The Sacramento Bee Editorial
Published: Sunday, Jun. 19, 2011 - 12:00 am | Page 6E
The prospect of a shiny new arena grabs the lion's share of attention. But a long-planned transit hub is just as important to downtown Sacramento's railyard and the region's vitality.
Because both pivotal projects are in the early stages of development, there's an opportunity to make sure they work in concert. We need to get it right – the transit center is essential for an arena to succeed in the railyard, and vice versa.
To cut the price tag from as much as $600 million to a more manageable $387 million, the current arena proposal does not include sizable parking. In addition to 8,200 parking spaces within four blocks of the site, the plan counts on 20 percent of Kings fans and concert attendees arriving by light rail.
Part of the argument for putting the arena downtown rather than in Natomas or elsewhere is that it would "provide connectivity" to regional transit. Planners say the arena should be the first destination in the region where people arrive by mass transit in big numbers – a showpiece for a greener future where driving is no longer the default decision.
But there is at least the potential for conflict between the arena and transit center.
The proposal unveiled last month to put an 18,000-seat arena on city-owned land in the railyard plops it down precisely where the transit hub has been envisioned.
Long a top priority, the $300 million intermodal center would replace the current train depot. It would bring stations for trains, light rail, buses – and possibly trolleys and eventually high-speed rail – close together, making transfers much easier and making it possible to go from home or office to another California city or even another state without getting in a car.
A more precise configuration of where an arena would be in relation to a transit center is a key issue in city staff's ongoing 100-day technical review of the arena development plan that is to be complete by September.
Officials are optimistic that a solution can be found.
It appears less likely that the arena and transit center would be combined in one complex, along the lines of Madison Square Garden in New York, where the subway and rail lines run below the arena. If you dig down on the railyard site, you quickly hit groundwater – requiring costly waterproofing for any subterranean structures.
More likely is that a transit center would go alongside the arena. The plan shows a light-rail stop on the site. The Regional Transit Green line now being built would directly connect to the Richards Boulevard area and ultimately could cross the American River to Natomas and Sacramento International Airport.
The side-by-side layout could also fit better with the recommendations of an Urban Land Institute expert panel for a "transit village," where bus, train and light-rail stations would sit amid green space. The existing concept for a massive, block-long, multistory transit center would divide the railyard development from downtown, the panel said in January.
If that means the city needs some adjoining land, the expectation is that the railyard's new owner, Inland American Real Estate Trust, would be a willing partner. After all, an arena and transit center would make the railyard far more valuable and attractive for development.
An Inland spokesman says there have been "only cursory discussions about making additional land available" for a transit center.
"That said, we have been working closely with the city on other infrastructure work and will do the same on this issue when needed," the spokesman said in an email response.
Another potential complication is that the city received $21 million in Measure A transportation sales tax money to help buy land for the transit center – the land that's now in play for the arena.
The city, however, could keep the money by acquiring another parcel for the transit center. Or there may be another financial maneuver that ensures that the city uses Measure A money as intended.
Understandably, officials and the public are focusing at the moment on how to finance the arena. If a new regional task force of elected officials and others, convened by Mayor Kevin Johnson last week, can't come up with a feasible and politically palatable plan, everything else is moot.
Still, as the arena plan moves forward, the transit center can't get lost in the shuffle.
Because both pivotal projects are in the early stages of development, there's an opportunity to make sure they work in concert. We need to get it right – the transit center is essential for an arena to succeed in the railyard, and vice versa.
To cut the price tag from as much as $600 million to a more manageable $387 million, the current arena proposal does not include sizable parking. In addition to 8,200 parking spaces within four blocks of the site, the plan counts on 20 percent of Kings fans and concert attendees arriving by light rail.
Part of the argument for putting the arena downtown rather than in Natomas or elsewhere is that it would "provide connectivity" to regional transit. Planners say the arena should be the first destination in the region where people arrive by mass transit in big numbers – a showpiece for a greener future where driving is no longer the default decision.
But there is at least the potential for conflict between the arena and transit center.
The proposal unveiled last month to put an 18,000-seat arena on city-owned land in the railyard plops it down precisely where the transit hub has been envisioned.
Long a top priority, the $300 million intermodal center would replace the current train depot. It would bring stations for trains, light rail, buses – and possibly trolleys and eventually high-speed rail – close together, making transfers much easier and making it possible to go from home or office to another California city or even another state without getting in a car.
A more precise configuration of where an arena would be in relation to a transit center is a key issue in city staff's ongoing 100-day technical review of the arena development plan that is to be complete by September.
Officials are optimistic that a solution can be found.
It appears less likely that the arena and transit center would be combined in one complex, along the lines of Madison Square Garden in New York, where the subway and rail lines run below the arena. If you dig down on the railyard site, you quickly hit groundwater – requiring costly waterproofing for any subterranean structures.
More likely is that a transit center would go alongside the arena. The plan shows a light-rail stop on the site. The Regional Transit Green line now being built would directly connect to the Richards Boulevard area and ultimately could cross the American River to Natomas and Sacramento International Airport.
The side-by-side layout could also fit better with the recommendations of an Urban Land Institute expert panel for a "transit village," where bus, train and light-rail stations would sit amid green space. The existing concept for a massive, block-long, multistory transit center would divide the railyard development from downtown, the panel said in January.
If that means the city needs some adjoining land, the expectation is that the railyard's new owner, Inland American Real Estate Trust, would be a willing partner. After all, an arena and transit center would make the railyard far more valuable and attractive for development.
An Inland spokesman says there have been "only cursory discussions about making additional land available" for a transit center.
"That said, we have been working closely with the city on other infrastructure work and will do the same on this issue when needed," the spokesman said in an email response.
Another potential complication is that the city received $21 million in Measure A transportation sales tax money to help buy land for the transit center – the land that's now in play for the arena.
The city, however, could keep the money by acquiring another parcel for the transit center. Or there may be another financial maneuver that ensures that the city uses Measure A money as intended.
Understandably, officials and the public are focusing at the moment on how to finance the arena. If a new regional task force of elected officials and others, convened by Mayor Kevin Johnson last week, can't come up with a feasible and politically palatable plan, everything else is moot.
Still, as the arena plan moves forward, the transit center can't get lost in the shuffle.
No comments:
Post a Comment