Design Review set for 4535 44th SW ‘microapartments’

(Looking west toward the project site, from the alley on the east side of 44th)
Followup to the “microapartments” project in The Junction that we told you about last month – its first Southwest Design Review Board meeting is now tentatively scheduled for May 9th (6:30 pm, Senior Center of West Seattle). According to the project page on the city website, the 4-story building is now proposed for 34 “residential units” and 1 live-work unit; the page also has the notation, “No parking proposed.” A pre-Design Review draft document on the city’s website says that’s because of the site’s transit accessibility; that document also now refers to the project as “studios” rather than the term “micros” used on an earlier document in the online file.

28 Replies to "Design Review set for 4535 44th SW 'microapartments'"

  • Rod April 9, 2013 (6:51 pm)

    No parking proposed…awesome. Of course every one of those occupants will use public transit or ride their bikes. Of course.

  • Bob ( Junction Dude) Blenz April 9, 2013 (7:14 pm)

    There is plenty of free street parking available all the way down the hill from 44th and all the way up the hill, to the summit of Genesee Hill, 56th. And to the left blocks, and to the right blocks, off Genesee. FREE PARKING.

    Don’t worry about it. Smart Cars to Lincoln Clown Cars. Plenty of FREE PARKING available. All over, just west of the Alaska Junction.

    And North and South of the Alaska Junction, as well, for that matter.

  • Gene April 9, 2013 (7:24 pm)

    Unbelievable! I have no objection to this building — but to not have some parking associated with it is ridiculous.

  • Civik April 9, 2013 (7:25 pm)

    So ‘micro’ didn’t test well in focus groups?

    A building with 34 units should have some parking. Looking at the site, I’d really like to know just what the hell the city is thinking. Glenn Way is already crowded with parked cars often enough, to assume that residents wouldn’t own cars is the dumbest thing the city has ever done.

    Unless you make it a requirement that you not own a motor vehicle to live in that space, it is going to make the parking situation even worse.

  • JayDee April 9, 2013 (8:08 pm)

    So there will be 34 “units” of microhousing (studios) where currently there are…6? And no parking because clearly the triangular lot cannot contain parking. I wonder if they will advertise that renters/owners have no parking? Of course they will…right?

  • Seaview April 9, 2013 (8:51 pm)

    I lived in the pike place market Stewart house for a few years. Same concept- small units with shared space. Close to amenities. No parking needed. Those were some of the best years! So free from the car.

  • Gene April 9, 2013 (9:08 pm)

    Well how about we wait until the units are rented & then try & survey the residents & see if none of them have a vehicle. Not saying there needs to be parking for every unit but SOME should be a part of construction. Can’t remember– is the street there posted 2 hr limit until after 6?

  • Nw April 9, 2013 (10:01 pm)

    How many buildings in this triangle will be removed?

  • Nw April 9, 2013 (10:02 pm)

    How many buildings in this triangular lot will be removed? If anyone has an idea please share it. Thanks

    • WSB April 9, 2013 (10:34 pm)

      I believe just the one but will double check the documentation that’s on file now. The lot is 3,770 feet.

  • Heather April 10, 2013 (3:36 am)

    The lots only 3770sqft???!!!! That’s less than half the size of my yard. Wow. I’m picturing 34 units next to my house… I’m a proponent of density but it’s ironic how that puts a different spin on it.

    • WSB April 10, 2013 (8:07 am)

      To the question about which buildings will be demolished: I rechecked the documents in the city’s online file (which don’t have direct links or I’d link them here). This parcel is only part of the “triangular” lot in that block – and only the small commercial building seen in our photo, clearly labeled 4535, is scheduled to come down.

  • Alvis April 10, 2013 (4:34 am)

    “Transit accessibility” is kind of irrelevant since there is no telling when Metro might slash service hours and coverage in the area. I suggest there should be a parking plan for visitors and overnight guests even though residents might not have cars..

  • ann@wcfb April 10, 2013 (6:21 am)

    I lived in a 200 sf apartment in my younger days, sans car and loved it. No parking was offered by my building, no one needed it. And this was 20 years ago in a much larger city than Seattle.

  • sam-c April 10, 2013 (7:15 am)

    when I moved out to Seattle, to go to grad school and then to work downtown for a few years, my car was more of a burden than an asset. i often forgot where my car was parked, i drove it so seldom. that was 6 years of living in U district and cap hill where i hardly ever drove (of course maybe bus service was better there than here, now). now that i have kids, and can’t afford to live within walking distance of neighborhood amenities, i couldn’t imagine not having a car.

    change your perspective when you think about these things. some people don’t drive as much as you do.

  • Civik April 10, 2013 (7:21 am)

    I ponder if that study looked at how many millenials still lived at home?

    Also, was it country-wide or just for DC? Maybe they should do a state by state analysis before we go treating it as gospel. For all we know, WA drivers licenses could be on the increase with city centers that have decent transit options dragging the average down.

  • old timer April 10, 2013 (7:22 am)

    I wonder if the new building will have bicycle ‘parking’, and maybe a room for bike repair.

  • Heather April 10, 2013 (8:33 am)

    Parking, I believe, is actually a building code issue. It might be that a building this size is simply not required by the city to provide parking. It’s a good topic to bring up during the meeting because sometimes developers and the city permitting office (I think ) will reassess parking requirements if there is reason to do so – such as recorded neighbor concerns about ease of access, documented lack of parking access at various times of day (photos of street parking in the am, during work hours and evening).

  • Kdsea April 10, 2013 (8:47 am)

    The parking waiver loophole is a terrible idea because it assumes adequate transit. What will happen if Metro further cuts service to the area?

  • Marty April 10, 2013 (8:55 am)

    No parking = no building permit.

  • koni April 10, 2013 (10:57 am)

    Actually it is the shockingly high price per square foot of these tiny apartments that is so wrong!

  • anonyme April 10, 2013 (4:31 pm)

    This is an absurd location for this type of housing. West Seattle is hosting thousands of new apartment units with no way to address the stress this will place on unimproved infrastructure and decimated bus service. WS is not downtown Seattle; we need to preserve our community before it’s destroyed.

  • bada-bing April 10, 2013 (6:09 pm)

    I’m always amazed at how many professional traffic engineers leave comments on every WSB article about apartment developments.
    And before everyone gets their panties in a bunch, large sections of Seattle have *zero* parking requirements for residential uses — those that occur in urban centers or urban villages (SMC 23.54.015 Table B.II). That’s all the areas in pink and green on this map:
    Please people, do your research and learn the code requirements before spouting off about the next project being built in your neighborhood. It’s like people who complain about their neighbor adding a second story on their house and blocking their view when doing such is perfectly legal.

  • Liz April 11, 2013 (8:54 am)

    Could this also end up being a Halfway House?

  • Nan April 11, 2013 (1:08 pm)

    I’ll bet the merchants along California who count on having all that customer parking between 44th and the alley are thrilled at the idea and pleased that none of the tenants will have/own cars.

  • Kim L April 29, 2013 (12:51 pm)

    I go twice a week to Community Acupuncture, which is right next door. If you’ve never had acupuncture before, you spend about half an hour reclined in a chair, in a dim room with soft music. The whole point is to relax so that the treatment can be effective. This will not be at all possible with the jarring sound of jackhammers and trucks. This very well may shut down Community Acupuncture, a valuable clinic and the only one like it here because of its affordability ($15-$40 sliding scale). Countless patients like me would be displaced. Acupuncture greatly relieves physical and emotional pain like sleeping disorders, stress, allergies, back pain and depression. It has helped me greatly, to the point where I do not know what I did with out it. It has helped countless people in West Seattle with their suffering. Aren’t people more important than money?

  • Miranda April 30, 2013 (11:35 am)

    Hello, I am a West Seattle acupuncturist who often sends patients to the community acupuncture clinic right next door. A patient of CAPWS myself, when it’s raining I don’t bike. I drive around looking for street parking. It is not often plentiful. Parking aside, if construction is noisy for years, the community clinic will struggle. Are y’all willing to find CAPWS a new home and help with their moving costs? If not, I absolutely cannot support this project.

Sorry, comment time is over.

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann