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

[arod74]

Originally Posted by jsf8278

What's your point? They're not beholden to California in anyway other than to provide the largest possible return for their customers, who happen to be California residents.

Not to speak for ozone but I think the point is this. Entities like Microsoft, GM, Boeing, etc are not obligated to do anything other than to maximize the return for their shareholders yet they pump in millions anually into "civic investements" in the areas they have rooted themselves. Its an apples to oranges comparison since CalPERS isn't a traditional corporation trying to build goodwill or add to its image but if there wasn't a sign on a building that says CalPERS just about no one would know that an organization that controls billions of dollars in investment capital has any presence in the region. I think a token project here or there wouldn't kill their great returns. Is Sacramento that poor of an investment? I guess so...

[TowerDistrict]

Apparently Sacramento is more risky than politically troubled, emerging market nations. As CalPERS relaxes their screening on those markets, and tightens up it's local investment.

[ozone]

I wasn't actually making a point per se. But yes arod74 you did, in fact, read my intent in posting those figures.

I will say that I absolutely do not agree with you jsf8278 when you say that CalPERS is not beholden to California in anyway other than to provide the largest possible return for their customers. What part of 'California Public Employees' don't you understand? We the California taxpayers employed these people. I don't know of any such para-governmental entity in any other country around the world (unless very corrupt) that would think it's OK not to invest heavily in the homeland and in particularly in the capitol city. CalPers investment would create jobs and spur more private investment. Americans are chumps to believe completety the Relgion of Free Market since there's no such thing.

[TowerDistrict]

i think jsf8278 was being facetious.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by ozone

I wasn't actually making a point per se. But yes arod74 you did, in fact, read my intent in posting those figures.

I will say that I absolutely do not agree with you jsf8278 when you say that CalPERS is not beholden to California in anyway other than to provide the largest possible return for their customers. What part of 'California Public Employees' don't you understand? We the California taxpayers employed these people. I don't know of any such para-governmental entity in any other country around the world (unless very corrupt) that would think it's OK not to invest heavily in the homeland and in particularly in the capitol city. CalPers investment would create jobs and spur more private investment. Americans are chumps to believe completety the Relgion of Free Market since there's no such thing.

Let me get this straight, because "Public" is in the name, CalPERS must invest in Sacramento? Forget about using it in its proper context, the word "public" is there, so screw the "Employees" and their "Retirement". CalPERS has to invest in little old Sacramento because it's the crapital of California. Of course!! That makes lots of sense. (I’m being sarcastic – just in case you did not catch on.)

I'm sorry, I don't agree. CalPERS should be looking out for their customers/investors, not finding ways to stroke your Sacramento pride. (By the way, what goes before a fall?)

"But Steve, we employ these people." So? Does that mean we get to direct where their $$ goes? That would be like my boss, who is a Mormon, saying I can’t use my paycheck to buy caffeinated drinks and porn; instead, I must use it to buy sacred undergarments and genealogy software. You know that would be totally unacceptable. I say, let CalPERS and its members decide what's best. Oh, that's right, most of the people on this forum hate freedom, so nobody gives a sh#t about what I have to say. Never mind, sorry everyone, go back to your sheeple activities. Don't listen to me; I'm just one of those "chumps".

[ozone]

that is a pretty lame scenario. Freedom?

WARNING the following is a rant: Anyone who thinks we have a free market in the good old USofA is delusional. Anyone who thinks Americans are good capitalistic are delusional. Anyone who thinks that buying an American brand is being patriotic is delusional. I lived in Asia where the average person was far more capitalistic than the average American is. I lived in a country which had a lot more protective tariffs and regulations and yet there were 10X (or more) small business owners. We are over regulated for sure..but it’s all backassward here.

What’s to blame for the America we have today? The multi-national-corporations, the Wall Street investors, international bankers, the military-industrial complex, the medical-drug industry and their lawyers and PR firms (better known as the corporate media). I’m not sure anyone of these are ‘evil’ per se (aside form the lawyers -j/k) -it’s more like they are amoral -which means they don’t do something because it’s the right thing to do or because it will result in the greater good for the most people -in the long run--but instead what will bring the best financially results in the shortest amount of time. I’m always amazed at how many knuckleheads right-wingers who go on and on about the free market and regulations yet they’ve never started a business from the ground up.

[Fusey]

^ My parents are fairly right-wing and they've started two businesses.

[goldcntry]

Carefull with the generalizations ozone... my right-wing parents run their vineyard, my right-wing aunt owns her own café, and my right-wing self has 2 home-based businesses on the side.

still luv ya though man!

[ozone]

OK I know there's a lot small business owners who are right wing -maybe most are. But actually that wasn't what I was trying to say. I wasn't complaining about those small buisness owners who are for whatever reason right wing (and many are not becuase it's economically and socially logical but because of their religion, upbringing or social conditioning). I have a few right wing friends and we just agree to disagree. No what I don't appreciate are these nimrods who think they are "business people" just because they are right wing, or do a little investing in the market, or are middle managment in some big corporate firm. I'm neither completely right wing or completely left wing ..it depends on the issue and often I'm neither. I believe basic morals (like not lying, stealing and cheating), common sense (like changing one's lifestyle to accomodate the changing economic realities) and doing things that support the common good is far more important and far more rare today.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by ozone

I believe basic morals (like not lying, stealing and cheating), common sense (like changing one's lifestyle to accomodate the changing economic realities) and doing things that support the common good is far more important and far more rare today.

I actually agree with your morals. I just happen to believe individuals and businesses should not be forced (by the government) to observe them. Although certain forms a lying and cheating, as well as all forms of stealing, should be punished.

I think CalPERS' attention to its investors serves the common good pretty well. It means more people with more money at retirement. That's pretty good if you ask me, and certainly better than dumping hundreds of millions of dollars into Sacramento so that a few skyscraper nerd, special interest forumers can have their "Sacramento pride" stroked.

[thekid@455]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

Let me get this straight, because "Public" is in the name, CalPERS must invest in Sacramento? Forget about using it in its proper context, the word "public" is there, so screw the "Employees" and their "Retirement". CalPERS has to invest in little old Sacramento because it's the crapital of California. Of course!! That makes lots of sense. (I’m being sarcastic – just in case you did not catch on.)

I'm sorry, I don't agree. CalPERS should be looking out for their customers/investors, not finding ways to stroke your Sacramento pride. (By the way, what goes before a fall?)

"But Steve, we employ these people." So? Does that mean we get to direct where their $$ goes? That would be like my boss, who is a Mormon, saying I can’t use my paycheck to buy caffeinated drinks and porn; instead, I must use it to buy sacred undergarments and genealogy software. You know that would be totally unacceptable. I say, let CalPERS and its members decide what's best. Oh, that's right, most of the people on this forum hate freedom, so nobody gives a sh#t about what I have to say. Never mind, sorry everyone, go back to your sheeple activities. Don't listen to me; I'm just one of those "chumps".

I really hate to pull this card, but if you read CalPERS requirements for their real estate investment portfolio, and I quote "75% of all equity invested by CalPERS, or Funds beholden to CalPERS, must be allocated to projects in California." So, yes they do have a strict investment requirement for their portfolio. And if you can get a hold of their current investments, you'll see how poor that decision has become.

[innov8]

1 1/2 years. Lots of green growth going on.

[TWAK]

man what could of been! They should of taken their losses and made it just 1 tower. I thought the 2 tower look was kinda....vegas'ish

[JVissle]

Originally Posted by innov8

1 1/2 years. Lots of green growth going on.

Thank you for posting and sending this thing in a new direction. I was starting to think they would go on for ever.

[ltsmotorsport]

Yeah, I much prefer on-topic discussions.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by innov8

1 1/2 years. Lots of green growth going on.

Technically CalPers too over the project on June 12th of last summer and promised a proposal would be forthcoming in 18 months. Alhough you're correct that construction stopped around a year and a half ago.

I'm still hopeful we'll get a look at their plans for this site this year (as Bob Shallit predicted.) Even so, it will still be a year and a half (at least once they announce their plans) before anyting is built, so as to give the project time to work its way through the city planning department. I think we're still about 2 years away from seeing any construction activity there.


It will also be interesting to see what will be proposed there. I think David Taylor and CIM may be preparing a proposal for 601 CM and I'm not certain CIM would propose something that would directly compete with their proposal at 301CM.

BTW i have no information that is actually the case. But didn't CIM and David Taylor just pick up some extra redevelopment dollars in their purchase of the Sheraton Grande?

[ltsmotorsport]

I wonder if they decided to go with something similar to the original project, how much cheaper it would be with almost all the foundation work close to done? How much was spent on construction before it stopped?

[innov8]

I did some investigating this last week and got in contact with people from
CIM and CalPERS and they both said the same thing (read below). I also
heard a rumor from a good source that there will be a single tower at about
the 40 stories tall and that allot of private and government agencies are
working on this project to make sure something extraordinary is built… will see about that?

Here’s the messages I got below…

mailed-bycalpers.ca.gov

innov8,

Sorry for the delay in responding to your question.
CIM, our investment partner, continues to explore development opportunities to determine the best use of the site. There will be news in the future, however with current market conditions it may take a bit longer to bring this project to the renderings and plans stage of development. Unfortunately, that's the only update I have at the moment.

Brad

And

Hi innov8,

We don't have any news on the Capital Mall site yet. CIM, our investment partner, continues to explore development opportunities to determine the best use of the site. There will be news in the future, however with current market conditions it may take a bit longer to bring this project to the renderings and plans stage of development.
All the best,

Laurie Weir, Portfolio Manager
Global Real Estate Investments
California Public Employees Retirement System
400 Q Street, Suite E4800
Sacramento, CA 95814

[ltsmotorsport]

Well, I guess that's something.

I sure wish they'd take advantage of all that extra foundation and piling work and at least make room for a second tower in the future.

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by ltsmotorsport

I sure wish they'd take advantage of all that extra foundation and piling work

They will make use of it; (for the garage)..


I think we'll be lucky of we see a 30 story proposal in the next 4 years.

My latest prediction (and I'm hoping that I'm wrong<<<<which i usually am)
is a 24 stroy tower announced in late 2009; a year to year and a half of planning, with construction starting in late 2011 or early 2012.


But again I'm always wrong; so it will probably be a 13 story tower announced in 2014.