Most Endangered Properties of 2008
The Washington Trust for Historic Preservation announced their 2008 list of the state’s most endangered historic properties from the western edge of the Murray Morgan Bridge this morning. With Mayor Baarsma, Representative Flannagan, and about 40 friends, officials, and passers-by in attendance, the crowd was quite sympathetic to those that hope to reopen the bridge.
Dominating the Tacoma skyline when it was built in 1913, the Murray Morgan Bridge, known then as the 11th Street Bridge, played a key role in the city’s urban development by linking downtown to the waterfront and the industrial tide flats. Designed by renowned bridge engineers Waddell and Harrington, the bridge is remarkable for the height of the deck, the overhead span designed for carrying a water pipe, and its construction on a grade. In addition, the bridge plays a prominent role in Tacoma’s social history, serving as the setting for gatherings and labor disputes, including a violent strike in 1916, just three years after completion. In 1997, the bridge was renamed after Murray Morgan, a noted Washington historian.
The rest of the list, for those that care, include:
- Commercial Net Sheds (Gig Harbor)
- Washington Hall (Seattle’s Central Neighborhood)
- Kapus Farmstead (Ridgefield, WA)
- Nuclear Reactor Building (UW – Seattle)
- Bettinger House (Edmonds)
- Greyhound Bus Terminal (Olympia)
- Old Granary Building (Bellingham)
For more information on each of these properties and the Washington Trust, check out the list an WashingtonTrust.org
Previously on Exit133
Photo provided by the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation
Filed under: tacoma-landmarks, History
10 comments
M MonkeyBob May 27, 2008
I have lived her 8 years and I have never understood the attachment to this ugly POS bridge. You would think it may be quicker, easier, safer, and (?) cheaper to build a new one.
C Christy May 28, 2008
You’ve only lived here for 8 years, you could never understand.
J Joe P. May 28, 2008
WHOA, wait a minute. I have lived here for 55 years and I think the bridge is pretty darned ugly. It may be unique but that just doesn’t make it worth saving. It looms over the waterway casting a perpetual pigeon dung splotched shadow on the area below. It is time to tear it down.
Removing it would allow thw city to build a gondola or funicular between the end of 11th Street and Dock Street below linking the downtown core with the waterfront. This would help the city grow and would attract people to the city.
The other side of the waterway could use the bridge pier on that side, reduced in height, to support a public dock with a much needed boat launching ramp alongside and parking for cars and trailers on the upland side. The dock would have a wonderful view both up and down the waterway and towards the city.
Remnoving the bridge would allow J.M. Martinac Shipbuilding to continue to build large vessels without worrying about having the bridge frozen in the down position.
Get rid of the bridge. It will open up the city to new possibilities.
M morgan May 28, 2008
You would think it may be quicker, easier, safer, and (?) cheaper to build a new one.
I wouldn’t. Did you see the price tag for the new Narrows bridge?! As Mayor Baarsma pointed out today, a new bridge would cost at least $135M – this is far greater than the estimate to renovate the existing bridge ($80M).
If this bridge were torn down today, future generations would say, “What were they thinking?!”
BTW- thanks for making the trek down here Washington Trust!
M MonkeyBob May 28, 2008
Morgan,
I have to admit that I didn’t see the price tags. But I wonder which would be a better investment? Toss $80m at an old rusty bridge and see how many more years you can get out of it or invest in the community an make something bigger, wider, that can handle heavier loads, and make the city shine better?
Does the $80m price tag have any warranty with it for a specific amount of years it would be good for? This is what worries me (besides the darn thing is pretty frigin ugly – IMO)
Thanks for the feedback Morgan
L Lee May 28, 2008
Yes Bob the $80 million would rehabilitate the bridge and allow a 50 year life span- assuming the city maintained it better than DOT has.
J Jesse May 29, 2008
The bridge really goes nowhere anymore since the new(er) route around the tideflats built in 2000-ish. Wasn’t that bridge part of the major (now pretty much defunct)route through the flats? On the flats side of the bridge is virtually nothing many cars would want to go to and big trucks would avoid downtown anyways. I don’t see it’s purpose anymore.
How about we take all those millions and do some more downtown projects like Foss waterway or Broadway’s LID…
R RR Anderson May 29, 2008
whatever happened to the plans to dismantle the MMBridge and reassemble it in a vertical position atop the new convention center as a spire? I like that plan. Infact it was my plan first, I thought of it. Nobody is allowed steal my bridge plan. Not unless you wanna pay me the big bucks. shazam!
G grubedoo May 30, 2008
Restore the bridge and make it into a park. It IS a beautiful piece of architecture and a irreplaceable piece of history. This solution would save an icon, make increased semi traffic downtown a non-issue and attract masses of fine, park loving people to Tacoma.
G grubedoo May 30, 2008
If we forget our history we forget who we are.