STORYLINE K Street Mall

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

Plaza change key to downtown's future

by Suzanne Hurt, published on October 13, 2009 at 8:49 PM

Storyline: K Street Mall RSS Feed

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images

Mayor Kevin Johnson has put it to the owners of the troubled Westfield Downtown Plaza: Either you're in or you're out.

The company, Westfield Group, has only another month or so to tell the city whether it will invest in its downtown Sacramento mall the way it's investing in Westfield Galleria at Roseville, Johnson told Westfield representatives and downtown business owners Monday.

"If not, we need you to not hold our city hostage anymore. We need you to sell and let the city move forward," he said. "In November or so, we need you to realize if you're in, you're in. If you're not, you're not."

For at least 11 years, the city has been negotiating over Downtown Plaza with Westfield, perhaps the world's largest shopping mall owner with more than $47 billion in investments in 119 shopping centers. In 2006, Westfield proposed a $120 million overhaul of Downtown Plaza. In May, the company postponed those plans for at least the rest of the year, while completing its $120 million reinvestment at Westfield Santa Anita in Southern California's Arcadia.

The mayor has been pressing Westfield for investment since at least August, when the company also backed out of a planned $200 million renovation of North County Mall in Escondido.

In a meeting at Cosmopolitan Cabaret Monday, Johnson said he and other city leaders are currently engaged in meetings with Westfield Group to determine whether they can make the current partnership work, or whether Westfield should sell the mall to the city or developers from Sacramento or beyond.

The mayor delivered the ultimatum during the first of two community meetings dubbed "Unlocking the Grid" that he's holding as the city works on a new strategy for K Street Mall and the downtown core. More than 100 business and property owners and others took part in the first meeting. Next Monday, Johnson plans to meet with people who live, work or visit downtown at 5:30 p.m. at the cabaret, 10th and K streets.

At the meeting's start, Johnson took a look back at decisions made in the last 50 years that cut off key streets and areas like Old Sacramento and the Sacramento River: the widening of Capitol Mall in the 1950s, the construction of I-5 and removing cars from K Street in the 1960s, construction of the suburban-style Downtown Plaza and Sacramento Convention Center in the 1970s, light rail construction in the 1980s, and tripling the size of the convention center in the 1990s.

Johnson encouraged participants to consider all of the city's assets while coming up with big-picture ideas to improve downtown and reconnect all its parts. Every decision impacts what the city will become, he said.

"We have to create an environment where all boats are rising," he said. "I don't want us to fall into doing the easiest thing to do."

Problems with safety and cleanliness were at the forefront for many. K Street Mall is plagued with "bums, lunatics, thugs and drug dealers," and the city should have a "visible police presence" on K Street until 2 a.m., said Gene Barton, who owns Marilyn's nightclub, 908 K St.

"No one's patrolling alleys. No one's down there after dark," he said.

Hannah Brantingham, the 27-year-old operations manager for 24 Hour Fitness on Seventh Street, said she didn't feel safe walking three blocks down K Street Mall to the afternoon meeting. She's concerned about the safety of employees who walk from a dirty yet expensive parking garage and about cars being stolen or burglarized there.

Another participant asked whether the city would relocate "SRO" hotels, cheap hotels providing single room occupancy on and around the mall.

The SROs have been a problem for "too long," said Johnson, who added, without going into specifics, that he's committed to not having SROs be an impediment to Westfield or other business owners.

The city should focus first on building a mass transit system to carry more people downtown, which would encourage development, said developer David Taylor.

Light rail to Davis could make it easier for UC Davis's 30,000 students to party, shop or eat downtown, said Steve Ayers, a developer and local steel company executive.

Plenty of talk revolved around how to bring more business, housing and spenders downtown. Some people suggested downtown — via retailers and restaurants — must stay open later to increase safety and make the area a more desirable place to be.

Sean Kohmescher said he keeps his Temple coffee and teahouse at 1014 10th St. open until 11 p.m., even though he loses money doing so, because that supports the kind of city he wants to live in. He suggested more business owners "take it upon themselves to create that."

While some were focused on bringing more "high-end" boutiques, restaurants and housing downtown, Kohmescher and others said the key is to have businesses that students and residents with middle-class or fixed incomes will use regularly.

Midtown works better than downtown because it has "mid-level" options, said Brook Taylor, a young professional who works in the Governor's Office of Planning and Research.

The city should focus on serving the needs of "folks in the middle" who provide a steady stream of business to the city, he said.


Suzanne Hurt is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

October 13, 2009 | 9:29 PM
"Midtown works better than downtown because it has "mid-level" options, said Brook Taylor, a young professional who works in the Governor's Office of Planning and Research." Taylor is "professional" at what? What funny meaning does "mid-level options" have? He for sure doesn't know what makes midtown work. What rock did he crawl out from under?
Midtown works because those much maligned people who live there, work and have worked since Taylor was in diapers in spite of city opposition and all other odds against them, to keep midtown's architecture preserved and its quality of life livable to attract other residents and businesses. He should put that in his planning and research.
4 0
REPLY
October 13, 2009 | 10:18 PM
"The SROs have been a problem for "too long," said Johnson, who added, without going into specifics, that he's committed to not having SROs be an impediment to Westfield or other business owners."

The SROs have been home to many folks with very low income. Where does the Mayor think they will live if the SROs are no longer around? Maybe they can go live in the tent city he's so fond of.
3 1
REPLY
edited on  October 14, 2009 | 8:51 AM
I hope Im agreeing with Taylor's assessment in that Midtown seems to be aimed at the core population of the area. In other words, regular, non state or elite trendy folks, whereas what development that has transpired in downtown seems to be shooting for the stars. But this is Sacramento in its own right. Not West Hollywood.
2 0
REPLY
October 14, 2009 | 11:54 AM
I think the problem is that we're continuously told, as a city, to be uppity. To only expect the best. The problem is that the best doesn't come and we end up with high end apartments that the majorityof people who live in Sacramento can afford. We need more inexpensive options. Not cheap, but certainly not "high end boutiques, restaurants, and housing." How can anyone miss the whole financial issue this country is in?

How can someone see that and expect people to be able to afford anything that is that out of reach? We have studios in midtown and downtown that are so ridiculously overprices it's laughable. $1100 for a 500 sq ft apartment. Are they serious? I saw a 2 bedroom 2 bath apartment that was running $2800. We need housing that meets the markets needs and attracts more people here. Most of the housing at these high prices are ending up with large amounts of vacancies. Which is better to make $4 or 500 less each month, or to have an apartment vacant for 3/4 of the year?
3 1
REPLY
October 14, 2009 | 2:00 PM
Paul: Where do you get your numbers that most high price housing is vacant in Sacramento? The apartments at 1801 L Street are high end rentals and it's 92% rented out with studios going for $1000 and 3 bed for $4000. Show me where you’re getting you facts from please.
1 1
REPLY
October 14, 2009 | 4:06 PM
About 25% of 1801 L Street is low-income housing.

Of course, technically $1000 for a studio apartment counts as "low-income housing"--LI housing means a unit affordable to someone making 80% of the area median income, which as of this year is around $40,000 (average income in Sacramento County is around $50,000.) Someone making $40K, according to low-income housing rules, should be able to pay about one-third of their income towards rent--or about $1000. I think the units at 1801 are part "low-income" and part "very low income" housing--with rents of around $600-700, intended for people making 60% of area median income, or around $25-30,000 a year.
3 0
REPLY
Zen
Author thumbnail
October 14, 2009 | 5:08 PM
Good points Bill, but I am still interested in Trapper's question: Where are the facts? I know that many of the higher end apartments are still being rented at a good rate. Granted many places have lowered there price, but so have all apartment units. In comparison to the amount of rental units in the Central City, the high end market makes up a small percentage.
0 0
REPLY
October 14, 2009 | 8:49 PM
I would like to echo W Burg's assessment of rental rates, but also state that it would be more reasonable to expect 2 and 3 bedrooms to go for *around* $1000, as any family on a median income will not be able to spend much more than that, and most will go out of their way to spend less at that wage range.
0 0
REPLY
October 15, 2009 | 12:41 PM
Trapper, $1000 for a 500 sq ft studio is ridiculous. I was paying less than that for a 600 sq ft studio at Capital Towers on the 14th floor.

I know a number of people living at 1801, at 16th and H, Capital Towers and a few other places. The people I know that live at these places often have roommates. Without the roommates they couldn't afford the housing. Even if their vacancies are relatively low, the occupancy is around 2 to 3 times what it would be expected to be for most apartments of the same size normally. I think if they made more affordable housing, such as what bill stated, 2 bedrooms for $1000 is right on par with what they should run. It's ridiculous to assume that most working people can afford these overpriced places.

2 0
REPLY
October 14, 2009 | 8:57 PM
Personally I like the mayors "an environment where all boats are rising" comment, not sure where that came from, but did make me smile (o.k chuckle)! - btw what kind of leverage does the city have to force a sale? And what terms could the city require for a potential buyer? This strong mayor thing sounds good but is there bite with that bark? What incentives are being given to Westfield to invest in this location vs others, there has to be a win-win I would think. With what I understand as to be the direction of the master plan for this area, SRO's don't seem to fit, while this may not seem compasionate, lines need to be drawn to create an environment that encourages commerce & participation of both the vendor and customer. By creating a vibrant center for entertainment, dining & shopping - taxes will increase and more money will be available to address the other issues facing a big city - be it SRO's, tent cities or otherwise -
0 0
REPLY
October 14, 2009 | 11:05 PM
The reason that San Francisco has such a huge homeless population is because the city tore down 1000's of SRO units when it redeveloped the Yuerba Buena Gardens area. SROs are an inexpensive way to keep those living on the margins housed. If the SROs are gone from around K Street, you can expect those folks to be sleeping ON K Street instead. If the city wishes to change the image of Downtown as a place only for the poor, then it should try to build other types of housing that other income levels will live in. When there's a mix of folks downtown, it won't be seen as an area just for low income people.
1 0
REPLY
October 15, 2009 | 9:20 AM
Great point about San Francisco's SROs, Tom--have you ever read "Living Downtown" by Paul Groth? It is generally about life in residential hotels but focuses mostly on San Francisco--although it does mention Sacramento, including discussion of a SRO replacement project from the 1960s that was planned but never built.

The funny thing is that the one neighborhood in San Francisco where there are still a lot of SROs is adjacent to Union Square, San Francisco's shopping district and location of many upscale hotels. Somehow, SROs are okay there but not here. One major difference is that San Francisco does NOT think of Union Square as a shopping mall--although it sounds like KJ learned that you still need to keep an eye on your bag in that part of town!
0 0
REPLY
October 15, 2009 | 2:22 AM
Advocate, Brook Taylor is right on. You have the "bums, lunatics, thugs and drug dealers" walking outside the heavily city-subsidized rich-persons-by-any-standard Citizens Hotel restaraunt/bar picture windows, and the contrast is stark, like if the hotel opened the door the contact between spector thought Pont was rude or if he had violated food preparation rules because things were so hectic. You only mention the actual cause of the closing - cockroaches - once, and you don't talk at all about the sev
0 0
REPLY
October 15, 2009 | 10:15 AM
What did you guys do to my response (above)? Your computer threw in a piece of a comment from another article half way through. Nice software (sarcasm)!
0 0
REPLY
October 15, 2009 | 2:09 PM
I'm not sure what the problem was, but you can edit the comment yourself or I can fix it if you wish.
0 0
REPLY
edited on  May 5, 2010 | 1:13 PM
No matter what area we might discuss, you cannot ignore the local demographic.
I would love to see K Street and its side streets catch up to the 21st Century because I see great potential for advancement there. But realistically, there needs to be focus on the non wealthy folks that already live and shop whats left of the area's reatail. They are the people who shop Walmart, The 99cents Only Stores, Big Lots and K-Mart. Its nice to dream of an upscale 'Beverly Sacramento Hills'. But come on... I seriously doubt that the people who work downtown and live in Folsom, Eldorado Hills or Roseville will be leaving their neighborhoods, filled with perfectly fine shoping areas, to return and shop in the depressing blight of postered up K-Street, filled with hoodrats and homeless hustlers, no matter how may Mason's or Morton's type diners open.
0 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below. Use commas to separate your tags.

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background