HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1181  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2016, 11:51 PM
Deno Deno is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by SacTownAndy View Post
This is the best 6 minutes I've spent all week. Old promo video found on archive.org called "The Sacramento Story... Ready for the 1980's".

https://archive.org/details/casacsh_000093
That was good. When businesses were moving in to Sacramento and California yes I remember that was a nice memory now gone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1182  
Old Posted Apr 15, 2016, 3:16 AM
SacTownAndy's Avatar
SacTownAndy SacTownAndy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The Bridge District, West Sacramento, CA
Posts: 1,260
I just noticed the federal courthouse is lit up tonight. I'm assuming it's for the MLS visit since "they" did that last time as well. It makes such a difference on the skyline. I know most of these are gov't buildings, does anyone have any idea who we could petition to have these lit all of the time? Wishful thinking, but thought I would ask.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1183  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2016, 4:32 AM
SacSFChi's Avatar
SacSFChi SacSFChi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Downtown Sac
Posts: 30
I live across the street from the courthouse and was pleasantly surprised by the crown lights. Coming into downtown from 160 that night was a special treat, and the new lighting of the Ziggurat was also on. Made the downtown core look so much bigger and of course brighter.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1184  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2016, 2:24 PM
creamcityleo79's Avatar
creamcityleo79 creamcityleo79 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Robbinsdale, MN
Posts: 1,787
Quote:
Originally Posted by SacSFChi View Post
I live across the street from the courthouse and was pleasantly surprised by the crown lights. Coming into downtown from 160 that night was a special treat, and the new lighting of the Ziggurat was also on. Made the downtown core look so much bigger and of course brighter.
That is one thing that has always disappointed me about Sacramento...especially living here in the Twin Cities now. The Wells Fargo Center crown lit up at night here is one of the most beautiful buildings, IMO. What a missed opportunity for Sacramento!


from flickr user keithjsemmelink
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1185  
Old Posted May 2, 2016, 9:59 PM
enigma99a's Avatar
enigma99a enigma99a is offline
Megalonorcal 11M~
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Rocklin
Posts: 2,251
In the meantime, city staffers will finalize a $200 million financing plan for the theater and convention center project. Hotel room taxes will likely carry the biggest load of the construction costs, accounting for an estimated $13.3 million a year in debt payback. The whole package is expected to go back to the City Council for approval this fall.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/new...#storylink=cpy

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1186  
Old Posted May 2, 2016, 11:41 PM
Pistola916 Pistola916 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SAN FRANCISCO/SACRAMENTO
Posts: 632
Quote:
Originally Posted by enigma99a View Post
In the meantime, city staffers will finalize a $200 million financing plan for the theater and convention center project. Hotel room taxes will likely carry the biggest load of the construction costs, accounting for an estimated $13.3 million a year in debt payback. The whole package is expected to go back to the City Council for approval this fall.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/new...#storylink=cpy

I know its only a conceptual drawing but damn does that look terrible. Community college performance art centers have better quality design than that shitty half ass project. It will be outdated in five years.

Last edited by Pistola916; May 3, 2016 at 4:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1187  
Old Posted May 3, 2016, 1:43 AM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
It is a conceptual drawing. And building a new theater from scratch could easily cost twice as much. It sounds like they're trying to "bundle" the $80 million for theater rehab into a bigger Convention Center project, I wonder if there is a way to "unbundle" it and just rehab the theater, which can clearly be done for a lot less than building a new theater somewhere else downtown with as-yet-unidentified sources of money?
__________________
"Old ideas can sometimes use new buildings. New ideas must use old buildings."--Jane Jacobs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1188  
Old Posted May 16, 2016, 7:26 PM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
“The Big EasyChair”
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 🌳🌴🌲 Sacramento 🌳 🌴🌲
Posts: 5,976
Aerojet Rocketdyne to move headquarters office to Southern California

​The largest locally-based, publicly traded company is moving its corporate headquarters from Rancho Cordova to El Segundo this summer.

(From the Sacramento Business journal.)
__________________
“The best friend on earth of man is the tree. When we use the tree respectfully and economically, we have one of the greatest resources on the earth.” – Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1189  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2016, 3:56 PM
LandofFrost's Avatar
LandofFrost LandofFrost is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 195
http://www.alternet.org/culture/five...ng-poor-people


Interesting blurb about Sacramento.

2. Sacramento, California

Thirty percent of Sacramento’s poor neighborhoods are gentrifying, and black neighborhoods like Oak Park are seeing the effects. Businesses catering to African-American residents are being replaced by places like Capital Floats, where you can float in a flotation tank for an hour for $65. Health bars, coffee shops and high-priced boutiques are peppering the neighborhood. A two-bedroom apartment can now cost $1500 a month, and some houses over $400,000. While true that urban blight is being removed, chain link fences replaced by white picket fences, so to speak, and home sales are increasing (by 10% last year), higher prices are threatening to price out the longtime residents. “If you stand on 35th and Broadway, you see the renaissance of a community. You see everything that sends a signal that this is a community in transition,” former NBA star and current Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson told the Sacramento Bee. “On one hand that’s a great thing. On the other hand, we can’t be a victim of our own success.”
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1190  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2016, 4:15 PM
Majin's Avatar
Majin Majin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Downtown Sacramento
Posts: 2,221
I rather have gentrified Oak Park than Oak Park from the 90s. The poor can always just move to South Sac.
__________________
Majin Crew: jsf8278, wburg, daverave
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1191  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2016, 6:49 PM
BillSimmons BillSimmons is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 87
Quote:
Originally Posted by LandofFrost View Post
http://www.alternet.org/culture/five...ng-poor-people


Interesting blurb about Sacramento.

2. Sacramento, California

Thirty percent of Sacramento’s poor neighborhoods are gentrifying, and black neighborhoods like Oak Park are seeing the effects. Businesses catering to African-American residents are being replaced by places like Capital Floats, where you can float in a flotation tank for an hour for $65. Health bars, coffee shops and high-priced boutiques are peppering the neighborhood. A two-bedroom apartment can now cost $1500 a month, and some houses over $400,000. While true that urban blight is being removed, chain link fences replaced by white picket fences, so to speak, and home sales are increasing (by 10% last year), higher prices are threatening to price out the longtime residents. “If you stand on 35th and Broadway, you see the renaissance of a community. You see everything that sends a signal that this is a community in transition,” former NBA star and current Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson told the Sacramento Bee. “On one hand that’s a great thing. On the other hand, we can’t be a victim of our own success.”
It seems like this debate always come down to a choice making shitty neighborhoods nice vs letting them stay shitty. When you look at it from the perspective of trying to appease the small number of people that are negatively impacted, it becomes a lose-lose situation.

Obviously this "problem" only effects poor long time renters. I haven't heard any complaints from home owners in Oak Park who's properties have increased 4x value in the last 5 years.

It seems the renters want the benefits brought to the neighborhood but only if it benefits them directly. If the neighborhood stays poor and dangerous with drugs sold and people getting shot on the street, then it's the city's fault and the police need to fix it. The city doesn't care about the neighborhood!

But when gentrification moves in, they're fine with the streets getting cleaned up and new businesses moving in, but only as long as it's at the expense of someone else. They want their homes and apartments renovated and updated, but want to pay the same price that they always have to continue living there.

The economy doesn't work that way. When you rent, you take on none of the responsibility yet see none of the benefit, and leave yourself at the mercy of the market.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1192  
Old Posted Jun 16, 2016, 8:37 PM
LandofFrost's Avatar
LandofFrost LandofFrost is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillSimmons View Post
It seems like this debate always come down to a choice making shitty neighborhoods nice vs letting them stay shitty. When you look at it from the perspective of trying to appease the small number of people that are negatively impacted, it becomes a lose-lose situation.

Obviously this "problem" only effects poor long time renters. I haven't heard any complaints from home owners in Oak Park who's properties have increased 4x value in the last 5 years.

It seems the renters want the benefits brought to the neighborhood but only if it benefits them directly. If the neighborhood stays poor and dangerous with drugs sold and people getting shot on the street, then it's the city's fault and the police need to fix it. The city doesn't care about the neighborhood!

But when gentrification moves in, they're fine with the streets getting cleaned up and new businesses moving in, but only as long as it's at the expense of someone else. They want their homes and apartments renovated and updated, but want to pay the same price that they always have to continue living there.

The economy doesn't work that way. When you rent, you take on none of the responsibility yet see none of the benefit, and leave yourself at the mercy of the market.
Also Oak Park has no chance of not being gentrified. It's next to downtown, between a Law School and a Medical School, and between Land Park and East Sac. It was just waiting for a time when enough people wanted to move closer to downtown again.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1193  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2016, 3:37 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento California
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillSimmons View Post

It seems the renters want the benefits brought to the neighborhood but only if it benefits them directly. If the neighborhood stays poor and dangerous with drugs sold and people getting shot on the street, then it's the city's fault and the police need to fix it. The city doesn't care about the neighborhood!

But when gentrification moves in, they're fine with the streets getting cleaned up and new businesses moving in, but only as long as it's at the expense of someone else. They want their homes and apartments renovated and updated, but want to pay the same price that they always have to continue living there.

The economy doesn't work that way. When you rent, you take on none of the responsibility yet see none of the benefit, and leave yourself at the mercy of the market.

This is a simplistic and erroneous view of the typical renter. You shit on all renters and yet the truth is that the renter often cares more than absentee landlord does and it's really the neglectful property owners who are most to blame for the poor conditions of neighborhoods. It's the renters who provide the labor force for those neighborhood jobs and it's the renter who will be the most consistent in putting money back into neighborhood businesses. And it's the renter who allows the property owner to own the property and make a profit and therefore is the market . So to say that the renter takes on none of the responsibility is a complete misunderstanding of how the economy actually works. The real problem with shitty neighborhoods is low-incomes which go hand-in-hand with poor education, addiction, dog-eat-dog violence and often institutional racism.

Last edited by ozone; Jun 20, 2016 at 4:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1194  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2016, 4:24 PM
Korey Korey is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 183
My neighbors in Oak Park are great and would love to spruce up their property a lot more than they have, but as renters they don't have much incentive to spend lots of money and sweat to help out their absentee landlord.

The renters are the ones living there day in and day out, keeping an eye on things, contributing to the neighborhood. The landlord just sits and watches their neglected house appreciate, largely on the backs of other homeowners' time and money and renters who will never be allowed to share in the gains (except in the form of rent increases).

My neighbors would love to buy in OP, they grew up here, but now home prices are coming up fast. Will they have to buy in a worse neighborhood or just try to ride out the coming rent increases as long as possible until they're forced out? Rents are going up in the core much faster than wages.

Gentrification brings a a lot of positives, no one is sad to see drug dealers and lowlifes pushed out of a neighborhood. But the trick is managing or at least discussing the negative impact to the good people who want to remain.

Things happen fast in America. The white flight to the suburbs that hollowed out city cores played out largely within a generation. Now cores are getting hot again and neighborhoods are turning around quickly. Just like Occupy, BLM, I think the hyper gentrification happening in places like the Bay, Brooklyn, etc is prompting a national discussion on gentrification and its effects. Maybe we live in a bubble and it's just largely within our own circles that it's discussed though
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1195  
Old Posted Dec 18, 2016, 7:46 PM
CastleScott CastleScott is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sacramento Ca/formerly CastleRock Co
Posts: 1,055
Just a question: do you guys meet-up sometimes for a beer and chat about local stuff, just wondering-it would sound fun and plus always good to meet and know local folks.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1196  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2016, 6:50 PM
Korey Korey is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 183
I don't think we've had a meet-up per se, but I'm always down to grab a beer and chat with some forumers. Y'all are a pretty good bunch.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1197  
Old Posted Dec 19, 2016, 8:16 PM
NickB1967 NickB1967 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
This is a simplistic and erroneous view of the typical renter. You shit on all renters and yet the truth is that the renter often cares more than absentee landlord does
While the tenants live there and so they will be more caring about immediate events than absentee landlords, the sad fact is that tenants don't have the financial stake in the properties that landlord owners do, and both groups of people will be much less likely to care about a neighborhood than owner-occupiers, who both live there AND have a financial stake in it.

When owner occupiers don't improve their properties, nearly always it is because they can't afford to do so and are they are barely hanging on, given the size of their their mortgage and other debts.

This was certainly the case in the 2008-2014 period when many owners were "upside-down", "underwater" or had "scuba mortgages", where what was owed against the property was more than the property value. We were fortunate not to have a more severe property crash simply because most owners stayed put. They mostly stayed put because:
1. Forgiven debt was counted as "income", giving those who walked away from their mortgages a huge tax penalty,
2. Inertia (moving is a pain), and
3. In most cases abandoning the home meant paying as much or even more to rent somewhere else anyway. So the owners might as well stay put until property values rebound, as they have since done.

As for absentee landlords? When gentrification happens, they suddenly DO have a stake in improving their properties, so they can charge higher rents to more affluent tenants. Tenants are fungible.

Absentee landlords are also vulnerable to being "underwater" or "upside down", just like owner occupiers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
and it's really the neglectful property owners who are most to blame for the poor conditions of neighborhoods.
As above, not so. Being "upside down" or "underwater" is a much larger factor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozone View Post
It's the renters who provide the labor force for those neighborhood jobs and it's the renter who will be the most consistent in putting money back into neighborhood businesses. And it's the renter who allows the property owner to own the property and make a profit and therefore is the market . So to say that the renter takes on none of the responsibility is a complete misunderstanding of how the economy actually works.
However, tenants are fungible, and if more affluent tenants willing to pay more for a place can be found, they will be found.

While it is a bummer that decent lower income people are often pushed out of gentrifying neighborhoods as well as the riff-raff, I don't see how this can be prevented without hampering gentrification, which on balance is (1) always better than the alternative of stagnation and (2) often inevitable, as BillSimmons noted with respect to Oak Park getting the "spillover" from Midtown and in fact becoming a "Midtown Annex".

As the old saying goes, "The rain falls upon the just and the unjust alike", and just as rent controls hamper gentrification because they try to prevent landlords from winning, I don't see how we can prevent the impoverished but decent people from losing. In the end, the market is and will be more powerful than any political edict.

Last edited by NickB1967; Dec 19, 2016 at 8:27 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1198  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2017, 7:55 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 5,079
Go ugly - go Sacramento. How do you suppose they determine these things?

http://www.travelandleisure.com/amer...e-cities#intro

America’s Least Attractive Cities
Travel and Leisure by Peter Schlesinger

“They may not be head turners,” says Matisse Rhodes, a New Yorker who lived in the Ohio city from 2010 until 2015, “but Clevelanders are among some of the warmest, most genuine people in the country.”

Rhodes isn’t alone in her assessment. In this year’s America’s Favorite Places survey, T+L readers scored cities across a wide range of categories, including how attractive locals are: and Clevelanders ranked near the bottom for their looks.

But readers can be fickle. Atlanta, previously voted one of the country’s most attractive cities, now joins the ranks of least-beautiful. A city in Florida has also made the switchover. Some things stay the same, however, including a tendency for cities with ultra-dedicated sports fans to rank poorly in the looks department. This is true for Memphis, a basketball (and barbecue) loving city that appears on this year’s list. And it’s especially true for the East Coast city that readers found least attractive.

There’s no arguing that amidst its spacious skies and purple mountain majesties, the United States has some objectively gorgeous people. But looks aren’t everything, and, as the saying goes, “beauty attracts the eye, but personality attracts the heart.” Some cities, it seems, rely more on the heart.

9. Memphis, Tennessee
8. Atlanta, Georgia
7. Tampa, Florida
6. Cleveland, Ohio
5. Milwaukee, Wisconsin
4. Charlotte, North Carolina
3. Spokane, Washington
2. Sacramento, California
1. Baltimore, Maryland
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1199  
Old Posted Apr 20, 2017, 11:01 PM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
“The Big EasyChair”
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 🌳🌴🌲 Sacramento 🌳 🌴🌲
Posts: 5,976
Quote:
Originally Posted by innov8 View Post
Go ugly - go Sacramento. How do you suppose they determine these things?

http://www.travelandleisure.com/amer...e-cities#intro

America’s Least Attractive Cities
Travel and Leisure by Peter Schlesinger

“They may not be head turners,” says Matisse Rhodes, a New Yorker who lived in the Ohio city from 2010 until 2015, “but Clevelanders are among some of the warmest, most genuine people in the country.”

Rhodes isn’t alone in her assessment. In this year’s America’s Favorite Places survey, T+L readers scored cities across a wide range of categories, including how attractive locals are: and Clevelanders ranked near the bottom for their looks.

But readers can be fickle. Atlanta, previously voted one of the country’s most attractive cities, now joins the ranks of least-beautiful. A city in Florida has also made the switchover. Some things stay the same, however, including a tendency for cities with ultra-dedicated sports fans to rank poorly in the looks department. This is true for Memphis, a basketball (and barbecue) loving city that appears on this year’s list. And it’s especially true for the East Coast city that readers found least attractive.

There’s no arguing that amidst its spacious skies and purple mountain majesties, the United States has some objectively gorgeous people. But looks aren’t everything, and, as the saying goes, “beauty attracts the eye, but personality attracts the heart.” Some cities, it seems, rely more on the heart.

9. Memphis, Tennessee
8. Atlanta, Georgia
7. Tampa, Florida
6. Cleveland, Ohio
5. Milwaukee, Wisconsin
4. Charlotte, North Carolina
3. Spokane, Washington
2. Sacramento, California
1. Baltimore, Maryland
Another useless list....

I've traveled to a lot of cities and personally I think Sacramento overall has very attractive people. I think that the diversity there helps make it attractive.
__________________
“The best friend on earth of man is the tree. When we use the tree respectfully and economically, we have one of the greatest resources on the earth.” – Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1200  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2017, 2:29 AM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,402
This article, like most such lists, is pretty much random choice--I assume they just have two coffee cans, one with adjectives and one with names of cities. They pull an adjective and 10 city names in random order, then Google to fill in the details--instant clickbait! From the sound of the article, it was an unscientific reader survey--they just asked people to choose/rank cities based on what they thought, so it's pretty much based on nothing but whim. Assuming my "two coffee cans" theory isn't correct.

This got picked up by local media for no apparent reason, but it seems like none of them actually read what they had to say about Sacramento, which was, all told, pretty nice (even though they're dead wrong about Sacramento being only two hours from Yosemite):
Quote:
2. Sacramento, California
Sacramentans don’t earn high marks for their looks, but readers did give them an A for effort. They received a perfect score for being active, which is easy to do in California’s state capital, just two hours from Lake Tahoe and Yosemite. Closer to home, Discovery Park, north of downtown, has 275 acres of riverfront forest and recreation fields. Sacramento also nabbed a perfect score for its café culture. Find the best brews in town at one of several Temple Coffee Roasters locations—the local chain has become a mini-empire of community gathering places.
__________________
"Old ideas can sometimes use new buildings. New ideas must use old buildings."--Jane Jacobs
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 8:25 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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