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. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Nov 19, 2008, 10:41 PM
LivingInExile LivingInExile is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 208
This thread makes me feel disappointed, sorry if I sound like a party pooper.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2008, 4:55 AM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,866
Yeah, it doe's suck... but this is what's been happening over the years. The more
digging I do the more I find, stay tuned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Nov 20, 2008, 5:41 PM
Ryan@CU's Avatar
Ryan@CU Ryan@CU is offline
Away since 06'
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by innov8 View Post
I pulled it off Google images; I did not go to the source. Sorry, you have now been credited
No worries. I was just surprised to see it.
__________________
Wake me up when playoffs start
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2008, 12:09 AM
Ryan@CU's Avatar
Ryan@CU Ryan@CU is offline
Away since 06'
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by innov8 View Post
Oh yeah, can't forget those cross town freeway plans. One ring around town
would have been nice so traffic would not have go through downtown to go cross town.


Ohhh wee need that so badly. Going from one end of Watt to the other can take 20 minutes, but if we had that freeway i bet it would take one minute.
__________________
Wake me up when playoffs start
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2008, 6:45 AM
doriankage doriankage is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan@CU View Post
Ohhh wee need that so badly. Going from one end of Watt to the other can take 20 minutes, but if we had that freeway i bet it would take one minute.
This map sort proves that not all freeways cause sprawl. Look in the southeast county, the 148, 65 and such are in areas that are now are neighborhoods and towns and tickytacky houses!
I know the Duke killed our chances in the 80's for the freeways, but I think this shows that you can't always blame freeways for sprawl; land developers and the consumers cause sprawl.
I think, where they can, they should build the freeways. I know the 65 by Rocklin-Roseville could still be built out and of course they are trying to build the Elk Grove-Rancho connector.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 9:28 PM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,866
Capitol Grand Tower History

Capitol Grand Tower History (2004 -2007)



Back in October 2004 Mohammed "Mo" Mohanna and John Lambeth proposed
a 32 story hotel/condo tower (315’) that would have been built at
1215 J Street where the current Capitol Grand Ballroom is now. In early 2005
Mo revised the tower to be 38 floors which was the second of four
revisions for the proposed tower. At 38 floors it had 405,000 sf, 192 hotel
room with pool and fitness room, restaurant 85 condos, and 238 parking
stalls topping out at 378’. Costs to build were estimated to be $65 million.





In February of 2006 plans were revised to include a second parcel and
expanded the size of the building. In partnership with the California Medical
Association, revised plans showed the new tower being 56 stories (701 feet)
and would have had 1.17 million sqft which includes 100,000sf of office,
395 residential condos, 250 hotel rooms with a pool and fitness room, and
several levels of subterranean. Cost to build were estimated to be $250 million.





In March of 2007 Mo Mohanna & John Lambeth and their partners the
California Medical Association revised their plans to make the tower even
taller and bigger. The fourth revision showed the tower being 70 stories and
965' to the top of the spire. The tower was going to have 7 floors of above
ground parking levels as well as 6 below going down 75' with slurry walls 3
feet thick surrounding the hole. No cost was released to build this final
revision and the EIR was never finished to proceed into the committees for approval.

Last edited by innov8; Dec 2, 2008 at 5:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Dec 1, 2008, 10:26 PM
Majin's Avatar
Majin Majin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Downtown Sacramento
Posts: 1,957
Why stop at 965'? Why not revise it one more time to break 1000'?
__________________
Majin Crew: jsf8278, wburg, daverave
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2008, 4:25 PM
What is a Rivercat? What is a Rivercat? is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 371
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2008, 9:38 PM
JeffZurn's Avatar
JeffZurn JeffZurn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 126
^pre Raley's field?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Dec 5, 2008, 10:17 PM
Surefiresacto's Avatar
Surefiresacto Surefiresacto is offline
thenorth.bandcamp.com
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Arden-Arcade
Posts: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffZurn View Post
^pre Raley's field?
No, that's Arco Field next to the Arena... started but never finished.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2008, 12:01 AM
Ryan@CU's Avatar
Ryan@CU Ryan@CU is offline
Away since 06'
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffZurn View Post
^pre Raley's field?
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...=158300&page=3
Go to the bottom and it's explained.
__________________
Wake me up when playoffs start
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2008, 1:34 AM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,866
West Sacramento has had some grand visions too in the last 20 years. Here's
a few from 1989.


July 3, 1989
Sacramento Bee
W. Sacramento has seen future, and it’s towering
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/...ckval=GooglePM

Below are paraphrased parts from the Sacramento Bee article.

20 years ago West Sacramento had really big plans for the riverfront costing
$1 Billion plus. The metamorphosis included the areas first 40-story high-rise
tower; the first luxury riverfront developments; and the first five-star hotel
and conference center. The proposed development was to include one 40
story tower at Raley’s Landing to be finished in 1992 as well as another
developer jockeying to build their own 48 story tower.

All the proposed developments were to transform West Sacramento image
from an industrial eyesore to an auto mall on the west end to upscale
waterfront development and residential construction to the southeast.
The developers expect to spend $1 billion, and the city expected $3 billion
to be spent over the next 20 years.

West Sac’s new general plan was a commitment to develop its entire
waterfront for public use, linking pricey marinas and other developments with city parks.



Lighthouse Marian was to be finance by the Japanese, 321-acre resort
project along the Sacramento River near the mouth of the American River.
It would have included a marina, hotel convection center, 18 hole golf course
and 1,660 homes, for an estimated price of $500 million.

Raley’s Landing was to be 28-acre project just north of Tower Bridge with a
630-room hotel, five star hotel and a 40-story office tower and second
smaller tower along with 400 riverfront condominiums. The development was
to receive up to $300 million in international financing.

The Triangle, a chunk of land between I-80 and the Tower Bridge was at the
time described as “the premier piece of property in the region” and was
designated for mix-use waterfront development. As many as 20 property
owner own land in the 135 acre area with The Rice Growers Association
owning 50 acres, which was the biggest chunk on land. The at one time the
city of West Sacramento had a plan to organize an association of all the
property owners in the Triangle area to create a plan for the 135-acre site,
but the effort failed when the Rice Growers Association pulled out of a city’s
plan to organize the property owners. The RGA felt there was so little
interest in the group that it would be more useful to hire a consultant to
plan its own property.



Dean F. Unger, a Sacramento architect, owns 9 acres of the property
waterfront property just south of the Tower Bridge and had plans mapped
out but had also been approached by several development groups. One of
the groups were vying for a position to build a high-rise was Kersten’s Trade
Center Development Corp. who approached Unger and the RGA to build a
48-story tower. Unger’s plans to keep the riverfront free of traffic and open
to bicycles and pedestrians. He had plans for a layered approach from the
river with shops and restaurants from the street level with mid-rises and
high-rise buildings behind with parking structures. Unger said “I want to
do something that is very, very significant, to give something of lasting
legacy to the West Sacramento community. It’s too fine a property to not
do it absolutely correctly.”

Last edited by innov8; Dec 13, 2008 at 3:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Dec 23, 2008, 10:19 PM
econgrad econgrad is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 795
Secondhand style

Plans for a 38-story condo tower at Sixth and Capitol died more than a year ago.

But pieces of the "Aura" project live on – at the funky Beatnik Studios photo gallery and artist workshop at 17th and Broadway.

At the rear of the gallery are frosted wall panels, lamps and other furnishings that once were in the condo project's sales model. There's even a glass door etched with the Aura name.

When the high-profile Aura project collapsed, D&S Development of Sacramento bought the furnishings at a liquidation sale and "recycled" them into its Beatnik property, says D&S exec Bay Miry.

Miry says the company also grabbed other Aura furniture, including a bathtub "because we thought it looked really cool."

Fittingly, D&S installed those items at its own condo project now selling at 14th and R streets.

By Bob Shallit
bshallit@sacbee.com
Published: Tuesday, Dec. 23, 2008 | Page 1B
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Dec 27, 2008, 7:50 AM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,866
Nacht & Lewis had plans for old railyards once... I think these were concepts
from back in the late 90's. Sactown Andy took these photos of the model back in 2003.





Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Dec 29, 2008, 9:48 PM
ltsmotorsport's Avatar
ltsmotorsport ltsmotorsport is online now
Here we stAy
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The grid of course
Posts: 7,793
Yeah, those buildings in the model are pretty hot. They remind me of the World Financial Center towers in NYC.
__________________
Yeah, I'm like an even less classy version of Tucker Max. - Snodrifter
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2009, 4:07 AM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,866
^ I thought the same thing... those would have looked sweet from I-5.

These proposals never had a chance since Mo Mohanna owned the properties.
Back in 2005 the city took several proposals for how to develop the 700 block
of K Street and the corner of 9th and L Street. The city choose Joe Zidens proposal
which never came to be because a land swap dispute with Mo.
Any bets on when something will be done to the 700 block of K Street?



700 block of K Street



700 block of K Street



Corner of 9th and L Street
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2009, 4:34 AM
wburg's Avatar
wburg wburg is offline
Hindrance to Development
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,105
That project never had a chance because it was contingent on fairly massive city subsidies ($70-90 million at the time, as I recall) and the free gift of the Marshall, the Capitol Park, the Greyhound station, the Berry, and several other properties that were not the city's to give. The Zeiden proposal was supposed to require far less city investment, and based mostly on trade of land between existing landowners.

I can only imagine how much higher that $70-90 million would have gone, if we had been foolish enough to choose that proposal, and what kind of legal battles we would be faced with. As horrid as the 700 block fiasco has been so far, with this plan it could have been even worse.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jan 22, 2009, 8:32 PM
JeffZurn's Avatar
JeffZurn JeffZurn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 126
Its sad to hear, all this goodness down the drain!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jan 23, 2009, 6:22 AM
innov8's Avatar
innov8 innov8 is offline
Kodachrome
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: livinginurbansac.blogspot
Posts: 4,866
I don't think the city subsidie was that much wburg, I beleive it was maybe
half that amout the developer was asking for... in any case, it never had
a chance with Mo still owning the property.

I prferred the second one down where the facades of the current buildings
were left and the residential midrise was built behind.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jan 26, 2009, 1:46 AM
daverave daverave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by innov8 View Post
I prferred the second one down where the facades of the current buildings
were left and the residential midrise was built behind.
I think that it's a shame that local developers have apparently fallen in love with Ankrom Moisan Architects for some reason... there is plenty of talent locally that could handle these projects. The love affair with all things Portland is grating.
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 5:33 PM.

     

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