Sacramento Suburban Development [Archive]

View Full Version : Sacramento Suburban Development

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

ozone

Mar 31, 2007, 9:52 PM

Fire safety of mid-rise buildings addressed by Roseville ordinance
Sacramento Business Journal -Friday, March 30, 2007
by Michael Shaw

The city of Roseville has approved a mid-rise building ordinance that the city
claims is the first of its kind in the state to address fire safety issues for four-to six-story buildings in height.

The ordinance, passed unanimously on Wednesday, requires a fire command center of a certain size, fire-fighting equipment storage, smoke management system, a fire alarm system that allows broadcasting of voice commands to building occupants, and a backup generator.

The estimated costs for a building of 158,000 square feet is about $311,000. That is significantly less than if a high-rise standard were applied to buildings of medium height, the city says.

The ordinance is expected to be enacted with a second vote by the City Council next month.

Is this a measure to encourage mid-rises or to discourage them I can't tell?

ozone

Mar 31, 2007, 10:15 PM

While I barely leave the city (downtown-midtown grid) I'm still interested in what other parts of Sacramento are up to. I'd also like to see what the suburbs look like through the lens of someone with a good and unconventional eye. I just don't get out to them to know or take pic myself. If anyone has any pics to share that would be cool. I'd like to see Zinfandel/50, Natomas, and Roseville.

Borough System for Sacramento: http://sacramental.blogspot.com/

Grimnebulin

Apr 1, 2007, 5:21 PM

ozone

Apr 1, 2007, 7:41 PM

Thanks for the encouragment. Yeah it's "my baby" -among many.

I took Toffler's Third Wave book off the shelf last night and read that -in the past we thought that 'small was beautiful' or that 'big is better' but in the future we'll see that 'small within big is beautiful and better'.

econgrad

Oct 31, 2007, 8:00 AM

North Natomas: Visions of a community neighborhood lost in a car-oriented suburb
By Mary Lynne Vellinga - mlvellinga@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PDT Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Before the home construction crews and bulldozers descended on the flat plain of North Natomas, city leaders made their vision clear: The northern frontier of Sacramento would be a pedestrian-friendly place where people could work, play and shop in the same neighborhood.

Not only that, this city within a city would pay for itself. The houses, stores and offices would generate enough fees and taxes to build roads and community facilities as well as pay for public safety and other city services.

Eight years and 15,000 homes later, city leaders say the reality has fallen well short of that vision. North Natomas doesn't look or feel much different from nearby suburbs. In some respects, it's more car-oriented than most because its roads are oversized to handle traffic from Arco Arena.

"It still is a suburban community, and I think what we envisioned was something that would be more than a suburban community," Councilman Steve Cohn said at a recent council workshop on growth.

Land once envisioned for job centers has been rezoned for big box stores, served by broad, traffic-clogged roads. More rezoning proposals are in the works. A promised light-rail line may be decades away, and bus service is sparse. Sound walls separate neighborhoods from sidewalks and streets.

On a recent Saturday, Mayor Heather Fargo gave a driving tour to illustrate North Natomas' flaws. "Look at this poor guy trying to cross the street," she exclaimed as her car approached the offramp from Interstate 80 on Truxel Road, en route to shopping centers on the other side.

In the Natomas Marketplace and Natomas Promenade shopping centers, she said, "You can't even go from one major store to another without driving."

City amenities undelivered

Much to the irritation of some new Natomas residents, the city also has not delivered promised improvements such as a police station, a second fire station, community centers and traffic lights at key intersections. The regional park remains an open field, and the finance plan for North Natomas doesn't contain the money to pay for it.

Schools are another sore point. Each of North Natomas' 14 "villages" was supposed to be anchored by an elementary school. But in three separate neighborhoods – Natomas Central, Westlake and Natomas Meadows – the school district has abandoned plans to build.

North Natomas' flaws have come to the forefront in recent weeks as Sacramento moves ahead on proposals to annex thousands of acres of farmland north of the city limits.

Fargo said the unfinished business in North Natomas should give the city pause before it annexes more land. "Frankly, we're not finished with North Natomas," she said.

Councilman Ray Tretheway focuses on the positive. The community has lots of bike paths, he said, and three small shopping centers people can walk to. "I talk to a lot of average people," he said. "They love Natomas. They're going crazy over it."

Yet residents attending recent meetings haven't been cheery. They demand that the city deliver promised amenities before moving to new territory.

"They feel they were tricked and their leaders have failed them," said Westlake resident Tom Reavey, a Sacramento County Taxpayers League board member. "Natomas as built bears no relationship to the community plan. The community plan called for walkable communities with neighborhood schools.

"What we've ended up with is almost the polar opposite," he said. "We've got traffic-choked, wide-laned major streets with little to no public transportation options, little pedestrian access, and scant walkability or bikeability."

In September, when a 12-year-old Natomas Middle School student was fatally struck walking on the Del Paso Road bridge over Interstate 5, some blamed the city. Signals planned for the crossings at I-5's onramp and offramp haven't been installed. "It really just tore at us," said resident Ken Stevenson."That's been a dangerous situation for years."

The finance plan for North Natomas lists traffic signals on Del Paso Road as one of the planned improvements. Dan Roth, Tretheway's district director, said the current schedule is to install them by 2009.

Earlier this year, acting on a request from the Natomas Community Association, the Sacramento County grand jury scrutinized North Natomas. Its final report called for an audit comparing the results of the Natomas development with the goals the city originally set, as well as its spending on improvements.

The City Council rejected the recommendation, saying that the grand jury report was based on outdated information, and that city finances are routinely audited.

Lack of services defended

The city defended its performance on delivering services to North Natomas, citing several reasons planned improvements failed to materialize.

A major reason: Not everything was included in the developer-funded North Natomas finance plan. Some things, such as freeway interchanges and a regional park, were left out because they were deemed community-wide benefits. Only part of the cost of the police station was covered.

The city took other items off the table to reduce the fees developers would charge homebuyers. The second fire station and three of four planned community centers are in this category.

"We were cautious about overburdening the development with fees because we really wanted it to get started," said Planning Director Carol Shearly. "We didn't know how far we could push."

As it turned out, the city's concern was unwarranted. With the housing market boiling, what was supposed to be a 25-year plan was half-built within six years. Sales have since declined along with the housing market.

Officials said rising construction costs also hampered the city's ability to deliver improvements, and government aid didn't materialize as planned.

"We haven't seen the federal and state monies we anticipated in this plan," said Mark Griffin, the city's fiscal manager.

Unrealistic expectations?

Fargo, who represented North Natomas before she was elected mayor, said she thinks new residents hold unrealistic expectations for how quickly the city can deliver services and improvements, and what level of service they should receive.

A South Natomas resident, Fargo noted that she had to wait 20 years for her own community center.

She cited the public safety issue, a major preoccupation of North Natomas residents. While she frequently hears complaints about a lack of police services, Fargo said the area has much less violent crime than many other city neighborhoods.

That doesn't mean she thinks North Natomas is a success, however. Fargo has plenty of criticisms about the design of the community whose development she helped oversee. In some cases, she can recite chapter and verse what happened; in others, she's not really sure.

Natomas Marketplace – a congested shopping center on Truxel Road – was rezoned despite her no vote. Wide streets were imposed on the neighborhood by city traffic engineers.

But why does the future regional park have a sound wall along part of its length, with houses turned away and no parking on the street?

"This one embarrasses me, because I feel like I ought to have caught it," she said. "But when you're the only council person looking at the plans, and they're coming so fast ... ."

Fargo has urged that any future development to the north be phased, so the city can oversee it more carefully.

"I'm not interested in doing North Natomas north," Fargo told her colleagues at a recent meeting. "If it can't be on the cover of a national magazine as a model, I don't know why we'd want to do more."

Majin

Oct 31, 2007, 7:21 PM

So basically North Natomas is a huge failure in every way possible.

Grats Mayor Fargo and city council, you only have yourself to blame for this.

Majin for Mayor 2020.

aufbau

Oct 31, 2007, 10:22 PM

I've often see children try to walk on Del Paso Boulevard over I-5 and it makes me hate Natomas a little more every time.

As a newer resident of Sacramento, I often recoil when told there was some sort of plan to that mess.

econgrad

Nov 1, 2007, 9:55 PM

Another example of our incompetent city government, all that wasted money on city planning. delaying development and increasing costs, spending our tax money and what was planned never happened....

Web

Nov 2, 2007, 4:48 AM

paid off by the developers of North Natomas.....

Its a shared responsibility.....

innov8

Nov 2, 2007, 3:20 PM

Placer, El Dorado among nation's 50 wealthiest counties Income, home prices, education all go into formula to figure affluence
By G. Scott Thomas of The Sacramento Business Journal

Friday, November 2, 2007

Many of the region’s monied households are in places such as Serrano in El Dorado Hills.

View Larger Placer County's deep-pocketed residents can enjoy a little chest-thumping, fist-pumping and even some Rolex-flashing, at least when it comes to their wealth.

The county finished at No. 43 among the nation's 100 wealthiest suburbs, according to a report released this week. El Dorado County was No. 44.

More than one of every 20 residents earn at least $200,000 per year in El Dorado and Placer counties, according to a report by Bizjournals, a sister company of the Business Journal.

Bizjournals created a nine-part formula to determine the relative affluence of 291 suburban counties, seeking the places with the highest incomes, most expensive houses, lowest poverty levels, strongest educational backgrounds, and most extensive ownership of stocks, rental properties and vehicles.

Placer County had per-capita income of $35,014 per year, but more high-income residents -- 6.8 percent earn at least $200,000 per year -- help increase the rankings. In addition, only 3.8 percent of the county's residents live below the poverty level. And one of every 10 homes has at least nine rooms, from bedrooms to game rooms, according to the report.

El Dorado County also fared well, with 5.9 percent of residents earning $200,000 or more per year, offsetting the $32,122 per-capita income. Less than 4 percent of the county's residents live below the poverty level. But bigger homes are less common, with 8 percent of the homes featuring at least nine rooms.

Big Apple 'burbs
Placer and El Dorado counties are the wealthiest -- and only -- Sacramento-area communities listed on the report, but they pale compared to the rolling hills of northern New Jersey, where dozens of upscale suburbs sprawl within 70 miles of New York City.

All of these havens may consider themselves unique and autonomous, but economist Joseph Seneca views them as a cohesive region. The "wealth belt," he calls it.

The name is appropriate. Almost a million people live in the region's three richest counties -- Hunterdon, Somerset and Morris -- where the income levels are 70 percent above the national average.

"It's an area of high incomes, high housing costs and high quality of life," said Seneca, a Rutgers University professor. "It has become an economic mass of real significance."

Similar "wealth belts" can be found in major metropolitan areas from Washington, D.C., to San Francisco. The nation's 100 richest suburban counties, taken as a group, are home to 46 million people whose combined income -- $1.6 trillion per year -- would cause any marketer to salivate.

At the very top of the list, rated by Bizjournals as America's wealthiest suburban county, is Hunterdon County, N.J. Fifteen percent of Hunterdon's households have annual incomes of $200,000 or more, which is 4.5 times the national rate of 3.4 percent.

Second place belongs to Fairfax County, Va., a high-tech hub near Washington, D.C. It has a highly educated, well-paid work force. Six of every 10 Fairfax adults have college degrees, and 15.2 percent of the county's households are in the $200,000-plus income range.

Better than most
The rest of the top 10 consists of two more counties from New Jersey, two from Maryland, and one each from California, Colorado, Connecticut and Virginia.

The 100 counties on Bizjournals' master list easily outstrip the national standard of living, no matter which indicator is used:

Their collective per-capita income is $35,275, 40 percent above the U.S. figure of $25,267.
Eight percent of all households in these wealthy suburbs have annual incomes of $200,000 or more. The national rate is 3.4 percent.
Big homes are much more common in the top 100 counties, where 14.7 percent of all houses have at least nine rooms. The U.S. average is 8.1 percent.
The correlation between income and education is strong, so it's no surprise that the proportion of adults with college degrees is higher in the wealthiest counties: 40.3 percent compared with 27.0 percent for the entire nation.

Wealthiest counties
1. Hunterdon, N.J.
2. Fairfax, Va.
3. Fairfield, Conn.
4. Howard, Md.
5. Loudoun, Va.
6. Montgomery, Md.
7. Somerset, N.J.
8. Morris, N.J.
9. Marin
10. Douglas, Colo.

ozone

Nov 3, 2007, 7:20 PM

So basically North Natomas is a huge failure in every way possible.

Grats Mayor Fargo and city council, you only have yourself to blame for this.

Majin for Mayor 2020.

You are right Majin. What a bunch of hypocritical jerks. Suddenly they wake up and realize that all those projects they have approved over the years do not comform to the Natomas Community Plan? Give me a break. :rolleyes:

The height of hypocrisy for Fargo to go around as a tour guide pointing out what's wrong. Mayor Fargo in particular is to blame for how Natomas turned out since she was it's representative and the Natomas Plan was her 'baby'. How hard did she fight to maintain the integrity of the plan?

Another proof that these community meetings are for the most part useless.

econgrad

Nov 5, 2007, 10:14 PM

:previous:
I couldn't agree more!!...I wonder what the city will or can do to help the area now? If anything. Another great example of sprawl, while we are not building upward (and smarter) like we should be.

brandon12

Nov 6, 2007, 4:51 AM

^^well said Ozone. Couldn't agree more.

Also, on a completely unrelated note, Sugit finished the NYC marathon in under 5 hours yesterday. Not too shaby Sugit!!!

TowerDistrict

Nov 6, 2007, 10:22 PM

Go Sugit !!!

(that don't sound right)

creamcityleo79

Nov 30, 2007, 3:41 AM

Although not an urban development at all, I JUST found out about Palladio at Broadstone in Folsom!!! WTF!!!?!??!? That project is HUGE!!! Some of the stores there aren't even at the Galleria!!! I am too exhausted to type them all up. But, just some highlights...Apple, H&M, Talbot's, Z Gallerie, Aeropostale, Ruth's Chris, PF Changs, CPK, Banana Republic, and MORE!! There's 129 stores. I knew NOTHING of this development until just now! I saw the construction. But, just figured we might be talking about some other big boxes like PetSmart or something like that. I never DREAMED it would be anything of this caliber...AND it's right across from the u/c Kaiser Hospital! I am TOTALLY in SHOCK!!!! Here is a link to the map of the development!

http://www.ggp.com/Content/Data/PDF/156-SP1.pdf

DALINSAC

Nov 30, 2007, 4:50 AM

[QUOTE=neuhickman79;3196625]Although not an urban development at all, I JUST found out about Palladio at Broadstone in Folsom!!! WTF!!!?!??!?

An H & M in Folsom??? Geez. I always hoped for Sacramento to snag one of those. That's a cool store. I always thought of H&M in really metropolitan areas so, I am really shocked to hear of one in Folsom. Wow

sugit

Nov 30, 2007, 4:56 AM

Damn , that's a hell of a lineup. Club Monaco as well. They also have the areas only Saks (even if it's Saks off 5th) in the outlets.

Just goes to show retailers will go where the $$$$ is. Right now, midtown and downtown still far far behind in that area.

ltsmotorsport

Nov 30, 2007, 7:48 AM

creamcityleo79

Nov 30, 2007, 2:43 PM

Man, you guys are out of touch. ;)

This mall has been planned since at least the early 90's. I don't think the Kaiser hospital came on board until much later, but it's a good addition to the site.

The silly thing is there is a Cold Stone just down the street at another shopping center and what would be a competing Border's in that same center.
The news isn't about the center itself. The news is about the tenants. I was reading some other forums online from people living in Folsom and as recent as August they were thinking this was going to be another boring average shopping center with nothing unique about it. The fact is, there's at least 4 or 5 stores that have never been in the Sacramento area before. That's what's surprising!

robw340

Nov 30, 2007, 4:16 PM

The news isn't about the center itself. The news is about the tenants. I was reading some other forums online from people living in Folsom and as recent as August they were thinking this was going to be another boring average shopping center with nothing unique about it. The fact is, there's at least 4 or 5 stores that have never been in the Sacramento area before. That's what's surprising!

You're right ...I knew there was something coming to Folsom too; for years i've heard of that shopping center coming there, to complement the other anchor shopping malls in Roseville and the one planned in Elk Grove (which makes it more of an urgent matter to get Downtown Plaza fixed.Now)....I love H&M, but Sacramento should be getting that, being that's so trendy and affordable -in Folsom!?!?!? Anyways, good lineup.

Fusey

Nov 30, 2007, 5:03 PM

Lucky for you there's a brand-new Petsmart across the street from where the mall will be. My office is right next to it. Best view in the world! :haha:

TowerDistrict

Nov 30, 2007, 5:15 PM

I don't make it out to Folsom much - will the mall be accessible by the
Gold Line? That would be nice.

In other news - the Raley's in South Land/Hollywood Park on Freeport Blvd.
is gearing up for a massive remodel and expansion project. They're already
presenting plans to the LPCA - I'm interested to see what comes of it. I think
the idea is to go big like we just saw Target do. I'm pretty sure they plan to
close it entirely, during construction, and move employees into other stores.
So it sounds big.

innov8

Nov 30, 2007, 5:22 PM

Very cool TD... I like the way the store is now, but I'm intrested to see what they have planned.

ozone

Nov 30, 2007, 6:29 PM

TowerDistrict

Nov 30, 2007, 6:46 PM

All I have to say is good luck getting the LPCA
to accept that. I think it will much harder than Target was but I could be
completely wrong. Is there really is a need for a larger Raley's in that
neighborhood?

You know, the LPCA should actually be credited with what happened to the
Target. They were all up in Target's business as soon as they announced a
couple changes were coming to the store. And I mean changes, because
Target was not at all looking to completely overhaul the store. In fact, they
were going to remove the gardening center - LPCA fought that. They were
going to dress up the store a bit - LPCA came up with a host of
recommendations. I would presume LPCA got Councilman Fong involved,
and really made Target take a "big picture" look at their store, and the
result sounds awesome.

I think you can count on the same action/reaction to Raley's. The issue has
always been the nightmarish swath of parking that fronts the street. I'm
completely guessing here - but I would bet money that we'll see something
that addresses the street (Freeport). Something akin to Oto's, also on
Freeport, but on a much larger scale.

And to cite the recent Mercy expansion in relation to Raley's expansion -
obviously there's a need for a greater capacity... otherwise they simply
wouldn't do it.

ltsmotorsport

Nov 30, 2007, 8:08 PM

I don't make it out to Folsom much - will the mall be accessible by the
Gold Line? That would be nice.

No, unfortunately. The Gold Line runs into old town Folsom, where as this shopping center is near Hwy 50 near the El Dorado Co. line, almost the opposite corner of the city. Hurray for those parking garages!!!:banana:

:rolleyes:

innov8

Jan 1, 2008, 10:12 PM

http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/1884/elkgrovemall20071211fmf0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Is this where the new Elk Grove mall is being built?

creamcityleo79

Jan 2, 2008, 12:04 AM

http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/1884/elkgrovemall20071211fmf0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Is this where the new Elk Grove mall is being built?
It appears as if it is!

ltsmotorsport

Jan 2, 2008, 3:07 AM

Wonder if Westfield's pressure made the site be all the way down at Grant Line & 99?

urban_encounter

Jan 2, 2008, 5:39 AM

No that's where the mall has been planned at all along..

innov8

Jan 2, 2008, 5:04 PM

I think your right Urban. This mall was probably in planning stages 10 years
ago when Florin Mall was still a somewhat functional mall and the developer
wanted to distanced the proposal so as to not compete with Florin Mall.
I don’t think the new mall had anything to worry about though.

wburg

Jan 2, 2008, 7:40 PM

Part of the impetus in putting a mall on the south edge of town is that it increases the incentive to continue development south of the mall into open farm areas.

Majin

Jan 2, 2008, 8:04 PM

Can we close this thread?

urban_encounter

Jan 3, 2008, 2:54 AM

Part of the impetus in putting a mall on the south edge of town is that it increases the incentive to continue development south of the mall into open farm areas.

Absolutely.

It's sad too because it flies smack in the face of the Blueprint for growth in that it will encourage the city of Elk Grove to push further South towards Galt.

That's part of the probelm of Balkizing every communtiy in the county into a separate municipality..

Web

Jan 4, 2008, 4:23 AM

innov8

Jan 11, 2008, 6:53 PM

It appears that there is more going on in Rancho Cordova than just the
Point East Towers. There is also a Westborough Station proposal that is
still only in the concept and planning stages. The Point East Towers still
need to provide additional information and is on hold until that
information is received.

www.planning.saccounty.net/tap/docs/Project-Overview-Complete.pdf

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/60/westboroughstationzy6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

innov8

Jan 15, 2008, 9:12 PM

Man, I'd hate to have bought a home in Natomas and be living there now...
this will make it even tougher for those tring to sell their homes. Who would
want to buy in an area that has less than 30 years of flood protection?

Building moratorium likely in Natomas basin
By Matt Weiser of The Sacramento Bee
January 15, 2008

A building moratorium is likely for Sacramento's fast-growing Natomas basin after federal flood-control officials said Tuesday they will designate the area as having a high risk of devastating flood damage because of inadequate river levees.

Next December, when the new federal flood hazard mapping is finalized, any new building - or substantial reconstruction of an existing building - would have to leave the structure as much as 20 feet above ground, high enough to avoid the most damaging of flood waters. But the cost of building that high up will result in practically banning new construction in Natomas, officials said.

The proposed designation also will require holders of federally backed mortgages to buy flood insurance in December. However, officials today recommended that property owners buy that insurance right away.

The new design is result of findings made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in 2006 that found Natomas levees no longer meet minimum flood-protection standards - being able to withstand floodwaters so strong they're likely to occur once in 100 years.

Sacramento city officials, who had requested the corps' study, had hoped for a different designation that would allow construct to continue without a need to elevate buildings. But the study announced today, found that some Natomas levee sections don't even meet a 30-year flood protection standard. As a result the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which sets flood-insurance requirements, determined that a stricter insurance rating zone would apply to Natomas when the mapping is finalized in December.

Construction projects in Natomas that obtain permits before December will be governed by existing flood-hazard maps, and won't require structures to be elevated, officials said.

The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency has a plan to rebuild Natomas levees to the minimum flood-protection level by 2010. It hopes to start construct on that project this summer, but the plan has not yet gotten final approval from state and federal officials.

Majin

Jan 15, 2008, 10:14 PM

So... are they just going to write articles and make plans for it, or are they actually going to do it?

urban_encounter

Jan 16, 2008, 6:57 AM

Next December, when the new federal flood hazard mapping is finalized, any new building - or substantial reconstruction of an existing building - would have to leave the structure as much as 20 feet above ground, high enough to avoid the most damaging of flood waters. But the cost of building that high up will result in practically banning new construction in Natomas, officials said.

I'm curious if this will indefinitely delay long the planned airport expansion??

creamcityleo79

Jan 16, 2008, 7:50 AM

I'm curious if this will indefinitely delay long the planned airport expansion??
I looked at the floodplain map for Sac County and it appears that the area of and surrounding the airport is at least 14 ft high already on the northern end and 20 ft high at the southern end. So, unless those new structures will be 6 ft tall or less, we should be fine. Unless, of course, those structures block Mayor Gotta-go's view of the planes taking off and landing. THEN, we have a problem! ;)

econgrad

Jan 16, 2008, 10:05 AM

So... are they just going to write articles and make plans for it, or are they actually going to do it?

The Bee will write articles about it, the city will read the articles written by the Bee, and the Natomas residents will hopefully gather together and make the Natomas Ark!

urban_encounter

Jan 16, 2008, 4:09 PM

I looked at the floodplain map for Sac County and it appears that the area of and surrounding the airport is at least 14 ft high already on the northern end and 20 ft high at the southern end. So, unless those new structures will be 6 ft tall or less, we should be fine. Unless, of course, those structures block Mayor Gotta-go's view of the planes taking off and landing. THEN, we have a problem! ;)

Here's our answer from this mornings Sac Bee

(This is just an excerpt)

Levee report shocks city
Feds plan tough restrictions that could halt building in Natomas and require flood insurance.
By Mary Lynne Vellinga And Matt Weiser - mlvellinga@sacbee.com
Last Updated 6:18 am PST Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

One major project that could be affected is the $1.3 billion expansion of Sacramento International Airport. That project includes a new four-story terminal replacing the Terminal B complex, as well as a hotel and multistory garage.

Sacramento County airport officials said Tuesday they have met with FEMA officials and believe they still will be able to move forward. Airports Director Hardy Acree said his agency is on a fast track to obtain building permits this spring. Construction is scheduled for summer.

Full story: http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/637772-p2.html

creamcityleo79

Jan 16, 2008, 6:49 PM

Here's our answer from this mornings Sac Bee

(This is just an excerpt)

Levee report shocks city
Feds plan tough restrictions that could halt building in Natomas and require flood insurance.
By Mary Lynne Vellinga And Matt Weiser - mlvellinga@sacbee.com
Last Updated 6:18 am PST Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

One major project that could be affected is the $1.3 billion expansion of Sacramento International Airport. That project includes a new four-story terminal replacing the Terminal B complex, as well as a hotel and multistory garage.

Sacramento County airport officials said Tuesday they have met with FEMA officials and believe they still will be able to move forward. Airports Director Hardy Acree said his agency is on a fast track to obtain building permits this spring. Construction is scheduled for summer.

Full story: http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/637772-p2.html

Why did the Bee so blatantly contradict itself? Amazing!

urban_encounter

Jan 17, 2008, 2:32 AM

Why did the Bee so blatantly contradict itself? Amazing!

Why do they call it "The Bee"???

creamcityleo79

Jan 17, 2008, 3:21 AM

Why do they call it "The Bee"???
maybe because Sacramento used to be an agriculturally important city and because bees pollenate plants. Just a guess. But, it sounds good!

wburg

Jan 17, 2008, 6:07 AM

Unlikely, since the Bee has been around since 1857 (all that 150th anniversary stuff last year) which was well before the Sacramento region became a major agricultural center...that was still technically during the Gold Rush era, before the Sacramento Valley became an agricultural powerhouse. There were some farms, but settlement was still pretty sparse.

About the name, it may have referred to the first issues' small size (printed on smaller paper to limit expenses.) Founder James McClatchy described the early paper as "It was a wee thing then and feeble in appearance, but though small, it was bright and plucky."

TowerDistrict

Jan 17, 2008, 6:24 AM

because they make the news sting?

econgrad

Jan 17, 2008, 8:39 AM

^:previous:
2 Snare hits and splash!

Dakotasteve66

Jan 17, 2008, 7:34 PM

Here's interesting stuff from Sac Bee's website on how it got its name:

(Exerpted from The Sacramento Bee's Ombudsman column on March 24, 1991)

Glad you asked. It's been that since 1857 when James McClatchy founded the paper. An editorial on the first day of publication said: "The name of The Bee has been adopted as being different from that of any other paper in the state and as also being emblematic of the industry which is to prevail in its every department."

So, the promise was a paper as busy as a bee. (Quaint, but not a bad marketing strategy, I should think.)

The first James McClatchy used a picture of a bee on his business stationery. His son, C.K., ordered the image of a bee depicted in mosaic tile in the lobby of the old Bee office at 911 Seventh St. in 1901. That mosaic now is on permanent display at the Sacramento History Museum.

In 1943 James McClatchy's granddaughter, Eleanor, then president of The Bee, asked Walt Disney to create some new images of the insect to "lend personality and a familiar identity" to the papers and the company's radio stations.

Disney, who donated his $1,500 fee to the Army Relief Fund, came up with "Scoopy" for the papers and "Gaby" for the radio stations. The new logos were announced with great front-page fanfare in The Bee on Sept. 4. That evening, a 15-minute radio interview with Disney from Hollywood was broadcast on KFBK. Eventually, Scoopy drawings were created for all sorts of Bee promotions and events, and the fellow became ubiquitous around the paper.

Scoopy is the only Disney-created character allowed to "work" outside of the Walt Disney Company, and still lives today throughout the pages of The Bee. He can be seen at events throughout the community, greeting children of all ages.

plinko

Jan 17, 2008, 7:39 PM

Just an FYI, the flood plain mapping will set minimum FINISH FLOOR heights in the Natomas area. The support structure below has to be 'breakaway' to allow for free flow of water.

It's pretty flat out there, but there is some variation in elevation IIRC and thus this 20' above grade is just the worst case scenario (but of course the number the media latches onto).

In the case of the airport, they may just have to raise the ground floor slightly and rework the grading of the aircraft aprons (at least SMF has lots of room for such things). Anything already existing would be grandfathered.

Interestingly enough, you could still build taller above grade parking structures with a building on top and meet the FEMA requirements. Density anyone? :)

But new single family homes? Awful expensive to raise the grade between 5'-20' to meet FEMA requirements.

It'll be interesting to see the results of these new regulations.

ltsmotorsport

Jan 17, 2008, 8:19 PM

Phillip

Jan 17, 2008, 11:43 PM

Why is Natomas in a Suburban Development thread? Natomas is part of Sacramento, yes? A lot of Natomas feels like a suburb. Maybe it's like an honorary suburb.

innov8

Jan 18, 2008, 12:59 AM

Just an FYI, the flood plain mapping will set minimum FINISH FLOOR heights in the Natomas area. The support structure below has to be 'breakaway' to allow for free flow of water.

It's pretty flat out there, but there is some variation in elevation IIRC and thus this 20' above grade is just the worst case scenario (but of course the number the media latches onto).

There's one office building on North Market near Northgate Blvd. that's built
up on a hill around 15' high. It's a single structure that was built even before
Arco One was built down the street. When you drive by, all you see from
your car is ivy growing on a hill and a sign. I'll have to get a photo someday.
Obviously, the people who built it knew the history of the area quite well.

Why is Natomas in a Suburban Development thread? Natomas is part of Sacramento, yes? A lot of Natomas feels like a suburb. Maybe it's like an honorary suburb.

If it's not in the grid or really close in a surrounding neighborhoods, I would consider it a suburban. Honorary for sure.

wburg

Jan 18, 2008, 4:59 AM

Exactly what is or isn't a "suburb" is kind of sticky, especially because Sacramento has grown quite a bit since incorporation, enveloping many neighborhoods built as suburbs of Sacramento that were originally outside the city limits or even their own incorporated cities. I'd say that Natomas is certainly suburban in form, even though it is in the city limits, so perhaps the way to describe it is as a "suburban neighborhood."

SacUrbnPlnr

Jan 20, 2008, 3:50 AM

Wouldn't it seem though, that after the repairs are done, and the area once again being designated 100 year flood protection, that development could continue the same as before? Wouldn't it just be another study, then it's off to the races again?

The Sacramento Bee also neglected to mention an important part of the process for removing the restrictive FEMA floodplain designation. Development can proceed in North Natomas under a less restrictive AR designation once SAFCA has meet certain milestones for percentage of funds appropriated, spent, and work completed. In other words, SAFCA does not have to complete 100 percent of the levee improvements before development may proceed.

plinko

Jan 21, 2008, 11:04 PM

The Sacramento Bee also neglected to mention an important part of the process for removing the restrictive FEMA floodplain designation. Development can proceed in North Natomas under a less restrictive AR designation once SAFCA has meet certain milestones for percentage of funds appropriated, spent, and work completed. In other words, SAFCA does not have to complete 100 percent of the levee improvements before development may proceed.

So if the levee work gets funding in the pipeline (etc) then FEMA removes the floodplain designation? Interesting...are there published timelines that the city/county has agreed to for levee work? Who actually pays for it? (Is there federal money available?)

Seems like any sort of moratorium or additional restrictions on development in Natomas would be a huge revenue loss for the city...especially in this economy.

Just curious...

plinko

Jan 21, 2008, 11:07 PM

On another note...did you guys know that Zaha Hadid was picked to design the new City Hall in Elk Grove? Stantec (Gordon Chong's old office) will be the local architect of record. I'm told that the city is still in contract negotiations with Hadid and her firm for the design so final renderings will still be some months off.

TowerDistrict

Jan 21, 2008, 11:41 PM

Yeah there was an article published in Sactown Magazine that said she
was in the running - then later published somewhere else that she had
won the bid.

Funny thing, is that her "plan" is nothing more than a series of abstract
shapes stretched across a flat plain. But yes, I'm thoroughly intrigued and
can't wait to see what comes of it.

Thanks for the additional info.

wburg

Jan 28, 2008, 8:59 PM

Has anyone been following the Greenbriar annexation? Apparently AK Tsakopoulis owns 500 or so acres north of North Natomas, and wants to build a new greenfield suburb on it. It's in the zone that just got de-certified from 100 year flood status, so nothing could be built until after the levees get fixed. RT is backing it because they think it could be a "transit-oriented village" stop on the DNA Light Rail line to the airport, although how and when they'll get Light Rail there through Natomas is still anybody's guess. Normally building the subdivision before the transit guarantees that the transit will never arrive (see North Natomas, which was also supposed to be a "transit-oriented village built without the benefit of transit.)

Methinks "transit-oriented village" is the new word for "suburb." There are other issues to consider--such as the fact that these suburbs, whoops, I mean "transit-oriented villages", are creeping closer and closer to the airport, and whether the folks who move there might suddenly realize that not only do they live in a flood zone and the promised Light Rail line may not arrive until they're ready to move to the retirement home, but that they're on the southern end of an airport runway.

TowerDistrict

Jan 28, 2008, 11:01 PM

I've followed it for as long as i can stomach it - so very very little. I had the
pleasure of sitting through the Planning Commission hearing on the subject,
while waiting to speak in favor of a true transit oriented development. There
wasn't anything said that was encouraging or spoke to a good reason for
approving Greenbriar. There were protesters all over the place and they
spoke one by one against it. Planning Commission board member, Barry
Wasserman spoke passionately against it. The RT chief was clueless as to
when they could possibly make it that far. Though, he did say it would take
8 years to cross the river. Every person I attended the Planning Academy
with was completely confounded as to why the City would want to take on
something like this.

And the only reason I can think of, is that all these local planners and regional
councils want to get another chance to build a cool project like they show in
the PowerPoint presentations.

Web

Jan 29, 2008, 2:19 AM

travis bickle

Jan 29, 2008, 5:21 PM

Why do they call it "The Bee"???

To differentiate it

innov8

Jan 29, 2008, 7:00 PM

Kobra starts work on hotel, stalls on center City, developer disagree over who would pay for convention center
By Mark Anderson of The Sacramento Business Journal

Friday, January 25, 2008

Alizadeh got an extension from the city of Roseville for permits for the conference center project, which is to be built next to the 279-room Embassy Suites.

The city has long sought a conference center, and it worked out a deal with Alizadeh's Kobra Properties LLC in July 2005 to subsidize the construction of a $13 million conference center as part of a development that would eventually include two hotels.

Almost from the time the project was approved, construction costs escalated dramatically. The conference center that originally was to cost about $10 million ballooned to almost $28 million. In addition to increased labor costs, raw materials costs for everything from concrete to wood to steel rose steadily. That cost spike has been an obstacle in negotiations ever since.

Alizadeh said his position is simple: "We're waiting for the city on the conference center. The city pays for the conference center."

The city's contract from 2005 has a not-to-exceed amount of $10 million for the conference center.

"We have an existing contract. And as long as that is an existing contract, there's not a lot I can say about it," said Craig Robinson, Roseville city manager.

The existing contract has the city subsidizing the center and eventually transferring ownership to Kobra. Roseville doesn't want to own the center.

And Alizadeh doesn't want to pay for the center. His hotel will do fine without a center, he said, noting the center is the city's idea.

Conference centers are difficult to finance because despite being expensive to build, they carry almost no value. They do, however, come with ongoing expenses to operate.

"It's been a difficult issue," Robinson said. "We're scratching our head on that. We think he should be building the center, too, but if we do get an Embassy Suites, that would be great."

Until the rain started this month, Alizadeh had crews starting construction on the hotel's underground work for sewer and water.

The permits for the conference center were about to expire, and they would have expired if no work was done on it, Robinson said.

"We were asked for an extension, and we granted one. It is a request that is often sought by developers, and it is something we often grant," he added.

"There is no question that a convention and conference center is needed," said Greg Van Dusen, executive director of Placer Valley Tourism, the marketing bureau for the cities of Roseville, Lincoln and Rocklin.

"I hope they can find some middle ground and get something started."

A conference center would help attract visitors to area hotels.

The area's room taxes are low -- a 6 percent transient-occupancy tax in Roseville, 8 percent in Rocklin and 10 percent in Lincoln.

The room taxes in the city and county of Sacramento are 12 percent, and the tax revenue is used to market the area, support arts groups and pay off bonding on the Sacramento Convention Center, Memorial Auditorium and Sacramento Community Center Theater.

There have been several attempts to increase Roseville's room taxes in the past couple of decades, but those taxes must be approved by a two-thirds majority, and residents of Roseville haven't approved a tax increase.

"If you look at the top destinations around the country, they tend to have the highest occupancy taxes. They are able to invest that into attractions and marketing," Van Dusen said.

The city of Roseville for 20 years has wanted a conference center for up to 1,000 people. It has gotten to exclusive negotiations for such a project five times, the most recent with Kobra in 2005.

The center should be opening this summer, according to the contract between the city and Kobra.

One bright spot for any eventual center is that the Embassy Suites rooms have a 6 percent fee added to them, which is to go to funding the center.

econgrad

Feb 2, 2008, 4:49 AM

Friday, February 1, 2008
Sunrise Mall buy simplifies Citrus Heights revitalization
Steadfast owns multiple malls, plans to invest millions, buy more
Sacramento Business Journal - by Kelly Johnson Staff writer

The new owners of Sunrise Mall plan to pump in "millions and millions of dollars" to improve the property, but this week's sale also could open the door to a major redevelopment that takes in the huge Citrus Heights shopping center and the commercial district around it.

Steadfast Cos. closed the deal Tuesday to buy the 1.1 million-square-foot mall and much of the land underneath it for an undisclosed price, estimated by industry sources at more than $100 million.

Executives with the new landlord say they will pump cash into efforts to boost sales, attract strong new tenants and add to the dining and entertainment options at the regional shopping mall. They're also looking to do some more shopping of their own, scouting for other retail acquisitions in Greater Sacramento.

Steadfast -- a Newport Beach-based owner and operator of malls, industrial space, offices, apartments and resorts -- and its equity investors didn't just acquire most of the region's largest shopping center this week in the long-rumored deal. They also removed many of the complex ownership structures that were the single greatest obstacle to reinvesting in the property, said Jim Yoder, Steadfast's senior vice president of commercial properties.

The old ownership structure was knotty and still has some complications:

* Cordano Associates and a group of local investors called Sunrise Mall Associates each owned 50 percent of the mall building leases, except for those covering a few anchor-store spots.
* American General Life and Accident Insurance Co. owned the land under the mall.
* Macy's women's store and Sears own their buildings and the land beneath them. JCPenney owns its building and leases the land from a family of investors. Macy's men's store owns its building and leases the land; Steadfast is now the landlord.

Yoder would not disclose exactly how many square feet of buildings and acres Steadfast picked up in the deal. In addition to the mall itself, the transaction included some satellite, or "pad," buildings around the mall.

Steadfast and its partners bought the mall with cash equity and a loan from AXA Equitable Life Insurance Co.

This purchase of a regional mall during an economic downturn speaks to the strength of Sunrise Mall, the surrounding suburbs and the Sacramento region, Citrus Heights Mayor Steve Miller said.
The vision thing

Steadfast definitely has deep enough pockets, Yoder said, to fulfill whatever redevelopment vision for the area that landowners, city leaders and the Sunrise MarketPlace business improvement district ultimately agree upon.

Sunrise MarketPlace, with more than 500 businesses, is the city's economic engine, with the mall alone producing $200 million a year in sales -- and the sales tax that produces. The players in the business district have been cooking up redevelopment plans to keep the area viable for decades to come.

The ideas in play include pedestrian bridges linking the mall to Marketplace at Birdcage across Sunrise Boulevard; multi-level parking garages; more retail along the streets instead of a sea of parking; and more intensive development with a mix of shopping, homes, offices, entertainment and civic uses. The City Council is scheduled to hear a consultant's final report in mid-March on the vision for the district.

"We'd love to 'densify' the project in a way that would make sense for everybody" so customers would spend more time shopping, dining, watching movies or otherwise entertaining themselves at the mall and the surrounding area, Yoder said. "It could include mixed uses at some point."

Steadfast has followed the planning effort, Yoder said, but Steadfast still needs to understand the district's and city's goals and determine what aspects fit with its own goals. Before the deal closed Tuesday, Steadfast was limited by confidentiality agreements from talking with business-district representatives or neighboring landowners. Yoder is scheduled to meet today with Sunrise MarketPlace executive director Kathilynn Carpenter.

Steadfast's more immediate plans for Sunrise Mall are to focus on leasing and promotions, increasing the quality and perhaps the number of retail kiosks, and increasing "cross-shopping" between the department stores and shops inside the mall. The mall could use a modern theater with more screens; more clothing stores, especially those serving Generation X and Y shoppers; and more restaurants, furniture stores and a maternity store, Yoder said. He'd like to attract some of the best national, regional and local retailers that would pull in customers from a greater distance. Steadfast also wants to fill the former Albertsons grocery store that adjoins the mall.

With its purchase, Steadfast kept all 28 mall staffers, including longtime mall general manager Doyle Phelan.
Reaching out, looking around

The new owners have been using consultants to survey area residents about their shopping patterns and desires for the mall, an unusual move in the industry, and will incorporate that feedback into plans for Sunrise.

Yoder hopes to expand shop sales by 25 percent, from $360 per square foot to $450, and said Steadfast will invest "millions and millions of dollars" into the mall interior over the next two to three years.

Physically the mall is in great shape, he said, and the recent addition of a food court is a plus. Sunrise Mall has a "very strong foundation" and does not require the "major heavy lifting" of Steadfast's previous mall acquisitions.

Steadfast is enamored with the Sacramento area, Yoder said. The company has watched the metro's growth since buying the Yuba Sutter Mall in Yuba City in 2004, and "definitely" wants to buy more retail projects in Sacramento.

And elsewhere, he added. "We really have a problem saying 'no.' "

But it was the owners of Sunrise Mall who came knocking on Steadfast's door a year ago, Yoder said.

"It was never really officially on the market or listed for sale," said Doug Elmets, a spokesman for the Cordano family. Many of the mall partners, he said, felt it was time to sell "to pursue other long-term goals."

A spokesman for American General did not immediately have information about its sale of the mall land.

It's becoming less common for anyone to own huge shopping centers except real estate investment trusts or big companies with multiple regional malls.

"Owning a mall -- it's not a private endeavor anymore," said Matt Holmes, principal of brokerage Retail West Inc.

"Massive" organizations are needed to manage and operate malls these days, said Scott Reynolds, director of retail leasing in Northern California for Panattoni Development Co. Inc.

"Smaller families just don't want to play in that league. It's too risky," Holmes said.

It's also unusual that some of the original developers, the Cordano family, held onto the mall all these decades.
Multi-mall clout

Landowners, city and business-district officials, department store managers and retail industry players all expressed optimism over Steadfast's move. In addition to simplifying the mall ownership, Steadfast brings financial backing, along with the clout and relationships with national retailers that come from owning multiple malls. It has a track record of investing in renovations, thinking creatively and boosting sales.

"They have tenant relationships," said Carpenter, the business district executive. "There's just a little more leverage when you own more than one mall." She's impressed with Steadfast's decision to add a 45,000-square-foot LA Fitness sports club as an nontraditional anchor to its Everett, Wash., mall.

"They bring a fresh outlook and probably some good ideas, too," said Miller, the mayor.

"I think Sunrise Mall will be in very good hands," said John Pentz, president of Pentz & Partners Inc., a Newport Beach developer, broker and property manager. "They're energetic and creative."

JCPenney store manager Debi Arnold said she's pleased the mall will have a "new set of eyes" and hopes the new owners will increase marketing.

Macy's manager Karen Hamilton, who serves on the Sunrise MarketPlace board, hopes Steadfast can take the long view to help make the mall viable for the next 30 years. "What can we do to keep it current for the type of customer who shops now?" she said.

Getting all landowners to sign onto whatever redevelopment plan is crafted for Sunrise MarketPlace won't be easy. Just because the wish list might include a convention center or some other feature at a particular site doesn't mean the owners of that site will want to tear down whatever they have there. But "start with the mall," said Steve Patterson, who owns shopping centers in the district and around Greater Sacramento, and "you'll get a ripple effect."

As a major landowner, Steadfast "can really serve as a catalyst to the whole MarketPlace," Miller said.
Sunrise Mall

Opened: 1972

Size: 1.1 million square feet on 96 acres

Stores: Four department store buildings and 120 stores

Anchors: Macy's, Macy's Men & Home, JCPenney, Sears

Occupancy: 95 percent

Renovations: $10 million interior upgrade, 1999; food court added, 2007

Sales: About $200 million

Shop sales per square foot (excluding anchors): $360

Annual visitors: 9 million

Average customer visit frequency: Every 12 days

Total employment: 2,000

Mall employees: 28 plus about 20 outside contractors
Sellers

Land: American General Life and Accident Insurance Co.

Building leases: Cordano Associates and Sunrise Mall Associates

kjohnson@bizjournals.com | 916-558-7860

All contents of this site © American City Business Journals Inc. All rights reserved.

econgrad

Feb 6, 2008, 2:15 PM

Rancho Cordova to Buy, Raze "Problem" Apartments
Written for the web by George Warren, Reporter

Police were called to the Grandee Apartments 252 times in a single year

The city of Rancho Cordova will spend $1.3 million to buy a 22-unit apartment complex on Folsom Boulevard -- and then tear it down.

It's the first time the four-year-old city will purchase a problem property in the name of redevelopment.

"The focus is to bring Folsom Boulevard up to a level that Rancho Cordova can be proud of," said Economic Development Director Micah Runner.

According to a city staff report, Rancho Cordova police were called to the Grandee Apartments 252 times in a single year.

A neighboring merchant called the demolition plan "a blessing."

"It just draws a bad crowd," said Craig Roy, whose family has owned or managed an auto parts store for decades. "It's been horrible for business."

The owners of the apartment complex agreed to the sale, which should close in January. There are no immediate plans for the soon-to-be-vacant lot.

The city has allocated up to $160,000 to move the existing tenants to other affordable housing.

Created: 12/28/2007 5:42:32 PM

Updated: 12/28/2007 6:36:29 PM

urban_encounter

Feb 20, 2008, 9:31 PM

Roseville Galleria announces new stores, 'indulge yourself' shops
By Jennifer K. Morita - jmorita@sacbee.com
Last Updated 1:14 pm PST Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Westfield officials have announced five new retailers that will be part of the $240 million Galleria at Roseville mall expansion, including a yoga-inspired athletic apparel company and a cosmetics store that makes beauty products using fresh, organic fruits and vegetables.

The newly named retailers are: Sephora cosmetics, Oakley Sunglasses, BCBG clothing, Lush cosmetics and lululemon athletic wear.

Larry Green, Westfield's senior vice president for the West Coast, announced the new retailers and revealed models of the ongoing expansion that will add variety to dining and group some stores for easier access by their targeted customers.

In addition to an outdoor dining terrace overlooking the mall's promenade area, Green said the food court will be revamped with an indoor fireplace and offer more sophisticated restaurants.

The children's play area will be moved, along with the indoor carousel, close to Sears, where stores selling children's goods will be grouped on the first floor and retailers catering to teens will be on the second level.

The "indulge yourself court" will feature high-end, luxury stores such as Burberry, Green said.

Cheesecake Factory will be the first retailer to open in May or June, followed by Crate&Barrel in its new mall location in either late summer or early fall. The first phase of the expansion is scheduled to be completed by November, Green said.

Other retailers announced earlier include Burberry, Kate Spade, Juicy Couture, Lacoste and Apple.

TWAK

Feb 21, 2008, 12:19 AM

anybody know whats going on at UC Davis? They seem to be building something else next to the Mundavi center (not the new wine building)

aufbau

Feb 21, 2008, 1:25 AM

anybody know whats going on at UC Davis? They seem to be building something else next to the Mundavi center (not the new wine building)

I think you may be referring to the new UC Davis Graduate School of Management and conference center:

http://www.gsm.ucdavis.edu/ExploreOurSchool/index.aspx?id=3252&m2=388&m3=4&m1=94

The site will also include a 75 room Hyatt hotel to be built later. This is part of the new "front door" of UC Davis, which also includes the Mondavi center and the nearly complete complex for the Viticulture and Enology departments (which will also feature a vineyard). Lookin' good:tup:

urban_encounter

Feb 22, 2008, 5:45 AM

reggiesquared

Feb 26, 2008, 5:36 PM

Not sure if anyone knows about this or maybe im late to the game but this is huge! I saw a billboard go up by where I live a few weeks ago, decided to figure out what it was. Pretty impressive for being under the radar.

north natomas
http://www.loopnet.com/Attachments/7/3/B/xy_73B138E3-9198-44F6-92E0-307E9AD4D45D__.JPG

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/MainSite/LoopNetFrame/Frame.aspx?LoopNetFrameUrl=http://www.cbre.com/commercestation&LID=15360400&PgCxtGuid=fbbb51d2-a98e-48fc-8e28-b8e6de0e3398&PgCxtFLKey=&PgCxtCurFLKey=Profile&PgCxtDir=Down&CID=&ItemIndex=&NewItemIndex=&SearchResultID=&ResultCount=&FilteredSearchID=&FilteredResultCount=&PageNumber=&PageSize=&RecentlyViewed=&PopupView=&PinProfileView=&NoBrandingView=&ID=&MatchedKeywords=
http://marketing.cbre.com/SacramentoArea/_PropertyBrochures/LeviSwettenham/Commerce%20Station%20-%20Email.pdf

sugit

Feb 26, 2008, 7:22 PM

Wow. For being in Natomas, that's a pretty sweet looking project. Too bad more of Natomas didn't shape up like this around its business centers...with light rail going straight into it. At least it looks like this plan has a station right at the front door.

sugit

Feb 26, 2008, 7:47 PM

On second look, there sure are a lot of surface lots. That rendering looks like is only one section of the whole plan.

innov8

Feb 26, 2008, 9:40 PM

The COMMERCE STATION submitted a draft EIR in September of last year and
not much has happen since. Here's a map of most everything going on north
of Sacramento as well as a link to all the reference numbers. Natomas PIPELINE (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/reference/maps/documents/PIPELINE_Natomas.pdf)

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/6653/natomasqx1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Surefiresacto

Feb 29, 2008, 5:50 PM

Anyone know what the massive warehouse is going up in Rancho Cordova/Gold River? It's on the opposite side of 50 from the Marriott near Sunrise? I'd say it's about 6-7 stories tall. :shrug:

L8 4 Tahoe

Feb 29, 2008, 8:37 PM

To me it looks like its going to be a public storage building. I think there is one right next to it and it could be expansion.

innov8

Feb 29, 2008, 10:47 PM

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/7724/natomasgatewaytowerok5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

From downtown I can see a crane has risen for the Natomas Gateway tower.
The crane looks like the kind that would help assemble a tower crane, but it could
be the main construction crane for the project since the towers only 12 stories.

Majin

Feb 29, 2008, 11:54 PM

That parking lot still makes me sick to my stomach.

aufbau

Mar 1, 2008, 12:56 AM

That parking lot still makes me sick to my stomach.

The idea of building a "green" building in a sea of parking lots floors me too.

otnemarcaS

Mar 1, 2008, 2:06 AM

Majin

Mar 1, 2008, 3:05 AM

I have no problem with the parking. There's a difference between living in an ideal world and a realistic world. This is Natomas area we are talking about, not NYC or SF. Green building or not, what company would want to lease that building if there was little or no parking?

Look, I don't give a damn if this isnt NYC, SF, Tokyo, or whatever else. I am sick and tired of these developers raping our city with these parking lots and the city council needs to step up and call them out on it. You don't need 12,000 parking spaces for a damn 12 story building. In fact, those spaces need to be put in parking garages instead of a parking lot.

econgrad

Mar 1, 2008, 5:06 AM

Look, I don't give a damn if this isnt NYC, SF, Tokyo, or whatever else. I am sick and tired of these developers raping our city with these parking lots and the city council needs to step up and call them out on it. You don't need 12,000 parking spaces for a damn 12 story building. In fact, those spaces need to be put in parking garages instead of a parking lot.

Maybe in Downtown or even Midtown you have an argument, no way in Natomas. There's plenty of room, cars a plenty, and the people who live in the area would rather drive than use light rail.

wburg

Mar 1, 2008, 6:45 PM

Maybe in Downtown or even Midtown you have an argument, no way in Natomas. There's plenty of room, cars a plenty, and the people who live in the area would rather drive than use light rail.

More to the point, they *can't* use light rail, even if they wanted to, because it doesn't run anywhere near them, nor to this office park. If it does someday snake up this way, and Natomas somehow gets repaired into more transit-oriented form, much of this parking lot will doubtless sprout new buildings as the market changes. A parking lot isn't eternal. Which, I think, everyone here realizes--except for Majin.

Although I do give Majin credit for finally realizing that developers *want* to build parking lots, because they're cheaper than parking structures, and they realize that in the absence of transit alternatives, the only way to sell buildings is to include sufficient parking.

econgrad

Mar 2, 2008, 1:03 AM

^ True. But some of us want a choice, if we want to use our cars, it should be convenient. If we want to use public transit, it should also be convenient. We can have transit and parking lots both, freedom and choice is always a good thing.

wburg

Mar 10, 2008, 10:51 PM

Found an interesting article in The Atlantic Monthly about the suburbs as the slums of the future (shades of "Suburbia"!) which mentions Elk Grove, as well as many other such places around the country:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200803/subprime

The decline of places like Windy Ridge and Franklin Reserve is usually attributed to the subprime-mortgage crisis, with its wave of foreclosures. And the crisis has indeed catalyzed or intensified social problems in many communities. But the story of vacant suburban homes and declining suburban neighborhoods did not begin with the crisis, and will not end with it. A structural change is under way in the housing market—a major shift in the way many Americans want to live and work. It has shaped the current downturn, steering some of the worst problems away from the cities and toward the suburban fringes. And its effects will be felt more strongly, and more broadly, as the years pass. Its ultimate impact on the suburbs, and the cities, will be profound.

Arthur C. Nelson, director of the Metropolitan Institute at Virginia Tech, has looked carefully at trends in American demographics, construction, house prices, and consumer preferences. In 2006, using recent consumer research, housing supply data, and population growth rates, he modeled future demand for various types of housing. The results were bracing: Nelson forecasts a likely surplus of 22 million large-lot homes (houses built on a sixth of an acre or more) by 2025—that’s roughly 40 percent of the large-lot homes in existence today.

For 60 years, Americans have pushed steadily into the suburbs, transforming the landscape and (until recently) leaving cities behind. But today the pendulum is swinging back toward urban living, and there are many reasons to believe this swing will continue. As it does, many low-density suburbs and McMansion subdivisions, including some that are lovely and affluent today, may become what inner cities became in the 1960s and ’70s—slums characterized by poverty, crime, and decay.

jsf8278

Mar 11, 2008, 4:31 AM

Surefiresacto

Mar 26, 2008, 5:01 PM

Anyone know what the massive warehouse is going up in Rancho Cordova/Gold River? It's on the opposite side of 50 from the Marriott near Sunrise? I'd say it's about 6-7 stories tall. :shrug:

Sunrise Boat & RV Storage. This building is hideous. What an atrocity!

http://www.sunriseboatandrvstorage.com/index

Majin

Mar 26, 2008, 7:19 PM

Question:

If you drive around north natomas near the empty space by the freeway, you will see a bunch of CBRE signs that say "10 story class A office building comming soon", "7 story class A office building soon" and "mixed used residential/retail comming soon."

Theres about 20-30 of these signs scattered throughout north natomas, has there been any actual plans released? I've never seen any 10 story office building proposals for Natomas other than whats under construction right now.

sugit

Mar 26, 2008, 7:31 PM

Couple pages back...

Not sure if anyone knows about this or maybe im late to the game but this is huge! I saw a billboard go up by where I live a few weeks ago, decided to figure out what it was. Pretty impressive for being under the radar.

north natomas
http://www.loopnet.com/Attachments/7/3/B/xy_73B138E3-9198-44F6-92E0-307E9AD4D45D__.JPG

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/MainSite/LoopNetFrame/Frame.aspx?LoopNetFrameUrl=http://www.cbre.com/commercestation&LID=15360400&PgCxtGuid=fbbb51d2-a98e-48fc-8e28-b8e6de0e3398&PgCxtFLKey=&PgCxtCurFLKey=Profile&PgCxtDir=Down&CID=&ItemIndex=&NewItemIndex=&SearchResultID=&ResultCount=&FilteredSearchID=&FilteredResultCount=&PageNumber=&PageSize=&RecentlyViewed=&PopupView=&PinProfileView=&NoBrandingView=&ID=&MatchedKeywords=
http://marketing.cbre.com/SacramentoArea/_PropertyBrochures/LeviSwettenham/Commerce%20Station%20-%20Email.pdf

Majin

Mar 26, 2008, 8:47 PM

Well that might cover the mixed use signs I saw, but I saw at least 5 signs saying 10 story office buidlings comming soon and at least 15 or so signs daying 7 story office buildings comming soon.

econgrad

Apr 2, 2008, 9:11 AM

Friday, March 28, 2008
Developers in Rancho Cordova could get break on mitigation rules
General plan amendment would relax habitat preservation requirements
Sacramento Business Journal - by Celia Lamb Staff writer

Rancho Cordova officials might relax requirements for developers to offset the environmental impacts of new projects.

The city planning commission voted March 13 in support of amending the natural resources section of the city's general plan, a blueprint for its growth through 2050. City planning director Paul Junker said the City Council might consider approving the amendments April 21.

The new language would water down rules that protect wildlife habitat by adding the qualifier "where feasible" or "to the maximum extent feasible" to requirements for interconnected habitat, restrictions on roads through wildlife preserves and other development limitations. Economic and social factors could be considered along with environmental, legal and technological factors to determine feasibility. Channelizing creeks into concrete corridors, which previously would "not be supported," would now "be discouraged, but is not prohibited."

The proposed changes address issues raised in a lawsuit against Rancho Cordova filed by the California Native Plant Society in September 2006. The suit challenged the city's approval of an environmental impact report and entitlements for the Preserve at Sunridge, a 2,700-home development and commercial "village center" planned in the Sunrise-Douglas community.

In July, a Sacramento County Superior Court judge ruled that the plan for offsetting environmental damage from the project did not comply with the city's general plan. The mitigation plan should have identified locations and performance criteria for vernal pools, he decided.

Rancho Cordova city attorney Adam Lindgren said the judge simply misinterpreted the general plan. The city has appealed the decision.

"The lower court required a tighter fit (with the general plan) than the law requires," Lindgren said. "We want to address the legal standard for general plan consistency."

Although there is no direct connection between the lawsuit and the proposed general plan changes, "the lawsuit did show us how the general plan could be misinterpreted," Lindgren added.Junker characterized the proposed general plan alterations as minor housekeeping tasks.

"The scope of these changes is fairly narrow," he added. "We're committed to natural resource preservation, but we want to make sure the policy language is correct and really precise."

But environmental activist Carol Witham, who helped lead the CNPS lawsuit, said the proposed changes would introduce too much "wiggle room" for developers.

"That is a very troubling document," Witham said. "It completely dilutes any intent language down to essentially nothing. It was pretty good, strong language regarding natural resources initially."

She's also concerned with proposed changes that she thinks could diminish the roles of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the state Department of Fish and Game in helping the city craft requirements for mitigating environmental harm caused by new development. The proposed changes would put mitigation decisions in the hands of the city but allow for comment from the two agencies. Under the current general plan, the agencies work with the city to design mitigation plans.

The proposed changes would affect future projects, including four specific plans under review -- Westborough, Rio Del Oro, Suncreek and The Arboretum-Waegell.

"This won't affect projects already approved," Junker said. So, it won't help settle the lawsuit over the Preserve at Sunridge.

clamb@bizjournals.com | 916-558-7866

SacTownAndy

Jul 15, 2008, 10:06 PM

Wow! I had totally forgotten all about this. A 23-story hotel in Lincoln? Will this be the tallest building outside of downtown in the metro area? I remember the insane chaos when Thunder Valley first opened (was working in Rocklin at the time).

http://media.sacbee.com/smedia/2008/05/07/20/197-4M8CASINODRAW.standalone.prod_affiliate.4.JPG
Source: www.sacbee.com/101/story/922065.html

Groundbreaking marks start of Thunder Valley expansion
By Art Campos - acampos@sacbee.com
Last Updated 2:09 pm PDT Tuesday, July 15, 2008

The United Auburn Indian Community will break ground Wednesday at Thunder Valley Casino near Lincoln on an expansion project that will include construction of a 23-story hotel atop the current gaming facility.

Besides the planned five-star, 650-room hotel, the facility will include a convention center, ballrooms, more gaming space, restaurants, a spa, a lounge, a 3,000-seat performing arts center and a parking structure.

The ceremony will begin at 11 a.m. at the south-entrance parking lot at the casino, 1212 Athens Ave.

Doug Elmets, a spokesman for the Indian tribe, which owns the casino, said in a news release that the expansion project will create about 1,000 construction jobs and 1,200 permanent jobs. Completion is set for July 2010, he said.

Analysts have estimated cost of the expansion to be $1 billion.

When completed, the project will generate $10.2 million in property tax, $900,000 in food and beverage taxes and $1 million in occupancy tax annually for Placer County.

Pistola916

Jul 15, 2008, 10:54 PM

econgrad

Aug 8, 2008, 12:27 AM

Guest commentary: Roseville moves ahead with projects
-
Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, August 7, 2008

Last week, I outlined the city's budget for fiscal year 2008-09 and how we're adjusting to the housing slowdown, sales and property tax revenue decreases, rising fuel costs and the effect of the state's budget crisis on cities.

Taking these factors into account explains why the 2008-09 city budget is one of many contrasts. For while the economy slows, long-term fiscal planning combined with funding that was in place before the slowdown allow the city to move forward with several key projects.

Revitalizing downtown

The city continues to invest significantly in downtown Roseville with a $65 million, multiyear revitalization effort, funded through redevelopment bonds and specific funds for transportation, traffic mitigation, water and sewer rehabilitation and tree mitigation.

The first phase – historic Old Town – was completed in the spring, and we encourage community members to share their vision this fall as we meet to develop the specific plan for all of downtown Roseville.

Improving traffic circulation

Traffic circulation is another emphasis for the city and the community. While we expand commuter and alternative transportation options, our highest priority is continuing to support the state Department of Transportation and the Placer County Transportation Planning Agency in their efforts to improve Interstate 80. The completion of Phase 1 of the I-80 project has already provided a significant improvement in traffic flow in the eastbound direction.

Phase 2 is planned to start this month with additional high occupancy vehicle and auxiliary lanes both east and westbound from the Placer County line to Eureka Road. Funding comes primarily from state and federal sources.

Other high-visibility improvements will be made to the interchange at Pleasant Grove Boulevard and Highway 65, the Riverside Avenue streetscape and the Cirby Way corridor (Foothills Boulevard to Riverside Avenue), with funding coming from sources such as impact fees paid by new development, gas tax funds and redevelopment agency funds, not the city's general fund.

Enhancing programs

The quality of life we enjoy in Roseville is enhanced by our parks, libraries and recreation programs.

In addition to opening our 58th park this summer, and a new library and Utility Exploration Center earlier this year, the city has contributed $1 million worth of parkland and park development funds to set a foundation for the fundraising effort to create "universally accessible playgrounds" where children and parents of all abilities can play side-by-side.

Along with the new universally accessible playground envisioned for Mahany Park, plans call for the city's other regional parks – Royer and Maidu – also to be transformed into barrier-free, sensory-rich areas.

The city recently broke ground on the Central Park Aquatics Center with two indoor pools and solar panels providing year-round climate control. Construction is funded by developer fees, and operations will be self-funded by user charges, with anticipated completion in late 2009.

In addition, state and federal grants have made it possible to begin work on a permanent facility and new exhibits for the Maidu Interpretive Center.

These are just some of the projects happening in Roseville. To keep up with city news, visit our Web site at www.roseville.ca.us or get a copy of our semi-monthly newsletter, Reflections. It's available for download and as an e-subscription.

Looking ahead

While we tackle today's challenges, we remain committed to ensuring the long-term sustainability of our city. Our quality of life was recognized in the August issue of Money magazine when Roseville ranked 90th in the top 100 best places to live in the nation. What makes this city a great place to live is how our community comes together to dream big and to get things done.

We have tough choices to make now, but we will make them wisely and with citizens' interests foremost in mind.

ozone

Aug 8, 2008, 3:59 PM

:previous: Rose-ville has a downtown AND a historic Old Town? I seriously doubt it. :koko:

wburg

Aug 8, 2008, 6:38 PM

They do...Vernon Street is nominally downtown, as it is/was the main strip and business district. Vernon Street was part of historic Highway 40. There are still some pretty nice old buildings along the route, mostly 20th century, like the old post office and city hall, their Tower Theater, some nice Art Deco department stores and a few railroad hotels. South of Vernon Street there are some nice residential neighborhoods with late 19th and early 20th century bungalows and cottages--imagine a mini Midtown.

On the other side of the tracks, physically cut off from Vernon Street and the business district, is a small district of a few square blocks that are "old town" Roseville, right next to the old Southern Pacific/Amtrak station. There isn't a whole lot there, a few restaurants and a bar or two and a few offices, but for the most part it's pretty quiet. They have a historic bridge (a pedestrian and auto bridge that goes over the train tracks, the only way to get safely across the tracks before the underpass was built) and a nice little Carnegie library. Most are 19th century brick buildings, some I think dating back to when the town was still called Union.

econgrad

Aug 8, 2008, 8:22 PM

^ There are 7 bars/clubs in Old Roseville.... with many "duesh bags in Roseville bars" as well (If you haven't heard that song yet, get with it). A new addition of some nicer bars and some that were upgraded. People "walk" from bar to bar just like in Old Folsom or Old Sacramento. Except there isn't the strong gang element that's in Old Sac.
Check it out sometime Ozone!

innov8

Aug 18, 2008, 5:05 PM

Friday, August 15, 2008
Region’s rich reside in Roseville, Elk Grove; Sacramento lags
Elk Grove beat Roseville in median income and home values, but fewer earn more than $200K
Sacramento Business Journal

Hefty paychecks and higher-valued homes helped Roseville and Elk Grove become two of the nation’s 50 wealthiest communities with at least 100,000 residents, at least before the free fall of the real estate market.

Sacramento — which boasts deep pockets in areas such as East Sacramento, the Fabulous 40s and Land Park — finished at No. 88, between Inglewood and Reno, Nev.

Of course, California’s once-booming housing market created some of the wealth factor, with five of the Top 10 cities and 17 of the Top 20, according to a just-released Bizjournals report based on 2006 data, the latest available.

Roseville, with median household income of $71,450 and a median home value of $473,600, finished at No. 37, the highest rating in the four-county region. Almost 5 percent — or one of every 20 — households earned at least $200,000.

Elk Grove, the nation’s fastest-growing city a few years ago and now better known as one of the hardest-hit foreclosure markets, finished at No. 43, just a few spots below cross-region rival Roseville. Elk Grove actually had higher median household income and median home values — $77,064 and $477,700, respectively — but fewer households that earned $200,000 or more per year, about 4.5 percent. Roseville’s per-capita income also outpaced Elk Grove, $33,916 vs. $28,379.

Sacramento ranked much lower, with median household income of about $46,000 and the median home value at $365,000.

While Roseville can enjoy some bragging rights, the city pales compared to others nationwide — and even a few less than 100 miles away.

Bizjournals identified 10 wealth centers — communities that manage to blend substantial size (populations above 100,000) with considerable affluence.

America’s top-rated wealth center, according to the study, is Arlington, Va., a densely settled suburb directly across the Potomac River from Washington, D.C. Its population is 199,800.

Arlington residents are highly educated, with one-third of local adults holding graduate degrees. They have their pick of government, law or lobbying positions in Washington or high-tech research jobs in northern Virginia.

The result was a 2006 per-capita income of $53,543 in Arlington, the highest figure among the 261 U.S. communities with populations in excess of 100,000. That’s more than twice the national average of $25,267. Bizjournals ranked 261 communities. You can see the rankings at bizjournals.com/edit_special/69.html.

Bizjournals created a six-part formula to analyze the relative affluence of all cities, incorporated towns and unincorporated urban areas above the 100,000-person cutoff. The strongest scores went to places with high income levels and large inventories of expensive homes.

The study’s raw data come from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2006 American Community Survey, the most recent source for federal statistics at the local level. All figures are for specific municipalities, not for the broader metropolitan areas to which they belong.

Arlington leads the pack because of its consistently strong performance in all six categories. It ranks first in the study group for personal capital income, second for the percentage of households with incomes of $200,000 or more, third for its upper 20 percent income threshold (the dollar figure that surpasses 80 percent of local earnings), and fourth in median household income.

Wealthiest cities
1. Arlington, Va.
2. Thousand Oaks
3. Naperville, Ill.
4. Alexandria, Va.
5. Stamford, Conn.
6. Irvine
7. San Francisco
8. Scottsdale, Ariz.
9. Huntington Beach
10. Sunnyvale
37. Roseville
43. Elk Grove
88. Sacramento

Show me the money
• The collective per-capita income for the Top 10 communities is $43,782, which is 73 percent more than the national average.
• Almost 11 percent of all households within the designated wealth centers draw annual incomes higher than $200,000. The corresponding figure for the whole country is 3.4 percent.
• Median home values range from $416,400 to $806,700 in the 10 places atop Bizjournals’ rankings. The national median is $185,200.

Majin

Aug 18, 2008, 6:50 PM

Yet Roseville and Elk Grove both look like ass.

econgrad

Aug 19, 2008, 12:07 AM

Yet Roseville and Elk Grove both look like ass.

So jealous.... :haha:

Majin

Aug 19, 2008, 7:45 AM

So jealous.... :haha:

Jealous of what?