The most recent new major development to open on Capitol Hill, the Capitol Hilltop Apartments hit a design review bump in 2020 (Image: Studio Meng Strazzara)
Seattle is continuing efforts to simplify its design review program while trying to maintain opportunities for community members to help shape buildings rising around the city. Changes in state law now have city officials looking at a new round of updates that need to be in place by next summer.
The Seattle Department of Construction & Inspections is collecting feedback on proposed reforms to the program that could include changes that would please developers and affordability advocates who say the process is too slow, too unpredictable, and too expensive.
The city says it is considering a roster of updates including “limiting projects to only one public meeting, streamlining the Design Review process to be quicker and less costly for applicants, and reducing the number of projects that are required to go through Design Review.”
You can take a survey on the process and possible changes here.
The current basic framework of the design review program is required for most new larger buildings and includes public notice with the ability for neighborhoods to comment on the appearance of new buildings, and City of Seattle Staff and volunteer Design Review Boards who review new buildings to make sure they meet design guidelines.
Following restrictions during the pandemic and complaints about the questionable results plus the time and expenses of the program, the city has introduced repeated rounds of changes to the program including exemptions for types of affordable housing and housing in certain areas of the city.
On Capitol Hill, the schedule of reviewed projects has slowed considerably due to several factors including current economic conditions. In is most recent decision, the East Design Review Board gave its blessing to an additional sixth floor atop the planned redevelopment destined for the old 15th Ave E QFC block.
Another 15th Ave E project also from developer Hunters Capital was the center of a more notorious review board decision as the body rejected one proposal for the auto row-inspired building in 2020 because the design was not contemporary enough, the developer said.
Most review board decisions are less dramatic with debate centering around setbacks, materials, and, occasionally, color.
For the latest reform effort, the city has hired consultant SEVA Workshop to gather feedback on the system:
SEVA Workshop is asking for people’s feedback on several topics, including:
- Which areas of Seattle should require Design Review for new construction
- Which types of new construction should go through Design Review
- When and how people can comment on new construction projects
- How to update the Design Guidelines to be easier to understand
- How adding incentives for new construction could improve equity
Some of the possible design review program changes could include:
- Limiting projects to only one public meeting,
- Streamlining the Design Review process to be quicker and less costly for applicants, and
- Reducing the number of projects that are required to go through Design Review (if new construction does not require design review, then most new buildings will not include any public comment period or public notice)
SDCI says its goal is to update the Design Review program before the Washington state’s House Bill 1293 deadline of June 30, 2025.
The changes will also come as the city prepares a new 20-year growth plan and zoning changes hoped to help reshape housing development in Seattle.
The survey process will run through November 27th.
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 as little as $5 a month.
Moving or leaving America is an option for the rich. Even tho Seattle is trying to make it easier to build housing. Nothing about this emplies affordability. Seattle, Portland, the Bay Area, L.A. county are all about to see an influx of people seeking tolerant neighbors and sanctuary from immigration reform. Just saying… gentrification is gonna look different this time.
That’s plausible, if by “immigration reform” you mean “mass deportation raids.” And while I expect business interests will ultimately force Trump to scale that effort way back, we may indeed see a considerable influx of the people he targets before then. So, let’s take a deep breath and then start preparing to welcome them.
The thing is: they won’t be able to deport very many because too many Republican benefactors hire undocumented people for cheap labor. That’s why Texas and other degenerate states only persecute, not deport, the undocumented workers, and certainly not go after the businesses that hire them.
Do you know how it works? How affordable housing is built?
Well please do tell.
Not to mention climate refugees…
I mean, as far as I can tell the buildings can’t get much uglier even with the review process so on its face this is maybe a good thing. Am curious as to how much it could change architectural outcomes, if at all.
The problem is budget. Not designs.
They use the same paint, flooring, cabs, lighting, plumping, Hvac….The same everything to keep costs low. The people won’t pay for “stylish”. Hell, they won’t pay for “basic bare minimum” they simply want the problem to go away and dump billions into the cops to get it done.
Thank you for linking this! This was news to me.
I tried to emphasize in my survey answers that working with the community to provide clear guidelines and templates to developers *before* design work starts was more efficient, more representative and more equitable than assembling panels (citizen or “expert”) to ratify designs after the fact.
I’ve said that for some time and the people that want more housing look at me like I’m crazy. I also told them if there were rules for multifamily projects on design to fit in to the scale and look of neighborhoods, set backs, parking etc in single family zones the push back would greatly ebb and they thought I was from mars.
Money…You can’t build fancy. The taxpayers are hard no on that.
Kill it all dead. Standardize on rules and ensure that approval can come in 24 hours or less.
Can’t we just 2 outta 3 falls thumb wrestle for it?
I was involved with Design Review from it’s inception. The entire process has veered way too far away from the original intent. The result is look-alike buildings and Boards that are over-reaching. Vince Lyons is rolling over in his grave.
Yes, the process is too slow, too unpredictable, and too expensive. But I could have told the City that 20 years ago.
What is the solution in your opinion?