Spring Air Project Goes Apartment
The News Tribune is reporting the developers who own the old Spring Air Mattress building have announced a plan to build a 90 unit apartment building instead of condos.
The quote from the executive according to the TNT, “This property is costing me $250,000 a quarter,” he said. “We’re $2 million pregnant already on this deal with not much to show for it.”
Sounds like motivation to me. I guess we’ll see.
Link to The News Tribune
Previously on Exit133
8 comments
E Erik B. February 6, 2009
Nice to have some humans living in that area. Unfortunately, the current artist rendition of the apartment shows an intention to construct a continuous blank wall immediately next to the widewalk for a half a block.
Check it out:
We just dealt with this issue on the Proctor Safeway. Come on architects out there, no continuous blank walls next to pedestrians please as it creates unhabitable dead zones.
D drzoltar February 6, 2009
I thought that plot of land was to be used for another parking garage for the Tacoma Dome station. I wonder what happened to that plan? More parking IS needed.
D drizell February 6, 2009
From the rendering, it’s not immediately clear if they’re showing the Puyallup Ave. side or the 25th St. side. I believe the earlier plans were to renovate the factory building and build a new structure on the parking lot. I’ll bet what we’re seeing is the 25th St. side. I doubt they would be able or willing to pull off a new building right now.
As for the walls, I can understand their purpose. If you’ve ever walked along 25th St., you’d know it’s pretty industrial in nature. There are a couple lumber mills a few blocks away, as well as a concrete mixing plant. There are always big trucks rumbling by, and the Sounder tracks run on the trestle above. No doubt the wall is an attempt to block out the noise for those townhomes.
E Erik B. February 6, 2009
As for the walls, I can understand their purpose.
Yeah. They are to fence in the private yards of the ground floor apartments. There alot of other alternatives for design. Let’s hope they choose one. An iron wrought fence instead would even be an improvement.
T Thorax O'Tool February 6, 2009
Yuck.
I almost would rather have a hole in the ground.
The city + developers can do better.
Where is David Boe when you need him?
U uoaaa181 February 6, 2009
This is one of my favorite solutions. New York has more to worry about for sidewalk level units than Tacoma does. Can’t the developer do something like this? It is the developers responsibility as they have to be willing to pay for it. Us architects/designers can suggest all we want but they have final say…
http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=1518
T TacomptonAroma February 10, 2009
“Come on architects out there, no continuous blank walls next to pedestrians please as it creates inhabitable dead zones.”
Architects don’t have any power and they don’t really design buildings anymore…they are just CAD monkeys for the developers. Developers generally don’t care about design issues because they don’t live near the buildings they are creating. If you want to change the design, you must legislate. I think a little more transparency would be nice along the sidewalk. Also a little grade change would help the privacy of the units – a couple of steps and a stoop, perhaps?
T Thorax O'Tool February 11, 2009
How about this:
We (the City) create certain aesthetic and human-usability/accessibility requirements, and enforce them in a most creative way.
It’s simple, really. Make the requirements optional, but here’s the beauty of it… buildings that meet Our pre-determined requirements are expedited through permitting and at a lower cost.
Think of it as a developer. Do it “your way” and spend the months and tens of thousands in permitting or do it “our way” and get your permit in 48 hours and at half the cost.
Remember, saved $ = more profit.