Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[CAGeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Pistola916

Aerial flyover of new 20 story state office high-rise on 7th and P street

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KhxFF22tTNQ

Very cool! Thanks for sharing. Strange to see an actual 20-story building going up and filling in some of the Sacramento skyline after such a drought of construction.

[Majin]

Is this the same building?

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/n...udget-includes-huge-office-building.html

[snfenoc]

Yes

[Majin]

Thats disappointing then, there were a few articles stating that it could be Sacramento's new tallest but its only 20 floors. Plus I'm not a fan of the adjoining plaza.

[Pistola916]

Originally Posted by Majin

Thats disappointing then, there were a few articles stating that it could be Sacramento's new tallest but its only 20 floors. Plus I'm not a fan of the adjoining plaza.

Due to the capitol view protection, there is a 300 foot height limit. They could have built it taller elsewhere but it is what is.

[snfenoc]

The protection corridor extends to P street? That's really silly, if true.

It's kinda hard to build tall in the downtown area if a significant portion of that area is controlled by a stringent view protection ordinance.

Having said that, I thought the building's stoutness was mainly due to the state's preference for buildings with ridiculously large floor plates, no?

[ltsmotorsport]

I think it only extends to the subterranean office block to the north. This block doesn't have a height limit as far as I remember. Would have been nice to get a new tallest, even if it is a State project.

After watching the video, you can tell they are spending a great deal on the interior, which is great for a number of reasons. What it also shows me is that there is little imagination to the exterior design, except for adding as many outdoor spaces on the "roof" as possible. Of course this is all nice, but how could it hurt to extend the crown element to fully cover the mechanical equipment? The building looks unfinished and a lazy addition to the skyline. I really dislike the view of the EPA HQ from the north, especially at the crown (coming down 12th Street and further away), and it would be a shame to have that repeated facing west. Would be a visible eyesore crossing the Pioneer Bridge.

[ozone]

I think you guys are being a little too harsh in your criticism of a SOB. This building looks quite a bit better than most of the others built in the last 80 years. The design looks to be responding to sac climate which is smart and appropriate and something we haven’t seen a lot of here. My only beef is I would have preferred the sunken office/roof garden across the street have been the site instead. Actually would prefer housing over more SOB built in that area but that wasn’t going to happen.

[snfenoc]

Well, I don't have much criticism for the building, either. I actually like it. I agree that hiding the rooftop mechanical equipment would be preferable. However, like you, I think this is one of the best building designs from the state in a long time. Also, like you, I'd love to see housing as part of the state projects. However, I know that's a bridge too far for the state. At least there will be a nice plaza with retail at ground level - not bad.

It's important to realize that the state prefers large floor plates. It's not like this building is designed for multiple businesses, who each want a floor (or floors) of their own. At one time, I think the state was planning something quite a bit shorter and fatter; so I see this building as a huge win for Sacramento.

Also, the 11-story building on 12th and O streets that the state is planning seems pretty nice as well. It will also have first floor retail. Given that the current building is a gray 4 story ugg-o monster, I'm pretty happy.

Additionally, I know the state is planning to build a huge garage as well. I'm hoping against hope that the state will add housing to that project. They asked for my opinion of their designs, which were all really nice, and I gave it.

Now, hopefully the state is planning something really special to replace the outdated eastern annex of the crapitol building.

[CAGeoNerd]

Agreed to those points, I actually like this building and it's a nice addition, and at the height it is. Otherwise it would skew the skyline to have a much higher building in that area. Also they are protecting a historic building which is a 3 or 4 story building on the NW corner of that block, so that's why the northern portion is likely shorter/plaza area.

[innov8]

Isn’t it a little early to give praise for a building that is not yet built? The East End
complex on Capitol Ave. was admired until it was finished. It gobbled up 3 ½ block and
destroyed hundreds of housing units in midtown… now look. Renderings are great until
you compare them to the finished product. I guess you could say right now it’s better
than a surface parking lot, (which is there right now) but will the area really change
much… like street life? SOB have made P Street a pretty lonely stretch, I don’t think
this tower will improve that much.



http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=17-ii-17_216-viii-17_216_860

Capitol View Protection corridor straddles the block of 7th & P Street. Large floor plates
are what the state prefers; this was mentioned again and again when this site location
was called the West End project in 2007. Back then, the state proposed one tower going
as high as 600’, but most were in the 400’ range. Even with the height restriction
known, the states proposals excided the height limit knowing they did not have to
follow Sacramento City codes when they build.

[wburg]

The "excitement at rendering, disappointment at finished product" is kind of a typical routine--people squeal with delight at the rendering, jump up and down at the sight of cranes, then when the building is done it's treated as a sort of disappointment. Kind of like "Sea Monkeys"--it looks great advertised in the back of a comic book, and it's super exciting when the package arrives, then disappointment when you find out they're just brine shrimp.

The Capitol View Protection Act is state law, not a local height limit, and it doesn't apply to the southern half of this block at all--I assume they are going that high because that's how much space they need on that footprint. The city zoning for this area has no height limit, the only limit is that applied by the state. And if that's the case, the fact that they are making room at the base for the Heilbron Mansion (which will be the focus of the new building's plaza) and stepping down the northeastern quarter is probably what prompted them to build this high. If they had decided to tear down the Heilbron and build on the entire block, they might have only gone 10-12 stories, but because they decided to make room for it (and turn it into the focus of a plaza), and the CVPA, the building will be twice as tall!

[snfenoc]

Sure it's early. But, at this point, all we have is renderings; and those renderings are significantly taller and better than anything built by the state in decades. It's true that the proof is in the pudding. However, the renderings that we have, so far, don't look bad.

You mention the East End complex as an example of a lauded proposal that turned out badly. First of all, I don't recall a lot of us singing its praises. In fact, I always thought that the inclusion of a little (now closed?) sports bar on the corner of 17th and Crapitol was a last-minute, feeble attempt by the state to counteract some of the criticism that the project received. Also, we're not talking about gobbling up 3.5 blocks of prime city land for what's basically a 6-story sprawlscraper that's trisected by the grid. Instead, we're talking about utilizing only 3/4 of one block for a 20-story tower. Also, it looks like the state is making a stronger attempt at building more lively and inviting structure with a plaza and ground floor retail. Will it work and liven up the area? I have my doubts; but we have to take what we can get from the state.

Also, these proposals look to be real - not just possibilities that the state is considering. That 600' tower and those 400' twin, "thin" towers were nothing more than ideas that the Department of General Services was kicking around. They were never serious proposals. In fact, prior to the economic downturn, the state had pretty much settled on a shorter, squatter design. That's why I was incredulous to the suggestion that the view protection corridor was responsible for this 20-story design. The state likes big floor plates; and it almost built something much worse. (Thank god for the Great Recession! ) The fact that the state seems to be compromising a bit should be seen as a good thing.

At this point, I am less concerned about height, and more concerned about housing. I think the city needs to work with the state on getting housing injected into those areas. Even if it's 50 units here and 30 units there, the numbers can add up. We have CADA, maybe they should inject themselves into the mix. Really, that area needs some life after 5PM. The state keeps bloviating about housing affordability and sustainability and green living and transit-oriented development and blah, blah, blah. Well, maybe it should adjust its goals a bit, act as a model and include housing with all its projects?

[snfenoc]

Ha! Is this the one time that preservationists actually caused a taller structure to get built? Nah.

I doubt preservation was the key, here. But go ahead, pat yourself on the back if you want...and we all know that you want to.

I thought the state wanted to move the Heilbron house, not destroy it?

Besides, as was mentioned, DGS was kicking around the idea of building other, taller options. It settled on a full block, 11-story building as the economy was going into the crapper. The state put everything on hold, and now it wants to build a 20-story tower and leave the Heilbron house in place. Obviously, it's all because of preservation, right? There are no other factors at play?

Come on, you know as well as I that preservationists act to hinder development by adding additional challenges to an already challenging process. They're goal is to facilitate nothing more than their egos.

[urban_encounter]

It’s difficult to tell from the rendering but please tell me that they’re not using dark tinted windows again?

[snfenoc]

Plans revealed for 125-unit mixed-use project near Sac State
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
May 8, 2018
8 hours ago



https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/n...for-125-unit-mixed-use-project-near.html

...plans have been revealed for a new student housing project with ground-floor retail space near California State University Sacramento.

Called Q Street Commons in an application with the city of Sacramento, the six-story project would have 125 apartments above parking and about 1,600 square feet of retail space...

Location will be at the northwest corner where Q Street meets Redding Ave/65th Street. It'll be right across the light rail tracks, due north of the new Hampton Inn.

That area is seeing a pretty good revitalization: The 70s vintage retail center, just to the east, along Folsom Blvd is getting an update. Also, a 90-unit apartment and retail building has been proposed at 65th and Elvas. (https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/n...a-group-exercises-option-to-acquire.html)

[ltsmotorsport]

That one on 65th (between Folsom and Elvas) is already out of the ground! Just drove by yesterday and looks like they have the makings of concrete forms up for the podium level.

[snfenoc]

That is awesome news! Thank you for the update.

[j_deguzman10]

http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article187449383.html

http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2017/12/0...reet-project-his-permits-may-be-revoked/


Saca, Eggert, and Germania have about two months to show progress on their projects The Metropolitan and Cathedral Square Commons respectively or else they are going to lose their rights to build in Downtown. That deadline is July 16th (CBS got the date wrong). While it is at this point very unlikely that either project will start before the July deadline, us interested in development around the urban core can only pray that these three developers either have a change of heart of somehow find funding for their projects.

While my research has not given me estimate totals for Cathedral Square, The Metropolitan will apparently cost 220 million dollars and the representative for Saca said in May 2017 that the City will not allow construction until funding is fully complete and was asking some 30 million dollars from the city, which at the time of the article shows that Saca was not even close to completing the funding for the project.

It's a total shame too, with the success of the Sawyer condos (one sold for 4.1 million... IN SACRAMENTO!!!) it shows that upscale living is back on the rise again and is indeed economically viable in Downtown. By adding these high rise condos, yes it will increase the rents in the city but it will also bring in some big bucks to the urban core as more and more wealthy people are interested in joining the revival of Downtown and Midtown. This could also bring in some investors for future projects (cough Republic FC cough).

Also, these two projects are around 400 ft tall and would add some much needed density to the skyline and could be a catalyst for future projects as well (paging Sacramento Commons).

However, this is all not guaranteed, especially if these two projects are not built, which if that does occur, will be a total embarrassment not only to the city who failed on 2 more high rise condo projects (301 Capitol Mall, Aura, EPIC, Capitol Grand Tower, I could go on and on and on...) but also to the reputation of the housing market in Sacramento, discouraging other developers from building big in the urban core and leaving us with these dinky 9 story buildings; while they do aid the housing crisis, we would need to build many of them to keep up with the demand, and with all this historical preservation and decrease of vacant lots will kick the city's rear unless they build and think high (Think of 19j, but even higher).

So all in all let's just hope that somehow, someway, these two projects will get off the ground and revitalize J street, one of the most important streets in Sacramento, because if they don't, that blight will continue for decades until the next proposal comes up, which historically takes a long long time...

[j_deguzman10]

Innov8 I have a question regarding the Colliers Q1 report you recently posted: is the $3.00 sq/ft total asking office rate or just Class A space downtown? If it's the former, doesn't that mean that Vanir Tower is close to construction because office levels are pre recession and apparently asking rents need to be around $3.10 sq/ft before construction is justifiable???