Category — West Seattle

The drama taking place on Alki sure sounds like that- where newer condo residents are ready to seriously trim a view-blocking tree growing on the neighboring older residence’s property.  

The West Seattle Blog reported about this on Thursday.

Plans were filed with the DPD to redevelop a fairly large amount of land in West Seattle (just west of the where the western end of the West Seattle Bridge turns south).

As reported by the West Seattle Blog,

“Land Use Application to allow 21 single family residences in an environmentally critical area (clustered housing). Parking for 30 vehicles will be located within the structures and 8 surface parking spaces will be provided on the site.”

Using Live Maps, here’s the Bird’s Eye View (looking west) of the property up for development. Comments on the West Seattle Blog are also expressing surprise that homes could be built on such a steep location.

Here is the view looking north

And here’s a link to the DPD’s map. (linked from the West Seattle blog)

The Seattle Hearing Examiner is an interesting quasi-judicial role - Hearing Examiner Sue Tanner can reverse, amend or affirm a decision made by a city agency (including the DPD). Lots of interesting appeals make their way to the Hearing Examiner, but the most significant DPD reversal she’s made recently was when she rejected the Master Use Permit issued by the DPD for a parking structure at Woodland Park Zoo.

And one really fascinating decision was reported by the West Seattle Blog today regarding the ‘Landmark Preservation Board’s denial of a “certificate of approval” for the replacement of the Satterlee House’ front lawn on 4866 Beach Drive with three 3,000 sq ft homes.The Hearing Examiner affirmed the Board’s decision, but also provided lots of interesting supporting information - that future appellants of other developments in town might want to keep on file.

• The Hearing Examiner affirmed that the owner couldn’t claim he was being denied ‘reasonable economic use’ because there are other ‘Landmark-compatible’ ways of developing the site that would provide the owner with economic gain
• How building on the front lawn,

“..would destroy the residences “prominence of spatial location” and “contrasts of siting, age and scale” that make it an “easily identifiable visual feature of its neighborhood and contributes to the distinctive quality or identity of such neighborhood”

• And that the landmark status will remain even when the property is sold to another owner. 

All in all a very interesting decision, and one that the West Seattle Blog covered well.(West Seattle Blog photo)   FYI - The Office of the Hearing Examiner also just published this really handy guide to their office. It does a good job of explaining their jurisdiction, what you need to do to prepare for the appeal hearing, and how to file an appeal.  

Sonics to OK, freaky weather, and Dalai Lama, oh my! It was a busy news week in Seattle.

And in case you missed them, here are some local land use stories that I thought were pretty interesting.

• The Seattle PI recaps yesterday’s neighborhood forum. And the article generates some comments.
• Design Review gets the smackdown in a PI article about Ballard growth.
  “Art Skolnik, who became the state’s first historic preservation officer in 1975, argued that residents oppose new development because new buildings are bland and unappealing, thanks to a city design-review process that is too restrictive. “The design-review process really hasn’t given us the architecture that people might welcome into their neighborhoods,” he said.”
• The Seattle Times talks about Rainier Valley development - at MLK Way’s light rail station, will this be The Gentrification Express‘ next stop? McIver suggests that buildings there should be as high as Belltown’s. Hmmm…gosh, this makes complete sense, and doesn’t this also mean that these buildings would be twice as affordable if they were twice Belltown’s height…if only we knew if McIver’s judgment has ever been wrong before?
• Reassurance that school properties won’t be sold to developers. Yeah, you might want to get that in writing.
• And a nice reminder that the squeaky wheel approach works - and a dangerous West Seattle school crossing will now be fixed.

The West Seattle Blog always does a good job covering the news, and this time published a really great play-by-play of a Design Review Board meeting for two proposed developments in the area.  However, the really juicy parts are in the conversation that follows in the comments.

The real concern here is that these buildings are so large and located at such strategic locations with the ‘Fauntleroy Triangle’ that they will set the tone for the neighborhood’s character going forward. There are lots of comments in the post about concern regarding the building’s bulk and scale, the types of businesses the building will see, and whether the architects are paying sufficient attention to the pedestrian experience on the streets they border.

Of course, this reminds me of the experience we faced in Wedgwood when our precedent setting development was proposed.  So…from our experience with this project, here are some pointers.

• If you’re not happy about it, form a group now. A non-profit license will cost you $50, and it will help you out later should you appeal a permit decision. Don’t rely on the WestSeattleBlog or your community council to do this work for you, they may both be great advocates, but you really need a team dedicated to your issues. In Wedgwood we formed the Wedgwood Action Group.
• Put together your list of things you want and get it in front of the developers/architects now. Don’t assume that the city will relay your concerns to them, because they didn’t in our case. And doing so early in the process will help ensure that you at least get answers to where there is movement to negotiate.
• Publish a blog. You’ve got to get the word out about your efforts.
• Get some press out about the building and then be prepared for some light blowback when you’re called NIMBYs. Don’t take these comments too seriously, have fun with your responses but don’t be mean.
• Write up to the city council and the mayor, but don’t expect them to do anything (you’ll be lucky if you get a response).
• Lobby the owner of the property. This is the person/group setting the price for this property and if they’re willing to work with you, can set conditions for what is built here. This actually worked in Wallingford, where the neighborhood lobbied the owners of the Bagley Lofts to lop off a floor.
• Take the Design Review Board meetings with a grain of salt. The DRB will help polish up the edges of a project, but won’t make the major bulk/scale reductions that you want. That fight will have to be with the DPD (which really won’t reduce bulk/scale either), or in any appeals to the decision you might need to make.
• Your best friend now is the economy, is there really demand for these projects to be built?

Just read about this on the West Seattle Blog. It seems that folks along Alki Ave are fighting(!?!) against “two options for completing the segmented sidewalk on the north side of Alki Ave from the west end of Alki Beach Park to the spot where the unbroken sidewalk picks up again just south of Alki Point.”

And why does the WSB say they are fighting these sidewalks?

“Major concerns voiced previously by residents along the north side of Alki included fears they would lose parking spaces that currently exist where a sidewalk would go, and also lose existing landscaping.”

Anyway, I have an easy solution for this, take away the Alki funding, and give it to an area that wants and needs it.

Check out the WestSeattleBlog.com for the latest in land use news from the SW side of the city. WSB highlights an apartment building that just went up for sale, the next step in replacing smaller homes with a 7-story building, and a design review this Thursday.

There’s a really good discussion on WestSeattleBlog.com right now featuring a letter from West Seattle Design Review Board member David Foster talking about how micropermitting allows developments to be built without going through the ‘rigor’ of the Design Review Board process.

David mentioned that one reason this is happening is because,

But when I spoke to the manager of the Design Review program at DPD, he admitted that all too often the bureaucracy lets these projects slip under the radar - “it’s too hard to keep track of”

This was the same thing I heard when listening to Diane Sugimora talk, that the DPD is the administrative arm of Seattle’s land use plans, but that we need to make our mayor and council close these bad loopholes.

Personally, what this means to me is not so much that the Design Review Board will jump in to fix the project (because they’re not allowed to), but that these micropermitted projects are subject to lesser mitigation requirements.

It was interesting to note in a follow-up post on WestSeattleBlog.com (props to WSB on the active follow-up, you’re kicking the Times butt with your news), they contacted City Councilman Richard Conlin who said that he was unaware that micropermitting was happening as much as he thought.

Well, hopefully that will serve as a wake-up call for him and it is now something we can point to saying that Councilmember Conlin is aware of the situation. We’ll follow his progress as he looks into it.

Anyway, just wanted to add this as a final point, here are two other key ingredients that make it easier for this kind of development to go through:
1. Look for properties that are L2/3 zoned.
2. The development occurs in communities with weak community reaction.