Many may assume with the possibility of zoning changes hanging in the air here in our neighborhood that developers might naturally choose to put a hold on their plans in the hopes that larger, taller buildings will be allowed on their lots in the near future. Indeed, that certainly seems to be the case at some properties. Back in August of last year, I wrote about the former Big Wheel Auto Parts building which is, at least for now, being used as a space for emerging artists. But how long can that last? On 45th in the vicinity of Meridian very few properties have been built up even though few reach their current legal limit of 40 feet. Under an upzone however, they could be built to 55 feet. In contrast, along Interlake in lower Wallingford, developers aren’t waiting for the upzone.
In the 3600 block, three lots have been or are scheduled for redevelopment. All of these properties are within the Wallingford urban village, and would undergo a change to zoning rules if current proposals were approved by the City Council. (For a detailed discussion of existing zones, zoning rules and proposed zoning changes, look here.) But developers in all three of these cases have, apparently, calculated that the time to build is now.
Farthest along in development — in fact, already built — is 3651 Interlake. This sits in an area currently zoned as Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 40. This allows for building up to 40 feet in height, but under the proposed upzone, the developer could have built to 55’. The building is a three story structure with 17 residential units and a “live-work” space on the first level immediately facing Interlake. There’s no off-street parking for the residents, but Stone Way is quite nearby, and this lot would most likely be considered as having “frequent transit” with no need for parking under city rules. During the design review phase of this project, area residents aired a number of concerns. While there was little opposition to the project in principle, many commented that the design had too many blank, concrete walls and glass windows making it a poor fit for the neighborhood. The City agreed with this contention, and made recommendations to the developer to remedy these problems.
3640 Interlake is well along in the planning stages. This lot, though nearby to 3651, is in a different zone: lowrise (LR) 2. This currently allows building up to a height of 30 feet, but if the current plan for upzoning were approved, the developer could have built to 40 feet. The lot will become the site of two townhouse buildings surrounding a courtyard with each building containing three living units. No car parking is proposed but bicycle parking is provided. The builder has asked for a variance to the setback requirement to make the courtyard bigger. The complete document set for this project can be found here.
1408 N. 36th, on the corner of 36th and Interlake, is currently home to two structures, one very ramshackle and boarded-up. The property was recently purchased, and plans for a 5-unit development are just beginning to take shape. Developers and City planners have received quite a bit of input from area residents (see the project documents to review all of this), but there is little opposition to the notion of replacing a single family dwelling with something to accommodate more residents.
[UPDATE: For those who don’t read the comments, Donn adds this about this property:
It’s my understanding that the last project listed, 1408 N 36th, has been aborted, the property is being acquired locally and the tree is expected to continue enjoying its not dead state for a long time. The house wasn’t “ramshackle” until someone, I assume the developer, sawed out the windows and replaced them with plywood.
I haven’t been able to verify this because, among other things, the city’s project information website is down this weekend for maintenance. Grrr …]
Some have expressed surprise at how quickly the review and comment period has moved:
I live in this Wallingford neighborhood, and only today did I hear about this project.
The largest number of comments seem to have been generated by the developer’s proposal to cut down a large, old tree:
- That tree should be saved. It is NOT dead.
- I am very concerned about allowing this development if it means that the exceptional tree on the property will be lost.
- The parking lot between Stone Way and Interlake, on the south side of 36th, is a better property to be developed, without sacrificing the greenness of the neighborhood.
- As someone who has lived in Wallingford for eight years, I am concerned about what I understand going on here, that you are taking out a huge, healthy tree that’s been present in the area for a very long time.
And a number of comments are aimed at ending up with a development that fits in with the existing neighborhood:
I appreciate that 1408 N. 36th is inside an urban village (only just) and that it will be subdivided doesn’t come as a surprise, but I would dearly like the houses to be designed in such a way that we can meet and know these neighbors.
Project documents can be found here.
This part of our neighborhood has seen quite a bit of development already. Clearly though, it’s destined for much, much more.
Thank you for this article. No parking fo rresidents?? Frequent tranist service? has anyone from our neighborhood tried to take Metro Tranist to the Seattle Center lately? Do you remember when one bus let you out on a corner by the center? Have you noticed that route doesn’t exist and to get to the center one has to get off a bus and walk 12-18 mnutes?? Or go downtown and transfer to another bus to go back to a corner farther away from center?
Cathy, the rresidents can take frequent tranist…they are lucky!
From within a block or two of this development, the route 32 goes to Seattle Center, Interbay (and the U District), the route 62 goes to downtown(and Greenlake and Roosevelt district). Route 31 also goes to the U District and Magnolia.
Hey Liz! I will check its route. I had 2 discussions with different Metro staff on Friday and neither suggested the 32.
I think people typically wouldn’t recommend 32 since that’d take much longer time due to the route. I would say you should only do that if you are extremely allergic to walking.
Allergic to walking you say. Really. Do you know that many (including both young and old; able and disabled) can’t walk that distance?? The city can’t be for only the healthy or young.
Do you know how many people can’t walk much and can’t afford to live in convenient locations? You know a good solution? Turn most of the convenient locations into high density neighbors instead of banishing them Auburn. Let’s solve this problem together by zoning up Wallingford.
I am more allergic to walking in a construction zone or by/through neighborhoods where I might get lost ( new walk route from 62 or rapid ride) than I am to walk down to Wallingford & 40.
And you think bus routes got to be more catered to your individual needs, otherwise it’s not good.
You got to have more people with the same needs to get that route. You can start by having higher density around you to create that need.
I am not sure which is more bothersome– a mosquitoe, Rue- mania & her spelling/grammar cracks or your argumentative style.
That’s a contextual issue. Mosquitoes probably don’t find each other bothersome. For me, what’s bothersome is the sense of entitlement, so posts showing that are what I reply to the most often. Maybe that’s why you find me bothersome.
It is entitlement that I would like a bus route from the Wallingford area to the Seattle Center- a large central multi event, center of the city holding events. activities, theaters, food, entertainment festivals and more to thousands of people ?
There is already multiple bus routes from Wallingford area to the Seattle Center. The sense of entitlement isn’t from that. It’s from ignoring the fact of already having options better than majority of the neighborhoods around the city and still thinking it’s not good enough. Wallingford in general enjoys much better transit options due to the fact that people from many other neighborhoods have to go through Wallingford to major locations.
First off I believe correct grammar would be” there are multiple..”. However the busroutes stop a mile or so from the Seattle Center– posted on their routes.. walking time is 15 or 18 minutes. Those are not exactly “to” the Seattle Center. however nothing will really appease your need to argue or ‘create” questionable ‘facts”. have a lovely day.I hope you find other things to do than call people out re nonsense..
Take the 26X to Denny & Dexter.
Change to the 8.
Get off on Denny or 1st Ave N.
Most of Seattle Center is then a two block walk.
You still haven’t shown how bus route like this isn’t reasonable, other than it’s not what you want. Walking time within 20 minutes without transfer is great already, and there are A LOT of options with very limited walking if you are willing to transfer once. Having to transfer is the norm, even in cities with the best public transits.That line of argument is the proof of your sense of entitlement.
Honestly, if you draw a map based on the time and walking distance for you to get around the city and region, you’ll realize you got way better covered than most. I’d rather have government figure out how to help the low wage workers in Seattle get to work first. They are getting to Seattle Center from places like Auburn instead of Wallingford.
Maybe you will get a job in Seattle Meiro.
It’s my understanding that the last project listed, 1408 N 36th, has been aborted, the property is being acquired locally and the tree is expected to continue enjoying its not dead state for a long time. The house wasn’t “ramshackle” until someone, I assume the developer, sawed out the windows and replaced them with plywood.
Thanks for chiming in with this important note, Donn. I updated the article to include your comment for the folks that might not read these comments.
Apparently North 46th Street isn’t waiting either; under proposal is a bungalow to be turned into 18 units.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b592506a800f8c6d37eff1afea7f1289c42dd4e84c23bad87cde176c84ebcfb4.jpg
On Friday I overhead a barista at one of our n’hood coffee shops talking about falling asleep on her bus commute in to work
On Saturday I walked past and saw this sign for the first time, and thought she and 17 others like her might have a better shot at sleeping later and walking ~2 minutes to work if that’s what they’d prefer
It was a good day
You could have shared that with her. She may not know any better, and even if she does there’s usually little risk of physical assault. I don’t know about the timing, might be a little early, but later on that stuff is for sure built for biotech barracks, for the U District SLU 2.
“physical assault”
What are you talking about?
Good day – are you sure she’ll be happy to live in a closet? And those other 17? When you tell the barista about this option please include that she’ll be sharing a bathroom and kitchen with strangers, and remind her of the size of the unit. She can then compare that reality to the nearby, newly-built options (offering private kitchens and bathrooms!) in close proximity, like Greenwood.
“are you sure she’ll be happy to live in a closet?”
I’m sure she’ll be happy with having more rather than fewer options among which to choose whichever one she prefers.
In San Francisco, young professionals have been happy living like that while paying still very high rent. People don’t all want the same thing, and many would be happier having something cheaper with fewer features.
This particular building will not have shared kitchens or bathrooms. See the proposed floor plans at http://web6.seattle.gov/dpd/edms/GetDocument.aspx?id=3323341.
Yeah but she’ll be even more delighted to learn that she’ll be potentially sharing that space with people with criminal records, since the city council knows better than landlords.
The suggestion by you and others that zoning changes will bring more criminals into the neighbourhood is scaremongering and it is despicable.
What the eff are you talking about? My comment had nothing to do with zoning changes are you too dense to get that?
Nice
Damn right it is. I don’t take kindly to accusations like that so shove off.
They actually got the street wrong on their little map on the sign. It’s on the south side of 46, not 47th. So 47th can breathe a little easier.
Does ANYONE know the exact date the City will vote on passing HALA? I heard it was fall, but interestingly cannot find a hard date. I also heard that it might be moved up to this summer.
This was in the email newsletter (not clickable to details though).
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cd5f4fe8bc5c60873a20ad691c2a4dd7fcd3fa740f09fa107fdfc5c4c5329bc7.jpg
Thank you, all I keep seeing is Fall, but never with an actual date and to me fall could mean September, October or November 🙂 Can’t believe a major legislation/regulation/proposal doesn’t have an exact date posted when we will know what has passed (bc I am sure the city will ramrod it through). The fact that date is vague is suspicious in and of itself.
The exact date is impossible to know at this point. There is a legal appeal from the SCALE folks that is still pending, and the outcome of that appeal can change how quickly the legislation can be brought to a vote.
How can someone form informed opinions on the issues of rezoning? I’ve asked something simular before but I’m lost in a sea of oppinions. I’ll just ask one question. How can I tell with some confidence how HALA will change Wallingford, Seattle and western Washington?
That may be three questions. Four, if you count the first sentence.
What’s the confidence level you are comfortable with? As it stands right now, I don’t think HALA itself is going to change things that much. With or without it Seattle will have roughly the same issues, with HALA only changing things in the margins.
Right, and those margins that HALA will affect strike right in the heart of my little community between 45th and 50th street. We are a small but vibrant neighborhood with strong ties to one another. It seems like poor planning to disrupt a neighborhood like ours when there are so many other options.
It seems like really good planning to give people who can’t afford single family detached homes here* the option of joining us here in such a great little neighborhood.
*The price of entry for a single family home appears between 45th and 50th appears to be nearly $800k – a 1916 1,060SF house on a 2,500SF lot sold just recently for $775k after 72 hours on the market.
What’s “so many other options”? This has been discussed many times already, that it’s obvious for the good of Seattle and the whole region, neighborhood like ours need to be disrupted. And what “strong ties” are you talking about? Be real. This is Seattle. And what vibrant neighborhood are you talking about? Ballard downtown is vibrant. Wallingford neighborhood is “vibrant” in the way that we have tons of people traveling through and only stopping for Ezell’s, Dick’s, or the drugstores.
I just walked to JSIS from my house on N. Pacific. Do you want multifamily housing? Come on down here! There are only three or four single family homes on all of North Pacific Street. I walked down 2nd Ave NE below NE 40th Street – every single one a LARGE multifamily structure. Maybe you don’t realize how much building has already been done – and is happening right now – in Wallingford. Leave the Craftsman houses alone and come to south Wallingford – lots of rentals to choose from.
Lots of rentals to choose from, but not enough of them. Have you not been following the housing market? And there are actually not enough different types of rentals to choose from. Majority of the units are studios and one-bedrooms. We need more two or three bedroom rental units.
What’s the reason behind leaving the craftman houses alone? Just your personal preference?
And if you are making fun of “strong ties” in this neighborhood – wow, be real, that’s YOUR problem.
Why is that my problem to doubt the strong ties? If you think that’s a thing, be more specific. I know what’s a neighborhood with strong ties is like, places where people all hang out together in communal places and borrow household things from each others all the time. If we want strong ties among neighbors, one way is to intentionally build small individual units while have them all linked to shared spaces. We can try to do that here by having everybody removing the backyard barriers and turn all backyards combined into parks.
Yep, that is exactly what our neighborhood has, right down to the open backyard to my neighbor’s yards so ours and other kids in the hood can come and go freely. All of he kids around our block come and go from each others’ yards, we all watch out for each other and, yes, even borrow household items. AND, the only neighbors that do not take part in this and that no one seems to know are the occupants of the duplexes that are a bit of a revolving door of UW students. Actually, one of them came to my door to borrow a can opener a few years ago. They’re absolutely welcome to hang with us if they’re interested!
I am going to guess that younger people without kids not generally hanging out with older people with kids has nothing to do with the former living in a duplex, and much more with the likelihood that younger people without kids are inclined to spend more time hanging out with young people without kids, while the reverse is true for older people with kids.
Right, that’s obvious. I was responding to tj questioning if my neighborhood has strong ties and countering his argument that the only way to achieve such a thing is by knocking down the current model.
I am not saying there is one model needed to achieve strong ties in neighborhood. I am stating a simple fact that Seattle is not a city with strong ties among neighbors. Honestly most suburbs would have stronger neighborhood ties just by default. People who really treasure that would be much better living in those new Issaquah developments instead of any real city. Some older residents in Wallingford might think there are some neighborhood ties, mostly because Wallingford originally was kind of a suburb. Still, it’s not a place where people are all similar to each other, including the whole community all going to the same Friday night high school games and the same church.
The current model is going in the way of weaker and weaker neighborhood ties, since all the new comers who buy into single-family houses right now are all million dollar house buyers. So the people who socialize around the blocks are the helps, and the residents are all in Hawaii or somewhere else during vacation times. Lower middle class and the poor typically have the strongest sense of helping neighbors, while upper middle class don’t hang out with you just because you are next door.
Did you read what I wrote? There are strong ties in my neighborhood – families with older kids, families with younger kids, the single guy down the street, newcomers and those who have been here for decades, retired couples, older widows who raised there families here. Perhaps it is a function of the artifical boundaries of N 45th and N 50th streets but a lot of us know each other and value each other and our community.
Our ties are not becoming weaker and weaker and the assumptions you are making certainly do not apply here.
You have no idea if there are stronger social bonds between people in Wallingford or people in Issaquah.
There are many institutions in Wallingford which encourage social interactions. Everything from John Stanford School to Murphy’s Quiz Night.
Also remember, institutions which bring like people together aften make others feel excluded.
Things that bring people together in metros and suburbs are totally different things. The thing about big city is that there are so many people, so people just sort themselves into different activities. Within the same block, people can all attend different activities around the city independently from neighbors. There could be a very strong bond among local Sounders fans, but they wouldn’t be all neighbors or what not. The less “city” a place is, the fewer the option, and the more time neighbors are forced together to do the same thing, and the stronger the bond. Here in Wallingford neighbors might never even bump into each other when grocery shopping, because there are so many options around, as opposed to smaller places people all shop at the same place and talk to the same clerks.
“Here in Wallingford neighbors might never even bump into each other when grocery shopping”
… and hanging out at school playground, Murphy’s quiz night, the multi-family picnics at the farmers market, volunteering at the Boys & Girls club, the Greenlake Running Club meetups at Brooks, the Wallingford Historical talks, selling Girl Scout cookies, adult tennis at Woodland, chatting at the bus stop, countless invitations to neighbor’s parties (Cinco de Mayo, end of term, check out our new deck, etc) …
Just read this website about non-zoning topics and see all the ways people meet in Wallingford.
All those things you’d bump into maybe 5% of the residents. This is a city, not a small town. You might think the bonding is strong, but by any measure it’s really weak comparing to majority of the places smaller than Seattle. That’s not counting the fact culturally Seattle is just colder than most other places in the US, let along other places around the world.
last word
Voluntarily, right TJ? You were going to say that part, right?
Yeah, no. I didn’t think so.
Free will is a luxury only those who live in privileges would consider given. It’s not like the poor who got forced out of Seattle had much choice.
IMO you can get a fairly complete view of the range of opinions and the data behind them from three sources:
Sightline (tl;dr it’s better than doing nothing but it’s not enough) – http://www.sightline.org/
The City (tl;dr we want to claim credit for responding adequately to the affordability crisis) – http://www.seattle.gov/hala
SCALE (tl;dr it will ruin everything) – https://www.seattlefairgrowth.org/
(Personally I’d call Sightline the best source for empirically & data based expectations.)
You can get different messages from Sightline, depending on which developer or developer advocate is writing, as some of them have taken a dim view of the requirements and will go into great detail with very interesting analyses. But of course, like any data based presentation, they choose the numbers to serve the purpose of their presentation.
That’s a tough one. If you find a solid answer, let us know. To help start your search on the right foot, the rezoning part of HALA is “Mandatory Housing Affordability”. Search for that and “Seattle”, and you’ll get the city’s material on it (go to the final EIS for details), and more. It’s hard slogging to get it all.
The background – what developers have been doing within the current standards and zoning (or at least getting away with), what those standards were like before 2010, how development cost relates to market rent, who’s actually living in the neighborhood now, etc. … I don’t know where to look for that stuff. Unfortunately, we lost a colossal neighborhood resource when Vince Lyons reached the end of his long life in 2015.