Category Archives: Essays

What do you think of when you think of Paris? You think of The Louvre, The

Avenue des Champs-Élysées—the most famous street in the world with its

theatres, cafes, brilliantly planned gardens and fountains. You think of culture,

language, history, art, music, cuisine.

 

London. What do you think of? You think of Parliament, the astonishing British

Museum, the Tate Modern, the National Gallery in Trafalgar Square, the Tower,

the rebuilt Globe, the British Library…you think of wondrous literature and

history commemorated everywhere in a great city.

 

These cities may be called, albeit crudely, ‘world-class’, but in neither of them

do you think first of their basketball arena. You don’t tell your cab driver, “Take

me to your stadium.”

 

In Rome you think of ancient legions of conquerors, magnificent art, the

Vatican, music, Michelangelo… a sumptuous culture alive on every street. But the

only arena you visit is the ruin of the Colosseum.

 

This is the problem with Sacramentans who think another

basketball/entertainment arena (they’re now renaming and reframing the

colossus they want the public to subsidize) will somehow invest us with world-class

status. They don’t understand what truly elevates a city. Really, it’s

embarrassing, like Donald Trump being so proud of the gigantic, “T” on his

building. It’s crass, sad, and shows a shrunken worldview.

 

World-class, according to Merriam-Webster, means “being of the highest

caliber in the world.”

 

World-class would be the MOMA in New York, Golden Gate Park in San

Francisco, the Art Institute of Chicago. But don’t make me go through the

cultural hallmarks of every great city. Let’s simply recognize that sports arenas

did not catapult these places to international renown.

 

A friend recently returned from Prague. He visited the Prague Castle, opened in

870 AD, the Prague National Theatre and the Dancing House. “Did you go to

their arena?” I asked. He looked baffled. “God no. What arena? Even if they had

one, why would I go there?”

 

When friends visit we drive them through our shaded neighborhoods and they

are surprised by the trees and the winter bloom of camellias. Sacramento has

more trees than any city its size anywhere, we tell them. Also as many trees as

Paris or London. We take them to the Crocker, Sutter’s Fort, the Capitol, the Old

Sacramento State Historical Park, the Railroad Museum, the Cathedral. We eat

and drink at the great restaurants in Midtown, stroll the streets, take a drive

along the American River. We are really a fine city, and when we witness our

attractions through the eyes of visitors, our appreciation is renewed. Nobody

ever asks to see our arena.

 

So please, stop telling us that if a struggling city that can’t afford to keep its

pools and libraries open full time builds another massive arena and surrenders

parking revenue to private entities–all this to host games that cost too much

for the kids who need the pools—it will become a world-class city. By whose

reckoning? Whose standards are these? These are the decisions of a City Council

that ignores the expressed will of the people (we voted twice against another

arena) and the standards of builders who will profit. We will not profit. We will

pay.

 

Consider Detroit. It has over four ‘world-class’ arenas (all supposed to

“revitalize” their struggling neighborhoods). It also has crumbling infrastructure,

deadly and multiplying financial problems, escalating crime and gun murder,

50% unemployment, 60,000 vacant buildings, 35 thousand abandoned homes,

more people living in poverty than cars on the streets, and looks increasingly like

a place devastated by bombs or plague. Despite its ‘world-class’ arenas a

quarter of a million people have fled the city in the last decade.

 

So puleeeze, developers and others who stand to profit, don’t tell us an arena

will make us a world-class city. Don’t tell us it will bring more than a few

temporary construction jobs. Don’t patronize us. Don’t act like we’ve never been

anywhere. Don’t assume your potential profit trumps our votes. It doesn’t. Don’t

act like you know what’s good for us. You don’t. What you ought to do, in fact,

is take a few trips (not at our expense) to ‘world-class’ cities yourselves. Then

come back and open those public pools and libraries.

Pat Lynch

WHAT TO DO WITH 48 ACRES!

It was obvious at the East Sacramento Preservation meeting last week that no one is crazy about 400 homes that are supposed to look like East Sac or River Park neighborhoods. Yet, time and time again over the past decade the community is being asked to accept high density housing or high rise office buildings.

The property was surplus land from the construction of the freeway, so Cal Trans sold it and the City zoned it to industrial that is compatible with the landfill across the freeway. This development was intended to connect to former State Route 148, eventually connecting to Richard’s Boulevard and Interstate 5. That being said, there was never an intension of opening-up this property to the McKinley neighborhood, yet every proposal does exactly that…at the expense of burrowing under the railroad tracks to gain access and jeopardizing flood protection. We get comments like it’s too expensive to build an overpass. Or, it’s not cost effective, etc…. but it’s okay to negatively impact the neighborhoods. Amazing.

The property is adjacent to the freeway with terrific sight-lines all the way to the railroad tracks. Potential land uses, then, should take advantage of this fact and design land uses that are oriented toward the West, toward the freeway, not easterly impacting the McKinley neighborhood. If I owned the property I’d look for businesses that take advantage of freeway access and visibility, i.e. automobile oriented uses like we’ve seen off Fulton Avenue where car dealerships jump out at you at the Marconi curve. With on and off access to the freeway, aren’t there an array of automobile uses that would want to locate there: Big-O Tires, Midas Muffler, etc, and maybe even a small strip commercial to support automobile uses. Thousands of cars and trucks pass this site daily. Isn’t there a land use that’s car- compatible?

Housing in my view is not a good use for this property. Unfortunately, that’s all the community has heard….infill development, high density urban living, etc. without public transportation or an employment base to support it. There are plenty of other infill housing sites in Sacramento.

Riverview Capital Investments’ excellent reputation in developing “green urban projects” seems to be confined to building houses. Commercial land uses can be clean energy projects and equally “green!” I agree with Councilman Cohn: Riverview Capital Investments is a leader in the financial world and they have the expertise to do a great job of developing the famous 48 acres…..but it doesn’t need to be housing.

How does an orchard or a Soil Born Farm sound?

Terry Kastanis

Board Member

East Sacramento Preservation Neighborhood Group