On a double-sized block in Greenwood, at the far end of a sprawling
parking lot, sits a big-box Fred Meyer that’s been in business since
1975. For the first half of its life, this Fred Meyer and the slowly
gentrifying neighborhood around it had a mostly peaceful coexistence.
But starting in the booming late-’90s, those at Fred Meyer headquarters
decided they needed a larger store on the site, and Greenwood residents
bristled, launching a familiar fight pitting neighborhood character
against the plans of a large chain retailer.
Over the next decade, the company went through an exhaustive
back-and-forth with Greenwood residents over the proposed expansion’s
design and parameters, but a core of vocal residents, who sought
something that fit in with the shops in the neighborhood’s center, were
never satisfied. Now, whether they like it or not, Fred Meyer plans to
submit plans to the city later this month to begin the process of
redeveloping the site, says Tom Gibbons, Fred Meyer’s director of real
estate. The new Fred Meyer will be about 30,000 square feet larger than
the current store and will replace a small grocery store on the same
block.
Gibbons says he has attended roughly 50 meetings to discuss the
project with neighbors and the city. Over the last decade, Fred Meyer
has morphed its plan from a big box into a thoughtful project that
includes 270 apartments, a partially underground store, and space for
new street-facing retail. The project meshes relatively well with the
surrounding neighborhood—especially when compared to its current
incarnation, a parking lot and a square building (aka, the dreaded big
box).
Nonetheless, Trevor Stanley, acting president of the Greenwood
Community Council, said the project is “just too massive.”
Which is odd because this site has been a big-box store since 1975.
If it wanted, Fred Meyer could use the existing building rules to build
an even larger box. Still, if the neighbors want to keep delaying the
project, there’s always the next step—a design-review process
with the city, which, if they’re committed to complaint, could easily
drag on for years. 
Ridiculous, eh? I wish these land-use screeds were easier to ignore, but I guess some coverage is better than none.
FWIW, the “small grocery store” is Greenwood Market, owned by Town & Country Markets, founded on Bainbridge in 1957 – though relatively small, still the largest minority-owned Washington business now, and one of the largest privately-held companies in the state. Their workers are treated with decency and it shows – they’re super cool. Contrast with Portland-based Fred Meyer/Kroger’s union suppression and hardcore labor tactics, plus the glumness of the Freddie workers at that store, and the people who shop that neighborhood (as I used to when I lived there) might have reason to be unconvinced that a larger FM and loss of Greenwood Market will improve their lives.
For the love of god let them build apartments. Everything will be ok. I promise. It could even help affordability on the supply side of that supply and demand equation! That block is a hole as it is, this will help return it to the neighborhood.
I agree with gus.
Furthermore, fifty meetings does not make for a thoughtful plan. It just means they had fifty meetings on a lousy proposal. Dom Holden, I trust you don’t come here and shop from your CD home. It’s a dreadful store and we don’t want a new, larger dreadful store. Well-planned high-density — bring THAT on.
Ditto @1 & @3. The new plans, while shinier than previous iterations, don’t translate into a neighborhood-scaled development. It’s still a huge, auto-dependent big box development that would suck the life out of the more pedestrian-friendly, community-oriented retail core that Greenwood is trying so hard to preserve.
On top of being inappropriate, the plans displace Greenwood Market, a great community member that regularly hosts neighborhood gatherings and supports community-based projects. When was the last time your local Fred Meyer did something like that?
I applaud FM for doing a better job with their planning and design, but they are still exploiting a zoning anomaly (C1) to sneak a retail stegosaurus into a neighborhood petting zoo.
I agree with Dominic that the “Seattle process” to neighborhood-meeting-based decisionmaking needs a giant enema. But he’s way, way wrong with his assertions here.
I agree with commenters 1, 3 and 4. Check out the meeting notes from May 8, with special attention paid to the goals for the area (most of which are geared to making it *better* than it was in 1975, especially considering how a number of retail establishments on that stretch of 85th seem to have been vacant since then) and the feasibility of the recent proposal.
Mind you that this whole area has been literally sinking for quite some time — and considering recent activity on this patch of land, bigger stuff plopped in this swamp might not bode well.
But hey, I’m not paid to report on this stuff, so whatever …
Hard to please or determined to find a mutually agreeable plan? My personal favorite taken from the comments above: “retail stegosaurus”. 1, 3, 4 and 5 are on the right page.
Honestly, new doesn’t mean bigger. The current Fred Meyer is a god-awful soul-usurping pit, but the Greenwood Market next door is not. It is not necessary for the new FM plan to be a monstrosity; especially one that consumes a local market that (as noted above from 4) supports the community. Shouldn’t the community support it back?
Research the issue and you will not only find key points this article neglects to mention, you will also see that FM’s building plan does not match the goals of the community. Those community goals are (people) oriented for circulation of bikers and walkers for a village city-center feel. FM’s goals seem to be in the pocketbook.
As original as this will sound, it’s true: Think outside the box.
Also, to boot, Yelpers have given Greenwood Market four stars.
@Greenwood Crazies:
Why is Greenwood Market threatened? Does Fred Meyer/Kroger own their building? Or are they looking to sell the crap-assiest of their locations because people will still go to Ballard Market & Central Market?
If this is Town & Country looking to sell, you should consider that it’s better to have a retail complex with at least some housing than a run-down Fred Meyer and possibly-empty-in-the-not-too-distant-future-turned-into-a-payday-loan-place-and-dollar-store. Think outside your utopian vision of your neighborhood.
I hope FM digs a big fucking pit, puts a chain link fence around it, and leaves it like that for a decade or two.
Fuck the Neighborhood Associations and the stranglehold they have on getting anything done. Does this sound familiar? Sounds like the folks in Roosevelt who would rather keep their slum blocks than not be able to dictate to private land owners exactly what they can and cannot build. I would be interested to know the ratio of current residents in Greenwood that pre-date the Freddy’s…
I say they should just use their current zoning and build a new store as big and ugly as they can.
I’d be interested to know how many of these resident activists actually pre-date the Freddy’s. I am so sick of the fucking Neighborhood Associations in this city I could just vomit.
I shop at the Greenwood Market. It is a smaller store and offers the sort of attention to detail that a local market can offer. I often find deals on quality products I like, as opposed to the QFC which picks out something like scary bacon from Mexico and sells it dirt cheap… echh. I also go to the Fred Meyer to purchase garden supplies and such. If I want more selection, it is just a skip and jump up the road to the larger Fred Meyer in Ballard. Given the option of losing the Greenwood Market, which offers items I might need daily, or the Fred Meyer which is a once a week proposition– I’ll take the Market. In both cases, I’m not feeling like a larger store would serve my purposes. Ballard is just down the way and now has various “big store” options. I’d also point out that there are houses for sale, condos empty, and plenty of apartments available in the neighborhood. More apartments or condos isn’t going to help the local residents fill those rooms.
Disagree if you will, Stranger, but I think characterizing the arguments of people that live in a neighborhood as “ridiculous” is disingenuous and betrays a disregard for other parts of town that Stranger staff don’t frequent. We’ve heard plenty of whining about Capitol Hill zoning. If I can shed a tear for the Cha-Cha having to relocate, then you can perhaps be a little less dismissive and outright dickish about trying to keep condos from killing a local market.
Sometimes you have to look at practical issues when a developer comes up with a design and wants approval. Fred Meyer keeps bringing up these big heavy buildings with underground parking. The designs they propose simply cannot be built here. It’s a swamp.
The last big development here required above ground development where the visible pavement actually sits on pilings, it is built almost like a pier. It also required a large commitment of land use for a restored wetlands and pond, and the pavement surfaces are water permeable. If Fred Meyer thinks they are going to dig into this swamp and keep the water out in a cost-effective way, they are mistaken. If Fred Meyer thinks they can put a heavy building here without it sinking in twenty years as the underground peat compresses, they are mistaken.
Seattle’s god-awfully slow process requires design approval before environmental approval. The swamp issue will come up in the environmental approval, then the design will get thrown out, and then what’s left of the design? I haven’t got a problem with Fred Meyer redeveloping, but why aren’t they being realistic about the sites issues and bringing a reality based design to the table?
Sometimes the term NIMBY makes sense – recent redevelopment in Greenwood has resulted in several lawsuits because the development disturbed the underground water table and peat, which has made such drastic changes to other nearby structures that foundations have cracked and fell apart. Check out the condemned houses near Safeway if you need confirmation.
I say let Fred Meyer build what they want. And if Greenwood Market didn’t have the foresight to own their building instead of lease – too bad for them if the lessor wants to end it. But development has to be based in the reality of the ground it is built on. THIS GROUND IS A SWAMP.
i [heart] fred meyers and would love to see a new improved store go in. try living on capitol hill where there is no longer a fred meyers. it sucks!