RealGM

Hopefully one of these proposals can be accepted.

Mayor Kevin Johnson's second go at getting a new arena built for the Sacramento Kings is a four-way race.

As expected, four development groups submitted arena proposals Thursday to a task force formed by the mayor. Two of the teams are focusing on the downtown railyard as their preferred arena sites.

Link

Not gonna hold my breath, but IMHO the best outcome for the city would be a complete entertainment and tranportstion hub at the railyards. Movie theaters retail spaces food bars comedy clubs and maybe a real Dave and buster and not that crappy baby onge they have in. Roseville. All anchored by the brand new Palms Palace Arena.

I COMPLETELY agree. Make it more than just an arena. A new theatre, trainhub, city subway, or something. Love it.

20,000 seats, Royal Court Stadium. Book it/

Nice to see more development groups joining in to make this arena. I'm glad Kevin Johnson is our mayor.

If KJ gets this thing built he'll be even more of a legend!

Dustin5566 wrote:Not gonna hold my breath, but IMHO the best outcome for the city would be a complete entertainment and tranportstion hub at the railyards. Movie theaters retail spaces food bars comedy clubs and maybe a real Dave and buster and not that crappy baby onge they have in. Roseville. All anchored by the brand new Palms Palace Arena.

I disagree and here's why. There are so many empty buildings on K st that there needs to be something done there. Downtown is a ghost town. Sacramento is still a place where people get in their cars, drive in, and when the event is over they drive home.

Putting it on K St:

1. Cleans up K St between 7th & 13th
2. Gives that area a confined place where people can go "to be entertained." There's no commuter traffic on K st other than the train. Therefore people can walk it.
3. Makes the Downtown Plaza attractive again.
4. If gives Sacramento a tourist destination. Every city has a place where "you take someone" when they aren't from here. Old Sac...really?
5. If you create more housing, more business spaces, more buildings you're just depreciating the value of all the other empty ones.
6. This is the kicker. Once the railyard is finished they will try to become their own community. It's so Sacramento to become "exclusive." Look at Folsom, Elk Grove, North Natomas, Roseville....wait now Rocklin. All these "new" communities have that I'm better than you feel to them. K street is in the heart of the city. The railyard, but proximity, is just as close to West Sac, or Natomas as it is the Capitol.

The assumption is once you build the railyard that it will be an extension of downtown. That's like saying the city of Sacramento gets zoning right.

There's already a train station on 5th and & I. Expand it. You can walk four blocks to the arena. With all this talk of a transportation "hub" who's riding light rail??? The rail doesn't go where people are commuting from (Elk Grove, Roseville, Natomas) but it does go to Folsom now. It's not an alternative to driving your car. RT is BROKE. They aren't expanding.

With Midtown in the area, and creating the railyard you're putting K st on a death blow. The other reason the city, et all keep pushing the railyard is there's so much toxic waste there, and no infrastructure that the only way anything will be built there is if we (tax payers) clean it up.

I envision the railyard becoming it's own community, and it will fight hard to separate itself from downtown.

There's already a movie theater in the downtown plaza FYI

ICMTM wrote:

Dustin5566 wrote:Not gonna hold my breath, but IMHO the best outcome for the city would be a complete entertainment and tranportstion hub at the railyards. Movie theaters retail spaces food bars comedy clubs and maybe a real Dave and buster and not that crappy baby onge they have in. Roseville. All anchored by the brand new Palms Palace Arena.

I disagree and here's why. There are so many empty buildings on K st that there needs to be something done there. Downtown is a ghost town. Sacramento is still a place where people get in their cars, drive in, and when the event is over they drive home.

Putting it on K St:

1. Cleans up K St between 7th & 13th
2. Gives that area a confined place where people can go "to be entertained." There's no commuter traffic on K st other than the train. Therefore people can walk it.
3. Makes the Downtown Plaza attractive again.
4. If gives Sacramento a tourist destination. Every city has a place where "you take someone" when they aren't from here. Old Sac...really?
5. If you create more housing, more business spaces, more buildings you're just depreciating the value of all the other empty ones.
6. This is the kicker. Once the railyard is finished they will try to become their own community. It's so Sacramento to become "exclusive." Look at Folsom, Elk Grove, North Natomas, Roseville....wait now Rocklin. All these "new" communities have that I'm better than you feel to them. K street is in the heart of the city. The railyard, but proximity, is just as close to West Sac, or Natomas as it is the Capitol.

The assumption is once you build the railyard that it will be an extension of downtown. That's like saying the city of Sacramento gets zoning right.

There's already a train station on 5th and & I. Expand it. You can walk four blocks to the arena. With all this talk of a transportation "hub" who's riding light rail??? The rail doesn't go where people are commuting from (Elk Grove, Roseville, Natomas) but it does go to Folsom now. It's not an alternative to driving your car. RT is BROKE. They aren't expanding.

With Midtown in the area, and creating the railyard you're putting K st on a death blow. The other reason the city, et all keep pushing the railyard is there's so much toxic waste there, and no infrastructure that the only way anything will be built there is if we (tax payers) clean it up.

I envision the railyard becoming it's own community, and it will fight hard to separate itself from downtown.

Every major city does this, though. It they could actually GET it in KStreet, I'd completely agree, but the railyard seems the best bet and thats where I'd throw my chips. And wherever it's gonnna be, you'll get more people interested if you promise an entertainment center, transportation hub, jobs, ect.

Lightning Strike wrote:

ICMTM wrote:

Dustin5566 wrote:Not gonna hold my breath, but IMHO the best outcome for the city would be a complete entertainment and tranportstion hub at the railyards. Movie theaters retail spaces food bars comedy clubs and maybe a real Dave and buster and not that crappy baby onge they have in. Roseville. All anchored by the brand new Palms Palace Arena.

I disagree and here's why. There are so many empty buildings on K st that there needs to be something done there. Downtown is a ghost town. Sacramento is still a place where people get in their cars, drive in, and when the event is over they drive home.

Putting it on K St:

1. Cleans up K St between 7th & 13th
2. Gives that area a confined place where people can go "to be entertained." There's no commuter traffic on K st other than the train. Therefore people can walk it.
3. Makes the Downtown Plaza attractive again.
4. If gives Sacramento a tourist destination. Every city has a place where "you take someone" when they aren't from here. Old Sac...really?
5. If you create more housing, more business spaces, more buildings you're just depreciating the value of all the other empty ones.
6. This is the kicker. Once the railyard is finished they will try to become their own community. It's so Sacramento to become "exclusive." Look at Folsom, Elk Grove, North Natomas, Roseville....wait now Rocklin. All these "new" communities have that I'm better than you feel to them. K street is in the heart of the city. The railyard, but proximity, is just as close to West Sac, or Natomas as it is the Capitol.

The assumption is once you build the railyard that it will be an extension of downtown. That's like saying the city of Sacramento gets zoning right.

There's already a train station on 5th and & I. Expand it. You can walk four blocks to the arena. With all this talk of a transportation "hub" who's riding light rail??? The rail doesn't go where people are commuting from (Elk Grove, Roseville, Natomas) but it does go to Folsom now. It's not an alternative to driving your car. RT is BROKE. They aren't expanding.

With Midtown in the area, and creating the railyard you're putting K st on a death blow. The other reason the city, et all keep pushing the railyard is there's so much toxic waste there, and no infrastructure that the only way anything will be built there is if we (tax payers) clean it up.

I envision the railyard becoming it's own community, and it will fight hard to separate itself from downtown.

Every major city does this, though. It they could actually GET it in KStreet, I'd completely agree, but the railyard seems the best bet and thats where I'd throw my chips. And wherever it's gonnna be, you'll get more people interested if you promise an entertainment center, transportation hub, jobs, ect.

I must say I think your spot on with your assessment !

Nice post !

100% agree

ICMTM wrote:

Dustin5566 wrote:Not gonna hold my breath, but IMHO the best outcome for the city would be a complete entertainment and tranportstion hub at the railyards. Movie theaters retail spaces food bars comedy clubs and maybe a real Dave and buster and not that crappy baby onge they have in. Roseville. All anchored by the brand new Palms Palace Arena.

I disagree and here's why. There are so many empty buildings on K st that there needs to be something done there. Downtown is a ghost town. Sacramento is still a place where people get in their cars, drive in, and when the event is over they drive home.

Putting it on K St:

1. Cleans up K St between 7th & 13th
2. Gives that area a confined place where people can go "to be entertained." There's no commuter traffic on K st other than the train. Therefore people can walk it.
3. Makes the Downtown Plaza attractive again.
4. If gives Sacramento a tourist destination. Every city has a place where "you take someone" when they aren't from here. Old Sac...really?
5. If you create more housing, more business spaces, more buildings you're just depreciating the value of all the other empty ones.
6. This is the kicker. Once the railyard is finished they will try to become their own community. It's so Sacramento to become "exclusive." Look at Folsom, Elk Grove, North Natomas, Roseville....wait now Rocklin. All these "new" communities have that I'm better than you feel to them. K street is in the heart of the city. The railyard, but proximity, is just as close to West Sac, or Natomas as it is the Capitol.

The assumption is once you build the railyard that it will be an extension of downtown. That's like saying the city of Sacramento gets zoning right.

There's already a train station on 5th and & I. Expand it. You can walk four blocks to the arena. With all this talk of a transportation "hub" who's riding light rail??? The rail doesn't go where people are commuting from (Elk Grove, Roseville, Natomas) but it does go to Folsom now. It's not an alternative to driving your car. RT is BROKE. They aren't expanding.

With Midtown in the area, and creating the railyard you're putting K st on a death blow. The other reason the city, et all keep pushing the railyard is there's so much toxic waste there, and no infrastructure that the only way anything will be built there is if we (tax payers) clean it up.

I envision the railyard becoming it's own community, and it will fight hard to separate itself from downtown.

I vote ICMTM for mayor! He seems to be the only one in Sacramento who understands how to build a city. I also like to add that for K st, the infrastructure is already there. Less crap to build, the cheaper.

The railyards will need to be developed sometime, but the ****hole that is downtown needs to be the priority. Downtown is the heart of every city and right now Sacramento has no heart.

I don't honestly care where it goes. I just want it go somewhere so I get to keep my Kings.

You cannot use the "revitalization" of downtown plaza as a selling point because they would build it on top of the site of the mall.

The CORE team, which focused on the site of Westfield Downtown Plaza.

Dont get me wrong ICMTM the there are numerous pros and cons for both sites. Honestly, I think the cheapest and easiest place to put it would be the existing Natomas site, but I think it is downtown or bust. The City needs an arena downtown and to finally be a progressive city where, as you said, people can go and hang out and bring friends and family.

I also think putting it next to Raley field would be a cool spot as it could be part of a "sports complex", but given the fact it is not in Sacramento County is a no go.

Any way, back to the subject,

The railyard is a great spot that has great visual appeal from the freeway and is close to the river. The railyard does have its drawbacks with the cleanup that would be needed to make the area fit for the project, but I think it is possible.

That part of town is pretty seedy and the new entertainment district (think our version of LA Live) would go a long way in cleaning up the area and bringing businesses and revenue into the area. Access can be had from Richards blvd, downtown, and the freeway. A Riverwalk with restaurants and water taxi that could shuttle people in from places such as Chevys on the river and other places of interest on the river. The number of cool amentities that could be put into place is endless. for instance, put in a walking bridge so people could park and walk from Discovery park.

K street would be a daunting task, you would have to demolish a lot of buildings, a mall, apartment complex, as well as reverting a lot of streets. An arena would be a very large project, think about picking up Arco and placing in on k street. The arena would coverJ, K, L, and probably M. Then parking and making a feasble way for the fans to get there. The City needs to do alot to help revitalize the downtown area, no question, they can do that by cleaning up the crime riddled streets and clean up the dirty buildings and getting together with the local city leaders to bring a compromise in relations to rent and security for incoming businesses.

I'm not saying "I'm right" and "you're wrong" by any means. I'm just pro K st.

I fear that they will try to make the railyard one size fits most and please nobody. If you put it on K st. You know what it is! Party Alley!!! It's the one place where you can have it because again there's no vehicular traffic for 6 blocks. You have IMAX on one end, and Crest in the middle. Redo those. You have restaurants already there. If you build things in the railyard one of two things will happen:

1. The businesses that are on K st will move to the railyard
2. The businesses that can't move to the railyard will die

You have a dying theater (Crest), two movie theaters (UA, IMAX), and a bunch of hit and miss places in that 10 block stretch. In all honesty leave the mall there. You can make it into something else like restaurants and bars or whatever. It's a nice mall even today. I think scrapping is a waste.

It can't go next to Raley Field!!!! I think it's a slap in the face that Raley Field is not in Sac County as it is.

I've only been to one other NBA game non Kings related and that was in Utah. It's downtown. It takes up a city block. There wasn't any major traffic. Salt Lake City in terms of population mirrors Sacramento. I feel the 7th & K spot works on so many levels:

1. The Infrastructure is there
2. Nothing on that block is worth saving
3. It's a nice spot to anchor tenants to both the mall, and K st
4. The light rail ALREADY goes right by there. There's no need to build an additional transportation hub.

You don't have to demo the entire K st. Just the one block. Yes driving in and out of there will be a mess....so don't! Go early and leave late like they do in every city.

I kind of came up with this on the fly but if they make the upper portion of the mall retail and the lower portion of the mall geared to restaurants (ie gas lamp San Diego) I think that's a win win! The only thing you'd need to do is make a walking bridge that goes from Raley field to the down town plaza. Then it's all connected.

I just think it could be done, and it could be a very attractive row.

I really see the railyard just becoming Sacramento's newest suburb.

I am really interested to see the side by side budget estimations of the 2 projects from demolition to construction.

I am not against K street, but given the hard time we had getting anywhere in the process I want to go with the more practicle option.

I agree with Mitch, I dont care where it goes as long as it gets built.

The best place for a new Arena would be above I5 South of Capital Ave. The "land" is basically free, it would rejoin Sactown with its river, and it would revitalize Old Sac.

ICMTM wrote:You don't have to demo the entire K st. Just the one block. Yes driving in and out of there will be a mess....so don't! Go early and leave late like they do in every city.

Yeah, thats not exactly a solution. They'd REALLY need to fix the driving situation and make SOME kind of major traffic intersection/free way enterance.

Lightning Strike wrote:

ICMTM wrote:You don't have to demo the entire K st. Just the one block. Yes driving in and out of there will be a mess....so don't! Go early and leave late like they do in every city.

Yeah, thats not exactly a solution. They'd REALLY need to fix the driving situation and make SOME kind of major traffic intersection/free way enterance.

Why?

So many cars seem to make it downtown every day as evidence of rush hour traffic. If the people who actually work downtown can get by for years what's a sporting event? There are more people who go there for work than to a Kings game. People use public transportation more so because they don't want to pay for parking and not to avoid traffic.

It's so Sacramento to be in your own bubble.

Before we say we need "wider roads" someone else other than me please do some research on what happens when you do that. It only temporary fixes an issue.

ICMTM wrote:Before we say we need "wider roads" someone else other than me please do some research on what happens when you do that. It only temporary fixes an issue.

Sacramento doesn't need 'wider' roads, it needs MORE roads, specifically freeways. I-80 is a nightmare.

Wider roads isn't a solution but trusting soli in the logic of people to get there early and leave late is?