Jim Fryett writes:
Many local neighbors are becoming aware of the proposed Avtech project, now in design review stage, as they stop in for coffee and or breakfast at the Varsity Inn this week-end!
A petition has been initiated requesting a call for the City DPD to hold a public meeting at this early design phase. The DPD office posted a notice of public meeting but has not provided that opportunity as of today.
Local resident and community members are encouraged to stop by the Varsity Inn to sign the petition and get an overview of the project. Additionally, it is very important is to email the City your comments at [email protected]. for the public record NOT LATER than MAR 20!
With many very important issues impacting this site, your comments are important as it relates to the scale, mass, infrastructure and neighborhood impact by the current design of this 240+ apartment complex.
Attached is the general flier. See you at the Varsity! Give/get a big hug to Patti and kudos to her!
I live next door to this proposed development on its north side and while I would support a public meeting, the comments in the attached letter are ridiculous to the point of absurdity. There is nothing inherently dangerous about a parking entrance/exit being located on a residential street. But if you think there is, why then would you go on to say that more parking should be included in the building and not less? That’s a contradiction in basic logic. Besides, mandating more parking means the cost of rents will be higher. Instead we need to be promoting housing affordability. With nearby buses, restaurants, and stores, it makes sense to limit the amount of parking in this proposed building.
The complaints about green space are particularly ridiculous. We have Gas Works Park two blocks away. We need housing, not some cheesy “green space” on the edge of the development that will never be used.
The building ought to be constructed to its fully zoned height. While others nearby whine about this even though it will have no effect on them, I am supporting a full height buildout despite the fact that it means I will lose my pretty awesome view of the lake and downtown. But since I don’t believe in selfishness, I won’t put my own needs above that of the community as a whole.
If a public hearing is intended to get the full range of voices regarding this project, including potential residents and not just the usual NIMBY suspects, great! But if it’s intended to just be a forum for whining, then nobody need bother.
Somebody please give a hug to Patty from “Chris and Laura.” We moved out of our rental at 35th & Wallingford or quieter shores last summer. I wish everyone near the new development both peace & luck, especially Varsity Inn!
It seems to me that having 240 new residences at their doorstep will be good for Varsity Inn’s business.
I’d like to say a big thank you to our neighbors who are helping to organize this effort and spread the information! Regardless of your feelings about the proposed development, I think we can agree that having involved community members make this a better place to live. I’d also like to thank those who have been able to have an open and respectful dialogue around these issues.
I am afraid to say anything after #1’s comments.
We are all whiners an dillogical and whatever.. stupid ignorant.
There nwo I dont have to type any more
Does anyone remember when Avetch was a Grandma’s Cookie factory? There must have been 100 or more people working there and tractor trailer rigs were pulling in and out all day loading up pallets of cookies. I always liked the large neon sign on the roof. You can just barely see it in this photo.
http://clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us/~scripts/nph-brs.exe?s1=wallingford&S2=&S3=&l=100&Sect7=THUMBON&Sect6=HITOFF&Sect5=PHOT1&Sect4=AND&Sect3=PLURON&d=PHO2&p=3&u=%2F%7Epublic%2Fphot1.htm&r=279&f=G
The phrase “cheesy greenspace” stumped me at first. A greenspace is always a good thing, right? It just depends what you do with it, like bad plant choices or lava rock. But then it hit me – we have an example of what Lower Wallingfordian must be afraid of, just down the street: http://goo.gl/maps/bgJEM
I agree, we don’t want more of that.
Some feedback.
LW – sorry you find the response ridiculous and bordering absurdity. As your neighbor please know we are not whining nor attempting to obstruct your view or general enjoyment of the neighborhood. Just want and in fact expect the forum of public comment as established by the city to be followed in allowing voice to be heard.
You are entitled to your differing beliefs about inherent dangers, right to views, and parking so when we get this meeting I hope you show up!
Re; parking issue – 240+ units 165 parking spaces – IF each unit only had one car that means about 80 cars left to own devices on Burke etc. Not possible!
Re: affordable housing – I’d be interested in what you would find affordable to be?
$1200 -1500 a month is what the project developers have stated as entry level #’s.
If they follow current developer practices such as 40th and stoneway – residents there are charged an extra 110 per month for a parking stall. Guess what? 1/2 of their 60% of residents are not paying for parking. So, either they don’t drive or they are parking on streets. Single family residential streets.
A current Mercer Island development http://mercerisland.patch.com/articles/mercer-island-council-to-consider-legacy-partners-affordable-housing-project?ncid=newsltuspatc00000001 with similar size in order to take advantage of rules to add more apts – filed to meet ‘affordable housing’ regs – so they are proposing 8 -12 out of 240 units as ‘affordable’ to get the extra space. The formula for affordable is 70% of average income for 2 in Seattle which is currently $42k annually. Do you qualify and would you want to tangle for those 8 spots?
Re; green – very very few want wall to wall line to property line building faces. Walk along 34th between burke and wallingford – double the height of existing Avtech building on both sides of street – like the feel? enjoy the light? the warmth? the openness? Many don’t.
This is not about whining – it;s about making our neighborhood a better place to live and be in and the AVtech project gives us the oppty to take a swing at that.
Doug, it would be good for Varsity- Patti has great food and better service!!
According to Developers they have no intent of providing commercial/retail space to add to The Varsity presence. They have chosen to snake around a mixed residence clause use by proposing to provide 8 live work units along 34th which would eliminate current limited street parking as well. It appears that about 30% of proposed units are 2 bedrooms – so residential count exceeds 300. The question is what is appropriate scale and mass for the Avtech property and surrounding neighborhood? Hope you will make the public meeting when the city gets to calling it….
Irish junkie – you may be my neighbor who does remember Grandma’s. He would like to see Avtech bldg be renovated. Grandma could return!!
Jandl don’t know if I’m your neighbor but it would sure would be nice to have the smell of date filled oatmeal cookies wafting through the neighborhood again.
Where we live and what our neighborhoods are like is so important on so many levels. It behooves all of us who live here to consider the impacts of proposed developments – they certainly are not always in the best interests of the current residents or our children or our elders. There is no value in rolling over for every developer who wants to stuff the neighborhood full of high density high dollar buildings.
Be well, walkin.. I no longer bother w/ my words. Ive been told to move out.. progress must come.
With two beds per parking spot, there will be a lot of new cars in the ‘hood.
And I’ll bet a dozen Top Pots that the council and mayor will ‘extract’ some meaningless concessions and then let the developer do whatever they want; the whiff of property tax revenue trumps everything.
That’s what happened with that monstrosity at 34th and Stone – in that case it was the Wall Comm Council (toothless outfit if there ever was).