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

[BrianSac]

Bob Shallit: Developer's digs may have to be downsized
By Bob Shallit - Bee Columnist
Published 12:00 am PDT Saturday, July 28, 2007
Story appeared in BUSINESS section, Page D2

Print | E-Mail | Comments (0) | Digg it | del.icio.us

John Saca wasn't able to build his Towers condo project downtown. Now his plans for a megamansion in Arden Oaks could be stymied, too.

A recent opinion from the county counsel holds that homes in the swank, rural enclave can be no taller than 30 feet -- as measured from the ground to the midpoint between eaves and rooftop -- without special permission.

That won't affect existing homes. But it could block plans for future ones, including Saca's proposed home at 1821 Ladino Road, which would be 47 feet high and possibly 30,000 square feet.


"As of right now, those plans (for the Saca house) won't get approved because they don't meet the ... height limitation," says John Whisenhunt, assistant county counsel.

Saca's lawyer, Gregory Thatch, isn't giving up. He's provided the county counsel with arguments saying the proposed home is allowed under current zoning. and he's hoping for a new, different ruling "soon."

The dispute centers on interpretation of the Neighborhood Preservation Area ordinance approved for the community more than two decades ago.

The NPA requires that homes in the area cannot exceed two stories. But it doesn't address height.

In its recent opinion, the county counsel said taller homes would be permitted if the NPA specifically allowed them. But since the local ordinance is silent on that issue, heights should be governed by the general zoning code, which sets a 30-foot limit (or up to 40 feet with a special use permit).

Thatch says that's a misinterpretation.

The "plain language" of the NPA permits taller homes, he says, and its drafters originally wanted to see larger homes in Arden Oaks.

"If you talk to the (county commissioners) who approved the NPA, they'll tell you they didn't intend to restrict heights," he says.

The issue has long been a hot topic in the neighborhood, home to many of the region's business and political leaders. Various surveys and meetings have been held on home-size limitations.

Some residents favor limits, saying giant homes could dwarf their neighbors' abodes and ruin the "country in the city" feel of the community.

Others think limitations will lower property values and make an elite neighborhood less special.

Saca, of course, is in the second group.

"Thirty feet," he says of the height limit under the county counsel's recent ruling. "That's a tract home and that's not what we want in Arden Oaks."

[TowerDistrict]

By Bob Shallit - Bee Columnist
Last Updated 5:59 am PDT Monday, August 6, 2007

Con-do mentality: Developers of a condo project off Fair Oaks Boulevard are hoping to benefit from the collapse of John Saca's downtown high-rise venture, known as the Towers.

A soon-to-launch ad campaign will make "veiled references" to the Towers' demise, says Scott Rasmussen, one of the backers of the nearly completed, 48-unit Pavilions complex in the 2300 block of Fair Oaks Boulevard near Fulton Avenue.

The basic pitch: Don't wait for the next downtown condo project to materialize.

"These units are here now. You can kick them and feel them," Rasmussen says of the Tuscan-themed, town-home-style condos that range from 2,200 to 2,500 square feet and sell for $720,000 to $780,000.

Sales have been slow since the first units came on the market late last year. Things are picking up now, Rasmussen says.

Fourteen units have been sold, including three in the past 30 days, Rasmussen says. The buyers of those three? All people who had made deposits at the Towers.

--

I don't really see how Rasmussen finds the two projects even comparable. A 2,500 sq. ft townhouse in the suburbs versus a 1,500 sq. ft. condo in a high-rise downtown?????

[Majin]

Exactly...not even sure what the point of bringing up the towers in his ad campaign. Not even the same product.

[travis bickle]

Completely different markets. This sales pitch may work on the unsophisticated, but that is not the buyer for either product. Rasmussen has embarrassed himself here. If those who bought in his project think they will get the same lifestyle a downtown highrise affords they will be sorely disappointed.

[Phillip]

The common thread to Sac Towers and the Pavilions townhomes is "the best Sacramento has to offer".

For a buyer who wants and can afford luxury, like over 600G, but doesn't want a single family home what are the options now in Sacramento?

[Majin]

Originally Posted by Phillip

The common thread to Sac Towers and the Pavilions townhomes is "the best Sacramento has to offer".

For a buyer who wants and can afford luxury, like over 600G, but doesn't want a single family home what are the options now in Sacramento?

I believe units in the Residence Inn (15th and L) go for upwards to 1 million.
Same with units in L street lofts.

[goldcntry]

Well slap me silly!

The last couple of days, I've noticed a couple of people in hardhats checking out various equipment boxes, storage containers, and other aspects of the site. This morning, there is a 10-12 man crew working out there! They're moving form lumber out of the storage container, there's a flatbed trailer inside the site with new equipment and supplies being off-loaded!

Dance tomato, Dance!

Now if CIRM would only announce what they're gonna do with the site once foundation prep is finished...

[Grimnebulin]

Originally Posted by Majin

I believe units in the Residence Inn (15th and L) go for upwards to 1 million.
Same with units in L street lofts.

FWIW, none of the Residence Inn units are being sold for over $1M, I had the price list here a few weeks ago. In fact, the two most expensive top floor penthouse units have already been sold.

And only the four corner penthouse units of the L Street Loft units were being sold for over $1M ($1.1M for two, and $1.2M for the other two) if I recall correctly when I checked them out.

[creamcityleo79]

Originally Posted by goldcntry

Well slap me silly!

The last couple of days, I've noticed a couple of people in hardhats checking out various equipment boxes, storage containers, and other aspects of the site. This morning, there is a 10-12 man crew working out there! They're moving form lumber out of the storage container, there's a flatbed trailer inside the site with new equipment and supplies being off-loaded!

Dance tomato, Dance!

Now if CIRM would only announce what they're gonna do with the site once foundation prep is finished...

You've GOT to be kidding! If you are being serious, that is AMAZING news! First, a report of a banner advertising the Towers a few days ago; and now, this! WTF is going on?!

[goldcntry]

I just went and checked again... just in case I'm suffering from caffiene-deprivation induced delusions...

There are 5 guys at this moment working with a small CAT with forks cleaning up various dropped boards, piling trim, etc from the Northwest tower foundation. The flatbed trailer still has the new(?) sand barrels and orange barriers on it along with some rebar. The workers have lunch boxes scattered around their truck, so they could be there most of the day...

I gotta remember to bring my camera to work!!

[JeffZurn]

Originally Posted by neuhickman79

You've GOT to be kidding! If you are being serious, that is AMAZING news! First, a report of a banner advertising the Towers a few days ago; and now, this! WTF is going on?!

What kind of Equipment is being used down there?
Whats this of a banner?

[sugit]

I remember CalPERS and CIM saying they would be cleaning the site up pretty quickly, so I assume that is what is going on.

[arod74]

With the state possibly looking for a private developer for the restarted west end project, I hope that Calpers/CIM might use this as the catalyst for their iconic building on the former Towers site especially considering the square footage requirements. The location would be perfect for what the state is looking for and what better partner to lease your building to then the state if your Calpers.

[sugit]

Iconic building and state offices are oxymorons.

I personally would much rather see as much housing as possible part of the mix. (even if it does take a little longer) Plus, given the location right next to DTP, a large retail footprint like The Towers had.

I just can't see either of those happening if state office are involved, and esp iconic. The state will put so many conditions and requirement on a building, and they won't pay rents that will be needed for iconic.

[arod74]

If the state was building the project I would totally agree based on all the dog ugly office towers the state has already mangled the skyline with. If CIM/Calpers are funding the entire project to lease I think they would put a quality project together especially to protect their investment if they were to sell down the line. Calpers isn't afraid to spend some cash on building appearances based on their HQ downtown. Plus the state is looking for around a million square feet for the west end project so I dont think we have to worry about a stumpy buliding here..

[goldcntry]

Originally Posted by JeffZurn

What kind of Equipment is being used down there?

Other than the flatbed trailor, they are just using a small CAT tractor with a fork in front to move various debris from yard. I just watched them working in the SE corner loading up 1-2 ft sections of I-beams that had just been discarded in the corner. With all the weeds and brush that has grown up on the lot, I had forgotten how messy the last contractors had left the site when they pulled out.

[Majin]

Originally Posted by Grimnebulin

FWIW, none of the Residence Inn units are being sold for over $1M, I had the price list here a few weeks ago. In fact, the two most expensive top floor penthouse units have already been sold.

And only the four corner penthouse units of the L Street Loft units were being sold for over $1M ($1.1M for two, and $1.2M for the other two) if I recall correctly when I checked them out.

"Upwards to 1 million" does not mean over 1 million. I means closer to 1 million but not quite. (+/- 10% approximently).

That statement was intended to answer:

For a buyer who wants and can afford luxury, like over 600G, but doesn't want a single family home what are the options now in Sacramento?

In which both Residence Inn and L street lofts both offer.

[Grimnebulin]

Originally Posted by Majin

"Upwards to 1 million" does not mean over 1 million. I means closer to 1 million but not quite. (+/- 10% approximently).

That statement was intended to answer:



In which both Residence Inn and L street lofts both offer.

Sorry - I guess the sentence was poorly phrased.

[innov8]

Originally Posted by arod74

If the state was building the project I would totally agree based on all the dog ugly office towers the state has already mangled the skyline with. If CIM/Calpers are funding the entire project to lease I think they would put a quality project together especially to protect their investment if they were to sell down the line. Calpers isn't afraid to spend some cash on building appearances based on their HQ downtown. Plus the state is looking for around a million square feet for the west end project so I dont think we have to worry about a stumpy buliding here..

I think you’re really reaching here to think CIM/CalPERS and the State will all
hook up to build at the former Towers site. Sugit’s right in that the State
requires many conditions when building for the State and to me, it just doe’s
not make since build 1.4 million sf on one block… the costs become greater
as a tower grows taller. Last week it was reported in the SBJ that the State
can build this needed office space anywhere within three miles of the Capitol.
The Triangle area in West Sac has three developers waiting to make
a bid for the project when the guidelines, enough to fill three binders, are
released in a few months. The article is the last post under the West
Sacramento: Proposal/Projects and Developments thread.

I have a feeling that the West End Project will be built in West Sac when all is said and done.

[arod74]

Originally Posted by innov8

I think you’re really reaching here to think CIM/CalPERS and the State will all
hook up to build at the former Towers site. Sugit’s right in that the State
requires many conditions when building for the State and to me, it just doe’s
not make since build 1.4 million sf on one block... the costs become greater
as a tower grows taller.

It is probably a reach but I thought I would throw it out there. I don't think the price would be too prohibitive considering the new estimate for the west end coming in at over half a billion. With the towers footprint being for 2 buildings you probably wouldn't have to go insanely high to fit in 1.4 mill sqft on the site imho..