Triangle’s future: Advisory group tonight; District Council last night

Tonight, the West Seattle Triangle Advisory Group is scheduled for the second meeting in its Phase II – which is focusing on land use (zoning). The frame grab above is from the group’s first Phase II meeting last month, at the heart of the presentation you can see in full here: Should higher buildings be built in The Triangle (and the area spilling over the area to its west dominated by ex-car lots)? Here’s how that same presentation saw that area as it exists now:

Tonight’s meeting is at 6 pm at the Senior Center of West Seattle (California/Oregon). The public is welcome, and there’s a time for public comment, if you have anything to say about the area or the process. (Other documents, including renderings for possible “massing” of future development, are linked from this page on the city’s Triangle website.)

But what’s happening so far is not sitting well with the Southwest District Council, whose monthly meeting last night again included a discussion of discontent with the process. There was also some concern about how what’s been discussed at previous SWDC meetings has been conveyed – if at all – so for tonight, they were planning to prepare a statement to get those concerns on the record, including questions about whether the area’s key stakeholders have truly been included in the process (at most of the meetings, property owner/business owner participation has been fairly light), and whether the “concepts” are in line with the area’s longterm goals.

The council also discussed a report that a public-comment period will start later this month when draft streetscape proposals from the Phase I are made public, including the “Fauntleroy Boulevard” concept that has long been under discussion – and that proposal has reportedly undergone a dramatic revamp from the previous concept of a tree-lined boulevard, because bicycle lanes have been added, according to SWDC co-chair Susan Melrose of the West Seattle Junction Association. SWDC’s Morgan Community Association rep Chas Redmond called the reported bike-lane additions an “11th-hour move” that he says would not be in keeping with the city’s longstanding Bicycle Master Plan. The road proposal also is likely to come up at tonight’s meeting

10 Replies to "Triangle's future: Advisory group tonight; District Council last night"

  • Donn May 5, 2011 (1:24 pm)

    Not if it looks like anything that happened in Ballard. It is out of scale with the neighborhood.

  • Susan M May 5, 2011 (1:29 pm)

    Clarification on bike lane. It is just being discussed and if a dedicated bike lane were to be placed on Fauntleroy, it might not leave enough space for the blvd concept. Nothing decided.

  • Peter on Fauntleroy May 5, 2011 (1:48 pm)

    In the presentation from last month, I see that the hight limits would be raised but require greater setbacks from the street, more facade modulation, and more open space. Not a bad tradeoff: greater hight limits will attract defelopment, and the greater setbacks and open space requirements prevent massive, square, entire block builidngs, ala Ballard. These are good ideas. I’m glad to see city planners are learning from the mistakes they made in Ballard. Can’t wait to see what comes our of tonight’s meeting.

  • Susan M May 5, 2011 (2:31 pm)

    Clarification on bike lane. It is just being discussed and if a dedicated bike lane were to be placed on Fauntleroy, it might not leave enough space for the blvd concept. Nothing decided.

  • cj May 5, 2011 (7:32 pm)

    Looks like were in a new building craze. Just remember all these new residents will need to park somewhere.

  • huskilvr May 5, 2011 (8:48 pm)

    It would be nice if some of it was office space or something other than mixed use retail. It would be great if we had more jobs over here so all of us don’t have to try and commute out of W Seattle.

  • JN May 5, 2011 (9:45 pm)

    I really hope they add in the bike lane. I am fed up with the lack of dedicated bike facilities in West Seattle.

  • Rview May 5, 2011 (10:28 pm)

    Great, so no provision for parking, no plan for integration with existing businesses (which have paid property taxes for years), and now removing city views from existing homes? All for what will likely be subsidized development? How does this benefit the existing community?

  • Doug May 6, 2011 (4:46 am)

    What terrible reporting. The phase one draft street plan has been out in the public for a few months. I saw the plan at a big public meeting earlier this year. This Blog posting is trumping-up controversy and hearsay, but the ideas that are being discussed have merit.

    • WSB May 6, 2011 (7:18 am)

      What has been shown previously is this right-of-way concept
      and that is not necessarily what will be presented eventually to the council for review/approval. That’s what has sparked concern, not what has been already shown and discussed (we’ve been at all of those meetings). At any rate, to the point discussed at SWDC, it still includes the treed-median Fauntleroy Boulevard, and SWDC members voiced concern that might ultimately not be feasible. It’s been under discussion for at least three years, long before this phase of official Triangle planning, so it has its passionate advocates.

Sorry, comment time is over.