urban land institute railyards report

7/31/2019 Urban Land Institute Railyards Report

1/95

!"""#$#%

& !"!# $$'(

"#$%&'()*$&(+'),)'-.!)

!(#)*)+**,

(-

'#./% .0

1*)******/"223.04)/%5)*)'-223.%222%6)****$(""27%17/1)*)/.01*)******/$%22%$2$4-/8%7%%9%$%3233":;!

,)#=(327%

!#7%/)# ?93@$$

!(# *)***

0)#1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

+(2')+A%-+:;+2

!+?.2+,+?9:;

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111110/2

22372'')*),&*!&).7

0!!/)032')
http://www.cityofsacramento.org/http://www.cityofsacramento.org/


2/95

(2( (%&=+ '!')*)!&*&)).7


3/95

!"#!$%#"&'()&

#&'*#'

# +'&! !&,#'

,&' ,,' '#','+'(),&

##!'#'#-.+/

#+'')#%+)%(

)'#!#(0''!!

#&!#!''0.12%3"

#,!''!!

* &!&!+)%##.+

!'(

4#.'+#'#-5')#

%'!6&

'(%''&*!&

#!1+'4+'()'/

!!,#'#!&

!!!!,#'

(

7!!,##'#,

'*'!,#!!!#'(-##!!

'#'#!!''&

"/)8!&&*#

!'#!'#,,

''!,#'!!#!$

##,/,#'(#!*!!

!8!'!%3"0.12

*,##!'#'*

#''(

)!&!*'!')#+'

2&')+2%% '6!!!

9(

)#!,&'!"#

!9.-0(+!!-#

#'#!*-%3"50.12

*

'#'#''(

Back to Table

of Contents


4/95

)!&,!+#

&,#':"&(

#' &&& $#

,#'(##'#'#2((;2'0

#' #,!'',

'''#' #5##* (


5/95

!!"#$%&

%%'

!!##!(%#

#(#'

%%%#

$!#!#)%&

*)

#

# %!+

) !,

! # #)!)

-%# #,

'#!) !!,

!!&%#,

%&&! ,

'!%,

%)!!!%

, .-)%)

#%!$&+

/-##$%)

!%%0

1%%-#0

2%#0

2&!%%)3)%!

)!#)

!!#

3%%!)##4566

/%%3) #!

476'8')%%#

!%// .

Back to Table

of Contents


6/95

9 ':!

;':!

'1":

& 56?5

@A3 56?5

2&A 56?7

'8'/' 56?7

9'*$ 56?@

;'*$ 56?@

9'B:'):/>9'' 56?@

):/#


7/95

3)#

%$*'!

-'.

'.


8/95

/#.BE.%

)

!) % 3*I C)

*'.?7%%&

1%#)%&

#!*'9%!

2

)!!

% '

+

%-

')!)!*'/#%

#

%*'%!#%

2*''.K

!.$+

*'!

C"!*'#

I/I

#

#I/#$'.

%*'

))+

I9%,


9/95

3*IC

%#$!

%%D

*'A-#

:)K!!/%%'


10/95

Daniel Rose Center for Public Leadership in Land Use

A ULI DANIEL ROSE FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM CITY STUDY VISIT REPORT

Sacramento

California

www.uli.org

Back to Table

of Contents


11/95

SacramentoCaliforniaRedeveloping the Railyards to Strengthen the Urban Core

January 2528, 2011

A ULI Daniel Rose Fellowship Program City Study Visit Report

Urban Land Institute

Daniel Rose Center for Public Leadership in Land Use1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW

Suite 500 WestWashington, DC 20007-5201


12/95

A ULI Daniel Rose Fellowship Program City Study Visit Report2

About the Urban Land Institute

The mission of the Urban Land Institute is toprovide leadership in the responsible use ofland and in creating and sustaining thrivingcommunities worldwide. ULI is committed to

Bringing together leaders from across the fieldsMof real estate and land use policy to exchange bestpractices and serve community needs;

Fostering collaboration within and beyond ULIsMmembership through mentoring, dialogue, andproblem solving;

Exploring issues of urbanization, conservation,Mregeneration, land use, capital formation, andsustainable development;

Advancing land use policies and design practicesMthat respect the uniqueness of both built and naturalenvironments;

Sharing knowledge through education, appliedMresearch, publishing, and electronic media; and

Sustaining a diverse global network of local practiceMand advisory efforts that address current and futurechallenges.

Established in 1936, the Institute today has nearly

30,000 members worldwide, representing theentire spectrum of the land use and developmentdisciplines. ULI relies heavily on the experience ofits members. It is through member involvement andinformation resources that ULI has been able to setstandards of excellence in development practice.The Institute has long been recognized as one of theworlds most respected and widely quoted sources ofobjective information on urban planning, growth,and development.

Cover photo: Urban Land Institute

2012 by the Urban Land Institute1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NWSuite 500 WestWashington, DC 20007-5201

All rights reserved. Reproduction or use of the whole orany part of the contents without written permission ofthe copyright holder is prohibited.


13/95

Sacramento, California, January 2528, 2011 3

About the ULI Rose Center

The mission of the ULI Daniel Rose Center forPublic Leadership in Land Use is to encourageand support excellence in land use decisionmaking by providing public officials with

access to information, best practices, peer networks,and other resources to foster creative, efficient,practical, and sustainable land use policies.

Daniel Rose, chairman of Rose Associates Inc., in NewYork City, in 2008 committed $5 million to the UrbanLand Institute to create the center. Rose Associatesoperates throughout the East Coast as developer andmanager of more than 30 million square feet of majoroffice towers, commercial retail centers, mixed-use complexes, and high-rise residential buildings.Rose has pursued a career involving a broad range ofprofessional, civic, and nonprofit activities.

The Daniel Rose Fellowship is the flagship programof the Rose Center. The Rose Fellowship is a yearlongprogram (from fall of the first year to fall of the next)intended to benefit the individual fellows throughleadership training and professional developmentopportunities and to benefit their respective citiesthrough technical assistance on a local land usechallenge. The Rose Fellowship focuses on leadership,integrated problem solving, public/private collab-oration, and peer-to-peer learning.

For the 20102011 fellowship year, the Rose Centerinvited the mayors of Charlotte, Detroit, Houston,and Sacramento to participate. Each mayor selectedthree additional fellows and a coordinator to serve asthe Rose Fellowship team from his or her city. Eachcitys Rose Fellowship team selected a specific land usechallenge on which they receive technical assistance.

During the city study visits, two assigned Rose Centerfaculty members, one fellow from each of the otherthree cities, and additional experts spend four daysvisiting each of the fellowship cities to learn abouttheir land use challenge. Modeled after ULIs AdvisoryServices panels, these visits include briefings from thehost citys fellows and other local officials, a tour of the

study area, and interviews with stakeholders. The visitsconclude with a presentation of initial observations andrecommendations from the visiting panel of experts,as well as ongoing assignments for the fellowship team.Each citys fellowship team also works with its assignedfaculty at the ULI Fall Meeting and at two workingretreats, and Rose Center staff and faculty return laterin the year to conduct a follow-up visit.

The Rose Center also holds forums and workshops ontopical land use issues for public sector leaders. Recentsubjects have included implementing approaches togreen building, responding to multifamily fore-

closures, and finding creative solutions to local fiscalchallenges. In addition, the Rose Center providesa limited number of scholarships for public sectorofficials to attend the annual ULI Fall Meeting.


14/95


Rose Center Advisory Board

Joseph Rose, ChairPartner, Georgetown CompanyFormer Planning Director of New York CityNew York, New York

Seth BrownPrincipal, Aspen Equities LLCBrooklyn, New York

Alex GarvinPresident and CEO, AGA Public Realm StrategistsAdjunct Professor, Yale UniversityNew York, New York

Glenda E. HoodPresident, Hood Partners LLCFormer Mayor of Orlando and

Former Florida Secretary of StateOrlando, Florida

William Hudnut IIIManaging Partner, Bill Hudnut Consultants LLCFormer Mayor of Indianapolis and

Former Member of U.S. CongressChevy Chase, Maryland

Greg JohnsonPresident, Wright Runstad & CompanySeattle, Washington

Tom MurphySenior Resident Fellow/Klingbeil Family Chair

for Urban DevelopmentFormer Mayor of PittsburghUrban Land InstituteWashington, D.C.

Peter RummellPrincipal, Rummell Company LLCJacksonville, Florida

Anthony A. WilliamsGovernment Practice Executive Director,

Corporate Executive BoardFormer Mayor of Washington, D.C.Arlington, Virginia

Rose Center Staff

Jess ZimbabweExecutive Director, ULI Rose Center

Gideon BergerFellowship Director, ULI Rose Center

Alison JohnsonProgram Manager, ULI Rose Center

Caroline DietrichLogistics Manager, ULI Education and Advisory Group

Trey DavisEvent Marketing Director, ULI Membership

and Marketing

ULI Publications Staff

James A. MulliganManaging Editor

Laura Glassman, Publications Professionals LLCManuscript Editor

Betsy VanBuskirkCreative Director

Deanna Pineda, Muse Advertising DesignGraphic Design

Craig ChapmanSenior Director, Publishing Operations


15/95


Daniel Rose Fellows

Kevin JohnsonMayorCity of Sacramento

John DangbergAssistant City ManagerCity of Sacramento

John HodgsonPresidentThe Hodgson Company

Mike McKeeverExecutive DirectorSacramento Area Council of Governments

Fellowship Team Coordinator

Desmond Parrington

Infill Coordinator, Community DevelopmentDepartment

City of Sacramento

Sacramento Rose Fellowship Team


16/95


Rose Center SacramentoStudy Visit Panel

Rose Center Sacramento Facultyand Panel Cochairs

Andre BrumfieldPrincipal, AECOMChicago, Illinois

Con HoweManaging Director, CityView Los Angeles FundLos Angeles, California

Panelists

Frank CannonPartner, Continuum Partners LLCDenver, Colorado

Marlene Gafrick (Daniel Rose Fellow Alternate)Director, Houston Planning and Development

DepartmentHouston, Texas

Mami HaraPrincipal, Wallace Roberts & Todd LLCPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania

Robert LaneSenior Fellow, Regional Plan AssociationNew York, New York

Danny Pleasant (Daniel Rose Fellow)Director, Charlotte Transportation Department

Charlotte, North Carolina

Marja Winters (Daniel Rose Fellow)Deputy Director, Detroit Planning and Development

DepartmentDetroit, Michigan


17/95


Contents

Acknowledgments 8

Land Use Challenge and Summary of Recommendations 9

The Panels Observations 12

Framework for Growth 14

Initial Development Strategy 19

Concluding Thoughts and Next Steps 22

About the Fellows and the Panel 24


18/95


Acknowledgments

The ULI Rose Center would like to thankSacramento mayor Kevin Johnson, assistantcity manager John Dangberg, HodgsonCompany president John Hodgson, and

Sacramento Area Council of Governments executivedirector Mike McKeever for agreeing to be Daniel RoseFellows. The Rose Center also thanks Sacramento

Community Development Department infil lcoordinator Desmond Parrington for serving as thefellowship team coordinator and all the above forhosting this Rose Center city study visit panel.

Special thanks go to Fran Halbakken of theSacramento Transportation Department, GregTaylor of the Sacramento Community DevelopmentDepartment, Bob Graswich and Daniel Lopez ofthe Sacramento Mayors Office, Kathy McAllisterand Kathleen Sall of the Sacramento City ManagersOffice, Elena Fong of the Sacramento Area Council ofGovernments, and Mary Sater and Allen Folks of ULI

Sacramento for their time and assistance during thepanels visit.

Interviews were conducted with numerousstakeholders, including elected officials fromthe city of Sacramento; community and businessorganizations; Inland American and ThomasEnterprises; representatives of the real estate,community development, and urban designprofessions of ULI Sacramento; staff from the

city of Sacramento and numerous Californiastate government agencies; and transportationofficials at local, regional, and state agencies. Thesestakeholders provided invaluable information anddiverse perspectives that greatly aided the panelsunderstanding of the citys land use challenge. Thepanel thanks all those who gave their time to be partof the process.


19/95


Land Use Challenge andSummary of Recommendations

The city of Sacramento, with 466,488 residents,is the capital of California, the most populousstate in the United States. Located near theconfluence of the Sacramento and American

rivers, Sacramento is in the northern half of CaliforniasCentral Valley, one of the most productive agriculturalregions in the world. The Central Valley produces

8 percent of U.S. agricultural value on less than1 percent of the nations agricultural land.

With nearly 2.2 million people, the Sacramentometropolitan area is the 24th-largest in the country.It grew by 20 percent from 2000 to 2010. At 15 percentover the same period, the citys growth lagged that ofits suburbs but was still strong, according to the U.S.Census. Sacramento is the 35th-largest U.S. city, but asonly the sixth largest in California, it tends to get lessnational publicity than its bigger sisters. The sheer sizeof Californiaif it were a country, only eight otherswould have a larger gross domestic producttends

to obscure the significance of its cities beyond LosAngeles, San Diego, San Jose, and San Francisco,which rank between second and 13th nationally inpopulation.

Its role as the state capital (which was moved here in1854, four years after the city was incorporated andCalifornia was granted statehood on the heels of theMexican-American War), however, keeps Sacramentoembedded in the consciousness of Californians. Thatrole has a huge effect on Sacramentos economy: its topthree employersthe state, Sacramento County, andthe University of California, Davis, Health System

are all public sector, and employment by the statedwarfs all others.

Sacramento also played an important part in U.S.history: the discovery of gold at Sutters Mill onthe American River east of Sacramento in 1848started the California Gold Rush, leading to massivemigration and immigration and a frenzied pace ofeconomic development. Following the Gold Rush,construction of the transcontinental railroad began,

with Sacramento as its western terminus. TheCentral Pacific Railroadwhich later merged intothe Southern Pacificbuilt a massive rail yard at theconfluence of the Sacramento and American rivers asa principal fabrication and maintenance facility for thefabled rail connection to the East that was completedin 1869.

Land Use Challenge

For their land use challenge in the Daniel RoseFellowship program, Mayor Kevin Johnson and theSacramento Fellowship team asked the Rose Center tohelp the city determine what actions would positionthe Sacramento Railyards to attract a significant shareof regional development over the long termand whatactivities or investments could be early catalyststhatcomplements investment in Sacramentos downtown.

The Sacramento Railyards became the largest railroad

complex west of the Mississippi, and at its peak inthe 1940s it employed more than 7,000 workers in itsmachine shops, steel foundry, and lumber mill. It wasthe Sacramento areas largest employer for more than80 years, at one point providing jobs for one-thirdof the metropolitan workforce. But by the 1990s, therailroad began moving jobs to more modern facilities

Sacramento lies at

the confluence of theAmerican and Sacramento

rivers, midway between

San Francisco Bay and

Lake Tahoe, anchoring

the northern part of

Californias Central Valley.

!"#$

!"#$

!"#$

(/

99

99

5

5

50

80

El Dorado

County

YoloCounty

SacramentoCounty

SutterCounty

Elk GroveElk Grove

RosevilleRoseville

FolsomFolsom

LincolnLincoln

RocklinRocklin

Rancho CordovaRancho CordovaDavisDavis

WoodlandWoodland

West SacramentoWest Sacramento

GaltGalt

Citrus HeightsCitrus Heights

LoomisLoomis

AuburnAuburn

PlacervillePlacerville

WintersWinters

WheatlandWheatland

Sacramento


20/95


in other areas, and Union Pacific (which acquired

Southern Pacific in 1996), finally closed the RailyardsCentral Shops complex in 1999.

In 2006, after four years of negotiations (mostlyrelated to the costs of and liability for environmentalcleanup), the Georgia-based real estate developerThomas Enterprises acquired the 240-acre site (aboutthe size of Sacramentos entire central businessdistrict) with plans for one of the largest urban infillprojects in the nation. The $5.3 billion redevelopmentwould have been built out over 20 years, duringwhich time the citys population was expected togrow by another 100,000. The plans included 12,000

residential units, 1.8 million square feet of retail space,2.3 million square feet of office space, 1,100 hotelrooms, 485,000 square feet of cultural uses, and 42acres of open space in scattered small parks. It calledfor many mixed-use buildings, with retailing at streetlevel and housing on upper stories along with a mixof low-rise and high-rise apartment buildings. Theseven remaining historic Central Shops buildingswould have been restored and adapted to cultural andentertainment uses anchoring a historically themedretail district, including a performing arts center for

the California Academyof the Arts and a newCalifornia State RailroadTechnology Museum.

The project seemedto dovetail with theregions existing plansto build a new $300million intermodaltransportation hub inthe southwestern sectionof the Railyards, which

includes the historic 1926 Southern Pacific depotbuilding. Thomas worked with the city and otherinstitutional stakeholders on an infrastructure plan forthe site to relocate a half-mile of the existing railroadtracks 500 feet to the north and build two new bridgesover the tracks along Fifth and Sixth streets to connectit to downtown. The total infrastructure costs for theRailyards redevelopment and intermodal facility

were estimated at $745 million.Despite its high price tag, the Railyards project seemedintegral to Sacramentos future: it would direct a largeportion of new growth into the urban core adjacentto downtown (which has struggled to find its retailfooting) and connect to a new regional intermodaltransit hub planned for inclusion in the states intercityhigh-speed-rail networkthe very definition ofsmart growth. It would also put hundreds of acresof abandoned, polluted land back into productiveuse. Beyond its $5.7 billion in construction-relatedeconomic output (combining direct costs and indirectspending), a 2007 study commissioned by the cityforecast that the direct, indirect, and induced effectsof the Railyards redevelopment would create about19,000 jobs by the time it was built out.

In 2007, the city approved a land use plan, entitlements,and a financing plan for the project, which included$222 million in city and redevelopment agency fundingand assumed $354 million in federal and state funding.Since that time, of course, the local and nationaleconomies have undergone a dramatic transformation.As the $225 million first phase of construction beganin 2010 (relocating the track and building the twonew bridges and three pedestrian tunnels, amongother street and infrastructure improvements),Thomas Enterprises found that it could not afford topay its lender, Illinois-based Inland American RealEstate Trust, nearly $200 million it owed in debt, andInland took ownership of the project. City officialsworked with Inland to honor Thomass financialcommitments and consider how to move ahead withthe development plans in light of the new financial,fiscal, and real estate market realities.

Summary of Recommendations

The panel was impressed with steps leaders have takento address this challenge, committing $225 million sofar for constructing bridges and tunnels, relocatingtracks, and building new roads as part of a newstreet network. The change in economic conditions,however, presents an opportunity to examine theentire Railyards development program, which wasquite ambitious, in relation to its surrounding areas.Large-scale redevelopment projects such as theRailyards typically take a very long time to build out.Their phasing needs to be market driven because

The Railyards occupy a

critical piece of real estate

adjacent to Sacramentos

central business district

and the Sacramento

River.

The Southern Pacific

Railyards in its heyday

during the 1950s.


21/95


of their extended time frame. As public/privatepartnerships around the country have demonstrated,public development partners sometimes carry theadditional risks of being committed to infrastructurefunded with public dollars regardless of whether theprivate partner can deliver on its development phases.

In that spirit, the panel offers a critique of the overallcontext of the Railyards site plan and the intermodal

facility to help the city and its partners understandhow they can best use investments in infrastructureand amenities to achieve their vision for the Railyardsunder current market conditions. Rather than build alarge facility that concentrates all the transit activityand connections, the panel recommends that thecity consider separating the various transit modes(intercity rail, bus, and light rail) within an area thatnot only is accessible for travelers who need to makeconnections but also takes advantage of this activityby allowing development to occur around it and createactual destinations beyond the transit access itself.

The panel also recommends that the city and therail operators consider ways to share high-speedand Amtrak service on tracks at the same level orto relocate the high-speed-rail terminal. With itsoverarching canopy, the conceptual facility proposedby the California High-Speed Rail Authority (HSRA)would be about 30 feet taller than the new Fifth andSixth street bridges, completely overwhelming themassing of the historic Central Shops buildings andobstructing their view from downtown or even fromthe Depot District on the other side of the tracks.

The city and its partners should be mapping out

and committing to completing a network of linkedopen spaces and great streets in discrete phases thattogether create an amenity that guides and shapesdevelopment but can accommodate incrementalgrowth over time that could manifest in manydifferent scenarios depending on the market.

The current land use plan, while allowing mixeduse in many places, seems to reinforce a segregatedoverall pattern. Rather than look at the site as a seriesof district plans, the panel recommends that the citylook at it as a series of component neighborhoodswithin a larger site that connect to their adjacent

neighborhoods and can grow incrementally overtime. Building neighborhoods, as opposed to districts,means building places that

Are seamless, without hard edges, and held togetherMby strong public spaces and streets;

Create a strong open-space system by framing parksMwith development; and

Celebrate the Central Shops buildings and otherMfocal points within the site.

On the basis of current market trends, neither officeor retail is likely to be the driver of development in theRailyards. Furthermore, the Railyards would have toabsorb about one-third of projected urban residentialdevelopment demand in the next 25 years to achievebuildout under its current land use plans. What isimportant is to target public investments, along withprivate investments, to create small, manageable, and

complete projects that will sustain themselves fromone real estate market cycle to the next and that willinspire activity and interest at each step of the way.

One strategy is building from the inside out, startingby creating a place at the Central Shops and workingoutward. That will be the more costly and capital-intensive approach, but with the right opportunity,such as the State Railroad Technology Museum, as acatalyst, it should be looked at. The alternative is togo from the outside in, eating away at the edges withorganic growth from the city and moving into the siteas opportunities become available. These approachesare not mutually exclusive; the city should keep thenet cast wide and try to use both, if possible.

Although no one silver bullet is likely to be found,opportunities for catalysts will clearly arise. Somethat are already being contemplated for the Railyardsinclude the intermodal hub, an entertainment/sportsarena, and a new county courthouse. Rather thanprovide any kind of back-of-the-envelope evaluationof their feasibility, the panel offers some criteriato evaluate them within the larger context of theRailyards site:

Does the project add value to the overall experienceM

or draw of the Railyards, especially considering whowould use it?

How would the project affect future phases ofMdevelopment?

What would be the return on current or plannedMinvestments?

Finally, the panel offers suggestions for how the citycan create low-cost, engaging interim uses that drawpeople to the Railyards and create interest in the site.The panel recommends working with organizationsto plan events relating to arts and culture, sports andwellness, or education both in and around the CentralShops buildings to bring people to the Railyards andget them interested in the site and its history, creatingpublic awareness of its special opportunities andproviding opportunities for revenue streams as well.


22/95


The Panels Observations

The panel was briefed by SacramentosRose Fellowship team and then toured theRailyards site and its historic Central Shopsbuildings; the existing Sacramento Valley

Station and its historic Southern Pacific depot; andadjacent areas such as Old Sacramento, WestfieldDowntown Plaza, and the downtown K Street

corridor. The panel also interviewed elected officialsfrom the area, representatives from state and localgovernment agencies and regional organizations,downtown business leaders, transportation officials,community organizations, members of the privatereal estate sector and urban design professions, andrepresentatives of Inland American, the currentprivate owners of the Railyards.

The panel was greatly impressed with the incredibleamount of progress that has been made through thecollaboration of numerous elected officials at thelocal, state, and federal levels; city departments andstate agencies including Caltrans and the California

Transportation Commission; regional entities suchas the Sacramento Area Council of Governments,Sacramento Regional Transit, and the SacramentoTransportation Authority; Amtrak; communityorganizations and the Downtown SacramentoPartnerships; and the current and former owners ofthe Railyards property. Although the public is just

starting to see the results in the form of the first phaseof infrastructure improvements, nothing could havebeen accomplished in the Railyards without theseyears of hard work to build a vision, align it withadopted policy, and then create the legal and financialframework for its implementation. An isolated,unbuildable site will soon be able to be used, and thatis no small achievement.

Among other accomplishments is broad communityand political support for redeveloping the Railyards.Environmental remediation has largely beencompleted, environmental review under state

and federal regulations has been completed, andentitlements have been awarded for the developmentof the property. Funding was secured for the initialphase of infrastructure improvements, and the cityhas adopted a solid set of principles in its plan for theRailyards to guide future buildout.

Like many large-scale developments around thecountry, the Railyards project has run into todaysmarket realities. The economic slowdown hassignificantly dampened market demand for many realestate productsespecially multifamily ownership(condominiums) and retail space, as well as office

and severely impaired access to both private andpublic capital. The result of these market conditions isthat Thomass original 20-year buildout plan is nowinfeasible and will not be built anytime soon. Theinitial development phasescreating a cultural andentertainmentthemed retail district in the CentralShops, followed by residential mixed use in theadjacent west end of the sitecertainly now need tobe rethought.

The panel at work.


23/95


This change in conditions, however, presents anopportunity to reexamine the entire Railyardsdevelopment program, which was quite ambitious, inrelation to its surrounding areas (Old Sacramento, the

Sacramento River, downtown, Alkali Flats, and theRiver District). Large-scale redevelopment projectssuch as the Railyards typically take a very long time tobuild out, even in growing regional real estate marketssuch as Sacramento. Their phasing needs to be marketdriven because of their extended time frame, whichusually results in different developers buildingdifferent parts under different market conditions. Thepublic sector can incentivize the market, but it cannotcreate it. This highlights the need for flexibility in thedevelopment plan; the plan should establish an overallframework but allow development to take placeincrementally and adapt to evolving market demand.Cities are healthiest and most sustainable when theygrow incrementally and evolve over time.

It is also desirable for large-scale development projectsto achieve synergies with their surrounding districts.At worst, they should do no harm (in the case of theRailyards, for example, the retail program should notcompete with downtown Sacramento, which has itsown retail challenges). At best, they should add valueto the adjacent areas and complement those goals withtheir own.

With large-scale developments, the desire is often to

find a catalyst or silver bullet that creates new demandand in turn speeds up the buildout time frame forthe entire project. Although such catalysts do in factsometimes emerge because of the rare developmentopportunities afforded by large-scale sites, makingthe success of a project contingent on a silver bullet isusually a recipe for failure because it sets unrealisticexpectations.

Construction of the Fifth

and Sixth street bridges,

linking the Railyards to

downtown Sacramento.

In the case of the Railyards, ideas ranging from anentertainment/sports arena to a county courthousehave been floated as potential catalysts for openingup the rest of the site. Although the city needs to

be positioned to take advantage of these and otherproposals as they become feasible, it should notmake the Railyards development contingent on anyone such idea. The original development programphasing is now in doubt, but the underlying plansfor the site offer a strong framework for its long-termdevelopment. That vision, which was created througha public process and voted on by the citys electedofficials, should not be abandoned lightlyespeciallyin favor of a scheme that seeks to trade off timing fordesired public outcomes. That is why the city shouldcarefully consider what criteria it uses to evaluate anysuch opportunities.

Time may be money, but large-scale developmentprojects almost always take a very long time,especially the ones that are done well and create trulylasting public and private value. The city and regionseem to recognize that the Railyards is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that deserves to be done right,which may mean taking the long view on maximizingthe return on public investment and achieving itsexpressed goals.


24/95


Framework for Growth

The adopted Railyards plans and the fundedinitial infrastructure projects create anexcellent framework for the ultimate buildoutof the site. From its tours and interviews, the

panel recognized that connectivity is the key conceptall parties have been trying to address: the Railyards isphysically separated from other parts of city.

The panel was impressed with steps leaders havetaken to address this challenge, committing $225million so far for constructing bridges and tunnels,relocating tracks, and building new roads as part ofa new street network. But for a city to grow it needsmarket demand, the right infrastructure in place,and amenities that can attract people and businesseswith location options. The panel offers a critique ofthe overall context of the Railyards site plan and theintermodal facility to help the city and its partnersunderstand how they can best use investments ininfrastructure and amenities to achieve their vision

for the Railyards under current market conditions.

Infrastructure: Build an IntermodalDistrictNot a Facility

In addition to the track relocation project, tunnels,and Fifth and Sixth street bridges, the first phaseof infrastructure projects include funding to buildeastwest streets Camille Lane and Railyards

Boulevard and northsouth streets Bercut Drive,Fifth Street (through the site), and Sixth Street (up toRailyards Boulevard). It also includes funding to buildthe Market Plaza in the Central Shops area adjacent toFifth Street and steps connecting it to the street, andto conduct environmental abatement and stabilize fiveof the Central Shops buildings.

After the heavy-rail and light-rail tracks are relocatedand tunnels are built to connect both sides of thetracks, the Depot District was envisioned to functionas an intermodal hub, with connections betweenintercity heavy rail; light rail; and local, regional, and

intercity busesas well as pickup/dropoff activityand parkingall occurring at street level in the areabetween the historic depot and the relocated tracks.As a next phase in its development, this area wasenvisioned to be built out with joint developmentsharing parking resources with the intermodalstation and a new terminal building linking thehistoric depot to the heavy-rail tracks. Plans also callfor the light rail to extend from its new location at theintermodal facility and loop through the Railyardsalong Seventh Street, extending to the station onRichards Boulevard in the River District to the northof the Railyards, and eventually terminating atSacramento International Airport.

Amtraks existing Capitol Corridor service betweenSacramento and the Bay Area, with more than 1.7million riders in fiscal year 2011, is currently thethird-highest ridership intercity route in the nation,behind only the Northeast Corridor (WashingtonBoston) and Pacific Surfliner (Los AngelesSan Diego).By 2025, 15 million passengers a year are expected to

Project Funding

Developer Programs

Prop 1C

5th Street Inll-Rd 1

5th Street Inll-Rd 2

Railyards Blvd Inll-Rd 1

5th St. Steps Il-Rd 2

Stanford St. Il-Rd 2

Central Shops

Abatement

CA Reuse-

Rd 1

City

Prop 1B

6th Street -pending HRCSA

6t h St ree t Bri d e H RC SA

Track Reloon TCIF

Prop 1C

5th Street & Bridge TOD-Rd 1

Camile Ln TOD-Rd 2

Market Plaza TOD-Rd 2

Bercut Dr. TOD-Rd 2

Funded infrastructure

in the Railyards.


25/95


Original intermodal

facility concept.

use Sacramentos intermodal transportation hub. TheCalifornia HSRA is also planning to provide serviceto the intermodal district along the heavy-rail tracks

as the northern terminus of its Central Valley routebetween Sacramento and Merced, with eventualservice all the way to Los Angeles and San Diego.

A conceptual rendering by the HSRA of its potentialSacramento terminal envisioned a second level ofheavy-rail tracks built over the relocated tracksto be used by the Capitol Corridor, resulting in ahigh, overarching canopy. This conceptual facilitywould be about 30 feet taller than the new Fifth andSixth street bridges, completely overwhelming themassing of the historic Central Shops buildings andobstructing their view from downtown or even from

the Depot District on the other side of the tracks. Thepanel believes this location and design could havethe unintended consequence of creating a physicalbarrier between the heart of the Railyards anddowntown, partially counteracting the benefits ofthe track relocation project.

The panel recommends that the city and the railoperators consider ways to share high-speed and

Amtrak service on tracks at the same level orrelocate the high-speed-rail terminal. Specificrecommendations for the latter suggestion

were addressed in a Rose Center follow-up visitto Sacramento on July 1314, 2011, which aresummarized in the Conclusion and Next Stepssection of this report.

The current site plan for the ultimate buildout ofthe Depot District, which includes a large newintermodal terminal building, also raises concernsabout the creation of physical and visual barriersbetween the Railyards and downtown. The panelquestions the economic feasibility of the planned jointdevelopment sites and the certainty of financing thetransit infrastructure envisioned in the third phase of

the project.

Rather than building a large facility that concentratesall the transit activity and connections, the panelrecommends that the city consider separating thevarious transit modes (intercity rail, bus, light rail)within an area that not only is accessible for travelerswho need to make connections but also takes ad-vantage of this activity by allowing development tooccur around it and create actual destinations beyondthe transit access itself. A good analogy is the design ofDenvers Union Station (in another former rail yard),which relocated its existing light-rail platforms two

blocks from the planned commuter- and intercity-railplatforms to capture the human energy, real estatemarket, and place-making potential of travelersconnecting between the two modes.

A transit district, rather than a large, central facility,will likely lower the cost of the transit facilities (fundingfor which has not yet been completely identified) andhelp make joint development opportunities much more

DEVELOP-

H STREET

G STREET

I STREET

TEERTSHT

TEERTSDR

TEERTSDN

REA

BLDGFEDERAL BUILDING

HISTORIC DEPOT

TRANSIT/ JOINT

DEVELOPMENT

PARKING GARAGE

JOINT

DEVELOP-

MENT

PUBLIC PLAZAJOINT

MENT

PUBLIC

PLAZA

SURFACE PARKING

TEERTSHT

NEW TERMINAL

EXTENSION

DROP OFF

REA PARKING

LRT

STATIONSUBLACOL

F STREET

.W.O.RLIARYVAEH

AMTRAK &

GREYHOUND

BUSES AT

GROUND

LEVEL

NAIRTSEDEP

OTNOITCENNOC

DRAYLIAR&SMROFTALP

PICKUP/DROP OFF

TAXIS

THOMAS ENTERPRISES

DEVELOPMENT

RAILROAD TECHNOLOGYMUSEUM

WAITING

AREAS,

OPERATOR

OFFICE, AND

RETAIL ARE ON

UPPER LEVEL

SMROFTALPREGNESSAPLIAR

SMROFTALPREGNESSAPLIAR

NOITCENNOCLENNUTNAIRTSEDEP

CHINATOWN

OLD SACRAMENTOSACRAMENTORIVER

TO

SACRAMENTO

INTERNATIONAL

AIRPORT

INTERSTATE

5

I-5ONRAMP

Phase 3: Intermodal TransportationFacility Improvements

Enables state-of-the-art operations

for multiple modes at single joint site

Improves mobility, transferring and

connections for passengers

Offers new transit services and ex-

pansion for all operations

Creates a destination facility serv-ing cultural, civic, retail, business and

other events

Enhances a historic landmark by

continuing its role in transportation andin the community fabric

Becomes a catalyst for the redevel-oping downtown Railyards center

Relieves traffic congestion on the

regions freeways and City streets

Concept Sketch of Dont Move the Depot Option

High-speed-rail station concept.


26/95


attractive, which in turn could provide greater sourcesof private financing for transit infrastructure.

Amenities: Open Space and GreatStreetsthe Public Realm

The greatest amenity the built environment canprovide is the larger network of connected openspaces and great streets that make up the public realm.A local example in Sacramento is its pedestrian-scale, tree-lined streets and network of public parks.Because no one has the ability to predict the highestand best land uses by parcel or district for such a largesite, or what silver-bullet catalyst projects mightemerge in the future, the best approach is to create alarger public-realm framework that ensures adoptedprinciples are followed through in the future that canprovide multiple buildout alternatives.

Other than addressing some concerns about functionaland economic links to downtown, current plans forthe Railyards do not speak with great fluency to itssurrounding context: the Sacramento Riverfront to thewest, the National Historic Landmark Old Sacramentodistrict to the southwest, the historic Akali Flatsneighborhood to the east, and the redeveloping RiverDistrict to the north. These surrounding districtsall have different strengths and weaknesses andare undergoing various changes or developmentpressures. The Railyards plan needs to recognize theseconditions and relate to these adjacent districts.

The city and its partners should be looking at thislarger context, from downtown to the opposite shoresof both rivers, and thinking about all the resourcesthat can be connected so that at the end of thedevelopment process for these areas (which will go onfor multiple generations), the whole is much greaterthan the sum of its parts. This means mapping outand committing to completing a network of linkedopen spaces and great streets in discrete phases that

together create an amenity that not only guidesand shapes development but also can accommodateincremental growth over time that could manifest inmany different scenarios, depending on the market.

Build Complete NeighborhoodsNot Development Districts

One example, for illustrative purposes, differs fromthe existing land use plan in that it looks organic, asif it were built up over time, because uses are mixedthroughout. A hierarchy of uses exists, such as more

residential density near transit and more commercialnear highway interchanges, but each neighborhood orsubdistrict is largely complete as a place and could bebuilt in an intermediate time frame.

The current land use plan, while allowing mixed usesin many places, seems to reinforce a segregated overallpattern: residentially dominant in the East End,retail dominant in the West End, open space in theCentral Shops area, transit in the Depot District, and

An intermodal

transportation district

would generate more

activity through transfers

from one travel mode to

another, which in turn can

generate commercial land

value and cost less to

build than a single, largefacility.


27/95


Rather than looking at the site as a series of districtplans, the panel recommends the city view it as aseries of component neighborhoods within a largersite that connect to their adjacent neighborhoodsand that can grow incrementally over time. Buildingneighborhoods, as opposed to districts, meansbuilding places that have the following qualities:

Each neighborhood or

subdistrict should be

largely complete as a

place and could be built

in an intermediate time

frame.

employment adjacent to downtown. The large open-space areas, Vista Park in the north and RiverfrontPark in the south, gave the panel the impression ofbeing leftover development sites rather than acting asorganizing principles that add value to the adjacentproperty, as open space does when it is well plannedand well designed.

An open-space system

that connects to the river

and frames the historic

buildings and new

development areas can

develop signature places

that sustain identity,

value, and investment.


28/95


Are seamless, without hard edges, and held togetherMby strong public spaces and streets;

Create a strong open-space system by framing parksMwith development; and

Celebrate the Central Shops buildings and otherM

focal points within the site.

The city should keep in mind the following keyprinciples throughout the development time frame:

Extending and connecting the Railyards toMdowntown;

The current land use plan,

while allowing mixed use

in many places, seems

to reinforce a segregated

overall pattern.

Sharing the Railyards assets with downtown;M

Providing a flexible, physical framework toMencourage incremental growth;

Developing signature places that sustain identity,M

value, and investmentsuch as an open-spacesystem that connects to the river and frames thehistoric buildings and new development areas; and

Creating an intermodal district, not a single, largeMtransportation facility.


29/95


Initial Development Strategy

The panel took a step back to try to understandthe market dynamics at play in Sacramentoand to provide the city with some strategiesfor an initial approach to development in the

Railyards. It also offers guidance on catalytic projectsand provides some ideas for how to create immediateinterest in the site today with interim uses.

Understanding the Market

On the residential side, the metropolitan area ispredicted to grow by about 300,000 units in the next25 years. About 35,000 of that growth is projected tobe urban dwelling units built in the regions center,an area encompassing Sacramentos downtown andWest Sacramento. With the competition betweenthe Railyards, River District, downtown, andmidtown (perhaps the most successful urban coreneighborhood, which is growing organically), plusWest Sacramento across the river, the Railyards would

need to absorb about one-third of that total to achievefull buildout in the current development plan.

Sacramento is a second-tier office market. It is notLos Angeles or San Francisco. As in other second-tier markets (such as Denver), competition is stiffon the corporate office side. About 11 million squarefeet of office is available in the central businessdistrict submarket, compared with 42 million inoutlying and suburban districts, but the lions share isgovernment (state, county, and city). The remainderis predominantly professional services firms that aresupporting government users. No single Fortune 500

company is headquartered in the city. The downtownvacancy rate of 15 percent is better than in mostother regional submarkets, and downtown rents aregenerally higher per square foot than in other regionalsubmarkets. But until Sacramento is able to grow itsopportunities for corporate headquarters downtown(where a lot of land is available for infill development),the panel does not believe that office is going to be thedriver of development in the Railyards.

The original plan had 1.4 million square feet ofretail development, a lot of it large format. Giventhe development principles that have been adopted(which the panel believes are very sound), large-format retail is probably not the best way to approachdevelopment of the site. Retail development hasclearly slowed. Sacramento has a soft market with

a lot of vacancy. Some time is going to be needed forretail to come back, and it, too, is unlikely to be themajor driver of development in the Railyards, giventhe competition and amount of vacancy in existingbuildings.

Outside In versus Inside Out

Sacramento should not worry overly about theseconditions; most other metropolitan areas areno different. When a city takes on ambitiousredevelopment projects, they do not happenovernight, or in one fell swoopthey are done

incrementally. What is important is to target publicinvestments, along with private investments, to createsmall, manageable, and complete projects that willsustain themselves from one real estate market cycleto the next and to create areas of activity and interestat each step of the way. Such projects link public and

The built sections of Denvers Riverfront Park feel

complete even though more development sites are

around them.


30/95


private investment in focused areas that create a placeon day one. Even if empty buildings exist beyond theinitial phase, the project can be designed so that itfeels like a completed place.

So how can this be done? Where does one start? Theanswer can be approached in different ways. One isgoing from the inside out, starting by creating a placeat the Central Shops and working outward. That will

be the more costly and capital-intensive approach,but with the right opportunity, such as the StateRailroad Technology Museum, as a catalyst, it shouldbe explored. The alternative is to go from the outsidein, eating away at the edges with organic growth fromthe city and moving into the site as opportunitiesbecome available. But these approaches are notmutually exclusive. The city should keep the net castwide and try to use both, if possible.

In Denver, the Central Platte Valley was a rail yardof similar size to Sacramentos through the 1980s.In 1983, then-mayor Federico Pea (who later wassecretary of transportation and then of energyunder President Clinton) had a vision for turningthis area into a riverfront park development thatextended from downtown Denver. It took threemayoral administrations and strong, committed,visionary leadership and staff to make thistransformation happen. It went through multipleiterations of property ownership to get where it istoday. But through public investment and strategicprivate investment, Denver consolidated the railcorridor into a single set of tracks, tore down theviaducts, reclaimed the riverfront, put in streets andinfrastructure, and is now investing in a half-billion-dollar multimodal facility. This is now the highest-value, fastest-growing residential neighborhood in

the entire Denver region and the most desirable officeaddress in metro Denver. But that took more than30 years from the time Mayor Pea asked Denver toimagine a great city.

Outside-in or inside-out

strategies do not have to

be mutually exclusive.

Denvers Central Platte Valley as a rail yard (above left)

and being transformed into an urban neighborhood

connecting its downtown (left).


31/95


Catalytic Projects

Although no one silver bullet is likely, opportunitiesclearly exist for catalysts. Some that are alreadybeing contemplated for the Railyards include theintermodal hub, an entertainment/sports arena, anda new county courthouse. Any of these may be viableprojects for the Railyards, but rather than provide

any kind of back-of-the-envelope evaluation of theirfeasibility, the panel offers some criteria to evaluatethem within the larger context of the Railyards site:

Does the project add value to the overall experienceMor draw of the Railyards, especially considering whowould use it?

How would the project affect future phases ofMdevelopment?

What would be the return on current or plannedMinvestments?

The panel also affirms some guiding principles that itheard from stakeholders during the interview processfor the city to keep in mind as it moves forward in thedevelopment process:

As one of the largest infill sites in the country, theMRailyards need to fulfill this opportunity to createsomething special.

The Railyards development needs to complementMand connect to what is occurring in downtown,midtown, and the River District and not competewith those markets.

Planning decisions need to be based on marketM realities and conditions.

The Railyards should provide both a local and regionalMdraw to bring people to the site and activate it.

Although enough land is available to allow aMtypically suburban site plan to develop, because theRailyards is located in the urban core, becoming anurban place is important.

The historical significance of the Railyards should beMcelebrated in the development.

Creating Interest with Interim UsesThe Central Shops will be the last living link fromthe history of the Railyards to its future, which isintertwined with the citys history. This also presentsthe opportunity for a wow factor in the Railyardsneighborhood around the Central Shops. For example,in Denvers Central Platte Valley, a former railroadmaintenance shop was converted into a unique REI

store with an indoor climbing facility that creates aregional draw.

Other than workers involved in the environmentalcleanup and infrastructure projects, very fewSacramentans have been in the heart of the Railyardsbecause access has been restricted for many years.How can the city create low-cost, engaging interimuses that draw people to the Railyards and createinterest in the site? A group that is interested in the

Railyards could be used to plan events on the siterelated to arts and culture; sports and wellness; andeducational and large-scale tented entertainmentevents, both inside and outside the buildings. Fromstreet festivals to fashion shows, these events wouldbring people to the Railyards and get them interestedin the site and its history, creating public awareness ofits unique opportunities and providing opportunitiesfor revenue streams as well.

In Denver, a former railroad maintenance shop was

converted into a unique REI store with an indoorclimbing facility that creates a regional draw.


32/95


Concluding Thoughts and Next Steps

The panel gave Sacramentos Fellowshipteam several homework assignments for theremainder of their time in the program:

Define the guiding principles more precisely forMdetermining the inclusion, siting, and design of thenear-term opportunities (e.g., intermodal district,

courthouse, arena).

Investigate interim uses, operators, and program-Mming that can bring people to the site in a low-costway as soon as publicly accessible and safe.

Integrate the plans for the River District, theMRailyards, and adjacent areas for open-space andtransportation networks so they can be understoodas a system.

Identify a cohesive first phase of development thatMleverages the committed infrastructure and creates acomplete place on its own, whatever its size.

Develop alternative plans for future infrastructureMbased on funding availability and developmentopportunities.

The city has to anticipate activity and not just react interms of looking at the development opportunities.Owners and developers may come and go, but the city

will be the steward for the principles and goals of theRailyards for a very long time.

Follow-up Visit on Entertainmentand Sports Complex

Following the January 2528, 2011, study visit, plans

were approved to build a new Sacramento CountyCourthouse in the southeast corner of the Railyards,adjacent to the central business district. As a follow-up to the study visit, the Rose Center organized a July1314 panel visit to address the most recent proposalconcerning an entertainment and sports complexin the Railyards. This follow-up panel found thatthe intermodal transit facilities and entertainmentand sports complex can both be accommodated inthe southern section of the Sacramento Railyards ina symbiotic way that creates public space, providesconnectivity to, and achieves synergies withsurrounding districts. Although the citys goals ofbuilding an entertainment and sports complex andintermodal transit facilities in the Railyards areachievable and desirable, policy makers will need tocommit to resolving key design challenges if they areto attain the public benefits envisioned in the adjacentdistricts of downtown, the future redevelopment ofthe Railyards, and the region as a whole.

In summary, the panel agrees with the idea ofthe city and HRSA staffs to move the future high-speed-rail station east of Sixth Street to avoid thecost, complexity, and design issues associated withconstructing a terminal over the tracks. In addition,the panel agrees with city staffs idea of moving theentertainment and sports complex as far west aspossible and shifting the intermodal transit facilitiesslightly to the east. The panel recommends that thehistoric Southern Pacific depot building serve as aniconic front door to the southern Railyards district.But to keep the scale and massing of the entertainmentand sports complex from overwhelming the historicdepot and Central Shops, the panel encourages the city

Conceptual site plan

proposed by the

follow-up visit panel for

an entertainment and

sports complex in the

Railyards.


33/95


to investigate the feasibility of excavation to address itsheight and to ensure that access points can be as closeto ground level as possible. Building on the panelsoriginal recommendations from its January visit,members concur with city staffs proposal of shiftingthe main intermodal axis slightly east and creating atransit district rather than a centralized facility thatpreserves the opportunity for joint development lining

the east side of a new street between the entertainmentand sports complex and the intermodal facilities.

The panel recommends the entertainment andsports complex have multiple access points to reduceconflicts among users, servicers, and through trafficand be wrapped in commercial development withactive ground-floor uses on the side facing the publicplaza. The panel believes enough real estate exists toaccommodate these buildings and an appropriatelysized public plaza that, if well designed, will helpprovide pedestrian staging into and out of the complexand feel safe no matter how many people are usingthe space. The location of the plaza also preserves avisual connection to the Central Shop buildings fromthe south side of the tracks, which is important to theoverall Railyards identity.

The panel urges the city to ensure that access to thedistrict is designed with a hierarchy of users in mind:pedestrians as the first priority, then transit, thenprivate autos. Clear and multiple pedestrian routes areneeded from parking, transit, and the surroundinguses and activities with adequate lighting, security,and clear signage, which will also enhance the

development value of the surrounding area. Given thelarge amount of parking close to the site, the panelrecommends using the existing, dispersed parkingresources to spread economic activity throughoutthe surrounding area and use the Railyards site moreefficiently.

Do It Right, or Dont Do It

The panel recommends that the city conduct furtheranalyses of site infrastructure and design costs, butit believes that additional costs are likely to be moreincremental than exponential. Above all, the panelemphasizes the need to do it right or dont do it.Too many design compromises could diminish thefunctionality of both the entertainment and sportscomplex and the transit facilities and diminish theregenerative potential of the surrounding areas. Forthe full follow-up report, visit http://www.uli.org/rosecenter.


34/95


About the Fellows and the Panel

Daniel Rose Sacramento Fellows

Kevin Johnson

Sacramento native Kevin Johnson was elected as the55th mayor of the city of Sacramento in November2008. He is the first native Sacramentan and the firstAfrican American to be elected to the office. His visionis for Sacramento to become a city that works foreveryone.

In the first year of his administration, Johnsonembarked on an ambitious plan to reshape how citygovernment serves the residents of Sacramento byimproving public safety, jump-starting economicdevelopment, and advocating critical school reforms.

Within City Hall, the mayor established new standardsfor accessibility and accountability through communityoffice hours, town hall meetings, and an external auditof city finances. Johnson also launched initiatives

to reduce homelessness, increase volunteerism, andpromote the arts. He is currently focused on his newinitiative for a greener Sacramento.

Johnson has also been a contributor on several nationaltelevision programs, including CNN Newsroom, TheOprah Winfrey Show, Dateline NBC, Larry KingLive, The Colbert Report, Fox Business Network, andTom Brokaw Presents: American Character Along

Highway 50.

John Dangberg

John Dangberg is an assistant city manager withthe city of Sacramento. His areas of responsibilityencompass four departments, including transportation,utilities, community development, and economicdevelopment.

These departments and their 1,400 employees provideessential city services and implement the citysGeneral Plan and Economic Development strategyfor growth and prosperity. In addition, Dangbergoversees a number of large urban infill projects.

Dangberg previously served as president of USAMultifamily Development, executive director of theCapital Area Development Authority, and communitydevelopment director for the Sacramento Housing andRedevelopment Agency.

John Hodgson

John Hodgson is the founder and president of theHodgson Company. He has headed numerousresidential and mixed-use master-planned projectsthroughout the greater Sacramento Valley area. He alsohas a strong interest in urban revitalization and mixed-used development in the urban centers of the region.

Hodgson is a full member of the Urban Land Instituteand recently served as chair of ULI Sacramento.He served six years as the chair of the Capital AreaDevelopment Authority. He currently serves as chairof the South Sacramento Habitat Conservation Planand is also active in numerous civic organizations.

Hodgson is a member of the State Bar of Californiaand a graduate of the University of California (UC) atDavis, and UC Davis Law School (King Hall).

Mike McKeever

Mike McKeever was appointed executive directorof the Sacramento Area Council of Governments(SACOG) board of directors on December 17, 2004.Previously, McKeever was project manager of theBlueprint Project at SACOG. McKeever was thefounder and president of McKeever/Morris for 13 yearsand then a senior supervising planner for ParsonsBrinckerhoff before joining SACOG as blueprintproject manager in 2001.

Over his 30-year career specializing in the field ofplanning, he has owned and managed two privatebusinesses that specialized in working with localgovernments on innovative multijurisdictionalprojects. He has been instrumental in developingcutting-edge planning techniques to integrate landuse and transportation planning.


35/95


More recently, McKeever was the principal creator ofPLACE3S planning method and software, designed tohelp professional and citizen planners understand theconnections between land use, transportation, and airquality issues. He has authored several manuals andguidebooks on various aspects of local governmentcollaboration, and has taught Stretching CommunityDollars seminars throughout California for the City,

County, Schools Partnership to help these units ofgovernment find creative ways to work together.

McKeever has also been involved in projects with theSacramento Regional Transit District and regionalplanning projects in Portland, Oregon; Salem, Oregon;San Diego, California; San Francisco, California;Chicago, Illinois; Albuquerque, New Mexico; Austin,Texas; and Victoria, British Columbia.

He is a native of Nampa, Idaho, and received his BAwith honors from the University of Oregon.

Rose Center Sacramento Facultyand Study Visit Panel Cochairs

Andre Brumfield

Andre Brumfield is principal in charge of urbandesign and planning for AECOMs Chicago office andthe master-planning practice leader for AECOMsMidwest region. During the course of his 16-yearcareer, Brumfield has applied his broad experience inthe fields of urban design, planning, and architectureto focus on neighborhood redevelopment and urbanrevitalization.

In 2007, after ten years as an associate and seniorplanner at Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, Brumfieldopened the Chicago office for EDAW/AECOM. Hehas addressed urban design and master-planningissues in a variety of neighborhood and communitydevelopment efforts that involve large-scale, high-density urban infill projects, public and affordablehousing redevelopment, brownfield redevelopment,and citywide master planning efforts. Over the pasttwo years, Brumfield has become involved in nationaldialogue on how cities deal with severe population lossand the challenge of developing long-range masterplanning strategies at the citywide scale.

Brumfield has a masters degree in urban planningfrom the University of Washington and a bachelorsdegree in architecture from the University ofWisconsinMilwaukee.

Con Howe

Con Howe is managing director of CityViews$150 million Los Angeles Fund, partnering withhomebuilders and developers to entitle land and build

workforce housing in greater Los Angeles. CityView,founded by Henry Cisneros, has financed more than7,000 units of housing in over 40 projects in Californiaand throughout the United States.

Previously, Howe was director of the ULI Center forBalanced Development in the West, focusing on thespecial land development issues of the fast-growingwestern United States.

Howe served as the director of planning for the cityof Los Angeles from 1992 to 2005. His work includedrevision of the citys General Plan to provide acomprehensive strategy for growth, updating the citys35 community plans, streamlining the developmentpermitting process, creating new zoning to encouragemixed-use and infill housing projects, and adaptive useof older structures as housing.

From 1987 to 1991, he served as executive director ofthe New York City Planning Department where hedirected a staff of 400 located in a central office and

five borough offices. Earlier, as director of the agencysManhattan Office, he helped direct major commercialgrowth to West Midtown and established urban designand preservation requirements for the citys TheaterDistrict and Times Square.

Before coming to New York City, Howe was executivedirector of the Massachusetts Land Bank, a stateredevelopment agency, and served in the GovernorsOffice.

Howe received a masters degree from MITs Schoolof Architecture and Planning and an undergraduatedegree from Yale, and he teaches a graduate coursein planning and redevelopment at the University ofSouthern California.

Rose Center SacramentoStudy Visit Panelists

Frank Cannon

Frank Cannon joined Continuum Partners in 2005 andserves as president of the Union Station NeighborhoodCompany, a joint venture entity created by real estatedevelopment companies Continuum Partners and East

West Partners that was selected as the master developerfor Denver Union Station in November 2006. TheDenver Union Station redevelopment is a public/privatepartnership to develop the $480 million multimodaltransit hub that will serve as the centerpiece of thenearly $7 billion Denver metropolitan regionsFasTracks system.

As president of the Union Station NeighborhoodCompany, Cannon is responsible for the planning,design, and development of over 1.5 million square


36/95


feet of commercial mixed-use development anchor-ing the Union Station Neighborhood. In additionto managing the real estate development team, heis a key member of the management team for thedesign and construction of the $480 million publicinfrastructure project.

Cannon is involved in many civic and professionalorganizations. He was appointed by the mayor of

Denver and serves as the current chair of the DenverDowntown Development Authority, a tax incrementfinancing authority assisting in the redevelopment ofDenver Union Station and the surrounding downtownarea. He serves on the board of directors of fourdowntown Denver metropolitan districts, specialtaxing districts responsible for providing publicinfrastructure and services. Cannon is an activemember of the Urban Land Institute and is a memberof the ULI Public Private Partnership Council. He isan active member of NAIOP, the Downtown DenverPartnership, and the Denver Metro Chamber ofCommerce.

Before joining Continuum Partners, Cannon was aprincipal with Civitas Inc., a national planning, urbandesign, and landscape architecture firm. While withCivitas, he was principal-in-charge of planning,urban redevelopment, transit-oriented development,and urban design projects in numerous cities acrossthe country and was instrumental in building thefirms national reputation.

Cannon is a graduate of the University of ColoradoCollege of Architecture and Planning with a bachelorsdegree in environmental design.

Marlene Gafrick

Daniel Rose Houston Fellow Alternate

As Houstons top planning and developmentofficial, Marlene Gafrick brings more than 30 yearsexperience in land development that includesordinance development, implementation andenforcement, permitting, and coordination withpublic agencies and special districts. Gafrick joinedthe department 30 years ago as an associate plannerfresh out of school. She was named planning directorby Houston mayor Bill White on July 7, 2005, andcontinues in that capacity today under Mayor AnniseParker.

While her work location has stayed the same, Gafricksresponsibilities and the ways they are fulfi lled haveseen many changes. She has been instrumental inthe creation and implementation of many new andamended ordinances to encourage growth whileprotecting and preserving neighborhoods. She is

especially adept at harnessing new technologies toimprove workflow and accountability.

The department provides tools and resources tostrengthen and increase the long-term viabilityof neighborhoods; regulates land development inHouston and the extraterritorial jurisdiction; andreviews, investigates, and promotes land regulationpolicies for the changing demands to Houstons

growth and quality of life.

Current challenges include changing developmentrules along transit corridors to increase pedestrianand multimodal connections to adjacentneighborhoods and creating rules to allow mixed-use/pedestrian districts. Gafrick is overseeing thetransition to a Regional Enterprise GIS environmentthat supports the sharing of data, GIS services, andresources among city departments, area governments,utilities, and related agencies. She also is partneringwith related city departments and outside agencies toincrease regional transportation planning, including

the adoption of a citywide mobility plan.

She holds a BS in economics in urban and regionalplanning from Missouri State University inSpringfield.

Mami Hara

A principal of Wallace Roberts & Todd, during hercareer Mami Hara has focused on development ofsustainability frameworks and civic projects in urbanenvironments that have included waterfronts andwater resources, park open-space systems, trailnetworks, neighborhoods, and cultural institutions.

Hara works with clients to integrate greeninfrastructure and urban development that enhanceecological function and civic life. She is currentlyworking with the Philadelphia Water DepartmentsOffice of Watersheds to mobilize implementationof one of the most ambitious municipal greeninfrastructure programs in the United States. Herwork with Philadelphia Water Department includesprogram development, program management, policy,and planning as well as advocacy and education forconducting similar projects on a national scale.

Hara earned a BA in design of the environmentfrom the University of Pennsylvania and her masterof landscape architecture degree from HarvardUniversitys Graduate School of Design. In additionto her work with Wallace Roberts & Todd, she is aninstructor in the University of Pennsylvanias schoolof City and Regional Planning, a lecturer in theArchitecture Department at Temple University, andboard chair of the Community Design Collaborative.


37/95


Robert Lane

Robert Lane, senior fellow for urban design at theRegional Plan Association, directs the CentersProgram, which is devoted to combating sprawl andpromoting compact, transit-oriented development.

Lanes current and recent past work focuses on therelationship between transit, land use, and urban

design and emphasizes public participation andcommunication through visual techniques. Projectsinclude the Somerville (NJ) Station Area Vision Plan,the Hastings-on-Hudson (NY) Waterfront plan, theNewark Vision Plan, Far West Side RedevelopmentAlternatives Study, and the Civic Alliance Vision Planfor Lower Manhattan.

Lane is an architect and urban designer who combinesurban design and planning research with 20 years ofprofessional practice. Over the last ten years, Lanehas initiated and completed three major independentresearch projects funded by the National Endowment

for the Arts, the New York State Council on the Arts,and the German Marshall Fund. This work has beenexhibited at the Municipal Art Society and has beenpublished in Oculus, Progressive Architecture,and the Harvard Architecture Review. Lane alsoteaches a professional development course for theLincoln Institute of Land Policy called Redesigningthe Edgeless City, which focuses on strategies forremaking the suburban and exurban landscape.

Before coming to Regional Plan Association, Lane wasan associate at Kohn Pedersen Fox Architects, PC. Hereceived his BA from Cornell University and a master

of architecture from Columbia University. Lane was aLoeb Fellow at the Harvard Graduate School of Designduring the 20082009 academic year.

Danny Pleasant

Daniel Rose Charlotte Fellow

As director of the Department of Transportation forthe city of Charlotte, Danny Pleasant is responsiblefor road and transportation planning and operations,including policy development and neighborhoodtraffic projects (street lights, street and sidewalkconstruction and maintenance, traffic signal

operations, pedestrian and bicycle programs, andright-of-way management). He also oversees capitalproject prioritization.

The department is responsible for 2,100 miles of streetsand traffic signals at more than 630 intersections. Italso provides planning services for the Mecklenburg-Union Metropolitan Planning Organization andrecently developed a Transportation Action Plan todeal with expected growth in the next 25 years.

Pleasant joined the city of Charlotte in 2002, followinga 14-year career as transportation planning bureauchief for the city of Orlando, Florida. He also workedas a transportation planner for the cities of Atlanta,Georgia, and Chapel Hill and Fayetteville, NorthCarolina.

He received his masters degree in urban planningfrom Texas A&M University and his bachelors degree

in parks and recreation administration from NorthCarolina State University. While a student at TexasA&M, he worked as a research associate with the TexasTransportation Institute.

Pleasant is a Fellow of the Institute of TransportationEngineers and a member of the American Institute ofCertified Planners, the Urban Land Institute, and theCongress for the New Urbanism. He is affiliated withWalkable Communities and has served on several of itsexpert advisory teams focusing on finding solutions tourban design problems.

Marja WintersDaniel Rose Detroit Fellow

On May 14, 2009, Mayor Dave Bing reappointed MarjaWinters deputy director of the City of Detroit Planningand Development Department. In this capacity, sheoversees the operations of nearly 200 employeeswho staff the departments six divisions: Financialand Resources Management, Housing Services,Neighborhood Support Services, Planning, RealEstate Development, and the Office of NeighborhoodCommercial Revitalization (ONCR), where she servedas director the preceding two years.

As director of ONCR, Winters worked withcommunity development organizations, volunteers,entrepreneurs, and local merchants to revitalize oldercommercial districts in targeted areas and encouragedsmall business creation and growth. Before she joinedthe city of Detroit, Wayne County executive RobertA. Ficano appointed Winters as department executivefor Wayne County Parks. While serving three years inthis capacity, she worked on several special projects,including leading the campaign to renew the ParksMillage; developed the framework for Wayne Reads!,a comprehensive literacy program; and managed acollaboration to reduce violence and promote conflictresolution throughout Wayne County.

A career public servant, Winters displays hercommitment to the city of Detroit through herprofession and her strong community involvement.Respected among her peers in the young professionalcommunity, Winters is a visible and vocal advocatefor civil rights, community empowerment, andcivic engagement. She is third vice-president of the


38/95


Detroit Branch NAACP Executive Committee, chairof the Detroit Branch NAACPs Political EducationCommittee, coadviser to the Detroit NAACP YouthCouncil, team leader of the Community & EconomicDevelopment Ministry and childrens churchinstructor at Life Changers International Ministries.In January 2008, Winters was appointed by GovernorJennifer Granholm to serve a two-year term on the

Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission.Winters is a current student of the Urban MinistryInstitute, is a graduate of the University of Michigan,and holds a BA in political science and a master ofurban planning.


39/95

Printed on recycled paper.1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, NWSuite 500 WestWashington, DC 20007-5201


40/95

Back to Table

of Contents


41/95


42/95

1

Introduction

For over 10 years, the City of Sacramento has supported the idea of constructing a new state-of-

the-art entertainment and sports complex (ESC) as a replacement for Power Balance Pavilion, an

aging facility located near the northern border of the City in North Natomas. A strong desire has

been expressed for this new facility to have a more central location within the City, in close

proximity to the regions major transportation infrastructure investments, including Regional

Transits (RT) light rail system.

After a Mayoral task force reviewed

multiple proposals for a new ESC in

several locations throughout the

City, a proposal for the ESC on a 13-

acre site in Downtown was selectedby City Council. The chosen site is

located within the southern portion

of the Railyards, a large urban

redevelopment area just north of the

Citys Central Business District (see

image to right).

This site is adjacent to the Sacramento Valley Station, the Citys passenger rail hub serving long

distance intercity trains and connecting buses, regional trains, RT light rail, and buses. The

station, housed in the historic Sacramento Depot completed in 1926, serves approximately 1.2

million passengers annually. The City of Sacramento is currently implementing the initial phase

of a plan to create a regional transportation hub at the station called the Sacramento Intermodal

Transportation Facility (SITF). Phase 1 of the SITF includes construction of new passenger and

freight track, new passenger rail platforms, a pedestrian tunnel connecting the new platforms

with the Historic Depot to the south and Central Shops to the north, a service tunnel under the

rail corridor west of the new platforms, and a pedestrian/bicycle tunnel located west of the

service tunnel that connects Old Sacramento and areas south of the rail right-of-way with the

Railyards to the north. Phase 2, the rehabilitation of the station building, is due to commence

construction in 2013 and will set the stage for Phase 3 which will expand the station facilities

into a multi-building intermodal district.


43/95

2

Purpose

Subsequent to the selection of the Railyards site for the new ESC, a process was initiated to

integrate the site planning efforts for both the planned SITF as well as the proposed ESC. Two

initial concepts were developed, both of which had their pros and cons, but required detailed

technical analysis as well as additional community input and study. The City of Sacramento

decided to initiate a focused planning effort, modeled after the Urban Land Institute (ULI)

national advisory panel format. This report documents the initial ESC concepts, the results of

the focused planning effort, the refined ESC concept that was unveiled to the public on April 12,

2012, and the subsequent site planning studies to further develop the Refined Concept.

Stakeholder Input

As a first step in the process of crafting a plan for the combined ESC and Intermodal

Transportation Facility site, the City of Sacramento reached out to key stakeholders. Twoseparate three hour long sessions of stakeholder interviews were conducted to gather feedback

on previously developed concept alternatives for the ESC/Intermodal Transportation Facility site.

Stakeholders present at the interviews included representatives from the following agencies,

companies, and organizations:

x Amtrak

x California High Speed Rail Authority

x Sacramento Area Council of

Governments (SACOG)x Walk Sacramento

x Inland America

x Capitol Corridor Joint Powers

Authority

x California State Parks

x Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates

(SABA)

x Regional Transit (RT)

x California Department of

Transportation (Caltrans)

x

Downtown Partnershipx ICON Venue Group

x Populous

x David Taylor Interests

x Inland American Holdings

The stakeholders were asked to identify issues or opportunities that were most important tothem. The stakeholders were invited to provide insight on the two concept alternatives that had

previously been developed for the site and identify other concepts they would like to see

explored. These interviews proved invaluable with assisting the project team in understanding

the complexities of the site, and the challenges and opportunities associated with integrating an

18,000 seat ESC with the existing and planned transit functions on the site.


44/95

3

Principles

After receiving feedback from the stakeholders and City of Sacramento staff from multiple

departments, the project team identified the following site planning principles:

Allow for multiple approaches by pedestrians to site uses, garages, and destinations.

Provide a positive experience for transit passengers and ESC visitors on site; include

pedestrian plazas, paths, and gateway treatments.

Create visual corridors through the site.

Plan for Intermodal Station functionality (passenger flow to platforms, service/baggage

connections to platforms, loading dock, etc).

Plan for ESC functionality (truck access and parking, premium parking, offices, and

limited secure parking for players and team officials, etc).

Context

Regional Access

The selected site is bounded by Interstate 5 (I-5) to the west, I Street to the south, 5th Street to

the east, and the recently realigned Union Pacific railroad tracks to the north. Once operational,

this new set of tracks will allow for the removal of the tracks that currently bisect the site.

Regional access to the site is provided both by rail as well as the regional freeway system.

On-ramps to northbound

and southbound I-5 are

located off of I Street

immediately adjacent to

urban land institute railyards report

Documents