HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum.

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. SkyscraperPage.com also features unique skyscraper diagrams, a database of construction activity, and publishes popular skyscraper posters.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2007, 4:16 PM
BrianSac's Avatar
BrianSac BrianSac is offline
CHACUN SON GOÛT
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by urban_encounter View Post
Salt Lake City??



NO!


Salt Lake City would do well to duplicate the energy of Midtown Sacramento.

I stand corrected! What was I thinking? But, you do have to give them credit for getting the Winter Olympics.





Never easy or timely.... I was telling a friend here in Chicago just yesterday how amazed i am at how quickly things happen in this city, compared to Sacramento which is much smaller. Sacramento's biggest obstacle is that there are special interests groups that cover everything from Fairy Shrimp, to the Swainsons Hawk, to Gaint Garter snakes, and NIMBY neghborhood associations for every corner of town etc...... Then there's the CEQA (which is severely abused). Of course let's not forgot visionless politicians who are afraid to take a stand..

Here in Chicago Mayor Daley tells the USOC that if they want a $500 million city backed guarantee of funds for the 2016 Olympics, then they can have it; and he delivers it overwhelmingly in the City Council within a week. No talks, workshops or charettes. They debate it, vote on it and move on it. End of discussion......

Sacramento talks and studies things to death and never make things become a reality. Not without a years of effort and then there's plenty of things that they've been talking about for decades that remain just talk....

Funny how Chicago calls itself the "The city that works", while I've always called Sacramento (which I still love) "The can't do city"..
My thoughts, exactly, about Sac! I've been saying this for years. Thanks for articulating it in this forum!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Mar 17, 2007, 4:24 PM
urban_encounter's Avatar
urban_encounter urban_encounter is offline
Age gets better with wine
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sacramento~Urbs Indomita
Posts: 5,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianSac View Post
I stand corrected! What was I thinking? But, you do have to give them credit for getting the Winter Olympics.


Agreed...


One of the best Winter Olympics in recent memory imho..

Salt Lake is doing a lot of things right, so i don't want to take anything away from what they're trying to do there.

But even with all of their momentum, they still (imo) still lack the kind of character and growing vibrancy you'll find in midtown Sacramento
.


__________________
"A developed country is not a place where the poor have cars. It's where the rich use public transportation." ~~~Gustavo Petro
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2007, 4:33 PM
TowerDistrict's Avatar
TowerDistrict TowerDistrict is offline
my posse's on broadway
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: in an LPCA occupied zone
Posts: 1,600
Riding into tomorrow
New trail along the south bank of the American River, when finished, will serve cyclists and future residents of the scenic area
By M.S. Enkoji - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Monday, March 19, 2007
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B1



Cyclists follow Two Rivers Bike Trail near the Fifth Street entrance to the city of Sacramento, in the background. The trail's first phase, finished in November, spans 21/2 miles atop the levee between Interstate 5 and Highway 160. The trail eventually will run from Discovery Park east to Sutter's Landing. Sacramento Bee/Bryan Patrick


The asphalt on the levee for bicycles practically sparkles like black glass in spots -- a sign that few bicyclists have discovered this new trail. Although only half of the five-mile Two Rivers Bike Trail in northern Sacramento is finished, its potential is already gleaming for cyclists -- and for people with real estate in the surrounding gem of the River District.

The trail is like icing on a cake yet to be baked, said Steve Ayers, past president of the River District. The property and business improvement district, from Interstate 5 east to Highway 160, is rimmed by the south bank of the American River -- and the finished part of the trail. "It means people living here will have nice access to the river, and it just provides for additional quality of life," Ayers said.

The River District has plans to largely transform the warehouse- commercial area that backs against the river into a lighter mix of housing and commercial. Rather than hide the river, people here want to showcase it, dressing it up with new assets like the bike trail. "It's one of Sacramento's best-kept secrets. That's evolving and changing," Ayers said of the south bank of the American River.

The first phase of the Two Rivers trail, finished in November, spans the 2.5-mile stretch of the levee top between I-5 and Highway 160. A modest workout, maybe, but it's a linear work in progress: The city this week got an agreement from Sacramento County for some property easements along the trail. "It's kind of limited, but it offers up views of the American River that haven't been seen," said Walt Seifert, executive director of Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates. "It's a very nice amenity, given the development coming in the Richards Boulevard area," Seifert said.

One of those developments, called Township Nine, will convert an old cannery property into 2,700 condo-style homes and offices and will probably become the first significant residential village in the area. The unfinished part of the trail extends east, beyond the River District for another two miles to Sutter's Landing Park, just short of the Capital City Freeway. That part would link to a connection across the river to the north bank's American River Parkway bike trail, the regional giant that extends to Folsom.

Therein lies the challenge. First, money to build it has yet to be found. Furthermore, grants to construct bike trails usually go first to trails identified as commuter routes, said Ed Cox, alternative modes coordinator for Sacramento. Securing the money is high on the city's wish list, Cox said.

Another problem is connecting the east and west ends of the trail. The Highway 160 and 12th Street bridges, which span the river about midway on the trail, are like roadblocks for the bike trail. The logical options, a trail bridge over the roads or tunnel underneath, are way too expensive and entail engineering difficulties involving the river, Cox said. "It's a real big question mark what we're going to do there," he said. One less expensive solution involves routing trail users onto surface streets, using crosswalks and traffic signals, Cox said.

Ayers said his group will lobby hard for completion of the entire trail. "Everyone is looking forward to when that transpires," he said. "Things take time. And it's well worth the wait."

__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------
Map of recent Sacramento developments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 1:15 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Top Retributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Golden Capitol
Posts: 1,718
Central City Two-Way Conversion Study

City Staff will present to City Council the recommended project alternative (alternative C) for the Central City Two-Way Conversion Study.

When: Tuesday 3/20 at 7:00 p.m.
Location: City Hall, First Floor, Council Chamber, 915 I Street.

I don't think I'll be able to make it because of work but I hope anyone who feels strongly about this issue to attend reguardless of which side of the issue you stand on.
__________________
The point of cities is multiplicity of choice. -Jane Jacobs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 4:59 PM
greenmidtown greenmidtown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
I wonder if L st. wasn't a one-way mini-freeway with only a few stop signs if this would've happened? The council should consider L st. for a two-way conversion particularly considering how many pedestrians walk around L st..


Police need help finding hit-and-run driver
Last Updated 1:26 am PDT Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B2

Print | E-Mail | Comments (0)

Police are looking for information about a Feb. 9 hit-and-run that severely injured a Sacramento man.

John Kerr was crossing L Street between 25th and 26th streets in his motorized wheelchair when he was struck by a vehicle and thrown from his wheelchair.

Friends of Kerr told The Bee last month that the man's legs and pelvis were broken in the accident, and his front teeth were knocked out.

The vehicle involved was described as small and white or silver in color, according to police. It might have damage to its right front quarter panel and passenger side door.

Anyone with information is asked to call Detective Bryon Schrum at (916) 277-6032 or Crime Alert at (916) 433-HELP.

Callers may remain anonymous and might be eligible for a reward up to $1,000.

-- Kim Minugh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 6:24 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenmidtown View Post
I wonder if L st. wasn't a one-way mini-freeway with only a few stop signs if this would've happened? The council should consider L st. for a two-way conversion particularly considering how many pedestrians walk around L st..

I can see this is now your soap box issue green. Your probably right, once
L Street is a two-way street, accidents like this won't happen anymore
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 9:38 PM
Phillip Phillip is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 562
For a person in a wheelchair I would think crossing a one-way street would be safer than crossing a two-way street, all other factors (number of cars, number of lanes, speed of cars) being equal. They can focus their attention in one direction instead of having to look both ways.

If L and N become two-way there will be more traffic on K and O. There will be no incentive to drive the extra block to get to a one-way street like there is now. K Street, especially at 20th, is already a difficult place for pedestrians to cross and I think that will get worse.

I'm sure I don't fully appreciate the difficulties that bicyclists encounter travelling around Midtown, but the fundamental problem is the volume of traffic passing through Midtown, and turning Midtown streets into two-way won't reduce total traffic volumes.

Midtown would probably be a more pleasant place if those busy one-way thoroughfares were two-way. If I was moving to Midtown I don't think I'd consider an apartment overlooking any of the busy one-way streets. Still, I view the one-ways as a necessary accomodation, moving 21st century traffic volumes through streets laid out in the 19th century.

I think Midtown strikes a good blance now---enough one-ways but not too many. I also agree more could be done to improve safety for bicyclists. At least cyclists know what the bad streets are now and can strive to avoid them, and they do have alternatives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 10:17 PM
greenmidtown greenmidtown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phillip View Post
For a person in a wheelchair I would think crossing a one-way street would be safer than crossing a two-way street, all other factors (number of cars, number of lanes, speed of cars) being equal. They can focus their attention in one direction instead of having to look both ways.

If L and N become two-way there will be more traffic on K and O. There will be no incentive to drive the extra block to get to a one-way street like there is now. K Street, especially at 20th, is already a difficult place for pedestrians to cross and I think that will get worse.

I'm sure I don't fully appreciate the difficulties that bicyclists encounter travelling around Midtown, but the fundamental problem is the volume of traffic passing through Midtown, and turning Midtown streets into two-way won't reduce total traffic volumes.

Midtown would probably be a more pleasant place if those busy one-way thoroughfares were two-way. If I was moving to Midtown I don't think I'd consider an apartment overlooking any of the busy one-way streets. Still, I view the one-ways as a necessary accomodation, moving 21st century traffic volumes through streets laid out in the 19th century.

I think Midtown strikes a good blance now---enough one-ways but not too many. I also agree more could be done to improve safety for bicyclists. At least cyclists know what the bad streets are now and can strive to avoid them, and they do have alternatives.
It does kind of seem logical that one-ways would be good for pedestrians because they'd only have to watch out for one side. But the problem is the behavior of drivers. Anyone who lives in Midtown or Downtown knows that drivers cruise the one-ways exceeding freeway speed limits at times, hence the term "mini-freeways." They use the two or three-lanes going one-way to cut each other off, burn out, race, etc.. I've had to step back or run to avoid cars coming at an intersection going 60 to 70 mph! This has happened to me specifically on L st. and Q st. which are both streets that aren't recommended for conversions. When I'm on K st. which has been converted to two-ways, I always feel safe crossing and drivers are always driving slow enough to at least see me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 10:45 PM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Top Retributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Golden Capitol
Posts: 1,718
The main problem with one-ways is that it encourages high-speeds -no other measure will slow traffic down to human-friendly levels like two-way conversions. But besides the speed issue there is the navagation and access problem. Also I think it helps to see the world comming and going. Only seeing a street in one direction your entire life is kinda weird. Like eating at Mc Donald's every night. But then again the whole idea that a city would be built completely around the auromoblie seems really strange and kinda sick.
__________________
The point of cities is multiplicity of choice. -Jane Jacobs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Mar 20, 2007, 11:04 PM
downtownserg89's Avatar
downtownserg89 downtownserg89 is offline
sactown's hitting puberty
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: downtown, Sacramento.
Posts: 370
my straight friend ALWAYS feels like the car next to him is "trying to race," so he'll be like oh yeah? chomp on this. and he literally floors it! i always hold on for my dear life and tell him to be careful, and he'll be like, i got you, serg. this always happens in midtown and on the freeway. so yeah. living proof!
__________________
facebook.com/buffslut
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2007, 12:53 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Top Retributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Golden Capitol
Posts: 1,718
So really what you saying is that IF the vast majority of the drivers acted as there is a Real, Breathing world outside of their hermetically sealed, privately-owned, limited passenger, high-speed transport machine they might drive slower and with more respect for others. Catch 22 A driver is isolated/separated from the environment in which he/she is passing through...so the driver has a totally different perception of speed/time/space and the world outside that those on the street do. The world that the car driver is passing through is a blurr... they might as well be driving through a Hollywood set since there is no real interaction or interfacing with the other drivers and certianly not with the pedestrians or anything on the street level.

Unfortunately, many Americans (though it is also a growing global pandemic) suffer from the psychiatric disorder most commonly characterized by a subject's obsessive, distressing, intrusive thoughts and related compulsions to their car(s).

For thousands of years makind has mostly walked to get around. It was the main way we humans got around for all but the last say 100 years. Yes, we had horses, camels, elephants, wagons, trains, boats, etc.. but even with the most advanced pre-car forms of transportation people still had to walk a lot, lot more than they did after. So the word "pedestrian"- or being a pedestrian- a very basic human characteristic and an activity we've been doing for thousands upon thousands of years has been turned into a negative. My Eastern European friend says that when she returns to the US she thinks that too many Americans are physically deformed..not only very overweight but also with weird poor posture even in a lot of young people -both condtions she attributes to CDD (Car Dependency Disease).

While I'm not an advocate for getting rid of all the advancments and return to the stone-age I do think we should start to rethink what cars are for and how we use them. Cars are the most inefficient and least cost-effective of all the major transportation methods we have today.
__________________
The point of cities is multiplicity of choice. -Jane Jacobs

Last edited by ozone; Mar 21, 2007 at 1:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2007, 1:16 AM
tuy's Avatar
tuy tuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Tracy, CA
Posts: 3,084
I never noticed before that Ozone misspelled Transportation in the thread title. Maybe a mod could correct it.
__________________
Current Metro - Stockton 679,687 Jan, 2007 CADOF Estimate
Current City - Tracy 80,505 Jan, 2007 CADOF Estimate
Former Metros - Kansas City, Cleveland/Akron, Omaha, Lincoln, Dallas/Ft. Worth
Travelled to 19 Countries on Six Continents
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2007, 1:52 AM
ozone's Avatar
ozone ozone is offline
Top Retributor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Golden Capitol
Posts: 1,718
That is funny because I thought someone would have picked up on that before now or maybe they don't really care. I did make a Type-o and tried to change it but could not. And yeah I wish it would be corrected.
__________________
The point of cities is multiplicity of choice. -Jane Jacobs
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2007, 11:51 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,864
Summary
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
City Hall-915 I Street, 1st Floor Council Chamber

Staff reports include an oral presentation including those recommending receive and file.

18. Central City Two-Way Conversion Study (PN: TL63)
Location: Central City Area (Districts 1, 3, & 4)
Recommendation: Adopt 1) a Resolution a) certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopting the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and b) adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Plan; and 2) a Resolution a) approving Alternative C as the Preferred Project; b) directing staff to amend the 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan; c) directing staff to amend the City of Sacramento General Plan, Circulation Element; d) directing staff to proceed with the design phase for the street segments contained in Alternative C; and e) directing staff to resume
study to improve bicycle access in the Central City.

Contact: Hector Barron, Supervising Engineer, (916) 808-2669; Lezley Buford,
Environmental Planning Manager, (916) 808-5935; Nicholas Theocharides,
Engineering Service Manager, (916) 808-5065, Transportation Department.
Action: Public comment by Shawn Eldredge, Maggy Krell, George Chambers, Chris
Halm, Kay Knepprath, Jim Collins, George Raya, Rick Bettis, Bruce Holmes, Bill
Burgua, Karen Jaques, Walt Seifert, Owen Howlett, Kitty Wilson.

Moved, seconded, carried (Cohn/Fong; Absent-Tretheway) to adopt an intent motion to certify the EIR with modifications to the findings and facts reflecting the proposed project as amended. Moved, seconded, carried (Cohn/Fong; Absent-Tretheway) to adopt an intent motion to approve the proposed project as amended to include 1) the funding order of Alternative C modified to remove N Street from 16th Street to 21st Street; 2) adding to the end of Alternate C funding order a) L Street, P Street and Q Street (21st-28th); then b) L Street, N Street, P Street, and Q Street (16th to 21st); and 3)direct staff to report back on extending 9th Street and 10th Street 2-way conversion to I Street and extending bike lanes throughout the Central City.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2007, 7:04 PM
greenmidtown greenmidtown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by innov8 View Post
Summary
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
City Hall-915 I Street, 1st Floor Council Chamber

Staff reports include an oral presentation including those recommending receive and file.

18. Central City Two-Way Conversion Study (PN: TL63)
Location: Central City Area (Districts 1, 3, & 4)
Recommendation: Adopt 1) a Resolution a) certifying the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and adopting the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and b) adopting the Mitigation Monitoring Plan; and 2) a Resolution a) approving Alternative C as the Preferred Project; b) directing staff to amend the 2010 City/County Bikeway Master Plan; c) directing staff to amend the City of Sacramento General Plan, Circulation Element; d) directing staff to proceed with the design phase for the street segments contained in Alternative C; and e) directing staff to resume
study to improve bicycle access in the Central City.

Contact: Hector Barron, Supervising Engineer, (916) 808-2669; Lezley Buford,
Environmental Planning Manager, (916) 808-5935; Nicholas Theocharides,
Engineering Service Manager, (916) 808-5065, Transportation Department.
Action: Public comment by Shawn Eldredge, Maggy Krell, George Chambers, Chris
Halm, Kay Knepprath, Jim Collins, George Raya, Rick Bettis, Bruce Holmes, Bill
Burgua, Karen Jaques, Walt Seifert, Owen Howlett, Kitty Wilson.

Moved, seconded, carried (Cohn/Fong; Absent-Tretheway) to adopt an intent motion to certify the EIR with modifications to the findings and facts reflecting the proposed project as amended. Moved, seconded, carried (Cohn/Fong; Absent-Tretheway) to adopt an intent motion to approve the proposed project as amended to include 1) the funding order of Alternative C modified to remove N Street from 16th Street to 21st Street; 2) adding to the end of Alternate C funding order a) L Street, P Street and Q Street (21st-28th); then b) L Street, N Street, P Street, and Q Street (16th to 21st); and 3)direct staff to report back on extending 9th Street and 10th Street 2-way conversion to I Street and extending bike lanes throughout the Central City.
Does this mean they approved it but added several more conversions noted above? I'm confused. And does this mean they're acting on it or they're merely proposing they get approved with further studies?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2007, 7:32 PM
TowerDistrict's Avatar
TowerDistrict TowerDistrict is offline
my posse's on broadway
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: in an LPCA occupied zone
Posts: 1,600
i read that like 30 times through and didn't understand what the hell they're getting at. If you get a chance, maybe you can watch the video and decipher their council code speak..

See March 20th city council video
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------
Map of recent Sacramento developments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2007, 8:25 PM
Sacdelicious's Avatar
Sacdelicious Sacdelicious is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Harlem, NYC
Posts: 132
Light rail rolls south next
As the system turns 20, RT officials discuss its expansion to Cosumnes River College.
By Ralph Montaño - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Thursday, March 22, 2007
Story appeared in CITY section, Page G1


It was 20 years ago this month that Sacramento Regional Transit District brought light-rail service back to the city of Sacramento. On March 12, 1987, thousands of people ignored the rain to be among the first to take the train down a nine-mile stretch into downtown.

Sacramento's rail transit system has done a lot of growing since then. Today, the rails cover 37 miles, from Folsom to Meadowview Road in south Sacramento.

Last week, members of the RT board of directors marked the anniversary by holding a public discussion on the system's next expansion -- a 4.2-mile stretch that will go to the doorstep of Elk Grove.

Known as Phase 2 of the South Line, the proposed extension will run south and west from the Meadowview Road Station to the Cosumnes River College Station. It will follow the Union Pacific Railroad line south for more than a mile before turning east over Morrison Creek. Following Union House Creek, the track will run east to Cosumnes River Boulevard then follow the road until turning south on Bruceville Road and ending at a large station on the east side of the college campus.

The project's estimated cost is $226 million, half of which will have to come from federal government funding that has yet to be approved. If the funds do materialize, planners estimate the project can be built in 2010.

For residents of the Valley Hi and North Laguna neighborhood, such as Al Estrada, the wait has already been a long one.

"I was looking forward to this when I moved here 18 years ago," Estrada said.

Plans to expand the South Line were delayed more than a decade in favor of the expansion to Folsom.

Estrada said he takes the South Line to work daily from the Meadowview Station. The proposed extension would place one of four new stations about five blocks from his home.

"Since they opened the South Line, I've saved money. It's convenient and timely," Estrada said.

About 40 people attended last week's meeting at the Samuel C. Pannell Community Center on Meadowview Road. None spoke out against improvements to the rail system. But some expressed concern about a 20-inch natural gas line that would have to be moved because of the extension.

The gas line runs south in the Union Pacific right-of-way. Officials say the gas line will have to be moved under Detroit Boulevard.

That worries some residents along the street, such as Alex Kotko.

"It's a concern to me," Kotko said. "It's going to disrupt the neighborhood for six to nine months. I've got my grandkids and daughter here so they can learn about what is going on."

Sacramento City Councilwoman Bonnie Pannell said meetings have been held on the issue of relocating the gas line.

"I'm talking to people, and we will have more meetings as we need to," Pannell said. "They tell me Detroit is the best route."

RT has made the supplemental draft environmental impact statement/subsequent draft environmental impact report on the expansion available for public review.

It can be viewed and downloaded at www.slp2.org. A computer disk copy can be obtained by calling (916) 491-5003 and stating your name, address and the desired format.

The document is also available at the following locations:

• Regional Transit administrative office, 1400 29th St., Sacramento.

• FTA office, 201 Mission St., Suite 1650, San Francisco.

• Elk Grove Community Library, 8962 Elk Grove Blvd., Elk Grove.

• Franklin Community Library, 10055 Franklin High Road, Elk Grove.

• Southgate Community Library, 6132 66th Ave., Sacramento.

• Valley Hi-North Laguna Library, 6351 Mack Road, Sacramento.

• Cosumnes River College Library, 8401 Center Parkway, Sacramento.

• Sacramento Central Library, 828 I St., Sacramento.

The public has until April 3 to review the document.

For more information, call Regional Transit at (916) 321-2843 or visit the project Web site at www.slp2.org or RT's Web site at www.sacrt.com.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2007, 11:47 PM
greenmidtown greenmidtown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDistrict View Post
i read that like 30 times through and didn't understand what the hell they're getting at. If you get a chance, maybe you can watch the video and decipher their council code speak..

See March 20th city council video
I watched it almost all the way through... They adopted the proposed plan with the same priority as recommended on alternative C meaning 19th and 21st will be done first as the money comes . However N st. from 16th to 21st will be held off until later because it's very costly to extend over the tracks. L,P, and Q will be done as the money comes after the conversions proposed in alternative C are completed but will be done from 21st to 29th st. to avoid the extra cost of extending the conversions over the tracks to 16th. Once that's completed L,N,P,Q st. will be converted to 16th. Finally they added a proposal to extend 9th and 10th st. conversions to I st..
All in all it went great! The original plan has basically been adopted just that the priority will be placed on the recommended conversions in alternative C, excluding N from 16th to 21st. And if issues come up after the first conversions, changes could be made.

Now the question is how long will it take for them to act? That wasn't made clear to me.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2007, 12:04 AM
TowerDistrict's Avatar
TowerDistrict TowerDistrict is offline
my posse's on broadway
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: in an LPCA occupied zone
Posts: 1,600
i know from experience with freeport and 21st south of b'way, that the areas that cross tracks are a pain to deal with. they just involve so many various approvals that all take months to get. freeport & 21st is close to 3 years behind schedule.

but look on the bright side, at least DT/MT doesn't have to deal with Curtis and Land Park residents!
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------
Map of recent Sacramento developments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2007, 12:30 AM
ltsmotorsport's Avatar
ltsmotorsport ltsmotorsport is offline
Here we stAy
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The grid of course
Posts: 7,782
^^I hate how long it takes to get transit in this country. This line should have been complete 5 years ago. And while I'm at it, DNA should be no more that 10 years out! I know ya'll feel me on this.
__________________
Yeah, I'm like an even less classy version of Tucker Max. - Snodrifter
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 6:49 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.