Sacramento: 301 Capitol Mall: A New Plan for The Towers Site

[arod74]

You would think the liens would be transferred onto the new titleholder just like residential property liens? Im sure someone might be able to enlighten us...

[travis bickle]

Originally Posted by ozone

I think you guys have pretty much said it all. I would just add that every city has experienced this type of thing and that Sacramento is not in any way unique in seeing a big project fold or greatly reduced. I wouldn't say that our small skyline will forever stay small because forever is a long time. It's also useless to play the blame game until we really know what went on behind the scenes. I'm actually hopeful in that CalPERS is looking at ways to make something happen and that we'll not have a big hole in the ground for ten years.

What makes Sacramento different is the late start. While every city suffered grandiose residential towers that were never built, most got something built. Even San Diego, a city for which everything broke just right, only got about 1 in 4 or 5 projects built, but there were so many proposed that San Diego's skyline is now radically changed in the most part for the better.

Sacramento got a late start because no one believed. Old stereotypes die hard and when the Towers and Aura were first proposed, they elicited more snickers than cheers. I think the shear scale of these projects in an untested market scared away - and still scare away - funding.

But that market is no longer untested. Frankly, the sales for both of these projects - based on nothing more than pretty pictures/models - are outstanding, but exploding construction costs and the inevitable market downturn combined to make success difficult, but not impossible.

In the end, cowardly minds prevailed.

[ltsmotorsport]

Originally Posted by travis bickle

In the end, cowardly minds prevailed.

No better way to put it.

[arod74]

I think that's the most bitter pill to swallow. All the nimby's and other freaks like those that just love to post their small minded barbs in the Bee get to wallow in Saca's failure.

[snfenoc]

travis bickle kinda stole my thunder, but I thought I would register my feelings.

The following assumes the pink-bloused, fat chick has sung, and the Towers project is doing a DEAD-on impression of George W. Bush's presidency:

I am a little concerned about the stigma this failure may place on the city. IF Aura happens, hopefully Sacramento won't be seen as such a risk to investors and developers. However, based on some of the comments I read on this board and heard from speaking with others, I think I have good reason to be at least a little worried. Many people seem to think the Towers were "too big" and "out of character" for Sacramento. I disagree. Size-overkill was not what doomed the project. Nope. Construction and materials price-overkill (along with the housing downturn) and Saca’s unfortunate timing combined to produce an insurmountable obstacle.

Back when the project was originally proposed (late 2004??) I remember thinking, 'Where was Mr. Saca 2 years ago?' I was optimistic, but I kept thinking he may have missed the boat, because construction prices were moving way up. It seems that hunch was correct.

Now I know it would have been easier to build a smaller, less expensive project (although, just ask Craig Nassi how easy it is) in Sacramento. But size was not the issue (well, I really hope size was not the issue). Unfortunately, many people don't agree. I'm concerned about the result of that kind of thinking. You know what kind of result I'm talking about, right? Something like 800 J Street? Honestly, I would rather have a hole in the ground at 8th and J than the ugly, wider-than-it-is-tall, architectural abortion that sits there. When I see a hole in the ground, I think about potential. When I see 800 J, I think about what could have been. I know. I know. I should just get over it. However, I refuse to get over it. “Get over it” is just another way of saying, “Accept this piece of crap.” I don't want crap. I want the best. If you can't give me the best, wait until you can.

I don't know what the CIM proposal will be. Maybe it will be something OK. Heck, maybe CIM will suggest waiting until the market turns around, so they can build something really spectacular. Who knows?

In closing, I hope developers and investors know that this failure has little to do with Sacramento and more to do with timing. I also hope they are interested in waiting until the timing is right (assuming prices will eventually come down) and building the best they can; instead of impatiently heading forward when the time is wrong and building the least they can.

That’s my 2 cents.

To those of you who bought into the Towers, I am sorry – that really sucks. To me the project was a beacon signaling Sacramento’s much-improved future; to you it was home.

[SacTownAndy]

This is probably my skyscraper side talking, but honestly I think I would rather have a hole there for a few years until market conditions improve (until that spot can get a project on the scale it deserves) rather than building an 800J-ish type development just for the sake of development. I just think it would be a missed opportunity.

[Scooby]

Any new owner would demand first lien position, meaning that the lienholders would need to be paid, or would need to remove the liens prior any transfer of ownership. I'm surprised that none of them has moved to perfect their lien. As it stands, they all have "priority" over the current owner. California lien laws only give a set amount of time before the liens become invalid if they are not pursued. They may be pursuing payment from the bond via the surety.

[tuy]

Put the Residential and Hotel in one Tower and bump it up to about 60 - 65 stories. Then build a 20-30 story business tower in place of the second tower.

They should be able to get more money for the top floors if they are taller and even for the intermediate floors if there is nothing obstructing the view.

The podium would still have retail, health club, etc..

[innov8]

Originally Posted by SacTownAndy

This is probably my skyscraper side talking, but honestly I think I would rather have a hole there for a few years until market conditions improve (until that spot can get a project on the scale it deserves) rather than building an 800J-ish type development just for the sake of development. I just think it would be a missed opportunity.

I totally agree with SacTownAndy & snfenoc. I'd rather see a hole in the
ground for a few years till the market improves instead of something of the
sort that was built on J Street. At this point, building one towers would
still be a beautiful thing... I'm almost certain we will be disappointed with what
CIM and CalPERS will propose if they propose anything.

[travis bickle]

Originally Posted by innov8

I totally agree with SacTownAndy & snfenoc. I'd rather see a hole in the
ground for a few years till the market improves instead of something of the
sort that was built on J Street. At this point, building one towers would
still be a beautiful thing... I'm almost certain we will be disappointed with what
CIM and CalPERS will propose if they propose anything.

I completely agree. Based on track records and Calpers recent gonad removal, I think we're probably looking at typically blah, state influenced 12-18 story "tower" that is overwhelmingly office with a small residential component. We'll be stuck with it for 50 years.

Give me the hole in the ground any day. We'll be stuck with that for maybe five years.

[ozone]

Do you think maybe you guys are putting way to importance on this one project? I'm not sure that its a case of "cowardly minds prevailing" as it much as developer who did not have it all together, being overly ambitious and just plain bad timing. Lots of people in this town supported this project and NIMBYS were not the problem this time folks. I mean we expected to go from virtually nothing to the tallest condos on the West Coast? It would be a hard sell in many cities let alone Sacramento.

I do not want a hole in the ground -period -that will only hurt downtown more than a smaller project would. Besides there are plenty of other sites downtown for something spectacular in the future. CalPERS knows that the city is expecting something more at the head of Capitol Mall than a typical boring SOB-like project and I don't think they'll come back with such a proposal. Their own HQ is a pretty nice design (even if it's kinda suburban).

[innov8]

Originally Posted by ozone

Do you think maybe you guys are putting way to importance on this one project? I'm not sure that its a case of "cowardly minds prevailing" as it much as developer who did not have it all together and just plain bad timing. Lots of people in this town supported this project and NIMBYS were not the problem this time folks.

I do not want a hole in the ground -period -that will only hurt downtown more than a so-so project would. Besides there are plenty of other sites downtown for something spectacular in the future. CalPERS knows that the city is expecting something more at the head of Capitol Mall and I don't think they'll come back with a typical boring SOB-like proposal. Their own HQ is pretty nice (even if it's kinda suburban).

This is a thread about the Towers... so yes. this is important being that it's at the
foot of Capitol Mall. I don't believe anyone has mentioned anything about
NIMBY's concerning this project except for when it was first proposed... did I miss something ozone?

You have a lot of faith in a State agency to produce a product that somewhat
attractive. The CalPERS HQ is nice, but of course it will be nice because it's
their HQ... I don't expect they will take it to that level for this project being
that liens are still owed and they have already sunk $25 million onto the ground
and they would still have to buy the land.

[travis bickle]

Originally Posted by ozone

Do you think maybe you guys are putting way to importance on this one project? I'm not sure that its a case of "cowardly minds prevailing" as it much as developer who did not have it all together and just plain bad timing. Lots of people in this town supported this project and NIMBYS were not the problem this time folks.

I do not want a hole in the ground -period -that will only hurt downtown more than a so-so project would. Besides there are plenty of other sites downtown for something spectacular in the future. CalPERS knows that the city is expecting something more at the head of Capitol Mall and I don't think they'll come back with a typical boring SOB-like proposal. Their own HQ is pretty nice (even if it's kinda suburban).

Respectfully disagree. The timing didn't bother any (enough) until calpers leadership changed. That's when this project began to spiral down. This project - as proposed - is a winner right now. They've sold nearly 50% of the units in a miserable overall market. But it's not enough for the new castrati at calpers.

The importance of this project to - not just Capitol Mall, not just downtown, but to the entire Sacramento region can not be overstated. It was something never before even contemplated here. It would have changed the Sacramento dynamic forever. You needed someone at the helm who believes in Sacramento and is willing to fight to the last dime to see it realize its full potential. No such person exists any longer at calpers. That's the big change here.

Now, does that mean Sacramento never recovers? Of course not. Should Aura get built, that too will start a series of successful downtown projects. As I've often said, the DT market is different than the rest of the region because of pent-up demand. But two breathtaking towers on CM would have created a synergy and confidence that will be difficult to recapture given the failure of one.

There is absolutely no reason to believe the calpers/CIM partnership will produce anything other than the mundane. Instead of looking at some stogy bloc haus at what should be our city's grand entrance for the rest of most of our lives, I'll take a hole in the ground for a few years while Aura and other projects prove the market.

[ozone]

Oh I thought I read someone blaming NIMBYs -maybe I'm wrong. Hey don't get me wrong I'm very disappointed but I don't think the sky is falling because the Towers is off.

How can you say the drop in the housing market didn't affect this outcome? CalPERS's first responsiblity is to it's members not to the hopes and dreams of Sacramentians. They couldn't "fight to the last dime" even if they wanted to. I'm not going to start blaming them until I know all the facts. In hindsight Saca probably needed a partner with more freedom.

Of course, I agree (as does the city) that site is very important- being that it's at the foot of Capitol Mall and that's why I don't think you see a typical SOB thing ever built there. I don't have faith in a quasi-state agency to produce a product that is attractive -unless they have no choice -which they really don't because they must deliever something above average or the city will not accept it. That being the case you all might get your hole afterall.

[TowerDistrict]

I presume that it would take a long while to get anything off the ground for CIM anyway. presuming it's radically different, a new project require a whole new set of approvals and possibly a new EIR. I also think that the Towers saga may have attracted an lot of bad press and, in turn, public misconception. I'm not sure if the next project could jump through the hoops so quickly.

but we'll see...

[snfenoc]

Do you think maybe you guys are putting way to importance on this one project?

Nope. Do you think maybe you are not putting enough importance on this one MAJOR project?

I do not want a hole in the ground -period -that will only hurt downtown more than a so-so project would. Besides there are plenty of other sites downtown for something spectacular in the future. CalPERS knows that the city is expecting something more at the head of Capitol Mall and I don't think they'll come back with a typical boring SOB-like proposal. Their own HQ is pretty nice (even if it's kinda suburban).

It's very possible CalPERS won't come back with the typical SOB-like building many expect. Saca's comment about CalPERS crapping it up may be tainted by his anger at possibly losing the project. However, I have a legitimate concern that CalPERS won't come back with something all that appealing; and if they come back with something like their sprawling, SOB, Mussolini-esque HQ, then I'm going to riot. "There are plenty of other sites downtown for something spectacular." That's what people said when 800 J put the final nail in Metro Place's coffin. It's always the same, "Let's settle, use up another great site with garbage and wait 'till the future." I don't mind waiting until the future. However, I do mind settling, especially with this particular site. Sometimes settling is a wise choice, but sometimes it is wise to wait. I think in this situation it would be wise to wait. That property is a pretty strategic place - it's like the gateway to Sacramento, so I think it should have something grand. Now "grand" means different things to different people. To me, "grand" does not have to mean twin 53 story towers. It could mean twin 40 story towers, or a single tall building (splitting the site in half and letting another developer have a crack at something else). Heck, tuy's idea is more than enough to please me. What I don't want to see is another 800 J-like development or two wussy 20 story buildings. I don't think there is anything wrong with saying, "Hey, let's wait until the time is right." Whatever gets built on that site, we are stuck with it. Why not put something decent there? Simply filling a hole with just anything does not sit well with me at all.

This is all speculation. We have no freaking idea what will be proposed. Those of us who know CalPERS and associate CIM with 800 J Street are simply thinking, "worst case scenario". Who knows? We may get the "best case scenario".

*************************************************

Remember folks, this is called skyscraperpage.com. I know in some ways it has morphed into something else , but let's not diminish the value of having a nice group of TALL towers dotting our city, OK?? Skyscrapers alone may not define a city, but they certainly are an important aspect of the overall definition.

[travis bickle]

No one is claiming the miserable market had no affect. It undoubtedly greatly contributed to calpers' pathetic performance in this matter along with construction costs. But none of those problems were deal breakers until new - gutless - leadership came on board.

If this project were an unqualified loser, calpers decision is perfectly understandable. But unless a lot of people are lying and therefore criminally culpable, there would seem to be a market (as in nearly 50% sold) here and every reason to expect continued sales during construction (albeit at a slower pace) as the market rebounds as it inevitably will.

If calpers/CIM presents a plan in November that is 525' of outstanding design in a single tower mixed-use, then I'm wrong and am delighted to be so. But given the track record, there's no reason to expect that now.

[TowerDistrict]

Well part of the reason a big tall building works so well there, is for those urban environment issues rather than the aesthetics of a distant skyline. 301 CM doesn't really affect much in terms of bordering neighborhoods and would put housing and visitors into an otherwise business corridor. I think it's always going to be healthy in an urban environment to have both a worker and resident population. Nobody likes a 6:00 pm ghost town, and that's what Cap Mall is now.

[innov8]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

Remember folks, this is called skyscraperpage.com. I know in some ways it has morphed into something else , but let's not diminish the value of having a nice group of TALL towers dotting our city, OK?? Skyscrapers alone may not define a city, but they certainly are an important aspect of the overall definition.

Well said Steve settling for anything in life only leads to regret later.

[BrianSac]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

travis bickle kinda stole my thunder, but I thought I would register my feelings.

The following assumes the pink-bloused, fat chick has sung, and the Towers project is doing a DEAD-on impression of George W. Bush's presidency:

I am a little concerned about the stigma this failure may place on the city. IF Aura happens, hopefully Sacramento won't be seen as such a risk to investors and developers. However, based on some of the comments I read on this board and heard from speaking with others, I think I have good reason to be at least a little worried. Many people seem to think the Towers were "too big" and "out of character" for Sacramento. I disagree. Size-overkill was not what doomed the project. Nope. Construction and materials price-overkill (along with the housing downturn) and Saca’s unfortunate timing produced an insurmountable obstacle.

Back when the project was originally proposed (late 2004??) I remember thinking, 'Where was Mr. Saca 2 years ago?' I was optimistic, but I kept thinking he may have missed the boat, because construction prices were moving way up. It seems that hunch was correct.

Now I know it would have been easier to build a smaller, less expensive project (although, just ask Craig Nassi how easy it is) in Sacramento. But size was not the issue (well, I really hope size was not the issue). Unfortunately, many people don't agree. I'm concerned about the result of that kind of thinking. You know what kind of result I'm talking about, right? Something like 800 J Street? Honestly, I would rather have a hole in the ground at 8th and J than the ugly, wider-than-it-is-tall, architectural abortion that sits there. When I see a hole in the ground, I think about potential. When I see 800 J, I think about what could have been. I know. I know. I should just get over it. However, I refuse to get over it. “Get over it” is just another way of saying, “Accept this piece of crap.” I don't want crap. I want the best. If you can't give me the best, wait until you can.

I don't know what the CIM proposal will be. Maybe it will be something OK. Heck, maybe CIM will suggest waiting until the market turns around, so they can build something really spectacular. Who knows?

In closing, I hope developers and investors know that this failure has little to do with Sacramento and more to do with timing. I also hope they are interested in waiting until the timing is right (assuming prices will eventually come down) and building the best they can; instead of impatiently heading forward when the time is wrong and building the least they can.

That’s my 2 cents.

To those of you who bought into the Towers, I am sorry – that really sucks. To me the project was a beacon signaling Sacramento’s much-improved future; to you it was home.

Snfenoc,

Amen!

I agree with everything you said,

The CIM 801 J Street building is mediocre at best...I hate the way the front of the building faces north.

The 301 Capitol Mall lot deserves a signature statement building for Sacramento.