Salt Lake:Official development news thread

[Scraperdude801]

I have to agree with viper that there is no possible way the wasatch can support as much retail that is planned. There is just way too much.

I love how some people are so excited for sandy just because these are "towers". ... This just perpetuates the madness and the sprawl. ... for every big development we seem to see a hundred 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 developments. ... I mean check out SLC in and around the DT area there are 2 story condo's being planned and 3 story office buildings. All off of the strength of CCC and other DT Rising projects.

Now take that above scenario and implant it into an already congested suburb ... so yeah you might get a couple towers (I highly doubt they will be anywhere near that size.) and along with it you will get a bunch of other developers putting there greedy little paws in the mix and developing 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 just make a quick buck. ... you want so a city form. ... you will see a suburb with too much traffic, a bunch of bs developments and a real DT like SLC hurting because somebody put there greedy little paws in. ... Mark my words if this proposal actually comes to life it will fail! and SLC will have missed out on some of the demand (I agree SLC needs to do a better job attracting developers. We have a lot of officials who pat themselves on the back because of developments like CCC which would have been developed regardless just because it is the church, their city, their spiritual center, and they have a pocket book most can't fathome.) ... but for other developers who look at the wasatch they may look at this failed development (and if the lehi development fails) and get the impression that the wasatch just doesn't support these urban developments. .... while yes there are large amounts of people who could care less about history or urban centers, there is almost an equal amount who are screaming for these kind of developments.

Just something to think about before some of you start doing jumping jacks and wetting your pants because you see tower renderings.

[leerjet]

Originally Posted by Viperlord

"Just like New York" Oh my hell. and maybe if they clench their 🞵🞵🞵🞵 cheeks together tight enough they can make it turn into a diamond too right?

When will Sandy learn. You are a suburb that relys fully on cars. New York relys on walkability. Freakn hell...

I have heard it all now.


but does anyone honestly think we can support this much retail in the valley/area?

City Creek Center, Gateway mall, Trolley Square expansion, Cottonwood mall village, Market station, Valley Fair mall expansion, Fashion place mall expansion, south towne mall expansion, this new sandy development, the real soccer stadium development area, Drapers retail mega area with ikea once it develops, lehis mega retail as well.

Am I the only one that sees a problem here? I dont think Sandy projects will be able to compete with all the draper and lehi projects stealing from it. There are only so many retail dollars to go around.

Lol. That was good.

I'm going to have to jump on the band wagon with you on this. I think it's great that they are going for LEEDS certification but it's kind of diminished by the fact they are going to make everyone drive from downtown and the rest of the valley to visit. This would be so much better closer to our Urban core. Instead they are undermining and taking away from our growing city.

You got to hand it to Dolan for being such an effective and manipulative SOB, it's just too bad he isn't working for Salt Lake. We really need to get these things downtown!

[Makid]

http://theprosceniumsandy.com/

This is the link to the website for the Sandy development. They even have blog...

One problem that I see is that they are pretty much stating that people will live in the same building they work in and that this will mean less traffic in the area.

While there may be some that will do this, the majority of people will be commuting both to and from the project. Therefore, traffic will not lessen but will increase.

They also state roads are coming but nothing about transit. That is a big oversight to me.

[NYC Rick]

However, the most vital element of any Metro urban area is the core...in this instance the downtown. It is the signature of a city. If the city is large enough, ie NYC, it can have many cores. Midtown, uptown, downtown, Brooklyn downtown because it has the populace that does not feel they have to travel because their core was integrated over a 100 years ago.

Sandy, even by the largest stretch, is a larger suburb. Its viability is based on the fact that it is a place to live. So many things have to be considered for a area to function correctly as a "business hub".

SLC downtown can be a very exciting area if it wants to be. It is taking all of the right steps. Close to the international airport, close to the historical relevant area (hell, it is the relevant area), the transportation center etc. It takes a whole lot of interlocking functionality to make a central area. Sandy is not a Ft. Worth or St. Paul. It is a fairly large suberb by certain standards.

I think that it is lame that anyone would like to create a central core that dwarfs the reality.

[Northernlad]

I think that SLC struggles to have a powerful downtown because of the mindset of most Utahn's. Example, and this is no secret, Most people in this valley would rather go to a themed restaurant in the burbs instead of an independently owned restaurant downtown and if every mall or shopping center along the Wasatch Front has similar stores then why go downtown unless you are taking your family to Temple Square or General Conference or a Jazz game, or to let your children run around in the Gateway fountain and take pictures of them in the act?
I really hope that the City creek center will help downtown and its image evolve.

[wrendog]

According to the Prscenium website, the project will be done in 2011 "if all goes well". The towers will be just over 400 feet. Sandy has a zoning limit of 20 stories, so that would have to be changed. I give this project 4.3876% of happening in it's current scale.

[UTPlanner]

I'm a little confused why everybody is blaming Mayor Dolan here. This is a project proposed by a private developer. I just do not see the connection here. Private property comes with certain rights. The right to develop is one of them.

I think this is a great project. I think that people should have the right to live the kind of lifestyle that they would like to. If people want to live in a high-rise downtown, they should be able to. If people want to live in a high-rise in Sandy, why not? I choose to live downtown because that's where I want to live. I wouldn't press my lifestyle on anybody.

If you feel it will only cause problems and traffic and an absolute nightmare...don't buy a condo there. Don't go shopping there. Don't go and see a show there.

A group like this ought to be more upset that SLC cannot/won't compete with its own suburbs, not the opposite.

[SLCforme]

you are right UTplanner, I do not like Sandy so I will not live/shop/be entertained/spend any money there at all. If others would like to then that is their prerogative and right. I shop at independent book stores and record stores, and eat at independent restaurants whenever possible because those are the businesses I want to succeed and see more of, and located in our urban core. If people like Sandy, then by all means, live in a psuedo-urban congested bumble 🞵🞵🞵🞵 of a town, and have fun. Lots of people like that, with their chain stores and restaurants and don't mind driving everywhere; I don't like that so I won't support them.

[SLC Rocks]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Hell yea. Those are huge towers. I like it.
However i think this is just going to turn on to be a pipe dream. Those towers just seem to be a little too big for Sandy. Hell SLC doesn't even have towers like these. Still those towers would be awesome to have.

Quality not quantity projects, I have to say I am generally confused with your positions on developments. If these were to be built in Sandy it would take a great deal of absorption out of Downtown, i.e. we will wait another 5-10 years before a 30+ hits SLC. I know you will disagree with me, but I think the some of the power brokers in this state want a new Business district to combat the wicked "evil" liberals of THE SLC. Change is inevitable, but supporting high-rise development just because we get a new building is not good for the local economy. Salt Lake is not dynamic enough, to support two districts or Hubs. Remember, Sandy is a suburb of Salt Lake City, it was farm land 20 years ago and blah, blah, blah, blah blahhhhh, o hell you’ve heard it all. Stop voicing support for 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 developments.

[wrendog]

^^^^^ did you really just tell someone to not voice support for projects that you deem "🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵"? Really?

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by delts145

Agreed Projects, I think it might put alot of people off a little at first glance. I'm pretty excited to see it go up. I think, it will help to put some pizazz into the local design scene.

RFPCME, I'm hoping that if they put a convention hotel on West Temple, close to the Salt Palace, that whatever tight fit might be necessary would drive the structure upward. It would be great if it were a new tallest! A Hyatt would be appropriate as a convention hotel. The new Hyatt over at the Gateway is simply a smaller business niche and wouldn't negate a convention specific Hyatt. Most of the big names are taking the Mariott lead now and creating different types of lodging for specific niches, but under the same name. My only concern about Hyatt is that they have had kind of a lack luster design lately on their convention hotels. Whoever designs this hotel and whatever name goes on it, I would really hope that our downtown fathers would guide it toward a visionary design. Something along the same scale of awe as our new library. The Grand and Little America function as one giant, ultra luxe convention hotel. It's actually quite unusual these days outside of Vegas to have a hotel as large as the Grand, yet so luxurious. Even though the Holding properties are a great jewel in any cities crown, Scott Beck has been pretty vocal about the need to have a larger hotel next to the Palace. Hotels, such as The Four Seasons, The Ritz, W, and Pennisula are just around the corner for downtown. Much of that type of hotel would probably be built on a smaller boutique scale, such as the Monaco and will often be couched in a multi-use luxe type structure. Say for example, mixed condo/hotel. Along with retail like Sak's and Neiman's, the success of CCC will spur much of the high end interest in downtown Salt Lake. It's quite surprising really, the numbers of downtown visitors now, who are somewhat in the wealthy category. Salt Lake has a larger niche of wealthy tourists than many cities, because of the predictable yearly ski and outdoor enthusiast's crowd, the Sundance crowd, the multi-level crowds like NuSkin, and the many wealthy LDS out-of-towners who visit for General Conference. These are all huge draws which happen on a predictable, semi-annual and seasonal basis.

Looking again at Urbanboys plan, which I like, I'm thinking it wouldn't be a stretch for them to take both the theatre and the hotel plots for a large convention hotel. I say this because it's highly likely that they will put the theatre at the current arts center sight next to Abravanel Hall. Also, because of the Marriott family having a big pull with the local market, I wouldn't be surprised to see the original CCC Marriott change names, and a Marquis (New York) style Mariott go up downtown. Personally, I would like to see them mesh the Convention Hotel right on top of the Salt Palace. I think a tower following the design que's of the Palace,West Temple facade could be incredible. Leave Main and West Temple for the more boutique type hotel/condo mix.

Whatever the mix ends up being, these are pretty exciting times for Salt Lake City. This whole CCC development, and the continual expansion of TRAX and commuter rail, is generating a lot of excitement for new projects downtown.

Delts:

You're pretty much spot on. The high-end hotel chains are too much and too small for a convention center hotel in downtown SLC. A new, much larger Marriott close to the Salt Palace would be great. But please, nothing that even closely resembles the Marriott Marquis on Times Square in NYC. SLC does not need another high-rise box. I'm holding out for an iconic tower (still prefer the art decco style of the Marriott in S.F.). But, hey, any graceful, slender tower would be wonderful, as long as it is not physically connected to the Salt Palace. Any tower over the Salt Palace would resemble a dripping Popsicle.

[leerjet]

I love it when everyone gets all worked up and heated on SLC vs Sandy! Lol. The only thing that isn't silly though is the future of downtown or maybe the future of Sandy.

Think about it, if Sandy proceeds to muscle their way through and complete this project... what happens if Salt Lake builds it's theatre as well? Do you think Sandy will still be first pick for Broadway shows? What if they don't get the tenants, housing demand, etc they're counting on due to all the other developments in process? This might not be so good for Sandy while simultaneosly being drain on Downtown and the entire county.

UTPLanner, I have to say that I'm a little astonished that you fail to acknowledge the connection between Dolan and the Sandy Theatre proposal.

[SLC Rocks]

Originally Posted by wrendog

^^^^^ did you really just tell someone to not voice support for projects that you deem "🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵"? Really?

There is more evidence proving what I deem good, YES REALLY, so I will definitely take a strong stand on my position, unless someone can convince or prove me differently. I am no architect or urban planner, but I am an economist, so if you want me to justify my position and you feel you can argue against my point, please feel free. Development for the sake of development is a self fulfilling prophecy; think about what is going on in the real-estate and capital markets right now, yeah, I would like to hear your thoughts. I can tell you right now this would be a 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 project, so those of you whom support have 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 views on development. Why is it that comrade and urban boy, future mayor etc…are the only ones who consistently make sense?

[wrendog]

^^^^^^ quite passionate there.

Seriously, it's ok if people like things that you don't. Let's move on.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by RFPCME

Delts:

You're pretty much spot on. The high-end hotel chains are too much and too small for a convention center hotel in downtown SLC. A new, much larger Marriott close to the Salt Palace would be great. But please, nothing that even closely resembles the Marriott Marquis on Times Square in NYC. SLC does not need another high-rise box. I'm holding out for an iconic tower (still prefer the art decco style of the Marriott in S.F.). But, hey, any graceful, slender tower would be wonderful, as long as it is not physically connected to the Salt Palace. Any tower over the Salt Palace would resemble a dripping Popsicle.

Hey RFPCME, Sorry, I totally agree with you on the outside style of the Marriott at Times Square. Infact, I had to laugh about that. I was thinking more along the scope or size, definately not the design,LOL. I do like the interior some, but the exterior is pretty bland. Again, I agree about height and would like to see it as taller and taking less expanse at the base, unlike some of these Hyatt's that have been built recently in the neighboring regions. If it were up to me I would like something like a great classic, but I would also be happy with a slender tower designed by Safdie.

[Viperlord]

Originally Posted by SLC Rocks

There is more evidence proving what I deem good, YES REALLY, so I will definitely take a strong stand on my position, unless someone can convince or prove me differently. I am no architect or urban planner, but I am an economist, so if you want me to justify my position and you feel you can argue against my point, please feel free. Development for the sake of development is a self fulfilling prophecy; think about what is going on in the real-estate and capital markets right now, yeah, I would like to hear your thoughts. I can tell you right now this would be a 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 project, so those of you whom support have 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 views on development. Why is it that comrade and urban boy, future mayor etc…are the only ones who consistently make sense?

well said,
most people do not understand the economy and development is the problem. you have to build on something over time, you cant just throw it together and expect it to do well. This project is way to shallow in planning I imagine. I see another few years of planning atleast before it could begin, but hey if they want to start construction soon, thats up to them.

I think most people do not realize that there are only so many dollars to go around. If you build a huge development in one place it is siphoning money from somewhere else, causing that place to fail, and with all the retail development along the wasatch front I see this happening all the time.

[T-Mac]

Agreed Viperlord. Outside of the church, all other developers generally have to have a certain percentage pre-sold before the project goes too far. Banks do not like to lend without having a certain amount already sold. If they do start to build and the sales aren't there, it will come to a screaching halt.

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds

It's all for show, I'm guessing. It'll be one of those amazing proposals you see that never really materializes. Every city and suburb has 'em.

Comrade:

Thank you for the dose or reality concerning the proposed "Proscenium" project in Sandy. The project doesn't interest me. What does interest me is the development logic underpinning the project..sort of a "If you build it, they will come."

In some instances that logic does work. Coors Field in Denver has spawned an enormous resurgence in LoDo-Denver. Sandy is employing the same logic with the soccer stadium, and it may work, given the number of soccer moms in the area. The giant fish tank in downtown Atlanta is generating enormous growth around it.

But when the attraction is a theater, albeit a Broadway-type theater, the logic is impossibly flawed. Can you image the draw the Broadway productions of "Rent" and "Wicked" would have in parochial Sandy...Heaven forbid serious theatre?

I admit the name "Proscenium," meaning the frame around the stage, does show some imagination. But the concept is wrong. The anchor for a project like this in Sandy would be much better if it were a crafts mall...better, a giant Laura Ashley store so it would draw from Utah County.

Possibly this is the reason Mayor Dolan should give up on his theater project.

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by T-Mac

Agreed Viperlord. Outside of the church, all other developers generally have to have a certain percentage pre-sold before the project goes too far. Banks do not like to lend without having a certain amount already sold. If they do start to build and the sales aren't there, it will come to a screaching halt.

Nice, Sandy can have its own version of the Boise Tower.

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

When it isn't built, here's where it won't be:

Something I just thought about is, where is the road access to the building in back? Its not even up to a street, only tucked back in behind next to the freeway. That alone take a bit more appele away from this project, as I like to see skyscrapers up to the street. There is something about standing at its base and looking straight up from a sidewalk.