Central City Neighborhoods

800 K Street Plan at Preservation Commission

2011-03-02T02:13:31Z

This Wednesday, March 2, the City of Sacramento's Preservation Commission will review and comment on plans for the 800 block of K Street. This plan follows the February review and comment for the 700 block of K Street, (a project of D&S Development and CFY Development) by the Preservation Commission, later presented to Design and Planning Commission.

City of Sacramento Preservation Commission

Wednesday, March 2, 5:30 PM, City Council Chambers, New City Hall, 915 I Street, Sacramento

Agenda for the Preservation Commission meeting can be found here:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=144

This project, selected last summer as one of two projects for the 700 and 800 block of K Street, is presented by David Taylor Interests, Domus, CIM and Zeiden Properties. After input by the city of Sacramento, the project now includes 200 apartments (the original plan called for 110) varying in size from 450 to 1100 square feet, and 20,000 feet of retail space, on a lot of approximately 1.1 acres. Two new buildings will be constructed, at 800 K Street and 801 L Street, and the historic Bel-Vue Apartments/American Cash Apartments building will be restored and renovated. The 800 K Street building will be six stories tall, not including a basement parking level at Sacramento's original street level. The 801 L Street building will be five stories. Affordability levels will vary within the project, ranging from low and moderate income to market-rate units. Potential tenants for the ground floor retail units were not specified in the staff report.

The complete report for the 800 Block proposal can be found here:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=144&meta_id=218914

This item will be received for review and comment, most likely to be followed by presentations to Design Review and Planning Commission in the coming weeks.

This month's Preservation Commission will also feature public hearings on two items: a recommendation for the Broadway Triangle project, a mixed-use project planned for Broadway between 34th and 36th Street that will include several landmark buildings in the Oak Park/Broadway historic district, and a recommendation for district signs, art, and bicycle furniture for the R Street Corridor between 10th and 13th Street.

Details about the Broadway Triangle project can be found here:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=144&meta_id=218908

The R Street streetscape plan can be found here:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=144&meta_id=218910

The Preservation Commission will also review a staff report regarding whether or not to recommend the California State Printing Plant on North 7th and Richards Boulevard to the City Council as a city landmark. Staff report can be found here:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=21&event_id=144&meta_id=218912

Pictures accompanying this article were taken from the City of Sacramento staff report, linked above.

SOCA Home Tour in Bungalow Row

2010-09-17T07:38:25Z

On Sunday, September 19, the Sacramento Old City Association presents its 35th annual Home Tour, focusing on the homes of Q Street's Bungalow Row and Winn Park. Sacramento Press reporter Brandon Darnell detailed the story behind the Home Tour here:

www.sacramentopress.com/headline/35635/Historic_homes_to_open_for_tour

The home tour's "base of operations" this year, where tickets are sold, is located in Winn Park, at the corner of 28th and P Street. Winn Park is also the location of the tour's street fair, featuring local contractors, artisans, crafters, artists and organizations. At the center of the park, near the fire relay station that is one of the stops on the tour, musical performers will play from 11 AM to 3 PM.

Performers scheduled are Ross Hammond, Chris Harvey and Tim White (of The Alkali Flats), Bobby Joe Ebola and the Children MacNuggits, and the Freebadge Serenaders.

At the street fair, local developers ZETA Homes will have information about their new residential project planned for 25th and R Street. Dave "I Do Windows and Doors" Clark will demonstrate how restoring wood windows can be cheaper and far greener than replacing wood with vinyl windows. Practical Cycle will share information on their upcoming local history bike rides. Midtown Business Association will share their upcoming events, and downtowngrid.com will offer coupons and gifts from local businesses. Several authors of Arcadia Publishing's books on local history will be present to sign and sell books. Archivists from the Center for Sacramento History and representatives of the Sacramento Old City Cemetery will share information on their organizations. Two stained glass artists, Mickey Abbey and Richard Graf, will feature their arts at either end of the park. CLUCK, the Campaign to Legalize Urban Chicken Keeping, will share information on their efforts. Local artists like Kitten Kustom Wares, New Old Jewelry and Carolyn Hess Handmade Quilts will display their crafts, while fine arts by Joy Gee of Matrix Arts, Mareia de Socorro, Nicholas Roberts and Greg LaTraille will be on display.

If you are planning on attending the "Sac Cycle Chic" bicycle ride, the ride will end at the Street Fair. For more information on Sac Cycle Chic:

www.saccyclechic.com/

The street fair will take place in the eastern half of Winn Park, but there will still be plenty of room for picnics and gatherings.

35th Annual SOCA Home Tour
Location: Bungalow Row and Winn Park, 28th and P Street, Midtown Sacramento
Description: Join us for the 35th Annual SOCA Home Tour. This year we are celebrating the 100th birthday of Bungalow Row. A street fair featuring artisans and craftspersons specializing in historic properties will be held in Winn Park at 27th & P Streets. Home Tour tickets will be available at the street fair. The street fair is free.
Start Time: 09:00 AM to 4:00 PM
Date: September 19, 2010

Tickets are $20 in advance and $ 25 the day of the event

Advance tickets can be purchased after August 22nd at the following locations:

The Avid Reader, 16th & Broadway

Collected Works, 4525 Freeport Blvd. next to Capitol Nursery

57th Street Antique Mall, 57th & H Street

Joann’s Elegant Gifts, 1019 L Street

Green Sacramento, 919 20th Street

For more information on SOCA:

www.sacoldcity.org

Grocery Outlet: Then and Now

2010-08-21T00:12:37Z

When I wrote Sacramento: Then and Now I wanted to show some images that were missed in other local history books, but were immediately recognizable by people who lived in the neighborhoods portrayed. I chose the image of the grocery store at 17th and Capitol because it was just this sort of place: ordinary, but recognizable and essential. At the time, it was still Rick's Uptown Market--one of the hazards of a book titled "Then and Now" is that the date of publication immediately becomes a new "Then."

The building is about 100 years old--I am pretty sure, but not positive, that it was constructed in about 1910. It was constructed as the Perkins and Company grocery store, selling food as well as dry goods and other essentials. Perkins & Company was first established in the town of Perkins, about seven miles east of Sacramento by Thomas Calley Perkins, renamed in his honor from the earlier name of Brighton. Thomas' son, Charles Calley Perkins, expanded the family business to Sacramento in the early 1900s, so this store was probably his idea. More about the history of Brighton Township, including Perkins, can be found in this a free online book called Stories of the Land by Paula J. Peper. The book was published by Stonebridge Properties, who currently plan to develop the Perkins/Brighton area into a new Sacramento County subdivision.

When the Perkins Store was built, Capitol Avenue was still known as M Street, and a streetcar line ran down its center. Paving was becoming commonplace in that decade, so the road may have been macadamized, but there was still a lot of horse traffic in addition to the streetcars, bicycles, pedestrians and a growing number of automobiles. Like most streetcar routes, M Street's property values were higher than adjacent blocks, so buildings on the street were more commonly commercial, multi-family dwellings or large, expensive homes of prominent families.

The Perkins & Company Store went out of business in 1944, but it served as a neighborhood market after Perkins closed: by the 1950s, it was a Raley's store. More recently it was part of the Compton's Market local chain, and most recently Rick's before closing and reopening as a Grocery Outlet store.

As the photos show, other than covering up some of the street-side windows with stucco, the store hasn't changed very much. The mural, now in mid-restoration/enhancement, gives a little bit of flavor, not strictly what the building actually looked like but enough to evoke the past. In the past week, Sacramento lost one of its oldest market buildings to fire, but places like the old Perkins Store, reopened today as a Grocery Outlet, still function in their historic role. As Sacramentans redisciver their central city, buildings like this one and places like neighborhood markets will have an important role to play. Perhaps this building could serve the neighborhood as a grocery store for another hundred years?

The K Street Plan: Local, Green, Historic and Affordable

2010-07-02T06:09:33Z

Disclaimer: This article is my opinion, given as a central city resident and board member of the Sacramento Old City Association. I am not an employee of any of the firms involved, nor the city of Sacramento. I am enthusiastic about this project because it represents the best combination of historic preservation, new development, downtown infill, fiscal responsibility, and promotion of local business, culture, and heritage.

In December 2009, the city of Sacramento asked local developers for plans to revitalize the 700 and 800 blocks of K Street. The project area occupies about one city block, around 2.5 acres, on two half-block lots. Four teams submitted proposals, and a five-member committee met three times to review the responses and select a recommendation to the city council. Their recommendation was based on experience, quality of vision and concept, relationship to local goals, proposed tenants, financial feasibility and delivery schedule. Based on these criteria, the committee chose elements of two proposals: the Promenade on K, proposed by D&S and CFY Development, for the 700 block, and a proposal by David Taylor, CIM, Zeiden Properties and Domus Development for the 800 block.

The Recommended Plan

The proposal for the 700 block includes 136 apartments along the alley side of K Street in a new mid-rise structure, with underground parking at Sacramento’s original street level. The apartments range from 450 to 1200 square feet, studios to 2-bedrooms. 37,840 feet of retail will occupy the ground floor of the existing structures on K Street. The front 90 feet of each building will be retained, and the two landmark buildings on the block retained entirely. The second floor of the historic buildings will also become apartments, and the building basements will be retained for storage or retail use. Because the 700 block has abundant street space, outdoor patios and kiosks will surround the walkway on K Street, creating an expansive outdoor room adjacent to the newly-remodeled St. Rose of Lima Park.

The 800 block will include new buildings on the corner of 8th & K and 8th & L, and the historic Bel-Vue Apartments will be restored and returned to residential use, a total of 110 market rate and mixed-income units, including three-bedroom units intended for families. Parking will be accessed via the alley and L Street, and will not be visible from the street. All buildings will have ground-floor retail, totaling 32,530 square feet. This project team is also considering acquiring the historic Kress and Montgomery Ward buildings, for conversion to mixed-use residential, but because these buildings were outside the project scope (the city does not own them) they were not included in the proposal.

Keep It Local

The proposal for the 700 block includes Letters of Intent from retailers interested in participation. Rather than seeking chain or out-of-town tenants, the D&S proposal sought local businesses. These include popular local eateries, like Old Soul Coffee, who plans a French bistro and wine bar, or Kru, who plans a ramen/yakitori restaurant and sake bar. Three of these potential tenants (Crepeville, Shady Lady and and Burgers & Brew) each plan live music venues in addition to a restaurant and bar. The Shady Lady letter points out Sacramento’s lack of mid-sized music venues, and suggests that this project could fill the glaring need for venues larger than small Midtown bars but smaller than the Memorial Auditorium or Crest Theatre. But it’s not all about music and drinks; the owner of “Top This” Frozen Yogurt wants to create a late-night dessert diner, adding cakes, pies and sundaes to their product mix. Rima Boutique and Muse Salon want to open boutiques selling clothing, accessories and artwork. Specifics on the 800 block’s retail mix were not available, but their team includes Z Gallerie’s Joe Zeiden, who has extensive experience bringing retail to downtowns throughout the state. Because all of these businesses can also operate during daytime business hours, they are useful to the tens of thousands of downtown commuters for lunch, daytime shopping, or after-work dining and entertainment.

Local business is complemented by the local residences included in the project. Affordable housing means employees of a yogurt shop or boutique can live in a nearby unit instead of commuting to work from the suburbs, and downtown office workers can walk from office to home, utilizing local retail options in their own neighborhood. Housing directly above K Street on the second floor, and along the alley, means greater safety through “eyes on the street,” complemented by evening activity in restaurant patios and street vendor kiosks. Many of K Street’s problems take place on vacant, disused properties where there are no residents or tenants. Bringing more housing and late-night business back to K Street means more safety by design. In many ways, this plan is a larger, more ambitious version of D&S’s recent success at 14th and R Street, where a dark, unused warehouse was turned into 12 residential units and a row of eateries and mixed retail, using a historic building, local businesses, and green design.

Keeping it Green on K Street

“Green” is a word that gets used a lot, so much that the meaning is sometimes obscured. This proposal for K Street is green in several important ways. It proposes using green and sustainable methods, plus solar and wind power generation on rooftops. Both blocks include green roofs as inner courtyards for tenant use. Adding downtown housing and the units’ proximity to transit means less driving and consumption of gasoline. Restoration of the existing buildings, instead of demolition, saves those buildings’ embodied energy, uses less energy than new construction, and reduces the load on our landfills.

This project is located at the nexus of both existing Light Rail lines and the Green Line to Richards Boulevard now under construction, with local bus access on both side streets. Recent changes allowing bikes on K Street, and proposed additional bike parking on the street and in the buildings, encourages biking to and from the project. Enhancing the streetscape, adding dense residential and greater security by design promotes walking and transit use. Project residents who work nearby, instead of in distant suburbs, won’t have to drive to work, and won’t have to go far for entertainment or dining.

“The greenest building is one that’s already built” is an old adage of the preservation community. Construction of a new building requires tremendous energy, an amount equal to decades’ worth of the building’s annual energy consumption. Old buildings, especially those built prior to 1940, were built when energy was more expensive, and were designed for more efficient use of energy. They are generally built of durable materials like brick, stone, and old-growth timber. They required less energy to create than high-energy materials like concrete and steel. Their energy cost has long since been paid. Demolition of old buildings is also energy-intensive, and sends most of those irreplaceable building materials to landfills, where they are joined by new buildings’ construction wastes (which makes up about half the contents of our landfills!) Saving old buildings is about more than aesthetics; it is the greener, cleaner and less wasteful choice.

Restoring K Street’s Legacy

K Street has been the heart of Sacramento since the Gold Rush, and it has played many roles over time. Younger people know it as the home of Light Rail and the Downtown Plaza mall, those in middle age remember the old pedestrian mall with its “tank traps” and fountains, and the older generation recalls the era of cruising K Street in hot rods in the 1950s and 60s. But all of these eras took place while K Street was in decline, and represent desperate efforts to bring suburban visitors back downtown. The era of K Street’s greatest vitality was during the early 20th century through the 1940s.

American downtowns boomed during this time, and Sacramento was no exception. K Street was a shopping street, home to every department store in town, with small specialty shops ranging from herbalists to bookstores. It was also a place for entertainment, including theater, vaudeville, movies, dining, live music, and dancing, although even then it was not Sacramento’s only entertainment district. It was also a place that thousands of Sacramentans called home, living in apartments above retail storefronts. These included modest rooms with a bath down the hall for working people, efficiency apartments for middle-class professionals, and elegant “palace hotels” for wealthy businessmen and legislators who wanted close access to the capital and the city’s financial district. Public transit reached through the city and the region, bringing visitors to K Street, but many called it home.

Teenagers and adults walked downtown on summer evenings, enjoying the respite from the heat, knowing that even at midnight, something was happening on K Street. Because people were always there, it was a safe place to visit. In the mid-20th century, this changed as suburbs grew, shopping centers and malls appeared, and redevelopment emptied the central city. Highways intended to bring people back downtown only made the central city easier to leave, and expensive redevelopment plans brought a few visitors during the day but the city still emptied at night. Sacramento’s legacy as an urban place was ignored, suppressed, and almost forgotten.

This project brings K Street back using a proven method: provide an experience and a place that cannot be duplicated anywhere else in the region. Residential options and transit means that the automobile takes a back seat—you can have a car and live here, but you don’t need one. Unique entertainment and local retail means that shopping and dining and music is different than what you find in any suburban shopping center. Preservation of historic buildings means that K Street’s true history as a vibrant, urban place is apparent to visitor and resident alike, not simulating the past in Disney style, but using the lessons of the past to shape Sacramento’s urban future.

Putting the “Fun” in Funding Sources

In these cost-conscious times, many criticize the use of public subsidy for downtown reinvestment. However, when compared to the costs of subsidized suburban sprawl, subsidizing downtown infill levels the playing field. The “free-market” solution would mean allowing downtown Sacramento to decay entirely, until property values became lower than undeveloped rural land—a nightmare scenario. However, those calling for frugality have a valid point. City resources are limited, and any project on K Street must make the best use of public funds.

For this project, the city provides the land and existing buildings on the site. The recommended project utilizes the buildings, instead of demolishing them, making use of these valuable resources. For the 800 block, the project team has asked to use $16 million in funds that were set aside for a future redevelopment project by David Taylor’s company, and about $6 million in local, state and federal funds for the south half of the 800 block, including rehabilitation of the Bel-Vue. On the 700 block, the project team asks for two $8 million loans, one forgivable upon completion of the project, and one that would be repaid with interest.

One consideration when cities fund public projects is local benefit. Construction projects create jobs, but not all construction projects create the same number of jobs. New construction projects spend about half on materials and half on labor. Rehab of existing buildings spends closer to two-thirds on labor and one-third on materials, because fewer materials are needed and rehab is more labor-intensive. This means more local jobs per public dollar spent. Those dollars directly benefit the local economy, because workers spend the money they earn in their community. Materials for preservation rehab also tend to come from local sources, rather than materials from outside the community, so more of the construction costs also benefit the local economy.

Really Good, But Not Perfect

While the project has many strengths, there are some weaknesses. Downtown Sacramento lacks a grocery store. Existing corner markets and drugstores have limited options, and farmer’s markets do not operate in winter, creating “food deserts” for downtown residents. The closest market is Safeway, accessible by light rail, but downtown needs a more complete neighborhood market offering fresh meat and produce. The development team should consider a market as part of this project.

While transit is close by, service ends after 9 PM, making transit useless for late-night visitors. While transit budgets are outside the scope of the project, better public transportation would complement a transit-oriented project like this.

Finally, while developer David Taylor is well-known for his ability to complete a project, his projects are often criticized as being architecturally conservative and plain. The 800 block plan includes only volume sketches, not detailed renderings, so we do not know how it will look. Similarly, the 700 block’s new residential units must measure up architecturally to the historic buildings they will complement. The eclectic existing architecture of K Street, from Gold Rush brick to Art Deco terra cotta to 21st century high-rise steel and glass, means an unlimited palette for a talented architect.

On July 13, Sacramento’s City Council is scheduled to select a project for K Street. The recommended project is an excellent choice for Sacramento. It embodies and builds upon our city’s history and culture, promotes local business, and brings more housing across all income levels to K Street at a reasonable cost.

For more details about each of the four proposals for K Street, check the city of Sacramento's website:

www.cityofsacramento.org/econdev/development-projects/700KStDevelopmentProjectConcepts.cfm

Supply, Demand and Midtown Parking

2010-06-18T01:41:14Z

At its June meeting, the Midtown Business Association board discussed parking policy in Midtown Sacramento, and how MBA should address the issue. At the May meeting, City Manager Gus Vina discussed a proposed tax on private parking lots to raise city revenue. Aaron Zeff, owner of Priority Parking, expressed concerns that this would force him to raise prices, and hopes to find other alternatives. MBA discussed hiring a consultant to address parking issues, but instead decided to work with other central city stakeholders, including the Downtown Partnership, neighborhood residents, state offices, hospitals, and the city of Sacramento, to work on a consolidated parking strategy.

As a neighborhood resident, I agree with Mr. Zeff’s assessment. Taxing private parking lots, causing increased parking prices, will make neighborhood parking worse. In order to reduce costs, raise revenue, encourage use of private lots, and make parking more convenient and safer, Midtown must eliminate free parking.

Midtown Parking: A Shortage of Supply

Any product’s price is based on supply and demand. Street parking in Midtown has a very limited supply, and demand to park there is high. Any first-year economics student can tell you what happens when a good with low supply and high demand is underpriced: a shortage occurs. Midtown’s parking shortage is apparent every Second Saturday, every weekend, and more and more, even during weekdays around popular restaurants and nightclubs. Parking until 6 PM is metered or limited through much of the central city, but after 6 PM, and all day Sunday, parking is free. Because the peak hours for restaurants, nightlife, and public events like Second Saturday are all after 6 PM, the free parking results in street congestion.

“Free” parking seems like a good thing, but of course, free parking isn’t really free. Street maintenance, repair, lighting and safety costs money. Neighborhood property owners, both residents and businesses, subsidize “free” parking with property taxes, city fees and costs to repair curbs and public right-of-way. Also, when a parking shortage exists, “free” parking has other problems: Because there is no charge for its use, people take up spaces for longer periods of time. Cars cruise around blocks multiple times looking for a space, adding to traffic congestion and air pollution. Cars park in residential neighborhoods, displacing parking spaces of Midtown residents, many of whom have no off-street parking options. Thus, people do not use garages or lots unless the neighborhood is completely full. If prices at parking lots rise, visitors will cruise for a spot that much longer, and press farther into neighborhoods. This often causes conflicts between neighborhood residents and businesses. And if visitors arriving in cars cannot find parking, sometimes they will just keep driving—right back out of the neighborhood.

Making Parking "Just Right"

The solution to the parking shortage is to eliminate this subsidized “free” parking, and simplify the confusing network of 15 minute, 30 minute, 1 hour, 2 hour, and metered zones with an overall central city parking policy that charges an appropriate amount to visitors. This amount should be low enough to be reasonable, but high enough to discourage people from sitting on a parking space without limit. The objective is a “Goldilocks price”: Not too high, and not too low. Ideally, street parking should be 85% capacity: mostly occupied, but generally a space or two will be available on each block. This means that street parking is convenient, limiting “cruising” for a space, and visitors can find parking close to their destination. People seeking all-day or longer-term parking are best served by private parking lots or garages. Because “free” parking is a private lot’s main competition, its elimination means more business for parking providers. Commuters would have more incentive to use daily parking instead of running to feed meters or re-park in 2-hour zones. Because they occupy all-day spots, they can shop or dine during rush hour and drive home at their leisure. Midtown residents can use current residential parking permits to park without charge in their own neighborhoods, but if they park in business districts away from where they live, they too have to pay for parking. This encourages neighborhood residents to leave their car at home, and walk to visit Midtown businesses, something many residents already do. Using Web-based tools, residents could order one-day parking permits for visiting friends to park on the street; Sacramento’s parking department is already working on a plan to implement this system.

Many Midtown businesses are concerned that their customers complain about the cost of parking. I would suggest this is a good thing: if a customer is in your business complaining about parking, it was obviously cheap enough that they paid for it. They will probably have the same complaint the next time they visit your business, and the time after that, but it’s not high enough to keep them away. Since daytime parking is already metered in much of the city, the rates paid by daytime visitors would probably not change. Evening hours for parking meters also recognizes that Midtown is no longer a place where the streets roll up at 6 PM. Visitors who spend $100 or more on dinner and drinks at Mulvaney’s or L Wine Lounge won’t balk at spending a few dollars to park, especially at a convenient space or clearly marked lot close to their destination.

In a survey conducted by MBA, a business owner and resident called for free parking because, “The only party that benefits from parking fees is the city. It drives people away from doing business in Midtown especially in this economy.” But there is a solution, used in cities like Pasadena, CA (see article link below). Instead of going to the city, parking revenue can be diverted to the neighborhood by creating a joint powers authority. In Pasadena, street parking funds pay for streetlights, repaving, trash cans, signage, tree trimming, benches, and other amenities. Parking funds go directly to improve the neighborhood. This means businesses, visitors and residents all benefit from a cleaner, safer, more beautiful neighborhood. Pasadena’s parking meters announce how the funds are used (see photo), but the results are obvious on their business streets, where parking is available and business is flourishing.

By contrast, the Westwood Village district of Los Angeles tried to address their parking issues by reducing prices at meters and encouraging free parking. Their business district has suffered, due to parking congestion that discourages visitors, and they have limited funds to maintain or beautify the district. Parking garages in Westwood Village have less business because they cannot compete with free parking.

While residents and businesses don’t mind taking parking funds out of the city’s hands, the city of Sacramento, eager to cut costs and raise revenues, may disagree. But there are benefits for the city, too. By extending evening and weekend enforcement, those who park illegally will be subject to fines. Fines from parking violators become added city revenue. Because the parking meter funds improve the neighborhood, the city’s economic burden is reduced; instead of using city funds to subsidize “free” parking for visitors and provide neighborhood amenities, street parking pays for it. Beautified business districts with correctly priced parking attract more customers and do better business, increasing sales tax and business occupancy tax revenue. Clean, safe, comfortable residential neighborhoods result in more investment, higher property value and increased equity, raising property tax revenue. That’s the kind of “tax increase” businesses and residents can live with—the kind that results from greater economic prosperity.

Urban Thinking for an Urban Place

Residents of suburban neighborhoods, used to large, free parking lots, may be uncomfortable with the idea of paying for parking. But, to quote MBA board member Michael Heller, who commented on the issue at Wednesday’s meeting, this is “suburban thinking in an urban place.” The only way to make Midtown’s parking as plentiful a suburban district is to demolish Midtown entirely and rebuild it into a copy of Arden Way, Fulton Avenue, Florin Road or other car-centric suburban business street. Those streets have their own strengths, but none compare to Midtown as a center of culture, nightlife, walkability and mixed use. Yes, there would be more parking, but Midtown’s unique character, its walkable streets, its shade trees, its historic architecture, its culture, its businesses, and its lively urbanity would be utterly destroyed. Nobody visits America’s great walking cities and comes home with stories about how easy it was to find parking!

Midtown is a unique neighborhood that draws regional visitors and national attention. Like the suburban residents of other great cities, Midtown Sacramento’s visitors are welcome, but they must learn that parking is not free. If they see clearly that parking fees can beautify and improve a neighborhood they already like to visit, while making parking safer and more convenient, they won’t mind paying. A comprehensive central city parking district, designed by and for business, residents and government, can solve many of Midtown’s parking problems. A tax on parking lots already struggling to compete with “free” (taxpayer-funded) parking is the wrong answer. It will make parking worse, not better, because it does not address the real problem of supply and demand.

Thanks to Aaron Zeff of Priority Parking for providing the article on Pasadena’s solution to the problem of free parking. The article is available online here:
“Turning Small Change Into Big Changes”
shoup.bol.ucla.edu/SmallChange.pdf

Midtown Business Association website:
www.mbasac.com
MBA Board agendas and minutes:
docs.mbasac.org/BoardAgendas/

Recent “Streetsblog” post on the cost of “free” parking in San Francisco:
sf.streetsblog.org/2010/06/17/san-franciscos-own-oil-spill-the-wasteful-hunt-for-free-parking/#more-237841

Pasadena parking meter photo from "Turning Small Change Into Big Changes" article referenced above. Street photos by author.

K Street Projects Will Be Heard at Preservation Commission

2010-04-07T04:55:45Z

On Wednesday, April 7 at 5:30 PM, Sacramento's Preservation Commission will meet at City Hall, 915 I Street, in the main council chambers. In addition to other agenda items, they will hear staff reports and provide direction regarding the four projects proposed for the 700 and 800 blocks of K Street.

Due to changes in the way the Preservation Commission reviews projects, and due to the relatively low number of hearings in recent months, the Preservation Commission does not meet every month. The April 7 meeting will be the first held in 2010; the others were canceled because there were no scheduled hearings.

The general public first viewed the projects proposed for the 700/800 blocks of K Street on March 22: one by D&S Development and CFY Properties, one by David Taylor, CIM and Joe Zeiden, one by John Saca, John Bagatelos and Bridge Housing, and one by Rubicon Partners, St. Anton Partners and Preferred Capitol Advisors. The Preservation Commission will add their review and comment, since the properties in the project area include several historic landmark buildings, in addition to some potentially historic buildings not currently on the city register. Several of the proposals also involve other historic buildings not in the project areas.

Other projects to be reviewed at the Preservation Commission include a presentation about the Powerhouse Science Center, a museum planned for a riverfront site and another historic buildng, the old PG&E powerhouse, and a plan for structural and life safety upgrade to the Sacramento Valley Station, another Sacramento landmark, as part of the overall rehab and expansion of the intermodal depot.

In addition to these projects, the Preservation Commission will discuss policy. The Minimum Maintenance Sub-Committee, which deals with how the city addresses historic properties allowed to fall into disrepair, will provide a report. The Historic/Cultural Resources Survey Committee will report on historic building surveys performed for the city, some of which could result in new historic districts. There will also be opportunity for the public to comment on each of these projects and policy items, and to present items not on the agenda.

The full agenda can be found here:

www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/preservation/2010/pc_agenda_4-07-10.cfm

City of Sacramento Preservation Commission April Meeting

Wednesday April 7

New City Hall
915 I Street- 1st Floor, Council Chambers
April 7, 2010- 5:30 P.M.

William Burg is a board member of the Sacramento Old City Association

4 Proposals for K Street

2010-03-21T19:25:18Z

On Monday, March 22, the city of Sacramento will host presentations by the four development groups interested in building a project on the 700 and 800 blocks of K Street. This meeting will be held at Old City Hall, 915 I Street, in the 2nd floor hearing room, at 5:30 PM.

The four groups who responded to the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) include:

* Bridge Housing, Saca Development and Bagatelos Development

They propose 360 units of housing, a renovated Bel-Vue, 48,000 square feet of office not on Agency property, and 33,000 square feet of retail.

* David Taylor, CIM Development, Domus, and Zeiden Properties

They propose 110 housing units, including a renovated Bel-Vue, 60,000 square feet of retail and 57,000 square feet of office.

* CFY Development and D&S Development

Their project for the 700 blocks includes retaining the facades on the 700 block, building new units to the alley including 136 residential units and 37,000 feet of retail space.

* Rubicon Partners, St. Anton Partners, and Preferred Capitol Advisors (Sacramento Alliance Team)

This proposal requires the entirety of the 700 and 800 blocks, including properties not under Agency control, to create 400 residential units, a 2000 seat entertainment venue, 175,000 square feet of retail including a grocery and farmer's market, 150 high-end luxury condos, and a 375 room four-star hotel.

This presentation will allow the public to learn more about the development groups and the proposals. More information about the proposals can be found here:

www.cityofsacramento.org/econdev/news/documents/700800LK_RFQ_Update.pdf

This meeting will be followed by interviews between the developers and a city-appointed selection committee (at this time, the makeup of the selection committee is unknown to this writer, but the city created the committee on March 15) on March 25. The City Council is expected to decide on a development proposal in April or May of this year.

To learn more, come to the meeting and meet the developers and city staff, who will present the four project proposals.

Monday March 22, 5:30 PM-7:00 PM

Old City Hall (915 I Street)

2nd Floor Hearing Room

Disclosure: William Burg is a board member of the Sacramento Old City Association (SOCA)

SOCA Home Tour in Boulevard Park

2009-09-17T04:46:33Z

On Sunday, September 20, the Sacramento Old City Association will hold its 34th annual historic home tour in the Boulevard Park neighborhood. Tour hours are from 10:00 AM until 4:00 PM.

The SOCA Home Tour is an annual event, and the main fundraiser for the Sacramento Old City Association. This home tour includes an inside look at eight restored historic homes in Boulevard Park. Tour visitors can walk through each of the homes on the tour to see how the workmanship of historic homes is often as beautiful on the inside as the outside.

The Home Tour also includes a street fair, including artisans and craftspersons specializing in historic home repair and restoration, local artists, crafters, photographers and artisans, and community organizations. Live music will be provided by Julie the Bruce, Andrew Surber and "Drum Polygon." The Sacramento "Capitol A's" Model A Club will display their restored antique cars throughout the tour. CLUCK (Campaign to Legalize Urban Chicken Keeping) will raffle a chicken coop and other prizes at their booth.

Tickets for the Home Tour cost $20, but you get a $1 discount if you arrive on a bicycle. Tickets for the fair can be bought at the site of the tour: the SOCA tour booth will be located on the corner of 21st and G Street, directly in the street median. Visiting the homes requires a ticket, but the street fair is free, and will run along 21st Street between F and H Street.

This year's tour is located in the Boulevard Park historic district, a neighborhood that is visually distinct due to the landscaped street medians running down 21st and 22nd Street. These medians were part of a real estate development project dating to 1905. Located on the site of the old Union Park racetrack, Boulevard Park was the first planned development of the Wright & Kimbrough real estate firm. The development's boundaries were from B Street to H Street between 20th and 22nd, with a portion of 23rd.

When the neighborhood was built, a streetcar line ran along H Street from downtown to McKinley Park. Many of the most elegant Boulevard Park homes were located facing H Street, with more modest but still beautiful homes closer to C Street. C Street had its own streetcar line, but freight trains also ran on the same tracks until 1953! In addition to the landscaped medians, three blocks in Boulevard Park have small central park areas located in the center of the block, in a space normally occupied by backyards and alleys. Covenants on property deeds required minimum setbacks, prohibited high fences and noxious uses, and made provision for shared tenancy of the alley parks. These features gave the neighborhood a pleasing, park-like look that is still apparent a century after its construction. The current Boulevard Park neighborhood includes an area beyond the original development. Homes in the neighborhood are a mixture of Craftsman and Prairie, Classical Revival, Colonial Revival, Spanish Revival and other revival st yles. Elsewhere in the neighborhood are Victorian homes of the Queen Anne, Stick, Shingle and Italianate styles.

Boulevard Park is one of Sacramento's most beautiful and well-known neighborhoods, and this year's SOCA Home Tour provides a unique look at the architecture, culture and creativity that make our city a great place.

SOCA's Web site can be found at: www.sacoldcity.org and includes membership information, details of SOCA activities and events, and updates about planning and preservation issues in Sacramento's central city.

Disclosure: William Burg is a board member of the Sacramento Old City Association.

Photographs taken by Randy Lum.

800 K/L-Belvue Demolition Plan Returns To City Council

2009-08-24T18:59:58Z

On Tuesday, August 25, the Sacramento City Council will hear a proposal by developers Bob Leach and Parkcrest Development to build a hotel at the corner of 8th and K Street and a parking structure at the corner of 8th and L Street, a project that would require demolition of city landmark the Bel-Vue Apartments and adjacent buildings. The meeting will be held at New City Hall, 915 I Street, at 6:00 PM in the main City Council chambers.

The item was originally to be heard at the August 11 meeting of the City Council (see sacramentopress.com/headline/11884/City_to_decide_on_fate_of_BelVue_Apartments_and_Berry_Hotel_today ) but was taken off the agenda at the last minute. According to the staff report, the "Exclusive Right to Negotiate" between the city of Sacramento and the developers expired on Sunday, August 23, but city staff can still work with the development group while a new RFQ (Request for Qualifications) is being prepared, a process that should take about 90 days according to the staff report. If city staff and developers cannot reach an agreement, the new RFQ will request proposals from other developers and development groups for a different project on the 800 K Street site.

Also according to the staff report, city staff had not fully analyzed the new proposal as of its submittal date of Friday, August 21, and could not provide complete comment. One change from previous proposals is a change to requested exemption from the hotel's "Transient Occupancy Tax": instead of 100% exemption from TOT for 10 years, they are asking for 50% exemption for 14 years. According to the accompanying financial documents, this would add up to approximately the same total subsidy for the project, but over a different span of time.

Another change is that Mohammed "Mo" Mohanna is no longer listed as a member of the development team. The staff report does not specify whether another investor has joined the team in Mohanna's place, or whether one of the existing investors will contribute more funds to make up for Mohanna's financial contribution to the project, or why this change has taken place. Most of the financial commitment comes from the Korean firm Consus, but the city has not yet received a formal commitment with complete terms and conditions from Consus.

The staff report does mention that the original "Exclusive Right to Negotiate" for this project occurred as a condition of a lawsuit settlement between the city of Sacramento and Mohanna, in addition to the city's payment of about $18 million to Mohanna for the land.

The total subsidy for the project is estimated at $31.5 million in land and tax exemption (both transient occupancy tax and tax-increment fund exemption.) This amount does not include the money previously paid to Mohanna for the property as a result of the lawsuit settlement.

The staff report does not address the issue of a potentially competing hotel project planned for the corner of 10th and K Street, nor does it address the issue of the demolition of the Bel-Vue landmark.

The staff report for this item can be found here:

sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php

The agenda for this week's City Council meeting can be found here:

sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php

City to decide on fate of Bel-Vue Apartments and Berry Hotel today

2009-08-11T08:36:49Z

On Tuesday, August 11, the Sacramento city council will decide whether to give away the half-block from K to L on 8th Street, containing the Bel-Vue Apartments and several other buildings to developers Bob Leach, Mohammed Mohanna and Parkcrest Development. The land was recently purchased by the city from Mohanna at a price of $18.6 million, and the developers are asking not only for free land but several years of tax-free operation. The net cost to the city will be about $34 million, 25% of the total investment for the project, in return for about 10% of the return. The proposed project is a 300-foot luxury hotel at 8th and K and a parking lot on 8th & L where the Bel-Vue stands. The project would destroy all surviving structures on the project site. In addition to the landmark Bel-Vue, the 1895 Feldhusen Building and the circa 1910 Sam's Club building would be demolished, although neither has the status of city landmark.

The proposed project would also demolish two half-blocks of Sacramento's underground sidewalks, along the corner of 8th and K Street. The sidewalks are still clearly visible from the alley, as the photograph above shows. As with the loss of the Bel-Vue, approval of this project would mean the loss of structures that, despite having fallen into disrepair and disuse, are part of the city's historic fabric. By restoring these elements instead of demolishing them, the city can maintain resources that cannot be duplicated in modern construction, and provide valuable downtown housing and a potential historic site of great tourism interest.

The staff report mentions that city staff and the developer have not been able to come to agreement on business terms, due to the low rate of return for the city and the large investment the project represents. The "Exclusive Right to Negotiate" (ERN) between the city and the developers has been extended twice in order to work out details, but city staff is still not confident in the developer's proposal. The council has been asked to advise city staff how to proceed.

Full staff report is visible here:

sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php

In slightly brighter news, at the same meeting the City Council will hear (and hopefully approve) a plan to restore the Berry Hotel, just across the street from the Bel-Vue. The hotel was acquired by the city after another developer's plan to restore the building failed last year. The hotel is currently being vacated by the city, and is almost completely vacant. This plan would restore the interior of the building, providing long-needed repairs, and reopen the Berry as permanent housing for very low income individuals. The Berry has filled this role for years, but if this plan is approved, the building will be completely renovated and restored, and a social services agency will provide a staff person to work with disabled residents. The staff report is visible here:

sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php

These two projects are almost polar opposites. The restoration of the Berry Hotel promises to bring back a city landmark, restoring to occupancy a 1920s hotel. The project will house those least able to find housing, those with very low income, and it will be completed for far less than a new project of similar scale would cost. Across the street, the Bel-Vue was occupied by tenants until shortly before it was taken over by SHRA. It will be demolished and replaced with a parking structure. The proposed hotel project will be utterly infeasible without a massive subsidy, one that a city in the throes of a financial crisis cannot afford. Perhaps the City Council will review the Berry project and consider what else they might do with the Bel-Vue, a city landmark and apartment building, for less money than the developers' subsidy.

The meeting will be held at New City Hall, 915 I Street, Sacramento, at 6:00 PM in the main council chambers.

The full city council meeting agenda is viewable here:

sacramento.granicus.com/AgendaViewer.php

(In the interest of disclosure, I oppose the demolition of the Bel-Vue and plan to attend in order to voice my opposition to the 8th & K project--and my support for the restoration of the Berry Hotel.)

"Buffy" at the Trash Film Orgy

2009-07-31T07:20:03Z

The ninth annual TRASH FILM ORGY series is halfway done, with three weeks remaining in this year's blood-soaked rock & roll monster extravaganza! If you haven't had a chance to visit this year's TFO, you already missed FLASH GORDON, SATAN'S CHEERLEADERS and CHOPPING MALL...but it's not over yet! This week's offering is the original theatrical version of BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER!

If you haven't been to the Trash Film Orgy before, it is more than just a movie--it is a whole experience! The "Trash Action Sideshow" features fun activities in the lobby, the "Retro-Trash Lounge" features entertaining artifacts from RETROCRUSH.COM, and pre-show and intermission on-stage performances and contests make TFO an amazing, unique and often profoundly weird entertainment value! The TFO is a hotbed of local musical, comedic and dramatic talent. Several TFO alumni have moved on to careers in television, stand-up comedy, modeling and late-night horror hosting. Its organizers are working on their second feature-length film, PLANET OF THE VAMPIRE WOMEN, and its current performers include members of two local comedy troupes, "ICUP" and "I Can't Believe It's Not Comedy!" Come see the best of Sacramento's late-night cinema entertainment at the TRASH FILM ORGY!

SEE the 1992 film that started the Buffy phenomenon! With Kristy Swanson, Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hauer, Luke Perry, Paul Reubens and Hilary Swank. And don’t miss the incredible VAMPIRE PROM!

TRASH FILM ORGY-the World’s Most Amazing Midnight Movie Show returns for its 9th incredible season!

Bringing you the best in 35mm Exploitation and Cult Cinema, TFO promises the ultimate theatre experience! With LIVE Bloody Stage Shows, Original Shorts, Audience Participation, Games, Costume Contests, Prizes and much, much MORE-you won’t believe your eyes!

This year’s festival features many exciting surprises… including the return of special guest stars and the TFO’s original host FRANCOIS FLY!!! You’ll be sure to cry your eyes out if you miss ANY of these exciting shows!

It all happens SATURDAYS at MIDNIGHT in the Fabulous and Historic CREST THEATRE located at 1013 K Street in Downtown Sacramento. 916-44-CREST
COME EARLY! Doors open at 11:30 for the Incredibly Interactive Trash-Action Sideshow and Music!

The TRASH FILM ORGY is adult fun for trash fans 18 and Over ONLY! And for trash fans 21 and over, the RETRO-TRASH LOUNGE serves beer and wine!

Tickets are $9.50 per show.
Cool Kids that come in Awesome Costumes can save $1 on admission. We recommend DECADES for all your costume needs!

www.trashfilmorgy.com has all the details about this year's series, plus photos of past shows if you want an idea of what to expect!

(In the interest of full disclosure, the author of this article is a participant in the Trash Film Orgy.)

Sacramento Preservation Roundtable, Saturday June 13

2009-06-12T16:52:11Z

Sacramento's Preservation Roundtable is a quarterly gathering of local history and historic preservation organizations, intended to share current information on local preservation topics, public policy, events, and plans in progress. Everyone is welcome to attend.

Preservation Roundtable - Saturday June 13th
9:00am to Noon at the Young Ladies Institute – 27th & N Sts. (1400 27th Street)
Continental Breakfast * $5 donation

6/13/09 AGENDA:

9:00 Welcome & Introductions
9:10 Preservation Issues & Updates:
- CA State RR Museum Foundation - Kathy Daigle
- Capitol Dist. State Museum & Historic Parks-Pati Brown
- DOC (Devel. Oversight Committee) update
- City Preservation Office - Roberta Deering
– Hwy 50 HOV lane –Kathleen Green & Karen Jacques
– Minimum Maintenance for Historic Structures – Tim Brandt Preservation Commission Chair
- Capitol City Preservation Trust Awards –Kay Knepprath & Fred Turner
- Sacramento City School District’s Bldgs. on the block-i.e.-Jefferson School at 18th & N Sts.

10:30 Speakers – Budget Impacts on Historic Preservation –David Kwong and Roberta Deering-Questions & Answer session

11:50 Announcements
12:00 ADJOURN

Sponsored by:
Page & Turnbull, Architects & SOCA (Sacramento Old City Association)

Next Preservation Roundtable meeting is Saturday, Sept. 12, 2009 at the School House in Old Sacramento

Second Saturday Needs Volunteer Crossing Guards

2009-06-04T03:09:35Z

Second Saturday has grown in popularity during the past few years, to the point where Sacramento police have asked for citizens' help. Because of declining budgets and the growing crowds at Second Saturday, there are not enough police available to perform crossing guard duty. To that end, Midtown Business Association Executive Director Rob Kerth sent out the following email:

"Hi Folks,
Our Sac PD Captain, Dana Matthes, is looking for a few good people to do crossing
guard duty on 2nd Saturday. If you've got the urge to help out, or know someone
who might, please give her a call at 808-4511. They have a training program to
get you all ready.
Thanks!"

Preservation Commission Approves Depot Plan

2009-05-22T06:04:42Z

On Thursday night, Sacramento's Preservation Commission held a special meeting to review plans to expand and refurbish Sacramento's historic passenger depot. The depot's environmental impact report includes two alternatives: a "move the depot" option that would involve rolling the historic building 400 feet north to meet the new track alignment, or a "don't move the depot" option that would build an expanded station between the current depot and the new track alignment. The commission was asked to provide their recommendation to City Council as to whether the city should move the station or not.

Union Pacific's railroad tracks adjacent to the depot currently form a sharp S-curve that limits the length of passenger trains that can safely pull into the station, and limits the maximum speed of freight trains passing through the city. The tracks' current location also puts freight trains very close to waiting passengers, with no barriers or other protection between trains and people. Union Pacific wants to straighten out the S-curve into a single tangent. By smoothing the curve, freight trains could travel more quickly, eliminating a traffic bottleneck. By providing separate freight tracks and limiting access to them with a fence, passengers waiting on the platform would be safer.

The issue of the historic depot has been a contentious point since the original plans to relocate the tracks appeared in the late 1990s. Preservation advocates are concerned that if the depot is no longer adjacent to the tracks, it will be replaced by a new building and the historic building will fall into disuse or disrepair. The city's objective is to maintain the depot as an "intermodal" station, a station where passengers can move between many different transportation modes: car, city bus, intercity bus, light rail, commuter train or long-distance train. Sacramento's passenger station is one of the busiest in the country, serving over a million passengers a year, and rail transit providers expect dramatic increases in rail passenger traffic in the coming decades, so either plan must allow for growth.

In 2007, the Sacramento City Council selected a radical plan: rather than abandon the depot, the existing depot would be moved to a new site adjacent to the tracks on giant rollers. Once relocated, the new depot would be put back into service. Over the past two years, staff have examined the plan more closely but had concerns about the feasibility of moving the depot. In order to cover all of their options, the report on the depot plan included two alternatives: a "move the depot" plan and a "don't move the depot" plan.

Both plans involved three phases. In Phase 1, the tracks are to be relocated and a surface path built from the depot to the new location. In Phase 2, temporary landscaping improvements would be added, along with an underground concourse allowing access to passenger train platforms without crossing freight tracks. This phase would also include some cosmetic and seismic retrofit to the depot. Phase 3 is split into two options.

In the "move the depot" option, two city blocks would be freed up for residential development, and a triangular structure would be built behind the depot to provide shelter to embarking passengers. In the "don't move the depot" option, the historic building would still serve as an entrance but a large structure similar to an airport concourse would be built behind the depot. Access to the tracks would be via this elevated concourse or via the underground tunnel completed in Phase 2. This structure would also contain a Greyhound bus terminal and drop-off points for local buses, and be adjacent to a relocated RT Metro light rail line. The bus functions would also be present in a "move the depot" scenario, but located at different points around the depot. Both plans include provision to make space for future high-speed rail lines, and both plans include space on the existing lots for new development. Another feature of both plans is a secondary tunnel at the western edge of the tracks, where "red cap" operated vehicles can transport limited-mobility and disabled passengers to the tracks.

Sacramento's city staff support the "don't move the depot" alternative, on the basis that it would be cheaper, provides more space for expansion, and avoids risks to the historic structure associated with relocation. The "move the depot" would provide less space for expansion, and the walk from entrance to tracks would be shorter, but the relocation would cost more than would be saved by building a smaller station expansion.

Some members of the public voiced concerns about the "don't move the depot" alternative. Kay Knepprath of the "Save Our Rail Depot" (SORD) Coalition stated that the city has already agreed to move the depot, and reiterated concerns that if the depot loses its connection with the tracks, it will no longer be used as a passenger station. City attorney Cheryl Patterson addressed the latter issue by mentioning that federal transportation funds will be used to pay for restoration of the station, and those funds require that the building continue to serve a transportation function. In other words, if it stops being a train station, the money must be returned. The operator of the local Yellow Cab franchise asked that, regardless of which option was selected, sufficient parking space for cabs be provided in the plan.

The Preservation Commission voted 5-2 to support staff's recommendation to select the "don't move the depot" option. Their recommendation will be passed along to the Sacramento City Council for a final decision on Tuesday, June 2.

A copy of the Preservation Commission agenda, including PDF copies of the environmental documents regarding the proposed track relocation and depot move, can be found here:

http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/preservation/2008/PC_Agenda_5-21-09.cfm

Midtown Neighborhood Association Meeting Thursday April 16

2009-04-13T18:33:36Z

On Thursday, April 16, the Midtown Neighborhood Association will hold its general membership meeting. The meeting will be held at the Trinity Lutheran Fellowship Hall, 1500 27th Street, at 6:30 PM.

Until last month, the Midtown Neighborhood Association (MNA) was the Winn Park/Capitol Avenue Neighborhood Association, a neighborhood group that has worked to make the central city a more liveable place since 1991. Recently, the WPCANA board of directors voted to extend our boundaries, taking in the area from 15th Street to 19th Street between J and N Streets. Because the name was already a little unwieldy, and because the city of Sacramento's planning maps just refer to WPCANA's underlying neighborhood as "Midtown," the board decided to change the name. The name also reflects the growing profile of Midown in the central city.

The association's current boundaries are J Street on the north, 15th Street on the west, 29th Street on the east. To the south, from 15th to 19th Street, N Street is the boundary; east of 19th Street, it is R Street. The reason for this rather unwieldy shape is because the neighborhood south of N Street between 15th and 19th is part of CARSA, the Capitol Area/R Street Association.

MNA's objectives include serving as a liaison between residents and local government, advocating for policies and actions that benefit neighborhood residents, providing a non-partisan forum for discussion of area concerns of mutual interest, maintaining communication within the neighborhood on issues including historic preservation, planning proposals, community problems, traffic, health and safety, and other actions that affect residents, and monitoring notices for new projects / development in Midtown neighborhoods.

Topics for the general membership meeting will include street lighting, street trees and our urban forest, parking, Sutter Hospital expansion plans, and alley development. There will also be opportunities to share neighborhood concerns and ideas.

Light refreshments will be provided.

For more information about MNA, visit the website at http://www.sacmidtown.org or join our Yahoo! group email list at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sacmidtown/ .

(Full disclosure: I am a board member of MNA.)

DOC Urges Deregulation of Planning and Design

2009-03-25T16:54:36Z

Sacramento's Development Oversight Commission is proceeding with its plan to merge the Planning Commission and Design Commission into a single body. Despite the overwhelmingly negative response from the current Planning and Design Commission members and the general public, the latest version of the DOC's proposal includes even less citizen input: instead of a seven-member board with two developer representatives and five members of the general public, the new proposal recommends five developer representatives and two members of the general public, in addition to the greatly reduced number of public meetings.

From a historian's perspective, the consolidation of these bodies into a single, smaller group has an interesting parallel with California history. In 1879, California lawmakers held a constituional convention to revise California's constitution and reflect the changes to the state since the original 1849 constitution's writing. One issue they hoped to address was the influence of the Central Pacific Railroad, whose power dominated state politics from the time of its completion a decade earlier.

The 1879 rewrite of the California Constitution included the creation of a three-member Railroad Commission, to deal with railroad issues. The original intent was to create an independent body to review railroad law, and remove it from the political influences of the State Senate, many of whose members were elected because of Central Pacific's money and influence. Central Pacific welcomed the creation of the new Railroad Commission: instead of having to bribe half of the state senate, they now only had to bribe two of the three members of the Railroad Commission to ensure decisions in their favor.

From Panama Bartholomy, Planning Commission member:

"The City Development Services Department and the Development Oversight Commission have posted a schedule (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/customer-service/CommunityAnnouncements.cfm ) of the community meetings where they have and will be presenting the DOC’s proposal to eliminate the Design Review Commission, move most planning decisions to the staff level out of the public forum and reconstitute the Planning Commission with a 75% developer membership.

"Despite posting the schedule and location of the meetings there is no time given for any of the upcoming meetings so any resident or neighborhood group would not know when to attend the meeting, negating any benefit of having the schedule online.

"It also now appears that the DOC’s original January 6 proposal has changed to even more heavily favor developer interests over neighborhoods. In their original proposal (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/planning/2008/documents/DOC_letter.PDF) the DOC proposed a new Planning Commission to be made up “of seven members, with at least two of the seven required to have professional experience in architecture, landscape architecture and/or urban planning.” The City handout presented by Bill Thomas, Director of Development Services, at the February 23 Neighborhood Alliance Group (NAG) meeting (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/documents/SUMMARY-CHART.pdf) proposed a Planning Commission of seven members, with five-representatives from the development community and only two of the general public. Sometime between January 5 and February 23 the City and DOC decided that the original proposal did not limit the general public’s involvement enough and decided that all development decisions in the city should be made by either the development community themselves or by city staff with orders to “Get the customers to success”.

"The City has now set April 30 as the date that the City Council will have a workshop on this issue. There they will decide on whether or not to continue to pursue this proposal.

"Community leaders that value the two-year old Design Review Commission’s role in ensuring the protection of neighborhood identity need to contact their City Councilmember before this meeting to express their views on the DOC’s proposal.

"Those that value a citizen oversight Planning Commission over a developer dominated rubber stamp Planning Commission need to attend each of the public meetings in the newly posted schedule (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/customer-service/CommunityAnnouncements.cfm) and ask the DOC and City why staff feel the public should no longer have a role in planning decisions that affect their neighborhoods.

"To keep up on these meetings and all activities related to this proposal feel free to join the Neighborhood Efficiency, Accountability and Transparency (NEAT) Coalition at its Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=69072329545).

"Here is the schedule of the next meetings where the proposal will be shared with select community members:

Curtis Park Community Meeting
March 25, 2009

Oak Park Neighborhood Association (Oak Park Community Center)
April 02, 2009

South Area Community Outreach Meeting (Pannell Community Center)
April 06, 2009

North Area Community Outreach Meeting (South Natomas Community Center)
April 13, 2009

City Council Workshop
April 30, 2009"

Sacramento Preservation Roundtable at Shady Lady Saloon, 14th & R Street

2009-03-13T20:08:13Z

The Spring Sacramento Preservation Roundtable will be held this Saturday, March 14, 9:00 AM

Held at The Shady Lady Saloon - 1409 R Street
A tour of the building following.
Discussion on "Minimum Maintenance of Historic Properties" & Neighborhood involvement.

Presentation by the Development Oversight Commission about the DOC's deregulation proposal and the elimination of the Design Review Commission

CADA (Capitol Area Development Authority) will present the latest projects & plans for the 18th & N / O Street Area

Juice, rolls, coffee, $5 Donation, students w/valid ID attend free

Sponsored by CADA, D&S Development &SOCA

http://www.sacoldcity.org

Date: Saturday, March 14, 2009
Time: 9:00am-12:00pm
------------------------------------------------

Forwarded by Panama Bartholomy of the City of Sacramento Planning Commission:

The City, and potentially members of the Development Oversight Commission (DOC), are expected to present to the Preservation Roundtable on Saturday March 14 (http://sacoldcity.org/WebCalendar/view_entry.php?id=17&date=20090314) the DOC's proposal to eliminate the Design Review Commission, move the majority of planning decisions to the staff level and overhaul the membership of the planning commission so that it contains only two non-development community members.

Please come out to the event to see if the City or DOC has prepared the requested analysis that identifies what problems the DOC’s recommendations are attempting to fix, what the costs and assumed benefits of the changes will be and how the City will preserve neighborhood input in development oversight.

This presentation is not posted on the City website and there are no other identified presentations to be found on any City website before the rumored late-April City Council workshop on this issue. This may be one of your last chances to provide input into this incredibly important proposal to overhaul the City’s development oversight public input process. Please come out an let your voice be heard to call for an elegant development review process that is efficient for our developers and City staff, inclusive of our neighborhood concerns and will enable us to continue to strive to be the most livable City in America.

The meeting will be held in the New Shady Lady Saloon at the corner of 14th and R Streets, 9:00 AM, Saturday, March 14.

The meeting will include a presentation from Capitol Area Development Authority (CADA) on the latest projects & plans for the 18th & N / O Street Area and a tour of the new Shady Lady Saloon.

Please note that there is a $5 donation requested by the Preservation Roundtable to cover the costs of food and beverages.

Wild Turkey in Newton Booth

2009-03-12T16:42:09Z

On Wednesday a wild turkey was spotted in the Newton Booth neighborhood...and not the sort you find at the Round Corner, but the feathered kind, at the corner of 27th and V in the field across from the old Newton Booth school. According to neighborhood resident Morris Lum:

"a turkey was spotted at the vacant lot at 27th Vst
it flew up the tree
and walked across the freeway ramp and back
he's peck'n around the grass
watch out for the big claws

wed 6pm

I put out a plate of mashed potaoes and cranberries
for it to eat . . . : )"

Wildlife isn't unknown in Midtown, mostly creatures like opossums, skunks, and the occasional raccoon. A wild turkey is something kind of unusual around here, and maybe a bit special. Ben Franklin once argued the idea that the wild turkey would make a better national bird for the United States than the bald eagle:

"I am on this account not displeased that the Figure is not known as a Bald Eagle, but looks more like a Turkey. For the Truth the Turkey is in Comparison a much more respectable Bird, and withal a true original Native of America . . . He is besides, though a little vain & silly, a Bird of Courage, and would not hesitate to attack a Grenadier of the British Guards who should presume to invade his Farm Yard with a red Coat on."

Photos by Morris Lum

City Closer to Eliminating Design Commission

2009-02-21T18:41:05Z

At the Planning Commission meeting on February 12, members of the Development Oversight Commission presented their proposal to eliminate the city of Sacramento's Design Commission by integrating it into the Planning Commission. This action would take most planning decisions out of the Commission's hands, assigning them to city staff, with fewer public hearings. This effort was met by surprise and disapproval by the Planning Commission, and also by the 20 or so members of the public who spoke against the effort at the meeting.

Development Oversight Commission member Brian Holloway assured people that this was only the beginning of a large-scale outreach program, that they had not yet formulated specific recommendations, and it would be many months before any action would be taken, but the letter they had sent to the Mayor regarding this action included very specific recommendations. Now, less than two weeks later, the city council is being asked to draw up a new ordinance to put these changes in place permanently. The massive outreach effort will consist of one meeting with the Area 1 Neighborhood Advisory Group, a monthly gathering of central city neighborhood associations and advocates, the day before the City Council meeting.

In brief, this change means that many projects that currently go before the Design Review Commission or Planning Commission will be approved by staff, with no board review. If people want to appeal a design decision, they have to pay a $500 fee to air their concerns before the Planning Commission. But even then, the Planning Commission will be smaller and have less power. $500 is chump change to a developer working on a multi-million dollar project, but to neighbors and small neighborhood associations, it is significant enough to give many groups pause. The change in threshold also means that many of the projects that most directly affect existing neighborhoods, like small infill projects, are the ones least likely to be heard.

The Development Oversight Commission is a think-tank of developers and contractors, paid by the city to suggest changes to the city's planning process. One member of the public at the February 12 meeting, a former Planning Commission member, suggested that eliminating the Development Oversight Commission might be a simpler cost-saving measure.

Here is the letter sent by Planning Commissioner Panama Bartholomy regarding this issue:

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

Dear neighborhood association, or neighborhood, leader:

At the February 12 Planning Commission meeting the Development Oversight Commission (DOC) members and City staff committed to an extensive public outreach effort to collect input from the community on their proposal to eliminate the Design Review Commission and "move most planning decisions to the staff level" :

http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/planning/2008/documents/DOC_letter.PDF.

Now the City Council has on its February 24 agenda an item (#8) to direct the Council’s Law and Legislative Committee to begin work on an ordinance to implement the recommendations:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=8&event_id=74&meta_id=171047.

The DOC and City staff have not provided any analysis to show the problems in the current process that the recommendations would address, nor the benefits expected from the implementation of the recommendations. In fact last year a Sacramento Business Journal survey of developers found that the City ranked first in the region for permitting process: http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2008/03/31/focus1.html. If this is the case is there the need for such a hurried process? Could there be enough time for community members and neighborhood groups to engage with the DOC and City on the most efficient and effective way to oversee development in the city?

The consent calendar is reserved for items with no controversy or questions of content. At this point without any clarity on the intent, nor benefits of such a significant change to our City’s development oversight process and lacking any input from groups besides the development community this direction from Council does not meet that criteria.

Please contact your council member to ask that the direction to the Law and Legislation Committee to begin work on this item be withdrawn until our community can work with the City to craft recommendations that ensure transparency and efficiency while preserving citizen participation. Council member contact information can be found here: http://www.cityofsacramento.org/council/index.html.

The DOC will make their first presentation to a community group next Monday, February 23, at the regularly scheduled Area 1 Neighborhood Advisory Group meeting at the Hart Senior Center (27th & J streets). The meeting starts at 6:15, I am told the DOC presentation will begin soon after 7:30.

Here is what is known about a schedule for this issue:

February 23: DOC presentation to Area 1 NAG, Hart Senior Center (27th & J streets). The meeting starts at 6:15, I am told the DOC presentation will begin soon after 7:30.

February 24: City Council to consider providing direction to Law and Legislation Committee to begin work on ordinance on March 17, New City Hall, 2:00: http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=8&event_id=74&meta_id=171047.

March 2: DOC monthly meeting: http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/development-oversight/2009/, location TBD

March 17: City Council Law and Legislation Committee, Committee potentially begin work on ordinance, City Hall, 12:30 pm.

Thank you all for your efforts to ensure that Sacramento continues to provide efficient services to all parts of our community.

City to Eliminate Design Commission

2009-02-12T17:55:35Z

This article was forwarded to me by Panama Bartholomy, a neighborhood activist. If you have a chance, come to City Hall tonight (915 I Street, New City Hall council chambers, 5:30 PM) and tell the Planning Commission that you don't want the city to shut its citizens out of the planning and design process.

-----

On Thursday the Sacramento Planning Commission will have a public hearing on a proposal (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/planning/2008/documents/DOC_letter.PDF) by the Development Oversight Commission (DOC), a City-appointed group comprised almost entirely of real estate developers, architects, and business consultants, to eliminate the City's Design Review Commission and change the development approval process in the City so that City staff will make most planning and design decisions administratively, leaving no opportunity for public input.

The reasons you and members of your association should come to the hearing at City Hall on Thursday February 12th at 5:30pm to testify against this proposal:

1. This attempt to reduce citizen and citizen-commission input and oversight of development in our community has undergone no public vetting from community groups that will be affected by such a fundamental shift in our City's development.

The proposal was developed and sent directly to the Mayor with no input from the Planning or Design Review Commissions. More importantly, the proposed ordinance was not brought to any neighborhood association or other community-based organization that normally comments on development in their communities.

This is not the kind of transparency and open government practices that should be an essential part of such a fundamental change in our community's development approval process.

2. The proposal will greatly reduce opportunities for Community input

The proposal will eliminate the City's Design Review Commission and fold its responsibilities into the Planning Commission and shift “…the majority of decisions to the staff level..”. The movement of “…the majority of decisions to staff level…” will likely reduce community involvement from the development review process. Communities have a right to be able to comment on projects that will be built in their neighborhood.

Even after moving most decisions to the staff level, by eliminating the Design Review Commission the public loses one of the two opportunities they have left to comment on development projects proposed in their neighborhood. The recommendation would squeeze all public input on a project into one meeting where every issue with design or planning will have to be settled. This will almost certainly create the types of extremely long meetings that discourage public involvement and will force complex decisions that have long-term impacts on communities into unreasonably short decision-making time frames.

Reducing opportunities for citizens to be involved in projects in their neighborhoods decreases transparency, will cause more projects to be appealed to the City Council and will increase the likelihood of lawsuits to block projects. This will decrease the effectiveness of the development review process.

Please come to the Planning Commission hearing and comment on this item and let the City know that you think the public should have a role in development decisions in our City. Please distribute this email to other residents who would come to testify in support of preserving the role of the citizen in our city's development.

The recommendation can be found here: (http://www.cityofsacramento.org/dsd/meetings/commissions/planning/2008/documents/DOC_letter.PDF) and the meeting is at the New City Hall, 915 I Street, 1st Floor- Council Chambers, February 12, 2009 at 5:30 P.M.

Winn Park/Capitol Avenue Neighborhood Association voting to oppose change in tree policy

2008-12-08T19:16:37Z

Below is the letter that is being voted on by the board of the Winn Park/Capitol Avenue Neighborhood Association (for those unfamiliar with WPCANA, we are the neighborhoods between K and R Street from 19th to 29th, recently adding a few blocks around Fremont Park to its area. The policy shift doesn't actually streamline the planning process--it moves responsibility from Parks & Recreation to Development Services, and changes the appeal body from Parks & Recreation Commission to Planning Commission, but doesn't actually take out any steps. It has not yet been approved (emails are still coming in) but I expect it to pass, and join letters by NBNA and other neighborhood groups in formally opposing this change in regulation.

December 8, 2008

Mayor Kevin Johnson
New City Hall
921 I Street 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 905814

Re: Proposal to Move Tree Appeals to Planning Commission

Dear Mayor Johnson,

The WPCANA board is opposed to moving the appeal process for the removal of any trees from the Parks and Recreation Commission to the Planning Commission.

Under the change that is currently being proposed, the Development Services Manager and his staff would be able to approve the removal of city trees at any time that a developer wants this done. The public would then have to appeal the approval to the Planning Commission instead of to the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Planning staff and the Planning Commission have no expertise with regard to trees and no basis for making reasonable decisions about them. The Central City has already lost far too many healthy trees to development projects and this change will make it much easier for developers to remove still more healthy trees. This is not a responsible way to treat the great legacy that these trees represent.

The draft 2030 General Plan talks about livability and sustainability as major goals. Trees are key to both and Sacramento has been blessed by having a great number of majestic trees planted and preserved over the last century. They provide necessary shade and make our hot summers much more livable. They help clean our dirty air, provide oxygen, sequester carbon and reduce the need for air conditioning. Sacramento should be looking for ways to preserve more of our trees, not creating new policies that make it easier to remove them. We owe it to future residents to do for them in planting, protecting and continuing Sacramento’s heritage of trees what was done for us.

Sincerely,

Matt Piner, Chair
Winn Park Capitol Avenue Neighborhood Association

Cc: Ray Kerridge