Sacramento: 301 Capitol Mall: A New Plan for The Towers Site - Page 134

friedpez · #**2661** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 5:34 PM**

Well in any case, CIM would be really foolish not to include housing in the project. Somehow and incredibly, BOTH the Towers and Aura fell through and each had at least 50% of their units sold out (or so we were told). Obviously there's a demand for luxury highrise condos in Sacramento, so there wouldn't be any reason not to include housing in at least one of the proposed towers on the site.

Just imagine, having a "lawnmower-height" office tower at around 25 stories, then going the extra mile with another 5 to 10 floors of condos that would poke above the skyline... Dare to dream, I suppose...

ozone · #**2662** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 6:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

Why don't you wait and see what's proposed??

OK well I didn't have a lot time so I just glanced thru the posts -and I thought someone/article said that housing was not going to part of the proposal. Please.... I'm not being negative when I say that the city should hold the developer's feet to the fire on housing. Of course, we'll have to wait and see the final proposal. But we have all been talking about the need for more market rate housing downtown for years so to even hint that there won't be housing just makes me fu'king mad. This is not an option for the develpers IMO.

As for CalPers ...well I could spend an hour telling you why I think they suck. The feed off the taxpapers of this state and a huge portion of their members live in Sacramento...and yet they seem to feel no particular responsiblity to this city. I would not be surprised if the state pulled out of the whole Resources HQ/West End project because the truth came out about this sleazy political insiderism with CalPers, that it was already a "done deal", and therefore it was politically impossible to go forward with Taylor at the O Street site at this time. Oh but wait, Lo and behold Calpers is developing another site that would be perfect for.. hum.. say for state offices and maybe in particluarly for the DOR?

sugit · #**2663** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 7:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozone

Oh but wait, Lo and behold Calpers is developing another site that would be perfect for.. hum.. say for state offices and maybe in particluarly for the DOR?

Oh man...I didn't even think about that. My heart sunk at the thought of SOBs at the old Towers site. I hope like hell you are wrong on this one.

TowerDistrict · #**2664** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 7:53 PM**

just rough estimates on the size of a twin-tower with 30-40 story buildings
would prolly put it in the range of space they were looking for. that would
be some crooked shit right there.

and why else would a firm propose a huge office devlopement with so much
already in the pipeline? that's just crazy.

innov8 · #**2665** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 8:47 PM**

Ah crap, that sure would suck. More SOB's (barrow ozone’s term) on Capitol Mall.

Let's just say this backdoor deal is in the works. Several years ago I got to go to several
West End workshops and as you know the State doe's everything wrong.
When street retail was asked to be included in the project, the State planners
wanted it off the street and hidden within the complex. Our small group told
them that this would kill street life and the business might also struggle
because they were tucked away so that by passers can't see them. Also, a
couple years ago State laws were changed so that State Projects could also
include housing, so what did the planners do? They tucked 15 or 20 units
into what to me looked like a forced location so that they could say housing
was included.

What a crooked mess for sure if this is being cooked up right now

JeffZurn · #**2666** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 9:09 PM**

I think you might be right about this, very interesting how everything is lined up. We will have to see how the whole thing un-folds in the next 18 months.

snfenoc · #**2667** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 11:09 PM**

It's good to know I'm not the only conspiracy kook on this forum. Yeah, when CalPERS took over the 301 Crap site earlier this year, I was thinking it had a good chance of becoming the future home of the West End SOBs. My only question is why wait 18 months?? The state's demand for office space already exists. Are CIM and CalPERS waiting for lower construction costs?

TowerDistrict · #**2668** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 11:29 PM**

i'd love to entertain the conspiracy notion more... but why wouldn't CIM just
submit a bid along with the other developers if they had an inside track with
the State and CalPERS connection?

though it still doesn't make any sense that 301 would be 800,000+ sq. ft. of
office space without some state government connection. There's just no
justification for that at all. Especially not after 621 and 500 CM and Meridian II
coming around the corner.

arod74 · #**2669** Posted **Dec 10, 2007, 11:37 PM**

Glad some of you are finally seeing the chess pieces move around in this whole incestious CalPers/CIM/state conspiracy. Some of us called this back in July when the state first announced they were taking bids for a privately funded building for the former west end project. Let the plot thicken... waahaa hahahah(maniacal cackle)

Quote:

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. 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.

innov8 · #**2670** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 1:51 AM**

It certainly has a better chance of happening now than it did back in August
when the State started asking for plans and bids. Now, considering that the
State is going $9 billion in the hole this year and possibly double that the next,
it's still seems unlikely to me... but who knows.

Please, oh please, let this be a crazy idea

urban_encounter · #**2671** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 2:07 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozone

OK well I didn't have a lot time so I just glanced thru the posts -and I thought someone/article said that housing was not going to part of the proposal. Please.... I'm not being negative when I say that the city should hold the developer's feet to the fire on housing. Of course, we'll have to wait and see the final proposal. But we have all been talking about the need for more market rate housing downtown for years so to even hint that there won't be housing just makes me fu'king mad. This is not an option for the develpers IMO.

As for CalPers ...well I could spend an hour telling you why I think they suck. The feed off the taxpapers of this state and a huge portion of their members live in Sacramento...and yet they seem to feel no particular responsiblity to this city. I would not be surprised if the state pulled out of the whole Resources HQ/West End project because the truth came out about this sleazy political insiderism with CalPers, that it was already a "done deal", and therefore it was politically impossible to go forward with Taylor at the O Street site at this time. Oh but wait, Lo and behold Calpers is developing another site that would be perfect for.. hum.. say for state offices and maybe in particluarly for the DOR?

I didn't say you were being negative; I just said wait until we see what's proposed.

Otherwise i agree with everything you said here..

urban_encounter · #**2672** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 2:25 AM**

R.E. Graswich was just on CBS13 (for he's scoop segment)..

He blasted the city and the people of Sacramento for "believing the hype" that Sacramento is ready for highrise residential living.

He went on to say that it's not and it "wont be for years"

urban_encounter · #**2673** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 2:42 AM**

btw here's his e mail

[email protected]

(where's neuhickman??)

creamcityleo79 · #**2674** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 2:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

btw here's his e mail

[email protected]

(where's neuhickman??)

Don't get me started. He'll be on the news tomorrow talking about me. They already mentioned me on the Bee's website and I posted about development there maybe once or twice! Then, they talked about that lady tonight on KCRA that I cussed out in email. I thought they were going to talk to her and she was going to say something about the negative response she got. Luckily, she didn't. She's still a bitch! But, maybe the food at her restaurant is good!

urban_encounter · #**2675** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 2:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by neuhickman79

Don't get me started. He'll be on the news tomorrow talking about me. They already mentioned me on the Bee's website and I posted about development there maybe once or twice! Then, they talked about that lady tonight on KCRA that I cussed out in email. I thought they were going to talk to her and she was going to say something about the negative response she got. Luckily, she didn't. She's still a bitch! But, maybe the food at her restaurant is good!

don't worry i sent him an email for you..

I basically asked him how it is, that 550 (+/-) Sacramentans put down non refundable depsoits if the city isn't ready???..

He's not interested in facts, just the media hype. CBS 13 is the worst news outlet in Sacramento.

creamcityleo79 · #**2676** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 2:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

don't worry i sent him an email for you..

You go on the news...I'm going DL for a bit! ;-)

ltsmotorsport · #**2677** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 6:20 AM**

Graswich is such a moron. I know why the local media keeps him around (because he can stir the shit with the best of him), but he has the most groundless opinions of all time. Who's still listening to this moron?

Hey Graswich; Sacramento was ready for condos, it's the banks that weren't ready for Sacramento.

SacTownAndy · #**2678** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 5:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ltsmotorsport

Hey Graswich; Sacramento was ready for condos, it's the banks that weren't ready for Sacramento.

Exactly! Did he give any rationale for his comments? What a bafoon.

leftopolis · #**2679** Posted **Dec 11, 2007, 11:48 PM**

I'm not buying the rumor of 2 office towers, but then those living in Sacramento might be more in the know. For what it's worth, below is a quote from CIM's website regarding the 800J project:

Downtown Sacramento has recently emerged as a vibrant urban center, creating a new need for upscale apartments, dining, entertainment, and retail options. CIM intends to become an integral developer in this process. http://www.cimgroup.com/

urban_encounter · #**2680** Posted **Dec 12, 2007, 1:51 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by R.E. Graswich

Thanks for the note. I beg to differ, and don't believe either project got anywhere close to the funding levels they needed, despite what promoters might say. I would love to see those buildings going up, but the essential truth of what I reported is self-evident.
Best,
Bob Graswich

At least he was polite in his response, (because my email was much more direct)...

But his comment that Sacramento wont be ready for highrise residential living for years is way off imo. Sacramento is ready now; and i think the fact that 550+ people putting down non refundable deposits is proof of that...

Now if he's trying to imply that it will be years before Sacramento actually sees a highrise residential tower built, I'm starting to believe that might be the case. But that's not what he said.