Salt Lake MSA Development Thread

[jedikermit]

I also don't quite understand why...I mean, Draper has it's appeal for certain residents, and that appeal isn't the urban lifestyle. It's not living in a community like that ^^^ . It's suburban and up in the foothills, and it doesn't fit in with that design at all. Even Sandy City, in the complex around their City Hall, then up to Jordan Commons and Rio Tinto, has more of an infrastructure than Draper does. I guess I don't see who in Draper would move to Draper, and then want to see that. ^^^ It seems to contradict everything that would be appealing about Draper in the first place.

I can see where the city managers would want the tax base to grow, can see how they'd be salivating all over it. But is that what's right for Draper?

In a similar vein, I don't understand the Draper extension of TRAX. Yes, as a stepping stone to routes south of Point of the Mountain, but Draperonians are known more for their SUVs than their affinities for mass transit. Perhaps that has changed with TRAX...I just don't know why UTA spent millions for a few more stations.

Blah blah blah, Draper bugs me.

[Plaid Shirts]

Originally Posted by jedikermit

I also don't quite understand why...I mean, Draper has it's appeal for certain residents, and that appeal isn't the urban lifestyle. It's not living in a community like that ^^^ . It's suburban and up in the foothills, and it doesn't fit in with that design at all. Even Sandy City, in the complex around their City Hall, then up to Jordan Commons and Rio Tinto, has more of an infrastructure than Draper does. I guess I don't see who in Draper would move to Draper, and then want to see that. ^^^ It seems to contradict everything that would be appealing about Draper in the first place.

I can see where the city managers would want the tax base to grow, can see how they'd be salivating all over it. But is that what's right for Draper?

In a similar vein, I don't understand the Draper extension of TRAX. Yes, as a stepping stone to routes south of Point of the Mountain, but Draperonians are known more for their SUVs than their affinities for mass transit. Perhaps that has changed with TRAX...I just don't know why UTA spent millions for a few more stations.

Blah blah blah, Draper bugs me.

I agree with everything you said!

Draper is a joke.

I think a series of "The Real Housewives of Draper" has a better chance of happening than this "mini city" within Draper. I think Draper is just doing this to show that they really want the prison gone. This is simply a pipedream for Draper.

[SLC Projects]

Draper first needs to show us all they can develop a true Urbanish mini city with Vista Station before trying ^^^^^^that out.

[Stenar]

Unfortunately, I live in Draper right now. I really, really hate it.

I lived in Sugar House for many years renting an amazing, huge Craftsman style house, all original hardwood and built-ins still intact. The rent was practically nothing. I loved that house so much, so I never bought a house.

The owner died and the heirs sold it. So, I needed to find a place quickly. A friend of mine was selling a second home in Draper for $150k less than it was worth just to get rid of it. So, now I have $200k in equity and am contemplating either moving back downtown or moving out of Utah.

Draper is the new 'it place' in the south valley, but I don't know why.

The one thing I do like about it is that we go walking by the Jordan River almost every evening, except 3 months a year. There is a great area along the river with a lot of trees, animals and birds.

Originally Posted by jedikermit

I also don't quite understand why...I mean, Draper has it's appeal for certain residents, and that appeal isn't the urban lifestyle. It's not living in a community like that ^^^ . It's suburban and up in the foothills, and it doesn't fit in with that design at all. Even Sandy City, in the complex around their City Hall, then up to Jordan Commons and Rio Tinto, has more of an infrastructure than Draper does. I guess I don't see who in Draper would move to Draper, and then want to see that. ^^^ It seems to contradict everything that would be appealing about Draper in the first place.

I can see where the city managers would want the tax base to grow, can see how they'd be salivating all over it. But is that what's right for Draper?

In a similar vein, I don't understand the Draper extension of TRAX. Yes, as a stepping stone to routes south of Point of the Mountain, but Draperonians are known more for their SUVs than their affinities for mass transit. Perhaps that has changed with TRAX...I just don't know why UTA spent millions for a few more stations.

Blah blah blah, Draper bugs me.

[Plaid Shirts]

Originally Posted by Stenar

Unfortunately, I live in Draper right now. I really, really hate it.

I lived in Sugar House for many years renting an amazing, huge Craftsman style house, all original hardwood and built-ins still intact. The rent was practically nothing. I loved that house so much, so I never bought a house.

The owner died and the heirs sold it. So, I needed to find a place quickly. A friend of mine was selling a second home in Draper for $150k less than it was worth just to get rid of it. So, now I have $200k in equity and am contemplating either moving back downtown or moving out of Utah.

Draper is the new 'it place' in the south valley, but I don't know why.

The one thing I do like about it is that we go walking by the Jordan River almost every evening, except 3 months a year. There is a great area along the river with a lot of trees, animals and birds.

I agree Stenar. I have no idea as well why people like Draper and the south end of the SL Valley so much. Draper and Day Break are probably the worst areas of the SL Valley.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Plaid Shirts

I agree Stenar. I have no idea as well why people like Draper and the south end of the SL Valley so much. Draper and Day Break are probably the worst areas of the SL Valley.

Daybreak? Are you joking? Daybreak is years ahead of Draper and other south valley cities in terms of set up and walkable.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Daybreak? Are you joking? Daybreak is years ahead of Draper and other south valley cities in terms of set up and walkable.

Daybreak is only a little bit better than the average suburban development (in terms of walkability and good planning). It is better in the design and variety of housing stock. That's mainly it.

[CountyLemonade]

Originally Posted by Stenar

Daybreak is only a little bit better than the average suburban development (in terms of walkability and good planning). It is better in the design and variety of housing stock. That's mainly it.

I disagree with this assessment—at least the first sentence—wholeheartedly. Having walked through most of Daybreak, it feels ridiculously more pleasant being a pedestrian there than it does in most places in the valley. The biggest flaw to Daybreak right now, to me, is the lack of a local neighborhood grocery store like Emigration Market. But when the District is as close as it is, you'll be hard pressed to get someone to open up until the population hits critical mass.

[CountyLemonade]

Originally Posted by Orlando

What kind of skyline, CBD, what have you just abruptly ends at a freeway? Could you imagine how dead that area would be outside of working hours?

Interesting to see they have a TRAX line running through this area, though. I'm assuming TRAX rather than FrontRunner as it's running in the street.

[delts145]

deleted

[SLC Projects]

Murray wants a downtown/skyline.......



Sandy wants a downtown/skyline.....



West Valley wants a downtown/skyline.....



South Salt Lakes wants a downtown/skyline....



Draper wants a downtown/skyline.....


Five suburban cities within 23 mils from each other, plus Salt Lake City with just a little over 1 million in the valley, this just doesn't seem real. I mean, where will the demand even come from? At least six cities are going to be fighting with each other over who gets this or who gets that. So instead of having just one major skyline ( salt lake ) we could be getting up to six tiny ones.
Don't get me wrong. I like the vision. But I've been on this forum long enough now to know pipe dreams when I see it. Sandy's and Draper's are way way waaaayyyyyy dreaming at this point, while West Valley's and Murray's are a lot more realized. I can see most of these cities getting 4-7 story buildings with maybe a 10 story building here or there if their lucky. But skyscrapers? Sorry guys, it's not happening. And if it did, it will only hurt downtown Salt Lake or other cities who are also trying to get the demand to come their way.
In short I believe that each of these cities should go toward these walkable TOD developments, yes, by developing buildings between 5-15 stories. Nothing taller then 15 stories or higher then the IHC tower in Murray. What Sandy wanted to do with those 40ish story towers was just flat out crazy house talk. Draper is kind of along there with Sandy with this pipe dream also. Hell, so far, Draper can't even get the "vista station" develop right. It's so far just turning out to be yet another office park, yawn.
So with me, between seeing a ton of "for lease" signs hanging from the office buildings all over "downtown" Sandy and seeing more and more office parks popping up all over Draper it looks like Draper might be taking some of those businesses away from Sandy. So already, we are seeing that there is just not enough demand for every city to get these "downtown" or "skyline" visions to come to pass. It's almost like it's a race between Sandy, West Valley, Draper, Murray and even South Salt Lake.......and I might even throw in West Jordan, and Daybreak/South Jordan in the mix as well to see just who can get the first true "2nd downtown" in the Valley. I see one maybe two cities at the most when all is said and done and my money is on Murray and West Valley. Sorry Draper, Sorry Sandy.

[Plaid Shirts]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Five suburban cities within 23 mils from each other, plus Salt Lake City with just a little over 1 million in the valley, this just doesn't seem real. I mean, where will the demand even come from?

None of those cities will ever get a skyline. End of discussion. They are all simply pipedreams. The valley does not have the population to have another skyline let alone six total. The valley's population would probably have to be around 13-15 million (not exaggerating) for it to have that many skylines. I cannot think of any U.S. city that has that many different skylines within it's metro area. So no way SLC will ever get another one or even six different skylines. There is also no demand from business to build that many as well.

If any city is going to buildup a skyline in Utah it will be Provo. That city has a lot going for it and I still think its downtown has not experienced its major boom yet.

[jedikermit]

I agree with Plaid Shirts, although looking at those "pipe dream" renderings abode, I'd say WVC's is both the most implementable and the best as far as TOD goes. However, Fairbourne Station needs to get some grocery stores and other basic services into that mix (maybe where Staples/ Toys R Us currently are, or on 35th or 3650) ...without a place to walk TO, a community never really is walkable.

[Stenar]

Walkability doesn't just mean it's nice to walk through. It means not having to use your car to get everywhere. There are few places to walk to in Daybreak to do day-to-day things.

When I lived in Sugar House, I could walk to the post office, walk to work, walk to restaurants, walk to the bus stop, walk to the grocery store, walk to the gym, walk to various other shops, etc., etc.

Originally Posted by CountyLemonade

I disagree with this assessment—at least the first sentence—wholeheartedly. Having walked through most of Daybreak, it feels ridiculously more pleasant being a pedestrian there than it does in most places in the valley. The biggest flaw to Daybreak right now, to me, is the lack of a local neighborhood grocery store like Emigration Market. But when the District is as close as it is, you'll be hard pressed to get someone to open up until the population hits critical mass.

[I-15]

Adding to the list of cities that have a second skyline,

St. Louis has Clayton:






The St. Louis metro is not that much bigger than the Wasatch Front. I suppose I could see another skyline developing at some point, but I sure would rather just see it all concentrated in downtown SLC.

[ToysNoiz]

When I see what is being dreamt up in Draper and other cities in the valley, I just think "I'd rather that be part of downtown SLC."

Projects put it well, more midrise/highrise office space in a city that isn't in demand will just hurt other surrounding cities.

But, I do look forward to seeing Murray grow. Although I'd rather not see any highrises. Save those for Salt Lake's CBD.

[Stenar]

To give So. Salt Lake SOME credit.

That plan shown was dreamt up by a developer, not the city. Also, it is mainly 4-5 story buildings, except for the one high-rise residential building. All of which is feasible (over time) that close to SLC and the streetcar.



South Salt Lakes wants a downtown/skyline....


[/QUOTE]

[Future Mayor]

Sandy did the same thing that Draper is proposing. Abandoned their historic town center "downtown" to create a new shinny downtown that they could build from scratch. It could be that the reason they do this is to not have to deal with the NIMBY's, surrounding the historic "downtowns" plus I think one of the problems is, as was mentioned, is that they never got to the point or size that they were ever critical to the growth of their respective cities, except when they were first settled.

I think the city in SL valley that has the best potential of actually creating a more urban downtown is Murray. Murray already has an established core, with a decent amount of buildings, it's in the heart of the city and it's easily accessible from all directions. I see Murray getting becoming more densely populated but I don't ever anticipate more than one building over 10 maybe 15 stories. Downtown Murray will become a collection of 5-10 story buildings, which I think is just about right, to create a nice urban center for Murray.

West Valley would be second on that list, not because they have an established or historic downtown, but because for several decades they have established that area as the core of the city, with City Hall, a Library and the Police Station. Another reason that WVC will easily see there's come about is because it is much much more reasonable than any of the others. They don't envision skyscrapers or anything taller than the Embassy Suites. Others reasons that benefits WVC is that Trax comes right into their "new downtown" it is somewhat close to the center of their city, and is accessible from every direction.

As was mentioned Draper is attempting to create their in the SW corner of the city, nearly completely surrounded by freeways, and the side that isn't is high end Riverton residential.

The one thing I do like about it, is that it isn't just more suburban sprawl with single family residential. At least they are realizing the need for more businesses and more dense living.

Another problem however is the fact that it is in no way easily accessible by transit. Which is ironic for both Draper and Sandy, because their "historic town centers" are both at the footsteps of Trax.

While many or most of us on here think that all these cities with their grandiose plans are insane, cities have to figure out ways to increase their tax base, particularly cities such as Sandy and Draper that have grown to the point they are at now, through mostly suburban residential. All these cities realize that they can't continue to grow their tax base without going up. Yes these downtowns are all pipe dreams (particularly Sandy and Draper), and we laugh at them but we would laugh at them just as much if their "Grand Vision" included two 4 story office buildings in their "downtown." Yes Draper needs to grow upward, the prison site is an ideal location only because it is a blank slate, but I think they will eventually figure out the best way to increase density, and it will probably have a few aspects of this dream, but mostly include many other pieces that haven't yet been thought of.

[EPdesign]

Originally Posted by Plaid Shirts

None of those cities will ever get a skyline. End of discussion. They are all simply pipedreams. The valley does not have the population to have another skyline let alone six total. The valley's population would probably have to be around 13-15 million (not exaggerating) for it to have that many skylines. I cannot think of any U.S. city that has that many different skylines within it's metro area. So no way SLC will ever get another one or even six different skylines. There is also no demand from business to build that many as well.

If any city is going to buildup a skyline in Utah it will be Provo. That city has a lot going for it and I still think its downtown has not experienced its major boom yet.

LA Metro Kinda does. Long Beach, Hollywood, Central LA, Orange City, The Airport Area, Century City to name a few

[ToysNoiz]

Originally Posted by EPdesign

LA Metro Kinda does. Long Beach, Hollywood, Central LA, Orange City, The Airport Area, Century City to name a few

Last November I took a trip to LA Metro. Flying overhead, I was surprised at how many downtown skylines there were. Very nice.