Quote:
Originally Posted by innov8
Berry Broome has the ability to provide more information on why he believes
this; instead, he offers a vague reference with no substance. Who is this
anchor tenant? How is this decision to cancel the current proposal make “us”
a doormat? The CalPERS board might be playing it safe if the economy is
softening, since they have taken ownership of the site they have spent
approximately $70 million and there little to show for it.
|
That's not how business deals work, real estate being no exception. The anchor may not even be unveiled until who knows when in the hopes that a new partner can salvage the project (in whatever form). Given CalPERS history, and the noted last paragraphs of the CIO article, I wouldn't be surprised if politics ultimately doom this project. Broome my be a ra-ra mouthpiece, but he's our ra-ra mouthpiece, and I can't blame him for really alluding to some possible shenanigans behind the scenes. I'm sure there's plenty of potential tenants who would look to fill space once built, and it's mighty tough to recruit companies if there's no space to put them.
On the project itself, it definitely isn't the most striking or innovative design, but it pushed the envelope in scale which is exactly what this city needs. It would've (or hopefully still will) provide much-needed premier office space, 100 more residential units downtown, over 20,000 square feet of restaurants and retail space, and publicly-accessible open spaces which would invite and engage anyone in or around the building. Make no mistake, this is a HUGE loss for Sacramento if it isn't built, especially as currently proposed. We have to demand more of ourselves, those who want to invest, and not settle for mediocrity (see 601 CM).
Threaded Mode