Imagine this: Sacramento mayor asks for arena proposals and gets seven
Just over the river, in a town called Sacramento, it appears public input on development/redevelopment projects is valued. In contrast, also called Woodland, it is interesting that 2.5 council members want to sole source a downtown entertainment redevelopment project to one developer.
From "Sacramento arena proposals unveiled" at SacBee.com:
Downtown railyard owner Thomas Enterprises heads a list of seven development teams that have submitted proposals to build a new sports and entertainment arena in Sacramento.
The railyard proposals are among seven submitted last week by an array of development interests, in response to Mayor Kevin Johnson's call for public plans on where and how to build a new sports and entertainment facility in Sacramento.
Read the entire article at SacBee.com.
From "Details Emerge On Arena Proposals" at KCRA.com:
"I was blown away when we ended up getting seven new proposals," [Mayor Kevin] Johnson said. "I have not seen them yet, but I think each of those seven members need to be commended, or development teams who submitted, because it takes a lot of time and energy to put a proposal together, especially in 45 days or less."
Read the entire article at KCRA.com.
Posts
33 comments:
One would think that the job of our city council would be much easier if they allowed and even requested input from Woodlanders. There are far fewer people living here rather than Sacramento. So the ideas might be fewer to choose from.
Letting just one developer walk all over our city means we are not getting the best offers. There are other developers out there who might actually want to HELP Woodland.
The city of Woodland is in a perfect position to take advantage of many different facets of developement. Our leadership has not recognised it yet. Many other cities, just like Sac. are preparing for the future growth of their own economies. Woodland leadership has not figured that out yet. They seem to be in "hunker down" mode. They are just sitting back and waiting for any kind of future.
Just keep your heads stuck deep in the sand. The real world will keep moving forward, while we let it just pass us by, great job of leadership people!
Look - we need work. Our town is drying up. Who cares who the develoepr is, just getter done.
Put a movie theatre anywhere.
Put a parking garage to go along with it so we can create some jobs and use the stimulus money that Sac and other cities are using and quit fighting about it.
Also - the theatre would be better on the East end given the Downtown and where the central area and traffic and site size are ; but who cares if it goes on the other end???
Tear down the State and build a new one.
10:46
You don't make sense.
First you said, "Put a movie theatre anywhere."
Then you said, "Tear down the State and build a new one."
The RDA advisory committee (all appointed by all council members) and at least two council members want the State Theatre to be considered as part of a mulitplex... along with many community members. Who in the community is speaking up for the Petrovich theater?
And what purpose would tearing down the State serve in the redevelopment in the historic downtown?
The grant to which I assume you are referring will cost the city money and won't guarantee any other "stimulus" money to build it.
From the October 21, 2008 WJ: On tonight's agenda the council (acting as the city's redevelopment agency) will vote on adopting a resolution to allocate $125,000 to match grant funds, if awarded, for the "Downtown Garage Project." The proposed sources of funds for planning the garage are: EDA federal grant funds - $125,000, Redevelopment bond funds - $125,000 and In-kind staff costs - $125,000, for a total of $375,000.
Another parking Xanadu on agenda tonight, staff says it will attract theater
A garage, in itself, won't stimulate the economy other than with temporary construction jobs. A new theater complex may, or may not, need a garage. The courthouse didn't... so why would a new theater?
You are overlooking many considerations with your flippant comment.
10:46
Yes this town needs work, do you know what it takes to create jobs? It is people like you and me gambling with their hard earned dollars, starting a business and making an attempt to make it successful. It is not taking from the productive segment of society and giving to the unproductive segment such as what the "Stimulus" program does.
This community competes for discretionary dollars as all other communities do. If our elected officials (this includes Federal, State and Local) had any clue as how to inspire business growth we would not be in the situation that we are in. Woodland has a downtown that is a gem, restaurants, theater, nightlife, etc... The possibilities would be endless if this community were to market these assets and create a draw. Who should pay for a new Theater and Parking Garage and if they are built how many jobs does that create? Building a Parking Structure would put about 75 people to work for approximately one year, and as slow as the construction industry is right now the people that would be working on it would be people that were already established with the builder.
I agree . At some point we will need a parking garage. There are grants and stimulus money from the Feds to put people to work. Build as many things as we can right now using the State and Federal funds, so we have some jobs here in Woodland.
I also do not care which end of the block it is on or if it is even in Downtown.
I also support a Super Wal-Mart as we drive to Dixon right now as they are cheapest and I am feeding a family of 5. Wal Mart is cheaper than Food 4 Less and Nugget and blows the doors off Bel Air.
It does not make sense, we can have a Costco, a super Target and no Super Wal-Mart?
Put the Super Wal Mart downtown if it can't go where it is now. That will get people shopping there.
Look at all the homes being forclosed on, for sale here in Woodland and the auto guys going under.
The Downtown is empty, the mall is empty and in a bad spot.
Get our Woodlanders working.
11:14
This comment you made is interesting: "At some point we will need a parking garage."
I would agree with it in general, but I think when we talk about a garage, or many garages, we need to be careful with the words we use.
I think "we," as in the users of downtown, are far from needing a garage. The latest parking study verified what I have been saying for two years now. There is NO parking problem in the downtown.
I think we will never NEED one single garage. A big garage, like the city was planning, would be a very poor solution to any parking problem that is in our future. People will not park two blocks from their destination. One big garage will not service the entire downtown. On big garage would be a waste of any money - and remember – federal funds come out of our pockets, too.
If there comes a time when a garage is needed, like with the Lofts project, it should be the developer who pays for it. This has already been planned for the Lofts project (an underground garage) and now the city wants to change that plan. If a garage accompanies a theater, the developer should pay for it. Take note of the Holiday Cinema in Davis where a modest garage is above the theaters - in fact, take a look at downtown Davis, period. There are a number of small garages scattered throughout the downtown. They have planned wisely.
One big garage would be a mistake. I don't know why certain staff and certain council members are so stuck on that idea. It would be very poor planning. Many small garages and small surface lots scattered throughout the downtown are the answer.
Lastly, there are many (relatively) low-cost solutions that the city can pursue NOW to make the downtown pedestrian/shopper friendly. For some reason, staff and council are choosing to ignore them. Spread the downtown north and south... use the alleys and cross streets... divert the heavy traffic to Court Street and slow down Main St. with selective diagonal parking locations. It's been done in MANY communities.
The city is so stuck on acquiring grants (for stupid things like $1,000 garbage cans and another street light for Main Street) that they have lost sight of creative and low-cost solutions that will generate excitement NOW.
Dino
Your last post was 100% correct. People will drive around the block 5 times to find a parking space so they will not have to walk more than half a block. Diagonal parking would increase parking spaces on Main St by 50%, maybe by doing this more people would find a parking space and visit our Downtown Merchants.
It's amazing....
Building a movie theater and parking garage will give a construction company and it's subs some cash influx for about 6 months...the real money will be made by the developer...we all know about those guys...
Then the theater and garage (if it isnt automated) will employ some of Pioneer high and Woodland high's finest minimum wage workers that the city has to offer...
Woodland need industry not just jobs... Woodland needs to attract and partner with the next Valley media.... The next large business owner be it ag, tech, warehouse ...something..
The city need to work with businesses looking for a place to land not cling violently to its corn stalk roots and "not another warehouse" mentality.
If I hear another Woodlander spout "that's the way it's always been here" line, I'll vomit.
Woodland has 3 types of jobs right now...Retail, farming and warehousing....and the city could offer so much to other industries.
Get the hell...outside the box people... stop the territorial pissing about a movie theater and get on board with truly developing some industry changes that will actually make an impact.
30 people working at $10 will not save Woodland or even just the downtown.
12:36
The "territorial pissing about a movie theater" IS about a broader vision. Why exclude an historical asset that is part of the historic downtown when there is a perfect opportunity to build onto an established draw for the downtown - history.
Obviously, there are many more industries/stores that will be part of an economic renaissance in the greater Woodland area. This post is specifically about an entertainment venue and opening up the process to include community input. Having Cambridge Junior College in the Porter Building is a good step. The Lofts project would be a good step if it ever happens. A theater is a good step, too, if done correctly and it's not too big. (I think 12 screens is too many.)
A garage will not employ anybody. If you are thinking of a big garage with a person taking money, I think that is not realistic for all the reasons I stated earlier.
I do agree whole-heartedly about your comment: "Get the hell...outside the box people." As I stated earlier, there are many creative and low-cost solutions that can be applied to one small part of the economic picture... making the downtown a pedestrian-friendly destination.
Jobs for the garage would pay about $35 an hour and it would be a 9 month build. Add in a Super Wal-Mart and you would have 40 jobs at $30 + over a year just for the construction. Unfortunalty once it is built; the profits all go to Arkansas and the jobs are no more than min. wage.
The industrial areas are dead. Have been empty since they were built on speck. These jobs pay $8 and hour and only generate property tax.
Farming is being off sourced to foreign countries. Plus - looking at loosing the Williamson Act will put a bunch of smaller farmer under. They really do not generate much in terms of money for the City.
Given the size of the new courthouse and the fact that West Sac, Davis are all sending their homeless and derilicks to Woodland and they end up at the Courthouse; eventually, we may have a problem. Build more bike storage while you are at it.
The plan is take the FREE money the gov't has for building a parking structure. Build one on every corner if need be; but do something to generate some work for the people that are in construction and live here. More than working in a warehouse.
The best tax source right now is Petrovich's mall. Build some stuff out there for all I care; if you want to fight over the Downtown.
BTW- Are we really getting a Rite Aid on East n Main? If so, maybe we should put a Denny's by it, so we do not have to drive so far to get to one. Who is the rocket scientist behind this one? If you have Rite Aid stock; sell it now as an idiot is running the company.
1:59 am,
Construction money will likely go to already employed workers.
Government money is not free.
I agree about the industrial area. It's really a joke if you ever drive around out there. Something COULD happen, and could have happened, in that vacuum... like locating retail out there instead of annexing and rezoning hundreds of acres of open space.
Your comment: "The best tax source right now is Petrovich's mall," is simply not true... assuming your use of the word "best" implies the largest amount of money. You would also have to weigh the amount of money the city gave up to build it and the drain it has on city services and the needless loss of farm land and poor environmental planning.
The last post on Petrovich's Gateway is correct. If the City Council and City didn't move forward on the Gateway as they correctly did, we (city) would be sucking air. Great job Petrovich and Council, you had my vote.
2:50
Walmart brings in more sales tax than Costco.
Target had already provided sales tax to Woodland... plus now Davis has a Target... there is no significant increase there.
Michaels is taking sales tax from Joann.
In n Out is taking sales tax from other burger joints.
I would like to see your math in calculating the net gain in sales tax from Gateway. Then I'd like to see you assess the poor environmental planning and loss of services for Woodland residents.
Gateway was poorly conceived and poorly built. Council should be ashamed for allowing it.
Gateway is a regional shopping center with most of its income from outside Woodland. The net sales tax to City from Gateway far exceeds any drain from other local businesses. Just ask any business managers at Gateway for customer address info.
3:20
Walmart brings in more sales tax than Costco.
Target had already provided sales tax to Woodland... plus now Davis has a Target... there is no significant increase there.
Michaels is taking sales tax from Joann.
In n Out is taking sales tax from other burger joints.
I would like to see your math in calculating the net gain in sales tax from Gateway. Then I'd like to see you assess the poor environmental planning and loss of services for Woodland residents.
Gateway was poorly conceived and poorly built. Council should be ashamed for allowing it.
Dino
Your hate for Paul Petrovich is consuming your balanced thinking process.
3:23,
If you are 2:50 (and 3:20), you are the one who claimed the city would be "sucking air" if it weren't for Gateway. I presented a real scenario, that you ignored, that discredits that claim. You are letting your love of Petrovich cloud the true worth of Gateway. The city is in a poor financial situation with little help from Gateway. Relative to all other sales tax revenue sources in the city, Gateway is far from being the savior of our town.
The only gain from Petrovich is to the officials that receive monetary benefits from him. I would like to know what kind of deal the City made with him. Usually developers of his caliber do not have to use their own money to develop these projects.
I do not like the location of Gateway, in the flood plain and on Class 1 soil
5:57
Aside from Pimentel's campaign donations (that for some reason had to come from two Petrovich employees and four Petrovich LLCs of another name), the city received the right to PURCHASE land from Petrovich to make the 1-5 southbound on-ramp.
Additionally, Petrovich agreed to give the city about $1 million IF he didn't improve his downtown properties within SIX years. I believe the threshold for improvements is about $300,000.
What didn't the city get? An auto mall which was the original concept to have Gateway approved. It was a scam.
Bringing that scam full circle is the city's secret deals with Petrovich for the downtown theater. I doubt Pimentel was in on the original Kirkwood/Petrovich scheming... but now that he has accepted money from Petrovich and wants to sole source a downtown theater to him, you have to wonder how many times (and in how many cities) Pimentel has met with Petrovich.
Thank you Dino for your last post. Do you know if the City ever gave the owner of the State Theater the First Right of Refusal to build a new theater complex? I would expect them to do that, building that would definitely put him out of business.
All that money.... you think Petrovich would have used tagger- resistant paint...
Just another gang sign mural in Hoodland....
Lovely Mall....
1:33
The city (Kirkwood, et al) never offered a first right of refusal to Richard Mann, owner of the State Theatre. In fact, Mann had an investor willing to build a multiplex that included the State about five years ago but the city tried to impose some sort of "parking ordinance" and basically drove the investor away. They drove him away because the city was already cooking up the courthouse garage/theater deal at the Hoblit site. Petrovich had inside knowledge to buy the Hoblit site.
We would already have a totally refurbished State Theatre and multiplex by now if it wasn't for the city.
Anon 3.02
I have heard is to expensive to fix the building and Mr. Mann is not interested.
10:24
Like I said before, Mann presented an opportunity to the city five years ago and the city screwed it up.
I talked to Mann myself and he is willing to sell the building. Therein lies the opportunity to renovate the State Theatre as part of a mulitiplex. That concept has been done in Alameda, Fortuna, Willits, Angels Camp, Orinda, Sacramento, Santa Cruz and San Rafael.
You need to get your facts straight before you start popping off about what you "heard."
More on topic: Let's put the arena in Woodland so it can be covered with graffiti and the Kings and change their names to the "Vatos Grande".
8:35
That's on topic?
Sorry have been pretty buzy and have been focused on work and not been paying attention to the blog
I felt you should have this.
The Railyards Developer Files for Bankruptcy Protection on Three Projects
Sacramento received a scare recently when the Atlanta Journal Constitution reported that Thomas Enterprises Inc., a developer for Sacramento's ambitious north-of-downtown development, The Railyards, has run into financial trouble. Stan Thomas, Thomas Enterprises' founder, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on three large projects, and almost had a fourth project go into foreclosure.
Thomas is well-known for tackling gigantic projects and financing them with his own money. Over the years, his plans have included building a seven-star boutique hotel near the Tower of London, a retractable roof stadium in Orlando, and five "mini cities" across the country. However, his ambitions outgrew the market, and the recent credit crunch prevented him from refinancing loans. He filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on a 2 million square foot San Antonio shopping center, a Prospect Park retail development, and a third project in Smyrna.
The Railyards is Thomas Enterprises' largest continuing project. The Railyards is being built on a hazardous waste site on the riverfront, and Thomas Enterprises is contributing about $100 million in environmental cleanup. Most of the infrastructure spending comes from public funding. Plans include 12,000 homes, 2.3 million square feet of office space, 1.4 million square feet of retail, a transportation hub, and a possible sports arena.
There is no indication that Thomas's financial troubles will affect The Railyards. Still, Thomas's plight has caused anxiety. Sacramento city councilman Kevin McCarty, the only council member to vote against Thomas's deal, has raised questions about Thomas's ability to finish the project. Millions of public money and thousands of potential jobs hinge on the project. Hopefully, Thomas's bankruptcy filings will prove to have contained his financial troubles.
It was at least about the arena
7:39
It's not about the arena. This post is about 2.5 Woodland council members who want to sole source a downtown multiplex. The arena example is used to show that other city's open up development/redevelopment projects without favoring one developer.
Fez,
So is Petrovich in bankruptcy?
Dino
Not that I know of.
Why do you ask grasshopper?
Fez,
I ask because this post is about Pimentel, Dote and possibly Davies wanting to sole source a downtown mulitplex (as Shallit obviously wants) to Petrovich. I thought your example of Thomas Entrerprises was leading to something that pertains to our downtown.
Post a Comment