REMINDER: Triangle megaproject ‘early design outreach’ meeting Wednesday

6:08 PM: Tomorrow brings the first public discussion of the biggest project since the city launched the Early Community Outreach for Design Review process – the early-stage plan for two mixed-use buildings with ~500 apartments on part of the Sweeney family’s land along Fauntleroy west of Avalon. (The official project addresses are 4440 Fauntleroy Way SW and 4406 36th SW.) The meeting’s at 6 pm Wednesday at nearby Chaco Canyon Organic Café (3770 SW Alaska); this stage of the process is generally informal and, as seen in the ECODR meetings we’ve covered, a good chance to truly talk with, more than listen to, the project team. No RSVP required.

9:33 PM: Checking the project’s files, we’ve found a few more details. Pre-application documents say the 4400 Fauntleroy site is envisioned so far as 215 apartments and 135 offstreet-parking spaces; the 4406 36th site, 285 and 185.

21 Replies to "REMINDER: Triangle megaproject 'early design outreach' meeting Wednesday"

  • Plf February 11, 2020 (8:26 pm)

    I just don’t understand how folks don’t understand how these kind of projects and development  negatively impact our infrastructure Be it traffic, parking, utilities, sewers we are challenged with an aging system this just adds stress on systems that appear fragile nowthe traffic which is horrible now can’t imagine what that area will be like and the cascade to all of West Seattle how about increase density in magnolia and spread out the pain

    • WSB February 11, 2020 (9:32 pm)

      Keep in mind that this project will be practically next door to the Avalon light-rail station. But parking is in the plan – 300+ spaces. Adding that info above.

    • Tsurly February 12, 2020 (6:53 am)

      Yawn, more discussion about traffic. Can’t we discuss anything else?

    • wscommuter February 12, 2020 (8:30 am)

      @PLF … not sure what your point is.  It’s private property.  The owner can do whatever he or she or they want.  The city can’t deny a building permit arbitrarily.  And yes, as other commentators have pointed out – there is a need for the housing.  

    • AMD February 12, 2020 (1:01 pm)

      Many, many times when asked for more money for transit and other infrastructure improvements, the response has been: “we don’t need to spend money on that, there aren’t enough people around to justify it.”  So you can thank the voters for the decision that we should bring people in first and then address their infrastructure needs.  The city did think of those things.  The voters decided they knew better.  And here we are.

  • Plf February 11, 2020 (11:15 pm)

    Ok so a bit of relief with parkingthat is but one of the stressors on our infrastructure which is fragile at best

    • Peter February 12, 2020 (7:55 am)

      I just love how people dismiss our critical and worsening housing shortage by concern trolling about how our infrastructure is allegedly on the verge of collapse. It’s not. We. Need. More. Housing. 

      • CMT February 12, 2020 (4:52 pm)

        And I just love how YOU attempt to wave away legitimate and critical issues as “concern trolling” because it interferes with your own single-minded view of the world.  Seriously, why do you think your viewpoint is SO much more valid than someone else’s?   Do you have any knowledge of the state of West Seattle’s existing water/sewer infrastructure and what happens to that sewage when it fails/overflows?   Do you actually  not understand that more than one need can exist and that proper planning can actually take both into account?  Or do you just not care because you want to be the only “right” one. 

        • john February 12, 2020 (5:39 pm)

          CMT is harvesting ‘red herrings’ with the claim that the issues of sewer infrastructure are a valid concern caused by new development.  That is simply not true.  No city officials support such claims.   The sewer issue is caused by the vast majority of existing homes that hardline their hard-surface runoff into the sanitary sewer and not the storm drains.  This issue preceded by half a century the current construction boom.   All new construction is required to mediate their runoff and separate it from the sewer.  Actual residential sewage has been greatly reduced through the widespread use of water saving appliances, toilets and low flow showers and faucets. CMT’s lack of understanding of this issue is one reason someone expressed ‘concern trolling’. 

          • CMT February 12, 2020 (9:20 pm)

            You are incorrect regarding West Seattle’s water/sewer infrastructure issues but my primary point was the dismissiveness of another’s viewpoint.  I’m not surprised you missed that given your own post.

          • john February 12, 2020 (9:37 pm)

            What part was I incorrect about?  

          • CMT February 13, 2020 (10:43 am)

            By way of example only, since I don’t have the energy to continue this soul sucking exchange, most of the WS Junction sewer pipes are 8″ diameter and either at or near capacity with the existing population.  Exponentially increasing the population will result in over capacity with the potential to create significant problems, including environmental.  No doubt you will have a pat answer to this but it is a big issue as time will show.Yes, our population is in need of more housing, however the argument “but housing” should not be used to as an excuse to ignore the real impacts of proposed development.Not accusing people with different viewpoints of “‘harvesting ‘red herrings'” and “concern trolling” would also be a good start to collaboration rather than division. 

          • john February 13, 2020 (11:44 am)

            Thanks for your response CMT.  Discourse is always good.  Did you happen to know about the Seattle City Sewer Map?  According to it, the WS Junction of Alaska & California is serviced by steel 12 inch sanitary sewer to a 18 inch steel combined.  The maps shows no 8″ pipes that you claim service “most of the the WS Junction”.
            Let the facts be seen.

          • CMT February 13, 2020 (10:08 pm)

            Yes  I do happen to know about the map.  By all means let the facts be seen, starting with the fact that your 12″/18″ diameter example is for the intersection of Alaska & California only.  If that intersection were the entirety of the Junction you would be correct.   However, it is not – the WS Junction Urban Village neighborhood comprises well over 20 blocks surrounding that intersection.   If you were to look at those, you would see many pipes of 8 inch diameter that are insufficient under current conditions.  Now that you have helpfully provided the map, people can verify that for themselves rather than reading our debate.

  • bolo February 11, 2020 (11:18 pm)

    It’s all for the greater good. Seattle is suffering a tremendous housing shortage. And vibrancy shortage. Infrastructure will follow, I am told.

  • David February 12, 2020 (3:49 am)

    Is there a map that shows where this will be? What businesses will be wiped out when this occurs? Where is the proposed Avalon light rail station in relation to this?

    • bolo February 12, 2020 (11:31 am)

      Repurposing Alki Lumber sites. You’ve likely seen the sign on your way in/out of W Seattle.

  • Kdubs February 12, 2020 (11:06 am)

    Will this wipe out alki lumber? What is there now? Thanks!

    • WSB February 12, 2020 (11:57 am)

      Alki Lumber plans to move to a new TBD location. Their owners are the property owners, who have chosen to redevelop.

  • Scarlett February 14, 2020 (1:22 pm)

    It is highly unfortunate that many commenters do not refer to the City’s own documents when making infrastructure generalizations.  Readers should review the City’s own 2035 Comprehensive plan which clearly shows in Figure 3.9-7, via a lovely red spiderweb  graphic, that about 90% of the City sewer lines are indeed <12″ and are likely (at the time of the plan’s preparation) at capacity, or capacity constrained.  This is the City’s own conclusion as stated in the City of Seattle 2035 Comp Plan. Too bad they don’t care much about this-because there is zero discussion to address the issue. If you  do an inventory of the proposed up-zone Junction urban village streets, using the GIS sewer map, it is glaringly true that at least 32 of our urban village blocks have sewer lines which are <12 inches in diameter and many are also are 8″ conveyances.  The sewer map speaks for itself.  What is disheartening is our continued dumping of sewage into the Sound.  The  City- EPA -Department of Justice, 2013, consent decree mandates the City self report all combined storm/ sewer overflows on an annual basis. In 2017 alone, the city dumped about 147 million gallons of storm/sewage overflow into the “waters of the United States”.  This quantity is sadly not unusual because in 2015 discharge was 149 million gallons storm/sewage released into the local waters like the sound and Duwamish. residential development also uses the sewers in most instances— read the city building codes and go talk to the folks building these sites.  The only thing different now is they hold roof water on site in crappy little retention structures and ostensibly release it slowly back into the sewers. How do you do this slowly when you have 30 days of non stop rain?  You don’t!   My roof rain catchment, for my old house, goes back into the lawn and eventually the ground water as do most of my neighbors. What is also missing from this conversation is that the City SPU has no current system wide analysis of the capacity of their sewer -storm system. They did just start an analysis that was awarded to a consultant in the last couple of years or so.  That project includes an Asset Management Plan -including pipe capacity analysis.  Too bad the analysis won’t be done, by their own timeline, until 2022.  It is insane to continue adding to the overburdened CSO system without this information or to have a plan to address capacity, but that is the Seattle way.  They should have done this long ago.  BTW, the myriad of retentions structures they are building, including the CSO tank at Lohman Beach only handle a small amount of CSO run off. Lastly there is the other city document worth noting called the “West Seattle Triangle Land Use Code and Zoning Amendments”  9-1-11, that says pretty much the same thing as the Comprehensive Plan regarding <12″ sewer lines, but also adds, on page 31, that “The relatively constrained status of sewer lines is typical of other areas in the city”.

    • CMT February 14, 2020 (4:01 pm)

      What Scarlett said!

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published.