Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I've never been to Denver but from what I understand there is so much cigaret smoke everywhere that it is almost intolerable.

No.

Honestly, I love the "debate" between Denver and SLC, but it's largely because they're two cities that are neighbors (as close to nearby as we get in the West), of a similar size, that have similar amenities and appeal. That said, over the last three summers, I've spent at least a week in downtown Denver each summer, and I really loved it. I'm a SLC resident, and love my city, but SLC could learn a lot about how to reinvigorate our downtown from some of the things Denver has done.

The people in Colorado that I interacted with were kind and hospitable and friendly and good-looking and a lot of fun (with one astounding exception, who we'll just call "Air Fondle"). All of which I would say about most Salt Lakers.

But to say that Denver is lurking to the east in a miasma of cigarette smoke that's intolerable is...weird. I'm a big time second-hand smoker, and didn't notice any appreciable difference in public or private settings.

I love SLC, and thanks to my career, I'll probably live here forever...but Denver's a great city too. I love visiting it, can't wait to go back.

[H4vok]

Originally Posted by jedikermit

No.

Honestly, I love the "debate" between Denver and SLC, but it's largely because they're two cities that are neighbors (as close to nearby as we get in the West), of a similar size, that have similar amenities and appeal. That said, over the last three summers, I've spent at least a week in downtown Denver each summer, and I really loved it. I'm a SLC resident, and love my city, but SLC could learn a lot about how to reinvigorate our downtown from some of the things Denver has done.

The people in Colorado that I interacted with were kind and hospitable and friendly and good-looking and a lot of fun (with one astounding exception, who we'll just call "Air Fondle"). All of which I would say about most Salt Lakers.

But to say that Denver is lurking to the east in a miasma of cigarette smoke that's intolerable is...weird. I'm a big time second-hand smoker, and didn't notice any appreciable difference in public or private settings.

I love SLC, and thanks to my career, I'll probably live here forever...but Denver's a great city too. I love visiting it, can't wait to go back.

Haha. I agree. I think it is more of a friendly rivalry than anything else. I lived in Denver for a year and loved it. The SLC and Denver communities are pretty similar when it comes to staying active and enjoying the outdoors. Downtown Denver is awesome. But...I'm from SLC so of course, SLC is waaaay better

[Future Mayor]

Edited so as to not encourage more ranting and raving by another forumer. Simply easier to ignore.

[chad.farnes]

Originally Posted by Makid

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/54651469-78/agreement-analysis-council-councilman.html.csp

County wants more analysis before partnering on mega-theater
Debt Review Council will take a week or two to scrutinize deal.


Looks like another week or 2 before we know if the County will join SLC or not.

While this wasn't the vote that I was wanted, it does make me somewhat hopeful. The council could have easily voted no (5-4 as is expected). However, it seems like they may be considering it. And really all that is needed is for one republican to switch sides. I am somewhat hopeful that this may happen after last night.

[scottharding]

Salt Lake County is unveiling a new online public forum for opinions, feedback, views, and pretty much everything we talk about. Here's the article in trib:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/54658221-90/county-public-forum-lake.html.csp

And here's the webpage itself: www.slco.org

[airhero]

Originally Posted by SandSailor

Your city is ringed by mountains in the 10,000 foot range. We are ringed (western side I should say) by 14,000 footers! Almost a mile taller!

Sorry for being nitpicky but as a frequent mountain biker/climber (or, as some people would say, a peak-bagger), I've learned that how you define "tall" is quite subjective. People say Colorado's mountains are taller, but to say that is misleading. Colorado's mountains, on average, are higher in altitude, like you say. Utah's mountains, on average, are more prominent. That means, to put it simply, that they are taller measuring from the so-called "base" of the mountain to the summit. Of the 57 ultra-prominent peaks (with prominence of 1500 meters or higher) of the continental US, Utah has 8, only behind California with 9 and tied with Nevada. Four of those are within 100 miles of Salt Lake (Timpanogos, Nebo, Flat Top and Deseret). Colorado is tied with Wyoming and Idaho with 3. (Fun fact--Alaska has 66! More than the rest of the US combined!).

I'm not claiming that Utah's mountains are better than Colorado's--I believe they are comparable. I just have a little bit of an issue with how some people look at what defines how "tall" a mountain is. If you hike a mountain in the mountain west, you don't start from sea level (unless you're amazing), you start at or close to the base.

Anyway, I think we all hate it when people underestimate Salt Lake because of pure ignorance, and like I say, stating Denver's mountains are taller than Salt Lake City's mountains is misleading, and it causes people who have never been to Salt Lake to underestimate the wonderful mountains we have here in much the same way as looking at how many people live in Salt Lake City proper causes people to underestimate how many people actually live here.

[Wasatch_One]

Originally Posted by airhero

Sorry for being nitpicky but as a frequent mountain biker/climber (or, as some people would say, a peak-bagger), I've learned that how you define "tall" is quite subjective. People say Colorado's mountains are taller, but to say that is misleading. Colorado's mountains, on average, are higher in altitude, like you say. Utah's mountains, on average, are more prominent. That means, to put it simply, that they are taller measuring from the so-called "base" of the mountain to the summit. Of the 57 ultra-prominent peaks (with prominence of 1500 meters or higher) of the continental US, Utah has 8, only behind California with 9 and tied with Nevada. Four of those are within 100 miles of Salt Lake (Timpanogos, Nebo, Flat Top and Deseret). Colorado is tied with Wyoming and Idaho with 3. (Fun fact--Alaska has 66! More than the rest of the US combined!).

I'm not claiming that Utah's mountains are better than Colorado's--I believe they are comparable. I just have a little bit of an issue with how some people look at what defines how "tall" a mountain is. If you hike a mountain in the mountain west, you don't start from sea level (unless you're amazing), you start at or close to the base.

Anyway, I think we all hate it when people underestimate Salt Lake because of pure ignorance, and like I say, stating Denver's mountains are taller than Salt Lake City's mountains is misleading, and it causes people who have never been to Salt Lake to underestimate the wonderful mountains we have here in much the same way as looking at how many people live in Salt Lake City proper causes people to underestimate how many people actually live here.

I've lived in both places...

The Wasatch is definitely more dramatic in relief (giving that imposing feeling) than the Front Range. For example, the Salt Lake valley floor is at roughly 4,200'. Within literally 3 miles distance the elevation relief rises over 7,000' toward either Lone Peak at 11,250 or Twin Peaks at 11,330.

Utah County is even more dramatic with Utah Lake lying at just over 4,300' and Timpanogos, just 5 miles to the east is 11,750. Over 7,300' higher than the valley. 11,930' Mt. Nebo to the south also has 7,000'+ relief over the valley floor.

When I lived in the Denver metro, I was in the Parker area at roughly 6,000'. The nearest fourteener, Mt. Evans, was (according to Google Maps) 46 miles away. And its closest point to the high plains, it's over 25 miles. The closest example of Wasatch type elevation difference would be Pikes Peak, though it lies roughly 11 miles outside of Colorado Springs. Even that doesn't have quite the relief of Timpanogos and twice the distance away. Longs Peak, another fourteener, is also roughly 21 miles from Longmont on the high plain.

The only places in my opinion (that I have seen personally) that can compare to the Wasatch would be the Tetons or the eastern Sierra Nevada near Mt. Whitney (I would even say that this area has the most dramatic wall of mountains of the three. The Owens valley floor lies at just over 4,000'. There is over a 10,000' difference within a 5 mile distance with a dramatic elevation increase toward the lower 48's highest peak, Mt. Whitney at 14,505')

[tygr]

It's apparently a SLOW time for development in SLC when we're talking about the development of our mountains...

But seriously, I love the dramatic relief of the Wasatch. I live basically at the base of Mt. Nebo and work at the base of Mt. Timpanogos. To say that looking out the window of my office from my desk and can't see the top of the mountain is no exaggeration. Now that's relief; or a good reason to feel claustrophobic.

When I've been in places like Orlando, I've honestly felt lost because I couldn't see the mountains. Some people come to the Wasatch Front and feel that the mountains are too ominous for them. Whereas I go to places without mountains and long for my "security blanket."

[Future Mayor]

Sorry no pictures, but here are a couple of updates about Main St. Lamb's Grill now has sidewalk seating with fencing around it. I like the addition of more sidewalk dining.

323 S Main has a new place opening called CO2 Cafe, it will feature handmade soda's and a unique menu. It is located next to Shogun Japanese.

http://c-o-2cafe.com/

[SLCdude]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Sorry no pictures, but here are a couple of updates about Main St. Lamb's Grill now has sidewalk seating with fencing around it. I like the addition of more sidewalk dining.

Does this mean Lambs Grill is staying in business?

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by SLCdude

Does this mean Lambs Grill is staying in business?

I didn't know there was a chance that they were going out of business?

[DCRes]

Those are both pieces of good news for main street!

From the website of the 'coming soon' CO2 cafe

The building fell into disrepair over the years, but we along with the landlords are working to bring it back to it’s former glory. The building will have special features like year-round covered outdoor seating with couches, front and back entrances that open up completely to transform the whole building into an open air gallery, large skylights, and sixteen foot ceilings.

[ctobsl]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I didn't know there was a chance that they were going out of business?

They are staying in business. They have changed cooks, updated the menu and the food is great now compared to what it used to be.

[SLCdude]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I didn't know there was a chance that they were going out of business?

I heard some rumors not too long ago, but It looks like they're staying put!

[gusam26]

I was walking to pioneer park today for the twilight concert series when I saw this sign. what is the status on this project? obviously nothing is happening on site and I doubt anything will be done by winter this year!!

[Comrade]

Call the number and find out!

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by gusam26

I was walking to pioneer park today for the twilight concert series when I saw this sign. what is the status on this project? obviously nothing is happening on site and I doubt anything will be done by winter this year!!

At first site I wasn't a big fan of this, because it was only two levels, but I guess it's not to bad considering it is being built in front of the parking garage. I like that they are being creative and building on a small parcel of availalble land.

Next up, something 10+ stories on the corner to the north.

Except that once again the area is zone for 75' max and 90' conditional use. I guess I wouldn't mind something around 8 floors on that corner. Anything commercial over two stories has to have some residential, except with a conditional use permit. I really hope the corner doesn't simply develop into something one level like the stupid Fidelity next to the Salt Palace across from ESA.

[DMTower]

I have a friend who lived in those lofts and he told me that the land owner has wanted to develop something in that little space for years now. Initially the plan was for town-homes or something along those lines but the residents in the lofts opposed it. The reason it is only two levels is most likely because the residents in those lofts don't want their views blocked.

[UTPlanner]

I did some digging and currently the project is only speculative, they haven't submitted anything to the city as of yet. I think it's a great little infill project. The parcel of property is not very large and I would certainly rather see a building than the parking structure behind it.

On a different subject, Cowboy Partners has secured a building permit to build apartments west of The Gateway...finally. Ground should be broken very soon.

I'm not sure if I have mentioned it prior but a developer has submitted a building permit to construct an apartment building at approximately 150 South 400 East. It was 100+ units but I'm not sure the exact number. If I already mentioned this then just disregard it.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by DMTower

I have a friend who lived in those lofts and he told me that the land owner has wanted to develop something in that little space for years now. Initially the plan was for town-homes or something along those lines but the residents in the lofts opposed it. The reason it is only two levels is most likely because the residents in those lofts don't want their views blocked.

They don't wan't their pristine views of 200 W and the Palladio apartments blocked, hell who wouldn't be upset about that?

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

I'm not sure if I have mentioned it prior but a developer has submitted a building permit to construct an apartment building at approximately 150 South 400 East. It was 100+ units but I'm not sure the exact number. If I already mentioned this then just disregard it.

That is a great location for a new apartment building. That address looks to be the laundrymat location behind Apollo Burger, combining that parcel with the one to the north and the one that sits to the west behind both of them, that would be a minimum of 87 units per acre, at 100. That's some seriouis density, I like it. If it is just the laundry mat parcel that's 192 units per acre, even better IMO.

The one bad thing though is that there are a lot of older 3 story walkups in the surrounding area, that most likely rely on that laundrymat for their laundry needs. Eliminating that will have a huge impact on them and result in them needing to drive to a different laundry facility, making the neighborhood a bit less walkable. That's something that needs to be considered. While it wouldn't be a need for the new building, which will most likely have hookups, replacing the laundrymat as part of the first floor retail would be something to think about.