Architectural Design Board to hold public hearings May 25 on proposed downtown Edmonds apartment buildings

Rendering of the 627 Dayton Apartments, as viewed from the southeast looking northwest.

The Edmonds Architectural Design Board (ABD) at its 6 p.m. Thursday, May 25 meeting is scheduled to hold separate public hearings on two multifamily buildings proposed in downtown Edmonds — one for 605/611 Main St. and the other for 627 Dayton St.

The developer for both proposals is Glenn Safadago and GBH Holdings.

The first public hearing on the ADB schedule is regarding a three-story, 17-unit residential building at 627 Dayton St., with a mix of studio, one-and two-bedroom unit proposed. Two existing buildings on the site (built in 1901 and 1930, respectively) and surface parking would be removed.

The second hearing is for a three-story multifamily residential building at at 605/611 Dayton Street. The building would be three stories and include 18 dwelling units, with approximately 2,600 square feet of office space and underground parking. The existing structures on the site would be removed.

According to the agenda memo for this item, the 627 Dayton proposal is not covered under a new code amendment — approved by the Edmonds City Council Nov. 7, 2022 — that extends the city’s BD2 zone designated street fronts downtown. The amendment prohibits multifamily-only housing in that designated downtown area and requires that all buildings there have commercial on the ground floor.

However, the ordiinance “did not take effect until Nov. 23, 2022, so as a result, the building at 627 Dayton can be a multifamily-only residential building,” the agenda memo states.

The meeting can be accessed in person or online. The physical meeting location is the
Brackett Room, third floor of Edmonds City Hall, 121 5th Ave. N. Or you can watch via Zoom here. The passcode is 591531.

You can see the complete agenda here.

  1. I wish the City would publicize Public Hearings like these, take steps to inform people about what’s going on. They could post notices on the City’s website. They could include them on the City’s calendar. They could distribute news releases.

    Edmonds City Hall needs to learn something about transparency. What good is a Public Hearing if the public can’t find out about it?

      1. Chris, it appears from the report of the city council meeting last night that council believes there should be more notice and transparency too.

        1. Just wanted to clarify what I shared with a couple of readers who notified me about this meeting and public hearings yesterday. Routinely the city sends out notices to the media of upcoming board and commission meeting agendas, as well as council meetings. I didn’t get one for this meeting so was grateful others pointed it out. It’s possible I may have missed it but I couldn’t find it. If that agenda notification process wasn’t in place, I would routinely check the city website for upcoming meetings. — Teresa

      2. Chris, your link goes to the City’s meeting scroll. Information about important events like Public Hearings gets buried there, accessible only to people who comb meeting agendas knowing what to look for.

        It would be far better for the City to just post Public Hearing notices where people can see them. Given the obvious public interest in these hearings, that’s the least the City could have done. Will Magnuson is correct; City Council also wants better public notice and transparency.

        1. Yes this is the predictable location on the city’s website for this info in addition to the fact that there has been a public notice on the property for MONTHS with this date listed and nearby neighbors affected by this property all got letters from the city in the mail.

          The days of the town crier are gone. The city does a good job putting things out for those who seek.

  2. It’s a shame to have about a half dozen businesses removed downtown to put up two projects of inexpensively built walk up apartments with only one commercial space purportedly for the developer’s office. It’ll serve the developer’s financial interests but not the interests, wishes and needs of the community.

  3. This has been a very confusing legislative process, including Ordinance 4254 developed on the fly during the April 19, 2022 Council Meeting. On May 26, 2022 I emailed City Clerk Scott Passey in the morning and stated:

    “It is May 26, 2022, and Ordinances 4254, 4255 and 4256 are still not available on the City’s website. I requested an executed copy of Ordinance 4254 on April 21st. As far as I know, City Council and the public have never seen Ordinance 4254 even though it was passed well over a month ago.”

    The Ordinances were posted to the City’s website later the day of May 26, 2022.

    Now we may have more confusion. An application for 18 units was made on November 8, 2022. The city represented the application was technically complete on November 18, 2022. Now we are told this project involves 17 units. Can an application lose its “technically complete” status if the number of units change?

    Hopefully the City will provide clarity as to what criteria were met that allowed the city to determine the application was technically complete on November 18, 2022. It would be great if City Staff informed all what “technically complete” means.

  4. Once again…parking? Or using the already extremely tight street parking?

    Good word Melissa…Behemoth.

  5. Just to address the parking, there is proposed parking for both of these developments. 18 spaces for the 18 apartments on the 627 Dayton site, and 21 parking stalls for the 18 apartments + office space for the 605/611 Main Street site. You can read through the building plans for these two buildings and any proposed development sites here. This is also where you can see when the public hearings will be held for each one:

    1. My Wife and I attended the meeting in 2022 with the so called ‘architect’ of the Main St. debacle and the 21 spots were barely big enough for a Smart car. Also, the alleged ADA spots were nowhere near large enough nor were they properly located.
      Destroying 4 early 20th century structures, especially the 2 on Main St. is a travesty! Those should be Historically Lamdmarked as the last of wood mill Worker’s residences. Edmonds like to flap their gums about it’s history but then destroys it. It is a terrible thing to destroy history for greed.

  6. Anybody with even a wick of common sense can configure out that if there is inadequate parking for the building tenants are going to park out on the street. Even the mayor’s participation in Bike to Work Day was basically a downhill event. Naturally riding back up the hill, especially in the rain, is going to be less glamorous for most.

  7. Tell them NO!! Nobody wants their ugly buildings. And they’re going to knock down historic houses ?? NOOOO…

  8. Interesting meeting last night at the ADB. The developer and architect like to tell us how they are helping out our community and downtown. Beware of the person who wants to do something for you. Next ADB meeting will be on June 15th at 6 pm presently scheduled in the Brackett room of city hall on 5th Ave. and the discussion will be regarding the apartment project at 605/611 Main. Comments are encouraged.

  9. They want to destroy what little city we have left to open it up for more tax from housing. Thats it plan and simple.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Real first and last names — as well as city of residence — are required for all commenters.
This is so we can verify your identity before approving your comment.

By commenting here you agree to abide by our Code of Conduct. Please read our code at the bottom of this page before commenting.