Murray Morgan Bridge versus Condo Development?

Dan Voelpel of the News Tribune’s column today is relevant to two of my hot button Tacoma issues – the Murray Morgan Bridge and Tacoma condo development.  How did the two things get intertwined?  It seems that the argument that industry and residential zoning can’t coexist is getting louder as Simpson and others claim their jobs will disappear if people are allowed to live on the Thea Foss.  Then somebody made the twisted connection that a vote for redevelopment became a vote against the Murray Morgan’s future.  Curious.

Rather than do the right thing by Tacoma and negotiate coexistence strategies, such as soundproofing criteria for condominium developments and separating truck and residential traffic, the industry coalition has resorted to hardball politics and behind-the-scenes deal-making.

Now, if Talbert can persuade four council colleagues on Tuesday to ban future residential development north of the bridge, guess what? The longstanding opposition to the bridge restoration funding will disappear.

On the Tacoma city council, Rick Talbert is leading the industry charge.  Voelpel states:

I like Rick Talbert. But in this case, he has, for some reason, become a parrot on the shoulder of industry pirates who want to hijack Tacoma’s vision for the Foss Waterway.

So who owns the vision for Tacoma’s waterfront and the city?  I believe that with the right vision both industry, residential, and commercial development can coexist. 

I am an absolute supporter of the Murray Morgan Bridge.  Why?  Because it’s a beautiful image of the old Tacoma existing with the new Tacoma rising at its feet.  And because as a cyclist it is the only good way to get out of the North End to places North – i.e. Seattle, Kent, or anywhere North without going through downtown and maneuvering the 21st Street Bridge.  It’s not only cyclists that use that bridge.  We see walkers, car commuters, and bike commters all heading to jobs in the tideflats.  Plus, the small import businesses that are popping up the tideflats are some of the most interesting new retail developments in the city.  Without the bridge, the lifeline to residents would effectively disappear.  If the bridge erodes much further, any hope for the east side of the Foss goes away with it.

With regard to Tacoma’s port industries, I have to ask, are we protecting the right industries?  We have a friend that for years has lived in Olympia and worked in Tacoma who recently told us that she would never live in Tacoma as long as the Simpson plant was in the tideflats.  So what’s the total economic impact of the businesses most concerned about condo development?  The container shipping industries are all relatively unaffected by this debate and would continue to bring in tax revenue.  Our friend’s position is that more people would move to Tacoma and support Tacoma if some of the dirtier tideflat industries were cleaned up and/or disappeared.  The economics equation then can’t be a simple industry zoning versus residential zoning if the residential zoning impact extends up into downtown, hilltop, and the North End.  If all our land values go up because that last hint of aroma went away, the loss of jobs could be justified.  I’m sure there’s somebody at the city that can do the math.

Linking these two issues is wrong.

I’m heading out.  Read the Voelpel article.

Link:  Bridge becomes a pawn in fight over Foss condos – The News Tribune

Update –

Link: Council says no to Foss condos

Update
10/23 State Closes Bridge