(Image: CHS)
Revived redevelopment plans for a new project that will demolish E Olive Way’s All Seasons Cleaners will come in front of the East Design Review Board this week a vision for an eight-story mass timber building within sight of the Capitol Hill Station entrance.
The building at 1800 E Olive Way, the corner of Olive and Harvard a block west of Broadway, is home to one of the remaining dry cleaners on the Hill. Back in 2018, the then-busy drive thru laundry and home to one of the Hill’s busiest little weekend flea markets was being lined up for a project that would have risen seven stories and created around 45 apartments, and 3,200 square feet of retail just off Broadway — but longtime business and property owners the Kim family opted not to sell, putting any redevelopment on hold.
Four years later following the pandemic, the opening of hundreds of new apartments above Capitol Hill Station nearby, and an important land use change, plans are back in motion for a building that can now rise eight stories thanks to the new Mandatory Housing Affordability zoning.
Design review: 1800 E Olive Way
Design Review Early Design Guidance for an 8-story, 73-unit apartment building with retail. No parking proposed. View Design Proposal (24 MB)
Designs to be presented this week describe an eight-story building, with a planned 67-77 residential units and about 2,500-3,500 square feet of commercial space. Plans call for a mix of one- and two-bedroom units, possibly with some three-bedroom units as well.
There would be no parking for cars, and 73 spaces for bikes in the light rail station-proximate project.
The project team, led by Tsuga Studio, will present three options for the new building at an Early Design Guidance meeting before the East Design Review Board. Since this is the early guidance meeting, none of the three have been fully fleshed out, but the main attributes are beginning to take shape.
All three propose construction from mass timber, which the packet calls a lower carbon option than steel or concrete. It would use a post and beam style and would allow for the ceilings to be finished wood. Capitol Hill will see another mass timber project in coming years just off E Olive Way as development comes together for the new City Market building. The affordable Heartwood project from Community Roots Housing at 14th and Union, meanwhile, will also boast cross-laminated timber construction.
The plans also call for placing a curb bulb on both sides of E Olive Way on the east side of its intersection with Harvard. The plans, which would require approval by SDOT, would make the street narrower and therefore easier for pedestrians to cross. It would also create a small plaza on the corner just in front of the building. Whether or not SDOT will allow it is an open question.
The designers call their preferred option the “Crown Jewel.” In this version, the top two floors would still use the folded plane design. Additionally, some of the lower floors facing east, toward the light rail station, would also use folded planes. The central floors along E Olive Way and Harvard Ave would have flatter walls, but the windows would be placed in a checkerboard pattern.
This option would also call for setback departures from the zoning codes, similar to the second option. It would also create 77 apartments, though there would be no live-work units. It would have the largest commercial area at 3,501 square feet.
$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻
Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.
Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 👍
While I’m a huge fan of no-car commuting etc. but having 0 parking options in a rental is severely limiting who this type of housing is for in the current Seattle we live in where a car is still very useful / borderline necessary.
Even having %30-50 of units have access to a parking spot would have increased the usefulness of this and other similar buildings.
We’re not at NYC level of public transit or mixed use development yet.
But isn’t it the responsibility of the for-profit builders to decide for themselves whether they accept that risk tradeoff, in exchange for significantly reduced construction costs?
Not sure.
Often, they just want to turn a profit within 1-3 years, and move onto another project; leaving the community to deal with the long term effects.
Regulations are great for that reason – you can force people to take the longer term vision, but I understand the short term economics don’t always align :/
I somewhat agree with 15th Ave Fan. There will be some demand for vehicles for a) getting out of the city, or b) having one partner work out of the city. The building may not need a 1:1 parking garage given that it’s on multiple bus routes to downtown, but surely there will be some demand for parking spots (especially spots with electric charging).
Without the parking spots, the cars from the apartment building will be pushed out onto the already overcrowded streets in central CH. And with the new curb bulb, they’re wanting to swallow an additional 4-6 street parking spaces (hence the SDOT approval).
But, it should not be the developers who make the decision to exclude parking spaces. They’ll do anything to save a buck. It should be the local citizens and the city’s urban planning department to make that decision. I would think the local businesses would balk at the removal of street parking spaces.
Or, perhaps, people who need reliable parking will simply choose not to live there — and pick one of many other complexes that have surplus parking spaces available?
Or they’ll have to lower their rent to where they can target residents who will accept a lower rent in exchange for not having guaranteed / secure parking?
My experience is that you succeed in business by identifying an audience you can profitably serve. That doesn’t mean serving everyone.
“Or they’ll have to lower their rent…”
Gurl, what neighborhood have you been living in?
Umm…. I’m in a neighborhood where I’ve had to lower my rent on higher-end rental units *I* rent out without parking, because higher-income folks often don’t want them?
(but they’re easily scooped up at lower price points)
I’ve lived in Seattle for years without owning a car. If a car is a necessity for you, you’re free to choose from the ~95% of housing options in the city that provide parking. Car-free buildings maximize the space for housing and provide a better pedestrian environment (No garage disgorging cars across the sidewalk).
It’s not severely limiting for Capitol Hill. I’ve lived without a car in this neighborhood for seven years and it’s been great. Plus, not having to build parking reduces rents, as more space can be dedicated to people (who pay more rent than cars).
Even if you’re right, the population of Capitol Hill is about 30,000 (according to my brief googling). Even if 1% of those people don’t need a car, housing like this would be in demand.
“not having to build parking reduces rents” is false. Rents are primarily controlled by market conditions. Building managers are going to charge the highest rent that the market will tolerate, regardless of amenities.
yes this is true. Development is not going to pass savings to tenants.
Yes, but if development costs are cheaper and the margins are higher, won’t there be more housing built — which in turns reduces rents?
And further, if it turns out people don’t actually want these apartments w/o parking as one or two naysayers here predict — then yes — the rents will naturally have to be lower because the value is lower.
Just going to hop on the train of people applauding more space for people than cars. Your worldview is pretty limited if you think having a car is a necessity, especially in a location within a block of the light rail station and bus routes to hiking trails and easy access to just about everything one needs on a daily basis. The majority of the world exists without a car, try imagining what that world could be like rather than imposing your limited view on the rest of us.
I can hardly imagine any place in the city where a parking-free building would make *more* sense than this one! It’s right in the heart of supremely walkable Capitol Hill, kitty-corner from a Link station.
That’s a reasonable argument for not having 1:1 parking.
Considering the majority of the people living there are going to be working downtown on either the Light Rail or the 8 (if they’re not working remote), I think the developers could even get away with 1:5 spaces:apartments in that location.
But, I’m also not going to pretend that an apartment building of this size won’t have people with cars and that it won’t put additional pressure on street parking if it doesn’t come with some parking.
Then let’s please start charging for street parking to control that “pressure”.
Agreeing that this location so close to at least four bus routes, the streetcar and the light rail is precisely the area that will attract renters that don’t have cars. I’ve lived with fewer transit options on the Hill without a car for over a decade—love to see more projects taking advantage of the opportunity provided by the station area overlay.
Constructing parking spaces does pencil into the ultimate base rent needed for developers to recoup costs on a project—just like any other construction cost so I’m sure eliminating underground parking is allowing the developer to maximize their profit elsewhere.
Looks like a great project