Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[BillSimmons]

Originally Posted by Majin

I told you guys this would be rubber stamped

Good thing we are in the era of KJ pro development. If Fargo was still Mayor she would of fought this tooth and nail.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article23825752.html

Fargo would have buried her head in the sand until the developers went away.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by NickB1967

And meanwhile, the block of 3rd / Capitol / 4th / L Street, where two high-rise condo towers were planned, remains two holes in the ground???

And they want to take out perfectly functional housing at Capitol Towers / Capitol Villas?

How are these two sites even related? One has not a damn thing to do with the other. It's bad enough to hear the whining about the demise of "villas" from anti-urbanists, but to have regular contributors to this forum vocally/publically opposed this project is and worthy. I do not want to but you in the same corner as they, because that may have not been your point. But if you are, you can commiserated with W "Synergy" Burg, whose side lost last night. But I'll because it's a win for Sacramento.

[creamcityleo79]

Mixed-use project at Stockton and T gets approval

A new mixed-use project got the green light Thursday night for a part of Sacramento where such projects haven’t been common.
On a unanimous vote, the city of Sacramento planning commission approved a project at Stockton and T streets with a five-story, 214-unit mixed-use building and 21 single-family homes.

The project would be on the site now home to an empty building formerly owned by AT&T until developer The Evergreen Cos. bought it more than two years ago.

Large mixed-use building proposed for Stockton and T in Sacramento
Representatives from Evergreen told commissioners they’d met with members of the surrounding Elmhurst neighborhood 20 times for the proposal. That might have been reflected in the relatively few people who spoke in opposition, relative to most other recent infill projects in Sacramento.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...jAiEl5DcXYSI67dxb4F9e33mJsZ&t=1434149700

[ozone]

^^^^^ Nice looking infill (certainly compared to what exists now). Looks like it'll have an above ground parking garage. Which is probably unavoidable in that part of town. Anyone have any news about the former Coca Cola plant nearby? While this is technically in Elmhurst, I think it'll have more psychological impact on north Oak Park.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by ozone

How are these two sites even related? One has not a damn thing to do with the other. It's bad enough to hear the whining about the demise of "villas" from anti-urbanists, but to have regular contributors to this forum vocally/publically opposed this project is and worthy. I do not want to put you in the same corner as they, because that may have not been your point. But if you are, you can commiserate with W "Synergy" Burg, whose side lost last night. But I'll because it's a win for Sacramento.

Huh? It certainly wasn't. I do not share Mr. Burg's fetishes.

It just seemed odd to me to rip out *far from blighted* medium density housing to build high density high-rise housing, when a proposed site for high density high-rise housing sits vacant a couple of blocks away, and has sat vacant for years now!

Of course, CalPERS being CalPERS may have something to do with that, as others have pointed out....

[Bubb90]

http://www.sacbee.com/entertainment/living/pets/article24385702.html

[creamcityleo79]

I really want to say that some of the people here lately have been SO RUDE to wburg. He has always been thoughtful and knowledgeable with his responses and I think it would be good if we can all keep things that way. I realize that he may have, at times, an unpopular opinion on things. But, he takes a beating sometimes when it comes to the comments. I know he doesn't need me defending him. But, let's cool it on the rhetoric against him sometimes. It borders on offensive...and that's totally unnecessary.

[Pistola916]

Originally Posted by NickB1967

Huh? It certainly wasn't. I do not share Mr. Burg's fetishes.

It just seemed odd to me to rip out *far from blighted* medium density housing to build high density high-rise housing, when a proposed site for high density high-rise housing sits vacant a couple of blocks away, and has sat vacant for years now!

Of course, CalPERS being CalPERS may have something to do with that, as others have pointed out....

The developers would have to buy the land from CalPERS. I agree that there are other underutilized plots throughout downtown to build on but if you don't own the land and the other developers are unwilling to sell, then there's nothing else to do

[creamcityleo79]

Developer Kolokotronis has ambitious idea for midtown: Building on top of a parking structure

Developer Sotiris Kolokotronis has another big midtown project in the works — one that would be constructed on top of the Sacramento Bee's parking structure at 20th & Q streets.
The developer and newspaper have a purchase agreement under which he would acquire the property but allow employees to continue using the two-story structure, said Bee community affairs director Pam Dinsmore. The deal was first reported Tuesday by the Bee.

The garage, which occupies an entire square block, has been the subject of development rumors before. Proposals floated for the site in the past included both a Whole Foods and a Raley’s.
A four-story building at 19th and Q streets is proposed with 72 residential units and just under 2,000 square feet of retail space. The retail space would be situated primarily against the street corner and have outdoor seating.

It's unclear what he would build, though presumably it would be housing. Dinsmore referred further questions to a broker working on the deal who did not return a call Tuesday. Kolokotronis also has not responded to calls about his projects in the area.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...ous-idea-for.html?ana=e_vert_st_20150615

[wburg]

The city does have the power to say where development does and doesn't happen, and what form it should take. And they can also get groups talking (like one developer with a plan and another with an undeveloped plot of land) to get that sort of mutually beneficial exchange going--government as facilitator of change.

I'm kind of surprised that there wasn't an article about the approval of the Ice Blocks project at last Thursday's Planning Commission meeting, while both Capitol Towers and the Elmhurst/T Street infill projects had their own articles--or maybe I missed it? But it's a very important and very cool project--historic rehab of the existing Crystal Ice complex on 16th and R, new infill apartment buildings on the 17th & R block, and office/commercial north of R and 17th that will incorporate some chunks of the Orchard Supply building (which is too far gone to save.) I was there on Thursday to support Ice Blocks in person, but "Preservation Group Supports Project" doesn't make for good Business Journal headlines, I guess. The Crystal Ice building will focus on retail/commercial--primarily stores selling stuff, rather than the bar/restaurant focus of other projects.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by creamcityleo79

Developer Kolokotronis has ambitious idea for midtown: Building on top of a parking structure




http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...ous-idea-for.html?ana=e_vert_st_20150615

Note that this rendering is for the building proposed at Q and 19th, not for Q and 21st on top of the parking structure, but they're part of a whole interlocking series of projects between 19th and 21st. This, like Ice Blocks above, is the sort of project that I like to see: building on a vacant lot or a parking structure. And we're seeing a whole lot of this kind of project, under construction and in the pipeline, ranging from alley units and small infill on vacant lots to block-sized projects. The preferred construction method these days is wood on top of a concrete podium--a lot cheaper (and greener) than steel construction, but it makes for a noticeable amount of density while still at a neighborhood scale.

[creamcityleo79]

Downtown building sold with mixed-use rehab coming

A downtown Sacramento building sold in recent weeks is in line for additions and renovations by the new owner.
The two-story building at 1228 H St., about 9,700 square feet, was an obvious value-add opportunity, said broker Tony Whittaker of CBRE Sacramento.

That’s just what the new owners, CS360 Towers LLC, have in mind. Whittaker said a rear second-floor storage area of about up to 2,800 square feet will become apartments to complement an existing one on the same floor.
On the first floor, about a third of the building is occupied with an office user. Whittaker said the new tenants will gut the rest, about 3,500 square feet, for an eventual retail use of some kind.
The new owners bought the building for about $600,000, a price that was critical for getting the deal done, Whittaker said.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...rehab-coming.html?ana=e_vert_st_20150615

[ltsmotorsport]

Originally Posted by creamcityleo79

Developer Kolokotronis has ambitious idea for midtown: Building on top of a parking structure






http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...ous-idea-for.html?ana=e_vert_st_20150615

Love the big, industrial-style windows shown on the rendering, but that flat facade on 19th desperately needs a little articulation.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by creamcityleo79

I really want to say that some of the people here lately have been SO RUDE to wburg. He has always been thoughtful and knowledgeable with his responses and I think it would be good if we can all keep things that way. I realize that he may have, at times, an unpopular opinion on things. But, he takes a beating sometimes when it comes to the comments. I know he doesn't need me defending him. But, let's cool it on the rhetoric against him sometimes. It borders on offensive...and that's totally unnecessary.

Well you are right about one thing. He does not need you to defend him. He actually takes delights in people coming down on him. So in a way we are making his day. It's not just his opinions that are unpopular my friend. He has said many things on this forum that have been equally if not more offensive. Maybe since you are new here you are unfamiliar with his history both on this forum and his activity in the community. He is involved in many issue regarding the central city and I applaud him for his interest in civic matters but too much of his activity can only be characterized as provincial NIMBYism. Fine. Who cares? I don't hate him (not that he would care if I did). More often than not I agree with him. BUT when I do not, I'll tell him he is flat out wrong. He won't care anyway because he never thinks he is wrong. :-P

[ozone]

Originally Posted by wburg

Note that this rendering is for the building proposed at Q and 19th, not for Q and 21st on top of the parking structure, but they're part of a whole interlocking series of projects between 19th and 21st. This, like Ice Blocks above, is the sort of project that I like to see: building on a vacant lot or a parking structure. And we're seeing a whole lot of this kind of project, under construction and in the pipeline, ranging from alley units and small infill on vacant lots to block-sized projects. The preferred construction method these days is wood on top of a concrete podium--a lot cheaper (and greener) than steel construction, but it makes for a noticeable amount of density while still at a neighborhood scale.

These projects are great infill and very much welcomed! I can't comment too much on them for personal reasons but just to say I'm very excited. Now if only we can get the planned park that is kitty-corner to the Q-19th street project going. This and dog run park will also start to bring the hood together nicely.

[wburg]

I don't take any pleasure in being insulted or belittled by Ozone or other users here, but I don't consider the possibility of offending people a reason to hold back from stating my opinion. Too often the "NIMBY" term is used as an all-purpose insult to belittle anyone who objects to any project for any reason, to the point where the term is meaningless.

creamcityleo79 started posting on this forum a couple of years before I did, according to our reg dates, so he has seen my posting here as long as you have. And I don't mind if people argue for civility and against unnecessary rudeness.

There was an article about the Q & 19th dog park recently too, it is high on CM Hansen's list of priorities. Although the other great news that came out the other day is the planned reopening of Washington Elementary School at 17th and E Street; a growing central city population needs schools, as the expectation that 100% of the new residents will be only empty-nest seniors, and singles who migrate to the suburbs to have kids, is unrealistic--and doesn't match the demographic trends already underway. But with the kids come dogs, and more places for both to play in the heart of the city is always worthwhile.

[creamcityleo79]

Originally Posted by ozone

Well you are right about one thing. He does not need you to defend him. He actually takes delights in people coming down on him. So in a way we are making his day. It's not just his opinions that are unpopular my friend. He has said many things on this forum that have been equally if not more offensive. Maybe since you are new here you are unfamiliar with his history both on this forum and his activity in the community. He is involved in many issue regarding the central city and I applaud him for his interest in civic matters but too much of his activity can only be characterized as provincial NIMBYism. Fine. Who cares? I don't hate him (not that he would care if I did). More often than not I agree with him. BUT when I do not, I'll tell him he is flat out wrong. He won't care anyway because he never thinks he is wrong. :-P

Since I am new here? I have been on this board since 2005!!!! My screen name changed from neuhickman79 within the past couple years!

[LandofFrost]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...t-resurrected-for-neighborhood-near.html


Townhomes in Newton Booth, 27th and V. So this is an older plan, anyone have a pic of what is was supposed to look like. From 2007?

[Mr. Ozo]

Originally Posted by LandofFrost

Townhomes in Newton Booth, 27th and V. So this is an older plan, anyone have a pic of what is was supposed to look like. From 2007?

http://livinginurbansac.blogspot.com/2007/01/townhouses-townhouses.html

I've been watching this one since 2007. There is a three story home under construction there right now across the alley off W, but I believe it is separate from this project.

[wburg]

It sounds like the plan has changed a lot since LJ Urban first proposed it in 2007; modular off-site construction instead of being built on site, and some changes to layout. There is a lot of infill going into vacant lots and alleys in that corner of Newton Booth, although we're seeing it happen all over the central city. The relocation of the Co-Op to 28th and R Street, now under construction, may be spurring some folks to move lots they have been sitting on for years.