I read the TNT article but do not buy the analogy. They are completely different.However, at least there is a discussion on the subject.

The steam plant was an attempt to place an exhaust pipe and a huge blank wall near one of Tacoma’s public parks.

Infilling urban areas with housing, more specifically downtowns (which the waterfront is part of) is a successful strategy used by many cities today. The alternative is to continue to place the new populations in the suburbs and then have them all drive in and park their cars while they walk around the waterfront during the day.

That would make the waterfront simply a disconnected driving destination.

Other than the Glass museum, the waterfront has been pretty dead and many of the hopeful retail shops have gone out of business who tried to locate there. The Foss is going to have to a lot of population there if it is every going to self sustaining with retail.

The design is going to look pretty good. There is a large walkway for the public which is now partially built.

The Safeway expansion proposal would place a blank wall on the mainstreet of Proctor. The developments on the Foss are designed to have restaurants and retail all on the first floor. These are ideal mixed use buildings.

I don’t see how Tacoma is going to develop if we can’t even put up large buildings in the downtown area. If Seattle took this approach, the Smith Tower would still be the largest building they had.

how is your fence hangin’ dave ?

I’m reading these forums about building in Tacoma and wondering if I’m crazy because I don’t care.

One could read a plethary of books on urban design and attend endless city seminars as to how large blank walls on main streets destroy the urban life and reduce the attractiveness of an area.

Yet, James Kunstler does such a better job of describing the detrimental effects of constructing blank walls in urban areas in this U Tube Clip in just a few minutes.

His book Geography of Nowhere : The Rise and Decline of America’s Man-Made Landscape does a pretty good job of describing the ill effects of blighted urban landscapes.

(By the way, welcome back to Exit 133 David N.)

One could read a plethary of books…

“Plethary”? Is that seriously a real word? Can’t find it in any online dictionaries, and only 41 Google hits…

The all or nothing at all responses regarding the waterfront condos are absurd. This claim that you are either for really tall buildings or you are against all development is a false dichotomy.

The developers maintain that they must be able to generate a certain amount of square footage in order to pursue the project. Sounds like a bluff to me. And if it is true – let them sell the property to another developer who can work within the zoning requirements and still turn a (huge) profit.

Tacoma is a waste land of for sale signs. Homes are sitting on the market for months. Who are all the boosters for the chock a block development. Wannabe real estate moguls?

As far as the Foss project, even once the project is approved the developers won’t develope in this current market. So the property will sit for how many years……it seems to me that rather than doing condos there, why don’t they do some commercial/retail? rents are more, seems like it could be profitable….even throw in some restaurants….I’m thinking of the facility up in Kirkland….it’s a mixed use area with commercial/retail and a hotel…….not to mention a marina and the place attracks many visitors…….just an idea…..

I think anyone who is considering the landscape as envisioned by Cecilia Hogan should spend some time in that kind of environment—- In her view, the city defined as tall, compact, and bustling.

I would also put forth that planned growth, even at its best oftentimes brings with it the following: air pollution, noise pollution, overcrowding, lack of privacy, stress, alienation and isolation.

So there’s really a lot more at stake than just diminishing views of surrounding nature. Or for that matter diminishing surrounding nature for views of high-rise buildings.

It’s well documented that small cities can generate into big cities. Just the same many big cities can degenerate into small cities, for lots of unanticipated reasons.

Tacoma may not be as tall, compact, and bustling as many people would like; but I don’t think it’s because of ignorance or lack of information about the consequences of life in a tall, compact, and bustling city.

Seriously, folks, I’m getting tired of people saying things like, “Well, there are vacant condos and homes today, September 16, 2007, so means there will NO DEMAND at any point in the future, and there is therefore no reason why any new residential projects should be approved.”

First of all, buildings of this magnitude are not built overnight. It would probably be at least a year, probably longer, before any of the buildings in Foss Harbor would even be ready for occupancy.

Secondly, Tacoma’s target population for 2017 is 246,000. That means the city has to grow by about 40,000 people in the next 10 years. It is simply impossible to achieve that number without increasing the density of the city. Downtown is the appropriate place to site the tallest buildings such as those in Foss Harbor.

Thirdly, it appears that Foss Harbor may not just be a residential project anymore. Voelpel’s column on Friday hinted that the buildings could include office space on the floors that are less than 100 feet high, in addition to the grocery store.

Finally, people seem to be skeptical that Tacoma could ever become a really nice city. If I were to tell you in 1997 that someone wanted to build a 180-foot building downtown in 2007, you never would have believed me. Think of what could be achieved in the next 10 years.

2 words……….High density COMMERCIAL and RETAIL in downtown………you need a reason for people to move to Tacoma over all the other options in the region…..not to mention you need to bring white collar jobs to the core…..then the condos will be sold…..think retail….and commercial………..not mom and pop retail either……let’s get past this little mom and pop retail attitude the downtown merchant association has…….we need REAL retail to get people to come downtown……then they will walk past the little mom and pop retail and discover some hidden gems…..if they still think they can supply downtown with all the retail we need they are smokin crack…..If I were a merchant I would love the idea of some big box retail downtown….more foot traffic…..as it is, I live downtown and I only visit one retailer…because it’s the only one that seriously offers something for most people….the other crap, is that, crap…..ooops I think they call them “Antique Stores” or something like that……the galleries are good….and there are actually a few decent stores on Broadway….but really…we need something for all the other folks who don’t live downtown to get them downtown…..some name that everyone recognizes…..and until I can shop for everything from suits to jeans to dry cleaning, to kitchen supplies, downtown is well underserved….so get over it….invite big box in with open arms…….ok, my monthly msg about this topic….one of these days perhaps it will happen….along with my 40 story highrise…with mixed commercial and retail…….

I all about density. Density, density, density. And height.

But I am willing to grant that keeping the height restriction on the Foss is a good thing. I am becoming more and more convinced that it’s not really downtown.

The physical separation from the downtown core is substantial as a pedestrian and as a driver. I’d be willing to count it as a bordering neighborhood to downtown in the same way that Stadium is (assuming Stadium is not actually downtown, as many people have argued here).

I’m not sold on protecting views. But centering some of our more dense development on a single street that runs 20 blocks with only 4 pedestrian outlets and 3 traffic outlets and poor accessibility to mass transit seems like a bad idea.

I love it.. I see people talking logical sense. I am reading comments from people who actually see the vision of Tacoma and what it will be.

Anybody who thinks downtown condos wont sell is not getting it. We have one of the most bullish markets in the nation… right here in downtown. Once our first wave of condos sell, then services and retailers have a reason to come… then people outside of downtown will come to visit the new stores… then they will want to live there… and employers will want to be there…then we will need more residential development… apartments and condos…. and commmecial development for office space and big retailers…then more people will be walking the streets … then good mom and pop stores will get the foot traffic… and so on and so on…..

Who knows the three stages city evolution? If you do, you know that Tacoma has started the third and final stage… re-urbanization.

When we think of the Foss the example we should look at is Granville Island. That is what Arthur Erickson had in mind when he designed MOG and is still the most pertinent plan to follow.

now check this project out…the city leaders developed a VISION (a word not in the vocabulary of tacoma leaders) and went with it………check this proposal out….

http://www.cityoffederalway.com/folders/home/businesseconomicdevelopment/economicdevelopment/citycenterredevelopment/United%20%20Proposal.pdf

word on the street is the “vision” created by Federal Way’s leaders is not an accurate reflection of the “vision” of the community.

“Yes, the Foss is cut off from downtown because of the geography. That’s a big reason its going to need to have a ton of housing in it or its going to be dead…like it is now. Without alot of housing it simply be a car destination.”

I’m not so sure about the housing thing. Adaptive reuse can be a tricky thing. It worked at UWT because the buildings and area were very compatible for reclaiming the area as a college. I have yet to be convinced that the city waterway, carved and created as a maritime working extension of the harbor, is suited for residential as its main use. Personally, I want a Granville Island-like destination in Tacoma. To my recollection there is no housing on Granville.

We could always demolish 705

well, yes, then what do you do with the railroad tracks?

Demolish 705? Then you would be the first to complain that you can’t get anywhere!