Wednesday, August 26, 2009
The Grand Potential, and the Reality
My loyal readers, both of you, will recall that a bit ago we reported on the grand potential of Woodbrook and a joint meeting between the Lakewood council and the Port of Tacoma.
The News Trib has a nice report before the meeting and another one after the meeting.
You might glance at least at the report after the meeting. Brent Champaco, the reporter, captures the essence of the meeting. There was a lot of discussion about traffic issues, potential zoning, etc... But the bottom line is that if someone developed that place as one massively master-planned parcel (as in DuPont), someone would have to buy it and displace 500 households.
I am known for epic blog postings, but this one is really pretty simple. Presumably, there are only two public entities that could take over this land. One is the port, which while it has the name Tacoma has jurisdiction over developing industrial land throughout Pierce County. But the port folks who spoke on the topic said that they have absolutely no interest in evicting 500 households.
That leaves the city. But Lakewood is a libertarian place. We would rather pull out our fingernails than perform eminent domain for some venture. We ain't University Place, and I love the folks there but I'd never use government funds to buy my downtown. If Lakewood wanted to do that, we woulda bought/seized the Colonial Center long ago. That ain't our way. We believe in private enterprise and limited government. Even if we had the will to evict all those folks because we somehow thought it would make the world a better place by creating a zillion jobs, we wouldn't because it's not the Lakewood way.
In practical terms, that means Woodbrook is almost certain to develop piecemeal and slowly. There was some discussion about whether there is a payoff to putting in up to $10 million of road improvements to seed private investment. The area needs thicker roads (to handle trucks) and different circulation to be most effective, among other things. I would think that at least a percentage of those road improvements are still very much on the table. We'd need more analysis to make sure there's a payoff for that expenditure in terms of jobs and other economic benefit. Then there'd be the question of where we'd find funding during an awful budget year. Maybe grants? Grants are pretty much the reason you've seen all the road construction activity this summer. For sure, this subject is still live and kicking.
Forward this post
The News Trib has a nice report before the meeting and another one after the meeting.
You might glance at least at the report after the meeting. Brent Champaco, the reporter, captures the essence of the meeting. There was a lot of discussion about traffic issues, potential zoning, etc... But the bottom line is that if someone developed that place as one massively master-planned parcel (as in DuPont), someone would have to buy it and displace 500 households.
I am known for epic blog postings, but this one is really pretty simple. Presumably, there are only two public entities that could take over this land. One is the port, which while it has the name Tacoma has jurisdiction over developing industrial land throughout Pierce County. But the port folks who spoke on the topic said that they have absolutely no interest in evicting 500 households.
That leaves the city. But Lakewood is a libertarian place. We would rather pull out our fingernails than perform eminent domain for some venture. We ain't University Place, and I love the folks there but I'd never use government funds to buy my downtown. If Lakewood wanted to do that, we woulda bought/seized the Colonial Center long ago. That ain't our way. We believe in private enterprise and limited government. Even if we had the will to evict all those folks because we somehow thought it would make the world a better place by creating a zillion jobs, we wouldn't because it's not the Lakewood way.
In practical terms, that means Woodbrook is almost certain to develop piecemeal and slowly. There was some discussion about whether there is a payoff to putting in up to $10 million of road improvements to seed private investment. The area needs thicker roads (to handle trucks) and different circulation to be most effective, among other things. I would think that at least a percentage of those road improvements are still very much on the table. We'd need more analysis to make sure there's a payoff for that expenditure in terms of jobs and other economic benefit. Then there'd be the question of where we'd find funding during an awful budget year. Maybe grants? Grants are pretty much the reason you've seen all the road construction activity this summer. For sure, this subject is still live and kicking.
