Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[enigma99a]

Yeah but they still have the Cathedral Square Condos on there. Isn't that project dead?

[wburg]

They're both zombies, dead but they just don't know it yet. So they stumble around eating people's brains.

[Web]

The Kings set NBA sellout records in ARCO Arena dating back to the 90's when the team was terrible. They're not going to have trouble selling out the new arena.

and what happenned since???

[BillSimmons]

and what happenned since???

Well they sold 99.7% of all seats available at Sleep Train this year.

http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance

Does that answer your question?

[Web]

Well they sold 99.7% of all seats available at Sleep Train this year.

http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance

Does that answer your question?

good for 19th....hmmmm even if they would of sold out every game maybe 17th and with such a team lately the 3rd worst road attendance......

so selling out next season will put them in the same rank probably.

I do know a season ticket holder who was not too happy to pay more yet again this next year......he says at least its a new arena unlike previous years ticket increases and not much to show.....28-32 wins for how many years now???

once the newness wears off of the arena and the team doesnt improve ......attendence could be hurting in a bit....again if the prices keep rising with nothing to show for it.:haha::haha:

[BillSimmons]

good for 19th....hmmmm even if they would of sold out every game maybe 17th and with such a team lately the 3rd worst road attendance......

so selling out next season will put them in the same rank probably.

I do know a season ticket holder who was not too happy to pay more yet again this next year......he says at least its a new arena unlike previous years ticket increases and not much to show.....28-32 wins for how many years now???

once the newness wears off of the arena and the team doesnt improve ......attendence could be hurting in a bit....again if the prices keep rising with nothing to show for it.:haha::haha:

They were ranked 19th because they have one of the smallest arenas in the NBA. Still I'm not sure how you can make the argument that they aren't selling tickets when they sold 99.7% last year.

That site has sortable statistics going back years for ticket sales. Go ahead an look it up for yourself. The Kings have been at or near 100% nearly every year in Sacramento, with the lone exceptions being the few years when the Maloofs were actively trying to move the team and fans obviously quit supporting them.

Also I'm not sure how road attendance proves your point? Who cares if people don't show up when they're on the road? It has no effect on ticket sales at home.

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

I can tell you right now as a STH that just because a ticket sells doesn't mean that person ends up at the game. There were several games that were "announced" sellouts where almost the entire upper bowl was empty. I had empty seats next to me in the lower bowl for a handful of games. For games we couldn't make, even when we undercut the actual value of our tickets, they didn't sell most times.

I have already heard from several others who plan on selling their tickets as much as possible next year, and after that, they're out. You seem to be massively underestimating just how sick and pissed off fans are for ownership's clowncar antics in running a basketball team. Sure, the new arena will be completely packed on Opening Night, as well as for Warriors and Lakers games (when their bandwagons outnumber actual Kings fans in attendance). But if next season is anything like last season, and right now, that's how it's shaping up, then that brand new arena is gonna stop being packed for Kings games sometime around February at the latest.

[BillSimmons]

http://www.nba.com/kings/seasontickets

[Pistola916]

I hope all the arena haters kick rocks and never sit foot at the GIC. Let them bitch and whine about the Kings all they want but this city is getting some first class entertainment. I, for one, am looking forward to Paul McCartney.

[creamcityleo79]

I hope all the arena haters kick rocks and never sit foot at the GIC. Let them bitch and wine about the Kings all they want but this city is getting some first class entertainment. I, for one, am looking forward to Paul McCartney.

We're going to see him tonight here in Minneapolis! I wish we were seeing him in Sacramento later this year. But, you can't have all your dreams come true! lol

[Deno]

Looks like upper level seats are better at sleep train. Don't see any amenities up there. Kind of walled in. No upper level bars restrooms snack bars? Just from the virtual tour.

[Pistola916]

Looks like upper level seats are better at sleep train. Don't see any amenities up there. Kind of walled in. No upper level bars restrooms snack bars? Just from the virtual tour.

All that stuff is on the second main concourse.

[ltsmotorsport]

Yamanee is being heard tonight at the Planning and Design Commission. Staff report and materials here (Item 6): http://sacramento.granicus.com/GeneratedAgendaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=126

The Railyards also has a review and comment item.

[Pistola916]

Holy cow. The Planning Commission voted 9-2 to move ahead with Yamanee! Then again the Planning Commission typically approves everything.

(I believe it can still be appealed by the City Council tho)

[enigma99a]

Holy cow. The Planning Commission voted 9-2 to move ahead with Yamanee! Then again the Planning Commission typically approves everything.

(I believe it can still be appealed by the City Council tho)

What are the chances this gets built?

[Pistola916]

What are the chances this gets built?

Given the city's track record for successfully building high-rise condos, none. But it's picking up momentum.

[urban_encounter]

Yes, there are plenty of other holes to build a sub 30 tower. I'd say this one needs to be in the 550-650ft range

Honestly I don't see anything ever being built in Sacramento over 500 feet in height.

There just isn't a market in Sacramento for high rise office buildings. There are only so many lobbyists and law firms in Sacramento and there just isn't enough private companies that want to lease high rise office space. The state requires large floor plates that are more conducive to suburban office parks.

Unfortunately Sacramento missed the boat on residential towers with the epic failure of "The Towers" and "Aura." I give John Saca credit for trying and coming close. But banks don't seem inclined to lend for such projects in Sacramento.

Whether Cal PERS ever builds their proposal at 301 CM remains to be seen. I personally think there will eventually be a parking garage at that site, (just a hunch). The Vanir Tower is rumored to be considering adding floors to their 26 story proposal, but even if it gets built (and that's a big "if") it won't be anywhere near 500 feet in height.

So what would it take to reach 500 feet? I have no idea. I remember during the economic downturn that Sacramento was ready to break ground on shovel ready residential towers when the economy improved. Well the economy improved and still there's nothing. It all leads me to conclude Sacramento's very modest skyline with continue to languish in mediocrity for a long time.

[urban_encounter]

Given the city's track record for successfully building high-rise condos, none. But it's picking up momentum.

I think the city council will overturn the Planning Commision. Just a hunch.

[Majin]

I think the city council will overturn the Planning Commision. Just a hunch.

Based on what? No chance they overturn. This isnt Fargo's council (which 100% would of overturned). The only person who will vote against this is Ashby and I hope steinberg hangs the vote around her neck.

[LandofFrost]

Bunch of stuff being built on R street.

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee403/landoffrost/Mobile%20Uploads/3C50DF94-6C6D-418C-BAEA-735E7CE001F5_zpsqvpo7ueb.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/landoffrost/media/Mobile%20Uploads/3C50DF94-6C6D-418C-BAEA-735E7CE001F5_zpsqvpo7ueb.jpg.html)

New Italian Place next to Artist Lofts.

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee403/landoffrost/Mobile%20Uploads/34588073-C35A-4DC8-8E2D-9BC00F4EE1CD_zpsef3trtf8.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/landoffrost/media/Mobile%20Uploads/34588073-C35A-4DC8-8E2D-9BC00F4EE1CD_zpsef3trtf8.jpg.html)

Architecture firm Near Fox and Goose.

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee403/landoffrost/Mobile%20Uploads/729C1F53-CC35-4476-8C37-FB220621D02D_zpszdxp4pem.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/landoffrost/media/Mobile%20Uploads/729C1F53-CC35-4476-8C37-FB220621D02D_zpszdxp4pem.jpg.html)

Burned down Ice Block getting town down.

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee403/landoffrost/Mobile%20Uploads/B6DBE041-60EA-45A6-9D0D-92A936ECCED8_zpsuibsufmq.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/landoffrost/media/Mobile%20Uploads/B6DBE041-60EA-45A6-9D0D-92A936ECCED8_zpsuibsufmq.jpg.html)

New Homes being built across the street from Ice Block

http://i1226.photobucket.com/albums/ee403/landoffrost/Mobile%20Uploads/453BA874-F509-4274-98FB-6D84AB0419D7_zpscblsxlto.jpg (http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/landoffrost/media/Mobile%20Uploads/453BA874-F509-4274-98FB-6D84AB0419D7_zpscblsxlto.jpg.html)

New something... no idea, with original south facing wall.

[urban_encounter]

Based on what? No chance they overturn. This isnt Fargo's council (which 100% would of overturned). The only person who will vote against this is Ashby and I hope steinberg hangs the vote around her neck.

I'm curious to see how Hansen votes...?

[Pistola916]

The proposed 6-story Fort Sutter Hotel is being appealed to city council this week. 6-stories!

[LandofFrost]

The proposed 6-story Fort Sutter Hotel is being appealed to city council this week. 6-stories!


Does that mean someone is contesting it? Why? It's not old enough to be a historic building and it's completely surrounded by huge buildings.

[snfenoc]

According to the SBJ, a union is appealing the proposal. Just a typical strong-arm tactic - probably to ensure unionized labor at the hotel. They'll have their stupid say, the council may or may not ask for a concession or two. Regardless, this'll be a rubber stamp job. Approved. Sadly, these annoying hiccups are just part of the process. Vote libertarian.

This proposal and Yamanee are both really nice. I hope they happen. But I doubt NO votes from the city council will derail them. Nope. If they fail, Sacramento's poor-ass economy will be the culprit.

[NickB1967]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2015/12/09/petrovich-renames-curtis-pk-vill-adds-dollar-store.html


Turns out Petrovich was not bluffing... Curtis park is getting a discount grocery story and a dollar store .... hahahhahahah. The NIMBYs actually managed to make their neighborhood much much worse. Classic.

Luddite activists don't understand economic reality. Who knew?

[wburg]

Does that mean someone is contesting it? Why? It's not old enough to be a historic building and it's completely surrounded by huge buildings.

The building on the corner is old enough to be a historic building (it's 95 years old, generally a building has to be 50 or older to possibly be historic--the one behind it is a 1980s tilt-up and clearly not historic), and was identified as a historic building in a survey back in the 90s and the Sutter EIR, but Paragary found a consultant willing to say it wasn't historic anymore. But this appeal, as snefnoc mentions, is coming from the hotel employee union, and they haven't produced a statement regarding why they have appealed the decision. I don't think the height is an issue, I think it's a few feet over the max for that zone but not by much. Randy Paragary's name carries a lot of weight and Ron Vrilakas is one of the city's most respected architects. The item was continued to the 31st of May according to the staff report on the city council agenda page.

[Korey]

Luddite activists don't understand economic reality. Who knew?

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article61324667.html

There won't be a Grocery Outlet on that site. The price of the new homes and the economics of the surrounding area mean Petrovich (and BlackPine) would be able to get much more $ with a more "upscale" mix of tenants. $ doesn't lie, he thought he could squeeze more with the gas station, council called his bluff.

I live in OP so I'd like this shopping center to get built. A gas station won't affect me negatively as it isn't in my immediate area, but I'm OK with Curtis Park putting its foot down on this issue. The proposal was already watered down enough from what it could be.

[urban_encounter]

The building on the corner is old enough to be a historic building (it's 95 years old, generally a building has to be 50 or older to possibly be historic--the one behind it is a 1980s tilt-up and clearly not historic), and was identified as a historic building in a survey back in the 90s and the Sutter EIR, but Paragary found a consultant willing to say it wasn't historic anymore. But this appeal, as snefnoc mentions, is coming from the hotel employee union, and they haven't produced a statement regarding why they have appealed the decision. I don't think the height is an issue, I think it's a few feet over the max for that zone but not by much. Randy Paragary's name carries a lot of weight and Ron Vrilakas is one of the city's most respected architects. The item was continued to the 31st of May according to the staff report on the city council agenda page.


I always chuckle when people in Sacramento refer to a building as being "historic". That's not to say that there aren't buildings with unique character or architectural significance for Sacramento and California that deserve to be preserved. But I think the word "historic" is used far too often in Sacramento.


Just my opinion.

[wburg]

Why Sacramento in particular? It doesn't matter whether a building is in Sacramento, Wichita, Juneau or Hoboken, 50 years is the generally accepted minimum threshold for a building to be considered historic. Of course, it takes more than just being old to be eligible--a building also has to be significant. Big cities tend to have strong preservation programs: it's small towns that don't consider their historic places to be worthy of consideration. So when people complain that a place is too obsessed with history, I consider that person a victim of small-town thinking.

[LandofFrost]

R street is on a roll.


http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article78508567.html


New retail and housing on the corner of 11th and R across from the Fox and Goose. They are only keeping the shell, but having walked into that building randomly once, it was basically and empty warehouse.

It has been owned by the Larson family for a very very long time and sold in 2014 for almost $3,000,000 to an LLC. I can't imagine that, with that amount of money, they will just be sitting on it. That's the second large lot on R street to sell for close to three mil.

[UnclearColt]

Of course, it takes more than just being old to be eligible--a building also has to be significant.

Based on what I've seen, preservationists use that word "significant" rather loosely.

[wburg]

And "demolitionists" use that word "significant" rather rigidly--"if it's inconvenient, it's not significant."

The hotel project and this other project at 11th & R Street share the same architect, and it's interesting to note that he's taking a different approach with the two projects. 11th & R is already a listed landmark, and they're reutilizing all of the exterior walls (the interior is primarily open space on one side, and the other side was converted to a theater in the 1990s, so probably not much interior to speak of other than the roof trusses) so it's definitely in the "adaptive reuse" category, but I think this looks pretty good, and appropriate given the industrial setting of R Street. I suppose, given my druthers, I would have liked to see an approach more like this on 28th and R Street, utilizing the 95 year old building combined with a new building on the back or, at the very least, utilizing the facade. The architect mentioned that this is a wood and stucco building rather than masonry, so there are more limitations with that approach. If the building had been listed prior to this project coming up, the calculations might have worked out differently, but they still might have worked out to the project's benefit.

[snfenoc]

The SBJ hosted their "Redefining the Core" event today:

For those of you who wonder why Sacramento doesn't sprout housing units like zits on a 15 year old's forehead, this comes from a report on today's meeting:


EXCLUSIVE: ​Real estate heavy hitters detail trends in downtown development
May 20, 2016, 1:45pm PDT

Sacramento construction costs resemble Bay Area — though rents, fees much smaller

One of the biggest challenges facing the city is that costs to build here are comparable to the Bay Area although fees are lower and rents are significantly lower. That makes it harder for a project to pencil out, said John Dangberg, Sacramento assistant city manager.

“That creates a challenge,” he said.
http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/05/20/real-estate-heavy-hitters-detail-trends.html

[enigma99a]

The SBJ hosted their "Redefining the Core" event today:

For those of you who wonder why Sacramento doesn't sprout housing units like zits on a 15 year old's forehead, this comes from a report on today's meeting:

On the other hand, many are looking to move here because of the cheaper cost of living.

[urban_encounter]

The SBJ hosted their "Redefining the Core" event today:

For those of you who wonder why Sacramento doesn't sprout housing units like zits on a 15 year old's forehead, this comes from a report on today's meeting:

I'm curious what rents they would need to collect to "pencil out" considering some of the outrageous rents in Sacramento's central city?

You would think the city of Sacramento would streamline the process and make it cheaper for developers. That combined with cheaper costs of land might help.

Although as I said earlier,, I seriously doubt that there will ever be a strictly residential tower built in Sacramento since banks are unwilling to take a chance on the market. A project that involves anything other than wood or prefab construction is probably a non starter. The exception may be Yamanee in Midtown. Sacramento really needs to help Yamanee succeed so it encourages banks and developers to push the envelop with future projects in Sacramento's central city.

[BillSimmons]

Based on what I've seen, preservationists use that word "significant" rather loosely.

Like Capitol Towers...

[nalmak]

As someone looking to move to Sacramento (or San Diego), in the next year, these developments are much needed. Outside of downtown, its pretty bland (exception Folsom and Carmichael. Can't count West Sac "Mills" yet). Would love to see other areas develop more.

I understand having a suburb full of KB Homes, and Toll Brothers houses next to each other, but not 6-8 areas. That's my one gripe on Sac, is if your not in downtown, your in suburbia in all directions. But money talks.

[wburg]

So if land and fees are cheaper, but construction costs are comparable (materials cost, labor cost, and environmental regulations being relatively consistent throughout California), building here is still cheaper. Can't see past the paywall--what is the suggested course of action? (My guess: Reduced regulation & expedited project review)

[ltsmotorsport]

While it may be cheaper than the Bay Area, the lenders also know there's more money to be made from projects there rather than here. Therefore, more money is available to lend there, and more projects proposed/get built there. It's a game played for money against time, where the winner gets to make the most money the sooner they open the doors. If you can make more money in location A over location B, you go to A because a lender will look more favorably on your project.

This is all not to say it is impossible here, just harder, with scrutiny by lenders being that much more intense. Of course our market can absorb what has been proposed, and many more projects, but only so much money will come here (see above).

This is especially important to consider when seeing larger projects such as Yamanee and Sac Commons. These are larger projects from developers with ties to money outside of Sacramento. If we truly want more central city housing and residents (of all income levels), these projects must be supported by everyone who says they want downtown and midtown to thrive. Showing these projects can not only be approved, but are supported by the community, says a lot about the maturity of the city's residents and invites more investment in housing developments for the city in the future.

[UnclearColt]

Like Capitol Towers...

But it was designed by all these master architects! Something something mid-century modern! /s

[Majin]

While it may be cheaper than the Bay Area, the lenders also know there's more money to be made from projects there rather than here. Therefore, more money is available to lend there, and more projects proposed/get built there. It's a game played for money against time, where the winner gets to make the most money the sooner they open the doors. If you can make more money in location A over location B, you go to A because a lender will look more favorably on your project.

This is all not to say it is impossible here, just harder, with scrutiny by lenders being that much more intense. Of course our market can absorb what has been proposed, and many more projects, but only so much money will come here (see above).

This is especially important to consider when seeing larger projects such as Yamanee and Sac Commons. These are larger projects from developers with ties to money outside of Sacramento. If we truly want more central city housing and residents (of all income levels), these projects must be supported by everyone who says they want downtown and midtown to thrive. Showing these projects can not only be approved, but are supported by the community, says a lot about the maturity of the city's residents and invites more investment in housing developments for the city in the future.

So far I have not seen any evidence the city and business leaders are nothing but supportive (in the KJ era). The residents seem for the most part supportive with their wallets besides the vocal minority old guard, but who cares if the projects get built and are successful?

[Pistola916]

Rumor has it Vanir Tower to go to Planning Commission this summer. Hopefully we see a more striking and taller design.

http://livinginurbansac.blogspot.com/2016/05/vanir-tower-re-activated.html?m=1

[Korey]

The wood frames are going up for the next phase of Park Moderns townhomes in West Sac. Barn is almost done, but no real landscaping around it yet.

I saw a decent amount of dirt moving around at Township 9, anyone know what's going on there? Just infrastructure work or any pending development?

Also, I saw the cut for G to get extended to 5th and 6th streets. When will 5th and 6th open btw?

The bridge from Curtis Park Village to Sac City is almost done, will be a great view spot.

Rumor has it Vanir Tower to go to Planning Commission this summer. Hopefully we see a more striking and taller design.

http://livinginurbansac.blogspot.com/2016/05/vanir-tower-re-activated.html?m=1

With the Arena hotel/condos, the J St streetwall is going to look great.

[urban_encounter]

Rumor has it Vanir Tower to go to Planning Commission this summer. Hopefully we see a more striking and taller design.

http://livinginurbansac.blogspot.com/2016/05/vanir-tower-re-activated.html?m=1

I'm skeptical that Vanir will ever get built. But like you said, hopefully the new proposal is taller than the first proposal. Even an additional four stories would help an otherwise mediocre design.

[Pistola916]

I'm skeptical that Vanir will ever get built. But like you said, hopefully the new proposal is taller than the first proposal. Even an additional four stories would help an otherwise mediocre design.

I feel the opposite. Vanir will get built. It's the Metropolitan I am more skeptical. The city has shown, albeit in a glacier pace, that it can construct office-specific high-rises (621, 500 capitol mall) Residential towers not so much.

[ltsmotorsport]

So far I have not seen any evidence the city and business leaders are nothing but supportive (in the KJ era). The residents seem for the most part supportive with their wallets besides the vocal minority old guard, but who cares if the projects get built and are successful?

Good and bad news about recent projects, including Yamanee: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/city-beat/article79432667.html

[Majin]

Good and bad news about recent projects, including Yamanee: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/city-beat/article79432667.html

Where is the bad news?

[Korey]

Whole Foods and Crystal Ice not starting yet maybe?

[urban_encounter]

I feel the opposite. Vanir will get built. It's the Metropolitan I am more skeptical. The city has shown, albeit in a glacier pace, that it can construct office-specific high-rises (621, 500 capitol mall) Residential towers not so much.

I agree about the Metropolitan. Highrise residential towers that aren't part of a mixed use project are unlikely in Downtown Sacramento.

[BillSimmons]

Good and bad news about recent projects, including Yamanee: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/city-beat/article79432667.html

Our very own hindrance to development making an appearance!

[wburg]

Whole Foods and Crystal Ice not starting yet maybe?

Whole Foods hasn't started yet, but the residential portion of Crystal Ice is going vertical, and the office portion (using the old Orchard Supply wall) is under construction. The fire was a huge setback to the project but the new building design was submitted and looks interesting--maybe just disappointed they didn't add more housing on the additional floors! Looks like some kind of site prep is going on at 19th & Q Street/20th & Q Street for the SKK housing planned there.

[ltsmotorsport]

Our very own hindrance to development making an appearance!

Relevant portion of the article for the Yamanee appeal:

For now, developers appear to be racing to build homes, shops and restaurants in the central city. Hansen, Mayor Kevin Johnson and other city leaders have touted an initiative to attract 10,000 units of housing to the central city over the next decade.

Incremental steps are being taken to reach that goal, including the planning commission’s May 12 approval of midtown’s tallest residential structure.

Yamanee, a 178-foot tower at 25th and J streets, received mixed reviews from neighborhood activists and preservationists. Some have lauded it as an architectural jewel that will attract new residents to the midtown grid, while others argued that a building of its height belongs downtown. The plans call for the building to include 134 condos with large patios and fireplaces that face inside and out, much like the lanais found in Hawaiian homes. The rooftop, 13 stories above J Street, would include a gym, sun deck and lap pool.

“We must look inward and upward when contemplating new development in Sacramento,” Julie Murphy, co-chair of the nearby Marshall School/New Era Park Neighborhood Association, told the planning commission.

However, central city historian William Burg has appealed the planning commission’s approval, calling for a full City Council review of the project in the coming weeks. In approving the tower, planning commissioners are allowing the developer to exceed the neighborhood’s height limit by more than 100 feet. Burg said he is concerned the approval opens the door to developers seeking to build tall buildings in other neighborhoods, including East Sacramento, Land Park and Curtis Park.

“The ‘significant community benefit’ justification for Yamanee is based on design aesthetics, housing, environmentally friendly features and transit orientation, but a project that fits within the existing height limit could provide all of the purported benefits to a similar degree,” he said.


I just don't understand the fear of height, and it's not even 200 feet tall. If the project were shorter and had similar qualities, much more property would have had to be bought and a bulkier building proposed, taking out more of the existing urban fabric. Cities are also living systems that change over time, especially along commercial corridors and when neighborhoods are so protected by many laws and policies, such as historic districts.

[BillSimmons]

I just think it's funny that the primary reasoning he gave (at least from what can be gleaned from this article) is a general fear of tall buildings sprouting up all over the city! Can you imagine?!? It would be CHAOS! Next thing you know there's gonna be a skyscraper in every neighborhood!

[Korey]

Whole Foods hasn't started yet, but the residential portion of Crystal Ice is going vertical, and the office portion (using the old Orchard Supply wall) is under construction. The fire was a huge setback to the project but the new building design was submitted and looks interesting--maybe just disappointed they didn't add more housing on the additional floors! Looks like some kind of site prep is going on at 19th & Q Street/20th & Q Street for the SKK housing planned there.

Shame about the fire but I agree the new design doesn't look terrible. I haven't been in that area in a bit, or at least didn't see behind Safeway. Last I saw was stuff moving around for the SKK project (or at least I thought); thanks for the update!

If CADA can get Westminster and their Site 21 up, think of what a 5 block walk from 16th street station will get you to. Not a lot of highrises this cycle but the city's looking up! Hopefully we can fly under the radar for a bit longer before the Portland-esque hype machine ruins things.

[Korey]

I just think it's funny that the primary reasoning he gave (at least from what can be gleaned from this article) is a general fear of tall buildings sprouting up all over the city! Can you imagine?!? It would be CHAOS! Next thing you know there's gonna be a skyscraper in every neighborhood!

There are plenty of places something that high can go. Downtown would love to have it. It'd probably be pretty profitable to build a highrise in Greenwich Village but that ain't happening.

[Pistola916]

I find it hard to believe that of all the projects approved so far, the Whole Foods mixed-use complex might be the last one to break ground. They were the first ones to gain approval. Are they really going to wait until the new parking garage on 21st and Capitol is completed. I thought these projects were going to be build simultaneously.

[creamcityleo79]

There are plenty of places something that high can go. Downtown would love to have it. It'd probably be pretty profitable to build a highrise in Greenwich Village but that ain't happening.

This is an interesting point. While I don't agree with wburg in this situation, I HIGHLY respect his intellect, point of view, and thought process. I don't think we should bash him and simplify it to "fear of tall buildings". It's about the neighborhood...and the character of the neighborhood...and what impact this high-rise building will have on that character. Again, I don't agree with him. But, I respect his opinions and his intentions!

[wburg]

I find it hard to believe that of all the projects approved so far, the Whole Foods mixed-use complex might be the last one to break ground. They were the first ones to gain approval. Are they really going to wait until the new parking garage on 21st and Capitol is completed. I thought these projects were going to be build simultaneously.

The developer on the project owns the building across the street and uses the current structure on 21st and L as their parking garage--they want to build the new parking structure first so their employees won't be without a place to park while the Whole Foods and apartments building is under construction. Kind of like the Co-Op project at 28th & R Street--they built the parking structure to replace the DHA lot before starting on the Co-Op itself--which looks like it's not far from completion, by the way.

[BillSimmons]

There are plenty of places something that high can go. Downtown would love to have it. It'd probably be pretty profitable to build a highrise in Greenwich Village but that ain't happening.

The obvious problem with that logic is that the owner/developer don't own a property on the other side of 16th street to build that project. It is where it is. It's not going to significantly change the character of the neighborhood.

This is a great project for Sacramento. It will provide some much-needed housing to a part of the city that everyone unaimously agrees is in serious need for more housing. A high-rise residential project succeeding in Midtown should open up more possibilities for these kinds of projects to work in downtown as well.

[urban_encounter]

I just don't understand the fear of height, and it's not even 200 feet tall. If the project were shorter and had similar qualities, much more property would have had to be bought and a bulkier building proposed, taking out more of the existing urban fabric. Cities are also living systems that change over time, especially along commercial corridors and when neighborhoods are so protected by many laws and policies, such as historic districts.

Yeah I would tend to agree with you. I'm not sure the people who are voicing the most concern for the relative modest height really have that much experience with urban environments outside of Sacramento.

A midrise like this project definitely fits in with the fabric of Sacramento's Mid-Town in that location. Secondly, I would be more interested in how Yamanre will help liven up the surrounding neighborhood which is where I think Julie Murphy is coming from. It's certainly a much more appealing project than another subdivision in Natomas.

This project is too tall to be wood or modular construction so it would likely be reinforced concrete and/or steel. That could be significant step in helping to get other projects of similar height (or taller) off the ground in Sacramento.

The question is whether they can get the project underway and completed before the economy starts its inevitable decline again?

[Korey]

The obvious problem with that logic is that the owner/developer don't own a property on the other side of 16th street to build that project. It is where it is. It's not going to significantly change the character of the neighborhood.

Yes well exactly, the developer has a plot of land in Midtown. They can try to extract as much money as possible from it by developing within the guidelines or sell to someone else. Could they extract more money if they get a height exemption and build Yamanee as proposed? Probably, but that's the rub, should they get the exemption? The city doesn't owe the developer money, it's interest should be in the health of the neighborhood and city. I just don't see why this project is special enough for an exemption.

Yeah I would tend to agree with you. I'm not sure the people who are voicing the most concern for the relative modest height really have that much experience with urban environments outside of Sacramento.

It's not the height by itself (I recognize a supertall this isn't) it's the erosion of the character of the neighborhood. I've lived in an Oakland neighborhood with twice the density of midtown where anything over 8 stories wouldn't fly. I've lived in DC where the strict height limits haven't robbed them of a desirable urban core. I think Wburg's a Chicago native, no?

Probably the urban environment Sacramentans have seen the most is SF, and we all know how the low-rise neighborhoods there almost define the city, much more than say, SOMA or Mission Bay.

[snfenoc]

Midtown is not a museum. It's subject to change. Those height restrictions are draconian; and as demand for urban living increases, they should be revised upward. This may, in fact be a precedent-setting project...so what?

If I had the money to afford a high(er) rise dwelling, my preference would be Midtown over Downtown...it's nicer. That may be what the developer is thinking.

[Pistola916]

It's too expensive to build downtown (and the railyards) nor does it have the cache of Midtown. There are plenty of midtown's across the U.S. where there are mid-rises to high-rises outside the downtown core. I don't believe that because a building is too tall that it has to be in the CBD. Midtown is the extension of the urban core. The whole "it will create a precendent" is flawed. No one will propose a similar building in East Sac, Land Park, Curtis Park, and Oak Park. And if we happen to see higher end taller structures in Midtown, so be it. I'd be so against it along Capitol Ave but not on J street.

A 15-story, 178 foot high-rise would not destroy the neighborhood's character nor will it be a nuisance like the rowdy drunks that frequent the series of clubs in the area.

Would you prefer a club or a sex shop, how about a liquor store on that corner?

That's a nuisance! Not a very tall mid-rise condo building

[CAGeoNerd]

Personally I like the Yamanee project and think it's a good thing for that part of midtown. It's very different putting a building like that in the middle some of the old 2-3 story residential homes in midtown, but right on J Street is a good place, with the apartment building across J street accompanying it. Will it stand out? Yes! But that's not a bad thing. It will anchor that part of town, and the benefits of having more residents in that neighborhood. This is similar to the Sutter Medical Center which rose up and totally changed the Sutter District, it anchors that part of town now. Anyway, I hope it gets built, and encourages more projects along J street.

[urban_encounter]

It's not the height by itself (I recognize a supertall this isn't) it's the erosion of the character of the neighborhood. I've lived in an Oakland neighborhood with twice the density of midtown where anything over 8 stories wouldn't fly. I've lived in DC where the strict height limits haven't robbed them of a desirable urban core. I think Wburg's a Chicago native, no?

I wasn't directing my comment at W. Burg (exclusively) although admittedly given his appeal of the project and the way I phrased my comment I could certainly see that it looks like I was singling him out. But I do think there's a very parochial view taken by some in Sacramento in regards to midtown development. Given the location of that proposal at 25th and J street, across J street from another midrise (if memory serves me correctly) I don't think that the Yamanee proposal even comes close to risking the character of the neighborhood. I lived many years in mid town Sacramento myself. It's been a neighborhood in constant flux for awhile but has always retained its character and charm.

Honestly, above tree level does the modest height of that proposal threaten the fabric of that community? I don't think so. I think how it blends on the ground floor on that street corner is more important to getting the project right as opposed to the height.

[Korey]

All good replies folks. Yes I want midtown to continue to evolve too, not interested in encasing it in amber. Sutter Medical is indeed quite tall (and I personally like the architecture of it although I've heard others disagree) but it's also pushed up against the freeway. I'd be ok with taller stuff on the West side of Alhambra in East Sac or Broadway in Land Park. The hotel Paragary's trying to build will help to create a cool little node there.

I know other places have highrises outside of their CBD/Core but we're not a 8+ million metro and I'd like to see some concentration of highrises, not Houston-lite with crap scattered around (not that Houston doesn't have a legit skyline).

If Yamanee is going to be built in Midtown then yeah that's one of the better locations. I'm not a fan of the tall apartment building across the street but it will help blunt the effect of a lone tower.

I also agree that how the base interacts with the street is critical. If that's done well then I'll be happy. Still, think the project should be shorter. And that's coming from someone who does Majin-like want to see Tokyamento.

[LandofFrost]

That empty piano bar between 16th and 17th on J street is getting an expensive remodel including rooftop deck and a really great tenant. The back portion of the building is going to have huge steal beams installed and a multi story multi unit apartment building added to it in the future.

[Majin]

That was quick

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/02/union-group-drops-effort-to-block-paragary-hotel.html

[Pistola916]

That was quick

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/02/union-group-drops-effort-to-block-paragary-hotel.html


"Paragary and project representatives have not said when the hotel is likely to be built. Among other steps, they may need to find a hotel brand to affiliate with. It’s also possible that Paragary will wait until the neighboring B Street Theatre project is complete"

Great. Now it looks like they won't start construction for at least two years.

It's the same shit with the Whole Foods project. They're going to wait until the parking garage is finished.

The Planning Commission should require developers to begin construction with their projects within 1 year after gaining approval.

[Majin]

I don't know whats going on with the whole foods project, but the last part of the article is just speculation. I agree in the general sense that projects take way too long to start here. But it looks like the city itself is not to blame with these projects, all of them are getting approved and in a timely fashion.

[ozone]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article83805932.html

Central city historian William Burg filed the appeal against the 178-foot structure days after it was approved. He will make a presentation at tonight’s public meeting to argue his case.

“I’m optimistic,” he said of his chances. “I hope the City Council will give this due consideration. And I think that I am going to have a lot of company tonight.”

Burg filed the appeal as a private citizen because “strategically it’s simpler to work as an individual,” but has the support from some community and neighborhood groups, he said.

In addition to opposing the height of the structure, Burg said he is concerned with the process that allowed it to win a deviation from the 2035 General Plan policy guidelines for the area.


This self-appointed purveyor of good urban planning and taste and local blowhard has soured every community-based group he's been involved in -including this online forum with his long-winded and completely disingenuous NIMBY arguments. Hey it's a free country but I wish he'd just stick to documenting history and trying to save truly historically significant buildings rather than getting involved in things like this. I'm ignoring the guy and hope he just goes away.

[snfenoc]

Appeal rejected. Bye Felicia.

[BillSimmons]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article83805932.html



This self-appointed purveyor of good urban planning and taste and local blowhard has soured every community-based group he's been involved in -including this online forum with his long-winded and completely disingenuous NIMBY arguments. Hey it's a free country but I wish he'd just stick to documenting history and trying to save truly historically significant buildings rather than getting involved in things like this. I'm ignoring the guy and hope he just goes away.

It's unfortunate because the man has some very interesting things to say when he sticks to what he knows. I have learned a lot about the history of Sacramento neighborhoods like the West End and Oak Park from wburg.

On the other hand, I have yet to come across another person on this board that I more vehemently disagree with on nearly every subject when it comes to urban planning and city development. Any time I see a project that sounds interesting get proposed, I see something about him appealing it.

[urban_encounter]

It's good to read that the appeal was rejected.

I still think it's unlikely that it will ever be built but hopefully I'm wrong. If built, this project could really pave the way for future high rise / mid rise projects in Sacramento's central city.

[LandofFrost]

I hope this project gets built. A shorter building would have been a better fit but overall the project is part of what is missing in the Sacramento housing market. I bet they will wait to see how the new condos next to the arena sell first.

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

I hope this project gets built. A shorter building would have been a better fit but overall the project is part of what is missing in the Sacramento housing market. I bet they will wait to see how the new condos next to the arena sell first.

I think the units next to the arena are still going to be rentals, not condos. At least, that's the last news I heard on that project.

Let's hope they build this damn thing in Midtown. We should aspire to more than trying to "save" some of the worst mistakes from our past and better spend our energy on things that will improve the city, like this project (and its alley activation and its increasing of Midtown's population).

[Majin]

I told you guys this a pro development council, nothing like the Fargo years. I'm surprised Ashby didn't vote it down though.

With that said, like everyone else, I really hope this thing gets built. I mean, at this point I really don't understand what is holding back the housing market. Rents/Prices are at housing boom highs, actually rents are probably way beyond boom era highs. KJ has his 10,000 unit downtown (or the entire grid itself) initiative by 2025, yet it seems like by 2017 VERY VERY few of that 10,000 units will even get built, definitely less than 1,000 of that 10,000. Steinberg really better somehow make some serious changes and attract more developers to the grid otherwise by 2025 we are going to be WAY OFF that figure. Probably less than 50% at this pace. Extremely disappointing and I'd consider KJ a failure in this regard. He definitely helped raised the profile of Sacramento and of course greatly improved K street with the Arena and the Hotel tower but he somehow really dropped the ball on bringing more housing to the grid, especially the CBD.

[Korey]

I don't think it's a Sacramento thing. Having lived in Oakland I follow their development closely and same thing there, except with double the rent prices and way more demand.

I'd rather have the buildings from this cycle (Legado, Powerhouse, WAL, Eviva, Ice Blocks, etc.) than the couple mid-rises and three highrises (STRS, 621 CM, 500 CM) from last cycle.

The pressure is building, eventually we'll get our high rises. Land in the grid is getting too valuable for anything else. What can the city really do to induce more high rises though?

[snfenoc]

Although Sacramento has the demand, it does not have the Bay Area's ROI. Developers have to fight for investment. Being a second or third choice (due to ROI issues), Sacramento developers have to fight for money with one hand tied behind their backs. That's my opinion of the proble, for what it's worth.

[Majin]

Although Sacramento has the demand, it does not have the Bay Area's ROI. Developers have to fight for investment. Being a second or third choice (due to ROI issues), Sacramento developers have to fight for money with one hand tied behind their backs. That's my opinion of the proble, for what it's worth.

Sacramento has always had lower ROI yet somehow where are ~2.5 million people in the area anyway. Plus things ARE getting built in the grid, the pace is just VERY slow compared to the demand.

And as you guys know I'm very against suburban development, but even the suburbs not much is getting built. If you drive through Natomas some of the housing lots that went unfinished during the bust/levee issues are starting up again but VERY small compared to the boom. Also, when you drive through the houses under construction, all of them are sold even though they arent even half way built yet. If even suburban building is extremely slow yet demand is high something is very wrong.

[snfenoc]

My point isn't that Sacramento projects can't or won't receive investment dollars...it's that Sacramento developments, in some cases, are lower on the priority list. It's a longer, harder fight for Sacramento developers to win crapital. You guys are living in the shadow of the Bay Area.

[urban_encounter]

Although Sacramento has the demand, it does not have the Bay Area's ROI. Developers have to fight for investment. Being a second or third choice (due to ROI issues), Sacramento developers have to fight for money with one hand tied behind their backs. That's my opinion of the proble, for what it's worth.

I think that you're 100% correct. That may change at some point but I doubt it.
Certainly not before the country slips into another recession. San Francisco casts a very larg shadow across Northern California and unfortunately for Sacramento, that will never change.

[Majin]

Sorry but as a leader the Mayor of Sacramento should not just accept that.

[Korey]

There's enough capital (and low rates) out there even if others are first in line; the financing is not happening for other reasons. It's really only SF and LA (barely) that are building high rises this cycle. SJ, SD, Oakland each have a couple projects and that's about it.

Majin, I've also noticed the low level suburban development. No Cordova Hills, no Folsom south of 50, no further EG sprawl south, Roseville west, etc. Good for us suburban haters but still an interesting sign of the times. It's not like building homogeneous single family stucco homes hasn't penciled out in the past or is subordinate to SF development.

[snfenoc]

One may (and rightfully so) argue that developers, builders and investors alike are starving the Sacramento market of housing to drive prices up toward the stratosphere....a cabal like OPEC, but with housing.

I think those low rates combined with the increasing money supply may be a culprit. If one thinks CPI is an accurate measure of inflation, he needs his head examined. If I'm a bank, I to want to invest large sums of money in projects that pay off at the highest rates to outpace inflation and take a healthy profit.

There is certainly a lot of crapital (too much) and low rates (too low) out there; and Sacramento may be attractive, but second or third in line to the SF area in terms of payoff.

Again, I think Sac will get some investment, regardless. BUT, again, it just isn't as attractive in terms of ROI. Now, if SF and the Bay Area start to run out of projects, and Sacramento's housing prices continue to rise, that crapital is gonna wanna go somewhere, so why not here?

Sadly, I fear people who'd really benefit from central city-living might get priced out.

God, I wish the government and the Fed would stop f**king with our money.

[Korey]

Raising rates to decrease money supply won't increase loan activity. The Fed should keep rates low while inflation isn't an issue, external countries/currencies will bitch but too bad. The problem is, even with super low rates and tons of capital floating around, very little is being lent out. Monetary policy is just a tool in the box, what we really need is a Congress that can actually function and pass policy for the good of our nation.

I agree, traditional CPI isn't a perfect measure of inflation, especially because the basket doesn't include autos, education costs, etc. Everyone has unique purchasing habits. But overall it's pretty obvious we don't have runaway inflation.

I wish there was some way to induce developers to build more, without going all commie on them. And this is as a homeowner who would benefit from restricted supply. But man, if they can't even get good middle class (not to mention low income) housing built in the bay with all of their wage and demand pressure, it doesn't look good for Sac.

I just don't look at it as a finite supply of capital where we lose if SF wins though, rather we are both suffering from the same overall market conditions (maybe they're Californian specific but I doubt it). But yeah, totally, SF is a more attractive market to build in with higher potential ROI.

[yolonative]

Raising rates to decrease money supply won't increase loan activity. The Fed should keep rates low while inflation isn't an issue, external countries/currencies will bitch but too bad. The problem is, even with super low rates and tons of capital floating around, very little is being lent out. Monetary policy is just a tool in the box, what we really need is a Congress that can actually function and pass policy for the good of our nation.

That's the Keynesian logic that contributed to the last recession.. Of course higher rates won't increase loan activity, they will promote savings and longer term investment instead. Loans will go out where the recipients are higher grade and mathematically worthy of the loan. But we are too far gone to flip the switch; once rates increase, the next bust is inevitable as everyone here seems aware is looming. Funny thing is, people think that this is how it naturally happens, but the volatile business cycle is probably more preventable than people realize. If only rates weren't artificially low for so long, we'd have healthier rates of lending that weren't as vulnerable to default and low grade. We'd have smaller booms and smaller busts.

Long story short, if there was less federal interference in monetary policy, we might not have obviously visible construction booms, but we'd have more steady construction rates, whether it be in SF or Sac or anywhere else. We'd have larger development projects say every couple years in Sac, no "Renaissance" like we are seeing now. But we also wouldn't have nearly decade-long droughts between skyscraper construction, as is the case today. That's my theory anyway.

[Pistola916]

the project got scaled down. Scheduled to break ground next year, so they say.

Updated design
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/8sk5bo/picture85090842/ALTERNATES/FREE_640/A9007_Powerhouse_45

Previous proposal
http://www.dreyfussblackford.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/A9007_Powerhouse_29-850x567.jpg

[enigma99a]

That's a bummer. Hopefully there is room to expand there if they come up with the remaining 30 million

[ltsmotorsport]

The original proposal is really what this city deserves. Just too bad the money didn't come around to make it happen. Like you said enigma, let hope it is a design with expansion in mind.

[Korey]

I really wish the money could have been found to do the original vision too. Does anyone know what's up with the cherry tree park Sakuramento was planning for that area? With the upgrades to the O Street bridge near Crocker, the Capital Mall and Old Sac connection they're building, and the Powerhouse area, we're actually making the best of the waterfront we have on the east side. Steinberg also seems to be wanting to push for more waterfront revitalization.

In other news:

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/24/cada-shelves-plans-for-condos-at-14th-and-n.html

Damn, I was actually going to email CADA the other day and see how I can get on an early list for this project. Loved the location.

[LandofFrost]

Damn, I was actually going to email CADA the other day and see how I can get on an early list for this project. Loved the location.[/QUOTE]


I feel like any time the term "condo" is used, there is 100% chance it will inevitably be changed to "apartment" or the project will just fall apart. (In Sacramento) I'm becoming a pessimist.

Downtown is becoming an area where a very few number of people own everything. I've been to many real estate seminars and economic classes and it always seems like mid rise, ownership housing should be a thing in Sacramento but it never happens. I think the real problem is that no one is willing to risk it. We need someone fearless to be the harbinger or maybe have a city prize to the first group that builds it.

I like the Mayors' plan for 10k new residents, but I don't think they should all be renters.

rant over , haha

[SacTownAndy]

Next steps in plan for new downtown state office buildings
Jun 29, 2016, 1:25pm PDT
Ben van der Meer
Staff Writer
Sacramento Business Journal


Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature on the new state budget paves the way for the largest new state building projects in Sacramento in more than a decade.

With $1.3 billion for three projects, the goal is to get at least one underway before Brown leaves office in early 2019, said Brian Ferguson, a spokesman for the state’s Department of General Services.

“Our preference is to do them all within the urban core,” Ferguson said. “We want them all to be accessible to the Capitol and to public transportation.”

The $1.3 billion includes:

– A new 650,000-square-foot office building to house about 2,800 employees currently in the aging state Resources and Bonderson buildings downtown;

– A new 205,000-square-foot office building for 1,100 employees in the Bateson building, another aging state structure

– Renovation or replacement of the Capitol’s eastern annex, which dates to the 1950s.


More info here: http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/29/next-steps-in-plan-for-new-downtown-state-office.html

[Majin]

How about we add actual housing units downtown instead of more massive office towers that do nothing to liven up the area past 5pm and do nothing to help with making rental cost affordable in the grid?

[wburg]

Sorry, the City Council seems to think that downtown Sacramento isn't ready for housing.

[Majin]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/30/mohannas-plan-11-story-mixed-use-project-in.html

Just waiting for wburg to file an appeal.

[Pistola916]

^
Another building that will never get built. Sigh.

[enigma99a]

Next steps in plan for new downtown state office buildings
Jun 29, 2016, 1:25pm PDT
Ben van der Meer
Staff Writer
Sacramento Business Journal





More info here: http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/29/next-steps-in-plan-for-new-downtown-state-office.html


Scares me actually. Could end up with 2 story buildings on 4 whole blocks

[enigma99a]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2016/06/30/mohannas-plan-11-story-mixed-use-project-in.html

Just waiting for wburg to file an appeal.

After Mohanna gets this one built, let's look at the Capitol Grand again :D

[enigma99a]

Speaking of Mohanna, maybe the K street towers could be next?

http://www.mohannadevelopment.com/#!downtownprojects/ctzx