Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[econgrad]

:offtopic:

I have been hearing from out of towners who visit our Downtown, and from 4 different people, the same opinion: The Sidewalks in Sacramento are too narrow for high foot traffic. I just returned from Santa Cruz, CA. Their downtown has 10 to 12 feet wide sidewalks in their Downtown, enough room for street musicians (thats what I did yesterday) and people walking around. It is ludicrous that a small town like Santa Cruz has a bustling (4 streets) core with people walking around and events, and our's is still struggling. Also, I found three (3) inner urban Lofts projects rising out from Santa Cruz's downtown. They can do it bigger, I do not understand why our city struggles. Vote this city council out! I saw more foot traffic in Downtown Santa Cruz in one day than I see in Downtown Sacramento in one week.

[Majin]

^^ I've been saying that for years but no one listens to me.

[innov8]

The reason no one listens is because of the cost. I believe the cost to replace
each corner with handicap accessible ramps was $5000 each... can you imagine
the cost to replace the whole thing? I'm sure the city would also ask property
owners to pay 50/50 on the costs too.

[wburg]

Downtown Sacramento already has 10-12 foot wide sidewalks, at least through the central business district (I/J/K/L). I just walked outside and measured 'em. Want to prove me wrong? Whip out your tape measure and show me the photos.

innov8: Sidewalks are considered to be the property of the owner of the land, although they're also public right-of-way. When the city tells you to replace your sidewalks, the landowner pays 100% of the cost. The city offering to pay 50% would be an act of immense generosity on the city's part.

Assuming thats 10-12 feet isn't wide enough, econgrad, how do you recommend we widen them? Take a lane of traffic out of the existing streets, or demolish every street-facing building downtown in order to give a wider setback?

[Majin]

That's a cop out, other smaller cities that get way less revennue have bigger sidewalks. The problem here isn't the fact that the city doesn't have money, it's the fact that they don't invest it in the right places.

When the boom was here, how much money was spent on Natomas vs K street/Central City?

[Majin]

Downtown Sacramento already has 10-12 foot wide sidewalks, at least through the central business district (I/J/K/L). I just walked outside and measured 'em. Want to prove me wrong? Whip out your tape measure and show me the photos.

innov8: Sidewalks are considered to be the property of the owner of the land, although they're also public right-of-way. When the city tells you to replace your sidewalks, the landowner pays 100% of the cost. The city offering to pay 50% would be an act of immense generosity on the city's part.

Assuming thats 10-12 feet isn't wide enough, econgrad, how do you recommend we widen them? Take a lane of traffic out of the existing streets, or demolish every street-facing building downtown in order to give a wider setback?

Outside the CDB, especially in the busy areas of Midtown what needs to happen is they get rid of the planter strips and go full concrete. They also need to put up their own money on fixing the sidewalks instead of relying on property owners (again, look at K street, whats Moe Mohanna done to fix his properties lately?). If the city is serious they need to put their money where their mouth is and start investing or else things will never improve.

[wburg]

Majin, you really seem to be convinced that the city can just come up with as much money as it wants, whenever it wants. Where do you think the city gets this money? They certainly don't print it up downstairs at city hall! The city budget comes from property taxes, fines and fees the city charges--in other words, we pay it. In order to spend lots more money on the many fun things you are suggesting for it, they need to charge more money--raise taxes.

As part of your Majin 2020 campaign, in addition to your bold proposal to wipe out all of the street trees in the central city with your sidewalk-expansion campaign, do you also suggest a huge tax increase?

[ozone]

Seriously guys why are we are now debating the width of our sidewalks.. WTF?

[wburg]

Seriously guys why are we are now debating the width of our sidewalks.. WTF?

Because we all get along so well, and there are so few other subjects worth debating these days, I guess?

You are right, though...this discussion has pretty much reached the "WTF" point.

Anyhow, before the sidewalk sidetrack, Econgrad was talking about Santa Cruz. Now, comparing Santa Cruz to Sacramento is kind of apples & oranges. Santa Cruz is a small resort city of about 60,000 people. It is mostly known for its boardwalk, beaches, nearby schools, generally really good weather, and mountain scenery.

Downtown Santa Cruz draws a lot of tourists from all over, especially the Bay Area. It has been a while since I was in Santa Cruz (one overnight trip in 1995 was the last time I was there) so I'll try not to make too many assumptions. But, so far as I know, Santa Cruz isn't an old-core industrial city, and it doesn't have suburbs where the bulk of the people who work downtown moved to over the past half-century. I will also make the assumption that Santa Cruz never had a redevelopment project that kicked 75% of the population out of its downtown. Finally, I'm pretty sure that Santa Cruz doesn't have a six-lane interstate freeway running in between its main tourist attractions and the rest of its downtown.

[uzi963]

On a different subject:

msnbc's Top 10 Underrated US cities.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18024681/

at least we made the list.

[innov8]

On a different subject:

msnbc's Top 10 Underrated US cities.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18024681/

at least we made the list.

Newsweek did one of these in 88' or 89' and Sacramento was ranked 10
right behind Providence Rhode Island. Not much has changed :shrug:

[econgrad]

Downtown Sacramento already has 10-12 foot wide sidewalks, at least through the central business district (I/J/K/L). I just walked outside and measured 'em. Want to prove me wrong? Whip out your tape measure and show me the photos.

innov8: Sidewalks are considered to be the property of the owner of the land, although they're also public right-of-way. When the city tells you to replace your sidewalks, the landowner pays 100% of the cost. The city offering to pay 50% would be an act of immense generosity on the city's part.

Assuming thats 10-12 feet isn't wide enough, econgrad, how do you recommend we widen them? Take a lane of traffic out of the existing streets, or demolish every street-facing building downtown in order to give a wider setback?

Wburg, go to DT Santa Cruz and see the difference. Its pathetic that Sacramento has no bustling fun streets to walk around, with wide sidewalks with room for pedestrians and street musicians and jugglers and artists, there is nothing like that here. Absolutely nothing, Folsom is the closest thing to it. And your comparison of Santa Cruz being a resort city has nothing to do with this, my point is people like you want a walkable city, it isn't that walkable with the sidewalks we have. The city really messed up. People like you should be just as disgusted as I am, if anything is going to change in future developments. Instead of defending the mistakes and defending the city's status quo of being mediocre. Ozone, cry all you want. This is a forum, we can talk about killer monkeys from mars invading Davis if we want to...

[wburg]

Wburg, go to DT Santa Cruz and see the difference. Its pathetic that Sacramento has no bustling fun streets to walk around, with wide sidewalks with room for pedestrians and street musicians and jugglers and artists, there is nothing like that here. Absolutely nothing, Folsom is the closest thing to it. And your comparison of Santa Cruz being a resort city has nothing to do with this, my point is people like you want a walkable city, it isn't that walkable with the sidewalks we have. The city really messed up. People like you should be just as disgusted as I am, if anything is going to change in future developments. Instead of defending the mistakes and defending the city's status quo of being mediocre. Ozone, cry all you want. This is a forum, we can talk about killer monkeys from mars invading Davis if we want to...

Downtown Sacramento's streets are pretty darn walkable the way they are--I know, I walk them all the time.

Santa Cruz as a resort city has everything to do with this, because the main reason wy there are jugglers and artists on the street in Santa Cruz is because they are a resort city. There are jugglers and clowns and musicians on the streets in Old Sacramento, especially when the weather's good or on holiday weekends, and the street gets pretty crowded. They, and the tourists they are there to entertain, generally don't wander any farther than Old Sacramento because Interstate 5 acts as a massive physical and mental barrier.

On the other side of that barrier is the working part of downtown Sacramento, the one based on the often-boring business of government, law, banking, and all those other mysterious activities that guys in suits perform. Because these people live in the suburbs, a pattern established in just about every major city in the United States since the 1950s, the vast majority of these guys in suits leave downtown at 5:00 PM. And because downtown Sacramento is set up for their needs, rather than entirely as a tourist attraction, there is little demand for jugglers on the street. I realize you don't see the central city as anything but a playground, econgrad, but some of us actually do work and live here.

[seinar]

I think what econgrad was saying is that Santa Cruz has more activity on their sidewalks. Sure they are a resort town, but the point is that if Sacramento wants to have activity on its streets after dark or whenever, then wider sidewalks might be the way to go. I work in midtown, near Marrs, after dark, there is very little foot traffic, except for Streets of London. I dont think having jugglers on the streets is the point. Its having a vibrant downtown area full of activity where people would want to hang out after work and on the weekends, and santa cruz helps that happen by having wider sidewalks. Besides, why cant sacramento be a city where people from all over would want to come and visit (i.e. a resort town). Nobody I know from the Bay Area comes here to visit.

[seinar]

Maybe the Railyards can have an area that is Santa Cruz-eque. That might help draw visitors, not just a place to live and work, but to play as well.

[wburg]

Well, it should be mentioned that I play downtown too. Tonight I'm having trouble deciding if I should go to the movie premiere at the Crest or a ten-band music festival near Broadway.

The area near Marrs gets quite a bit of foot traffic--20th and K is pretty much foot-traffic city, even on weeknights. It's not like street traffic in downtown Bangladesh, but there are a lot of people out there.

Wider sidewalks has pretty much nothing to do with it.

There are a lot simpler ways to promote downtown nightlife: greatly reduce restrictions on entertainment permits, allow street music every night instead of just Second Saturday, allow all-ages music venues to operate, permit street vendors and food carts to a much greater extent, just to name a few.

Try coming out on Second Saturday and you'll see what Sacramento street life could be like every weekend, if only it was allowed to occur! Our sidewalk widths seem just fine, they're crowded solely because there are a lot of people out on them--and that's the objective, right?

As we see on the K Street Mall, continuous demolition and reconstruction and "beautifying" projects don't draw foot traffic, they chase it away.

People from the Bay Area don't come here to visit because there's still more to do in San Francisco, and almost certainly always will be. Plus, most Bay Areans still think Sacramento is a truck stop and a Wal-Mart by the highway.

The point is that we aren't a resort town like Santa Cruz. We lack an ocean, for starters, and our weather gets cruddy sometimes. We aren't a cultural mecca like San Francisco, but then no other place on the surface of the Earth is like San Francisco, and there is little point to trying. This doesn't mean that we can't have nightlife and a place to play--but we have obstacles to cross that a city like Santa Cruz simply doesn't have to deal with.

Our goal should be to try being more like Sacramento. Focus on promoting the great local culture, unlock its potential in simple, cost-effective ways, instead of wasting time and money on expensive prestige projects. Bring life back to the central city by encouraging residential projects in infill areas that are accessible across the economic spectrum--it's the college kids and young adults, who aren't necessarily wealthy, who make a city hum with activity. By placing job centers near those residences, you keep people in a place where work and home are in close proximity--thus increasing the chances that they'll also stay close to play.

[ozone]

What we need is a good old fashioned earthquake to destroy our downtown so we can remake it with doublewide sidewalks. Then the sidewalks can look even more empty after 5pm and on the weekends.

[ltsmotorsport]

Then the sidewalks can look even more empty after 5pm and on the weekends.

:haha:

[TowerDistrict]

Yeah i just hit up the Crest where there were lines down the sidewalk to get in.
There was a huge line outside on Azukar, Parlare had about 15 people just
downstairs. Streets of London was crowded and there was a dude playing
the sax out front. Kinda bummed I'm missing the Sound Art Fest down the
street, but my slippers and a bottle of scotch were calling. Besides, tomorrow
is the Art Walk and I'll bet there's gonna be a good turn out. But I gotta
miss that cause I'm dining at 55 Degrees then hitting up the Broadway
show, Putnam County Spelling Bee.

like you all give a shit ;)

There's no shortage of stuff going on in this town, but I do get what econgrad
is getting at too. I've heard retailers in Midtown complain about the City
being very stringent on street festivals, and we all know that music venues
have faced problems with noise and crowd controls.

So I do think the City can do more to foster an environment that brings
more people to the streets. I also think that it's a good thing to identify cool
stuff happening in other cities and bring that vibe to your hometown. It
doesn't have to mean that you think your city is lacking - rather consider
this is a very cosmopolitan city with varied interests... it's good to mix it up
and try on a few different pairs of shoes.

[wburg]

TD: Did you catch "Why Lie, I Need A Drink" at the Crest? I went to the Sound Art fest instead. I walked home at midnight, stopped by Chita's on the way and had a taco. Quite a lot of people on the street in that neck of the woods, even after midnight.

[TowerDistrict]

TD: Did you catch "Why Lie, I Need A Drink" at the Crest? I went to the Sound Art fest instead. I walked home at midnight, stopped by Chita's on the way and had a taco. Quite a lot of people on the street in that neck of the woods, even after midnight.

Yes I did. It was fantastic. Unpretentious, unassuming and hilarious. I had
to go check it out because i missed it when it was pre-screened at Fools
Foundation and i didn't see any future dates lined up, otherwise I really
wanted to check out the Sound Art Fest. I saw your name on the lineup...
did you play tonight, or are you up tomorrow?

Who are the organizers of the festival? I hope this type of thing finds a home
again, once that building is demoed. That's set to happen this summer i think.

[TowerDistrict]

oh yeah.. most of that film was shot in this neck of the woods, so it was interesting
to see the various street characters I'm familiar with on camera. I've always had a
soft spot for most of them... except for that dick with the longer blond hair that's
always around Broadway. That guy was even worse on camera than he is in person.

[wburg]

TD: The SSAF is put on by the same folks who organize the Norcal Noisefest. I'm involved but mostly I just do grant writing and promotion. I'll be there tonight. We've been doing this kind of thing pretty regularly since around 1994, finding venues generally isn't a big problem.

I was tempted to duck out of the first night to see "Why Lie?" as Keith is an old pal; hopefully he'll get more showings or do a DVD release. Good to hear there was a line down the block. And yeah, part of the fun of locally produced movies is seeing places and faces I know on the big screen!

[jsf8278]

Do you guys know if Why Lie...is going to be shown at the Crest anymore? I checked their website and it didn't appear as though ti was. Was that a one night engagement?

[sugit]

The website says "One night only" so I'm guessing so. Sucks too, I wanted too see it, but couldn't make it lat night.

[Dougall5505]

whats up Sacramento guys? I thought you guys might be interested in these renders. They are of some rail line but show a couple proposed projects. renders by: http://flickr.com/photos/nc3d/
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2326/2317296526_1c7ce4781e_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2088/2317296348_123f264634_o.jpg
good luck getting that new arena!

[Pistola916]

I would say good luck getting all those towers.

[sactown_2007]

That must be Sacramento in 2045 -- years after Fargo is no longer mayor anymore because there sure are a lot of new buildings blocking that view of the Capitol from city hall!! :haha:

[urban_encounter]

I would say good luck getting all those towers.

Never mind the towers; we will be lucky to have a waterfront that looks that good; or an intermodal station; or high speed rail; or........(well the list goes on an on)

Ironically when i was a kid this is the kind of city I had envisioned Sacramento would one day resemble. (Albeit with more trees than depicted in the rendering)..


But at the rate things are going, it's not likely to happen in my lifetime...

[TowerDistrict]

cynics the lot of ya!

[wburg]

There are some things in that rendering that almost certainly won't be there by 2030, like the Towers and Aura/Epic and the Mohanna one, but there were almost certainly be something similarly protuberant. The stuff in the Railyards is mostly conjecture based on the heights they have already talked about, and I'm pretty sure the green roofs are the renderer's imagination at work. It would be kinda nice if they used the concept. I do expect that tall stuff will appear along the Sixth and Seventh street armatures east of the Shops buildings.

I would definitely far rather see a cluster of tall residential towers downtown than a bunch of mid-rise residential spreading farther east. And I wouldn't mind seeing some of those towers crop up where Westfield currently sits.

The rendering does posit the relocation of the Southern Pacific depot. I consider that unlikely.

I suppose my focus is a little more ground-level. Are the little cars on I-5 electric, or gas-powered? Are the homeless housed, or do they sleep on the sidewalk in the shadow of those towers? Is there a teeny trolley over the Tower Bridge? Is the RTM up and running with a big HSR locomotive inside that kids can climb all over?

jsf: The showing of "Why Lie" was a premiere, just a one-time deal rather than a regular engagement. If it gets picked up by a distributor it might be back for some duration, otherwise it will probably make it to DVD at some point.

[innov8]

From what I understand, the Metropolitan will probably resubmit new plans
but only with some minor changes. This project will then go back through
Planning Commission in May and it will also go before the Design Commission
once again. It looks like Saca's going to push forward.

[innov8]

Awesome photos, Steve. Thanks for posting!!!

I'm so unaware of all the Sutter project's components. Can anyone explain
why the Trinity Cathedral would be demolished in the first place? Is the church
okay with this plan?

That rendering of the new cathedral makes me queezy. It looks like my
grandma's living room exploded.

I emailed the Cathedral and this is why they are demolishing the current Cathedral.

Building a new cathedral is a very long-term project. At today's
construction prices we need at least $18M. We raised $3M on our first
capital campaign. We have refocused our efforts to rebuilding our
hall/program area as a first step.

Why build anew? Trinity Cathedral is running out of room. In the program
area we have reached capacity+ . As we continue to expand program
opportunities for people in the community (wider community than only the
immediate Trinity Faith Community), we suspect, hope and pray that our
membership will grow. Hence the need for a new cathedral building. But, as
I said, we also suspect that this latter phase of the building project is many
years down the road.

A lot of people love the current cathedral. It is charming. Future plans will
include retaining the stain glass windows; having a main worship space that
is more flexible; having a chapel that can be open 24x7; including a
baptismal pool; including a labyrinth; and many other items. We will wait
and see how much of the "wish list" we are able to incorporate.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have additional questions.

Jerry Pare'
Manager of Administration
Trinity Cathedral
2620 Capitol Ave
Sacramento, CA 95816
W: 916-930-8026
F: 916-446-2589

[urban_encounter]

From what I understand, the Metropolitan will probably resubmit new plansbut only with some minor changes. This project will then go back through Planning Commission in May and it will also go before the Design Commission once again. It looks like Saca's going to push forward.


I admire his willingness to keep with it. I wouldn't have (at least not in this depressed market and not with the current clowns sitting on the city council).

Now i know why we have developers wanting to build residential higrises in the suburbs instead of downtown.


It will be interesting to see if the new design can incorporate additonal setbacks and still have enough of an imprint on that parcel to build a profitable residential highrise. That will be at the height of the campaign season, so it will be intersting to see how Fargo responds (if the council receives it prior to the June primary.)

[TowerDistrict]

There was an interesting article in the Sacramento Union last week about the upcoming Props 98 & 99. These are two competing propositions that change and/or limit the use of Eminent Domain. I'll give you all one guess who's featured in the main photos...

Urban, you've been talking about this for a while now. These two propositions seem very confusing, and I really don't understand how they can both be voted on simultaneously. They directly contradict each other, but their implications are drastically different.

Prop 98 (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_98_%282008%29) was writen by that Howard Jarvis Taxpayers people and would mean the end of K Street.

The other, Prop 99 (http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_99_(2008)) was written by the League of Cities and would only prevent the forced sale of single-family homes. So Mohanna is out of luck on that. Even if he could place a pyromaniac vagrant in one of his buildings and call them a resident, he'd have to prove they'd been a resident for one-year minimum.

[Dakotasteve66]

Confusion may have been the very intent of Prop 99. This is just supposition on my part, but if the League of Cities knew that Prop 98 was coming and it would be bad for them, then they could have lobbied to get Prop 99 on the ballot. I think its a proven fact that when voters are confused on an issue, or competing issues, they usually vote No.

Also, I would assume there are more home-owner voters than business-owner voters, thus giving solice to the home-owners by allowing them to vote for Prop 99 which protects them, but still allows for businesses to be taken via Eminent Domain.

[JVissle]

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g31/JV1st/metropolitan_1_Miami.jpg



I was browsing thru different comps and came across a proposed project for Miami's Upper East Side. (Soleil 43 floors 514ft Residential --Approved)
Metopolitan, meet your long lost twin brother, Soleil. Separated at birth, reunited at last.

[urban_encounter]

http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g31/JV1st/metropolitan_1_Miami.jpg



I was browsing thru different comps and came across a proposed project for Miami's Upper East Side. (Soleil 43 floors 514ft Residential --Approved)
Metopolitan, meet your long lost twin brother, Soleil. Separated at birth, reunited at last.



The chances that Sacramento's skyline will one day give birth to the Metropolitan are slim..

[urban_encounter]

There was an interesting article in the Sacramento Union last week about the upcoming Props 98 & 99. These are two competing propositions that change and/or limit the use of Eminent Domain. I'll give you all one guess who's featured in the main photos...

Urban, you've been talking about this for a while now. These two propositions seem very confusing, and I really don't understand how they can both be voted on simultaneously. They directly contradict each other, but their implications are drastically different.

Prop 98 (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_98_%282008%29) was writen by that Howard Jarvis Taxpayers people and would mean the end of K Street.

The other, Prop 99 (http://www.ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=California_Proposition_99_(2008)) was written by the League of Cities and would only prevent the forced sale of single-family homes. So Mohanna is out of luck on that. Even if he could place a pyromaniac vagrant in one of his buildings and call them a resident, he'd have to prove they'd been a resident for one-year minimum.


Proposition 98 will also put an end to rent controls, which will really hit senior citizens and low income people hard. There is a lawsuit pending to force the backers of prop 98 to include that tidbit in the official statement of the prop as it will appear on the ballot, so people won't be fooled....

[snfenoc]

I can't wait to vote for Prop 98.

[econgrad]

I can't wait to vote for Prop 98.

Agreed! How dare people think that we are better off allowing the Government to take property from private citizens.

http://yesprop98.com/

[creamcityleo79]

Agreed! How dare people think that we are better off allowing the Government to take property from private citizens.

http://yesprop98.com/
You've lost all my respect with that endorsement! You've GOT to be kidding me! First global warming and now this...it seems you are quite delusional!!!

[snfenoc]

You've lost all my respect with that endorsement! You've GOT to be kidding me! First global warming and now this...it seems you are quite delusional!!!

Well that's not a very tolerant and diverse thing to say.

[TowerDistrict]

I just don't understand why so many think it's a terrible thing for government to force a sale for private development, but it's okay to force sale of property for something such as a freeway through a neighborhood?

There seems to be this distinct line that people don't want crossed between private and public developments - and all i can think about is the numerous examples of freeways and even public transit systems gutting neighborhoods. In my eyes, that's so much worse than a few retail shops replacing a blighted area.

[jsf8278]

I think a big problem with the whole K street ED is this: The city is attempting to force the sale of privately help property and plans to then resell it to another private individual.
As far as ED law goes, that is one of the hardest types of ED cases to win. Municipalities have a much easier time when they are forcing the sale of private property to build a road.

[TowerDistrict]

i understand the difference. I just don't understand why people think that's more acceptable?

When the controversy of K Street finally blows over, will people look back at it and think it worse than I-5 and 80/50 gutting through the central city? Because, in the grand scheme of things, I consider that the ultimate abuse of government.

Wrestling properties from a slumlord so they can be renovated strikes me more as a city simply looking out for itself.

[econgrad]

I just don't understand why so many think it's a terrible thing for government to force a sale for private development, but it's okay to force sale of property for something such as a freeway through a neighborhood?

There seems to be this distinct line that people don't want crossed between private and public developments - and all i can think about is the numerous examples of freeways and even public transit systems gutting neighborhoods. In my eyes, that's so much worse than a few retail shops replacing a blighted area.

I never said anything about a freeway. I as well do not think the Government should have that much power either. Overall, the real solution is in the planning process, solve these problems like transportation BEFORE all is developed. As far as K street and redevelopment, it is very unwise to allow the City, State or any Government agency to control what is felt necessary for development. If we would just allow market forces to work, we wouldn't of had this K street problem in the first place. There is much profit to be made on K street, let the private sector do its work.

Sorry Neuhickman that I lost your respect, these are my beliefs and I will stand by them. I am willing to discuss these, as we did before, I enjoy our debates very much. Its good to talk with people with opposing view points, its too boring to be surrounded by people who think the same.

[innov8]

Bob Shallit:

Sacramento Bee
March 12, 2007

Just moving: It took longer than expected. But officials at Mercy General Hospital are ready to move a handful of homes – and demolish others – that stand in the way of its controversial expansion plan.

This week, a one-story home at 848 39th St. will be relocated to a vacant lot at 46th and T streets. An adjacent single-family residence will be transported later to Oak Park. At least one other dwelling may be moved.

The remaining residences are scheduled to be demolished within the next 45 days, says Wendy Hoyt, an urban planning consultant who is working with Mercy.

"They're all older homes in disrepair," Hoyt says, adding that Mercy is pleased it's been able to salvage at least some of the dwellings. "If we move one, that's fantastic. If we move two or three, that's even better."

* * *

[econgrad]

^ Why bother preserving any of them...this preservation is madness!

[TowerDistrict]

I never said anything about a freeway. I as well do not think the Government should have that much power either. Overall, the real solution is in the planning process, solve these problems like transportation BEFORE all is developed. As far as K street and redevelopment, it is very unwise to allow the City, State or any Government agency to control what is felt necessary for development. If we would just allow market forces to work, we wouldn't of had this K street problem in the first place. There is much profit to be made on K street, let the private sector do its work.

I wasn't referring to anyone in particular in my comments - just general observation. I know you and snfenoc are more rigid on this issue than most. There seems to be a majority that considers ED for public projects as acceptable - and i disagree that this reasoning is somehow "okay".

[goldcntry]

Bob Shallit:

This week, a one-story home at 848 39th St. will be relocated to a vacant lot at 46th and T streets. An adjacent single-family residence will be transported later to Oak Park. At least one other dwelling may be moved.

"They're all older homes in disrepair," Hoyt says, adding that Mercy is pleased it's been able to salvage at least some of the dwellings. "If we move one, that's fantastic. If we move two or three, that's even better."

* * *

Am I the only one who thinks this is kinda crazy in my mind? Granted, I do spend a majority of my life up here in the Emerald Tower and the elevation does tend to thin out the brain cells, but these house moves just don't make sense to me.

I don't know all the logistics of this particular move, but I have had experience with house moving albeit in Jackson. The house they're moving from near the corner of 39 and H has a very looooong route through midtown to get all the way to 46th and T.

The most direct route is straight up 39th to T and then east on T.

Some obstacles include:


Narrow 39th Street...

Narrow 39th Street with lots of overhanging trees...

Low power/phone lines running on both sides of Folsom BLVD...

Lightrail lines at 39th and the Freeway...

The Freeway...

More powerlines, narrow streets, and the Elms of Elmhurst...


Yes it could be done but at what cost? Mercy may gain some sentimental goodwill for moving a less-than-spectacular house, but does it measure up to all the grief and work that this kind of move will cause? And they want to do it for more than one home??? My mind boggles. I don't want to sound harsh to the current residents of the effected homes; I'm sure they love their homes very much. I just have to ask at what point does sentimentality trump sanity?



oh wait... this is East Sac.... :D

[sugit]

Check this out a new hotel for 13th and I Street


http://www.twinsoup.com/index.html

Luxury boutique Hotel AVIA is coming to the corner of 13th & I Street in Sacramento!

AVIA, it's brand essence of 'The Art Of Living Well' will set out to put a fresh new face on the hospitality industry evoking the inviting ambiance of a cocktail party thrown by a gracious local host. AVIA Hotel will "surround guests with imaginative design and samplings of authentic food and wine pairings. Hosts will share local lore, pulling strings to help guests explore under-the-radar restaurants and the hottest shopping spots."

According to developer Roger Hume, the new luxury boutique hotel AVIA will feature 22-stories, a roof top pool & spa, roof top bar & lounge named Politix, a mid-level courtyard for guests and a second Masque Restaurant on the ground floor with an urban twist.

As for the interiors & design, Hume has hired Colum McCartan, known for such masterpieces as Hotel Vitale in San Francisco, & The Biltmore in New York. According to Hume, the interiors of AVIA Sacramento will have the look and feel of both Hotel Vitale & and Tower 31. We are told the projected completion date is the first part of 2010. Stay tuned...

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/AVIA_images-736817.jpg

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/vitale_pic4-755379.jpg

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/t31_web2-721807.jpg

[TWAK]

You've lost all my respect with that endorsement! You've GOT to be kidding me! First global warming and now this...it seems you are quite delusional!!!
oh i see, apparently the government cant tell you what to do with your body, or your relationships, but they sure as hell can take away your private land?

[creamcityleo79]

oh i see, apparently the government cant tell you what to do with your body, or your relationships, but they sure as hell can take away your private land?
I didn't say that. I just think that government should have this at it's disposal in circumstances like the Mohnna/K St debacle. I am more concerned about someone who does not believe in global warming and could stand in the way of saving our planet. The ED thing was just the kicker for me!

[urban_encounter]

oh i see, apparently the government cant tell you what to do with your body, or your relationships, but they sure as hell can take away your private land?



Just out of curiosity, have you ever owned your own home?


Property owners do have responsibilities and part of those responsibilities as a homeowner (or landowner) is to maintain your property..


Owning property doesn't give you the right to let it fall into a state of disrepair so that you bring down the surroudning neighborhood with you, increasing blight or crime.

[innov8]

Check this out a new hotel for 13th and I Street


http://www.twinsoup.com/index.html

Luxury boutique Hotel AVIA is coming to the corner of 13th & I Street in Sacramento!

According to developer Roger Hume, the new luxury boutique hotel AVIA will feature 22-stories, a roof top pool & spa, roof top bar & lounge named Politix, a mid-level courtyard for guests and a second Masque Restaurant on the ground floor with an urban twist.

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/AVIA_images-736817.jpg

That appears to be the former Epic Project site. I'll beleive it when it's topped out in 2010 or whatever the first part is :tup:

[snfenoc]

Just out of curiosity, have you ever owned your own home?


Property owners do have responsibilities and part of those responsibilities as a homeowner (or landowner) is to maintain your property..


Owning property doesn't give you the right to let it fall into a state of disrepair so that you bring down the surroudning neighborhood with you, increasing blight or crime.


What gives you the right to tell me what responsibilities I have with my property? You pay attention to your sh%t, I'll pay attention to mine.

[sugit]

That appears to be the former Epic Project site. I'll beleive it when it's topped out in 2010 or whatever the first part is :tup:

I actually think the site is where Bountiful Market used to be. I heard about this about 6-8 months ago when then they first closed, but never saw or heard anything after that.

[TowerDistrict]

That's very cool. Coincidentally, the interior designer for that project worked on Hotel Vitale which is owned by Joie De Vivre who are doing up The Citizen.

I hope for the sake of eating up ugly ass vacant lots, that they mean they're building it on the north-west corner of 14th & I... but that seems doubtful. The lot I'm referring to I think used to be a building that the Unibomber hit.

If it is at 13th & I where Bountiful Market used to be, then that is directly next door to the Sterling Hotel. I wonder if those two hotels/restaurants can coexist well?

[jsf8278]

What gives you the right to tell me what responsibilities I have with my property? You pay attention to your sh%t, I'll pay attention to mine.

What gives Urban and every other citizen that right are laws that by require property owners to maintain the marketability of their property. Its really not about paying attention your your own Sh%t as you say.

What makes you think you can do whatever you want with your property? You don't own some absolute right to it. Your ownership rights to your property include responsibilities. If you don't abide by those responsibilities, one consequence can be government acquisition.

[snfenoc]

That argument only works if I respect the laws of this nation, this state and this city. I don't. So kiss my...!

Thankfully, I can work to change those laws, which includes voting for Prop 98.

[wburg]

Roger Hume is also the fellow working on the project at 18th and S...I'm still hoping to hear more about that site. Interesting news...I drove by and judging by the "13th and I" description I can only assume that they'll be razing those two brick buildings, rather than the ugly-ass vacant lot on the other end of the block--unless the plan is to use the whole half-block on the I Street side. The other options are the firehouse/office condos, the Sheraton's parking lot, and the Attorney General's office.

I certainly hope that this move wouldn't threaten the Sterling, a beautiful landmark building. I don't think the markets are the same--the folks hoping for the new-and-shiny type of boutique hotel probably wouldn't be impressed by a building like the Sterling, and someone looking for a beautiful-old-mansion type of boutique hotel probably wouldn't care much for this Avia project.

Avia...sounds like a skin-care product.

[TowerDistrict]

Someone just bought the Sterling recently right? Did I read that here?

And I'm not so sure people's interests are as narrow as liking only modern or only historic. In fact, I like both environments equally, and like it better when the two environments are combined. But I think the Sterling will retain it's wedding niche. women like skincare products and all, but probably not that much.

22 Stories is a big building. What's the Federal Building across the street - like 12 stories, maybe less? I have to imagine the building is going to require near a half-block footprint, unless it rises like a pencil on end.

[sugit]

Yeah, I read that as well. I can't remember who bought it, though I think I remember is was someone we would know. You're right about the Sterling TD, it's not going anyway, it has it's niche in this city.

I'm sure it's the corner where the market was. When they closed there was a sign on the door saying there was a new hotel in the development stage for that site.

The EPA building on 10th is 20+, and the Attorney General Building across the street I think is around 18 or so. I would imagine at 22 stories, the hotel would be about the same height.

Burg - I think they have opened a sales office in the corner retail space in the Safeway project on the 18th and S corner. I've seen some stuff in there as I drive by, but haven't stopped by yet to see what they have to see.

[wburg]

D&S Development (yay!) owns the Sterling.

sugit, they have some sort of office there, I go by all the time, but I have yet to go by when there is someone inside! I tried to nab some photos of a plan I saw sitting on the table but they're a little fuzzy.

[innov8]

Someone just bought the Sterling recently right? Did I read that here?

And I'm not so sure people's interests are as narrow as liking only modern or only historic. In fact, I like both environments equally, and like it better when the two environments are combined. But I think the Sterling will retain it's wedding niche. women like skincare products and all, but probably not that much.

22 Stories is a big building. What's the Federal Building across the street - like 12 stories, maybe less? I have to imagine the building is going to require near a half-block footprint, unless it rises like a pencil on end.

Ah, across from the Fed building... that would be cool to see.

http://img378.imageshack.us/img378/6160/i14thnewxt7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[TWAK]

I didn't say that.
I know, my post wasn't too serious, I just like to fight the status quo of this forum from time to time.

I do actually feel the government shouldn't have the power to take away peoples land, even if they are a fuckbag like mohanna, or to put in an expressway.

now back to the construction......anybody notice the La Rivage hotel on I-5 in little pocket? I think that's the neighborhood name, it says that on a neighborhood map of sactown.

[urban_encounter]

What gives you the right to tell me what responsibilities I have with my property? You pay attention to your sh%t, I'll pay attention to mine.



Are you facing eminent domain????


For the record, the Constitution and the U.S. Supreme Court allow for redress against individuals who put the wellbeing of the people at risk by their actions or inactions.


Are you familair with the Constitution? It's in the preamble..


We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America



Meaning that the government may enact laws to promote the well-being of the people.


The Constitution doesn't give one person the right to trump the general welfare, wellbeing or interests of everybody else.

By your logic you have the right to run a crack house and neither the government or your neighbors have any right to object.



Luckily neither the law nor the Supreme Court agrees with you.

[snfenoc]

Urban:

First of all, _________________ and the horse you road in on. ;) ;) Second, leave the United States. And I mean that, Mr. big government socialist. Go live in Canada, or Great Britain, or China, or North Korea. I think you'd be at home in those countries knowing the government is taking "care" of everything and that individual rights are completely unimportant.




Duuuhhhh, what's this constipation thingy you talk about urban? Please, enlighten me oh great and condescending one.




When I asked, "What gives you the right..?" I wasn't referring to the legal right. Heaven knows, the government has a very broad interpretation of the constitution and, therefore, very broad powers (thanks to the fascist totalitarians who occupy all branches of our government and the freedom-hating civilians who allow them to do so). I'm talking about the moral right. What gives you the moral right to say society (and all its whims) is more important than the individual? But you don't have to answer that question, because I know what you will do - simply point back to the constitution and its open to interpretation preamble, court rulings and state/federal laws as all the moral authority you need to destroy the rights of others. Because of course, our individual rights come from the government – they are certainly not inherent.




Let's take a closer look at eminent domain, shall we?? There is actually no specific provision for eminent domain in the constitution ("...and congress shall taketh thy urine-soaked property and giveth it to Josiah Zeiden for the purpose of shoving it up his assh@%e."). Nope, there is only an implicit allowance in the 5th (14th) amendment (due process), which demands (yes, it’s actually a limit on government) just compensation for property taken. What constitutes proper usage of eminent domain is left up to us, the people. Sadly, many years ago, the courts decided they have a right to interpret the constitution (yep, I believe they don't, or shouldn't - suck on that one for a while); and the people’s role as the arbiter of what’s constitutional was relegated to the garbage heap. The courts ruled, as long as it is for public benefit (Broad Definition Alert!), eminent domain is OK. This gives government (state and local governments, especially) a lot of power to crap on the rights of individuals. Thankfully, we still have the power to elect representatives and (in California) the right to pass propositions through the referendum/initiative process. I happen to think eminent domain is misused. Honestly, I believe the only acceptable public benefit is for national defense (I may be willing to accept ED for transportation purposes, but I’m not even halfway sold), and even then, eminent domain should be met with strong skepticism. Now, is that OK with you, urban? Am I allowed to think that way? I know my thoughts don’t benefit the general welfare as you define it (more on that later). So do you wish to eminent domain my thoughts? Anyway, I am more than happy to vote for Prop 98. In fact, as I said earlier, I can’t wait to vote for it. Now, it is not perfect, but I’ll take it.

What I find laughable is many think a cleaned up 700 K Street block will cause Sacramento to become a great city. Those people are morons. Sacramento’s current condition is not that bad. In fact, I’d say it’s fine the way it is. Can the city get better? Of course, but let’s leave that up to the market. Let’s leave that up to private developers. Let’s allow an organic, untainted by government development process. Unfortunately, we don’t have the market to pay for all the extra stuff people want (hip, urban villages with people drinking fair-trade coffee and reading Harper’s magazine). So, our master-planning city leaders think they can force the issue by subsidizing proposal after proposal, making useless master plans and scapegoating Moe. People need to wake up. No amount of public action and eminent domain is going to turn Sacramento into something it’s not. Patience and faith that the market will grow at its own pace is what we need.

Now, please understand, I’m not a big fan of K Street. I think it needs work - a lot of work. However, in a free society that work has to be stimulated by private demand and development. I guess I am just patient enough to wait for it. Also, I’m not a big fan of Moe. He has had his subsidy-loving hand out for 20+ years. I don’t respect that. However, I understand the inability to get his land developed “properly” (who defines properly?). The money just ain’t there. Where is he supposed to get millions of dollars? (The only way you are able to own land down town is if you can afford to develop it? I don’t think so.) Hell, Zeiden can’t even afford to do it – he requires a massive government handout.




Urban, you excerpted a part of the constitution mentioning “general welfare” of the public as a goal for our government. I don’t dispute that; I can read despite my public education. However, I do dispute your definition of “general welfare”. I really doubt the framers had the forced fixing of blight properties, or social security, or health care, or affordable housing, or wacko environmentalism (a nod to you, neuhicky) in mind when they included “general welfare” in the preamble. Socialist, totalitarian elitists have interpreted “general welfare” to include those things (and more), but people who actually believe in liberty don’t have the same view. Instead, we think the protection of our liberty (National defense and strong boarders to prevent the tyranny of other nations from invading and taking over) and the pursuit of justice (punishing those (only after a defendant-favored process) who steal, kill, maim, rape, etc.) benefits the general welfare just fine. In addition, we believe all those things you love don’t benefit general welfare, because they sacrifice individual liberty. After all, what good are clean neighborhoods, retirement benefits, cheap prescriptions, nice little housing blocks for the “masses” (as I’m sure you call them, urban), and clear air if little freedom exists to enjoy them? Liberty first. Everything else is gravy. Now, this very limited form of government is not without it’s problems. I agree. It means having to accept annoyances and worse without government interference. It means “Blighted” districts (really, go to the Tenderloin in SF and tell me K Street is blighted) will have to remain that way until the market decides to fix them. Too bad. But at least Moe keeps his liberty (property), and that means way more to me than some master planned block of dumb stores.




Oh by the way, just so you know, I am fully against all drug laws, and I believe I do have the right (whether the constitution or the laws specifically say so or not) to own and operate a crack house. Of course, if government allowed people to exercise their individual right to use and sell drugs, one could probably operate his business a lot more legitimately, and not out of his house. Also, many of the problems that come with operating a black market business would vanish.



Ron Paul for President!

[wburg]

Okay, I'm kinda frightened here...I agree with snefnoc. I don't like Prop. 98, especially if it would essentially end rent control (not that we have it in Sacramento, but it seems like it would threaten low-income housing requirements too, which we do have) and pretty much mean a lot more homeless on the street. But I agree with his arguments against eminent domain on K Street.

The places where I do agree:
* 700 K was actually doing better before the city got involved: the block was fully occupied by businesses. Maybe not businesses the city is in love with, but there were plenty of long-standing local businesses (Sub-Q, Records, Bonehead Tattoo, Texas Mexican, Comics & Comix, Joe Sun) and national chains (Men's Wearhouse) and even an all-ages, fully permitted entertainment venue (Junta) occupying the block.

* Big high-profile projects based out of City Hall to "revitalize" the city don't have a great track record. Despite claims to the contrary, City Hall did have a hand in the success of midtown, but that came more from their willingness to work with the existing built environment and relative lack of desire to knock things down and replace them with other things. There are places where government can help, and places where the hand of government can make changes--like code enforcement and minimum maintenance standards that make taking care of a building less fiscally painful than letting it rot. Perhaps Snefnoc wouldn't agree with that, but I consider code enforcement a lot less odious than eminent domain.

* Finally, I agree that eminent domain has a very, very tainted past. Eminent domain and wholesale demolition were a common cure for a nonexistent disease called "blight," an affliction that city government and business used to describe places that were often lively, fully occupied and active, but property values (and thus property taxes) were not as high as they could possibly be. The tag of "blight" was used as an excuse to carve swaths through nonwhite neighborhoods for freeways or government/business projects--this was often deliberately used as a means of destroying the neighborhoods of undesirable populations.

Eminent domain and redevelopment were some of the tools used to keep cities segregated during an era when segregation and racial exclusion were obviously on their way out. Wanting to demolish a neighborhood because it's a black neighborhood was not okay, but demolishing it because it was "blighted" was just fine. I realize that people get irked when I bring up race, but it's really unavoidable; you can't talk about American cities without discussing race any more than you can talk about them without discussing buildings.

So, while I think that he could be nicer about it, I see his point.

[goldcntry]

Okay, I'm kinda frightened here...I agree with snefnoc...

Yah... I've been glancing out my window all morning looking for the four Horsemen of the Apocolypse... :haha:

I thought I saw them in the Sacca Memorial Reflecting Ponds and Billboard Monument for a second but realized it was just vibrations from the Crocker Museum worksite...


:tomato:

[TowerDistrict]

I realize that people get irked when I bring up race, but it's really unavoidable; you can't talk about American cities without discussing race any more than you can talk about them without discussing buildings.

When I bought my house in Land Park, I signed papers that would prevent me from selling or renting my house to persons of Chinese, Japanese, Mongolian, African and Hindu decent - amongst many others. So it's not at all out of bounds to bring up racial or ethnic issues when talking about the history and formation of cities and their neighborhoods. Racism wasn't hidden from view, it was legal institution.

Of course, all that horseshit was voided on the following page. Which amended any racial discrimination in the contract is illegal.

[TowerDistrict]

Of course, i would have willingly signed papers that would prevent snfenocs from inhabiting the neighborhood. But I do feel safe from his ideals, being that we live in parallel universes and all.

[sactown_2007]

Wow this is a great find Sugit!!!! :tup: With all the failed projects in the past few years, this is like a ray of sunshine! LOL!! Lets hope it will get built in 2 years they say it is scheduled to be.



Check this out a new hotel for 13th and I Street


http://www.twinsoup.com/index.html

Luxury boutique Hotel AVIA is coming to the corner of 13th & I Street in Sacramento!

AVIA, it's brand essence of 'The Art Of Living Well' will set out to put a fresh new face on the hospitality industry evoking the inviting ambiance of a cocktail party thrown by a gracious local host. AVIA Hotel will "surround guests with imaginative design and samplings of authentic food and wine pairings. Hosts will share local lore, pulling strings to help guests explore under-the-radar restaurants and the hottest shopping spots."

According to developer Roger Hume, the new luxury boutique hotel AVIA will feature 22-stories, a roof top pool & spa, roof top bar & lounge named Politix, a mid-level courtyard for guests and a second Masque Restaurant on the ground floor with an urban twist.

As for the interiors & design, Hume has hired Colum McCartan, known for such masterpieces as Hotel Vitale in San Francisco, & The Biltmore in New York. According to Hume, the interiors of AVIA Sacramento will have the look and feel of both Hotel Vitale & and Tower 31. We are told the projected completion date is the first part of 2010. Stay tuned...

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/AVIA_images-736817.jpg

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/vitale_pic4-755379.jpg

http://www.twinsoup.com/uploaded_images/t31_web2-721807.jpg

[urban_encounter]

I am fully against all drug laws, and I believe I do have the right to own and operate a crack house.




Judging from your hysterical post, your off to a quick start

[snfenoc]

Hysterical? This country is in a sad state when people who care deeply about individual freedom are dismissed.

Extremism in the defense of liberty is NO vice!

[snfenoc]

When I'm not rebelling against big government or mast........uh.......doing other stuff, I like to walk around Sacramento. Here's a little mini update of a few projects I saw during today's short walk:




Wow! Steel erection (ha!) on that artsy Sutter office building is coming (double ha!) along nicely:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0001.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0002.jpg



Look out! 500 Crapitol Mall is about to make its statement on the Sacramento "skyline":

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0003.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0004.jpg

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0005.jpg



Here's the sign for that little project next to Dragonfly (?) on Crapitol Ave:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0006.jpg

Here's the site:

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb297/snfenoc/DSC_0007.jpg



That's it.

[SacUrbnPlnr]

When I bought my house in Land Park, I signed papers that would prevent me from selling or renting my house to persons of Chinese, Japanese, Mongolian, African and Hindu decent - amongst many others. So it's not at all out of bounds to bring up racial or ethnic issues when talking about the history and formation of cities and their neighborhoods. Racism wasn't hidden from view, it was legal institution.

Of course, all that horseshit was voided on the following page. Which amended any racial discrimination in the contract is illegal.

Dear Tower District:

When we bought our house in Land Park some years ago, we were very offended by the discriminatory language, notwithstanding that such language is null and void legally. Thanks to recent state legislatiion, there is a process to request that the County Recorder actually remove the offensive language from the recorded deed. We had the language removed so that the young couple who purchased our home last year did have to sign a deed with the offensive language in it.

[COASTIE]

CalTrans says it can fix I-5 in downtown Sacramento in two months
The Associated Press
Article Launched: 03/17/2008 11:13:18 AM PDT


SACRAMENTO—A complicated freeway repair on Interstate 5 in downtown Sacramento that had been expected to take 10 months may take only two.
The downside is that I-5 will be partially closed during those two months, and that could cause big traffic jams.

State transportation engineers are projecting slowdowns on most freeways entering the metropolitan area and on city streets.

Workers will replace a nearly 40-year-old roadbed on the section of freeway that divides the downtown region of the state capital from the Old Sacramento waterfront area. The work is expected to begin in late May.

[sacamenna kid]

Has anybody heard when they're ever going to build that arts building at 14th and H? It was announced a long time ago.

[sugit]

Has anybody heard when they're ever going to build that arts building at 14th and H? It was announced a long time ago.

I think they need it to be ready by 2010, so I would imagine anytime now.

[Steven Fong]

http://www.nlarch.com/docs/CUP_demo1.jpg
The view from my desk

http://www.nlarch.com/docs/CUP_demo2.jpg
The infamous gassifier

http://www.nlarch.com/docs/DGS-CUPa.jpg
View of the new tank from the NE side of the complex

In order to maintain heating and cooling service to surrounding state buildings, the project will be divided into two phases:
Phase 1 will be the demo of the old gassifier and construction of the new heating/chilling plant.
Phase 2 will be the demo of the old plant and the construction of the new tank.

It looks like Phase 1 will be complete by late 08/09 and Phase 2 will be complete by 2010.

[sugit]

That actually looks pretty cool considering what is there right now.

[urban_encounter]

You and i seldom disagree, but i think that cooling plant looks like a cross between Chernobyl and Star Trek set.

[sugit]

Considering the piece of shit that is there now...Beam me up, Urban. :)

[urban_encounter]

Considering the piece of shit that is there now...Beam me up, Urban. :)

:haha:


o.k. you have a point..

[jsf8278]

Residential towers proposed for site near Capitol
By Mary Lynne Vellinga - mlvellinga@sacbee.com

Published 8:02 pm PDT Thursday, March 27, 2008

A Los Angeles-based developer is proposing to transform a leafy, four-block area south of the Capitol with five new residential towers.

The Bond Cos., an experienced developer of infill housing and retail projects nationwide, filed an application with the city of Sacramento Thursday to replace 206 low-rise apartment units in the Capitol Towers neighborhood with five towers ranging from 15 to 33 stories.

Mark Bachli, a principal in the Bond Cos., said the "market will determine what is actually built" on the Capitol Towers property, bounded by Fifth, Seventh, N and P streets.

Still, he said his company views the parklike superblock -- where no cars are allowed -- as the perfect place for a high-density urban development, which can be built in phases as market conditions permit.

The proposed project also would contain 50,000 square feet of street-level retail -- which Bachli said could include a grocery store -- and parking garages wrapped by three to five stories of housing or office space. It may also include a hotel.

The 15-story apartment building at the center of Capitol Towers would remain.

In total, Bond Cos. is proposing to build 1,646 new housing units. Doing so would create a neighborhood nearly eight times as densely packed with people as the current one on the four-block property, which city leaders have long viewed as underused.

For a complete story, see Friday's Bee.

The Sacramento Bee Unique content, exceptional value. SUBSC

[aufbau]

My heart skipped a beat thinking it was regarding the towers' old site. However, this is definitely welcomed news-the current sprawlplex does not belong any near the urban core.

[sugit]

I had the same feeling, aufbau.

I remember quite a few years ago a different company wanted to do the same thing, but obviously that didn't go anywhere.

Who knows when this will be built (my guess not for at least a couple years), but I sure am glad they are starting the process now instead of waiting for market to get hot again, then start from scratch..thus missing the market by the time they get everything lined up. At least now they can jump at the right moment.

[wburg]

I'm sure Majin will be thrilled to hear about that...hopefully they can fix the dreadful "superblock" concept and reorient the buildings back towards the street. The idea of superblocks was to create an inwardly-directed residential area that would try its best to ignore the street--an effort that many would consider successful, at the price of effectively removing the residents of the complex from the neighborhood.

I'd agree it is a very good place for high-density infill. Great location, and they don't have to knock down anything old.

[econgrad]

I lived at Capital Towers briefly when I was attending CSUS undergrad. At that time, the city would not allow the current owners to develop more towers. Now, finally it seems to be happening? I certainly hope so...

[Deno]

They won't block the Mayor's view so they might have a chance to be built not sure how sleek they may be.

[jsf8278]

I sure am glad they are starting the process now instead of waiting for market to get hot again, then start from scratch..thus missing the market by the time they get everything lined up. At least now they can jump at the right moment.

I agree. That seems to be the catch phrase for why Aura and some other projects failed, or can't get off the ground. "the housing market this, and the housing market that."
It would seem to me you would to begin building now in a slow market, and be finished building in a year or two right when things begin to pick back up.

[TowerDistrict]

Five new towers envisioned downtown
An L.A. firm, undaunted by others' failures, plans to transform apartment site.
By Mary Lynne Vellinga - mlvellinga@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PDT Friday, March 28, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1 (http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/818350.html)

Undaunted by the recent failure of two high-rise condominium projects planned for downtown Sacramento, a Los Angeles-based developer proposes to transform a leafy, four-block area south of the Capitol with five new residential towers.

The Bond Cos., an experienced developer of infill housing and retail projects nationwide, filed an application with the city of Sacramento Thursday to replace 206 low-rise apartment units in the Capitol Towers neighborhood with five towers ranging from 15 to 33 stories.

Mark Bachli, a principal in the Bond Cos., said the "market will determine what is actually built" on the Capitol Towers property, bounded by Fifth, Seventh, N and P streets. Still, he said his company views the parklike superblock – where no cars are allowed – as the perfect place for a high-density urban development, which can be built in phases as market conditions permit.

"It's ideally located along the light-rail line. It is close to thousands of jobs, retail, restaurants and entertainment opportunities; those are the key ingredients to smart and sustainable growth," Bachli said.

The proposed project also would contain 50,000 square feet of street-level retail – which Bachli said could include a grocery store – and parking garages wrapped by three to five stories of housing or office space. It may also include a hotel. The 15-story apartment building at the center of Capitol Towers would remain.

In total, Bond Cos. is proposing to build 1,646 new housing units. Doing so would create a neighborhood nearly eight times as densely packed with people as the current one on the four-block property, which city leaders have long viewed as underused.

"I think it's great," Assistant City Manager John Dangberg said of the plan, which is in its formative stages. "This site is one of the few superblocks we have in the downtown. It's part of a four-block neighborhood. And it has the highest-density residential zone that we allow in our zoning code, but it has only two-story walk-up units on it."

Since the early 1960s, when it was developed by the late U.S. Rep. James Scheuer, Capitol Towers has been a tree-shaded oasis in downtown. The streets that once ran through the property were closed long ago and replaced by pedestrian walkways. At the project's heart sits an Olympic-size pool, fountain and an abstract sculpture mural by artist Jacques Overhoff.

While Capitol Towers remained static, however, the neighborhood around it has changed significantly in the past 40 years. The downtown skyline emerged. Light rail appeared next door. The potential of the nearly 10-acre parcel has not been lost on developers, but none has been successful so far.

In the early 1990s, the Scheuer family tried and failed to land a big state office tenant for the land. In 2000, developer Post Properties, a well-known firm from Atlanta, proposed to turn the property into an "urban village." Post pulled out after running into a buzz saw of neighborhood opposition. Frustrated by the lack of movement, the Scheuer family allowed the two-story garden apartments to deteriorate and sit vacant. In 2001, the property was purchased for $25 million by a Marin County development firm, which performed an extensive renovation and upgrade of the tower and garden apartments.

The complex is now 93 percent leased at rents ranging from $875 for a low-rise studio to $2,165 for a three-bedroom tower unit. A partnership controlled by the Bond Cos. bought Capitol Towers in June 2007. Bachli would not disclose the purchase price, but property records show the partnership borrowed $43 million on the parcel the same day it changed hands.

Mayor Heather Fargo said the Bond Cos. may fare better than others with its development plan. Unlike Post Properties, it is proposing to keep the streets closed to cars, and to preserve as many of the trees dotting the property as possible.

"This (plan) does a good job of preserving what's special about Capitol Towers; that's the tree canopy," Fargo said. "It's also the superblock where people can walk for several blocks without having to cross a street. "I think it will help maintain the sense of community that's very strong in the neighborhood."

Bachli said his firm has held two meetings with tenants of Capitol Towers and plans to reach out to residents of the neighboring 500 N St. and Pioneer towers as well. Still, Jim Pachl, an environmental lawyer who opposed the Post proposal, is watching the latest idea for Capitol Towers with a wary eye. He met with Bachli and other project representatives about a month ago. Pachl and Judith Lamare own a condominium on the 14th floor of 500 N St.

Pachl said he's troubled by the recent failure of the Aura and the Towers condominium projects. The Towers was under construction when it melted down financially, leaving a huge hole in the ground on the Capitol Mall.

"I'm sitting here saying, 'How realistic is this?' " Pachl said.

Unlike John Saca, the developer behind the Towers project, Bond Cos. has substantial experience building infill residential developments in such cities as Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago. Its Sunset & Vine project in Hollywood is credited with helping spark that neighborhood's revitalization. Headed by brothers Larry and Robert Bond, the firm has offices in Los Angeles, Chicago and the Washington, D.C., area. New projects in Oakland and Chicago include Whole Foods stores.

Bachli would not discuss possible financing for the Capitol Towers site, other than to say that Bond has partnered with financial giant AIG Inc.

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2008/03/27/21/775-5W28TOWERS.xlgraphic.prod_affiliate.4.gif

[SacUrbnPlnr]

I agree. That seems to be the catch phrase for why Aura and some other projects failed, or can't get off the ground. "the housing market this, and the housing market that."
It would seem to me you would to begin building now in a slow market, and be finished building in a year or two right when things begin to pick back up.

Bond Companies is seeking land entitlements, but may not acutally build the project. One or more pieces could be sold to others to build over a period of time. It may take several years before the first part of the project is developed. So, we'll have to be patient.

[JeffZurn]

Well finally some good news around here, lets hope this guy actually plans on doing something instead of just talking about it.

[TowerDistrict]

Don't you love the environmental lawyer sitting in his 14th floor, penthouse condo opposing high-rise residential towers.

And I totally agree with wburg, that the "super block" concept should be trashed, or at least never replicated. Ironically, that seems to be what prompted neighbors to go up in arms against the 2000 proposal. And looking at the crude diagram above... it looks as though the towers would address the street and the pedestrian walk-throughs would be oriented in a corresponding grid. That's what I'd like to see, opposed to a meandering garden.

Question is... why would the City put any money into 601 when this looks to be everything and then some?

[urban_encounter]

I personally don't believe we're likely to see a residential highrise built for the next 5 years..

The lending for these projects is just too strict (at least for Sacramento) and the housing market here is the worst i've ever seen.


Although i do think the downtown/midtown and TOD need to be the city and county's priority if housing is going to be built at all...

[NewToCA]

The project would be a good match with a significant upgrade to Downtown Plaza. It would put a nice base of folks within walking distance to DTP, OldTown Sac and K St.

[cozmoose]

Another boutique hotel may be in the works for downtown Sacramento, this one at 13th and I streets.

The rumor is that local developer Roger Hume and his Southern California partners want to build a 22-story boutique hotel, with a new version of the swanky Masque Ristorante on the premises.

Hume, who developed the La Borgata retail center in El Dorado Hills where Masque is located, couldn't be reached for comment. One of his partners, Nick Magliarditi of Newport Beach, confirms via e-mail that the partnership purchased the former Bountiful Country Market site at 13th and I last year – for $2.45 million, according to county records.
Click here to find out more!

But, Magliarditi says, "we will not be disclosing any plans right now as it is premature."

One possibility involves construction of an Avia hotel – a new brand of upscale inns being rolled out by LodgeWorks LP of Wichita, Kan.

Initially, four Avias – in California, Georgia and Texas – are to be built over the next two years, with interior design work done by New York firm McCartan, which also has offices in San Francisco.

What is McCartan's take on plans for the I Street corner? Company spokeswoman Jennifer Zaudke acknowledges that the company has had discussions about "the Sacramento Avia." But, she adds, "we haven't actually started on it."

* * *

Z's on K: Speaking of downtown lodging, developer Tony Giannoni says he's "exploring the idea" of building a hotel on K Street.

Gianonni, who helped develop the Marriott Residence Inn at 15th and L streets, hinted he was working on some sort of K Street hotel project while speaking on another matter at this week's City Council meeting.

What are the details? Gianonni says he won't be ready to spill them for another week or two. But he'd like to bring upscale lodging to the long-blighted pedestrian mall.

He also notes that some public money will be needed because the financing market is so tight.

"I've never, ever done a project that required a city subsidy," he says. "But that's the only way (this one) can be done."

* * *

Bumpy times: Even Sac International has been snagged by the economic downdraft.

After steady passenger gains in recent years, airport traffic started falling late last year due to the economy's turbulence.

Passenger volume was down 0.5 percent last November, compared with the same month a year ago. That was the first downturn in 15 straight months of gains.

December's count was off 1.3 percent from the year earlier and January's numbers dropped 3.1 percent. Traffic increased 1.3 percent in February – but only because the month was one day longer than last year, says airport boss G. Hardy Acree.

Despite the slowdown, Acree is optimistic things will start picking up later this summer. "We expect to see a 1 percent growth in passenger activities" by year's end, he says.