Followup: 30-units, no-parking 6917 California neighbors’ petition

November 11, 2013 at 11:26 pm | In Development, West Seattle news | 40 Comments

(UPDATED TUESDAY AFTERNOON: City confirms, comment deadline extended to Nov. 27th)

Last Saturday, we updated the saga of 6917 California SW, the 30-units, no-parking building proposed for part of what’s currently the site of three old houses in south Morgan Junction, with 2 houses and 4 townhouses on the rest of the site. The deadline for comments is Wednesday; formal requests have been filed for a two-week extension, but there’s no official confirmation yet. And neighbors are organizing: They are seeking signatures on an online petition via change.orgsee it here – and also circulating a flyer:

The project currently requires no public meetings; that’s part of what neighbors hope to change. We first reported on the project four weeks ago, after discovering it in city files even before the land-use-application sign went up. Official comments on the proposal can be sent by following the instructions on the official notice

ADDED TUESDAY AFTERNOON: We now have multiple confirmations, including one from the city, that the comment deadline for this project has been extended to November 27th.

40 Comments

  1. I’m glad people are finally starting to say enough!

    Comment by T — 2:21 am November 12, 2013 #

  2. Power to the PEOPLE!!! Nice work neighbors.

    Comment by AmandaKH — 6:25 am November 12, 2013 #

  3. @T- Ive been saying that for months but peoples reaction is”welcome the change”, ya BS. There needs to be rules in place, if they’re going to build,parking must be included.

    Comment by Alki Resident — 6:46 am November 12, 2013 #

  4. How can they keep building buildings without parking when they are threatening to take half of West Seattle’s bus service away? It doesn’t make sense.

    Comment by Bonnie — 7:10 am November 12, 2013 #

  5. Sign and share, share, share. Get the word out!

    Comment by Sarah — 7:39 am November 12, 2013 #

  6. The responsibility for this project is with the now deposed Mayor and soon-to-be-districted City Council, but the question is how we get city government to fix the mess it created. A good start would be to appoint a new head of DPD who knows what she is doing.

    Comment by Gatewooder — 7:45 am November 12, 2013 #

  7. Not requiring 1 car per unit is absolutely ridiculous.

    Comment by Brian Wade — 9:15 am November 12, 2013 #

  8. Right on Gatewooder!!!
    .
    And T I am glad enough is enough is starting to take hold. Personally I’ve had enough of this, many years ago, but better late than never. I tired to point this out but was called a NIMBY or dismissed outright, hard not to say I told ya so to all of the previous detractors! And yes, I attended design review meetings, emailed DPD, elected officials, etc. I tried to sound the alarm and get others involved.
    .
    Well said Alki and Bonnie!

    Comment by enough — 9:37 am November 12, 2013 #

  9. On November 5, 2013 I received the following from PRC@seattle.com re Master Use Project 3016077 “The comment period for this project was extended to 11/27/2013, per citizen request”

    We owners/residents of Cinnamon Ridge (6910 California Avenue S. W.)as well as our neighbor condominium, Oak Ridge, are most concerned about the negative effect that this construction will have on the neighborhood/community. We are currently soliciting signatures to request a meeting with city planners to bring to their attention “our concern about the environmental impact,congestion,and livability concerns on our surrounding neighborhood, local elementary school and business community”

    Comment by Patricia Agostino — 9:41 am November 12, 2013 #

  10. This is completely irresponsible development. Sign that petition, folks.

    Comment by sw — 9:56 am November 12, 2013 #

  11. Growth and development are a given when you have a cool community like West Seattle. However, we need a balanced approach to these projects and that takes input, discussion, and creative thinking about safety, parking, infrastructure, etc… So far, there doesn’t seem to be anyone looking at the big-picture and longer-term impacts of this type of growth. I signed the petition and hope you will too!

    Comment by JO — 9:58 am November 12, 2013 #

  12. Thanks, Patricia. We will make a note of the extension in the story and future mentions. – TR

    Comment by WSB — 10:05 am November 12, 2013 #

  13. This is the result of Seattle electing people who support uncontrolled growth, mass transit for ALL and cramming the most people in the smallest spaces for the benefit of tax revenue and then keep electing the SAME people into office and expect them to do differently.
    Look at the areas where these developments are happening; West Seattle and Ballard, for the most part. Why isn’t this happening in Magnolia, Queen Anne, Leshie(sp?), Mt Baker areas?
    Hopefully by passing the council by district will help even this out, but there is two years that this current crop (actually the same ones) can force these types of developments on to neighborhoods where they don’t live.
    The policy that opened the door for this to happen was the “Urban Villages” and the fact that only two areas (for the most part) were designated for this type of development.
    The next big thing to be built along these line (some are already being built) are the ‘A-pod-ments” where they cram people into small buildings with, again ZERO parking.
    Right now the ONLY way to stop these, or alleviate the situation with no parking is to have the DPD add that ALL renter/leasers/buyers that move into these developments sign an agreement that they can move ONLY if they have NO cars.
    But don’t hold your breath on that happening.

    Comment by Ex-Westwood Resident — 10:08 am November 12, 2013 #

  14. One more things…
    After attending a few of these Development meetings and trying to bring up the parking issues, I gave up going to them after being told that parking wasn’t part of the discussion and not the prevue of the board.
    Maybe we need to start DEMANDING that whom ever is in charge of the parking issues in the city start showing up at these meets so it can de discussed!!!

    Comment by Ex-Westwood Resident — 10:12 am November 12, 2013 #

  15. One question….
    Has anyone tried to figure out how many High-Density residential units/apartment are being built in West Seattle and the included parking spaces?

    Comment by Ex-Westwood Resident — 10:24 am November 12, 2013 #

  16. Your right Ex, started going to Design Review Board meetings myself and found it to be a joke. It seems they had very little interest with input from the public. Basically was about what they the board members felt was right for the community even though most don’t live in W/S and have to deal with every day issues we have, which I found odd. Anytime someone raised a question they did not like or about safety of ingress or egress of buildings, access, parking, view blockage and such they would say not here for those issues. I guess that’s why they call it a design review board. That’s the way this city rolls. Don’t care about the problems their opening up with the density, parking, traffic, ingress egress out of the area, just try and look good doing it.
    As far as your question about parking spots good luck on finding good numbers on that as they seem to change between start and finish. Builders and the city now are also changing the size of what they are allowing a parking stall to be. Good luck trying to park in one unless you drive motorcycle. Another interesting point that no one talks about is many of the new building apartments in W/S are 2bd units, so what does that do for car numbers and parking soon to impact this area :0

    Comment by wetone — 12:14 pm November 12, 2013 #

  17. I wrote a comment to the DPD Project contact, and signed the petition. Too little too late…The junction growth is another one that skimmed along, and some of us weren’t on top of it until it was a done deal. Now the character of the Junction will be forever lost. Frustrated with myself.

    Comment by Cid — 12:30 pm November 12, 2013 #

  18. You only have to look as far as Capitol Hill to see what happens when you have buildings with no parking. Have you ever tried to find a place to park there? Common sense should tell everyone that new buildings with no parking is insanity. All you get is more money for the developers and a huge problem for the neighborhood.

    Comment by Marty — 12:53 pm November 12, 2013 #

  19. Wish all of these rental units being built (with no parking) would have some sort of a tax placed on them that goes towards mass transit and transportation. I am tired of my property taxes having to pay for most everything. Or, if making the citizens living in the apartments pay taxes for the services they use is too agregious (gasp!), then hit the developers of these projects with the tax that would support the infrastructure that they are touting as one of the reasons that they are allowed to build such structures.

    Comment by ACH — 1:49 pm November 12, 2013 #

  20. Property tax actually only accounts for four percent of Metro funding. The lion’s share of it is sales tax, which everyone pays, renter or owner or …
    .
    http://metro.kingcounty.gov/am/budget/revenue.html

    Comment by WSB — 1:58 pm November 12, 2013 #

  21. Only let people live there who don’t drive.

    Comment by no — 1:59 pm November 12, 2013 #

  22. Your exactly right it is the Investment companies that are making the profits here. The people running this city only look at short term money fixes for bad planning and spending they have made in the past and now, and see instant money here. The city’s actions show they care little about the long term effects of communities involved and the long term problems they are causing. Expect higher car tabs, property taxes, gas tax, tolls… soon. So they can rebuild the infrastructure to try and handle the build up they have allowed. Investment companies profit and our city goes farther in debt trying to catch up…

    Comment by wetone — 2:15 pm November 12, 2013 #

  23. Thx for the link WSB, but obviously the funding isn’t “enough” hence the drastic cuts proposed. I won’t get into potential mismanagement, etc of the existing funds. But somehow the city is expecting all of these people who will be moving here to rely on mass transit as their means of transportation.
    .
    If there is such a poor inadequate level of transit to and from West Seattle- this is a huge problem. Cleaning up the existing management of funds maybe will help (I have no idea if funds created are being used efficiently or not- and do not claim to have any knowledge of the use of finances) but ultimately MORE service will be needed here to support the units being built in West Seattle. Didn’t I read here on the blog that over a thousand new units are currently being built or planned here on the peninsula? So, more funding will be asked for. Having those who use the transit system by living in these high density units – or the developers that build these units contribute more to funding these services seems fair. The rest of us already contribute via our sales and property taxes- whether we use it or not. Those who definitely use transit (or developers who profit from it being near the structures they build) should contribute more for those services.
    .
    If those transit services are not funded and available, then people will be forced to drive. And building high density structures with no parking for these units is irresponsible.

    Comment by ACH — 2:22 pm November 12, 2013 #

  24. More like two-thousand-plus. I *have to* go cloister myself somewhere to finish the updated map. Anyway, no, that was just a datapoint, not a refutation. – TR

    Comment by WSB — 2:26 pm November 12, 2013 #

  25. I used to live on Capital hill. Apartment, no parking. Everyday I had to circle around to find parking, often parking blocks away.When I moved to WS, I could park right in front of my house. What a concept! With all the apartments going up around the Junction without enough parking spaces, I am afraid I will have to drive to Burien to eat out so I can park.

    Comment by Michael Waldo — 2:33 pm November 12, 2013 #

  26. Petition signed. I’m “one of those” bike riding, bus riding, anti-car folks. But even I object to residential housing being allowed by our city to be built without proper infrastructure. I would prefer that we have, fund and maintain a robust mass transit system in our city that is not overcrowded and “at capacity” at peak times as well as a safe, efficient network of bicycle infrastructure so that more than just the “spandex-clad hardcores” would see bicycling as a viable commuting and transit alternative, rather than requiring zoning that accommodates ownership and use of single occupancy vehicles for every resident. But reality is that we currently do not have that infrastructure. Until we do, we have to zone for drivers/parkers. If we don’t require parking to be built along with apartment dwelling units, then those cars will clog the lanes of our city streets that could otherwise be better utilized for said bus/bike infrastructure. Get the (parked) cars off the streets and put buses and bikes in their place. And require developers to accommodate the cars that will inevitably materialize with their residents.

    Comment by Stephen M — 3:08 pm November 12, 2013 #

  27. This type of rampant development destroys the quality of life in a neighborhood. The “planners” don’t give a fig about long time West Seattle residents, and would just as soon demolish all the single family homes to make way for a West Coast version of Co-op City (Bronx, NY) Densely packed, dismal, and expensive to boot. Look at this link in wikipedia to get a preview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-op_City,_Bronx

    Comment by Jonnie Gilman — 3:25 pm November 12, 2013 #

  28. Thanks for the statistical clarification, TR. even makes my point more dire.

    Two thousand plus units being built (or planned)
    +
    Lack of transit, and more cuts being proposed
    +
    These new residents being forced to drive a car for transportation
    +
    NO parking spaces or inadequate parking for many (most?) of these developments
    =
    Big problem for West Seattle

    Comment by ACH — 3:29 pm November 12, 2013 #

  29. My letter to the permitting board:
    As a resident of West Seattle since 1984 I am writing, beyond concerned now, with a wish that you completely decline the permitting of this project, and any further high density proposed projects in West Seattle. Parking is only the tip of the iceberg concerning what is wrong with not only this project, but all increased density projects for West Seattle. This city and it’s planning, zoning and transportation departments have basically destroyed W. Seattle, are continuing to negatively impact everyone living over here, and seem to have a ravenous appetite for increasing density, yet a complete disregard for accompanying support services and transportation issues. There is basically one way out, and one way into W. Seattle (yes, there is a lower Spokane St. avenue, and a White Center/Roxbury exit, but effectively, other than the 1st Ave. bridge, completely overburdened too, the Spokane St. avenue is susceptible to complete collapse if there is any problem with the bridge) , and it is so over burdened now that it becomes incomprehensible you are considering adding one unit to our part of the city. A catastrophe over here, say a devastating earth quake, and we are doomed to no service being able to get in or get out. No hospital, very few clinics, and a bridge that will certainly be massively over crowded, if it is still standing, as it is every day now; an hour commute from the Lincoln Park neighborhood to downtown now in the morning. That’s the definition of insane. Just stop!
    No parking requirement, just as an aside, for this project is basically stupid – try to ride a bus now with effectively decreased service, despite what you may believe. Keep adding people to that formula, really? It’s time to completely stop until support structures and services are brought up to what exists here already in terms of population, and a little more thought is brought into the planning and permitting process. Hospitals, transportation support, roads, new and different ways out and in, and an emergency plan that actually catches up to the population that is now here from twenty years ago, let alone the one you are trying to shoe horn into this peninsula. Just stop the density push – enough already!

    Comment by Matthew Lawrence — 3:36 pm November 12, 2013 #

  30. It should be pointed out that although Mayor McFail was voted out of office, EVERY INCUMBENT SEAT ON THE CITY COUNCIL was retained in this last election. The message that sends is that people approve of the job the current city council is doing. I for one voted against every incumbent city council candidate, because ANYTHING, even a group of trained chimpanzees, would be better than what we have now.

    Comment by Ronnie Applewhite — 3:39 pm November 12, 2013 #

  31. As an update, the Morgan Junction Community Association was able to confirm with the project planner at DPD (Carly Guillary) that the comment deadline HAS been extended to 11/27.

    Comment by Rob — 3:39 pm November 12, 2013 #

  32. Ronnie – Sawant/Conlin isn’t settled yet. New vote total within the hour, in fact …

    Comment by WSB — 3:40 pm November 12, 2013 #

  33. … and Sawant has pulled ahead, in fact: http://westseattleblog.com/?p=255860

    Comment by WSB — 4:25 pm November 12, 2013 #

  34. Zero parking does not make sense, but I do think a 50% minimum should be required. Where do our friends park when they visit our house? Same place as yours, on the street. Free parking is not a right.

    If Sawant pulls ahead,and wins, keep in mind on issues according to her website is to do more for transit, HOWEVER decrease car use and increase bike use….that means encourage zero parking requirements……not good

    Comment by WSSgal — 5:01 pm November 12, 2013 #

  35. Don’t forget about the trees. On that site in the alley is a 45 inch diameter Douglas Fir tree in excellent condition. In your discussions about this project ask if there are any “tree protection” for this exceptional tree. I looked at some of the development documents and all that could be gleaned is that the trees were accurately located on the site plan. What about “protection”? Save the Trees!

    Comment by for the trees — 5:32 pm November 12, 2013 #

  36. bucklawgroup.com

    the best land use, municipal law, real estate litigator – Pete’s a “Super Lawyer”

    Comment by DontGetJesse!GetBuck — 5:35 pm November 12, 2013 #

  37. Thanks for the update, WSB.

    This in insanity!

    Also: Go Sawant!! 41 votes!!

    Comment by imcoveredinbees — 5:56 pm November 12, 2013 #

  38. Seriously, NONE of you can comprehend not having cars? I live in a large building and don’t have a car. And just because they add parking spaces does not mean they are free. Many of the people in my building who do drive don’t use the parking spaces because they cost money.

    Personal automobiles ARE NOT A SUSTAINABLE SOLUTION. Look around you — your city is littered with cars. The newscast tonight had no less than FOUR stories about traffic fatalities. There is NOTHING WRONG with a building with no parking spaces. You absolutely CAN get around without one.

    Comment by Lynne — 8:53 pm November 12, 2013 #

  39. Cars! Cars! Cars!

    I ABSOLUTELY love the freedom that my personal automobile provides me.

    In fact I think I’ll take a quick drive over and around right now.

    I like driving so much I think I’ll go buy another car tomorrow. After all I have a two car garage.

    You anti-car people are a hoot. Carry on. Keep the laughs coming.

    Comment by Jeffrey — 11:09 pm November 12, 2013 #

  40. Yes, some of us need cars. I like to go Snowboarding . . . not gonna take a bus. Like to go visit family in Oregon . . . not gonna take a bus. Like to go to the beach . . . not gonna take a bus

    I think you get the picture here.

    Comment by Wes C. Addle — 4:50 pm November 13, 2013 #

Sorry, comment time is over.

All contents copyright 2014, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
Header image by Nick Adams. ABSOLUTELY NO WSB PHOTO REUSE WITHOUT SITE OWNERS' PERMISSION.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^