More than 60 new households could be coming to 11th Ave E in the next few years on Capitol Hill. C&A Development is proposing to replace a three-story, nine-unit building with an eight-story, 70-unit building as the neighborhood two blocks north of Cal Anderson Park and a block from Capitol Hill Station continues to increase in density. Wednesday night, the project will begin the city’s design review process.
228 11th Ave E
Design Review Early Design Guidance for an 8-story, 73- unit apartment building. No parking proposed. View Design Proposal (56 MB)
EDG–Early Design Guidance
Project Number
Theresa Neylon — Email comments: [email protected]
The site is 228 11th Ave E, between East John and East Thomas streets. The area is generally home to two-and three-story buildings, with a few single-family houses peppered in. But with an 80-foot height limit allowed under current zoning, projects like this one are likely to reshape the area over time. The project site is just a few blocks away from another big project, the coming redevelopment of the Safeway on 15th and John.
The existing building dates to 1963. It and its small parking lot will both be removed.
The proposed building would be nearly 39,000 square feet, with 70 units and no parking for cars. The developer does plan for parking for long-term bike parking, and another 4 short-term bike spots.
With a design from B9 Architects, the developer is proposing three alternatives, according to a draft plan. The preferred version would require some deviations from the city building codes be permitted. Current codes would mandate that building be recessed in slightly at a height of 42 feet – stepped inward in what’s called a wedding-cake style. But the developer’s preferred version calls for not recessing. Instead it would remove most of the apartments on the 8th floor, replacing them with a rooftop deck. This proposal also calls for the top few floors to be slightly angled out from the front of the building, to help break up the mass along the street, rather than a plain, solid façade. There would also be a recessed entry point along 11th. This version would allow for 70 units, while the other two options would allow for 73.
The preferred version calls for the mix of apartments to include 16 efficiencies, 48 one-bedroom and six two-bedroom units.
The plan calls for retaining and protecting a vine maple tree on 11th, two other trees will be protected, but both are on other properties, and neither will be very visible from the street.
Outreach conducted by the development team back in February resulted in no public comments being submitted. Owing to Covid, outreach consisted of some flyers being posted in the area, a tactic consistent with city guidelines.
The proposal is scheduled for an early design guidance meeting with the East Design Review Board at 5 PM July 14. The meeting will be virtual, information about how to “attend” is available on the city’s website.
Seven stories in Eastlake
Over on the other side of the neighborhood, well, maybe not technically in Capitol Hill, there a proposal for a different three-story building and surface parking to give way to something taller.
Developer Pastakia and Associates plans a new building at the corner of Eastlake Avenue and East Hamlin Street at 2720 Eastlake Ave E. The proposal calls for removing the existing three-story office building constructed in 1970 and its adjacent parking lot. It would be replaced with a seven-story building with 90 apartments, three live/work units, and 4,220 square feet of commercial space. The 65-foot-tall building would allow for 34 parking spaces for cars in an underground lot accessed from the alley. Bike storage will also be available, and in a nod to the site’s proximity to Lake Union, there will be kayak storage, as well.
2720 Eastlake Ave E
Land Use Application to allow a 7-story building with 90 apartments, 5 Small Efficiency Dwelling Units, 3 Live-work units and retail. Parking for 40 vehicles proposed. Existing building to be demolished. Early Design Guidance conducted under 3036715-EG. View Design Proposal (45 MB)
REC–Recommendation
Project Number
Greg Johnson — Email comments: [email protected]
The building would have a very shallow U-shape fronting Eastlake Ave, with space for a small courtyard for residents, and the ever-popular rooftop deck.
More details on the project are available on the city website. The project is scheduled for a design review meeting before the East Design Review Board at 7 p.m. July 14. The meeting is virtual, for information on how to access the meeting or to sign up to comment, visit the city’s website.
PLEASE HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE!
Subscribe to CHS to help us pay writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for as little as $5 a month.
And every single one of them will be more expensive than the units they replace.
Just calling it out.
So are you against building more housing units?
I feel like there are some people that will never understand it doesn’t matter what these new units are relative to the old units. There are a million studies that show building more housing brings down rents area-wide.
It does not bring rents down in the immediate area of redevelopment. Instead it drives displacement but may make outlying areas (slightly) cheaper. So, in this case it drives a cycle of displacement throughout the city in order to make Kent marginally cheaper than it otherwise would be. Personally, I think that’s a poor deal for Capitol Hill residents, but opinions vary.
There’s also evidence that redevelopment drives demand, which blows this whole model up, but whatever. Supply side 4 life!!
So sick of this argument. I am against big developers and big landlords. I am for more housing but I am not for more housing at the expensive of neighborhood character and high rents. There’s parking lots all over the city that can be high rises before destruction of quaint buildings and legacy buildings.
“I am not for more housing at the expensive of neighborhood character and high rents.”
Lol it’s like the people you are trying to help are fighting against you.
I was thinking the same thing. This guy has a vision of what he wants and what he thinks is equitable without any idea of how to get there. LOL
I think Jansen mistyped – I read their post to mean “I am not for more housing at the expense of neighborhood character, [resulting in] high rents”.
Dude, apparently you haven’t figured this out yet, but this is how cities work. Older housing stock gets replaced by new, denser housing stock. Yes, the new apartments will be more expensive, because they’re newer and nicer. But there will be more of them, so more people will be able to live in apartments near really good transit service. This isn’t rocket science.
Nimbys and Sawantists have a surprising amount in common
Egan Orion Amazon lovers and Big Developers seem to as well… hatred for the houseless and driving up costs of living by concern trolling density.
Wait why are developers bad? They provide a service in exchange for money. Oh I get it.
Yep! We should totally prioritize the needs of future, wealthier residents over the needs of those who are here right now! So happy for them! I hope they love their new spots!!
You sound like a Trumper on immigration.
Should we build a wall?
this new housing will not be nicer or more affordable, and new construction is notoriously hit or miss in terms of quality, esp when you are looking at efficiencies – which at 73 units on that lot seems likely, though with the incorporation of the parking lot it might be luxury studio size. either way, it’s not likely to bring many benefits to those of us on the lower end of the financial spectrum. more rich people will be able to live near good transit service.
expanding a bit of new retail further into the neighborhood is interesting though, and certainly better than the massive, empty street level lobbies at the new cal anderson development.
also i really wish they would provide unit floor plans or any details about the units really at all, in design review documents!
Design review should be scrapped. It’s just a bunch of architects being petty.
You seem to think that we can somehow regulate stasis into the market, that we can build more units but force the landlords to charge _less_ for better / nicer / newer units.
I really don’t see what there argument is, it’s not even a capitalist argument to build more housing, it’s just counting.
More people are moving in than leaving, so we have to build more housing. We are pretty much out of land so you have to tear down stuff to build more. Unless you are just advocating for more urban sprawl?
Now if you want to make the argument that we could be tearing down single family homes instead of apartments if zoning were different, that’s a completely valid argument. However, we can’t so this is the only option that exists. Blame the city council for that one.
The when discussing things with people who don’t believe in the concept of personal property the arguments can get a little convoluted.
Just wondering, what do you propose as an alternative?
This simple gentrification nothing more. The idea that more expensive house is good does not translate to reality. It’s a utopian ideas. More people will be driven out than brought in. Loo no further than the central district
This literally makes no sense. If you build buildings with more units, that brings in more people.
If you developed nothing, the same rich people would still move in there would just be fewer spots.
Simple math says this building removes 9 apartments but adds 60, so how does this drive more people out than come in?
8 stories is too tall. Incompatible with the neighborhood. They also make no mention of parking. There are no 8 story buildings in the near vicinity.
Lol I can’t tell if this is trolling or not.
Build simple affordable safe housing
For the MAJORITY of Us citizens who LIVE ON $1000/LESS/MONTH.
AFTER PAYING TAXES WORKING RAISING FAMILIES.
THIS GREED ARGUMENT IS OLD OLD OLD AND ITS OVER
WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
NOW.
50000 100 UNIT BLDGS 30% RIGHT FG NOW TO START WITH.
EAT THE RICH OTHERWISE.
National median family income is $79,900/yr. The national median individual income is $36k. That’s significantly more than $1k/mo and at that income level you pay no income tax.
I don’t disagree that prices are making the city unaffordable for many, but at least let’s argue from the true facts.
I think it may be time for you to move. Gotta be better than all this anger and stress. 😄
I like it, I love it, I want some more of it.
Upzone Everywhere.
Love to finally see some new development taking advantage of the height increases allowed in the station area overlay. It’s too bad the actual station development isn’t this tall. We’re going to see a lot more 8-story buildings right here and and it’s exactly the thing that should be going in this close to the light rail station.
I’m not happy that this ugly 8-story building will block all the light and view from my home (per the shadow map in the design proposal), but I guess if we have to build density, near the light rail station is the best place to do it.
I just wonder how long it will take for these to be re-listed as condos, same as all the rest of B9 Architects ugly buildings in the area.