Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

This is just me fantasizing that we could host one of these games here in Salt Lake.

http://www.espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/18...ned-2016-copa-america-centenario?cc=5901

Too bad we do not have a stadium big enough for a tournament like this. They will pick stadiums that will have no less then 60 thousand seats. BYU will never let anything FIFA into their stadium, Rice-Eccles is not big enough even after they get around to expanding it. Plus the field width would end up being an issue. But this would bring a lot of money to the state if they hosted 2 or so games.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by AllOutOfBubbleGum

This is just me fantasizing that we could host one of these games here in Salt Lake.

http://www.espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/18...ned-2016-copa-america-centenario?cc=5901

Too bad we do not have a stadium big enough for a tournament like this. They will pick stadiums that will have no less then 60 thousand seats. BYU will never let anything FIFA into their stadium, Rice-Eccles is not big enough even after they get around to expanding it. Plus the field width would end up being an issue. But this would bring a lot of money to the state if they hosted 2 or so games.

Stanford's stadium is being suggested and it only seats 5,000 more than RES. But you're right, they're an anomaly, as most every other stadium suggested house NFL teams.

Though, in other countries that have hosted COPA their stadiums are routinely on the level of RES (20,000-50,000).

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Stanford's stadium is being suggested and it only seats 5,000 more than RES. But you're right, they're an anomaly, as most every other stadium suggested house NFL teams.

Though, in other countries that have hosted COPA their stadiums are routinely on the level of RES (20,000-50,000).

I agree that it's not out of the possibilities they could choose Salt Lake ... but This tournament is going to split the profits with both federations so they will need to make a ton more money then what they are used to. This is going to be an awesome summer ... Euro Cup in June ... this in July and the 2016 Olympics in August.

[Deek1978]

Not only that, but Lavell Edwards Stadium can't really be configured to host a Soccer match this large. The field simply isn't wide enough. Add in to that the grass only extends to the football sidelines before it becomes artificial. What really throws a wrench into the mix is that the corner concrete pads come down really close to where the endzones come. Basically, corner kicks would be taken off of concrete.

As much as I love BYU, probably more than the rest of the board combined, Lavell Edwards Stadium is a horrible place for a soccer match.

I love soccer. Served my mission in Brazil, and I've taken a look at LES multiple times before coming to this conclusion, but I am in no way a professional. Rumors abound that BYU will be doing major renovations to the Stadium following the 2015 Football season, but nothing has been announced.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Old&New

This has been my criticism since the first concept renderings came out. The city should have worked out a deal with Zion's Bank to use a portion of their parking lot across the street.

Just because it didn't get built on the Zions parking lot doesn't mean the city didn't attempt to negotiate with them. I would assume the city looked at the Zions lot as they explored all possible location options. My guess is that either they had no interest in selling that parcel or the price was simply to high for the City to purchase it. If you recall, the property they are building the PAC on, was actually offered to the city at no cost, but is was the other potential PAC sites that where up in arms about such an advantage of that site vs theirs, so the deal was changed and a price was attached to the transfer of the land.

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by Deek1978

Not only that, but Lavell Edwards Stadium can't really be configured to host a Soccer match this large. The field simply isn't wide enough. Add in to that the grass only extends to the football sidelines before it becomes artificial. What really throws a wrench into the mix is that the corner concrete pads come down really close to where the endzones come. Basically, corner kicks would be taken off of concrete.

As much as I love BYU, probably more than the rest of the board combined, Lavell Edwards Stadium is a horrible place for a soccer match.

I love soccer. Served my mission in Brazil, and I've taken a look at LES multiple times before coming to this conclusion, but I am in no way a professional. Rumors abound that BYU will be doing major renovations to the Stadium following the 2015 Football season, but nothing has been announced.

You're right LES does have a field size issue with the corners. However, for the 1994 World Cup a proposal was given to BYU from the US Soccer people about how to make the field work for Soccer and BYU could host a World Cup event. BYU didn't want to do it because it would only be a temporary build and then they would have to constructed it right back. I also think having Budweiser and Heineken signs in the stadium had something else to do with BYU turning them down but I'm just assuming that would be an issue.

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Just because it didn't get built on the Zions parking lot doesn't mean the city didn't attempt to negotiate with them. I would assume the city looked at the Zions lot as they explored all possible location options. My guess is that either they had no interest in selling that parcel or the price was simply to high for the City to purchase it. If you recall, the property they are building the PAC on, was actually offered to the city at no cost, but is was the other potential PAC sites that where up in arms about such an advantage of that site vs theirs, so the deal was changed and a price was attached to the transfer of the land.

I think, in the end, this location will be the best. The end result is Regent Street running all the way to Gallivan and the potential interaction that street can have with pedestrians and maybe even street venders selling souvenirs. I think ever city I've been to in Europe had a street like that.

The Zions Bank parking lot will go away. It's in such a high demand area. Maybe Zions wants it to build a new head quarters there some day. With 111 and 151 plus the PAC coming on line in the next 3 years, close to that area I'll make a bet that that lot will not stay parking past 2020.

I bet my prized tomato plants that haven't started growing yet.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Deek1978

As much as I love BYU, probably more than the rest of the board combined, Lavell Edwards Stadium is a horrible place...

Couldn't agree more!

[wrendog]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Couldn't agree more!

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Just because it didn't get built on the Zions parking lot doesn't mean the city didn't attempt to negotiate with them. I would assume the city looked at the Zions lot as they explored all possible location options. My guess is that either they had no interest in selling that parcel or the price was simply to high for the City to purchase it. If you recall, the property they are building the PAC on, was actually offered to the city at no cost, but is was the other potential PAC sites that where up in arms about such an advantage of that site vs theirs, so the deal was changed and a price was attached to the transfer of the land.

You would assume so, but the city didn't. They never proposed putting the theater on 100 south. They only proposed putting the theater on Main Street, to which Zion's property management said no because they eventually want to build their own tower/headquarters fronting Main. In fact, the city never once had a conversation with Mr. Anderson about the theater.

The Anderson family has had sort of a rivalry with the Eccles family. And I'm sure the Anderson family would have loved to leave a legacy of their own by having a theater named after them. They may have even offered up the land for free, or given the city a sweet deal, in exchange for naming rights.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by AllOutOfBubbleGum

I think, in the end, this location will be the best. The end result is Regent Street running all the way to Gallivan and the potential interaction that street can have with pedestrians and maybe even street venders selling souvenirs. I think ever city I've been to in Europe had a street like that.

The Zions Bank parking lot will go away. It's in such a high demand area. Maybe Zions wants it to build a new head quarters there some day. With 111 and 151 plus the PAC coming on line in the next 3 years, close to that area I'll make a bet that that lot will not stay parking past 2020.

I bet my prized tomato plants that haven't started growing yet.

I think the back of the theater, useless retail space, and theater loading docks have made this the worst case scenario for Regent Street. Additionally, this theater will have a lot of Main Street frontage; what happens to the street activity when it's not intermission/curtain call or there is no matinee or evening show that day?

I'm just saying: they better have street performers.

I'm not worried though, this city is pretty good at making lemons into Lemon-aid.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Old&New

You would assume so, but the city didn't. They never proposed putting the theater on 100 south. They only proposed putting the theater on Main Street, to which Zion's property management said no because they eventually want to build their own tower/headquarters fronting Main. In fact, the city never once had a conversation with Mr. Anderson about the theater.

The Anderson family has had sort of a rivalry with the Eccles family. And I'm sure the Anderson family would have loved to leave a legacy of their own by having a theater named after them. They may have even offered up the land for free, or given the city a sweet deal, in exchange for naming rights.

You make it sound so simple, that if the city had only talked to Mr. Anderson that they could have built it on 100 S. Even if Mr. Anderson really wanted to have his name on the theater and wanted to leave a legacy, it's not as if he owned the property himself. Zions is a for profit bank and giving away the property for free, which wouldn't have happened (already addressed in regards to the PAC location) or even at a highly discounted rate would have been a hard decision for the board to justify, unless the theater would have been named the Zions Bank Theater and the reduced price for the land would have been the donation. While on the other hand, Property Reserve had a much larger incentive to sell the PAC property at a discounted rate, because it would bring more customers to their existing enormous investment of CCC, and their parking garages.

I see why the city didn't consider 100 S though. The studies showed a target area that the PAC would be ideal, with visibility, and a feel of a connection to other arts centers, IMO I don't think that section of 100 S would have been a very ideal location, I think the city focusing on Main was the right decision.

As for Regent Street, I think you are doubting the possibility of what can occur there, being a connection with CCC, Gallivan Center and Main St. A cleaned up street, including street art, retail, restaurants, and a theater entrance it can be a very vibrant street in downtown. As for the loading dock, yes they will enter the dock from Regent St, but the entire dock is enclosed and the trucks won't be visible. So for the few minutes they drive in and out, it won't be very inviting, but after that I don't see it being a problem at all.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

You make it sound so simple, that if the city had only talked to Mr. Anderson that they could have built it on 100 S. Even if Mr. Anderson really wanted to have his name on the theater and wanted to leave a legacy, it's not as if he owned the property himself. Zions is a for profit bank and giving away the property for free, which wouldn't have happened (already addressed in regards to the PAC location) or even at a highly discounted rate would have been a hard decision for the board to justify, unless the theater would have been named the Zions Bank Theater and the reduced price for the land would have been the donation. While on the other hand, Property Reserve had a much larger incentive to sell the PAC property at a discounted rate, because it would bring more customers to their existing enormous investment of CCC, and their parking garages.

I see why the city didn't consider 100 S though. The studies showed a target area that the PAC would be ideal, with visibility, and a feel of a connection to other arts centers, IMO I don't think that section of 100 S would have been a very ideal location, I think the city focusing on Main was the right decision.

As for Regent Street, I think you are doubting the possibility of what can occur there, being a connection with CCC, Gallivan Center and Main St. A cleaned up street, including street art, retail, restaurants, and a theater entrance it can be a very vibrant street in downtown. As for the loading dock, yes they will enter the dock from Regent St, but the entire dock is enclosed and the trucks won't be visible. So for the few minutes they drive in and out, it won't be very inviting, but after that I don't see it being a problem at all.

100 south would have been a better location for these reasons:

-View corridor terminus looking down Richards Street (great visibility)
-South fork of City Creek leads City Creek Center shoppers to it
-Less demolition involved, therefore more historical preservation
-Close enough to the convention center to be considered convention meeting space, therefore increasing the overall square footage of the salt palace on paper.
-opportunity to connect the back stages of three theaters together, therefore increasing support capacity for the two old theaters on the block
-Would leave Main Street open for retail
-May have jump-started restoration of the dinwoody building and Pantages theater.
-Has easier access for loading off west temple

I don't doubt the possibility of what can occur on regent street because of its location. I just think there would have been greater possibilities without the theater on that block.

A theater on 100 south would have also benefited PRI/CCRI, and it wouldn't have been necessary to sell their property.

Both Mr Anderson and Mr Simmons were intrigued by a proposal for a theater on first south leaving plenty of room for a flux-tower on Main. But the city was already in bed with PRI at this point. The city kept saying "it's too late to turn back!" (even though that was two years before demolition even started). Too late my —! Just the cost of demolition alone could have been a reasonable price-tag for the property across the street, which is mostly cleared out.

Alright, I'll get off my soap box now.

[jtrent77]

Originally Posted by Old&New

Alright, I'll get off my soap box now.

For reals? or just for tonight?

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by jtrent77

For reals? or just for tonight?

[Stenar]

Who's the Anderson family? Isn't Zions Bank owned by the Simmons family?

Originally Posted by Old&New

You would assume so, but the city didn't. They never proposed putting the theater on 100 south. They only proposed putting the theater on Main Street, to which Zion's property management said no because they eventually want to build their own tower/headquarters fronting Main. In fact, the city never once had a conversation with Mr. Anderson about the theater.

The Anderson family has had sort of a rivalry with the Eccles family. And I'm sure the Anderson family would have loved to leave a legacy of their own by having a theater named after them. They may have even offered up the land for free, or given the city a sweet deal, in exchange for naming rights.

[ToysNoiz]

There is green tarp covering the tip-top floor of the Walker Center. Does anyone know what's going on? Are they renovating?

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by ToysNoiz

There is green tarp covering the tip-top floor of the Walker Center. Does anyone know what's going on? Are they renovating?

I believe DOMO is moving in there--very possible they're renovation or adding signage or something...

[ToysNoiz]

Green on Walker Center.





Air Center site

[Hatman]

I will admit I have a streak of foamer in me.

(Foamer: Noun - train buff so obsessively passionate he/she foams at the mouth)

I've been out the past few days following Union Pacific Big Boy 4014 as the railroad moves it from California to Cheyenne. They are going to restore this massive steam locomotive to active service, and use it for excursion trains as a 'rolling ambassador' for the railroad.
This is development related because whenever UP excursion trains travel west, they have to travel through Utah. Ogden does a great job of accommodating UP's steam fleet at Union Station; they even kept a water-tower in working order so that UP doesn't need to bring in tanker trucks of water to refuel their trains, like they do everywhere else. It seems to me, though, that Salt Lake City could do a much better job of hosting special trains, and that this in turn would bring in more railfans and tourists.
The problem is that Salt Lake removed the tracks from its two historic train stations, so now there is no where for the steam trains to stop. Sure there is the intermodal center, but the platform there is too tall for the old steam trains to pull up to.
(The platform height is 18 inches above the rail-head so as to be level boarding for the daily Amtrak trains. The old steam engines, however, are wider than the Amtrak cars and would scrape the sides)
This means that Big Boy 4014 had to go on public display in the train yards north of Salt Lake City, where people had to drive down industrial roads just to get close to it - rather than stopping in the city center where it would bring in more visitors.


(Using the Newspaper pictures so that you don't need to see my ugly face...)


So, I'm thinking that - in order to bring these special event trains downtown - it would be fairly easy to add an 'event' platform just west of the Amtrak platform - one that is 6 inches above the rail head or less - so that ANY train can stop in Salt Lake City, not just Amtrak Superliner trains.

There are four rusted and unused yard tracks to the west of the Amtrak platform/servicing tracks. The easternmost could be rebuilt to handle the heavier trains (Big Boy weighs over 1,000,000 lbs when fueled up) and a switch could be added to connect it back to the Amtrak station tracks at the north end for run-through operations. It would look like this:



The platform would be the same length as the Amtrak platforms, 1000 ft, which would be able to accommodate the steam locomotive and 10 of the vintage passenger cars they pull.

The platform would be relatively cheap; it doesn't need to be any more complicated than a 6-foot-wide sidewalk. The trackwork (adding and removing switches) would not be very expensive either because it deals with low-speed yard and station tracks.

It seems to me like this would be a very effective way of bringing more people downtown.

(Edit): This is how it appeared in Ogden:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAZxNzxb870
Now compare that to Salt Lake City's display and tell me this isn't needed...