HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Sacramento Area


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #5001  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2014, 6:05 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Great job downtownserg89! I was just about to post my own pics but you pretty covered it and then some- thus saving me the trouble. Thanks! Finally seeing a buzz of activity. Hopefully well have some new (advanced) proposals soon.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5002  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2014, 9:25 PM
creamcityleo79's Avatar
creamcityleo79 creamcityleo79 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posts: 1,787
Serg! You nailed the pics! They make me want to come home!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5003  
Old Posted Apr 12, 2014, 11:49 PM
CAGeoNerd CAGeoNerd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 353
Great pics, thanks so much for sharing! Lots of things going on, but all dotted around. Hopefully we see more in downtown happening (well, other than the gym going in next door to Dive Bar!)

I hadn't heard about the "WAL" project on R Street - is that what was the lot next to Shoki Ramen House??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5004  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2014, 3:37 AM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
WAL is across the street on the next block, the old Lawrence Warehouse plus a new building of similar size. More than 100 apartments, ranging from low-income studios to 1000+ sf market rate apartments, intended for working artists who need a place to live that can also function as a studio.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5005  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 12:56 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
The fence has gone up around The Warren site. Site demolition and cleanup has begun or will shortly.



The project will include 118 market-rate one and two bedroom rental apartment units, 5,195 square feet of ground floor retail along 16th Street and 133 parking spaces on the first floor and in the basement. The projected completion date is the first quarter of 2015. While I'm not wild about the design at least it's much needed infill housing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5006  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 1:11 AM
Majin's Avatar
Majin Majin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Downtown Sacramento
Posts: 2,221
I wish the projects under construction or soon to start construction had a little more height to them. Hopefully the next ground of projects will.
__________________
Majin Crew: jsf8278, wburg, daverave
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5007  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 2:08 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin View Post
I wish the projects under construction or soon to start construction had a little more height to them. Hopefully the next ground of projects will.
I believe this is within the capitol view corridor. But I'm with you. We need to get more height in this town.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5008  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 3:48 AM
ltsmotorsport's Avatar
ltsmotorsport ltsmotorsport is offline
Here we stAy
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Parkway Pauper
Posts: 8,064
While I'm glad to hear that the Warren site is moving forward, I wish they would have gone with something a little closer to the previous design. This looks rather bland.

Still, really can't complain about seeing more new quality housing coming to the grid.
__________________
Riding out the crazy train
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5009  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 4:14 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltsmotorsport View Post
While I'm glad to hear that the Warren site is moving forward, I wish they would have gone with something a little closer to the previous design. This looks rather bland.

Still, really can't complain about seeing more new quality housing coming to the grid.
do you mean this?



The project was originally going to be condos so.. maybe when then decided to go with rental they needed to cut some costs in order to get it funded and moving forward?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5010  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 4:17 AM
NikeFutbolero's Avatar
NikeFutbolero NikeFutbolero is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 98
So did the Aura project completely die off?
__________________
SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5011  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 6:07 AM
ltsmotorsport's Avatar
ltsmotorsport ltsmotorsport is offline
Here we stAy
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Parkway Pauper
Posts: 8,064
Aura has been long gone for a while. Not sure if the entitlements are still valid, but I would have to assume a new design would come for any new proposal on that site.

ozone - Yes, that design. If we could at least get the glass fully covering the corner again, that would be a step in the right direction.
__________________
Riding out the crazy train
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5012  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 3:07 PM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
A lot of the condo-to-apartment shift is due to liability--the extra insurance you have to buy when you get sued in the first 10 years is a disincentive for building attached condos, but if they are built to condo standards they can convert from apartments to condos once the building is 10 years old. The Warren and a lot of other projects are doing that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5013  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 3:35 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Does anyone know what's going on with the 700 block of K Street? Does Ali Youssefi/CFY have what it takes to move this forward without redevelopment funds? You would think that with the arena they could be able to do it without it. Where does the city stand?

wburg- I really question whether insurance was the deciding factor in going for rental over condos. More likely tight credit and a market that's still not fully recovered -at least not to pre-crash. But whatever.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5014  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 3:57 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 5,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by urban_encounter View Post
I can't predict what's going to happen Michael and really if it makes economic sense it will happen. If not, it doesn't matter. One thing I can say is that 1988 is irrelevant.
It’s only irrelevant if you ignore why it happen and why it could happen today.
In the last three economic cycles, Sacramento has been about 1 ½ years
behind when getting projects started. While most other cities reaped the
benefits of getting out of the gates early with their projects before the
economy dipped into a recession, Sacramento was still on the sidelines.

If the current (sluggish) economic cycle softens and the Fed reins in its
monthly QE3 printing of money, and other factors, it’s likely that many of
these on the drawing board won’t move beyond that. It’s fun to cheer these
proposals through the process, but I’m highly cautious as to how many will
break ground only because of where we are in the current economic cycle.

If Sacramento sees half these proposals completed, I would count that as an
enormous success. I’m glad to see the arena being built downtown, but I’m
highly skeptical about the city’s financing numbers and why they still don’t
want to talk about it… like when the bond payment rate nearly doubles in a
few years. It will be a great photo opportunity. Maybe you can join me Jim?

Regarding 301 Capitol Mall, my contact within CalPERS say we should not
expect to see a proposal for the site for at least 12 to 16 months because
they are uncertain about the economy. If this latest press release draws
enough positive attention, we should expect to see combination of
sectors in the proposal that include office, residential, retail or hospitality.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5015  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 5:02 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
^^^ do you still intend to do your blog? You haven't updated it since July of last year. Also I'm curious what type of business you are in. If you wouldn't mind sharing that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5016  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 8:04 PM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
Does anyone know what's going on with the 700 block of K Street? Does Ali Youssefi/CFY have what it takes to move this forward without redevelopment funds? You would think that with the arena they could be able to do it without it. Where does the city stand?

wburg- I really question whether insurance was the deciding factor in going for rental over condos. More likely tight credit and a market that's still not fully recovered -at least not to pre-crash. But whatever.
The city is currently suing the state in order to get this project untangled from the giant mess that occurred with the end of redevelopment. They have private funding and everything is all set, but the state doesn't want to consider the project an enforceable obligation.

Tight credit and a recovering market are why insurance becomes the deal breaker. For-sale housing is under construction and getting snapped up quickly, but only on detached row houses where the condo lawsuit problem doesn't apply, like Tapestri Square and 2500 R.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5017  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2014, 8:41 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg View Post
The city is currently suing the state in order to get this project untangled from the giant mess that occurred with the end of redevelopment. They have private funding and everything is all set, but the state doesn't want to consider the project an enforceable obligation.

Tight credit and a recovering market are why insurance becomes the deal breaker. For-sale housing is under construction and getting snapped up quickly, but only on detached row houses where the condo lawsuit problem doesn't apply, like Tapestri Square and 2500 R.
WTF? This is the State Capitol and I know the Gov and certainly the SF-snob Lt Governor doesn't give a damn about Sac but can't the f'king state pretend to care?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5018  
Old Posted May 12, 2014, 6:18 PM
LandofFrost's Avatar
LandofFrost LandofFrost is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 195


16 Powerhouse. Just reached the top floor in the back.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5019  
Old Posted May 12, 2014, 6:21 PM
TWAK's Avatar
TWAK TWAK is offline
Resu Deretsiger
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lake County, CA
Posts: 14,905
sucks I had an apartment on 16th and N then I move to pittsburg CA. Drove up 16th a week ago, not fair!
__________________
nobody cares about your city
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5020  
Old Posted May 13, 2014, 10:35 PM
SacDTRes SacDTRes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6
Sacramento Commons

The Sacramento Commons project, between 5th and 7th and N and P, is being heavily contested by the Sacramento Old City Association (sacoldcity.org), the National Trust for Historic Preservation (represented by an attorney from SF), SacMod, the Northern California chapter of Docomomo, and the California Preservation Foundation. They believe "that the site has unique architectural significance ... and unique association with the development of Sacramento as a capital city."

1. I just can't see how a bunch of two story apartment buildings have historical significance to block a project like this. They argue more for the layout of the entire block which has historical significance, but it seems to be a stretch to me. However, there is a significant list of opposition.

2. Does anyone know how much influence these organizations have at the city level?

3. Do these groups pick and choose their battles, or do they generally fight all urban development?

It's interesting to me that they want to use the EIR as a tool to help block the project, when urban development located near public transit fits many of the checkboxes for smart development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Sacramento Area
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:52 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.