My vote is in:

Best Views: (tie) Reverie at Marcato and Hanna Heights

Most Innovative: The Galleria

Best Value: Reverie at Marcato

Best Location: Hanna Heights

Best Interiors: Bridge

Best “Fit” into the Neighborhood: Hanna Heights

Friendliest and Most Knowledgable Staff: Prium (Hanna Heights and Chelsea Heights)

I think the best thing about this year’s Tour is that many of the featured projects were newcomers. Many of last year’s crop apparently have sold out, which is encouraging. I think the biggest issue that the city’s condos will continue to face is affordability. Tacoma’s median household income is about $38,000, meaning that in order to be affordable for a typical Tacoma household, a condo would have to cost no more than about $170,000. (The least expensive I could find was a $215K 1 bedroom at Reverie.)

I would advocate for the Walmart approach to new condos: more supply, lesser quality, and therefore, lower prices. Not everyone needs (or desires) solid marble countertops, bamboo flooring, or a jacuzzi tub. Some of us probably enjoy going to a laudromat even. I think we need a couple more Commencement Terraces and Park Towers.

Anyone agree? Or disagree with my top picks on this year’s Tour.

Biggest Surprise: Reverie at Marcato
Biggest Disappointment: Hanna Heights
Most Unique New Construction: The Roberson

The Marcarto development started developing the corner of 15th & Tacoma, one of the more challenged major intersections in the City. Maybe it was the nice weather on Saturday or that it was my first stop on the tour, but I felt surprisingly comfortable walking over. The units are priced reasonably considering they have many of the same amenities. The views rank right up there with the best of them. The development is expected to open in January with construction beginning on Phase 2 in the spring.

Hannah Heights is located in a prime location next to The Grand and The Triangle and is being developed by Prium, who has done some quality local projects. Maybe this raised my expectations too high. The model unit looked nice enough and decks are included. However, they did not seem very unique. The unit reminded me of many of the others I’d seen throughout the town and the decks don’t do much if you are looking directly at the next building 10ft away. The views will also be substantially altered if the 207ft Jay Heights gets developed down the block. (The on-site sales person I got was also at the pushy end of the spectrum and tried to tell me that “No, Jay Heights would only be 5 or 6 stories,” and wouldn’t affect the view.)

While there are some interesting remodels out there (City Hall & Bridge), much of the new construction seems similar. Last year The Triangle went in a different direction with some green design elements and unique materials. This year there was nothing that quite stood out the same, but The Roberson finally pulled in a new unit type: the live-work unit. They are providing 8 live-work units along Court D. These give a 500sf open space on the first floor with 1000sf of living space on the two floors above. (I do wish they had more of a roll-up door style with a smaller side door to allow more street presence & the movement of larger furniture/equipment/materials.) These types of units are flexible enough to allow the conversion to commercial uses as warranted. Hopefully, they will leave these areas relatively bare to allow for tenant improvements. These spaces can quickly become incubators for small start-up businesses. I’d love to see more of these (at less than $3.4M). The Roberson looks like it will open early next summer.

The only thing I want for Christmas this year is the Granville. :) Those units are amazing, and so beautiful.

I’m a total numbers geek and thought I would share these.

The Dorothy data:
before condo conversion:
owner: DOROTHY DEVELOPMENT LLC
purchase price: $3,750,000
price per square foot: $139

After condo conversion:
avg price per square foot: $378
final sales price for building: $10,164,644

The Vintage Y data:
before condo conversion:
purchase price: $1,500,000
price per square foot: $79

After condo conversion:
avg price per square foot: $334
final sales price for building: $6,753,000

Anyone up for starting a co-op DIY condo company?

mb-

I began renting downtown just over a year ago from my home in the North Slope District. I am currently debating where to buy a condo: Downtown, Stadium, North Slope, or North End. There are definitely pros & cons, but most of them are what you’d expect living downtown. As most of your questions above seem more rhetorical, I’d be happy to talk with you more directly.

I tried to visit every development that was listed on the Tour as well as some that were not, however I did not wear a snazzy blue button. This was in part because it can be hard to get some questions answered if they don’t think you’re going to buy. I imagine some other residents were incognito for similar reasons.

I was wondering about the ArtLofts as during last year’s Tour they were quoting prices in the 150s. I asked the Catapult rep at the Bridge and he said they’d be starting “first quarter 2007”....so hopefully that means they’ll start on time.

As far as Hanna Heights, DavidS, much of my observation is based on wandering all the way up to the penthouse units (although they are still in the rough in construction phase, the windows are in and if you can get up there, it’s worth it). Those units have 20 foot ceilings. Also, the Prium reps told me their priority list goes like this: 1) Hanna Heights, 2) Chelsea Heights, 3) 1933 at Dock Street and finally 4) Jay Heights. They estimated they’d start selling Jay Heights in the fall of 2008. So it’s still a couple years out, which explains their construction delay…..

That’s a great article Jamie. I know someone who says they’d actually like to have kids in a downtown Tacoma condo. Of course they can’t afford the price for 2-3BD as a young parent. That seems like the biggest challenge for those that would want to raise a child downtown: not being able to compete with the empty-nesters on equity or income. More condos could help solve this.

(drizell, your prioritizing of the Prium units sounds like what I heard.)

Thnanks, Jamie, I’ll check that out.

DavidS, interesting about the family wanting to live downtown. Having thought about that, I realize that it was hard for me to think of families living in most of these condos. Also they seem to be heavily marketing just to young couples, young singles, and empty nesters. That’s too bad.

craigA, the figure I was told (not to start any rumors, perhaps someone can verify?) is that there are currently 8000 total units either approved, in planning or under construction. That’s a lot of units for a town the size of Tacoma.

Jay Heights has certainly been delayed.

One of the reasons likely is that Prium has now won the Foss project Nineteen Thirty-Three at Dock Street which they are now working very hard on. This project has certainly taken a priority.

With that said, Prium has added now information for Jay Heights including this postcard on the project

That’s a lot of units for a town the size of Tacoma.

Looking at Bellevue, Seattle and Bellingham lately, they all seem to be building a ton of condos. I am not sure our rate is any higher.

There’s one method of analysis which would suggest that the Tacoma market can only absorb X number of condos per year.

Another one is that as more condos become built, the downtown becomes functional and attractive creating greater demand for housing units.

Should we be worried about a slowdown/bubble burst in the condo and apartment market in downtown? Yes the numbers look out of wack, but wouldnt you think a compamny like williams and Dame, the guys who just bought the Elks Temple, would have taken this into consideration? And just recently the mattress factory down on Puyallup Ave was just sold to a developer with the intent to build condos. I would assume that developers would only buy and build if they had the analysis and numbers to suggest the market will remain lucrative. And as far as i know the over-all plans over at Marcato have not changed or been delayed. Maybe Prium is just plain outta money right now for Jay Heights.

What anyone in the St. Helens or Stadium Dist. that currently has a view of Mt. Rainier should worry about is the proposed “S-8” amendments to the City’s shoreline regulations. Simon Johnson has a deal with the Thea Foss Waterway Development Authority to buy 3 parcels on Dock St. north of 11th, if the Authority can get the City to raise the max. height from the current 100’ to 180’. Note that Cliff St. is around 75’ above Dock, so this would double the height. Views from Fireman’s Park, the Perkins, and the Cliff St. Lofts N. and E. will be blocked, and from Sky Terrace, and the St. Helens Dist. towards Mt. Rainier, you’ll get lovely views of towers. It’s at the planning commission now, but may be before the council by the end of the year.

I find it odd that the City begged businesses and residents to move downtown, but plan to punish them by building a wall of condos to block their view of the waterfront, the Bay, and the Mountain.

http://www.cityoftacoma.org/Page.aspx?cid=2219 for more info.
Don’t let them build “The Wall.”

DavidS
Thanks for your comments, so does it “feel” like people are living downtown? We are interested in moving into a condo as we are tired of the endless project an old house brings. The freedom to travel away on weekends and have more time to do the great things downtown, ie museums, restaurants etc.
Have you had an overall positve experience living downtown, I do know it is what you make it etc. But I was just interested in getting some opinions on the downtown living.
Also, I heard from someone from the city that Catapult isn’t developing that lot next to The Bridge and also from a local artist I know that the artist loft project fell through. Does anyone know about those rumors?

I didn’t go on the tour, and I don’t live in Tacoma anymore, but I have followed the condo movement in the downtown area with interest. Overall, I’m cautiously optimistic about the developments taking place over the last couple of years. I do, however, have two nagging concerns.

First of all, I’m not sure that the downtown area currently has the services to support the people who might move into these new condo buildings. There are plenty of new restaurants, yes, but what about groceries, cleaners, etc. It’s true that downtown Seattle (I don’t want to get into a Seattle v. Tacoma debate but it is the nearest large city) doesn’t have a QFC, but there is Ralphs, and the market is also downtown. Is Stadium Thrifway close enough to supply the new downtowners? Maybe this is just a chicken-and-egg thing that will resolve itself once folks have moved in. I do hope so.

My second concern is that it seems like the ratio of downtown condo prices to (near to) downtown houses is out of whack. If 2BR condos run in the $300K range (and I know that not all them do, but the Triangle units are about $500K) and a 3BR house with a lot can be had near downtown for far less something seems funny to me. I realize that some people would simply rather not have a yard to take care of, but compare this situation to the one in Seattle (again, sorry). Ever priced a detached single-family residence on Capitol Hill or Queen Anne? They cost more than a(n admittedly very pricey) 2BR condo, that is for certain. How much are folks going to want to pay for a downtown condo once the novelty of “urban living” fades?

rbnguy: your concern about 16-story buildings is understandable, but I beg you to consider the long term benefits of having such a development. Currently, downtown Tacoma is built at a relatively low density. Many of the buildings are short and squat. With a decreasing quantity of land, building higher density development is essential. In the downtown core, zoning allows for high-rise (20-plus stories) buildings. Unfortunately, most of the new buildings being constructed downtown are topping out hundreds of feet shorter than what is permitted.

Contrary to popular belief, the Foss Harbor proposal is not a “wall.” From Fireman’s Park and other points up to about the Elks Building, one could still see the mountain and the Thea Foss because the buildings are designed to be porous, allowing existing view corridors to be preserved. The mountain would still be visible from street level throughout most of the Stadium District and downtown. Existing waterway views may be partially blocked.

Think of the long term benefits of taller buildings: as views are blocked or partially blocked, developers will begin to build taller structures to reclaim some of the lost views. As a result, we get a downtown with more people, more numerous and more successful small businesses, and greater demand for public transportation, and less reliance on cars.

It’s a win-win for downtown Tacoma. The Tacoma Planning Commission is still accepting comments on the Foss Harbor-led proposal to raise the height limit. Please support this catalyst for the further development of downtown Tacoma!

From the BIA Blog on the Foss Height Limits:

Anonymous said…
The economic benefit of the Foss towers far outweighs the angry Perkins and Cliff Street Lofts owners. Their values will not go down because of the new towers. They will only go up! Changing views, that is part of living in an urban enviroment. I know my view from my condo might someday be gone. The zoning across the street allows 90 feet but I know that new development will benefit my value and the neighborhood much more than my view. This is an exciting time in Tacoma, if you don’t like it, move. Buy a place on the water where nobody can build in front of it or just GET OVER IT!

DavidS
Thanks, Yes I did register my email and really appreciate your willingness to answer some questions. Some of my other questions might be your experiece letting go of house living and moving to condo living. Some specific and I guess others just philosophical.

re: Foss Waterway Towers.

We need to ensure long term connections between the waterfront and downtown for all people, not just those who can afford the buy-in. While I support additional development along the waterfront, I do disagree that the proposed towers are clearly a benefit to Tacoma. I believe this stems from two issues: 1)What views are important & 2)Redevelopment potential.

1) The Towers proposed significantly alter the view from a variety of points. A large part of the view from downtown is comprised of a sense of open space – what the City has termed “the far shore view.” This is part of seeing the mtn. from downtown. Based on the City’s own analysis, anything option over 100ft obscures 71.6% of this view from the Fireman’s Park Totem Pole (~street level in downtown & on Murray Morgan). The public will not have the pleasure of entering most buildings downtown to appreciate the view. (As a side note, imagine if Site 1 or Alber’s Mill on Dock Street proposed a 180ft high building. Views of the mountain would be obstructed from the glass bridge, Tollefson Plaza, the Convention Center, etc. This deals directly with issue #2…)

2) It was suggested that building taller on Dock Street would create an upward race throughout downtown. I do not believe the market is there, nor will be there for at least a generation. The “race to the sky” line of thinking assumes that taller buildings would be built to capture the view. However, if it is not feasible to build a 20 story building today with 15 stories of view, it is less feasible to construct a 20 story building with only 5 stories of view. (part of why Marcato started at the top of the hill) As for buildings substantially impacted like the Perkins or Frank Russell, these buildings are not going to be torn down for at least a generation regardless of what is built on Dock Street.

Rather than fast track this height increase because of the developer, I believe this height issue needs comprehensive consideration within the context of the entire shoreline and should be rolled into the Shoreline Master Program update the City is currently working on.

If you were of sufficient means, the sign of success was to buy a track home in a 20 unit residential developement in a cultisac. If you walked out of the cultisac 200 feet away, you were met with a 50 mph road with no sidewalks.

Cult-i-sac. Love it.

The Thea Foss was designed to be enjoyed by all, including the views from the city. With a height increase, the folks on the Thea Foss are the only ones who will be able to enjoy it. At the current limit of 100 feet, they still enjoy the same view. Nothing stands in their way of enjoying their view, they don’t need to span up to 180 feet to capture the view. But the folks in downtown, suffer from the height increase. Not to mention the idea of tall condos along Thea Foss really doesn’t sound to pleasing, not to mention it will totally hide the waterway. There are plenty of other locations to fight for a height increse that makes better sense.

Here’s the Chamber’s position on the height issues on the Foss:

Among others, the Tacoma-Pierce County Chamber has weighed in with support for the change. Height limits act primarily to constrain the real estate market from achieving the “highest and best” intensity of development and from providing the living or working environment sought by prospective residential or office occupants. Likewise, by effectively restricting supply, these limits have the economic effect of raising the price of space (of course, other regulatory variables also come into play—setbacks and coverage, as well as the parking ratio).

My office is on Fireman’s Park so tall buildings would certainly effect me.

However, I support having a high density on the Foss waterway because:

1) Without sufficient units there, the Foss will not be able to support any retail as it is geographically remote.
Condos create little activity per sq. ft. compared to other uses as many of them have owners who are absent.

2) A large number of people are going to be required there to monitor the area “eyes on the street” to keep the area safe.

3) The waterfront property is exceedingly hard to come by and needs to be fully developed if it is going to be viberant. A number of retail businesses have already gone out of business there.

4) High desity on the Foss will help the rest of downtown retail and crime prevention.

5) Downtowns traditionally allow unlimited heights. Seattle just lifted their heigh restriction downtown. Bellingham has never had one. Over the last 80 years, Seattle has had one building eclipse the view of the other.

It doesn’t really work for a downtown to try to have one building built earlier try to stop subsequent buildings from going in so that they maintain their views.

I seriously dont understand the “dont block my view” argument regarding the development of a downtown. We all live in the city because we want/like the diversity and excitment that is a product of DENSITY! Density is not going to happen if we allow Tacoma to continue being a spread out city full of squatty short buildings. Would Vancouver be the city it is today if they were concerned with not blocking someone elses view? I think not. Erik’s list of reasons is spot on. The 24 hour street life we all want will only happen if we put as many people as possible, into the smallest area as is feasible. Basically, do Tacomans want a skyline, or a cityscape of short 4/5 story buildings spread over a large area.

Without trying to turn this into a Dock St. thread, a few more random thoughts on the Foss:

1) As mentioned, Dock Street is isolated from downtown. It is it’s own island neighborhood connected to the mainland downtown in a handful of spots. While this area is critical to the City’s future it needs to be considered separate from downtown.

2) There is probably not more than $1.5M worth of income w/in 1/4 mile of Thea’s Landing – a primary reason the stores struggle. Business/office uses typically supply more $/sf of income because of the density of workers. While the market is hot for residences right now, there needs to be a consideration by the City/Foss Dev. Auth. if retail is a desired use – as we are running out of potential locations w/ the hot residential market.

3) The City is in the midst of updating its Shoreline Master Program and reconsidering height limits in a number of areas throughout the City. This evening’s Planning Commission Agenda includes some discussion of these projects.

The proposal to increase height limits in one specific area on the Foss needs to be rolled into a more comprehensive discussion on height limits in downtown and waterfront uses. I understand this may slow down the development of this site, but considering the buildings will stand for at least 50yrs, taking a more comprehensive view might be appropriate.