Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

Speaking of rumors, Ivory Homes supposedly purchased the NW corner of 300 South 200 East, where the store Green Ant is currently located. The rumor is that they are going to build an apartment building. I'm not sure how many parcels they own but I think it includes the Ken Sanders Books Building. Keep in mind this is a total rumor at the moment.

Has Ivory Homes ever built an apartment building? A tower? I only know their subdivisions out in suburbia.

If the rumor pans out, I hope Ken Sanders Books ends up someplace good. And I hope he gets help moving his books. They're heavy.

[Scraperdude801]

Originally Posted by jedikermit

Has Ivory Homes ever built an apartment building? A tower? I only know their subdivisions out in suburbia.

If the rumor pans out, I hope Ken Sanders Books ends up someplace good. And I hope he gets help moving his books. They're heavy.

This.

Sugarhouse would be a great location for his store, but I get the impression that the building he is in doesn't charge much in way of rent, and that's how he stays afloat.

[UTPlanner]

Ivory Homes built the apartments at Fairbourne Station in WVC. That's the only development I can think of.

[Future Mayor]

They weren't the original developer but they took over development of Trolley Place Townhomes. 524 S 500 E.

If the ultimate builder of suburbia sees a market it downtown I see that only as a good thing. That means that the market for new downtown condos, townhomes and apartments is huge, and we'll continue to see more.

[Comrade]

I have no problem with it if they adapt their habits to a more urban environment. It'd be nice if we could ditch some of the suburban mindset that accompanies a great deal of the residential development downtown (not all, mind you) and get something truly decent - maybe a 10-plus story tower?

It's frustrating that, even today, we still aren't getting any significant height with our residential development (beyond what is being built by the LDS Church). I think that really is the next step to making Salt Lake a world class city. Currently, though, at least in that regard, we lag behind most our peers.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Comrade

I have no problem with it if they adapt their habits to a more urban environment. It'd be nice if we could ditch some of the suburban mindset that accompanies a great deal of the residential development downtown (not all, mind you) and get something truly decent - maybe a 10-plus story tower?

It's frustrating that, even today, we still aren't getting any significant height with our residential development (beyond what is being built by the LDS Church). I think that really is the next step to making Salt Lake a world class city. Currently, though, at least in that regard, we lag behind most our peers.

I completely agree with you Comrade, I want to see 10+ story residential buildings popping up throughout the city. I guess the one positive spin we can put on all these 4-6 story residential projects is that they are taking up available land, and as demand for downtown housing continues, even after all these are built, the result will be taller developments.

It's the same concept with taller office buildings. The less land there is, the taller the new buildings need to be built in order to justify the cost of the land, they need more rentable/leasable square footage to make a project profitable. So I say the sooner we get these 4-6 story residential buildings built the better. I think what will happen is that these 4-6 story buildings will take up the available underutilized land, and the taller ones will end up being built on what is now considered properly utilized, but will become under utilized when the residential demand continues. Places like the Taco Bell, Tony Burger, Zuppa parcel.

[i-215]

It's a trade off, Comrade. Would you rather have:

• A larger footprint of medium-density "urban" living, spread across 40+ blocks of downtown, like Brooklyn?
• A small footprint of impressive high-rises, spread across 3 blocks of downtown, like Manhattan?

Ideally it would be nice to have both, but there's a limited amount of demand for downtown residential, and to me the 4-5 story stuff with street-level retail seems more interesting and vibrant and interesting to me than a traditional 1970s-style high rise.

[utenation]

Bike-to-work rates are high in Utah

U.S. Census study » Workers in SLC, Provo rank among top in nation for biking to jobs.

By Lee Davidson

The Salt Lake Tribune


First Published 2 hours ago • Updated 34 minutes ago

Residents in Salt Lake City, Provo and Logan are four to seven times more likely than typical Americans to bike to work.

Still, only a tiny fraction of them do so — 4.6 percent of workers in Logan, 3.1 percent in Provo and 2.5 percent in Salt Lake City, according to a report released Thursday by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Nationally, just 0.6 percent of workers bike to work, based on survey data for 2008-12.

Among what the Census calls "mid-sized" cities with populations between 100,000 and 200,000 residents, Provo’s cycling rate ranked No. 9 highest in the nation and Salt Lake City was No. 11.

The report said cycling to work increased by 60 percent nationally over the past decade. Brian McKenzie, its author, said the increase came as "many cities have invested in bike-share programs, bike lanes and more pedestrian-friendly streets."

That has become more of a focus recently in Utah.

For example, Carlos Braceras, new director of the Utah Department of Transportation, who is an avid biker, recently changed agency policy to ensure that all new projects are more friendly to non-motorized traffic.

"Needs of bicyclists, pedestrians and other active transportation users will be routinely considered as an important aspect in the funding, planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance of UDOT transportation facilities," the policy he pushed says.

UDOT in recent years has done things such as include trails for bikes and walkers along big projects, including Legacy Parkway and the Mountain View Corridor, and more recently has pushed even small projects to make "active transportation" easier.

Salt Lake City has done likewise — such as remodeling North Temple when the new airport TRAX line was built to include bike lanes and better sidewalks. The city in recent years has also added a bike-share program, and made a big effort to make crosswalks safer.



University cities often had higher bicycling rates in the study. Logan, home of Utah State University, was the highest in Utah. Next highest were Provo, the home to Brigham Young University, and Salt Lake City, locale of the University of Utah.

The report had data for cities with populations greater than 20,000. The Census estimated that no workers at all bicycled to work in two such Utah cities: Eagle Mountain and Herriman.

The report also had data on how many workers walk to their jobs.

In Provo, 14.5 percent of workers did — ranking No. 3 nationally among mid-sized cities. In Salt Lake City, 5.3 percent did. In Logan, it was 7.7 percent.

Some of the higher walk-to-work rates in other Utah cities were: Cedar City, 5.6 percent; St. George, 3.2 percent; Murray and Cottonwood Heights, 2.9 percent each; Ogden, 2.7 percent; and Orem, 2.2 percent.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/57920134-90/bike-census-cities-lake.html.csp

[arkhitektor]

When you hear about Ivory Homes building apartments, it's really referring to ICO Construction, an affliate company of Ivory Homes. They've built lots of apartments all over the Wasatch Front.

http://www.icocompanies.com/construction-portfolio/

[Comrade]

What expands most skylines nowadays are residential buildings. I'd wager that most the proposed high-rises in a great deal of cities are residential - not commercial. You take a look at Austin, whose skyline has ballooned over the last decade (it went from one that was similar to Salt Lake in 2003 to one that now dwarfs ours) and you see much of the growth came from residential or hospitality:

2010: The Austonian - 683 feet (city's new tallest)
2010: W Austin Hotel and Residences - 478 feet
2010: Four Seasons Residences - 394 feet
2009: Spring - 434 feet
2009: The Ashton - 416 feet
2009: 21 Rio - 236 feet
2008: 360 Condominiums - 581 feet
2008: Legacy at Town Lake - 339 feet
2008: The Monarch - 323 feet
2008: AMLI on 2nd - 225 feet
2007: The Shore - 257 feet
2004: Austin Hilton Convention Center - 377

Those are all the residential/hotel buildings built in Austin in the past ten years. That's almost our entire downtown developed in the last ten years. The most recent commercial tower to be built in Austin was the Frost Bank Tower - a 515 foot building that was the city's tallest from its completion date in 2004 until the opening of the 60 Condominiums four years later.

In fact, Austin has now had three new tallest since 2004 and two of those have been residential towers.

Salt Lake's skyline future isn't necessarily in commercial development (that's part of it), but also building upward in terms of residential. You want to change the dynamics of our current skyline? That's the path - especially with people looking to downsize as they grow older.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by i-215

It's a trade off, Comrade. Would you rather have:

• A larger footprint of medium-density "urban" living, spread across 40+ blocks of downtown, like Brooklyn?
• A small footprint of impressive high-rises, spread across 3 blocks of downtown, like Manhattan?

Ideally it would be nice to have both, but there's a limited amount of demand for downtown residential, and to me the 4-5 story stuff with street-level retail seems more interesting and vibrant and interesting to me than a traditional 1970s-style high rise.

Neither. Salt Lake isn't going to build itself into Brooklyn (and Brooklyn has plenty of height, too - as this is the tallest building there) and they're also not going to build itself into Manhattan with a few taller residential buildings. There is the potential for a healthy mix and the city should definitely push for that healthy mix - especially since the heart of downtown can be instantly expanded with a push toward vertical living.

Here's a question for you:

Would you rather 99 West be a four-story Cowboy Partners structure or what we eventually got?

[DenverInfill]

Originally Posted by utenation

We definitely need more towers on the east side of main..

I assume Main is the widest street that runs into the capitol. I'm curious: does the east side of Main with the more mid-rise skyline have a different subarea or district name than the west side of Main where the taller buildings are? Or is the whole built-up area on both sides of Main simply known as Downtown or the CBD?

Also, how far south down Main past the point where the skyline drops off to low-rise structures is the boundary for what's considered Downtown?

Thanks!

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

I assume Main is the widest street that runs into the capitol. I'm curious: does the east side of Main with the more mid-rise skyline have a different subarea or district name than the west side of Main where the taller buildings are? Or is the whole built-up area on both sides of Main simply known as Downtown or the CBD?

Also, how far south down Main past the point where the skyline drops off to low-rise structures is the boundary for what's considered Downtown?

Thanks!

That's State Street. Most of our tallest buildings (CBD) are within North Temple, West Temple, 600 South to 200 East.
As for Main, the Grand American Hotel is really our last "highrise" on Main between 500-600 South. Main runs all the way down to about 4500 South in Murray.

[ToysNoiz]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Neither. Salt Lake isn't going to build itself into Brooklyn (and Brooklyn has plenty of height, too - as this is the tallest building there) and they're also not going to build itself into Manhattan with a few taller residential buildings. There is the potential for a healthy mix and the city should definitely push for that healthy mix - especially since the heart of downtown can be instantly expanded with a push toward vertical living.

Here's a question for you:

Would you rather 99 West be a four-story Cowboy Partners structure or what we eventually got?

He didn't literally mean for SLC to become Brooklyn, he meant for SLC to be more dense and urban like Brooklyn. While we all love tall skylines and you make a good point with 99 West, I'd rather have a denser urban downtown with low-midrise buildings with restaurants and other fun things. Mix in a few highrises here and there and I'd be happy as a clam.

It's my dream that more highrises will go up on the east side of the skyline, while more urban, commercial entertainment developments can sprout on the west side.

[SLC Projects]

In terms of highrise development, SLC is getting there. Sure we are not Austin, but we are adding a good number of highrises. Looking back from 2009-2014 ( 5 years ) SLC has added 6 new highrises of 10-stories or higher to the skyline with at least 6 more 10-stories or higher in the works within the next five years. ( 111,151/145, CCH, AIR Hotel, State Street Development, Cascade )

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by ToysNoiz

He didn't literally mean for SLC to become Brooklyn, he meant for SLC to be more dense and urban like Brooklyn. While we all love tall skylines and you make a good point with 99 West, I'd rather have a denser urban downtown with low-midrise buildings with restaurants and other fun things. Mix in a few highrises here and there and I'd be happy as a clam.

It's my dream that more highrises will go up on the east side of the skyline, while more urban, commercial entertainment developments can sprout on the west side.

He used an unsustainable example. No one is advocating for 100 new 50 story towers to dot Salt Lake, turning it into the next Shanghai. That's the point - we can do a healthy balance of both. We bemoan Salt Lake's skyline a lot of the time and honestly, adopt a mindset that stifles its growth. A lot of cities develop their skyline through residential building - not necessarily commercial development.

There is no reason that can't happen in Salt Lake and it won't happen at the expense of the medium (really low-level a lot of the time) apartments that are going up downtown, either. There's enough downtown open space just begging for a few decent residential skyscrapers - or even true medium level residential (10 stories seems middle to me between high-rise and low-rise) and it's just not happening. Maybe the demand isn't there - but we often make demand.

More people in the heart of downtown, and not just on the outskirts of the city center, means more restaurants and other fun things. 99 West and The Regent probably, nay, certainly, did more for downtown living than all the Cowboy Partners properties combined.

So, yes, the city should explore ways for more vertical residential development - especially if it's mixed use with either a hotel, retail or commercial. It will not only expand the skyline, but it will definitely bring more people into the city center.

[linguisize]

A few more 10-15 story apartment buildings would be wonderful scattered along the east side. The few that you can see from my place look great in my opinion. Minus the relative ugliness of Sunset Tower.

[delts145]

South Salt Lake planning development near streetcar line

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/86560...ing-development-near-streetcar-line.html


A UTA streetcar prepares to leave the Fairmont stop of the S-Line in Salt Lake City. (Matt Gade, Deseret News Archives)

SOUTH SALT LAKE — The city is working with neighbors, property owners and developers to discuss new development near the S-line streetcar stops.

The first area being discussed is the “East Streetcar” area from State Street to 500 East. A new master plan will be presented to the South Salt Lake City Council, followed by new zoning.

The other area where new homes, office space and retail are planned is in downtown South Salt Lake, from State Street to 200 West and from 2100 South to I-80. The plan will allow taller buildings and larger shopping, while the East Streetcar area is focused on what is compatible with adjacent homes and neighbors’ needs.

“We have been holding block meetings in this neighborhood and hearing what people want,” said Sharen Hauri, the city's urban design director. She said a grocery store, restaurants and extending the trail alongside the S-line are all popular ideas.

Questions on the East Streetcar Master Plan can be directed to Hauri at 801-464-6771 or [email protected].


.

[brankrom]

This is good news for SSL. Density cures a lot of woes for under-served areas. Let's hope there are some interested parties with the capital to get things moving. It's an ideal location for young professionals, its a 15 minute trax ride to downtown and a 20 minute S-line ride to Sugarhouse.

[scottharding]

I just rode the S line for the first time the other day, and I was thinking the whole time how ready it was for development. The line is nearly pointless now, except to access the heart of Sugarhouse without a car, but some development around the stops and it will be brilliant.