Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[Yackemflaber69]

what ever happened to the capital grand tower

[wburg]

Having nothing to do with the courts I don't know if a new Sac Co. courthouse is really warranted. Of course, I'd like to see new construction and jobs created but I don't see courthouses as really enlivening a neighborhood. So I guess I really don't care that much. I mean it's not like it's going to have some spectacular game-changing design. And If a new courthouse is built what would happen to the old one?

Supposedly the courts are so crowded and backlogged that they need a new court building but would still use the existing courts building, just with the number of courtrooms it was designed for instead of being packed to the gills the way it is now. It's also a foot in the door for Railyards development, and would help pay for some of the infrastructure costs needed to entice a master developer to buy the property from Inland. Lots of activity at the site these days--track realignment is all done, they're building the second tunnel and getting started on the bridges, getting started on the depot rehab and the Phase II "transit village" plan, plus the housing at 7th and H is about to open up. Lots of complaints about the long walk from Light Rail to trackside, but part of Phase II will include realigning the tracks north-south, and eventually connecting them with the Green Line alignment up 7th Street to Richards, which will cut down on that walk.

[wburg]

https://s3-media3.ak.yelpcdn.com/photo/EPRqrow9avejwMIoyNp4wQ/l.jpg

Apparently the California Auto Museum is working on plans to expand into a new, larger building, combined with a Natural History Museum. I found a brief article on the plan in the Business Journal from a couple months ago that says they're developing the plan but don't have the funding yet--it would take about $40 million. I have noticed a lot of toxic remediation going on at the Front Street site next to the CAM over the past year--it used to be an illumination gas plant and electric powerplant for the company that became PG&E, pretty nasty stuff. That will be the new parking area, completely capped off, and the CAM/Natural History Museum will be a taller building that takes up the current CAM property site including the existing parking lot. Could be cool if they can find the funds--and give a nice impetus to development of the Docks waterfront area. It would also give people walking along the existing "Riverwalk" promenade, that currently extends to R Street, something to walk to, and provide a southernmost site for a "museum mile" that runs north to the Crocker, Old Sacramento, the Railroad Museum, Sacramento Museum, and future RTM and Powerhouse Science Center.

[Eriu]

I saw that article in the business journal as well, I have admit that I'm pretty interested, especially by the idea of a natural history museum. Though, the idea of the two museums ( cars and natural history?) together is kinda odd.

I haven't been able to find any other information on it, I'm quite curious about how they plan to fund all of this.

[202_Cyclist]

Sacramento's Township Nine starts with 180 apartments, light-rail station

By Tony Bizjak
Sacramento Bee
Jan. 17, 2013

“Construction is finally under way for Sacramento's long-planned Township Nine housing project – a live-work-play community planned for 10 square blocks off Richards Boulevard north of downtown.

But amid groundbreaking-day speeches Wednesday, project developers acknowledged that the initial 180 apartments on a former cannery site are the only part of the development with funding in place, other than the initial light-rail station on site.

The money for the rest of the 65-acre project is still being cobbled together…”

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/01/17/5120436/sacramentos-township-nine-starts.html#mi_rss=Our%20Region

[innov8]

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/8371/latest16powerhouserende.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/17/latest16powerhouserende.jpg/)

Latest 16 Powerhouse rendering by LPAS! 50 luxury rental apartments above retail. June start date. https://www.facebook.com/#!/16Powerhouse?group_id=0

[ltsmotorsport]

Looks great. Wish we could get more projects like this that didn't solely focus on the luxury market for downtown, but any residential development downtown is good, especially on this site.

I still can't get a picture of how deep/far down P Street this building goes. Is it just the first two properties or three?

Love the start date in the near future too.

[joeg1985]

Love love love the look of that. Some density coming to 16th and P!

[wburg]

It's just on one property, the former motel operated as apartments by CADA, about 16 units I think, so effectively tripling the density. The lot is maybe a third of an acre? From P to the alley and 80 feet deep? Should make a nice companion to the other two CADA properties on 16th that just got untarped, and we'll see if the Warren on N and 16th gets built next.

[ozone]

Looks good. This is across P from Starbucks, across 16th from Fremont Park and on the same block as Hot Italian, correct?

[ltsmotorsport]

That's it. Glad to see this site being put to better use.

Wburg, thanks for clarifying. Wouldn't have minded seeing the 1612 address being part of this project for more and newer units, but this is still very nice.

[ltsmotorsport]

After the "ground breaking" a few weeks back, I've finally seen some more stirrings at the 2500R project site the past few mornings.

http://www.2500rmidtown.com/

So from all the way back in August until now: there's actual equipment and dirt work being done at the site since last week.

[LandofFrost]

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee403/landoffrost/Rstreet_zps1b4d2394.png (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/landoffrost/media/Rstreet_zps1b4d2394.png.html)

I'm excited about this project getting done. It's has been my dream to buy here... but I guess they are only renting.

[joeg1985]

^ What project is this?

[jbradway]

It's the Warehouse Artist Lofts. http://www.cadanet.org/project/capitol-lofts/

Used to be Capitol Lofts.

[wburg]

I'm still hoping some warehouse/industrial/office building goes "condo" with for-sale units, but so far the only ones being considered are rental like this one or commercial/office only like the Kress. I have a feeling as the market shifts a bit some of these projects built as apartments will switch over to condos, and hopefully some of the landlords sick of upper-story office spaces sitting vacant will start marketing them as residential lofts.

[CAGeoNerd]

I'm still hoping some warehouse/industrial/office building goes "condo" with for-sale units, but so far the only ones being considered are rental like this one or commercial/office only like the Kress. I have a feeling as the market shifts a bit some of these projects built as apartments will switch over to condos, and hopefully some of the landlords sick of upper-story office spaces sitting vacant will start marketing them as residential lofts.

Thanks in part to a new arena downtown, yes? ;)

[wburg]

Thanks in part to a new arena downtown, yes? ;)
Pretty sure it will happen whether or not they build an arena.

[CAGeoNerd]

Pretty sure it will happen whether or not they build an arena.

I don't understand how people expect the grid to build upwards with condos magically, as if there is such a demand at the moment that people are coming in droves to live there, and with so many amenities and job opportunities to drive them there. :shrug: Aren't business people always going on about "incentivizing"? There's not going to be any more growth the way you are hoping for unless there is a catalyst and investment to do so.

[wburg]

I don't think magic is required--there is already a high demand for downtown housing, as you can see if you try home shopping in the central city. The properties aren't cheap because their numbers are limited, especially ownership housing. There are only about 2000 for-sale homes, including condos, in the entire grid! Rentals are also comparatively higher, due to demand and the advantages of location. People aren't coming in droves to live here because there is a severe shortage of central city housing supply! High demand, low supply--and thus, high prices and shortages. This produces opportunity for a developer willing to provide an urban product to supply that need.

Catalysts come in all sorts of forms--some are as simple as less-restrictive zoning codes and parking ratios, both of which were recently passed by the city council. Both make it easier to build urban forms in the urban core, and lower requirements for parking lots that just aren't as necessary in an urban setting. That changes the fiscal equation for builders. I suppose I'm less sanguine about the potential of arenas to be catalysts--the studies and numbers I have seen don't suggest that outcome. Arenas tend to follow after the revitalization of a neighborhood, but they don't cause it. I'm already seeing the first signs of recovery in the central city--and sure enough, here is an arena plan to capitalize on it.

[travis bickle]

I don't think magic is required--there is already a high demand for downtown housing, as you can see if you try home shopping in the central city. The properties aren't cheap because their numbers are limited, especially ownership housing. There are only about 2000 for-sale homes, including condos, in the entire grid! Rentals are also comparatively higher, due to demand and the advantages of location. People aren't coming in droves to live here because there is a severe shortage of central city housing supply! High demand, low supply--and thus, high prices and shortages. This produces opportunity for a developer willing to provide an urban product to supply that need.

Catalysts come in all sorts of forms--some are as simple as less-restrictive zoning codes and parking ratios, both of which were recently passed by the city council. Both make it easier to build urban forms in the urban core, and lower requirements for parking lots that just aren't as necessary in an urban setting. That changes the fiscal equation for builders. I suppose I'm less sanguine about the potential of arenas to be catalysts--the studies and numbers I have seen don't suggest that outcome. Arenas tend to follow after the revitalization of a neighborhood, but they don't cause it. I'm already seeing the first signs of recovery in the central city--and sure enough, here is an arena plan to capitalize on it.

This is so funny I had to reply.

So now wburg, Mr. "this deal-is-already-coming-apart-at-the-seams" himself, shoots a pathetically impotent shot across the bow claiming that anything good that happens downtown now won't be as a result of the catalytic effect an arena, with it's 20,000 visitors 300 nights a year, has.

Oh no... the spectacular revitalization of Sacramento's downtown was already well underway (as those thousands of residential units downtown we all see under construction so clearly attest) and those damn millionaire/billionaire developers who are spending billions of dollars as part of this arena are just leaching off the fine results that relaxed parking requirements had already produced.

Ok wburg... you just keep clinging to that one!

This is a great day for Sacramento. The arena and the comcommitant development will change the city for generations. If you're going to continue to have tantrums about all the great things that are coming as a result of this, you're in for a long, bitter decade or two.

I've pointed out several examples where a catalyst did precisely what was promised by energizing downtown.

Last night I went to several ULI related events as it is having their annual meeting here in San Diego at catalyst #1. And Downtown streets were pulsatingly alive last night as the Padres were playing at catalyst #2.

I don't need another study to prove that catalyst development works.

I live it everyday.
:cheers:

[Majin]

This is so funny I had to reply.

So now wburg, Mr. "this deal-is-already-coming-apart-at-the-seams" himself, shoots a pathetically impotent shot across the bow claiming that anything good that happens downtown now won't be as a result of the catalytic effect an arena, with it's 20,000 visitors 300 nights a year, has.

Oh no... the spectacular revitalization of Sacramento's downtown was already well underway (as those thousands of residential units downtown we all see under construction so clearly attest) and those damn millionaire/billionaire developers who are spending billions of dollars as part of this arena are just leaching off the fine results that relaxed parking requirements had already produced.

Ok wburg... you just keep clinging to that one!

This is a great day for Sacramento. The arena and the comcommitant development will change the city for generations. If you're going to continue to have tantrums about all the great things that are coming as a result of this, you're in for a long, bitter decade or two.

I've pointed out several examples where a catalyst did precisely what was promised by energizing downtown.

Last night I went to several ULI related events as it is having their annual meeting here in San Diego at catalyst #1. And Downtown streets were pulsatingly alive last night as the Padres were playing at catalyst #2.

I don't need another study to prove that catalyst development works.

I live it everyday.
:cheers:

I already saw this coming from wburg. 3 years from now when K street is alive and bustling surrounded by lots of new retail and housing, wburg is going to claim it had nothing to do with the arena and the surrounding developments, but is because the historic preservation of some random warehouse 3 miles away, or that Heather Fargo instituted these reforms and KJ just happens to be inheriting her success or some bullshit.

[ozone]

From the SBJ:

..." would add large glass-walled spaces above the existing center and Community Center Theater. The design firm was engaged by the Sacramento Convention & Visitors Bureau to see how to expand the center, which is now one of the smallest convention centers of a major city on the West Coast."

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2013/05/30/sacramento-convention-center-expansion.html

[CAGeoNerd]

From the SBJ:

..." would add large glass-walled spaces above the existing center and Community Center Theater. The design firm was engaged by the Sacramento Convention & Visitors Bureau to see how to expand the center, which is now one of the smallest convention centers of a major city on the West Coast."

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2013/05/30/sacramento-convention-center-expansion.html

"With an estimated cost of $200 million..."

Wait, where's the uproar from the anti-arena folks at? I'm sure they will be outraged at this "boondoggle" and misuse of public funds for an extravagant and unnecessary project! :rolleyes:

[ozone]

This was from the SBJ article.

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/3951/mapconventioncenter0531.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/341/mapconventioncenter0531.jpg/) Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

So it looks like the the main expansion will be achieved by adding another floor to the CC. And it looks they want to add a ballroom on top of the Community Theater (can we please give this place a less generic name?) Not knowing anything about the CT structure, other than what most people see, I never imagined that was possible. The best part from the view of good urban space and pedestrian movement is "opening up" K Street, improving the pedestrian corridor between 15th and 13th and creating a 15th Street entrance.

As far as people caring or not caring about the expansion. If I understand it correctly the money for the expansion is in part coming from the hotel tax. Which makes sense because they would be the main beneficiary. It would be nice to have a convention center large enough to host groups other than girl volleyball regionals and the Jehovah Witnesses.

[Bubb90]

V.o.r.t.e.x.since it is evil to talk about suburbs on here lol..anything in the talks for any proposed true skyscrapers?

[Pistola916]

V.o.r.t.e.x.since it is evil to talk about suburbs on here lol..anything in the talks for any proposed true skyscrapers?


I was thinking about this the other day when I visited Sac. For a city of nearly 500,000 and 2.5 million people in the region, it would be nice to see an architect/developer propose and successfully build a signature tower. Perhaps that day will come when the arena anchors the downtown plaza development.

[enigma99a]

As far as people caring or not caring about the expansion. If I understand it correctly the money for the expansion is in part coming from the hotel tax. Which makes sense because they would be the main beneficiary. It would be nice to have a convention center large enough to host groups other than girl volleyball regionals and the Jehovah Witnesses.


Yeah but correct if I am wrong but aren't we lacking in hotels to have a big convention downtown? Same with the arena, even if we get a new arena we won't be seeing any all star games because of the lack of room capacity.

Maybe the towers should be built as originally planned but with hotels in both towers plus a few units of residential

[CAGeoNerd]

Yeah but correct if I am wrong but aren't we lacking in hotels to have a big convention downtown? Same with the arena, even if we get a new arena we won't be seeing any all star games because of the lack of room capacity.

Maybe the towers should be built as originally planned but with hotels in both towers plus a few units of residential

Well, chicken and egg argument. There is supposed to be a hotel going up with the new arena, and West Sac is building one right next to Raley Field on the waterfront. Those are the only two I know that are "planned" (term used loosely). Once the arena plan becomes clear, and if the convention center is expanded, developers are going to start looking at places to plop new hotels in downtown.

The thing I'm really hoping/dreaming for, is a new signature tower for Sacramento's skyline. (aren't we all?).. Nothing has been built higher than the Wells Fargo building since it first went up. It's time for a modern, taller building to rise up and feature itself in the skyline! :tup:

[snfenoc]

I thought a mid-range, limited service hotel was planned for K Street? (Again, "planned" is a loose term.)

I've read (and experienced) that Sacramento hotels are doing OK, but they still have plenty of rooms available. Even with a relatively small expansion of the convention center in the works, I don't think a new 25-story Ritz-Carlton is needed at this point.

As far as a signature tower is concerned, I don't think a developer will win $100 million plus in investments with the following argument:

"Come on, guys! It's time for Sacramento to have taller, signature building. I mean...come on!"

It seems that market capabilities are at the heart of Sacramento's height "problem".

[Pistola916]

It seems that market capabilities are at the heart of Sacramento's height "problem".

That, and Sacramento doesn't have any Fortune 500 companies. Smaller metros like Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Columbus, OH all have a signature tower but they are home to a few corporate headquarters.

[snfenoc]

That, and Sacramento doesn't have any Fortune 500 companies. Smaller metros like Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Columbus, OH all have a signature tower but they are home to a few corporate headquarters.

In other words...market capabilities are at the heart of Sacramento's height "problem". ;)

[wburg]

Take your pick--skyscrapers downtown, or more "landscrapers" on the urban fringe. Growth outward sabotages growth upward.

[ltsmotorsport]

Can't believe I'm agreeing with wburg so often recently! ;)

But seriously, what you say is true. The more money that's invested in tract home developments and office parks is money that could have been spent on development in the core or other existing neighborhoods.

[Bubb90]

When is construction on the Powerhouse museum going to start?

[BillSimmons]

I was thinking about this the other day when I visited Sac. For a city of nearly 500,000 and 2.5 million people in the region, it would be nice to see an architect/developer propose and successfully build a signature tower. Perhaps that day will come when the arena anchors the downtown plaza development.

We already had that project proposed and even started! Unfortunately, The Towers project turned out to be not much more than a couple of holes in the ground :(

[Eriu]

When is construction on the Powerhouse museum going to start?

That's what I want to know. Last I heard things were supposed to start up in Spring of this year, but here we are in almost Fall and nothing.

[enigma99a]

That, and Sacramento doesn't have any Fortune 500 companies. Smaller metros like Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Columbus, OH all have a signature tower but they are home to a few corporate headquarters.

Sucks that the Bay Area is only 75 miles away :( and our weather doesn't help

[CAGeoNerd]

The problem is any time an entrepreneur or small company gets going, they eventually get bought out by a larger company. Recently it was that gaming company in midtown that the owner sold off to EA Games. Similarly to lots of other businesses. We're never going to get a Fortune 500 company when any promising company always gets bought out by a larger company headquartered somewhere else.

[ltsmotorsport]

Sacramento arena plans spur talk of sales nearby
By Tony Bizjak
Published: Wednesday, Aug. 28, 2013 - 12:00 am | Page 1A
Last Modified: Wednesday, Aug. 28, 2013 - 5:33 pm

Plans for a new Kings arena in Downtown Plaza have helped re-energize the downtown real estate market – prompting several deals, including one that would erase a downtown eyesore.

Two notable J Street sites, the historic Fruit Building at Fourth Street and a group of four boarded-up buildings near 10th Street, are either in escrow or in final negotiations for sale, parties involved in the deals say.

The sale of an office building at Seventh and L streets to a national investment company was completed two weeks ago.

Officials say the potential downtown arena was either the spark for the sale in each case, or a key driver in raising the price.

In a dramatic turn for the long-blighted 1000 block of J Street, an undisclosed Southern California investment company has agreed to buy the row of boarded-up storefronts for $7 million, said a real estate broker involved in the deal.

The company is talking about building a high-rise housing project of up to 25 stories on the block between 10th and 11th streets, said broker Kyle Mickiewicz of Cassidy Turley Real Estate. That may include apartments, or condominiums and a hotel.

.....

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/08/28/5686600/arena-plans-spur-talk-of-sales.html

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2013/08/27/21/38/1h5dul.Xl.4.gif


As the article mentions further down, these are the properties where St. Anton and Cordano proposed the Cathedral Tower condo building. It'll be interesting to see the full proposal/design from the new team.

[CAGeoNerd]

Exactly why people wanted the arena to go downtown.. it's already happening... downtown is going to get revitalized and things are going to be transformed and grow upwards very soon! I can't wait to see what it looks like 5, 10 years from now!

[NME22]

Boom! There it is. Not sure why it is so hard for some to see what a downtown arena could do for out city. Hope to see many more articles like this as we get closer to building an arena.

[RainDog]

downtown is going to get revitalized and things are going to be transformed and grow upwards very soon! I can't wait to see what it looks like 5, 10 years from now!

I think 5-10 years is more than a little optimistic. You might get a shiny tower or two, but I imagine they will be poorly designed at the street level. This has always been my experience in Sacramento (I lived in El Dorado County for 10 years so I would visit the city fairly often). It always blew my mind just how desolate some stretches of downtown are. The vacant store fronts, hold potential. They can be filled. But the numerous office buildings with uninviting or no retail frontage that take up large quadrants of downtown, are going to be a large obstacle when it comes to trying to make downtown inviting. I just recall walking many blocks without passing any interesting retail, only occasional banks and chain shops like Starbucks, Quisnos, that sort of thing. Which of course is not exactly "destination" retail.

I don't mean to be a debbie downer, I just think the city has a long way to go. It seems like they are taking some steps in the right direction, but they will need to execute those plans well for things to really change downtown and I have very little faith in Sacramento's ability to properly execute anything.

I hope I am wrong. I would really like to see Sacramento become something special. I just think if that is ever going to happen, it is going to take at least another 20 years.

[jbradway]

I think 5-10 years is more than a little optimistic. You might get a shiny tower or two, but I imagine they will be poorly designed at the street level. This has always been my experience in Sacramento (I lived in El Dorado County for 10 years so I would visit the city fairly often). It always blew my mind just how desolate some stretches of downtown are. The vacant store fronts, hold potential. They can be filled. But the numerous office buildings with uninviting or no retail frontage that take up large quadrants of downtown, are going to be a large obstacle when it comes to trying to make downtown inviting. I just recall walking many blocks without passing any interesting retail, only occasional banks and chain shops like Starbucks, Quisnos, that sort of thing. Which of course is not exactly "destination" retail.

I don't mean to be a debbie downer, I just think the city has a long way to go. It seems like they are taking some steps in the right direction, but they will need to execute those plans well for things to really change downtown and I have very little faith in Sacramento's ability to properly execute anything.

I hope I am wrong. I would really like to see Sacramento become something special. I just think if that is ever going to happen, it is going to take at least another 20 years.

The less than impressive office buildings are probably government. They are less interested in appearing inviting. Nature of the biggest beast in downtown.

[NME22]

I think 5-10 years is more than a little optimistic. You might get a shiny tower or two, but I imagine they will be poorly designed at the street level. This has always been my experience in Sacramento (I lived in El Dorado County for 10 years so I would visit the city fairly often). It always blew my mind just how desolate some stretches of downtown are. The vacant store fronts, hold potential. They can be filled. But the numerous office buildings with uninviting or no retail frontage that take up large quadrants of downtown, are going to be a large obstacle when it comes to trying to make downtown inviting. I just recall walking many blocks without passing any interesting retail, only occasional banks and chain shops like Starbucks, Quisnos, that sort of thing. Which of course is not exactly "destination" retail.

I don't mean to be a debbie downer, I just think the city has a long way to go. It seems like they are taking some steps in the right direction, but they will need to execute those plans well for things to really change downtown and I have very little faith in Sacramento's ability to properly execute anything.

I hope I am wrong. I would really like to see Sacramento become something special. I just think if that is ever going to happen, it is going to take at least another 20 years.

:(

[Pistola916]

Powerhouse Science Center construction now expected in 2014
Ben van der Meer
Staff Writer- Sacramento Business Journal

Construction on the Powerhouse Science Center on the Sacramento River waterfront should get underway in early 2014, according to the center’s acting executive director.

Ray Burnell, who's also a deputy executive director for the museum's science and exhibits, said public and private support should allow work to start then and will be completed about 18 months later.

The museum’s funding is a combination of new market tax credits, private donations, and bond money through an arrangement with the Sacramento County Office of Education.

"We've come a long way," Burnell said.

The science center, long in the works, will be in what was a Pacific Gas & Electric Co. power station on Jibboom Street, north of the I Street Bridge. When fully developed as two buildings, the center will be 48,200 square feet and will have 55 permanent jobs. The estimated project cost is $78 million.

Earlier this year, an economic impact analysis found the museum would bring in about $14.5 million in outside consumer spending a year after it opens, and create 535 construction jobs.

Otto Construction has the contract to build the center, which has had its start date for construction pushed back at least twice.

[enigma99a]

Old Exploratorium was 80,000 ft so 48,000 isn't bad.

[wburg]

Lots of CADA lots are booming these days...the "Legado de Ravel" apartments are finishing up, that's 80 or so market rate apartments, "16 Powerhouse" is another 50 or so market rate units a block away, the "WAL" project in the old CADA warehouse on R Street is starting construction on its new half (the 12th Street side) and framing up the apartments (that's about 110 units, 75% affordable) and getting ready to start fixing up the B&L building on 11th with a pizza place on the ground floor and offices above. By the end of the year demo and site clearance should start for the Warren at 16th & N, the City Council is reviewing that project for approval of its low-income component (20% will be affordable to someone with an average Sacramento County income, the other 80% market rate.)

I suppose once these go up it's only a matter of time before the other CADA lots get going. Ace of Spades might miss having the lot at 15th and P to park tour buses, which is a CADA lot temporarily surfaced as parking "ground cover." The other lot is the Enterprise car rental place next to Simon's and the day care behind it--hopefully they will be able to transfer their leases to the ground floor of one of the new buildings, but I don't think it will be too long before something else takes over that site.

The other lot on that corner (north side of 16th/17th on N) is more problematic: part is cleared for a project that never happened, and an old school. They both belong to the school district, who is notorious for kind of sitting on old school properties. But if someone made them the right kind of deal to build something new on the vacant lot and fix up the old school (it would make fairly swell apartments/art studios and has a lot of character) it would help connect the dots.

The Fremont Park area the eastern half of CADA's properties) is already the most densely populated part of the city, and it's going to have a few hundred more residents in the next couple of years. Now let's see if there is enough impetus to get some residential conversion in the CBD. Apparently the new zoning code will get rid of the necessity for a conditional use permit to put housing in the central business district (the same restriction used for gun shops and adult bookstores) in addition to much loose parking requirements. Although from what I hear, now it's the banks who insist on lots of parking to provide private-sector loans, just as local government has stopped insisting that urban buildings use suburban parking ratios...

[ltsmotorsport]

I've heard the same concerning lenders. Seems like someone needs to be shown the up-to-date literature/research.

[Surefiresacto]

Awesome design pics of the Convention Center expansion posted on Sac Biz Journal today. I love the new walkway down K St from 13th St to 15th St. Also the ballroom overlooking Capitol Park would be an awesome black tie event space.

:tup:

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2013/10/01/sacramento-convention-center-expansion.html?s=image_gallery

[Mr. Ozo]

Awesome design pics of the Convention Center expansion posted on Sac Biz Journal today.[/url]


And absolutely no funding source or way to pay for them. The Convention center still paying off debt from the last remodel until 2021.

Pretty pictures though.

[CAGeoNerd]

I'm sure all of the STOP people will be out in full force gathering signatures to put the convention center on the ballot... http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rolleyes007.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

[urban_encounter]

I'm sure all of the STOP people will be out in full force gathering signatures to put the convention center on the ballot... http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-rolleyes007.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

Very few of them are actively volunteering to gather signatures. From a grassroots perspective STOP is a joke. It took $100,000 of Chris Hansen's money to get them to 18,000.

But in any event you make a great point and no, i doubt that they will.

[wburg]

The funding source for the Convention Center is the local hotel tax, but the city may be eyeing it as a way to backfill revenue for the arena--it was listed on the term sheet as additional tax revenue to repay arena construction loans. If a new Convention Center expansion gets built and the existing tax revenue gets dedicated to that purpose, it won't be available to repay arena loans if parking/ticket revenue falls short.

[jbradway]

The funding source for the Convention Center is the local hotel tax, but the city may be eyeing it as a way to backfill revenue for the arena--it was listed on the term sheet as additional tax revenue to repay arena construction loans. If a new Convention Center expansion gets built and the existing tax revenue gets dedicated to that purpose, it won't be available to repay arena loans if parking/ticket revenue falls short.

It is what they call a waterfall or backstop. It's primary use is to offer better security for the bonds and a better rate. And of course backfill as revenue as you stated.

I personally cant see the city touching the hotel tax for the convention center renovation for a very, very long time.

The good part is the city doesn't have to build any new garages. That's what NY did for Yankee Stadium and got into trouble. They can focus on revenue generating upgrades like smarter pay stations, meters and apps to locate open parking spots, etc.

[wburg]

The city has been using hotel tax for convention center upgrades for a long time--it seems like the interest in using it as backfill revenue is changing spending priorities for that revenue stream. Is there any sort of pro forma showing projected parking revenue? I'm still concerned that the projections seem kind of optimistic, especially considering the city is giving about one-third of its parking inventory to the development team.

[jbradway]

The city has been using hotel tax for convention center upgrades for a long time--it seems like the interest in using it as backfill revenue is changing spending priorities for that revenue stream. Is there any sort of pro forma showing projected parking revenue? I'm still concerned that the projections seem kind of optimistic, especially considering the city is giving about one-third of its parking inventory to the development team.

Updated projections were coming this fall last I heard.

[snfenoc]

There is a nice little article in today's Bee about the emerging R Street Corridor.

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/02/5871313/r-street-corridor-redevelopment.html#storylink=cpy

Glad to read the former Crystal Ice plant is still on the developer's radar. I sure hope they include some housing.

Also, it is nice the city approved plans for the Natural Foods Co-Op. However, I wish there were a housing component to it.

[v.o.r.t.e.x]

There is a nice little article in today's Bee about the emerging R Street Corridor.

http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/02/5871313/r-street-corridor-redevelopment.html#storylink=cpy

Glad to read the former Crystal Ice plant is still on the developer's radar. I sure hope they include some housing.

Also, it is nice the city approved plans for the Natural Foods Co-Op. However, I wish there were a housing component to it.

Crystal Ice if I am not mistaken is the portion of R street that will connect Safeway to other businesses down the road. Thats pretty cool, nightclub and grocery store in 6 minute walking distance. Just like real CITY ;)

[Bubb90]

New 8000 seat stadium?

[CAGeoNerd]

http://www.sacrepublicfc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/calexporendering_website.jpg

http://sacrepublicfc.com/cal-expo-multi-use-facility/

Supposed to be a temporary venue with hopes of building a permanent home in the "downtown core."

[wburg]

Sounds interesting...although the definition of "downtown core" is pretty fuzzy, and this is only 2 miles away from the edge of Midtown. Best thing about it: no public funding.

[jbradway]

Nvm

[snfenoc]

There was another nice little article (if you can get past the pay wall) in Sunday's Bee. This time, it was about development along Del Paso Boulevard.

New optimism in quest to revive Sacramento’s Del Paso Boulevard
The Sacramento Bee
By Ryan Lillis
rlillis@sacbee.com
Published: Sunday, Nov. 17, 2013 - 12:00 am
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/11/17/5918521/new-optimism-in-quest-to-revive.html#storylink=cpy

There are 12+ properties the city is looking to sell to developers. Some of the ideas being kicked around for those parcels include:
- Graphic design firm
- Brewery
- Midsize apartment building
- Culinary center
- Rehab of the former Grand Theater
- Public market

Sacramento continues to move forward...slowly.

[urban_encounter]

Sounds interesting...although the definition of "downtown core" is pretty fuzzy, and this is only 2 miles away from the edge of Midtown. Best thing about it: no public funding.

A nice project but the one drawback about it, is that it doesn't nothing for the central core.

[wburg]

The city is bigger than the central core--and the central core itself is expanding.

[Sactorleans]

This obviously won't be a big project, but does anyone know what is planned for the lot at 21st Street and Capitol Avenue?

They just demolished the Colonial style home/office building that was built at a diagonal on the corner.

[wburg]

They also demolished the salon next door. Combined with the big parking lots behind them it's a reasonably sized lot, about as big as the mixed-use building on the other end of the block--roughly a quarter block. No plans submitted to the city yet, maybe ask the property owner?

[ltsmotorsport]

It's a prominent corner so a good number of units and a little retail space would be great there.

[urban_encounter]

The city is bigger than the central core--and the central core itself is expanding.

There are 240 acres of undeveloped land sitting and dormant, adjacent or in close proximity to light and heavy rail. It would be the perfect place for a 20,000 MLS stadium (imo). It beats the heck out of a Bass Pro Shop.

[urban_encounter]

The city is bigger than the central core--and the central core itself is expanding.

There are 240 acres of undeveloped land sitting and dormant, adjacent or in close proximity to light and heavy rail. It would be the perfect place for a 20,000 MLS stadium (imo). It beats the heck out of a Bass Pro Shop. But yes I agree that there's more to the city than the central core.

[wburg]

We'll see what the new property owner has in mind for the Railyards--have you been out there to see the work in progress on the 5th and 6th Street bridges? "Dormant" is a bit of a stretch. The Bass Pro shop has been out of the equation for a while. I wouldn't rule out MLS, but if they ask for public money, they may find the cupboard bare.

[SacTownAndy]

Saw this in the business journal:


Sacramento Commons would add new downtown housing
Ben van der Meer
Staff Writer- Sacramento Business Journal
Dec 18, 2013, 6:48am PST

A proposal to add several new housing units to downtown Sacramento should come before the city in the way of a formal application in February.

Sacramento Commons, which got its first public airing before city of Sacramento staff and residents near the future site this week, has a tentative concept for one high-rise residential building, two mid-rise residential buildings, and a mixed-use building on the block bordered by Fifth, Seventh, N and P streets.

According to a tentative site plan provided by a law firm working with the developers, the west side of the block would have the two mid-rises, the high-rise would be in the southeastern corner, and the mixed-use building would be on the northeast portion.

.....

full story here:http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2013/12/18/sacramento-commons-would-add-new.html

[enigma99a]

What's the status of Aura? http://www.hrgarchitects.com/index_Parking_Aura.html

If the Arena goes in, is there any talk of bring it back or is it 100% canned?

[NME22]

Saw this in the business journal:


Sacramento Commons would add new downtown housing
Ben van der Meer
Staff Writer- Sacramento Business Journal
Dec 18, 2013, 6:48am PST

A proposal to add several new housing units to downtown Sacramento should come before the city in the way of a formal application in February.

Sacramento Commons, which got its first public airing before city of Sacramento staff and residents near the future site this week, has a tentative concept for one high-rise residential building, two mid-rise residential buildings, and a mixed-use building on the block bordered by Fifth, Seventh, N and P streets.

According to a tentative site plan provided by a law firm working with the developers, the west side of the block would have the two mid-rises, the high-rise would be in the southeastern corner, and the mixed-use building would be on the northeast portion.

.....

full story here:http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2013/12/18/sacramento-commons-would-add-new.html

Additional quote from the article.

“They’ve been talking about doing something for awhile,” she said, though the prospect of a new arena for the Sacramento Kings a few blocks north helped those talks gain momentum."

:tup:

[BillSimmons]

Any idea how high the mid/high rises will be.

[enigma99a]

Any idea how high the mid/high rises will be.

No higher than the capital :D

Honestly, I think the city should impose a height minimum in a tight zone around the current high rises. Otherwise when the downtown does get revitalized, the core won't be so spread out.

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

I hope part of the proposal is reintroducing the grid to that superblock.

[Mr. Ozo]

You have to wonder if 6th Street could be restored. It seems possible here but I'm not sure about the section on the south side of Capital Mall. There is room between the buildings to do it with no parking. It obviously would benefit circulation to the arena.

Edit: It looks like the right way of 6th between N and Capital is combined into the parcel of what I believe is a federal goverment building and used for parking. I wonder what the odds of getting that back to open up 6th street are?

I hope part of the proposal is reintroducing the grid to that superblock.

[enigma99a]

I was hoping it would include this bunker at 7th and N but it looks like the West side of that intersection. Oh and that lovely North Korean green monster needs to go too.

http://i39.tinypic.com/166cebb.png

[wburg]

No higher than the capital :D

Honestly, I think the city should impose a height minimum in a tight zone around the current high rises. Otherwise when the downtown does get revitalized, the core won't be so spread out.

I don't think the Capitol Towers superblock is included in the "Capitol View Protection Act" height limit, but it isn't in the Central Business District (where there is no height limit) either. As I recall the last time I heard about this proposal, they were talking about 25-35 stories. I wouldn't count on the Resources Building or the "bunker" and rooftop park at 8th and O going away anytime soon, unless the state suddenly gets a massive influx of cash and needs enormous new buildings for more state employees.

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

In an ideal world, everything from Front to 10th and N to S would be ripped up, a true grid would be reinstated, and there'd be an emphasis on streetside retail. The more time I spend in other cities, the more I realize that there's just so much Sacramento needs to do for catchup and how badly a series of small mistakes led to our current downtown. Here's hoping the arena and a slew of new projects like this one help to really change downtown.

[wburg]

Our big need for catch-up is in downtown residential--that's the big mistake that changed everything downtown. We had an extra 30,000 people, still had a true street grid, and the main feature of the neighborhood was streetside retail. But in the mid-20th century, all of those were called "blight" and wiped out with all possible speed in the name of progress. Plenty of other cities did that too, but it seems like the local development community still isn't sold on the idea of people living downtown, which is why every attempt to "revitalize" is based on visitors and commuters, with housing as a passing afterthought.

[enigma99a]

Although this news is a bit old, there is a chance that the SF Bay Area including Sacramento could host the 2024 olympics. Or also perhaps 2022. In addition to the Arena, we should also shoot for the Olympics too. It would bring in a huge amount of dollars and new facilities

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/san-francisco-san-jose-invited-to-submit-bids-for-2024-olympics/

http://sacramentopress.com/2012/02/21/city-bid-to-host-2022-olympics-new-arena-will-be-a-factor/

[202_Cyclist]

Although this news is a bit old, there is a chance that the SF Bay Area including Sacramento could host the 2024 olympics. Or also perhaps 2022. In addition to the Arena, we should also shoot for the Olympics too. It would bring in a huge amount of dollars and new facilities

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/san-francisco-san-jose-invited-to-submit-bids-for-2024-olympics/

http://sacramentopress.com/2012/02/21/city-bid-to-host-2022-olympics-new-arena-will-be-a-factor/

The Olympics, although enjoyabe to watch for two weeks every four years, are a singificant waste of money that could be spent on far better public investments, such as infrastrucutre. The Sochi Olympics have cost Russia nearly $50B. The Vancouver Olympics cost $7B. Billions of dollars are spent on things like venues for archery or kayaking that will only be used a couple of times.

[NME22]

Although this news is a bit old, there is a chance that the SF Bay Area including Sacramento could host the 2024 olympics. Or also perhaps 2022. In addition to the Arena, we should also shoot for the Olympics too. It would bring in a huge amount of dollars and new facilities

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/san-francisco-san-jose-invited-to-submit-bids-for-2024-olympics/

http://sacramentopress.com/2012/02/21/city-bid-to-host-2022-olympics-new-arena-will-be-a-factor/

Unfortunately, the US Olympic Committee is not going after the 2022 winter Olympics, so that's out. Though Sacramento was asked to apply, we're not really an option to host the Summer Olympics.

The reason why it cost so much for the Sochi Olympics is the city lacked the proper infrastructure. They had to build the infrastructure and THEN the venues. So this is not an issue that your average large American city would have.

I think there is value in having the Olympics, but it's not in the cards for us in the near future.

[enigma99a]

Unfortunately, the US Olympic Committee is not going after the 2022 winter Olympics, so that's out. Though Sacramento was asked to apply, we're not really an option to host the Summer Olympics.

The reason why it cost so much for the Sochi Olympics is the city lacked the proper infrastructure. They had to build the infrastructure and THEN the venues. So this is not an issue that your average large American city would have.

I think there is value in having the Olympics, but it's not in the cards for us in the near future.

I think SF is interested for 2024 but would have some spillover to Sac. That would be ok..

[urban_encounter]

Our big need for catch-up is in downtown residential--that's the big mistake that changed everything downtown. We had an extra 30,000 people, still had a true street grid, and the main feature of the neighborhood was streetside retail. But in the mid-20th century, all of those were called "blight" and wiped out with all possible speed in the name of progress. Plenty of other cities did that too, but it seems like the local development community still isn't sold on the idea of people living downtown, which is why every attempt to "revitalize" is based on visitors and commuters, with housing as a passing afterthought.

As long as its cheaper for builders to construct homes in Elk Grove, Roseville, Folsom and Natomas we aren't likely to see much high density housing. It just doesn't pencil out (yet). There isn't that catalyst to make people want to open their wallets and pay a premium. Not without low income housing subsidies and let's be honest we have enough of that in our central core. Those are not the people who are going to fill bars and restaurants. I think everybody knows that more market rate housing is what downtown needs but you have to make people want to be a part of something that they can't get in the suburbs. To that end we have already seen five commercial properties change hands in anticipation of the ESC. The owners of 555 CM want to build a residential component and maybe even open up then L street side. Things are verge of changing. But market rate downtown housing isn't going to just miraculously happen without a catalyst project.

[wburg]

As long as its cheaper for builders to construct homes in Elk Grove, Roseville, Folsom and Natomas we aren't likely to see much high density housing. It just doesn't pencil out (yet). There isn't that catalyst to make people want to open their wallets and pay a premium. Not without low income housing subsidies and let's be honest we have enough of that in our central core. Those are not the people who are going to fill bars and restaurants. I think everybody knows that more market rate housing is what downtown needs but you have to make people want to be a part of something that they can't get in the suburbs. To that end we have already seen five commercial properties change hands in anticipation of the ESC. The owners of 555 CM want to build a residential component and maybe even open up then L street side. Things are verge of changing. But market rate downtown housing isn't going to just miraculously happen without a catalyst project.

The era of cheaper suburban housing is starting to fizzle out--I don't think we have seen the end of sprawl, but a lot of people in the housing market (about a third, I think) just plain aren't interested in a house in the suburbs, even if the house itself is cheaper, because that suburban house comes with expensive hassles like a long commute home, and lacks the sort of physical environment that can't be found in the suburbs but can already be found, to a certain extent, in the central city. That's the market people are already building for in Midtown, in West Sacramento, in Southside and Alkali Flat and even East Sacramento and Curtis Park.

The catalyst is already occurring in every direction around the downtown core, where housing of all sorts (both low-income and market rate) is under construction or in the planning stages. The people in the market-rate housing fill the bars and restaurants, and the people in the low-income housing certainly do as well, and probably also work there (remember, "low-income" refers to people making $20, 30, 40K per year.) Because they live downtown, they spend their money downtown on a day-to-day basis.

You don't have to make people want to be part of something, they already want to be part of it. And the most important "urban amenity" of all is people living in the downtown core.

[202_Cyclist]

Regarding the end of sprawl, this is a good post.


As it turns out, suburban sprawl actually peaked 20 years ago

"The rate of suburban sprawl peaked in the mid-1990s and has declined by two-thirds since then, even through the giant housing boom. Could this quiet change in land use have caused many of the changes that we're seeing today, from recentralizing job growth to the decline in driving?.."

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/21720/as-it-turns-out-suburban-sprawl-actually-peaked-20-years-ago/

[wburg]

Nice! Someone should let the Metro Chamber and the County Board of Supervisors know about that--they are still approving new greenfield sprawl. And yes, that's the other big change that has been underway for a while, but since Sacramento's biggest job sector other than government is building suburbs, the folks with the money are loath to follow this national trend.

[urban_encounter]

The era of cheaper suburban housing is starting to fizzle out.

I hope that you're right about this.

I still believe a significant catalyst project (ESC) as well as a more permanent public market would help attract even more people. I know that the prospect of a new arena going up motivated me to sell my D8 home and relocate back downtown. I know of others planning the same move. We don't need twin 53 story buildings. But there's so much that can be done to help grow the central city population again. That's something that we can all agree upon.

[urban_encounter]

Nice! Someone should let the Metro Chamber and the County Board of Supervisors know about that--they are still approving new greenfield sprawl. And yes, that's the other big change that has been underway for a while, but since Sacramento's biggest job sector other than government is building suburbs, the folks with the money are loath to follow this national trend.


Very true....

[wburg]

Saw this in the Bee today: suddenly the economics shifts and agriculture on land intended for sprawl makes more money!
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/17/6163821/yuba-county-developers-weigh-value.html

There is a lot more going on downtown than an arena. $300M spent in that part of downtown will make a big difference in that specific neighborhood, but the real difference will be made by the ancillary development--and that's what we don't have a clear picture of yet. The number of 550 housing units maximum gets tossed around--but no minimum!

[urban_encounter]

Saw this in the Bee today: suddenly the economics shifts and agriculture on land intended for sprawl makes more money!
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/17/6163821/yuba-county-developers-weigh-value.html

There is a lot more going on downtown than an arena. $300M spent in that part of downtown will make a big difference in that specific neighborhood, but the real difference will be made by the ancillary development--and that's what we don't have a clear picture of yet. The number of 550 housing units maximum gets tossed around--but no minimum!


The Kings will need the ancillary development because of their stipulation that they will not take a bigger piece of the media pie. I wholeheartedly agree that the arena is just a fraction of what we may see and housing will need to be a big component of it. Its pretty exciting times for the central city.

[wburg]

If the Kings will need the ancillary development, I'd like to see something in writing to that effect, like the successful example in San Diego, where there were specific numbers and targets for ancillary development. Housing is absolutely key and the first priority--they have a maximum number of housing units, but no minimum number of units. We've already seen a weakening of the regulatory environment--instead of a PUD, it's a "design district" which leans more toward "should" rather than "shall" in its enforcement language.

[urban_encounter]

If the Kings will need the ancillary development, I'd like to see something in writing to that effect, like the successful example in San Diego, where there were specific numbers and targets for ancillary development. Housing is absolutely key and the first priority--they have a maximum number of housing units, but no minimum number of units. We've already seen a weakening of the regulatory environment--instead of a PUD, it's a "design district" which leans more toward "should" rather than "shall" in its enforcement language.


I wouldn't be opposed to more detail in the final term sheet in relation to some of the ancillary development (the housing component). I think it's very important to obtain a more clear picture of when we can expect more housing. I'm less concerned about commercial office space since we have a glut of office space.

[Web]

The owners will make a fortune on the billboards and the "Free" city land to develop in the future.

[snfenoc]

Boutique hotel plan emerges for Marshall Hotel
By Ryan Lillis and Hudson Sangree
rlillis@sacbee.com

Published: Thursday, Feb. 27, 2014 - 4:24 pm

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/27/6195701/boutique-hotel-plan-emerges-for.html#storylink=cpy

[NikeFutbolero]

Boutique hotel plan emerges for Marshall Hotel
By Ryan Lillis and Hudson Sangree
rlillis@sacbee.com

Published: Thursday, Feb. 27, 2014 - 4:24 pm

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/02/27/6195701/boutique-hotel-plan-emerges-for.html#storylink=cpy

Thank god

That corner is ghetto as hell.