Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Jerm

I base CSA's on the amount of Professional sports teams they support SLC has 1 Denver has 4 I'll take the 100k difference in growth. I think Salt Lake is doing just fine. mls does not count

Wrong. SLC has 2. MLS does count.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Marvland

Who moved in? Are they employed? How much do they earn? These studies don't matter as much as we think they do. We are a leader in quality job growth and are actively sniping jobs from the tech and financial sector. Raw population numbers many times say more about sprawl and capacity for sprawl in "Boom" times than anything else.

Love downtown Denver, love Phoenix, love Vegas. They all have things that we don't (outside massive raw population increases due to earlier energy booms, snowbirds inflight and the gaming industry, etc), but have you been to these markets recently? HIDEOUS sprawl. Seriously, the Front Range development pattern is ugly. So is the southward march in Phoenix. Vegas is a sprawling mirage that has to reinvent itself once a decade, although its recent local movement is a great sign.

The SLC market is largely done with its sprawl phase. That's now St George's job. Very little dirt left any more. We are naturally bound by mountains and the lake. We are now in an infill phase, which is about quality, not quantity. We will see population increases to be sure, but we are developing a true identity with real opportunity that will weather coming up and down cycles better than the raw boom towns. Very few cities outside of Austin and SLC can say that.

You lost me when you said SLC is largely done with its sprawl phase. In fact, much of Utah's growth is sprawl.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Comrade

You lost me when you said SLC is largely done with its sprawl phase. In fact, much of Utah's growth is sprawl.

Actually, Utah's one of the most Urban states. Utah tops the list with 9 out of 10 people living on just 1% of the state’s land.

The census numbers show that as Utah grows, the population is not spreading out. In fact, existing cities are growing to the point of bursting at the seams. This is due to lack of land.

http://www.kutv.com/news/features/top-st...n-anywhere-else-99242.shtml#.VRhu0uHS1Ko

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Actually, Utah's one of the most Urban states. Utah tops the list with 9 out of 10 people living on just 1% of the state’s land.

The census numbers show that as Utah grows, the population is not spreading out. In fact, existing cities are growing to the point of bursting at the seams. This is due to lack of land.

http://www.kutv.com/news/features/top-st...n-anywhere-else-99242.shtml#.VRhu0uHS1Ko

You're confused by the word urban in the context of that story. It's not the urban we're used to when discussing the comparisons between urban and suburban living. It's more in comparison to, as the article says, rural living.

West Valley City is sprawl - but compared to Helper, Utah, it's urban.

Utahns might choose to live in cities - but those cities are not urban by most any rational standard. Even Salt Lake City, for the most part, is mostly suburban in comparison to a lot of cities.

Case in point: Nevada has a more urban population than Utah by the definition of the article - as 94.2% of its population living in 'urban' areas. That's the same level as New Jersey.

Do you really believe Nevada is as urban as New Jersey? Do you really believe Utah is as urban as Rhode Island or Maryland? Probably not.

[TheWire]

The Marmalade Library off of 500 N and 300 W continues to rise at a good pace. Here are some progress photos:

North perspective:




South perspective:

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Comrade

You're confused by the word urban in the context of that story. It's not the urban we're used to when discussing the comparisons between urban and suburban living. It's more in comparison to, as the article says, rural living.

West Valley City is sprawl - but compared to Helper, Utah, it's urban.

Utahns might choose to live in cities - but those cities are not urban by most any rational standard. Even Salt Lake City, for the most part, is mostly suburban in comparison to a lot of cities.

Case in point: Nevada has a more urban population than Utah by the definition of the article - as 94.2% of its population living in 'urban' areas. That's the same level as New Jersey.

Do you really believe Nevada is as urban as New Jersey? Do you really believe Utah is as urban as Rhode Island or Maryland? Probably not.

Yeah you're probably right about the term "urban" being Mis-used by the media in the story. perhaps a better word to describe the story probably could've been "compact?" Or even "higher density".
But to go more a long with Marvland's comment The Salt Lake Valley is just about built out. I don't know about you but I remember as a kid whenever seeing a new apartment complex going up in the suburbs these complexes usually were only two stories high. And back then that was a big deal. Same thing with new hotels in the suburbs only two stores. Today I'm seeing new apartment buildings popping up all over the valley that are all four, five maybe some that are six stories high. I can even say the same thing about office buildings again as a kid seeing new buildings pop up that were only three stories high, today I'm seeing them as high as six maybe seven stories. Same thing with new hotels, four or five stories high.
While no these are not at a Urban setting, what we are starting to see now cities along the Wasatch front taking that next step as land gets harder and harder to find. West Valley City just recently had to postpone handing out building permits to developers because the city's down to about 500 acres of undeveloped land remaining as the city will go back to the drawing board to approve higher density development. Murray city is probably the best example I can give you. I don't know if you have ever checked out the fireclay development, But I've been really impressed with their higher density up to the sidewalk, walkable development that's probably about as close to urban living you're going to get in the suburbs so far. The next step for fireclay would of course be ground-level retail, perhaps a small little grocery store.
West Valley's Fairborn station development has great potential same can be said with Sandy city's development if they can ever get their act together. In fact right now in Sandy city I'm seeing quite a few higher density apartments and office buildings popping up along State Street. Vista station in Draper is a complete joke so I won't even use them as an example. Daybreak in South Jordan while yes it's spread out at Least I'm seeing higher density apartments popping up as well as walking/bike paths plus A Trax station is always a plus. Overall not your typical suburban neighborhood.
I can ramble on all day about potential cities in developments in the suburbs but basically I think you and I are young enough that we will see the Salt Lake Valley build out Within our lifetimes and will start to see even higher density development as well as smarter development take place.

[Comrade]

Salt Lake isn't higher-density, though. It's compact sprawl - but it's still sprawl. The only reason it's compact is due to the natural boundaries that you don't necessarily get in other regions. Still, from Logan on down to the southern area of Utah County, almost all of it is sprawl - with tiny pockets of actual urban development.

Unfortunately, the movement over the last decade or so to limit sprawl has been half-assed a lot of the time and it's given us faux-urban living.

This is compact:



It's also still sprawl. There really isn't anything urban about it except that there are more homes. The problem with sprawl goes beyond just the fact homes are spread out - it's that they continue to be isolated which forces residents to use their car.

But let's be honest, in the SL Valley, much of everything west of I-15 is sprawl and most everything south of I-80 is either an older form of sprawl or the more damaging newer one.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Salt Lake isn't higher-density, though. It's compact sprawl - but it's still sprawl. The only reason it's compact is due to the natural boundaries that you don't necessarily get in other regions. Still, from Logan on down to the southern area of Utah County, almost all of it is sprawl - with tiny pockets of actual urban development.

Unfortunately, the movement over the last decade or so to limit sprawl has been half-assed a lot of the time and it's given us faux-urban living.

This is compact:



It's also still sprawl. There really isn't anything urban about it except that there are more homes. The problem with sprawl goes beyond just the fact homes are spread out - it's that they continue to be isolated which forces residents to use their car.

But let's be honest, in the SL Valley, much of everything west of I-15 is sprawl and most everything south of I-80 is either an older form of sprawl or the more damaging newer one.

What we are also seeing with newer development now are either bike trails or walk paths or both added. So hopefully cars isn't their only choice. We are also seeing a lot of the trails getting connected to one another making one big long network of trails making it much easier to get around on foot or bike.

[Comrade]

Trails are nice but they're no different than a local park placed right in the middle of a sprawling subdivision. They're no more urban, either.

It isn't that you can't walk around a neighborhood - you can walk around any suburban neighborhood. It's that you're limited in what you can walk to, even with the bike trails and whatnot.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Comrade

It isn't that you can't walk around a neighborhood - you can walk around any suburban neighborhood. It's that you're limited in what you can walk to, even with the bike trails and whatnot.

Perfectly stated. A trail leading to another trail, leading to another trail is really nice for walking and biking, but if it doesn't easily lead to somewhere that normally requires a car, it is simply a suburban trail network. Don't get me wrong I think those are important, but the distinction must be made. Just because people can walk in their neighborhood, doesn't make their neighborhood walkable.

The S-Line Trail helps to make it's neighborhoods more walkable, because it's dual purpose, exercise and a mode of transportation. It leads to places, retail, entertainment etc, while also connecting to parks.

For our existing suburban communities to become truly urban they need to change the way the look at zoning. Holladay had a prime opportunity to at least make it's heart a bit more Urban/Walkable, but alas the CAVE people shot down the retail/office/residential proposal for the Holladay Center and it ended up being retail/office only. It wouldn't have made Holladay suddenly urban overnight, but it would have at least provided some walk-ability for a few residents.

While Day Break isn't perfect by any means, it is much better than traditional suburban sprawl. Yes the trails are mostly just trails, but at least they do all connect to the retail and office portions of Daybreak, rather than just trails leading to trails and nothing more. One thing that Daybreak does right is there are no Cul-de-sac, and there are more pockets of retail than simply one giant shopping complex. They could definitely use a few more pockets of retail. I think they should alter the master plan a bit and allow for more neighborhood commercial nodes throughout the entire area, even if it simply provides a couple restaurants in the neighborhoods, that is a huge step in Walk-ability as compared to any other WJ, SJ, Draper, Sandy neighborhood. Again I'm not saying Daybreak is the solution but it's a huge improvement.

[UTPlanner]

I have conversed with a few people around the building that have been working on the convention center hotel project. All of them mentioned that they were very uneasy about the lack of progress and the perceived lack of commitment from Omni Hotels. Representatives from Omni have been canceling meetings with the city and at this time are not discussing any future conversations. I'm not saying that the project is dead but it appears to be going through a very rough spot at the moment. This was a definitely a fear of mine when only a single group offered to push forward with the project.

[linguisize]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

I have conversed with a few people around the building that have been working on the convention center hotel project. All of them mentioned that they were very uneasy about the lack of progress and the perceived lack of commitment from Omni Hotels. Representatives from Omni have been canceling meetings with the city and at this time are not discussing any future conversations. I'm not saying that the project is dead but it appears to be going through a very rough spot at the moment. This was a definitely a fear of mine when only a single group offered to push forward with the project.

Ugh.... Is this lumberjacks news? Great.

[SLC Projects]

The whole CCH development is starting to turn out to be a joke. Really, let's just dag our feet and take our sweet 🞵🞵🞵 time on something that was needed ten years ago. The planning for CCC didn't even take THIS long.

[UTAZLoVer]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

I have conversed with a few people around the building that have been working on the convention center hotel project. All of them mentioned that they were very uneasy about the lack of progress and the perceived lack of commitment from Omni Hotels. Representatives from Omni have been canceling meetings with the city and at this time are not discussing any future conversations. I'm not saying that the project is dead but it appears to be going through a very rough spot at the moment. This was a definitely a fear of mine when only a single group offered to push forward with the project.

Can they put out another RFP?

[Comrade]

The CCH will open the year SLC hosts Super Bowl C.

[UTPlanner]

They could certainly put out another RFP, but because there was only one group that chose to submit their portfolio the last time, I'm not sure how useful it would be. Everything I'm hearing is simply conjecture at the moment but it is from people on the selection committee. I'm hoping that they're wrong and that the project starts crawling forward.

[Comrade]

It's a good thing Salt Lake and Utah has that #1 economy and so much growth!

Still baffled why only one group submitted a proposal.

[DCRes]

111 from CCC

[IMG] by , on Flickr[/IMG]

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

I have conversed with a few people around the building that have been working on the convention center hotel project. All of them mentioned that they were very uneasy about the lack of progress and the perceived lack of commitment from Omni Hotels. Representatives from Omni have been canceling meetings with the city and at this time are not discussing any future conversations. I'm not saying that the project is dead but it appears to be going through a very rough spot at the moment. This was a definitely a fear of mine when only a single group offered to push forward with the project.

Well that is discouraging. I've also noticed a nice new sign on the corner of Royalwood Office Plaza (ie, the best site). I will say that having been part of multiple bidding processes, typical RFP's 🞵🞵🞵🞵. Trying to think of one that didn't. There are many good people at the city, county and state level, fighting the good fight, but it's usually a case of "design by committee". It took Marmalade 10 years to break ground and now they only have the bones of a library up. I'll be surprised if any of the proposed development RFP winners stay in place in Marmalade. If rates go up this year, it might just stay how it is for a while.

The Fed's have caught on and if a property isn't just auctioned off, they usually start with an RFI (Request for Information), before issuing an RFP. The RFI allows developer/partners to chime in on critical deal pieces before they structure the RFP. The CCH RFP was really restrictive. The county can re-issue the RFP with adjustments but it's a time-frame issue for sure. Bummer for now.

[Makid]

Regarding the CCH:

Before another RFP can be sent out, it would need to be reworked to include more developers. If this were to happen, we would be on roughly the same schedule for where we were at this time last year.

From what I have heard, the CCH is still progressing and there should be an announcement regarding the CCH location within the next few weeks (but due by end of April at the latest). Omni may be slow to respond as they are finalizing the purchase agreements for the land as well as working on the initial design documents for the official announcement.

The information above is approximately 1 week old, so it is possible that some things have changed since then. I am still hopeful that things are progressing on schedule and the missed calls were due to illnesses.

There are numerous scenarios that I can think of that there may be a delay in communications between Omni and the stakeholders here. Only time will tell what the reasons really are.