DEVELOPMENT: Key land-use approval for 4747 California SW

| Development | West Seattle news

(4747 California rendering by Ankrom Moisan)

A surprise sighting in the city’s twice-weekly Land Use Information Bulletin today – a key land-use approval for the long-paused project at 4747 California SW, which finished going through Design Review four and a half years ago. The project was designed to be a mixed-use building with a new home for Husky Deli, whose owner Jack Miller is a partner in the site-development team. Last time we updated the project was two and a half years ago, when another partner on the seven-story, ~79-apartment, ~41-parking-space project told us it was “on the shelf for a little while.” We have a message out to inquire whether today’s approval announcement means it’s actively moving forward now, or just means that city bureaucracy got around to the approval (the time span is longer than most we’ve seen)3031135-LU nod. Whatever turns out to be the case, the notice opens a two-week appeal period for the land-use approval, and explains how that works.

Jeff January 29, 2024 (3:58 pm)

Speed these up already! We need density like no other!

Mike January 29, 2024 (6:09 pm)

We need infrastructure to support it first. Without infrastructure to support it, additional density is a horrible idea.
- WSJ January 29, 2024 (7:59 pm)
  
  Just curious what kind of infrastructure you’re referencing? Development projects require utilities upgrades and have transportation specific improvements (eg bringing sidewalk up ti current design standards) as conditions of development.
  - Peter January 29, 2024 (8:14 pm)
    
    Concern trolling about utilities is a standard tactic of anti-housing activists. Just ignore them.
    - CarDriver January 30, 2024 (5:20 am)
      
      Peter. Tell us. How much housing here in WS? 10,000;20,000; more??
- SpencerGT January 29, 2024 (8:33 pm)
  
  We need residents for infrastructure, though. Classic chicken and the egg.

Javier January 29, 2024 (8:09 pm)

Seriously we need to step things up here in WS. Development has gotten stagnant. We’ve fallen way behind other neighborhoods in the city. Even Downtown Redmond is more urban than we are. Pathetic!

Stickerbush January 29, 2024 (8:55 pm)

The attraction of WS to me was always it’s lack of urbanity.
- Bus January 29, 2024 (10:31 pm)
  
  The attraction of WS to most of us was that it was affordable, but with housing scarcity that’s no longer the case. People who want suburbs can live in actual suburbs.
  - Alki resident January 30, 2024 (6:33 pm)
    
    We are a suburb. Been here since the 80’s, West Seattle has drastically changed but it’s still a suburb. What do you want, more townhouses in people’s backyards?
SUBurb January 29, 2024 (8:58 pm)

That’s because we are a suburb. Go live downtown if that’s what you want.
- Derek January 29, 2024 (9:45 pm)
  
  No thanks, I like it over here and I want it to be denser. We are a city, not a suburb. This is Seattle. Not Puyallup. You can move to the suburbs if that’s what you want.
  - Spooled January 30, 2024 (4:59 am)
    
    So you like it here but insist that it change (denser) to meet your urbanist ideals. Perhaps it was already ideal to many others who came before you. I’m not on board with this density fetish and will resist it where possible.
  - Julian January 30, 2024 (8:37 pm)
    
    Just like you can move to a denser neighborhood if that’s what you want.
- SpencerGT February 2, 2024 (10:49 pm)
  
  Okay.

PDiddy January 29, 2024 (9:13 pm)

Is this the same building that hosts Bakery Nouveau? If so this is going to be devastating for a lot of businesses. Does anyone know if this includes the formerly free parking behind? I hate that this is now paid parking and that places like elliots are getting free seating where the cars used to park. I can only guess this will make a bad parking situation even worse now.

WSB January 29, 2024 (9:16 pm)

No, it’s not. It’s the building with Sleepers in Seattle and a hot-yoga studio. And again, this doesn’t mean the project is starting up immediately – haven’t yet received a response to my question yet, going to have to try other means of contact tomorrow – TR
- PDiddy January 30, 2024 (9:52 am)
  
  Any idea if this also includes the parking lot in back?
  - Bus January 30, 2024 (11:39 am)
    
    There are office buildings behind these businesses. The parking lots are behind the adjacent building. Those parking lots are also separate parcels, with different owners, so without even looking at the proposal it stands to reason the parking lots are not included in this development.
Charles Burlingame January 29, 2024 (10:07 pm)

Streateries are definitely not “free” for business owners.https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/permits-and-services/permits/how-to-estimate-and-pay-fees
Bus January 30, 2024 (8:39 am)

Those parking lots were never “free”, they were paid for by the same businesses you claim to support. Now the customers pay directly, rather than having businesses raise prices to support the parking, so that only the parking-lot users are paying rather than everyone.

Amber January 30, 2024 (6:53 am)

Well that’s unfortunate. They want to put in 79 apartments but only provide parking for half their residences. Plus the general strain from construction in an already congested area, lack of parking, and unnecessary and bland development (there are a thousand buildings in West Seattle alone that look exactly like the plans for this building and they are all ugly and cheap, not to mention how many empty apartment buildings are already in the neighborhood). I’m not against housing, it just doesn’t seem necessary. Also, these aren’t going to be marketed as low income housing. Just poorly constructed, poorly placed apartments to make the developers and property owners more money. This is purely about maximizing profits, not providing housing. I’m sure they’ll rent, but let’s not pretend this is about housing.

Jeff January 30, 2024 (12:33 pm)

Amber, it is about housing because all density is good no matter what. The developers profiting insanely is a poison we have to take in order to get the greater good served with housing. Density is the only thing that brings down housing costs, generally speaking.
Kram January 30, 2024 (1:46 pm)

The problem is the these apartments are not cheap. You may think they look cheap and that is your opinion but currently s/f costs for 74 unit apartments like this are in the low to mid 400’s per square foot. Now do the math on rents. There isn’t anything left to do more interesting construction or many developers would. Building an apartment building is a for profit endeavor. I bet you work for a company that is trying to be profitable. Developers are generally groups of investors that yes, are trying to make a profit but do some research before you comment. This group is local and some of the investors live in West Seattle. They do care as far as I can tell as they don’t need to provide any parking at all…
Peter January 30, 2024 (4:29 pm)

Ah yes, the standard “empty apartments” lie that’s trotted out in any discussion of housing. Hi, you say you’re not lying? Prove it. Name the empty buildings in the neighborhood and present your proof that it’s sitting empty.

Derrick January 30, 2024 (4:26 pm)

79 Apartments with 41 parking spots… I know there is a vocal contingent here that is opposed to cars or accommodations for the reality that most people frankly need them in this region. However, if we continue to support building residential space with no room for cars, and we simultaneously eliminate the parking options behind the businesses in the junction- are we dooming those businesses?

Ped January 31, 2024 (3:04 pm)

could the increase in people living nearby, without cars, not be a boon for businesses? they have a larger customer base and don’t have to pay for the costs of parking infrastructure. i think what’s frequently missed in these conversations is that the people living in those new residents will also need to buy things, and folks nearby walking gives a greater customer throughput than what cars and parking provide.

Sorry, comment time is over.