Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by jtrent77

I was able to upload the photo today that I quickly snapped.

Well that's disappointing. Like I said.....misleading rendering. Sure they might try to rebuild the two buildings, but renderings would have us believe those were the SAME buildings, not new look-a-likes.

[Comrade]

WHAT HAVE WE GOTTEN OURSELVES INTO?!?

Of course, I'm not that spastic. But this is not what I expected. I hope the building comes out looking good & not cheap. I agree with SLC Projects, though. The rendering led me to believe it would be the same building, and therefore the same historic facade cleaned up.

I was really under the impression the Rex would be the original historical building and not a recreation of it. That gives me pause because often recreations don't look nearly as genuine.

Yikes.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by stayinginformed

I am not sure if this was posted before, but the elevations for the Liberty Gateway apartments are up on the RDA site. They are applying for funding from the RDA to help defray the cost of building parking below the building. This will be at 50 South 500 West, and built by cowboy partners.

I am so over these type of apartments. Can't Cowboy Partners develop something new? They're ugly. They're not very urban. And they all look the damn same.

And can we please find something new to call these buildings? How many Liberty buildings do we need?

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds

WHAT HAVE WE GOTTEN OURSELVES INTO?!?

Of course, I'm not that spastic. But this is not what I expected. I hope the building comes out looking good & not cheap. I agree with SLC Projects, though. The rendering led me to believe it would be the same building, and therefore the same historic facade cleaned up.

I was really under the impression the Rex would be the original historical building and not a recreation of it. That gives me pause because often recreations don't look nearly as genuine.

Yikes.

Yeah.....

As a re-creation I think this has potential to go south in a hurry. If not executed very well and very expensively, this will turn out looking awful. The fact that this is an RDA project makes me think they're not going to be spending top dollar and we may end up with some terrible abomination in State St.

[farmerboy]

Originally Posted by jtrent77

i was able to upload the photo today that i quickly snapped.

wtf?????!!!

[DerrickSLC]

The good people at Beans & Brews were admiring the new view as the Rex Theatre came down. I'm in agreement with many that the design of the larger building needs more. Also, the old Regis facade, I'd be okay if the design changed. All for the Rex coming back!!

An issue that's troubling is the developers. I lived in Cowboy Properties for nearly two years and it was built absolutely horribly. I stayed due to location, cost, and had a really awesome view that I still miss. But it felt like the neighbor below lived with me. I could hear everything. Luckily, I was on the top floor.

From what I've heard, LaPorte hasn't done well in that same regard. The money being invested should warrant otherwise and hope that it is the case with this new development. We need to educate builders/developers of what quality is, yet we're in a time where the dollar dicatates the type of quality.

Interesting conversation with a co-worker at lunch. Discussing housing then mentioning the Metro Condos and how the complex was built with wood-framing. I mentioned with the price that sound-barriers and quality should be expected at that price. One would expect that in most living conditions (for rent and for sale).

That topic reminded me of why developers only build so high because of reaching that height where wood-framing isn't allowed. I wonder if this is the case, again, with Cowboy Properties at the Gateway, that takes money to build income-based housing but builds less than quality buildings?

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by DerrickSLC

The good people at Beans & Brews were admiring the new view as the Rex Theatre came down. I'm in agreement with many that the design of the larger building needs more. Also, the old Regis facade, I'd be okay if the design changed. All for the Rex coming back!!

An issue that's troubling is the developers. I lived in Cowboy Properties for nearly two years and it was built absolutely horribly. I stayed due to location, cost, and had a really awesome view that I still miss. But it felt like the neighbor below lived with me. I could hear everything. Luckily, I was on the top floor.

From what I've heard, LaPorte hasn't done well in that same regard. The money being invested should warrant otherwise and hope that it is the case with this new development. We need to educate builders/developers of what quality is, yet we're in a time where the dollar dicatates the type of quality.

Interesting conversation with a co-worker at lunch. Discussing housing then mentioning the Metro Condos and how the complex was built with wood-framing. I mentioned with the price that sound-barriers and quality should be expected at that price. One would expect that in most living conditions (for rent and for sale).

That topic reminded me of why developers only build so high because of reaching that height where wood-framing isn't allowed. I wonder if this is the case, again, with Cowboy Properties at the Gateway, that takes money to build income-based housing but builds less than quality buildings?

I really wish that companies like Cowboy Partners would stop building low-quality, income restricted housing downtown. When our first kid was born, we lived downtown but when we went looking for a larger place, we found that at many places like Cowboy's properties, my $40,000 income at the time made us too wealthy to qualify at income restricted properties. Non- income restricted places were too expensive. We eventually just gave in and bought a house in the suburbs.

It seems like most of the current housing developments downtown are either too cheap or too expensive for the average working people that a vibrant city needs and as a result downtown is inhabited mostly by the very rich and the very poor.

Developments of the type that Cowboy partners keep putting up are just making the problem worse and are quickly becoming slummy because the sort of person who is poor enough to get a new apartment for $280 / month (That's the rent at Liberty Citywalk) doesn't care about the place and won't treat it well.

I know that there are proponents of 'mixed income' housing, but why would anyone want to pay 3x the rent for their apartment to live next door to a person who gets a huge housing subsidy and treats the building like crap?

[Future Mayor]

I understand your frustrations, but what is a proposed solution?

Do you consider Palladio, and Emigration Court for the rich? I would however like to see the market rates complexes be built with more of an urban look than Palladio, more along the lines of Liberty Midtown.

I personally wouldn't have a problem living in Liberty Midtown next to someone paying much less rent than me. I would rather have a mixed income building than an all restricted income building such as the new one on 100 S and 300 E.

One major issue is that low income individuals need places to live, and the feds are more than willing to help developers out with funding on those types of projects. I would like to see more units go up there are less income restricted, there are still programs out there that provide money where just 20% of the units are restricted income. These are the one that need to start popping up more. IMO, these are the types of developments that will help to lift those people up.

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I understand your frustrations, but what is a proposed solution?

Do you consider Palladio, and Emigration Court for the rich? I would however like to see the market rates complexes be built with more of an urban look than Palladio, more along the lines of Liberty Midtown.

I personally wouldn't have a problem living in Liberty Midtown next to someone paying much less rent than me. I would rather have a mixed income building than an all restricted income building such as the new one on 100 S and 300 E.

One major issue is that low income individuals need places to live, and the feds are more than willing to help developers out with funding on those types of projects. I would like to see more units go up there are less income restricted, there are still programs out there that provide money where just 20% of the units are restricted income. These are the one that need to start popping up more. IMO, these are the types of developments that will help to lift those people up.

It probably sounds heartless, but beggars can't be choosers....
We shouldn't be building subsidized housing in prime locations downtown. A one-bedroom unit at Emigration Ct. is $980 month and a similar subsidized unit at Lib. Citywalk is $250. That's a pretty big disparity and if someone has to compromise on location becuase of price, it should be the person who is getting 80% of their rent paid by the gov't. and not a middle-class market rate renter.

At least in my case, that's the main reason there aren't more families living downtown, it makes little sense to pay a high premium for housing when you can get so much more in the 'burbs becuase most of the new housing downtown is tailored to people who can afford a very expensive condo or are so poor that they get subsidized rent.

[scottharding]

On the flip side:
I lived in Liberty Midtown immediately after it opened. For me, it was perfect because it was income-restricted. I wasn't so "poor" that I was paying 280 a month. My rent was fixed at $500, and went up to $550 in the two years that I lived there. Eventually, I didn't qualify for rent restriction at all anymore, which worked out perfectly because it also was time for me to get a bigger place and move in with my fiance.
But I was not a poor, living off the government type. I was newly out of school, working for a non-profit downtown. I was thrilled to be downtown, parked my car for literally months at a time, walked and took the train everywhere, and participated in nearly everything downtown has to offer, from pubs and shopping to theatre, Jazz basketball and events at Gallivan and the Library.
Also for the record, I never had much of an issue while at Liberty Midtown. The quality of my apartment was fine, and yeah, I could hear neighbors every now and then, but who doesn't in an apartment? I had no problems with the quality of Cowboy Properties, and their management staff was always very good.
So yeah, I wish they were building taller for Liberty Gateway, and I agree that there's a derth of housing for the true middle-class, but what I'm saying is that income-restricted isn't exactly tailoring to degenerates. Quite the opposite I think. There were a lot of people like me in Liberty Midtown. I still live downtown, by the way, even though I'm paying much more. After living at Liberty Midtown, I knew I'd never leave downtown.

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by scottharding

On the flip side:
I lived in Liberty Midtown immediately after it opened. For me, it was perfect because it was income-restricted. I wasn't so "poor" that I was paying 280 a month. My rent was fixed at $500, and went up to $550 in the two years that I lived there. Eventually, I didn't qualify for rent restriction at all anymore, which worked out perfectly because it also was time for me to get a bigger place and move in with my fiance.
But I was not a poor, living off the government type. I was newly out of school, working for a non-profit downtown. I was thrilled to be downtown, parked my car for literally months at a time, walked and took the train everywhere, and participated in nearly everything downtown has to offer, from pubs and shopping to theatre, Jazz basketball and events at Gallivan and the Library.
Also for the record, I never had much of an issue while at Liberty Midtown. The quality of my apartment was fine, and yeah, I could hear neighbors every now and then, but who doesn't in an apartment? I had no problems with the quality of Cowboy Properties, and their management staff was always very good.
So yeah, I wish they were building taller for Liberty Gateway, and I agree that there's a derth of housing for the true middle-class, but what I'm saying is that income-restricted isn't exactly tailoring to degenerates. Quite the opposite I think. There were a lot of people like me in Liberty Midtown. I still live downtown, by the way, even though I'm paying much more. After living at Liberty Midtown, I knew I'd never leave downtown.

Good points, I'm not trying to make everybody who lives in these developments out to be a welfare leech, it just seems like the current system makes it too easy for developers to ignore a large and important segment of the population. There are a certain number of people who are willing to pay a lot more for location, and that need seems to be met pretty well. Beyond that, developers get enough of a subsidy from building income restricted housing that they don't need to cater to anyone else. That's why there are so many Liberty Fill-in-the-blank apartments downtown. I suspect that having so much income restricted housing downtown skewes the 'market rate' for apartments in SLC upward. In the long term, having young professionals priced out of the matket when they get their first raise and no longer qualify for income restricted housing isn't good for the city.

[arkhitektor]

I also realize that the housing subsidies they are using are mostly outside the city's control and administered by some deptartment of the federal government, but there has to be something the city can do to try and influence these types of developments....

[scottharding]

I think you're right about that for sure.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

I really wish that companies like Cowboy Partners would stop building low-quality, income restricted housing downtown. When our first kid was born, we lived downtown but when we went looking for a larger place, we found that at many places like Cowboy's properties, my $40,000 income at the time made us too wealthy to qualify at income restricted properties. Non- income restricted places were too expensive. We eventually just gave in and bought a house in the suburbs.

It seems like most of the current housing developments downtown are either too cheap or too expensive for the average working people that a vibrant city needs and as a result downtown is inhabited mostly by the very rich and the very poor.

Developments of the type that Cowboy partners keep putting up are just making the problem worse and are quickly becoming slummy because the sort of person who is poor enough to get a new apartment for $280 / month (That's the rent at Liberty Citywalk) doesn't care about the place and won't treat it well.

I know that there are proponents of 'mixed income' housing, but why would anyone want to pay 3x the rent for their apartment to live next door to a person who gets a huge housing subsidy and treats the building like crap?

What you save in rent (by living in the suburbs) you spend in gas.

[T-Stan]

Has anyone heard any news lately about the Salt Lake Regional Athletic Complex (The soccer and baseball fields just East of I-215)? They did all of the grading and plumbing for the water systems last fall, but nothing has happened since it started snowing last Winter.

I looked all over, but couldn't find any news.

[stayinginformed]

Originally Posted by T-Stan

Has anyone heard any news lately about the Salt Lake Regional Athletic Complex (The soccer and baseball fields just East of I-215)? They did all of the grading and plumbing for the water systems last fall, but nothing has happened since it started snowing last Winter.

I looked all over, but couldn't find any news.

I think it might be more litigation.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

It probably sounds heartless, but beggars can't be choosers....
We shouldn't be building subsidized housing in prime locations downtown. A one-bedroom unit at Emigration Ct. is $980 month and a similar subsidized unit at Lib. Citywalk is $250. That's a pretty big disparity and if someone has to compromise on location becuase of price, it should be the person who is getting 80% of their rent paid by the gov't. and not a middle-class market rate renter.

At least in my case, that's the main reason there aren't more families living downtown, it makes little sense to pay a high premium for housing when you can get so much more in the 'burbs becuase most of the new housing downtown is tailored to people who can afford a very expensive condo or are so poor that they get subsidized rent.

If there was a bigger market for middle-class downtown housing, it would exist. It does come down to supply & demand and I'm guessing there just isn't the demand for middle class families wanting to give up their homes with their own yards for a condo in the heart of the city.

Sure, there are people, couples, and even smaller families, who are just like you - but they're in the minority. Until that demand is there, you're not going to see those families move downtown. It's not that the options aren't available, it's just that, on the whole, there aren't enough people to warrant such construction.

Middle class families are not beating down the doors to live downtown. It just isn't happening and probably won't happen for a few more decades. The people willing to live downtown are single, couples, retired, rich or poor.

[Comrade]

As for mixed-income development, they are far better than isolating incomes, which seems to be what you're proposing. You say it makes these developments slummy, but let's be honest, you're using a bit of hyperbole here, aren't you? Have you actually seen slummy, cheap apartments? By your statement, I can only assume you haven't.

Your type of mindset pretty much leads to the creation of ghettos and I can guarantee you you're more likely to find slummier buildings and apartments in those neighborhoods than anything you'll get from a Cowboy Partners property.

So, let's not get extreme here. There is nothing slummy about these condos/apartments. They might not be as pristine as something upscale, but I'd wager, to the naked eye, there isn't any difference between those developments and one geared solely to middle-income residents.

Look, when you integrate income levels, crime goes down, slums become fewer and the overall fabric of the city improves. You say you don't like it, fine, then what's the alternative? Building housing projects solely for low-income residents? That's proven how successful? Isolating low-income neighborhoods from the rest of the city? That's just asking for the creation of a new ghetto.

The bottom line is that mixed-income housing works. It helps clean up cities, lowers crime, creates unity and allows a segment of the population a chance to actually live in a safe part of the city. Prior to mixed-income, they were regulated to the outskirts of the city, across the tracks, in the ghettos, away from the remainder of civilization and that allowed the problem to grow.

If you don't like living next to someone who's beneath your economic class, maybe you should stick to living in the suburbs. Because it sounds like the city isn't for you.

[UTPlanner]

First of all, I'm pretty confident that the new apartments being constructed by Cowboy Partners west of The Gateway are not income controlled.
Here is a link to a document that clearly states that it is market rate apartments: http://www.slcrda.com/meetingsmin/2012/BOD/071712/8A_LibertyGatewayReimb.pdf If you're curious as to why projects like that are built, it's usually based on the type of financing the company uses for the project and frankly, because there is a huge need for it.

Now that's clear, I completely agree with Comrade that mixed income housing is not only a smart thing to do but personally I think it's the moral thing to do. (If anybody wants to hear my speech about why I think it's the moral thing to do, I will gladly share it with you privately)

It is interesting to see that downtown living seems to be a complete dichotomy with some of the wealthiest in the city juxtaposed with some of the least wealthy. There are not a lot of places that currently appeal to middle-class families at the moment but I think that's true of most cities. There is a draw for people to come back to the city but I think it's mostly made up of younger people/couples/families or retired people/couples. You are not going to see a huge influx of middle class famillies wanting to raise their child in a multi-family residential development until there are shifts in societal thinking. I'm definitely not saying that it won't happen but I think it's a ways off.

Lastly, if you think Cowboy Partners projects are "ghetto" then you need to get out of SLC every once in a while. I don't love all of their projects or proclaim them to be architectural gems but they are certainly not "ghetto".

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

First of all, I'm pretty confident that the new apartments being constructed by Cowboy Partners west of The Gateway are not income controlled.
Here is a link to a document that clearly states that it is market rate apartments: http://www.slcrda.com/meetingsmin/2012/BOD/071712/8A_LibertyGatewayReimb.pdf If you're curious as to why projects like that are built, it's usually based on the type of financing the company uses for the project and frankly, because there is a huge need for it.

Now that's clear, I completely agree with Comrade that mixed income housing is not only a smart thing to do but personally I think it's the moral thing to do. (If anybody wants to hear my speech about why I think it's the moral thing to do, I will gladly share it with you privately)

It is interesting to see that downtown living seems to be a complete dichotomy with some of the wealthiest in the city juxtaposed with some of the least wealthy. There are not a lot of places that currently appeal to middle-class families at the moment but I think that's true of most cities. There is a draw for people to come back to the city but I think it's mostly made up of younger people/couples/families or retired people/couples. You are not going to see a huge influx of middle class famillies wanting to raise their child in a multi-family residential development until there are shifts in societal thinking. I'm definitely not saying that it won't happen but I think it's a ways off.

Lastly, if you think Cowboy Partners projects are "ghetto" then you need to get out of SLC every once in a while. I don't love all of their projects or proclaim them to be architectural gems but they are certainly not "ghetto".

Give me a break. You and comrade seem to reading way too much into what I've said, but thanks anyway for the moral enlightenment. I'll take a rain check on your speech about the morality of mixed income housing. In the end it comes down to a difference of opinion about how scare resources should be used to house low-income families. I think there is a problem with the balance of housing types in the city and the pair of you clearly don't. That's probably why you guys still live there and I no longer do.

As for my apparant naïveté on what a constitutes a 'ghetto', I never actually used that term and you must be aware that words such as 'ghetto' and 'slummy' are generally used in modern language in the context of their surroundings, not to relate places to 'ghettos' in the historic sense. My use of the word 'slummy' was simply to illustrate that from my point of view as a potential tenant in many of the mixed-income buildings we looked at in the city, there were undesirable elements. I'm not speaking exclusively about Cowboy's properties, and I won't list every place we visited, but have you been inside an apartment building like the apartments at Citifront? No way in hell was I going to pay market rate to live in a place like that which in the space of a few years had been beat to crap by its 'mixed income' residents.