Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III - Page 302

wburg · #**6021** Posted **Jan 15, 2016, 4:15 PM**

I may have to page through the arena thread to see if anyone talked about how building an arena without parking would incentivize people to turn nearby properties into parking garages. The city of Sacramento's parking department has a parking management program where they work with property owners who have parking lots to monetize them--the city manages the parking and provides security, paying a percentage of the profits to the property owner and the rest goes to the city. The current Greyhound bus barn is being used for parking and managed by the city, so I imagine they could also be the manager of parking for this new building.

The demand for parking downtown isn't going away, in fact it's going to get higher, so the idea of someone wanting to monetize that demand shouldn't be a surprise. And if there is an increase in housing in the central business district, despite the NIMBD attitudes I hear, then the most likely candidate I've heard for a retail tenant (an urban-format Raley's) will be very much in demand for the building.

ozone · #**6022** Posted **Jan 17, 2016, 6:00 PM**

I sure hope the State does NOT build new offices along the O Street corridor. While there's lots of avantages and incentives for doing so, like owning the land and accessibility to light-rail, the area is over-saturated with state offices already which makes it dull during the day and dead at night. I'd rather see the state look elsewhere and infill the O Street area with housing.

I'm not sure if I like the idea of an SOB at the Capitol Pit site. I'd rather that space be reserved for something like a new performing arts center/mixed-use project. I like the idea of a single tower which would have a much smaller footprint than a bunch of spread out midrises. Doesn't the city own the land around the Sac Valley Station? Why not give the state land next to the depot/SVS for their new offices? Part of the deal could include funding the new intermodal station. And a private developer could build the hotel. That way they'd have access to public transport and jump start the Railyards.

Pistola916 · #**6023** Posted **Jan 18, 2016, 3:24 AM**

The Wells Fargo building has been our city's tallest for far too long.

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article54827605.html

Let’s find a bold vision for our city’s skyline
BY ROB TURNER
Special to The Bee

Quote:

So what qualifies as iconic? A 20-to 30-story tower is not iconic – not in a city with several buildings that size. A mixed-use tower with residential and retail would be nice, but again, not iconic..

Quote:

They don’t need to build two 53-story towers. But give us at least a single 40-story tower and a design that looks amazing at night. An observation deck would be a nice, public-friendly touch, too. Only one block away from the new arena, it’s likely to be seen frequently during nationally televised Kings games. It needs to represent the city.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article54827605.html#storylink=cpy

enigma99a · #**6024** Posted **Jan 19, 2016, 9:00 AM**

Quote:

Now comes word that we soon will learn the plans for this block, and that the project will include condos, retail and office space. CalPERS is saying that it will be the “iconic” project that they initially promised.

How soon is "soon"?

Ryan@CU · #**6025** Posted **Jan 23, 2016, 11:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma99a

How soon is "soon"?

When's the next World Cup? Probably then.

Pistola916 · #**6026** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 3:39 AM**

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/biz-columns-blogs/bob-shallit/article56932608.html

LandofFrost · #**6027** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 4:02 PM**

Cool building on Q and 15th. Yay for density. Boo for more rental properties.

Korey · #**6028** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 5:15 PM**

I'd also like condos vs. apartments, but I'll take it. I'm waiting for the CADA condos at 14 & N. Standard 21st century urban infill 4/5 stories of wood on concrete, kinda bland design but much better than say the Eviva renders (we'll see on the final product with both).

Within a radius of like 4 blocks Fremont Park is getting some great density. I'd like to see a redesign of the 16th Street light rail station and maybe the park itself. Wasn't there talk of relocating the station a block east?

Majin · #**6029** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 6:17 PM**

Does anybody have any kind of construction schedule for all of these apartments proposed? It's getting ridiculous how many proposals/renderings we are seeing vs actual construction. It's like 20:1 or something even worse.

Mr. Ozo · #**6030** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Majin

Does anybody have any kind of construction schedule for all of these apartments proposed? It's getting ridiculous how many proposals/renderings we are seeing vs actual construction. It's like 20:1 or something even worse.

But look at all the pretty pictures.

snfenoc · #**6031** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 11:31 PM**

Basically, the only significant developments we see under construction have received subsidies.

Schmoe · #**6032** Posted **Jan 28, 2016, 11:39 PM**

Nice new video from the Sac Downtown Partnership.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_p0cPgVJiY

wburg · #**6033** Posted **Jan 29, 2016, 3:50 AM**

There is occasional talk about moving the station a block east, but the owners of the land don't seem to be interested in doing anything whatsoever with it--apparently the folks behind Ice Blocks nearly begged them to sell so they could make it part of the project but they'd prefer to just sit on the vacant lot for another 20 years or whatever.

Mr. Ozo · #**6034** Posted **Feb 2, 2016, 11:30 PM**

The Q and 15th article references changing building codes that allow up to 8 floors with wood on concrete now. Does anyone have a link or a reference to what they are referring too?

Thinking there are a lot of single lots around downtown where you could fit something like this proposal from San Francisco.

KingsFan#1 · #**6035** Posted **Feb 3, 2016, 10:59 PM**

Can't say I'm thrilled with this

http://www.sactownmag.com/Blog/2016/Mass...itol-Mall-could-end-up-as-citys-tallest/

Majin · #**6036** Posted **Feb 3, 2016, 11:14 PM**

At least it's over 400ft but I really don't like the design. Maybe i'm too much of a traditionalist but I really hate that "stacked" looked rather than 1 monolithic tower. Also don't like the 7th floor garden/landscaping/trees.

Plus the ground floor area looks awful.

Pistola916 · #**6037** Posted **Feb 3, 2016, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingsFan#1

Can't say I'm thrilled with this

http://www.sactownmag.com/Blog/2016/Mass...itol-Mall-could-end-up-as-citys-tallest/

I'll take it over waiting another 10 years.

Nevertheless, the design reminds me of the Kings hotel tower. I also think its too boxy. I was hoping for a slimmer tower. The developer did say its a preliminary design that will likely change and grow taller.

Korey · #**6038** Posted **Feb 3, 2016, 11:26 PM**

Don't like podium at all. We're not Miami.

Majin · #**6039** Posted **Feb 3, 2016, 11:27 PM**

Did anyone catch this little nugget?

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article58238888.html

Quote:

One possible candidate for the space, a new headquarters for the state Board of Equalization, appears to be a no-go. The Department of General Services released a report last week saying the BOE should move into a campus-like facility with low and midrise buildings instead of a tower.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/real-estate-news/article58238888.html#storylink=cpy

What is with this? Is the BOE planning on bolting to the suburbs? No more "campus" parks in the grid.

SacTownAndy · #**6040** Posted **Feb 3, 2016, 11:29 PM**

I wonder what impact this will have on the Vanir tower?