Another West Seattle project gets its first Design Review date: 3201 SW Avalon Way

(King County Assessor’s Office photo)

Starting with tonight’s meeting for 4747 California SW, four projects are now on the Southwest Design Review Board calendar for the next two months. A September 20th date has just been added for 3201 SW Avalon Way, proposed for 7 stories, 152 apartments, and 80 offstreet-parking spaces. We first told you about this project last December, when the early-stage proposal surfaced for the site of the 28-unit Golden Tee Apartments at Avalon/Genesee. The September 20th review – which would focus on the size/shape/siting of the building, since it’s the Early Design Guidance phase – is set for 6:30 pm at the Senior Center/Sisson Building (4217 SW Oregon); if you have comments before that, you can e-mail Abby Weber (, the city planner assigned to the project.

22 Replies to "Another West Seattle project gets its first Design Review date: 3201 SW Avalon Way"

  • Wmyron July 19, 2018 (4:30 pm)

    152 apartments > 80 off-street parking spots…. unless they are using some kind of new common core math….Maybe the “extra” parking spots needed can be on the 16th or 17th fairway at the golf course….

    • Kram July 19, 2018 (5:46 pm)

      You’re implying they will need it. Seattle doesn’t require parking for every unit and many developments require none. This building will be in a frequent transit area and the thought/hope is to get people to take the bus and not drive. There’s also an environmental factor here. Another factor is cost. If you require parking for each tenant you now have very expensive buildings and maximized rent. To even get close to something resembling affordable you need to start with making the building affordable.  Bet that golf course isn’t there in 20 years anyway…

  • MacJ July 19, 2018 (5:12 pm)

    Glad to see that ugly building getting replaced. Would look forward to similar news about the old Pizza Hut looking church down the street.

    • Goldie July 19, 2018 (11:16 pm)

      MacJ… It’s sinfully ugly, though, some of the fleek 60’s features within my home will be treasured.  The hustle is real.  

  • not yourbackyard July 19, 2018 (6:09 pm)

    Sure all of you that don’t like the view, also don’t live in the neighborhood, but have contributed to the speedway Avalon has become. 152 more units on this street is beyond what the infrastructure can handle and the city is absolutely not going to address that in the development give away.  None of you imposing your will on everyone else’s neighborhood are living here to deal with the consequences. Really tired of the rhetoric from all who think only their vision is best for everyone else. If you don’t live on Avalon, you have no money on the table and your opinion is worthless.

    • Jort July 19, 2018 (6:54 pm)

      “Development give away?” What’s that? The city has the power to withhold a property owner’s right to build what’s allowed by law to be built on their own land?Seriously. Give away? What’s the city “giving away?” If highly-concentrated, highly-centralized development in extremely narrow, very specific areas bothers you, then perhaps you should work with your city leaders to spread the allowable areas for growth around the entire city — and that means ALL zoning types, including the sacred SF zones.Until then: this is where it’s going to be, and it will get built, and we will adapt and move on.I look forward to somebody commenting with profound sadness that we are about to lose this truly unique architectural treasure.

    • KM July 19, 2018 (7:46 pm)

      Does Avalon have their own Mayor and City Council? Is it a private road? A separate municipality? 

  • just wondering July 19, 2018 (6:38 pm)

    By the time the bus gets to that area on Avalon in rush hour aren’t they  standing room only?

    • Swede. July 19, 2018 (11:00 pm)

      The Rapidride C-line is usually full leaving the Cali/Alaska junction yes. The other lines I can’t say since I never ridden them in the morning. 

  • Derek July 19, 2018 (7:27 pm)

    I already can’t find any parking on Avalon! I’m sure this is going to help :(

  • JB July 19, 2018 (8:15 pm)

    Key word is “Hope” they will use transit.  If you believe that one, I’d  sell you a great piece of property.  When is this going to stop, can’t get out of Wes Settle any time during the day as it is.  When it takes over can 1/12 hour a day to commute on the Viaduct now, it’s only can get worse with more traffic and no viaduct.

    • Matt July 19, 2018 (9:23 pm)

      I’d like to buy a great piece of property, especially if it is 5 min commute! 

  • Stephanie July 19, 2018 (8:35 pm)

    Oh Yay more File Cabinets. Absolutely no thought on original architecture. UGLY FILE CABINETS!

    • WSB July 19, 2018 (9:35 pm)

      Have you seen an early design rendering? There was nothing in the file when I looked again before publishing this.

    • John July 21, 2018 (10:35 am)

      Stephanie,Can you give us an example of the original architecture you would  like to see?

  • TJ July 19, 2018 (9:56 pm)

    What is the environmental factor there Kram? And hoping they will use the bus is at best wishful thinking. Even if some do, most of them will still have cars. The city is completely turning a blind eye to crowded streets by not addressing them, and allowing so much more growth. And real affordable housing would be built outside of Seattle, like 16th in White Center or 1st Ave in Burien, areas that look the same as the late 1980’s. 

    • Kram July 20, 2018 (5:26 pm)

      One of the many reasons Seattle and other cities are allowing these building to move forward without parking for every resident is pollution/environmental. Cars = pollution essentially. I’m not saying it’s correct logic I’m saying its just one of many reasons. Most cities are not actively planning for more cars and are in fact stifling the growth. Look how many car lanes/street parking we’ve lost to bikes for example. Agreed on the affordable housing in White Center and Burien but neither of those places are in Seattle jurisdiction. I’m an advocate of subsidized rent. We have the units of density; why does the city need to involve itself in building apartments (slowly and expensively)?

  • AMD July 19, 2018 (10:31 pm)

    For the millionth time, when people with cars choose to live in places that do not include storage for their vehicles, that is the resident’s fault, not the city’s.  I do not understand the push to have the city force car storage on people, especially given the offense people take when the city “forces” their views on other things (sugar tax, Styrofoam takeout container ban, etc.).  Either you want the city to hold everyone’s hand and tell them what to do with their stuff or you don’t.  

  • Goldie July 19, 2018 (11:24 pm)

    The hustle to find a new home is real!

  • LK July 20, 2018 (8:00 am)

    26 to 152 units?  That’s quite a leap…anyone else starting to get concerned that  we’re over building in some of these areas?  I completely understand the need for housing, however cramming 152 units into a spot that once housed 26 is kind of mind blowing.   Not sure our local infrastructure can keep pace with this type of growth…not to mention the design impact of these types of buildings that permanently morph the landscape.

  • Joe Grande July 20, 2018 (8:15 am)

    I own a condo next door at Luna Court.  We have 69 living units and two levels of deeded parking spots plus about a dozen guest parking spots.  If we are 69 units and 5 floors, how the heck will they shoe-horn 152 units on that piece of real estate?  Additionally the entrance to their parking garage will be from Genesee.  That will be a hoot in the winter.

    • John July 21, 2018 (10:33 am)

      Joe,How many parking spots total for the total 69 living units?  And  how often are those dozen guest spots fully occupied by guests by guests?

Sorry, comment time is over.