Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[wburg]

Nah, figured there would be a lot of rampant speculation as the balloon gets squeezed back this way. We'll see what actually gets built--and what new holes in the ground we'll be looking at for a while.

[ltsmotorsport]

Rehabbing the Plaza Building next door to the Metropolitan would be a great. I would think the Plaza could be redone to lofts with retail down below and add a housing product that the Metropolitan alone couldn't provide. You simply can't build buildings like that anymore due to costs alone, and rehab to bring it up to current codes would be great to see.

[CAGeoNerd]

Originally Posted by BillSimmons

This clearly has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the new Arena being built a few blocks away! Completely independent! Was bound to happen anyway! Nothing to see here!

Too true! It's all just coincidence. The arena had no impact whatsoever.

[enigma99a]

Originally Posted by CAGeoNerd

Too true! It's all just coincidence. The arena had no impact whatsoever.

Who would want to live within walking distance to the Kings games

[snfenoc]

So what we have is an offer on land 5 blocks away from the site of an arena that has yet to start construction. Keep in mind, we have no formal proposal for that land. The property in question is next to property the developer already owns. Also, we should consider the improving housing market, region-wide, state-wide and country-wide (generally, speaking). Heck, there have been rumblings of an improving office market.

Hmmmmmm.

The problem I have is how much credit should I assign to an arena that hasn't even been built for developments that aren't even formally proposed?

Your post is right about one thing...there is nothing to see here. At least, not right now.

Let's check back in 5, 10, 15 years. Let's see what actually gets built. Let's consider the real costs to the city. Let's study the effects of free flowing, seemingly infinite government dollars on inflation. Then, maybe we can make a conclusion.

[Surefiresacto]

Saw this posted in the Sac Bus Journal over the holiday weekend... it's a little preliminary, but still very exciting to see this type of news popping up again.


Is the long-mothballed Metropolitan high-rise project back?
Ben van der Meer - Sacramento Business Journal
May 23, 2014

I also posted this on the Metropolitan thread page so the conversation can continue over there.

[enigma99a]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

So what we have is an offer on land 5 blocks away from the site of an arena that has yet to start construction. Keep in mind, we have no formal proposal for that land. The property in question is next to property the developer already owns. Also, we should consider the improving housing market, region-wide, state-wide and country-wide (generally, speaking). Heck, there have been rumblings of an improving office market.

Hmmmmmm.

The problem I have is how much credit should I assign to an arena that hasn't even been built for developments that aren't even formally proposed?

Your post is right about one thing...there is nothing to see here. At least, not right now.

Let's check back in 5, 10, 15 years. Let's see what actually gets built. Let's consider the real costs to the city. Let's study the effects of free flowing, seemingly infinite government dollars on inflation. Then, maybe we can make a conclusion.

From the Biz journal

Officials with CIM, which is handling development possibilities for the lot informally known as “the hole in the ground” at 301 Capitol Mall, acknowledged they’re starting to consider possibilities in light of an expected surge in new development nearby.




They must mean development nearby in the State

[BillSimmons]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

So what we have is an offer on land 5 blocks away from the site of an arena that has yet to start construction. Keep in mind, we have no formal proposal for that land. The property in question is next to property the developer already owns. Also, we should consider the improving housing market, region-wide, state-wide and country-wide (generally, speaking). Heck, there have been rumblings of an improving office market.

Hmmmmmm.

The problem I have is how much credit should I assign to an arena that hasn't even been built for developments that aren't even formally proposed?

Your post is right about one thing...there is nothing to see here. At least, not right now.

Let's check back in 5, 10, 15 years. Let's see what actually gets built. Let's consider the real costs to the city. Let's study the effects of free flowing, seemingly infinite government dollars on inflation. Then, maybe we can make a conclusion.

You know that this lot was originally part of the arena project, right? It was 1 of the lots that originally was going to be given to the Kings owners as part of the land swap. Not some random, far away piece of land completely unaffected by the $500 million project going down around the corner.

[BillSimmons]

Originally Posted by enigma99a

From the Biz journal

Officials with CIM, which is handling development possibilities for the lot informally known as “the hole in the ground” at 301 Capitol Mall, acknowledged they’re starting to consider possibilities in light of an expected surge in new development nearby.




They must mean development nearby in the State

Welp so much for that

[Deno]

Originally Posted by enigma99a

Who would want to live within walking distance to the Kings games

I would

[Jay916]

Arena + Metropolitan =

[CAGeoNerd]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

So what we have is an offer on land 5 blocks away from the site of an arena that has yet to start construction. Keep in mind, we have no formal proposal for that land. The property in question is next to property the developer already owns. Also, we should consider the improving housing market, region-wide, state-wide and country-wide (generally, speaking). Heck, there have been rumblings of an improving office market.

Hmmmmmm.

The problem I have is how much credit should I assign to an arena that hasn't even been built for developments that aren't even formally proposed?

Your post is right about one thing...there is nothing to see here. At least, not right now.

Let's check back in 5, 10, 15 years. Let's see what actually gets built. Let's consider the real costs to the city. Let's study the effects of free flowing, seemingly infinite government dollars on inflation. Then, maybe we can make a conclusion.

You know very well that 5, 10, 15 years from now you'll attribute any development to improvement of the economy or other development or changing demographics or ANY reason than to ever give credit to the arena. It's okay to admit you and the other nay-sayers were wrong. This is just one example of many going on and many on the way, precisely why many people such as myself supported a new arena downtown even at the high cost and even though I'm not even much of a Kings/NBA fan. What everyone was hoping and expecting to happen given history and example, is happening. It's only going to ramp up more from here. Just join us - then in 5, 10, 15 years you can say you were right all along instead of searching for excuses for why the arena didn't help anything.

[Web]

Originally Posted by CAGeoNerd

You know very well that 5, 10, 15 years from now you'll attribute any development to improvement of the economy or other development or changing demographics or ANY reason than to ever give credit to the arena. It's okay to admit you and the other nay-sayers were wrong. This is just one example of many going on and many on the way, precisely why many people such as myself supported a new arena downtown even at the high cost and even though I'm not even much of a Kings/NBA fan. What everyone was hoping and expecting to happen given history and example, is happening. It's only going to ramp up more from here. Just join us - then in 5, 10, 15 years you can say you were right all along instead of searching for excuses for why the arena didn't help anything.

please read the articles about how an arena is not always the panacea its claimed to be.......I still can not believe all the give aways in this deal.....the free billboards and also the free property. Call me whatever but at some point that hole in the ground would develop to something......and most cities it seems are all in recovery mode and building buildings etc the economy is on the riuse from a very deep hole.

Also I am still voting NO on a strong mayor on the ballot this november

[wburg]

On the flip side, people are already crediting the arena for development that started before the latest arena deal was struck last year. Pointing out big-picture issues, like the dramatic recovery of the housing market of the past few years, cultural shifts resulting in more interest in downtown living, changes in procedures and codes like new zoning and parking regulations, and it's a whole different environment--of which the public expenditure of an arena is a limited part, but hardly the only or even the deciding factor. It's something to point to for people who like their answers simple. Cities aren't simple, they are complex interlocking pieces.

And it still doesn't answer the biggest question--will the arena and its side effects eventually produce enough revenue to the city's general fund to repay the interest payments on the loan? That's the unknown variable. The folks in the private sector, and the housing speculators, and even the Kings organization, don't care about the answer, because they will be making money either way. Figuring out how to balance the general fund is city government's problem.

[wburg]

And distracting us from arena chat...

Sacramento City Council approves financial boost for planned science center
By Ryan Lillis
[email protected]
Published: Tuesday, May. 27, 2014 - 9:13 pm

The Powerhouse Science Center, a proposed science and environmental museum on the banks of the Sacramento River, received a big financial boost Tuesday night from the Sacramento City Council.

By a unanimous vote, the council agreed to dedicate $350,000 a year over the next 20 years to the construction of the first phase of the project north of downtown. That $7 million contribution will help the science center pay off a $25 million construction loan it is seeking from the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank.

Powerhouse officials said Tuesday that if the loan application is granted, construction on the museum could begin as early as September and be completed by early 2016.

The museum is planned for a mostly vacant plot of land adjacent to the city’s water intake structure, between Interstate 5 and the river. It is less than a half-mile from Old Sacramento and is envisioned as the northern anchor of a “museum row” that would include the California State Railroad Museum, a planned railroad technology museum in the downtown railyard and the Crocker Art Museum.

The first phase of the construction will result in a 37,000-square-foot museum – nearly four times the size of the facility it will replace, the Discovery Museum on Auburn Boulevard. It will include a domed planetarium, a hands-on space exploration simulator, classrooms and a nature center with live animals. A gallery of exhibits will focus on the state’s water supply, and the Sacramento Municipal Utility District is planning an outdoor garden that will promote renewable energy.

“We will be shaping the next generation of scientists and engineers,” said Ray Burnell, the museum’s executive director.

Michele Wong, president of the museum’s board, said the organization is “taking the existing programs that we have at the Discovery Science Museum and we’re blowing them up into something much bigger.”

“This will be a destination science center that is meant to be a hub for science education, exploration and innovation for the region,” she said.

With expanded learning and exhibit space, museum officials project 250,000 people will visit the facility each year.

In addition to the I-Bank funding, the Powerhouse center has more than $8 million in state and local grants and $2.2 million in private donations lined up for the construction work. The organization is also seeking $13.5 million in federal tax credits.

Museum officials have already received key building permits and other approvals needed to begin the work.

The city’s contribution is on top of $143,000 it gives to the museum each year for operational costs at the Discovery Museum. Those contributions will continue in the new location.

Sacramento County is also being asked to contribute to the project and the Board of Supervisors is scheduled today to vote on a resolution supporting the museum’s I-Bank application. So far, the county has not decided whether to help fund the project. County spokeswoman Chris Andis said, “We are definitely considering funding this project down the road, though the exact date or amount has not yet been determined.”

The funding approved by the city Tuesday comes from three sources. The largest pot – $200,000 – will come from a newly formed Economic Development Fund that is made up of property tax revenue that had been going to the city’s redevelopment agency. Redevelopment agencies were dissolved in 2011.

Wong said museum officials are exploring financing methods for the second phase of the project, which will involve the renovation of the former Pacific Gas and Electric power station at the site and the construction of a parking garage. Much of the funding for that phase would come from sponsorships.

“Once we have broken ground (on the first phase) and people see this is really happening, it’s going to be easier to close other exhibit sponsors,” she said.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2014/05/27/6436934/sacramento-city-council-approves.html#storylink=cpy

[BillSimmons]

Originally Posted by wburg

On the flip side, people are already crediting the arena for development that started before the latest arena deal was struck last year. Pointing out big-picture issues, like the dramatic recovery of the housing market of the past few years, cultural shifts resulting in more interest in downtown living, changes in procedures and codes like new zoning and parking regulations, and it's a whole different environment--of which the public expenditure of an arena is a limited part, but hardly the only or even the deciding factor. It's something to point to for people who like their answers simple. Cities aren't simple, they are complex interlocking pieces.

And it still doesn't answer the biggest question--will the arena and its side effects eventually produce enough revenue to the city's general fund to repay the interest payments on the loan? That's the unknown variable. The folks in the private sector, and the housing speculators, and even the Kings organization, don't care about the answer, because they will be making money either way. Figuring out how to balance the general fund is city government's problem.

This sounds an awful lot like your reasoning behind claiming that Staples Center was NOT responsible for the explosion of growth and development in Downtown LA that you made on the City Data forum not too long ago.

[BillSimmons]

I wonder how many lawsuits S.T.O.P. is going to file against this $7million Science Museum Subsidy?

[wburg]

Originally Posted by BillSimmons

This sounds an awful lot like your reasoning behind claiming that Staples Center was NOT responsible for the explosion of growth and development in Downtown LA that you made on the City Data forum not too long ago.

Well, unless you count just LA Live and Staples Center itself, the area around the arena is pretty much just parking lots. Downtown Los Angeles' turnaround was part of the same overall cultural shift, and its timing during the previous real estate boom helped the downtown housing market. What made the difference in downtown Los Angeles was the conversion of downtown to a more residential neighborhood--not single-family homes, but conversion of vacant and underutilized office buildings to condos. That conversion was facilitated by policy shifts and a generation that already wanted to live downtown but couldn't because of silly stuff like parking minimums.

Staples Center, as arenas do, "squeezed the balloon" towards downtown, and the city followed up with policies that facilitated residential development.

The city of Los Angeles also insisted on a community benefits agreement:

http://communitybenefits.blogspot.com/2008/01/success-of-hollywood-and-highland-cba.html

Some of the provisions included in the Staples Center CBA:

· $1,000,000 for the creation or improvement of parks and recreational facilities

· $25,000 per year for a term of five years for the creation of a residential parking permit program

· an agreement to comply with the city’s living wage ordinance and to make all reasonable efforts to reach the goal of ensuring that 70% of the jobs created by the project pay a living wage;

· an agreement to give priority hiring to persons displaced by the project and to low income individuals residing within three miles of the project

· job training programs to be coordinated with community groups

· $100,000 in seed money for a first source (i.e. local) hiring program

· a requirement that 20% of the residential units in the project be affordable

· $650,000 in interest-free loans to non-profit housing developers for the creation of additional affordable housing

· an agreement to cooperate with the coalition to establish an advisory committee to assist with the implementation and enforcement of the agreement.

[jbradway]

wburg, still with the squeezing balloon metaphor? I guess LA Live retail and restaurants, Grammy Museum, Nokia Theater, Ritz Carlton, JW Marriott, condos, etc. got squeezed from somewhere else then? Or places that got renovated like the Holiday Inn that turned into the Luxe City Center?

And none of that existed around the old Forum.

[BillSimmons]

Originally Posted by jbradway

wburg, still with the squeezing balloon metaphor? I guess LA Live retail and restaurants, Grammy Museum, Nokia Theater, Ritz Carlton, JW Marriott, condos, etc. got squeezed from somewhere else then? Or places that got renovated like the Holiday Inn that turned into the Luxe City Center?

And none of that existed around the old Forum.

Yes you see what happened was they took all of those things from around Los Angeles and they placed them inside of a "balloon" and then they flew that "balloon" over to Skid Row and they "squeezed" the "balloon" until a world class entertainment center plopped out.