Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[urbanadvocate]

I have heard rumors that Kaiser is getting ready to make a very large proposal at the railyards (this in addition to the new medical offices across the arena site. Anybody else hear anything about this? Personally I wish they would develop further north along Richards which is already not pedestrian friendly but has easy access to freeways.

[Deno]

I thought Kaiser might develop the Natomas sleep train arena property.

[ozone]

I have heard rumors that Kaiser is getting ready to make a very large proposal at the railyards (this in addition to the new medical offices across the arena site. Anybody else hear anything about this? Personally I wish they would develop further north along Richards which is already not pedestrian friendly but has easy access to freeways.

This is the first I've heard of this. I'm having a hard time imagining what it might be. I know the City is keen on adding a hospital to Natomas and there's land and infrastructure ready for it. And with Sutter, Mercy and UCD Med Center already servicing the Central City I don't think we need another one. It would be great if they moved their HQ here though.

[urbanadvocate]

I thought Kaiser might develop the Natomas sleep train arena property.

From what I am hearing (unconfirmed source) Kaiser is no longer interested in Natomas and feel the railyards allow them to service a larger population. Additionally they have a reputation for scoping an area out by first building a medical office (like they are now doing on J street) before a larger development. Once again unconfirmed and no actual sources other than an "insider" into Kaiser. Might be rumor but I am starting to think it is more than that.

[creamcityleo79]

This is the first I've heard of this. I'm having a hard time imagining what it might be. I know the City is keen on adding a hospital to Natomas and there's land and infrastructure ready for it. And with Sutter, Mercy and UCD Med Center already servicing the Central City I don't think we need another one. It would be great if they moved their HQ here though.

This will probably not happen. But, it would be one of the biggest developments in recent Sacramento history!!!

[urbanadvocate]

This will probably not happen. But, it would be one of the biggest developments in recent Sacramento history!!!

From what I hear Kaiser is already looking at entitlements--but I don't know exactly what area of the r-yards.

[creamcityleo79]

From what I hear Kaiser is already looking at entitlements--but I don't know exactly what area of the r-yards.

I meant the HQ. I mean, really...if that happened...SUPER EPIC AMAZINGNESS would transpire!!!

[wburg]

I can't really envision a new Kaiser campus being the biggest thing Sacramento had ever seen, considering we already have a couple of Kaiser campuses and a few other hospitals. I have heard a few reports about this too, they bought the building at 6th and J to use as a medical office building, and there were noises about a Kaiser campus to replace Kaiser Morse as it will not meet earthquake standards in a decade or so. As to the location, there are plenty of hospitals in Midtown/East Sacramento but none downtown--the last time there was a hospital there was probably the old Southern Pacific employee hospital in the railyards, quite a few decades ago! If Kaiser did decide to locate there, it would be an additional employment center, create more demand for Railyards housing, and if they're thinking of a downtown location one can assume they're optimistic about the potential for a lot more residential downtown in general and in the Railyards in particular. But I doubt they have much reason to relocate their corporate headquarters to Sacramento from Oakland.

Still hoping for a college campus in the Railyards, as part of the semi-stereotypical "eds and meds" method of developing downtown economies, probably in the form of that theoretical UC Davis Food Center. But still crossing my fingers for a university campus with an undergrad program, as that would call for student residential housing (while the plethora of small grad-student campuses downtown are commuter campuses.)

[creamcityleo79]

I can't really envision a new Kaiser campus being the biggest thing Sacramento had ever seen, considering we already have a couple of Kaiser campuses and a few other hospitals. I have heard a few reports about this too, they bought the building at 6th and J to use as a medical office building, and there were noises about a Kaiser campus to replace Kaiser Morse as it will not meet earthquake standards in a decade or so. As to the location, there are plenty of hospitals in Midtown/East Sacramento but none downtown--the last time there was a hospital there was probably the old Southern Pacific employee hospital in the railyards, quite a few decades ago! If Kaiser did decide to locate there, it would be an additional employment center, create more demand for Railyards housing, and if they're thinking of a downtown location one can assume they're optimistic about the potential for a lot more residential downtown in general and in the Railyards in particular. But I doubt they have much reason to relocate their corporate headquarters to Sacramento from Oakland.

Still hoping for a college campus in the Railyards, as part of the semi-stereotypical "eds and meds" method of developing downtown economies, probably in the form of that theoretical UC Davis Food Center. But still crossing my fingers for a university campus with an undergrad program, as that would call for student residential housing (while the plethora of small grad-student campuses downtown are commuter campuses.)

For the record, I meant that if they move their HQ to Sacramento...which I don't think will happen. But, if they did, it would be a big deal!

[Pistola916]

Vanir Tower is expected to break ground in 2016, according to a recent blog post in The Architects Newspaper (http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=7958#.VSntXfldXpV)

Also the Vanir Tower website (http://www.vanirtower.com/) is up.

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/18193-main_1204-2_18193_sc_v2com.jpg

UNVEILED> 601 J STREETPei Cobb Freed's tilted tower to rise in Downtown Sacramento.

With construction on a new AECOM-designed arena underway, downtown Sacramento is poised for a comeback. The latest entrant in the race to recapture the city’s business district is a glassy tower developed by Vanir Development Company (which will locate its headquarters there), designed by Pei Cobb Freed & Partners (PCF). The building will consist mostly of offices with two restaurants and a café on the ground floor.

Characterized by a bold geometric facade, the building nevertheless remains sensitive to the surrounding urban fabric. “The balance between iconic forms that give skyline presence, and how the building transforms as it comes to the ground to respond to the context, is fundamental to the design,” explained PCF’s Michael Bischoff.

The tower’s north and south facades form parallelograms, canted to respond to traffic flows along the adjacent streets. Because those streets run in opposite directions, the parallelograms lean against one another. The resulting tension is resolved by diagonal folds along the east and west facades.

Engaged with the base of the 26-story building is a metal-panel-clad parking podium, set back in deference to an old bank building to the east. The southwest corner of the tower pays homage to another historic neighbor, the Scientology building across J Street, with a street-level plaza. “Creating a public open space in response to the Scientology building was an important gesture, showing that our building was not trying to diminish it,” said Bischoff.

Of course, no design for Sacramento would be complete without a reference to the new Kings arena, just to the south of Vanir’s site. In the plan, the angled face defining the southwest corner of the tower points toward the center of the arena. “Our goal was to be both deferential to historic buildings and architecturally responsive to the development of the new arena,” said Bischoff.

Work on the tower is expected to begin in 2016, with completion by 2018.

[Majin]

Glad so far it seems this will get built, but I really want to see some progress on some residential towers.

[Pistola916]

http://www.sactownmag.com/Blog/2015/Sacramento-Kings-announce-Kimpton-as-operator-of-new-Downtown-Plaza-Hotel/

[CAGeoNerd]

Vanir Tower is expected to break ground in 2016, according to a recent blog post in The Architects Newspaper (http://archpaper.com/news/articles.asp?id=7958#.VSntXfldXpV)

http://www.archpaper.com/uploads/18193-main_1204-2_18193_sc_v2com.jpg

UNVEILED> 601 J STREETPei Cobb Freed's tilted tower to rise in Downtown Sacramento.

With construction on a new AECOM-designed arena underway, downtown Sacramento is poised for a comeback. The latest entrant in the race to recapture the city’s business district is a glassy tower developed by Vanir Development Company (which will locate its headquarters there), designed by Pei Cobb Freed & Partners (PCF). The building will consist mostly of offices with two restaurants and a café on the ground floor.

Characterized by a bold geometric facade, the building nevertheless remains sensitive to the surrounding urban fabric. “The balance between iconic forms that give skyline presence, and how the building transforms as it comes to the ground to respond to the context, is fundamental to the design,” explained PCF’s Michael Bischoff.

The tower’s north and south facades form parallelograms, canted to respond to traffic flows along the adjacent streets. Because those streets run in opposite directions, the parallelograms lean against one another. The resulting tension is resolved by diagonal folds along the east and west facades.

Engaged with the base of the 26-story building is a metal-panel-clad parking podium, set back in deference to an old bank building to the east. The southwest corner of the tower pays homage to another historic neighbor, the Scientology building across J Street, with a street-level plaza. “Creating a public open space in response to the Scientology building was an important gesture, showing that our building was not trying to diminish it,” said Bischoff.

Of course, no design for Sacramento would be complete without a reference to the new Kings arena, just to the south of Vanir’s site. In the plan, the angled face defining the southwest corner of the tower points toward the center of the arena. “Our goal was to be both deferential to historic buildings and architecturally responsive to the development of the new arena,” said Bischoff.

Work on the tower is expected to begin in 2016, with completion by 2018.
Awwwwesome. :cheers:

[Pistola916]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/04/15/former-cathedral-square-high-rise-site-going-up.html?page=2

[Majin]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article18649035.html

I knew something was going on here. Original contractors were fired and replaced. Also there have been some design tweaks. Hopefully it will look better now and this has been a blessing in disguise. The project is doing to have it's THIRD groundbreaking in Summer.... lets see if it gets delayed again...

[wburg]

Not necessarily a development project, but while wandering around recently, I noticed that the Whiskey Hill Lofts, the rehabbed tilt-up office building at 21st and S and the four-unit buildings on its former parking lot, now have a sales office instead of a rental office. They were built to be sold as condos before the market crash, but ended up being leased as rentals since construction. Now they're up for sale. I wonder if some of the other buildings originally intended to be condos but used as rentals (like Alexan Midtown) will start selling units now that the market seems to have hit an upturn, and these condo units hit the 10 year old mark?

[enigma99a]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article18649035.html

I knew something was going on here. Original contractors were fired and replaced. Also there have been some design tweaks. Hopefully it will look better now and this has been a blessing in disguise. The project is doing to have it's THIRD groundbreaking in Summer.... lets see if it gets delayed again...

Could be worse. At least it is not shipping containers

[ozone]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article18649035.html

I knew something was going on here. Original contractors were fired and replaced. Also there have been some design tweaks. Hopefully it will look better now and this has been a blessing in disguise. The project is doing to have it's THIRD groundbreaking in Summer.... lets see if it gets delayed again...

Jeesh. I didn't read the article (because it's in the Bee). Did they say what the problems were with the contractor? I hope you are right about the design. The current design looks to much like an office building to me.

[ozone]

Vanir’s tower is yet another missed opportunity. Yes, it's a very welcomed infill. Cheers to that! But the design is not a game changer and it's seems kind of dated, which is not surprising since it's by Pei Cobb Freed & Partners. If I were building my company's HQ/signature tower I'd want to make a real statement. But I hope I end up eating my words.

[Majin]

Jeesh. I didn't read the article (because it's in the Bee). Did they say what the problems were with the contractor? I hope you are right about the design. The current design looks to much like an office building to me.

The schedule (which I assume to mean they were too slow), and they even admit the building didn't look like residential in the article I believe. Hopefully it looks softer, more open, and more exposed windows.

[Pistola916]

Vanir’s tower is yet another missed opportunity. Yes, it's a very welcomed infill. Cheers to that! But the design is not a game changer and it's seems kind of dated, which is not surprising since it's by Pei Cobb Freed & Partners. If I were building my company's HQ/signature tower I'd want to make a real statement. But I hope I end up eating my words.

The design is what I'd consider boring for New York or San Francisco but for Sacramento, its still a sharp looking high-rise IMO. But who knows, maybe they'll tweak the design before construction starts.

A real statement would be to increase the floor count to a whopping 30 stories. Vanir is less than 50 feet from being the tallest building in the city. How hard is it to surpass 429 feet, which is the height of the Wells Fargo Center.

[enigma99a]

The design is what I'd consider boring for New York or San Francisco but for Sacramento, its still a sharp looking high-rise IMO. But who knows, maybe they'll tweak the design before construction starts.

A real statement would be to increase the floor count to a whopping 30 stories. Vanir is less than 50 feet from being the tallest building in the city. How hard is it to surpass 429 feet, which is the height of the Wells Fargo Center.

A building above 429 hasn't been done before so it can't be done :) at least thats the thinking

[ozone]

The design is what I'd consider boring for New York or San Francisco but for Sacramento, its still a sharp looking high-rise IMO. But who knows, maybe they'll tweak the design before construction starts.

A real statement would be to increase the floor count to a whopping 30 stories. Vanir is less than 50 feet from being the tallest building in the city. How hard is it to surpass 429 feet, which is the height of the Wells Fargo Center.

Totally agree with this!

A building above 429 hasn't been done before so it can't be done :) at least thats the thinking

Haha. Funny, at the same time not because we all know there's knuckleheads that think like this.

[ozone]

http://s6.postimg.org/lxqhcbasd/sacramento_commons_from_5th_st_600xx1095_732_212.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/lxqhcbasd/)

Sacramento Business Journal
Ben van der Meer
Apr 17, 2015

As the Sacramento Commons housing redevelopment project winds through city planning and approvals, the debate is only ramping up over whether it includes historic elements that should be protected. Capitol Towers was developed more than 50 years ago on a parcel surrounded by N and P streets and 5th and 7th streets and is regarded as a rare example of an intact midcentury modern neighborhood. In January, it won designation on the National Register of Historic Places....

SacMod, a group opposed to the project, took heart in a decision by the city’s preservation commission earlier this week to recommend the site be placed on the local historic registry as well. With historic designation, Sacramento Commons project gets complicated....

Group president Gretchen Steinberg said the commission also recommended the City Council deny the project. The Sacramento Commons proposal would require demolition of some garden-style apartments as part of a plan to add several new residential buildings, including a pair of 25-story towers.

“To this day, the applicant has continually refused to acknowledge its responsibility for stewardship of the historic district even though it was advised of the historic resources on site by the preservation community in February 2014,” Steinberg said in an email Friday. “Preservation AND progress can be achieved at the same time through compromise and ingenuity.” .....

Once developed, Sacramento Commons would have more than 1,300 new residential units, and could include a hotel."

I hate this meddling by a bunch of mostly suburban-orientated individuals, to save one of downtown's out of place suburban-style developments. Ms Steinberg disingenuously refers to this place as a "historical district". Of course, they were the ones who pushed to get it placed on the National Register of Historic Places in the first. Which it should never have been IMO.

Our fellow forumer wburg supports the efforts to derail this project and "likes" SacMod's Facebook page. I wonder how he reconciles his persistent call for more downtown housing with his efforts to try and stop Sacramento Commons, which will add more housing and likely spur additional infill nearby?

[LandofFrost]

http://s6.postimg.org/lxqhcbasd/sacramento_commons_from_5th_st_600xx1095_732_212.jpg (http://postimg.org/image/lxqhcbasd/)



I hate this meddling by a bunch of mostly suburban-orientated individuals, to save one of downtown's out of place suburban-style developments. Ms Steinberg disingenuously refers to this place as a "historical district". Of course, they were the ones who pushed to get it placed on the National Register of Historic Places in the first. Which it should never have been IMO.

Our fellow forumer wburg supports the efforts to derail this project and "likes" SacMod's Facebook page. I wonder how he reconciles his persistent call for more downtown housing with his efforts to try and stop Sacramento Commons, which will add more housing and likely spur additional infill nearby?


I also don't understand this, I'm sorry but I'm totally ok with all of those poor quality (I've been inside them many times) two story buildings on that super block. The one thing i don't like about this project is that these homes are surrounded by blocks of surface level parking and a giant one story office building. Why can't they build on one of those vacant lots instead of eating up existing housing. There are two entire blocks of vacant parking to the East and South.

[wburg]

LandOfFrost makes a good point: why destroy a currently fully occupied, economically viable housing complex, one of the most densely populated in the central city, when there are so many empty parking lots, vacant lots, failed-project sites etc. within a stone's throw? The Capitol Towers superblock includes a total of 440 units, and if you add the other two buildings on the four city blocks, the overall density is 59 units an acre--if the whole central city was that dense, 100,000 people would live there--three times what there are now.

The silly thing is, Kennedy Wilson isn't even a developer--they're a real estate investment trust. They aren't actually planning to build anything, and those renderings are just volumetric placeholders, not actual designs they want to build. Once they have the entitlements they will flip the now far more valuable parcels to other developers, who may or may not build what KW has tentatively planned for the lost (if they decided they wanted to do something else, all they have to do is submit a new planning application.) But even a lot of local developers are questioning the logic of high-rise housing in Sacramento even in the middling future--they don't see how KW or other developers are going to make the money back they would have to spend for high rise towers here.

Is it disingenuous if it's factual? It is a historic district, designed by an award-winning team of architects. The buildings aren't abandoned, vacant or falling apart--in fact, they have all been recently fixed up and people are eager to rent there. Part of why they are eager is because, as older buildings, they can't command the super high rents of new buildings, so they are within reach of the existing central city workforce. The proposed replacement would not be nearly as affordable, and you'd lose the comfortable, parklike atmosphere that helps conceal the fact that you're sitting in a neighborhood that is among the most densely populated in the city except for the Main Jail!

59 DUA is pretty much in the "sweet spot" for transit-oriented development; the long-range objective of central city housing is to build on parcels where there is no housing, not destroying housing to create different housing. That's how redevelopment worked back in the 1950s, and for the most part it was a failure--with the notable exception of Capitol Towers. 59 units an acre is also about the same as the MAXIMUM planned density for the ESC and ancillary development (maximum 550 units on 8.5 acres, currently only 69 units are planned) so apparently that density is good enough for the ESC at the heart of downtown--and of course, if you walk down 7th Street between these two sites, the population density is zero. Since the Marshall Hotel closed, nobody lives in the intervening blocks!

As to how I reconcile more central city housing with saving places like Capitol Towers, there is no need to reconcile them because they are in no way contradictory. We could double the population of the central city without demolishing one building. Just fix up and fill up the vacant buildings, build new housing on parking lots and other empty lots, and we'd be back to 50-60,000 in the central city within a decade or two. We can have our city and live in it too, and we're seeing it happen right now.

[ozone]

LandOfFrost makes a good point: why destroy a currently fully occupied, economically viable housing complex, one of the most densely populated in the central city, when there are so many empty parking lots, vacant lots, failed-project sites etc. within a stone's throw? The Capitol Towers superblock includes a total of 440 units, and if you add the other two buildings on the four city blocks, the overall density is 59 units an acre--if the whole central city was that dense, 100,000 people would live there--three times what there are now.

The silly thing is, Kennedy Wilson isn't even a developer--they're a real estate investment trust. They aren't actually planning to build anything, and those renderings are just volumetric placeholders, not actual designs they want to build. Once they have the entitlements they will flip the now far more valuable parcels to other developers, who may or may not build what KW has tentatively planned for the lost (if they decided they wanted to do something else, all they have to do is submit a new planning application.) But even a lot of local developers are questioning the logic of high-rise housing in Sacramento even in the middling future--they don't see how KW or other developers are going to make the money back they would have to spend for high rise towers here.

Is it disingenuous if it's factual? It is a historic district, designed by an award-winning team of architects. The buildings aren't abandoned, vacant or falling apart--in fact, they have all been recently fixed up and people are eager to rent there. Part of why they are eager is because, as older buildings, they can't command the super high rents of new buildings, so they are within reach of the existing central city workforce. The proposed replacement would not be nearly as affordable, and you'd lose the comfortable, parklike atmosphere that helps conceal the fact that you're sitting in a neighborhood that is among the most densely populated in the city except for the Main Jail!

59 DUA is pretty much in the "sweet spot" for transit-oriented development; the long-range objective of central city housing is to build on parcels where there is no housing, not destroying housing to create different housing. That's how redevelopment worked back in the 1950s, and for the most part it was a failure--with the notable exception of Capitol Towers. 59 units an acre is also about the same as the MAXIMUM planned density for the ESC and ancillary development (maximum 550 units on 8.5 acres, currently only 69 units are planned) so apparently that density is good enough for the ESC at the heart of downtown--and of course, if you walk down 7th Street between these two sites, the population density is zero. Since the Marshall Hotel closed, nobody lives in the intervening blocks!

As to how I reconcile more central city housing with saving places like Capitol Towers, there is no need to reconcile them because they are in no way contradictory. We could double the population of the central city without demolishing one building. Just fix up and fill up the vacant buildings, build new housing on parking lots and other empty lots, and we'd be back to 50-60,000 in the central city within a decade or two. We can have our city and live in it too, and we're seeing it happen right now.

Utter Rubbish!

[wburg]

utter rubbish!
RHETORICAL MASTERSTRoKE

[midtownsacto]

I noticed a fence went up around the former Pyramid Brewing Company building on 11th & K, anyone know what's going on there?

[sacamenna kid]

Anyone know anything about the Powerhouse science museum? Nothing happening.

[creamcityleo79]

The Mill at Broadway targets millennials as home buyers

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article19099410.html

[wburg]

I noticed a fence went up around the former Pyramid Brewing Company building on 11th & K, anyone know what's going on there?

They're converting the upper floors back into apartments (it was an apartment building before being converted to department store/offices) but no word on a ground floor tenant yet.

[Ryan@CU]

Page one of this thread needs a serious update

[joeg1985]

The Mill at Broadway targets millennials as home buyers

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article19099410.html

Does anyone else think that this development is going to look like crap? Those renderings are horrible. Who would want to buy into this?

[wburg]

Does anyone else think that this development is going to look like crap? Those renderings are horrible. Who would want to buy into this?

Watch the video to determine their target market: http://millatbroadway.com/live-on/

Renderings are always horrible. I know some of the folks involved in the project's design aspects, but the principal architect is a firm in Granite Bay. Looks like variations on the "skinny house" model with various exterior finishes intended to mimic "historical" styles but doesn't seem to do so very well.

[NickB1967]

Does anyone else think that this development is going to look like crap? Those renderings are horrible. Who would want to buy into this?

Somebody single, or recently coupled, who wanted to be really close to their downtown work, I reckon. They could make really swell starter homes, and possibly rental properties after that.

The extra bathrooms (relative to bedrooms) make for a useful shared housing or roommate situation.

"The 2.5 acre urban farm" I suspect will have to have a hired professional gardener for it, as the inhabitants may be too busy out having fun or more likely ekeing out a living, depending upon the economy and their debt situations.

[joeg1985]

I guess I have very little concept about how much people in Sacramento care about what their home looks like. Whether it has curb appeal or not. Renderings don't typically look that bad. Usually it seems the finished product isn't as great looking as the rendering. The renderings are suppose to sell the property (ie should look amazing).

[ozone]

Sacramento Business Journal
Apr 27, 2015
Ben van der Meer

A concrete slab for mixed-use housing project Eviva should be poured early next month, with the modular housing units appearing by summer’s end.

In presenting an amendment to the original Capitol Area Development Authority agreement for the project at 16th and N streets, authority staff on Friday updated long-awaited progress on the project.

Though the project broke ground last summer, progress was hardly noticeable until recently. CADA deputy executive director Marc de la Vergne said the original local subcontractor couldn't meet construction deadlines, so the developer Integral, working with LDK Ventures, switched to Boise-based Guerdon Enterprises LLC. Tricorp Hearn is the general contractor.

Eviva, with 118 market-rate units and 5,000 square feet of first-floor retail space, will have units built in Boise and assembled at the project site, a process called modular construction.

The delays also allowed the developer to tweak the project’s design. Renderings released with the groundbreaking showed a building hardly distinct from neighboring state office buildings.

De la Vergne said Eviva now has corners slightly taller than the rest of the project, with a slight setback at the top. As well, the balconies are wider and there are more of them, and the color palette is more eye catching, he said.

Denton Kelley of LDK said the project’s delays ended up making it better.

“An unfortunate snafu with the subcontractor provided us with an opportunity to work on the design,” he told CADA’s board. “So we’re very happy with the outcome.”

The amendment CADA’s board approved Friday accelerated $3 million in property tax rebates for the project over a 10-year period, rather than the original 20. CADA’s contribution is capped under the amendment.

[ozone]

http://s6.postimg.org/wrqgy0y8x/metro_crossing_se_corner_usa_properties_railyard.jpg

Sacramento Business Journal
Mar 17, 2015
Ben van der Meer

A Roseville-based developer has proposed the first private project for the Sacramento railyard.
USA Properties Fund Inc. expects next week to submit to the city a plan for the four-story, 200-unit apartment project, to be called Metro Crossing. The company hopes to start construction in summer 2016.
The project is notable because it's a tangible sign of progress for the 200-acre railyard. Problems with toxic soil clean-up, economic downturns and ownership upheaval have stalled development of the infill site for years. Although many ambitious ideas have been floated — including a major-league soccer stadium — the only other firm construction plans so far are for a Sacramento County courthouse.

Art May, senior vice president of development at USA Properties, said Metro Crossing would be an affordable housing project totaling about 316,000 square feet.

The plan will call for apartments surrounding a five-story parking garage. Amenities would include a community room, pool, pet-washing station and bike repair shop. In layout, Metro Crossing would be similar to the Cannery Place Apartments in Township Nine, but without any retail space, May said. LPAS Architecture and Design in Sacramento is the project architect.

Apartments would range from one-bedroom, one-bathroom units of about 620 square feet to two-bedroom, one-bathroom units of about 940 square feet. There also would be two-bedroom, two-bathroom units.
USA Properties also would have space for on-site classes through its nonprofit partner LifeSTEPS, May said, including job training assistance and after-school programs.

Metro Crossing would be on Seventh Street between extensions of F and G streets, with the western side facing the completed but unopened Sixth Street bridge over the railroad tracks.

May said his company, which specializes in affordable housing, estimates an 18- to 20-month construction timeline.

"The railyards are going to be a great opportunity for multiple different developments," May said. "And there's a huge need for affordable housing."

Railyard developers needed to include an affordable housing project as a condition of receiving state money for railyard infrastructure. May said Metro Crossing satisfies about half of that requirement.
But as his company moves into more market-rate housing projects as well, May said, it's possible they'll be doing more in the railyard.

"Nothing is guaranteed yet, but we're hopeful," May said

CfpPFNHEdR8

[Majin]

^^ Suburban garbage

[Pistola916]

CADA revealed the redesigned Eviva. And it looks worse IMO.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/04/27/midtown-project-eviva-back-on-track-with-revised.html

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

Good grief, that looks like all the banal new stuff I see getting built here in Portland. Since when has Sacramento been a city of brick? If I had that project in school and I proposed that, any one of my professors would have failed me.

[wburg]

Since when has Sacramento been a city of brick?
Since the 1854 fire when brick construction was mandated by the city aldermen to limit the damage potential of future fires. And when I look at nearby buildings to the west I see a whole lot of brick: Substation A, the passenger depot, the Shops buildings... (I assume you're talking about the building in the Railyards rather than the Eviva redesign, as I don't see any brick in that design unless you count the concrete blocks on the ground floor)

Still, it might be fun to see some architecture that is a little more dynamic and playful, along the lines of Gehry's "Fred and Ginger," instead of the bold architectural statements about maximizing leasable square footage and minimizing construction costs we see passing through the rendering phase.

[ozone]

CADA revealed the redesigned Eviva. And it looks worse IMO.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/04/27/midtown-project-eviva-back-on-track-with-revised.html

I could not tell if that was the revised plans or not. Do you know for sure that it is?

[LandofFrost]

"Changes Keep trees, add more commercial space to Sacramento Commons"

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/05/01/sacramento-commons-changes-trees-commercial-space.html?page=all


“This is the wrong project in the wrong place,” said Justin Wood, a member of the preservation group SacMod. “There’s overwhelming consensus about this among the community.”


^^ Really? Justin Wood? I think the opposite is actually true. Most people I've talked to, who even know what Sacramento Commons is, actually think that the two story apartments have no place in downtown.

[Majin]

Ultimately I don't see any neighborhood activist/wburg from getting this project built. It may include some stupid changes like more open space, but it will get built. The grid is just too hot right now and KJ's city council is a rubber stamp for developers.

[ozone]

"Changes Keep trees, add more commercial space to Sacramento Commons"

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/05/01/sacramento-commons-changes-trees-commercial-space.html?page=all


“This is the wrong project in the wrong place,” said Justin Wood, a member of the preservation group SacMod. “There’s overwhelming consensus about this among the community.”


^^ Really? Justin Wood? I think the opposite is actually true. Most people I've talked to, who even know what Sacramento Commons is, actually think that the two story apartments have no place in downtown.

Essentially we have a bunch of suburbanites living in Eichler knockoffs spouting nonsense about the "historical" value of something because they have a fetish for anti-urban Midcenturism. When this guy talks about overwhelming community opposition to this project I have wonder what community he's talking about? I live on the Grid. My business is on the Grid. Everyone I know who is familer with this project supports it.

[ozone]

^^ Suburban garbage

It is more urban than dirt.

[Mr. Ozo]

"Changes Keep trees, add more commercial space to Sacramento Commons"


Yep, I'm content with these changes. Let's build it.

[ltsmotorsport]

^Agreed. The changes look good. The SE plaza needs a little more tweaking though to fix the ped/vehicle conflicts, the project overall is a win for Sacramento

Essentially we have a bunch of suburbanites living in Eichler knockoffs spouting nonsense about the "historical" value of something because they have a fetish for anti-urban Midcenturism. When this guy talks about overwhelming community opposition to this project I have wonder what community he's talking about? I live on the Grid. My business is on the Grid. Everyone I know who is familer with this project supports it.

This is really the problem. The opposition from within the grid is a very small portion of the population of the grid. The rest of the opposition comes from those who don't live there but have the fanaticism for the style you referenced. There is very little merit to their arguments, no matter the opinions of a select few. Two story, suburban-style apartments of questionable quality are not comparable to the potential of the proposal.

[Pistola916]

We could be starring at yet another hole in the ground.

Where is John Saca? He's been M.I.A on his Metropolitan proposal. I seriously can not trust this guy anymore.

After Fire, Biltmore Hotel Could Be Torn Down By City Of Sacramento
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/05/05/after-fire-biltmore-hotel-could-be-torn-down-by-city-of-sacramento/

[Majin]

We could be starring at yet another hole in the ground.

Where is John Saca? He's been M.I.A on his Metropolitan proposal. I seriously can not trust this guy anymore.

After Fire, Biltmore Hotel Could Be Torn Down By City Of Sacramento
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/05/05/after-fire-biltmore-hotel-could-be-torn-down-by-city-of-sacramento/

I agree, he is full of it. Sell the MF'er off if you're going to let it rot or turn it into a hole in the ground. With the arena and hotel tower going up along with K street reving up with residential units, it's time to put up or shut up. NO MORE BLIGHT DOWNTOWN.

I hope the city can force a sale or ED. It's really time to get rid of the slumlords downtown.

[LandofFrost]

It's too bad, I think that the Metropolitan would actually come out profitable, as it would have zero competition in the ownership condo market.

But... didn't the city council kill this project back in the day, because it blocked their view of the capital?

[wburg]

No, that was just a comment a former councilmember made about the project. It was approved and fully entitled, but Saca is still kind of new to the "building buildings" things vs. getting them approved.

I'm sure the Saca family doesn't mind the idea of having the city demolish the building for them, they certainly have no intent of repairing it, and no estimated construction date for the Metropolitan.

[Web]

We could be starring at yet another hole in the ground.

Where is John Saca? He's been M.I.A on his Metropolitan proposal. I seriously can not trust this guy anymore.

After Fire, Biltmore Hotel Could Be Torn Down By City Of Sacramento
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2015/05/05/after-fire-biltmore-hotel-could-be-torn-down-by-city-of-sacramento/

Isnt this a classic bs developer........wait for the city to demo it then probably demand a subsidy to build.......what a hose bag. eminent domain the place and sell it to a developer for once. Stop giving away land period.....(think all the free land in the arena deal)

[Deno]

Where is Justin Wood, looking out to preserve the historic Biltmore.

[ozone]

Where is Justin Wood, looking out to preserve the historic Biltmore.

It's too old for him.

[wburg]

Too old, or too late. The Biltmore was vacated back in 2001 for an office building that never got built, and left vacant for the proposed condo tower project that got put on hold because of the market crash (not because it blocked a councilmember's view of the Capitol.) In the intervening 14 years, the building and its neighbors have sat vacant waiting for the developers to pull their thumbs out and build something, leaving that block of J Street as a long-term civic eyesore.

And, in some ways, that seems to be the business model. Buy a building you don't care about because you have other plans for the land, let it sit and rot for a few decades until there's an *ahem* suspicious fire, and the city tears the building down for you because now it's "blight." The city isn't in much of a position to judge property owners for letting their buildings decay, because it's their business model too. The Biltmore was old and funky, but it was occupied, useful housing until the tenants were removed. Decay set in, and the building may not be salvageable unless extraordinary measures are taken--but the owners aren't interested in taking any measures at all, because they don't want the building there in the first place.

And that's what Justin Wood and the SacMod folks are trying to prevent happening at Capitol Towers--the current business model we see on J Street. Kennedy Wilson isn't a developer, they are a real estate trust, and they aren't actually going to build the project they propose. They're just getting the entitlements, which will let them sell the land to other developers at a higher price. So what happens if the buyer is someone like Saca, with more money than building ability? Capitol Towers are a fully occupied, highly desirable but reasonably affordable apartment complex right now, and among the most densely populated part of Sacramento's central city right now. If the tenants get turned out, will they sit and decay for a decade while the new owner figures out how to get their project financed? Will they burn down years later, or be flattened to leave a big embarrassing bare patch on another commuter route, giving an impression of Sacramento as bad as the 1000 block of J Street?

It's probably too late for the Biltmore, and while I was hoping that the Plaza and RCA Buildings next to it are ripe for a 700 K type residential/retail conversion, they have been vacant and decaying for just as long, and I assume they will be the next buildings to have an "accidental" fire blamed on homeless people trying to keep warm in August. Capitol Towers, on the other hand, is still viable and occupied, densely populated, and is a slap in the face to people who claim nobody lives downtown.

It's not infill if there's already dense downtown housing there. Two-story apartments have a place downtown if it's within a designed context including three mid-rise residential towers, as the Capitol Towers superblock does. Parking lots, on the other hand, have no business downtown, but because of the arena plan, private parking lots are becoming a money-making machine. Some developers are trying to get their downtown buildings demolished to become "Temporary" parking lots--like the "temporary" parking lot across 7th Street from Capitol Towers, demolished before I was born for high-rises that never got built either.

[Majin]

Two-story apartments have a place downtown

I just lost what little respect I had left for you.

[UnclearColt]

I just lost what little respect I had left for you.

I agree, 2 story apartments have no place in that part of midtown. Especially when you look at reviews for the complex (Yelp (http://www.yelp.com/biz/capitol-towers-sacramento), Google (https://www.google.com/search?q=capitol+towers&oq=capitol+towers+&aqs=chrome..69i57.2463j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=0&ie=UTF-8#lrd=0x809ad12f0004368b:0x4d16a968e6fdc74d,1), and ApartmentRatings (http://www.apartmentratings.com/ca/sacramento/capitol-towers-and-villas_916447328895814/)), you see overwhelmingly negative reviews with the only consistent pro being the staff and many people talking about how run-down the units are.

It really is unfortunate though not surprising that there is such a controversy about this project. Preservationists for the most part are just extreme hoarders.

[wburg]

Capitol Towers isn't in Midtown, and in that part of downtown, almost all the housing is 2-3 story apartment buildings--EXCEPT for the Capitol Towers superblock, which has 3 mid-rise towers (two are on adjacent lots) complemented by the low-rise building. It's the most densely populated part of the city, and people are complaining that it isn't high-density enough, perhaps because bad/amateur urban designers that neighborhoods have to look dense to count as high-density, as opposed to urban neighborhoods that have a high population but still look like pleasant residential streets because they were well-designed by people who understood how cities work.

As to the reviews, they seem to be pretty mixed (many of the negatives complain about the staff) and most of the property issues are maintenance stuff that can be fixed pretty easily without demolition. Considering that the current owner wants to demolish most of the complex, I can't imagine they want to spend anything more than the absolute bare minimum maintaining the units, so maybe we are already seeing the slumlord effect we've witnessed downtown for the past few decades by wannabe investors waiting for the Skyscraper Fairy to arrive.

[ozone]

@wburg

Did you just say that Justin Wood and the SacMod folks are trying to prevent another Biltmore from happening at Capitol Towers? Wow! You must think we are a bunch of idiots. I'm sorry but none of your arguments have been very convincing. It is infill if they are going to add more units.

[snfenoc]

@wburg

Did you just say that Justin Wood and the SacMod folks are trying to prevent another Biltmore from happening at Capitol Towers? Wow! You must think we are a bunch of idiots. I'm sorry but none of your arguments have been very convincing. It is infill if they are going to add more units.

True, but it's the opposite infill if they allow the garden units to go unoccupied and let them decay for 20 years. I think wburg's main concern is that there really aren't solid plans for the site and that it will end up like the other holes in the ground. Preservation is just a vehicle with which he can oppose these "plans".

Having said that, I think busy body progressives create these sorts of problems with their insistence on directing development, picking winners and loser and awarding public funds to their well-connected political cronies. If the incentive of free money were removed from the equation, we might see a change. Of course, there is no perfect solution to anything.

[wburg]

@wburg

Did you just say that Justin Wood and the SacMod folks are trying to prevent another Biltmore from happening at Capitol Towers? Wow! You must think we are a bunch of idiots. I'm sorry but none of your arguments have been very convincing. It is infill if they are going to add more units.

Nah, I only think a few posters here are idiots. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether or not you're one of them.

Urban infill generally refers to that which goes on vacant lots, or properties that are seriously decayed or abandoned. Not every new project counts as urban infill, and I'd say that a project that demolishes an occupied, economically viable apartment complex, even if the end result is higher population density, doesn't count as infill--it's just a replay of 1950s style redevelopment, which was generally a disaster unless you were a developer getting paid to demolish existing neighborhoods and build new ones. Infill fills in the blank spaces, the parking lots or vacant sites, it doesn't wipe out the most visually prominent and densely populated neighborhood in downtown Sacramento.

Now, if the owners of Capitol Towers proposed building new midrise or highrise units on their own surface parking lots, and/or in place of their parking structure, providing a net increase to the total quantity of housing on the superblock. Capitol Towers leases out parking spaces to commuters even though they have a high vacancy rate, suggesting that they're currently overparked, and they do have really, really good transit access.

Another possibility might be partnering with CADA, who control the block directly across the street, which only has one building on it, the Heilbron Mansion. Building residential towers on that corner, with the Heilbron as the focus of a small park/greenspace area next to light rail, would be very welcome. A recent Business Journal article about CADA discussed their interest in converting more of their lots to housing, which we have seen in mid-rise form along 16th Street, and historic rehab/new construction on R Street. Maybe KW would be willing to build across the street instead, if CADA can provide the land?

[sacamenna kid]

Nah, I only think a few posters here are idiots. I'll leave it up to you to decide whether or not you're one of them.

Urban infill generally refers to that which goes on vacant lots, or properties that are seriously decayed or abandoned. Not every new project counts as urban infill, and I'd say that a project that demolishes an occupied, economically viable apartment complex, even if the end result is higher population density, doesn't count as infill--it's just a replay of 1950s style redevelopment, which was generally a disaster unless you were a developer getting paid to demolish existing neighborhoods and build new ones. Infill fills in the blank spaces, the parking lots or vacant sites, it doesn't wipe out the most visually prominent and densely populated neighborhood in downtown Sacramento.

Now, if the owners of Capitol Towers proposed building new midrise or highrise units on their own surface parking lots, and/or in place of their parking structure, providing a net increase to the total quantity of housing on the superblock. Capitol Towers leases out parking spaces to commuters even though they have a high vacancy rate, suggesting that they're currently overparked, and they do have really, really good transit access.

Another possibility might be partnering with CADA, who control the block directly across the street, which only has one building on it, the Heilbron Mansion. Building residential towers on that corner, with the Heilbron as the focus of a small park/greenspace area next to light rail, would be very welcome. A recent Business Journal article about CADA discussed their interest in converting more of their lots to housing, which we have seen in mid-rise form along 16th Street, and historic rehab/new construction on R Street. Maybe KW would be willing to build across the street instead, if CADA can provide the land?

My guess is that if KG wants it, the sale will happen, and Wburg may end up being right. I know those apartments well, and they are no great shakes, but the general landscaping concept was the work of Lawrence Halprin, and is (I think) his only Sacramento project. I would hope that whatever the new design , some of the Halprin landscaping footprint (that long promenade) could be maintained.

[ltsmotorsport]

It's probably too late for the Biltmore, and while I was hoping that the Plaza and RCA Buildings next to it are ripe for a 700 K type residential/retail conversion, they have been vacant and decaying for just as long, and I assume they will be the next buildings to have an "accidental" fire blamed on homeless people trying to keep warm in August. Capitol Towers, on the other hand, is still viable and occupied, densely populated, and is a slap in the face to people who claim nobody lives downtown.

This is just so true. I can't only hold out the faintest of hopes that the Plaza and RCA buildings will get the respect and much needed love they deserve. They could be save and turned into some amazing condos or apartments, neo art deco even, with some great high ceilings and amazing views of Cesar Chavez Plaza.

The Biltmore and the two other properties just east could easitly host a development the scale of the Metropolitan proposal and the block could then keep some of the good architectural bones. One thing that is lost with much of the new development is the fine grained architecture on each block. A full block of the same building almost becomes monotonous to the person walking by and is out of scale for the pedestrian. Take the 900 block of J Street as an example; maybe not the prettiest block at first glance, but the articulation of the buildings lends a certain authenticity to the urban sense of place. The interior space is also something that won't and really can't be replicated in new construction.

Either way, it would be nice to see some of the more substantial and quality buildings stay at the Metropolitan site. At this point though, the property owner needs to be shown the potential on-site that would only contribute to the current proposal's aspirations.

[LandofFrost]

More good news for 16th Street.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/city-beat/article21297699.html


Crystal Ice Plant plans.

[Folks3000]

The ground floor retail is open under Power 16. I noticed a lot more demolition going on at 700 K behind the facades. The senior housing at the Curtis Park redevelopment is going up and I noticed the first wood frames rising at the 5th street/Broadway redevelopment area.

[Web]

The ground floor retail is open under Power 16. I noticed a lot more demolition going on at 700 K behind the facades. The senior housing at the Curtis Park redevelopment is going up and I noticed the first wood frames rising at the 5th street/Broadway redevelopment area.

The fronts are rehabs and backs are all new taller construction on the alley

[Wmlegr]

They're also working on the first foundations at the creamery project in Alkili Flat

[creamcityleo79]

He's back: Kolokotronis proposes new mixed-use in midtown Sacramento


A new mixed-use project proposed in midtown Sacramento also could mark a comeback of sorts for a prominent developer.
Last week, city of Sacramento planners received an application for a four-story building at 19th and Q streets with 72 residential units and just under 2,000 square feet of retail space. The address off the applicant is 1121 18th St., or the office of SKK Developments, the firm founded by Sotiris Kolokotronis.

It's unclear where exactly the project would be built and if the company proposes rental or for-sale housing. The full application was not available Friday and Kolokotronis could not immediately be reached. But in development circles, word has circulated for weeks that he plans to build many residential units in that part of midtown.


http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/06/01/hes-back-kolokotronis-proposes-new-mixed-use-in.html

[Majin]

These projects are coming too slow.

[wburg]

Four stories and 72 units would cover the vacant quarter-block at 19th and Q quite nicely--the houses on that block were moved off years ago, even after the WP tracks were removed in the 1980s. The zoning overlay calls for up to about 110 units/acre, the .625 acre lot works out to about 115 dua. Close to transit, grocery stores, and more Midtown bars than you can shake a PBR tall boy at.

[Bubb90]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article23043207.html

[ltsmotorsport]

Nice to see a few more specifics about Kolokotronis' plans, as well as more potential residential units. Hope they can move as fast as possible.

[creamcityleo79]

Very exciting. Kolokotronis is a great corporate citizen! I can't wait to see the plans for this! :)

[sacamenna kid]

Any news on the new Kimpton hotel near the arena? The live cam pics still show an empty hole in the ground. And also, what about the Powerhouse Science Museum?

[snfenoc]

Any news on the new Kimpton hotel near the arena? The live cam pics still show an empty hole in the ground. And also, what about the Powerhouse Science Museum?


Arena construction moves into most intense phase
Jun 4, 2015, 7:25am PDT
Ben van der Meer
Sacramento Business Journal
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/06/04/arena-construction-moves-into-most-intense-phase.html

There was no update on work beginning yet for the mixed-use hotel tower at the north of the project site. Kings team officials have said they still believe that tower can be built in time to open alongside the arena in fall 2016.

Hmmmm....

[Pistola916]

Any news on the new Kimpton hotel near the arena? The live cam pics still show an empty hole in the ground. And also, what about the Powerhouse Science Museum?

No way the hotel opens on time unless construction starts now. I'm predicting a Spring 2017 opening.

[jbradway]

I do know that some of the tenants like River City Brewing are closing by the end of this month. So more demo work on the west end of the plaza is coming soon. More of a remodel than complete tear down.

Part of the hotel construction is the other portion of the open plaza in front of the arena. I would think they want it to be far enough along that just the inside of hotel needs finish work. They can do that if the start pile drilling late this month or early next.

[Web]

I do know that some of the tenants like River City Brewing are closing by the end of this month. So more demo work on the west end of the plaza is coming soon. More of a remodel than complete tear down.

Part of the hotel construction is the other portion of the open plaza in front of the arena. I would think they want it to be far enough along that just the inside of hotel needs finish work. They can do that if the start pile drilling late this month or early next.

there was an article in the bee a bit ago....river city is being told to leave.

[Bubb90]

And also, what about the Powerhouse Science Museum?

Any news on this?

[Bubb90]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article23536111.html

Hope this happens!

[creamcityleo79]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article23536111.html

Hope this happens!

He just keeps going!!! Love it! :tup:

[Mr. Ozo]

He just keeps going!!! Love it! :tup:

This is huge. A game changer for this "side" of Midtown. I've been walking past these empty lots always daily for coming on a decade. Can still remember the old house that used to be in the middle of the lot.

Glad someone has the vision to see the potential of the area.

[creamcityleo79]

Controversial proposal for downtown high-rises goes to Sacramento planning commission



A proposal to convert a downtown Sacramento development built in the 1960s from low-rise apartments to high-rise condos has reignited a debate over whether this leafy, four-block piece of real estate should be packed with housing or left alone.

The proposed Sacramento Commons is scheduled for a final hearing Thursday before the Planning and Design Commission, which will make a recommendation to the City Council. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chamber, 915 I St. The council is set to take up the matter July 14.

The Sacramento Commons project calls for increased density, which supporters and opponents agree would change the character of the neighborhood.
The Sacramento Commons project calls for increased density, which supporters and opponents agree would change the character of the neighborhood. | RANDALL BENTON RBENTON@SACBEE.COM
Beverly Hills-based real estate investment firm Kennedy Wilson purchased the property bounded by Fifth, Seventh, N and P streets in 2012. The 10-acre parcel is occupied by Capitol Towers, a 15-story tower with 203 apartment units, as well as 206 low-rise garden apartments, known as the Capitol Villas. Designed as a pedestrian-oriented community with streets closed to vehicle traffic and a lush canopy of trees, it is regarded by residents as an oasis in the city.

Various developers have proposed more intense uses for the prime real estate since the 1990s, but they’ve all faded in the face of opposition.


Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article23668615.html#storylink=cpy

[NickB1967]

Controversial proposal for downtown high-rises goes to Sacramento planning commission



And meanwhile, the block of 3rd / Capitol / 4th / L Street, where two high-rise condo towers were planned, remains two holes in the ground???

And they want to take out perfectly functional housing at Capitol Towers / Capitol Villas? :???:

[Majin]

And meanwhile, the block of 3rd / Capitol / 4th / L Street, where two high-rise condo towers were planned, remains two holes in the ground???

And they want to take out perfectly functional housing at Capitol Towers / Capitol Villas? :???:

It's not as if developers or property owners can just choose any random empty plot of land to develop. You actually have to own the land or able to purchase it for a reasonable price.

[jbradway]

It's not as if developers or property owners can just choose any random empty plot of land to develop. You actually have to own the land or able to purchase it for a reasonable price.

Doesn't CalPERS own that lot now?

[Majin]

Doesn't CalPERS own that lot now?

Yes, but its probably just not CalPERS it's probably a group of investors that includes CalPERS.

[Bubb90]

http://m.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/06/11/next-k-street-success-story-developer-buys-three.html

More news

[BillSimmons]

And meanwhile, the block of 3rd / Capitol / 4th / L Street, where two high-rise condo towers were planned, remains two holes in the ground???

And they want to take out perfectly functional housing at Capitol Towers / Capitol Villas? :???:

It doesn't work that way, bruh. Need to have a word with CalPERS about that.

[wburg]

Wow, synergy! Guess who just bought up some more property on K Street?

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/06/11/next-k-street-success-story-developer-buys-three.html?ana=twt
Broker Ken Turton, whose Turton Commercial Real Estate oversaw the sale, said he couldn’t identify the buyer because of a non-disclosure agreement. But according to public records, the buyer's office address is that of developer Moe Mohanna. The buyer, listed as 10 Kay LLC, acquired 920, 924 and 930 K St. in recent weeks for a combined $5.3 million.

[Web]

Wow, synergy! Guess who just bought up some more property on K Street?

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/06/11/next-k-street-success-story-developer-buys-three.html?ana=twt

does he just buy and sell land because his development ideas always crash and burn?
:shrug:

[enigma99a]

Wow, synergy! Guess who just bought up some more property on K Street?

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/06/11/next-k-street-success-story-developer-buys-three.html?ana=twt



How about the 965ft Capitol Grand Tower? Let's get that done first

[bradbeds]

Doesn't CalPERS own that lot now?

Hearing that they have BIG plans for that lot and are going to be announcing something soon. Keep your eyes open on this one.

[Majin]

Hearing that they have BIG plans for that lot and are going to be announcing something soon. Keep your eyes open on this one.

Someone said that last year (i forgot who) and nothing. I'll believe it when I see some real news articles.

[Majin]

I told you guys this would be rubber stamped :tup:

Good thing we are in the era of KJ pro development. If Fargo was still Mayor she would of fought this tooth and nail.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article23825752.html

[bradbeds]

Someone said that last year (i forgot who) and nothing. I'll believe it when I see some real news articles.

Tired of them just sitting on that lot, either sell it or build something there.

(I will accept nothing less than a decent highrise there)

[enigma99a]

Tired of them just sitting on that lot, either sell it or build something there.

(I will accept nothing less than a decent highrise there)


Maybe a minimum height requirement of 600' for starters