Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[TowerDistrict]

I'm assuming those complaining about the West End site are those who have private land to be developed. Well I for one would not like to see yet another SOB (State Office Building) in the O Street area. I'd rather it be developed into high density housing with ground level retail. O Street is pretty much dead after 5 pm and on weekends and not too lively during the weekday. One more SOB there would be another nail in the coffin. The state should sell the WE site (at a reasonable cost) for 'green' urban housing and give the office bid to a developer that has land somwhere else. I know I'm such a dreamer.

I kinda agree with this too.

but at the same time, isn't the dowtown retail/restaurant economy largely based on the state worker population? it would seem that removing that population would be devastating area business. sure i'd love to see west sac jump-start their urban development, but not at the expense of downtown sacramento.

that's a lot of building they're talking about... 700,000 sq. ft. + 1,400,000 sq. ft. ?!?!

[wburg]

Ah common, you know which category you sit in the most… you short track
record on this forum speaks for it’s self. And your telling me you that you
now wish that 800 J was 20+ stories taller? 800 J is the most bland new
building in DT and you want to see more of it… I think your just saying that
to sound like you want things to change DT. You have supported maybe a
couple of new projects in DT that involve building an entirely new structure,
other wise you give it the AX saying something of the sort “the alley walls
need to be preserved” like at the Cathedral Square or “what about reuse?”

Wberg, covers been blown, your in the preserve everything or reuse NIMBY camp... and that's okay, just admit it

innov: Your ability to misconstrue pretty much everything I say boggles the mind. We AGREE on plenty of things (such as the 800 J building being horribly bland) but you insist on placing me on the other side of the argument (I, like my friends, think that the earlier 30-story structure with better design, should have been built on the site.)

I have a different, not opposing, philosophy on how I think downtown should look. Development and preservation are both important, and in my mind they are complementary, not opposing, positions--one helps the other. It is obvious, both from responses I have seen on this board and from the long list of projects that follow similar lines, that I'm not alone in this opinion. I don't fit in the "camp" you have staked out for me. And I ain't gonna be your N____.

[snfenoc]

...but at the same time, isn't the dowtown retail/restaurant economy largely based on the state worker population? it would seem that removing that population would be devastating area business. sure i'd love to see west sac jump-start their urban development, but not at the expense of downtown sacramento.


Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing. I know West Sacramento is just over the river, but it might as well be 1000 miles away (as far as I am concerned). I want the "real" Sacramento to be the focus of major development, not West Sac. The Cal STRS building has me very mildly interested. However, I would be a lot more interested if it were on the "right" side of the river.

If the "West End" project goes further west, I would not see it as a boon for Sacramento; in my mind it would definitely be a loss. Of course, this means you can bet it will be built in West Sacramento. Knowing our luck, the building(s) will be the tallest in the area.

[TowerDistrict]

as a point of reference to a 1,400,000 sq. ft. building, see the slightly smaller US Bank Tower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_bank_tower)in Los Angeles.

[sugit]

Damn, this line caught my attention...

About half the agency's employees now work at the Resources building at Ninth and N streets. The state plans either to remodel the aging 17-story building or tear it down.

When a few of us went to the West End meetings, there were rumors of this happening.


Interest high in office project
State wants private sector to build big new digs for agency.
By Mary Lynne Vellinga - Bee Staff Writer

The state of California is looking for a private developer to build one of the largest state office projects in history, and contenders on both sides of the Sacramento River are lining up.

More than 100 people crowded into a briefing earlier this month for potential bidders to build a new 1.4 million-square-foot headquarters for the state Resources Agency somewhere within three miles of the state Capitol.

"There are probably 20-plus development firms that could turn in a proposal," said Anne Cavanagh, project manager for the state Department of General Services, which is overseeing the effort. Proposals are due Nov. 6.

The state turned to the private sector after concluding that the project -- formerly dubbed the West End -- would be too expensive for the state to build itself.

In 2001, the Legislature authorized a budget of $391 million to build the high-rise headquarters on a two-block stretch of land in downtown Sacramento bordered by P, N, Seventh and Eighth streets. A parking garage would have gone on land nearby at Ninth and R streets.

But by last year, when the state finished its environmental review, the cost had ballooned to $520 million, and probably has risen since, Cavanagh said.

"We walked away from that project," she said. Instead, the state now plans to lease the new Resources Agency headquarters, with an option to purchase it after 10, 15 or 25 years.

The state is asking bidders to submit two proposals: One for 700,000 square feet of space and another for twice that much. The larger amount would allow the state to bring about 4,000 employees of the Resources Agency together in one place. If that's judged too expensive, about half that many would locate in the new building, with the rest remaining in existing leased space, Cavanagh said.

A 1.4 million-square-foot project would be nearly as big as the state's massive East End complex at Capitol Park.

Bidders can propose to build on a private site within three miles of the Capitol or on state-owned property already slated for the West End project, originally envisioned as two towers.

The state plans to contribute its downtown land at no cost, a provision some potential bidders said was unfair to those with private sites.

Cavanagh said the state's downtown property would be expensive to build on for a variety of reasons, including the need for underground parking and the fact that it's surrounded by light rail.

"When you add all those things up, it's not necessarily free," she said.

The building competition has attracted interest from developers in Sacramento, West Sacramento and South Natomas. Potential sites include the West Sacramento riverfront, the downtown railyard and the Richards Boulevard area.

Developer Mark Friedman, who plans to offer a site in West Sacramento's Triangle redevelopment area, called the competition a "high-stakes game."

Because of the detailed list of state specifications, including a requirement that the building include environmentally friendly features, the cost of submitting a bid is likely to top $250,000 and may be as much as $500,000, said Friedman and other bidders.

"Basically what we have to do is completely design and price a building, and submit a proposal that we're willing to live with in 90 days," Friedman said.

Suheil Totah, who is spearheading the downtown railyard development for Thomas Enterprises, said he isn't sure whether the company will compete.

"We're going to take a look at the package and decide if it's a good fit for us," Totah said. "It appears to be quite an endeavor to respond. You have to weigh the likelihood of them wanting to come to your site vs. staying where they are."

John Dangberg, Sacramento assistant city manager, said the city will do what it can to make sure the thousands of Resource Agency jobs remain in Sacramento.

"We're going to keep it here in Sacramento; that's our priority," he said.

About half the agency's employees now work at the Resources building at Ninth and N streets. The state plans either to remodel the aging 17-story building or tear it down.

The building competition is reminiscent of a flurry of state projects bid out to the private sector in the early 1990s.

Eventually, the California Environmental Protection Agency was built at 10th and I streets; the city of Sacramento leases that building to the state. Developer Opus Corp. built the Department of Justice headquarters at 13th and I streets; the state since has purchased the building.

The state later built the East End project, an undertaking derided for its sterile architecture. But Friedman said there's no question the East End has helped revitalize midtown Sacramento. He's hoping the new project could do the same for the West Sacramento waterfront.

"After the East End project was put in, 20 or 30 new restaurants sprung up in the immediate area," he said. "One thing that has helped make those restaurants successful is all the lunch business."

[wburg]

The floor area is kind of different, though: the West End is planned for most of two city blocks. A building taking up one city block 17-20 stories high, assuming 75-80% lot coverage, would work out to about 1.4 million sf.

The US Bank tower in Los Angeles is a lot narrower and skinnier--personally it's one of my favorite buildings on the downtown LA skyline, but it's built on more expensive land so it had to be taller.

I know that in some of the earlier renderings of the West End project, there were plans for residential components, including a residential "wrapper" around a parking structure, and separate residential components. Assuming that one could make those units accessible to people who worked in downtown offices, you could serve several purposes--expand and centralize office space, increase residential opportunities, limit commuter traffic and increase the night-time occupation of the neighborhood to keep the neighborhood safe and help drive local businesses that stay open past 5:30 PM.

As long as they don't mess with the Heilbron House, of course!

[ozone]

I'm assuming the Resources building is the one behind the Stanford Mansion? (so it's on O St and not N street as the Bee reported. But whatever.) I think it's the oldest post WWII 'highrise' in Sacramento.

If the state decides to tear it down I would like them instead to convert the building into a residential tower with the top floors turned into the state's official governor's residence. A low-rise structure could built on the under-used plaza on N Street, next to the Stanford Mansion, to be used for the governor's 'public' duties -offices, reception, dining hall, etc.. with a garden courtyard in between the old and the new for entertaining.

And as I said before the two blocks now set aside for the West End Project should be sold to a private developer for housing and retail.

My reasoning is thus:

1. West of this, is already the largest, cleanest (albeit somewhat bland) enclave of modern housing in downtown so more housing in the area would help to create a strong middle class/semi-upscale downtown neighborhood.

2. Housing would be a more appropriate companions to the Stanford House and Heilbron House that state office buildings would.

3. I'd rather see the governor's residence in downtown Sacramento for purely practical reasons. Why build an elaborate suburban riverside mansion in WeSac if our governors are only part-time residents anyway? Because they don't really 'live' here it's better for them to be close to the Capital. And I think a penthouse would satisfy CHP security concerns.

4. A residential "wrapper" around a parking structure is regressive thinking and will not provide enough housing.

5. I'd rather see new SOB's built anywhere other than along the oversaturated O Street corridor. However, I still would like them built close-in (not in Natomas).

WeSac's idea is to make the Triangle Specific Area an extension of the urban fabric of downtown Sacramento so the State's investment there would be a catalyst for accelerating other planned riverfront development like housing, hotels, commerical/retail, parks and recreational amenities, etc.

The river is our most salient feature yet the riverfront is our most neglected asset. So developing the West Sacramento riverfront would ultimately be a 'boon for the "real" Sacramento' as well because it will encourage more activity and improve access to the Sacramento River for the residents and visitors of both cities. Besides 50 years from now I don't think people are going to care much about which side is the "right" side of the river.

[enigma99a]

as a point of reference to a 1,400,000 sq. ft. building, see the slightly smaller US Bank Tower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_bank_tower)in Los Angeles.

haha:haha: too bad the floor plates will be like a WHOLE city block.. aww nice and stubby. Well, actually with a private developer we could see a nicer building come out of this than before. Gotta stay tuned:fingerscrossed:

[TowerDistrict]

1.4 million square feet on the block bordered by 7th & 8th and O & P could, in theory, produce a building almost the exact same size as the US Bank Tower in LA. Do I think that will happen? Absolutely not. But that tower occupies about the same area as the size of one Sacramento city block, and lists 1.3 million sq. ft of rentable space.

[travis bickle]

Yeah, I'm thinking the same thing. I know West Sacramento is just over the river, but it might as well be 1000 miles away (as far as I am concerned). I want the "real" Sacramento to be the focus of major development, not West Sac. The Cal STRS building has me very mildly interested. However, I would be a lot more interested if it were on the "right" side of the river.

If the "West End" project goes further west, I would not see it as a boon for Sacramento; in my mind it would definitely be a loss. Of course, this means you can bet it will be built in West Sacramento. Knowing our luck, the building(s) will be the tallest in the area.

I agree with this completely. I admire what West Sac. has been able to accomplish and I greatly envy their "no-freeway" access to the river, but I want the Valley's regional center on the EAST side of the river.

I want all those taxes from state and other employees to be generated in Sacramento, not West Sac.

Speaking of the taxes and please, pardon my ignorance, but what is the status of downtown's redevelopment agency? San Diego's Centre City Development Corporation (CCDC), has been very successful as a catalyst for downtown and keeping a significant portion of taxes generated downtown as well. Anyone? Anyone?

[creamcityleo79]

The area from the center of the Triangle development to the state capitol is 1.44 miles. The area from the Cap City Freeway at Sutter Med Ctr is 1.44 miles also. In my opinion, it is just as important for West Sac to be developed fully on their riverfront as it is any other part of Downtown or Midtown Sacramento. The only difference is city and county limits. But, who really cares about that anyway!?!? Where are the tax dollars going to go for people going out to eat and clubbing!? There aren't too many great, trendy restaurants in West Sac! Nor are there too many (if any at all) trendy clubs or bars (that I know of!). So, my point is that how can you say that development in "the loop" is any more important than development on the other side of the river!? Those trendy urbanites living in West Sac are living there to be close to the clubs, restaurants, and, to a certain extent, shops in Downtown and Midtown!

[wburg]

travis: SHRA is alive and well, and the city council recently consolidated the various redevelopment zones in the central city into a single redevelopment zone--although the R Street Corridor is technically a separate redevelopment zone under CADA's jurisdiction.

[ozone]

The area from the center of the Triangle development to the state capitol is 1.44 miles. The area from the Cap City Freeway at Sutter Med Ctr is 1.44 miles also. In my opinion, it is just as important for West Sac to be developed fully on their riverfront as it is any other part of Downtown or Midtown Sacramento. The only difference is city and county limits. But, who really cares about that anyway!?!? Where are the tax dollars going to go for people going out to eat and clubbing!? There aren't too many great, trendy restaurants in West Sac! Nor are there too many (if any at all) trendy clubs or bars (that I know of!). So, my point is that how can you say that development in "the loop" is any more important than development on the other side of the river!? Those trendy urbanites living in West Sac are living there to be close to the clubs, restaurants, and, to a certain extent, shops in Downtown and Midtown!

Thank you!

[otnemarcaS]

Welcome Back :tup: ... seems like this thing was down and out forever.

[otnemarcaS]

Bob Shallit: Major law firm will anchor newly named Bank of the West Tower
By Bob Shallit - Bee Columnist
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, September 10, 2007
Story appeared in BUSINESS section, Page D3


The Bank of the West Tower on Capitol Mall will feature blue-tinted windows and a gold-hued granite exterior.

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2007/09/09/18/60-1B10EXTERIOR.embedded.prod_affiliate.4.JPG http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2007/09/09/18/35-1B10INTERIOR.embedded.prod_affiliate.4.JPG

Developers of Sacramento's next high-rise office tower have an anchor tenant and a new name for their 25-story building on Capitol Mall.

McDonough Holland & Allen, Sacramento's second-largest law firm, has signed a letter of intent to occupy nearly four floors of the $125 million office tower planned at 500 Capitol Mall.

Letters of intent aren't binding. But project manager Angelo G. Tsakopoulos says the parties have agreed on all deal points. What remains? Some "legal language," he says.

Similarly, Gerald Holt, the law firm's executive director, says McDonough's move to the new building in 2009 "looks very likely."

Even more certain is the presence of Bank of the West, which will open a branch in the building's lobby and get naming rights for what's to be called the Bank of the West Tower at 500 Capitol Mall.

Bank of the West also is providing about half of the financing with the remainder coming from the Tsakopoulos family.

Tsakopoulos, whose partners in the project are his parents, George and Drosoula Tsakopoulos, says foundation work is nearly complete. Structural steel will start going up in late October, with completion planned for spring 2009, he says.

The end result, Tsakopoulos says, will be a dramatic building with classic lines and costly exterior features, including blue-tinted windows and gold-hued granite.

"I wanted something that will look as good 50 years from now as it will when it first opens," he says.

Tsakopoulos said the building, first proposed with a replica of the Parthenon on its top, is intended to "stay in our family for generations."

Tsakopoulos says lease talks are under way with several other potential office tenants. In addition to the bank, a restaurant and other retail outlets are being sought for the ground floor.

[sugit]

Double

[sugit]

This sounds great!

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2007/09/09/23/785-1W10VENUETABLE.embedded.prod_affiliate.4.gif

River Cats adding new concert site
Outdoor venue could be rearranged to host sports, graduations.
By Jon Ortiz - Bee Staff Writer

It's little more than grass and picnic tables now, but the Sacramento River Cats want to transform a 1.5-acre plot next to Raley Field in West Sacramento into a state-of-the-art outdoor event hot spot unlike any other in the region.

The Triple A baseball team will announce today its plan to privately finance a facility flexible enough to host everything from concerts and theater productions to volleyball games and high school graduations.

Alan Ledford, president of Raley Field, said the plan is in its earliest stages and he wouldn't comment on construction costs or naming rights. The facility should be completed by March 2009.

"This will be a great fit for the community," Ledford said. "We're excited."

The announcement reflects how the River Cats, now in their eighth season in West Sacramento, continue to evolve from a Triple A baseball franchise into a regional entertainment player. It also meshes with West Sacramento's plans to revitalize its riverfront as a work/play destination.

"These kinds of venues are terrific for adding to the general appeal of our waterfront," said city redevelopment manager Val Toppenberg.

Mayor Christopher Cabaldon called the proposal "a venue that will increase community pride" and boost the local economy.

While some larger venues in the region have struggled to book acts and boost ticket sales, Raley Field keeps adding events to its non-baseball calendar.

Big-name performers such as John Mayer and the Dave Matthews Band have performed there, and the stadium often hosts community celebrations, festivals and private events. Some smaller events will likely move to the new facility, Ledford said. The organization will continue booking bigger events for the stadium.

The proposed site lies between the stadium's grassy Home Run Hill in right field, and Third Street, one-tenth of a mile from the Sacramento River and the Tower Bridge. The team already uses the area for barbecues, wine tastings and smaller concerts.

Pent-up demand for small outdoor venues is so intense that River Cats executives estimate that once the 3,500-seat project is done they'll add at least 60 dates to the 100 events already hosted there each year.

Designed by Heller Manus Architects of San Francisco, the facility will include a permanent 40-foot by 60-foot canopy-covered stage on the north end with lighting and a sound system.

An area in front of the stage will accommodate table seating for 1,300 people, or 2,800 seats configured in rows. Behind that, box seats and four suites will back up to a gently sloped elevated grass section where visitors can spread blankets.

Gates on the south end of the venue will open into a plaza with concessions and restrooms.

Local event promoters and entertainment industry experts said the River Cats' decision to build a smaller facility makes good business sense.

Larger venues like Arco Arena and the Sleep Train Amphitheatre near Marysville are becoming more difficult to book with surefire sellout acts. And the new facility will take advantage of the amenities that Raley Field already has.

"It will be a lovely addition for the area, especially with the industry trending toward smaller venues," said Sherry Wasserman, president of Berkeley-based events promoter Another Planet Entertainment. "There just aren't many artists who draw 15,000 people anymore."

During the emergence of arena concerts in the 1960s and '70s, music fans in the Sacramento region often had to travel to the Bay Area to catch the biggest performers. That changed in the mid-1980s when Arco Arena opened and Cal Expo built a 14,500-seat venue. That facility closed in 1996.

No one keeps track of how much money the region takes in from live performances, said a spokeswoman for the Sacramento Convention and Visitors Bureau, though it is clear the industry is downshifting to smaller facilities. But Sacramento currently has little to offer by way of the 1,500- to 5,000-seat venues many promoters and artists prefer.

Convention Center manager Judy Goldbar said the 2,450-seat Sacramento Community Center and the 81-year-old Memorial Auditorium, which can handle 4,000 visitors, together sell about 375,000 tickets each year. Average profits from rent and concession sales range from $9,000 to $12,000 per night.

The theater-in-the-round Wells Fargo Pavilion on H Street can seat 2,200, but its operations are restricted to its theater season between Memorial Day and Labor Day and a few small private events, said a spokesman.

"A lot of artists who go through on their way to Bay Area wineries would stop to play a small outdoor place (in Sacramento)," said Gary Bongiovanni, editor of Pollstar, a Fresno-based concert industry publication. "Your weather is generally good enough to have a fairly extended season. You'll definitely see more shows if they build this."

Lee Smith, chairman of Live Nation Inc., a Beverly Hills-based promoter and stadium owner-operator, said the new facility at Raley Field will capitalize on the "niche venues" trend that has made wineries more popular with performers and audiences.

"And it's a well-known site, it's accessible, it has a good track record and obviously there's already plenty of parking and infrastructure in place," said Smith, whose company this year put the Sleep Train Amphitheatre in Marysville on the market.

[foxmtbr]

Sch-weet!!

[creamcityleo79]

Welcome back everyone! :) This is great news! :)

[arod74]

:previous: Well the new outdoor venue at Raley field will cetainly be a nice alternative, but I think most of us are still waiting to see something bigger in the 10k seat range to get excitied and erase the pain that is the dirt pit known as the Sleeptrain/Maryshell amphitheatre.

[snfenoc]

This article is kind of a downer :( :
http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2007/09/10/focus1.html?b=1189396800^1516707

Towering disappointments
Try as it might, Sacramento can't seem to find success in building a high-rise condo building. Considering other cities' vacancy rates, that might be a good thing.
Sacramento Business Journal - September 7, 2007
by Robert Celaschi -- Correspondent

On the list of big-city status symbols that Sacramento can't quite seem to land, add the condominium tower. The most ambitious project to date, John Saca's 53-story twin Towers on Capitol Mall, died in June when the California Public Employees' Retirement System bought out Saca's interests.

Saca hopes to get back in the game with a 39-story condo tower at 10th and J streets called The Metropolitan, but it's very early in its conception.

BCN Development's 38-story Aura project at 6th Street and Capitol Mall is technically still alive, but stalled.

Sacramento isn't the only place where new high-rise condos can't get traction -- Kansas City, Mo., has seen the same pattern of unfulfilled dreams in the past few years -- but most major cities have been building them in significant numbers.

San Jose's first three condo towers are under construction right now, with 20 more in the planning stages. Miami has several dozen under way. Phoenix, Denver, Dallas and Las Vegas have been sprouting them, too.

Why can't Sacramento follow suit?

Blame commutes that are still comparatively short, detached housing that's in the same price range, and a downtown that hasn't quite achieved a critical mass of entertainment and social venues.

Don't feel too bad, though. In cities where condo towers have been a hot trend, the condo markets are becoming glutted thanks to overbuilding.

Sacramento may have dodged a bullet.

EASY ACCESS
"I spent some time watching the Sacramento developments from afar and questioning at the time whether they could get done. I thought they had a chance, but I didn't think at the time Sacramento would be able to support two large developments," said Charles Young, senior development director for Mesa Development LLC. That company is building Three Sixty Residences, a 23-story tower containing 213 condos in downtown San Jose.

As with any product, it comes down to whether the market will support a price high enough to cover the costs of construction, plus a satisfactory profit. The costs aren't that different in San Jose than Sacramento, said Young, but the cheapest unit at Three Sixty is fetching $600,000. Units in Saca's Towers project started at $368,000. When the Towers' original $500 million construction costs rose by $70 million or more, the building site went dormant and liens and lawsuits from contractors began to pile up.

Even at comparatively low prices, the Towers' entry-level price didn't stack up that well against Sacramento's median housing price of $365,500 for the four-county area. In San Jose, the median is $865,000.

You can't drive 20 minutes from downtown San Jose and buy a house for less than the cost of a high-rise condo unit, but in Sacramento you still can, Young said.

And the Bay Area has the high median incomes to match the high median housing prices, he added.

With a falling median price for single-family homes, that's going to make it even harder for a tower with hundreds of condos for sale. Buyers need to sell their current homes in order to buy into a tower.

"If you can't sell it, you can't trade up," Young said. "A high-rise is not a shelter house. It's not just a place you go to sleep. It's a lifestyle choice, and you pay for that choice."

The building itself can't be the only draw. A condo tower also isn't a product that most people gravitate toward naturally or easily, said Lewis Goodkin of Goodkin Consulting in Miami. Buyers must feel tempted by what they see beyond the building.

"The cities that do the best are the ones that have truly exciting downtowns, with a lot of opportunities for retail, entertainment, social activities," Goodkin said, and relatively few cities can deliver that.

In New York, Chicago and a few other places, condo towers have been part of the landscape for decades, but for most of the country, condo towers have become popular only in the past five years, he said.

Then, too, there's the makeup of the buyer market. Goodkin's own city of Miami has downtown jobs to support condo buyers, but it also draws on the tourist and retirement markets.

TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING
Miami is also a prime example of a city that has overdosed on condo towers. The city has about 25,000 units slated to close later this year, overwhelmingly owned by speculators, Goodkin said.

"Overwhelmingly" can mean 50 percent to 70 percent, depending on the source. In any case, they are people who intended to flip the units at a profit without ever moving in, sources said.

Expect to see similar problems in other cities where condo towers are hot.

"Vegas is a disaster. There is so much hotel condominium and regular condominium, it's really going to be a major, major headache within the next year," Goodkin said.

In some markets now, condominium developers are offering tens of thousands of dollars of incentives to move units, and even that's sometimes not enough, said Jack McCabe of McCabe Research & Consulting in Deerfield Beach, Fla. He's already seeing bulk sales of units to investment banks and hedge funds, he added.

"Previous boom-bust cycles really started in California, but this one seems to have started in Florida," he said. In Miami alone there were 52 projects that were previously announced for high-rise condos, and the land is now listed for sale, he said, and 37 high-rise towers are still under construction.

If Sacramento missed the condo-tower bandwagon, it might have been a blessing.

"Now, lenders are pulling in the reins on condo loans because of the risks involved," McCabe said. That includes requiring a higher percentage of presale contracts before they will release construction funds.

WHAT IT TAKES
In a perfect world, developers design condo towers in a down market and start selling as the market resumes its rise. But it's hard to hit that cycle.

"It's very important, no matter when you design the building, to have the mindset that it's going to be a tough market with lots of competition," said Krysen Heathwood, chief operating officer of The Mark Co., which is marketing the Three Sixty project in San Jose for Mesa Development.

"They came in when the market was already softening, but because we had the mentality as a partnership that we were going to design the building for a tough market with lots of competition, the building is doing very well," she said.

That means not cutting corners on anything the prospective buyer will associate with a top-quality product.

"It's the finishes and the amenities that the buyer is seeing. They aren't seeing how the elevator is built," she said.

And the advertising has to start early.

"High-rise living or high-density living is a new product type for many areas. You have to educate the people on the lifestyle that's built around that," Heathwood said. For a company like hers, that means getting in at the design phase to find out what the target buyers are willing to pay for. Then comes a PR campaign showing how the idea has worked in other cities.

"That whole urban lifestyle is beautiful, and I think it will eventually happen in Sacramento," said Young of Mesa Development. But as long as detached houses offer a reasonable alternative, it's going to be tough for a tower to lure hundreds of buyers in a short time.

The article makes some very good points. However, I'm not sure I completely agree with it. Though it is not clearly stated, I think the author implies Sacramento is not ready to have high rise condos in its down town. (I may be reading this wrong, but that's the impression I get). I don't think so.

True, the housing market's current state makes it difficult for people to sell their homes and purchase expensive condo units. It also offers a less expensive, bigger alternative to pricey, small high rise condos for those looking to buy. Also, I agree with the overall notion that Sacramento probably cannot support today's exorbitant high rise condo costs. Yes, there is a cutoff (which is different for different cities) where prices are just too high. However, I think Sacramento's ceiling is high enough to support high rise condos in reasonable market conditions (housing and construction costs). In other words: Yes, Sacramento has a lot less wiggle room when compared to New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and San Jose (I guess). However, it's price cutoff is still high enough to allow construction of at least a couple towers when construction and materials costs are reasonable and the housing market is not in the toilet. In fact, Aura may have worked (even in today's market) if Nassi had not designed such a poor pricing structure (according to a source). I've spoken to a few people who have some expertise (I've also read a number of articles); they all say Sacramento has pent up demand for high rise condo towers and can support their prices (when times are better).

The willingness to buy expensive condos is affected by a number of things according to the article. These include commute times, tourism, the amount of hip urban lifestyle (I guess), and the price of detached homes within a certain radius of down town. While all of these items (plus many more, I'll bet) can increase the demand for a lot of high rise condo towers, I am not sure the lack of huge numbers in each of those areas hurts the demand to build a few high rise condo towers.

Will we have to wait until our commute times are worse (you mean, they can get worse?;) ), down town is hopping and full of tourists (like San Jose's down town) and the median price of detached housing within 20 miles increases massively for a high rise condo or two or three to be built? I don't think so. (Well, I hope not :( )

[wburg]

It seems like we're in a situation of moderate demand. There are people who want that kind of housing, and we do have some places well-suited for the housing type, but the prices people are willing to pay aren't quite high enough to meet the construction costs. Meanwhile, there are plenty of places very close to downtown (within easy walking distance, bike or light rail) that are under construction and well-suited for someone who wants to live comfortably in the central city. It isn't because Sacramento is a cow town, over-regulation, or rampant N-wordism, it's the market.

But...the market will come. Part of what will make that nice bouncy downtown are the folks currently moving into the close-set infill projects and mid-rise buildings. Their dollars will support more businesses to serve their tastes, and eventually the critical mass will arrive. Obviously the groundwork should be started when the market is still down: that whole "buy low, sell high" concept. Current market conditions make the "buy low" part a challenge. But Sacramento is definitely on the map, and we're only going up from here--including construction in that direction.

[ltsmotorsport]

The author of the article still thinks every housing product is exactly the same, and geared towards the same kind of people. Condo builders aren't competing with SFHs the same way 500 CM isn't competing with commercial warehouse space in township 9 area. There almost two different markets. We all know there was plenty of demand for these towers with the strong pre-sales, the lenders were just wary of an unproven product in Sacramento along with the overall slowing in the housing market that made lenders tighten up on any loans being awarded.

[innov8]

Bob Shallit: Developer raises its bet on downtown revival
By Bob Shallit of The Sacramento Bee

Wednesday, September 5, 2007

The company developing a boutique hotel at 10th and J streets is placing another bet on Sacramento's downtown core.

Rubicon Partners is acquiring an interest in the former J.C. Penney building at 630 K St. -- across from the Hard Rock Cafe at Downtown Plaza's eastern entrance. Rubicon is planning to rehab the now vacant, five-story building into office and retail space.

Most of the upper floors will be leased to environmental consulting firm Jones & Stokes, which will move its corporate headquarters from midtown next year.

The ground floor will become retail space, says Peter Thompson, a principal with Sacramento-based Rubicon, which is developing the Citizens Hotel at 10th and J and also owns the historic Forum Building at Ninth and K streets.

Thompson says the arrival of Jones & Stokes is some good news for a part of downtown that's struggled but is gradually showing signs of a revival. He cites Downtown Plaza's plans for a redesign and the recent opening of the Three Monkeys restaurant at 723 K St.

"We're long-term bettors and we feel this area is going to continue to improve," he says.

Rubicon, a partnership of Thompson and Kipp Blewett, is expected to complete the K Street building deal this week. Current owner Buzz Oates will continue to have an interest in the property and Rubicon will manage it, Thompson says.

The building, constructed in the 1950s, originally was a J.C. Penney store. It was converted to office use in 1978 and most recently served as state offices.

Jones & Stokes has been considering the site for about six months, says Ron Thomas, member of a Colliers International team of office brokers that represented the consulting firm.

He says Jones & Stokes ran out of room at its current site, 2600 V St., and liked the "urban" feel of the downtown location.

"It's perfect for them," Thomas says. "They're right on the doorstep of the mall and there's a light-rail stop in front of the building."

He said the 180-person J&S office is slated to move into its new headquarters during the second quarter of next year.

* * *

[TowerDistrict]

^^^ yeah, that's really going to be interesting to see what happens to the Newton Booth School building when Jones & Stokes moves. i can't imagine there are a lot of companies lined up to move into that building. It's a unique spot to say the least.

[innov8]

Gateway West Office Tower
West of I-5
184 ft tall - 12 Story
327,316 sf
1170 parking spots

This project is envisioned to create a mirrored building of the 12 story office
building known as "Natomas East" that will be located on the East side of
interstate 5 with the exception of slightly smaller floor plates. Natomas East
is suppose to start construction this fall. If both towers get built, between
the two of them will be nearly 700,000 sf of new office space.

Entitlements needed for this project are: Amendment for increased height
and special permit for the office building.

The building would be done in white precast concrete, blue tinted glass.


http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/3104/gatewaywest1gx0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/5774/gatewaywest2southlb6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/2465/gatewaywest2westeastei6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Majin]

Does the parking lot really need to be that big?

[Majin]

And I thought we agreed on no more surface parking anywhere in the city.

[JeffZurn]

^ Does Natomas area count as the city? Regardless that is big parking lot.

[Majin]

^ Does Natomas area count as the city? Regardless that is big parking lot.

No but I'm trying to change that.

Big parking lots aren't going to help the matter.

[COASTIE]

Tower Bridge to close for work
By Tony Bizjak - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Friday, September 14, 2007
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A16

Print | E-Mail | Comments (3)| Digg it | del.icio.us


Christopher Baccus of West Sacramento rides on the Tower Bridge where the sidewalk has been widened. The line on which he is riding marks the edge of the old sidewalk. Baccus, who has been riding his bike over the bridge for 23 years, says the old sidewalk was "like an obstacle course."
Sacramento Bee/Autumn Cruz


Sacramento's landmark Tower Bridge has long been a stalwart span, except for one little thing:

Like a bodybuilder plagued with skinny calves, the bridge suffers a bad case of narrow sidewalks.

"Those little scrawny things where you have to dodge bicycles and people, and there isn't room!" lamented frequent crosser Marcia Johnston.

Johnston, who works in West Sacramento, is among a growing pedestrian contingent that shoulder-scrunches daily and nightly over the historic span, built in 1935, to offices, River Cat baseball games, restaurants and condos on both sides of the river.

They're about to get $12 million worth of elbow room.

The ends of the bridge have already been widened.

To finish the job, however, officials must close the bridge to traffic of all sorts -- cars, pedestrians and bikes -- for the next two months.

Barricades go up Monday at 5 a.m. The bridge is expected to remain closed until Nov. 20, while crews widen its sidewalks from 3 feet to 10 feet.

A second closure tentatively is scheduled for next year, between January and April. But Sacramento city project manager Nader Kamal said contractors are hoping to get enough done during this closure to avoid shutting the bridge a second time.

"We have a plan, but we don't know how it will work until we get out in the field," Kamal said.

Monday's closure of the historic portal to Sacramento's Capitol Mall is not precedent-setting.

The span was closed for three months in 2002 for a gold paint job. Back then most of the complaints seemed to come not from commuters but from residents who thought the bridge looked pumpkin-colored, not gold.

Officials said commute traffic on the bridge and surrounding roads has increased since then, and that could lead to some jams during the closure, especially on the nearby but undersized I Street Bridge.

Although state highway data indicate only 16,000 to 18,000 cars cross the Tower Bridge on an average day -- a tiny slice of the overall cross-river commute -- Kamal and traffic officials say the closure of a centrally located connector definitely will be noticed.

"It sounds like it is not a big number, but whenever we close it for even 10 minutes, especially in the morning, cars really line up," he said.

Officials advise motorists to use the Capital City Freeway over the Pioneer Bridge to the south. Pedestrians and bicyclists should use the I Street Bridge.

Kamal said, however, he fears many local drivers will try crossing the narrow I Street Bridge and will run into traffic jams in the first few days.

"They are going to be unhappy, but things will get easier," Kamal said.

Yolo and Sacramento transit agencies will divert buses to the Pioneer Bridge, officials said.

"If that backs up due to heavy traffic or an accident, we have very few alternatives," said Terry Bassett, head of the Yolo County Transportation District.

City officials on both sides of the river say an improved bridge is worth the bother.

Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo described the bridge as the "belt buckle" between the growing waterfronts of two cities.

"With all the development on the riverfront, it is important people in an urban setting can walk, ride bikes, take strollers, and use wheelchairs to get back and forth," Fargo said.

Sacramento is adding housing downtown and wants to develop its downtown railyard. West Sacramento officials plan more than a million square feet of offices and 1,000 residences -- including high-rise condos overlooking the river -- near the Tower Bridge over the next 10 years.

And Raley Field officials announced plans last week to build an entertainment amphitheater yards from the bridge's western anchorage.

Now, however, "you can't walk two people abreast on the bridge," said Steve Patek, West Sacramento's director of community development. "If we are trying to build a civic center with the river as a focal point, people need to be able to walk back and forth."

Workers say they are forced to close the bridge because of mechanics and maritime law.

The work will be done on the bridge's center span, which moves up and down for boat passage by use of motors and precisely calibrated counter-weights.

The bridgework, adding concrete to the sidewalks, will temporarily throw the bridge out of balance, officials said. To compensate, workers must lock the bridge, but must do so in the up -- or open -- position, because maritime rules require the bridge to open for passing boats.

Sacramento city spokeswoman Linda Tucker said the closure periods were chosen to avoid problems for Sacramento River Cats crowds and Christmas holiday travelers.


For Detour map and pictures click
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/378692.html

[wburg]

I think when majin said "we" agreed on no parking, he was using the royal "we."

[sugit]

Yeah, this makes it sound like it won't happen too soon...but at least they are getting all their ducks in a row so they can jump the moment the next opportunity comes.

We may have missed the boat this time for high rise housing, but it does at least seem like things are lined up for the next cycle.
________________________________________________________________

Downtown high-rise project seeks funds quietly, won't offer pre-sales
Sacramento Business Journal - September 14, 2007
by Michael Shaw Staff writer

Sacramento's next condo tower has been quietly approved by the city, but the owners of the project don't mind a lack of fanfare, considering how other prominent condominium projects struggled during the past year.

There's no sales office yet, no billboards and no promotion of Cathedral Square -- a 25-story, 233-unit tower planned for the southwest corner of 11th and J streets.

The canceled Towers on Capitol Mall project and the seemingly lifeless Aura condo project grabbed the limelight in part because ambitious developers were selling units while at the same time trying to finance and build them. But Cathedral Square's developers, St. Anton Partners and the Cordano family, have been more comfortable under the radar, hoping to begin selling when the market favors them.

That means not anytime soon.

Financing the estimated $120 million tower will be a challenge, said Steve Eggert, one of the St. Anton Partners along with Peter Geremia. Eggert said they'll face the same hurdles as the earlier projects, including the housing slump and rising construction costs. And there's an additional issue of a credit crunch, which has led to less capital available for construction lending.

But they have avoided some of the pitfalls.

"We're not under the time pressure of an expiring land option," Eggert said.

Developer Craig Nassi of Denver had proposed Aura on Capitol Mall on land owned by another developer. Nassi has an option for the property. The Towers at Capitol Mall collapsed under rising construction costs but also due to a progressively turbulent relationship between developer John Saca and his equity partner, the California Public Employees' Retirement System. The partnership dissolved when a new deal couldn't be struck.

Eggert said he and his partners own the Cathedral Square property, now home to vacant buildings and a few small retail shops, and don't face internal pressure to deliver the project on a timeline.

He's looking to the sale of about 600 condos in those earlier projects as a sign that there's significant demand for luxury condos downtown.

The biggest challenge is funding.

"Up until the end of last year, there was abundant capital," Eggert said. "That has tightened up significantly."

The slowdown in capital markets is somewhat tied to the subprime meltdown because higher defaults have meant less money to distribute to other investments such as high-rises.

David Taber, president and chief executive officer of American River Bankshares, noted that assets tied to the subprime mortgage fallout are also being scrutinized more thoroughly by lenders. American River doesn't do high-rise construction lending, but he said the effect of tightening credit has been minimal on commercial projects.

"From my office in Rancho Cordova, I look out and see construction all around," he said. "Walls are being tilted up. ... The commercial real estate market is very good."

The Federal Reserve said last week that commercial real estate markets had experienced somewhat tighter credit conditions, but a number of banks noted that "credit availability and credit quality remained good for most consumer and business borrowers."

The Cathedral Square's developers will need to find a construction lender to provide about 75 percent of the cost and a mezzanine lender for any remaining portion that isn't covered by equity, which is about 20 percent, Eggert said.

Unlike previous projects in Sacramento, the developers won't be pre-selling units. Eggert and his partners would get little reassurance by locking in prices at the bottom of the market under contracts that could be easily canceled by buyers, he said.

Sacramento city officials are prepared to wait until the developers are ready.

"They told us basically they need time to prepare a plan for building permits," said David Kwong, Sacramento's planning manager. "They're waiting for a better market."

Brimming with confidence
The project has sailed through the city's planning process. Developers had originally planned to put a spire atop the building, mirroring Sacramento's Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament nearby. But they canceled the spire after concerns expressed by the city's planning and design commissions, Kwong said. Any objection period for the project has passed, and the building doesn't need City Council approval.

The building is designed by San Francisco's Kwan Henmi Architects, which also is designing developer Saca's next attempt at a high-rise, The Metropolitan. That project is going through the approval process at Sacramento's design review and planning commissions, city officials said.

If built, Cathedral Square will feature many unobstructed views of the Capitol in 600- to 3,000-square-foot units, with penthouses, oversize windows, 9- or 10-foot tall ceilings and parking in a secured garage. The building will have a swimming pool, a fitness center and a clubhouse for residents. It has 12,000 square feet of retail space on the ground floor for a restaurant or shops.

While the developers are taking a different approach than their predecessors, there is the same confidence about delivering the project.

"I believe it will get built," Eggert said. "The condos will be delivered just as the next cycle is heating up."

[sugit]

From the CADA Website...seems like these 2 and the 15 story one on N Street are moving along pretty quickly.
_________________________________________________________________

Progress on East End Gateway Sites 2 and 3

Ravel Rasmussen Properties is proposing to develop two sites with mixed use projects. On East End Gateway Site 2 (EEG 2), at the northwest corner of 16th and O Streets, the proposal is to construct 24 apartments above 5,816 square feet of ground floor retail. There will be a total of 36 surface parking spaces on the site which are proposed to be accessible from O Street and the alley on the north side of the site. The proposed project will be a total of four stories in height. The site is the former location for an auto repair facility and surface parking lot.

On East End Gateway Site 3 (EEG 3), at the southwest corner of 16th and O Streets, the proposal is to construct 60 apartments above 8,087 square feet of ground floor retail space. There will be a total of 57 parking spaces on the site which are proposed to be accessible from O Street, and the alley on the south side of the site. The proposed project will be a total of five stories in height. The site is the former location for a retail space and surface parking lot.

Between these two project, there will be a total of 84 apartments that include sixty 1 bedroom/1 bath units ranging from 702 to 780 square feet and twenty-four 2 bedroom/2 bath units ranging from 972 to 1,080 square feet and 13,903 square feet of ground floor retail space.

These mixed use projects are inspired by Andalusian architecture of southern Spain and the elegant interpretation of Spanish Architecture foudn in Monterey, California. They will provide multi-family housing on the upper floors of the buildings and retail/restaurants at the street level.

The materials being used for the projects are commonly found within the Sacramento region. The classic Spanish cement plaster look will be accented with brick and Spanish tile. Prominent features include two corner towers; one will be capped with a blue/green mosaic tile dome and the other with Spanish detailing that steps in as it ascends.

At the street level, the arched openings along the base of the buildings will provide an inviting feel, which will open the interior of the building to the public. The sidewalks will blend into these openings and will be used for outdoor seating for restaurant uses.

CADA will host a public workshop to discuss these projects on Thursday, September 20 from 6-7:30pm at the CADA administrative office, 1522 14th Street.

Projected Construction Period: Mid 2008 - Mid 2009

[innov8]

Here's the latest rendering without the spire.

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/5555/cathedralsquarebz3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[arod74]

Looks like the people running the show at Cathedral square are going about the process wisely. Must admit that it is hard for me to get excited about the project. Though the stature of the project probably helps the likelyhood of it going up, the size and rather pedestrian design isn't making me root hard for it. Sort of similar to the new Marriot. Having people living downtown and knocking out the structures currently in the location are great, but fairly uninspiring considering past proposals...

[Majin]

How will they truely know how the market is without trying to sell them? Doesn't make any sense to me.

Sounds like a cop out, that thing should be going up ASAP.

[TowerDistrict]

How will they truely know how the market is without trying to sell them? Doesn't make any sense to me.

Sounds like a cop out, that thing should be going up ASAP.

they must be referring to some sort of lending market or something. because if they had the money to build it now, there wouldn't be a better time. "they" always act like these buildings go from demo to finished construction in two weeks.... as if they can time when they want to hit their ideal market within a window of a couple days.

and i know i'm just bitter everyone is in this holding pattern. but the endless excuses don't really satisfy.

[Cynikal]

And I thought we agreed on no more surface parking anywhere in the city.


I would limit that to the central city which the City defines from river to freeway, river to freeway. Currently the City is trying to crack down on surface parking lots in the Central City. Actually, this item is going to the Law & Legislation committee ( a sub-committee of council) on Tuesday the 18.

But I digress, Outside of the central city the only vialble parking is surface parking. There is no demand to build structures generally and a structure costs between $20,000 and $40,000 per space.

[wburg]

While wandering around Saturday afternoon I went by Tapestri Square at 21st and T; two of the three models are open for tours. I went inside both, first the "Lil Brownstone" one along the back of the project, then the big "Madison" one.

The smaller ones were laid out a lot like the "skinny houses" in Portland (a friend of mine up there owns one) if you're familiar with those. The ground floor has enough room for two cars parked in tandem (well, maybe not if you own two Navigators, but two midsize cars would fit with room to spare) and have a couple of storage areas off to the side so you can still stick your kayak or whatever in the garage and fit both cars. The level above the garage is the main living area, with kitchen, dining room, full bathroom (it has a shower) and a small patio. The top level has two bedrooms: the master bedroom has its own master bath, the other bedroom does not. The building is comfortably appointed, if not outright luxurious, and the finish level is easy on the eyes. I think they are about 1400 square feet.

The Madison is the big unit of the three available models in the project--I think it is close to 3000 square feet. The bottom story also includes a two-car tandem garage, plus there is also living space on the ground floor: the model was also the tour office so I'm not sure if it was set up like the other ones will be, but I think the idea is to have two bedrooms downstairs with stair access to the upper level and also a separate entrance. The main floor is downright swanky: big windows in front of a large, airy living room, a plushly appointed kitchen/dining room in the back, and both a master staircase and secondary stairs in the middle. The top level is this huge master suite with a gargantuan bathroom and a separate den area.

The exterior is as nice as the interior. When I first saw the plans for these, I liked the way they looked but was worried that they might not look as good once completed as they did on paper, but actually I think they look better in person than they did on the plans. Needless to say I'm pretty darn happy about this project being in my neighborhood.

Price points vary from $430K to $850K. I did notice that the smaller models are actually a lot bigger than the units in the Whiskey Hill project (which I also like, btw) and are priced lower.

And despite the latest fad where providing parking is apparently Public Enemy #1, I think it's pretty cool that they provide sufficient parking. It means that you have the option to drive if you want, but if you don't want to you have a secure place to store your car. The location is close enough to light rail (four blocks) and bus lines (buses run on both 21st and T) to make public transit downright handy.

[travis bickle]

Regarding the ground floor living space in the Madison models:

Might you be able to use that space as an office or retail? Does the zoning allow it?

I worked on the Village Walk project in San Diego's Little Italy. We designed the ground floor living space on the three story units as retail and marketed the units as "Shopkeeper Units." There is separate and direct access to the street. Is that possible here?

[Majin]

And despite the latest fad where providing parking is apparently Public Enemy #1, I think it's pretty cool that they provide sufficient parking. It means that you have the option to drive if you want, but if you don't want to you have a secure place to store your car. The location is close enough to light rail (four blocks) and bus lines (buses run on both 21st and T) to make public transit downright handy.

:hell:

[ozone]

I do not think every new development is an appropriate place for ground-floor retail/office and this IMO is the case here. SD's Little Italy is a very different neighborhood than Poverty Ridge. I like the fact that's it's just going to be houses. Besides Safeway, Peet's, Rite Aid, Fin's and a bunch of other businesses are only a block or two away.

I was in my old hood the other day and while I know very little about trendoidy Portland I was impressed how much they reminded me of townhouses back east. The location is a little old -should be closer to the core. But we have CADA and it's amazing cutting-edge urbansuburban projects downtown.


"And despite the latest fad where providing parking is apparently Public Enemy #1"

---HAHA. You're funny. Don't Panic wburg. This town is still pretty much a car dominated place. Jessh you can take the kid out the suburb but you can't take the suburb out of the kid. It's not about making Sacramento car-less but rather making it less car -bringing a sensible balance between the car, the pedestrian, and the cyclist. If some people haven't gotten that by now they probably never well. wburg I hear you can get some great deals right now in Roseville, Elk Grove, and Natomas and they are a parking lovers wet dream.

[Majin]

I hate parking lots.

I really do.

[wburg]

I think a parking lot killed Majin's parents and he has sworn eternal bloody revenge.

It's not about making Sacramento car-less but rather making it less car -bringing a sensible balance between the car, the pedestrian, and the cyclist.
We are of a mind about this. I'm just not as either/or about the issue as some are. There's a big, big difference between giant parking lots around a shopping center and having some provision for parking in close proximity to one's home. We can't just rule the car out of the equation, and maybe a good way to look at it is finding ways to *store* the car, for times when it does come in handy, rather than building cities around a car-driven metaphor.

travis: The zoning was changed from commercial to residential so I don't think that by-right commercial use would be a simple option. A residential occupancy permit might work, allowing one to have (for example) a consulting office with low-traffic business on the ground floor. By-right commercial would probably make the units even more expensive. Only about half the units will have direct access to city streets, there is an access road through the middle of the project and limited non-garage parking (I think there are maybe eight guest-parking spaces.)

As ozone mentioned before he started calling me a suburbanite, there is quite a bit of convenient nearby retail, limiting the need for retail in the project.

[travis bickle]

a sensible balance between the car, the pedestrian, and the cyclist.

Ozone's quote is the very definition of smart growth.

[creamcityleo79]

Some pics of the 4th Ave Lofts UC in Oak Park. I didn't even know this project existed. They're on the corner of 4th Ave and 35th St. Oak Park is really turning into a nice neighborhood (North and Central Oak Park).
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1342/1405260234_4796be660f_o.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1146/1405260180_7711b0b5df_o.jpg

and a bonus pic of the Sutter Med Ctr Parking Garage UC
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1075/1405260116_c9413b64e2_o.jpg

Pics taken by me with my new iPhone! (I LOVE IT!)

[downtownserg89]

like honestly, why did they have to make the oak park lofts so..... unnattractive? they look strange, half looks somewhat modern and the other half looks like the sn&r building accross the street from the maaaaars. i could just imagine what went through the contracter's mind, "oh uhm, oak park? eh, just get some bricks. make it work. add a little pizzaz. there ya go. no one's really gonna see them, i mean hey it's OAK PARK!"

gahh i dont know, i've been out of it lately.

[JSCANLON]

Is the city still trying to get rid of greyhound? if so is 701 still ready to go?

[Trojan]

I went to the Starbucks on Broadway this morning and I saw the new apartments down the block.. I think they look great, especially the brick apts. Certainly they are more attractive than a lot of other things in Oak Park. The modern mixed with the brick adds some variation, but overall, who can complain about any kind of satisfactory infill in OP?

[creamcityleo79]

The 4th Ave Lofts look great in person!

[Tenebrist]

The 4th Ave Lofts look great in person!

I agree. They look pretty fuckin' cool.

[wburg]

Considering it's catty-corner from the Guild Theater I can see why they chose brick, but not sure why they only chose brick on half, other than economics. I'll have to check em out in person.

[snfenoc]

I went to the East End Gateway thing at CADA last night. Here are a couple of pics of East End Gateway Sites 2 & 3:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/EastEndGateway_2.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/EastEndGateway_1.jpg


The info:
East End Gateway Site 2:
NW Corner of 16th & O Streets
4 Stories tall. About 60' to the top of the tower feature
12 1br/1ba and 12 2br/2ba -- 24 units total
5,816 square feet of retail/commercial/office space on the ground floor
36 parking spaces

East End Gateway 3
SW Corner of 16th & O Streets
5 stories tall. About 77' to the top of the tower feature
48 1br/1ba and 12 2br/2ba -- 60 units total
8,087 sqaure feet of retail/commercial/office space on the ground floor

The CADA Board (if everything is OK) should approve the schematic design and financing strategies for East End Gateway Sites 2 & 3 in November (at the November 1 meeting???). From there, CADA must enter into an agreement with the developer (Ravel Rasmussen Properties & Separovich/Domich Real Estate) - some time in December (again, if everything is OK). Construction would start in the Spring or Summer of 2008.

They hope to land a Mexican restaurant for one of the buildings (Do we need another Mexican place), Ravel Rasmussen is talking with a local restaurant group.

As you can see, the architecture has a Spanish/Mexican theme to it. The walls will be clad in stucco with wood and metal trim/features. The roof of each building will be tile. The interior finishes will be very nice (10' ceilings, granite counter tops, etc.). These will be higher-end market rate apartments. (I hate being poor). Management from Fremont Mews and 18th and L were asking probing questions trying to figure out the rents (trying to make sure their absurdly expensive prices are not too absurd, I guess).

I asked the architect (Christopher Wilson of Stantec Architecture (formerly Chong Partners Architecture)) about the Spanish theme and stucco walls:
1) Will these buildings look as cheap as the La Quinta Inn, I mean, The Fremont Building? His answer was a definite NO.
2) I'm a little worried about the stucco walls, I noticed some of the stucco buildings here in Sac have not held up well (lots of cracking, chips, paint coming off, etc.). What can you say about the quality of the stucco walls you propose? He noted that some buildings are cheaply done, having only a single coat of cementitious material over a styrofoam-like substrate. He said the stucco walls for East End Gateway Sites 2 & 3 will be higher quality than that (more layers and a higher quality substrate). A fine grain sand, which will give the walls a smoother surface than the overly grainy texture of some of the cheaper buildings, will be used. In addition, he mentioned the stucco may have integrated color, so no gray spots when the inevitable chips occur. However, the stucco will crack; cracking can be minimized, but it will still probably happen.



What about the other projects???
I cornered Tom Kigar of CADA and asked him about the CADA Warehouse and the East End Gateway Site 1 Project (possibly a 14 or 15 story tower).

He said CADA is excited to sign an agreement with the developer for the CADA Warehouse this month (or was it next month? I forget) and construction should begin within the next few months or so. (Where have we heard that before? However, he seemed pretty sure about it, so :shrug:)

He seemed a bit more skeptical about East End Gateway Site 1. He expects CADA to sign an agreement with Lambert (the developer) in January. Construction could begin 6 months later. Although he would not assure me it will happen, he did say Lambert has a lot of experience and "if anyone can do it, it's them." CADA thinks Lambert will have to get about $600 a square foot. (A bit pricey. Can the market handle it?)



That's all I have for you all.

[arod74]

Great rundown snfenoc, I'm liking what I am seeing. As long as they stick to their guns on the stucco, it should be a fine addition...

[goldcntry]

I agree. I really love the Spanish Pueblo style of architecture.

[sugit]

Thanks for reporting back, Steve. I really wanted to check it out, but had other commitments yesterday. Def has a Santa Barbara building look to them, minus the cheaper material.

I wonder if the high temps in summer contribute to the stucco cracking?

Assuming everything is okay, sure glad to see them getting going so fast after Loftworks pulled out last year.

Good to hear about Capitol Lofts, I had all but written that sucker off. but as you said, I'll believe it when I see it.

When you asked him about EEG 4 at 16th and P, he said 14-15 stories? I know that the site 1 at 16th and N is 15 stories (ground breaking in November, hopefully) , but I thought the one on P street was going to be around 8.

Was he maybe referring to the one on N Street? If not, glad to see them pump up the density on that site as well.

Thanks again for posting this stuff....

[ozone]

Hey Steve thanks for the good info. Excited to hear that the CADA Warehouse is finally going forward -it's been a heck of a long time in coming.

I'm not real excited about Spanish revival in Sacramento but hopefully it'll look good. I guess it'll blend in nicely with the Luna building. Hey in the last rendering-doesn't the perspective view down 16th Street look a little more intimate than it really is? Anyway it is a heck of lot better than a couple of holes in the ground.

[sugit]

Hey Steve thanks for the good info. Excited to hear that the CADA Warehouse is finally going forward -it's been a heck of a long time in coming.

No kidding..I remember when the city approved a subsidy for this project back in 2001!

[wburg]

Stucco is a perfectly good material in this climate if it is done right, but most recent stucco is very cheap and cracks a lot more quickly. Spanish Colonial Revival is most definitely intended to reflect the Luna's building. Did they mention anything about price points, rental vs. purchase, affordable components?

And yeah, I think EEG 1 is the 15 story project that Lambert is doing.

[snfenoc]

Yeah, sugit and wburg, I think you guys are right; East End Gateway 1 is the 15 story project. I've edited my previous post. It's hard to keep all the sites straight. It gets confusing. Basically, I asked him about the possibility of a tower at one of the other EEG sites; I assigned Site 4 to the project (I was not sure whether it was 1 or 4, so I just picked 4), not Mr. Kigar.

He did not say anything about ground breaking in November. He did say CADA has not signed the Dispoition and Development Agreement (DDA) with Lambert yet. I do think he said that CADA expects to sign an agreement in January (if everything is good). This may be way off. Keep in mind, he is the lead for EEG 2 & 3; someone else is doing EEG 1 & 4. His answers seemed a tad vague, so maybe he is not best source.

[innov8]

This could be considered a Friday funny... but on Weds. the city dusted off the Epic plans to continue the application process.

Perpetual dream state
Sacramento Business Journal - September 21, 2007

Developer Craig Nassi can't drum up the equity needed to build his Aura condo project, and Sacramento's withdrawal of a $10 million loan offer makes the job next to impossible in today's tapped-out lending market. But that hasn't deterred the brash developer from pushing his next Sacramento project, "Epic," a 50-story mixed-use tower at 1215 I St. If built, it would be the city's tallest building ("if built" is a popular caveat these days).

Nassi's BCN Development recently requested the city begin processing the application again after it had been held indefinitely. The city's Design Commission looked over the project Wednesday. One source close to the development said Nassi might feel the mixed-use aspect, such as offices or a hotel, might make the project more viable than Aura. No word yet on whether Nassi will ask for city funds or request building permits be expedited, as he did with Aura, where no dirt has moved.

[sugit]

Yeah, sugit and wburg, I think you guys are right; East End Gateway 1 is the 15 story project. I've edited my previous post. It's hard to keep all the sites straight. It gets confusing. Basically, I asked him about the possibility of a tower at one of the other EEG sites; I assigned Site 4 to the project (I was not sure whether it was 1 or 4, so I just picked 4), not Mr. Kigar.

He did not say anything about ground breaking in November. He said CADA has not signed the full agreement with Lambert yet (a DCA? a DTA? I forget - Next time, I will remember to bring a pen, so I can take down the details). I do think he said that CADA expects to sign an agreement in January (if everything is good). This may be way off. Keep in mind, he is the lead for EEG 2 & 3; someone else is doing EEG 1 & 4. His answers seemed a tad vague, so maybe he is not best source.


DDA (Deposition and Development Agreement) is the term.

Marc de la Vergne over at CADA is the lead for sites 1 and 4. I went to the meeting lat month for site 1 (no rendering other than a site plan), and they said the time line is November 2008 for groundbreaking on site 1. The project is getting about a 5-6 million subsidy from CADA.

You can get some info on the DEIR
http://www.cadanet.org/pdf/eir.pdf

Like you though, I didn't get the feeling it was a slam dunk at all yet.

http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/1433/16thandnth0.png

[snfenoc]

November 2008 is definitely possible. I thought you were referring to November 2007. I wish.

[sugit]

ha...2007, riiiiiiiight.

Did they mention anything about a subsidy for sites 2 and 3?

[Majin]

This could be considered a Friday funny... but on Weds. the city dusted off the Epic plans to continue the application process.

Perpetual dream state
Sacramento Business Journal - September 21, 2007

Developer Craig Nassi can't drum up the equity needed to build his Aura condo project, and Sacramento's withdrawal of a $10 million loan offer makes the job next to impossible in today's tapped-out lending market. But that hasn't deterred the brash developer from pushing his next Sacramento project, "Epic," a 50-story mixed-use tower at 1215 I St. If built, it would be the city's tallest building ("if built" is a popular caveat these days).

Nassi's BCN Development recently requested the city begin processing the application again after it had been held indefinitely. The city's Design Commission looked over the project Wednesday. One source close to the development said Nassi might feel the mixed-use aspect, such as offices or a hotel, might make the project more viable than Aura. No word yet on whether Nassi will ask for city funds or request building permits be expedited, as he did with Aura, where no dirt has moved.

:runaway:

[snfenoc]

Yeah, management from Fremont Mews asked about subsidies. CADA will provide the land (worth $1-1.5 million each? or total? I forget) and about $1+ million in funds for Site 3. Originally, Ravel Rasmussen planned 69 (ha!) units total for both sites (each building was going to be 4 floors). CADA asked them to add another floor to Site 3, increasing the total units to 80+. However, extra engineering and construction (basically, a concrete podium) is required for 5+ story buildings. This extra construction costs $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, so Ravel Rasmussen asked CADA to contribute money ($1 million +) to mitigate the extra costs for Site 3.

Are these technically subsidies? I have no friggin' clue.

[sugit]

Shoot...The Fremont Mews people better hope the projects get built, it makes the area much more attractive for people to live and in turn should help them rent more places...plus they received a subsidy as well.

[snfenoc]

Yeah, I think the Fremont Mews manager was just trying to gauge what the rents will be. Somebody named Dimitri from 1801 L Street was there too; he was also interested in subsidies, rents, # of affordable units, etc.

[wburg]

Are these technically subsidies? Does a bear technically shit in the woods? Land and money on top of it certainly sounds like a subsidy to me. And if they're getting subsidies, I certainly hope they're providing a percentage of affordable units. Although I'm curious as to whether these properties will remain in CADA's control or whether the land ownership will be handed over to the development company.

Fremont Mews is also a CADA project.

[sugit]

Fremont Mews is also a CADA project.
I know, but the city (SHRA) also kicked in a subsidy for it as well.

CADA is required to keep a min 25% of affordable units in the total amount of units they develop. It isn't on a individual project basis, even if there is a subsidy on the project.

That's why you see a project like these with no affordable housing, a project like Fremont Mews with a higher than 25% affordable component, the Fremont Building with affordable housing but less than 25%, and a project like the one being planned at 16th and N (not the high rise) being a 100% affordable housing project....and whatever else in between.

[snfenoc]

Yeah, I agree, wburg. They are subsidies. CADA seemed uncomfortable calling them subsidies. Although, I do understand the money. Ravel Rasmussen never planned on 5 stories for Site 3. That was a CADA request.

According to the website (http://www.cadanet.org/eeg.php), all units will be market rate.

Will it remain in CADA's control? I'm not sure. I got the impression that it would be under the developer's control. Why would CADA give land and money and get nothing out of it, though?? So maybe it will have some control.

[sugit]

I know with some of the projects, CADA does the property management and leasing which generates income. In addition, CADA receives the tax increment (property taxes and I think projected sales tax as well) from the project.

I'm pretty sure this is how it works...

The subsidy comes in the form of the developer getting a percentage of the TI in the form of an annuity stream.

So let's say the developer needs 1M, CADA figures out what % of the TI that 1M will come out to be as a annuity stream if sold at present value (bust our economics or finance books if you don't know what I mean) , the developer will then sell the annuity stream (in the form of a note I assume) to an investor at its present value to make up the 1M..and tada!..there is the 1M

[sugit]

He said CADA is excited to sign an agreement with the developer for the CADA Warehouse this month (or was it next month? I forget) and construction should begin within the next few months or so. (Where have we heard that before? However, he seemed pretty sure about it, so :shrug:)

I got my copy of the CADA agenda for the 28th and it has CADA approving a DDA for Capitol Lofts. I can't believe that thing looks like its going to get built after all these years.

http://www.dbarchitect.com/project_detail/103/Capitol%20Lofts.html

http://www.dbarchitect.com/images/dynamic/slideshow_images/image/9813_warehouse_elev-final_forweb.project_large.jpg

http://www.dbarchitect.com/images/dynamic/slideshow_images/image/9813_nw_perspective_2006.04.24_final.project_large.jpg

http://www.dbarchitect.com/images/dynamic/slideshow_images/image/9813_sw_perspective_2006.08.project_large.jpg

Also, on the same agenda is shows CADA supporting the Taylor/CIM team for the West End project and parking garage on R Street. No other information than that though. That team sure is making a big play on DT Sac.

[Jay916]

Wow the Towers and Aura really took the life out of this forum. :(

[sacamenna kid]

How is it that San Jose is putting up two condo towers a la Aura: Axis, and some other high rise near their new city hall by Richard Meyer? How can that cow town out-do Sacramento? I guess it's the Silicon Valley edge...

[snfenoc]

If you don't like posts with a lot pictures in them, well, then you're kinda screwed...


Here's my mega construction update (all photos taken by me):

Sutter Garage:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0003.jpg

Sutter Expansion:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0004.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0005.jpg


Those brownstone things near Sutter Hospital:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0006.jpg
(Oh, look some graffiti "artist"/ass clown wanted attention"

I'm not sure if these are part of the Alchemy project or not:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0007.jpg

Alchemy at R Street:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0009.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0014.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0012.jpg


500 Craptiol Mall:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0023.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0024.jpg


621 Crapitol Mall:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0031.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0032.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0027.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0036.jpg


The Aura Parking Lot:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0035.jpg


The Orleans "Hotel"
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0042.jpg
Yep, it's going vertical...
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0043.jpg


CalSTRS:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0048.jpg


Ella was open:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0049.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0050.jpg


The previous photos were taken on Saturday (dark and gloomy). The following photos were taken on Sunday (partly cloudy, then clear later on):

So Crap Lofts:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0051.jpg
(I see you Vader)

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0052.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0053.jpg


16th and H:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0062.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0063.jpg
(Don't you just love the douche bags and their graffiti?)

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0064.jpg


L Street Lofts:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0065.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0066.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0067.jpg


Washington Park (17th and D)
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0070.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0071.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0072.jpg


Globe Mills:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0080.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0074.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0073.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0075.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0076.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0077.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0078.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0079.jpg


North End Lofts:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0081.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0082.jpg


I forget what these are called:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0083.jpg


Whiskey Hill:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0085.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0086.jpg



This stuff is just for fun:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0087.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0069-1.jpg

Oh yeah, did I ever mention Sacramento is the Crapitol of California?
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0060.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0061.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0054.jpg
(Vader, you're an assh^%e)

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0055.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0056.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0057.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0058.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0059.jpg

No Diving:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0046.jpg

[JeffZurn]

Great looking shots, thanks for the update Snfenoc!

[Grimnebulin]

Great shots, Steve!

Love the Vader comment...see the Family Guy last night? Or even better, the Robot Chicken Star Wars spoof?

[ltsmotorsport]

I love how Chris (Seth Green) argues with Peter over it at the end of the episode.

Thanks for the updates, Steve. Thankfully, posts with mountains of photos are my favorite.

621 is see-through, but also has different kinds of glass.:sly:
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/Construction%20Update%209-23-07/DSC_0057.jpg

[ozone]

Great photos. Good eye. Thanks for showing us the progress of many of the project uc.

[wburg]

I noticed the nice cloudscape on 621 CM yesterday as I was walking to the Chinatown fair. It's definitely visually impressive...kind of a "stealth skyscraper."

[arod74]

Sweet photo update snfenoc, I'm really digging the Globe Mills project. Incorporating the exisiting structure really makes it differnent from anything out there.

[BrianSac]

snfenoc,
Nice photos! Nice to see the "Orleans" hotel taking root.

[uzi963]

most comprehensive update in the last year. great job snfenoc.

[foxmtbr]

Holy crap! What a huge update! Awesome job. :tup:

[krudmonk]

How is it that San Jose is putting up two condo towers a la Aura: Axis, and some other high rise near their new city hall by Richard Meyer? How can that cow town out-do Sacramento? I guess it's the Silicon Valley edge...
You know the world is ending when Sacramento starts passing on "cowtown" comments to cities that are older, bigger and more dense.

[ozone]

Calm down there buckaroo. I would never call SJ a cowtown but as one who is pretty familiar with San Jose I never understood it's feelings of superiority over Sacramento. If you compare the two cities IMO Sacramento proper has more 'bones' to work with and is overall more attractive. If we only we had all that high-tech money "sigh".

Anyway, San Jose is what it is and Sacramento is what it is. I'm all for SJ getting more dense and I'm pretty sure Sacramento will start to see high-rise infill but the cost of real-estate is just not high enough to really drive that market yet. Still there's a lot of nice infill going on. Of course, nobody know what the future holds for either city but if I were placing bets I'd say that with the Railyards and the Riverfront Sacramento has more possibility becoming Northern California's 'second city' than does San Jose.

[krudmonk]

Calm down there buckaroo. I would never call SJ a cowtown but as one who is pretty familiar with San Jose I never understood it's feelings of superiority over Sacramento. If you compare the two cities IMO Sacramento proper has more 'bones' to work with and is overall more attractive. If we only we had all that high-tech money "sigh".

Anyway, San Jose is what it is and Sacramento is what it is. I'm all for SJ getting more dense and I'm pretty sure Sacramento will start to see high-rise infill but the cost of real-estate is just not high enough to really drive that market yet. Still there's a not of nice infill going on. Of course, nobody know what the future holds for either city but if I were placing bets I'd say that with the Railyards and the Riverfront Sacramento has more possibility becoming Northern California's 'second city' than does San Jose.
San Jose has no feelings of superiority over anyone, I don't think. Don't bunch us in with the rest of the Bay Area, which is pretty snooty. San Jose merely exists in its own element. It's not San Francisco, where every second of every day revolves around hyping itself and crapping on others. Urban issues are are actual urban issues, not opportunities to surpass Los Angeles (the usual benchmark) and brag about it.

That said, I expected a little more empathy from Sacramento on the whole "this town sucks" parade, being that it's similarly a target of other city snobs.

[innov8]

Ya, I feel ya krudmonk. Other than Sacramento's midtown, both San Jose
and Sacramento are neck in neck in many areas. Although, San Jose is getting
the A's for the most part and has a modern arena which Sac. is struggling to build
as well. Shot, San Jose will also get HSR (if it gets built) in the first phase
and Sac. won’t. Yeah, I feel ya :hug:

[creamcityleo79]

You know the world is ending when Sacramento starts passing on "cowtown" comments to cities that are older, bigger and more dense.

More dense?!? San Jose: 5,216.3/sq mi
Sacramento: 4,711/sq mi

WOW! 500 more people per sq mi!

San Jose is 174.9 sq mi of land.
Sacramento has 97.2 sq mi of land.

If Sacramento incorporated all the unincorporated parts of the metro area in Sacramento County, it would have a population almost the size of San Jose AND would still have a bigger metro area!

[wburg]

I wouldn't call San Jose a cow town, considering they're twice our size. But we're way out in front in terms of historic preservation: San Jose's "historic district" is one city block. Aside from the mission period and a brief stint as California's capital, San Jose's claim to historic fame doesn't stand up much to Sacramento's, until the beginnings of Silicon Valley.

Oh, and we have taller buildings than they do.

[creamcityleo79]

Turns out you should have contacted the Bee to see if they could use some of your pics, snfenoc!
No housing bust here
City core is hopping with new, urban infill homes
By Mary Lynne Vellinga - Bee Staff Writer

Published 12:00 am PDT Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2007/09/24/20/416-2M25HOUSING1.embedded.prod_affiliate.4.JPG

Javier Tostado works on a window at the new Globe Mills project in the Alkali Flat community, where a developer has converted an old grain complex into a stylish rental units for low- and moderate-income residents. About eight new developments are in the central city.

Driving around Sacramento's urban core, you'd never guess there was a housing market slump.

New lofts, three-story row houses and condominiums conceived during the housing boom are nearing completion in neighborhoods ringing downtown.

Some have attracted surprising interest, given the region's depressed home sales. At 18th and L streets, for example, one buyer is spending $2 million to combine two loft penthouses into a more spacious one.

At least eight housing developments with about 500 units are either under construction or just completed in the central city. Across the Tower Bridge on the West Sacramento waterfront, another roughly 250 units either have hit the market or soon will.

Unlike previous central city projects, nearly all of the new units coming on line are for sale, not for rent. Most were built without public subsidy.

An exception is the Globe Mills project at 12th and C streets in Alkali Flat, which received $19 million in redevelopment funds. Developer Skip Rosenbloom and architect Michael Malinowski are winning accolades for their striking renovation of the old grain elevators and mill into rental units for low- and moderate-income tenants.

For years, city leaders pushed unsuccessfully for more homeownership downtown. But the finances didn't make sense for developers until the housing market boom pushed prices high enough to cover the extra expense of building on small, inner-city lots.

When sales prices topped $300 a square foot a few years ago, developers rushed to get into the urban housing business. Projects started in those heady days are now ready to open.

The builders hope that their products -- and locations -- are interesting enough to sell in tough times. "It's a scary market," said developer Mark Friedman, a partner in Loftworks, which is building 32 brownstone-style row houses in midtown at N and 26th streets. "Suburbia, Schmaburbia," boasts a billboard at the construction site.

"The product is extraordinary," Friedman said. "Time will tell if we'll be rewarded for producing a good product."

Developer Tony Giannoni says he's proud of his new midtown urban housing project, Tapestri Square, a block of 58 row houses at 21st and T streets.

Earlier this year, Giannoni sold 30 condominiums atop his new Marriott hotel on L Street downtown to a single reseller from Southern California, who has found buyers for a third of them.

Plenty of people have been coming through the Tapestri Square models, which opened two weeks ago. It's unknown how many of these lookers will turn into buyers for the narrow three-story houses that range in price from $450,000 to $850,000.

"If they sell in this market, that shows how strong the downtown can really be," Giannoni said.

The new urban projects offer a range of styles in an effort to appeal to different buyers.

Tapestri Square aims for a traditional "East Coast" feel with wood stair rails, tile and hardwood floors. Targeting empty nesters, it offers an optional elevator to save aging knees.

Other projects offer variations on the loft theme, ranging from "true lofts" with a big open room downstairs and a sleeping mezzanine upstairs, to "soft lofts" with an open floor plan but separate bedrooms. Granite countertops are ubiquitous. Garages are tucked underneath on the first floor.

Some developers are highlighting their projects' green features. Regis Homes has outfitted 36 houses in its SoCap Lofts project on R Street with solar panels.

Regis is planning a grand opening Thursday. Like many urban infill projects, the SoCap Lofts are painted in deep colors. The vivid combinations scream urban like beige screams suburban.

The units stand just three feet apart and are three stories tall. "I'm building a product I could never live in myself," said project manager Eric Schlenker, who has three young children. "But we're very confident we'll find 36 buyers it will work for."

On the other side of midtown, developer Sotiris Kolokotronis and his partners have defied sales trends with their seven-story complex of 92 lofts at 18th and L. The new building is across L Street from a 176-unit apartment complex Kolokotronis opened last year.

Positioned at a hub of new restaurants and shops, the building is commanding prices far higher than its competitors -- about $540 a square foot. Here, buyers pay nearly $400,000 for a 676-square-foot loft. Thirty-five of the units are in escrow, including nine of 12 penthouses.

Standing on the top floor, which is still under construction, partner Demetri Romas pointed to the 18-foot-high penthouse ceilings, the mezzanine and the sweeping view of downtown to explain why well-heeled buyers have been attracted to the L Street Lofts.

Some L Street buyers had previously signed contracts to buy units in developer John Saca's planned 53-story condo towers before that plan fell apart.

"Several Kings (players) have been through here; they love the high ceilings," Romas said. "The new coach has been through."

Eight blocks away at 17th and D streets, Signature Properties is appealing to a different demographic with its 52 Craftsman-style condominiums. They offer nearly 1,300 square feet of space at prices ranging from the high $300,000s to the mid-$400,000s. Signature has sold 11 of the 24 units released to date.

"We have a lot of people who were previously renting that are buying their first home; that's really cool," said spokeswoman Alisa Boris.

For one developer on the periphery of the central city, sales have come more slowly. West Sacramento developer John Leonard took the drastic step of holding a public auction Saturday for his 22 loft units on the West Sacramento waterfront.

"The goal is to sell the homes, pay the bank, and do the right thing," Leonard said.

Only one of the downtown projects under construction is immune from market conditions. The conversion of the abandoned, burned Globe Mills complex to housing has been expensive, and filled with surprises.

No private developer would likely have attempted it without public assistance, said Friedman, a friend of developer Skip Rosenbloom. "The building had been sitting there for 20 years with nobody having the courage to take it on," he said.

Nearly $36 million later, the Globe Mills project is near completion. It will be one of the most unusual residential complexes in the region.

By dedicating the 112 senior units in two new buildings to low-income tenants, the project qualified for money from the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency. It raised more money by selling tax credits.

"It's the only way you could save this building," the project architect Malinowski said. He doesn't think finding tenants will be a problem.

The senior activity room will sit on top of five-story concrete silos that once stored grain. One of the round silos will be an elevator shaft, another a mail room. A stairway will "float" in another.

Metal chutes that carried grain to the base of the building will be converted into light fixtures sticking like metal spiders out of the lobby ceiling. The old mill building will contain 31 lofts reserved for moderate-income tenants.

Seven lofts on the ground floor boast 20-foot-high concrete ceilings and huge windows reminiscent of those in Koloktronis' million-dollar penthouses. But in order to snag this edgy bit of urban housing, a couple can earn no more than 110 percent of the area median income, a restriction that excludes any couple making more than about $60,000.

No Kings need apply.
http://www.sacbee.com/static/newsroom/graphics/2W25HOUSING.gif

[travis bickle]

Combining Snfenoc's great pix with this story is yet further proof that downtown Sacramento and the rest of the region are two distinct and separate markets.

As many here have said, downtown offers a lifestyle unavailable from Portland to LA and from the East Bay to... well... I don't know... Denver?

There is a huge pent-up demand for this kind of living. One thing about Sacramento getting a late start on downtown condos is that there are still buyers for them and it is not overbuilt like Miami or San Diego where the condo market and the suburban markets are both greatly suffering.

While I would have much preferred the Towers (and other high-rises) under construction right now (start three months earlier or take three months off the approval process and they would be... sniff), seeing all of this activity proves that downtown is a viable market.

If you're offering a typical suburban lifestyle in this cycle... good luck. That type of product everywhere and the plummeting sales figures reflect it. If you're offering the unique downtown urban experience, they're are still plenty of qualified buyers willing to pay, and pay well for it.

It's good to see the Bee acknowledge that.

Oh and please... let's try not to inject race into this thread wburg...

[goldcntry]

Oh and please... let's try not to inject race into this thread wburg...

Huh??? :shrug: Travis, you just like poking wburg, don't ya! You two are probably best friends and love egging each other on over and swearing at each other over beers at the Zebra Club every Thursday afternoon... :poke:

Ah... you must be referring to his reference of "walking down to the chinatown fair?" You are such a card you big tomato! :tomato:

[ozone]

Did I miss the Chinatown fair? I thought it was going to be on the 30th. Or is that something else?

It's nice to see the Bee finally gett'n it. Would it hurt them to be a downtown booster? They are somewhat of a NIMBY newspaper.

[otnemarcaS]

Oh and please... let's try not to inject race into this thread wburg...

Not sure I understand this too. :shrug: Couldn't be goldcntry's reference to the Chinatown fair as there was a Chinatown Mall culture Fair downtown on Sept 23.


Oh, and we have taller buildings than they do.

In all fairness, SJ would easily have many more taller buildings than Sacramento if there wasn't the building height limits to meet basic federal safety standards due to the proximity to SJ's international airport. I think most buildings cannot be more than 22-24 stories or so.

[wburg]

Nah, I just mentioned walking to the Chinatown fair because that's where I went on Sunday and saw a very similar view of 621 CM to one of Steve's shots. I was talking about skyscrapers, honest!

[travis bickle]

Not sure I understand this too. Couldn't be goldcntry's reference to the Chinatown fair as there was a Chinatown Mall culture Fair downtown on Sept 23.

What I was referring to are comments from wburg like the following:

"racists who hate poor people" from Sacramento Transportation thread.

and...

"Vibrancy" and "urbanity" are buzzwords that really don't mean anything. They are used when someone wants to say "higher property value" and "more white people." from the Railyards thread.

What's really funny about the latter is that everyone knows when someone says "vibrancy" what they actually want to say is "fewer preservationists."

[goldcntry]

:lmao: