Holy cow, just peeked out the front window before you had the photos up. Looks like a big meteor hit the thing…

It was unoccupied, right? Hopefully there were no squatters caught inside…

I’m sure glad I didn’t just drop $850,000 (list price from Colliers) on that thing. Maybe the land will be cleared off to the point that someone can afford to buy it and something useful will finally occupy the end of that block.

Perhaps caused by a collapsed Chinese tunnel under this building? I also wouldn’t rule out the meteor possibility.

The helicopter picture from KOMO TV shows that there is significant damage to the ugly building immediately north of the Eagles Building. Perhaps both will be coming down?

That’s too bad. A cool building with alot of potential to be fixed up.

This structure is to be demolished tomorrow or the next day

The front facade appears to be intact. It would be nice if they could save that and restore the building behind it.

Is the building in a historical district?

Before we get another pile of rubble and another surface parking lot, perhaps we need to look at all of the options first.

“...there is significant damage to the ugly building immediately north of the Eagles Building.”

I wish there was more appreciation for early to mid-century buildings. This part of our history is important for more than the evolution of craftsman to single story rambler homes.

I’ve always thought the old photo building would lend itself well to a modern-industrial fix up considering all the glass & windows.

“Redevelopment anticipated”

I wonder if it will still be eligible for this list:
http://www.ci.tacoma.wa.us/tacomanews/Filthy15/1305_S_Fawcett.asp

Just heard a short presentation by the Fire Department and learned:

1) The whole building will likely be torn downtown tomorrow. They want to work from the front to the back for demolition. Also, the collapse apparently caused some structural problem.

Thus, I don’t think they are going to be able to keep the facade.

2) No evidence of foul play in the collapse although they are not going in to look at it because of the danger.

3) The adjacent building will be razed as well because of the damage.

4) Some residents from a nearby building had to be evacuated.

I bet the facade could be saved if someone wanted to dump a ton of money into it immediately as in tomorrow.

Hmmm. I sure hope they start on the Luzon building quickly before it falls down.

I would not be surprised if this collapse set the city on a round of new inspections on some dilapidated brick buildings around town.

This reminds me of an old episode of “Taxi”. In one show Latka has to move out of his apartment because they are tearing the building down. Some one asks him why they are tearing down his building and he replies, “it wouldn’t burn”.

Great. King 5 news footage. More good publicity for Tacoma, the city where the buildings are so bad that they just fall down, right on the edge of downtown.

More good publicity for Tacoma, the city where the buildings are so bad that they just fall down, right on the edge of downtown.

Yes. Just in case someone thought Tacoma is redevoloping too fast. Here’s an example where too much delay caused us to lose a great building.

With that said, the collapse of the building and the razing of it and the ajacent building probably will speed something along.

Apparently, it was was being marketed as a tear downtown by the owner.

I just hope the site isn’t used for yet another condo project.

Best use I know of would be retail on the first floor with spaces above that can change from work to live easily depending on the market.

This is the most disorganized preservationist group I’ve ever seen.

Well this is awkward. I didn’t realize the Exit133 commenters were a preservation group. Maybe I need to update the About page… And regarding the kingdome – It’s out of scope.

And apparently John H. is a new reader to this blog. As to the facade … it’s called wishful thinking. And it’s still legal in the U.S. the last time I checked.

The “scope” comment I believe is a reference to the fact that this is a Tacoma-centric blog. And yes, we all know the King Dome is gone. It’s called sarcasm.

Hopefully your response was an attempt at the same and I simply read over any attempt at humor. If not, I’ll warn you … don’t read this blog on Fridays. You’re likely to get miffed.

John H, I would have to say I would side with you on this one. I’m a member of Historic Tacoma, on which more than one Exit133er is a board member. Yet as a half-assed preservationist, I struggle with the mindset that EVERYTHING should be saved. I think this building’s collapse is a blessing in disguise. Now that the buildings there are gone, it opens the door to redevelopment. I can hardly blame developers for not buying up this property. Somewhere along the line people have to realize that some buildings are just too far gone. Just making some of those historic, yet crumbling buildings even sturdy again would cost more than the building is worth. I don’t think saving the facade alone is a great idea.

Facade preservation is an accepted method in many places to preserve street character when the original building is beyond salvage. There are many examples especially in Vancouver, BC.

However, preservation of the facade sort of loses some of its benefit if there are no other character-defining buildings along the same street front.

So, personally, if there was an intact zero lot line brick building street frontage along the block, I think the idea of a facade retention would make more sense. Such as along certain sections of Pacific.

As for the “replication” of the facade, this is generally not considered a worthwhile thing to do unless what you are replicating is very important or unique, such as Ft Nisqually.

Otherwise, I hope this spurs some interesting new architecture in the area, although I won’t be holding my breath.

While it is generally regarded as a given that the Eagles building was going to be torn down, it is still a shame that better maintenance was not performed to prevent its collapse. We are lucky no injuries occurred, or worse. Vacant blighted buildings do nothing to the value of the city and only encourage the type of drug dealing and prostitution problems Fawcett and Tacoma Avenue have been trying to fight.

Other communities have minimum building maintenance standards that property owners must abide by. Simple roof maintenance alone has been shown to be extremely effective in reducing “demolition through neglect.” It sure could have helped with the Eagles building. It makes one wonder how many other buildings are on the verge of similar catastrophic failures.

I encourage everyone to contact city officials and urge them to take immediate action to prevent possible future casualties from occurring.

I don’t see any reason to “replicate” the facade, or save it (obviously impossible). But why couldn’t the new developers try to build something along the same lines? Something classic that 90 years from now people will be talking about preserving! Instead of these monstrosities that are being built today that 15 years from now people will be tearing down because they’re so dated. Prium, listen up. You’re designs are U-G-L-Y and are destined to go the way of shag carpet!

Mr. Ruskin –

Your criticism has not gone unnoticed by the readers here…I am honored to have a man of your caliber among us.

The Eagles Building at 13th and Fawcett has ‘spontaneously collapsed.’

With the razing of the building now imminent, it might be useful to perform a little forensics here. There are people in the real estate business who know much more, but here some of the public records:

According to the Pierce County Assessor, the property was apparently in foreclosure.

The land value went up about 50 percent last year alone.

The building and lot were assessed at $172,900 in 2005 and $433.300 in 2007.

The Tacoma city site states:

Address: 1305 S. Fawcett S.

*Designation: Derelict Building*

Why on the list:“Derelict buildings or structures” means any building or structure where conditions exist which make the building or structure unfit for human occupancy.

What’s next: Redevelopment anticipated

Interestingly, the assessed value of the building nearly tripled from 2005 to 2007.

Question: Why did the Eagles Building collapse? I doubt it was because of old bricks.

I assume it was a leaky roof that rotted the wooden beams. Hopefully, someone will be able to make some kind of examination of it.

I wonder how many historical buildings are at risk for experiencing the same fate?

I’d like to see some cool mid-century modern lines on new construction. There are a few vintage 50’s apartments or condos along Stadium Way that have that feel.

Also, while visiting Orlando (the tiny part that’s actually got some soul), I was struck by the TALL sharp Mediterranean looking white condos with contemporary metal railings on the balconies. While the exaggerated, tropical Miami aesthetic might look out of place here, I don’t see why ultra sleek contemporary wouldn’t fit in. Thoughts, Drizell, anyone? I’m bored to death with Starbucks quadruple-colored NW-looking construction, like Prium. Can’t we add a little zest?

Very amusing, Morgan…

WRT to the Eagles building, they were poking away at the front of the building with some equipment this morning, opposite the side I can see from my office. So I think that makes for a controlled collapse, if anything…

they were poking away at the front of the building with some equipment this morning

I have about ten minutes of video.

So do you plan to share?

Soon. My computers with not quite enough GBs of free space are choking on it now. I have some editing to do… Hopefully in the next day.

I must’ve observed this ‘NW Contemporary’ aesthetic several years earlier when trekking up to Seattle; perhaps that is why I’m so bored. I’m guessing that the trend hit our neighbor prior to trickling down along the Puget Sound and maybe that is why I feel it’s looking already dated.

Why can’t Tacoma develop its own unique aesthetic, anyway? And yes, what is the rush to put up buildings so quickly? The long-term vision does seem lost in these days of instant gratification and earning a quick buck. (see quote from above:)

“Prium projects’ outer walls are much preferable to blank, lifeless walls covered with vinyl siding….Prium is actually building far more expensive and interesting buildings than what is required.”

Perhaps this is the bigger concern: why is the City requiring so little? Perhaps we are setting our expectations too low. And this is not meant as some ‘yuppified, gentrifying’ diatribe. I am talking about solid, quality construction in sleek, classy architectural styles that will stand the test of time and still be around into the next century, like some of Tacoma’s grand old buildings.

I like the Prium designs also. The materials used add to the urban feel and I think they look…i won’t say futuristic, but maybe future-thinking? They aren’t trying to replicate the past and look like they’ve been there awhile. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want a downtown filled with them.

I also like grand old buildings. Where are they in Tacoma? We do have some interesting buildings, but grand? From my window, I look at the “World” Trade Center buildings – they’re nice looking, nice stone, have some good detail work, but grand? No. I think most of the downtown buildings would fall into this category. …and before anyone mentions it, Stadium HS is a grand old building, but how many of those do we have?

An earlier post mentioned FL-style buildings, it doesn’t quite fit, but Hawthorne Hill looks to be stucco. It’s different for around here.

I wonder what could have been built using all the bricks from the First United Methodist Church and the Eagles building?

Here’s an interesting article about one community that built a park and an amphitheater.

Has Tacoma learned anything?

The city is considering adopting some sort of design review.

I like Priums designs. Hanna Heights looks very urban and modern to me, and Chelsea Heights fits well into the neighborhood while still being interesting.

The Prium properties are far better than most of the buildings which have been built in Tacoma in the last 60 years.

The best thing about them is their location near the center of downtown and because they add to the urban landscape.

Chelsea Heights is built right up to the sidewalk on two fronts with retail/commericial on the first floor and housing above.

They have hidden the entrance to the parking garage pretty well and the driveway does not cut across the sidewalk.

Compare this to the typical strip mall or apartment complex in Tacoma which are basically large which have been placed in the middle of acres of cement which has created a pedestrian unfriendly sprawl.