Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III [Archive] - Page 40

innov8

Apr 11, 2009, 2:08 AM

Friday, April 10, 2009
State office growth staying centralized
Plans to double space over next 40 years
Sacramento Business Journal - by Michael Shaw Staff writer

The state of California will need to nearly double its office space over the next 40 years and will look to fill remaining vacant spots in Sacramento’s central core, including The Railyards, but will also consider other areas such as suburban office campuses and the West Sacramento riverfront.

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/9651/optimumstateofficesites.jpg (http://img214.imageshack.us/my.php?image=optimumstateofficesites.jpg)

Those are the findings of a much-anticipated study released today that could mean opportunities for landlords and developers. Local government leaders, anxious about the state’s long-term goals, have also been eager to hear the findings and for the most part were relieved to hear the results.

The Sacramento Region State Office Planning Study estimates a need for another 13.7 million square feet in the capital region, far more than currently controlled by state government in the downtown core.

Consequently, officials will look to the most promising ready-to-develop sites to accommodate the state’s growing office needs.

The study, commissioned by the Department of General Services, is the first major update to an obsolete 1960s-era plan that envisioned state offices occupying a monolithic chunk of downtown encompassing 62 blocks south of the Capitol.

“A really long-term focus like this hasn’t been done in probably 40 years,” said Doug Button, deputy director of General Services.

The study determined several sites in Sacramento and West Sacramento that could be the best short-term solutions for expanding office needs, based on proximity to public transit, compliance with environmental and floodplain considerations and several other state requirements.

But the study is not a “target list” of parcels that the state plans to locate, Button cautioned, noting that the optimum sites could change over time.

“If a new bus line goes in, it could change things next year,” he said.

And given the economy and the state’s budget problems, the study’s not likely to immediately affect the regional office market or development trends.

A consultant team led by Hellmuth, Obata + Kassabaum Inc., an international planning firm better known as HOK, studied available office opportunities in a 15-mile radius of downtown Sacramento. The team examined 48 different sites within that area, some on state-owned land and others entitled or planned for office developments. Consultants met with officials from Sacramento, West Sacramento, Sacramento County, the Sacramento Regional Transit District and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments to examine growth areas and determine which parcels are best outfitted for office developments.

Although it falls within the 15-mile radius, the city of Davis was the only jurisdiction that declined to participate, officials said.

The study determined eight of the 48 sites are “optimum” destinations for new state office buildings over the next five years. One of the big winners could be West Sacramento, which has two optimum sites — the area formerly called the “Triangle” that has been renamed “The Bridge District,” and the Washington area to the north of that district.

West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon welcomed the possible arrival of state offices.

“It’s the right strategic fit for what we’re trying to accomplish,” he said. “It’s keeping these types of developments within the urban core, so it fits with regional strategies.”

West Sacramento is already transforming industrial districts into housing and office developments, but it still needs to build critical fiber-optic lines, sewer connections and other infrastructure to ensure that transformation, Cabaldon said.

The state’s consultants concluded there could be about 4 million square feet of usable space in West Sacramento. But the city says the Bridge District alone could accommodate as much as 7 million square feet.

Sacramento city officials also welcomed the study because it highlights remaining downtown sites and several others within the city as optimum for near-term development.

“This takes the angst out of it,” Sacramento City Manager Ray Kerridge said of the study. “In the past, when the state was looking at facilities, there had been a competitive aspect. We saw that with the West End project.”

Developers with sites on both sides of the Sacramento River competed for the huge West End project, which would have housed the California Resources Agency. Elected officials became advocates for specific sites before the state ultimately put the project on hold due to budget constraints. To read more click here... (http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2009/04/13/story1.html)

Pistola916

Apr 11, 2009, 4:35 AM

Maybe they'll bring back the Golden State tower proposal back or something similar.

Sactorleans

Apr 15, 2009, 5:35 PM

They are currently excavating the empty lot on F Street between 11th and 12th Street (between Three Women & an Armoire and Dominoes).

Anyone know what the plan is for that location?

Phillip

Apr 15, 2009, 7:48 PM

re: post 3903 (State needs more office space)

The Sacramento Region State Office Planning Study estimates a need for another 13.7 million square feet in the capital region, far more than currently controlled by state government in the downtown core.

This week's Sac Business Journal says Sacramento's office vacancy rate is 19.6% for offices 10,000 s.f. and larger.

Can anyone translate a 19.6% vacancy rate into square feet available?

innov8

Apr 18, 2009, 4:30 PM

Friday, April 17, 2009

Lofts lender asks to foreclose on unsold units
Sales have stalled at high-profile L Street Lofts project in midtown

Sacramento Business Journal - by Michael Shaw

Developer Sotiris Kolokotronis built the L Street Lofts in a partnership venture with Resmark Equity Partners of Los Angeles.

The L Street Lofts had been hailed as a revitalizing project for midtown Sacramento but a protracted dispute has left sales offices closed and the high-profile project in danger of foreclosure due to an unpaid $25 million construction loan.

La Jolla Bank, which loaned the money to build L Street Lofts, filed suit April 3 in Sacramento, claiming that only 22 of the 92 condos have sold. The bank is asking a judge to appoint a receiver to take control of the property and allow the bank to foreclose on the remaining unsold units.

Developer Sotiris Kolokotronis, who built the L Street lofts in a partnership venture, had not seen the lawsuit and, through a lawyer, declined to comment.

The Rancho Sante Fe-based bank made a short-term construction loan for $33 million in 2006, later increasing the total to $35 million. The bank claims to have distributed $24.9 million of that total.

It claims L Street Lofts LLC has “refused and continues to fail and refuse to pay any of the delinquent sums,” according to the lawsuit. It is also seeking about $1 million held in escrow from condo sales.

The L Street Lofts were built in part with equity from Resmark Equity Partners LLC of Los Angeles, which places funds into real estate projects for the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and other investors.

The sides had appeared to negotiate a settlement several months ago, but condo sales have remained halted. According to a source, there have been no condo sales since last summer.

When suburban home and gas prices soared, the Lofts project was praised as a viable alternative and a sign that central city housing was desirable. But with home prices plummeting region-wide, there’s fewer inducements for suburbanites to relocate into pricey condos, said Kathryn Boyce, an executive with new home analyst Hanley Wood Market Intelligence. Even without financial pressure, the outlook for top-of-the-line infill projects may be troubled as foreclosures on existing homes and new-home projects lower housing prices, she said.

“There is probably a lot of demand from people who want to live there,” she said of the Lofts project. “But even that pool of people has shrunk.”

She said that borrowers who want to get into the L Street Lofts, where prices originally ranged between $398,000 for the smallest units and penthouses starting at $750,000, could need so-called “jumbo loans.”

Lending restrictions on those and conventional loans have tightened considerably with the recession, leaving some borrowers without means to relocate into new loft projects.

Many developers say Kolokotronis was hit with bad timing.

“He built a beautiful project,” said developer Mark Friedman, who has developed property in midtown and has been keenly aware of the effect of the recession on housing. “It’s like a beautiful yacht that got swamped by a tsunami.”

http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2009/04/20/story7.html

brandon12

May 6, 2009, 8:07 PM

45-story condo tower on Lot X? Developer eyes possibilities
ShareThisBy Bob Shallit
bshallit@sacbee.com
Published: Wednesday, May. 6, 2009 - 11:52 am
The national development company offering to build a "university village" on the Sacramento State campus is contemplating another eye-catching proposal: a downtown condo tower.

Clark Realty Capital of Arlington, Va., is considering the possibility of a lofty condo/hotel project on "Lot X," the 2.6-acre, city-owned parcel at the southwest corner of Third and Capitol Mall.

Clark development executive William Hamilton says the company's interest is very preliminary. "We haven't talked to architects or run any numbers," he says.

But Hamilton calls the vacant land "one of the premier lots on the West Coast." If it pencilled out, the company would build a "signature building" that "lets people know they are entering a grand city."

Hamilton, a Roseville native now working out of Clark's San Diego office, says one possibility is a 45-to-55-story tower with 100 condo units, a 200-room hotel and perhaps some office space.

Assistant City Manager John Dangberg says he hasn't seen specific proposals for Lot X from Clark or its local representatives at CB Richard Ellis.

But he says he'd be intrigued if Clark is willing to pay market value for what he says is "arguably one of the most valuable and important properties downtown."

"Anytime you have interest from a national developer, it's very exciting," he says. "We're hoping to do a lot of business with Clark in Sacramento."

arod74

May 6, 2009, 8:49 PM

econgrad

May 6, 2009, 9:40 PM

travis bickle

May 6, 2009, 10:02 PM

After what happened with the Towers, until they are capping the 55th floor, I'm not getting excited. I would be mildly surprised if it got to the rendering stage. And due to being on the edge of downtown I am not so sure how "premier" the lot is for the condo/hotel possibility. As an office tower sure but there are other more central locations that I would consider better suited for the condo/hotel aspect. If anything maybe it can awaken CIM/CalPers from its slumber and get them to make good on their plans for an epic project they mentioned after strong arming Saca for the Towers lot 2 years ago. You wouldn't think they would want to allow themselves to get beaten to the punch if there was another viable project progressing across the street targeted for the same potential customers.

I can tell you on very good authority that at this point there is nothing to get too excited about. I know that there is another legitamate firm very interested in the Lot X site and I wouldn't be surprised if part of the idea here was to get them motivated to act. Certainly wouldn't be the first time that scenario has played out. There have been no direct talks between the City and Clark and absolutely no firm ideas on what might work best there. I understand that Clark has been looking at the site with great interest and undoubtedly would want something that would raise the bar for Sacramento, but the concept mentioned is but one of many possibilities.

Still a long way to go on this and the parties are clearly at a phase where most projects go nowhere. The Sac State concept has a much greater chance of getting built, and even it is still at a place where most concepts fail.

Pistola916

May 7, 2009, 1:10 AM

(yawn)

45-story condo tower on Lot X? Developer eyes possibilities
ShareThisBy Bob Shallit
bshallit@sacbee.com
Published: Wednesday, May. 6, 2009 - 11:52 am
The national development company offering to build a "university village" on the Sacramento State campus is contemplating another eye-catching proposal: a downtown condo tower.

Clark Realty Capital of Arlington, Va., is considering the possibility of a lofty condo/hotel project on "Lot X," the 2.6-acre, city-owned parcel at the southwest corner of Third and Capitol Mall.

Clark development executive William Hamilton says the company's interest is very preliminary. "We haven't talked to architects or run any numbers," he says.

But Hamilton calls the vacant land "one of the premier lots on the West Coast." If it pencilled out, the company would build a "signature building" that "lets people know they are entering a grand city."

Hamilton, a Roseville native now working out of Clark's San Diego office, says one possibility is a 45-to-55-story tower with 100 condo units, a 200-room hotel and perhaps some office space.

Assistant City Manager John Dangberg says he hasn't seen specific proposals for Lot X from Clark or its local representatives at CB Richard Ellis.

But he says he'd be intrigued if Clark is willing to pay market value for what he says is "arguably one of the most valuable and important properties downtown."

"Anytime you have interest from a national developer, it's very exciting," he says. "We're hoping to do a lot of business with Clark in Sacramento."

innov8

May 7, 2009, 5:22 AM

travis bickle

May 7, 2009, 1:27 PM

Travis, is the other firm the one that proposed the 9 story hotel that included
the city giving them the land plus $30 million in subsidies?

Do you know if Clark is also asking for any incentives from the city to help this
project get off the ground? I would not blame them if they did ask for something
in return, it seems like nothing gets built these days downtown unless
subsidies are included to sweeten the deal.

My understanding is that they are different firms. I am told that the City was very disappointed with the nine story hotel proposal that was the result of months of negotiations.

The story in the Bee was very premature. There have been no discussions of any type of subsidies or anything like that, so it's hard to say what Clark would need to make deal work. But the city is broke: hard to subsidize anything when you have no money.

Even with the best of intentions by everyone involved, this will be a very difficult deal to pull-off. The article probably makes things even harder. At the same time, it's hard for Clark to complain about free publicity. A month ago, very few people in Sacramento knew who Clark was. The more I think about it, the more I think the purpose of this piece was to motivate other development firms into action both at Lot X and across the street at 301 CM.

Certainly ACM Dangberg wants the local development community to know there is a new player in town. I very much hope he is proved right.

sugit

May 7, 2009, 5:57 PM

But the city is broke: hard to subsidize anything when you have no money.

The city still has redevelopment money left correct? They haven't used that 25M they put out there a short time ago for a housing project.

I know they have stated on more than one occasion they would like the money to used on JKL, but from your impression, did they seem willing to use it for a project on Capitol Mall?

arod74

May 7, 2009, 10:55 PM

Yeah I think your right sugit. From what I can recall the city hasn't completely burned through the proceeds from the sale of the Sheraton yet. Those are seperate from the general fund of the city I believe and so aren't affected by the current city deficit.

sugit

May 7, 2009, 11:53 PM

Correct. There are still Sheraton funds available. I believe there is also money left over from the redevelopment bonds the city sold a few years ago. There is at least 25M left there as well.

SacDTRes

May 18, 2009, 3:24 PM

arod74

May 19, 2009, 4:16 AM

Does anyone know who or what is going into 500 CM? The parking garage is open and security is staffing the building 24/7 now, but it still seems to be mostly empty, and I haven't heard any news about tenants.

Welcome to the forum SacDTRes. There isn't an adundance of info available but I would point you toward the 500 Capitol Mall thread started by innov8 http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=116260&page=9 in addition to LandofFrost http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=136014 and the developers website http://www.500capitolmall.com/. Looks like the latest is that McDonough Holland & Allen, PC, Attorneys at Law has signed a letter of intent to occupy space in the building...

SacDTRes

May 19, 2009, 11:32 PM

Thanks for the info. I was hoping to hear about the restaurant or who is going to occupy the first floor, but it seems like it is unknown or just not happening right now.

At night, the lights in the upper middle floors are on, so that must be the law firm. The rest appears empty. There is no lack of empty office space in downtown now!

The American Flag on the top of the building they added last week is a nice touch.

Pistola916

May 23, 2009, 4:39 AM

A new downtown high-rise for county courts?

By Bob Shallit
bshallit@sacbee.com
Published: Friday, May. 22, 2009 - 2:14 pm

A downtown block now home to a two-story parking garage is the mostly likely site for Sacramento's next government high-rise: a 12- to 16-story courts building.

As part of a statewide upgrade of more than 40 California courthouses, state officials have been quietly scoping out possible locations to ease the space crunch at the Gordon D. Schaber Courthouse downtown on Ninth St.

A couple of sites in the central business district have been considered, and discussions also have been held with developer Thomas Enterprises about building at the nearby downtown railyard site.

But the county-owned block bounded by Seventh, Eighth, G and H streets -- just west of the Schaber building -- is getting the most consideration now, says Rob Leonard, the county's economic developer director and a key participant in project talks.

"If you consider proximity to (the Schaber building) as a driving force, you'd have to say it's the leading contender," Leonard says.

Leonard and officials with the state's Administrative Office of the Courts stress that the process is still at an early stage. Construction on the estimated $540 million project is unlikely to begin before 2012. And it could be delayed further if funds are diverted to ease California's budget crunch.

Leonard sees the building as an economic stimulus and a much-needed design statement for downtown.

One of his goals is to not just "plop down ... another big state compound" in an area already filled with monolithic governmental structures. One option: Build a narrow high-rise for the courts, paired with a building that provides various mixed uses, including housing.

"The idea," Leonard says, "is to bring new life and new uses into that government zone."

ltsmotorsport

May 23, 2009, 7:08 PM

Well, we can only hope for a project with that quality and mix of uses. We'll see...

innov8

May 28, 2009, 4:41 PM

Does anyone know who or what is going into 500 CM? The parking garage is open and security is staffing the building 24/7 now, but it still seems to be mostly empty, and I haven't heard any news about tenants.

What I have heard from Rudolph & Sletten is that the owner has four floors
of tenants already moved in. Tuesday was the first day that the building
was occupied with people actually working.

tone1657

Jun 7, 2009, 4:26 AM

I visited the url and blogspot says it's no longer there.

innov8

Jun 8, 2009, 5:50 PM

I visited the url and blogspot says it's no longer there.

Yeah, were a little confused as to why it's removed. I'm tring to figure out
how to contact someone as to why... but that's also been difficult. If anyone has
any ideas as to what I can do to fix it, please send me a PM.

UPDATE: It appears Google marked it as spam so I contacted them to restore it back... hope it works.

innov8

Jun 9, 2009, 4:06 AM

Bob Shallit
L Street Lofts project back on track
Monday, Jun. 8, 2009
http://www.sacbee.com/shallit/story/1929685.html

One of Sacramento city's most bitter - and bizarre - legal squabbles is ending.

Developer Sotiris Kolokotronis last week settled his nine-month dispute with a Los Angeles investment group that backed his prestigious, eight-story condo complex at 1818 L St.

New investors have come in and the L.A. firm - Resmark Equity Partners LLC - is now "out of the picture," Kolokotronis says. Talks are under way to settle a default notice filed by the project's construction lender, La Jolla Bank, and a suit by general Sacramento contractor Otto Construction, says Charles Trainor, Kolokotronis' attorney.

As a result, sales of condo units, which were halted during the Resmark dispute, can resume.

The troubles began last summer when Resmark filed a lawsuit charging that sales were lagging and sought control of the project. In September, Resmark representatives tried to physically take possession of the property, leading to an angry standoff that drew police to the condo site.

"In all the years I've been (in development), I've never experienced anything like this," Kolokotronis says of the dispute. (Resmark officials did not return a call for comment.)

For Kolokotronis, the dispute was all the more frustrating because Resmark was investing money for the Sacramento-based California Public Employees Retirement System, which he had hoped would be more patient with the project's progress.

"That was disappointing." he says.

Kolokotronis and his new, undisclosed partners now face the challenge of selling the remaining 70 units at the 92-unit L Street Lofts complex where Sacramento King Kevin Martin is an owner and Mayor Kevin Johnson is leasing with an option to buy.

"This is not a great market," the developer says. But he's optimistic because the most expensive units already have been sold and a marketing campaign - aborted by the legal battle - can now move forward.

"I think we will be very successful," he says.

TWAK

Jun 9, 2009, 5:24 AM

give one to me, i'll buy for cheap

joninsac

Jun 11, 2009, 1:47 AM

The new Meridian Plaza Phase 2, now a 25-story hotel & office tower. I love the new design. Looks kinda like a Metro Place Jr.

Images from hornbergerwortstell.com -
http://www.hornbergerworstell.com/portfolio/section4/site2/big_images/i1.jpg
http://www.hornbergerworstell.com/portfolio/section4/site2/big_images/i2.jpg
http://www.hornbergerworstell.com/portfolio/section4/site2/big_images/i3.jpg

Anyone know anything about a hotel project proposed for 8th & L? I stumbled on these renders at Fletcher Farr Ayotte's website. It's a 409-room hotel with a 7-story garage next door. Looks like a Hilton.

Images from ffadesign.com -
http://www.ffadesign.com/projects/images/hos_sachotel02.jpg
http://www.ffadesign.com/projects/images/hos_sachotel01.jpg
http://www.ffadesign.com/projects/images/hos_sachotel03.jpg

innov8

Jun 11, 2009, 2:51 AM

Nice find joninsac.

Meridian II has improved but they still only made the southwest facing side
towards the Capitol the dynamic side... why is K Street forgotten?

The hotel at 8th & L Street is okay but that garage next to it is a mistake.
This is the same design flaw used for the Library Tower garage at 8th and J St.
The garage leaves much to be desired for what could have been an awesome block.
This proposal shouldhave the garage built underground and below the tower. It looks
as though the garage takes the whole corner of L & 8th Street... what a waste if that happens.

It's good to see something new even if nothing gets built for years.

Majin

Jun 11, 2009, 4:15 AM

Wow MII looks a world better. Very nice, did you see any construction timeframe? The Hilton looks nice too but I agree the garage is ass, I would rather they get rid of it completely and just do away with the parking.

joninsac

Jun 11, 2009, 4:25 AM

^ Nope, didn't see anything about a construction timeframe.

ltsmotorsport

Jun 11, 2009, 7:01 AM

Yeah, totally agree with you guys on MII and the Hilton. The garage should be underground like Mike said. Total waste of a 1/4 of a block.

But overall, this is the best thing seen on the Sac section in a long time. Fresh proposals/renderings FTW.

goldcntry

Jun 11, 2009, 2:35 PM

Cynikal

Jun 11, 2009, 3:08 PM

The cost would go up considerably with enough underground parking and someday our property values will make that a viable option. A garage can work in this area if it was wrapped with commercial/retail at the pedestrian level and open to the public. If you are going to make the $35,000 per space investment you might as well open it up to everyone.

ltsmotorsport

Jun 11, 2009, 4:25 PM

So could they make the entrance/exit to the garage in the alley then so commercial would be all along the streetfront?

innov8

Jun 11, 2009, 5:42 PM

I agree that the garage should be at least partially underground. However, playing devil's advocate, wouldn't there be a huge cost added on with all the water table problems we have downtown and the constant pumping that would be required?

http://www.sacfrg.org/images/sleepytomato.gif

Yes, that's true... that's why I also said it could built into (under) the tower like
a majority of other towers in the city. Underground parking could only be
a floor or two while the other five are built into the tower. I would prefer to
see the old structures that are currently at 8th & L St. than another 7 story garage
that wipes out another corner in the central city. If this current option is acceptable
and built, downtown Sac will soon look like downtown Phoenix with huge parking
structures every other block.

Cynikal

Jun 11, 2009, 5:52 PM

So could they make the entrance/exit to the garage in the alley then so commercial would be all along the streetfront?

Sure, but this alley could be activated for commercial and restaurant use as well. I would trade a curb cut and street entrance for additional pedestrian space if the options were on the table.

snfenoc

Jun 11, 2009, 7:04 PM

Couple of questions:

There seems to be a lot of hotel proposals out there. 10th and K, Capitol Lofts, Avia, I think even the Marshall is/was supposed to have a hotel as part of its remodel, now these....Can we absorb them all?

Also, is the Hilton 8th and L or 8th and K? It looks like K Street.

ltsmotorsport

Jun 11, 2009, 7:37 PM

wburg

Jun 11, 2009, 8:34 PM

I'd be all for doing away with the parking garage if it meant saving the Bel-Vue, the really nice old building on 8th, and the Hof Brau building (where 815 L around the corner was) although the building on the corner is probably a bit too remuddled to save. The Bel-Vue would be a totally easy remodel into market-rate or mid-income residential units. Also, take a look down that alley sometime: it has a ton of character, leading down to the original street level, and even still has the remains of a retail facade. That would be a killer spot for alley activation, with historic buildings and texture on one side and a big ol' modern hotel on the other--although the alley would make for a good place for access to parking in the hotel structure. Although parking could be very limited at that spot: it's right by both streetcar lines and most bus lines, if one was looking for a place where one could put a skyscraper with drastically reduced parking it's close to ideal.

The Marshall Hotel plans are probably scrapped--they have changed ownership since the plan to demolish the Jade Apts. and hollow out the Clayton/Marshall were floated (and it was only a preliminary plan.) I wouldn't mind seeing it turned into a boutique hotel along the lines of the Citizen, assuming the replacement SRO unit on 7th and H gets built.

In terms of capacity, as people become less interested in the suburbs and more interested in central cities, hotels at the center will probably start to have more appeal than motels out on the periphery. It would be pretty easy to take light rail from Amtrak to a hotel on K Street...kind of the way people used to take the streetcar from the Southern Pacific station to the Hotel Land, or the Clunie, or the Clayton, etcetera.

snfenoc

Jun 11, 2009, 11:25 PM

You are absuletly right, wburg. The Bel-Vue does have a lot going for it, and I've always thought that it should be remodeled into middle income housing units. Some old buildings have really nice character that can't be duplicated by today's "mid century", hip, swingin' crap-ass, really ugly-looking style. I wonder how this Hilton hotel and garage (if built) will look in 20 years.

To me, this Hilton seems like a pretty ho-hum solution for the 800 block. The hotel itself is OK, but I'm with all of you - I don't like that garage. Not it's positioning, but the fact that it isn't wrapped in housing and retail. I don't mind garages as long as they don't become dead spaces. This has every indication of becoming a dead space. I WANT MORE HOUSING, DAMMIT!!

Phillip

Jun 12, 2009, 6:52 AM

Yeah, the hotel is at 8th and K, the parking garage is at 8th and L. And all I can think about when I look at those renderings is the parking garage at 10th and L that always sits 1/2 empty (at least every time I've looked).

Maybe add a few floors of hotel on top of the 10th & L garage? The views would be fine; overlooking the Capitol and Capitol Park. The vacant retail on L could be hotel lobby. Wouldn't need any new parking built at all.

Here's a Residence Inn that Marriott built on top of an existing downtown parking garage. The pic is from Marriott's website, not me.

http://i285.photobucket.com/albums/ll48/PhilipsPics/ResInnGarage.jpg

http://www.marriott.com/hotels/photo-tours.mi?marshaCode=mspri&pageID=HWHOM&imageID=0f

wburg

Jun 12, 2009, 4:21 PM

Interesting idea, except there isn't much vacant retail space at 10th & L, aside from Newsbeat's old location. They would need an elevator, probably attached to the outside rather than drilled through the parking structure, and the maximum height would be driven by the state Capitol View Protection rules...but other than that, yeah, that would be neat.

One thought about hotels: In the past, hotels weren't just for overnight guests: many had permanent residents who liked city conveniences and energy but didn't want the responsibilities and expense of a downtown house. We now associate long-term hotel residents with the SROs, but there were also elegant palace hotels with long-term residents. So building hotels isn't a bad strategy, as it provides the seeds for residential living in the central city. If the hotel doesn't work out so well, go residential or even condo.

Phillip

Jun 12, 2009, 7:27 PM

All these hotel proposals are "some day" and "what if" for now, waiting for the market to improve.

I wasn't suggesting a garage-top hotel as solution to vacant storefronts on L Street. There isn't that much vacant, like you say. It was the underutilized parking garage and the Capitol Park views that inspired the idea. Filling ground level retail would be a side benefit. A small hotel like that doesn't need a large lobby. The existing jeweler and clothing store would fit in well with a hotel.

Having a lit up 24 hour presence at street level like a hotel lobby provides would help that 1000 L block, which is a dead zone after 5 or 6 pm now. Another elevator or two would have to be built. I don't know if that's feasible or if that deck can support more floors.

A garage-top hotel would be ugly on the outside and contribute nothing to downtown's skyline, the way the 8th and K highrise design would. But it seems like half the rooms at 8th and K would look directly into Darth Vader across the streeet. A neutral view is okay, but that almost seems like an offensive view to me---a wall of dark glass. Maybe it would turn out different than I'm picturing.

Another spot where I like to imagine a hotel is at 16th and J, on the parking lot across the street from P.F. Chang's. I think of that intersection as the center of Downtown/Midtown, the crossroads.

bc sacramento

Jun 12, 2009, 7:29 PM

What was posted by Join Sac on the Meridian II tower is the old design (3-4 years ago). That was designed by H&W out of San Francisco, and the current design is by Lionakis of Sacramento.

joninsac

Jun 13, 2009, 2:27 AM

^ Well, that sucks if the M2 renderings are old. It would make sense though since H&W did the original masterplan for the entire Meridian project. I wonder why H&W took so long to post these renderings on their website.

Skyhook

Jun 13, 2009, 5:08 PM

Been operating tower cranes long time, Going to Sacramento, hope to see the top of your heads soon...

Skyhook

innov8

Jun 13, 2009, 9:28 PM

Been operating tower cranes long time, Going to Sacramento, hope to see the top of your heads soon...

Skyhook

What kind of work are you coming here for because other than Sutter, no
cranes will be rising in Sac for quite a while.

Web

Jun 13, 2009, 11:19 PM

Been operating tower cranes long time, Going to Sacramento, hope to see the top of your heads soon...

Skyhook

was there a picture deleted here or something????

very true where is there a skycrane?? except maybe in the railyards for the bridges being built but those arent skycranes they are just cranes.....

speaking of Railyards blvd is pretty well graded awaiting utilities and pavin! also it looks like the 2 bridges are going in now at 5th and 6th.....:banana:

innov8

Jul 3, 2009, 5:29 AM

Here's what site 4 will look like for the East End Gateway.

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/408/eastendgatewaysite42009.jpg (http://img19.imageshack.us/i/eastendgatewaysite42009.jpg/)

East End Gateway Site 4

SW corner 16th & P Street
Developer: MNA Management, Inc. / Foothill Partners
Architect: Mogavero Notestine Associates
Unit Count: 40 condominiums and 8 to 12 rental co-op rooms
Projected Sales Prices: $225,750 (525 Sq Ft.) $429,000 (1,100 Sq. Ft.)
Retail Space: 5,560 sq. ft.
Estimated Development Costs: $12,400,000
Projected Construction Period: Late 2011 to Mid 2013
Key Milestones: Developer to provide Financing Plan: August 15, 2009
CADA and Developer enter into Exclusive Negotiating Agreement subject to
CADA Board approval of Financing Plan: September 18, 2009

SactownTom

Jul 3, 2009, 7:43 AM

I'm kinda meh on the design. The rounded entry is pretty weak.

sactown_2007

Jul 5, 2009, 5:42 AM

Hey guys, check out the cool skyline at the very beginning of this movie trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ke2BNQaj34

Here is another Trailer w/ a different view:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-wMe9vxkWI

I also saw a different trailer on TV this morning while watching Wimbledon that really had a great view of the skyline but can't find it online.

sactown_2007

Jul 5, 2009, 5:56 AM

And I got one more for you guys that I saw the other day on WGN -- check out the night skyline of this city at 13 AND 42 seconds into this new commercial for WGN America:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0fkCbX3K6g

Schmoe

Jul 6, 2009, 8:18 AM

Hey I recognize that place!

Surefiresacto

Jul 6, 2009, 3:45 PM

Here's what site 4 will look like for the East End Gateway.

East End Gateway Site 4

SW corner 16th & P Street
Developer: MNA Management, Inc. / Foothill Partners
Architect: Mogavero Notestine Associates
Unit Count: 40 condominiums and 8 to 12 rental co-op rooms
Projected Sales Prices: $225,750 (525 Sq Ft.) $429,000 (1,100 Sq. Ft.)
Retail Space: 5,560 sq. ft.
Estimated Development Costs: $12,400,000
Projected Construction Period: Late 2011 to Mid 2013
Key Milestones: Developer to provide Financing Plan: August 15, 2009
CADA and Developer enter into Exclusive Negotiating Agreement subject to
CADA Board approval of Financing Plan: September 18, 2009

Isn't the SW corner of 16th & P Street Fremont Park?

Cynikal

Jul 6, 2009, 9:39 PM

Korea company backs downtown hotel project, developers say

ShareThis
By Bob Shallit
bshallit@sacbee.com
Published: Monday, Jul. 6, 2009 - 2:25 pm
Developers of a proposed downtown high-rise hotel say they've nailed down the rarest of commodities: project financing.

South Korea-based Consus Asset Management has pledged to invest more than $91 million to build the 409-room, 25-floor hotel at 8th and K streets and a six-story parking garage at 8th and L, says lead developer Bob Leach.

"Even as bad as things are here, they think (Sacramento) will recover faster than other parts of the country," Leach says of Consus officials, who made the cash commitment after a series of face-to-face meetings in Korea over the past six months.

Leach says he and his partners made contact with Conus through Sacramento hotel-builder Parkcrest Development Corp.

Also on the development team: Moe Mohanna, the Sacramento developer who sold his K street properties to the city last fall for $18.6 million after a lengthy legal battle.

The development group, called USA Hospitality, currently has an exclusive right to negotiate with the city for the planned hotel site. That right expires later this month but Leach is confident it will be converted to a long-term deal once city officials see his financial backing.

"This is the only (proposed downtown) project that has financing tied to it," says Leach, who also developed the swank Le Rivage Hotel on the Sacramento River. "Why not let us run with the ball and score a touchdown for K Street?"

Leslie Fritzsche, the city's downtown development manager, says the development group has made progress. But, she adds, "there are still a number of things outstanding" that need to be resolved.

If all goes well, Leach's team expects to begin construction next summer on a Hilton, Marriott or Starwood hotel. The opening would be in late 2012.

He says the $136 million hotel project will increase the city's ability to host major conventions, spur business at Downtown Plaza and lead to store openings on the long-troubled K Street Mall.

"You get this project built and people will be lining up to put retail on the 700 block" of K, he says.

wburg

Jul 6, 2009, 10:45 PM

That's the sound of the other shoe dropping, I guess. Build the hotel at 8th and K, I say, but lose that parking garage, fix up the landmark and get two cool projects for the price of one!

Majin

Jul 6, 2009, 10:47 PM

Moe Mohanna

Dead on arrival.

Cynikal

Jul 6, 2009, 11:10 PM

I agree Burg. I'm surprised that demo was approved. Well the more I think about it, I'm not surprised. There are far better parking solutions for that block than another garage. If they do approve the garage I hope they, at least, have some ground floor retail or something to engage the pedestrian level.

This could be a good redemption for Moe. I'll wait and see.

wburg

Jul 6, 2009, 11:17 PM

The demo hasn't been approved yet--they're just preparing the EIR. I assume that approval for demolition of the landmark would be one of the "number of things outstanding" that Leslie Fritsche mentioned.

What other sorts of parking solutions would you recommend, vs. another garage?

Pistola916

Jul 6, 2009, 11:51 PM

Perhaps a redesign of the hotel too.

Rick'sSkyline

Jul 7, 2009, 2:07 AM

I agree!! A sleek design of it, where people wouldn't think it was a hotel? Too bad we can't hide that parking garage out of sight!!

ltsmotorsport

Jul 7, 2009, 2:49 AM

What other sorts of parking solutions would you recommend, vs. another garage?

I would say put the garage above the lobby/potential retail of the hotel, then the rooms above. Isn't that how the Sheraton is set up or is the garage to the side? I can't remember.

cozmoose

Jul 7, 2009, 6:15 AM

25 stories? how tall would that be?

please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
:tup:

Pistola916

Jul 7, 2009, 6:35 AM

I believe the hotel would be around 350-375 feet. BTW, I know Hilton has committed to the project, but is there any chance project officials might be able to attract a Westin or a W? Or there just isn't room for a luxury hotel in Sac?

Ghost of Econgrad

Jul 7, 2009, 9:18 AM

wburg

Jul 7, 2009, 4:23 PM

Well hey, there's an argument to put the parking in the main hotel building instead of a separate garage: jack that sucker up a few more stories!

tronblue

Jul 7, 2009, 5:23 PM

Seriously, why waste valuable space on the side for a garage? What is the benefit over loss here? I'm at a loss and I don't want to look at another parking garage.

innov8

Jul 7, 2009, 5:59 PM

If you guys are serious about not seeing another garage take up another
block downtown, then start telling Jennifer Hageman at the City of Sacramento’s
Community Development Department. Since it has not started an EIR or been
through any committees, this is where this proposal can be headed off at the pass.

To give public comment about this issue, contact Jennifer Hageman of the
City of Sacramento’s Community Development Department at
jhageman@cityofsacramento.org or (916)808-5538.
Written comments should be sent to Jennifer Hageman, City of Sacramento
Community Development Department, 300 Richards Boulevard, Sacramento,
CA 95811. Comments are due before 4:00 PM on July 27, 2009.

This is info from Wburg's article last week... read it here (http://sacramentohistory.blogspot.com/).

singlecell

Jul 7, 2009, 7:08 PM

i think something really sleek hotel wise would look great next to the older fabric of the bel-vue hotel.

there is a great hotel ( arcotel velvet ) next to the tacheles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunsthaus_Tacheles) art commune in berlin.
the two mesh in such a beautiful way.. the contrast makes each one look so much more interesting..

turn the bel-vue into artist studio spaces (real ones), turn the ground level shop fronts into galleries, swag stores, coffee, corner store.. and you get tenants that will stay in downtown, and while lower-middle class, still frequent those establishments.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3457/3698146599_f57d45a1a5.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2459/3698141391_43304249df_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3457/3698141235_724decf2f2.jpg

singlecell

Jul 7, 2009, 7:31 PM

wburg

Jul 7, 2009, 8:03 PM

Shallit's article mentions a " Parkcrest Development " as being on the team.
I'm very afraid if the this link is one and the same Parkcrest.
Their designs border on laughable (and nauseating)..

http://www.parkcrestdev.com/hotels.html

Additionally, Bob Leaches "Le Rivage Hotel" doesn't look much better..
http://www.lerivagehotel.com/media/images/photogallery/large/facade.jpg

From what I can gather, the whole development team reeks of mediocrity..
( yay, more parapets and stucco !! )

Indeed, it's the same folks who did Le Rivage. It's like someone fed a Natomas tract home some highly illegal steroids and HGH. I'm kind of horrified of what they might come up with for a tower using the same...well, I hesitate to call it an "aesthetic."

Downtown is a great place for that kind of cool contrast between an ultra-modern hotel tower next to a restored historic building. It would be very easy to turn 815 L Street back into an active nightclub, it was still open until last year, thus pushing the whole downtown nightlife concept a bit closer to the waterfront. Not sure if artists' lofts would pencil out, but middle-income rental or ownership housing would work pretty darn well right there. The lofts D&S put above 14th & R are mostly sold already, so we know there is a market!

Ghost of Econgrad

Jul 7, 2009, 10:15 PM

:rolleyes: "sigh..."

Every Hotel needs a parking structure, please someone find me one major hotel in an urban setting without a parking structure...

Now the whining about a separate garage from the hotel does have merit. I just think Sacramento is so under-developed it really doesn't matter.

Just my crazy Right Wing Extremist two cents for you all.

Majin

Jul 7, 2009, 11:18 PM

I just think Sacramento is so under-developed it really doesn't matter.

If that were true they wouldn't have to tear down a building to put one in.

tronblue

Jul 7, 2009, 11:36 PM

http://www.corporatestucco.com/images/ocean_hammock_1_.jpgHey Wburg, is this what your thinking of, but 25 stories worth of stucco and maybe a few stupid palm trees in front.

Ghost of Econgrad

Jul 8, 2009, 1:36 AM

If that were true they wouldn't have to tear down a building to put one in.

The only reason they would have to tear down a building is because of the location of the hotel.

wburg

Jul 8, 2009, 2:54 AM

The only reason they would have to tear down a building is because of the location of the hotel.

Or, they could make the building a few stories taller, and put it in the same building.

tronblue: I think I'm gonna be sick...

tronblue

Jul 8, 2009, 3:15 AM

What you don't like the tuscan exterior movement? But in all seriousness, I'm allergic to Rocklin too.

tronblue

Jul 8, 2009, 3:40 AM

The beson tower in portland sorta reminds me of those mockups at 8th and K a few pages back. Obviously its residential, but its 26 floors and has underground parking.

http://tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:Lrfft2jEDk6WmM:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fe/Benson_Tower_front.JPG

snfenoc

Jul 8, 2009, 6:47 AM

In order to have an integrated parking garage and maintain the same number of rooms, the entire structure will have to be over 30 stories (that'll be tough with a Capitol View Protection height limit of 300' - I think) or go underground quite a bit. I'm not a structural engineer or an architect, but I'm thinking either of these alternatives carry a higher price tag than the proposal.

Plus, it may be preferential to have parking garage entrances/exits on both 8th AND L Streets.

Also, someone mentioned the adaptive reuse of the old warehouse on 14th and R as a good model for the Bel-Vue and other buildings on L. I don't think so. There looks to be a significant size and, therefore, $$$$ difference. I'm not sure if a developer is willing to take on that burden. I sure haven't seen 'em lining up to develop the Berry or the Marshall. The Maydestone building has been closed for 6 years (it was in disrepair for much longer), yet it is just now getting to the point of POSSIBLE redevelopment.

The ho-hum plan for that block is probably a result of these issues.................or the developer and city have zero sense of style and history.

Ghost of Econgrad

Jul 8, 2009, 7:20 PM

Or, they could make the building a few stories taller, and put it in the same building.

I'm with you on that. As snfenoc pointed out, the Capitol View Protection height limit of 300 theoretically could be an issue. Hey, if they can combine the parking in the same building, I am always for that. I was merely stating the central city is still in it's infancy (IMHO) and that a parking structure is not that big of a deal. I am more concerned with housing, housing and more housing.

Side Note: Sorry you got sick from that house in Rocklin Wburg. I would totally live in a house like that than in an expensive condo in midtown myself. I love the differences of opinions on here! :) The palm trees would have to go. Yuck!

Majin

Jul 8, 2009, 7:34 PM

I would totally live in a house like that than in an expensive condo in midtown myself.

I would expect nothing less from you :yuck:

tronblue

Jul 8, 2009, 7:43 PM

Wait a sec...Econ you hate palm trees? The embodiment of wasted natural resources, the graceful and most pointless palm tree? Its good to find common ground.

wburg

Jul 8, 2009, 8:09 PM

Unless I am misreading it, the height limit for the north half of the K/L block at 8th is 350 feet.

http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=17-v-17_96-17_96_100&frames=on
http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/qcode_files/image050.gif

The Bel-Vue is in a lot better shape than the Maydestone; it was occupied by residents until the city took it over and kicked everyone out, the Maydestone was vacated because of a fire and its interior is severely damaged.

Here's an idea...the Citizen is doing pretty bang-up business as a boutique hotel in a historic building (which, by the way, does not have an integrated parking structure--they park at the 10th & L lot.) Why not turn the Bel-Vue apartments into boutique hotel rooms, and move the parking into the main building?

snfenoc

Jul 8, 2009, 8:16 PM

The diagram is a very poor copy. Read the text (which is like reading stereo instructions):

4. Three Hundred Feet. The applicable height limit shall be three hundred (300) feet for property located within the following areas:

a. The half block to the south of K Street, between 16th Street on the east and 12th Street on the west;

b. The half block to the south of K Street, between 10th Street on the east and 8th Street on the west; and

c. The half block east of 8th Street, between a line parallel to and two hundred ten (210) feet to the north of L Street on the north and N Street on the south.

We are talking about the empty hole on 8th and K right?

Phillip

Jul 8, 2009, 8:19 PM

South Korea-based Consus Asset Management has pledged to invest more than $91 million to build the 409-room, 25-floor hotel at 8th and K streets and a six-story parking garage at 8th and L, says lead developer Bob Leach.

He says the $136 million hotel project will increase the city's ability to host major conventions, spur business at Downtown Plaza and lead to store openings on the long-troubled K Street Mall.

Has anyone heard of Consus Asset Management? I can't find anything about them on Google.

The article says negotiations took place in Korea. Has anyone from Consus Asset Management visited Sacramento? Walked on the K Street Mall? Researched the current state of Sacramento's hotel market?

If this hotel will cost $136 million and Consus invests $91 million where does the other $45 million come from?

Why would Korean investors build a new highrise hotel in one of the weakest hotel markets in California when they can buy foreclosed trophy hotels in stronger markets for less than construction costs?

Yes, I'm skeptical.

snfenoc

Jul 8, 2009, 8:58 PM

Phillip:

I did find some mention of Consus on Google. According to the info I found, Consus is a South Korean asset management group founded only about 5 years ago. They may be an offshoot of or associated with an aggressive public employee investment fund. The info is sketchy though.

It does seem odd that they haven't come out here to at least check out the site and its surroundings. But maybe that's normal. Maybe face to face meetings are enough.

The developer will probably have to find an equity partner unless he has deep pockets - how about CalPERS? (j/k) That's gonna be hard. I don't know, can you get $40 million in stimulus money for a hotel?

Is Sacramento the weakest hotel market in California? According to the article, Consus seems to think we'll recover faster than other markets. Maybe that's why they are willing to invest.

I know, my answers are pretty weak. I'm with you. The more I think about it, the more I wonder what kind of idiot would give Sacramento (of all places) $90 million to build anything?

It's the surprising nature of the investment that has me thinking, 'Raze the Bel-Vue. Shit like this doesn't happen every day.'

wburg

Jul 8, 2009, 9:43 PM

phillip: You're right, it is in the 300 foot height limit.

Some other new news: There was also a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) released for ANOTHER hotel project (15 stories high, 180 rooms) proposed for the southwestern corner of 10th and K (most recently the home of a Washington Mutual bank, I think.) An MND is basically a statement explaining why a site is below the threshold needed for an EIR, which means that such a project could get going a lot faster (no need for completion of an EIR, public review, etcetera.)

I spoke with a city employee yesterday, she claimed that funding for the 8th & K project had not been secured, but they had an ERN (exclusive right to negotiate) with USA Hospitality. The ERN expired last month but they got a 45-day extension.

travis bickle

Jul 8, 2009, 11:11 PM

Why would Korean investors build a new highrise hotel in one of the weakest hotel markets in California when they can buy foreclosed trophy hotels in stronger markets for less than construction costs?

Phillip, you have hit the nail on the head. This makes little sense. It's more than just hotels too. Across almost every building sector (particularly high-rise), this precise equation is being worked out and new construction is found to be lacking. It's one reason why I'd be surprised if "Lot X" got started anytime soon. And given current trends (particularly govt policies and their effects on credit markets), this situation isn't going to get better for awhile.

Most strong development firms left (and I am very familiar with one) are looking for troubled properties to purchase at bargain basement prices now, not sites to develop (at least not in the near term). Certainly nothing you're going to have to carry on your books for a few revenue-less years.

If this Korean firm has money in the bank as claimed, investing $100 mil plus of it into a hotel on K Street seems ill-advised given the other opportunities out there.

The W Hotel in San Diego can't cover their payments and is going belly-up. If you had that kind of cash, which has the greater potential - an existing luxury property a couple blocks from San Diego Bay... or a hole on the K Street Mall?

BTW - although I agree that the exterior design of Le Rivage leaves something to be desired, the rooms and service are outstanding. Say what you want about Bob Leach, but he knows how to run a luxury hotel. Still skeptical about some mysterious Korean investors though...;)

tronblue

Jul 9, 2009, 1:17 AM

Shouldn't we also be skeptical in that Mo is in on this. I still remember his plan to destroy the facades on K street so he could envision his dream of a second story walk way akin to the mall. Horrible.

Phillip

Jul 9, 2009, 2:52 AM

Is Sacramento the weakest hotel market in California? According to the article, Consus seems to think we'll recover faster than other markets. Maybe that's why they are willing to invest.

All the most recent recent reports I've seen put Sac in the bottom third among Cali hotel markets based on occupancy and revenue per room. Inland Empire and Palm Springs are down there too. Every market without exception is down from a year ago.

Just a few years ago Sacramento had one of the highest hotel occupancy rates in California---high 70's, low 80's. Now we're in the 50's. Demand is down but the larger culprit has been overbuilding, especially in the suburban submarkets.

The Bee used to print monthly occupancy levels for Sacramento's hotel submarkets--Downtown, Arden, Rancho Cordova, etc. Lately I've just been seeing one figure for the whole Sacramento region, with no breakout by submarket.

It would be interesting to know how downtown Sac's hotels are faring vs. the suburbs now. My guess is that Downtown might be in better shape (i.e. less bad) because Downtown didn't see rampant overbuilding of hotels like North Natomas and Roseville/Rocklin, for example.

Phillip

Jul 9, 2009, 2:57 AM

phillip: You're right, it is in the 300 foot height limit.

wburg,

It was someone else that mentioned the 300 foot height limit but hello!

Phillip

Jul 9, 2009, 3:17 AM

The W Hotel in San Diego can't cover their payments and is going belly-up. If you had that kind of cash, which has the greater potential - an existing luxury property a couple blocks from San Diego Bay... or a hole on the K Street Mall?

And right on cue...yesterday Starwood sold their W Hotel in downtown San Francisco to Asian investors for $90 million.

The W San Francisco is larger than the proposed K Street Hilton (423 rooms vs 408 rooms) but cost $45 million less. And the W is already built.

W Hotel sold to Hong Kong company
James Temple, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide Inc. has agreed to sell the W Hotel in San Francisco to a Hong Kong investment company for $90 million, representing a more than 50 percent drop from peak hospitality property values set two years ago.

The publicly traded company based in White Plains, N.Y., said in a statement it pursued the sale to reduce its debt. Keck Seng Investments Ltd. is expected to close on the deal at the end of the month.

Starwood, which opened the upscale, 423-room hotel at the crest of the dot-com boom in 1999, will continue to operate it as a W Hotel under a long-term management agreement. General Manager Michael Pace couldn't immediately be reached for comment.

The high-water mark for San Francisco hotel sales was set around April 2007, when Taj Hotels Resorts and Palaces based in Mumbai, India, bought Campton Place from Kor Hotel Group of Los Angeles for about $58 million. That amounted to more than $500,000 per room, nearly 60 percent more than the W's "per-key" price of less than $213,000.

The price reflects continuing weakness in the hospitality sector and tightness in the credit markets, said Mark McDermott, senior managing director of San Francisco hotel advisory firm PKF Capital. Hotel occupancy levels in the region fell 12.6 percent from last year and room rates declined 11.7 percent, the company reported.

Few hotel properties have been sold in the past few years, but the market has begun to loosen in recent months. Notably, San Francisco investment fund Geolo Capital bought the Carmel Valley Ranch resort from Blackstone Group for $20 million last week.

"We've finally basically bridged the buyer-seller gap, with sellers' expectations falling to levels where buyers are confident enough" to pursue deals, McDermott said. "We would expect this type of activity to represent, hopefully, the start of folks dipping their toes back into the water."

Jones Lang LaSalle Hotels represented Starwood, which listed the W hotel for sale late last year.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/07/08/BU4O18KLKU.DTL&type=printable

Ghost of Econgrad

Jul 9, 2009, 9:38 PM

Tsakopoulos Delivers 433,000-Sq-Ft Bank of the West Tower in
Sacramento
Project by Late Developer George Tsakopoulos is the California Capital's Third Largest.
Tsakopoulos Investments has completed development of Bank of the West Tower, a 25-story, 433,000-square-foot Class A office tower at 500 Capitol Mall in downtown Sacramento. It’s the third-tallest building in the Golden State’s capital city. Rudolph and Sletten, a wholly owned subsidiary of Tutor Perini Corp., completed work on the 396-foot high-rise designed by architect Ed Kado. The tower overlooks the Sierras, the Sacramento River and the
State Capitol rotunda.
Editor's Note: This article is excerpted from the current edition of In The Pipeline, CoStar Group's weekly column covering new development and construction. To receive the column every week by e-mail, join our distribution list.
Sacramento's second-largest law firm, McDonough Holland & Allen, PC, was the first tenant, signing a lease to occupy space on the 17th through 19th floors. Other law firms relocating to the building include Hanson Bridgett LLP, Somach Simmons & Dunn, and Stoel Rives LLP.
In addition to a bank branch on the ground floor, Bank of the West will have offices on the 11th and 12th floors.
The building features on-site management, 24-hour security, a fitness center with showers and locker facilities, cable-ready access, legislative audio access, an overnight express center, a planned restaurant and an 800 stall parking garage.

http://www.costar.com/News/Article.aspx?id=D7E9521A3F0B8B685008102CB4C1340D

snfenoc

Jul 10, 2009, 8:23 PM

I'm too cheap to buy a subscription to the Sacramento Business Journal, but they do offer excerpts of articles on their website. They did a piece on CADA's East End Gateway sites titled Financing deadlines loom for several East End Gateway sites. Here is the excerpt they offer of it on their website:

A joint powers authority dedicated to putting housing in Sacramento’s central city has proposals for all of its 16th Street “East End Gateway” sites, but the clock is ticking for developers to refine plans, secure financing and start construction.

The Capitol Area Development Authority is a city-state partnership that has seen proposals come and go for its sites due to plunging housing prices that have made infill development extremely challenging.

According to the authority, Ravel Rasmussen Properties and Separovich/Domich Real Estate have until Wednesday to close on property and start construction on two Spanish colonial revival style apartment buildings at 16th and O streets (East End Gateway Sites 2 & 3). CADA’s staff say the developers will miss that deadline and that will have to be addressed at an August board meeting. The first building of 24 apartments is estimated to cost $9.3 million to construct, and rents are projected at $1,400 to $2,100 a month. :lmao: Construction costs haven’t been estimated for the second building.

A partnership of MNA Management Inc. and Foothill Partners has until Aug. 15 to provide a financing plan for the estimated $12.4 million condominium and apartment project it proposed at the southwest corner of 16th and P streets.

For those of you with access, it would be nice to know what the rest says. Things sure don't sound good for 16th Street.

By the way, does the Prop 1C funding received by Capitol Lofts (another project CADA has failed to deliver) mean that it is a go? Or are they waiting for a next round and a next round?

sugit

Jul 10, 2009, 8:55 PM

From what I understand, site II (the 24 apartment mixed-use project) actually has an offer for construction financing. I don't know if it's enough to get it off the ground though.

As for Capitol Lofts, even with the Prop 1C money, there is still a financing gap that needs to be filled.

To get more info on these, there is a 16th St. Streetscape meeting on July 21st at I believe the CADA offices where they will talk a bit about them.

In this tight credit market...I have a hard time seeing CADA not extending those deadlines if need be.

Phillip

Jul 10, 2009, 11:08 PM

Some other new news: There was also a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) released for ANOTHER hotel project (15 stories high, 180 rooms) proposed for the southwestern corner of 10th and K (most recently the home of a Washington Mutual bank, I think.) An MND is basically a statement explaining why a site is below the threshold needed for an EIR, which means that such a project could get going a lot faster (no need for completion of an EIR, public review, etcetera.)

It's probably theoretical for now but if a new hotel was being built downtown I'd favor 10th and K over 8th and K.

The largest concentration of popular restaurants, clubs, and entertainment are east of 10th, and most people want to stay as close to the action as possible. Two blocks isn't a long distance, but people spending $150 or $200 a night for a room have choices and I think most would prefer the less edgy locations of Hyatt, Sheraton, or Citizen over 8th and K, at least as lower K Street (700/800/900) is today.

It would be different if 700, 800, 900 K were already more developed, or if a new 800K hotel was part of a larger plan to restore all three blocks of K street at the same time. But just a hotel by itself on 800, with 700 and 900 left as they are, I don't know who would prefer that location over the alternatives. I can understand why the city of Sac would want an 8th and K location above all others though, after the money and effort they've spent trying to revitalize that block.

Also, views are one reason people will pay a premium to stay in highrise hotels and the views from 10th and K should be much better than from 8th and K. From 10th and K the Citizen Hotel, Elks Building, and Cesar Chavez Park would be visible to the north, once you get up a few floors, and Capitol Park and the Dome to the southeast. Contrast to 8th and K where the Renaisssance Tower totally obstructs views north, and I don't think there's much of visual interest due south.

Finally, love it or hate it, the Renaissance Tower (Darth Vader) is one of the most dramatic and recognizable buildings on Sacramento's skyline. Even people who never go downtown know the Renaissance Tower from driving past on U.S. 50. A highrise at 800K would severely block that familiar view of the Renaissance from the freeway. From a "building up the Sacramento skyline" standpoint a highrise in almost any other location than 8th and K, where there's already one tall landmark in residence, would accomplish more.

Btw, I walked past the 800K site today just to see what the Bel-Vue looked like. I'm embarrassed to admit after all the talk about Bel-Vue here that I had no image or memory of the Bel-Vue. And yes, it is a handsome building, at least the facade facing 8th Street. Why did the city close it?

Pistola916

Jul 11, 2009, 7:15 AM

Bob Shallit: Move quickly or lose hotel financing deal, Sacramento told
bshallit@sacbee.com
Published Saturday, Jul. 11, 2009

Developers of a proposed downtown hotel project have a not-so-subtle warning for city officials:

Act quickly to back the project or risk losing a $91 million financing commitment from a South Korean investment group.

The Sacramento developers – a joint venture of Parkcrest Development and USA Hospitality – want city officials to donate the land for the 25-story hotel and a six-level garage on Eighth Street, between K and L. That would be a departure from earlier city plans to sell the land to developers.

The Parkcrest and USA team also wants the city to forgo some taxes during the hotel's first few years of operations.

If those incentives are granted within a few months, Seoul-based investment firm Consus Asset Management "is in," says Sungmin Park, a Parkcrest VP.

But, he says, delays could force Consus to take its money elsewhere: "This is very time-sensitive."

Park says his Korean American company worked for years to get Consus to invest in U.S. projects, but the company was focused on China, Russia, South Korea and other markets where returns were higher.

Setbacks in Asia last year prompted Consus to look for "safer havens" and back the Sacramento project.

Parkcrest is kicking in $8 million, and other local investors, including Moe Mohanna, have committed millions more, giving the developers sufficient funding for the $136 million project, Park says.

Now, he adds, "we just need the city to say 'yes' to us."

City staffers are negotiating with the developers over terms of any deal. The issue is scheduled to go before the City Council on Aug. 4.