I don't get Old Town. Bulldoze that turd and create a real riverfront (San Diego: apartment, condo)

[wburg]

The question is, what does "revitalize" mean in this context? About 3 million people visit the six-block area of Old Sacramento every year, and they generally seem to like it a lot. It's our #1 tourist destination by quite a stretch. There are multiple weekend-long festivals and street fairs that draw around 50,000 people each.

As to L Street across from the Capitol, it already is a retail shopping/entertainment area: on that stretch you have jewelry, men's clothes, a few places for cookies and candy, specialty services like shoe repair, a cigar bar, a hotel, a big theater, and toward the east end, three restaurants and two nightclubs. Sure, there are already plenty of offices--being the administrative hub of a $2 trillion economy requires a lot of office space. Who says it's a profane notion to use that street for entertainment and shopping?

Could there be "more" in either area? Sure, there could always be more. But businesses require customers, and there you have two basic choices. You can make parking cheaper and more plentiful (which is expensive and very bad for foot traffic) and hope you can get customers to come there from the suburbs, or you can add more residential units to the neighborhood and create a customer base for those businesses. You don't even have to add that many--just enough to turn downtown back into something resembling a residential neighborhood. People already want to live there--the problem is one of supply, not demand, and the local development community would rather build offices downtown (perceived as more profitable and less trouble) and build suburban developments on the urban fringe. And when people do start talking about living downtown, often they end up talking about building new housing in existing residential neighborhoods near downtown, not in the CBD itself--or in far-off industrial areas like Township 9, which is about as far from downtown as East Sacramento.

[webdev]

No reason to tear it down but considering Sacramento is the capital of California you would think we could have something more impressive. It could use a bit of a revamp. You go to a place like San Antonio Texas and you see what can be done with a river front.

I do agree with moovin though. The city has really screwed up its opportunities to take advantage of all the river front areas. That's one of Sac's best assets. Sac has been been public sector for so long and it shows.

[Clark Fork Fantast]

Some people (OP) just don't have an appreciation for history, I guess. IMO, Old Sac is one of the coolest places in the entire state (assume that it hasn't been neglected since last I was there in 2007; if it has, then indeed it should be revamped). The frontier festivals/Old West Days have an authentic backdrop that makes them more fun and meaningful than most other festivals where parades and living history performances take place on paved roads in front of modern storefronts. I've had so much fun visiting Old Sacramento many times over three decades (as a tourist, maybe--but unsuspecting? Hardly ).

[Curmudgeon]

We had some good times and have some great memories about Old Town, especially of taking grandchildren there for some of the festivals such Frontier Days and the Pacific Rim event and back in the day, Jazz Festival venues. They have good memories of it too and that's what really counts. While not likely feasible from a business perspective, it would be nicer if some more upscale establishments replace some of what I've always referred to as tourist junk stores but by-and-large, there's something for almost everyone there if they take to time to look for it. I strongly favor continued historic renovation over demolition. If we were still in Sacramento I wouldn't mind living there in retirement.

[bluevelo]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

We had some good times and have some great memories about Old Town, especially of taking grandchildren there for some of the festivals such Frontier Days and the Pacific Rim event and back in the day, Jazz Festival venues. They have good memories of it too and that's what really counts. While not likely feasible from a business perspective, it would be nicer if some more upscale establishments replace some of what I've always referred to as tourist junk stores but by-and-large, there's something for almost everyone there if they take to time to look for it. I strongly favor continued historic renovation over demolition. If we were still in Sacramento I wouldn't mind living there in retirement.

Old Town is a mixed bag. If they ever get a good ped bridge connection over to stuff that West Sac is doing to beef up its waterfront, it will be a really cool area.

However, a few years ago a good friend of mine was in town, staying on L Street, and needed some tourist stuff to take home for the kids... there's really nothing on K Street/core - its all over in Old Town - the tacky has got to be *somewhere*.

[Chimérique]

Originally Posted by webdev

You go to a place like San Antonio Texas and you see what can be done with a river front.

The thing about San Antonio's river, it's basically a creek and it is very easy to control, manipulate and design a Disney like atmosphere around it. San Antonio's river is extremely small compared to the Sacramento River.

San Antonio's riverwalk was designed by Disney. In it first few decades, even after Disney designed the riverwalk, it was a stinky, overbearly humid-hot area to walk around.

But once they devoted funds to keep it clean and less stinky with the help of AT&T funding and donations,(corporate headqrts in San Antonio), and because it is so small, they were able to make it a bonafide tourist destination.

[moovin]

My post wasn't a troll post but I'm not a public works planner, builder, or anything like that, so you need to consider my use of hyperbole and metaphor to make my point. One thing I have done is traveled extensively and have seen the beauty and draw of riverfronts. What works in one city may not work in another but I am confident that Sac is at the bottom end of its potential of a thriving riverfront. It may draw numbers of tourists as it is but so does the giant ball of yarn (wherever that is). Its cheesy. If you like old West towns then you should go to Universal Studios. My point is I will never go there or advise any business associate, friend, or decent human being to ever visit that location in Sac. I would always point to mid-town or mid-town/Capital area. It may be successful but it could be much more successful.

[caligirlz]

Originally Posted by moovin

What works in one city may not work in another but I am confident that Sac is at the bottom end of its potential of a thriving riverfront. It may draw numbers of tourists as it is but so does the giant ball of yarn (wherever that is). Its cheesy. It may be successful but it could be much more successful.

I agree. Sacramento's lack of riverfront has been discussed for years, even on CD.
I've only been there probably less than 5 times since I moved to Sacramento in 2005. It IS touristy. The stores are touristy. There are some good restaurants, unfortunately, I haven't been to The Firehouse yet. Everything else I tried was, let's say, not worth a repeat visit. I'm not into festivals. I would like to go to the underground tour and visit some of the Museums if I go again.

[wburg]

Problem is, the only solution I hear is "bulldoze it!" and they don't seem to notice any of the riverfront we have besides the 1000 or so feet of Old Sacramento. I can only assume that they prefer the bulldozed part, and just want to sabotage the city by destroying a part of it that people not from Sacramento actually like to visit. Or they just hate old buildings. Obviously if you live way out in the sticks you're not going to find yourself in Old Sacramento that often. And if you're not into festivals, then Old Sacramento isn't for you....or Midtown/Downtown for that matter. Or Old Folsom or Old Roseville, or Old Auburn or Old Placerville, either. They seem to have quite a few festivals.

[webdev]

Originally Posted by Chimérique

The thing about San Antonio's river, it's basically a creek and it is very easy to control, manipulate and design a Disney like atmosphere around it. San Antonio's river is extremely small compared to the Sacramento River.

San Antonio's riverwalk was designed by Disney. In it first few decades, even after Disney designed the riverwalk, it was a stinky, overbearly humid-hot area to walk around.

But once they devoted funds to keep it clean and less stinky with the help of AT&T funding and donations,(corporate headqrts in San Antonio), and because it is so small, they were able to make it a bonafide tourist destination.

You are right it is smaller. I guess some of us feel it would be nice to touch up our riverfront boardwalk. Ironically the Disney thing isn't too far off from the idea.