Developer's proposal disappoints Seattle officials

When Seattle city officials sold the Alaska Building two years ago, they expected developer Kent Angier would turn the 15-story office tower into downtown housing.

That's what Angier said he was going to do and what he indicated on a proposal to buy the Alaska Building.

Now Angier plans to convert the historic building into a Marriott hotel. Mayor Greg Nickels is disappointed, along with some City Council members, who thought they had a commitment from Angier to bring market-rate housing to the northern edge of Pioneer Square.

"The notion that we deceived the city and threw them a curve is utter baloney," Angier said. "When we bought the building the mayor's staff mentioned no restrictions" on how the building could be used. And, Angier added, if the city had required that the Alaska Building become apartments or condos then the sales price would've been less than the $8.5 million he paid. City officials agree that any conditions imposed on the building would have reduced its value.

"As far as I'm concerned, the developer is exonerated because no conditions were made or set," said City Councilmember Peter Steinbrueck, who chairs the council's urban-development committee.

In addition, the Pioneer Square Community Association supports a hotel, saying it would help neighborhood merchants.

Nevertheless, Steinbrueck's committee has become a battleground for the Alaska Building and a burgeoning movement that has labor activists and their allies arguing the public should get "community benefits" when the city gives something of value to developers.

Activists turned out at Wednesday's committee meeting to urge council members to reject a land-use code amendment Angier wants so he can build an addition to the Alaska Building.

Representatives from the local hotel-workers union said they want the council to consider the impact of such a deal on hotel employees. Marriott is a nonunion chain and activists want to assure good conditions for those who might toil at the converted Alaska Building.

Union officials Rick Sawyer and Stefan Moritz also said they want a more transparent process before the city grants Angier a code amendment. "The council needs to look at housing, transportation and social impacts when an economic enterprise like this comes before them," Sawyer said.

Activists also pointed out that Angier has a tentative deal to sell the Alaska Building to Seattle developer Henry Liebman and foreign investors. Angier declined to disclose details of Liebman's offer. Liebman said he and his partners would spend $85 million to buy the building, renovate it and completely outfit it as a hotel. Until all renovation costs are known, Liebman said, the purchase price is uncertain.

Steinbrueck's committee postponed a decision on the amendment.

Councilmember Richard Conlin said he wants to explore the possibility of requiring Angier to develop housing in the Alaska Building.

Conlin noted the city could have sold the Alaska Building to an office developer for about $500,000 more than it got from Angier, but it passed up the extra money to get housing and around-the-clock residents in a part of downtown that resembles a ghost-town after 5 p.m.

Steinbrueck said he is sympathetic to union activists, but he maintains Angier isn't legally obligated to develop housing or provide any other public benefits.

"There seems to be seller's remorse and I, for one, feel a share of the responsibility. I wasn't paying attention, I will acknowledge, when it [the sale] went before the finance committee," he said.

Bob Young: 206-464-2174 or byoung@seattletimes.com