DEVELOPMENT: How should Seattle’s Design Review program – once the main venue for public comment on projects – change?

(From second Early Design Guidance packet for the CVS project in 2015)

Seattle’s Design Review program is a shadow of its former self already – take a look at the city’s project-review calendar, empty as of our check while writing this story. It’s been criticized for adding time and money to projects. But over the years, it’s also been the main channel through which some not-so-great projects have eventually died – two examples in our archives, the standalone Petco store (and parking lot) once planned where the Rally live/work/townhouse complex sits at California/Charlestown, and the standalone CVS store (and parking lot) once planned (rendering above) where the Maris mixed-use building went up at 4722 Fauntleroy Way SW. The last Southwest Design Review Board meeting in our archives was almost a year ago. So what should the program’s future be? You have three days left to let the city know via a survey:

Design review changes are coming to the City of Seattle. Please tell us your thoughts by November 27:

Design review is currently required for most new larger buildings in the City of Seattle. It includes public notice with the ability for neighborhoods to comment on the appearance of new buildings. City of Seattle Staff and volunteer Design Review Boards review new buildings to make sure they meet the Design Guidelines.

Recent changes to Washington State law require us to make changes to Seattle’s Design Review program.

SEVA Workshop is asking for people’s feedback on several topics, including:

-Which areas of Seattle should require Design Review for new construction
-Which types of new construction should go through Design Review
-When and how people can comment on new construction projects
-How to update the Design Guidelines to be easier to understand
-How adding incentives for new construction could improve equity

Some of the possible design review program changes could include:

-Limiting projects to only one public meeting,
-Streamlining the Design Review process to be quicker and less costly for applicants, and
-Reducing the number of projects that are required to go through Design Review (if new construction does not require design review, then most new buildings will not include any public comment period or public notice)

SDCI’s goal is to update the Design Review program before the Washington state’s House Bill 1293 deadline of June 30, 2025.

Take the Design Review Program community survey and add your voice to help shape the future of Seattle. The survey closes November 27.

(Thanks to Robin Schwartz in South Park for circulating the survey.)

7 Replies to "DEVELOPMENT: How should Seattle's Design Review program - once the main venue for public comment on projects - change?"

  • G November 25, 2024 (7:37 am)

    Zero engagement here, much like the engagement with the design review board. If Design Review disappears I hope it’s replaced with some other forum so that all opportunity for comment are not shut down with it.  thank you for the local examples.

  • Joe Z November 25, 2024 (9:43 am)

    It should just be a check that buildings are to code. There isn’t any need for review beyond that. The aesthetics review has been a complete failure, it’s entirely subjective and most people don’t even like the look of buildings that are approved. 

  • KM November 25, 2024 (9:52 am)

    Get rid of it, focus on accurate and enforced permitting & code.

  • Kyle November 25, 2024 (11:31 am)

    The value is in robust notification and reoccurrence of meetings to review.

  • Jeff F. November 25, 2024 (11:36 am)

    Get rid of it all together. It’s gone way beyond any sort of usefulness anymore. All it does is give voice to busy body NIMBYs, delays construction, and adds to costs which ultimately we all pay for. Be gone, Design Review!!!

  • Jason November 25, 2024 (12:02 pm)

    Get rid of it!! Waste of time. Seattle Process is tiring and exhausting.

  • bolo November 26, 2024 (11:08 am)

    What was the reason for it in the first place? Any good intentions? Was it in response to some bad works?

Sorry, comment time is over.