West Seattle development: See the packets for tomorrow’s Arbor Heights and Avalon Way design reviews; comments open for 2222 SW Barton apartments

| Development | West Seattle news

Two development notes tonight:

DESIGN REVIEW DOUBLEHEADER TOMORROW: If you’re interested in either of the projects that go before the Southwest Design Review Board tomorrow (Thursday) night, you’ll want to review the “packets” first.

Here’s the one for the 6:30 pm review, nine 3-story live-work units at the former Church of Christ site in Arbor Heights, 4220 SW 100th. Though the packet by Lemons Architecture contains the shown-above concept for the Claremont Partners LLC-owned site, this is the first phase of review, Early Design Guidance, and so the discussion will largely center on massing – size and shape.

Here’s the packet for the 8 pm review, the seven-story residential project at 3039 Avalon Way SW, currently described as including 71 units and 19 offstreet parking spaces.

Nicholson Kovalchick is the architecture firm; Union Street Investments is the owner/developer. We covered the first review back in February; this is now in the Recommendation phase, which means this could be the final meeting about the project.

COMMENT TIME FOR 2222 SW BARTON: The application is in for the 4-story apartment building proposed at 2222 SW Barton, southeast of Westwood Village, currently described as “containing 27 small efficiency dwelling units and 39 apartment units,” replacing a small apartment building. This notice opens an official comment period. Here’s the notice from the latest edition of the city-circulated Land Use Information Bulletin. You can comment until January 16th – here’s how.

anonyme January 5, 2017 (7:20 am)

Unless there are services/retail on the first floor, the Arbor Heights development is one of the most ill advised plans I’ve ever seen. While buses do run on 100th, they are few and far between; service to this area is terrible, and there are no commercial amenities. This will be the beginning of apartmentland in Arbor Heights, which has so far evaded the blight due to the above noted issues. Now we’ll have both.

HelperMonkey January 5, 2017 (8:39 am)

This is a ridiculous project to put smack in the middle of a residential area without sidewalks or regular bus routes. Hey Developers – just because you CAN doesn’t mean you SHOULD.

Josh January 5, 2017 (8:56 am)

It does seem like the Arbor Heights development sticks out as huge compared to what’s around it.

Alkiobserver January 5, 2017 (9:04 am)

Helpermonkey: Totally agree.
This is a ludicrous project for the neighborhood. In no shape whatsoever does this concept fit. Not at all. Even from the “massing” it clearly will be massive eyesore among single family residences. My fear is this will be the city’s soft opening for developers to start to encroach on SF zones. We already have issues with traffic speed on 100th St without a sudden spate of “work” spaces to add new customer traffic to it. Years ago there was a doctor’s office on 100th that was located within a residence. When the doctor retired and was selling the place, the city made it clear that its use as a commercial space was non-conforming and whatever when in had to fit within the SF zone. Fast forward to today, and we have a non-conforming former store/church that is now going to be EVEN MORE non-conforming.

WSB January 5, 2017 (9:43 am)

We’ve mentioned this before in coverage of this project, but: This proposal does not involve a zoning change.

The site is zoned NC1-30 (explained here). That is the same height for which single-family homes qualify – if that’s what was built on the site instead, or if any nearby house were torn down or added to, they could be just as tall.

Certainly that’s not the only “massing” issue/topic here, but for anyone who has not read about/discussed it previously, just wanted to be sure that was clear. If you look at Arbor Heights on the citywide zoning map – zoom in on http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/Research/gis/webplots/smallzonemap.pdf – this block is a tiny strip of commercial/multifamily zoning. There are a few other spots in AH, where, I believe, there already are apartment/condo buildings, and you’ll see the darker zoning for those spots on the map, plus of course 35th/Roxbury, where another ex-church is about to be remodeled and added to, to become a charter school. (As reported here last week, the official application is in, and as of today, the comment period is now open on that, separate story coming up.)

One main point of Early Design Guidance reviews is to determine which of the architect’s three proposed “massings” would be preferable. Two of the alternatives here are proposed with what is referred to as “departures” from the zoning code, which is not unusual, but does require specific approval from the board if granted, so you’ll want to look at those if you haven’t already – you can do a browser search for the word “departure” while looking at the packet: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/AppDocs/GroupMeetings/DRProposal3025192AgendaID6219.pdf

P.S. On the issue of whether live-works lead to bonafide business on the ground floor, that’s been a topic of discussion at past SWDRB meetings too, the general philosophical concern of whether they add to street-level “activation” or not. There are many along California SW from Admiral to Morgan, some with retail businesses, some with professional offices … – TR

D Del Rio January 5, 2017 (10:39 am)

I agree that this might be the beginning of apartment building in Arbor Heights. One must realize we are not that far from Downtown Seattle, and zoning could change. The only upside I see from it is that density could bring better bus service to the area, and maybe some businesses such as a restaurant or coffee shop.

Alkiobserver January 5, 2017 (12:54 pm)

Thanks for the further details Tracy. Understood this would not involve a zoning change, though my personal opinion is that it should… To change this tract from the non-conforming NC1 to SF. A commercial core within a much less dense area was appropriate and vogue for the neighborhood in the 1950’s, but is not applicable in current times where we now have numerous shopping and commercial cores already established. 100th Street is in need of speed bumps or a diet with the amount of arterial traffic it currently sees daily. Whether it would be a severe negative, adding in traffic from 9 retail outlets would most certainly not improve that for the neighborhood.

anonyme January 5, 2017 (1:49 pm)

I actually think a small, quaint retail core on 100th would be a valuable asset in Arbor Heights, but parking and integration into this overwhelmingly single family neighborhood would need to be carefully considered. This project is/does none of the above.

GettingCrowdedOut January 8, 2017 (9:25 pm)

Sometimes I think developers get approvals that ordinary people would not. There’s a developer who splits lots and puts up huge homes. Looks like different companies but the MO is the same. Buy a lot. Split the lots. Put houses that are twice as big as everything around it by pushing to the property lines. Architecture of the homes is all the same. Square with shed or flat roofs. The latest us on 34th and Charleston. I don’t even know how they could get it approved.

Sorry, comment time is over.