Salt Lake:Official development news thread - Part 2

[urbanboy]

I always have thought The Grand America Hotel missed out on some great opportunities to front the sidewalk along main street and share it's retail experience with window shoppers. I came up with this configuration:

Pink: Retail
Peach: Hotel
Green: Hallways
Blue: Event space



I want to know if you all think this configuration is an improvement from what is there now, or if you prefer it the way it is.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

I always have thought The Grand America Hotel missed out on some great opportunities to front the sidewalk along main street and share it's retail experience with window shoppers. I came up with this configuration:

Pink: Retail
Peach: Hotel
Green: Hallways
Blue: Event space



I want to know if you all think this configuration is an improvement from what is there now, or if you prefer it the way it is.

I always thought the Grand's retail should've fronted the street, too... and that the hotel complex should have been built on the block north of Little America as that would put it 2 blocks closer to the Salt Palace and closer to the rest of downtown. Little America and Grand America could've shared event space via a skybridge if they'd put the Grand north of Little also.

[ski_steve]

SLC set to move on Broadway theater, housing makeovers
The Redevelopment Agency could sign contracts with developers today.

Salt Lake City is poised to pick teams to develop a Broadway-style theater on Main Street and overhaul low-income housing tenements on State Street.

City officials also are pondering a lease agreement for the unoccupied Rio Grande Hotel, a longtime low-income housing haven at 428 W. 300 South.

The Redevelopment Agency, which owns each of the housing properties, may sign contracts with the developers today.

The Broadway playhouse group includes internationally renowned Moshe Safdie and Associates. Safdie designed downtown's award-winning Main Library.
For its part, LaPorte proposes to demolish the properties at 235 South and 241 South and replace them with a new, seven-story building. It would feature commercial on the first two floors, an atrium connecting to the rear alleys, and restoration of the historic Cramer House to the east, possibly into a restaurant. Besides two levels of underground parking, the plan calls for 36 units above a series of shops that "would target higher-income residents of the downtown area."

Just to the south, the tenements would be restored, complete with 78 low-income studios and a refurbished Rex Theater. LaPorte, which did a similar renovation with the Stratford Apartments in 2007, has contacted the Children's Theatre and Salt Lake Film Center about leasing the Rex. Both buildings would be seismically ungraded and meet "green" building standards.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13547205?source=rss

[Orlando]

This is very good news!

[urbanboy]

Theater by Moshe Safdie:
















Theater by Garfield Traub Swisher:

[UTAZLoVer]

Are banks a roadblock to walkable development?

Downtown » Old-fashioned parking standards stall financing for transit-oriented projects.

By Derek P. Jensen
The Salt Lake Tribune

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13529914

Salt Lake City's new-urbanism epiphany -- fervently backed by Mayor Ralph Becker and the City Council -- appears to be catching static from an unlikely source.

Transit-oriented development isn't stymied by outdated zoning, unwilling developers or a lack of space. It turns out, banks, wedded to old-fashioned lending standards that stress parking, may pose the biggest blockade by denying financing.

The reason: Lenders operate from a tried-and-true principle that maintains more parking means less risk and a higher return on their investment. But ditching cars is the whole point of urban developers looking to create 24-hour live, work and play environments that hug light-rail hubs.

Take the capital's gateway district, which soon could be further revived by a North Temple TRAX train, a new viaduct and millions in streetscape upgrades. City leaders envision a walkable, vibrant mix of housing, retail, restaurants and offices that one day will bridge the FrontRunner hub and a new North Temple transit station along downtown's western rim.

But commercial investors, including one with a $100 million blueprint, complain banks cannot grasp the concept and instead slam their doors.

"It's an interesting dilemma," says Council Chairman Carlton Christensen. "In Portland [Ore.] they admitted it and said it took a number of years. For the first few projects, lenders had to have their hands held. The educational part is critical. We can help facilitate that.......

Read More: http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13529914


Crazy banks!

[Sight-Seer]

I thought the city was rethinking its requirement for retail on lower floors. In the case of the State Street redevelopment mentioned above people won't walk there because it's a block or two from any other retail. It will just encourage more automobile traffic. And there are people who would like a street-level residence, which isn't available if street-level is occupied by retail.

[cololi]

Wow, that may be the best article derek Jensen has ever written. Financing and parking is one of the biggest deterrents to compact, walkable development. However, some things are changing. There are a number of small projects that have been built in SLC over the last 5 years that have very little, or no, parking. It can be done and lenders are just now starting to get it. One of the things that a fixed rail transportation system does is remove a lot of the risk that lenders fear. The train is a permanent investment and returns on private investment around transit stations are at least 20% higher than areas that do not have transit stations. The Urban land Institute is probably the best organization at addressing the interface of financing and planning.

SLC only requires ground floor retail (restaurant, office are okay as well) along Main St between S Temple and 400 S and on the streets that cross main between State and W. Temple. On State, ground floor residential is permitted. The proposed development by LaPorte is a good mix of old and new and I think people will be pleased.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Sight-Seer

I thought the city was rethinking its requirement for retail on lower floors. In the case of the State Street redevelopment mentioned above people won't walk there because it's a block or two from any other retail. It will just encourage more automobile traffic. And there are people who would like a street-level residence, which isn't available if street-level is occupied by retail.

I can't imagine anyone on State St. wanting a ground floor residence. In a downtown setting, people will assume your home is an office or something and walk right in, not to mention it's easier for people to break into your home and it's so close to the street noise, etc.

One summer, I lived in the small town of Paris, Illinois (population 9,000) in central Illinois in an apt that was on their State St (they had a Main and State parallel like ours). Whenever we forgot to lock the door, people would walk right in because they assumed it was some sort of office and since there was no sign, they wanted to come in to find out what office it was. Or they'd constantly lean up against the windows and try to peer in.

I'm sure the same thing would happen on State St. in SLC.

[East2Westback]

That there would be a significant difference between how people would approach an apartment house in SLC and Paris, Illinois.

I know that you understand cities but I also know that once people in a large city see an apartment house they do not assume it to be a business.

State Street could use apartments. The incredible mundane ambiance of the the East side of State could become a very interesting entre to a defined living area. It could very much increase the populace growth to the downtown.

Neighborhoods, new or old become just that. You lived in NYC. Though very different from SLC in living vibe, you can also see that they really are neighborhoods. State street and east could be rewarded with a close to DT living area. Just a different and more urban access than up to 13th East.

[TonyAnderson]

Originally Posted by Stenar

I can't imagine anyone on State St. wanting a ground floor residence. In a downtown setting, people will assume your home is an office or something and walk right in, not to mention it's easier for people to break into your home and it's so close to the street noise, etc.

One summer, I lived in the small town of Paris, Illinois (population 9,000) in central Illinois in an apt that was on their State St (they had a Main and State parallel like ours). Whenever we forgot to lock the door, people would walk right in because they assumed it was some sort of office and since there was no sign, they wanted to come in to find out what office it was. Or they'd constantly lean up against the windows and try to peer in.

I'm sure the same thing would happen on State St. in SLC.

I agree.

[WeST]

Originally Posted by UTAZLoVer

Are banks a roadblock to walkable development?

Downtown » Old-fashioned parking standards stall financing for transit-oriented projects.

By Derek P. Jensen
The Salt Lake Tribune

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13529914

Salt Lake City's new-urbanism epiphany -- fervently backed by Mayor Ralph Becker and the City Council -- appears to be catching static from an unlikely source.

Transit-oriented development isn't stymied by outdated zoning, unwilling developers or a lack of space. It turns out, banks, wedded to old-fashioned lending standards that stress parking, may pose the biggest blockade by denying financing.

The reason: Lenders operate from a tried-and-true principle that maintains more parking means less risk and a higher return on their investment. But ditching cars is the whole point of urban developers looking to create 24-hour live, work and play environments that hug light-rail hubs.

Take the capital's gateway district, which soon could be further revived by a North Temple TRAX train, a new viaduct and millions in streetscape upgrades. City leaders envision a walkable, vibrant mix of housing, retail, restaurants and offices that one day will bridge the FrontRunner hub and a new North Temple transit station along downtown's western rim.

But commercial investors, including one with a $100 million blueprint, complain banks cannot grasp the concept and instead slam their doors.

"It's an interesting dilemma," says Council Chairman Carlton Christensen. "In Portland [Ore.] they admitted it and said it took a number of years. For the first few projects, lenders had to have their hands held. The educational part is critical. We can help facilitate that.......

Read More: http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_13529914


Crazy banks!

This is more of a short term problem. I have a great deal of faith in profit seeking institutions like banks to eventually find the best use for their depositors money. Banks are not urban planners and may even have bad impressions of these types of developments. It also should be remembered that there have been some awfully planned and executed developments that were labeled as "mixed use", "new urbanism", etc., which may play into this reluctance. As time goes by we will see a changing of the tides if these developments are shown to be good investments.

I would rather have the banks turn down financing for 100 ill conceived developments before they approved one good one.

[Sight-Seer]

I while ago, it was several months, there was an article about someone building a ground floor residence downtown. So not only are there people who want a ground floor residence, there are people who have done it.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by WeST

This is more of a short term problem. I have a great deal of faith in profit seeking institutions like banks to eventually find the best use for their depositors money. Banks are not urban planners and may even have bad impressions of these types of developments. It also should be remembered that there have been some awfully planned and executed developments that were labeled as "mixed use", "new urbanism", etc., which may play into this reluctance. As time goes by we will see a changing of the tides if these developments are shown to be good investments.

I would rather have the banks turn down financing for 100 ill conceived developments before they approved one good one.

Meh. Just throw a parking structure on it. Bank happy.

[Viperlord]

State Street Property proposals

Pics and information from the RDA board meeting yesterday.

The site in its current condition:

Photo Credits to d_rockinslc on flickr.com

There were two submittals to the RDA for the state street property. One was from La Porte Group, and the other was from Hamilton Partners.

The RDA chose the La Porte Group as their favorite, but also kept Hamilton Partners proposal in mind in case if La Porte Group's proposal fell through.

for more information on the RDA meeting click on the link below.
http://www.slcrda.com/First/2009/BOD/101309old.pdf

read the descriptions I posted for a better understanding of the two projects. Theres some really good details in those descriptions.

La Porte Groups proposal





Hamilton Partners proposal






In closing I think that it is cool that Hamilton Partners is looking at another project already. They are looking at this project, and the Broadway Theater on Main Street. I agree when Hamilton Partners says they beleive in Downtown Salt Lake.

Also, I find it cool that Hines was part of the proposals for the Broadway theater. Hines owns some buildings here in SLC. If you look at their portfolio on their website they have a whole lot of major office towers. With Hines taking a bigger interest one can only hope for a tall tower from them someday. lol

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Viperlord

State Street Property proposals

Pics and information from the RDA board meeting yesterday.

The RDA chose the La Porte Group as their favorite, but also kept Hamilton Partners proposal in mind in case if La Porte Group's proposal fell through.

La Porte Groups proposal

I much prefer the La Porte proposal. Hamilton's would be CRAPPY. I'm glad the RDA chose La Porte.

[John Martin]

I like the La Porte proposal more. Preserve/restore two old buildings + a taller new one = .

The Hamilton proposal just looks boring and repetitive in comparison.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by East2Westback

That there would be a significant difference between how people would approach an apartment house in SLC and Paris, Illinois.

I know that you understand cities but I also know that once people in a large city see an apartment house they do not assume it to be a business.

State Street could use apartments. The incredible mundane ambiance of the the East side of State could become a very interesting entre to a defined living area. It could very much increase the populace growth to the downtown.

Neighborhoods, new or old become just that. You lived in NYC. Though very different from SLC in living vibe, you can also see that they really are neighborhoods. State street and east could be rewarded with a close to DT living area. Just a different and more urban access than up to 13th East.

Sure, depending on the design, people could tell whether it's an apt. or not on the ground floor.

That doesn't negate the other problems: noise, crime and the fact that people associate ground floor residential with poor people, i.e. only poor people live on the ground floor as wealthy people want a view and want to be away from the noise and possible break-ins.

Yes, State St. could have a lot more residential housing, that doesn't mean there has to be ground floor residential for that to happen. The ground floor can be office or retail.

The vast majority of apartment buildings in Manhattan do not have ground floor residential, so I'm not sure why you brought up NYC. Those apartments that have ground floor residential in NYC all have bars on the windows to prevent people from breaking in.

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by Viperlord

State Street Property proposals

La Porte Groups proposal

LOVE IT!

[esirhgih]

Is the facade on 253 S. State a recreation of the original? Are there any photos of what is used to look like?