West Seattle development: Land-use approval for 3261 Avalon

| Development | West Seattle news

(From the “design proposal” packet for the project’s Design Review Board meeting)
Once again tonight, we’re squeezing in a few non-weather stories before what’s likely to be one final (for now) round of overnight/morning coverage. The six-story, 120-apartment building planned at 3261 SW Avalon Way has won final approval for its land-use permit. The decision (read it here) was published in today’s city Land Use Information Bulletin. The project passed Design Review in July and November (here’s the final report), but this is the city Department of Planning and Development‘s final word, pending a two-week window for any appeal to be filed (here’s how). You can watch the permit toplines for the project on the city website, here.

Aman January 19, 2012 (9:51 pm)

Ugly Bldg.

Out for a walk January 19, 2012 (11:37 pm)

I absolutily agree. With a little forethought and planning these buildings could be much more attractive.

redblack January 20, 2012 (7:32 am)

architects don’t seem to have much imagination these days, do they? a big part of these designs is the cost of the materials. sad, but true.
.
personally, i’d like to see some bricks or stone all the way up those “towers” at the ends.

cj January 20, 2012 (9:54 am)

Its too tall,but that’s just me.

Mickymse January 20, 2012 (12:56 pm)

I wouldn’t worry about too tall. It’s filling in space between tall buildings after the still uncompleted one at the corner with 35th went up.

365Stairs January 20, 2012 (2:03 pm)

(note from the architect)

“architects imagination goes as far as the pocket books of the developers…..
brick weighs alot and needs to be supported at each level by expensive steel angles which in turn
need to be support on heavy gauge studs…etc. etc.

You should see all the iterations the last 10 years have put on this WS project…..I’ve been on it for 3 weeks…..”

Aman January 20, 2012 (2:26 pm)

I appreciate the burdens of cost constraints. Thank you for the insights.

HOWEVER, isn’t architectural design code a starting point to improve how buildings look?

Maybe we should raise our local architectural design standards?

After All, if the design code aspires to a higher standard (whatever design style(s) that may be), wouldn’t the (increasingly our of state) developers have to meet those?

We have such a beautiful scenery. Why not compliment it?

Thanks…

RayK January 21, 2012 (11:23 am)

I like the apparent size of windows allowing lots of light on overcast days. The building mass is disguised by the vertical “silos” that make it look segmented horizontally. The roofline avoids straight lines and that also reduces the visual mass.

IMHO of course.