vocaligifted comment-61905 2012-01-04T19:59:49Z 2012-01-04T19:59:49Z Awesome pictures as usual Michael! =))) vocaligifted 2012-01-04T19:59:49Z Prakash comment-61712 2011-12-28T18:48:03Z 2011-12-28T18:48:03Z Good to know, I was always wondering whats happening while passing by everyday. Prakash 2011-12-28T18:48:03Z Marta M. Adint-Weeks comment-61700 2011-12-28T07:41:04Z 2011-12-28T07:41:04Z Sacramento is such a great city! Marta M. Adint-Weeks 2011-12-28T07:41:04Z shuttersue comment-61683 2011-12-27T18:22:38Z 2011-12-27T18:22:38Z nice photos shuttersue 2011-12-27T18:22:38Z Kati Garner comment-61680 2011-12-27T17:34:50Z 2011-12-27T17:34:50Z Excellent photos! Kati Garner 2011-12-27T17:34:50Z Sherrie Tyler comment-61656 2011-12-26T18:18:09Z 2011-12-26T18:18:09Z Fabulous...I like the one of the capitol but they all are breathtaking!! Sacramento is beautiful! Sherrie Tyler 2011-12-26T18:18:09Z TAB comment-61647 2011-12-24T07:34:53Z 2011-12-24T07:34:53Z In the spirit of Christmas. Wonderful TAB 2011-12-24T07:34:53Z Midtown Family comment-61643 2011-12-23T23:16:06Z 2011-12-23T23:16:06Z Awesome shots! Midtown Family 2011-12-23T23:16:06Z Steven Chea comment-61639 2011-12-23T22:19:51Z 2011-12-23T22:19:51Z Nice shots! Steven Chea 2011-12-23T22:19:51Z Casey Kirk comment-61636 2011-12-23T21:03:42Z 2011-12-23T21:03:42Z These are beautiful! Great way to kick off my holiday weekend. Casey Kirk 2011-12-23T21:03:42Z Colleen Belcher comment-61635 2011-12-23T20:58:44Z 2011-12-23T20:58:44Z Fantastic shots, Michael! I especially love the one of the Capitol Christmas Tree. Thanks for sharing! Colleen Belcher 2011-12-23T20:58:44Z Kati Garner comment-61528 2011-12-20T21:53:31Z 2011-12-20T21:53:31Z Great photo essay! Kati Garner 2011-12-20T21:53:31Z Todd Keller comment-61520 2011-12-20T17:48:24Z 2011-12-20T17:48:24Z Very cool! Todd Keller 2011-12-20T17:48:24Z Scott Whyte comment-61493 2011-12-20T16:48:46Z 2011-12-20T16:48:46Z This is great! Thanks for putting this together.. Scott Whyte 2011-12-20T16:48:46Z Ben Ilfeld comment-56214 2011-08-29T23:57:36Z 2011-08-29T23:57:36Z Awesome as always. I'm interested in that last one. The new windows make a huge difference. Ben Ilfeld 2011-08-29T23:57:36Z Isaac Gonzalez comment-56187 2011-08-29T20:19:02Z 2011-08-29T20:19:02Z Great pictures! Isaac Gonzalez 2011-08-29T20:19:02Z duckman comment-48879 2011-04-07T22:54:01Z 2011-04-07T22:54:01Z how does this effect owners of property within swanston? duckman 2011-04-07T22:54:01Z tamarad comment-48288 2011-03-29T22:58:17Z 2011-03-29T22:58:17Z how do you find out about renting an apartment??? tamarad 2011-03-29T22:58:17Z William Burg comment-46296 2011-02-23T20:50:05Z 2011-02-23T20:50:05Z Actually, "low and very low income people" make too much money to afford this kind of housing: in Sacramento, "low income" for one person is around $40,000 a year, and "very low income" is about $30,000 a year--SRO units are aimed at the extremely low income folks who make less than $20,000 a year. Fortunately the projects on the 700 and 800 block of K Street are aimed at the low, very low and moderate income segments ("moderate" meaning more like $50-60,000 a year.) William Burg 2011-02-23T20:50:05Z William Burg comment-46295 2011-02-23T20:48:21Z 2011-02-23T20:48:21Z $625-650 for a one-bedroom is low-income or very low-income housing; it is only slightly more expensive than what is considered SRO rents (extremely low income housing) which runs about $400-600 for studios and 1-bedrooms. Market-rate housing in new construction is based on rents feasible based on new-construction prices, which are considerably higher than rents feasible in older buildings. Yes, we need more market rate housing in the central business district--but there is no money for it right now. New construction will help attract more investment, and creating housing across income levels will reduce homelessness. Residents of SRO units don't have a lot of disposable income, but because they generally don't have cars, they spend pretty much all their disposable income in the neighborhood, so it isn't as though they have no economic effect. In the long run, we will hopefully have many thousand new housing units in the central city--but closing or demolishing SRO units is a foolish effort that will just spike homelessness. It will make matters worse, not better. William Burg 2011-02-23T20:48:21Z Renn comment-46276 2011-02-23T17:51:32Z 2011-02-23T17:51:32Z I agree that market rate is what CBD needs - about 5,000 units to make the downtown vibrant. The 7th and H site however was never going to be market rate anyway. The proximity to the jail is a very tough site issue, and let's not forget the SMUD station next door. Market rate likes to be next to beauty and urban spaces like Ceasar Chavez park, Capital Park and the River. The 7th and H project is addressing the much needed permanent housing for low and very low income people, many of how whom will be formerly homeless. Renn 2011-02-23T17:51:32Z Dale Kooyman comment-46253 2011-02-23T06:06:11Z 2011-02-23T06:06:11Z Bill, market rate does not have to mean expensive or luxury at all. We have a lot of market rate housing in midtown and those rents reflect what the market will bear--now as low as $625 to $650 for a one bedroom quite reasonable for a couple whether one or both work. I saw a for rent sign for a one bedroom in MSN for $510, There have always been too many SRO's in relation to market rate in the CBD and the "least it exists" is far too few which is why there are no customers for the downtown businesses. Far more market rate is needed in or adjacent to the CBD. Dale Kooyman 2011-02-23T06:06:11Z William Burg comment-46201 2011-02-22T20:51:06Z 2011-02-22T20:51:06Z One thing to note is that this is not really supposed to be transitional housing--SRO housing is permanent, long-term housing. It's a good start, but we need hundreds more units to meet the demand. The more housing of this type we have, the fewer people on our streets and parkways. William Burg 2011-02-22T20:51:06Z William Burg comment-46200 2011-02-22T20:49:41Z 2011-02-22T20:49:41Z Dale: "Market-rate" housing means "expensive/luxury" housing--thus the term "market rate," charging what the market will bear. Admittedly, there is not enough market-rate and workforce/moderate-income housing in the CBD, but at least it exists, and there is a desperate shortage of housing in this price range. The alternative to supportive housing is the street or the Parkway, and even those places are getting crowded. William Burg 2011-02-22T20:49:41Z Dale Kooyman comment-46184 2011-02-22T20:04:24Z 2011-02-22T20:04:24Z Seems that location, next to the existing light rail and Amtrak terminal and coming intermodal terminal, would be better suited to market rate apartments for people working downtown and those commuting on the Capitol Route. These folks are always the last to be considered while the K Street and Plaza businesses struggle in the absence of such market rate housing that can house potential customers and then wonder why businesses fail. But that is, has long been and will apparently continue to be Sacramento's short sighted approach. As long as that mentality exists there will be no real lasting revitalization to the CBD. Mercy does have a good reputation for good management so that is the only plus I can see. Dale Kooyman 2011-02-22T20:04:24Z Gerard Falla comment-46151 2011-02-22T05:51:27Z 2011-02-22T05:51:27Z This project will benefit a lot of folks in the Sacramento needing transitional housing - it's also a great example of private/public partnerships, with Mercy housing working with SHRA and local sustainable architects Mogavero Notestine Associates - glad to hear that groundbreaking will come soon - it's a win for affordable housing in Sacramento. Gerard Falla 2011-02-22T05:51:27Z Ahsan Awan comment-34010 2010-08-02T00:44:11Z 2010-08-02T00:44:11Z The Zoo is an important part of our community, providing educational, cultural, and economic enrichment. It's important for Sacramento to maintain it. The much needed expansion requires a relocation that will cause some shift in opportunity, culture, and economy. However, the feasibility study conclusions are clear: the current site is insufficient to sustain operations. It's time to move. Ahsan Awan 2010-08-02T00:44:11Z LisaB23 comment-33028 2010-07-17T17:10:40Z 2010-07-17T17:10:40Z On a recent trip there to see the baby tiger it looked as though a modest expansion is possible along the back as it backs up to the road and golf course. Can the golf course or ampitheatre be relocated? At the current location, and parking could be reconfigured to make more spaces. The zoo access from Sutterville does not put traffic into the adjacent to neighborhoods. Not living there I can't speak for how it impacts neighbors but I have seen plenty of examples where good design mitigates a lot of the negative impacts. LisaB23 2010-07-17T17:10:40Z William Burg comment-25040 2010-04-18T08:29:36Z 2010-04-18T08:29:36Z The low-income housing in Chinatown wasn't torn down, it was rehabbed and is low-income senior housing now. If we don't create this kind of housing, the private sector certainly will not--and if we do not, the people who would be housed here will be on the street. Our failure to preserve our stock of small, affordable housing is a primary reason why homelessness has become an epidemic. The only cure is housing, and if the private sector can't provide it, the public must. William Burg 2010-04-18T08:29:36Z mybluehaven comment-24973 2010-04-17T05:29:23Z 2010-04-17T05:29:23Z Only WORKING people should be allowed to live here, but it will be filled with the usual losers and addicts (drug and alcohol) that no one in their right mind would rent to.......of course the taxpayers will foot the bill and it will be torn town in25-30 years like the low income housing in Chinatown. mybluehaven 2010-04-17T05:29:23Z thsas comment-24963 2010-04-16T20:46:58Z 2010-04-16T20:46:58Z Michael and WB, thanks. thsas 2010-04-16T20:46:58Z William Burg comment-24920 2010-04-16T08:27:25Z 2010-04-16T08:27:25Z In order to function as replacements for SRO units, the rents would have to be about $350-400 a month, in order to be comparable to rents charged at SRO hotels downtown. The typical SRO resident is on SSI or Social Security, which means they get around $900-1000 a month--although some are employed, but their incomes are probably in the same range. Housing in this range is considered "very low income," the lowest of three categories of low-income housing. The typical SRO room does not have a kitchen or a bathroom--bathrooms are generally shared, as are kitchen facilities, if there are any. William Burg 2010-04-16T08:27:25Z Michael Zwahlen comment-24910 2010-04-16T04:20:22Z 2010-04-16T04:20:22Z Housing is considered affordable when rent and utility costs are no more than 30% of a household's income. A family of four with two working parents earning minimum wage can only afford $700 in rent or mortgage payments and utilities. Housing costs are often much more than this. So it's based on income by the renter. Michael Zwahlen 2010-04-16T04:20:22Z thsas comment-24907 2010-04-16T04:03:18Z 2010-04-16T04:03:18Z Michael, is there a clear definition of what "affordable housing" means in dollars? thsas 2010-04-16T04:03:18Z Ian Merker comment-23158 2010-03-10T23:02:36Z 2010-03-10T23:02:36Z The clock is #6 on the J and K Street Commercial Corridor Walking Tour, right between the Elks Building and Citizen Hotel. Just hold your breath and squint your eyes until you get there. www.sacramentoheritage.org Ian Merker 2010-03-10T23:02:36Z KrisLex comment-23149 2010-03-10T07:35:55Z 2010-03-10T07:35:55Z Though I agree this is not a great block, I am excited that it is seen as a historical artifact worth saving. The jewelry store and clock was my Grandfather's for many years and I have wonderful memories every time I drive by and see it. He would be thrilled to know it matters. KrisLex 2010-03-10T07:35:55Z RichardRich comment-23135 2010-03-09T17:21:54Z 2010-03-09T17:21:54Z While great news, polishing this jewel will highlight what a turd the 1000 block of J is. The rock band particing upstairs notwithstanding, its pure, unmitigated blight. Where's guerilla art when you need it? RichardRich 2010-03-09T17:21:54Z cogmeyer comment-20328 2010-01-09T00:09:28Z 2010-01-09T00:09:28Z Holy cow, wburg and agree on something! And thank you for better articulation of my point about how the Portland / Sacramento bridge comparison differs. Patrick J, despite the changes, Jefferson is not an expressway by any means and very shortly will become woefully inadequate to handle traffic from West Sac's expansion. Interesting that you are opposed to a "freeway into the heart of the Delta" but seem to be okay with West Sac building thousands of houses there? While I am sorry that West Sac chose not to apply any long-term planning for their traffic needs, at this point I see that as something that is West Sac and Yolo's self created problem, not Sacramento's. As long as they continue to build their communities with walls and cul-de-sacs to prevent outisde traffic, I will oppose bridges that will dump their traffic onto our open gridded streets. cogmeyer 2010-01-09T00:09:28Z Patrick J. comment-20298 2010-01-08T04:26:01Z 2010-01-08T04:26:01Z How is Jefferson not an expressway? I remember when it was two lanes. I you mean Freeway that would be a horrible idea. A freeway heading into the heart of the Delta: no. Lake Washington has three lanes on each side: I imagine with a bridge that could extended all the way east the river. The problem is there is only one way out of Southport, Jefferson. If you built a bridge it wouldn't be like everyone suddenely stopped using Jefferson. Sutterville is already a mess; I think 90 percent of non local car traffic would take the Freeways. Patrick J. 2010-01-08T04:26:01Z William Burg comment-20295 2010-01-08T02:31:27Z 2010-01-08T02:31:27Z Portland isn't a very good model when compared to Sacramento because it is a radically different situation. In Portland, both sides of the river are within the same city--here, not only are they different cities but different counties, which makes jurisdiction more complex. Portland got big a lot earlier than Sacramento, which meant different growth patterns--more dense interconnections, and fewer sprawling suburbs (Portland has those too, but they came later.) Sacramento's bridges are comparatively recent: the first bridge not exclusively for railroads was the I Street Bridge in 1911, followed by the Tower Bridge in 1935 (it replaced an earlier bridge that had 9-foot outriggers for non-railroad traffic.) But even those were primarily for highway traffic from the Bay Area to Sacramento and the Sierras, not traffic between West Sac and Sacramento--it simply wasn't needed. It probably is needed now, but it's a problem because of precisely what bbbmer wants: people will get off the crowded freeways and zip through residential neighborhoods trying to avoid congestion--and create more congestion in the process. My two cents: Re-activate the electric railroad that runs into Southport, build a streetcar/pedestrian/bicycle bridge at Broadway, and run a streetcar line from West Sac down Broadway, through Southside and then to downtown Sacramento (with connections to light rail.) That alone will take a lot of short-hop commuter pressure off the Pioneer Bridge, without adding more street traffic to the surface streets. William Burg 2010-01-08T02:31:27Z cogmeyer comment-20291 2010-01-08T01:20:11Z 2010-01-08T01:20:11Z NIMBYism cuts both ways. The Broadway bridge is first and foremost a band-aid for West Sacramento poor civic planning. They could have made Jefferson and Lk Washington Blvds into expressways, as well as better utilzed the Tower and I St bridges to access Sacramento and the freeway. Instead, purely on the basis of NIMBYism, West Sac has created a traffic nightmare for its residents, even though they are still early in their buildout. West Sac failed to utilize their greenfield opportunity to provide their own traffic solutions, and now want to use a Broadway Bridge to dump their mistake on Sacramento. Portland is indeed a great model in that both sides of the river are largely on grids, and their are enough bridges that one neighborhood doesn't receive all the traffic. This would be fine in Sacramento if both communities opened up their neighborhoods for mutual benefit. But that's not the case, and frankly I am not particularly interested in helping West Sacramentans speed down my street as he cuts through neighborhoods as he tries to get to 99. And the idea that a bridge will improve a commute between I-5 and Davis is not realistic, as West Sac continues to build out and their NIMBY inspired streets get even more congested. Lets be honest here - what is really needed is a freeway bypass connector over West Sac between 1-5 and 1-80 (maybe Sutterville to Industrial)? But West Sac NIMBYism will not even let an idea like that get off the ground. cogmeyer 2010-01-08T01:20:11Z Patrick J. comment-20290 2010-01-08T00:49:22Z 2010-01-08T00:49:22Z Huh? Southport is nowhere near Elkgrove. I think a bridge at Sutterville makes a lot more sense than one at Broadway, altough idealy we'd have both. Patrick J. 2010-01-08T00:49:22Z bbbbmer comment-20287 2010-01-08T00:29:27Z 2010-01-08T00:29:27Z I hope they finally just build the planned bridge at Sutterville Road. I would LOVE to bypass the I5 / Biz 80 interchange to get to Davis at rush hour... From my naive perspective, it seems this would help alleviate the 2x daily grind of this maze of traffic... bbbbmer 2010-01-08T00:29:27Z Michael Zwahlen comment-20262 2010-01-07T17:48:17Z 2010-01-07T17:48:17Z The City had spent over a decade studying the idea of putting a deck over I-5 in downtown and late last year they abandon the whole idea. They spent millions on all the studing and found after every study it would cost more to deck I-5 than it did the last time they had a study. The conclusion was always that it was getting more and more expensive to build. The arena has also been studied to death and the cost to build become greater every year nothing is done. Ten years ago an arena would have cost around $250 million and now it's twice that. Michael Zwahlen 2010-01-07T17:48:17Z waldorfandstatler comment-20261 2010-01-07T17:47:25Z 2010-01-07T17:47:25Z I predict that West Elk Grove (Southport) and Elk Grove will be connected, it's only a matter of time! waldorfandstatler 2010-01-07T17:47:25Z Steve Vicente comment-20235 2010-01-07T09:32:13Z 2010-01-07T09:32:13Z Why does so much need to be spent on a study?!? Heck, just look at traffic counts and major arteries. Ignore the NIMBY's that want to protest all development, and BUILD A BROADWAY BRIDGE already! Sacramento is sad when you compare it to another river city like Portland. Portland has 3 or 4 times the river crossings, and a nicer city to show for it. Sacramento has complete lack of cooperation between the Capitol and Yolo/W.Sac. Steve Vicente 2010-01-07T09:32:13Z thesacramentofly comment-20017 2009-12-30T15:33:52Z 2009-12-30T15:33:52Z that land was deeded to the state by a widow who gave that land for california new state fair grounds under the provision the there be no addmision to the fair.ARNOLD better not touch that place. But it obvious that the idiots that are the board at cal expo need to be removed ,being as how they are mostly horse MEN. THIER WAS PLANS IN THE ORIGINAL VISION FOR A ARENA TO BE LOCATED CENTRALY ON THE GROUNDS.THE DEED WAS LAND THAT BORDERD ARDEN WAY WAS FOR THE FAIR WELL THE STATE SOLD 40 percent LEAVE IT ALONE THESACRAMENTFLY thesacramentofly 2009-12-30T15:33:52Z Kevinmg33 comment-18728 2009-12-05T00:05:51Z 2009-12-05T00:05:51Z Just to clarify something as well. USA Hospitality was asked to respond with the three requirements back in August and the Council directed staff to release an RFQ in 90 days if the following did not occur. The three issues have not been addressed and it's time to release the RFQ. USA Hospitality can continue to work with the city, however it is time to allow other qualified developers/development teams to chime in on the future of these key sites in the JKL Corridor. Kevinmg33 2009-12-05T00:05:51Z William Burg comment-18659 2009-12-04T03:40:42Z 2009-12-04T03:40:42Z Industrial General is a new partner in all this, they are based out of Las Vegas and they are run by someone named Theodor Bodnar. Not much else online about them...the name doesn't exactly explain much. The staff report is, well, grim. It mentions that with the current financing there is still a $6 million funding gap, the project price does not include the construction costs for 100 condos that are supposed to go in at some unspecified future time, and both Consus and Industrial General have conditioned their approval on things that the city has already made pretty clear that it is unwilling or utterly unable to do--like issue bonds for the entire construction cost. http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=8&event_id=98&meta_id=188342 The plan makes no mention at all of the Bel-Vue, even though the city specifically said they had to estimate the costs of retaining the facade (which is a joke.) A draft of the RFI (what they will send out if the hotel plan gets rejected) mentions the Bel-Vue, and its landmark status, but does not specify that the city wants the building to stay there. William Burg 2009-12-04T03:40:42Z sara comment-18527 2009-12-01T23:05:16Z 2009-12-01T23:05:16Z would it increase our bill sara 2009-12-01T23:05:16Z iadam comment-16255 2009-10-24T17:48:57Z 2009-10-24T17:48:57Z people in sacramento are scary? iadam 2009-10-24T17:48:57Z thsas comment-16116 2009-10-22T22:29:21Z 2009-10-22T22:29:21Z Markes, I pay for the right to express my opinion about government spending each time I earn or spend a dollar. When my families money is taken from us it is not polical, it is personal. thsas 2009-10-22T22:29:21Z Mark comment-16022 2009-10-22T06:24:39Z 2009-10-22T06:24:39Z Is this a forum for advancing your political agenda guys? I think not. But after looking at those boring designs I'll say it's 6 million poorly spent. For six million couldn't we get Frank Gehry to go back to his genius early work using inexpensive materials? At least we'd have something interesting and with his name associated with it, it would attract more people -making the whole renovation thing pay off. Mark 2009-10-22T06:24:39Z thsas comment-15958 2009-10-21T17:12:16Z 2009-10-21T17:12:16Z Hey, you may need to sell your car to make the house paynment, but you can always walk to the theater. Government waste creates poverty. thsas 2009-10-21T17:12:16Z The Parrhesiac comment-15936 2009-10-21T08:29:59Z 2009-10-21T08:29:59Z BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH SPEND SPEND SPEND SPEND... ITS NOT OUR MONEY ITS NOTS OUR MONEY ITS NOTS OUR MONEY ITS NOTS OUR MONEY Doh! It is our money and consumers and tax payers are being forced to foot the bill. The Parrhesiac 2009-10-21T08:29:59Z bbbbmer comment-15914 2009-10-21T01:18:38Z 2009-10-21T01:18:38Z This is a perfect project for stimulus money... bbbbmer 2009-10-21T01:18:38Z bleatherwood comment-15912 2009-10-21T00:49:56Z 2009-10-21T00:49:56Z It should be noted that the lack of renovation is for the public areas only--the stage area has been upgraded, but that's stlil some time ago. And if you don't spend the money to improve facilities, you lose the income to be generated by attracting top-tier events and productions. Oh, and when you have a major construction project, you create jobs... bleatherwood 2009-10-21T00:49:56Z The Parrhesiac comment-15905 2009-10-20T20:54:27Z 2009-10-20T20:54:27Z HOLY CRAP...does the spending NEVER END in this city? $6 Million for design costs...jesus christ is there any sane people in this town? WE ARE IN A RECESSION! and the only answer our city council seems to have is to INCREASE SPENDING! I seriously hope this city gets what it deserves for voting in the bozo's downtown. The Parrhesiac 2009-10-20T20:54:27Z CalAutoMuseum comment-15297 2009-10-12T02:19:26Z 2009-10-12T02:19:26Z The California Auto Museum is promoting the idea of making the project more of a Balboa Park or Golden Gate Park development with mor cultural amenities than is currently slated. It would be more effective in making the Riverfront accessibe to the public than housing and office construction, plus it would enliven the area more in the evenings with Museums and parks that could bring in live concerts, party venues, etc. Currently, the Military Museum, the Auto Museum and a new Natural History Museum are looking for a permanent home. Combined with the proximity of Crocker Art Museum and the Railroad Museum, this could be a rich, vibrant area with some modifications. CalAutoMuseum 2009-10-12T02:19:26Z Michael Zwahlen comment-14984 2009-10-06T19:42:41Z 2009-10-06T19:42:41Z I'm sorry Jim, but you’re clueless. Do you have any evidence to support your claim about a "Sacramento Insider"? Treasure Island is on the back burner just like hundreds of other projects because of the economic meltdown and credit crunch. Your posts sound so angry full of conspiracy theories but with NO evidence... where's your evidence to back up you assumptions? Michael Zwahlen 2009-10-06T19:42:41Z William Burg comment-14974 2009-10-06T16:24:21Z 2009-10-06T16:24:21Z SHRA is effectively "the city," it was acquired during the gigantic redevelopment programs of the fifties and sixties, when Sacramento destroyed the neighborhood and former industrial/dock center that used to be there, via federally-subsidized redevelopment loans and eminent domain proceedings (those who weren't bought out were forced out.) Jim, my question for you is this: What would YOU like to see done with it? William Burg 2009-10-06T16:24:21Z The Parrhesiac comment-14972 2009-10-06T15:44:52Z 2009-10-06T15:44:52Z SInce you seem to know so much about everything William..how did they get title to the property? Is it actually owned by SHRA and NOT the City? In any case, if what you say is true, the tax payers own it...and they will give it away for penny's on the dollar...and no doubt to whomever gives huge campaign contributions to Council members..thats how business is don't here in River City. There is simply no reason whatsoever that the City owns this property, other than swapping it for campaign contributions. The Parrhesiac 2009-10-06T15:44:52Z The Parrhesiac comment-14971 2009-10-06T15:43:56Z 2009-10-06T15:43:56Z If this is true...look what they have done with Treasure Island... Virtually nothing...except made it a play ground for friends of Gavin Newsome. And I see that their name is "Docks Partners" who else is in the partnership? Taylor or Tsakopoulos, or some other well placed Sacramento Insider? Of course there is... there is no way the City would give this project to a San Francisco Development team, unless part of that team was a well placed Sacramento Insider. The Parrhesiac 2009-10-06T15:43:56Z William Burg comment-14936 2009-10-05T18:31:29Z 2009-10-05T18:31:29Z Actually, the city of Sacramento owns most of the land. Part is being transferred from State Parks to the city (the R Street site that was supposed to be the Museum of Railroad Technology), although Parks will retain the "Sacramento Southern" railroad right-of-way. I do wonder what will happen to the California Auto Museum. They are a private nonprofit, without big supporters (public or private) and they have leased the big warehouse at the end of Front Street from the city for minimal cost. I have heard rumors that the city of Elk Grove has offered to find them a place if they can't stay in Sacramento, but what a shame to lose them! The ongoing conversion of the R Street railroad bridge into a ped/bike bridge will help, as will the infrastructure improvements going in along Front Street, which have all been part of the plan. More pedestrian bridges over I-5 would be nice, it would help link the Southside neighborhood to the river again. William Burg 2009-10-05T18:31:29Z Michael Zwahlen comment-14935 2009-10-05T17:13:40Z 2009-10-05T17:13:40Z The developers choosen for this venture is KSWM Docks Partners, LLC, which includes Kenwood Investments. They are the same group of people that redid the Ferry Building in SF and are redeveloping Treasure Island as well. Rodney: How would you keep costs down? There are a lot of developers who would like to know how. Michael Zwahlen 2009-10-05T17:13:40Z The Parrhesiac comment-14933 2009-10-05T16:10:53Z 2009-10-05T16:10:53Z I'm curious who owns the land. I would bet it is David Taylor or (ATK) Tsakopoulos. And they will get hundreds of millions of dollars in tax payers subsidies to develop the land. The Parrhesiac 2009-10-05T16:10:53Z Rodney comment-14931 2009-10-05T15:36:39Z 2009-10-05T15:36:39Z Build it. Get the commitment for the whole project. Do NOT phase it. Increase retail to 70,000 SF. Increase access to/from nearby neighborhoods with ped crossings. I know Calif construction cost are insanely high, but figure how to keep costs down so that the area is middle class affordable, not just upper class. Rodney 2009-10-05T15:36:39Z The Parrhesiac comment-13435 2009-09-08T04:46:27Z 2009-09-08T04:46:27Z This article appears to be factually inaccurate. The staff report on this agenda item says it is to approve $1.8 million. http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=8&event_id=94&meta_id=183370 The Parrhesiac 2009-09-08T04:46:27Z The Parrhesiac comment-13430 2009-09-08T01:26:25Z 2009-09-08T01:26:25Z Thats just very odd....I would assume that it is because he does not have a California contractors license...something is fishy...was he awarded the contract? Is he "partnering" with a CA licensed union contractor? The Parrhesiac 2009-09-08T01:26:25Z The Parrhesiac comment-13423 2009-09-07T20:10:07Z 2009-09-07T20:10:07Z No offense meant, but your story simply cannot be true. Any contracts with the City would require the contractor to pay employees a "prevailing wage" which is local union wage scale, BUT, it would be illegal for the city to REQUIRE a contractor to use unionized employees. In fact, over 90% of prevailing wage contracts with the City go to non-union shops. If your friend has told you he is being "forced" to hire "teamsters" he is not being truthful or he has misunderstood the contract. Being an out of state contractor I could see this happening. My next question would be, WHY would the City hire an out of state contractor since their is NO BENEFIT, the wage scale is set locally... Also, is he licensed to do work in California as a plumber? I'm interested in hearing more on this...I think I will look into this. The Parrhesiac 2009-09-07T20:10:07Z The Parrhesiac comment-13390 2009-09-07T15:39:13Z 2009-09-07T15:39:13Z "$20 Million grant/loan" - In other words a new tax. Just who are they going grant/loan the money to themselves? The answer must be YES... This means it thye will increase our bills to pay for meters so they can charge us even more... nice. The Parrhesiac 2009-09-07T15:39:13Z The Parrhesiac comment-12804 2009-08-28T22:16:38Z 2009-08-28T22:16:38Z If Mohanna is involved in this project, the City is looking at a FAT lawsuit for gift of public funds...that is unconstitutional. Attorney Steve Belcher is already suing them on this issue on the David Taylor martini bar/cougar bar projects...he can just change the name on the suit and file it. Sacramento does not need any more hotels for at least 5-10 years. The Parrhesiac 2009-08-28T22:16:38Z trapper comment-12751 2009-08-28T00:45:03Z 2009-08-28T00:45:03Z That parking garage next to the hotel is hideous. If the cities going to give away free money and land they could at least get a better design. This city doe does not need any more monster parking structures downtown. trapper 2009-08-28T00:45:03Z William Burg comment-12749 2009-08-28T00:27:55Z 2009-08-28T00:27:55Z The $31.5 million includes a gift of the land, currently owned by the city of Sacramento, forgiveness for 50% of the hotel's Transient Occupancy Tax for 14 years, and not having to pay tax increment (the difference between the land's current value and the value of the land once they build a building on it) for a decade. The current plan does not include a loan or a cash grant. However, the only reason the city owns the land is because they recently paid "Mo" Mohanna, one of the development partners, $18.5 million for the land. So, in essence, we gave him money for the land and would now be giving him back the land, plus massive tax breaks...so in some ways, the total tab adds up to more like $50 million. William Burg 2009-08-28T00:27:55Z The Parrhesiac comment-12748 2009-08-27T23:25:12Z 2009-08-27T23:25:12Z Its FREE MONEY No repayment. free land + tax incentives The Parrhesiac 2009-08-27T23:25:12Z Anthony Bento comment-12747 2009-08-27T23:22:46Z 2009-08-27T23:22:46Z What does the $31.5M subsidy mean? Is it a loan, tax incentives, or do they want a cash grant from the city? Anthony Bento 2009-08-27T23:22:46Z Paul Cox comment-12737 2009-08-27T16:43:11Z 2009-08-27T16:43:11Z Eh, I prefer Amtrak. Less dregs. Paul Cox 2009-08-27T16:43:11Z The Parrhesiac comment-12719 2009-08-27T03:54:31Z 2009-08-27T03:54:31Z David Taylor will most likely end up with the project..as usual in Sacramento. The Parrhesiac 2009-08-27T03:54:31Z William Burg comment-12716 2009-08-27T03:50:07Z 2009-08-27T03:50:07Z One council member, Waters, mentioned saving the facade only, but two council members mentioned saving the building for adaptive reuse. Up until this point the developer didn't even bother mentioning the buildings on the site--either the Bel-Vue, the Feldhusen or Sam's Hof Brau, or the underground sidewalks. The city's design review, preservation and planning staff and commissions haven't even had the opportunity to see this project yet, let alone provide comment. Up to now, the only city staff involved were Economic Development staff--they don't look at anything but how the project pencils, and from the sound of things, they have some pretty serious doubts. Michael Ault of the Downtown Partnership gave a technically supportive but sort of back-handed statement about the project--he said they wanted to see projects going up on K Street quickly, and stated that the Partnership supports the idea of a hotel at 8th and K "in concept" (with the caveat that they haven't looked very carefully at the numbers on this project) but urged the Council to issue the new RFQ soon, rather than wait another 90 days. The 90 days is not an extension to the current Exclusive Right to Negotiate--that expired on the 23rd. The city will still work with the current developer in the meantime, but other developers can now start preparing proposals for their own projects at the site. I'm willing to bet that at least a few developers heard that and started throwing numbers together today for potential alternate projects. William Burg 2009-08-27T03:50:07Z Marion Millin comment-11256 2009-07-30T07:22:58Z 2009-07-30T07:22:58Z And in the meantime, travelers using pubilc transportation are left hanging. Marion Millin 2009-07-30T07:22:58Z Seth Sandronsky comment-11215 2009-07-28T13:04:56Z 2009-07-28T13:04:56Z Long live the grey dog! Seth Sandronsky 2009-07-28T13:04:56Z FFT comment-11209 2009-07-28T01:21:05Z 2009-07-28T01:21:05Z Nice. FFT 2009-07-28T01:21:05Z William Burg comment-11205 2009-07-27T22:02:34Z 2009-07-27T22:02:34Z My guess is that the new Greyhound station on Richards will be open and occupied, and the Light Rail line extended to Richards, about the same time that the Intermodal Facility will be ready for Greyhound to move in...in other words, moving Greyhound to Richards is one of those projects like spending a couple million re-surfacing and re-decorating the 700 block of K Street while at the same time making plans to reintroduce vehicle traffic to K Street: project #1 will be completed just in time for project #2 to make project #1 unnecessary. However, the contractors receiving city funds to carry out these changes seem to like the arrangement, and it keeps the Curse of Sutter at bay. William Burg 2009-07-27T22:02:34Z Michael Zwahlen comment-11201 2009-07-27T20:50:49Z 2009-07-27T20:50:49Z Light rail service is planned to extend from downtown to Richards Boulevard along 7th Street by 2014. When the Intermodal Transportation Facilities completed, Greyhound will be moved into the station. No time has been given yet for when that will happen; the concept is still in the design stages with track realignment in the works right now. http://livinginurbansac.blogspot.com/2009/04/sacramento-intermodel-transportation.html Michael Zwahlen 2009-07-27T20:50:49Z Marion Millin comment-11198 2009-07-27T20:13:06Z 2009-07-27T20:13:06Z When will the Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility be "ready for occupancy"? Will Greyhound be re-relocating to it? How will Greyhound customers get from Richards Blvd. to wherever they're going without access to public transportation? Marion Millin 2009-07-27T20:13:06Z trapper comment-10776 2009-07-16T00:16:19Z 2009-07-16T00:16:19Z I like the grid layout of the streets. trapper 2009-07-16T00:16:19Z savemidtown comment-9421 2009-06-13T02:15:43Z 2009-06-13T02:15:43Z It's time to start a Save the Bel-Vue Campaign. This is most certainly a gem. When you look at it from the back it looks like what you see in a 'real' city. Oh wait we are a real city too so we really need to start acting like one - this includes preserving our architectural gems and keeping reasonably priced housing downtown. Rehab and reuse is the answer to bring life back downtown. savemidtown 2009-06-13T02:15:43Z Bill Burgua comment-9416 2009-06-12T23:38:06Z 2009-06-12T23:38:06Z The downtown Seattle Hilton sits on top of it's own parking garage. You enter at street level into a modest lobby and elevate up to the main lobby. Doing this in Sacramento would give the lobby an awesome view. Bill Burgua 2009-06-12T23:38:06Z William Burg comment-9412 2009-06-12T22:56:29Z 2009-06-12T22:56:29Z I don't think the city of Sacramento has an architecture department. William Burg 2009-06-12T22:56:29Z Casey Kirk comment-9407 2009-06-12T22:34:38Z 2009-06-12T22:34:38Z Eyesore... exactly the word that came to mind when I read this. I think putting a gigantic parking structure is the LAST thing downtown needs and hopefully the developers get enough opposition before they put this plan in action that they don't follow through. Casey Kirk 2009-06-12T22:34:38Z Matt comment-9397 2009-06-12T19:56:52Z 2009-06-12T19:56:52Z I totally agree about the parking structure... look at the one that's at 8th and H! its a whole block! and its like 2 stories! talk about eyes sore. they should just get rid of all easy acsess parking, like parking garages and then increase public transportation. THEN they should jack up the price at the meeter and then BAM! the cities money problems are solved. I should be mayor. Matt 2009-06-12T19:56:52Z Zen comment-9385 2009-06-12T16:43:10Z 2009-06-12T16:43:10Z What building are your referring to on 10th and K? What do you mean the City's Architecture Department's Building? Do you mean it was reviewed by the City? Zen 2009-06-12T16:43:10Z William Burg comment-9380 2009-06-12T16:28:24Z 2009-06-12T16:28:24Z The parking structure would also wipe out the Bel-Vue/American Cash Apartments building, an architectural gem that could be very easily rehabbed as apartments. The city of Sacramento's redevelopment agency owns it now, but apparently has no plans to rehabilitate or repair the structure. Such a conversion would be cheaper, easier and faster than a new building, and bring more permanent residents to the central city. Also in the same complex are some interesting and historic buildings, including the site of Sam's Hof Brau, most recently 815 L Street. With all the recent emphasis on bringing entertainment and nightlife to downtown, why not reopen it as a nightclub? It would require less conversion than the buildings on K that are slated for nightclubs, as it is already set up as a nightclub/bar--just polish it up and add some new fittings! Hmmm...maybe it's time for an article on the Bel-Vue. William Burg 2009-06-12T16:28:24Z iadam comment-9373 2009-06-12T08:27:16Z 2009-06-12T08:27:16Z But dosent the mayor want sacramento to become the next Phoenix? thats why i voted for him. iadam 2009-06-12T08:27:16Z David Watts Barton comment-9354 2009-06-12T03:20:13Z 2009-06-12T03:20:13Z 13th and J, 16th and L, 7th and L, the Sutter monstrosities...you're right Michael, someone at the city is apparently so desperate for development that they don't have the sense to even THINK about how these structures look at street level. Then again, have you SEEN the city's architecture department's building at 10th and K??? My cousin the architect came to town recently (from Portland), and she thought it was a JOKE. David Watts Barton 2009-06-12T03:20:13Z kenneth lauszus comment-9208 2009-06-09T23:03:22Z 2009-06-09T23:03:22Z It was a big flop in bringing life to "K " Street. Another ineffective catalyst. It was a shame to lose the Cluny Hotel, it would hav made a great Boutique Hotel. kenneth lauszus 2009-06-09T23:03:22Z Casey Kirk comment-7709 2009-05-15T22:58:57Z 2009-05-15T22:58:57Z I agree, thanks for the great history and background on this building. I think it's one of the things we Sacramentans take for granted and learning about the building gives us a greater appreciation for our skyline. Casey Kirk 2009-05-15T22:58:57Z Michael Zwahlen comment-7706 2009-05-15T21:45:44Z 2009-05-15T21:45:44Z Yes Jenn, I took the photos. The David Shore quote came from a August 6, 1986 Sacramento Bee article called "CITY OKS 25-STORY OFFICE PLAN" or go to this link: http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=SB&p_theme=sb&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&p_topdoc=1&p_text_direct-0=0EB0D734289FF98C&p_field_direct-0=document_id&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&s_trackval=GooglePM City officials tend to say that about nearly every new development downtown... I don't think much will change until more people move downtown though. Michael Zwahlen 2009-05-15T21:45:44Z Jenn Walker comment-7702 2009-05-15T20:13:07Z 2009-05-15T20:13:07Z Are the photos yours? Where did you get David Shore's quote from? It's interesting that they thought the building would clean up downtown. Jenn Walker 2009-05-15T20:13:07Z Mark Forsyth comment-7677 2009-05-15T17:17:10Z 2009-05-15T17:17:10Z great history. I love that building too. Thanks for the info Michael Mark Forsyth 2009-05-15T17:17:10Z