I was down it t-town for this last weekend, and took a few shots. I do not know any information on the tower being built.

http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f117/vvebmike/DSC00249-1.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f117/vvebmike/DSC00245-1.jpg
http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f117/vvebmike/DSC00248.jpg

^
That's one of the new condos (of course). But don't know anything more about it.

Nice pics. :)

The tower looks to be the Esplanade project.

http://www.theesplanadetacoma.com/

Web cam here: http://theafoss.oxblue.com/esplanade/

Hello Tacoma, I hardly know you anymore.

Great pictures! I think it is sad that many people ignores Tacoma that Tacoma is growing as well as Bellevue and Seattle do. We should have third thread for Tacoma Development Thread. We can learn more about Tacoma developments.

Not just Seattle and bellevue, but all the fastest growing towns in our state.
Tacoma, Vancouver, Spokane, Everett... I already made intro posters for them. ;D

http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/8288/ajmeverettintrolb8.jpg
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/8286/ajmtacomaintrohh3.jpg
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/6572/ajmvancouverwaintromi2.jpg




be sure to check out my exstensive pictures of Tacoma.
http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/3274/ajmtacomanarrowscardvt9.jpg (http://usaspatriot.proboards38.com/index.cgi?board=places&action=display&thread=1150520076&page=38#1158510325)http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/529/ajmtacomacardnu2.jpg (http://usaspatriot.proboards38.com/index.cgi?board=places&action=display&thread=1150520076&page=38#1158543518)

Poor 'ole Tacoma. Or is it?

Tacoma could be the next cool place that is still affordable. Afterall, some of us over a certain age remember the awful smell (now gone), and it offers many views that are equal to Seattle's.

New condos are going up, new homes are being built. Hey, Tacoma could be the next big Puget Sound story in the next 20 years. I'd bet on it!

BTW, The Tacoma Narrows Bridge project is more than halfway done. Can Seattle say that about the Viaduct or 520? 'Nuff said!

Tacoma, you may be a 2nd cousin, but we love you!

I think City of Tacoma need to bury this highway and railways. It should help downtown Tacoma reconnect to the waterfront.

all those projects should help Tacoma to develop, but let's not forget that this place, still as one of the most dangerous place in america as far as natural disaters, don't forget that this city is on a major disaster path.if something did happend with mountain Rainier in the future. other than that, it should be fine

Poor 'ole Tacoma. Or is it?

Tacoma could be the next cool place that is still affordable. Afterall, some of us over a certain age remember the awful smell (now gone), and it offers many views that are equal to Seattle's.

New condos are going up, new homes are being built. Hey, Tacoma could be the next big Puget Sound story in the next 20 years. I'd bet on it!

BTW, The Tacoma Narrows Bridge project is more than halfway done. Can Seattle say that about the Viaduct or 520? 'Nuff said!

Tacoma, you may be a 2nd cousin, but we love you!

I'm glad it does not smell so much. Have you been over the new Narrows? Tacoma will continue to improve, I have no doubt about that. 40 minutes to the south and I feel like I'm in a different world. Well, I do. Either I have to change or Tacoma has to change a bit still before I don't feel that way anymore. Oh yeah, I'll second the love.

all those projects should help Tacoma to develop, but let's not forget that this place, still as one of the most dangerous place in america as far as natural disaters, don't forget that this city is on a major disaster path.if something did happend with mountain Rainier in the future. other than that, it should be fine

Wrong.

Tacoma is risky for earthquakes. But Mt. Rainier is 40 miles away. The only major volcano risk that far out is mudflows, which only affect river valleys. Most of the city is on hills. Furthermore, in Tacoma you should get plenty of notice to evacuate the valleys.

Wrong.

Tacoma is risky for earthquakes. But Mt. Rainier is 40 miles away. The only major volcano risk that far out is mudflows, which only affect river valleys. Most of the city is on hills. Furthermore, in Tacoma you should get plenty of notice to evacuate the valleys.

True, but those valleys around Tacoma are filling up with more and more people everyday. That's the scary part.

^^ People doesn't care if they're living in dangerous place for natural disasters. Look at Florida... Dangerous place to live for hurrances... Try Kansas... Tons of tornados... Northwest region... Volancoes and some faults for massive earthquakes... California... Alot of faults for earthquakes. People will always live in dangerous places no matter what period. I chose to live in Puget Sound even its dangerous for massive earthquake, tsuamsani or volanco eurption because I love Seattle so much so I am not letting these to stop me from living there.

^^ People doesn't care if they're living in dangerous place for natural disasters. Look at Florida... Dangerous place to live for hurrances... Try Kansas... Tons of tornados... Northwest region... Volancoes and some faults for massive earthquakes... California... Alot of faults for earthquakes. People will always live in dangerous places no matter what period. I chose to live in Puget Sound even its dangerous for massive earthquake, tsuamsani or volanco eurption because I love Seattle so much so I am not letting these to stop me from living there.

you right, but still a little scary isn't?

you right, but still a litle scary isn't?

Well... We can't stop it from happening... We have to live with it whether we like it or not. We can't continue living in fear of anything that could happen to us.

Well... We can't stop it from happening... We have to live with it whether we like it or not. We can't continue living in fear of anything that could happen to us.

that's true

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=124055&highlight=tacoma

you right, but still a litle scary isn't?

Driving to work everyday is scarier.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=124055&highlight=tacoma


Damn sice job mseattle! :okay:

Wrong.

Tacoma is risky for earthquakes. But Mt. Rainier is 40 miles away. The only major volcano risk that far out is mudflows, which only affect river valleys. Most of the city is on hills. Furthermore, in Tacoma you should get plenty of notice to evacuate the valleys.

I believe that Downtown would remain unscathed by a large scale lahar. But smaller towns in the valleys like Orting will get wiped out. Not to mention that if grand enough, a landslide could go right through the Port of Tacoma into Commencement Bay.

What I find quite interesting about all this volcano talk, is that since the 1980 St. Helens eruption is in most of our memories, the statistical facts shows that these type of events are quite rare, and will most likely not happen again in our lifetimes. Sure, a Rainier eruption could happen tomorrow, but the odds are it won't happen for hundreds of years, if not longer. The greater threat is a major Pacific quake which happens on average every 300-500 years, with the last one in 1700. So, it could happen tomorrow, or in 2200! While we need to be vigilant about all threats, I think over-reaction to these threats is simply unreasonable based on the odds. Take reasonable precautions, but realize the odds are low.

Well, the odds are substantial that Rainier will erupt in our lifetimes. But the effect on Tacoma will probably be limited to mudflows in the river valleys (with lots of notice) and maybe light ashfall. At 40 miles, it's reeeallly far away.

We never know what will happen when it erupts, it's a sleeping beauty until it wakes up. Mt. Rainier is more violent than Mt. St. Helen from what the volcanogists say. Also, Mt. Rainier is the largest sratsovolcano in the United States.

St. Helens was especially destructive because 1) it blew sideways, and 2) the eruption dropped off much of the mountain. Mt. Rainier could be a much bigger eruption, but chances are the force would mostly go up.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/mountsthelens/rain12.shtml

Wow, Mt. Rainier was around 16,000 ft tall before it blew its top off about 6,000 years ago. :eek2:

Here's the fact I just found on the internet

What is the world's tallest volcano?

This question is a bit of a controversy. At 22,560 feet (6,887 m) Ojos del Salado, a stratovolcano, is often considered the world's highest active volcano. The problem is that no historic eruptions have been recorded, although fumaroles are active at the summit. The absence of recorded historic eruptions may be due to the volcano's remote location more than a lack of eruptions.
If you feel you need a recorded eruption to consider a volcano active, then we move on to others. For years Cotopaxi was the world's highest active volcano, however Chile's Tupungato (21,489 ft.) is a higher mountain, and awakened from its dormancy with an eruption in 1986.

Well, the odds are substantial that Rainier will erupt in our lifetimes. But the effect on Tacoma will probably be limited to mudflows in the river valleys (with lots of notice) and maybe light ashfall. At 40 miles, it's reeeallly far away.

Gonna have to disagree mhays...the last major eruption of Rainier was 1,000-2,000 years ago. There have been minor ones as recently as the 1800's, but I woudn't call the odds "substantial" the Rainier will erupt in our lifetimes, atleast signicantly. But who can really predict?

As for 40 miles being "really far away", don't forget that ash covered much of Eastern Washington, some places up to a foot deep after St. Helens in 1980.

Deleted, double post.

Gonna have to disagree mhays...the last major eruption of Rainier was 1,000-2,000 years ago. There have been minor ones as recently as the 1800's, but I woudn't call the odds "substantial" the Rainier will erupt in our lifetimes, atleast signicantly. But who can really predict?

As for 40 miles being "really far away", don't forget that ash covered much of Eastern Washington, some places up to a foot deep after St. Helens in 1980.

The ash was an inconvenience, and expensive to clean up, but not really dangerous. It was actually pretty fun for me, with my family driving through the Tri Cities and Yakima right after on one of our twice-annual trips from Boise back to Seattle...

I guess this is the official Tacoma thread? The New York Times had an article about Tacoma today in their Real Estate section:


In Tacoma, Recreating Public Housing
By LINDA BAKER
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v506/captain_cookie/24nati.jpg
WHEN Wendy and Michael Dinon decided to buy their first home, they focused on new construction near downtown Tacoma, Wash., where Mr. Dinon works as an index analyst for the Russell Investment Group. Last October, the couple, who have a 2 ½-year-old daughter, Milly, found what they were looking for: an affordable three-bedroom house in the Salishan neighborhood, two miles east of downtown.

“Price is what drew us,” said Ms. Dinon, whose 1,700-square-foot house cost $226,000, the market rate for Salishan but about 20 percent less than comparable properties in other neighborhoods. Her husband’s 10-minute commute was also a factor. But Ms. Dinon said they also liked Salishan’s diverse population, which includes Cambodian, Vietnamese and Russian immigrants. “Had we purchased regular tract housing, there wouldn’t be such a sense of community,” she said. “There is so much knowledge to be gained from all the different people here.”

Until a few years ago, Salishan presented a different image. Its previous incarnation, as a public housing project, 855 barrack-style homes built in the 1940s, was notorious for its high crime rate. Then, in 2004, the Tacoma Housing Authority began to demolish the project and move its 3,000 tenants to other public housing or subsidized rental units.

The new Salishan is a Hope VI development, a program of the Department of Housing and Urban Development that converts distressed public housing into mixed-income communities. The developments continue to serve poor residents but also provide market-rate homes for sale.

Late last year, the first phase of the Hope VI neighborhood opened to new as well as former residents — 30 percent of whom have so far decided to return.

Phase 1 consists of 90 market-rate houses, 40 below-market-rate houses for sale to buyers with incomes less than 60 percent of $49,584, the city’s median, and about 300 subsidized rental units — town houses and apartments in multifamily buildings.

When the 188-acre development is completed in 2009, it will have about 250 market-rate houses, 100 below-market-rate houses and 815 subsidized rentals. Financing for the project includes a $35 million federal Hope VI grant, $9 million from the Washington State Housing Trust Fund, and about $60 million in private funds generated from the sale of low-income tax credits.

Salishan recently won a housing award from the American Institute of Architects and a neighborhood design award from the Congress for the New Urbanism. Its New Urbanist-style neighborhood includes single-family houses and Craftsman-style town homes, with porches, that sit amid pocket parks and playgrounds. Michael Mirra, the executive director of the Tacoma Housing Authority, said that the multifaceted community has raised local property values, has catalyzed new development and is “building large scale equity” in the city of Tacoma.

Salishan also embodies the aspirations of a city that has historically languished in the shadow of Seattle, 36 miles to the north. Situated on Puget Sound, Tacoma (population 200,000) has a reputation as a gritty metropolis. It was an image perpetuated by industrial pollution in Commencement Bay and a string of high-profile crimes, including a murder-suicide committed by the city’s police chief in 2003.

“Tacoma does have that stigma,” said Beau Towne, a local real estate agent. But, Mr. Towne said, the city is undergoing a renaissance. He cited the expansion of the University of Washington’s local campus; a thriving artists’ colony that is linked to the Museum of Glass; and the proliferation of mixed-use developments along the Foss Waterway downtown.

“Tacoma is a regional city,” Mr. Mirra said. “We count Salishan as part of our effort to provide high-quality affordable housing for families with children.” The median housing price in Tacoma is $274,000. In Seattle, it is $430,000.

Continued here...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/24/realestate/24nati.html?ref=realestate

It's unclear how many similar redevelopments are happening nationally, but the Seattle area has at least five in addition to Salishan. Each on is a total redo of a low-density public housing "neighborhood" in a (relatively) more urban format.

These include New Holly, High Point, and Rainier Vista in Seattle, Greenbridge in White Center, and Westpark in Bremerton.

This is a very big deal for these areas. Bad neighborhoods become good ones, while still providing affordable housing (sometimes part of the subsidized housing is relocated off-site). And sometimes the new density is fairly high for neighborhoods that have traditionally been single-family.

For example, High Point will have 1,600 units on 130 acres. (or 1,559 on 120 acres per another site) http://www.thehighpoint.com/

New Holly will have 1,392 units on 120 acres. http://www.newholly.org/

Rainier Vista will have 850 units on 65 acres. (Another website says 1,010 units, but that probably includes off-site replacement.) http://www.rainiervista.org/

Greenbridge will have 1,000 units on 100 acres. http://www.kcha.org/HOPEVI/index.html

Westpark will have 759 units on 82 acres.
http://www.newwestpark.com/REDEVLOPMENT%20PHASING%20PAGE.htm
http://www.newwestpark.com/Council%20to%20View%20Westpark%20Sub-Area%20Plan.pdf