Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[ozone]

No way a simple mid rise goes on this lot. Far too much money has already been sunk into it. They basically have a 70 million dollar piece of land right?

I did not say simple. I just don’t think it has to be a skyscraper. I forget what constitutes a mid rise but I believe buildings within the 15-25 floor range could turn a profit and make a major impact in the area even if they wouldn’t transform the skyline. I just have hated the last two skyscrapers put up on the mall and disliked the CIM proposal. It looked like more of same boring garbage. What ever they do there I prefer good design over height. Of course, both would be ideal.

[sactivity]

I did not say simple. I just don’t think it has to be a skyscraper. I forget what constitutes a mid rise but I believe buildings within the 15-25 floor range could turn a profit and make a major impact in the area even if they wouldn’t transform the skyline. I just have hated the last two skyscrapers put up on the mall and disliked the CIM proposal. It looked like more of same boring garbage. What ever they do there I prefer good design over height. Of course, both would be ideal.
I wouldn't mind the current design of it had a pyramidal/dome-ish/cone-head type of crown rather than the one they have now. Too asymmetrical. It looks stupid. I like the glass though.

[urban_encounter]

No way a simple mid rise goes on this lot. Far too much money has already been sunk into it. They basically have a 70 million dollar piece of land right?

Honestly given this market I would say nothing over 28 stories gets built and if I’m wagering money then I would say 12 to 16 stories for residential with a large component of parking. I think Cal PERS will want to monetize that site with as little risk as possible. Parking in such close proximity to the Golden 1 Center might do that.

Side note: Travis, thank you for your perspective of development in the central city. A lot of us are fans but few have your expertise or connections. I always appreciate reading your point of view.

[ltsmotorsport]

At this point I think it would be outstanding to keep the height of the project as it stands, though I fear we'll see a down-sized proposal in the future. I hope we don't, as there has been article after article lately about how the market could absorb (and really needs) large blocks of class A office space. For now, we have a damn good mixed-use proposal for a new-tallest that should (and again, hopefully) continue forward unchanged (or taller ;) ).

[Pistola916]

At this point I think it would be outstanding to keep the height of the project as it stands, though I fear we'll see a down-sized proposal in the future. I hope we don't, as there has been article after article lately about how the market could absorb (and really needs) large blocks of class A office space. For now, we have a damn good mixed-use proposal for a new-tallest that should (and again, hopefully) continue forward unchanged (or taller ;) ).

Even if it were to be downsized, I wish they can maintain the height to at least 435-450 feet. It would still be considered the tallest in the city.

[Sachornet]

There's a new proposal for a 5 story apartment building with 190 units near 3rd and S street: https://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article235650447.html

Some news on the CADA "Courtyard" project near 14th and O. Construction to start in Dec. 2020, 4 stories, 32-45 units: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article235685452.html

Also, this past Monday, they started moving some dirt around in the vacant lot on 10th and U. Hopefully this means that they are starting work on the 3 story apartment building with 21 units that HK3 proposed: https://www.hk3development.com/projects/10u-mixed-use/

[enigma99a]

Yesterday I noticed some excavation work starting on 7th just south of richards blvd. There is a 29 story tower supposed to be coming to the SW corner of Richards and 7th. Perhaps just demo work is starting and the actual construction is a while out

[CAGeoNerd]

Yesterday I noticed some excavation work starting on 7th just south of richards blvd. There is a 29 story tower supposed to be coming to the SW corner of Richards and 7th. Perhaps just demo work is starting and the actual construction is a while out

Some new state building right? I hope it would start soon but I don't think they've even released a design for that thing yet

[novatone82]

New Sac County courthouse construction slated for early 2020 start

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/09/29/new-sac-county-courthouse-constructionslated-for.html

[Sachornet]

By October 17, they will select the 3 final bridge designs for the I Street Bridge replacement.

Rob Turner from Sactown Magazine provides his thoughts in this piece: http://www.sactownmag.com/October-November-2019/Arch-de-Triumph/

[sactivity]

New Sac County courthouse construction slated for early 2020 start

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/09/29/new-sac-county-courthouse-constructionslated-for.html
I really hope it winds up looking better than the very un-inspiring drawings we've seen.

[innov8]

Colliers International Sacramento | Office Q3 2019

Sacramento's office market moves full speed ahead in the third quarter.

http://colliers-sacramento.com/MarketReports/2019_Q3_Office_Market_Report_FINAL.pdf

[TWAK]

I really hope it winds up looking better than the very un-inspiring drawings we've seen.
It must be a courtroom floorplan sorta thing...but did they really have to chose the same position and basic design as the federal courthouse? Yeesh.

[sactivity]

It must be a courtroom floorplan sorta thing...but did they really have to chose the same position and basic design as the federal courthouse? Yeesh.
I personally don't mind the positioning, etc.. it almost looks like twin towers... in fact, the federal courthouse has at least a more stately design... they should go the distance and make a duplicate. Or something completely different altogether.

[enigma99a]

Richards & 7th now has construction ongoing.. massive clearing and demo of existing buildings. (29 story Office of State Publishing Tower)

[Majin]

Richards & 7th now has construction ongoing.. massive clearing and demo of existing buildings. (29 story Office of State Publishing Tower)

I can't find any info on this. Link?

[innov8]

It may or may not be 29 floors.

Click here (https://www.bidnet.com/closed-government-contracts/4468-richards-boulevard-office-complex--rboc-?itemId=569550224) and then on Bid Related Documents on the right.

Submission of project proposals is the week of November 18th and the Agreement the week of March 16, 2020

[Bubb90]

It will not be 29 floors. Certain departments can't be housed in the same building. The plan is to have 2 or 4 buildings with a max height of 13 floors per building.

[urban_encounter]

They demolished the old stand alone leasing office at 601 CM in preparations for the Shornstein residential project. Having entitlements in hand made all the difference in the world because they seem to be moving quick by California (and Sacramento) standards.

[Majin]

It will not be 29 floors. Certain departments can't be housed in the same building. The plan is to have 2 or 4 buildings with a max height of 13 floors per building.

Where did you get this info?

[Majin]

They demolished the old stand alone leasing office at 601 CM in preparations for the Shornstein residential project. Having entitlements in hand made all the difference in the world because they seem to be moving quick by California (and Sacramento) standards.

Well I guess that is that for this property. I hope 10th and K happen at 15 floors and we stop building these sub-10 floor apartment buildings.

[Bubb90]

Where did you get this info?

From a very reliable source. I take back partly what I said. Its down to 3 equal towers, 4 equal towers or a 4 tower variation.

[SacTownAndy]

Non-soccer related news:

Sacramento exploring alternative to streetcar
https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/10/21/sacramento-exploring-alternative-to-streetcar.html

[Majin]

Non-soccer related news:

Sacramento exploring alternative to streetcar
https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/10/21/sacramento-exploring-alternative-to-streetcar.html

Well that is disappointing.

I don't think there is any way to more effectively use the money however for the purpose of inner city transport that is faster than light rail.

[ozone]

I’m not disappointed that the street car is not moving forward. It’s benefit to current residents of the central city was questionable. Shifting it into light-rail extensions is slightly better but it is won’t help much. I would rather have a cool looking bus system exclusive to the grid, with a very simple routes on priority lanes that takes passengers E-W Alhambra to DOCA/OldSac/Railyards and intersecting N-S route from Broadway north. One with an app and/or metro card use only so it’s prepaid before you get on. I’d also like them to move light rail off of K Street downtown, as they have talked about. The light rail stations there hurt businesses because of the noise, ugly and unattractive stations and type of people that hang around them off peak.

[urban_encounter]

The Sacramento Business Journal is reporting that Anthem United has submitted plans for a 153 unit residential project on the corner of 11th and J.

I’m excited to see this parcel finally being developed and it will help with increasing pedestrian traffic and higher density in the downtown core. Anthem is new to this market and have built a lot of projects in the northwest so this is a good test project for Anthem in this market.

That property has been an eyesore for a long time so lets hope this gets off the ground before the next economic downturn.

:cheers:

[enigma99a]

The Sacramento Business Journal is reporting that Anthem United has submitted plans for a 153 unit residential project on the corner of 11th and J.

I’m excited to see this parcel finally being developed and it will help with increasing pedestrian traffic and higher density in the downtown core. Anthem is new to this market and have built a lot of projects in the northwest so this is a good test project for Anthem in this market.

That property has been an eyesore for a long time so lets hope this gets off the ground before the next economic downturn.

:cheers:

Their website is almost 100% single family homes in places like Lincoln. Is this their first urban development?

[urban_encounter]

Their website is almost 100% single family homes in places like Lincoln. Is this their first urban development?


They’re based in Canada. If there’s a local office they might also build single family homes.

Here’s some of their other urban projects.

On their site they have some press links about acquiring the 11th & J property.

https://anthemproperties.com/residential/

[enigma99a]

Nice infill

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article236906928.html

https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/skiphs/picture236908313/alternates/FREE_480/CathedralSquare1.JPG

[urban_encounter]

Nice infill

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article236906928.html

https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/skiphs/picture236908313/alternates/FREE_480/CathedralSquare1.JPG



Agreed!

[sactivity]

Wasn't this supposed to be Saca's "Metropolitan"???

[enigma99a]

Wasn't this supposed to be Saca's "Metropolitan"???

No that is on the opposite side of J.

[Majin]

Nice infill

https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article236906928.html

https://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/skiphs/picture236908313/alternates/FREE_480/CathedralSquare1.JPG

:sleep:

[urban_encounter]

:sleep:

Majin,

You crack me up. :haha:

[sactivity]

I'm beginning to think the Wells Fargo tower will be the tallest building in Sacramento forever. Jesus!

[enigma99a]

I'm beginning to think the Wells Fargo tower will be the tallest building in Sacramento forever. Jesus!

This site was supposed to be a 25 story building. Was not too ambitious imho. Now we’re settling for a 6 story infill.

I work downtown and see what a shithole it is, so without creating a reason to be downtown, I think these kinds of projects are needed. But it just is depressing to see all of the prime spots used for these landscrapers.

[sactivity]

This site was supposed to be a 25 story building. Was not too ambitious imho. Now we’re settling for a 6 story infill.

I work downtown and see what a shithole it is, so without creating a reason to be downtown, I think these kinds of projects are needed. But it just is depressing to see all of the prime spots used for these landscrapers.

That's okay. With the railyards doubling the size of downtown there will be lots and lots of room for... ahem, more 6-story buildings!

[Korey]

That's okay. With the railyards doubling the size of downtown there will be lots and lots of room for... ahem, more 6-story buildings!

*Oprah Voice*

You get a Texas Donut! And you get a Texas Donut! Every lot gets a Donut!

[urban_encounter]

While I would certainly love to see some taller high quality towers built in Sacramento, I’m also happy to see increasing residential densities downtown, which will eventual help create a vibrant city center. Some of the most vibrant cities in the world were great places to live and work long before skyscrapers.

Residential skyscrapers will come only when the local market demands it (and lets face it, probably when San Francisco’s construction boom cools).

[sactivity]

While I would certainly love to see some taller high quality towers built in Sacramento, I’m also happy to see increasing residential densities downtown, which will eventual help create a vibrant city center. Some of the most vibrant cities in the world were great places to live and work long before skyscrapers.

Residential skyscrapers will come only when the local market demands it (and lets face it, probably when San Francisco’s construction boom cools).

Probably when San Francisco falls off into the ocean. Then Sac well have beach-front property.

[Korey]

I’m also happy to see increasing residential densities downtown, which will eventual help create a vibrant city center. Some of the most vibrant cities in the world were great places to live and work long before skyscrapers.

Agreed and I think all of us are really happy with the amount of small projects that have filled up the empty and underutilized spaces in the grid. This cycle has resulted in less height than the previous one, but definitely has added more bodies to the core.

Height seems inevitable in the long run, as less space remains available and the trend is towards relaxed zoning and regulation for these types of developments. The Bay is definitely an elephant in the room and it's white hot market has sucked up labor and expertise that might otherwise be available to work on a Sac project.

[novatone82]

Any news or opinions on the Sacramento zoo relocation?

[snfenoc]

CADA micro-unit project on O Street eyed for fall 2020 start
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
November 14, 2019

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/11/14/cada-micro-unit-project-on-o-street-eyed-for-fall.html?iana=hpmvp_sac_news_headline

Work could start within the next year on Capitol Area Development Authority’s bid at building a micro-unit apartment project.

CADA’s board signed off Wednesday on submitting an application for state tax-credit financing for a five-story, 56-unit project at 1322 O St.

Additional Information:

The CADA board had to act quickly to apply for the state tax-credit financing. The deadline to apply is this month.
Governor Newsom has made $500 million in tax-credit financing available in bid to push new housing construction. (I don't know if $500 million is enough??)
CADA will receive confirmation on whether this project will receive funding in January.
Originally, the building was only planned to have 30-40 units, but CADA thinks a larger project will hit a cash-flow sweet spot to make the project "pencil out" as affordable housing.
Williams & Paddon is the project designer.
Cross-laminated timbers will be used instead of old-growth trees. (Supposedly, this will make the project more "sustainable".)
Projected cost is $15.5 million
CADA looked to 19J as inspiration
Units will be around 320 square feet
Highest monthly rent will be $1172. (More projects like this one, please!)
1300 square feet of retail.
A rooftop community room and deck is planned.
The will be no parking.
Location is next to Sam's Market.
The Courtyard event space that is on the back part of lot will probably have to go. (Look out for preservationists!)


https://i.postimg.cc/Y2sQdPnv/Capture2.jpg

[Majin]

:sleep:

CADA micro-unit project on O Street eyed for fall 2020 start
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
November 14, 2019

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/11/14/cada-micro-unit-project-on-o-street-eyed-for-fall.html?iana=hpmvp_sac_news_headline



Additional Information:

The CADA board had to act quickly to apply for the state tax-credit financing. The deadline to apply is this month.
Governor Newsom has made $500 million in tax-credit financing available in bid to push new housing construction. (I don't know if $500 million is enough??)
CADA will receive confirmation on whether this project will receive funding in January.
Originally, the building was only planned to have 30-40 units, but CADA thinks a larger project will hit a cash-flow sweet spot to make the project "pencil out" as affordable housing.
Williams & Paddon is the project designer.
Cross-laminated timbers will be used instead of old-growth trees. (Supposedly, this will make the project more "sustainable".)
Projected cost is $15.5 million
CADA looked to 19J as inspiration
Units will be around 320 square feet
Highest monthly rent will be $1172. (More projects like this one, please!)
1300 square feet of retail.
A rooftop community room and deck is planned.
The will be no parking.
Location is next to Sam's Market.
The Courtyard event space that is on the back part of lot will probably have to go. (Look out for preservationists!)


https://i.postimg.cc/Y2sQdPnv/Capture2.jpg

[LandofFrost]

CADA micro-unit project on O Street eyed for fall 2020 start
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
November 14, 2019

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/11/14/cada-micro-unit-project-on-o-street-eyed-for-fall.html?iana=hpmvp_sac_news_headline



Additional Information:

The CADA board had to act quickly to apply for the state tax-credit financing. The deadline to apply is this month.
Governor Newsom has made $500 million in tax-credit financing available in bid to push new housing construction. (I don't know if $500 million is enough??)
CADA will receive confirmation on whether this project will receive funding in January.
Originally, the building was only planned to have 30-40 units, but CADA thinks a larger project will hit a cash-flow sweet spot to make the project "pencil out" as affordable housing.
Williams & Paddon is the project designer.
Cross-laminated timbers will be used instead of old-growth trees. (Supposedly, this will make the project more "sustainable".)
Projected cost is $15.5 million
CADA looked to 19J as inspiration
Units will be around 320 square feet
Highest monthly rent will be $1172. (More projects like this one, please!)
1300 square feet of retail.
A rooftop community room and deck is planned.
The will be no parking.
Location is next to Sam's Market.
The Courtyard event space that is on the back part of lot will probably have to go. (Look out for preservationists!)


https://i.postimg.cc/Y2sQdPnv/Capture2.jpg

Wow, $250,000 a unit for that kind of building is really good. They must already own the land. Happy about all the high density infill.

[snfenoc]

Looks like the old Sacramento Ballet building on 17th & K Streets has been torn down, and the site has been cleared. I think this is the site of the 8.5-story 17Central proposal from Bay Miry. This seems to correspond with plan, which is to begin construction early next year.

[LandofFrost]

Looks like the old Sacramento Ballet building on 17th & K Streets has been torn down, and the site has been cleared. I think this is the site of the 8.5-story 17Central proposal from Bay Miry. This seems to correspond with plan, which is to begin construction early next year.

I don't think this was ever news, but, the Burgers and Brew behind it has approval for an apartment complex at the back of their property.

[yolonative]

I don't think this was ever news, but, the Burgers and Brew behind it has approval for an apartment complex at the back of their property.

Do you have more info on this?

[LandofFrost]

Do you have more info on this?

The plans for this building went across my desk very briefly. I noticed that the back of the building was way over reinforced and I was told by higher ups that B+B wanted the option to build a number of floors on the back of the property, someday, for apartments... maybe.

Anyways, this might not be public information, and it might never happen, I just thought it was interesting.

[sactivity]

You know I was thinking... CalPERS should probably build TWO buildings at 301. The piles are already there. They can make them, like, 52, maybe 53 stories tall. With lots of condos, some office, ground-floor retail and an Intercontinental hotel.

[sactivity]

THIS JUST IN... The city has just announced that it is officially changing its slogan too "Sacramento -- it just doesn't pencil out!"

[enigma99a]

You know I was thinking... CalPERS should probably build TWO buildings at 301. The piles are already there. They can make them, like, 52, maybe 53 stories tall. With lots of condos, some office, ground-floor retail and an Intercontinental hotel.

I think this forum as well as the CBD needs a minimum height. Too many lame projects being discussed here

[TWAK]

You know I was thinking... CalPERS should probably build TWO buildings at 301. The piles are already there. They can make them, like, 52, maybe 53 stories tall. With lots of condos, some office, ground-floor retail and an Intercontinental hotel.
I'd just take one, honestly that design of two towers with the Vegas-like entrance was a bit much for me :haha:
How about lot X if we are talking about old projects :tup: ?

[sactivity]

I'd just take one, honestly that design of two towers with the Vegas-like entrance was a bit much for me :haha:
How about lot X if we are talking about old projects :tup: ?
I just think it's a little ironic that CalPERS dumped Saca because of "cost overruns". Honestly, with today's construction costs it would've been cheaper IMO to cover those overruns. Its not like it was going to get any cheaper.

[Pistola916]

How long before Calpers releases a new project proposal/rendering? As much as I would like to see a new tallest, I would be satisfied with even 400' feet.

[snfenoc]

After $5.5 million sale, 223 apartments coming near Sac State
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
Nov 21, 2019, 4:37pm PST Updated Nov 21, 2019, 4:51pm PST
https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/11/21/after-5-5-million-sale-223-apartments-coming-near.html

...Construction on 223 housing units with retail should start by year’s end or early in 2020, a development director with The Martin Group said. “We’re currently in design plan check with the city,” said Rayanna Schmeling of the Oakland-based company. “As soon as we get that permit, we’re ready to get going.”

https://i.postimg.cc/Bvbjb7zF/CD9-D9-DC6-7-C6-F-46-F6-AD8-E-BD405876-B7-E0.jpg

Additional Information:

Project Name - 65 East
Location - 6620 Folsom Boulevard in the same "block" next to the light rail station.
Aiming for completion before the fall 2022 semester
2 residential buildings, a 6-story building of apartments and retail, and a parking garage.
The project will be aimed at students, but NOT exclusively.
Sac RT is selling other properties near its stations to spur Transit-Oriented Development.
Retail - 7000 square feet ground floor.


This area is starting to come together. Sac State will become less of a commuter campus. There will be a lot of life. This is exciting news.

[snfenoc]

Some more good news. I heard that SKK Development has landed an investor in a $60 million, 5-story project: Apartments @ 700 16th Street. The investor would be taking advantage of the site's opportunity-zone designation.

Additional Information:
Aegon Real Estate in Cedar Rapids, IA is taking the plunge
190 apartment units
3000 square feet of ground floor retail
Site demolition could begin very soon: within weeks. Vertical construction should begin in the first quarter of 2020.
Construction should be completed in mid-2021
The site is across from a 95-unit project (H16) that is slated to be finished very shortly (within the next few months). It is a few blocks away from another 95-unit development (E16) that is in the middle of construction and should be finished by fall 2020.

https://i.postimg.cc/6qpWkfkK/D294-E23-D-08-C8-4341-B08-F-7-A0-D11-FE6262.jpg

This area is going to be hopping with even more life. Very good news. There are plenty of other sites along 12th and 16th Streets that are undeveloped or underdeveloped, so let's keep 'em coming!

[snfenoc]

Pappas requests changes to proposed midtown project
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
November 25, 2019

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/11/25/pappas-requests-changes-to-proposed-midtown.html

While details of the change weren’t immediately available, one part of the application requests eliminating a city requirement to demolish an existing garage at the project site, 2025 L St.

Not that long ago, Pappas requested an extension for the required demolition of the old parking garage at 20th and L. That extension was good until November 21, 2019. Now, it looks like they want to be released from that requirement? I hope this does not mean that Pappas is planning something boring for that site... or putting the entire project on the back burner.

Honestly, Pappas has had 3 years since Whole Foods pulled out of the proposal (5-7 story building with a floor or two of a grocery store, some parking and around 100 housing units). They should have something nice put together by now. With all of the development in Midtown, and the fact that 20th and L is a prime site, I am annoyed that Pappas has not been able to move forward. I'm sure there is a grocer that wouldn't mind locating to that part of Midtown. Of course, there is a big need for housing as well.

Current ugly parking garage on the site:
https://i.postimg.cc/0yQs3Fjn/1Capture.jpg

The parcel takes up one half of a block, stretching from 20th and L to 21st and L.

The original agreement with the city was that Pappas would build a parking garage with ground floor retail on 20th and Crapitol. Then, they would build the exciting phase. So far, all they have built is the ho-hum parking garage. I am not happy with Pappas. :hell:

To be fair, it is too early to tell what the updated proposal will be, but it concerns me that they keep kicking the can down the road and may want to keep the old garage in place. I'm thinking that Mid-Town will not get a new grocery store anytime soon, and the housing portion may be a fraction of what was originally planned. Having said that, maybe the old parking garage will be converted into a large, hip public market with housing on top. Maybe it'll become a huge nightclub, or something. I don't know. It's just taken Pappas so long to show any progress that I am beginning to get pissed off.

[Majin]

Yes there is a severe lack of normal neighborhood "amenities" in the grid, moreso downtown than midtown. But there is definitely a need for more grocery stores and small convenience stores.

[CAGeoNerd]

How couldn't they get the Nugget or Trader Joes or a similar grocer to take the place for that building? People on the grid are begging for another/better grocery store. It's awful that nothing has happened with that lot, especially since they built the parking structure at 21st and Capitol to replace it's use. :yuck:

[Majin]

How couldn't they get the Nugget or Trader Joes or a similar grocer to take the place for that building? People on the grid are begging for another/better grocery store. It's awful that nothing has happened with that lot, especially since they built the parking structure at 21st and Capitol to replace it's use. :yuck:

I highly doubt there is a demand problem.

[sactivity]

Just thought I'd break the almost full-week silence to let everyone know there are no new skyscrapers proposed for Sacramento at this time. Now, go back to sleep!!!

[sactivity]

Just thought I'd break the almost full-week silence to let everyone know there are no new skyscrapers proposed for Sacramento at this time. Now, go back to sleep!!!

[Clinton Robinson]

Haven't seen ANY activity here in while does anyone have any photos of the Natural resources building and any progress photos of any of the current projects around Sac??? I highly appreciate any photos and everyone who looks forward to seeing Sac get some highrises and density a big thank you and Merry Christmas!

[sactivity]

Haven't seen ANY activity here in while does anyone have any photos of the Natural resources building and any progress photos of any of the current projects around Sac??? I highly appreciate any photos and everyone who looks forward to seeing Sac get some highrises and density a big thank you and Merry Christmas!
I will be down there sometime in the middle of January for about a week. I plan to shoot as much as I can. See you soon.

[Clinton Robinson]

Saaaactivity coming through!!!!! THAAATS RIGHT!!! Highly appreciated and quite honestly looking forward to catching up on what's going up in the town!!! I have not been there since August when they were about 3/4 of the way to topping out the Natural resources building. I actually like the rendering aside from believing that it should be 100 ft taller and have been interested in seeing the actual building itself once it gets its skin. Anyway I will definitely be looking forward to seeing some new photos of Downtown Sactown so thank you VERY much in advance!!!!!! I'm kind of bummed out we are not getting more highrises in Sac! Nevertheless I have hope we will get some righteous increase in the Skyline in the near future!!!!!

[downtownserg89]

Haven't seen ANY activity here in while does anyone have any photos of the Natural resources building and any progress photos of any of the current projects around Sac??? I highly appreciate any photos and everyone who looks forward to seeing Sac get some highrises and density a big thank you and Merry Christmas!

I suppose I can hop on the rusty ol' bike and go on a ride around town with the camera. So many updates to post. Lots of activity taking place all over the grid.

[Clinton Robinson]

Hahaha.... That's right DTSerg!!! You already know it is highly appreciated! Looking forward to seeing the progress made DT!!!!

[sactivity]

Hahaha.... That's right DTSerg!!! You already know it is highly appreciated! Looking forward to seeing the progress made DT!!!!
You might be interested in this link...
https://app.oxblue.com/open/turner/nnrhproject

[enigma99a]

New 14-story hotel planned in downtown Sacramento

Canopy by hilton

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/12/23/new-14-story-hotel-planned-in-downtown-sacramento.html?ana=e_sac_bn_breakingnews&j=90388881&t=Breaking%20News&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTldFNVlXTXpZMk5qT1RRdyIsInQiOiJsdENLaDZteGFuMVlLc0h3K0EwZGJvOFlNaktwNHpHNDA4STZiMHZZXC9zYU1VeVQ5dEhuSHB6ZHpYem1mbEZ2TXgyNjN3YlNKR1pWcjZEZXhsUlk0TnU4U3ZTVmt2TzhhUU01amZoU1RNYmFyKytqcWFEcWlqYnYzcUs4bUY1YTZYWURjaFRmbHgrUk5UVnlHTHhvK0JBPT0ifQ%3D%3D

[Majin]

New 14-story hotel planned in downtown Sacramento

Canopy by hilton

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/12/23/new-14-story-hotel-planned-in-downtown-sacramento.html?ana=e_sac_bn_breakingnews&j=90388881&t=Breaking%20News&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTldFNVlXTXpZMk5qT1RRdyIsInQiOiJsdENLaDZteGFuMVlLc0h3K0EwZGJvOFlNaktwNHpHNDA4STZiMHZZXC9zYU1VeVQ5dEhuSHB6ZHpYem1mbEZ2TXgyNjN3YlNKR1pWcjZEZXhsUlk0TnU4U3ZTVmt2TzhhUU01amZoU1RNYmFyKytqcWFEcWlqYnYzcUs4bUY1YTZYWURjaFRmbHgrUk5UVnlHTHhvK0JBPT0ifQ%3D%3D

Thats great we need more hotels downtown.

But I really wish we would get more 20+ floor apartments built.

[snfenoc]

New 14-story hotel planned in downtown Sacramento

Canopy by hilton

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/12/23/new-14-story-hotel-planned-in-downtown-sacramento.html?ana=e_sac_bn_breakingnews&j=90388881&t=Breaking%20News&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTldFNVlXTXpZMk5qT1RRdyIsInQiOiJsdENLaDZteGFuMVlLc0h3K0EwZGJvOFlNaktwNHpHNDA4STZiMHZZXC9zYU1VeVQ5dEhuSHB6ZHpYem1mbEZ2TXgyNjN3YlNKR1pWcjZEZXhsUlk0TnU4U3ZTVmt2TzhhUU01amZoU1RNYmFyKytqcWFEcWlqYnYzcUs4bUY1YTZYWURjaFRmbHgrUk5UVnlHTHhvK0JBPT0ifQ%3D%3D

Thank you for the heads up, enigma99a. I read the article.

Here is some additional information about the project:

Eva Hill of Venture Oaks Real Estate is the developer.
It would be a 275 room, 14 story hotel.
It would have 50 luxury apartments on the top floors.
It would have ground floor retail and a rooftop bar.
The existing building will be demolished. It has not been occupied in over a decade.
The developer would like to start construction in 2020 and open the hotel in 2022.
Due to its location, the project can qualify for favorable tax treatment as an Opportunity Zone investment.
In October the top Sacramento hotels had an occupancy rate of 85.2%. This is up from the prior year, when the Convention Center was still open, and the occupancy rate was 82.1%.


I was in San Francisco this past weekend, and I saw a lot of buildings under construction. Most, if not all, were in the 7-15 story range. Yes, SF got the Salesforce Tower and a few other tall buildings, but the trend for residential and hotel buildings seems to be mid-rise. I live in Southern California, and just about every new, "urban-living" apartment or condo building is 8 floors or shorter.

[urban_encounter]

Thank you for the heads up, enigma99a. I read the article.

I was in San Francisco this past weekend, and I saw a lot of buildings under construction. Most, if not all, were in the 7-15 story range. Yes, SF got the Salesforce Tower and a few other tall buildings, but the trend for residential and hotel buildings seems to be mid-rise. I live in Southern California, and just about every new, "urban-living" apartment or condo building is 8 floors or shorter.

Your observation backs up that SF Chronicle article I mentioned about developers in San Francisco saying they are having a hard time making projects pencil out now because of costs. They would have to rent a 1 bedroom apartment for $5k a month. Now some tech worker might pay that without blinking an eye in the city, but SF has been on a building spree since the end of the Great Recession. The market that can afford high rise condos with astronomical prices are probably finally drying up somewhat. The same for rental properties going for $5k a month.

Sacramento’s central city residential boom is still in its infancy but I suspect we’ll see plenty of low and mid rise projects as long as the local economy remains on a growth curve.

[Pistola916]

New 14-story hotel planned in downtown Sacramento

Canopy by hilton

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2019/12/23/new-14-story-hotel-planned-in-downtown-sacramento.html?ana=e_sac_bn_breakingnews&j=90388881&t=Breaking%20News&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTldFNVlXTXpZMk5qT1RRdyIsInQiOiJsdENLaDZteGFuMVlLc0h3K0EwZGJvOFlNaktwNHpHNDA4STZiMHZZXC9zYU1VeVQ5dEhuSHB6ZHpYem1mbEZ2TXgyNjN3YlNKR1pWcjZEZXhsUlk0TnU4U3ZTVmt2TzhhUU01amZoU1RNYmFyKytqcWFEcWlqYnYzcUs4bUY1YTZYWURjaFRmbHgrUk5UVnlHTHhvK0JBPT0ifQ%3D%3D


With Mohanna’s 10 K hotel and residential project and this, that part of downtown is going to look great.

[snfenoc]

With Mohanna’s 10 K hotel and residential project and this, that part of downtown is going to look great.

Absolutely! I was thinking that area really needs some additional development to fill in the blanks and blight.

Now, if we can just get the old bus terminal going with a good project, and if the Kings will get their act together for 8th & K/L (among other things), that dead, dark and dank area will have new life.

[enigma99a]

With Mohanna’s 10 K hotel and residential project and this, that part of downtown is going to look great.

Yep, and I work one one block away on K so I am glad to see all the changes happening.

[Clinton Robinson]

Sactivity... THANK YOU for taking your time to shoot that link! I REALLY LIKE the Natural resources building!!!! Looking good and I think on the street level it fills the block REALLY well! I believe it is a nice addition to the Skyline and the skin is looking good! Just wish they would put a few more taller towers in the capital city! Anyway thank you guys also for the Hilton info too! Hopefully we get some good infill soon and some game changing highrises!!!!!

[sactivity]

Sactivity... THANK YOU for taking your time to shoot that link! I REALLY LIKE the Natural resources building!!!! Looking good and I think on the street level it fills the block REALLY well! I believe it is a nice addition to the Skyline and the skin is looking good! Just wish they would put a few more taller towers in the capital city! Anyway thank you guys also for the Hilton info too! Hopefully we get some good infill soon and some game changing highrises!!!!!
You're quite welcome for the first part... and for the rest... well, you're preaching to the choir around here!!!

[urbanadvocate]

Any updates on the new Courthouse timeline?

[urban_encounter]

Any updates on the new Courthouse timeline?


Since it’s a government project, construction should start by 2027 and be completed by 2038.

[ltsmotorsport]

A few recent articles have mentioned a start this year, and as hinted above, I wouldn't be surprised with a 3-year build out at least.

[CastleScott]

^That sounds about right. lol!

[innov8]

Colliers Sacramento Office Snapshot: Q4 2019

Downtown continues to dominate with the highest net absorption of 184K/SF.
The vacancy rate has fallen to its lowest point since 2002. Rents for Class A
office space in downtown set another high averaging $3.35/SF.

Colliers construction & forecast: Hines’ takeover of Tower 301 on Capitol
Mall, new design plans should be released in the first half of 2020, but
construction is still at least a year away from starting. The new $300 million,
20,000-seat stadium in the railyards should start construction in spring
2020. In the River District, demolition and site work on a new four-building,
1 million SF office development later this year.

Read more here: http://colliers-sacramento.com/MarketReports/2019_Q4_Office_Market_Report_FINAL.pdf

https://i.postimg.cc/HLChM1LC/Q4-2019-Market-Rates.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

https://i.postimg.cc/NjXnLjB4/Q4-2019-Office-Market-Fundamentals.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

https://i.postimg.cc/SK7t71XY/Q4-2019-Strong-Growth.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

[snfenoc]

Some potentially bad news about the Broadway corridor and the Fitzgerald:

Trondheim considers scaling back on Broadway project
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
January 17, 2019

https://i.postimg.cc/0yB2GpkB/Capture.jpg



Trondheim is building another residential project nearby, called the Onyx, on 1818 X Street. Depending on its leasing reception, Trondheim may choose to keep the Fitzgerald a mixed-use project or scale it back to just retail.

The culprit? Construction prices. They keep rising. Scott Kingston, VP of Turton Commercial Real Estate, says that construction costs are "making complex urban residential projects nearly infeasible."

Infeasible is the new word for "Doesn't Pencil Out".

Trondheim will probably have to get permission from the city to scale back the project. Honestly, I hope the city does not allow it. We need residential.

However, I understand Trondheim's concerns: Construction prices are just too ridiculously high. The barriers to entry are too high. The labor costs are too high. Materials are too high. There are too many people. This is a big problem with our economy, in general... we are pricing ourselves out. Because the money supply keeps growing, we get inflation. People start looking at ways to combat the fact that the dollar they got today will be worth only $0.90 next year. Also, every new regulation makes it that much more expensive to do just about anything. So what do people do? They raise their prices. Also, they only want to invest in high return investments, like the stock market. That leaves fewer investment dollars for lower return investments, like construction. Then, publicly-traded companies have to post ridiculous profits every quarter to justify the increase in their stock's value; so they raise their prices. This monster will keep feeding itself until only the richest are left standing, and everyone else is working 50-60 hours a week (if they can find jobs) but still can't earn enough to live.

A company like Trondheim can get super-high rents for its apartments; but super-high rents won't cover (or will barely cover) the construction costs. So they need to get superduper high rents, which Sacramento residents cannot afford.

Easy money is like a drug. It's nice at the time, but it has long-term consequences; and the longer we "use", the harder it is to stop.

I mean, we have people on this forum bitching about the lack of 40-story buildings. Well, now we have a 5-story building that may not get off the ground. Scary.

[Majin]

Ok a couple of things here.

Yes I think anyone plugged into the housing prices crisis here would agree, hopefully even the entire city council, wasting more space on retail only projects should be a complete no-go at this point. In this market I don't even think there is a legitimate argument for "take what you can get" if what you get is zero housing. The property might as well stay empty if it's going to offer zero housing.

As far as construction not even penciling out for the standard 5 story apartment complex...based on the 1000's of units under construction right now, I don't think we should draw any conclusions from one company, but if we are close to that point I think it's time to the state government to step in. Yes I know snfenoc your head just exploded.

If the only thing builders claim will pencil out is suburban low density track houses in the far out suburbs like Roseville, Rocklin, Folsom, etc and we get to a point where is no housing being built in the city (because it doesn't pencil out) then that will be in 100% complete violation of the state's anti sprawl laws (SB375) and the goals of the state to be a leader on combating climate change. I don't like NIMBYism but citizens would have the right and the facts on their side to sue the state government to step if we get to the point where "the market" can only support suburban sprawl in direct violation to SB375. Plus the state and Newson would be complete and utter hypocrites if they allowed that to happen.

[snfenoc]

I understand your exasperation.

To walk back may rant a little bit...

The city, state and feds should not be forcing companies to lose money. As you noted, this one project from one company. Also, Trondheim is not saying it won't build the project as planned - with housing. Trondheim is just saying it MAY decide to build only retail. Who knows? If Trondheim gets a good response from its other project, the Fitzgerald could still happen as planned.

Keep in mind, this project is NOT in downtown or midtown; it's in the Broadway corridor. Therefore, maybe Trondheim's investment side is a little worried about what kind of rents it can expect in that area, while construction costs are going up. Maybe if this project were located in downtown or midtown, it would not be as big a problem?

It's important to remember that both RISK and return are contemplated when making an investment. If the return from a larger investment isn't enough to justify the risk, a company may (and reasonably so) decide to do something smaller and less risky with its money. It's Opportunity Cost: if the value of the next best opportunity is similar to, or better than, the opportunity being considered, you go with the next best opportunity. Especially, when the opportunity being considered carries more risk.

I don't know what you expect the "gubment" to do? If something is too expensive, giving it more money from the seemingly endless public bank account will only make that thing MORE expensive. You want to stop all suburban development? OK. That won't decrease the price of building in the central city, however. It'll just drive people away. People are beginning to move out of the Golden State - the value they get from their jobs doesn't cover the cost of living. More regulations will only increase the cost of living.

I really think we need to consider the Federal Reserve's behavior. Interest rates are too low. The money supply is too high. Also, government spending is too high. The result is a huge tax on the consumer - the inflation tax. Yes, changing things up will create some major discomfort for quite some time; but it's the best thing for the economy in the long term.

The market always "wins". It will allocate resources to the best place to make money, no matter if the government is involved or not. I would rather that freedom play a larger role. At least, with freedom, the people have a better chance of getting what they want instead of some one-size-fits-all monster that the government is subsidizing, forcing on everyone and making more expensive.

[urban_encounter]

. I don't think we should draw any conclusions from one company, but if we are close to that point I think it's time to the state government to step in.

Don’t hold your breath that the incompetent state government of California will come riding to the rescue atop unicorns and spreading their magical fairy dust to fix our housing crisis. They can’t keep the power on or the roads paved and their regulations, mandates and endless environmental review is what caused this freaking mess to begin with.

[CAGeoNerd]

I'm a little more socialistic than you guys from the sound of it. What I'd like to see is the state and cities building housing themselves, not relying on private developers or "the market" to do it. I'd like the City of Sacramento to build housing on parcels throughout the grid. If they can build it non-profit or low profit then it should be cheaper than private developers who need to extract profit for their investment. It seems like a clear piece of the solution to me, but there is so much entrenched interests that either frown upon or outright combat that from happening, it's a shame.

[snfenoc]

I'm a little more socialistic than you guys from the sound of it. What I'd like to see is the state and cities building housing themselves, not relying on private developers or "the market" to do it. I'd like the City of Sacramento to build housing on parcels throughout the grid. If they can build it non-profit or low profit then it should be cheaper than private developers who need to extract profit for their investment. It seems like a clear piece of the solution to me, but there is so much entrenched interests that either frown upon or outright combat that from happening, it's a shame.

I understand what you're saying. Whenever we're faced with tough economic issues like this, we tend to turn to Mama Gubment to make everything better. However, I think government solutions are a very black and white, one-size-fits-all band-aid for a much bigger problem, that has a lot of gray area and complications.

The main issue is prices... they are too damn high. But that's what you get when the market is not allowed to truly sort things out. We call problems like this a "Market Failure" but that is an incorrect label. The market is not failing at all. It is responding (as it should) to the complications that we have created.

Labor and materials are roughly 2/3 the cost of construction:

The construction labor shortage goes all the way back (at least) to the last economic downturn. You had workers that were paid well (probably too well) who lost their jobs and did not come back to the construction labor market. (I guess they all learned to code.) The new generations do not want to do manual labor. Why would they, when they can get a loan for college? Plus, the construction labor unions make it kinda hard to break in to the business. I read somewhere that construction labor costs are roughly 20% higher in California than they are in other western states.

California requires that buildings be made from much more efficient and stronger materials than other states. These materials cost more. Add in the effect of tariffs, and they cost a lot more. Add in the fact that materials are now demanded all over the globe (ghost cities in China), and they cost a sh$t load more.

In addition to higher labor and materials prices, then, you have contractor licensing requirements. Then, you have local impact fees that can be as high as $20,000 per unit. (Local government impose impact fees because the property taxes they levy each year are not enough. This is usually where the anti-Prop 13 people rear their heads and say, "See! We need higher property taxes." Yeah...that sounds like a good idea. Instead of streamlining government and cutting costs, the state and cities should be allowed to raise them so high that a retired person can't keep his house.) Then you have CEQA lawsuits. Then you have every other barrier to entry that you can imagine.

You think that removing the profit motive, by having state and local governments be the investor, will work? The last thing you want to do is subsidize high prices. They just get higher. The more dollars you have chasing after a finite resource, the more that resource costs. The cure for high prices (in a "free-er" market) is... high prices. People stop seeing the value in investing or consuming high priced goods, they pull back and the market has to adjust. OR competition comes in and says "I can do it cheaper," and the market has to adjust. Unfortunately, we keep printing and spending money, while we increase barriers to entry for competition. Consequently, there is no incentive for prices to drop.

I mean, wasn't there a report recently about "affordable" housing in California costing somewhere around $500,000 per unit to build? These are subsidized, affordable housing units! Think about that. Why are they so expensive? Well, those units still have to meet California's strict standards; and they are still built by laborers who are in short supply and cost too much. Plus, only a select few contractors even qualify to build affordable units.

You want to gubment-built housing to be the standard in California? In addition to everything mentioned above, you'll have to pay California Rental & Affordable Places board members and bureaucrats (probably 1000s of them) to administer such a large government program.

Where would the state and local governments find the money? How many units do we need to build in California? Tens of thousands? At $500 K a unit, you're looking at $5 BILLION dollars for just 10,000 housing units. Good luck.

Again, there is a major pricing problem that has been created by a lack of labor, too many regulations and inflation. Should we be sending so many kids off to college, to major in Lesbian Dance Theory? Does every new unit really need to have $10-15 K solar system built into it? Should interest rates be so low?

As an aside, I really don't think that asking for a 15-20% return on your investment over 10 or 15 years, while the government is inflating our currency, and you can do much better in the stock market, is greed. I think it's smart.

If I had one criticism for business in the United States, I would say that it is waaay too focused on the short-term and not interested in the long-term. However, I understand why. As I said in a previous post, when the dollar you make today is only worth 90 cents tomorrow, you kinda have to focus on the "right now."

[snfenoc]

In more hopeful news...

Two SKK Developments projects starting in first quarter
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
January 21, 2020
https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/news/2020/01/21/two-skk-developments-projects-starting-in-first.html?iana=hpmvp_sac_news_headline

Demolition will start this week on a long-closed Sacramento hotel building, with new residential units and retail space planned in its place.

This is the 190-unit apartment project on 16th and H (Clarion Hotel Site).

Also, the article mentions that the Arden Gateway project (737 units!) will start in the 1st Quarter of 2020. This project is located just north of Arden Fair Mall. Not really the kind of development we like; but it's pretty close to the central city and should help that area a bit. Maybe, this will lead to some development at Cal Expo. Heck, maybe Arden Fair will be developed into something better?

SKK also hopes to begin a 312-unit apartment project in North Natomas, by Arco Arena, this year as well.

Finally, there was a blurb about developing the Metropolitan site on 10th and J Streets. SKK is now a part of the development team. Basically, don't hold your breath... They are far from having a complete plan:

What ultimately gets proposed there, he said, takes time to plan properly. With city officials eager to see the site developed instead of left blighted, there’s bound to be more pressure to propose something that can be realized on that location this time around.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like it won't be anywhere near 40 stories tall. The proposal will be something that the developers feel has a really good chance of getting built. The city is tired of waiting.

Now, Majin, your head just exploded.

[urban_encounter]

I'm a little more socialistic than you guys from the sound of it. What I'd like to see is the state and cities building housing themselves, not relying on private developers or "the market" to do it. I'd like the City of Sacramento to build housing on parcels throughout the grid. If they can build it non-profit or low profit then it should be cheaper than private developers who need to extract profit for their investment. It seems like a clear piece of the solution to me, but there is so much entrenched interests that either frown upon or outright combat that from happening, it's a shame.

This is just mind boggling.

[Son of Travis]

I'm a little more socialistic than you guys from the sound of it. What I'd like to see is the state and cities building housing themselves, not relying on private developers or "the market" to do it. I'd like the City of Sacramento to build housing on parcels throughout the grid. If they can build it non-profit or low profit then it should be cheaper than private developers who need to extract profit for their investment. It seems like a clear piece of the solution to me, but there is so much entrenched interests that either frown upon or outright combat that from happening, it's a shame.

Wow... the ignorance here is frightening.

[CAGeoNerd]

I understand what you're saying. Whenever we're faced with tough economic issues like this, we tend to turn to Mama Gubment to make everything better. ... As I said in a previous post, when the dollar you make today is only worth 90 cents tomorrow, you kinda have to focus on the "right now."
This is just mind boggling.
Wow... the ignorance here is frightening.

Thanks for ridiculing me. Sounds like I am definitely more socialistic than you guys. There is nothing insane about advocating for publicly-funded housing built for the public and sold to the public. Not everything has to be thrown out to the free market and hope private enterprise responds to demand. The state should build affordable housing and rent/sell units to increase units available and affordability. I would LOVE the City of Sacramento to build mid-rises all over the grid in city-owned parcels. I would LOVE the State of California to do the same working with cities across the state to build housing everywhere. It's a win for everyone- except for private developers, which is why it doesn't happen- they hold too much influence in state and local governments because of $.

Yes, there are lots of regulations and bureaucracy in California. Most are there for good reason. The solution isn't to do away with regulations to get more development, the solution includes getting more units built at lower cost, and that would include cutting out 15-20% profit shavings that inflate the cost of projects and housing for people, which afterall, is what we should prioritize.

[snfenoc]

Thanks for ridiculing me. Sounds like I am definitely more socialistic than you guys. There is nothing insane about advocating for publicly-funded housing built for the public and sold to the public. Not everything has to be thrown out to the free market and hope private enterprise responds to demand. The state should build affordable housing and rent/sell units to increase units available and affordability. I would LOVE the City of Sacramento to build mid-rises all over the grid in city-owned parcels. I would LOVE the State of California to do the same working with cities across the state to build housing everywhere. It's a win for everyone- except for private developers, which is why it doesn't happen- they hold too much influence in state and local governments because of $.

Yes, there are lots of regulations and bureaucracy in California. Most are there for good reason. The solution isn't to do away with regulations to get more development, the solution includes getting more units built at lower cost, and that would include cutting out 15-20% profit shavings that inflate the cost of projects and housing for people, which afterall, is what we should prioritize.

I don't think that I was ridiculing you. I said I understood your position. Explaining why I don't think it's a good idea is not ridiculing; it's being critical, which is perfectly fine on a forum where we discuss these kinds of things.

OK, so your plan is to remove the 15-20% profit that people who invest in these projects demand. Then, you want to have the government pay for housing projects. Think beyond your desired outcome just a little. Do you really think anything will actually change for the better?

The hard costs to build will probably still be there. Materials are still gonna cost money. Labor is still gonna cost money. Land is still gonna cost money. The contractors are still gonna want to get paid. On top of all that, the local governments will still need to levy some kind of rental tax; or they will have to pay impact fees out of one pocket to the other. Why? Well, they will have to supplement the costs to serve all that new housing, right? (We're talking costs for schools, sidewalks, trash service, police, etc.)

Plus, just about every government program lacks efficiency. You'll have to pay the bureaucrats and paper pushers who administer this housing program of yours. You'll have to pay plumbers, electricians, roofers, & HVAC contractors to come out fix the problems that crop up as the years go by. Heck, doing so will probably add 15-20% to price of each unit, maybe more. So the money you saved by not profiting those evil investors will just go to evil program administrators and contractors. You're saving nothing.

Therefore, I don't think the $500,000+ per unit cost to build housing will change for the better. If anything, it'll get even more expensive.

As I've said over and over again, we have a pricing problem. The market is overvaluing housing, college, automobiles, and just about anything that you get a loan to buy, plus more stuff.

Due to the large money supply, low interest rates, government spending, and high regulation, the market is getting bogus inputs, which causes prices to rise.

If the seemingly endless public bank account starts paying for tens of thousands (maybe even hundreds of thousands) of housing units, do you think the price will come down? Of course not.

Construction prices will probably rise even higher, because there will be more dollars chasing after a finite (or heavily-restricted) resource. I can imagine a day where zero privately-financed housing (or even office) projects will get built. Why? Because the government will have out-competed the private investors with its endless money supply.

Consequently, the public will be stuck with one-size-fits-all gubment apartments; and they will end up paying more taxes or get stuck with a higher inflation tax.

Not good... No bueno!

[innov8]

Downtown Sacramento still booming
Colliers Sacramento Weekly Market Insights (Subscribe now: bob.shanahan@colliers.com)

Downtown Sacramento 2019 Year In Review:
· $513.3 million total property sales
· 210 residential units completed
· 600 new units under construction at Sacramento Commons
· 160 new units under construction at 601 Capitol Mall
· 5.3 million Old Sacramento Waterfront visitors
· 38 new businesses
· 13% increase in population
· 81.4% average hotel occupancy
· 70 new development projects underway
· $47 million in funding secured for activation of Old Sacramento Waterfront
· Major League Soccer & Kaiser Permanente coming to the Railyards
· Groundbreaking of expanded Convention Center and performing arts district

Check out the downtown development map and other data, the numbers are good.
Downtown Sacramento Partnership's 2019 Annual Report (https://www.downtownsac.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/DowntownPartnership_AnnualReport2019-1.pdf)

[ltsmotorsport]

First renderings out for the new State office complex at 7th and Richards.

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/RESD/Projects/Page-Content/Projects-List-Folder/New-Visions-for-Sacramento-River-District#@ViewBag.JumpTo

Specs:
-7-12 stories (from what it looks like)
-1,250,000 square feet
-4,560 employees
-Design/Build team; Hensel Phelps, ZGF Architects, Dreyfuss + Blackford Architects
-Site currently being demoed
-Fall 2020 start, 2024 opening

[Majin]

I wouldn't exactly call that a suburban office campus but I still wish they would take less space and build taller.

First renderings out for the new State office complex at 7th and Richards.

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/RESD/Projects/Page-Content/Projects-List-Folder/New-Visions-for-Sacramento-River-District#@ViewBag.JumpTo

Specs:
-7-12 stories (from what it looks like)
-1,250,000 square feet
-4,560 employees
-Design/Build team; Hensel Phelps, ZGF Architects, Dreyfuss + Blackford Architects
-Site currently being demoed
-Fall 2020 start, 2024 opening

[urban_encounter]

Thanks for ridiculing me. Sounds like I am definitely more socialistic than you guys. There is nothing insane about advocating for publicly-funded housing built for the public and sold to the public.should prioritize.

Well if you’re a socialist then you are definitely more socialist than I am because I’m not a socialist.

For the record I wasn’t trying to ridicule you; I would sit down over a beer or coffee and say the same thing.

The idea that the State of California or the city of Sacramento should design, construct, lease or sell residential units just doesn’t make any sense imo. Please explain how the State can do that? Will we use the East Span of the Bay Bridge as an example of State engineering marvel and fiscal responsibility? Maybe high speed rail? Even when there are public private partnerships like the Veterans housing at Mather, costs are staggering. That project was projected to cost $55 million for a total of 110 units. For that price we could give Veterans $500k each and tell them to go buy a house.

Government housing projects are usually undesirable places to live. I was living in Chicago’s Edgewater neighborhood, while Cabrini Greens east of downtown Chicago were brought down one building at a time. They were overrun by gangs and drugs and people were economically trapped once they went into government housing. A lot of young people lost their lives living there.

Federal housing projects have been tried and rarely are successful (if any). We don’t need the state coming in and constructing commie blocks. Jerry Brown raided the State redevelopment agencies coffers which was a tool cities used to help build low income housing.

I think we agree that something needs to be done but we definitely disagree on the approach. I think California can streamline CEQA, to eliminate bogus lawsuits. It shouldn’t take developers two to three years and a small fortune to get projects constructed. We can protect the environment without going to extremes which in turn pushes housing costs higher.

Side note: China is constructing two massive prefab hospitals w/ 1000 and 1500 beds respectively in 10 days; yet it takes three plus years to build a six story wood structure apartment building in this town. :shrug:

[urban_encounter]

First renderings out for the new State office complex at 7th and Richards.

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/RESD/Projects/Page-Content/Projects-List-Folder/New-Visions-for-Sacramento-River-District#@ViewBag.JumpTo

Specs:
-7-12 stories (from what it looks like)
-1,250,000 square feet
-4,560 employees
-Design/Build team; Hensel Phelps, ZGF Architects, Dreyfuss + Blackford Architects
-Site currently being demoed
-Fall 2020 start, 2024 opening


Decent, but I wish it were in the city center; on state owned parcels and not off Richards Blvd.

[LandofFrost]

Decent, but I wish it were in the city center; on state owned parcels and not off Richards Blvd.

I like the location. It's close to township 9 so maybe that will get built out someday and what the city center really needs is more housing not more buildings that are dead during the weekends and at night.