Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III - Page 199

Pistola916 · #**3961** Posted **Jul 6, 2009, 11:51 PM**

Perhaps a redesign of the hotel too.

Rick'sSkyline · #**3962** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 2:07 AM**

I agree!! A sleek design of it, where people wouldn't think it was a hotel? Too bad we can't hide that parking garage out of sight!!

ltsmotorsport · #**3963** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 2:49 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wburg

What other sorts of parking solutions would you recommend, vs. another garage?

I would say put the garage above the lobby/potential retail of the hotel, then the rooms above. Isn't that how the Sheraton is set up or is the garage to the side? I can't remember.

cozmoose · #**3964** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 6:15 AM**

25 stories? how tall would that be?

please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft

Pistola916 · #**3965** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 6:35 AM**

I believe the hotel would be around 350-375 feet. BTW, I know Hilton has committed to the project, but is there any chance project officials might be able to attract a Westin or a W? Or there just isn't room for a luxury hotel in Sac?

Ghost of Econgrad · #**3966** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 9:18 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by cozmoose

25 stories? how tall would that be?

please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft
please say 500 ft

12 feet avg per story. 25*12 = 300 Feet.

wburg · #**3967** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 4:23 PM**

Well hey, there's an argument to put the parking in the main hotel building instead of a separate garage: jack that sucker up a few more stories!

tronblue · #**3968** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 5:23 PM**

Seriously, why waste valuable space on the side for a garage? What is the benefit over loss here? I'm at a loss and I don't want to look at another parking garage.

innov8 · #**3969** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 5:59 PM**

If you guys are serious about not seeing another garage take up another
block downtown, then start telling Jennifer Hageman at the City of Sacramento’s
Community Development Department. Since it has not started an EIR or been
through any committees, this is where this proposal can be headed off at the pass.

To give public comment about this issue, contact Jennifer Hageman of the
City of Sacramento’s Community Development Department at
[email protected] or (916)808-5538.
Written comments should be sent to Jennifer Hageman, City of Sacramento
Community Development Department, 300 Richards Boulevard, Sacramento,
CA 95811. Comments are due before 4:00 PM on July 27, 2009.

This is info from Wburg's article last week... read it here.

singlecell · #**3970** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 7:08 PM**

i think something really sleek hotel wise would look great next to the older fabric of the bel-vue hotel.

there is a great hotel ( arcotel velvet ) next to the tacheles art commune in berlin.
the two mesh in such a beautiful way.. the contrast makes each one look so much more interesting..

turn the bel-vue into artist studio spaces (real ones), turn the ground level shop fronts into galleries, swag stores, coffee, corner store.. and you get tenants that will stay in downtown, and while lower-middle class, still frequent those establishments.

singlecell · #**3971** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 7:31 PM**

Shallit's article mentions a " Parkcrest Development " as being on the team.
I'm very afraid if the this link is one and the same Parkcrest.
Their designs border on laughable (and nauseating)..

http://www.parkcrestdev.com/hotels.html

Additionally, Bob Leaches "Le Rivage Hotel" doesn't look much better..

From what I can gather, the whole development team reeks of mediocrity..
( yay, more parapets and stucco !! )

wburg · #**3972** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 8:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by singlecell

Shallit's article mentions a " Parkcrest Development " as being on the team.
I'm very afraid if the this link is one and the same Parkcrest.
Their designs border on laughable (and nauseating)..

http://www.parkcrestdev.com/hotels.html

Additionally, Bob Leaches "Le Rivage Hotel" doesn't look much better..

From what I can gather, the whole development team reeks of mediocrity..
( yay, more parapets and stucco !! )

Indeed, it's the same folks who did Le Rivage. It's like someone fed a Natomas tract home some highly illegal steroids and HGH. I'm kind of horrified of what they might come up with for a tower using the same...well, I hesitate to call it an "aesthetic."

Downtown is a great place for that kind of cool contrast between an ultra-modern hotel tower next to a restored historic building. It would be very easy to turn 815 L Street back into an active nightclub, it was still open until last year, thus pushing the whole downtown nightlife concept a bit closer to the waterfront. Not sure if artists' lofts would pencil out, but middle-income rental or ownership housing would work pretty darn well right there. The lofts D&S put above 14th & R are mostly sold already, so we know there is a market!

Ghost of Econgrad · #**3973** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 10:15 PM**

"sigh..."

Every Hotel needs a parking structure, please someone find me one major hotel in an urban setting without a parking structure...

Now the whining about a separate garage from the hotel does have merit. I just think Sacramento is so under-developed it really doesn't matter.

Just my crazy Right Wing Extremist two cents for you all.

Majin · #**3974** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 11:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost of Econgrad

I just think Sacramento is so under-developed it really doesn't matter.

If that were true they wouldn't have to tear down a building to put one in.

tronblue · #**3975** Posted **Jul 7, 2009, 11:36 PM**

Hey Wburg, is this what your thinking of, but 25 stories worth of stucco and maybe a few stupid palm trees in front.

Ghost of Econgrad · #**3976** Posted **Jul 8, 2009, 1:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Majin

If that were true they wouldn't have to tear down a building to put one in.

The only reason they would have to tear down a building is because of the location of the hotel.

wburg · #**3977** Posted **Jul 8, 2009, 2:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost of Econgrad

The only reason they would have to tear down a building is because of the location of the hotel.

Or, they could make the building a few stories taller, and put it in the same building.

tronblue: I think I'm gonna be sick...

tronblue · #**3978** Posted **Jul 8, 2009, 3:15 AM**

What you don't like the tuscan exterior movement? But in all seriousness, I'm allergic to Rocklin too.

tronblue · #**3979** Posted **Jul 8, 2009, 3:40 AM**

The beson tower in portland sorta reminds me of those mockups at 8th and K a few pages back. Obviously its residential, but its 26 floors and has underground parking.

snfenoc · #**3980** Posted **Jul 8, 2009, 6:47 AM**

In order to have an integrated parking garage and maintain the same number of rooms, the entire structure will have to be over 30 stories (that'll be tough with a Capitol View Protection height limit of 300' - I think) or go underground quite a bit. I'm not a structural engineer or an architect, but I'm thinking either of these alternatives carry a higher price tag than the proposal.

Plus, it may be preferential to have parking garage entrances/exits on both 8th AND L Streets.

Also, someone mentioned the adaptive reuse of the old warehouse on 14th and R as a good model for the Bel-Vue and other buildings on L. I don't think so. There looks to be a significant size and, therefore, $$$$ difference. I'm not sure if a developer is willing to take on that burden. I sure haven't seen 'em lining up to develop the Berry or the Marshall. The Maydestone building has been closed for 6 years (it was in disrepair for much longer), yet it is just now getting to the point of POSSIBLE redevelopment.

The ho-hum plan for that block is probably a result of these issues.................or the developer and city have zero sense of style and history.