Build Over the Railroad Tracks? (12. August 2008, 15:29 by Derek Young) ~ What Tracks?
This idea’s been floating around various Tacoma halls for a long time now, but since it has come up in several public meetings over the last few weeks including today’s economic development committee meeting, it seemed like time to ask you to consider it …
In the Foss Waterway update a few weeks back, a question arose about air rights over the BNSF tracks that parallel downtown Tacoma. What would happen, for example, if we could build over those tracks? What development potential exists? What are other cities doing that may be similar? We look down at a map and see a lot of potential “land” over the rail yard at the north end of downtown. Maybe a bridge over to stadium way …
So … what do you think? Where would it make sense? What have you seen in other places? Could it make sense as a bridge between downtown and the water?
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.
Build over main-line railroad track? Sounds good; except for, the trains that transport hazardous materials or liquids that would pass below such an overhead development.
Many people still remember the rail-tank-car fire that burned under the 509-bridge by Portland avenue; it follows, just don’t build stuff over main-line railroad tracks or rail switching yards.
From my memory, the Tacoma City Council already presented public information about the future trains numbers will increase; for example, how the number of trains moving along these track will increase in future years, so, just some simple logic thought results: more trains on the tracks might also indicate more hazardous materials will also be moving or stopping as these trains cargoes pass through the City of Tacoma and traveling next to the Foss Waterway new urban centers and under bridges that already exist within Tacoma.
1 | Posted by John Sherman | Aug 12, 04:04 PM
An intriguing thought, yes. However, I’d prefer if the City focused efforts on more tangible and cost-effective measures for the time… like improving transportation within the city and encouraging business and (affordable) residential development.
Last time I checked, there was a bridge from downtown to the waterfront, especially one that many seem to be in love with… Play with the Murray Morgan a little bit, make it structurally sound for pedestrian and mass transit use, then throw a quaint little pedestrian bridge back over to the waterfront trail that’s supposed to run from Ruston to Thea Foss…
My guess is the cost will be about the same for all that as it’d be for a brand new bridge to downtown or Stadium Way from the waterfront… or to build some sort of park over the railroad or something along those lines.
2 | Posted by kbce | Aug 12, 07:14 PM
Anybody that has ever seen video of a rail car burning inside a tunnel will know why this has got to be the most dangerous idea in the world.
I agree with John Sherman #1 in that there are far too many hazardous chemicals rolling through Tacoma to warrant this. The cost is also prohibitive as there is little money to go around right now. Maybe in 10-12 years when the freeloaders with their abatements start paying their share of what it takes to run this City.
4 | Posted by J. Cote | Aug 12, 11:21 PM
We should definitely put a lid over the tracks and the “freeway” cutting off downtown from the water. The train tracks don’t need to be fully enclosed though – the design should be more like a concrete snow shed, with one side open for ventilation and emergency access.
5 | Posted by TacomAroma | Aug 13, 08:00 AM
I appreciate an economic argument against such a plan, though unless (and until) someone can present a coherent, comprehensive plan complete with alternatives and related costs, it’s difficult to have a cost rationalized opinion one way or another. On a side note, and speaking of cost based decisions, I thought it was curious that after a pretty good discussion thread on downtown signage here on the 133, no one reference the Tribune article on Monday where the city council “balked at the $2.5M price” of the proposal.
As for safety concerns, I don’t think a single instance of “dramatic accident footage” should necessarily rule out such an option. Aren’t there also examples of similar design that have existed safely? I saw footage of a plane crash once… so no more air travel?
6 | Posted by rick | Aug 13, 10:15 AM
The discussion of building over the tracks is one of long-run versus short-run.
In the long-run, what we need to do is just secure the air rights NOW so it will be possible should the right development opportunity present itself in the next 5-10-20-50 years.
Given our economy and a host of other contributing factors in Tacoma, I don’t think anyone is under the impression the actual construction of ANY structure over the rails could or would occur in the next 2-5 years.
Vancouver BC, New York and Michigan have great examples of what CAN occur in Tacoma given the opportunity. A few links describing the over the rail development can be found at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/nyregion/21westsideWEB.html?ref=nyregion
http://www.topix.com/city/chicago-il-south-loop/2008/02/huge-project-proposed-over-metra-railroad-tracks-near-mccormick-place
A comprehensive article with many examples at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,836757,00.html
It’s time Tacoman’s started thinking outside the box about how we can attract new development for office space and more which in turn creates new and better jobs. Hey, we have the best water, power, internet and rail systems in the entire PNW, yet we don’t get the development. Why is that? Why are 40% of all building cranes locates in Bellevue and NOT Tacoma? Proximity to Seattle? No. Better resources? No. Better development atmosphere? YES.
In the end, this discussion is all about creating opportunities and not limiting them.
Without the vision to dream about what can be, Tacoma will be stuck with what could have been. Or, are we to believe all the visionaries are in Seattle and points north.
Do we really want to see the same Tacoma skyline in 30 years?
I would hope not.
7 | Posted by Darrel Bowman | Aug 13, 04:28 PM
C’mon, guys. think reality. There are just WAY too many other things that need to be done before such a venture is even considered. I think of you guys as great thinkers. Bright, intelligent idealist, young people that know how to think.
THINK of a way to solve the things that need to be solved and can REALISTICALLY be don sometime within this decade.
Covering the tracks, closing I-705, streetcars all around town. These things will not get done in my lifetime. I’m 50, BTW, on the 17th and I feel like you all do. I want to make a difference for my kids and for theirs.
I’ll bet that one of you, or all collectively, could figure a way to catch the Methane that’s being burned off at the dump and power the entire City fleet. THAT’S something to shoot for because the technology is already in place. Thinking outside the box is always exciting, but sometimes you need to be in the box to actually accomplish things.
8 | Posted by J. Cote | Aug 14, 12:11 AM
I’m not an expert on Train Haz Mat Tunnel Security, but I’m sure there are people that are. It would be nice to get a definitive answer on that question – it does sound like it is solvable.
Remember also that as part of the Sound Transit Sounder expansion to Lakewood there will be an additional route to the South. I’d guess this article means someone is exploring the alternatives of using that route for haz mat as well as Sounder and Amtrak. (FWIW, getting Hazmat away from the Sound is probably a good thing.)
Remember also that air rights over Pacific are also an issue on that route.
That area should also be getting looked at as original Sound Transit were remiss in not addressing comp planned bike routes at that same location.
9 | Posted by Douglas Tooley | Aug 14, 04:56 AM
Building over the tracks would eliminate about 95 percent of the reason I go downtown.
10 | Posted by TheGulag | Aug 19, 10:04 PM
I think this is a great idea. However, there is currently very little room to manuever between Dock St. and I-705. The railroad tracks come almost onto Dock St. There isn’t even enough room to put a sidewalk on the west side of the street and still achieve two lanes of traffic. This means that any covering of the existing tracks will mean a blank wall along Dock Street, which is definitely not exciting.
Another idea is to drop the level of the tracks down below street level, or at least a little lower than they are now. This is what was done in Detroit. Railroad tracks crisscross the city, yet they are not visible nor do the trains need to keep people awake all night with their whistles. The major issue I see with this is hitting the water table.
Commenting is closed for this article.
