Subsidizing Development Over Our History

Peter Callaghan has weighed in on the grocery store/condo mega project landing on top of USA of Yesterday.  Our discussion became the most verbose and complex threads in Exit133’s history at more than 110 comments at last count.  Callaghan calls the building “one of the coolest spots left in town” and argues that the loss isn’t worth a grocery store – or at least the city and the people shouldn’t subsidize it. 

If the owners want to tear it down along with the rest of a long city block for what looks like an uptown version of the Thea’s Landing monolith, they can. But they shouldn’t get financial help from city taxpayers and financial contributions from their neighbors.

Because, in truth, this isn’t a private project. It is the latest result of public policy decisions aimed at changing the economics of downtown development – for better and now for worse.

By state law and city ordinance, any multi-family housing units built within designated areas enjoy a 10-year property tax abatement on the value of improvements. In this way, Tacoma taxpayers subsidize living in some of the priciest homes in town.

What I have to ask is this, where’s the creativity?  Will another starbucks/tully’s color schemed mixed use project become something we’re proud of ten or twenty years from now?  While I would love to see the building reused or saved, couldn’t the new architecture at least bow its head toward what was there?  New condos and higher density doesn’t necessarily mean we have to tear down every corner of the lot.  If we can’t save the building (and several will try), at least show me a new mixed use project with a huge fin, big windows, and a Cadillac in the window!  I realize it takes work, but I believe some creativity will be worth it in the long run. 

(Derek Opens Can of Worms)

Link to The News Tribune

Link to Brett’s Letter to The News Tribune

Previously on Exit133