DEVELOPMENT: Land-use approval for 115-apartment project at 3417 Harbor SW

(Rendering by Atelier Drome Architecture)

Five months after passing the final stage of Design Review, the project planned for 3417 Harbor SW – just north of the west end of the West Seattle Bridge – has received land-use approval. Today’s city-circulated Land Use Information Bulletin includes the decision on the proposal for a 5-story building with 115 apartments and 65 offstreet parking spaces. This opens a two-week period for appeals – if you’re interested in filing one, this notice explains how; May 13th is the deadline. We first reported on the plan for this redevelopment project two years ago; its first Southwest Design Review Board meeting was the last one held in-person pre-pandemic; its second and final review was online last November. The project still needs other permits before construction – building and demolition among them.

13 Replies to "DEVELOPMENT: Land-use approval for 115-apartment project at 3417 Harbor SW"

  • Kalo April 30, 2021 (8:12 am)

    I thought the city parking requirements for Harbor Ave/Alki developments were one and a half spaces per unit. 

    • WSB April 30, 2021 (9:45 am)

      I don’t believe this is part of the Alki Overlay area.

  • Flan April 30, 2021 (9:12 am)

    Sad these buildings don’t include some sort of shops below! I am happy that the cat cafe and the local shops now will be getting more foot traffic though. 

    • Flan April 30, 2021 (9:24 am)

      Oh man I just noticed it will also be blocking the views of those houses behind it. Yikes

      • Foop April 30, 2021 (11:38 am)

        Affordable housing > one persons view. It might stink for the homeowner, but it’s greater good versus your personal castle.

        • d April 30, 2021 (12:01 pm)

          Where does it say it’s affordable housing? 

          • Erithan April 30, 2021 (6:06 pm)

            Thanks for pointing this out. I don’t think people realize most of the new stuff isn’t truly affordable for people who need it (even if it’s advertised as such). Even the EDU’s are more expensive (to my understanding) because they have to make everything custom due to how small they are, and they seem to be more commonly built now.I’m below the poverty line income wise, and I know without the luck to get into HUD housing (which is still rough with costs here now), there is nothing affordable in the area anymore, that I’ve seen anyway. :(

          • Foop May 1, 2021 (8:10 am)

            More / denser housing = more affordable housing, apologies I forgot an adjective. This is a net positive and my point still stands.

          • d May 7, 2021 (2:23 pm)

            Here’s the definition of affordable housing: The Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development defines an “affordable dwelling” as one that a household can obtain for 30% or less of it’s income.

            This development is a for profit driven venture. It is land, a commodity, real estate….. not “more affordable housing”.

             Let’s just wait&see what the costs of rent, lump sum move in costs, non-refundable credit checks, non-refundable deposits/administrative fees, add on monthly parking fees, pet deposit, monthly pet rent and additional W/S/G fees et al. then we can determine whom exactly can afford this housing?

            Building more/denser housing also creates more and more  housing that is unaffordable to more and more people thus creating the “affordable housing crisis” we have here in Seattle.

  • MLK April 30, 2021 (3:16 pm)

    I’m all for condos and or Apartments as long as there is one to one designated parking minimally. With 50 apt with no designated parking means Harbor Ave at the intersection of the Bridge on-ramp and off ramp will be problematic. Also, leaves less public parking for those day visitors of families. They need to have 115 designated parking spots minimally. 

  • Mj April 30, 2021 (10:43 pm)

    Flan the owners of the home’s to the west could have offered to purchase the proper to protect their views or bought a view rights easement. 

    Regarding parking – the site location is such that residents are likely to need access to a car thus is likely under parked.  A site at the Junction would work with the parking provided because residents have easy access to businesses and grocery stores that are not readily available at the 3417 Harbor Ave. site.

  • Georgina May 1, 2021 (1:16 am)

    Wish they weren’t so ugly and cheap-looking. Not affordable at all.

  • Derek May 1, 2021 (11:00 am)

    View of what? Metal and ship yards and storage facilities? You don’t get a city view or anything there. 

Sorry, comment time is over.