DEVELOPMENT: 2222 SW Barton project gets key approval

| Development | West Seattle news | Westwood

(Image from Design Review packet by Cleave Architecture)

From today’s Land Use Information Bulletin: The apartment project just uphill from the southeast edge of Westwood Village has received key land-use approval. 2222 SW Barton [map] – a project first reported here almost two years ago – is planned as a 4-story building with 39 apartments and 27 “small efficiency dwelling units” (microstudios), no offstreet-parking spaces. Southwest Design Review Board members gave their final approval at a meeting last September (here’s the city report). The decision (PDF) published today opens an appeal period – the official notice explains how to file one; March 12th is the deadline.

Scott A February 26, 2018 (12:29 pm)

It’ll be nice to have a sidewalk along the north side of Barton Street as part of this project. Now if SDOT would just create some kind of a walking path or sidewalk for another block or so to the east there would be a decent walking route on the north side of Barton all the way to Delridge that’s not blocked by parked cars.

N. Bringolf February 26, 2018 (12:46 pm)

I know it is of no concern to you but the parking is an issue for me. I live on 24th just south of the structure you are going to install with no off street parking. To think that tenants won’t have cars is absurd. Where are the cars going to be parked? Undoubtedly, in front of my house. Thoughtless and uncaring.

Jon Wright February 26, 2018 (3:20 pm)

Well, the area in front of your house is public right-of-way. Why would it be “thoughtless and uncaring” if a member of the public used a public resource?
JCW February 26, 2018 (8:03 pm)

Well, if 25th Ave is any indication, there’s enough space for plenty of cars. Meeting neighbors from a block over while they return from work isn’t the worst thing in the world.

H February 26, 2018 (1:03 pm)

I know that this area is supposed to be a huge transit hub but I hope that this is one of the few builds that is granted permits for zero parking.

WSB February 26, 2018 (1:06 pm)

The documents note “none planned, none required.”
- H February 26, 2018 (4:27 pm)
  
  Let me rephrase that. Since this build was approved for no parking, my hope is that it is one of only a handful. With density projections for that area I’d really like to see them get an abundance of parking in earlier in the development planning.

CarDriver February 26, 2018 (3:30 pm)

N Bringolf. Hate to be the bearer of bad news but the neighborhood will be seeing lot’s of new cars. The sad reality is that the city is convinced that large #’s of people don’t, or won’t have car’s. The REALITY is that most, if not all of these new resident’s WILL have at least 1 car. In addition they will have friends and family visit-the MAJORITY will come by car. To those of you that will say I’m wrong please provide some REAL FACTS supporting your theory that people don’t, and won’t ever own a car.

CarDriver February 26, 2018 (3:33 pm)

Another note. On today’s news a new study was reported on. Uber and Lyft drivers are clogging the streets. Their increase is due to more people riding. The new people could have walked, taken transit or biked but preferred going in a car.

WSB February 26, 2018 (4:00 pm)

That’s happening everywhere – look up the stats for New York City – though that place, where parking is scarce and massively expensive, had a traditional-taxi culture before “ride sharing” muscled in … But if anything, your point would more support the argument that parking is NOT needed because the vehicles that drop folks off are eventually parking at the drivers’ homes somewhere else.
- TM February 26, 2018 (6:51 pm)
  
  WSB, your opinion is based on what? Stick to reporting the news and let those of us who are affected by these projects voice “our” opinion.
  - WSB February 26, 2018 (7:46 pm)
    
    Not opinion. It’s the way the world’s going. http://www.govtech.com/transportation/The-Future-of-Parking-in-an-Era-of-Car-Sharing.html (And that’s from 2015!) We don’t use ride-sharing … we own and drive cars … but I’m not in one of the up-and-coming generations. Those I know who are … are living differently. The friction right now seems to me, in 10 years of covering this, that the planners are trying to go from 0 to 60 in getting to the fewer-car future, when the transition, as so often discussed here, isn’t happening so rapidly. On a smaller scale, what might be more realistic is building parking that could be converted into living space if/when the time comes that it’s not being used. (Speaking of which, are there really local garages standing empty at night, as has often been cited in citywide discussion? If so, where?) – TR
    - Morgan February 26, 2018 (8:04 pm)
      
      Thoughtful thorough reporting makes it always worthwhile to read comments..ty
    - Canton February 26, 2018 (8:16 pm)
      
      Not saying TR, that your mindframe, or business is anti-car, but can you imagine doing your job with public transit only? How efficient would your news coverage be, without a car?
    - WSB February 26, 2018 (8:35 pm)
      
      I don’t see a carless future, and certainly mine is far from the only profession that needs on-demand door-to-door transportation. I’m not so sure it’s going to be the future some envision, with driverless cars roaming around ready to pick up any of us on a moment’s notice. But things are undeniably changing, and that’s not just a parking issue – for example, if you have a one-lane-each-way street, and people getting picked up and dropped off by car-share services, stopped in the travel lane, does that call for a different type of street design? P.S. On the parking issue, working on a story about all the signage added to mark off no-parking zones in residential neighborhoods. If any has turned up in yours lately … or if you have the telltale little flags marking utility lines … I’d love to hear from you.
    - Canton February 26, 2018 (9:40 pm)
      
      Why do we have one lane roads? The city is trying to diffuse car transit. If transit works for some, cool, but to ram this concept down everyone’s throats, is disingenuous, at best. Did public transit for work a while ago, Now with a child, impossible. Rather spend 45 mins in car, than loose hour and half on transit, with my kid. Even with light rail, it would be bus, rail, bus, then another bus. Totally support smart rail service, and will pay, even though, it will never help my individual case.

MrB February 26, 2018 (4:08 pm)

Are they ever going to repave SW Barton? That stretch is in terrible condition.

MJ February 26, 2018 (6:19 pm)

66 residential units, some residents will own cars yet no spaces being provided. Yes these units have walkability to a grocery store and are served by good transit, but zero parking is not consistent with reality. Some parking should be provided for the project.

Jon Wright February 26, 2018 (8:27 pm)

It seems to me that the crux of the matter is people taking advantage of free parking on public property who don’t want other people around who might want to take advantage of free parking on that same public property.

Eric1 February 27, 2018 (8:56 am)

LOL John. I think you hit the nail on the head. For some reason, people seem to think that the street parking in front of their home is theirs. I see far too many houses with more bedrooms than parking spaces and these are probably the guys who are complaining the loudest because they need street parking too. If we assume one driver per bedroom, we should have the city require all houses to have one off street stall per bedroom: Similar to how people are screaming for one stall per apartment.

.

Oh, I hear you guys whining. I have kids… they don’t drive… I have an empty bedrom…. Yeah and 90% of you have a garage full of crap and no cars in it. Boat? RV? Spare sports car? Yeah… i colect crap too but I have room for my stuff including garage space for the spare car. But by all means, continue to rail against apodments and forget when you were 20 and fnding street parking for your 20+ year old hand-me-down car was a rite of passage because you lived in the cheapest place you could afford.

John February 26, 2018 (8:30 pm)

Sixty-six units and 0 spaces of off-street parking? The Seattle city government sells out residential neighborhoods again to Developers for their cash. Taxpayers should demand better accountability for urban planning from the Mayor and City council.

Sorry, comment time is over.