Over at Capitol Hill Seattle yet another example of why design review adds costs and complication to housing projects.

A Department of Planning and Development representative confirmed to CHS that the developers of Viva Capitol Hill, the six-story, 105-unit mixed-use apartment building finishing construction in the triangle at 12th, E Union and Madison, has been denied a temporary certificate of occupancy over an issue with the a discrepancy between the building’s approved design and its final form.

The rep said DPD and developer Alliance Residential are working to solve the “color siding issue.”

“The building was approved with an accent color, but was built all one color,” the DPD rep said about the dispute.

The builder explains.

“You think you’re doing the right thing,” Knight said. “Then the planner came out and said what was built didn’t match renderings.”

“This is news to us.”

Knight doesn’t believe Alliance should be blamed. ”We are not convinced that we did anything wrong,” Knight said.

If you’ve ever bought a house or financed a car or done anything with a bank you know how complicated closing the deal can be. The complications are even greater with large development projects like 1111 E. Union Street which has over 100 units of housing ready to be occupied. Being denied a Certificate of Occupancy (a C of O) is every builder’s worst nightmare. It’s like having the moving truck all ready to go for your family to move a new house and finding out from the bank or real estate agent that “there’s a problem.”

The problem here has it’s origin in design review. How much of an impact will all this have on the price of rents in the building? Hard to tell. But the project is certain to get more expensive the longer the City is evaluating color palettes and schemes for the new building. Does the color of the siding really matter to someone who just got a job and needs a place to live? Probably not.

This project’s trouble with design review is a classic example of why the program needs serious revision. The developer already paid a bundle to get the project through the original process, costs that have to be made up somewhere, and that somewhere is higher rents. Now there’s another hold up right at the time the building needs to be leased up. This is the reason why we have asked that microhousing not be subjected to design review until these kinds of SNAFUs are no longer looming over every project. Part of the reasons rents go up is costs, and costs are created when color palettes get fussed over rather than letting people move in to a new home.

But is the neighborhood happy? After all the claim is that design review gives the community a chance to have influence on design. The comments and complaining have already started.

Wow. The rendering and actual are quite different regardless of the color issue. Can’t believe how cheap they went. I would of considered the rendering with the big windows and warmness to it. This looks bleak, boring and not worth the money they are charging.

Hmmmm. So it’s too cheap for what they’re charging? Now the City is micromanaging the C of O for the building which adds more costs. Unfortunately neighbors look at this and see the City not doing it’s job or doing it poorly, developers are not happy because they’re costs and risks go up, and surely the City must not be satisfied with its own inspectors who should have found this issue earlier. And through it all, Council keeps hearing that housing is too expensive. This is why!  It’s time to change this costly process that makes just about everyone annoyed.