Madison Valley residents can expect another early design guidance meeting and more opportunity to provide their input about a proposed four-story, multi-use development where City People’s Garden Store currently stands.
The East Design Review Board determined at a Wednesday meeting at Seattle University that work still needs to be done on the design options for the building, which is slated to house a PCC Natural Market, three residential floors, and two parking levels.
Floyd Ngono, with community group Save Madison Valley, said the project as designed will create a a development that “looms over” nearby residences.
But Wednesday’s decision kicks the project back to the drawing board.
“I do want to show appreciation to the architect team because they did provide incredibly generous setbacks,” said board member Natalie Gualy. “… So they have taken sensitive action.”
The review board noted blank walls on the building, landscaping, topography and sensitivity to neighboring single family homes as particular areas where it would like to see design changes.
What the development set to replace City People’s will look like
Four previous public meetings have been held that have drawn contention from area residents about the proposed development and led to the formation of a citizen group that goes by Save Madison Valley.
The group provided its views on Wednesday, following a presentation by Studio Meng Strazzara, the architecture firm on the project.
The community group outlined about two dozen points where the group says the architect deviates from the Seattle Design Guidelines.
Multiple members of the group who spoke to the proposed development said that they felt the building “overwhelmed” the site and expressed concerns that they believe the building is designed beyond the allowable height on the Dewey Place side.
The height will be reviewed to ensure it follows zoning regulations, Magda Hogness, planner with the City of Seattle, said.
Save Madison Valley and individual residents also expressed concerns about losing trees. The group feels there is at least one exceptional tree, if not an entire exceptional grove, that will be destroyed.
“The amount of vegetation and greenspace removed will not be replaced to any appreciable degree,” said, Jane Nichols, Save Madison Valley member. She noted 39 mature trees, more than 20 native plant species, and more than 14,600 square feet of tree canopy will be lost.
However, in his presentation, Charles Strazzara, architecture firm partner, said that according to an arborist report, none of the trees at the site were found to be significant.
Save Madison Valley’s presentation was met with applause and whoops of approval from many in the audience, which board member Gualy noted was the largest she’d seen in her three years on the board.
Some of the other individual commenters shared Save Madison’s Valley’s views, but others approved of one or a combination of the architect’s design options.
Dave O’Hern voiced his support for option three saying he liked many features including the number of parking spaces and small residential units.
“I think (the architect) incorporated a lot of feedback from the community,” O’Hern said.
Prior to public comment Strazzara presented the project background and three design options to the group.
The first option, Strazzara said wasn’t favored for reasons that included no room for landscaping and bulkiness, especially on the Dewey Place side of the building which has single family homes across the street.
The second design option included a plaza area on Madison. Some area residents said they liked the communal feature it brought to the building; however, the Dewey Place side of the building was still met with a large wall.
The prefered third option made an effort to decrease the wall by setting the top three residential floors back, creating a step effect with the levels, leaving rooftop space above the retail level at the edge of the building on the Dewey Place side of the development.
“We’re trying to definitely be a good shepherd and stay within what the zoning allows,” Strazzara said.
Construction is slated for early 2017 with PCC scheduled to open in 2018.
Velmeir, the Michigan-based “full service commercial retail development company” is purchasing the longtime Madison Valley home of City People’s, which will close at the end of the year.
According to the company, City People’s, “the first women-owned hardware/mercantile store in Seattle,” was founded in 1979 by Judith Gille, Dorrie Wayenberg and Barbara Bower. Harley Broe later joined the partnership. It first opened at 19th and Republican before stretching out in a larger space on 15th Ave E where it operated for 17 years before shuttering in 2001. City People’s opened in Madison Valley since 1988. Its Laurelhurst location remains open.
Too bad it wasn’t kicked back for being too small in scale. This development should be twice as high.
Now queue those live near an arterial and despise change….
THANK GOD!!!
“Save Madison Valley and individual residents also expressed concerns about losing trees. The group feels there is at least one exceptional tree, if not an entire exceptional grove, that will be destroyed.”
Two thoughts:
1. “Save Madison Valley”. The tenant will be an upscale grocer, this is not a major threat. We get you don’t want extra traffic or have to look at the store. But really, will Madison Valley be ruined by a grocery store?
2. If only there were a place where there were lots of native species of trees nearby, since the PCC will turn MV into a CONCRETE JUNGLE! Oh wait, it is across the street from the ARBORETUM.
Again – we get it, you don’t want the traffic in your neighborhood and probably want to save your street parking so you can use your garage as storage or whatever. But this is really disingenuous under the guise of concern for “trees” and “saving” anything other than your own self-interest. Although I suppose it is more honest than the people are claiming to be against it because of no affordable housing (har, har, har!) I’ll bet Seattle Housing Authority could propose to build affordable housing there without a peep from the neighborhood groups. They’d be thrilled. Right?!?!?
*Loud clapping* And this is why the Mayor is shutting down the NIMBY (w/ a few exceptions) Neighborhood Councils.
Did you attend the meeting? Far more that what you’re talking about was discussed and the review board had big problems with the design that had nothing to do with traffic. Perhaps you should go vs. attacking a group based on few facts.
Save Madison Valley presented a detailed description of the failure of the proposal to meet multiple specific design guidelines. That includes guidelines that aim to preserve existing natural features, including trees, on the site (“Promote continuous habitat, where possible, and increase interconnected corridors of urban forest and habitat where possible; Create an open space design that retains and enhances on-site natural areas and connects to natural areas that may exist off-site and may provide habitat for wildlife”).
KS wrote: “However, in his presentation, Charles Strazzara, architecture firm partner, said that according to an arborist report, none of the trees at the site were found to be significant.”
That’s incorrect. He said none were Exceptional. As applied to trees, Exceptional and Significant are specific terms in the Seattle Municipal Code and SEPA, respectively, that have different meanings. Many of the trees are clearly Significant under SEPA.
The City Arborist has a nominal policy to increase the dwindling tree canopy in Seattle, but I’m not sure about the commitment that they have to this concept. Hopefully, in this case, they will preserve any trees which are in reasonable shape and not a problem as far as overhead wires.