Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[delts145]

I'm not sure, but haven't we seen a tremendous amount of resistance from neighborhoods throughout the metro whenever a building is proposed for over a certain height. I'm thinking Cottowood Heights, Holladay, Provo Canyon vicinity, MTC in Provo, etc. IMO, even areas like Sugar House or Liberty Park would go bonkers over something we think of as highrise. It seems like single family residential gets extremely irate about their views being blocked.

I remember Stenar commenting on how he thought that highrises had compromised the appeal of the Pearl District in Portland. Apparantly, a lot of people in Portland and Salt Lake City feel the same way.

Having lived on the East Bench, I know that even something as natural and beautiful as a tree can become a major issue. There aren't too many metros that are dealing with the kind of views that Salt Lake affords in such close proximity.

I think we'll see certain areas where clusters of highrises would develop like South Salt Lake, Murray or Draper's I-15. Though, I think it would be impossible in areas along the East bench of Salt Lake or the E. bench of the Metro. In general, it will probably be a few more decades before we see any highrise clusters venture outside of the mid-valley areas like State, Main, I-15 or West Valley's 215.

Those of you who are intimately familiar with Central L.A., have you noticed that it seems as if the Salt Lake Valley is developing almost exactly in the same way.

Hmm, on second thought, maybe Sugar House would allow something of a highrise neighborhood to replace that awful Shopko, next to I-80.

[Future Mayor]

I like the heights that are going into Sugarhouse right now. I wouldn't want to see anything more than about 10-12 in the area, and even 12 is pushing it IMO.

I do agree with what was said about the State St corridor though, I think we will see highrise, 15+, in SoSaLa, Murray, and Sandy, and as mentioned maybe WVC. I think those all make logical sense. While I think the highrises at the mouth of Immigration Canyon provide a need for luxury living, the are in no way convenient to any amenities or shopping. It's a highrise but it's the ultimate in auto dependency, so if you really think about it, that highrise in that location creates more pollution than a typical suburban style development would in that location, due to vast increase in the number of cars.

[Future Mayor]

Edited.

[UTPlanner]

The Boyer Company purchased all of Questar's former land holdings in and around 100 South and 200 East. This includes the offic building on the SW corner of the intersection and large parcels that stretch from State Street to 200 East just south of the building. This isn't a new purchase only newly advertised to the public.

The SE corner, 101 S. 200 E., is where the Boyer Company has proposed the construction of a new building. The company was in the office last week with construction drawings so I would be surprised if they were putting the proposal on hold. I will let you know if I hear anything concrete.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

The Boyer Company purchased all of Questar's former land holdings in and around 100 South and 200 East. This includes the offic building on the SW corner of the intersection and large parcels that stretch from State Street to 200 East just south of the building. This isn't a new purchase only newly advertised to the public.

The SE corner, 101 S. 200 E., is where the Boyer Company has proposed the construction of a new building. The company was in the office last week with construction drawings so I would be surprised if they were putting the proposal on hold. I will let you know if I hear anything concrete.

Please tell me it wasn't the same drawings that were posted on here. Yeah I just looked up the parcel information and as you said the entire SE corner, their proposed building was owned by Questar and the SW corner including the building and the parcel to the south was owned by a REIT, which obviously leased out the building the to Questar.

[UTPlanner]

I'm not sure what the current design looks like. I only saw a cover sheet. If I see any more details, I will let you know.

[Makid]

Since Outdoor Retailer is back, I would expect some information about the Convention Hotel soon.

From the SLC Council Agenda for 1/22 (Today)
4. Convention Hotel Time Certain 4:15 p.m.
The Council will receive a briefing from Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) on their analysis and financial model for a potential convention headquarter hotel in downtown Salt Lake City. The Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency (RDA) and Salt Lake County jointly funded this study.

http://www.slccouncil.com/agendas/2013Agendas/Jan22/012213A4.pdf

[Jumpur]

^
That document is awesome. If you scroll through it it shows potential floor plans of the proposed hotel. It looks like they're just using an example from the Houston convention center hotel but it still is usable for us to determine the possible height of our own hotel.

For example, the L-shape floor plan that is displayed in that document has 45 rooms per floor. With the goal of 1000 rooms, that adds up to being about 23 floors of guest space. Plus the four floors of ballroom space below, we would have a 27 story hotel if we went with a similar plan of the example given.

HOWEVER, if we ditched the sucky L-shape and cut off the left portion of that example and only kept the section with the maintenance and elevators, it looks like we could fit in about 25 rooms per floor. Then it would be much slimmer, sleeker, and it'd be 44 floors

Now the question is which type of hotel are they going with. Stubby and wide, or slim and tall.

[Stenar]

I think Sugar House ought not have anything over 5-6 stories myself.

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I like the heights that are going into Sugarhouse right now. I wouldn't want to see anything more than about 10-12 in the area, and even 12 is pushing it IMO.

I do agree with what was said about the State St corridor though, I think we will see highrise, 15+, in SoSaLa, Murray, and Sandy, and as mentioned maybe WVC. I think those all make logical sense. While I think the highrises at the mouth of Immigration Canyon provide a need for luxury living, the are in no way convenient to any amenities or shopping. It's a highrise but it's the ultimate in auto dependency, so if you really think about it, that highrise in that location creates more pollution than a typical suburban style development would in that location, due to vast increase in the number of cars.

[SLC Projects]

I say go for slim and tall.

[strippadam]

I took a stroll through Gateway the other evening before a jazz game. I am not worried about the status of the gateway continuing nor do i feel that it should change its current game plan. In all only 17 stores are vacant out of a total of 115. That is a small amount all things considered.

I simply think attracting a few new merchants such as JCPenny, or Kohls into one of the bigger spaces and some new to the market stores such as Fcuk, Armani Exchange, and Guess will fill up the downstairs quite nicely.

Perhaps we could even attract a Chuckie Cheeze or a Dave and Busters to move into the space.

[Comrade]

I am not asking for a whole corridor of skyscrapers. But I see no problem with a few 10-20 story residential high-rises throughout parts of the city, especially in areas directly connected to the light rail.

I guess I never really understood the idea of getting so uptight over something that might exceed height limits. I live in SugarHouse and really don't see the problem with a building the size of the Redman or The Lincoln Tower, both of which probably would not be developed in today's SugarHouse.

To me, high-rise apartments, ones that aren't at a ridiculous height for a residential neighborhood, add to the viability and vitality of a neighborhood. It's unfortunate we're so close-minded in that regard and instead of getting true urban development, we often get residential that can be extremely forgettable ... you know?

I guess I'd just like to see Salt Lake acting more like a city and less like a suburb. The developments we almost universally see outside the city core, while not entirely suburban in nature, borderlines on what is being developed in countless suburban communities all over the nation. The true aspect of city living should be the diversity of its residential development - from high-rises to mid-rises to even potentially attached housing.

Me? I look at the Pearl District and I envy it. I see a vibrant, active community that probably got there in part of their embracing of certain developments.



But even I agree that something like this is probably too radical for Salt Lake. I think it's clear most Utahns are content with smaller, more conservative development patterns. But I look at a great portion of the city and I think it would benefit from a push toward not necessarily skyscraper livin', but something taller that four-stories.

SugarHouse, the eastern area of Salt Lake between downtown and 1300 East (especially on 400 South), and maybe the proposed Granary District.

I'm not saying go build a 15 story residential tower right in the heart of Yalecrest, you know? But some push toward taller residential development outside the city center should be there ... as I do believe that's where we're moving toward, even if Salt Lake still lags behind a great deal of most cities out west.

[Future Mayor]

I look forward to looking through that report. Luckily the images just say "prototypical" hotel design, so it's obviously not set in stone that it would be like that.

I say reduce it to about 30 rooms per floor, including the lobby and event space that would put it at about 37 floors. Based on the average floor height of that I calculated back in November http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=5899231&highlight=grand#post5899231 the average floor height of The Grand America, City Center Marriott and Downtown Marriott is 16.5'

So at an average of 30 rooms per floor at an average of 16.5' per floor, combined with lobby and meeting space. The convention hotel would be 610.5' well beyond the current tallest.

Even at a smaller L with 40 rooms per floor, 29 total floors, we would have a height of 478.5' A new tallest height wise, and possibly even visually (depending on placement)

[Makid]

I think the push towards more highrises (8 to 15 stories) is starting. At least along 4th South.

I am unsure of the new zoning that has been worked on for North Temple but the idea there is that it will lean more towards the 8 to 10 story residential buildings.

I do feel that we are beginning to turn back time so to speak with regards to highrise living. Even though the last little while has been focused on Condo's, I do feel that we will see in the next 4 to 5 years at least 1 highrise apartment building being built within the Downtown area as well as 3 or 4 highrise apartment buildings being built outside of the Downtown.

As we are nearly built out, we have only 1 choice left and that is to build up. This will occur along transit lines with good road coverage. I feel the primary areas for this to occur are Downtown, North Temple, 4th South, Sugarhouse (we are seeing this already here), South Salt Lake and West Valley.

There may be some other areas but the further away you go from Salt Lake City within Salt Lake County, the less likely we are to see highrise buildings. The roads and transit options aren't as good, yet.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I look forward to looking through that report. Luckily the images just say "prototypical" hotel design, so it's obviously not set in stone that it would be like that.

I say reduce it to about 30 rooms per floor, including the lobby and event space that would put it at about 37 floors. Based on the average floor height of that I calculated back in November http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=5899231&highlight=grand#post5899231 the average floor height of The Grand America, City Center Marriott and Downtown Marriott is 16.5'

So at an average of 30 rooms per floor at an average of 16.5' per floor, combined with lobby and meeting space. The convention hotel would be 610.5' well beyond the current tallest.

Even at a smaller L with 40 rooms per floor, 29 total floors, we would have a height of 478.5' A new tallest height wise, and possibly even visually (depending on placement)

I like the numbers. Something tells me that we will end up seeing the height between 450' and 500'.

I do think that height is one area that they can push as a selling point for visitors. If they do push it above 550', I would really like to see a top floor restaurant. The views would be great.

I also feel that a height greater than 450' would encourage the UPAC tower to go taller.

[delts145]

I'm hoping that the mindset of those pushing the design of the new Convention Hotel will follow the same pattern as recent major projects. All in all I've been very impressed by projects such as the Library, Public Safety Building, CCC, proposed DA building, Rio Tinto Museum, etc. If Salt Lake continues to follow this pattern, we'll have both an iconic Broadway Theater and Convention Hotel.

[Makid]

Outdoor Retailer - and $40 million impact - staying in Utah

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55677546-78/salt-lake-outdoor-state.html.csp

The Outdoor Industry Association, which brings the state’s largest convention to Salt Lake City twice a year with an estimated economic impact of more than $40 million annually, announced Tuesday it is staying through at least 2016.

Nielsen Expositions, owners of the Outdoor Retailer Summer and Winter Market trade shows, said the decision followed an in-depth search for the ideal location. "The selection confirms Salt Lake’s standing as the outdoor capital of North America and its relevance as a convention destination," a Nielsen news release said.

In an attempt to get the group to stay through, state and local economic development officials announced this month they would provide free to the trade show at a cost of $2.66 million, a 150,000-square-foot tent for exhibitor space.

Additionally, the state’s creation of an Outdoor Recreation Vision plan, which is being unveiled Wednesday by the governor’s office, has been seen by many as another inducement to get the OIA to keep bringing its shows to Utah.

The Outdoor Retailer Summer Market and its Winter Market, which begins Wednesday and runs through Saturday, brought some 44,000 buyers and sellers to the state last year, according to the Governor’s Office of Economic Development.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Makid

I think the push towards more highrises (8 to 15 stories) is starting. At least along 4th South.

I am unsure of the new zoning that has been worked on for North Temple but the idea there is that it will lean more towards the 8 to 10 story residential buildings.

I do feel that we are beginning to turn back time so to speak with regards to highrise living. Even though the last little while has been focused on Condo's, I do feel that we will see in the next 4 to 5 years at least 1 highrise apartment building being built within the Downtown area as well as 3 or 4 highrise apartment buildings being built outside of the Downtown.

As we are nearly built out, we have only 1 choice left and that is to build up. This will occur along transit lines with good road coverage. I feel the primary areas for this to occur are Downtown, North Temple, 4th South, Sugarhouse (we are seeing this already here), South Salt Lake and West Valley.

There may be some other areas but the further away you go from Salt Lake City within Salt Lake County, the less likely we are to see highrise buildings. The roads and transit options aren't as good, yet.

Agreed on all parts. There are certain areas where high-rise living should be pushed and it's generally the areas you outlined. I get some people don't want to be overwhelmed by the sight of a ton of towers outside downtown, but I don't think it'll ever come to that (in our lifetime).

[SLC Projects]

So should I get my hopes up to maybe see a model rendering or otherwise more info ( site height size) of the CC hotel in the coming days?

[Makid]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

So should I get my hopes up to maybe see a model rendering or otherwise more info ( site height size) of the CC hotel in the coming days?

The meeting today is only regarding possible funding mechanisms. Once funding is agreed on, then we will see some proposals from possible developers. That is when we will see massings, locations and potential heights.