(Image: CHS)
Imagine this: five-and-a-half stories of apartments in an Afrofuturist design on 23rd and Cherry with thousands of square feet of childcare and other retail spaces with a public courtyard. Of the 120 apartments, which range in size from about 400-square-foot studios to two-bedroom units between 700 and 800, 30% would be reserved for low-income residents.
Thursday night, the proposed Acer House project will move forward with its first pass through the Seattle design review process:
2210 E Cherry St
Design Review Early Design Guidance for a 5-story, 120-unit apartment building with 4 live-work units, childcare, and retail. No parking proposed. Project relies on a contract rezone. View Design Proposal (23 MB)
Review Meeting: June 10, 2021 5:00 PM
Meeting: https://bit.ly/Mtg3037717 Listen Line: 206-207-1700 Passcode: 187 663 1617
Comment Sign Up: https://bit.ly/Comments3037717
Project Number: 3037717 View Related Records
<
div class=”drdetail-block”>
Planner: David Sachs — Email comments to [email protected]
Kateesha Atterberry, founder of the Urban Black commercial property management firm working on the development, says the team wants a childcare provider focused on “Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics.” Commercial spaces will likely include the existing Flowers Just 4 U, which might be the only Black-owned florist in the Pacific Northwest, with Atterberry saying she would additionally like to see a recording studio and other artists in the five micro retail spaces for small businesses.
On top of the housing affordability, Atterberry also hopes the project, known as Acer House, can be commercially affordable.
“Creating vibrant communities where businesses can thrive and contribute to the local economy is dependent upon them being able to afford the spaces they are in,” Atterberry told CHS in an email. “Our goal is to provide affordable leasing terms and access to resources for additional support. We believe in partnering with businesses to ensure their success because their success is our success.”
$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE THIS SPRING
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻
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 👍
Existing businesses on the corner, including the Somali restaurant Dur Dur Cafe across the intersection from the Garfield Community Center, will get priority if they want to return with the new development, Atteberry said in a recent Central Area Land Use Review Committee meeting.
Atterberry notes there will also be community development funds to offer investment opportunities to people with historical roots in the Central District. One of the existing landowners on the corner, a CD native, is an investor in the project.
“We are creating a wealth-building mechanism and providing access to communities that are usually excluded from the commercial real estate industry as a means to build wealth,” Atterberry said.
The development will feature a U-shaped community courtyard facing E Cherry, which would include outdoor dining and shopping opportunities for the retailers, and a community porch extension to the south. On the roof, the developers are proposing a vegetable garden.
The project won’t include parking given its proximity to transit.
As for the development’s architecture, it will look to adhere to the tenets of Afrofuturism, which the developers describe as a “form, color and material design expression at the intersection of traditional aesthetics of the African diaspora and modernism,” adding that “in its programming and narrative, rather than simply in form or ornament, Afrofuturist architectural works contribute to the shift of the projected future.”
“This is not a trend that comes up and goes away. This is a growing idea and movement internationally for design,” said Schemata Workshop’s Donald King, the project’s architect. “Accompanied with the belief that the people of the African diaspora will be in the future, will have more power in the future, will also have more equity in the future and will not just be marginalized… Just having more power and control over their destiny.”
King said he couldn’t think of another Seattle building using Afrofuturism.
This is all part of a broader push for Acer House to be what Capitol Hill developer Ben Maritz calls the “first truly anti-racist private sector development here in Seattle.”
“We are honoring the historical and cultural significance of the Black/African-American community of the Central District, while laying out a vision for Afro-futurism and Black Excellence,” Atterberry said. “It was imperative that we pay homage to a community that has built their traditions within this neighborhood and greatly contributed to its success.”
But a lot of this remains up in the air with the project still in its early stages. The development will get some early guidance in the city’s design review process this Thursday and, in total, that process is expected to take 2-3 months, King said.
And perhaps the biggest outstanding question is if the project will be given a rezone of the property by the Seattle City Council to build up to 55-feet instead of the 40 currently allowed. The legislation for that rezone was transmitted to the council in late April. King expects that with this rezone process, construction could start in about a year and then it would take another 18 months for the building to open.
The project’s website estimates construction will start in 2023 and open in 2025.
King says a number of things bode well for this project in getting the council’s approval, whether it be its social equity lens or its commitment to some affordable housing.
“We need housing,” King said. “To make this housing work, we really need the rezone and it is not a very large impact on the neighborhood.”
$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE THIS SPRING
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻
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 👍
And so continues the process of building almost all the new housing on busy arterials.
Seattle is gonna look like Vegas soon.
Agreed, the noise levels are going to be high.
Also, this constant non-provisioning of parking doesn’t work. The existing neighborhood streets are already clogged, and it’s folly to think none of the apartment dwellers will have a car. We live in a hilly city and not everyone can reach their destinations on a bus…
If you want a place to store your car then pay for it. This attitude of “I should be able to park for free but others shouldn’t” is idiotic.
My point is they should be building things like this all over the city, not just on arterials.
Then build the parking and charge for it…. Offer it to anyone (not just residents) if you feel you need cost offsets to subsidize tenants without cars. I’m pretty sure it’s not legal to have housing that is below grade, so it’s not like underground parking takes away from living spaces and many larger buildings need buried foundations for structural reasons anyway, so you aren’t saving on the buildings by not having to dig.
Building underground parking significantly increases construction costs (digging is expensive), which drives up the rent necessary for the finances to pencil. People who want dedicated parking can pay for it. Side street residents don’t own the parking spaces in front of their homes.
You didn’t bother to actually read a thing I said did you…..
Underground parking approaches $100,000 per parking stall. That number is from a few years ago and is likely closer to $150,000/stall these days.
Digging an underground building foundation does not magically create underground parking spaces. There’s significant effort and cost to construct the infrastructure for underground parking on top of constructing the foundations. You can’t build affordable housing with $150,000 in unnecessary additional costs per unit.
And I’m not sure how renting out unneeded parking spaces is “subsidizing tenants without cars”, when those parking spaces didn’t need to be constructed in the first place.
That’s some impressive mental gymnastics right there.
That is complete BS… As far as I can tell a 5.5 story building of that size will likely require at least one underground level for structural purposes, so they will have to dig… and if they have to dig, what do you propose putting down there otherwise? Remember that it cannot be residences – those cannot be below grade.
And your numbers for parking are ridiculously inflated…
“Construction costs for multilevel parking are $35-$65/sf, averaging about $50. $50*325sf=$16,250 per parking space. Underground parking costs roughly one multiple for each level below grade. Thus, underground parking that is one level below grade is 2x$16,250, or $32,500 per parking space. Two levels below grade costs 3x$16,250 or $48,750/space.” and that is from an article arguing *against* underground parking….
$250/month wouldn’t be ridiculous for an indoor parking space in Seattle. At that rate it would only be about 5 years before the construction cost was recouped…
I should have mentioned that this is my field of work so you wouldn’t make a fool of yourself!
Here’s an article from 2014 talking about underground parking stall approaching $80,000. 2014 was probably the lowest construction costs have been in my career (when counting for inflation). Construction and material costs have increased significantly since then:
https://la.streetsblog.org/2014/10/17/new-ca-database-shows-how-much-parking-costs-and-how-little-its-used/
Care to share the source of your numbers?
You are correct, at least one underground level, though it depends on soil conditions and other factors. Without underground garages, the hole would be excavated and foundations, footings and piers constructed. The hole would be backfilled, either with the excavated material or other import. Remember, that foundation is to support the above ground building. And depending on the building, you may not have to excavate the entire hole. Piers can be augered into to prevent excavation and export of material, which is very expensive.
When you start considering occupiable space underground, that brings a whole other level of complexity. You then have to add additional foundations and support for the underground space on top of the above ground space. When that underground space is for cars, you need to provide access and maneuvering space, plus additional infrastructure to support the cars. Underground fire suppression, for example, is very expensive. It’s not as simple as “hey, I’ve got a hole, the parking is basically free!”.
Then you get into the question of how much parking can you reasonably provide? Underground parking is much more limiting than surface parking. For example, I live in a 40’x60′ building with six units across three floors. There’s one underground parking level that barely fits six spaces and four of those spaces take differing levels of jockeying to get into. So for a larger building, you’re talking multiple levels of parking, which starts driving the complexity and cost skyward, hence the $100,000+ price tag per stall.
Your numbers assume a $15,000/stall cost for underground parking. That’s not realistic. At $100,000/stall, you’re looking at a 33 year recuperation for $250/month. Even at $50,000/stall, which is a absolute minimum for above ground parking garages, you’re looking at a 16 year recuperation. A now that building needs to hire a parking management company on top of that, plus you need someway to ensure security for building residents with general public being given access to their garage.
So you can see why builders are opting not to construct parking.
People aren’t willing to pay it would seem (they want others to pay).
Reminds me of this onion article: https://www.theonion.com/report-98-percent-of-u-s-commuters-favor-public-trans-1819565837
Agree! But these days it seems like those of us who feel this way are “tilting at windmills.”
Regarding Parking: Isn’t the block already a “restricted parking zone” where residents can pay $30 a year for overnight street parking. Is that a reasonable solution for those concerned about losing parking with more neighbors moving in?
The streets are already clogged with cars. Adding all of these apartments without parking spots available (and in most buildings you pay for them, they’re not free) is not going to make the RPZ system work better.
I’m fine with the building offering paid parking. But having none makes the businesses less successful and the neighborhood parking situation worse.
Lol, having people living next door to the business is bad for business.
So if they are looking to attract families, where are the 3 bedroom units?
I see it a different way. Having more small apartments means more young singles can live in their own apartment, instead of living in SFHs with roommates. That frees up more family-sized housing for families. So regardless, building more housing is all gravy.
They don’t pencil. Basically even if demand is there you don’t make the rent on that space work out, so they just don’t get built. The myth that somehow building more space like this will free up SFH for families…the SFH aren’t affordable either. 2BR units work fine if you only have one kid, I guess.
Sounds Good – but the details are important. Does the 30% affordable housing include one and two bedroom apartments, or is it mostly lofts? Is affordability baked into the commercial leasing prices for 10 years or how about longer? I’m hoping to see more affordable housing and real accommodation of local businesses in the project.
Can we leave old buildings alone? Build on parking lots or down in White Center. Leave the cool stuff alone.
Currently, we’ve got plenty of old buildings, but not enough space for people to live.
The owners of these old buildings are taking advantage of a hot real estate market in Seattle and cashing out. All power to them. You are free to purchase and preserve the old buildings as they come up for sale.
A ton of parking lots are being turned into housing, but it’s not enough.
Oh I get it, you really just don’t want other people moving in to your neighborhood.