Subdivision of 227 23rd Ave. E.

This Land Use Application is to subdivide one parcel into three unit lots. The construction of residential units is being reviewed under Project #6120908. This subdivision of property is only for the purpose of allowing sale or lease of the unit lots. Development standards will be applied to the original parcel and not to each of the new unit lots.


This project has been assigned to one of DPD's Planning Consultants (Geoff Appel). If you would like more information about the project, please call the assigned planning consultant at (425)741-3800 x211 with the project number (3008134 ,227 23rd Ave. E.).

Comments due by 12/05/2007.

Application to subdivide 1920 E. John Street

The recently sold property at 1920 E. John Street is being developed as 6 townhouses.

You may comment on the application to divide the property into 6 lots for separate sale.

The project is being built as two separate townhouse buildings, fronting onto both E. John Street and onto 20th Ave E.


View Larger Map

1) 201 - 20th Ave E: EAST TRIPLEX (BLDG 1) - NORTH UNIT-203 20TH AVE E; MIDDLE UNIT-201 20TH AVE E; SOUTH UNIT 1928 E JOHN ST. Construct a 3-unit townhouse (east bldg) with attached garages and occupy, per plans (Establish use as multi-family structures, two 3-unit townhouses with garage parking / review & process for 2 AP's under #6139732).

2) 1920 E. John Street: WEST TRIPLEX (BLDG 2) - NORTH UNIT-1920 E JOHN, MIDDLE UNIT- 1922 E JOHN, SOUTH UNIT-1924 E JOHN ST. Description of Work Construct a 3-unit townhouse (west bldg) with attached garages and occupy, per plans (Establish use as multi-family structures, two 3-unit townhouses with garage parking / review & process for 2 AP's under #6139732).

Note to those living in the immediate vicinity: expect puzzled people knocking at your doors looking for these new addresses in due course. East Thomas Street turns effortlessly into East John Street at 20th and John [and both sides of the little island are technically E. John Street] and the adjacent block of 20th Ave E. is the 100 block on one side and the 200 block on the other side of the street! We wondered, when we bought our house, why it said "2009 EAST JOHN STREET" on the porch pillars in such large letters. After the first few visitors got lost on the "wrong" segment of East John Street, we realized why!

Central Area summit: care to volunteer?

The Central Area Development Association (see this summary of what they do) has invited our neighborhood to participate in their October 27th annual retreat. Here (in part) is what they ask:

Dear Miller Park Neighborhood Association,

The Central Area Development Association (CADA) is pleased to invite you to participate in the morning session of its annual retreat on Saturday, October 27th. We are soliciting your opinions of and vision for the future of the Central Area in a process to identify where and how CADA can best contribute to the development of the community.

As a community-based development association we rely upon your input and participation. It is not only a critical component to CADA’s mission and philosophy but to the Central Area’s health as a whole.

We ask that you review the following and then identify at least two individuals you believe will best represent your group at the retreat. Please have them come prepared to provide us with the following information as a consensus of your group:

• A brief history of the group - no more than 2 minutes
• Opinion of the Central Area as they see it today in regards to housing, economic development, education, crime, arts, opportunity, etc.
• Current focus of the group - short-term (up to 12 months) and long-term (12 months and beyond)
• Top two things the group would like to see accomplished in "their" area and how it would benefit the entire Central Area.

Note: please don't limit the 'kind' of things you'd like to see happen. Although CADA's primary line of business is affordable housing and CADA may not be the organization that fulfills your vision, we do partner with and delegate to other organizations in our efforts to revitalize the Central Area.

Please provide us with a written copy of your talking/bullet points. You may send this with your reply or give it to us at the retreat. As there will be potentially eight to ten groups attending, each group will have 15 minutes to speak and there will be a timekeeper to ensure that everyone is heard.

I'd be happy to volunteer (if you agree) and am writing to invite you to join (or replace) me. Drop me a note by Friday (Send to me: tayles@jps.net) with your contact info and I'll send it on to CADA. We could get together this weekend and work on the talking points they suggest.

As resources to think about what to say, I remind you of the Central Area's neighborhood planning efforts in the late 90's which resulted both in a general plan for the area and in a specific plan for the Madison-Miller area (see right side of blog page; "Madison-Miller Neighborhood Plan"). See links in this post for more background info.

Former Madison-Millerite runs for Mayor of Mount Vernon

This just in:

Hi Andrew, I am running for Mayor of Mount Vernon--
can you believe it?
no one filed to run against the current mayor, and i think he should be replaced, so i filed myself and now i have a growing campaign!
you can see me on the front page of today's skagit valley herald

--Doris Brevoort

I am keeping reading what's up with my dear Mad-Miller neighborhood, and am frequently referring to the Urban Village work I was involved with in our CAP group when people ask me what was my experience that makes me prepared to be the Mayor? goodness!
Best regards to all of you there at MMad--- Doris

Multifamily zoning rules changing

Save the date! The City's revisions to the Multifamily building code may well affect the whole look and feel of our neighborhood. Drop by the meeting, learn, comment, let the City know your views.

The Multifamily part of neighborhood is mostly the area between Madison and John, consisting of a mix of condos, townhouses, apartments and older single-family houses. The proposed rules will, I suspect, serve to make things more dense. I haven't read them yet. Take a look at them and let me know.

The business oriented areas around Madison are in Neighborhood Commercial zones, and their building code rules were updated a year or so ago.

22nd & Madison development: Design Review

The Sept. 19th Design Review meeting for Jim Mueller's proposed development of the Twilight Exit / Oscar's II site at 22nd & Madison went very smoothly. Both the Design Review Board and the (small number of) neighbors present seemed very impressed with the project. I'll post the Board's report when it's available.

Jim described his plans to research and memorialize the music history of the neighborhood in the new building. The architects from Mithun then described several alternative plans for a six-story mixed use project on the site (most of the site is zoned 65', a bit of the south end is 40'). Everybody preferred their first scheme. Below (thanks to Jim and Mithun) are a copy of their illustration of it, and a couple of my pictures of their model .

(click on any image for larger copy)

My only real concern (echoed by René Soulard) was that the garden terrace was buried in the building and did not benefit from the stunning view of Mount Rainier that the site offers. Below are a couple of views from the adjacent "Views at Madison Park" apartments above the Safeway.

Cottage Housing in Madison-Miller Urban Village

During our neighborhood planning efforts about a decade ago, and the subsequent rezoning efforts, the southern part of the Madison-Miller Urban Village was rezoned (map) to allow "residential small lot, tandem cottage" housing - see this City zoning chart for a terse explanation.

Our intent, as I recall was, to prevent too much "gentrification" by:

• allowing people to stay in the neighborhood by developing part of their property, while remaining in their existing house on the rest of the property.
• allowing more small developments like the "Pine Street Cottages" to keep housing affordable.
  

I note that, after a decade, one such "cottage housing" project has finally been proposed and approved. Here's the text of the DPD decision, which notes "This will be the first cottage housing development on this section of 22nd Avenue." (It goes from 22nd to 23rd).

I'm glad to see that at least one of our ideas is finally coming to pass. Let's hope that it helps to make some part of our neighborhood a little less unaffordable. And maybe it will inspire us to take part in the new neighborhood planning efforts that the Mayor is promising us!





View Larger Map

Neighborhood Development activity

(vacation over, time to catch up on City activities)

Here are some recent Planning Department Public notices for major development projects in our area that might interest you.

2203 E UNION ST: Land Use Application for Jim Mueller's project at 23rd & Union.

Here are several Miller blog posts about it:

• Some expert advice (and some comments)
• MANY (19!) neighborhood comments on the project.
• The first Design Review Hearing on the project
• Reports on Mueller's neighborhood meeting
• A transcript of that meeting

A neighbor wrote in to URGE YOU to send your comments to DPD, if you have put them on the website (and even if you haven't):

Comments on the Miller Community Council site are not official to the City design process unless they are also sent to the city. Joanna
The comment period has been extended to the 19th of September.

Thank you!

General Info:

Department of Planning & Development
Public Resource Center
700 Fifth Ave. Ste. 2000
P.O. Box 34019
Seattle, WA 98124-4019

(206) 684-8467 phone
(206) 233-7901 fax

Send comments to:

Lisa Rutzick
Project: 3005925 ( 2203 E UNION ST)
Land Use Planner
Department of Planning & Development
700 Fifth Ave. Ste. 2000
P.O. Box 34019
Seattle, WA 98124-4019
T: 386-9049
F: 386-4039

***************************

2051 E MADISON ST: Notice of Design Review Early Design Guidance Meeting (Sept. 19, 6:30 PM, Miller Community Center). This is the first Design Review Hearing for Jim Mueller's project to demolish and redevelop the land where the Twilight Exit (formerly Oscar's II) now sits. Your comments at this first meeting will carry extra weight.

Here's an overview of the Design Review process, and here are notes on how to get involved and here's the permit status information and here's what little we know about the project.

***************************

2320 E MADISON ST: Notice of Application. A NEW application for a development on Madison. Anyone know any detials, or anybody involved? A Design Review Hearing surely awaits us!

Neighborhood Planning to return?

Those of you who were around a decade ago may recall the neighborhood planning efforts that went on in our neighborhoods back then, which resulted both in the Central Area Neighborhoods Plan and in the Madison-Miller neighborhood plan (see RHS of page, below "Miller Links").

Those planning exercises helped us meet neighbors, understand City zoning and land use rules, and really gave participants a sense of ownership and empowerment in their neighborhoods.

But the City kind of gave up after the plans hit the (dusty) shelves. All professional City help in implementing and updating the plans soon ceased: small groups of dedicated neighbors continue to meet to try and move the process forward, but it's terribly hard work without City help.

Various people have been pressing for the Neighborhood Planning Process to be revived, including Councilmember Clark, who was a Neighborhood Plan City employee in a former life.

The Mayor is now talking of reviving the Neighborhood Plans, though he seems to want to make them much more homogeneous and centrally guided than they were before. You can learn more about (what little) we know about the upcoming process in:

• Councilmember Clark's latest newsletter.
• This Seattle PI article (and links in it)
• These notes from the City Neighborhood Council, which include the Deputy Mayor's notes from his presentation to City Council.

So, why should we care? Firstly because we might want to keep control of our neighborhood's destiny. Secondly because there are obvious concrete examples in our area of the need for local neighborhood control.

The proposed redevelopment and upzone of the SW corner of 23rd & Union has got a lot of public input on this blog. Most people have been supportive of Jim Mueller's proposed upzone of his property as a necessary step in the redevelopment of that property. He has, however, been very open about his plans to acquire and redevelop more properties at 23rd & Union (and on Madison) and some people have expressed great concern that allowing this one upzone (from a 40' to a 65' neighborhood commercial zone) will open the door for creeping upzoning of the whole intersection, with the consequent change of the whole character of the area.

A revived neighborhood planning process would be an excellent chance for neighbors to learn about the benefits and consequences of such upzoning, and would allow the immediate neighborhood to be fully informed about the process and make an informed collective decision about the wisdom of such upzoning.

Note, by the way, that the City has recently changed zoning standards for neighborhood business districts and is in the process of doing so for multifamily residential zones.

23rd & Union development: some expert advice

Many thanks to all of you who commented on Jim Mueller's proposal to upzone and develop the Coleman site at 23rd & Union. Please Click Here to review the previous comments or add your own.

Most of the comments were very supportive of the project, but a couple questioned whether Mueller really needed the upzone to 65'. I took the question to Joe Nabbefeld, who has lived in the neighborhood for many years, and used to write on real estate for the Daily Journal of Commerce (see these articles as examples of his work) and now has his own company. He's agreed to let me share his very informative answers.

Please feel free to comment further.

(Andrew)
My blog post about Jim Mueller's 23rd/Union project has generated some interesting feedback, including this comment:

"I'm not willing to take Jim at his word when he says that he needs 65'. This is because I'm largely ignorant of financing matters and because I see so many other new retail/residential buildings that are below 65'. Why can these projects "pencil out" but not Jim's?"

Do you know how we could get estimates on costs etc to answer that question?

Thanks,

Andrew Taylor

Joe's first response:

First, land prices (aka costs) play a role in what height will "pencil."

Land prices adjust, through market forces, to what height the zoning allows.

So, for example, when there is land that is zoned for 30 feet (such as L-3 zoning, which these days is almost entirely having townhomes built on it), the land quickly becomes priced at the maximum that a builder can pay for 30-foot land.

The next zoning tranche up is 40 feet. More can be built on that land (another story), so the market will price at a bit more per sf of land than for the 30-foot land.

The next up is 65-foot land. You can build roughly twice as much than on 30-foot land (it's more complex than that, based on different setback requirements and such. So, as you can see, the land price adjusts up to the essentially the maximum that a builder can pay for that land based on still penciling at what can be built on it.

So if someone sees a project that is built to only 40 feet, they can't just say well why can't the guy over there just keep his at 40 feet ...
Since the "guy over there" may have paid more per sf, and more per residential unit that can be built, for his site, and therefore has to build to the higher capacity to "make it pencil."

"Making it pencil" is a term that can be misunderstood, or abused, meanwhile.

These projects involve massive amounts of money that someone has to put at risk. So "making it pencil" does not just mean break even or make a slight profit. "Making it pencil" means I have to go out in the marketplace for capital and convince investors to bring put down these massive amounts of money on my project. I have to compete against every other opportunity that these capital sources have, so I have to promise them a competitive return, or profit, on their investment. It has to reflect, or compensate them, for the level of risk that they are taking, too -- which is rather high in development.

So the market will say how much these investors have to receive, and once they put their money into my project, I have to deliver them the return that they were promised. Delivering that return is "making it pencil." If there's not a clear path to delivering that return, then the developer has to opt not to attempt the project -- but instead take those investors and themselves to a different site that will pencil with more certainty.

What we don't want to get to on any project, particularly ones that are bringing housing into the city, getting people off the freeways, and particularly ones that are attempting to build out greenfield sites that have been sitting fallow and also formerly red-lined sites and red-lined areas ... What we don't want to do is worry about how much profit the risk-taker might make. That's a bad formula. What we want is just the opposite -- we want to encourage the risk-takers to take the risk and build, and the way to do that is to say "we hope you do so well that you want to come back and do the next one." We particularly want to say that to classy, well-meaning, smart risk-takers like Jim Mueller.

Being "in scale" with what is currently in a neighborhood, while sometimes well-meaning, is often a red herring. It's often the wrong perspective (or an attempt to hide the NIMBYism that is at play). "Scale" is always changing, and will always be changing. Every new advancement steps out of the scale of what was there. The first teepee wasn't in scale with the meadow. The log cabin wasn't in scale with the teepee. The 3-story fort wasn't in scale with the cabin. Then an office building came in, then a taller one. The first 240-foot tower wasn't in scale with the 85 foot ones around it, but then came another 240-footer and it was in scale.

The city has rightly set a course of bringing growth into the city, where the infrastructure is already built and paid for, and where people thrive by sharing so many facilities and resources and the energy that courses thru a good city. To do that, each neighborhood has to build up where it can, such as where the earthquake long ago took out a brick building and nothing is there now. It would be a travesty to not build as much good, well-designed housing as we could on that site.

To: Joe Nabbefeld
Subject: RE: Question about Mueller project

Quick follow-up question, having read your letter more closely.

Mueller's site is zoned 40'. Was it priced as 40' by the seller, and hence allow a 40' building, or did the seller also assume that it will be upzoned to 65', and price it as a 65' property (and hence preclude 40' buildings)?

Presumably the purchase price is public information, so we could compare it to similar recent 40' or 65' NC property sales and make a judgement?

Sorry to be a bit slow on the uptake, but I don't think about this stuff all day?

I personally like Mueller and favor his plans, but then I don't have to live right next to it!

Joe's answer:

I don't know what the price was. (And have no knowledge whether Jim has closed on buying it.)

And it gets complicated real quickly.

For one, there's the cost of the environmental clean-up. (And does the neighborhood want that to remain not-cleaned up?)

For another, almost nothing gets built in 40-foot zones these days (just because we see a building in a 40-foot zone, doesn't mean that building could be built today. Market conditions right now preclude building to 40 feet ... Generally, an exception being if the property owner is the builder themselves and have owned it so long that they own it free and clear ... Hence can make something "pencil" that somebody buying the land today couldn't make "pencil.")

What does get built in some 40-foot zones is townhomes, under-utilizing the site, which is not good for the city and region.

One reason so little is done in 40-foot zones is what you would do is small wooden condo structures, and liability insurance costs preclude that. The apartment market is coming back, and so some small wooden apartment buildings might possibly begin to pencil again, but not yet.

Land Use Application:2331 E Madison St

Land Use Application to allow one live-work unit and one, two-unit townhouse structure. Residential parking for two vehicles provided one within the structure and one surface.

Details on DPD website

Presented at 23rd/Union Design Review Hearing

From: Andrew Taylor
To: Jim Mueller
I have long been concerned about the very jarring transitions between adjacent zones in Urban Villages: I fought (without success) for Diane Sugimura's idea that the rear of Deano's property be upzoned to NC2-40 (rather than NC3-65) to ease the transition ( 65' -> 40' -> 30'),

Jim's proposal would put NC3-65' immediately across 22nd Ave from NC2-30'. One way to preserve the views of the sky from the upper floors of the adjacent NC2-30 building would be to upzone only part of the proposal to 65'. That loses rather a lot of units. I suggest a stepped approach (see attachment) to preserve the sight lines (i.e keep ~ the views seen if it were 40'). The stepped roof areas could be used for attractive roof gardens.

If there's an opportunity, I'd like to describe the idea during Wednesday's meeting.

I stopped by tonight to take a picture of 22nd. I was struck by the lovely big trees, and suggest we do our best to preserve them.

********************************************

Hi Andrew and neighbors,

There is a lot of support for your idea of graduated heights from Joanna Cullen, Dean Taylor, me and others in the 'hood. Please do present it tonight. Bill and I will be at the CADA Board meeting and will miss the Early Design meeting.

There are also requests for some affordable units in exchange for support for the contract rezone. We need workforce housing in the 'hood for firefighters, nurses, teachers and such people essential to our community. It's the right thing to do. There is the 10-year property tax abatement program that would offset some of the developer's pain.

You may print this out as documentation of my support.

Jean Tinnea

********************************************

Thanks for your ideas, and thank you for the support and great feedback at our meeting last week!

We have wrestled with this mightily for the last six months, and have stepped the building at the 22nd Ave. side as much as we can. We did a poor job of communicating this at the meeting last week, and will have some better materials to show you tonight.

Our approach to design is to look at who the neighbors are on each side of the property and to make our projects as friendly as possible to them.

In the case of the 22nd avenue side of the East Union proposal, this translated into stepping the building on the SW side, and using the SW side of the property as a mews for townhouses rather than taking the building to the edge. We then incorporated townhouses along 22nd Avenue to make our project a part of the single family street rather than turn our backs on the neighbors.

These moves put our parking all underground, which is expensive, but we determined that this was the right thing to do. There is just barely enough room in the project economics to do this.

The only cost tradeoff we can make if we take away top floor rentable units is to save money in the parking garage by excavating less deep -i.e. putting it on the ground floor - a Hobson's Choice if there ever was one!

The accepted approach to getting projects through design review is to bring in a design that is cheap and let the neighbors argue the developer into the project he wanted to build in the first place. We take the opposite approach and try to present something that we think is best. The downside for us is that we have nothing to "trade"...

I am sure we will have a positive and communicative discussion tonight, and our team looks forward to continuing to work with you.

And lastly, we love mature street trees and our intent is to keep them!

Best,
--Jim, (James C Mueller)

********************************************

Brief Report on Design Review Hearing

Very good turnout of neighbors (and other builders, architects?). Good, clear presentation by architects and Jim Mueller.

About 12 neighbors spoke. Many spoke in opposition of any upzone. I briefly presented my proposal and gave board members a copy of the flyer.

I stayed for the Design Review Board's deliberations. They _seemed_ to be generally in favor of the upzone (the community representative member less so).

I'll request an electronic copy of the Board report and post it here.

I think that strong letters from you, the immediate neighbors, would be of great value in the rezone process.
See: http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/publications/cam/cam228.pdf

Contract rezones require approval from the Seattle City Council in conjunction with a "Property Use and Development Agreement," which provides specific limits on the uses of the property under the new zoning.

Much concern about traffic issues on 22nd. Neighbors seemingly mollified by parking entrance on 23rd (though the Board sort of opposed that) despite the obvious need for northbound traffic to circle back via 22nd. Some neighbors concerned by traffic on Union and wanted crosswalk on Union at 22nd: I doubt that S-DOT will go for that.

Some discussion of need for developer to "give back to community" in exchange for upzone. Suggestion of offsite affordable housing.

I recorded the Board's deliberations on my camera, if anybody is interested.

Andrew

Transcript of 23rd/Union Meeting

(reproduced with the permission of its author, Nick Pottier, Central Neighborhood Association. Couple of edits by Andrew)

For those who didn't make it, some quick notes taken during the meeting. I just typed these up during the meeting, so forgive any typos or errors. No proof reading either. Don't sue me! :)

Jim Mueller presented the project and their plans therein. There were various plans available for viewing before the meeting with various sketches, I don't know if these are available online just yet.

- he's been working with community leaders to find something that will fit in with the neighborhood
- architects are Mithun architects
- the building designs are concepts to get a feel for how the space will be changed, they are not final or detailed
- JC Mueller core values: integrity, intelligence, homework Triple bottom line: environment, community, economics, all sustainable
- previous site was Coleman building, demolished by Nisqually quake
- white tanks on the site are to clean up from old dry cleaning pollution, takes 6-8 months
- they took into account position of site between residential and commercial areas

- Objectives:
- Community Revitalization
- Urban Design
- Economics - (requires taller building to pay off)
- Neighborhood Economics - bring new residents and retail
- Sustainability - Build responsibly

- Project Features
- Approx 90 units
- 85-90 parking stalls
- ~4500 square feet of street level retail (preference for local/regional)
- Encourage pedestrian activities

Option 1:
- 40 foot tall
- retail only on street level

Option 2:
- 65 feet (six stories)
- street level is both residential and retail
- town houses on 22nd

Option 3: (preferred and proposed)
- 65 feet (six stories)
- Entry on 23rd
- 22nd has town homes
- Retail on Union and 23rd on street level

Height:
- height is needed to make project feasible
- proportion of space is what makes you comfortable in a space.. Walmart parking lot is too spread out, with taller structures a larger setback will make it feel OK
- very much wants to make pedestrians comfortable and create a comfortable space
- example: alley 24 across from REI, which is 75 feet

Design review board meeting:
- Wednesday, June 27, 2007
- 6:30 PM
- Miller Community Center
- 330 19th Ave E

Information:
AskUnion@jcmueller.com

Q and A:

Q: Are you pursuing any other zoning changes in the area?
A: Yes, maybe.

Q: Parking will be exiting onto 23rd? Is that going to be a traffic issue?
A: Something we are still studying and trying to work through, city will certainly be involved.

Q: Can you make your number if you step back the first few floors?
A: We have stepped them back a bit at 40 feet, which will make it feel less tall from the street.

Q: What are the pros and cons of people living on 22nd?
A: Should be almost all positive. New residents will be good for the area, and shadow is cast on Union street, not 22nd.

Q: Will there be retail/visitor parking?
A: Yes, some, accessed off 23rd.

Q: Tell us more about sustainable building. How green?
A: Will be studied but still in planning and depends on what we can achieve economically. City has incentives for this as well. Building locally in town is a big step towards being green.

Q: How many parking levels underground?
A: Two. They are expensive.

Q: Describe housing.
A: Market rate, 'affordable'. Not low income.

Q: Lot of real estate on 23rd & Union. What do you think about a pedestrian mall?
A: Some are great, some fail completely. Don't know about this.

Q: West Harbor area has a lot of great ideas. Please study that.
A: We are definitely going to focus on bicycles and flex cars.

Q: You guys should have a secure bicycle area and a bike workshop area.
A: Ya I like that.

Q: Setback is great, maybe vary the roof line to have it appear more different.
A: Architect is listening, I'm sure he'll note it.

Q: Will they be rental units or for sale?
A: Don't know yet.

Q: Construction time frame?
A: Will start construction in about a year. Will take about 14-16 months to build.

Q: How big are the sidewalks?
A: Min requirement is 12 feet, we'll have to actually widen it a bit.

Q: Tell us more about the contract rezone process.
A: Project gets approved at a height. It does not allow us to resell the site with that rezone, its only approved for that particular project. Meeting on the 27th will be official kickoff.

Q: Is there any fear that this project might be killed because of rising interest rates etc?
A: Seattle still has a strong economy and the CD is close to downtown so will remain in demand.

Q: Why don't you sell it to people with no cars? And therefore no parking to save money?
A: The market objects to that, though I like the idea. Lenders would not go along with that however, not economically feasible.

Q: How are you reaching out to the african american community?
A: Apparently not very well, because none are in attendance. Help!

Q: How was this information spread?
A: Mostly through websites, apparently didn't reach all the audience.

Q: How do you make the retail look more diverse and small to attract the smaller retailers?
A: The problem is actually cost. Its hard to find small retailers who can afford the rent of a new space. We will try to make it as affordable as possible.

Q: Is the space going to be retail or small office space?
A: No, it will be retail.

Q: Tell us more about the green elements of this project.
A: We are still determining that. More as we start nailing things down. We will do what is effective and makes sense economically.

Q: Do you have a square footage cost?
A: Rents in areas like this in 2009ish will be $2.25 sq/ft for residential. That's the minimum needed to get financing. Condos about $5.50 sq/ft. Big costs are construction and parking.

Q: Would be great to see the context of the site and its height with other buildings around.
A: No slides for that, but our other boards had it.

Q: Houses on 22nd will be in shade in the winter.
A: Yes, there will be some, can't avoid it.

Q: Have you thought about the impact of street parking? Zone parking?
A: We will have parking, so it won't be us causing the problem.
(others chimed in that we've tried to do zoning before, but haven't goten residential support)

A: Plan for a street car coming through 23rd & Union?

Q: For sale or for rent?
A: Don't know yet.

Q: Unit mix?
A: 80% 1 bedroom and studio, 20% 2 bedroom.

Q: Any sketches of the actual final design and finish?
A: This will be part of the review process. Lots of factors. 1) cost 2) durability 3) maintainability We'll be picking a skin that fits those criteria and which will hopefully fit in with the neighborhood. Start of that discussion on the 27th.

Q: Have you looked at mechanical parking, is it cheaper?
A: Yes, I've looked at it and used it in China. In general its more expensive except for special cases. Getting cheaper but not yet there.

Q: You said you don't prefer national chains. How serious are you?
A: Its my preference. No promises, but I have a strong personal preference towards biz owners being in the stores.

Q: Are there environmental issues that might block the project?
A: No, contamination from dry cleaning was it.

Q: There is a bus stop on 23rd, will that move?
A: We'll have to deal with that, might move.

Q: Will you have a sustainability consultant on the project?
A: Our architects kind of specialize in that.

Q: Is green and sustainable going to be the 'brand' of this project?
A: Yes, but I also want to do something with music since this area has a strong history of that.

Q: Is there any shared/community space to this project? Courtyard?
A: I don't know yet, we are still designing the retail level. Most buildings like this have a common area for residents. Maybe make that more community based. It's possible.

Q: Would be nice to see something less boxy.
A: Design is changing constantly. There will be updated designs on the 27th for you to look at.

Q: Can you talk about the materials? Looks like glass & metal.
A: Still too early.

Q: There are lots of small children on 22nd. Please don't put the parking entrance there. How do I help make that happen?
A: Show up to the meetings, preferred option is definitely not to have parking entrance there. Cars belong on 23rd and Union.

Q: Won't entrance on 23rd cause people to double back on 22nd to turn left?
A: Yes, that's a concern. City planning is thinking about that and its something we are tracking.

Q: 23rd is an arterial, no parking. You are going to add load to the parking, how will it be handled?
A: Trying to create a pedestrian area, hopefully people will walk. We'll have some parking but in the end we are in a city, thats just the reality of the situation.

Q: Could they ever require a change to traffic on 22nd? (couldn't hear details)
A: Yes, maybe.

Q: Most of us want you here, but we have concerns about parking and traffic etc..
A: This is a great place to live without a car, close to downtown etc.. More discussion on pedestrian access.

Q: Will you be selling parking separately from the units?
A: Possibly. (additional comments about people then parking on the street)

Q: Will there be bike parking and what about the impacts of the bicycle master plan?
A: Yes, there will be bike parking and I'm a big fan of the bicycle master plan.

Q: How about some covered bike parking?
A: Ya, that's what I have in mind.

Q: No option for parking entrance on Union.
A: Parking entrance would ruin retail space.

Q: Will people put up with traffic on Union when sitting at a cafe on it?
A: Yes if done correctly.

Q: Who will be responding to emails and such?
A: Denise and I monitor comments and questions. As does our PR firm. (Nyhus)

That's it.

-Nic

Reports on Proposed Development at 23rd & Union

Following the meeting on Tuesday with Jim Mueller, Jean Tinnea has shared some thoughts, and Nic Pottier of the Central Neighborhood Association has posted a long report about the meeting (care to join their group?). As my contribution, I offer photos of the architects' display boards, and a video recording of the first 40 minutes of the meeting: low tech recording on my digital camera. Most of the audio is clear, and you can sort of see the slides (most of which are of the boards shown here). It's at the end of this post.

Here's where the project would be built: the "Context"

(click on picture for bigger copy)

Here's the developer's preferred Scheme:
"Scheme 1" - Parking entrance on 23rd
(click on picture for bigger copy)
Here's another design with a rezone to 65':
"Scheme 2"
(click on picture for bigger copy)

Here's another design with a rezone to 65':
"Scheme 3"
(click on picture for bigger copy)
And here's how it might look: "Concept"
(click on picture for bigger copy)

And finally, here's the video of Jim Mueller's presentation: watch it here, or click on "Google Video" to enlarge it.

Don't forget the first Design Review Hearing on the project (Miller Community Center, 6: 30 PM, Weds June 27th): your chance to comment officially on the project.

And here's the rest of my video (memory card filled up before presentation ended).

Feedback about 23rd & Union Development Proposal

Jean Tinnea, from the Central Neighborhood Association, writes:

There will be a meeting with Jim Mueller for the 'hood at Central Cinema 6pm Tuesday June 19th. Jim is the developer planning to develop the former Colman Building site. The current zoning is 4 stories. All past development tries have failed. There are several reasons and one is that they didn't 'pencil out' (be able to pay for itself) at 4 stories. The project must pencil out in order to get financing and to carry itself once built.

As a Board member of the Central District Development Association (CADA) that builds and preserves affordable housing, I can say it gets more and more difficult to get financing and get a project to pencil out. It is darn near impossible to get funding for affordable housing projects. (Thanks, W.) Meanwhile, due to the rising cost of land and building materials, it is also more challenging, certainly more expensive, to develop in general.

As a 28-year homeowner, property and business owner in the Union St corridor, I personally resisted all previous efforts to upzone the 23rd & Union corner. Development and economic rejuvenation happened all around us but not on Union east of 14th. (That project at 14th is just beginning.)

Although I haven't yet seen the design for the Colman site, the current developer, Jim Mueller, has a vision, good ideas, is approachable, WANTS to work with the community and followed the Neighborhood Plan in his previous developments in S Lake Union.

I am ready to support a contract upzone to 6 stories. In return, I'd like to see some affordable housing, affordable retail and/or public space, and thoughtful integration into the surrounding 'hood, say step zoning where the new structure steps down from 65 feet on 23rd to 40 feet on 22nd. I know that some will resist to the end, and I suggest that the rest of us think of what we would like in exchange for an upzone and, at last, some rejuvenation of the Union Street corridor.

Jean Tinnea

Saturday Central Area Plan Meeting

I recently drew your attention to a meeting this Saturday to re-interest neighbors in the Central Area Neighborhood Plan (1:30 to 3:30 PM Saturday, Garfield Community Center, 23rd & Cherry).

My previous post started with a facsimile of a postcard sent out by the Neighborhood Plan Implementation Team. Several of the bullet points (OK, frowny-face points, ☹) on the postcard appeared critical of developers. The team wants to emphasize that they are aware of both well-intentioned and less well intentioned developers, and were not wanting to paint with a broad brush.

I might add that I have been extremely impressed with Jim Mueller, a developer who's involved both in the Madison corridor and the 23rd & Union area. He's met with many of us, turned up at a neighborhood cleanup, and is clearly sensitive to many of our issues as well as those of others in the area. He's selected an architecture firm that we've had positive experiences with, and I think we'll all enjoy working with him to guide our neighborhood in its inevitable redevelopment.

I invite you to come along on Saturday to talk about the Central Area Neighborhood Plan, and how we can use it to guide our neighborhood in the direction we'd like to see it go.

(As noted, in part, before). The Madison-Miller area took part in neighborhood planning as part of the Central Area plan process from 1996 to 1998: the resulting general plan is posted on the City website together with the scary and incomprehensible "Approval and Adoption Matrix" .

The Madison-Miller area, with the guidance of some very talented consultants, also produced its own Master Plan as part of the planning process, although it was never posted online by the City. I have now scanned and posted the Madison-Miller Master Plan: see the "Madison-Miller Neighborhood Plan" list of links, on the right of this page, just below the "Miller Links" list.

(Just found this great 1 page explanation of the Comprehensive Plan and Seattle's neighborhood planning efforts!)

For a flavor of the neighborhood planning process, check out the Spring 1996 "Miller Times" For some early results of the planning, see the Fall 1999 "Miller Times" and City's 2004 Fact Sheet on the plan.

Previous views of where the plans might be going are in the 2004 Priority Report and the 2005 Priority Update, which seem to be the City's last obvious neighborhood plan related activities. Councilmember Clark (a Neighborhood Plan Steward in a previous life) has expressed special interest in auditing and updating neighborhood plans. You can watch a video of the 5/19/07 Neighborhood Plan Workshop hosted by Councilmember Clark.

Fire Station 6 Relocation Meeting

The lovely Art Deco Fire Station on 23rd at Yesler (already an official Central Area landmark) is being replaced as part of the 2003 Fire Levy.

See meeting details below if you're interested in the possible relocation sites (and ask them for me what they're planning to do with the lovely old building: the one on 15th made a lovely video store!). Click on notice below for a more readable version.

Addendum (from Christina Faine, Fire Levy Communications Officer)

Yes, the existing structure has been designated as a landmark to
protect its historic character. Once the new station is built, the
current building will no longer serve as a fire station. The City
intends to sell the property and return the proceeds to the levy
program.

Central Area Plan Revitalization Workshop

(map of Central Area Urban Village planning areas)

Central Area Quality of Life Is Under Attack

Want to do something about it?

What concerns you the most about what is happening in our neighborhoods or the Central Area?

Come find out how the Central Area Neighborhood Plan can help us take control of our community’s destiny and the Overall Quality of Life in the Central Area

Saturday June 9, 2007
1:30pm - 3:30pm
Garfield Community Center
2323 East Cherry St

☺ Programming that Creates and Promotes Positive Activities and Environments for our Young People
☹ Negative Impact on our infrastructure, traffic and parking problems due to zoning changes and over development
☹ Flooding and/or other property damage due to the over development or lack of adequate reparations or modifications
☹ Madison St., Jackson Place, other corridors and neighborhoods are under siege by developers who disregard our concerns?
☹ Shrinking green spaces and urban trails to keep our neighborhoods healthy?
☹ Are Developers developing you out of your home?


Co-sponsored by:
Central Area Neighborhood Plan Stewardship and
Seattle Parks and Recreation

(The Madison-Miller area took part in neighborhood planning as part of the Central Area plan: the resulting general plan is posted on the City website together with the scary and incomprehensible "Approval and Adoption Matrix" .

The Madison-Miller area, with the guidance of some very talented consultants, also produced its own Master Plan as part of the planning process, although it was never posted online by the City.

I have now scanned and posted the Madison-Miller Master Plan: see the "Madison-Miller Neighborhood Plan" list of links, on the right of this page, just below the "Miller Links" list.)

Neighborhood Plans: Madison-Miller Plan now online

In the late 90's many Seattle neighborhoods underwent an extensive and exhausting neighborhood planning exercise, and produced voluminous neighborhood plans, which were adopted by City Council. The Spring 1996 "Miller Times" captures some of the flavor of the process.

(Just found this great 1 page explanation of the Comprehensive Plan and Seattle's neighborhood planning efforts!)

The Madison-Miller area took part in neighborhood planning as part of the Central Area plan: the resulting general plan is posted on the City website together with the scary and incomprehensible "Approval and Adoption Matrix" .

The Madison-Miller area (with the guidance of some very talented consultants) also produced its own Master Plan as part of the planning process, although it was never posted online by the City.

I have now scanned and posted the Madison-Miller Master Plan: see the "Madison-Miller Neighborhood Plan" list of links, on the right of this page, just below the "Miller Links" list.

Most of the people involved in the planning process have moved away (or faded away) and many new and enthusiastic neighbors have moved into the area. After a long period of neglect, the City is now showing interest in revisiting our neighborhood plans, and maybe even in helping us to update them.

I encourage all of you to take a look at the Madison-Miller Master Plan: only limited development has happened along Madison in the last decade, and much of the plan is still relevant to us. It's a remarkably readable and accessible document, and you might even enjoy looking at it.


In her May 2007 Newsletter, Councilmember Sally Clark reported on the audit of the Neighborhood Plan Implemetation that she is supervising. She also wrote a Seattle Times Op-Ed piece about the neighborhood plan audit.

Note that, after the adoption of all the different neighborhoods' diverse plans for their respective areas, the Mayor got the Department of Planning and Development to undertake wide-reaching citywide updates of the building code for multifamily areas and for neighborhood business districts. Those updates seemed to be a "cookie cutter" approach and paid little attention to the requirements & desires expressed in the various neighborhoods' plans. Let's hope that this new interest in updating neighborhood plans may redress the balance a bit. (updated 8/08 to remove obsolete references)

Sat. May 19th Neighborhood Plans Workshop

(Editorial comments: the Madison-Miller area is clearly going to be redeveloped very soon. It would be to all of our advantages to use a revitalized neighborhood plan to help shape the development the way we want it. It's a geeky, technical, exhausting, micro-managing sort of exercise, but it seems to be our best option. If you can't make it to the May 19th workshop [it clashes with our MaDCAP cleanup] maybe you can come to the June 9th Central Area Neighborhood Plan Stewardship's event to get Central Area residents, businesses owners and other organizations acquainted and involved with the Central Area’s Neighborhood Plan.

Andrew Taylor)

(Click on poster for more readable version).

Here's the press release with all the details.