Next Design Review meeting set for Conner’s Junction project

| Development | West Seattle news

The city has set a “tentative” date for the Conner Homes Junction project’s next Southwest Design Review Board meeting – potentially the last one, if the board approves of the proposal: March 12, 6:30 pm, location TBA (added later: the site is now set – High Point Library). This is the two-building project, California/Alaska/42nd with an alley between the two; the image above is one of several we published from the most recent city Design Commission meeting related to the “alley vacation” proposal (because of the underground parking garage) that’s part of the plan. That commission has seen that street-level portion of the project twice since the last Design Review meeting on the entire project (WSB coverage here, from last May; official city report from the same meeting is here), and still has to review it again before SDOT can consider signing off on that component.

mrhineh February 17, 2009 (9:28 am)

Is the California/Alska Junction zone ready for Bellevue-fication? Ughh. 5 story buildings in the Junction will start the strip mall breakdown up and down Cali. Is this what we want??

Meghan February 17, 2009 (9:55 am)

Yes, I would say that the Junction (i.e. the center of a densely populated part of the major city that is Seattle – not some suburban town – whether you like it or not) IS ready for 5 story buildings. And if you know anything about urban design, you would know that this is JUST the type of development that we need. It is actually the opposite of what Bellevue did to get the bad rap they got (i.e. build strip malls with parking in front), though Bellevue has learned from that mistake since. This is reasonably dense housing with sidewalks, underground parking, and public open space near public transportation. This is smart design! Join the 20th, er I mean the 21st century.

rbj February 17, 2009 (10:10 am)

I believe that smart design would leave the main streets alone and build for density around it, much like the complex going in behind petco that doesn’t violate the junction but stands away from it.

Smart design doesn’t necessarily mean ripping down the old and putting up leed certified condos in its place. It means preparing for density as well as creating it and doing so in a respectful manner.

My main concern is that businesses underneath the building will be kinko’s, subway and etc. This has happened all throughout other communities in Seattle. How do we build for “smart design / growth” while not homogenizing our neighborhood?

I’m all for density but we can do better.

Cleveland Ken February 17, 2009 (10:47 am)

Yup, stack ’em like cord wood. Maybe if we are lucky we can get a Wal-Mart that would be good, huh? Looks like we already have the shootings and other great stuff so let’s make it happen. I’m all for the screwing up of West Seattle. There’s no stopping now.

mrhineh February 17, 2009 (11:27 am)

Well, I guess if thats the signature of WS that you like, you can have it. I think we can do better, without disrupting a last vestage of traditional West Seattle. As I glance at the Junction, I see plenty of 21st development I can tolerate and support. But to me, some things can be built aound, leaving a sense of long standing community, rather than some trendy new footprint to mix with the architectural history.
If you note my feedback, it has to do with California Avenue, not “reasonably dense housing with sidewalks, underground parking, and public open space near public transportation”.
Alki has already gone to the yuppies, I guess the hill tops are next.

NoMoreBellevueBlurb February 17, 2009 (1:08 pm)

I agree that we should preserve architectural history (like the buildings Verite and Easy Street are in), but the buildings that are going to be replaced are, quite frankly, rubbish. I’m also quite sick of hearing this Bellevue blurb over and over. This, as Meghan stated, is NOT what Bellevue got its crappy image for.
All that said, I also don’t like the new buildings as they are presented right now. I think the base of the California side building should be limited to 2 stories (just like the buildings surrounding it) and consist out of a steel and brick façade (like a modern version of the Verite building across the street). The second level should house restaurants preferably with some kind of covered outdoor space. On top of that 2 story base I would add 3 residential levels that are well set back (~12 feet). The space opened up for the setbacks could be used for residential patios.
BTW I like yuppies because they don’t shoot others (too much to lose…).