Docks Area & Riverfront Promenade

[TowerDistrict]

Sacramento Riverfront Website

Sixth Community Workshop - April 18, 2007 (PDF, 11Mb) Highly Recommended

-------------------------------------------------
68 Townhouses
824 Low-Rise Stacked Flats
504 High-Rise Stacked Flats
1,396 Dwelling Units Total
-------------------------------------------------

Refined Docks Area Concepts

Alternates A & B


Alternate A (Moves Reservoir)


Alternate B (Renovates Reservoir)


Streetscape Example


-------------------------------------------------

Riverfront Promenade

R Street Park


Riverfront Promenade - Alt A


Riverfront Promenade - Alt B (Chosen by the City 10.16.07 - finalized plans due by Feb. 2008)


Riverfront Piers - Phase 2


Riverfront Sideviews



Riverfront Rail Planting Concept

[goldcntry]

Thanks for the heads-up Tower! Now if "they'll" actually DO something about it!

[What is a Rivercat?]

poor towers prolly never gonna look like that

[wburg]

Not sure how that "Riverfront Rail Planting" thing would work--the rail along Front Street is still in regular use by the CSRM's Sacramento Southern tourist train, and they do regular maintenance, including ballasting, tie replacement, and most importantly, weed spraying. Renderings of flowers in between ties is cute but not exactly practical.

I still hope the Towe Auto Museum can find a place to stay in the new Docks/Riverfront: it's a great cultural amenity, along with the CSRM trains. The other existing structure, which is a historic building, is the SPCA structure on Front Street. Other than that, if you want a place for things to go tall, I think the Docks are a good choice. Maybe not supertall office structures, but it's a good spot for residential towers with a river view.

One problem with the Docks is their level of interconnection with the rest of downtown: the only ways in or out are on Front Street, via Broadway to the south, via Old Sacramento to the north, and via the bridge at O Street to the east. We have I-5 to thank for this--it means that traffic will be a challenge unless there are alternative transport modes close by.

[TowerDistrict]

goldcntry: i realize the cynisism about these large scale projects is probably warranted. but all these concepts and diagrams are very well fleshed out, and more importantly, were completed by the firms chosen to lead the projects - not a city run community workshop. they are legit proposals and will soon be chosen. then comes the EIR, the construction bids, and the actual construction - which will begin at R street (5th image down)

Rivercat: the towers were in doubt a year ago, and i did not expect to see them on this round - but they're there, and are all planned at 30 stories. We won't see those for several years, though. They are all on Phase 2.

wburg: The main feeder street connecting the docks will actually be U Street. You're right that I-5 is a bitch, but the good news is that Old Sacramento has the same issues and has fared remarkably well considering the odds. I think the main contributer to that success is the river - people would cross I-5 on foot if that was the only way to get to it.

As for the Towe... I was under the impression that they were there to stay, but now i'm not so sure of it. All i can say for sure, is that their end of the project will be safe for a few years, while the north side Phase 1 in under construction.

About the rail planting... I have a lot of confidence in this Walker Macy group. And at this point, I don't think they're throwing out ideas just to make themselves look capable. While speaking to them, I was told that they are under a lot of pressure to get this project underway quickly. Below are a couple images of precedent projects. One being a freight train, and the other a streetcar. Do you happen to know the frequencey of the trains coming through there?

[TowerDistrict]

^ is the above post showing up?

i'm getting all sorts of weirdness from the forum today...

[ajmstilt]

they are showing up just fine for me.

[innov8]

I dig "A" for sure. Having the RR still run thru there will add some charm to that area.
I think the trains go thru there 3 or 4 time a day on the weekends, maybe twice during a week day.

[wburg]

towerdistrict: How would U Street work?

Sacramento Southern trains run hourly (once in either direction) on Saturdays and Sundays, April-November, plus occasional mid-week School Trains, and Setzer Forest Products gets deliveries of freight cars (roughly 3-10) once a week via Sacramento Southern.

I have seen the grass-between-rails concept (it is part of the West Sac streetcar concept on Capitol Mall) and it would be all right but I assume the developer would then be responsible for installing and maintaining it, or paying SSRR to do the same? SSRR is entirely volunteer-run and operated, including maintenance of way, and that sort of roadway is considerably more expensive and maintenance-heavy than wooden ties.

Old Sacramento doesn't have the same issues: the freeway there is elevated, permeable at multiple points, and one block from Light Rail. The Docks have one road in or out, and the only people who cross I-5 on foot are people trying to kill themselves.

[ltsmotorsport]

Alternative A for me. It gets more people next to the river.

[Sacto]

Alternative A is my choice, I'm not sure about the train running through the parks though - looks kinda odd and out of place to me.

[friedpez]

When I interned for the City's econ dev department I worked on this project for nearly 15 months. Honestly, the proposals we're now seeing are, in my opinion, way better than what was originally proposed, and I think option A best reflects what is best for the area because taller buildings near Pioneer Bridge will help reduce noise and "enclose" the riverfront park, making the area seem much more intimate and liveable. The only issue is Pioneer Reservoir, which, one way or another, will need serious cash for upgrades and should therefore just be moved.

Also, moving the rail line from the waterfront levee to Front Street would cost a ton of money, and it is possible to integrate rail lines into boulevards and parks nicely, using fencing and vegetation to provide controlled crossing points. What I gathered from community workshops was that it would be pretty neat to be at a park, see trains, boats, people, bikes, and cars all in the same neighborhood.

[wburg]

sacto: The trains are already running there, they are part of the California State Railroad Museum, which owns the right of way. If it makes you feel better, they are beautiful historic steam trains that only run three days a week (and eight months of the year), not full-sized freight trains. I agree with friedpez--if anything, they're a built-in amenity. Moving it to Front Street isn't exactly an option because it continues south past Front Street, currently to Baths a mile or two south but hopefully to Hood someday. Doesn't it fit a park setting to see trains filled with waving tourists, or dining cars filled with folks on a "wine train" type of excursion, going past as you enjoy the park and the river?

My own personal "wouldn't it be great" would involve a restored gas motor car (like the Yerington) utilized as a sort of "commuter shuttle" that could take people to and from Old Sacramento--or a regular commuter train (using Sac Southern equipment) that could, theoretically, take commuters from Hood (coming from Elk Grove or Laguna) downtown, through the Docks area. There are obvious challenges--funding, FRA approval, ADA compliance, equipment restoration, and on and on--but I just think it would be neat.

[BrianSac]

Back-Seat driver: Residents rally against bridge idea
By Tony Bizjak - Bee Staff Writer
Last Updated 8:12 pm PDT Monday, June 4, 2007
Story appeared in METRO section, Page B1

Print | E-Mail | Comments (1) | Digg it | del.icio.us

The battle of the Broadway Bridge has begun. Arguing that a proposed bridge over the Sacramento River at that site is a half-baked idea, a coalition of Land Park, Curtis Park and Southside Park residents are calling on city officials to back off the planning process.

In a petition to the city, Land Park resident Jim Randlett argues it's a waste of taxpayer dollars to study a four-lane bridge for cars without first studying possible transit connections over the river.

What about streetcars, light rail and buses? he asks.


Randlett and other residents complain a bridge would steer tens of thousands of cars through their neighborhoods. The city, they argue, should be working to reduce the number of cars in city neighborhoods, not invite more in.

Councilman Rob Fong met with some residents and calls their request reasonable. In fact, he agrees.

The city is sending a mixed message, he pointed out, when it talks about building a bridge mainly for cars while vehemently opposing Caltrans' plan for a Highway 50 carpool lane because, city officials say, it will harm city neighborhoods by depositing more cars on city streets.

In midtown, the city has been struggling for nearly a decade now to repair the damage done a generation ago when quaint neighborhood streets were turned into three-lane, one-way expressways.

The city recently began a Broadway Bridge feasibility study in partnership with the city of West Sacramento.

Fong said he plans to meet with City Manager Ray Kerridge to talk about changing the scope of that study.

"I think it would be more appropriate to look at what are the best transit alternatives for moving people across the river and where might the best locations be," Fong said. "More cars are not necessarily the desired outcome here. We have to look at what we are really trying to encourage."

Of course, that depends on who is doing the looking.

Across the river, West Sacramento officials are especially interested in a bridge that can bring thousands of commuters from the city's Southport subdivisions to jobs in Sacramento.

For them, that means a conveyance for cars that also has room for transit, bicycles and pedestrians.

"We're looking at a bridge that hopefully will accomplish a lot of objectives," West Sacramento official Steve Patek said recently. "One is to give people in suburban parts of Sacramento and Southport an alternative way across the river without getting on the freeway system.

"It is difficult to serve a suburban area with transit and expect a majority of people will use transit."

Ironically, a mile to the north, West Sacramento and Sacramento are working earnestly together to design and build an old-fashioned streetcar line over the Tower Bridge. They hope to have that line up and running in five years.

Some residents have asked why not loop the streetcar over a transit bridge at Broadway?

That's possible, officials say. But not now.

West Sacramento officials say they want to extend the streetcar line south past Raley Field toward Broadway. But a streetcar is a very urban transportation form, useful for short-distance travel where there is a dense mix of offices, stores and apartments and condominiums, transportation officials say.

There is none of that for now on either side of the proposed Broadway Bridge site. A streetcar line there wouldn't be worth the money, officials said.

So, questions loom: Is there a better place to build a bridge, and what type of bridge should it be?


Makes me wonder how did the people of Portland manage to build 10 bridges over the Willamette River within their central core?

[NewToCA]

I think the bridge is a good idea in terms of long term strategic thinking. I know that these get opposed, but it certainly makes sense for vehicle movement and alternative roadways. Like it or not, that comes with a big city.

Now if we could only get a bridge at Bradshaw over the American River...

[neuhickman79]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

I think the bridge is a good idea in terms of long term strategic thinking. I know that these get opposed, but it certainly makes sense for vehicle movement and alternative roadways. Like it or not, that comes with a big city.

Now if we could only get a bridge at Bradshaw over the American River...

Don't even get me started. WAY before I was into urban planning and such I was a HUGE advocate of a bridge over the American River...we're talking right around the time I turned 18 (that would be 1997...OMG I'm old!). It'll probably never happen. But, it is THE single most necessary road project in Sacramento County, IMO!

[wburg]

I'm not sure how this bridge would increase traffic, since the people who currently go from West Sacramento to Sacramento take the Pioneer Bridge (on Hwy 50) and get off on Fifth Street, which means they're already going through that neighborhood to and from downtown. The only part that would see an increase in traffic is on Broadway itself, between the river and 5th/10th Street, instead of X Street.

It does seem like a logical place for a later streetcar extension, though--Phase 2 of the plan includes a line down into Southside, and a leg at Broadway would make it easier for a future West Sacramento extension that could run into Southport--via the old Sacramento Northern mainline that the city of west Sacramento already owns (and could put some nice TOD along the rail lines to provide some much-needed density.)

[TowerDistrict]

Originally Posted by wburg

I'm not sure how this bridge would increase traffic, since the people who currently go from West Sacramento to Sacramento take the Pioneer Bridge (on Hwy 50) and get off on Fifth Street, which means they're already going through that neighborhood to and from downtown. The only part that would see an increase in traffic is on Broadway itself, between the river and 5th/10th Street, instead of X Street.

This is probably true, but i actually don't blame residents a bit for calling this a half-baked idea if there isn't a simultaneous push to plan multimodal transportation over the bridge. That would appease a lot of people who are looking for both cities to uphold all the future planning that's been in the works for years now.

I find these quotes confusing...

"We're looking at a bridge that hopefully will accomplish a lot of objectives," West Sacramento official Steve Patek said recently. "One is to give people in suburban parts of Sacramento and Southport an alternative way across the river without getting on the freeway system.

Which suburban Sacramentans are we talking about here, and what are the other objectives?

West Sacramento officials say they want to extend the streetcar line south past Raley Field toward Broadway. But a streetcar is a very urban transportation form, useful for short-distance travel where there is a dense mix of offices, stores and apartments and condominiums, transportation officials say.

There is none of that for now on either side of the proposed Broadway Bridge site. A streetcar line there wouldn't be worth the money, officials said.

How is that different from the current streetcar route in West Sac? There is nothing there either to warrant a streetcar. So if we are talking about using this form of transportation to spur development, what better an area than the West Sacramento riverfront which has the highest density development proposals of either side of the river?

Again, I hope they can come up with something that is built for the future and adheres to all our transportation planning objectives in this region. I do want a Broadway Bridge - but I don't want this costly, bureaucratic mess of retrofitting that is the Tower Bridge. I hope everyone pushes for more.

[wburg]

The Tower Bridge retrofit makes sense in that the riverfront north of the Tower Bridge is already in the sights of developers, and a streetcar would help connect those areas with downtown. It also reactivates a former transit line, but in a more effective way, but there isn't much yet slated for the area across from Broadway. Give that a few years.

I think the term "Sacramentans" here refers to "West Sacramentans." And I think the other objectives are to increase traffic through currently industrial areas on both sides of the river, as a way to spur commercial development of those areas (the fuel tanks along the western edge of Broadway, the lumber mills just to the east of I-5, etcetera) by turning that part of Broadway into a commuter boulevard with more traffic and activity. It would also make the Docks more connected to shopping in West Sacramento/Southport (like the Nugget market.)

[travis bickle]

From another thread - but applicable here...

I actually see this waterfront as having a real potential into becoming a sort of museum promenade anchored by the RTM/CSRM on the north, the greatly expanded Crocker in the middle and the Towne on the southern end.

Far from a one-track town, I think that's pretty impressive.

If the talked about I-5 bypass is ever actually built and that land returned to the city, a true promenade could take its place, add some additional attractions and create one of the most compact, beautiful and exciting museum/arts districts in the country.

Even if I-5 remains where it is as it is - those three oustanding anchors along the Sacramento will make for a great urban scene.