Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[wburg]

Originally Posted by jbradway

How do you and wburg propose that it be built on land they don't own? Sort of a sticking point there don't you think?

I'm pretty sure that it is possible for land to be transferred from one owner to another by exchanging special pieces of paper. The city of Sacramento owns the land, and they are actively marketing the site for someone to build something on that site--the Kings owners have first right of refusal, but the city really wants something to be built there. Although it sounds like the door may have closed, see the story above--D&S and CFY may have a proposal. Interested to learn more.

However, when one door closes, another opens--CADA just announced they want a condo building at 14th and N Street, currently occupied by a parking lot and a 2 story apartment building, on a lot with a maximum height limit of 200 feet. Perfect spot for a Yamanee size/type building!

If someone wants to build a 15 story building, there are places in town where it is permitted by zoning and encouraged by the city's general plan, and places where it is not permitted and discouraged by the general plan, which seems to imply that someone who wants to build a 15 story building should probably have bought some land in the part of town zoned for it, instead of a part of town that doesn't allow that height. Unless they're really, really bad about doing their due diligence, they knew that when they bought the property in the first place.

[BillSimmons]

That's a great idea. Let's get all the developers in town in 1 room and they can all just trade property back and forth so they can build projects on specific projects that are to our liking. Clearly our opinions are more important than things like real estate values, land ownership, market trends, etc. This is a much better plan.

[Korey]

Maybe the developer knew that he could just roll the city and get an exemption.

That new CADA development could be so cool. Fantastic location and for sale instead of rental. I'm fine with more D&S and CFY, they've done the city well.

[LandofFrost]

I'm really happy about CADA building condos ... for sale, we need a bellwether in this area.

Speaking of Condos, any news on the three high rise condos they are supposed to build at O and 8th?



If you get a chance to check out the new homes at the Creamery they are pretty neat. For $450,000, they seem well priced too. They are not townhomes, they are completely separate and I was impressed.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by BillSimmons

That's a great idea. Let's get all the developers in town in 1 room and they can all just trade property back and forth so they can build projects on specific projects that are to our liking. Clearly our opinions are more important than things like real estate values, land ownership, market trends, etc. This is a much better plan.

I think you have an awesome idea, here. Let's institute it. Of course, not all landowner's want to sell or trade; not all parcels have the same value; and not all locations serve a particular developer's business model. Other than those very minor issues, what other problems could crop up?

Yamanee would be like a gateway drug for Midtown -
Let's consider Downtown Sacramento's staggering ability to build tower after tower: The Great and Powerful Map has directed an almost innumerable amount of tower developments into Downtown - I can nearly count them all on one hand. If the Great and Powerful Map were to be ignored and Midtown dabbled in Yamanee, in a year or two, it could be shooting up tower after tower in some dirty back alley...with used cranes, no doubt! Who knows what's next? Midtown could contract a CTD (Crane Transmitted Disease). Then, we'd all have to wear ribbons during CTD Awareness Month, countless dollars would be spent on CTD research, we might even have to make a quilt...I mean, ugh! It's just not worth it.

I ask all developers to follow the Great and Powerful Map - it has been such a blessing so far. Directing large developments inward is the way to go. Downtown is so different than it was in the 80s...the 1880s.

[Majin]

The problem people like wburg keep missing is that not all plots of land are equal. Just because there is an available property at 14th and O doesn't mean a the 15 story tower will as successful there as their 25th and J location. You can just build things in a random location and it will be profitable. It's location, location, location. Come on, you should know this. This is real estate.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by Majin

The problem people like wburg keep missing is that not all plots of land are equal. Just because there is an available property at 14th and O doesn't mean a the 15 story tower will as successful there as their 25th and J location. You can just build things in a random location and it will be profitable. It's location, location, location. Come on, you should know this. This is real estate.

But the Great and Powerful map says differently. We have a plan. And like all government plans, it doesn't work. So why would we deviate from that?

[SacTownAndy]

Originally Posted by LandofFrost

If you get a chance to check out the new homes at the Creamery they are pretty neat. For $450,000, they seem well priced too. They are not townhomes, they are completely separate and I was impressed.

We stopped by the Creamery to check out the models last weekend too and thought they were pretty slick. And those rooftop patios... sheesh those were cool.

[innov8]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

But the Great and Powerful map says differently. We have a plan. And like all government plans, it doesn't work. So why would we deviate from that?

It’s a wonder as to why the city even follow the central city general plan, the
2030 general plan has been largely ignored. The Natomas general plan was
ignored as well shortly after it was agreed upon, it does not even resemble
what was originally planned. The Railyards are shaping up to be a midrise low
density disappointment as it’s scaled down over and over again.

[LandofFrost]

Originally Posted by innov8

It’s a wonder as to why the city even follow the central city general plan, the
2030 general plan has been largely ignored. The Natomas general plan was
ignored as well shortly after it was agreed upon, it does not even resemble
what was originally planned. The Railyards are shaping up to be a midrise low
density disappointment as it’s scaled down over and over again.

I don't really understand why the West Sacramento Bridge District is doing so great and the Railyards so crappy. Is it just that TBD was ready for construction sooner?

[bradbeds]

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/ne...plan-for-800-k-is-mixed-use-project.html

Looks like they want to build something like 16th and Powerhouse at 8th and K.

Think that spot deserves something bigger than a 5-6 story mid rise, but I'll take what I can get I guess.

[Korey]

5 stories wood on concrete downtown and 13 stories in midtown lol. Lets take what we can get Sacramento.

Originally Posted by LandofFrost

I don't really understand why the West Sacramento Bridge District is doing so great and the Railyards so crappy. Is it just that TBD was ready for construction sooner?

West Sac has been focused on TBD; Sac has been focused on the arena.

[Majin]

BTW, that is speculation, they never confirmed the height of the building they are planning.

[jbradway]

Originally Posted by Korey

5 stories wood on concrete downtown and 13 stories in midtown lol. Lets take what we can get Sacramento.



West Sac has been focused on TBD; Sac has been focused on the arena.

Railyards development has nothing to do with the city working on the arena.

Inland American had been in negotiations to sell the Railyards for a few years. And only recently has it completed changing hands to Downtown Railyard LLC. Inland ended up with the site when Thomas Enterprises defaulted in 2010. Inland was never going develop this project. They are a real estate investment company.

The dragged out time was due to the discussion over toxic waste cleanup and who was paying for that. In the mean time the city put in roads, bridges and a bunch of infrastructure over the last 5 years.

[LandofFrost]

Here is a really interesting article about London tall buildings that talks about the importance of clustering tall buildings together.

http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/dec/11/city-of-london-skyline-of-tomorrow-interactive


I think it's interesting given the proposals for a hotel on Capital and 28th and the condo tower on J and 25th

[Korey]

Yes I understand the remediation and reimbursement took a while and that Inland was just an absentee landlord waiting out the slump to pass the property onto another developer. And I'm glad that it was sold to a local developer.

Still, I wish that the city had done more than laying the infrastructure. Now that a possible MLS stadium is on the drawing board it seems like there's more interest from the city in how that area develops than in years.

TBD is one of West Sacramento's top priorities and has the mayor and city manager's personal attention and hand holding in many aspects. Just don't see that with Sac and the Railyards. Of course, if some 3 story apartments with surface parking surrounding them are placed along the river or in those key plots near the Tower Bridge then I'll reassess my current high opinion of TBD.

I think West Sac knows it can't f*** up TBD while Sac seems to just sit back and hope the development turns out ok in the Railyards.

[CAGeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Korey

Yes I understand the remediation and reimbursement took a while and that Inland was just an absentee landlord waiting out the slump to pass the property onto another developer. And I'm glad that it was sold to a local developer.

Still, I wish that the city had done more than laying the infrastructure. Now that a possible MLS stadium is on the drawing board it seems like there's more interest from the city in how that area develops than in years.

TBD is one of West Sacramento's top priorities and has the mayor and city manager's personal attention and hand holding in many aspects. Just don't see that with Sac and the Railyards. Of course, if some 3 story apartments with surface parking surrounding them are placed along the river or in those key plots near the Tower Bridge then I'll reassess my current high opinion of TBD.

I think West Sac knows it can't f*** up TBD while Sac seems to just sit back and hope the development turns out ok in the Railyards.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe development in the railyards is being held up because they are having to update their EIR? The land use plan has/is changing with the MLS stadium and hospital, aside from whatever other changes they have from what they envisioned back in 2007... which we know was very different times. It will start up soon. MLS giving us a timetable for entry to the league will be key on how fast shovels start going in the ground. I have a feeling that when that is announced and going, we'll see developers really move in to start plans/building.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by wburg

Considering that the neighborhood nearby just lost an inexpensive supermarket (Mercado Loco on Fruitridge and Sutterville) there is an apparent need for one in the area--not just Curtis Park but North City Farms, South Oak Park and Carleton Tract. And while Curtis Park has something of a tony reputation, many parts of the neighborhood aren't all that fancy, or at least not to the point where they'd never darken the door of a Grocery Outlet.

This really could turn out to be a blessing in disguise. Grocery Outlet and Dollar Tree have both opened central city locations in the past few years, in Midtown and Southside Park, and both get quite a bit of neighborhood business from an area considered very up-and-coming, with an economically diverse population ranging from SRO residents to dwellers of million-dollar historic homes and high-end condos. Most importantly, so far, no stabbings or shootings have occurred at either location. On the other hand, the Petrovich built Safeway at 19th and S has gained a reputation as the "Stabby Safeway", multiple assaults with knives and firearms have taken place there since its opening.

Petrovich is a vindictive, tacky, whiny scumbag, and I could go on. He is almost entirely to blame for the gas station fiasco. I wish he'd take his car bumper-turned-animal art and just go away. And I've never heard anyone call Safeway at 19th "stabby Safeway". You just made that up. It's perfectly safe. I don't know what you are on about. It's a hell of a lot busier than either of those discount stores so naturally it's going to get some crazies now and then, but get real the Alhambra Safeway is a lot sketchier.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by innov8

Did you read the part where wburg took his best shot to shut it down?

"Our concern is that there wasn't any comparison of the scale of the project
when compared to the neighborhood," said William Burg of Preservation
Sacramento, an advocacy group for historic building preservation.

If he would look across the street he would see a nine story residential bldg.

Wburg's demonstrating how he truly is a hindrance to development.

I wish that the Sacramento Preservation Whatever would stick to trying to preserve truly historical and architecturally worthy buildings. They are quickly becoming joke. The next thing you know they'll be trying to save all those ugly little shingle & stucco "mushroom apartments" You can't claim to want a vibrant urban core and at the same time oppose urban infill because it replaces subpar structures.

[wburg]

I'm not familiar with this "Sacramento Preservation Society" of which you speak.

Regarding West Sacramento's Bridge District vs. the Railyards, it should be noted that the Bridge District specific plan was first approved back in 1993 and it's just now seeing construction, whereas the Railyards plan, approved in 2007, is almost done with its infrastructure work despite the largest real estate/economic crisis since the Great Depression and the bankruptcy of the principal developer. Bridge District is a very big deal for West Sacramento, a smaller city with fewer projects underway and fewer major projects, and they are benefiting from about $50 million in assorted subsidies--Prop 1C funding, redevelopment tax increment financing, and an infrastructure district. The Railyards got Prop 1C funding too, but to assume they have done nothing is to avoid looking at all that has been done and the obstacles they're facing. Since 2007 we now have two large bridges over one of the busiest railroad lines on the west coast, an underpass with functioning light rail line, and fairly complete street infrastructure. The site is fenced in by the aforementioned railroad line, and Interstate 5, and part of the project has included major renovation and track relocation work at the Sacramento Valley station while not interrupting service at the second-busiest Amtrak station on the west coast.

In terms of end results, the Bridge District should end up with something like 3000 housing units and a couple million square feet of commercial on about 180 acres. The Railyards' revised plan will include a comparable amount of commercial, twice as much housing, plus a new sports facility and a full-sized urban hospital on 100 or so buildable acres--and it is largely those last two components that eat into the previous 10K-12K housing units. They aren't actually lowering the zoning, just the estimated buildout. If the economics of residential construction changes rapidly, they can always build more units to higher densities. For right now, LDK, like most other developers in town, recognize that midrise construction is the most cost-effective method with the highest price points that the region can currently absorb.

Considering that Sacramento is a much bigger city, which requires organizational structures that are larger, less flexible and less nimble than a small city, and we're also dealing with a whole lot of other projects throughout that large city, from suburban expansion at Delta Shores to the downtown arena, which has sucked most of the air out of the room for the past few years, I'd say we're putting quite a bit of effort into getting things done in the Railyards. We've laid the groundwork, doing the things a public entity like a city can do, and the developers are making the changes necessary due to the current economic reality and the opportunities that have come forth since 2007. It's going to be denser, larger and more prominent than the Bridge District upon completion, even with reduced numbers--and has potential for greater levels of growth should factors change. The main reason for the change in plan is more flexibility for the developer and private sector partners--and isn't that what people here keep asking for, less restrictions on the private sector?