Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[mhays]

This has been a great discussion. I'm not local but will comment on a few points...

Based on my area, many boarded up businesses are still in business. Some simply boarded up for protection while closed for a while. Others due to the fringe groups at protests. I get takeout in places with boarded windows (same neighborhood as Orlando's project, which I like btw, despite losing a great pizza place).

Portland doesn't have projects like the Alta example, at least in its core. Their blocks are 200' square vs. 660', and parking is mostly below-grade. They do have blocks with woodframe housing and little or no retail though. Denver is between the two.

As for retail, it seems important for the immediate area to have basic conveniences. The Gateway would be a big asset. Nightlife should be walkable. Street walls should have a lot of doors, windows, and visible activity. But I don't think every street should have retail. Retail should be clustered into good retail streets, not dotted in small amounts everywhere.

That's especially true at the moderate densities you get with projects like Alta Depot, which looks like fewer than 100 units per acre. But it would still be true at double or triple that density. A mix of uses would also help, because residential-focused areas tend to rely too much on evenings and weekends.

The US has 40 square feet of retail per person (and falling). Let's say 10-20 square feet in your own neighborhood. At 1.5 people per unit and 15 square feet, that's 6,480 merited by the residents. (You only get to 15 if a lot of types of retail are covered.) That would equal an 80-deep store on 1/5 of the north frontage of Alta Depot. You could jam enough retail into Alta Depot to handle the eventual neighborhood density by itself, but nobody builds for hypothetical futures they don't control.

Big cities are full of dense-but-quiet residential areas -- Manhattan, Hong Kong, London, and so on, outside of their core districts. It's not easy to make non-retail frontages interesting and active, but there are options. For example townhouse-style units with their own entries on that frontage, with apartments above.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

Clearly, several of you liked 'In the Venue (I've never been).' However, they chose to sell to developers - and they will likely not be the last place to do so.

No one has claimed that In The Venue was obtained other than selling to a developer. That is the way it works obviously. The problem is they are removing an old building with fairly good urban design principles and replacing it with something that lacks those. If they aren't willing to preserve the structure, which is my preference, then they should be replacing it will something just as good or better as far as design. For me I don't worry much about any one development because as you said, not everyone has to have and can have the perfect ratio of active street use, but the shear number that don't is what has me concerned for the ability for SLC to create neighborhood nodes they claim they would like to see.

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

I personally think a lot of you are being a little overdramatic about this. You are basically demanding that this area goes from 0 to 100 instantly as if that is some normal occurrence. Do you really think if we start going through Portland or Denver block by block that we wouldn't find Alta Depot style structures even with all of their regulations? Of course we would.

I am not sure about others, but I sure don't expect that. The issue is a small fraction is being built that are worthy of being called urban and the rest of extremely flawed. With the nature of real estate we will likely have those with us for the rest of my life. Further, you are comparing apples and oranges. Portland, didn't tear down many of their buildings with good design and quality, but instead repurposed them. They demanded this and developers listened. Also, with their blocks being something like 200' by 200' worst case they are stuck with a bad building one of many small blocks. A place like Alta Depot is over 3x the square footage of 1 Portland block, so the impact is far different to the city environment and future potential for active streets.

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

The first few projects aren't as good, but they were the only ones willing to develop in a place swarming with homeless and police, no easily accessible walking paths, surrounded by freeways and industrial train lines, and roads that are crumbling to bits. Now that they have established to investors that the area is a safe investment, new and better projects can be demanded by the city going forwards.

The homeless situation was definitely a drag on developer interest and I can understand why. I bit my lip with Alta Gateway for that very reason, but Alta Depot would not have that excuse. The area is completely changed and so should the cities expectations from developers. It is funny you mention The Post development because they are building in a pretty terrible location too since they are bracketed by terribly large, busy roads, freeway and poor infrastructure, but apparently they can muster mostly good urban design principles.

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

Could Alta Depot be better? Heck yeah it could. Could the city still choose to demand improvements be made? Yes. But demanding and treating every project that is proposed as if they must either be enormous urban mega developments with tons of ground floor retail (that will likely never be filled) or they are trash/will be crime ridden is crazy. Honestly, if building a mid-block access in this development would somehow attract crime than you are essentially proving many of the developers' fear of the area correct -- anything that isn't fortress-like in design will endanger their future profits. It should also be noted that the midblock access proposed in this project is no different than the one in Sugarmont Apartments in Sugarhouse (they clearly were using that project as their inspiration)

I don't understand your argument regarding the alley way. Small side streets are amazing IF they are designed correctly. All this would prove to a developer, if it became dangerous, is poorly designed streets where business and housing turn their backs to it and where it is infrequently used are breeding grounds for criminal activity. If the Alta's were to engage the street with live/work, retail, outdoor seating, etc., the place would be a gathering spot and therefore be inherently safer. I think cities should be realistic and realize in the era of Amazon brick and mortar businesses are not as needed, but you can still expect developers to build in a way that at least allows many areas of the first floor to be easily converted to retail if and when the environment changes.

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

Should regulations regarding this be improved in the future? Yes. Is it the end of the world and the doom of Salt Lake? No, of course not.

Now who is being overly dramatic?

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

We are already seeing great projects being proposed and built - such as The Post District, Block 67, Paperbox, and many other CBD projects. The city is improving and the projects that are proposed right now and some of its most ambitious in our history. I think Salt Lake City will eventually get to where a lot of you will at the very least will be okay with it. I'm personally looking forward to many of these amazing projects and I hope some of you are as well.

I agree and I hope they are not scaled down into value engineered oblivion.

[Comrade]

I get it. There's an appetite for mediocrity in Utah. Like I said in another post, Salt Lake aims so low that any type of development is palatable. But the problem persists exactly because so many of you are conditioned to accept the bare minimum. You even see it with tower proposals downtown.

Salt Lake is doing a piss-poor job developing itself beyond the city core. That is what this discussion is about.

My concern, which was not addressed at any point in Blah_Amazing's post, is Salt Lake's continued lack of focus on creating true neighborhoods. And no, just having a bunch of cookie-cutter apartment complexes isn't a neighborhood. It's a denser suburb.

Take a look at all the development on 400 South.

Is 400 South any more walkable, and pedestrian friendly today, than it was a decade ago?

No.

That's despite a sizable increase in residential development on the street over the last ten years.

The problem is that none of these developments have any street engagement.

Block 44 removed a cluster of historic buildings that had far better street engagement just due to their sheer size and a much better overall level engagement - and replaced it with a monstrosity of a structure that created a dead zone for nearly a full block.

Don't get me wrong. I don't particularly miss the buildings on that old site - though, I did love this little house:



But it goes back to my point: we shoot so low that what replaces is is, arguably, worse.

There is zero street engagement with Block 44:



It's basically a dead area now. At least The Exchange, going up across the street, will hopefully create a decent amount of street engagement, so, I am not critical of all development. However, it's clearly an anomaly at this point.

Literally, next to Block 44, on the east-side of 400 East, we have The Quattro. Not an ugly development, and fortunately, it's not as expansive as Block 44 - but there's still no street engagement:

Just a block east, we've got The Encore. Yet another massive dead space that stretches half the block. Again, zero street engagement. Even less so than The Quattro.

Now again we have a situation where the defense will be, "yeah, but it's better than what was there before."

And it's true. There wasn't anything significant. You had a 60s era office building and a smoke shop.



I get people don't care about that building. Alone, I wouldn't either. If it had to go, it had to go. But it's literally the only building in this area of 400 South that had any sort of decent street engagement.

Instead, it's been replaced by this:



I don't have a problem with development, or even going in and replacing underutilized, older buildings that are not significant to the fabric of the city.

My problem is that there continues to be a lack of overall planning and foresight when it comes to 400 South.

Are they making it more urban? Absolutely.

Is it more pedestrian friendly and walkable?

Absolutely not.

That is a concern to me because 400 South is a major thoroughfare into downtown. It's also got TRAX right down the middle. To me, 400 South should be lined with businesses - not just walls of residential condos that do little to actually engage with the neighborhood.

And that takes me back to my original point: Salt Lake City does a piss-poor job creating neighborhoods - especially beyond the main centralized core.

I'll readily admit, I like where downtown is going. I like what I am seeing from Paperbox and the Post District. Those are great potential developments - if developed as they're currently proposed.

But this isn't about downtown.

This is about the rest of the city. Areas that aren't directly downtown.

Areas like the Depot District or the 400 South corridor.

Areas that lack overall neighborhood cohesiveness and don't utilize the foundation that is already there.

The Depot District absolutely should use the old GreekTown area as a springboard for the neighborhood. But they're not. They'll demolish it for tacky, boring condos with little street engagement. They'll do exactly to that area as they're doing to 400 South: establish a building boom of these apartments that offer zero street/pedestrian engagement. In the long run, these areas will just be blocks and blocks of apartments and nothing more. Exactly what they're doing out in the suburbs.

Salt Lake should be different, though. We have an urban fabric to work with. WE ARE NOT UTILIZING IT.

For one, Salt Lake doesn't have an abundance of these little retail nodes outside of downtown. Getting rid of that GreekTown block will just mean we have one fewer.

But instead of pushing for the creation of these nodes, a centralized, walkable area, we're solely focused on just residential development at all costs. Forget how the building engages with the sidewalk. Forget the emphasis on retail development. It's all about residential development that is still geared toward the automobile because there's no central community for these people to walk outside their apartment and experience. The thing is, we are not building these communities.

This is a little area about 4 miles outside downtown Portland:



Portland has a lot of these little retail centers at the heart of these neighborhoods.

Salt Lake has only a cluster of these.

We shouldn't be removing them.

More importantly, they should be a blueprint for how to develop neighborhoods going forward. There are plenty of areas outside downtown that could have these little blocks. I'm thinking the area around Smith's Ballpark. Or by the Fairground of North Temple.

Is there a focus for that, though?

Based on what I am seeing? No. No there isn't.

But one of the most egregious examples continues to be 400 South. This isn't just some minor street. If it was, say an area like 200 West, I could understand not putting as much emphasis on retail and commercial development. But 400 South is not only a major street - it's also got a freaking TRAX line to work off.

Yet the development isn't establishing a neighborhood. It's just throwing up residential condos that fail to interact with the street.

Because there's no rhyme or reason to what the city considers 'good' development, this will only continue. And we'll have a 400 South that looks about as engaging for the pedestrian as 3500 South by Valley Fair Mall in WVC.

[SLC PopPunk]

A few picture updates from today.

The Birdie
The Magnolia
Cottonwood Broadway
PaperBox
Convention Center Hotel
West Quarter

[i-215]

Comrade, you hit the nail right on the head. Good urban design doesn't just mean dense. Density alone doesn't mean it functions well for humans.

Example: Pruitt Igoe



This super dense block of housing in St. Louis may have been more modern, but it had no retail. It was difficult to walk places because it broke up the natural street grid. The uniformity of the buildings act like a "machine" which creates a level of discomfort among humans who interact with it. Arguably, it functioned far worse than the "slums" it replaced.

There are countless examples of good urban *dense* design. Neither Pruitt Igoe nor this SLC design are good. Frankly, it is a suburban mid-rise in an urban setting.

-----

Likewise, good urban design *can* exist in low density settings.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Comrade

I get it. There's an appetite for mediocrity in Utah. Like I said in another post, Salt Lake aims so low that any type of development is palatable. But the problem persists exactly because so many of you are conditioned to accept the bare minimum. You even see it with tower proposals downtown.

Salt Lake is doing a piss-poor job developing itself beyond the city core. That is what this discussion is about.

My concern, which was not addressed at any point in Blah_Amazing's post, is Salt Lake's continued lack of focus on creating true neighborhoods. And no, just having a bunch of cookie-cutter apartment complexes isn't a neighborhood. It's a denser suburb.

Take a look at all the development on 400 South.

Is 400 South any more walkable, and pedestrian friendly today, than it was a decade ago?

No.

That's despite a sizable increase in residential development on the street over the last ten years.

The problem is that none of these developments have any street engagement.

Block 44 removed a cluster of historic buildings that had far better street engagement just due to their sheer size and a much better overall level engagement - and replaced it with a monstrosity of a structure that created a dead zone for nearly a full block.

Don't get me wrong. I don't particularly miss the buildings on that old site - though, I did love this little house:

But it goes back to my point: we shoot so low that what replaces is is, arguably, worse.

There is zero street engagement with Block 44:

It's basically a dead area now. At least The Exchange, going up across the street, will hopefully create a decent amount of street engagement, so, I am not critical of all development. However, it's clearly an anomaly at this point.

Literally, next to Block 44, on the east-side of 400 East, we have The Quattro. Not an ugly development, and fortunately, it's not as expansive as Block 44 - but there's still no street engagement:

Just a block east, we've got The Encore. Yet another massive dead space that stretches half the block. Again, zero street engagement. Even less so than The Quattro.

Now again we have a situation where the defense will be, "yeah, but it's better than what was there before."

And it's true. There wasn't anything significant. You had a 60s era office building and a smoke shop.


I get people don't care about that building. Alone, I wouldn't either. If it had to go, it had to go. But it's literally the only building in this area of 400 South that had any sort of decent street engagement.

Instead, it's been replaced by this:

I don't have a problem with development, or even going in and replacing underutilized, older buildings that are not significant to the fabric of the city.

My problem is that there continues to be a lack of overall planning and foresight when it comes to 400 South.

Are they making it more urban? Absolutely.

Is it more pedestrian friendly and walkable?

Absolutely not.

That is a concern to me because 400 South is a major thoroughfare into downtown. It's also got TRAX right down the middle. To me, 400 South should be lined with businesses - not just walls of residential condos that do little to actually engage with the neighborhood.

And that takes me back to my original point: Salt Lake City does a piss-poor job creating neighborhoods - especially beyond the main centralized core.

I'll readily admit, I like where downtown is going. I like what I am seeing from Paperbox and the Post District. Those are great potential developments - if developed as they're currently proposed.

But this isn't about downtown.

This is about the rest of the city. Areas that aren't directly downtown.

Areas like the Depot District or the 400 South corridor.

Areas that lack overall neighborhood cohesiveness and don't utilize the foundation that is already there.

The Depot District absolutely should use the old GreekTown area as a springboard for the neighborhood. But they're not. They'll demolish it for tacky, boring condos with little street engagement. They'll do exactly to that area as they're doing to 400 South: establish a building boom of these apartments that offer zero street/pedestrian engagement. In the long run, these areas will just be blocks and blocks of apartments and nothing more. Exactly what they're doing out in the suburbs.

Salt Lake should be different, though. We have an urban fabric to work with. WE ARE NOT UTILIZING IT.

For one, Salt Lake doesn't have an abundance of these little retail nodes outside of downtown. Getting rid of that GreekTown block will just mean we have one fewer.

But instead of pushing for the creation of these nodes, a centralized, walkable area, we're solely focused on just residential development at all costs. Forget how the building engages with the sidewalk. Forget the emphasis on retail development. It's all about residential development that is still geared toward the automobile because there's no central community for these people to walk outside their apartment and experience. The thing is, we are not building these communities.

This is a little area about 4 miles outside downtown Portland:



Portland has a lot of these little retail centers at the heart of these neighborhoods.

Salt Lake has only a cluster of these.

We shouldn't be removing them.

More importantly, they should be a blueprint for how to develop neighborhoods going forward. There are plenty of areas outside downtown that could have these little blocks. I'm thinking the area around Smith's Ballpark. Or by the Fairground of North Temple.

Is there a focus for that, though?

Based on what I am seeing? No. No there isn't.

But one of the most egregious examples continues to be 400 South. This isn't just some minor street. If it was, say an area like 200 West, I could understand not putting as much emphasis on retail and commercial development. But 400 South is not only a major street - it's also got a freaking TRAX line to work off.

Yet the development isn't establishing a neighborhood. It's just throwing up residential condos that fail to interact with the street.

Because there's no rhyme or reason to what the city considers 'good' development, this will only continue. And we'll have a 400 South that looks about as engaging for the pedestrian as 3500 South by Valley Fair Mall in WVC.

I used to frequent that part of Portland. I miss Portland a lot.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying Comrade. SLC is being a bit short-sighted. But, I also think just by the highlighted statement above that you do not understand the dynamics at play here. I'm sure the SLC city planners would love to have a super cool and vibrant urban atmosphere. But, they are fighting against the prevalent suburban sprawl trend. Developers claim that it is more expensive and too long to develop in SLC compared to places like Lehi or Draper. They have no idea how easy it is to develop in SLC compared to places like Seattle & Portland with their sophisticated Design Review process. 10-20 years ago, I bet SLC was just trying to get any housing to be built in the Depot area, and as you can see many developers don't want to do retail because of the difficulty of getting any retail. It's the chicken or the egg scenario. Get people there first and then build retail to follow or risk having empty retail spaces and hope enough critical mass will follow. The bottom line is that many developers and tech company owners don't get the vision. They're used to having their large 4-5 bedroom houses and large yard. SLC is getting there, and we are starting to see some developers with enough courage to venture into doing something more urban. And, you are right, too. SLC needs to tighten their zoning now to require retail at the street level on primary pedestrian streets.

[eleetham]

As I was looking at Denver LoDo district and the few high buildings in that surrounding area would these buildings fit the bill what people want near the Salt Lake Central Station and the Alta Depot area. Here are the listing of buildings 1601 Wewatta St, Kimpton Born Hotel, 1650 Wewatta The Platform, 1750 Wewatta The Coloradan, 1777 Wewatta Union Denver, Hotel Indigo, 1920 17 St Cadence at Union Station, 1777 Chestnut The Grand, 1707 Chestnut and 1700 Bassett Glass House. Would these apartment towers the one office building that has curb side store,bars & restaurant one has a Whole Foods Market is that what people want to see more of from what I’m reading or am miss understanding everything.

[eleetham]

I forgot if someone is good doing graphic design with the building I listed I would love to see how it would fit into the the surrounding Salt Lake Central Station. Thanks

[Makid]

I will say that thing that is missed is the current height limits. This limitation causes more angst than I think people realize.

Developers need to make things pencil out. Nearly every development in the Depot district is at or near the maximum height. This is both before and after the conditional design review.

I have heard that a few developers wished they could build taller rather than wider but they are limited based on the limits. And rather than wait for possible changes and allow for multiple phases of development, they utilize the whole property to the maximum of the current limits.

Now, we all like to lament the super block long developments but to make the development pencil out, they are nearly maximizing the space. This leaves little room for mid block walkways and retail.

Now, the City is working on redoing the height limits and they are finalizing the requirements for the study. The results should be completed either later this year or early next year with the City Council then voting to adopt the changes. So we are probably 12 to 15 months out from the changes being enacted.

If the heights are increased, I would expect to see more mid rise buildings 8-12 story buildings start to spring up in the Depot district. This would add some variety while also adding the chance for some minor retail, even if only on the corners to start.

Changes are coming, hopefully the changes will be sufficient to encourage a more walkable environment, especially along transit corridors.

[Comrade]

I agree that taller would be more ideal than wider (and not just because I am a fan of height but because it allows for more land usage).

And I don't buy Salt Lake is at any more of a disadvantage as any other city with its suburbs. We just have leadership that doesn't push for the type of diverse developments we need to be seeing in the areas surrounding downtown Salt Lake.

Just having blocks of these residential developments might make Salt Lake more dense, but it does not make it more urban.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Comrade

I agree that taller would be more ideal than wider (and not just because I am a fan of height but because it allows for more land usage).

And I don't buy Salt Lake is at any more of a disadvantage as any other city with its suburbs. We just have leadership that doesn't push for the type of diverse developments we need to be seeing in the areas surrounding downtown Salt Lake.

Just having blocks of these residential developments might make Salt Lake more dense, but it does not make it more urban.

Well, you should believe me. Office & residential development in Lehi & Draper have far outpaced downtown SLC. Building Salt Lake posted a few articles about it a while ago. I'm from the Salt Lake area but have lived in Atlanta, Orlando, Philly, Portland, and now Seattle. Atlanta and Orlando are two very sprawlish metros and their downtown areas have lacked the urban vibrancy that you see in Portland and Seattle, although Atlanta is seeing a lot of dense mixed-use infill now. I continue to see all of the new single family residential development and stand-alone office parks pop up in Lehi land. I continue to see all of that development down there far outpace the development in downtown SLC. It is the opposite up here in Seattle and Portland. There's so much more demand to build in downtown Seattle. A lot of that has to do with how Amazon and Paull Allen's Vulcan development created an Innovation Zone just north of downtown in South Lake Union. There have been 40 highrises built in the downtown Seattle area in the last decade.

A lot of it also is about demographics. There are more married couples and families per capita in Utah than, I believe, every state, which creates more of an incentive to not live in a 1 or 2bedroom condo downtown versus owning a 3 or 4 bedroom home in the burbs.

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by RC14

I use to live at Citifront, a block and a half from this proposed project. I always avoided walking down 100 or 200 south because that was during the height of the homeless situation. If I walked anywhere I would always us the North Temple bridge. During the time I lived there my car was stolen and my apartment was broken into, even though Citifront is one of those 'fortress like' projects. I have heard horror stories from people who lived in apartments in the surrounding area that were worse than what I experienced. In spite of this, I still loved that area and would live there again, especially now that it is cleaned up.
All this to say, I realize the Alta Gateway isn't the most exciting project in the world but I understand almost every aspect of it. I think it is appropriate for the area at this time. I would not live there if it wasn't fortress like or didn't have ample parking based on my experience.
My belief is that as the area gains density and more of these lots are filled we will start to see better, more urban projects. This project is not replacing anything desirable. It is an empty field and a bus garage in a sketchy, somewhat isolated, part of town. This project will bring in more residents which will inevitably create demand for retail and nightlife. IMO the area is already overdue for better retail development, it is only a matter of time.

That being said, I think the future of retail is up in the air right not. I don't think we should be demanding block after block of ground floor retail. In other parts of the country these places are shuttering. This was happening pre COVID due to Amazon and now with COVID 19 and the increased threat of looting and riots, I don't know how retail survives. It would not only require business owners who are willing to take the risk but banks and insurance companies as well. I think we will have to wait and see on that.

All of this

Again, it's not like I don't understand what all of you are saying and arguing for. I have both undergraduate and a masters degrees in city planning. I have sat through countless classes pushing for these reforms. It’s also important to note that we are again talking about what most would consider (even now), to be the worst and least desirable part of the city. I also think the urban ideals that some of the people on this forum are pushing are somewhat proving to be outdated and are not matching the future socioeconomic trends that has been occurring over the past decade and that covid has only accelerated.

Regent Street, right in the heart of the city (let alone the area we have been discussing – which most people consider as one of the ‘sketchiest’ neighborhoods in Salt Lake), still has empty storefronts years later! Many of the buildings that have been added lately with ground floor retail also are still vacant. The main retail center in the neighborhood we are discussing, 'The Gateway' was only recently saved from total collapse due to a resale of the property and $100 million dollar renovation turning it into 'an entertainment district.' Right now entertainment is one of the worst industries impacted by the virus, and The Gateway will be lucky to get out of this intact, especially with only a few actual residents in the area right now to support it (most of which live the very buildings some of you seem to despise). Ground floor retail only works if you have the people to support them, and everything is telling us that downtown Salt Lake City just doesn’t have that yet.

Orlando is correct, the suburbs have pulled so much away from the city over the years and they are genuine competitors at this point. With the state’s pet project at the prison site, continued expansions in cities like Sandy, Draper, Lehi, and Provo, Salt Lake City often (actually I’d say almost always) loses out.

However, I’d argue there is more to it than that. Many of you have been citing other cities like Seattle, Portland (there are significant problems with this example in particular that I really don’t want to get into), and Denver as places we should be emulating and asking ‘why aren’t we like this place?’ Putting it simply – its because we just aren’t those places, we never will be. We aren’t Denver or Portland – we are Salt Lake City, UTAH. While Salt Lake may be slightly more progressive and liberal then the rest of the state, everywhere else isn’t, which matters tremendously.

Culturally, Utah (even SLC) will never be a Denver or Portland. There is a reason there isn’t a significant expanse of nightlife in the city (be honest, beyond just a few little nodes here or there this is true). Most people that commute into SLC (which is a supermajority of those that work in the city) are LDS with families. Unlike in many of the cities often cited, where a majority of workers go out for drinks with friends and coworkers after work – most people finish up with their work get in their cars and go back to the suburbs and their families (both LDS and nonLDS). This is something that will likely not change for at least a generation or two and has become ingrained in the culture and built environment. And I know many of you are going to say ‘I know tons of people that go out’ or something to that effect, but in reality that is a very small portion of people, even in Salt Lake City proper. Many liberal people in Utah are just more suburban and conservative than their other urban counterparts throughout the rest of the country. I say this as someone who has spent of lot of time with them as a student at the U.

This phenomenon occurs because of the preconceived notions the rest of the world has towards Utah – leading to very few people or businesses coming here unless that perceived culture and environment is something they want to be either be a part of or, at the very least, adjacent too. You get a few here or there that are ‘rebels’ (so to speak) but they are a minority. So, if its your dream to make Salt Lake City into this Seattle or Portland-like urban environment with tons of nightlife where thousands of people are bar hopping every night, you will be disappointed. The culture here, while changing slightly, isn’t changing that much – and that’s okay.

Salt Lake is its own unique thing, and we are currently in a very early stage of our urban rebirth. Portland has been evolving and adopting strong urban policies for over sixty years, while Salt Lake is really only about a decade into our real urban renaissance. The city is learning and growing, while at the same time having to compete with pandemics, recessions, crime, homelessness, protests, riots, and strong socioeconomic forces trying to pull people and jobs to the suburbs. So far, I think there is significant promise in Salt Lake.

Is every project going to be featured in Architectural Digest? No, of course not. Is there very sound and logical reasons why businesses and developers are extremely hesitant to invest in grand $100+ million dollar urban projects with tons of ground floor retail and tall buildings in a neighborhood that has been notorious for crime, homelessness, and drugs for decades? Yes! Will growing stability in the area, being proven by these pioneer projects, allow for the city to take a tougher stance in the future! Of course! I think most of us agree that the city is reaching a point where it can start pushing forward more advanced policies regarding building designs, density, materials, etc. However, being someone that condemns every project that is willing to trust in the city that the still sketchy area they are moving into will become better in the coming years, but isn’t some grand-scale miracle of urban design, is getting to be a bit cumbersome and absurd. There just aren’t the socioeconomic forces here to make it happen yet. The retail, entertainment centers, bars, etc. that we already have are barely holding on as it is. Vacancies in retail are already apparent and may very well get worse. If the places we already have are going to survive, we need the actual physical people living there to support them – and that doesn’t happen without a few Alta Gateways and Depots here and there.

So, if you are here to just whine and complain how this isn’t fair, well what can I say? I don’t have time for clowns. Should we push for reasonable reforms and policy changes that improve the built environment, preserve critical historic structures, and match future socioeconomic trends? Yes, absolutely! As for me, I am looking forward to the coming decades as our city continues to change and evolve.

[Blah_Amazing]

Interestingly, another project is getting discussed in the past week that would take up the parking lot directly east of the Central Station Apartments along 200 S. It is currently appealing a Design Review Team’s Denial of Building Permission. https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/Cit...howInspection=
Here is an excerpt from their appeal:

This office represents Bridge Projects, LLC, a Utah limited liability company, in connection with its appeal of the Development Review Team’s disposition of Bridge Project’s Commercial/Mixed Use/Affordable Housing Design Review Application of May 28, 2020 herein. Pursuant to the review process, Bridge Projects was notified, on June 8, 2020, that the design as submitted could not include a cantilevered structure to be located over Woodbine Street, a private street belonging to Bridge Projects and running southward from 200 South Street at approximately 550 West. The Design Review Team’s conclusion in this regard was based on the assumption that Woodbine Street is a “public way” as defined by the International Fire Code at Section 202 adopted by Salt Lake City (“a street, alley, or other parcel of land open to the outside air leading to a street, that has been deeded, dedication or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for the public use and which has a clear width and height of not less than ten feet (3048 millimeters)”). Because the Design Review Team regarded Woodbine as a “public way,” and because a neighboring structure being constructed by Central Station Apartments, LLC, the fire separation requirements of the IFC could not accommodate the proposed cantilevered section, in that fire separation was required to go to the center line of Woodbine Street (which is only 16 feet and 6 inches in width).

I'm unsure what will happen on this project, but it is interesting. It appears the project will be two new buildings to the Bridge Projects campus (though the documents are only detailing one), as well as pedestrian paths, plazas, and some green space. The project appears to include affordable housing units and art studio spaces. Unfortunately, the renderings are just architectural drawings as of now.

Project Site:


Project Site Plan:


North Elevation (facing 200 South):


East Elevation:

[delts145]

Thanks Blah_Amazing for the update on the Post District Project. I agree that this is one of the projects to really look forward to.

As always Atlas your quality updates are very much appreciated

Originally Posted by Atlas

I took a drive today and snapped some pictures for you all. The view of downtown coming down 5th/4th South from the U is striking because of how many cranes there are now (even more soon!). I wish I had gotten a picture of that and also a picture of the CCH. Lots of progress on Dixon Place and The Exchange and not a lot noticeable on Sugarmont. Sugar Alley and Post District sites show no activity yet.

Sugarmont Apartments


Dixon Place


The Exchange



Liberty Sky


95 State


Salt Lake Temple


Block 67



The Post District

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

I was excited to see that Lowe Property Group has finally updated their website on the Post District. Other than some of the planned towers, this is the project I am most excited for! I think some of these images are different from the ones that were posted a few weeks ago, so I thought I'd include them. https://www.loweprop.com/post-district








It looks like they will be starting with the buildings they are calling 'Post House' https://www.loweprop.com/post-house , which they have listed separately on their site. Currently, Post House is also listed as 'Under Construction' so I am hoping we will be seeing some real progress on the sight very soon.

[Blah_Amazing]

So, I checked up on Held Properties website: https://www.heldproperties.com/offic...lennium-tower/ and they still list 370 Millennium Tower on the site.

This is what the site says:

This planned 27-story mixed use commercial, hotel, condo and ground floor retail space building is the first live/work/play facility designed for downtown Salt Lake City. The striking tower will offer breathtaking views of the city and nearby mountains and provide an exciting and dynamic lifestyle for business tenants and residents alike. Featuring offices and dwellings with oversized windows, dramatic natural lighting and extended ceilings, 370 Millennium Tower is designed to inspire and thrill workers, residents and visitors alike. The premises will include a full-service high-end hotel and a 15,000 square foot amenity deck with fire pits, jacuzzi pool and outdoor event space overlooking downtown. Just steps from award-winning rapid transit, fine restaurants, excellent shopping and the new federal courthouse, 370 Millennium Tower is destined to become the new cornerstone of southwest downtown SLC.

Property Features
Construction scheduled to begin in 2Q 2020
Central and strategic iconic downtown location
Onsite residential, business, restaurants, hospitality and fitness amenities
Stunning 360º views of downtown Salt Lake City and Wasatch mountains
41,000 SF of luxurious outdoor amenity space
28,500 SF of flexible indoor amenity space
200,000 GSF of commercial office space
15,000 RSF of ground floor retail
Immediate freeway access (primary downtown arterial, east/west flow)

I'm wondering if people really think this project is still active or not? I mean, we haven't heard anything about it in basically a year. The project also seems really ambitious for a developer that only controls a few older office buildings and some 1 floor suburban offices. The project also includes residential, office space, retail, and a hotel!? That seems like a very complex and difficult project to both lease out and finance. However, I really would love to see a tower go up on this site. I mean the impact it would have on the skyline would be substantial.


What do all of you think?

[delts145]

Didn't someone post something a few weeks ago about the property being for sale again?

If it's still up in the air I would be happy to reach out to them here in L.A. and ask what the status is.

[Blah_Amazing]

Another new project is proposed in the Ballpark Neighborhood located at 2100 South just east of the second phase of @2100 Apartments. https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/Cit...howInspection=





Project Description:

W3 Partners is requesting a height modification of 15’ for its proposed affordable multi-family housing project, The Nest @ 21st.
• The project is located at 160 West 2100 South
• Zoning: Commercial Corridor
• The Commercial Corridor Zone allows a height of 30’, with a possible 15’ increase in height subject to the following:
• Approval by the Planning Commission
• Increased landscaping equal to ten percent (10%) of the area of the additional floor

CONSTRUCTION:
• The Nest@21st will consist of main level concrete podium parking with three levels of wood-frame construction above the podium
• The exterior materials are anticipated to be concrete and glass glazing on the main level frontage, with brick, metal and wood on floors 2-4

DWELLING UNITS
• The Nest@21st will consist of approximately 244 dwelling units in one building
• The dwelling units will vary in size with studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom units
• 108 Studios approximately 450 sf each
• 66 One-bedroom units ranging in size from 590-695 sf each
• 70 Two-bedroom units approximately 740 sf each
• Amenity space
• Approximately 10,000 sf of amenity space will be located on the main level fronting 2100 South (Leasing office, Clubhouse space, Fitness room, Business center/lounge/gathering space, and Bike storage/repair and pet washing station).

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

I'm wondering if people really think this project is still active or not? I mean, we haven't heard anything about it in basically a year. The project also seems really ambitious for a developer that only controls a few older office buildings and some 1 floor suburban offices. The project also includes residential, office space, retail, and a hotel!? That seems like a very complex and difficult project to both lease out and finance. However, I really would love to see a tower go up on this site. I mean the impact it would have on the skyline would be substantial.


What do all of you think?

That's first I've seen on this "Lazarus" project in a while. They have had a for sale sign up for years. Might be the best tower site in the city. Fingers crossed. Nothing I can find in Accela. One to watch, maybe even with better renderings!

[RC14]

I have been assuming 370 millennium was dead given there is a large "For Sale" sign on the property but with this project, who knows.

[ThePusherMan]

I work just a block away from the held site. I can confirm that although it used to have signs for leasing the signs now and have been for a while for sale. I'm 99% confident that that project is dead in the water.

Being a bar owner downtown I can confirm that there is little to no happy hour culture in Salt Lake City. Part of that is because about ten years ago they made happy hours illegal. Some bars do well around 5pm but almost all of those bars are food focused. I think that a big factor in why this is the case is that although a lot of the younger work force is non-mormon and want to go out and blow off steam after work, the management and boss tier positions are widely older and LDS. Building workplace culture usually comes from the top down so if the boss isn't taking you out for drinks after work it just isn't part of the culture. That being said, the bar and restaurant scene (Covid aside) is very healthy in Salt Lake City. I've been int he SLC service industry since 2007 and the changes are absolutely unrecognizable. Covid is going to really put a dent in our industry but I believe we are poised to bounce back quickly once there is a vaccine.

In other news: The AT&T store is officially no more. I'm happy to see projects expanding west and south. Makes more of the the D2 area feel like it is part of downtown. When we were looking at placing my bar one of the places we looked was State and 6th next to the AAA Jewelers (it's still vacant). At the time it felt very far from the downtown core but a couple massive apartment complexes later and it feels very much so apart of the city. I hear both sides of the vibrancy/street engagement vs density argument. Are there no non commercial/retail to making these apartment buildings more engaging? Art? I just feel like there's got to be something in between these two extremes. Also, more height please and thank you.