Proposal to eliminate parking requirement in urban villages

I told you recently (http://tinyurl.com/yoplrf ) about the City's plan to change the zoning code in our multifamily areas (your input needed at a meeting on Monday 10/15/07, 5:30 PM, City Hall).

On the City's webpage about the proposed changes ( http://tinyurl.com/36o4pj ) you can learn about the proposed changes [my comments in brackets]. Main points:

2. Reduce number of zones by consolidating the existing L3 and L4 zones to make a new LR3 zone [Much of our area is presently L3 or L4].

8. Eliminate parking requirements in urban centers, urban villages, and station areas, and reduce parking requirements in other areas (consistent with changes in commercial areas). [YEP, THAT'S US: We're in an urban village]

From John Rahaim (SPD Planning Director):

Hello Andrew. Sorry for this mistake. Like the Neighborhood Commercial zones, we are proposing to eliminate the parking requirement only in Urban Centers and transit areas, and to lower-- but not eliminate -- the requirement in Urban Villages. We will clarify this tonight at the open house.

Thanks for your sharp eye on this.

John

23rd & Union development: some expert advice

Many thanks to all of you who commented on Jim Mueller's proposal to upzone and develop the Coleman site at 23rd & Union. Please Click Here to review the previous comments or add your own.

Most of the comments were very supportive of the project, but a couple questioned whether Mueller really needed the upzone to 65'. I took the question to Joe Nabbefeld, who has lived in the neighborhood for many years, and used to write on real estate for the Daily Journal of Commerce (see these articles as examples of his work) and now has his own company. He's agreed to let me share his very informative answers.

Please feel free to comment further.

(Andrew)
My blog post about Jim Mueller's 23rd/Union project has generated some interesting feedback, including this comment:

"I'm not willing to take Jim at his word when he says that he needs 65'. This is because I'm largely ignorant of financing matters and because I see so many other new retail/residential buildings that are below 65'. Why can these projects "pencil out" but not Jim's?"

Do you know how we could get estimates on costs etc to answer that question?

Thanks,

Andrew Taylor

Joe's first response:

First, land prices (aka costs) play a role in what height will "pencil."

Land prices adjust, through market forces, to what height the zoning allows.

So, for example, when there is land that is zoned for 30 feet (such as L-3 zoning, which these days is almost entirely having townhomes built on it), the land quickly becomes priced at the maximum that a builder can pay for 30-foot land.

The next zoning tranche up is 40 feet. More can be built on that land (another story), so the market will price at a bit more per sf of land than for the 30-foot land.

The next up is 65-foot land. You can build roughly twice as much than on 30-foot land (it's more complex than that, based on different setback requirements and such. So, as you can see, the land price adjusts up to the essentially the maximum that a builder can pay for that land based on still penciling at what can be built on it.

So if someone sees a project that is built to only 40 feet, they can't just say well why can't the guy over there just keep his at 40 feet ...
Since the "guy over there" may have paid more per sf, and more per residential unit that can be built, for his site, and therefore has to build to the higher capacity to "make it pencil."

"Making it pencil" is a term that can be misunderstood, or abused, meanwhile.

These projects involve massive amounts of money that someone has to put at risk. So "making it pencil" does not just mean break even or make a slight profit. "Making it pencil" means I have to go out in the marketplace for capital and convince investors to bring put down these massive amounts of money on my project. I have to compete against every other opportunity that these capital sources have, so I have to promise them a competitive return, or profit, on their investment. It has to reflect, or compensate them, for the level of risk that they are taking, too -- which is rather high in development.

So the market will say how much these investors have to receive, and once they put their money into my project, I have to deliver them the return that they were promised. Delivering that return is "making it pencil." If there's not a clear path to delivering that return, then the developer has to opt not to attempt the project -- but instead take those investors and themselves to a different site that will pencil with more certainty.

What we don't want to get to on any project, particularly ones that are bringing housing into the city, getting people off the freeways, and particularly ones that are attempting to build out greenfield sites that have been sitting fallow and also formerly red-lined sites and red-lined areas ... What we don't want to do is worry about how much profit the risk-taker might make. That's a bad formula. What we want is just the opposite -- we want to encourage the risk-takers to take the risk and build, and the way to do that is to say "we hope you do so well that you want to come back and do the next one." We particularly want to say that to classy, well-meaning, smart risk-takers like Jim Mueller.

Being "in scale" with what is currently in a neighborhood, while sometimes well-meaning, is often a red herring. It's often the wrong perspective (or an attempt to hide the NIMBYism that is at play). "Scale" is always changing, and will always be changing. Every new advancement steps out of the scale of what was there. The first teepee wasn't in scale with the meadow. The log cabin wasn't in scale with the teepee. The 3-story fort wasn't in scale with the cabin. Then an office building came in, then a taller one. The first 240-foot tower wasn't in scale with the 85 foot ones around it, but then came another 240-footer and it was in scale.

The city has rightly set a course of bringing growth into the city, where the infrastructure is already built and paid for, and where people thrive by sharing so many facilities and resources and the energy that courses thru a good city. To do that, each neighborhood has to build up where it can, such as where the earthquake long ago took out a brick building and nothing is there now. It would be a travesty to not build as much good, well-designed housing as we could on that site.

To: Joe Nabbefeld
Subject: RE: Question about Mueller project

Quick follow-up question, having read your letter more closely.

Mueller's site is zoned 40'. Was it priced as 40' by the seller, and hence allow a 40' building, or did the seller also assume that it will be upzoned to 65', and price it as a 65' property (and hence preclude 40' buildings)?

Presumably the purchase price is public information, so we could compare it to similar recent 40' or 65' NC property sales and make a judgement?

Sorry to be a bit slow on the uptake, but I don't think about this stuff all day?

I personally like Mueller and favor his plans, but then I don't have to live right next to it!

Joe's answer:

I don't know what the price was. (And have no knowledge whether Jim has closed on buying it.)

And it gets complicated real quickly.

For one, there's the cost of the environmental clean-up. (And does the neighborhood want that to remain not-cleaned up?)

For another, almost nothing gets built in 40-foot zones these days (just because we see a building in a 40-foot zone, doesn't mean that building could be built today. Market conditions right now preclude building to 40 feet ... Generally, an exception being if the property owner is the builder themselves and have owned it so long that they own it free and clear ... Hence can make something "pencil" that somebody buying the land today couldn't make "pencil.")

What does get built in some 40-foot zones is townhomes, under-utilizing the site, which is not good for the city and region.

One reason so little is done in 40-foot zones is what you would do is small wooden condo structures, and liability insurance costs preclude that. The apartment market is coming back, and so some small wooden apartment buildings might possibly begin to pencil again, but not yet.

"Don't mess with Ms. Esther"

Please join me in congratulating Esther Pounds on her retirement from her long-held position as the resident manager of Capitol Hill Housing's Hazel Plaza apartments at 21st Ave E. & E. John. Let's thank her for her many years of hard work for the neighborhood, and wish her all the best for the future.

Below is a letter from Capitol Hill Housing's Executive Director, Chuck Weinstock, which tells it much better than I could, followed by a note from Esther herself. Chuck is also retiring soon from his similarly long-held position at Capitol Hill Housing. I'd also like to thank him for his many years of dedication to affordable housing, as well as his keen interest in all of the housing and development issues around Capitol Hill and Miller Park. For a quick review of Capitol Hill Housing's mission, you might read the articles in the July 92 or Spring 96 editions of the Miller Times.

Esther and Chuck epitomize all that we love in Capitol Hill Housing: they work hard to provide safe, legal, drug-free affordable housing that is a pleasure to have in the neighborhood.

(Click on the letters for a larger version)

Transcript of 23rd/Union Meeting

(reproduced with the permission of its author, Nick Pottier, Central Neighborhood Association. Couple of edits by Andrew)

For those who didn't make it, some quick notes taken during the meeting. I just typed these up during the meeting, so forgive any typos or errors. No proof reading either. Don't sue me! :)

Jim Mueller presented the project and their plans therein. There were various plans available for viewing before the meeting with various sketches, I don't know if these are available online just yet.

- he's been working with community leaders to find something that will fit in with the neighborhood
- architects are Mithun architects
- the building designs are concepts to get a feel for how the space will be changed, they are not final or detailed
- JC Mueller core values: integrity, intelligence, homework Triple bottom line: environment, community, economics, all sustainable
- previous site was Coleman building, demolished by Nisqually quake
- white tanks on the site are to clean up from old dry cleaning pollution, takes 6-8 months
- they took into account position of site between residential and commercial areas

- Objectives:
- Community Revitalization
- Urban Design
- Economics - (requires taller building to pay off)
- Neighborhood Economics - bring new residents and retail
- Sustainability - Build responsibly

- Project Features
- Approx 90 units
- 85-90 parking stalls
- ~4500 square feet of street level retail (preference for local/regional)
- Encourage pedestrian activities

Option 1:
- 40 foot tall
- retail only on street level

Option 2:
- 65 feet (six stories)
- street level is both residential and retail
- town houses on 22nd

Option 3: (preferred and proposed)
- 65 feet (six stories)
- Entry on 23rd
- 22nd has town homes
- Retail on Union and 23rd on street level

Height:
- height is needed to make project feasible
- proportion of space is what makes you comfortable in a space.. Walmart parking lot is too spread out, with taller structures a larger setback will make it feel OK
- very much wants to make pedestrians comfortable and create a comfortable space
- example: alley 24 across from REI, which is 75 feet

Design review board meeting:
- Wednesday, June 27, 2007
- 6:30 PM
- Miller Community Center
- 330 19th Ave E

Information:
AskUnion@jcmueller.com

Q and A:

Q: Are you pursuing any other zoning changes in the area?
A: Yes, maybe.

Q: Parking will be exiting onto 23rd? Is that going to be a traffic issue?
A: Something we are still studying and trying to work through, city will certainly be involved.

Q: Can you make your number if you step back the first few floors?
A: We have stepped them back a bit at 40 feet, which will make it feel less tall from the street.

Q: What are the pros and cons of people living on 22nd?
A: Should be almost all positive. New residents will be good for the area, and shadow is cast on Union street, not 22nd.

Q: Will there be retail/visitor parking?
A: Yes, some, accessed off 23rd.

Q: Tell us more about sustainable building. How green?
A: Will be studied but still in planning and depends on what we can achieve economically. City has incentives for this as well. Building locally in town is a big step towards being green.

Q: How many parking levels underground?
A: Two. They are expensive.

Q: Describe housing.
A: Market rate, 'affordable'. Not low income.

Q: Lot of real estate on 23rd & Union. What do you think about a pedestrian mall?
A: Some are great, some fail completely. Don't know about this.

Q: West Harbor area has a lot of great ideas. Please study that.
A: We are definitely going to focus on bicycles and flex cars.

Q: You guys should have a secure bicycle area and a bike workshop area.
A: Ya I like that.

Q: Setback is great, maybe vary the roof line to have it appear more different.
A: Architect is listening, I'm sure he'll note it.

Q: Will they be rental units or for sale?
A: Don't know yet.

Q: Construction time frame?
A: Will start construction in about a year. Will take about 14-16 months to build.

Q: How big are the sidewalks?
A: Min requirement is 12 feet, we'll have to actually widen it a bit.

Q: Tell us more about the contract rezone process.
A: Project gets approved at a height. It does not allow us to resell the site with that rezone, its only approved for that particular project. Meeting on the 27th will be official kickoff.

Q: Is there any fear that this project might be killed because of rising interest rates etc?
A: Seattle still has a strong economy and the CD is close to downtown so will remain in demand.

Q: Why don't you sell it to people with no cars? And therefore no parking to save money?
A: The market objects to that, though I like the idea. Lenders would not go along with that however, not economically feasible.

Q: How are you reaching out to the african american community?
A: Apparently not very well, because none are in attendance. Help!

Q: How was this information spread?
A: Mostly through websites, apparently didn't reach all the audience.

Q: How do you make the retail look more diverse and small to attract the smaller retailers?
A: The problem is actually cost. Its hard to find small retailers who can afford the rent of a new space. We will try to make it as affordable as possible.

Q: Is the space going to be retail or small office space?
A: No, it will be retail.

Q: Tell us more about the green elements of this project.
A: We are still determining that. More as we start nailing things down. We will do what is effective and makes sense economically.

Q: Do you have a square footage cost?
A: Rents in areas like this in 2009ish will be $2.25 sq/ft for residential. That's the minimum needed to get financing. Condos about $5.50 sq/ft. Big costs are construction and parking.

Q: Would be great to see the context of the site and its height with other buildings around.
A: No slides for that, but our other boards had it.

Q: Houses on 22nd will be in shade in the winter.
A: Yes, there will be some, can't avoid it.

Q: Have you thought about the impact of street parking? Zone parking?
A: We will have parking, so it won't be us causing the problem.
(others chimed in that we've tried to do zoning before, but haven't goten residential support)

A: Plan for a street car coming through 23rd & Union?

Q: For sale or for rent?
A: Don't know yet.

Q: Unit mix?
A: 80% 1 bedroom and studio, 20% 2 bedroom.

Q: Any sketches of the actual final design and finish?
A: This will be part of the review process. Lots of factors. 1) cost 2) durability 3) maintainability We'll be picking a skin that fits those criteria and which will hopefully fit in with the neighborhood. Start of that discussion on the 27th.

Q: Have you looked at mechanical parking, is it cheaper?
A: Yes, I've looked at it and used it in China. In general its more expensive except for special cases. Getting cheaper but not yet there.

Q: You said you don't prefer national chains. How serious are you?
A: Its my preference. No promises, but I have a strong personal preference towards biz owners being in the stores.

Q: Are there environmental issues that might block the project?
A: No, contamination from dry cleaning was it.

Q: There is a bus stop on 23rd, will that move?
A: We'll have to deal with that, might move.

Q: Will you have a sustainability consultant on the project?
A: Our architects kind of specialize in that.

Q: Is green and sustainable going to be the 'brand' of this project?
A: Yes, but I also want to do something with music since this area has a strong history of that.

Q: Is there any shared/community space to this project? Courtyard?
A: I don't know yet, we are still designing the retail level. Most buildings like this have a common area for residents. Maybe make that more community based. It's possible.

Q: Would be nice to see something less boxy.
A: Design is changing constantly. There will be updated designs on the 27th for you to look at.

Q: Can you talk about the materials? Looks like glass & metal.
A: Still too early.

Q: There are lots of small children on 22nd. Please don't put the parking entrance there. How do I help make that happen?
A: Show up to the meetings, preferred option is definitely not to have parking entrance there. Cars belong on 23rd and Union.

Q: Won't entrance on 23rd cause people to double back on 22nd to turn left?
A: Yes, that's a concern. City planning is thinking about that and its something we are tracking.

Q: 23rd is an arterial, no parking. You are going to add load to the parking, how will it be handled?
A: Trying to create a pedestrian area, hopefully people will walk. We'll have some parking but in the end we are in a city, thats just the reality of the situation.

Q: Could they ever require a change to traffic on 22nd? (couldn't hear details)
A: Yes, maybe.

Q: Most of us want you here, but we have concerns about parking and traffic etc..
A: This is a great place to live without a car, close to downtown etc.. More discussion on pedestrian access.

Q: Will you be selling parking separately from the units?
A: Possibly. (additional comments about people then parking on the street)

Q: Will there be bike parking and what about the impacts of the bicycle master plan?
A: Yes, there will be bike parking and I'm a big fan of the bicycle master plan.

Q: How about some covered bike parking?
A: Ya, that's what I have in mind.

Q: No option for parking entrance on Union.
A: Parking entrance would ruin retail space.

Q: Will people put up with traffic on Union when sitting at a cafe on it?
A: Yes if done correctly.

Q: Who will be responding to emails and such?
A: Denise and I monitor comments and questions. As does our PR firm. (Nyhus)

That's it.

-Nic

Reports on Proposed Development at 23rd & Union

Following the meeting on Tuesday with Jim Mueller, Jean Tinnea has shared some thoughts, and Nic Pottier of the Central Neighborhood Association has posted a long report about the meeting (care to join their group?). As my contribution, I offer photos of the architects' display boards, and a video recording of the first 40 minutes of the meeting: low tech recording on my digital camera. Most of the audio is clear, and you can sort of see the slides (most of which are of the boards shown here). It's at the end of this post.

Here's where the project would be built: the "Context"

(click on picture for bigger copy)

Here's the developer's preferred Scheme:
"Scheme 1" - Parking entrance on 23rd
(click on picture for bigger copy)
Here's another design with a rezone to 65':
"Scheme 2"
(click on picture for bigger copy)

Here's another design with a rezone to 65':
"Scheme 3"
(click on picture for bigger copy)
And here's how it might look: "Concept"
(click on picture for bigger copy)

And finally, here's the video of Jim Mueller's presentation: watch it here, or click on "Google Video" to enlarge it.

Don't forget the first Design Review Hearing on the project (Miller Community Center, 6: 30 PM, Weds June 27th): your chance to comment officially on the project.

And here's the rest of my video (memory card filled up before presentation ended).

Sat. May 19th Neighborhood Plans Workshop

(Editorial comments: the Madison-Miller area is clearly going to be redeveloped very soon. It would be to all of our advantages to use a revitalized neighborhood plan to help shape the development the way we want it. It's a geeky, technical, exhausting, micro-managing sort of exercise, but it seems to be our best option. If you can't make it to the May 19th workshop [it clashes with our MaDCAP cleanup] maybe you can come to the June 9th Central Area Neighborhood Plan Stewardship's event to get Central Area residents, businesses owners and other organizations acquainted and involved with the Central Area’s Neighborhood Plan.

Andrew Taylor)

(Click on poster for more readable version).

Here's the press release with all the details.

Land Use: 1834 24th Ave

Land Use Application to subdivide one parcel into four unit lots. The construction of townhouses has been approved under Project #6090823. This subdivision of property is only for the purpose of allowing sale or lease of the unit lots. Development standards will be applied to the original parcel and not to each of the new unit lots.

You might care to submit comments on this application to subdivide the land at 1834 24th Ave.

Sustaining A Vibrant and Diverse Neighborhood

Dear Friend of Capitol Hill Housing,

As you may know CHH has its Annual Meeting in April each year. This year it will be on April 30th at 6:00 at the Northwest Film Forum, 1515 12th Avenue. The event will mix a little organizational business and a panel discussion we think you will find interesting about development and change for Capitol Hill.

The business items will be brief, but important. We elect two community members to our Board, provide a summary of the organization’s activities for the year, and ratify the selection of our independent auditor. People who are residents or property owners in Capitol Hill are eligible to vote.

Our panel-“Sustaining A Vibrant and Diverse Neighborhood”-will feature representatives of some of the most current developments on Broadway, Pike-Pine, and 15th East. These projects are place makers for Capitol Hill’s future and include examples of new construction and preservation. How does the “market” see Capitol Hill? How do they connect with Capitol Hill’s character? The panel will be hosted by Channel 21 and Capitol Hill resident, C.R. Douglas. He will also moderate a question and answer segment from the audience.

Panelists: Dana Behar, HAL Properties, Cameo & Braeburn Projects at 14th and Pine

Anne Michelson, Pike/Pine Neighborhood activist/developer with project at 12th and Pike.

Maria Barrientos, Developer with three projects currently in development on Capitol Hill.

Chuck Weinstock, Capitol Hill Housing, just completed Broadway Crossing and Silivian.

Bob Burkheimer, owner of the former QFC/Bartells site currently under redevelopment.

We hope you will take the opportunity to check in with us, help us take care of some organizational business, and take part in an important community conversation. Space is limited so please rsvp to rsvp@chhip.org as soon as possible.

Sincerely yours,

Chuck Weinstock

Executive Director
Capitol Hill Housing
1406 10th Avenue, Suite 101
Seattle, WA 98122

Here's a colorful meeting flyer to download, print and share.

East Madison Street Redevelopment

The closing of Deano's Grocery Store may herald a great wave of redevelopment on East Madison Street in our area.

Marching east down the street, here's what I know:

1) 1700 E. Madison Street: the Trader Joe's building. Permits for the apartments at the rear of the Trader Joe's building are still pending?

2) 1818 E. Madison Street: the "Fratelli's" site. Val Thomas is a very well respected Seattle architect and builder, who built the 19th Ave lofts a few years ago. His plans for the redevelopment of the "Fratelli's" site were approved years ago (but not implemented) but he recently noted:

....the status of our project at 19th and Madison. We are now fully permitted and hoping to proceed. I will let you know as things fall into place.

His presentations at Miller neighborhood meetings, and the Design Review meetings, are exhaustively documented on the old Miller website. I think it will be a fine addition to our neighborhood. Here's the DPD page. Project will have 134 apartments, 170ish parking spaces and retail on 19th.

Go see the cows before they go away.

3) 2040 E. Madison Street: Dean Falls' property. Bar and store closed, site pretty much empty. Rumors abound about Dean demolishing and building, selling etc. Just checked the County website: still belongs to DEF Inc. No bulldozers yet. Here's what I know about plans for the property, here are pictures of the models and plans. and here's another Miller page about it.

4) 2051 East Madison Street (the new "Twilight Exit") had "For Sale" signs on the building for some while, and now does not. Property had been sold (check the King County website) but no signs of planning for redevelopment yet.

5) 2216 E. Madison Street (the Madison Temple site ) also had "For Sale" signs for a long time, but now does not, but has not been sold (according to the King County site). The site has been fenced: somebody may have an "option" on it, although the realtor's website is still active. The Miller website has details of all the Design Review Hearings etc (in 2001) that led to the Master Use Permit for the project.

Note that the rezoning of the property from 85' to 65' means that the exisiting plan for an 85' building (and no other) is "grandfathered in".

Deano's Rumor Mill & Public Records

Rarely a week goes by without someone reporting that Dean Falls' property on Madison is about to be knocked down and redeveloped. Two reports today:

Yesterday I noticed a fridge sitting on the sidewalk outside of the old Twilight Exit. Are they cleaning out the place in anticipation of demolition?

I was out for a walk & I stopped into Deano's Grocery yesterday and the place was almost totally empty of merchandise. I asked the clerk if they were closing down and he said they were closing next week and that the building would be demolished. Is this true?

I checked with a property developer whom I know to have been negotiating with Mr. Falls for over a year and he had no comment.

Mr. Falls received his Master Use Permit to redevelop the property on March 31st, 2005, but has not done so. Here and here are details of the development plans, and here is a photo album of the design.

So, if Mr. Falls is not going to develop it himself, we will know that something is happening when we can see, in King County records, that the property has been sold.

Open the King County Parcel Viewer and "search by address": enter "2040" and "Madison" and you'll get a map like this.
Select the "Identify" tool (right margin) and click on any property to identify it and then click on "property report" to see ownership. The red highlighted "Recorders Office: Excise Tax Affidavits Report" link produces actual copies of Real Estate Excise Tax Affadavits, signed by buyer and seller, if the property has been sold recently!

Note the parcel number and go to the King County Assessor's eReal Property System and enter the number to find out more about the property. The "Recorder's Office" link from the eReal record (upper window, scroll down a bit) also takes you to the Real Estate Excise Tax Affadavits.

The King County Property Tax web search lets you look up the name and address of the taxpayer for the property, and will show if they are behind in their taxes and (it appears) might even let you pay peoples' property taxes for them!

From these resources it's clear that Dean Falls' properties are still owned by his company, DEF Inc, so the demolition rumor may be premature (though County records may take a while to be updated).

But if you keep checking on the County records, you'll be the first to know if the property is sold!

I'd be intersested to learn of (and will pass on) any better, easier ways to get this information.

Townhouse Project, 1626 23rd Ave

Fron the 3/15/07 DPD notice:

Land Use Application to subdivide one parcel into four unit lots. The construction of single family residences has been approved under Project #6106808. This subdivision of property is only for the purpose of allowing sale or lease of the unit lots. Development standards will be applied to the original parcel and not to each of the new unit lots.

Design Review Hearing: 2320 E. Madison Street

(from official notice, with additions)

The Director of DPD is convening the Design Review Board

for an early design guidance hearing, at which the basic concepts of the plan will be explained: more detailed plans will be discussed at one or more subsequent meetings.

The proposal is for a three-story, mixed-use building with five apartrments over 1,245 sq. ft. of retail. Parking for five vehicles will be located within the structure.

MEETING

Wednesday, March 21, 2007, 8 PM

Seattle Central Community College
1701 Broadway, Room 3211

The Design Review process is an excellent opportunity for you to learn about upcoming projects, and to offer your advice to the architects and the Design Review Board.

Details of the process are at the City website

There was an old (vacant?) house on this site, which burnt down a year or more ago. The site is just uphill from Philadelphia Fevre and the Bottleneck Lounge and across the street from Crush.

PS: Here's where to find notices of upcoming developments in our area.

MORE townhouses?

This property at 1920 E. John is on the market for $1,200,000 as a "tear-down". Much as I like all our new townhouses and neighbors (see 21st Ave. E. between John and Denny) it would be nice to see something a bit different built. So, if you know any good builders, please let them know about this listing . Great location, 7,200 square feet, zoned L-3.