DEVELOPMENT: Preview ‘early design’ before review meeting Thursday for 4448 California SW

The newest redevelopment proposal for The Junction goes to the Southwest Design Review Board in an online meeting this Thursday. It’s a first look at 4448 California SW, in the Early Design Guidance phase, so the proposal focuses on options for the building’s size, shape, and placement on site, not its final appearance. It’s proposed for 96 apartments across six stories over ground-floor commercial space, no offstreet parking proposed (none is required), on a parcel zoned for up to 75 feet, currently holding the commercial building that’s rented to Doll Parts Collective and a mortgage lender. Here’s the meeting packet by architects Atelier Drome:

4448 California packet by WestSeattleBlog

(You can also see the meeting packet here.) Information on how to attend/watch/listen to the meeting at 5 pm Thursday (July 15th), and how to comment on the project’s design, can be found here.

39 Replies to "DEVELOPMENT: Preview 'early design' before review meeting Thursday for 4448 California SW"

  • J Taylor July 13, 2021 (12:59 pm)

    Cannot understand why West Seattlites stand for development 1) without off-street parking for residents,  2) green building such as roof-top solar panels or green roofs, and 3) more space for replacement of perimeter trees. Way to go green.

    • Ice July 13, 2021 (8:38 pm)

      Off-street parking is pretty much the opposite of green.

    • Kram July 13, 2021 (8:47 pm)

      You should write the city and tell them your concerns. The people who build these are following all the rules the city put in place. The cost of off street parking means less affordable housing so Seattle doesn’t want off street car storage. Cities change, density is inevitable and our region can only expect more of this as long as our population keeps swelling.  

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (7:42 am)

      J Taylor, I assume that you live in a green building with solar panels, green roof and that you never store your electric vehicle on the street in front of your green home.   We all appreciate you going green, now if you can convince all of your neighbors.

  • Diane Fields July 13, 2021 (1:04 pm)

    My goodness.  Even when the bridge is fixed it is going to be challenging to get out of WS.   So many apartments. 

    • Reed July 13, 2021 (7:51 pm)

      Not too many apartments, too many cars.

      • af12 July 13, 2021 (8:12 pm)

        They need to at the minimum provide parking for 30% of units.  People are going to use cars now and in the future.  However, it will be electric cars, etc.  People will use more mass transit if it’s similar to other modern and industrial countries (we are not there yet!). We can’t bike our way out of this fiasco!

  • Mike July 13, 2021 (1:34 pm)

    Another box with no parking.  Blah!

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (7:45 am)

      What did you want?  A spherical building surrounded by acres of parking lots?

  • Just wondering July 13, 2021 (2:14 pm)

    96 apartments and no off street parking.  Unbelievable!

  • L. July 13, 2021 (3:29 pm)

    No parking.  Again.  96 units.  

  • Foop July 13, 2021 (4:06 pm)

    Glad to see less enabling of cars, these units will help house folks to don’t want / need a car, certainly some will have cars and use street parking but one day we’ll learn, the hard way, that the only way to grow with our population is to find more efficient ways of getting around and build better transit faster.

    • spooled July 13, 2021 (4:36 pm)

      Hi jort!  We see you and still disagree with you.Maybe we’ve reached saturation in many parts of the city.  When/after that happens, animals are less nice to each other and it goes poorly for all.

      • Ron Swanson July 13, 2021 (5:51 pm)

        LOL.  Seattle is a fraction of the density of many of the world’s most livable cities.  There’s plenty of room to grow without compromising quality of life.

        • Auntie July 13, 2021 (6:02 pm)

          In my opinion, the quality of life in West Seattle has already been compromised by development. It used to have a close-knit small town feel. Now it’s just an increasing number of big indistinguishable boxes pushing out small local businesses. What next – Walmart?

          • B W July 15, 2021 (2:36 pm)

            Yes, capitalism. Welcome to America, where have you been?

        • East Coast Cynic July 13, 2021 (8:18 pm)

          The problem is many of those livable cities have widespread right of way public transportation that runs for most hours of the day, which West Seattle doesn’t have much of.  And given the politics of building right of way public transportation, e.g., funding link, skirmishes over which is the better mode-more buses vs. link vs. gondola, nimbyism, it’s very likely imo that we are not going to get enough of the right of way public transportation that we need commensurate with the growth in our population for the foreseeable future.

  • Pessoa July 13, 2021 (6:41 pm)

    Nostalgia for a West Seattle “Mayberry” that probably never was.   Cities change, but you change as well.  If you were somehow able to put all the pieces back in their original places, it still wouldn’t be same because you are not the same person you once were.  C’est la vie, mes amies.   

    • Erin July 14, 2021 (4:05 am)

      I will always have great memories of the old west Seattle. The rock sport French onion soup and the yummy capers cafe . 

  • Millie July 13, 2021 (7:34 pm)

     An “over-sized aesthetically challenged” box with no parking.   It appears we are headed down the path of our neighbors in Ballard.  We all know how happy they are not!  With each new development another piece of Seattle’s history and neighborhood characteristic is lost to “homogenization”.

  • af12 July 13, 2021 (8:11 pm)

    They need to at the minimum provide parking for 30% of units.  People are going to use cars now and in the future.  However, it will be electric cars, etc.  People will use more mass transit if it’s similar to other modern and industrial countries (we are not there yet!). We can’t bike our way out of this fiasco!

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (7:55 am)

      Good point AF12,. but as all of these car storage advocates, you. ignore what happens when all of these parked cars attempt to leave the garage – gridlock. We already have too many cars for the built out road system. Street parking can easily be controlled with political will.  Simply monetize all street parking with an electronic system. The existing situation has created the problem and simply encourages all drivers to assume available street parking whether apartments or SFRs. 

  • JVP July 13, 2021 (8:18 pm)

    I feel fortunate that the recent developments in the Junction on California are mid-size projects. They keep a good feel compared to huge full or half block buildings such as Whole Foods and the newer stuff right around there. And for the record, I feel like the neighborhood is more vibrant and friendlier than ever. A lot of them durn younguns moving in seem to be warm and welcoming. I like the vibe. 

  • Joe Z July 13, 2021 (9:09 pm)

    Somehow I suspect that West Seattle blog commenters are not the target audience for these units. 

  • Rico July 13, 2021 (9:31 pm)

    Having lived in other metro areas that have significant more density than Seattle, I always question why Seattle is trying to embrace the qualities that make many of these cities so miserable to live in?    Like prohibition did to alcohol consumption, no parking will reduce some of the cars.  However, I know of one individual who lives in a building with no parking and he has three vehicles- all parked in near-by neighborhood No parking but also discriminates against those who need a vehicle to get around- many who are olderBottom line, no parking benefits developers and that’s about it. 

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (8:11 am)

      Rico, I can also share anecdotally that I know people who live in apartments with parking garages that don’t own vehicles.  They have no choice but to pay for the parking.  But there is actual data regarding parking.– The Seattle Times reported actual data.  “To be sure, homeowners still own or lease the bulk of the vehicles in Seattle — they have about 265,000 of them, while renters have 195,000. And only 4% of owner-occupied households are car-less, compared with 31% of renter households.” seattles-car-population-has-finally-peakedI ask the garageniques why one third of the apartment dwellers without cars should be required to pay for a parking space they have no use for?

  • angela quarterman July 13, 2021 (10:16 pm)

    96 more toilets, 96 more kitchen sinks, 96 more dishwashers, 96 more……………… can the existing mid-century infrastructure handle this?  

    • Foop July 13, 2021 (11:01 pm)

      So now that you live here no one else should be able to?

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (8:27 am)

       I hope a  few facts can answer angela quarterman’s question -Mid-century toilets – 6- 7 gallons per flush.Modern Water Saver toilets – 1.3 gallons per flush.——–Mid century dishwashers 10 – 15 gallons per cycle.New Energy Star dishwashers 3 gallons per cycle.——-Mid century kitchen sink faucets no restrictions/unlimited.Water save faucets, required since 1994, 1.8 -2.2 gallons per minute.—It is a myth that 

    • af12 July 14, 2021 (8:51 am)

      Well said Angela!

  • Joan July 14, 2021 (7:44 am)

    Exactly which city department should we submit  our complaints to, as far as changing zoning laws, if that’s what it takes to require parking for new apartments/condos? I’m sure many of us would like to speak out. We vote and we need changes badly. Candidates, are you listening? NO MORE dense living spaces without parking!! I live next to a park with a small parking lot and I hate it when cars invade my street. Sometimes I hate to go anywhere for fear of having no place to park when I come back. Imagine 96 new apartments near your street!

    • WSB July 14, 2021 (10:49 am)

      The reduction in parking requirements now goes back almost a decade and has continued to loosen since then. It is a “director’s rule” from what is now the Department of Construction and Inspections (at the time, DPD). One of the early versions was featured in this story.

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (12:27 pm)

      Joan,  “my street” seems to defining signifier.  Why not “our street,” because your street is just as much mine and the public? I as well as everyone else have the same right to driving and street parking as residents, especially near a park.Besides, why don’t you simply park in your garage or driveway?

  • Joe Z July 14, 2021 (11:51 am)

    I’m trying to follow the logic of these complaints…

    (1) Off-street parking is good because it reduces demand for street parking.

    (2) Off-street parking is bad because it increases car traffic on roads.

    (3) Therefore, ban all new development????

    • JohnW July 14, 2021 (12:38 pm)

      Joe Z,(1) It is not good to increase the subsidy of free street parking.  Our (false) entitlement to our spot in front of our house is what got us here. (2) Off-street parking is not good because it increases reliance on cars when our world climate is demanding the opposite. (3) Development is needed because of our housing shortage and to house the homeless.

  • HL July 16, 2021 (8:43 am)

    Cars aren’t a necessity if you live in the city.

Sorry, comment time is over.