Salt Lake:Official development news thread

[delts145]

Hell yeah Viper, I'm really liking this beautiful baby. If it's executed as well as what the rendering implies, I will be one very happy camper! I'm hoping that dark red is actually brick.

..

[Future Mayor]

I do like the design of the office building and I'm still up in the air about the location. I understand them wanting to place it right on Rio Grande to sort of finish off the project but it would be nice to possibly extend development up that street a little. On the other hand the N. Temple Via Duct is pretty close, do we know where the shortened via duct will hit street level? An extended Rio Grande Street continued as a one way would be nice either under the via duct or across N. Temple depending on the bridge. If an extended Rio Grande isn't possible then I guess I don't really have to much of an issue with it's placement. But if they want to sort of punctuate the north end of the development with this building it should be taller than 5 stories and it should maybe have a nice entrance area in front of it. I'm just thinking and typing as the thoughts come.

The hotel exterior is ok, nothing fantastic but not horrible, at least it looks to have some sort of material besides Stucco.

The biggest positive in my mind about having this hotel be a Hyatt is that I honestly feel that Hyatt is simply testing the SL market with this type of property. I honestly expect to hear a Hyatt Regency be announced for downtown in the next 5-8 years.

[Viperlord]

btw, with the Sheraton selling their hotel on the south end of downtown this past month... does anyone have any idea if they will enter the SLC market in any other form?

[ski_steve]

HOORAY!!! I want to congratulate Boyer on this one, they finally did it! This new building looks like its actually using Salt Lake architecture! It looks very similar to the Rio Grande Train Station. Not a exact copy, but they have very similar features.




protophoto.com

It would be nice to extend the Gateway, but I guess not. So at least this building is a terminal view for the gateway. Look down the street and you see this building, with its huge window and clock. I think it will the best for the Gateway! But then again a lengthened Rio Grande street would do wonders for my project, but no matter, mines great anyway.

Future Mayor: The Viaduct will be shortened to 400 W, and if it was to end at Rio Grande Street, then the grade will be to great for Trax to cross the bridge. But then again a lengthened Rio Grande street would do wonders for my project, but no matter, mines great anyway.

The Hyatt is amazing, it ok. I like that its a bit different from the surrounding buildings.

[Future Mayor]

Seeing as the viaduct will end at 400 W when it is rebuilt then I think the location of the new Gateway office buildings is a great location, because it won't be possible to extend Rio Grand under the viaduct.

[WASDEN]

I wouldn't get all excited over Boyer's office building just yet. They are notorious for the "bait n switch" with the materials and designs for Gateway buildings. There is a good possibility they will cheap it out in the end under the banner of "maintaining project consistency" so legit brick might be too much to ask. But if the actual building looks anything like the rendering we might have the best Gateway addition yet.

While I do agree with the height restrictions in that neighborhood (I believe they were implemented to preserve sight lines to Salt Lake's signature architecture) I am not ready to give Boyer credit for building on a "human scale." The Gateway is anything but. It is a monotonous cancerous sprawl of disposable architecture (minus Dick's sporting goods which may be the only building that is respectful to its historic neighbor). I guess I am asking too much since it is an improvement from an empty rail yard, but c'mmon people have some vision!

[SLC Projects]

Freaking hell are you kidding me? Sorry guys but i'm about to do some more bitching....

First of all I like the design of the new office building and the Hyatt hotel. I love the idea of having a clock on top of the building.
But why the hell do we have a big ass parking lot behind the buildings?
So let me see if i understand this...Boyer went from planning on building TWO 8-story buildings to now only ONE five story building with a big ass parking lot behind it. Why the hell can't they build a underground parking with both the office building and the Hyatt hotel like they did with the rest of Gateway? This is why this project is a waste of space in my book.
Ok there's enough room on that land to build Four Office buildings, plus the Hyatt hotel and have the parking underground.
I just don't understand some of these developers.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by stevena07

HOORAY!!! I want to congratulate Boyer on this one, they finally did it! This new building looks like its actually using Salt Lake architecture! It looks very similar to the Rio Grande Train Station. Not a exact copy, but they have very similar features.




protophoto.com

See, I thought it reminded me of the Promised Valley Playhouse -- just a much bigger version.

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds

See, I thought it reminded me of the Promised Valley Playhouse -- just a much bigger version.

Good eye. Very similar colors, design--yeah. I like the design of this one too--not quite as beige stucco as the rest of the Gateway.

[Future Mayor]

I was bored last night and decided to read any and all thread with "Salt Lake" in the title.

I know it's been about a year since the rumor was posted but has anyone heard anything about the ESA hotel on the block south, rumored as a W?

[Sight-Seer]

It bothers me a lot that they aren't building underground parking. Some of those parking lots are huge. It cheapens the whole project and decreases the density. It reminds me of Provo or Sandy. It seems like developers have to be forced into underground parking because it adds a lot to the cost of buildings. Maybe the council needs to get tough with the developer again. It was probably a struggle to get the underground parking we have. It seems like the council is just letting them do what they want. Like others have mentioned, the builder is also changing the design after getting approval.

[ski_steve]

Originally Posted by Sight-Seer

It bothers me a lot that they aren't building underground parking. Some of those parking lots are huge. It cheapens the whole project and decreases the density. It reminds me of Provo or Sandy. It seems like developers have to be forced into underground parking because it adds a lot to the cost of buildings. Maybe the council needs to get tough with the developer again. It was probably a struggle to get the underground parking we have. It seems like the council is just letting them do what they want. Like others have mentioned, the builder is also changing the design after getting approval.

I don't think any of us here like huge parking lots, especially in downtown. But, a above ground parking lot, significantly increases the cost to build. I was talking just the other day in my Architecture/Urban planning class, to my professors and they said that it now costs 30,000 $ in a underground parking. THAT IS PER SPACE. So each space cost the equivalent of 30,000 $ ! That is freaken' expensive! They just told me this, I don't know of the studies or what not behind it. But I sure believe it, they are trustworthy.

[Future Mayor]

It is definetly not cheap to built a parking structure, especially an underground. Many of you may think that the $30,000 seems really high but it could very well be the case. According to Commercial Investment Real Estate Magazine a surface lot cost between $1,200 and $1,500 per space, an above ground parking structure costs anywhere between $6,000 and $12,000 per space.

While they didn't state an average for the underground structure it is substantially more than an above grade structure. The cost can vary greatly depending on the conditions of the soil, water table and if the underground structure is an extension of the above ground structure or the the above ground portion is a completly different use.

http://www.ciremagazine.com/article.php?article_id=432

I am in no way justifying the Gateway surface lots, I am simply backing up Steven's statements.

When the demand for the property increases to the point where the surface lot is costing them potential income they will build an underground or even an bove ground structure and convert some of the surface lots to new buildings. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Gateway announce another office building or residential units facing 500 West directly west of the Hyatt and around the corner from the new office building. As we all know the demand is there and I think Boyer is probably proceeding cautiously with the remainder of their build out. CCC probably has them slightly nervous. When they feel the demand is right for them to proceed I would imagine that north end of the Gateway consiting of the Hyatt on the East, the new office building on the South, a new office or residential on the West and the new viaduct on the north with a combination underground above ground parking structure in the middle of them all.

Maybe something like below. We can always keep our fingers crossed, right!
New residential to the West, office to the North, plaza with underground parking and a water feature in the middle, along with an expanded Hyatt to the East.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

When they feel the demand is right for them to proceed I would imagine that north end of the Gateway consiting of the Hyatt on the East, the new office building on the South, a new office or residential on the West and the new viaduct on the north with a combination underground above ground parking structure in the middle of them all.

Future Mayor that's about what I was thinking last night what Boyer should do. Have the Hyatt to the east, have the 5-story office building to the South, then have two more office or residential buildings added, One to the west and the other to the north. Maybe have a Plaza in the middle with underground parking.

[Future Mayor]

I was thinking a structure on the north side wouldn't be all that desirable since it would be pretty much backing the viaduct. Now that I think about it more I think it could work. See my revised image above.

[SLC Projects]

Future Mayor it's like you got inside my head with that image. LOL

That is just what I was thinking. Only I had Four buildings. But Five works better.


Ok this is what Boyer should be doing with their project. Sure it would cost alot more, but they would get alot more out of it in the long run.
In fact we should e-mail that image to the Boyer company or the city council.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Future Mayor it's like you got inside my head with that image. LOL

That is just what I was thinking. Only I had Four buildings. But Five works better.

Ok this is what Boyer should be doing with their project. Sure it would cost alot more, but they would get alot more out of it in the long run.

So since we are thinking alike, you wanna loan around $500,000 to put down as option money on the properties I need for my first development?

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

So since we are thinking alike, you wanna loan around $500,000 to put down as option money on the properties I need for my first development?

LOL, If I had the money I would. I can't wait to hear more about your first development. It sounds really cool.

[delts145]

So maybe you two brilliant visionaries should form an LLP.

[Scraperdude801]

I vaguely remember reading some where that the city actually helps compensates for parking structure and underground parking. I could be wrong though, it could have been a vivid dream.