Urban Development Discussion Thread

[LASam]

Anyone know the status of this development in West Sac by the Cordish Companies... it's called the Stone Lock District. Looks like it would compete with the Railyards to a certain extent.

The Cordish Companies - Scroll down to Stone Lock District on left.

[NorCal Dude]

Sacramento's downtown is plain horrifying. It is neglected, abandoned and in many places resembles crumbling Detroit. If anything is certain, it is vital that the Sacramento region as a whole need to support the development of a revitalized, prosperous and dense urban core that will act as the business and cultural anchor of our region.

You clearly have not spent any time in Detroit.

[alhat]

Originally Posted by Majin

I'll believe it when I see dirt flying. Either way we need more housing downtown not more hotels.

So is there any significant construction activity going on now with either Railyards or Township 9. Are there crews on the ground actively working and if so do they need support services like temp housing or other amenities??

[Majin]

Originally Posted by alhat

So is there any significant construction activity going on now with either Railyards or Township 9. Are there crews on the ground actively working and if so do they need support services like temp housing or other amenities??

I believe the answer is no to both.

[wburg]

The Railyards is restarting its infrastructure work (road grading and utilities) while Township 9 is demolishing the old cannery (which would make great lofts, but they apparently think old buildings are icky so oh well.)

Bringing back the subject of redeveloping postwar retail/residential corridors, Sacramento County is re-doing their land use maps along Watt Avenue in North Highlands to support higher densities and more mixed-use neighborhoods, with a big node close to the Light Rail station and a smaller node up by Elkhorn and Watt:

http://www.dera.saccounty.net/portal...0921154045.pdf

[Majin]

Originally Posted by wburg

The Railyards is restarting its infrastructure work (road grading and utilities) while Township 9 is demolishing the old cannery (which would make great lofts, but they apparently think old buildings are icky so oh well.)

I bet if I drive by it right now I'd still see the two tractors will no one operating them in the railyards. If I drive by two weeks from now I'd probably see the same thing.

As for township 9, I have no idea where the cannery building is but for a project that big, so far all these are doing is demolishing 1 building? Impressive....not.

Originally Posted by wburg

Bringing back the subject of redeveloping postwar retail/residential corridors, Sacramento County is re-doing their land use maps along Watt Avenue in North Highlands to support higher densities and more mixed-use neighborhoods, with a big node close to the Light Rail station and a smaller node up by Elkhorn and Watt:

http://www.dera.saccounty.net/portal...0921154045.pdf

As for land use maps... blah. I don't even want to get into that.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by Majin

I bet if I drive by it right now I'd still see the two tractors will no one operating them in the railyards. If I drive by two weeks from now I'd probably see the same thing.

As for township 9, I have no idea where the cannery building is but for a project that big, so far all these are doing is demolishing 1 building? Impressive....not.



As for land use maps... blah. I don't even want to get into that.

Not one building, but an entire complex of buildings that covers the equivalent of several city blocks. This was a major cannery complex, not one building.

Why don't you want to get into the land use maps? If they actually build it out, it should bring the area up to roughly Midtown's current levels of density, at least along the Watt Avenue corridor--then all they need is a streetcar running up and down Watt in place of the bus routes to bring the density up higher.

[Majin]

Originally Posted by wburg

Not one building, but an entire complex of buildings that covers the equivalent of several city blocks. This was a major cannery complex, not one building.

Where is this at? I want to see how extensive the work is.

Originally Posted by wburg

Why don't you want to get into the land use maps? If they actually build it out, it should bring the area up to roughly Midtown's current levels of density, at least along the Watt Avenue corridor--then all they need is a streetcar running up and down Watt in place of the bus routes to bring the density up higher.

For one, I have no reason to believe the county or the region in general is going to make a serious attempt at densifying outside of the city core. I just don't buy it and it sort of annoys me when they make these "smart growth", "densifying", or TOD plans and never follow through with it. Natomas is the best example of that.

Can you even name one example outside of the city core where something was built with real urban design? Can you give one example of a recently developed area that actually has good street design, gridded with good connectivity (no cul-de-sacs or dead ends).

There are a tons of different changes to the design guidelines for the city/county they need to make if they were really serious. New developments to have gridded street only. Absolutely no surface lots fronting streets. Maximum parking spaces for surface lots, anything beyond that and a garage needs to be built. Get rid of all minimum parking requirements. All major boulevards required to have zero set back with only mixed used or office developments, with street parking. Imagine what north natomas would look like if those requirements were in place.

[wburg]

Originally Posted by Majin

Where is this at? I want to see how extensive the work is.

Richards Boulevard, west of 7th Street.

For one, I have no reason to believe the county or the region in general is going to make a serious attempt at densifying outside of the city core. I just don't buy it and it sort of annoys me when they make these "smart growth", "densifying", or TOD plans and never follow through with it. Natomas is the best example of that.

Can you even name one example outside of the city core where something was built with real urban design? Can you give one example of a recently developed area that actually has good street design, gridded with good connectivity (no cul-de-sacs or dead ends).

There are a tons of different changes to the design guidelines for the city/county they need to make if they were really serious. New developments to have gridded street only. Absolutely no surface lots fronting streets. Maximum parking spaces for surface lots, anything beyond that and a garage needs to be built. Get rid of all minimum parking requirements. All major boulevards required to have zero set back with only mixed used or office developments, with street parking. Imagine what north natomas would look like if those requirements were in place.

Tell you what: read the document I linked, and tell me what you think of it. This is new ground for Sacramento's suburbs, I don't know how well it will be followed or when. Yes, North Natomas was built completely wrong (thanks to planning by special permit and granting of every possible exception to their own rules) but since that experiment seems to have turned out to be a failure, there are other things t try. This is also a very different project than North Natomas--it is infill and reconstruction along an existing neighborhood corridor, not greenfield development like Natomas.

[Phil Minor]

Originally Posted by wburg

Bringing back the subject of redeveloping postwar retail/residential corridors, Sacramento County is re-doing their land use maps along Watt Avenue in North Highlands to support higher densities and more mixed-use neighborhoods, with a big node close to the Light Rail station and a smaller node up by Elkhorn and Watt:

http://www.dera.saccounty.net/portal...0921154045.pdf

Its going to be high density but I doubt it will be particularly pedestrian oriented.

A lot of the traffic that was supposed to be handled by this network of unbuilt freeways has been diverted onto Watt Avenue. Because of the positioning of the Haggin Oaks Golf Course, the rail roads and McClellan, there also just wasn't space for a bunch of roads parallel to Watt Avenue.

IndyRoads.com --- California's independent roads website

Functionally all of that traffic gets diverted onto Watt Ave. Watt Ave has freeway levels of traffic. But there is no where else to squeeze the traffic.

If you look at the record of transit oriented development generally it fails in areas in close proximity to the freeways. The traffic and customers from freeways make auto oriented projects out compete transit oriented projects along those corridors. This is why few transit agencies bother to build transit down the middle of freeways anymore, despite the ease of getting rights of way in those corridors.

Under the Sacramento Regional Blueprint, the County has to zone a certain amout of higher density infill. Given the prostitution on Watt Avenue, redevelopment of that corridor has become a priority.

But you also have to look at what the market will bare and how much development agencies are willing to subsidize the new projects. Along Watt Avenue, current housing prices are well below replacement. In downtown, downtown business groups were willing to pressure redevelopment agencies to subsidize above market units like lofts arguing that the only way to bring retail to downtown was to bring in wealthier people to shop at that retail. But there really isn't a pressure group demanding more subsidized above market housing for North Highlands.

So instead the county is going to redevelop this on the cheap. What the area will probably get is a bunch of Garden Style Apartments, think of the apartments between Fulton and Howe or along Madison. These are high density, but not particularly pedestrian orientated.

Some of it is just a lack of basic demand. How many people (other than Hooker's) are willing to walk around on Watt Avenue? The traffic is too fast, too unpleasant and too noisy. In short the developers will have a point, why spend all this money trying to make a pedestrian oriented community in an area that inherently isn't pleasant for pedestrians?

My hunch is that when all is said and done, money will be made available mostly to tear down some of the hotels where the hookers do there business. After that redevelopment money will be redirected downtown or to a new arena for the Kings.

Part of the problem is that county is going to permit a bunch of housing off highway 160 between Rancho and Elk Grove. If you zone a bunch of new housing there, you kill the demand to build infill along Watt Avenue.

As long as the Sac Blueprint demands a certain amount of land to be zoned for high density infill, they will zone a certain amount for that purpose. But that stuff will only get built to the extent that the redevelopment agencies are willing to subsidize it and right now I don't think there heart is in it, nor do I think there is widespread support in the relevant County Supervisor districts to spend a bunch of money redeveloping Watt.