Sacramento Proposal/Approval/Construction Thread - III

[innov8]

So do you remember all the grand towers proposed for the Railyards? All the
towers proposed for the West Sacramento Bridge District? This will go the same
way as those and others over the last four decades, renderings of soaring
high-rises but no money or demand to actually get it built. Sacrament's sweet
spot is around 8 to 12 floors unless the state is paying for it. I'm happy with
that cause I hate driving thru the Railyards and seeing empty land, but I know
it will never be like we were lead to believe.

Proposed Railyards 2008


West Sacramento Bridge District 2010

Originally Posted by SacTownAndy

New plan for train station calls for housing, hotel
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
Sep 7, 2020

[sactivity]

The only thing that gets done are picture drawings

[snfenoc]

When SacTownAndy posted the article about the Master Plan for the Train Station, I did not not want be negative. Thank you innov8 for opening the door.

It's important to keep in mind that the Master Plan for the Train Station is just that, a plan. It isn't an actual proposal for a 25-story hotel, or an office tower, etc. It's just a plan to guide developers and zoning.

I remember getting excited when Sacramento's Master Plan for The Docks Area that was shown on Channel 3. This was probably around 20-25 years ago. The plan included high rise housing, hotels, retail, a park (I think), and museums. What do we have two decades later? Nothing much, if anything at all. It was just a set of drawings and maybe some zoning. It was an exercise in imagination (and futility). It was a dream scenario of what the city wanted to get built. A developer has to actually buy a parcel. Then, he (or she) needs to do a study, and create a proposal, and get funding, and find a contractor, and probably get additional funding after the contractor's sky-high bid.

These pretty drawing probably aren't going to become reality anytime soon. Maybe, after a decade, part of the overall plan will be completed; and it will probably a scaled down version.

Sacramento just does not have enough money to justify these lofty goals right now. If construction prices come down, if more construction laborers enter the market, and/or if investors lower their expectations, then maybe we can see these fantasies come true.

With regard to demand, I think there are plenty of people willing to live in the area. (I just read that Sacramento was the #1 searched city for those wishing to move; and most of those people were from outside the Bay Area.) I think offices will eventually make a comeback. There may not be as many office buildings, and they be designed for less exposure, but I think the pendulum will eventually swing back toward people working in the same space. But, again, Sacramento just has to attract more money to justify the expense of construction.

[DLMusgrove]

If work from home continues to be a big thing after the pandemic, I wouldn't be surprised if some Bay Area companies open up smaller offices in Sacramento for when their employees do need to get together in person.

[Bikemike]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

When SacTownAndy posted the article about the Master Plan for the Train Station, I did not not want be negative. Thank you innov8 for opening the door.

It's important to keep in mind that the Master Plan for the Train Station is just that, a plan. It isn't an actual proposal for a 25-story hotel, or an office tower, etc. It's just a plan to guide developers and zoning.

I remember getting excited when Sacramento's Master Plan for The Docks Area that was shown on Channel 3. This was probably around 20-25 years ago. The plan included high rise housing, hotels, retail, a park (I think), and museums. What do we have two decades later? Nothing much, if anything at all. It was just a set of drawings and maybe some zoning. It was an exercise in imagination (and futility). It was a dream scenario of what the city wanted to get built. A developer has to actually buy a parcel. Then, he (or she) needs to do a study, and create a proposal, and get funding, and find a contractor, and probably get additional funding after the contractor's sky-high bid.

These pretty drawing probably aren't going to become reality anytime soon. Maybe, after a decade, part of the overall plan will be completed; and it will probably a scaled down version.

Sacramento just does not have enough money to justify these lofty goals right now. If construction prices come down, if more construction laborers enter the market, and/or if investors lower their expectations, then maybe we can see these fantasies come true.

With regard to demand, I think there are plenty of people willing to live in the area. (I just read that Sacramento was the #1 searched city for those wishing to move; and most of those people were from outside the Bay Area.) I think offices will eventually make a comeback. There may not be as many office buildings, and they be designed for less exposure, but I think the pendulum will eventually swing back toward people working in the same space. But, again, Sacramento just has to attract more money to justify the expense of construction.

Sacramento needs to play up its culinary farm to fork chops, and it’s proximity to outdoor activities, notably the Sierra and the River.

Its as good or better than Denver for outdoor activities (the Sierras are vastly more beautiful than the Colorado Rockies), has more world class ski resorts within 1.5hrs drive, and Denver has no major waterway like the American River. Sac also has superior access to organic produce.

I don’t understand why Sacramento has not cultivated a prevailing outdoor culture and attractiveness of the likes of Portland Denver or SLC which can fuel the kind of millennial boom that the latter cities are experiencing. Sac should be much more sophisticated than it is, but alas

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by Bikemike

Sacramento needs to play up its culinary farm to fork chops, and it’s proximity to outdoor activities, notably the Sierra and the River.

Its as good or better than Denver for outdoor activities (the Sierras are vastly more beautiful than the Colorado Rockies), has more world class ski resorts within 1.5hrs drive, and Denver has no major waterway like the American River. Sac also has superior access to organic produce.

I don’t understand why Sacramento has not cultivated a prevailing outdoor culture and attractiveness of the likes of Portland Denver or SLC which can fuel the kind of millennial boom that the latter cities are experiencing. Sac should be much more sophisticated than it is, but alas

I think the city/area has done a lot the cultivate the above for a long time. For the past decade, there has been a significant push to brag about the Sacramento area's "culinary farm to fork chops." Also, for decades, Sacramento has touted itself as being in the middle of everything. I've seen numerous campaigns from Visit Sacramento, The Downtown Sacramento Partnership, city government, etc. that play up the area's "Farm to Fork" culinary freshness, as well as its proximity to other great locales. In the past, I think the latter of the two benefits carried less weight because there were other, cooler (in terms of weather) and hipper cities in the Bay area which were destinations on their own. Plus, they were just as close to LA as Sacramento; and they weren't all that much further away from the Sierras. Now that the Bay Area cost of living has reached a tipping point, I think Sacramento's culinary prowess and proximity to great locations for outdoor sports and leisure may have more meaning.

[snfenoc]

Project of 104 units planned at 16th and R in Midtown Sacramento

By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
September 21, 2020

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramen..._news_headline

If there's a spot where two hot development corridors in Sacramento meet, it's the northeast corner of 16th and R streets in Midtown. And after years of anticipation, now there's a proposal for that spot.

The city is processing plans for 1619 R St. calling for a six-story project of 104 units, 4,240 square feet of commercial space and 92 parking spaces on the lot.

Though more details on the applicant weren't available, the property owner is 16 R Associates LLC, with a Sacramento address. The address for the owner corresponds to JB Management LP Sacramento, a firm that includes members of the Benvenuti development family. A message left at JB Management on Friday was not returned.

PROPOSAL DRAWING (VRILAKAS GROEN ARCHITECTS):


CURRENT SITE (AS SEEN FROM 17TH AND R STREETS):


This is another 6-story project, but it fills an ugly hole between the Ice Blocks development and the rest of the big stuff going on in that area.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

• Architect: Vrilakas Groen Architects.
• Unit Mix: (18) Studios; (6) Live-Work Lofts; (31) one-bedroom; (28) one-bedroom with office; (21) two-bedroom. I think, maybe they should double the Studio units?
• Apartment Sizes: 558 to 1200 square feet.
• First Floor: Live-Work Lofts + (2) Retail spaces on either southern corner.
• Development Time Frame: None given.
• Development Cost: None given.

[Majin]

Yes I hate that ugly hole in the ground but yikes another 6 story project. Midtown is going to be full of these soon. And why so much parking? Or any parking at all?

[urbanadvocate]

Although I would like to see taller buildings going up, these 5-8 story buildings really are changing the fabric of the city for the better. I think of the area around Fremont Park, along R street (which this would add too), and soon the north side of 16th street and a few others. All have become more lively (pre COVID) with great street level activity.

[CAAndrew]

Originally Posted by innov8

So do you remember all the grand towers proposed for the Railyards? All the towers proposed for the West Sacramento Bridge District? This will go the same way as those and others over the last four decades, renderings of soaring high-rises but no money or demand to actually get it built. Sacrament's sweet spot is around 8 to 12 floors unless the state is paying for it.

Pretty common for munis to zone without regards for what's profitably buildable for private developers. Exceedingly few cities lay out their GP and area plans while taking that in to account. I get why citizens generally don't grasp how much development costs, PSF or per DU, and how that compares to PSF rents, but it's problematic that city councils and planning departments frequently seem to fail to either know or care.

Maybe if the RHNA had sharp teeth, then cities would have incentive to create plans that optimize for actual development.

[CAAndrew]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

A developer has to ... do a study,

One way cities sometimes simplify this step is to go through the CEQA EIR process for a whole plan area. Any project that stays within the limits of the EIR, then, doesn't need to do an individual study and can skip that step.

[Schmoe]

[urbanadvocate]

According to the Biz Journal, Sac Bee is leaving their Midtown location. Article was locked so could not get details. Will be interesting to see what is eventually planned there considering the other development in that neighborhood (does it have a name--is too far north to be in Poverty Ridge?).

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by CAAndrew

One way cities sometimes simplify this step is to go through the CEQA EIR process for a whole plan area. Any project that stays within the limits of the EIR, then, doesn't need to do an individual study and can skip that step.

I was thinking "study" in terms of the developer figuring for himself (or herself) what he can actually build. Then, having to go back to the drawing board once the contractors come back with bids that are ridiculous. Then, probably go back to the drawing board again, when the chosen contractor shifts the goalpost.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by urbanadvocate

According to the Biz Journal, Sac Bee is leaving their Midtown location. Article was locked so could not get details. Will be interesting to see what is eventually planned there considering the other development in that neighborhood (does it have a name--is too far north to be in Poverty Ridge?).

Developing that location, plus the supporting facilities across the way would be really nice. I think it amounts to about 2.5 to 3 total city blocks.

[urbanadvocate]

Anybody know anything about the residential highrise proposed where the old Rusty Duck restaurant is?

[enigma99a]

Originally Posted by urbanadvocate

Anybody know anything about the residential highrise proposed where the old Rusty Duck restaurant is?

Been replaced with a 6 story proposal lol. Jk

[snfenoc]

Looks like Township 9 is gonna suck...

Application reveals more about Township Nine plans
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
September 30, 2020

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramen..._news_headline

New plans filed with the city provide a deeper look at what developer 29th Street Capital has in mind for the stalled Township Nine project in Sacramento.

The plans slightly revise already approved plans under another developer for 936 multifamily units in Township Nine, north of Richards Boulevard between Fifth and Seventh Streets in the city's River District. Here are the highlights:

1. Seven square blocks of development are planned, with four buildings surrounding common open space and parking. The four building types would have 24, 30, 36 and 42 units each, in three-story buildings. All units would be either one- or two-bedroom, ranging from 567 to 1,071 square feet...

I think this is just the first, single-block phase of the overall master plan. However, further reading shows that two areas (future phase?) will be live/work lofts - we know that means 2 or 3 story condos; and one area (again, a future phase?) will be mixed-use and only 3 1/2 stories. The north end/river front-facing lots appear to be residential, while the south end/Richards Blvd-facing lots will be commercial.

Just as we had pretty much already concluded, it looks like the whole project is going to be low-rise.

[Majin]

The application should be denied.

[snfenoc]

It's as though Ben van der Meer and 29th Street Crapital were reading our little forum....

Plans for Township Nine mixed-use development start to take shape
By Ben van der Meer – Staff Writer, Sacramento Business Journal
October 1, 2020

https://www.bizjournals.com/sacramen..._news_headline

Three-story buildings are part of Township Nine's immediate future, but taller buildings are still possible down the road for the infill project.

Kevin Smith, of incoming developer 29th Street Capital, said mid-rise buildings of luxury residential units with views of the Sacramento River are still in the plans for land along the project's north end. The southern portion of the project in Sacramento's River District, along Richards Boulevard, is planned as commercial with a mix of uses, and could see mid-rises or even a building as tall as 15 stories, he said.

"We're focused on what we think will be attainable central city housing," said Smith, 29th Street's vice president for development in Northern California....

We shall see.

More Information:

• The first set of apartments will begin in Q1 2021. It will be a single block with four, 3-story apartment buildings. There will be 126 units total.
• There will be additional sets, which will follow the same basic pattern - 4 buildings per block - eventually filling up seven blocks.
• Each successive block will have different unit counts.
• The plan is to start a new building each month, then move on to the next block once the previous block is built out.
• The buildings in this 7-block residential phase will be residential-only - no mixed-use. 29th Street Crapital does not think it's prudent add more retail at this point. For example, Cannery Place Apartments (built 10+ years ago) has a retail spot that remains vacant. Maybe, as those 7 residential blocks get filled with people, that little retail space at Cannery Place Apartments will have enough demand to open up... as a yoga studio.
• The north (riverside) and south (Richards) ends/phases of the development will occur once other projects come on line (e.g., the State office complex, the MLS stadium, the Kaiser hospital, and other Rail Yard developments). Again, we shall see.