"What's going on Sacramento" Chit-Chat

[SacTownAndy]

Originally Posted by wburg

Welp, if we can convert office buildings into boutique hotels, we can convert some of them into housing!

100% agree. This is the way to keep downtown viable.

[Valley Proud]

Oh you know, pretty pictures of stuff that never gets built. Same ol' same ol'

[innov8]

Download and read more here about Record Sales Volume Despite Rising Interest Rates and Faltering Fundamentals in Sacramento’s apartment market.

Sacramento’s apartment market is beginning to cool as out-migration back to coastal markets is weighing on occupancy and rents across the region. While market occupancy declined 200 basis points over the last year, it is still above the region’s long-term average, suggesting a return to normalized market fundamentals in the wake of the pandemic-fueled expansion. Annual rent growth decelerated to almost one-third the rate from a year earlier. Demand has turned considerably negative this year as the market grapples with a historic wave of new supply coming online. If out-migration to the Bay Area accelerates, new inventory could take some time to be absorbed. Occupancy is on track to fall closer to 95 percent in the next year while annual rent growth should stabilize to around five percent. Despite these faltering market fundamentals, investors are not deterred. Sales volume is continuing at a record pace and pricing is still rising significantly. 2022 Q3 Sacramento Multifamily Market Report

[urban_encounter]

I’m stunned about how much secrecy surrounds the Capitol Annex project.
They keep everything wrapped behind tarps; there’s nothing online about what people can expect from this new annex (besides the new parking garage).

My guess is that the old annex is completely gone and if the State did tear it down then it would seem to violate the court’s order.

We’re going to lose the West Steps and a lot of historic trees because this entire proposal/project deliberately shrouded in secrecy from the start. I suspect we will feel the regret of the Alhambra Theater or the Merrium Apartments.

[CAGeoNerd]

Originally Posted by urban_encounter

I’m stunned about how much secrecy surrounds the Capitol Annex project.
They keep everything wrapped behind tarps; there’s nothing online about what people can expect from this new annex (besides the new parking garage).

My guess is that the old annex is completely gone and if the State did tear it down then it would seem to violate the court’s order.

We’re going to lose the West Steps and a lot of historic trees because this entire proposal/project deliberately shrouded in secrecy from the start. I suspect we will feel the regret of the Alhambra Theater or the Merrium Apartments.

They did demo the entire annex from what I saw recently. I thought this was common knowledge?

[urban_encounter]

Originally Posted by CAGeoNerd

They did demo the entire annex from what I saw recently. I thought this was common knowledge?

It was certainly common knowledge that they wanted to demolish the annex. However, there’s a CEQA lawsuit and I believe we were waiting to see the outcome. Because the underground parking lot the State intends to build will change Capitol Park forever. They’re intent on building a visitors center on the Westside of the Capitol that will destroy the gathering spot for protestors.

This is really unfortunate imo.

[SactownScraper]

Are there any mid/highrises under construction or plan to be this year?

[kamehameha]

Aggie Square, Kaiser Railyarurds, North State Medical School and the New Courthouse(Still under construction). Two Midrises and two Highrises

[kamehameha]

You can also add the California Tower 15 story UC Davis . Groundbreaking should be happening this year 2024

[SactownScraper]

Thats for the information. I believe X Lot is supposed to be breaking ground this year as well!

[Bubb90]

Any thoughts on the new plan for the former Sacramento Bee site? They want to build a "mini neighborhood" with 62 townhomes and 60 single family homes! I personally don't like this idea.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by Bubb90

Any thoughts on the new plan for the former Sacramento Bee site? They want to build a "mini neighborhood" with 62 townhomes and 60 single family homes! I personally don't like this idea.

It's a quick cash grab by the developer.

It’s also possible that the developer wants to get the site entitled rapidly, so they can turn around and sell it. Properties with entitlements in place tend to be worth more than properties without.

Assuming this new proposal actually happens, it's a real disappointment.

The Sac Bee headquarters site is two entire city blocks. Yet the developer wants to build only 120 for sale 3-story town homes and single-family homes for rich people? What an absolute travesty and a waste of high-value land… Land that should be reserved for high-concentration projects.

Man, I thought the former proposal, with its block-sized Bauhaus boxes and zero ground-floor retail was bad… This new one makes me want to put my head in the oven. I'd rather see them repurpose the existing structure.

In the past, I was staunchly pro-developer. With each short-stack, uninspiring proposal, I would say roughly the same thing: Sacramento cannot afford lofty projects right now. These less than exciting proposals are what can get built. Give it some time. Things will change once Sacramento proves itself. We won't run out of building sites.

However, after 15 years (long enough) of the same crap, and now that most new proposals are worse than crap, my opinion has changed.

Of course, we must acknowledge the elephant in the room: We all know that prices in general are too high. Well, construction prices are beyond too high... They are straight up stupid. Add in the "California Premium" that developers pay, and it’s no wonder that smaller towns in other states, like Boise, are getting more privately financed high rise developments than we are. Construction prices are lower in those places.

Bay Area cities must also deal with stupidly high construction prices, but at least they have plenty of rich people who can pay $4,000,000 for a 650 square foot high-rise condo or pay $8,000 a month for high-rise 1 bedroom apartment. That’s why, if you look at the SFYIMBY website, nearly every other proposal is a high-rise. Plus, it seems that Bay Area cities get better-looking or at least more interesting proposals than Sacramento does.

In an effort to justify their existence and build something instead of nothing, Sacramento developers propose developments that can get built quickly and for relatively little money. I understand that they have families to feed. However, this spate of horrible proposals indicates how short-sited and disrespectful of Sacramento these developers really are.

Plus, continued construction only serves to incentivize ridiculously high construction prices. The cure for high prices is high prices – If developers stop engaging greedy contractors, they will be required to lower their prices. So, I think it is time for developers to put a moratorium on construction projects.

A better option is to bring more young people into the trades. One of the biggest reasons for high construction prices is high labor costs. (After the 2008 economic meltdown, scores of construction workers left the industry and never returned.) With more laborers, construction prices may stabilize or even come down. Plus, what’s the point of getting a degree if you’re just gonna become a barista?

Furthermore, we must seriously curtail CEQA - we should neuter it. That way, annoying union lawyers from Davis can't sue every development that doesn't have a Project Labor Agreement.

Anyway, this is the last straw... I am done with Sacramento. I have spent 25 years getting excited about Sacramento's future and following its "development." But nothing has changed. Every single awesome proposal failed. Even becoming a top destination for displaced Bay Area workers who only make $200,000 a year has done little to spur exciting changes. At the end of the day, Sacramento is an ugly, dark, dank, boring, nearly useless government town with nothing interesting to offer. It will always play second fiddle to the real California cities. It will never enjoy the kind of development that I want to see... Not in my lifetime anyway.

I moved to Southern California almost 14 years ago because I couldn't buy a job in Sac. I am so glad I did.

[Pistola916]

Originally Posted by snfenoc

It's a quick cash grab by the developer.

It’s also possible that the developer wants to get the site entitled rapidly, so they can turn around and sell it. Properties with entitlements in place tend to be worth more than properties without.

Assuming this new proposal actually happens, it's a real disappointment.

The Sac Bee headquarters site is two entire city blocks. Yet the developer wants to build only 120 for sale 3-story town homes and single-family homes for rich people? What an absolute travesty and a waste of high-value land… Land that should be reserved for high-concentration projects.

Man, I thought the former proposal, with its block-sized Bauhaus boxes and zero ground-floor retail was bad… This new one makes me want to put my head in the oven. I'd rather see them repurpose the existing structure.

In the past, I was staunchly pro-developer. With each short-stack, uninspiring proposal, I would say roughly the same thing: Sacramento cannot afford lofty projects right now. These less than exciting proposals are what can get built. Give it some time. Things will change once Sacramento proves itself. We won't run out of building sites.

However, after 15 years (long enough) of the same crap, and now that most new proposals are worse than crap, my opinion has changed.

Of course, we must acknowledge the elephant in the room: We all know that prices in general are too high. Well, construction prices are beyond too high... They are straight up stupid. Add in the "California Premium" that developers pay, and it’s no wonder that smaller towns in other states, like Boise, are getting more privately financed high rise developments than we are. Construction prices are lower in those places.

Bay Area cities must also deal with stupidly high construction prices, but at least they have plenty of rich people who can pay $4,000,000 for a 650 square foot high-rise condo or pay $8,000 a month for high-rise 1 bedroom apartment. That’s why, if you look at the SFYIMBY website, nearly every other proposal is a high-rise. Plus, it seems that Bay Area cities get better-looking or at least more interesting proposals than Sacramento does.

In an effort to justify their existence and build something instead of nothing, Sacramento developers propose developments that can get built quickly and for relatively little money. I understand that they have families to feed. However, this spate of horrible proposals indicates how short-sited and disrespectful of Sacramento these developers really are.

Plus, continued construction only serves to incentivize ridiculously high construction prices. The cure for high prices is high prices – If developers stop engaging greedy contractors, they will be required to lower their prices. So, I think it is time for developers to put a moratorium on construction projects.

A better option is to bring more young people into the trades. One of the biggest reasons for high construction prices is high labor costs. (After the 2008 economic meltdown, scores of construction workers left the industry and never returned.) With more laborers, construction prices may stabilize or even come down. Plus, what’s the point of getting a degree if you’re just gonna become a barista?

Furthermore, we must seriously curtail CEQA - we should neuter it. That way, annoying union lawyers from Davis can't sue every development that doesn't have a Project Labor Agreement.

Anyway, this is the last straw... I am done with Sacramento. I have spent 25 years getting excited about Sacramento's future and following its "development." But nothing has changed. Every single awesome proposal failed. Even becoming a top destination for displaced Bay Area workers who only make $200,000 a year has done little to spur exciting changes. At the end of the day, Sacramento is an ugly, dark, dank, boring, nearly useless government town with nothing interesting to offer. It will always play second fiddle to the real California cities. It will never enjoy the kind of development that I want to see... Not in my lifetime anyway.

I moved to Southern California almost 14 years ago because I couldn't buy a job in Sac. I am so glad I did.

Oklahoma City is planning to build the tallest building in America yet Sacramento can't get past 400 feet. The other night I watched the Kings game who were playing on national TV and there were showing drone shots of the city -- unfortunately they flew over the 301 Capitol Mall site -- talk about utter embarrassing.

Every midsize city Portland, Salt Lake City, San Antonio and OKC are seeing mid to high-rise residential boom. But Sac can't find a way to go over 8-stories.

As far as the former SacBee proposal, it is so disappointing but not surprising. 21st Street side should be 5+ stories with ground floor retail below.

[snfenoc]

Originally Posted by Pistola916

Oklahoma City is planning to build the tallest building in America yet Sacramento can't get past 400 feet. The other night I watched the Kings game who were playing on national TV and there were showing drone shots of the city -- unfortunately they flew over the 301 Capitol Mall site -- talk about utter embarrassing.

Every midsize city Portland, Salt Lake City, San Antonio and OKC are seeing mid to high-rise residential boom. But Sac can't find a way to go over 8-stories.

As far as the former SacBee proposal, it is so disappointing but not surprising. 21st Street side should be 5+ stories with ground floor retail below.

Keep in mind, I don't think it's appropriate to built 30 story towers in Midtown. (The SuckBee headquarters site is in Midtown.)

However, this proposal is simply too "safe," too small, too boring, too gray-on-beige for such a high-profile location. It simply doesn't belong. If you want to build for-sale condos and single family homes, there are other parts of the city where that kind of development is appropriate.

This site should have been subdivided into 4 properties. Each property should have a 6 to 8-story apartment and/or condo building with ground-floor retail to engage the public. Furthermore, the architecture should be anything but another Bauhaus box.

If you don't know what "Bauhaus box" means, there are other names for this overused architecture style. They include, Developer Modernism, McUrbanism, Fast-Casual, LoMo, Beige Box Revival, Normcore, Earth Tones 'n Rectangles, and Spongebuild Squareparts. Typically, the boxes are clad in styrofoam covered with a micron thickness layer of concrete. After the first rainstorm, the paint leaches out, making the building look tired within a year.

You know what I am talking about, right? Shit that looks like this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


And this:


Granted, some of the examples above way too tall for Suckramento.

Also, if built, the ownershit residential units will be there for a very long time. A boring apartment complex can be replaced in 30 to 50 years. But you can't kick 120 families out of homes they own to build something better. Sac'll be stuck with it. Damn, this proposal is just so disappointing.

And to those of you who say, "Well, I'd like to see you build something better... You couldn't build a nice project, no matter how hard you tried."

You're right. I can't build a nice project. But neither can these developers. Well, at least I would have tried.