Exit133.com: Foss Waterway Height Amendment Meeting

Foss Waterway Height Amendment Meeting (30. March 2007, 08:24 by Derek) ~ What View?

I’m sure many of you are aware of the proposed changes to the height limits on the Foss Waterway. It’s been a topic in my inbox for… years. The general idea is that the limits would increase from 100 to 180 feet for an area north of the Murray Morgan Bridge. Our friends in the Perkins Building and Cliff Street Lofts have some definite opinions on this change. Well…

A public hearing by the Planning Commission has been scheduled for Wednesday, April 18, 2007, at 5:00 p.m., to receive public comments on the draft proposed amendment to the Foss Waterway shoreline regulations. A community meeting (an informational session) has been scheduled for Wednesday, April 11, 2007, at 5:30 p.m., for interested parties to learn more about the proposed regulatory changes, ask questions, and be more prepared for the public hearing. Both events will be held in the City Council Chambers.

We’ve let this issue sit for a long while now. The first studies were appearing in 2004. Have you opinions changed at all?

The detailed changes, exhibits, drawings, and staff reports are available via the city site linked below.

Link to the City of Tacoma

Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.

It breaks my heart that some wealthy people will lose their fancy views and possibly value in their property. Some times you just need to take one for the team. Tacoma needs higher buildings on the waterfront or how else can we attract the kind of money Tacoma needs. Seriously, I think they should go even higher than the proposals are asking for, why not 300 feet? Tacoma is lagging far behind in many ways, how on earth are we going to see our first 10 million dollar condo if people in minor buildings worry about their views and property values.

1 | Posted by Crenshaw Sepulveda | Mar 30, 12:37 PM

Yeah, more condos are going to help downtown…....not!!....

2 | Posted by rich | Mar 30, 03:02 PM

One hundred feet seems high enough for that area. Bigger buildings can be constructed away from the waterfront if they’re needed. But if good public access and a bike/pedestrian path from downtown to Old Town are part of the deal, a few extra feet might be OK.

3 | Posted by Michael G. | Mar 30, 05:42 PM

No one is going to pay 10 million for a condo if some poor schlub can have the same view, if not even a better view and live in some dinky apartment at the top of the hill. No sir, this can not happen, we need to have a mighty wall of buildings right on the water front to preclude any free viewing of the water or other sights that might be had. I don’t know how high up we have to go, but by god we’ve got to do it, no one will enjoy the water front view for free. Besides, the poor really can’t appreciate a water front view. No way should anyone without the proper money be able to get anywhere near the water. If some one is sneaking a free peek at the water front that is justification enough for blocking out their view.

4 | Posted by Crenshaw Sepulveda | Mar 30, 07:27 PM

The city has done a ton of high tech work to try to address view corridors.

I hope they build some nice buildings on these Foss lots which are not too car centric and are pedestrian friendly without minimal gaping parking garages.

The city shouldn’t squander the lots as there are only a very few waterfront parcels.

They should be mixed use buildings with retail on the first floor with housing and or commercial spaces above.

The inherent problem with Tacoma’s waterfront is that it is physically separated from the rest of the city by a cliff. You either have to walk over a bridge to it or drive to it.

Thus, they are going to have to build a ton of housing units there to have enough life there to keep it from being a dead zone. The merchants on dock street and the Blue Olive overestimated how much activity was going to be down there and went out of business.

5 | Posted by Erik | Mar 30, 07:49 PM

No wonder the city is lagging on all of the other land-use issues! How many hundreds of hours have been spent trying to please a few condo owners who think they own their view?

6 | Posted by Jake | Mar 30, 08:31 PM

What I particularly like about the City’s process is how, in order to please Herb, they’ve picked and chosen the parts of the comprehensive plan that support what they want to do, while ignoring the parts that talk about connecting the waterfront, not blocking views from downtown (residential and commercial) not blocking view of downtown from the waterfront.

They also conveniently continue to ignore the Charter provision against selling city-owned waterfront property. (I suppose if you look at the esplanade and Thea, they subdivided it so that the walkway is a separate parcel, or some other trick)

You want class A office space? 100’ buildings are plenty high for that. with parking, and maybe a shuttle of some kind to get workers up the hill.