‘Asphalt prairie’ or new apartments? Lakewood hearing airs pros, cons of Towne Center site
A proposed apartment complex in Lakewood was the focus of a public hearing Friday, where project backers pointed to its benefits and opponents expressed concerns over storm water runoff risks and more.
The City of Lakewood Planning and Public Works Department held the hearing at Lakewood City Hall Council Chambers to discuss the Lakewood Towne Center Apartments Master Planned Development.
The project is planned adjacent to Lakewood Towne Center on the southeast side, currently a parking lot, and would require the demolition and relocation of the existing Barnes & Noble store.
The plans originally called for 390 units and 519 parking stalls. Those plans were revised, and it now calls for 309 units across multiple, smaller buildings and 473 parking stalls. The estimated construction cost of the project was unavailable as of Friday.
Alex Dalzell, project manager with Urbal Architecture, noted that the design of the apartments calls for half of the units to be two-to-three bedrooms, “which is promoting housing for families,” he said.
Other representatives tied to the project touted its increased focus on landscaping and buffers to help minimize a “heat island” effect in the summer.
Rob Anderson is development director with Seattle-based Alliance Residential and the Lakewood apartments’ project manager. Anderson said he believed that most issues brought to them through discussions with the city and via submitted comments from the public had been addressed.
“We’ve received a number of comments and worked through addressing as many if not all those throughout the process,” he said at the hearing. “We think we’ve found an excellent blend of city design requirements and requirements asked for from the school to the south and everywhere in between.”
Some opponents at the hearing begged to differ.
Lakewood resident Eric Chandler brought to the hearing a stack of 115 responses to the project to submit for the record, of which he said there were 107 opposed.
“What we’re having here is a whole bunch of people, citizens of Lakewood, who said not (just) no, but hell no,” he said.
Concerns over site’s location
Friday’s public comments kicked off with flooding concerns.
Don Russell, who described himself as a longtime resident of Lakewood, contended that the site is “not suited hydrologically or geographically to be located where it’s being proposed,” citing rising and falling groundwater levels in the area.
Much of the focus of opposition was on the location’s proximity to water sources and the resulting storm water runoff. Opponents argued that the plans are a continuation of development in an area that should never have been designated for such activity decades ago.
Kurt Reidinger is a retired Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife biologist. In his submitted comments to the city, he wrote, “One of the reasons this is a ‘problem’ area from a storm water management standpoint is that the original Villa Plaza development was placed on top of a lakebed.”
Reidinger contended that Lakewood and Pierce County “chose a very poor location to emphasize urban development as it likely has significant quantities of wetland/lakebed soils, and it originally was the nexus of two biologically important fish-bearing streams. Covering over a very large area with asphalt and other impervious surfaces was bad enough from a storm water standpoint, but making the area a crossroads for automobile traffic greatly complicated the situation from a pollution perspective.”
Lakewood City Council member Mike Brandstetter said that in terms of environmental concerns and storm water runoff, the area’s issues could be improved upon.
“This is an area that I’d ask you to look at closely to make sure, (but) I think that over the last 50 years, since the area was paved over, there’s been a slowly increasing degradation of Ponce de Leon Creek. It has impacted Lake Steilacoom and downstream into Chambers Creek.
“I don’t think that just keeping the area the way it is as a asphalt prairie is going to be in the best interest,” he added. “However, it is important that this project be done in a way that doesn’t just maintain the status quo, but that you look at making sure that the standards for storm-water treatment ... are actually going to have an enhancement of the quality of the storm water....”
Christina Manetti, speaking on her own behalf and also separately representing the Garry Oak Coalition, said that she could recall previous discussions about the large paved parking areas, including where the apartments are planned.
“Growing up here when it was Villa Plaza, you were struck by the vast amount of asphalt that was there that was not being used for parking cars,” she said. “There was too much. And we were told back in the ‘70s that this was because of the hydrologic situation under that parking lot — that that was a wetland under there, a creek under there before, and simply, it’s not possible to build large buildings there because of that.”
“And that’s why we had these vast parking lots that were mostly used for watching fireworks on the Fourth of July,” she added. “And we don’t see any evidence that sufficient consideration has been given to this.”
Eric Schossow is principal civil engineer for Facet, which is working on the project. He stated, “The asphalt parking currently on the site has no treatment or flow control measures implemented based on when it was built.
“Our project will be bringing the proposed design up to current standards, including water-quality treatment and flow-control measures to recharge groundwater and send clean water back into the ground,” he added.
In response to the storm water runoff and pollution concerns aired at the hearing, he stated that “we can’t really undo stuff that’s happened in the past, but what we can do is help mitigate some of those things compared to what’s existing out there right now.”
He added that by implementing flow-control features, landscaping and water-quality treatment measures, it would be “a vast improvement for what’s out there.”
Barnes & Noble
Ryan Vande Bosche is director of development with Kite Realty Group, majority owner of Lakewood Towne Center. In his testimony, he sought to assuage concerns about Barnes & Noble’s future at the center.
“We have worked with Barnes & Noble as landlord to relocate them within the Lakewood Town Center,” he said. “So those that were concerned with losing that great tenant, we fully intend to retain them.”
The News Tribune reported in October that permits submitted to the city indicated the bookstore would be moving to the former Dressbarn location at the shopping center, 10330 59th Ave SW, Unit A&B.
Kayln Jones of Lakewood remained concerned over Barnes & Noble’s future.
“I learned how to read there. I hung out with family and friends and attended Bible study and school fundraisers there, and with all due respect to Kite Realty, they don’t really have a stake in the impacts this will have,” she said. “They’re based out of Indiana, and they won’t feel the effects ....”
Lakewood hearing examiner pro tem Stephanie Marshall allowed for additional written comments to be submitted after the hearing to enter those referenced or introduced at Friday’s hearing, with the new deadline of 5 p.m. Monday. Following that, she said she “typically” issues a written decision with findings and conclusions within 10 business days.
This story was originally published January 26, 2025 at 5:00 AM.
