Point Ruston News - Two Proposed Agreements May Provide a Way Forward
Archival maps from public files of the Department of Natural Resources
Point Ruston, the large mixed use development sitting atop the smelter site that birthed both the Town of Ruston and a considerable toxic legacy, may get a helping hand from the City of Tacoma.
The developers of the site have spoken with the City manager about amending their LID agreement to allow up-front funding of $3 million to complete sewer, water and power installations for the site. Details of the plan can be found at the Tacoma Daily Index.
The other agreement sought by the developers involves sale of a 100’-wide band of land along the waterfront to the City. This waterfront strip extends along the entirety of the project, from Tacoma park lands to the south and into the Town of Ruston. This proposition has been presented to the City Council. One issue that requires clarification is the matter of timely EPA coordination to guarantee that all permits and remediation issues are resolved. Another is the question of whether the City would gain anything by purchasing the land (which exists only conceptually, since the strip is not yet a distinct parcel and would be composed of portions of tracts and parcels created over the last 3 years), since easement agreements were already in place for public access to the Point Ruston Waterfront. Details can be read at the trusty Daily Index here.
The unique factor of this project has always been public benefit – from both the significant improvement to Ruston Way and the construction of a waterfront esplanade. The development has also neatly resolved the lingering complications of one of the City’s most troubling toxic Superfund sites. But these conversations between the City and the developer show that both sides are quite serious about moving the Point Ruston project forward. What will happen if this project doesn’t get the help it is seeking? After all, there are a lot of ongoing projects in the City in need of financial boosts. What do you think?
More coverage by Lewis Kamb in the Tacoma News Tribune here
Filed under: Waterfront, Developments, Ruston Way, Point Ruston
12 comments
R RR Anderson March 9, 2011
fingers crossed. Just don’t let Eric Anderson turn it onto surface parking for DaVita
T Tacoma1 March 10, 2011
Access to Pt Defiance/Owens Beach from Ruston Way would be great to have. Especially for cyclists and pedestrians who would no longer have to go up the steep hill once u arrive in Ruston to get to the park.
The Ruston tunnel was a barrier to all pedestrians, and a somewhat scary ride on a bike. With it going away, this esplanade sounds like the perfect project for public funds.
I do wonder if we could include the fine residents of Ruston in the financing though. Afterall, this is their back yard. They have alot to gain here.
D dolly varden March 10, 2011
I agree with Tacoma1, though the ride through the tunnel is more than somewhat scary. But the icicles in there during the recent cold snap were awesome!
D dolly varden March 10, 2011
…or should I have said “arsenicsicles”?
R Rick Jones March 10, 2011
Let’s call this what it is – a local version of a ‘Too-Big-to-Fail’ bailout. If The City has an easement to the waterfront then there is no reason to purchase the property contained in the easement except to help Mr. Cohen et al with public funding unavailable in the private sector. I am a huge fan of the Pt Ruston Project and admire the nerve required to dream it up and then act upon that vision, even in a booming economy. What I don’t like is the apparent attempt to disguise the assistance the public is being asked to give by packaging as if we will gain a benefit we already have through the shoreline easement.
If, as our City manager states, the conditions of the easement can change ownership, what the city has from Pt Ruston LLC is not an easement, but a license. An easement cannot be changed or extinguished except by the beneficiary of the easement, not the property owner. Any purchaser of Pt Ruston’s interest would have to accept (caveat emptor) the easement.
D Daniel March 10, 2011
Rick,
You’re quite right. I backed off from making that statement in the article because it is a pretty critical point and because I am quite sure the easement does not exist yet. It’s too early to dismiss that point as immaterial.
On the other hand, the developers have already installed the sewer line – which the City is using. So it’s a bit misleading to say that the developers are asking for funds “up front.” The city already benefits from the project installations. So, one might make the argument that the developer has shown quite good faith to this point.
S Steve March 10, 2011
If this negotiation leads to permanent public access to the water, then it’s a plus. At the west end of the current Ruston esplanade (where the shoreline juts immediately to the north), is an informal path down through the rip rap leading from convenient parking to a sandy beach. This is a great launch for hand-carried boats. If this launch point could be made permanent, we’d gain access which now is exceptionally limited from Owens Beach to Marine Park.
R RR Anderson March 11, 2011
slipramp!
S Sean Dannen March 21, 2011
We cannot afford $6 million dollars to buy land we have an easement for. We cannot afford to put our city in any financial risk for anyone. We currently cannot afford to repair our city streets. We have high unemployment. We have lost a major employer(Russell Investments). We have social services being cut at all levels in our society. In good times this is not a prudent idea.
Secondly, giving a $3 million cash advance is not a risk the city should take. Estimating costs and signing a contract are business decisions. We all should be held accountable for our decision. Point Ruston can go to Private market for loans.
Technically the EPA could stop any development but they want superfund sites to be used and not be blight in our community.
Holding a bag of risk coupled with $6 million handout when we are unable to provide for our citizens already is ridiculous.
D Daniel March 21, 2011
Sean,
The $3 mil is not an “advance”, per se. The sewer line is already installed, and the City is already using it. It may be reasonable to release funds for work already accomplished on the LID, given the circumstances.
R RR Anderson March 21, 2011
install digital billboards, red light cameras and parking pay-stations in every possible location… let it pay for itself?
R RR Anderson March 21, 2011
Clear Channel owes Tacoma over 30 million dollars. Why doesn’t the city enforce her 1997 law and collect on this debt? They could give it all to Point Ruston toxic waste superfund condo project!