I've had the flu the last coupla days. That picture you see are some tattoos that a couple of Chicago Bananas fans got recently! How cool is that? Personally, I'm saving up for a full-color banana on my lower back (and a tiny dolphin on my ankle).
While I was recuperating I have been reading the Magic Mountain (no, not the history of the amusement park), which is the perfect book to read when you're sick because it's about a guy in a TB sanitorium in the Alps. I also read the new New Yorker cover to cover (the media issue) and it is a corker, let me tell ya. The Mitford sisters (guphy, take note), an awesome article about Christopher Hitchens (where he declares the four most overrated things in life to be: lobsters, champagne, anal sex, and picnics-which made me laugh really hard). Buy it, it's the best issue in ages. Oh and I saw The Departed, which is Scorcese's best movie since Goodfellas (OK, I haven't seen the Age of Innocence). And possibly the best movie of the year behind Jackass 2 (JK).
Speaking of movies, it's very exciting that this friday the Almodovar fest starts at the Crest. I will be checking some of those movies out, using Dan's article as my guide. Looks like tomorrow All About My Mother is playing at 5:40 and Women on the Verge is at 8:00. Shortbus is starting tomorrow, too, and I don't have very high hopes but I will always take any chance to see a boner on the big screen.
Guess what the city has been sneaking around doing behind everyone's back? Everyone is so distracted by this arena debacle (oh yay the Maloofs have deigned to come back to the negotiating table) that the city was able to give eleven million bucks to a developer who is building a "lavish" (this just in: "lavish" in, "luxury" out-luxury is so 2005) hotel on 18 floors of one of the towers they are building. Why? Because of high construction costs and a "slumping housing market". You might ask what a slumping housing market has to do with a hotel and I wouldn't have an answer for you. You might also ask (wisely) if Sac needs many more hotels (they're already building that "boutique hotel" by Temple) and I would answer "probably not", but I'm not running things around here. Tucked into the last sentence is the note that with this money gone, there is now 12 mill left in the city redevelopment fund. So they just gave away half the fucking fund to some non-local major developer who already fucking started construction on the goddamn behemoth! Are you telling me they would have just shut construction down if the city didn't give them this handout? The city council voted unananimously on this. Other highlights from the article? The developer blaming hurricane Katrina and Rob Fong referring to them as the Twin Towers, which has a pretty ominous ring. This is a fucking joke, this developer is rich as fuck and everyone knows he did not really need this money. What's an 11 million dollar overrun on a 500 million dollar project?
45 comments:
Good to have you back, Becks. Here is how I would rank the 8 films playing in the festival:
1) Talk to Her
2) Live Flesh
3) Bad Education
4) All About My Mother
5) Law of Desire
6) Matador
7) Women on the Verge...
8) Flower of My Secret
By the way, could you let The People know that The Barnesyard can be viewed at:
www.barnesyardarchives.blogspot.com
about the InterContinental thing.... none of that was done in private. everything was long, drawn-out and open to the public.
maybe you're just paying attention too late? either way the IC hotel is a $106 million project that is not obligated to be built at all. the city has historically given away subsidies to hotels because they make their money back instantly. the tax revenue generated over 10 years from the IC hotel is anticipated to be about $110 million. each year, the hotel will generate $1.7 million to be use for affordable housing.
Subsidies have been given to the Sheraton, Hyatt, and the Joie de Vie. and yes - Sacramento absolutely needs more hotels, and definitely needs a more upscale one. The occupancy rates have constantly been consistently high for years. also this subsidy is not for Saca, but the hotel itself. though the hotel will be inside the towers project - the costs of construction and the business itself are totally independent of the building. The city likes these projects cause they generate big money right away, and there is no risk to the city as the loan is paid upon completion of the project.
i don't know why the "housing slump" thing made it in the Bee. Saca did not say that at all. he was very brief and gracious and thankful for the city assiting the hotel. if he did say that, it was not said publicly, and he was probably on drugs.
if you have time watch the city council meeting. It's actually quite entertaining when this guy Don something goes off on a tangent about the excitement of downtown being better than meth, and how he couldn't run for council because he would have to prostitute his morals. good stuff!!!
ok, fact guy, facts are nice (i personally don't need them to start spouting off, i'm like rush limbaugh in that way) but where are you getting that 100 mill figure? here's what the paper said:
Several council members said they viewed the subsidy as more of an investment, referring to a city report that estimates the hotel will add about $1.5 million to the local tax base annually and support 190 jobs. The entire project is expected to generate more than $7 million in new taxes, according to the city.
and i meant "sneaking around" in the sense that although i read the bee and news and review regularly this was the first i had heard of this subsidy so I assumed there had not been much public debate about it. very few people have the time or inclination to go to city council meetings so I don't count just talking about it there as being really open to everyone.
but thanks for the opinion, you obviously know more about the issue than i do.
Back to the important stuff, was the New Yorker article about the new book of Jessica's letters? I can't wait! She is the coolest Mitford, ending up being a big ol' Red in Berkeley. But having never slept with Hilter, she is not the most interesting Mitford.
Have you caught the fever?
guphy
yes, it's about jessica's letters, and yes i caught the fever at precisely the moment when I saw the picture of the whole family and one of the sisters was wearing a tweed suit and holding a weinerdog.
Viva Pedro! .... We don't get movies that good in theatres in my little corner of the world, so I won't get to see them again in these fabulous new prints .. His Volver, however, is on the top of my must-see list for the rest of this year
Oh, yeah, they love their animals. Evelyn Waugh even named a character after Jessica's goat*. I have a copy of The Sisters you can borrow if you want.
* I REALLY could go on like this forever.
i hate to be fact guy again, and rain on your rush, but there were multiple articles published in the bee and business journal about the request. it was about the same time Westfield requested $20 million slap some modern features on the mall and built a target and movie theater.
i don't really know how the city government could be more open than opening the doors to the meeting, televising them, broadcasting live on the web and being archived on the city website. but i do understand your point that most people aren't inclined to do any of that.
the $110 million figure is an estimate from the city's downtown development group, and Leslie Fritzsche who gave the presentation to the council:
"Over the 15 years of the loan, the project would generate $110 million in additional tax revenue. The project also spurs private investment of $640 million. The city will recoup its investment one and a half years after the hotel opens through the new tax revenue that will be generated, she said." - published in the biz journal, yesterday.
sorry if i'm being boring, or sounding righteous - i just think it's a pretty sound investment on the city's part. i'll go away now. :)
I`m hella having a bad flu over here.Almost fainted yesterday--here is a japanese remedy..
1.Fresh Ginger parts(actual plant tear/rub off)
2.japanese green orange but a lemon will do(you want the c and the tartness)
3.Honey
4.Hot Water
Add Shoo Chuu if ya want...And drink fast while it`s hot.Kinda like a Ginger`ed hoddy toddy.I`ve been taking meds so no shoo chuu.Wanna see some crazy drunks go here...http://www.japangets.com/drunk.html
sounds a lot like a sore throat remedy recommended by Dr. Andrew Weil: 1 tsp sliced fresh ginger, 1 tbsp lemon juice, 1 tbsp honey and a dash of cayenne pepper. Boil the ginger in a cup or so of water, add the rest, and drink it warm.
and yeah, we do need a couple of boutique hotels. The other bad news is that the Marshall Hotel, across from the Saca tower, will probably end up as one in a couple of years.
See "Age of Innocence," Beckler. It's the only thing that throws a wrench in the "best movie since 'Goodfellas'" proclamation," which is what I initially said upon walking out of the "The Departed." Then I realized I misspoke.
True story: Only one hotel in the downtown Sacramento area has been built without subsidies from the city. That's the new Marriot that's going in across from Mason's on 15th and L, which will be opening in March. And the reason that hotel didn't receive a subsidy? It's fully paid for by three Indian tribes -- two from Southern California and one from Green Bay, Wisc. And here comes the shameless plug: We've got an article on the tribes' role in the changing face of downtown in the next issue of the Midtown Monthly...
A fellow departed lover! What did you think of the chick (the only one in this macho movie, so you know who i'm talking about), smiller liked her but i thought she looked way too much like ms. heather mills aka former mrs. mccartney.
and wait a minute all you fact folks, i accepted your rationale too fast because there is always pressure to bow to business interests. we don't need any more hotels, we don't need boutique hotels, sac doesn't need to grow. those needs all stem from people who want to make money off of it and i have nothing to gain from that so why should i agree that we need these things? i like sac the way it is. sorry if that makes me a hippy.
"The Departed" - Scoresese's best movie since "Casino"
I like sac the way it WAS. The way it IS gives me an ass rash.
what i needs:
Less luxury hotels.
Less fine dining.
Less loft-living.
Less valet parking.
More walking.
More historic preservation.
More bike lanes.
more mom'n'pop.
but that's just me...
i like sac just the way it is and the way it was. that's why i moved here and live here now. but i want more people in the city center. i think it's in the best interest for myself and the region at large. i like the quaint hippy aspects, and i also like the economic aspects. in a city those two come together. in sacramento we add the state government, so it's even more complex. but i digress...
that money was going towards redevelopment anyway. it always was going to go to some developer, some contractor, some architect, some engineer, some corporation, and some lowly employee. It's really not an us against them senario.
More luxury hotels.
More fine dining.
More loft-living.
More valet parking.
More walking.
More historic preservation.
More bike lanes.
More mom'n'pop.
but that's just me...
More luxury hotels.
More fine dining.
More loft-living.
More valet parking.
leads to...
More rent increases for commercial and residential properties....
....making it harder for Mom and Pop to survive. There is really nothing quite like gentrification to sterilize a community.
liv
Quick, call Stuart Katz before the idea loses fire!
Smitty - "you have no class - nasty man. Your just nasty and trailer park."
i have a problem with the constant call for "more people in the city center," especially as part of the call for luxury housing and "upscale" entertainment & dining options. downtown is densely populated already. these big money people just want more wealthy people downtown, but they're afraid of phrasing it that way.
More luxury hotels.
More fine dining.
More loft-living.
More valet parking.
leads to...
Situations like the open lot across from the Distillery being turned into expensive high-rise condos, whose occupants start complaining about the 'noise' on the block that preceding them?
I get the point that development can lead to bigger and better things for the city's economy and quality of life. But unless you're Milton Friedman, it's pretty naive to think that it's all going to be positive changes.
smitty, i live at 19th & broadway so i'd like to know what you plan.
liv, that's cynical and untrue. you shouldn't use that empty phrase "gentrification" to validate yourself. any mom & pop store would appreciate more residents nearby. especially people with some disposable income. and every land owner in the city wants their property to be worth as much as possible.
darin, do wealthy people not deserve to live downtown?
and last i checked there are hundreds units of housing currently under construction downtown that target mid-range home buyers. and for all you arm-chair proletariates - the globe mills project on 12th street is currently under construction, and so too a few CADA funded projects like the East End Gateway site on 16th street - these will bring hundreds of new affordable housing units downtown. but i also doubt that any of you people qualify for such housing.
Anyway, the InterContinental Hotel loan will generate $1.7 million annually for a 15-year period that will be used for affodable housing in the city of Sacramento. If you do the math, that's more money than they loaned to the hotel itself. in fact it's $25.5 million.
about the distillery... that situation is ridiculous and needs to be addressed. anyone who moved there knew damn well the disillery was there first.
but problems like this happen all over the city and have to be worked out. it's not just the evil wealthy people.
SN&R aritcle
No, I am not being cynical. Sacramento has no rent controls or other systems put in place to protect people who see a sudden surge in the market and who then can no longer afford to live where the live. I moved twice in 2 years in 2002-2003 because everytime I arrived somewhere the rent went up faster than my meager college student earnings could keep pace with.
As for 20th and Broadway, Smitty is refering to a neighborhood where my husband and I own property so I do have a vested interest in real estate in this town. Does that mean that I'm all for opening the door to any developer with a dollar who wants to spend it in Sac? No. I have sat in on city council meetings and have been to my share of various community group gatherings. I have seen how politics work. I don't think that it's cynical to believe we should be wary of gentrification, I think we should be smart about the way our city evolves.
I could site various instances where city government was more than happy to give money to a developer at the cost of a locally owned and operated establishment. The Crest is the first example that comes to mind.
Lastly, what the city calls affordable housing is often still out of reach for many people.
Liv "I identify myself by my first and last name" Moe
i never said anything about not allowing wealthy people downtown. i just commented that all the talk of needing more people downtown is really just a call for more wealthy people downtown. which it is. it would help promote an honest debate on the situation if that were acknowledged, instead of the developoment community's presentation of downtown as some underpopulated wasteland.
oh, and the distillery situation proves that not every independently owned small business (i.e., mom & pop) wants more residents nearby with more disposable income.
liv, point taken. i agree that we should be very concerned with the developments that happen in our city, and believe me, i am.
i think right now it's very hard to find a decent place to rent downtown. the supply is so low that places can charge huge sums because they're new or newly renovated, and have modern amenities. i happen to think more of these developments are neccessary as to bring competition and more options.
and rent control is kind of a sticky situation though. if you aren't able to raise the rent of your own property, then you also aren't able to adjust to the rising costs of everything else around you. this can cause your property to slowly decay over time, because preventative maintenance is not feasible. berkeley is a good example of this situation.
there have been projects around town that were deemed too big, too dense, too much. so the city planners and design review are very active in taking into consideration the concerns of existing and established neighborhoods. the issue with the towers and intercontinental aren't of that variety. the project is located at the site of the abandoned headquarters of the former sac union. it's at the most prime location in the city's central business district. i'd hardly consider that an example of gentrification.
the st. anton was not publically funded at all, so it's not like the city pandered to developers on that. and although somebody wrongfully made a stink about the distillery (and the city has handeled it very poorly) there was also a quote in the SN&R from another resident of the building who said this:
"resident Debbie Rafter said she moved downtown for its culture and revitalization. “That’s why we’re here,” Rafter said. “At least, that’s why I’m here.”"
there are always going to be good things and bad things that occur with a city experiencing growth. the best thing is not to get caught up in hype, and not to make it an issue of class warfare. a successful city balances a population of all walks of life, and it takes active process to achieve that.
Nice attempt there to link concern over the negative impacts of gentrification with being an elitist or having some kind of class resentment. Doesn't change the fact that the city government gives a higher priority to the needs/concerns of developers and large economic interests. What I would really like to see is somebody who's younger and lives downtown (maybe even somebody who posts here) trying to run for office. We talk about it enough, why can't we run and elect somebody to advocate for that point of view? Sacramento needs its own version of Matt Gonsalez.
Speaking as a property owner, I am MORE than willing to see property values in sacto 'correct' or stagnate for some time, even if it means that I lose some money. it seems like a fair trade-off to me.
Soaring property values keep a lot of average folks out of the housing market and encourages speculative real estate investment. Speculating on real estate is not necessarily a bad thing, but when speculators are driving the prices up (as happened from 2000-2005 in sacto) far in excess of what the average homebuyer can afford, it's bad for the community.
I'm also curious where td wants his 'more luxury lofts' and 'more luxury hotels' to go if he/she also wants more historic preservation. historic (let's say pre-1960) sacto is being destroyed at a rate not seen since the downtown freeways were built. perhaps i wouldn't be so opposed to this development if it wasn't almost universally shitty architecture. Oh, and where are all those more valet parked cars supposed to park?
Everything is a trade off. growth has its benefits. Sure, i'd LOVE to see a good art museum in sacto. I'd love to see a well-planned renovation/revitalization of the railyards (i.e. not Q&R). i'd love to see a thriving rt system (can you imagine a seattle-style monorail in sac?) skyscapers? Sure, as long as they'll still look good in 50 years. Public market on K Street? sign me up. I'm all for growth-- smart growth. and what we're seeing today-- this ain't it.
I don't know where td got the numbers re: downtown rentals. last I checked, the sacto rental market has the largest number of vacant apartments in years.
I'm 26 and a downtown home owner and i post here. i don't see how a younger perspective would align with whatever your views are. i get the feeling you're thinking i'm a bad guy here? that i'm all for progress without responsibility?
omf, i said a decent place. there are plenty of decrepit rentals downtown. also i'm just trying to relate to what liv said about being priced out of two places - which is very inconsistent to having a vast number of vacanies and a buyer's market in realestate. so maybe you can address that?
but i do agree, that i would love to see things settle down too. and they will, i think.
anyway, if you want to see a list of more historic preservation with more lofts and more hotels i'll give you a partial list:
1) CADA's Capitol Lofts on R & 11th (housing)
2) 700 block of K Street, Zeiden proposal (all retail)
3) Elliot Building on J & 15th (retail, office, housing)
4) Crystal Ice Plant, R & 16th (retail, housing)
5) MARRS, 20th & K (retail - not really historic, but adaptive reuse nonetheless)
6) Cathedral Building, 12th & K (restaurant, housing)
7) Joe De Vie hotel / Calwest Building, J & 9th (hotel)
8) Hale Lofts, 8th & K (retail, housing)
9) REA building, 4th & I Street (office, retail)
10) Live theater & restaurant proposal, 10th & K
11) Globe Mills, 12th & C (housing, community center)
there's more.. but those are the farthest along atleast.
Valet cars park in empty state/office garages. The Crocker Art Museum plans should please you - it's pretty extensive. RT expansions are underway to the Amtrak station, and soon to the railyards and hopefully to the airport. several stations are under extensive design improvements. There is a public market geared up for R Street, behind Safeway and next to the Crystal Ice Plant project.
last, i just found about these guys and couldn't be more pleased with their approach towards development. This is the kind of company i want to see more of in Sacramento. be sure to check out and comment on their project in the Newton Booth neighborhood at 27th and V Street.
thanks for engaging me. later.
regarding the rental market being high-priced yet with lots of vacancies: just proof that it's not as simple as basic supply-and-demand. investors bought rental property at the height of the real estate market and have to charge big rents to be able to pay their mortgages, but most renters did not see their incomes increase in any way close to proportional to the run up in real estate costs. lots of renters got forced from "decent" housing into "decrepit" housing because of this. and stagnant prices and more houses for sale hardly make a "buyer's market in real estate" when the asking prices are still way above what most people can afford. it may "correct" itself eventually, but we're no where near there yet.
oh, and the 700 block of K street proposal is a perfect example of bad redevelopment, using city subsidies (and possibly eminent domain) to force out successful, unique, locally owned businesses and replace them with generic chain stores.
overall, TD, we probably would all agree on a bunch of stuff, like wanting good redevelopment of actual blighted/vacant areas such as Globe Mills or the Crystal Ice Plant. But a lot of us have seen our downtown get less & less appealing because of the sort of redevelopment that the city has been supporting with our tax dollars.
good points on the rental issue. and i don't mean decrepit as quite the insult as it may come accross. my current home is decrepit, but I'm able to fix that with blood, sweat, tears and dollars for my own benefit.
by saying "buyer's market" i was alluding to very low interest rates, which is a good portion of why i was able to purchase my home - especially being self-imployed at the time (hmmm... maybe i should say unemployed).
agreed on 700 K block... that's tough and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. i just used as an example of historic preservation - which it will be - in an architectural sense at least.
to address the taxpayer's concerns - what i started my commenting on was just that. i know it's using tax dollars to fund projects that may not benefit you or i directly or immediately - but they do benefit the city's funding capacity. the way i see it is the city is using a large chunck of money to spur big investment, in order to see a larger return on investment. thus the city disperses the larger fund into the many smaller, more individual groups of projects that need it.
also, the city's bond capacity was for $800 million in redevelopment funds. just over $100 million has been allocated. and the JKL corridors were their prime targets for this funding after performing numerous charettes and public outreach. in 2008 another $20-something million in bonds will be sold - so now it is the city's residents responsibility to push for projects and causes that meet their objectives. change is coming regardless of whether the city spends $1 or $800 million. and i think the more people involved in the process, the better this city will be in the near future.
ammmmmanda-where'd you hear that? is it inside info? i googled it and didn't find anything.
dan-i put casino in my queue cuz i only saw it once when it came out, but it is hard for me to see how any movie starring sharon stone (and pesci, who i'm not crazy about) could be better than the departed.
td-your views are interesting and I value a dissenting opinion here and there. why do you think most of us readers wouldn't qualify for for "low cost" subsidized housing (which I bet that most of us couldn't afford)-do you think we're a bunch of richies?
Bananas tattoos! Those kids got Bananas tattoos!!
But yeah, I came in on this late cuz I wasn't at work Friday - but I'd like to say that I'm glad that, for the most part, this conversation remained civil. TD, I don't agree with a lot that you've said (some though) but it's nice to see some "pro-development" talk that's not just b.s. rhetoric.
Joe Sun - gone? Or just moving? If it's gone, that's highly symbolic. A true Sac mom n pop institution that closed down as a direct result of redevelopment.
miller
I agree with Miller. I find it hard to believe that it's a good thing for our city to develop over a successful, independently owned and operated establishment. I also don't like the message it sends to small operators. Essentially, go ahead try your best and if someone with more money wants to do something else where you're located then you you lose.
I would really like to get confirmation or a source for that piece of info.
-liv
I gotta chime in and agree that the projects td cited are not what I'd call 'historic preservation' either. Saving a part of the facade of a building may be better than tearing it down completely, but not much.
The 700 K project is the WORST example of sacto 'renovation' that I've seen since the levelling of old hotels and apts that accompanied the building of the new convention center. Yeah-- let's drive out the ONLY two businesses that have thrived on the west end of K street! Way to go Sacto!
BTW...
on the independent tip... I'm putting together a buy local shopping guide for the holidays and would love feed back on some of your favorite mom n pops.
-liv
The problem with the developement in Sac is that the developers/city leaders are putting the cart before the horse. I get the feeling that what they want is a young vibrant population that goes out at night - the creative class. But those folks don't come because you invest in world class hotels and fancy pants lofts. I think they live in places that a.) are cheap b.) have an intellectual life and c.) have made vast investments in public parks/services/public space, public transit. I think Sacramento has gone about this last factor backwards - the city invests in commercial and residential, not in institutions that really make the city more livable and that attract people. My two cents.
Scott Soriano for Mayor! There's some council members that need their ears boxed.
That's the spirt! C'mon now, somebody just try running for an office. If Gary Coleman can run for Governor, it can't be that hard. Just somebody please run!
easy to run, hard to win. remember that Gary Coleman got beat by an oompa loompa.
>easy to run, hard to win. remember that >Gary Coleman got beat by an oompa
>loompa.
Hey, I did my part and casted my vote for Arnold. Arnold "Watchoo talkin' 'bout, Willis" Drummond, that is.
--the gooch
Miller, that's funny that you only have time to post when "you're at work."
Jed
Can anyone even see those Banana tattoos or what? Are you all so jaded that something that beautiful doesn't move you even a little bit?
Those Banana`s Tattoo are amazing!!!the Banana`s are like tottally demi-god status kinda like the shinto empourer of japan!!!I totally would love to move back to Sacto but without socialized cheap healthcare(thanks nippon)I`m stuck here.We still have Tower with 500 yen cd bins where i can wade thru cheap american imports.But what was the shit of the indie japan scene "the shibuya kei"is becoming a memory.Indie record stores are closing,Trattoria records is no more and bein` replaced by Plastic Beats from Korea or Puffy.The Population over here is getting smaller and smaller but they build apartments galore while old traditional kick ass homes crumble.The block down the street next to campign office for a mayor candidate is park made of a asphalt where ya can see the elderly volunteer taking a leak.They put some potted flowers out which died in the sun with a no parking sign sayin` this is a park but actually looks like a parking lot.Those crazy zazen buddhist would actually do this.Did you know "head honcho" came from "hancho"which means boss in japanese.Last time out drinking i drank shoo chu and talked about sumo to some guy but then got sumo`d by the guy.Cause Sumo is tottally like bonding..So drunk i couldn`t walk home and took a cab home and gave drunken japaneese directions.The next day i slept all day at kumamoto castle listening to Taiko with many other passed out from drinkin` too much the night before.Taiko is awesome!!!!Goin to Sumo ju-ichi gatsu for the fukuoka basho!!!
take care---jay
I dunno smitty - I sure as hell wish that I could actually get home on RT late at night. Sure, I can take the train - but no buses actually connect to the train late enough to get me home. Now that's pretty brilliant, eh?
Rather than using the savings to be in a band, I'd invest them in local businesses. Um, bar businesses, most likely, but still...
"they want the benefits of having a young vibrant population without the problems"
There's some mighty good, and very accurate wisdom in that statement.
And I've been whining and ranting and cynical longer than you, you young punk (no offense to omf of course).
Post a Comment