Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[wburg]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

A portion of the Ice Blocks development is going vertical? I didn't think anything was happening there quite yet. Someone should post photos; cause I think many of us are curious to see how far along this property (or properties) has progressed. It has been in the works for 10 years; it's nice to know a resolution is actually happening.

I'll snap some next time I go past, took some while going by on light rail but they're all blurry. They're doing the concrete podium of the apartment building right now, and the Orchard Supply building has been demolished except for the southern wall, which will remain as part of the new buildings, they're excavating for the foundation of that portion right now. This isn't the plan that has been in the works for 10 years, which looked very different and only incorporated the Crystal Ice building, but a different plan that incorporates three half-blocks, submitted last year. Obviously the featured portion of the plan, the Crystal Ice building itself, was set back enormously by the fire--they were just getting ready to start building and had tenants signed up for the entire building.

There may be a wealth of interesting plans, especially for 16th, J, Q, R, S Streets, and Broadway, but this is Sacramento...plans aren't enough. At this point, I'll believe it when I see it.

If you haven't seen it, you might not believe it.

In regard to the 1300 units you mentioned. That is an achievement. However, it's an achievement that took 6 years to reach. While I am glad that Sacramento has added housing units (especially in the central city) during a construction boom, I guess I'm not particularly impressed with the rate. Isn't Sacramento looking to add like 10-15 thousand units to central city? At the current rate, it would take 45-70 years to add that many. I'm hoping for a tipping point, where central city growth becomes accelerated...a boom. So far, it doesn't look like Sacramento has reached that point. Sometimes, I doubt it ever will.

5 years--2010 to 2014 (the 2016 numbers aren't out yet.) And considering that this number represents 75% of ALL RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION, about one-twentieth of the city's surface area, it stands out. And a lot of the work going on goes far beyond just "plans" like the infrastructure and remediation work in the Railyards. All of that work was necessary before anything could be built, but it's basically done, and the planning has been done concurrently. Now that things are ready to open, I think we'll definitely see an acceleration (market permitting of course) of those numbers in the Railyards. The overall plan is 10,000 units in 10 years, which means bringing up the numbers from the 400 or so units built in 2013-2014 to 1000 units a year. There's more housing than that currently in the pipeline for the central city, plus more going up just outside the central city (Mill at Broadway, Curtis Park Village, McKinley Village, and a baker's dozen little infill projects.) And of course it's not all residential, the new Co-Op is taking shape and Midtown commercial vacancy rates are approaching zilch.

It's the little infill projects that really make the difference--small buildings that use up those vacant lots in between buildings in downtown and midtown. They don't make for 🞵🞵🞵🞵 high-rise renderings but the numbers matter, and the 1300 or so new housing units translates to 2000+ new residents, which makes up for the 20 years of slow draining of population from the central city since its last peak in 1990.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by CAGeoNerd

To be fair, the Whole Foods building will have 2 or 3 levels of parking, above the Whole Foods which will be at ground level. There will be 4 or so levels of apartments above that, so really people would be living on the third floor and above. Also, there will be some retail space at ground level of the parking structure at 21st and Capitol, so at least that's something!

It's not that the WF building didn't have parking (that will be parking for the residents and a little for WF itself) but the location of the housing right next to all the nightclubs. This is a strategy that was used in SoMa in SF: Locate cool new condos right next to the nightclubs, hipsters buy/rent condos because they think it will be cool to live there all the time, after 6 months of OONTZ OONTZ OONTZ until 2 AM they start complaining to the city about noise, clubs shut down, land goes up for sale, condo builder buys it and builds another condo--lather, rinse, repeat. There are ways to beat this game, mostly involving good management of clubs (a lot of SoMa clubs post signs telling patrons to keep it down, and door staff shush people for having loud conversations on the sidewalk, and of course just good insulation in the buildings) but we'll see how it plays out. A parking garage at 20th & L would mean no complaining residents, and some small ground floor retail would be nice along 20th Street. But at this point it's a done deal, so hey.

Not seeing any beige in that color scheme--white and orange, as mentioned above, a riff on the building across the street.

[LandofFrost]

Originally Posted by wburg

It's not that the WF building didn't have parking (that will be parking for the residents and a little for WF itself) but the location of the housing right next to all the nightclubs. This is a strategy that was used in SoMa in SF: Locate cool new condos right next to the nightclubs, hipsters buy/rent condos because they think it will be cool to live there all the time, after 6 months of OONTZ OONTZ OONTZ until 2 AM they start complaining to the city about noise, clubs shut down, land goes up for sale, condo builder buys it and builds another condo--lather, rinse, repeat. There are ways to beat this game, mostly involving good management of clubs (a lot of SoMa clubs post signs telling patrons to keep it down, and door staff shush people for having loud conversations on the sidewalk, and of course just good insulation in the buildings) but we'll see how it plays out. A parking garage at 20th & L would mean no complaining residents, and some small ground floor retail would be nice along 20th Street. But at this point it's a done deal, so hey.

Not seeing any beige in that color scheme--white and orange, as mentioned above, a riff on the building across the street.

I don't think residents of the apartments above whole foods will ever win that fight. Could become a civil rights issue with a whole class of people who feel those three clubs are they only place they can congregate in peace.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by LandofFrost

I don't think residents of the apartments above whole foods will ever win that fight. Could become a civil rights issue with a whole class of people who feel those three clubs are they only place they can congregate in peace.

I assume you are referring to the so-called gay clubs? The demographics of those clubs has long been moving towards a very mixed population both in 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 orientation and ethnicity so I'm not sure that argument holds much weight anymore. Also many in the gay community do not have much love for the owner of Faces so don't expect an outpouring of support for him.

Most of the noise issues come from drunks going home or back to their cars but some of the clubs have open areas that get noisy. The Mercantile Saloon is notoriously loud. Bad design that could and should be redone or just plain done away with.

As a Midtown resident I wouldn't mind seeing the city's major nightclub scene move Downtown because I think it's better suited for that sort of thing. 20th and K doesn't have to epicenter of Sacramento's nightlife for ever. The city should ever be evolving.

[wburg]

20th & K isn't the epicenter of Sacramento nightlife and hasn't been for a long time (if ever), it's multi-polar with nodes in several places, but 20th & K Street is located in between two particular nodes whose range is growing, along L Street from Downtown and farther down K Street. Clubs and late night attractions within a block of 20th & K include Faces and the Depot, and Mango's which is a lot more recent, but also Lowbrau/Block/Comedy Spot, Barfly on 21st which features live bands in addition to club nights, many of which are not specifically LGBT oriented. The experience of SoMa clubs, and the reaction of residents at the midrise building at 21st & L to live music at the Distillery across the street (repeated complaints until they stopped hosting live music) suggest what might happen elsewhere on the block around the proposed WF. We are seeing evolution, primarily a growth phase right now--nobody is suggesting that nightclubs be forever static, but rather that residential right next to nightclubs can be hazardous to those clubs unless steps are taken to address noise outside the clubs and soundproofing within the units--or, just possibly, relocating those units a bit farther away from the clubs.

[creamcityleo79]

Originally Posted by wburg

20th & K isn't the epicenter of Sacramento nightlife and hasn't been for a long time (if ever), it's multi-polar with nodes in several places, but 20th & K Street is located in between two particular nodes whose range is growing, along L Street from Downtown and farther down K Street. Clubs and late night attractions within a block of 20th & K include Faces and the Depot, and Mango's which is a lot more recent, but also Lowbrau/Block/Comedy Spot, Barfly on 21st which features live bands in addition to club nights, many of which are not specifically LGBT oriented. The experience of SoMa clubs, and the reaction of residents at the midrise building at 21st & L to live music at the Distillery across the street (repeated complaints until they stopped hosting live music) suggest what might happen elsewhere on the block around the proposed WF. We are seeing evolution, primarily a growth phase right now--nobody is suggesting that nightclubs be forever static, but rather that residential right next to nightclubs can be hazardous to those clubs unless steps are taken to address noise outside the clubs and soundproofing within the units--or, just possibly, relocating those units a bit farther away from the clubs.

Just clarifying, Faces AND the Depot are on the NE and SE corners of 20th and K.

[urbanadvocate]

Originally Posted by ozone

I assume you are referring to the so-called gay clubs? The demographics of those clubs has long been moving towards a very mixed population both in 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 orientation and ethnicity so I'm not sure that argument holds much weight anymore. Also many in the gay community do not have much love for the owner of Faces so don't expect an outpouring of support for him.

Most of the noise issues come from drunks going home or back to their cars but some of the clubs have open areas that get noisy. The Mercantile Saloon is notoriously loud. Bad design that could and should be redone or just plain done away with.

As a Midtown resident I wouldn't mind seeing the city's major nightclub scene move Downtown because I think it's better suited for that sort of thing. 20th and K doesn't have to epicenter of Sacramento's nightlife for ever. The city should ever be evolving.

Even if the demographics have become much more mixed it still represents entire group of people who have no alternative places to go--the Bolt off of Del Paso does not count. What it historically represents is what is important.

I also disagree that clubs should move downtown. The benefit of decentralized clubs is that they have a different culture around them that they cater to thus creating options and diversity of entertainment. The nice thing about midtown is the fact that there are clubs and bar options in proximity. Midtown would be boring as f*** and sleepy without that proximity. I know downtown isn't far but by proximity I mean just walking down the street.

[ozone]

Originally Posted by urbanadvocate

Even if the demographics have become much more mixed it still represents entire group of people who have no alternative places to go--the Bolt off of Del Paso does not count. What it historically represents is what is important.

I also disagree that clubs should move downtown. The benefit of decentralized clubs is that they have a different culture around them that they cater to thus creating options and diversity of entertainment. The nice thing about midtown is the fact that there are clubs and bar options in proximity. Midtown would be boring as f*** and sleepy without that proximity. I know downtown isn't far but by proximity I mean just walking down the street.

I understand your point regarding having a variety of places to go that cater to different tastes. I'm not saying that there should be a single "nightclub" area. Despite what our resident NIMBY blabs on about 20th and K is biggest single nightclub scene in Sacramento and has been for years. Since I've lived Midtown for years I think I know what's going on around here. All I'm saying is that I'd like to see new bars/nightclubs open up west of 16th Street and wouldn't cry if a few of the ones we have now get replaced by housing, retail, restaurants. I totally disagree that Midtown would be boring as fu*k without so many bars. In fact, a few less bars might improve the quality of life for the people who live here. Oh yeah that's right it's a real neighborhood and not just a weekend playground for suburbanites. The concentration of bars might be convenient for some but it does cause problems. So I'm glad places like Ace of Spades is drawing people away and I hope once the arena is done it will accelerate that. And I don't see why new bars/nightclubs that are LGBT friendly/oriented couldn't open up downtown. It's been happening in downtown LA why not here?

[wburg]

Sounds like Ozone doesn't want these clubs in his backyard. 20th & K is a big nexus for the LGBT demographic, but for live music (for starters) it's not exactly a hotspot (aside from occasional punk shows at Barfly), and a lot of other places like R Street, downtown along K Street, the J & 28th block, and the half-dozen or so places within a block or so of 21st and P have their own crowds--not necessarily taking away from 20th and K but adding to a greater whole. Downtown LA's evening life is busier and more active because they tripled their downtown population in a decade, making it easier to turn old, vacant office buildings into housing, meanwhile Downtown Partnership seems to still be betting all their chips on office construction while office vacancies have barely shifted since 2010 and residential rents/home prices have punched through the roof with over 1000 new units primarily in Midtown (aside from rehabbed/replacement SRO units, no new housing in the downtown core.)

And in some ways, it's the denser population of Midtown that makes Midtown bars work; the longest-lasting ones, like the Merc, are primarily neighborhood bars. Sure, there are plenty of visitors from out of town, but half the money that goes into the tills of these places is from people within easy walking/biking distance. When you go there you're going to see a lot of regulars and neighbors, and neighbors tend to be more tolerant of their own watering holes than ones set up primarily catering to outside customers. If anything, regulars seem to learn to avoid the bro-traps, and the planned venues right outside the arena will be a cluster aimed primarily at the Roseville bro market (in the ground floor of the Ochsner building and managed by Paragary protege Trevor Shults) which, if anything, may help make Midtown neighborhood bars and clubs friendlier and more neighbor-centric, and thus less likely to have to go away anytime soon.

Ace of Spades and its predecessors have been going for years, which draws an entirely different crowd than 20th & K (all ages mid-sized live rock venue that shuts down by 11 PM vs. 21+ dance clubs that go until 2 AM) so I don't see Ace accelerating the movement of neighborhood bars towards the arena, and the recent proliferation of new live music venues (and some really talented bookers bringing great shows to those venues) is an overall growth of the music scene.

[urbanadvocate]

Originally Posted by wburg

Sounds like Ozone doesn't want these clubs in his backyard. 20th & K is a big nexus for the LGBT demographic, but for live music (for starters) it's not exactly a hotspot (aside from occasional punk shows at Barfly), and a lot of other places like R Street, downtown along K Street, the J & 28th block, and the half-dozen or so places within a block or so of 21st and P have their own crowds--not necessarily taking away from 20th and K but adding to a greater whole. Downtown LA's evening life is busier and more active because they tripled their downtown population in a decade, making it easier to turn old, vacant office buildings into housing, meanwhile Downtown Partnership seems to still be betting all their chips on office construction while office vacancies have barely shifted since 2010 and residential rents/home prices have punched through the roof with over 1000 new units primarily in Midtown (aside from rehabbed/replacement SRO units, no new housing in the downtown core.)

And in some ways, it's the denser population of Midtown that makes Midtown bars work; the longest-lasting ones, like the Merc, are primarily neighborhood bars. Sure, there are plenty of visitors from out of town, but half the money that goes into the tills of these places is from people within easy walking/biking distance. When you go there you're going to see a lot of regulars and neighbors, and neighbors tend to be more tolerant of their own watering holes than ones set up primarily catering to outside customers. If anything, regulars seem to learn to avoid the bro-traps, and the planned venues right outside the arena will be a cluster aimed primarily at the Roseville bro market (in the ground floor of the Ochsner building and managed by Paragary protege Trevor Shults) which, if anything, may help make Midtown neighborhood bars and clubs friendlier and more neighbor-centric, and thus less likely to have to go away anytime soon.

Ace of Spades and its predecessors have been going for years, which draws an entirely different crowd than 20th & K (all ages mid-sized live rock venue that shuts down by 11 PM vs. 21+ dance clubs that go until 2 AM) so I don't see Ace accelerating the movement of neighborhood bars towards the arena, and the recent proliferation of new live music venues (and some really talented bookers bringing great shows to those venues) is an overall growth of the music scene.

Exactly, couldn't agree more. Besides Friday and Saturday night after 10, places like Merc are busy and bustling with people that live within a short distance. People that have no interest in downtown bars that would covet the Roseville bro-crowd.

It is great downtown LA is producing more clubs but I seriously doubt it is at the expense of clubs moving from other areas like WEHO--it is in addition to those areas and likely cater to a completely different crowd.

[UnclearColt]

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2016/04/1...s-concerns-where-parking-will-come-from/

Does anyone else find it ironic that a lot of the same people who, at least nominally, support more people riding on public transportation are now the same people attacking the arena because of the inconvenience it will cause vehicle drivers? wburg I'm looking at you....

[wburg]

And I'm looking back at you going "what you talking about"? I have plenty of criticisms of the arena, but worries about increased traffic isn't one of them. For starters, the "create a downtown attraction that suburbanites will visit and then drive home" concept has never worked particularly well (that was the idea behind Downtown Plaza and the K Street pedestrian mall back in the 1960s, and its 1990s reboot.) But even the arena "pulse" doesn't come close to the level of traffic that goes in and out of downtown every weekday. We have the public transit capacity, as long as we don't keep doing things like shutting down bus and light rail stops that are closest to the arena and raising light rail fares--or, ideally, stop doing those things and reverse those policies. We'll see.

The people who are worried about traffic seem to primarily be people who drive home to the suburbs from their downtown workplace, who don't use public transit. I was telling people years ago that the arena would result in changes to city parking policy (later meter hours, higher meter rates, more parking congestion) but I don't object to those changes. If you want irony, it was primarily arena supporters who told me that I was crazy for suggesting that the arena would result in later parking enforcement or increases in parking rates. Here's what I said about it 3 years ago:

Originally Posted by wburg

I'll just wait for the suburbanites to start fuming when they have to feed a meter to park on the street at midnight, that will be amusing. As I have said before, this is the best location in the central city for an arena--far better than the Railyards site--my main issue has always been the funding part. We'll see how that works out.

And a few months later:

Originally Posted by Mr. Ozo

18,000-20,000

I'm still trying to wrap my head around that many people Downtown every game day.

Originally Posted by wburg

That's about 15% of typical weekday commuter load, or about half a typical Old Sacramento special event like SMF, Pacific Rim or Gold Rush Days, maybe 4-5 times the current K Street weekend nightlife crowd on the 1000-1200 block. It's at a time when downtown is usually pretty well emptied, but a lot depends on how much time and money is spent by the crowd in the surrounding neighborhood, and how many arrived by means other than driving.

[Web]

Originally Posted by wburg

And I'm looking back at you going "what you talking about"? I have plenty of criticisms of the arena, but worries about increased traffic isn't one of them. For starters, the "create a downtown attraction that suburbanites will visit and then drive home" concept has never worked particularly well (that was the idea behind Downtown Plaza and the K Street pedestrian mall back in the 1960s, and its 1990s reboot.) But even the arena "pulse" doesn't come close to the level of traffic that goes in and out of downtown every weekday. We have the public transit capacity, as long as we don't keep doing things like shutting down bus and light rail stops that are closest to the arena and raising light rail fares--or, ideally, stop doing those things and reverse those policies. We'll see.

The people who are worried about traffic seem to primarily be people who drive home to the suburbs from their downtown workplace, who don't use public transit. I was telling people years ago that the arena would result in changes to city parking policy (later meter hours, higher meter rates, more parking congestion) but I don't object to those changes. If you want irony, it was primarily arena supporters who told me that I was crazy for suggesting that the arena would result in later parking enforcement or increases in parking rates. Here's what I said about it 3 years ago:



And a few months later:

I am still baffled at the size of the arena......somewhere in the low 17s it is actually smaller than arco and most nba arenas. Yes I know it has more suites for the corporate $$$ but also those upper level seats seem far far away! AND I am sure $$$....if the team doesnt turn around 3 or 4 yrs of novelty crowds will be it.

[Pistola916]

Originally Posted by Web

I am still baffled at the size of the arena......somewhere in the low 17s it is actually smaller than arco and most nba arenas. Yes I know it has more suites for the corporate $$$ but also those upper level seats seem far far away! AND I am sure $$$....if the team doesnt turn around 3 or 4 yrs of novelty crowds will be it.

It's not smaller than Arco. It seats 17,500, which is about right for our market. Staples Center in LA seats 18,118 and Madison Square Garden seats 18,200. If you haven't been to either Staples or MSG, you'd realize the nosebleeds are pretty damn high. The upper level at Golden 1 is higher but nothing to whine about...sort of like complaining about traffic. lol.

[Web]

Originally Posted by Pistola916

It's not smaller than Arco. It seats 17,500, which is about right for our market. Staples Center in LA seats 18,118 and Madison Square Garden seats 18,200. If you haven't been to either Staples or MSG, you'd realize the nosebleeds are pretty damn high. The upper level at Golden 1 is higher but nothing to whine about...sort of like complaining about traffic. lol.

so with thousands of less seats the nosebleeds are higher here than most others??

chicago 23129
detroit 22076
charlotte 21624
philadelphia 21315
dallas 21146
portland 20709
la lakers 19125
la clippers 20578
cleveland 20562
toronto 20511
atlanta 20425
+so on and so on and so on......and guess what

pulling in 29th of 30th and holding steady is golden 1 center at 17,250 or so sleep train was 17,317

only New orleans is less at 16,867

and portland is really a good comparison on "market"

All I originally meant was why is the capacity so low?? less rows???

[ThatDarnSacramentan]

The capacity's lower because the trend in sports now is that a lower capacity makes the events more exclusive. Lower capacity means fewer tickets, which means the tickets that are sold can be sold for a greater amount. Even the Moda Center in Portland removed almost a thousand seats because there was more capacity than necessary.

Besides, with the Kings being in a perpetual state of tire firedom, the diminished capacity still won't be exceeded. I wouldn't be surprised if the new arena only sold out for the first two months of the season next year barring the Kings pulling a complete 180 on the basketball side.

[jbradway]

Originally Posted by Web

so with thousands of less seats the nosebleeds are higher here than most others??

chicago 23129
detroit 22076
charlotte 21624
philadelphia 21315
dallas 21146
portland 20709
la lakers 19125
la clippers 20578
cleveland 20562
toronto 20511
atlanta 20425
+so on and so on and so on......and guess what

pulling in 29th of 30th and holding steady is golden 1 center at 17,250 or so sleep train was 17,317

only New orleans is less at 16,867

and portland is really a good comparison on "market"

All I originally meant was why is the capacity so low?? less rows???

17,500. Not sure where you pulled the 17,250 number. And by higher, I think the original poster meant higher upper deck than Sleep Train. That is due to the extra level of suites and the lower bowl open to the concourse.

There are actually more seats in the lower bowl than most NBA arenas. The upper deck is where the capacity is limited. They actually kept the sideline seating and corner as the majority of seats in G1C. Those are easier to sell than the ends. There is no upper deck seating on the open end and very small on the other end.

It's pretty smart to do that. Lower bowl and upper sideline seating is in high demand. Thus higher per seat cost. The end zone seating upstairs was priced at about $750 for a season ticket. So it's not pricing out everyone.

All those arenas you mentioned were built in the 1990s or early 2000. Barclays in Brooklyn was built recently and only has 17,700 in the NYC area. So the trend is not for the massive multi use arena anymore. The NBA and NHL are trending that way for all the facilities they have teams.

[BillSimmons]

Originally Posted by ThatDarnSacramentan

The capacity's lower because the trend in sports now is that a lower capacity makes the events more exclusive. Lower capacity means fewer tickets, which means the tickets that are sold can be sold for a greater amount. Even the Moda Center in Portland removed almost a thousand seats because there was more capacity than necessary.

Besides, with the Kings being in a perpetual state of tire firedom, the diminished capacity still won't be exceeded. I wouldn't be surprised if the new arena only sold out for the first two months of the season next year barring the Kings pulling a complete 180 on the basketball side.

The Kings set NBA sellout records in ARCO Arena dating back to the 90's when the team was terrible. They're not going to have trouble selling out the new arena.

[Pistola916]

I was browsing the downtown development page and The Metropolitan was listed, which it wasn't before the last time I checked.

http://downtownsac.org/project/metropolitan/

"Saca Development is looking to move forward with the Metropolitan high-rise that was initially proposed years ago. The project will be a mixed-use hotel/high-end condominium of 39 stories situated on the northeast corner of 10th & J streets. The Metropolitan will include 190 housing units, 11,000 sf of retail and 545 parking spaces."

[CAGeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Pistola916

I was browsing the downtown development page and The Metropolitan was listed, which it wasn't before the last time I checked.

http://downtownsac.org/project/metropolitan/

"Saca Development is looking to move forward with the Metropolitan high-rise that was initially proposed years ago. The project will be a mixed-use hotel/high-end condominium of 39 stories situated on the northeast corner of 10th & J streets. The Metropolitan will include 190 housing units, 11,000 sf of retail and 545 parking spaces."

Please let this happen. Please.