Development – West Seattle Blog… West Seattle news, 24/7 Sun, 27 May 2018 03:31:36 +0000 en-US hourly 1 DEVELOPMENT: 3 project notes from Junction, Luna Park, Morgan Mon, 21 May 2018 22:45:00 +0000 Three West Seattle development notes today:

4826 40TH SW: The Fauntleroy/Edmunds development hub continues to densify. Headed for administrative design review (watch for the notice) is a 3-story, 27-apartment, no-offstreet-parking “small efficiency dwelling unit” (SEDU) building. It would replace the duplex shown in the Assessor’s Office photo above.

2821 SW YANCY: A few more details on this early-stage proposal from Transitional Resources, first reported here back in February. This too would go through administrative design review, according to notes posted online from a pre-submittal meeting with the city. It’s described as 100 percent affordable housing with 44 SEDUs, potentially in two buildings, with up to three parking spaces on site.

7001 CALIFORNIA SW: We’ve been watching this block for a while as a lot-boundary adjustment proceeds. Now there’s an early-stage redevelopment proposal for the north end, four rowhouses with no off-street parking at 7001 California SW, where there’s currently a pet-care business.

Share This

]]> 43
HAPPENING NOW: HALA upzoning – and more – open house in West Seattle Thu, 10 May 2018 01:38:02 +0000 (WSB photos)

Very low-key – and low turnout, so far – city open house happening right now in the Louisa Boren STEM K-8 lunchroom. Though the headline topic is HALA upzoning for Mandatory Housing Affordability, it’s somewhat outflanked by an abundance of other city departments tabling too, like SDOT:

Other departments there if you have questions include Seattle Public Utilities, City Light, Parks, Neighborhoods, and the Office of Housing. But back to HALA upzoning – if you have questions about what’s planned for your part of West Seattle, you can wander around the room to find the map, and someone to talk with:

This is not a feedback event, so, so far as we can tell, you’re not being asked to put dots on maps. Just an FYI type of open house – the next feedback event in this area is the official public hearing on June 5th at Chief Sealth International High School.

Several community groups are here too, even the coalition that’s appealing the HALA Environmental Impact Statement (as their case continues working its way through the system, with more documents filed on the Hearing Examiner‘s site just this week). You’re welcome to drop in until 8 pm, 5950 Delridge Way SW – parking is in the big lot that stretches south of the school entrance. And of course there are snacks.

Share This

]]> 40
YOU’RE INVITED: Discussion next week about Transit-Oriented Development in West Seattle Wed, 09 May 2018 21:20:26 +0000

With light rail on the way to West Seattle … one local group says it’s time to talk about Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). Welcoming West Seattle has just announced “a lively discussion” about TOD and affordable housing, one week from tonight:

Southwest Youth and Family Services, 4555 Delridge Way SW


Councilmember Lisa Herbold
Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda
Bill Rumpf, Mercy Housing
Marijana Cvencek, Schemata Workgroup
Edward Butterfield, Sound Transit


Bryce Yadon, Futurewise
Matt Hutchins, Welcoming West Seattle

The event is free and open to the public. Light refreshments will be provided. Doors 5:30 pm, discussion 6:00 pm. Panelists will have a robust conversation on the ins and outs of implementing TOD, and what it will mean for further development and housing affordability; diving into the advocacy action necessary to capitalize on TOD, and how neighbors can start efforts now to be well positioned as new stations open over the next two decades. Our moderators will be asking a set of questions collected from community members and coalition partners. Please RSVP and submit any Transit Oriented Development and Affordable Housing Questions, here!

Share This

]]> 0
DEVELOPMENT: New parking pushback in Morgan Junction Tue, 08 May 2018 04:55:03 +0000

We’ve reported before on the plan to replace that old house at California/Willow with a seven-unit rowhouse building, most recently when it was approved last month. We noted then that since we first wrote about the plan last year, the plan had changed to include one offstreet-parking space instead of the original five. The notice says it’s expected to generate demand for seven to 14 spaces, but since what the city considers “frequent transit” is within 1,320 feet, it doesn’t have to include any parking. Neighbors have filed an appeal and have a pre-hearing conference with the city Hearing Examiner tomorrow. It’s not just the downsizing of the parking plan, they say in their appeal, but also they say the change wasn’t communicated. This is a block and a half north of a redevelopment plan that caused a hubbub over lack of offstreet parking four and a half years ago; that appeal was eventually settled and the 30-unit building went up.

Share This

]]> 51
DEVELOPMENT: Design comment period opens for 3084 Avalon Way apartments Fri, 04 May 2018 23:31:08 +0000

That’s the official “administrative design review” (public comments but no meeting) packet now online for 3084 Avalon Way SW – as mentioned here last week, the project that first turned up as an early-stage proposal last year is now on the books with 7 floors, 35 apartments, and no offstreet parking spaces, replacing a 64-year-old triplex. And the two-week public review phase is now under way. The city has just overhauled its permit system, so notices and announcements don’t look quite the way they used to – here’s the one for this project. If you have comments, you can send them to the assigned planner for the project, Joseph Hurley,

Share This

]]> 3
LAM BOW APARTMENTS: Plan to replace fire-destroyed building goes to Southwest Design Review Board tomorrow Thu, 03 May 2018 04:05:56 +0000 jennifer2(WSB reader photo from September 2016 three-alarm fire, the cause of which was never determined)

Tomorrow (Thursday) night, the plan for replacing the fire-destroyed building at the Lam Bow Apartments (6955 Delridge Way SW) goes before the Southwest Design Review Board. Here’s the full “packet” prepared for the meeting:

(You can also see it on the city website in PDF.) While getting ready for the meeting, project-team members visited the Delridge Neighborhoods District Council meeting in mid-April. If you’re interested in a preview before tomorrow’s review, here are our notes:

The briefing was led by Ryan Moore of the Seattle Housing Authority, which owns the Lam Bow. He said that as is required in the Early Design Guidance phase, they will be presenting three options for the new building, which will be 3 stories high, with about 50 apartments and 49 offstreet parking spaces. Their preferred option has a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units, with a central play area, a new commons building, and an open space that might be used for a P-patch or recreation. In general, DNDC attendees had positive reactions, but they also had a lot of questions about access to the parking lot on the Delridge Way side of the building; SDOT is apparently requiring that access be closed because of the future conversion of Metro Route 120 to the RapidRide H Line. The future of that project depends on federal funding that already has been called into question, and since then, the Move Seattle levy spending situation has raised further questions about upcoming RapidRide projects’ city funding. Moore said access to the parking lot would continue via 23rd SW, which would also see improvements such as a sidewalk and gutter. Attendees said they still thought keeping both sides open would be optimal. Moore also was asked about nearby Longfellow Creek and drainage, and said they are still working with a consultant on that.

Thursday night’s hearing will be limited to design issues, and is the first of at least two times the project will be considered by the SWDRB. It starts at 6:30 pm at the Senior Center/Sisson Building (4217 SW Oregon).

Share This

]]> 7
‘Mandatory Housing Affordability upzones are coming soon!’ and other HALA status updates Tue, 01 May 2018 21:13:23 +0000 No “proposed,” no “expected,” just a flat-out statement that HALA upzoning is on the way – that’s how the city Department of Construction and Inspections starts the newest post on its blog-format Building Connections website. The gist of the post is to tell developers that they can start including plan alternatives that include what would be allowed under the upzones. (To summarize quickly – the upzones, as explained here, are meant to be a tradeoff in exchange for requiring developers to include a certain percentage of “affordable” units, or to pay a fee to help fund some being built somewhere else.)

Meantime, the citywide community groups’ appeal continues making its way through the system; the document file gets ever bigger, with the newest document filed just today, a response to a city move for “partial dismissal.” The pre-hearing conference for the appeal of the Mandatory Housing Affordability Environmental Impact Statement is now set for June 11th; the hearing itself is on the schedule as starting two weeks later, on June 25th, with that entire week set aside, plus another week in late July. Then there’s also the prospect of mediation, as noted by City Councilmember Lisa Herbold when she spoke to the Morgan Community Association last month.

As also mentioned by MoCA – which is among the groups that are party to the appeal – the district-by-district open houses/public hearings have almost made their way to District 1, end of the line. The open house for one last look at the West Seattle/South Park upzone maps is one week from tomorrow, Wednesday, May 9th, 6-8 pm at Louisa Boren STEM K-8 (5950 Delridge), and the official City Council public hearing for the proposed District 1 changes is at 6 pm Tuesday, June 5th, in the auditorium at Chief Sealth International High School (2600 SW Thistle). The council’s last scheduled HALA meeting is August 6th.

P.S. If you’re still not caught up on what changes could happen in your neighborhood, the maps and other background are here.

Share This

]]> 50
DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWUPS: 4508 California SW; 3084 Avalon Way; The Kenney Wed, 25 Apr 2018 18:59:27 +0000 Three quick development followups:

MORE DETAILS ON JUNCTION PROJECT: On March 30th, we brought you first word of an early-stage plan for a mixed-use project at 4508 California SW. We spoke briefly with property owner Leon Capelouto, who had no additional details to share. Since then, a document that’s appeared in city files provides a few details – a rough outline for 70 residential units, 34 parking spaces, 5,450 “commercial and back of house” square feet, which compares to the 4,690 square feet of commercial space in the buildings that would be demolished. The project remains in the early, pre-application stage.

MORE DETAILS ON AVALON PROJECT: In November, we reported on an apartment building proposed for 3084 SW Avalon Way – at the time, documents did not indicate the size or unit count. The project will be going through Administrative Design Review – no meeting, but there will be a call for public comment – and the city project page says it’s planned for 7 stories and 35 apartments, with no offstreet parking.

PROJECT AT THE KENNEY: Thanks to Mike and Colby for pointing out the signs that have gone up around the perimeter of The Kenney (7125 Fauntleroy Way SW):

It’s been a year and a half since the retirement center’s management/ownership previewed their scaled-back plans for redevelopment. The notice now is for part of the plan – five townhouses in two buildings on the south side of the site. We inquired with The Kenney to find out more; spokesperson Angela Johnston replied, “The new development will include several townhomes that will be offered to people age 62+. As part of The Kenney model, those residents will pay a one-time entrance fee and a monthly fee (similar to rent), which will include a variety of services and amenities. They will essentially have the best of both worlds – living independently in a single-family home, while reaping the benefits of community life with their peers.” And she says they expect to have a timeline and more details soon about other “renovations and programming changes that are happening throughout The Kenney campus.” Meantime, the signs’ appearance and official application for the townhouse construction indicates an official comment period should be opening soon – watch the Land Use Information Bulletin. (ADDED THURSDAY: And indeed, the notice is in today’s LUIB – the comment period is open through May 9th.)


Share This

]]> 3
Southwest Design Review Board gives its final OK to 4722 Fauntleroy, 4721 38th SW project Fri, 20 Apr 2018 21:25:11 +0000 By Tracy Record
West Seattle Blog editor

The biggest West Seattle project currently on the drawing board has cleared Design Review.

It’s the two-building, 300+-unit, mixed-use project at 4722 Fauntleroy Way SW and 4721 38th SW, and the Southwest Design Review Board gave its final approval last night, after a presentation that drew no public comment. Here are the design “packets”:

All five members of the newly filled-out board were present; that meant some extra questions since the three new appointees – John Cheng, Matt Hutchins, Scott Rosenstock, all West Seattle residents – weren’t on the board when this project was first presented in the Early Design Guidance phase last July. (The two holdover members are Don Caffrey of Beacon Hill, now chairing the board, and Crystal Loya of West Seattle.) Also at the table, the assigned city planner for the project, Carly Guillory.

The project is being developed by Legacy Partners, which built (and has since sold) Youngstown Flats in North Delridge. Here’s how last night’s review unfolded:

ARCHITECTS’ PRESENTATION: Derrick Overbay and Rob Deane with Encore Architects led the presentation. 4722 Fauntleroy SW was referred to as Building A, 4721 38th SW as Building B, and though they are being considered separately, they are to be built and managed as one project, Overbay said. The site, which has north-south and east-west alleys through it, is zoned for development up to 85 feet on Building A’s location, 40 feet on Building B’s location. Building A is proposed for 10,000 sf of retail space toward the north, 16 live-work units, 240 apartments, with residential parking entry off the north side, into two underground levels of parking. Building B is “being designed as more transitional” with 50 apartments and 1 live-work unit, 1 level of parking to be accessed off the alley, three levels of residences.

Deane also recapped Building A’s shipyard/port-inspired design concept that was described at last summer’s Early Design Guidance meeting. He and Overbay explained how it had evolved since then, showing how the massing and “rhythm” would include some spaces for courtyards and a “mid-block break along Fauntleroy,” and how exterior materials – including brick at the pedestrian level, with “warmer wood-type textures at the building entries” – and colors would play into that. The south side will be mostly hidden by the development going up to the south; the alley-facing east side of Building A has some stepped-down elements, as it faces smaller Building B. There’s an amenity space atop Building A, with a small roof deck. The entry on the retail side to the north will have a glass/steel canopy.

Building B will use the “same 8 x 8 x 24 stacks” as Building A, Deane picked up, plus some courtyard space. He showed how they had responded to EDG criticism that B was too much a small version of A. The building has more grade to deal with than the other one, so “we’ve used this grade to inform the composition,” he said. Metal paneling, wood composite, and fiber cement will all be used on the exterior. The two buildings’ parking is shared, “so there will be a connection off the alley.” The residential entry is on 38th, and there’s a roof deck. Deane also showed how they hope to create a buffer area because of all the activity they expect between the buildings.

They’re asking for departures – zoning exceptions. #1 involves a 10-foot-wide section of the garage facing 38th SW. Without it, the project wouldn’t look any different, “it would just have less parking,” Overbay said. The live-work unit would be 12′ high instead of the required 13′ if the departure #2 is granted.

Other elements they reviewed included the balconies – multiple types, using glass and/or steel – and signage – some building-mounted, some canopy-mounted signage. And since there’s a bus stop along the front of Building A on Fauntleroy, they have integrated “some lower canopies” at that spot.

Landscape architect Forrest Jammer from Thomas Rengstorf and Associates talked about their part of the project. Nine street trees were shown along Fauntleroy, which has a five-foot-wide planting space along with at least six feet of sidewalk width; there’ll be a more “accented pattern” of permeable pavers near the entries, the commercial one toward the north, the residential one toward the center. There’s a courtyard on Level 2 facing the alley – including a narrow strip running south of it – and one on Level 3 facing Fauntleroy. There’ll be a bioretention planter including some natural-stone boulders, he said, and “we want to take the water and drop it down from the roof onto the rocks, to create a little splash, a little interest.” The Level 3 courtyard is fronted by private patios and will have some “accent trees,” smaller conifers most likely, Jammer said. Some “modular green roofs” will be stacked to reinforce the architectural concept, and will have planters/plantings that vary in height; the green roof also will “serve a bioretention function,” he said.

He also addressed a question raised at the previous meeting – how does A interact with the new development going in to the south? He showed three ideas, the preferred one including raised planters.

Building B would have four street trees on 38th. A few private patios border the south-side courtyard. There’s also a 42″ bioretention planter on that side, “but we’re trying to step that down.” There’ll also be some green-roof area, similar to Building A.

BOARD QUESTIONS: Rosenstock wondered how the floor plan would work, circulation-wise – at the entries, and the alleys – how they imagine people coming off Fauntleroy and Alaska to get in. They think the west-east alley is how most people will enter, so that’s why the parking entries are on the north side. “But given the topography of the site, it was a challenge,” acknowledged Overbay. He added that they’re widening the alleys, as required. Rosenstock also asked about how Building A’s Fauntleroy south end will relate to the project next door (“The Foundry”). There’s a partial walkway between the two, it was noted, and that will include an entry to the other building’s bicycle garage. (Page 44, SDCI’s Guillory noted.)

Cheng asked about the change to a more-flat facade and Overbay recapped some of the EDG feedback that then-recessed massing sections were said at the time to not be helpful in the design concept. His second question was about the live-work facades, which have smaller, steel canopies. And his third question was about a blank-wall section on the north side and how long it would be. About 64 feet, was the reply. He then asked about heights and materials for some of the planters. Possibly plastic, Renner said. Cheng also asked about lighting; Overbay said it was focused around all the pedestrian areas, and for clarity on the change that made Building B a little less of a smaller clone of Building A. Cheng also wondered if the lobby was considered for northeast-corner siting; Overbay said that was in one of the EDG concepts but the current concept was considered to be better.

Loya asked about future possibilities for subdividing the ground-floor retail space; while a rendering suggests a pharmacy (perhaps a nod to the site’s scrapped previous project proposal?), there’s nothing set so far, the architects said.

Caffrey wondered about the finish for the areas with exposed concrete – “pretty much a natural sack-and-patch finish,” said Overbay. Caffrey also wondered about lighting features along Fauntleroy; “potentially backlit … halo” style, said Overbay.

PUBLIC COMMENT: There were none, but you can still comment by e-mail – send comments to planner Guillory at

BOARD DELIBERATION: Concerns listed included from Cheng, blank wall and lighting issues on the north side. Loya also had a blank-wall issue on Building B. Rosenstock voiced concerns about street-level interaction on Building A, including the bus stop and live-work entries. Hutchins also voiced concern about “the lack of consideration for what’s going on in the alley between the two buildings” and the adjacent buildings, plus the shared plaza area, and “lack of convictions with regard to the crane (concept) which got diluted and is a little weird now on Building A.” Caffrey also wondered if they’d done enough to reinforce the parti and voiced concern about the live-work interactions on Fauntleroy. He also said there’s a lot more theme consistency since EDG. Cheng added that the crane theme is “very successful.” Caffrey recalled from the EDG meeting how they wanted the crane theme connected to the ground. Hutchins suggested that Building B appeared to have a “strange inversion,” with the entry not where you would think it would be. Caffrey observed that it’s a really difficult site to access, but Hutchins thought there would be a way to “punch up” the access from the east-west alley. “I would prefer to see that be a great alley to hang out in” especially once adjacent sites are built out. “I’m just looking for that to be more of a signified entry because I think that’s the one most people are going to levitate toward.” Loya observed that the color scheme/material placement might need a little tweaking to emphasize the entries; Hutchins said bringing the wood “down to the ground” could indeed help.

Regarding the departures, board members had no major objections toward granting them.

Caffrey noted that the alleys needed to be brought into the street-level-interaction discussion, because West Seattle’s alleys are more and more falling into that category, with people using them without vehicles as well as with them. “Some simple concrete scoring in an alley can do a lot to slow down vehicles,” he observed. Overbay said they hadn’t discussed scoring the alley to the north of Building B – they “weren’t thinking about pedestrians walking along that alley.” Caffrey said some kind of treatment could make a difference. Guillory pointed out that this was more SDOT turf since it’s right-of-way and that the board might be better served just identifying concerns rather than suggesting solutions.

Next they discussed the Fauntleroy face of Building A. No objections were raised. Caffrey said the brick facade at street level is in keeping with a “long tradition,” though others were concerned that it was “watering down” the theme because the brick was only covering one story in the design proposal. Discussion focused on whether the building should have well-defined vertical “fins.”

Loya expressed concern about the “massive” retail space, 10,000 square feet – with just one entry shown – and skepticism that a tenant could be found for something that size. She thought it might end up as three or four spaces.

Cheng suggested that a 30-foot section of blank wall be broken up with some glazing.

Rosenstock again expressed concern about the bus stop area, saying people wouldn’t necessaily want to lean against the building, especially considering it’ll be windows, so maybe seating or something else would be merited.

Regarding entrances to the live-work areas, Caffrey asked for opinions between the proposed options. Option 2 won.

On to the roofs, starting with Building A: Caffrey wondered about its main gathering space being on the east side of the building, toward the single-family neighborhood, though he said that side seemed mostly garage entrances and the like, so that might not be an issue. No other major issues arose.

Everyone was OK with the signage plan, which, it was noted, didn’t include anything like a nearby sign Caffrey gestured to which is a sore spot for some (the big lit-box sign on Junction Flats, visible out the window of the meeting room at the Senior Center/Sisson Building, even through the blinds).

The board voted to let the project clear out design review and Caffrey thanked the architects and developers for “a thoughtful, well presented project.”

WHAT’S NEXT: You can still comment (as noted above) until permits are finalized. We have a followup question out to Legacy Partners regarding when, depending on how the permit process proceeds, they expect to start work on the site.

Share This

]]> 7
DEVELOPMENT: Design Review previews for 4722 Fauntleroy Way SW, 4721 38th SW; updates on Morgan, Admiral rowhouses Mon, 16 Apr 2018 18:19:19 +0000 Three development notes as the week gets going:

SEE THE PACKETS FOR 2-PROJECT DESIGN REVIEW MEETING: This Thursday at 6:30 pm, the 2-building project at 4722 Fauntleroy Way SW/4721 38th SW takes up the entirety of the Southwest Design Review Board’s meeting. Above is the packet for the 7-story building (retail plus 231 apartments, 25 small efficiency dwelling units, 16 live-work units, 241 offstreet parking spaces); below, the one for the 4-story building (51 apartments, 1 live-work, 23 offstreet parking spaces) on 38th.

Both are by Encore Architects for developer Legacy Partners. The Thursday meeting at the Senior Center/Sisson Building (4217 SW Oregon) will be the second and potentially final review for the project (here’s our coverage of the first one back in July 2017).

CALIFORNIA/WILLOW ROWHOUSE APPROVAL: From today’s Land Use Information Bulletin, the decision approving a seven-rowhouse project at the site of this century-old house in south Morgan Junction, at 4300 SW Willow.

(King County Assessor’s Office photo)

When we first wrote about this plan last September, it had five offstreet-parking spaces, but the notice today says that’s changed to one. The approval notice opens a two-week appeal period.

COMMENT PERIOD FOR 48TH SW ROWHOUSES: Also in today’s LUIB, the official two-week comment period has opened for the two-building Admiral rowhouse project that we reported on last week, thanks to a tip and photo from Graham.

The proposal for the site of that 59-year-old house has two addresses – here’s the notice for 2329 48th SW (five units) and here’s the one for 2331 48th SW (two units).

Share This

]]> 3
TRAFFIC ALERT UPDATE: California SW reopens after tower crane goes up at PCC/Luna Apartments site Sat, 14 Apr 2018 15:47:49 +0000

8:47 AM: Thanks for the tips! One week later than originally scheduled, the tower crane is going up right now at 2749 California SW, past and future home of the West Seattle PCC store (WSB sponsor), which will be beneath the Luna Apartments. Because of the installation, California SW is closed between Lander and Stevens.

This is West Seattle’s third current tower crane, along with The Foundry on the northeast Fauntleroy/Edmunds corner and the YMSA project at the former Alki Tavern site in the 1300 block of Harbor SW. PCC says it’s expecting to open the new store in mid-to-late 2019 (and is delivering to West Seattle in the meantime; the new Burien store is expected to open in “late spring” this year).

P.S. Although buses are being rerouted around the closure, as Kim pointed out via e-mail, there are no Metro alerts.

ADDED 12:20 PM: Progress report – the view from about 15 minutes ago as we passed through the area again:

We’ll check back by mid-afternoon.

7:38 PM: We’ve been going back and forth to check on the status. By early evening, the crane arm was going up:

Heading back that way one more time in a few minutes.

8:16 PM: Not open yet but many of the vehicles are gone.

10:35 PM: Just went back to check. Now open.

Share This

]]> 34
Wondering what ever happened to Arbor Heights project at 4220 SW 100th? It’s going back to Design Review Thu, 12 Apr 2018 23:55:41 +0000 Yet another development note today:

(Project rendering by Lemons Architecture)

Almost two years have passed since we first reported on a project proposed for a small slice of commercial/multifamily-zoned property in Arbor Heights, the former church site at 4220 SW 100th. At the time, the proposal was for nine live-work units; last year, that changed to eight townhouses and one live-work unit. Today, a tentative date was set for the project’s next Southwest Design Review Board meeting, June 7th, more than a year after its second review in April 2017 (WSB coverage here). Its draft “design packet” is also now available (see it here – big PDF). The June 7th hearing is set for 6:30 pm at the Senior Center/Sisson Building (4217 SW Oregon)

Share This

WEST SEATTLE DEVELOPMENT: Plans for 13 houses and 5 townhouses Thu, 12 Apr 2018 20:22:43 +0000 Two more development notes:

13 HOUSES IN DELRIDGE, AND A RESIDENT’S REQUEST: Today’s Land Use Information Bulletin includes two notices that launch comment periods for adjacent undeveloped sites where 13 new “clustered” single-family houses are proposed. Eight of them would be at 5244 23rd SW (here’s that notice); five would be at 5232 23rd SW (here’s that notice). Each would be three stories, with parking for one vehicle. Comments are being sought on environmental impacts as well as on “allow(ing) a cluster housing development in a steep slope.” The deadline is April 25th, and you can follow the link to each notice to see how to comment.

One comment already in – and CC’d to us when sent pre-notice – is from area resident Douglas Ollerenshaw, who wrote to the city:

… I am requesting that the project include a publicly accessible stairway on the currently inaccessible Brandon St right of way on the south edge of this parcel.

A public stairway at this site would serve as a critical connection for residents of Puget Ridge to access the RapidRide H bus line that is currently being planned. It would also provide residents with access to the Delridge Library, nearby parks, and local businesses. There is currently an approximately 1 mile gap separating the closest pedestrian connections between Delridge and 23rd (at Oregon and Juneau Streets). This section of Brandon St. appears on the Feet First Trails of West Seattle map as a ‘future trail’. It is currently covered in deep shrubbery and inaccessible. …

The development site is just south of the address pinned on this map.

TEARDOWN-TO-TOWNHOUSES AT 4518 41ST SW: Three months ago, we reported on a plan to tear down a house at 4518 40th SW and replace it with five townhouses. City files now show an almost-identical plan for an almost-identical address one block west – 4518 41st SW, where this 108-year-old house will be demolished:

This five-townhouse project will go through Streamlined Design Review (public comment but no meeting), according to the city website.

Share This

]]> 7
DEVELOPMENT NOTES: Admiral, Pigeon Point, Delridge, Alki Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:19:42 +0000 A few notes on what’s planned where:

ADMIRAL TOWNHOUSES: The photo is from Graham, who says his neighborhood has long been watching to see what will happen with 2329 48th SW, where the sign has now gone up for a project that will replace a 59-year-old house with seven townhouses – one 5-unit building, one 2-unit building. The site is zoned Lowrise 1. This address hasn’t yet shown up in the city’s Land Use Information Bulletin, which is usually the announcement of a 2-week comment period.

PIGEON POINT TOWNHOUSES: A notice of application that was published today in the aforementioned LUIB opens a comment period for a 6-townhouse, 6-parking-space project at 3850 22nd SW. The notice explains how to comment by the April 23rd deadline. This is one of multiple development proposals on the block, as we mentioned last month.

SOUTH DELRIDGE TOWNHOUSES: A demolition permit is being sought for 9025 17th SW, which went through Streamlined Design Review (the no-meeting type of DR) for the 4-townhouse, 2-parking-space plan.

MORE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETINGS AHEAD: The formal notices are not out yet but here’s what’s been added to the online schedule: The Lam Bow Apartments building to replace the one demolished after the 2016 fire will go to the SW Design Review Board on May 3rd. Here’s the “design packet”:

Then on May 17th, the board is scheduled to take another look at 1250 Alki SW, the downscaled SolTerra project, where one house was moved offsite and 4 remain, facing demolition. The project is currently proposed for 40 units and 76 offstreet parking spaces; that’s fewer units and more parking than when the revised project went before the board for Early Design Guidance last May.

Share This

]]> 18
DEVELOPMENT: Half-microapartment project for 4554 Delridge Way SW Thu, 05 Apr 2018 22:10:30 +0000 (King County Assessor photo)

Delridge redevelopment continues: A new early-stage project is in the city’s online files for 4554 Delridge Way SW, proposing to replace the 83-year-old house (photo above) with a 3-story building described as 8 one-bedroom apartments, 8 “efficiency studios,” and 8 underground parking spaces. This site is across from the south end of Delridge Playfield and next door to West Seattle’s first microhousing building (4548 Delridge). Again, it’s an early-stage proposal, so no reviews or meetings are scheduled yet.

Share This