Comments on: No Density In My Backyard http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/ Reducing all human experience into that of the present generation and the passing moment* Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:22:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: Andrea http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-2420 Mon, 02 Jun 2008 22:45:35 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-2420 I work (but don't live) in this neighborhood, and I'm all for it. I work (but don’t live) in this neighborhood, and I’m all for it.

]]> by: Almost What We Don’t Build Anymore | hugeasscity http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1870 Sat, 03 May 2008 17:30:20 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1870 [...] As this example demonstrates, the City’s parking requirement all but makes it inevitable that on small lots, developers will build low numbers of expensive units rather than higher numbers of affordable units. The proposed development at 1126 34th Ave in Madrona is another example. If expensive urban land is used to store cars, someone has to pay. [...] […] As this example demonstrates, the City’s parking requirement all but makes it inevitable that on small lots, developers will build low numbers of expensive units rather than higher numbers of affordable units. The proposed development at 1126 34th Ave in Madrona is another example. If expensive urban land is used to store cars, someone has to pay. […]

]]> by: SeattleScape » Blog Archive » A teacher and his funky development dreams http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1823 Thu, 01 May 2008 18:35:06 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1823 [...] Other local bloggers weighs in on the plans here and here. [...] […] Other local bloggers weighs in on the plans here and here. […]

]]> by: The Hipster Zombies http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1782 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:58:47 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1782 Let's put up a big box to block out all the light, like we did in Fremont. We'll follow the artists around to all the funky neihborhoods, put up our big boxes, move in, and drive all the life out of the place. Onward to Georgetown! Let’s put up a big box to block out all the light, like we did in Fremont. We’ll follow the artists around to all the funky neihborhoods, put up our big boxes, move in, and drive all the life out of the place. Onward to Georgetown!

]]> by: Mike Leavitt http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1773 Tue, 29 Apr 2008 06:50:29 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1773 the parking lot will not stay as-is. but the actual circumstances are more complicated than first impressions of the plans. With specific ideas to alter and support the development plans, the 50 letters and 25+ attendees at 3 public meetings have not protested NIMBY-style. The developer of Bowling Green, commonly referenced as Madrona's biggest building, has also spoken against these lot plans at every meeting. If there was a real plan for affordable units and reduced car traffic, all the do-gooder and "mossback" Madrona liberals would give the plan a group treehug. this site's architects, property owner, and other Madrona developers will all say that the bottom line is "it doesn't pencil out". If M.Tobias had paid less than $1,000,000, the building envelope wouldn't need to be maximized to flip the property. Until Johnston's intelligent architects buy the property themselves, filling the footprint of a high priced empty lot will not urban-ize Madrona. Since property rights are involved here more than urban density, it's not as simple as "it'll be bigger than what was there before." Roy McMakin's development (1422 34th Ave) walked the razor-thin line between multi-functional high density and a non-maxed building envelope. Unlike his neighbor to the North, McMakin minimally impacted his neighbors’ property rights. With a few minor adjustments to its current site plan, the Madrona parking lot can also be developed well. the parking lot will not stay as-is. but the actual circumstances are more complicated than first impressions of the plans. With specific ideas to alter and support the development plans, the 50 letters and 25+ attendees at 3 public meetings have not protested NIMBY-style. The developer of Bowling Green, commonly referenced as Madrona’s biggest building, has also spoken against these lot plans at every meeting.

If there was a real plan for affordable units and reduced car traffic, all the do-gooder and “mossback” Madrona liberals would give the plan a group treehug. this site’s architects, property owner, and other Madrona developers will all say that the bottom line is “it doesn’t pencil out”. If M.Tobias had paid less than $1,000,000, the building envelope wouldn’t need to be maximized to flip the property. Until Johnston’s intelligent architects buy the property themselves, filling the footprint of a high priced empty lot will not urban-ize Madrona. Since property rights are involved here more than urban density, it’s not as simple as “it’ll be bigger than what was there before.”

Roy McMakin’s development (1422 34th Ave) walked the razor-thin line between multi-functional high density and a non-maxed building envelope. Unlike his neighbor to the North, McMakin minimally impacted his neighbors’ property rights. With a few minor adjustments to its current site plan, the Madrona parking lot can also be developed well.

]]> by: danb http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1589 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 07:24:33 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1589 Steve, I think the key is that there is no underground parking in the Madrona building. The nine stalls fit in the back on ground level. I suspect a building like this is only doable with a low number of large area units so that the parking requirement is also low. Steve, I think the key is that there is no underground parking in the Madrona building. The nine stalls fit in the back on ground level. I suspect a building like this is only doable with a low number of large area units so that the parking requirement is also low.

]]> by: Steve http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1586 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 06:13:31 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1586 This looks like a great project; definitely the kind of thing to support if there's an obvious way to do it. It brings up a question in my mind, though: How can this project pencil with only 3 stories where the 23rd & Union project mentioned a few posts back apparently needs 6? Are Madrona rents much higher? (To be clear, I personally support 6 stories at 23rd & Union and generally, as much density as a community will tolerate. I'm just surprised to know that anyone's thinking of building a mixed-use project that's only 3 stories...) This looks like a great project; definitely the kind of thing to support if there’s an obvious way to do it.

It brings up a question in my mind, though: How can this project pencil with only 3 stories where the 23rd & Union project mentioned a few posts back apparently needs 6? Are Madrona rents much higher?

(To be clear, I personally support 6 stories at 23rd & Union and generally, as much density as a community will tolerate. I’m just surprised to know that anyone’s thinking of building a mixed-use project that’s only 3 stories…)

]]> by: Rob A http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1573 Sun, 20 Apr 2008 02:51:56 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1573 It is amazing to me how many progressives there are in Seattle that do their best to stop progress - especially projects like this that are environmentally desirable and a vast improvement to what currently occupies the location... It is amazing to me how many progressives there are in Seattle that do their best to stop progress - especially projects like this that are environmentally desirable and a vast improvement to what currently occupies the location…

]]> by: David Sucher http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1571 Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:26:30 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1571 Oops. I meant The Boulders at Green Lake; I don't know Stonewater. Oops. I meant The Boulders at Green Lake; I don’t know Stonewater.

]]> by: David Sucher http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1570 Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:22:50 +0000 http://noisetank.com/hugeasscity/2008/04/19/no-density-in-my-backyard/#comment-1570 That's sick i.e. I mean the thoughtless NIMBY attitude. Johnston does some very fine work -- their Stonewater Townhouses by Greenlake are (from the outside) totally yummy. And for god's sake, 30' is not big. I wish there was someway to help good development like this one-- of course you are doing so on this blog and I will link. That’s sick i.e. I mean the thoughtless NIMBY attitude.
Johnston does some very fine work — their Stonewater Townhouses by Greenlake are (from the outside) totally yummy.
And for god’s sake, 30′ is not big.

I wish there was someway to help good development like this one– of course you are doing so on this blog and I will link.

]]>