STORYLINE Arena

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

1 of 3
close

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

1 of 3
Loading images
Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image

Sacramento developer David Taylor and a prominent Colorado sports facility developer have been pegged as the top contenders in an effort to build the city a new downtown arena.

Mayor Kevin Johnson's arena task force is recommending city officials work with Taylor and ICON Venue Group to determine if building a sports and entertainment center is feasible now and if they're the right team for the project.

In an analysis released Friday, the task force encouraged the city to give the ICON-Taylor team 90 days to study the viability of such a project and to develop a proposal and financing plan. The team was handpicked by Johnson after another team, which then included Taylor, failed to produce a viable project on schedule last year.

Without a detailed proposal for the task force to consider, the ICON-Taylor team's first-place ranking to build an arena in the downtown railyards was based on its experience and credibility. The team's partnership with the historic railyards' new owner, Inland American Real Estate Trust, was also a factor in the selection, according to the analysis.

"While the lack of a development plan could be considered non-responsive in some circumstances, the (ICON-Taylor) team warrants unique consideration owing to its extensive experience and track record, locally, nationally and globally, in the development of major projects, including events centers, under challenging circumstances," the task force said in its analysis.

Task force co-chair Chris Lehane is scheduled to present the analysis to the Sacramento City Council at its Tuesday night meeting.

The task force is recommending the city manager's office take up to 120 days to determine if the team's proposal demonstrates "a real promise of feasibility" and if the Sacramento Kings owners, the Maloofs, or the NBA will commit to stay in Sacramento and work on an acceptable development agreement.

The task force also recommends the City Council consider entering an exclusive negotiating period with the developers to hammer out a final agreement on the project.

Four teams met the task force's Dec. 30 deadline to submit proposals or indicate interest in developing an arena to replace the Kings' current home, Arco Arena, in Natomas.

Detailed proposals were submitted by the Convergence Team, led by Sacramento developer Gerry Kamilos, and Natomas Entertainment Sports Center Partners, led by Mike Corrick of Nacht & Lewis Architects and Rick Millitello, general manager and executive vice president of Skanska USA Building Inc. of Oakland.

Providing proposals with detailed funding plans seemed to work against them, as the task force used those details to rank the teams lower in the analysis.

Natomas ESC Partners, which was ranked fourth, expressed a concern about how a federal moratorium on development in Natomas might affect their proposal during the task force's fact-finding meetings with development teams last week.

The task force said the proposal doesn’t seem to be in the city’s or region’s best interest economically, when compared to building an arena integrated with downtown's future regional transit center. Also, redevelopment of the Arco Arena site should work without a new arena, the task force said.

The Convergence Team, which won the first shot at developing an arena last year, has simplified its proposal, yet its plan remains the most complex.

A California Exposition and State Fair manager told task force members that Cal Expo officials are reluctant to consider even a scaled-down plan to privately develop part of the existing state fair site to help fund a downtown arena.

"The project’s inherent complications likely render it feasible in theory only," the task force said in its analysis.

The CORE team was ranked second by the task force. The team – led by former arena task force member and president of McClellan Park, Larry Kelley, and entrepreneur Ali Mackani – has made a determination of project viability its priority, like the ICON-Taylor team.

The team includes experienced local players such as Kelley, a notable developer, and real estate attorney Mike Kvarme, another former task force member. But the team is lacking a sports facility developer with ICON's expertise, according to the analysis.

The task force recommends the City Council be asked in 90 to 120 days – late April or late May – whether to enter an exclusive negotiating period with the developers.

On Tuesday, the City Council could make a decision to proceed with one or more of the development teams. Because the team's proposals varied so much in terms of detail, city staff members have outlined a set of submission requirements they'd like the team or teams to turn into the city within 90 days. A preliminary financial plan and a signed concurrence agreement with the Kings are among the requirements.

City staff would then take 60 days to review the proposal or proposals, prepare a staff report and return to the council, possibly in July, for consideration of an exclusive negotiating period, said Assistant City Manager John Dangberg.
 

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

January 22, 2011 | 8:46 PM
Love it. Lets finally get something done. Sacramento has so much potential. Not that I am saying anything new. We all want the best for Sacramento, I think the problem is that we all have different views on what the best is, and then come the delays. If I had a dollar for every time I read about a new arena project, I would have enough to build an arena myself.
0 0
REPLY
January 24, 2011 | 10:12 AM
Great recap. Thanks!
2 0
REPLY
January 24, 2011 | 4:59 PM
If you take Arco Arena away from Natomas, what will happen to Natomas? That is about the only thing that keeps Natomas going.
0 3
REPLY
January 25, 2011 | 11:55 AM
If that happened, Natomas would remain what it already is--office complexes for work, Big Box Stores for shopping, and homes for living. The old Arco Arena site would become an office complex or light industrial most likely. Assuming the parks are maintained and the neighborhood is policed, that is better than most of the rest of Sacramento proper.

The real question, however, is how can we most cheaply (re)build a new arena. I know some people have mass-transitopian and downtown utopian visions dancing in their heads, but priority #1 is keeping the Kings at lowest cost.
1 1
REPLY
January 30, 2011 | 8:56 PM
Priority 1 is keeping the Kings, period. We don't have the luxury of second opinions at this point - if it's not in Natomas, they need to get on board - else the Kings will be gone, the arena will attract a handful of low-caliber events, and everyone loses.

While it's true Arco is a great benefit to Natomas, it has a great opportunity to re-invent itself if there is no arena there. Perhaps they should focus on attracting another major tenant like a theme park - something Sacramento is in dire need of.
2 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below. Use commas to separate your tags.

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background