Sacramento: 301 Capitol Mall: A New Plan for The Towers Site

[innov8]

30 buyers have signed the new contracts

[innov8]

The City Transportation Dept. will pulling back the traffic barriers that are on
L Street, 3rd, and Capitol Mall... I heard it will be this way for a while

[enigma99a]

Originally Posted by innov8

The City Transportation Dept. will pulling back the traffic barriers that are on
L Street, 3rd, and Capitol Mall... I heard it will be this way for a while

Well, I hate to say it but this project is close to its death.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by enigma99a

Well, I hate to say it but this project is close to its death.

Is Sacramento worth investing my time & energy in? That's what I overheard from a frustrated Midtowner today. Those of us with ambition for something other than the staus quo are not happy with this turn of events.

BTW where has the mayor been in all this? I don't think I've heard a peep out that woman. Anyone But Fargo is my slogan for the election.

[foxmtbr]

^ You should run! I'll vote for you (if I'm able to by then).

[ozone]

Originally Posted by foxmtbr

^ You should run! I'll vote for you (if I'm able to by then).

Thanks for the vote. Can you send $$$$? j/k
I'm too unconventional to be elected to anything in Sacramento.

[enigma99a]

Originally Posted by ozone

BTW where has the mayor been in all this? I don't think I've heard a peep out that woman. Anyone But Fargo is my slogan for the election.

I don't think that Fargo likes tall buildings anyway. Plus she doesn't care. Not just about 301CM but any project in the city. Someone with leadership needs to take control... this sucks

[ozone]

Originally Posted by enigma99a

I don't think that Fargo likes tall buildings anyway. Plus she doesn't care. Not just about 301CM but any project in the city. Someone with leadership needs to take control... this sucks

Amen Brother! Who would be a good candidate? There's not many current "leaders" with a real vision.

[snfenoc]

I don't think this project needs a mayor; it needs money. (The city has already ponied up $11 million). I seriously doubt the mayor's leadership (or lack thereof) has any bearing on a potential equity partner's decision to gamble $100 million+ on a luxury, high-rise condo project in the midst of a down market.

I hate to say it, but if this project fails, the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of John Saca. He proposed The Towers late in the game. Now, the housing market is down and construction prices are high. Is the city to blame for that? I don't think so. Had Saca proposed the Towers earlier, they may be nearing completion by now. I don't want to seem like I am scolding Mr. Saca; I just think his timing was unfortunate.



I'm not sure the latest "news" is a nail in the coffin. I think the city just wanted to know when it could dismantle the barrier bottlenecks and ended up getting the typical John Saca answer:

City: Mr. Saca, for the past 3-4 months the Towers site has been void of any construction activity. In fact, Anna Nicole Smith shows greater signs of life. It is a waste to have barriers up for a project that is stalled. Can you tell us when construction will resume?

Saca: Soon.

City: Can you give us a more definite answer?

Saca: How about, 'Sometime in the future'?

City: When will you be able to give us an actual date?

Saca: Soon.

[ozone]

As someone who is basically anti-government I can understand your viewpoint but I disagree with you -this is just the type of project that needs a mayor. Yes it needs money. But you underestimate the power of the 'bully pulpit' in generating interest and financing. And I'm talking beyond any city subsidy. I think that the mayor's strong and aggresive leadership could do a lot more than you think. There's tons of examples of that happening elsewhere. Whether or not it would have helped in this case we will never know. I'm not blaming the city. All I'm saying is that the mayor doesn't really seem to very interested in the Towers (as enigma99a said). This project recieved more attention and excitement than any I've seen in a long time. It not like in SF or NYC today were it would be just one more tower. Speaking of that I remember reading how Joe Alioto, one of San Francisco's great mayors, put a lot of his energy behind the development of three major building projects, BART, Transamerica Pyramid and the Embarcadero Center. These projects transformed the city and skyline of San Francisco and mayor Shelley before him took an aggressive stance against anti-development groups to get things like the BofA tower built.

I guess Saca has to be blamed partly for this situation but when Saca started out the market was not down. How would he know that the market would take a dive?

[snfenoc]

As someone who is basically anti-government I can understand your viewpoint but I disagree with you -this is just the type of project that needs a mayor. Yes it needs money. But you underestimate the power of the 'bully pulpit' in generating interest and financing. And I'm talking beyond any city subsidy. I think that the mayor's strong and aggresive leadership could do a lot more than you think. There's tons of examples of that happening elsewhere. Whether or not it would have helped in this case we will never know. I'm not blaming the city. All I'm saying is that the mayor doesn't really seem to very interested in the Towers (as enigma99a said).

I'm not anti-government, I'm anti-social...........................................................................ism

The bully pulpit is great, but at the end of the day (In My Opinion), I don't think it is enough to carry a project of this magnitude. Sorry. It takes private individuals/corporations willing to gamble the big $$$$. In the midst of a market where contruction prices are higher and housing sales are lower, it's going to be tough for Saca to find those people. No amount of stump pounding by the mayor will create the right equity partner. Nope. That's Saca's job. Last time I checked, he was the developer, not Mayor Fargo

Would it be nice to hear some positive quotes from Fargo, you bet! It may ease the minds of a few potential buyers - I'll give you that. (But it won't decrease the exorbitant construction and materials prices, which is probably the biggest culprit in this "bump in the road".) With that said, the mayor has been positively involved with The Towers project (as well as many other projects); in a number of speeches she expressed excitement about it. Plus, she and the City guided The Towers through the complicated approval process. Also, she and rest of the city council (save for my hero, Robbie Waters) pledged $11 million in subsidies. You discount this money, but I think it is VERY significant. If what you say about the necessity of government support is true, then I think $11 million of government support speaks a lot louder to buyers and potential lenders than more "Rah! Rah!" speeches by the mayor.

Look, I'm not a huge fan of her (I mean, her mentor was Mayor Rudin). However, I detected an implication of blame in your "where's the mayor?" question; and I thought it was unfair.

When Saca started out the market was not down. How would Saca know that the market would take a dive?

Well, he probably had an idea he was right up against the clock (speculation on my part). When I said he was to blame, that was a little overboard. "Blame" is too strong a word. How about, 'the project is his RESPONSIBILITY.' That's fair. After all, he is the developer. The timing was unfortunate, but he is responsible for that timing. By the way, no amount of bully pulpiting by the mayor can turn back the clock.

[Majin]

Where is this new equity partner saca has talked of for the past 2 months? I just wish there was *some* news that showed this project having signs of life...

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by Majin

Where is this new equity partner saca has talked of for the past 2 months? I just wish there was *some* news that showed this project having signs of life...

He'll announce one soon.

[mechanico]

If Saca put the property on the market tomorrow he may be able to get out of this situation.

[innov8]

A positive quote from Fargo would be nice, but I'm sure the defeat of the
arena ballot measures that she stumped for has taken some wind out of her sail.

These are the players working on behalf of John to move the project forward
that have said so publicly.

John Dangberg, Sacramento assistant city manager

Joseph Mohamed Sr., holding the $22 million note on the property

State Senator Darrell Steinberg

Assemblyman Dave Jones

BTW, they aren’t removing the barriers, they are pushing them back off the
street onto or next to the sidewalk.

John can make this project happen.

[bennywah]

I think he should compromise, build one tower first, then when the market rebounds start the 2nd tower, try to get a lock on construction prices and get the project rolling again. Many twin tower projects start one tower first and usually a year or so later start the 2nd, I see it here in San Diego all of the time.

It would allow him to still have a new symbolic, iconic, and new tallest and show people he's got what it takes to get this thing going, end rant.

[Sacto]

^ Good point.

[TowerDistrict]

Originally Posted by bennywah

I think he should compromise, build one tower first, then when the market rebounds start the 2nd tower, try to get a lock on construction prices and get the project rolling again. Many twin tower projects start one tower first and usually a year or so later start the 2nd, I see it here in San Diego all of the time.

I think this is now true. Maybe he shouldn't be pushing everyone's patience on this, and get one tower going. the best option would be to build the tower housing the InterContinental, so the hotel can attract visitors and generate outside hype, while they fill the rest with the first wave of residents, which would produce a lot of regional attention.

As a side note, I was down in the Bay watching the One Rincon Hill rise faster than even 621 seems to. It was killing me....

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by bennywah

I think he should compromise, build one tower first, then when the market rebounds start the 2nd tower, try to get a lock on construction prices and get the project rolling again. Many twin tower projects start one tower first and usually a year or so later start the 2nd, I see it here in San Diego all of the time.

It would allow him to still have a new symbolic, iconic, and new tallest and show people he's got what it takes to get this thing going, end rant.

I agreee 100% and i suspect that's what will probably end up happening.
Which btw would be the best thing for Saca and the market..

That was the origional plan anyway. Plus i just think that it's unlikley that they will get enough people resigning their contracts to justify both towers being constructed simultaneously... With Tower I housing the Hotel they wouldn't need as many buyers to fill up Tower I....


BTW i agree with both snfenoc and Mike (innov8)...

The city has already been supportive in the efforts to build the Towers. I'm not sure what else they can do that probably isn't already being done...?
It's just going to take time to pull everything together and then we'll eventually see construction resume by Summer (on at least one of the Towers).......


However...

I'm encouraged by the fact that somebody with deep pockets has enough confidence in the project, to step in and pay off Cal Pers $25 million dollar investment, in order to get them out of the project.

[Grimnebulin]

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

I'm encouraged by the fact that somebody with deep pockets has enough confidence in the project, to step in and pay off Cal Pers $25 million dollar investment, in order to get them out of the project.

So is this still based upon hope or have your sources (saw your post in the other thread) confirmed that CalPers has been bought out? Just wondering...and hoping.