West Seattle development, lot-split edition: 5028 Puget Blvd.; 3239 California; 4050 30th; 5303 21st; 3273 37th; 2450 55th; plus, Design Review reminders

Lot splits and boundary changes often portend development projects, so we’ve been tracking them in the city system, and some of the newest proposals top this update on West Seattle development:

7 LOTS @ 5028 PUGET BOULEVARD SW: One block east of Delridge, the overgrown 35,000-square-foot site shown above is under review for a seven-lot split. The proposal appeared in the city’s newest Land Use Information Bulletin – here’s the official notice, which triggers a two-week comment period (here’s how to send in a comment). There is no formal filing for construction permits so far, but online city files include a site plan originally filed more than a year ago, showing three homes fronting Puget Boulevard and four to the east, upslope, behind them. There is also an arborist’s report showing 63 “significant” trees on site, three of them considered “exceptional.” Concerns about this project, which will require environmental review, are outlined in a discussion in the North Delridge Neighborhood Council Google Group.

3 PARCELS, 2 LOTS @ 3239 CALIFORNIA SW (map): As reported here in December, this site, which currently holds a commercial building, is proposed for demolition and residential development.

It’s on the west side of the block upzoned in 2010, with at least two other projects pending. The land-use permit application is now in for reconfiguring it into what the online file calls three parcels and two unit lots.

4 LOTS AT 4050 30TH SW (map): This is the long-idle townhouse site in a triangular spot at SW Avalon, SW Yancy, and 30th SW, which has lain idle since the project stalled in the recession.

Now it’s up for approval of a four-unit lot split to proceed. Here’s the official notice; here’s how to comment.

3 PARCELS AT 5303 21ST SW (map): This site is proposed for splitting one lot into three. A formal development proposal is not attached, but the applicant of record is a construction company.

BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS AT 3273 37TH SW (map) A project is in the works for this three-lot site with one 95-year-old house that’s targeted for demolition, according to documents available online. The official proposal is to adjust the boundaries.

2 PARCELS @ 2450 55TH SW (map): In the Alki area, this lot split is proposed with a site plan showing a duplex to be built between two existing houses, one fronting 55th and one fronting Wickstrom to the east. Here’s the official notice; here’s how to comment.

The Land Use Information Bulletins this week also included the three formal notices for the March 6th Southwest Design Review Board meeting, regarding two north West Seattle projects already reported here (one with additional information):

1606 CALIFORNIA SW (map): 6:30 pm March 6th, Senior Center of West Seattle. We first reported back in October about this proposed 3-story, 16-unit apartment building, with 21 planned parking spaces; this SWDRB date was set a month ago. Here’s the official notice.

3257 HARBOR AVENUE SW AND 3303 HARBOR AVENUE SW (map): The review is at 8 pm March 6th, also SC of WS. First mentioned here last month, the notices for 3257 and 3303 confirm this is a two-building, 6-story project proposed for a total of more than 90 units.

SIDE NOTE – LEARN MORE ABOUT HOW LAND USE WORKS: Have trouble slogging through notices, deadlines, comment requirements, when do you get to have a public hearing and when don’t you, etc.? Come to the next Delridge Neighborhoods District Council meeting on Wednesday (February 19th), 7 pm at Youngstown Cultural Arts Center, to hear from local neighborhood leaders who will break it down from a truly public point of view.

13 Replies to "West Seattle development, lot-split edition: 5028 Puget Blvd.; 3239 California; 4050 30th; 5303 21st; 3273 37th; 2450 55th; plus, Design Review reminders"

  • WSweekender February 14, 2014 (3:51 pm)

    I never thought I would ever say this; however, for some of these development plans, well “there goes the neighborhood (s)”. Thanks to WS Blog for keeping us so well informed!

  • NW February 14, 2014 (6:20 pm)

    Unsustainable place will not be able to handle the population boom. Not in my back yard damit! Place is going to the dogs

  • FreGirl February 14, 2014 (8:01 pm)

    So sad the owner at U Frame It said he is going to be kicked out after 20 years in business. For more stupid not needed ugly apartments /condos.

  • wetone February 15, 2014 (10:31 am)

    2450 55th project I don’t understand , only one house on the lot ? But outcome from recent sale is what I predicted. Amazing how this city is allowing lots to be subdivided into such small parcels as this one roughly 1875 and 2750 sqft. with a duplex being built on one. People think we have problems now getting in and out of W/S just wait a few more years. If the city keeps allowing this type of building practice single family homes (with yard) as we know them today will soon be gone. You will have two or three family resident structures at a minimum where one once was. Not substianable with our infrastructure. But this city sees one thing only as do the investors $$$$$$$ they don’t care about the future problems soon to come from this building practice. There are a few more houses on this street that will have huge impacts in near future. : (

  • WS since '66 February 15, 2014 (12:48 pm)

    I look at the comments and think how they could have been from any time era. When my family moved here in 1966 the same comments were heard. Frankly, on Sept 14, 1951 the local Native Tribes would have concurred with the above comments. The fact is people want to live here for all the reasons we do. We arrived here, staked our “claim”, and want to keep West Seattle all to ourselves.

    • WSB February 15, 2014 (1:01 pm)

      Which reminds us of the climate when we arrived in the early ’90s (I had been hired by a local TV station – newscast producers were hard to come by), when the warning was to change your out-of-state plates at the border, lest your tires get slashed. Luckily we found a warm welcome. But I believe the heart of the debate now is how to grow, how to develop, and how to be able to effectively advocate if there is something coming to your neighborhood … I hope readers will see the very last paragraph about a presentation planned at this Wednesday night’s Delridge Neighborhoods District Council meeting, including that kind of information. – TR

  • NW February 15, 2014 (1:31 pm)

    I just am still ,unfortunately, at the place where it just pisses me off and I can’t see the positive of how the area I grew up in and family has lived in well over a century is changing so dramatically. We whites have pillaged since we arrived in North America for sure I agree with the comment above I guess I am better off not having an opinion it, development. Maybe that’s something to work towards.

  • Oldman WS February 15, 2014 (4:32 pm)

    As long as our government sits back and allows the population boom to continue, this will be our continuing future.

  • sam-c February 17, 2014 (10:10 am)

    not necessarily a population boom, but I think (anecdotally) that there is a need for more single family houses, not apartments. was talking to friend this weekend. they are due to have a baby soon and have been looking for a house for a while (all over, not just one area). they are at the open houses, several families show up and every one they see is a family with a baby, toddler, or another expecting family like themselves. they’ve been out-bid on several houses …. may still be in a 1 bedroom apartment with a newborn. (fun for their neighbors too :)

  • NW February 17, 2014 (5:08 pm)

    Affordable houses here in Seattle forget it. It’s not a population boom it’s a gentrification boom. Money money money …. money.

  • pjmanley February 18, 2014 (10:59 pm)

    For all the talk, single family homeowners are routinely demonized at planning meetings downtown, and we can judge the city by its actions more than words. If I were a developer or investor wanting to maximize my profit, why would I build anything but the highest density housing, like Apodments, which pull 3 to 5 times anything else, per square foot? Sometimes the city has to say “no” to such un-affordable housing to keep things in balance. We’ve absorbed plenty of growth in WS in the last 25 years, and we continue to take more than our share, but at some point it becomes dysfunctional and ridiculous. I think we’ve reached that point.

  • NW February 19, 2014 (6:24 pm)

    It’s absurd pj and I agree with you completely I am getting to the point where I plan on leaving in the next decade. See ya!

Sorry, comment time is over.

WP-Backgrounds by InoPlugs Web Design and Juwelier Schönmann