Zenith Property
Updated September 26, 2025
Questions and answers from the August 21 community meeting about the Zenith LLC/Landmark Project:
What are the plans for preservation of pieces of the building and put elsewhere?
There is a mitigation measure for architectural salvage work. "Allow salvage companies, such as Second Use and similar, on-site prior to demolition for architectural salvage work for resale purposes to support waste stream diversion of building materials, including stained glass, leaded light windows, light fixtures, marble and wood finishes, and decorative metal work. Recommend that salvage companies work directly with historical societies and agencies to identify and select features that may be of interest to them.
Who is the lead agency vs SEPA Official?
The Lead Agency is the City of Des Moines on this project and the SEPA Official is the Community Development Director, Rebecca Deming. These roles are dictated by state law and City Code.
Who selects the alternatives?
Reasonable alternatives are selected by the lead agency in consultation with environmental consultants and public input obtained during the scoping process.
Why is there no requirement for development plan?
How can we make the developer more open in the future? This is a state law, the City cannot change this requirement.
What is the possibility of a zone change for the future project?
It is unknown at this time as there are no development plans for a future project. If the property owner were to create plans that do not align with the current zoning, then a request to the City Council would need to be made for a zoning change.
If it is Demolished, How soon would the City receive the plan for the future project?
It is unknown at this time as there are no development plans for a future project. This is private property and the City does not control the timing of any future development.
The Demolition of the Interior shows the longest time, why is that? Is it due to cost? It that what makes it cost prohibitive to remodel?
The demolition of the interior timeline is an estimate based on the amount of material or types of materials that need to be sorted for recycling or to be diverted from landfills.
How was the mitigation arrived at?
In consultation with City's environmental consultant based on input received through the public process.
What mitigation opportunities will there be on the future project application?
Unknown until we know the size and type of project. It will subject to environmental regulations which likely will trigger mitigation through the SEPA process due size of the property.
Why didn't it look at just keeping the structure there?
The report does look at preservation of the structure without reuse or for future reuse. It is discussed as part of Alternative 2 Historic Preservation in the Draft EIS (See Chapter 3 for Details).
The interior demolition is first. Would it be possible to issue a permit for ONLY that with discussions on whether it would be possible for the developer to leave the shell intact and build new construction within it?
That would preserve what the community wants and even please the union laborers, who can do the required abatement. Although the EIS did not look at demolition of the interior and the structural implications it did look at the process and costs to preservation the structures which would involve physical repairs to stabilize the exteriors of buildings and structures, provide security protection, and provide regular monitoring. It is discussed as part of Alternative 2 Historic Preservation in the Draft EIS (See Chapter 3 for Details)
Did the City approach prospective buyers about phasing in renovations to make the project feasible? Each phase, when completed, could begin generating revenue.
The ECONorthwest feasibility study finding states "Without incentives, a redevelopment of the primary structure at the former Masonic lodge would likely need a subsidy of over $100 million in present value terms. However, even with potential financial incentives, a redevelopment of the former Masonic lodge would likely need a subsidy of around $50 million. Financing tools like C-PACER and historic tax credits help close the gap with potentially better financing amounts and terms, however net operating income does not exceed the likely debt payments. The implication being that potential financing partners will not offer the funds for the project because they cannot be paid back by the project." Whether phased or not the report states that they would not likely find funding partners for this type of project due to the return on investment.
Why is the appeal fee so high?
The appeal fee is intended to cover the cost of the appeal. The fee is uniform for all appeals of administrative decisions that are heard by the Hearing Examiner. In this specific situation, given the complexity of the process that is being appealed, the appeal fee will only cover a small portion of the cost of the appeal. The City’s appeal fee is commensurate with surrounding jurisdictions fees for similar processes.
Updated August 8, 2025
Demolition Permit Decision
With an independent study finding no feasible path to preservation of the former Masonic Home, the City has issued a Zenith conditional demolition permit decision to Zenith Properties LLC, the owner of the property.
The decision to approve the permit was based on the findings of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ordered by the City and conducted by a specialized environmental consulting firm.
Based on the EIS, the City determined that approving the permit is the most fiscally responsible choice for taxpayers. The City has limited control over actions on private property as long as the owner complies with the law. Approving a decision that conflicts with the EIS findings would likely lead to costly litigation.
Approval of the permit is the first of many steps in a process prescribed by law. Demolition is not expected to start for several months or until the outcome of any appeal is known.
The period for appeals was August 8-18, 2025. Appeals must be submitted in writing to [email protected] by 4 p.m. on August 18.
Environmental Impact Statement
The EIS concluded that even with available historic preservation incentives and subsidies, it is not financially feasible for the property owner to preserve the structures.
As property owner, Zenith Properties, LLC will be required to complete mitigation measures, including:
• An on-site historical interpretation installation with public access, when/if the property is redeveloped.
• Payment of $1.2 million to a preservation fund for maintaining of City-owned or managed landmarks, such as the Beach Park.
• Measures to contain construction and demolition impacts (dust, noise, etc.)
• Wildlife and tree canopy protections
• Mitigation of traffic impacts
The EIS process included several rounds of public comment. The City gathered 728 unique comments, which guided the options evaluated in the EIS. The complete Final EIS can be found here.
Preservation Status
For 12 years, many potential investors explored or planned to restore the main structure. All concluded that it was not feasible. No other government, community or historic preservation entity has proposed a viable plan to preserve and maintain the property.
The City does not have the resources to purchase the property or to preserve and maintain it for a potential future use.
The interior of the building has significantly deteriorated due to forces of nature, neglect and trespassers. As deterioration continues, rehabilitation costs increase, and the likelihood of redevelopment decreases. The EIS concluded that if the site remains undeveloped, the result will be “demolition by neglect” and safety issues that the City would need to manage.
July 31, 2025
Masonic Home Environmental Impact Statement Released
The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Zenith Property is final and posted on the City website.
The City ordered the EIS over three years ago in response to the property owner’s application to demolish the structures on the grounds, also known as the Masonic Home or Landmark on the Sound. The process included several rounds of public input.
The report presents discouraging conclusions for those of us who hoped the main building could be saved, citing the deterioration of the structure and the high cost of restoration. However, it prescribes mitigation measures that could preserve some elements and provide public access to the grounds.
City staff will present the EIS findings and implications to the City Council at its regular meeting, August 7 at 6 p.m. at City Hall. This is an informational presentation only.
The City Council does not vote on the EIS or the demolition permit. As with other permits, such as building permits, City staff takes action on applications, based on City policy and regulations set by the Council.
It is anticipated a decision on the Zenith demolition permit will be made on August 8, 2025 and the outcome of that decision will be shared publicly on August 8. Per State law, the City is required to wait at least seven days between the release of an EIS report and the decision on a pending permit.
The window to appeal the EIS and the City action begins on the permit decision date and closes 10 days later. More information on the appeal process can be found in Des Moines Municipal Code 16.05.320 (Agency SEPA Appeal).
I recognize the historic and cultural value the Masonic Home has in our community. The City is forced into a difficult position. As I consider next steps, I commit to you that I will keep the sustainability of our City and the best interests of residents at the top of my mind.
More details and links to the final EIS report are available on the City’s website. www.desmoineswa.gov/ZenithEIS
A community meeting where residents can ask questions was scheduled for August 21, 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Beach Park auditorium.
Here is a link to the video from that Community Meeting
July 26, 2025
The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the permit application to demolish the structures on the property known as Landmark on the Sound is complete.
The City ordered the EIS in response to the permit application submitted by the property owner. The City has invested significant time and resources on the EIS over the past three years.
The purpose of the EIS process, which is prescribed by the state, is to identify likely environmental impacts, reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures.
The EIS, conducted by an independent environmental consultant, Environmental Science Associates (ESA), initially examined three options:
1. No action (neither demolishing nor preserving the building)
2. Demolition by the property owner
3. Preservation and reuse.
Following the public comment phase, the City ordered a study of an additional option: to fund rehabilitation of the main structure by building multi-family housing on the undeveloped portions of the property.
Summary of Findings
This summary outlines the conclusions in the FEIS for each option evaluated.
Alternatives Evaluated:
No action: The EIS found that leaving the structure in its current state would ultimately result in “demolition by neglect” (eventual loss of historic resources due to natural deterioration and/or vandalism.)
The inside of the building has significantly deteriorated due to forces of nature, neglect and trespassers. It presents a fire and safety hazard. If left to decay further, the City would eventually be forced to require demolition for safety reasons.
Demolition by property owner: The EIS found that demolition would result in a loss of historic resources, trees, and potentially wildlife habitat. Residents would experience temporary environmental and traffic impacts during demolition (estimated at 5-6 months). Mitigation would be required to address these impacts.
The EIS notes that demolition would remove the structures that are a current fire and safety hazard.
Preservation and reuse: This option would protect historic resources but would require funding to mothball the structure (close the facility to protect it for future use or sale.) Residents would experience temporary environmental and traffic impacts during mothballing. These impacts would be less than for a demolition, but would also require mitigation measures.
Additional preservation study: The idea to fund restoration of the main building by constructing multi-family housing elsewhere on the property was found to be not financially feasible. The EIS notes that costs linked to historic preservation are 2-3 times higher than typical multifamily construction, a cost difference for this project of over $160 million. The consultants concluded that preservation and reuse is not feasible even with available preservation incentives and subsidies. The analysis also explored the potential of reusing the structure as a hotel and senior housing. No development scenario was financially feasible.
The economic analysis, conducted by the Leland Group, assumed the development of 280 apartments to offset preservation costs. It calculated that rents would have to dramatically exceed current market rates and that apartment rents would need to dramatically exceed current market rates, making them an estimated 32% higher than upscale apartments in Manhattan, New York City.
For details of this analysis, please see EIS Report, Appendices M, N, O, and P. Zenith Final EIS Appendices July2025
Next Steps
City staff will present the FEIS findings to the City Council at its August 7 meeting.
Action on the demolition permit is anticipated shortly after the Council presentation, on August 8th. Per State law, the City is required to wait at least seven days between the release of an EIS report and the decision on a pending permit. The public has 10 days from the permit decision date to appeal the findings of the FEIS. Appeals must be filed with the City Clerk in writing by August 18, 2025.
A community meeting where residents can ask questions is scheduled for August 21, 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Beach Park auditorium.
Complete FEIS and More Information
• Final EIS
• Draft EIS
• Appendices Part 1 A-D (unchanged from Draft EIS)
• Appendices Part 2 E-K (unchanged from Draft EIS)
• Appendices Part 3 L-P (new in the final EIS)
Hard copies of the Final EIS are available to view at the following locations:
City Hall*
21630 11th Avenue S, Suite D
Des Moines, WA 98198
Open 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Monday – Friday.
* Copies can be purchased for the cost of printing.
Des Moines Public Library
21620 11th Avenue S
Des Moines, WA 98198
Open 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Monday, Thursday, and Friday; 12 p.m. to 8 p.m. on Tuesday and Wednesday; and 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.
Woodmont Public Library
26809 Pacific Hwy S
Des Moines, WA 98198
Open 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Monday, Thursday, and Friday; 12 p.m. to 8 p.m. Tuesday and Wednesday; and 11 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturday (closed Sunday).
Contact
Please submit questions to the City’s SEPA Official at [email protected]
Please click here to sign up for email updates regarding the project.
Accessibility and Accommodations
Please contact the City Clerk at 206-870-6519 or [email protected] for special accommodations, translation, or interpretation.
Zenith Properties ha solicitado un permiso de demolición a la ciudad de Des Moines para las antiguas estructuras de Masonic Home (antes Landmark on the Sound) ubicadas en 23660 Marine View Drive S. Lo invitamos a comentar sobre el proceso de revisión medioambiental. Comuníquese con el secretario municipal al 206-870-6519 o envíe un correo electrónico a [email protected] para recibir adaptaciones especiales y servicios de traducción o interpretación.
Zenith Properties 已向 Des Moines 市申請了針對前共濟會之家 (Masonic Home)（Sound 地區的前地標建築）的拆除許可，該建築位於 23660 Marine View Drive S。誠邀您就環境審查流程給予意見。 請撥打電話 206-870-6519 或傳送電郵至 [email protected] 聯絡市辦事員，獲取便利措施、翻譯或傳譯服務。
Zenith Properties đã nộp đơn xin cấp giấy phép phá dỡ của Thành Phố Des Moines cho công trình Masonic Home cũ (trước đây là Địa Danh trên Eo Biển (Landmark on the Sound)) có địa chỉ tại 23660 Marine View Drive S. Xin mời quý vị góp ý cho quy trình đánh giá tác động môi trường. Xin liên lạc với Lục Sự Thành Phố theo số 206-870-6519 hoặc qua thư điện tử [email protected] nếu cần được hỗ trợ đặc biệt, dịch thuật hoặc thông dịch.