New owners of ex-Conner Junction site: Groundbreaking this year

(Sketch of California-facing view taken from project renderings last year)
We’ve just heard from Chicago-based megadeveloper Equity Residential for the first time since the company closed the deal to buy the California/Alaska/42nd site long owned by Charlie Conner. The day the deal was finalized, we’d sent an inquiry looking for comment – no response, but we renewed the request today, and just heard back from Equity spokesperson Marty McKenna.

He says Equity expects to break ground “within the next year.” He also confirms they are going ahead with the project as per the plans already approved by the city, two buildings totaling almost 200 apartments, and says they will honor the agreement made with community members regarding external elements of the project.

The remaining business tenants are renting month-by-month, he says, adding that since the new development “will have a retail aspect,” they’re also open to the possibility that all or some of them might want to be part of it. (Some have already found new locations, as most recently mentioned here just yesterday.) Though the site has its land-use approvals, a demolition permit would have to be sought before any construction could start; you can watch the project’s city webpages for signs of that as the year goes on.

84 Replies to "New owners of ex-Conner Junction site: Groundbreaking this year"

  • Neighbor January 4, 2012 (4:51 pm)

    And the commute just keeps getting better…

  • Susan January 4, 2012 (5:17 pm)

    Time to look for a job in West Seattle!

  • cj January 4, 2012 (5:20 pm)

    200 tenants, with possibly 200 cars. So when do we get the floating landscape put in for the extra roads we will need?

  • DF January 4, 2012 (5:33 pm)

    Mired in!

  • michael ford January 4, 2012 (5:55 pm)

    Just what we need more apts… go along California and all you see is apt available signs. Also it will take all the character out of the Junction, soon it will be just square apt complexes. :(

  • Ajax January 4, 2012 (6:12 pm)

    I’m kind of hoping for an earthquake to hit just my house since this is the most feasible plan to get out of West Seattle at the lowest monetary loss in the foreseeable future.

  • Seattlite January 4, 2012 (6:14 pm)

    What a mess the quaint Alaskan Junction has become. It is totally over developed with apt buildings with no roadways to accommodate any more cars! What is West Seattle going to do with all of these new people?

  • Petert January 4, 2012 (6:30 pm)

    Now THAT’S pretty ugly.

  • mightymo January 4, 2012 (6:42 pm)

    It’s sort of a drastic way to get rid of that hideous Super Supplements logo but I suppose it will have to do.

  • DF January 4, 2012 (6:50 pm)

    To answer your question seattlite. It’s going to get uglier I have a real f…ing hard time with these projects this “news” I M guessing this is a clear example of why folks moved out of southern cal. . Why don’t we ask the editor? WSB what do you say, your from there? They are now screwing us over.

  • allen January 4, 2012 (6:52 pm)

    That is hilarious!

  • Ronnie Applewhite January 4, 2012 (6:59 pm)

    Any word on what might happen to RockSport? I love that place.

  • WSTroll January 4, 2012 (7:02 pm)

    The schools are already overcrowded. Seriously, how do we avoid more of this in the future? Is it too late to stop this?

  • godofthebasement January 4, 2012 (7:14 pm)

    NIMBYs make me sad :(

  • Keep West Seattle Funky January 4, 2012 (7:29 pm)

    This is so sad…

  • chris January 4, 2012 (7:43 pm)

    Folks, this is what an urban village looks like which is what the junction has been designated since the 80’s. Density has it’s plus’s and minus’s…a big plus is that it makes mass transit very efficient. Concentrated development keeps it out of your backyard.

  • datamuse January 4, 2012 (7:48 pm)

    Y’all could move down to Highland Park. It’s still mostly single-family housing down here.

  • bsmomma January 4, 2012 (7:54 pm)

    I have lived and breathed West Seattle for almost 30 years. Between the current population and all the new living spaces inviting even more people to make EVERYTHING more congested and over crowded, this may be my push to find another hood. I hate saying that but our nice quaint and friendly neighborhood is and has been (Alki…ahem cough cough) turning into condoville.

  • zephyr January 4, 2012 (7:55 pm)

    Were aesthetics any part of the design review process? This building is really ugly at least from the rendering. Such a confused jumble of planes. No beauty here.

    This doesn’t seem to add much quality to the Junction, it dominates the street and heart of West Seattle with its massiveness. ~z

  • coffee January 4, 2012 (8:03 pm)

    I recently visited a friend who rents in the QFC building, can’t think of the name of it but anyways I was shocked at how crappy and small the space was and he pays almost 1400 a month. My house payment on 2100 sq ft is only 200 more a month, and I rent my furnished studio for 600, I realized I can get a lot more!

  • Eaglelover January 4, 2012 (8:15 pm)

    Just what we need, more congestion and out of town investments.

  • Kelly January 4, 2012 (8:18 pm)

    I’ll withhold my comments on the design. But what about any benefits this building could provide to the community?
    For once I’d like to hear about new projects like this making the news with a headline “Equity Residential Builds Seattle’s Greenest Apartments – Protecting Human Health and Water Quality”.

  • Alki Guy January 4, 2012 (8:24 pm)

    Bummer…I frequent AAA and ROCK SPORT and will miss them!

    • WSB January 4, 2012 (8:40 pm)

      Pretty much everybody is looking for new locations, Alki Guy, if they haven’t found them already. The Beer Junction will move later this year into a space that’s undergoing renovations where the Junction liquor store and train shop used to be (also home to a new salon/boutique); and there will probably be news soon about others. There’s a fair amount of commercial space available around West Seattle, both new and old …

  • Alki Guy January 4, 2012 (8:43 pm)

    Thanks WSB. I know we blog readers will be the first to know!!

  • barker January 4, 2012 (9:19 pm)

    Jeez, the glass is always half empty with you people.

  • JN January 4, 2012 (10:07 pm)

    Did I read it correctly, some people are upset with our neighborhood being INVESTED in? And people here complain about the traffic, but when the solution presents itself (more density=more demand for effective mass transit) you complain and whine. This is what the youth of today want and need, more density, efficient mass transit, walkable, compact neighborhoods. The days of driving from work back to your single family home are over.

  • JH January 4, 2012 (10:35 pm)

    I hope they offer a deal to current businesses on rent. It would be nice too if the impact is minimal to the area while it’s being built.

  • datamuse January 4, 2012 (10:37 pm)

    Hey coffee, maybe with more housing units being built your friend’s rent will go down.

  • old timer January 4, 2012 (11:02 pm)

    I wonder if the local businesses feel bad about
    all the new customers moving in.
    Funny how the only thing that is guaranteed in life
    is that which is most resisted.

  • Chuck and Sally's Van Man January 4, 2012 (11:18 pm)

    “Visualize Ballard.” It’s getting easier all the time…

  • wsguy January 5, 2012 (12:59 am)

    The small home town feel has been gone for a while now so we might as well welcome the future. Does anybody know how much the new tolls will be on the ws bridge?

  • NotMe January 5, 2012 (1:51 am)

    So, DF gets away with using f dash dashes instead of the actual f-bomb, and that’s ok? I see…
    I really don’t understand why there is this sentiment in West Seattle that only people “from here” have some sort of entitlement.
    I wonder what people’s comments in the WSB were in the 1930’s when some of the bigger buildings went in. “Well, there goes the livery stable! Next thing you know, the small town feel here in West Seattle will be gone when that there indie record store goes in. Where are these people from, anyway? Queen Anne? I say burn down that wooden bridge and keep them out!”

    • WSB January 5, 2012 (2:07 am)

      NotMe, I just got flagged about that a few minutes ago. Spent five hours at a school board meeting and the battery ran out two-thirds of the way in. Don’t draw inferences, it’s going away. – TR

  • Stu January 5, 2012 (6:21 am)

    Does anyone know if the other buildings in the Junction (ie: Easy Street, Husky Deli, Elliot Bay buildings)are protected or will see the entire junction be mowed down and replaced with these Ballard/Queen Ann type buildings?

  • rw January 5, 2012 (6:21 am)

    Parking will become worse in the Junction. That is part and parcel of a thriving downtown. I also have no doubt new creative retailers will be inclined to locate in West Seattle to serve the increased population. And I do not think the building pictured for this site is unattractive. It might even end up being attractive. I’m curious what the people who called the sketch unattractive would consider an “attractive” modern mixed use building.

    • WSB January 5, 2012 (7:58 am)

      Stu – there is nothing in The Junction at the moment that is a historical landmark, if that’s the kind of protection you are asking about. The zoning along California for the two blocks of business district is 85′ – you can see the zoning on this map
      Unless the rules on this have changed since the 2008 development-boom bust, if you propose a project for a building of a certain age, it has to be studied for potential landmark status. (This is what happened before The Kenney shelved their big plan in favor of smaller improvements, for example.) I have heard people say they’d expect such status for the California/Alaska buildings on the north side of the intersection – although that COULD simply mean the facades would have to be preserved, while add-on upper floors were allowed. – TR
      P.S. Regarding parking, which several people have mentioned – This particular project went through the system before the city rules changed and includes 271 parking spaces underground (as noted on this city permit page for one of the buildings ) in a shared garage, which also will include space underneath the alley, which is why the project went through a street/alley vacation process as well as the standard rounds of design review, etc. Some of them were to be set aside for the building’s retail space.

  • W January 5, 2012 (6:29 am)

    I hope that design isn’t final. It’s beyond ugly.

  • Brandon January 5, 2012 (7:11 am)

    Floor to ceiling window, good. Getting rid of the ugly buildings that house rocksport and frankly most of that block, good. Face it folks, you live in a city, not a town. If you want to live in a small town, there are plenty. Also, how to the junction businesses feel about more potential customers? Also, if you want a less dense urban area I hear Detroit has plenty of empty neighborhoods.

  • Rick January 5, 2012 (7:16 am)

    @barker: The glass isn’t half empty, or half full. It’s just broken.

  • Ex-Westwood Resident January 5, 2012 (7:57 am)

    One more reason to make fewer trips to the junction…lack of parking, which will only get worse with this block of apts going up.

  • Good Grief January 5, 2012 (8:37 am)

    Thank you Brandon!! WSB,Hope it’s okay to post this, if not sorry! A great article on desnity. this

  • Dave January 5, 2012 (8:43 am)

    “Lack of parking”? Nonsense, we have, and will have, more parking, esp free parking THAN ANY OTHER neighborhood in Seattle. Try to find 3 free parking lots within 2 blocks (which we have in the West Seattle) on say Capital Hill or Ballard. Go on, try. This corner building is not removing ONE SINGLE parking space. Grow up. This the apt folks will have their own underground spaces, and this is GOOD from a urban planning standpoint. I WANT growth in the dense heavily transit oriented corridors like this. GOOD for them!

    90% of the Junction is junk. This isn’t a row of Victorian ‘Painted Ladies’ or historic landmarks. The buildings housing Easy Street, Cupcake Royale and Eliott Bay Brew Pub are about the only good buildings. The rest are garbage. Radio Shack, PetCo, etc are just junk. Sorry not every junky 50’s retail storefront is a magic building worth saving. Most of these, like the 50s/60s “redo” of the King Street train station are HORRIBLE, just examples of the worst architecture of that period, where pseudo-modern took over and the old brick and ornate buildings were destroyed or covered in flat bland stucco. You could tear out most of the Junction and I wouldn’t shed a tear. The buildings being torn down for this project are throw array bland featureless uninspired architecturally meaningless mid century storefronts. Just cookie cutter boxes. NO loss there.
    If you drive by the Vitamin Shoppe / Rock Sport and think “god, that’s a beautiful building” then you need your head examined. :)
    If you want an example of ‘keeping’ a beautiful architecturally significant building, go downtown and get a coffee at the walk up Monorail Espresso, and look up. Notice the old Coliseum Theater building (now Banana Republic). THAT is a beautiful architecturally significant building. The Vitamin Shoppe (old bank) is not.

  • CB January 5, 2012 (9:09 am)

    haters gonna hate

  • A January 5, 2012 (9:26 am)

    Parking is what keeps me away in the evenings and weekends. The parking garage that will be under the building, will it be free?….I’m sure not.

  • Seattlite January 5, 2012 (9:35 am)

    Who said anything about hate? People are expressing their opinions on this blog. Change is good but change without planning is not good. The urban village concept originally envisioned that rail would connect all the urban villages. Over development is not good when there is no infrastructure to support increased density. Seattle and WA state politicians have a pattern of ignoring rejection votes which does cause voters’ ire.

  • datamuse January 5, 2012 (9:38 am)

    I ride my bike to the Junction. Place could use more bike racks.
    I think parking, and/or the scarcity thereof, is relative. Clearly none of you people have ever lived on Capitol Hill.

  • WS commuter January 5, 2012 (10:19 am)

    I’ve lived in W. Sea for 30 years … moved here just before the high bridge opened … watched the changes as we morphed from a sleepy community of older folks who worked at Boeing and the steel mill and such, to all us yuppies (me included) moving in and changing the ‘hood. Didn’t have WSB back then, but there was a current of resentment at the yuppies in the 80’s and early 90’s. But W. Sea survived and even thrived. Old timers will recall the Junction filled with Van’s and Shaffrons and Tradewell … and those businesses died. The newer businesses have revived the Junction. New restaurants make it a happening place to be in the evening, notwithstanding the parking challenges. Same thing is happening today. New development is inevitable … and we’ll be just fine.

  • questionable January 5, 2012 (10:23 am)

    I still have never had a problem parking within a block or two of the junction. Between free street parking and block after block of free lot parking west of california, I doubt I will have a problem even after this structure goes up. “No parking” is a complaint of the lazy.

  • villagegreen January 5, 2012 (10:44 am)

    @datamuse – Exactly! I’m amazed every time someone complains how difficult it is to park at the Junction. My god, the place is surrounded almost on all sides by FREE parking. Yes, most of the parking is full at times, but I’ve never spent more than 5 minutes looking for a free spot. For some perspective, Capitol Hill is thriving. Businesses and restaurants are opening up daily, it seems. And the parking is insane. One can easily spend 20 minutes to find a spot and then spend the next 20 walking to where you need to go. Things are no where near that bad here and one large apt. building isn’t going to bring us anywhere close. West Seattleites seem extremely spoiled when it comes to free parking. Maybe in years past West Seattle really was more like a suburb, but that it changing–and IMO thank god!

  • Peter on Fauntleroy January 5, 2012 (11:35 am)

    I continue to be amazed at everyone in WS who cries about every new building being the end of the world.

    We need more density in WS. A lot more density. Here are only a few of the many reasons why we need more density:

    High density development with easy access to transit is cheaper, cleaner, more efficient, and more sustainable that single houses that lead to single occupant vehicles.

    Density builds community by getting people out of the isolated coccoon of their cars and far flung houses so they can interact with their neighborhood.

    Density spurs economic growth by increasing the customer base for existing businesses and supplying the population mass that new businesses need to survive.

    Density raises home value for owners be erasing blight and decay, and it lowers rent for renters by increasing supply vs. demand.

    Maybe most importantly, we will never get light rail in WS until we have the population density to make it economically viable, and we have a loooong way to go to reach that point.

    I’m very excited about this project making WS a better place to live, and hopefully a lot more development will follow in the Triangle too now that it’s zoned to allow more residential development.

  • justbob January 5, 2012 (11:36 am)

    I like the look of the new building. West Seattle is really getting cool. Hope the Rocksport sticks around too and I’ll be in heaven.

  • Creekside January 5, 2012 (12:04 pm)

    I say let the Downtown Emergency Services Center have at least half the units in this new apartment building in the Junction instead of placing 75 new housing units on Delridge Way at Brandon Street. Makes a lot more sense than sticking them in a Delridge, a neighborhood that offers them little, if anything to do besides hunker down, be isolated and find themselves in harms way.

  • A January 5, 2012 (1:45 pm)

    @ Villagegreen.
    It’s not just one large apartment building! Look at the triangle, QFC building, all along California ave and Alki….they are everywhere. I have lived here all of my life and worked in the junction most of it. There are better places to build, like where Huling Chevrolet used to be and the used car lots. I think the biggest issue is the building they are planning on building is on California Ave and defaces the main Junction. If they were 3 blooks north or 3 block south there would not be so much resistance from the people that have lived here and owned these little businesses for decades

  • Seattlite January 5, 2012 (1:58 pm)

    I agree with you A. I like the way the Admiral Junction redid the Safeway, retail, apts by only adding a couple of floors of apts. It is esthectically much more appealing and fits the community as a whole rather than the tall apt building complex proposed in this post. Morgan Street Junction looks pretty good too. I like the way Edmonds has kept the uniqueness and quaintness of their retail area. Too bad WS did not have the foresight and planning to do the same for the Alaska Junction.

    • WSB January 5, 2012 (2:08 pm)

      You may know this already, but zoning is different in Admiral, mostly 4 stories max (40′). In Morgan, it’s three stories (30′) in many spots, although I can think of some existing exceptions (south end of MJ, plus Cal-Mor Circle right by Fauntleroy/California).

  • Todd January 5, 2012 (2:54 pm)

    This has been a hot topic since Conner announced what he wanted to do and convinced the city council to re-zone the area for his plans.
    Parking IS an issue – there are fewer spots to park now, and more restaurants, bars and shops. As I recall, the plans called for equal or slightly less parking for the number of proposed residential units. This does not make up for the entire lot behind Rocksport for any of the businesses that may be locating in the new building – likely to have street parking restrictions as well. I do and will continue to miss the “old” WS, but living here for many years, I can say that in the late 80’s the Junction nearly died. JC Penny’s left, the grocery store moved to it’s current location (Thriftway in Morgan Junction) and the drugstores were closing up (Morton’s, etc.)
    It’s a double-edged sword – I like that we actually have a “nightlife” now (non-existent in 1990), but I really dislike the over-building without plans for additional traffic and parking (Delridge and Fauntleroy have become one lane arterials, as will Alaska soon enough). Unless all of these new residential units will contain people who work in WS, they will have to drive over the bridge to get somewhere…is there a sudden jobs boom around?
    Hope the Rocksport finds new digs.

  • datamuse January 5, 2012 (3:18 pm)

    Todd, if parking is an issue then why is the Jefferson garage mostly empty every time I go into it? Or are we only counting free parking in our estimates?
    I thought the changes to Fauntleroy were to keep people from cruising down it at freeway speeds. No?

  • Peter on Fauntleroy January 5, 2012 (3:27 pm)

    Lots of people worried about parking. Others have made good points about how silly these concerns are. Let’s parse the numbers, shall we?
    OK. “Almost 200” apartments. Lets call that 190 apartment. The building will have 271 parking spots. Right away there are 81 excess parking spaces.
    With me so far? OK. Next, in Seattle only 74% of renting households (not people, household) own cars. So for 190 households that 141 cars (rounding up). 271-141 gives us a net total of 130 MORE parking spaces than this building actually needs.
    So, could one of the NIMBYs please explain to me how ADDING a net of 130 parking spaces to the Junction is going to make parking worse?

  • Seattlite January 5, 2012 (4:05 pm)

    Peter why do you have to call people names? Todd’s points are valid and he made them without sarcasm and name-calling. The City council caved re rezoning much to the chagrin of high percentage of West Seattle residents.
    Parking is an issue if you want to park right in front of the retail core on California Ave. If you don’t mind walking a block or two, there is not much of a problem. I believe that underground parking can be kind of intimidating based on safety.

  • Bruce Nourish January 5, 2012 (4:42 pm)

    My God. It’s the end of the world.

  • datamuse January 5, 2012 (4:44 pm)

    Seattlite, that’s why I said it’s relative. West Seattle is the ONLY place I have EVER lived where being able to park right in front of where you intend to do business is a reasonable expectation, and that includes the small town in western Massachusetts with a downtown core that was only four blocks long.
    We can argue back and forth about whether it should be, I guess (and for the record, I get that for some folks, a block or two might be a hardship–that’s about how far my mother in law can get before she needs a wheelchair). But here’s the part I wish someone would explain to me:
    If these new residential units are being added right IN the Junction, AND they come with their own parking, then how exactly are they contributing to a lack of parking on the street?

  • A January 5, 2012 (4:46 pm)

    Underground parking is also going to have a fee. Then what about late hours? The nightlife people will be locked in…I know I have been locked in a garage, or two, downtown after hours.
    @datamuse, the reason the Jefferson Square garage is not full is because they charge to park.

  • datamuse January 5, 2012 (4:50 pm)

    Bruce: well, it IS 2012…who knew that it would end like this? ;)

  • Seattlite January 5, 2012 (4:53 pm)

    datamuse — One answer could be that whoever occupies the new residential units may have one, two, or three vehicles per unit depending on how many people live in one unit. I don’t know how large or the number of bedrooms the residential units will have but I do know that it is not unusual for resdential home occupants to have more than one vehicle which can even clog up residential streets.

  • datamuse January 5, 2012 (4:53 pm)

    A: So, we ARE only counting free parking, then. Got it.

  • datamuse January 5, 2012 (5:00 pm)

    Fair enough, Seattlite. I seem to remember somebody complaining about that very issue in the Junction not too long ago, and even wondering why the residents couldn’t, you know, park somewhere else, for whatever sense that makes. And since I DID live on Capitol Hill and First Hill, where a lot of the apartment buildings have no or limited tenant parking, I can see how that could be a problem.
    Maybe we could improve the transit system, or something. I know, I know, crazy talk…

  • WS Small business owner January 5, 2012 (6:39 pm)

    Having worked in the multi-family industry (apartments), I assume the majority of the underground parking will be for residents only. They usually have a gated entrance to keep shoppers out of their spaces. There will probably be one floor of parking for shoppers and guests of the building, limited to a few hours. That means about 20 spaces with time limitations.

    And as a small business owner in West Seattle, I say the more the merrier. Plus the current buildings on that corner are way uglier than what they propose. Granite slabs and that Super Suppliments sign? It could not be worse than that.

  • Peter on Fauntleroy January 5, 2012 (7:11 pm)

    @Seattlite: My comments were not insulting or sarcastic; if you want to take it that way that’s your choice. But since you refer to Todd’s comment I’ll use that as an example of how people tend jump to conclusions based on their fears without analyzing the issue.
    Todd’s wrote: “the plans called for equal or slightly less parking for the number of proposed residential units.” That is factually incorrect. Observe: From the original story: “two buildings totaling almost 200 apartments,” and from WSB comment on 1/5/12 7:58am: “This particular project went through the system before the city rules changed and includes 271 parking spaces underground (as noted on this city permit page for one of the buildings” As to the parking lot behind Rocksport, those 30 or so spaces are more than made up for in the excess parking planned for this building. And currently they primarily benefit a bar which people shouldn’t drive to anyway (yes, I’m against drunk driving).
    You see Seattlite, facts matter. I form my opinions only after examining the facts. If you consider my citation of the facts that inform my opinion to be “name calling” or “sarcasm,” well, I’m not sorry.
    Now on to your own comments, Seattlite: “Parking is an issue if you want to park right in front of the retail core on California Ave.” That’s perfect example of the sense of entitlement for car owners that has  resulted from the US government’s pro-car pro-sprawl social engineering of the late 20th century. Oh no, if I can’t take two tons of steel with me, how can I get anywhere?! (See, that’s sarcasm.)
    Next, you stated in response to datamuse “whoever occupies the new residential units may have one, two, or three vehicles per unit depending on how many people live in one unit.” There’s no way to know that, but it is extremely unlikely. Statistically, only 74% of renting households (not people, households) in Seattle have cars. From Sightline via SBB: . Total renting household divided by total cars owned by renters equals 0.74 cars per renting household. Even one car per apartment is unlikely, to say nothing of three.
    Parking isn’t the problem, a society addicted to big, dangerous, polluting machines for personal convenience is the real proble. And high density development on transit lines (just like this) is the solution.

  • NotMe January 6, 2012 (1:35 am)

    Thanks for the passive aggressive rant, Peter. I feel so much more informed now – and gosh, you were so direct that you frighten me a little.
    Did you get the sarcasm there, too? Good. Get over yourself. My car is not big, it isn’t dangerous, and as for polluting, it isn’t anywhere near as much as a bus. And, I am not addicted to my car. Thanks, neighbor.

  • Theresa Anderson January 6, 2012 (6:30 am)

    In the meantime of progress let’s enjoy what we still have. Young at Art is open for children and adults to enjoy. We offer open studio with theme’s of the day, art workshops for kids and adults, among a myriad of other community art needs. Creation and destruction go hand in hand don’t they.
    See you there.

  • sgs January 6, 2012 (2:37 pm)

    Development, parking, mass transit are all issues that come with increasing density. My objection is that the location for a tall building is terrible. I agree with an earlier comment that 3 blocks north or south would have been acceptable.

    Any talk of parking permits for the west side of the Junction? We who live here need a place to park – if you are coming into the Junction from another neighborhood, please ride the bus or bike.

  • questionable January 6, 2012 (3:27 pm)

    You have to feel sorry for the car addicts who don’t even know that they’re so hopelessly connected to their vehicle. If all gas stations closed tomorrow I’d guess around sixty percent of those reading this would be dead within a month.

  • Under Achiever January 6, 2012 (3:38 pm)

    For a bunch of people who probably consider themselves progressive and open minded change appears to be quite difficult.
    Wow. Just wow.

  • datamuse January 6, 2012 (3:44 pm)

    Just cause I bike up there from Highland Park doesn’t mean everyone can, sgs. I’m confused: do you want people bringing their business to the Junction or not?

  • Pokey January 6, 2012 (3:45 pm)

    @ Peter,

    Ditto what NotMe said !

  • w January 6, 2012 (11:28 pm)

    controlled by zoning code: overall size of building, use, whether & how much parking is required.
    goals of land conservation, energy efficiency, reducing car dependence & making the city a better place for pedestrians are likely to drown out any cries for more convenient parking or the old days before everybody else moved here. During the comment period for zoning changes, focus on protecting and reinforcing what you think is valuable, such as character, history or experiential quality. ie: “ I like the small town feel of the alaska junction: the small scale, eclectic retail establishments make it an inviting place to be – new buildings near this intersection should create this same feel, or be set back far enough so as not to disrupt it.”

    controlled by design review meetings: aesthetic issues, materials, building massing & modulation

    Saying you think something is “ugly” doesn’t help anyone – say what makes it ugly to you, why it matters to the neighborhood & suggest what type of thing you would rather see. ie: “that super-supplements building is featureless & squat, the signage too dominate, it does not give enough architectural importance to a prominent intersection, a building that defines the corner with a more welcoming entry and a greater height would be better.”

    controlled by WSB comments: ?
    It’s hard to show up in person & letter writing is a dying art…but until WSB is officially incorporated as part of the process, these remain the best ways of reaching people who make decisions.

  • bsmomma January 7, 2012 (8:14 am)

    I’m all for change. But why do we need more living space? There is already so much brand new, in the works and soon to be new Condos/High End Apartments.

  • questionable January 8, 2012 (10:58 am)

    We’ll keep needing more living space as long as people keep breeding out of control. Causality’s a bitch.

  • coughfeenut January 8, 2012 (1:00 pm)

    @Dave- couldn’t agree with you MORE!!!!! and you are so right about all those mismatched ugly businesses like radio shack and super supplements and a lot others……OMG you really do need to get your head examined if anyone thinks those are worth saving..or just nice to look at!!!!SSSSShriek!!!!

    The total lack of buildings nicely blending together has always bugged the crap out of me in the junction…hopefully in the years to come we will have more consistent look without losing flavor.

  • WSB January 8, 2012 (1:13 pm)

    Reminder of WSB rules. One name per person/IP per comment thread. In another comment thread, you can use some other handle if you want to, but only one per comment thread so what’s really one person with four comments SHOWS as one person with four comments rather than one person pretending to be four. Thank you. – TR

  • Jeremy January 10, 2012 (5:56 pm)

    Could someone tell me what is going down with RockSport?

    Not much is mentioned about the businesses down there except the Beer Junction.

    • WSB January 10, 2012 (6:04 pm)

      They have not announced a new location yet. We’re still following up with the businesses that haven’t made announcements yet – certainly it’s not like the wrecking ball is coming in tomorrow, but the months will go by fast. – TR

Sorry, comment time is over.