Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by goldcntry

So who/what in City Hall would be the best for emailing our approval and whole-hearted enthusiasm for this project? It'd be nice to have an actually read account to send comments to that won't just be ignored... Lovin' this project and hoping for the best!

Contact City Council, they will have the final say on the approval of the conditional use for the height. I know from a text conversation with one member of City Council that he/she has no problem voting for approval. Yes the request goes before the Planning Commission first, but even if PC denies, that is simply a denial that they are passing on to City Council for the final vote.

I look at it similar to The Regent getting it's conditional height approval. A major part of the reason that The Regent was approved for a height above the 100' mid-block restriction is that the corner building, First Security, to put is simply, wasn't using all it's height potential, and since it was remaining on that corner, The Regent was allowed to be taller than 100', the same case can be made for this new hotel and The Walker Center.

The reasoning behind the 100' mid-block height restriction is to limit the creation of a massive 300'+ wall along all the streets of downtown and reducing the access of natural lights to those streets. So with First Security and Walker Center not really being all that tall, allowing more than 100' on the mid block doesn't create that wall of buildings that the restriction is meant to protect against.

I see absolutely no reason that PC and City Council won't approve the increase in height.


I was gone a while, had a bunch of things going on, just didn't find the time to check the forum, but it's good to be back.

[Wasatch Wasteland]

Originally Posted by slcskyline

This is a random observation and I'm not sure which thread it belongs in, but I personally have always felt like Salt Lake City doesn't get the credit it deserves, partially because of how small the MSA is, after you remove both Ogden and Provo as separate MSA's. And I feel that it has a negative impact on SLC's development patterns and overall perception as a market nationally. So, I decided to investigate the actual numbers and see if I was just making stuff up, so here goes...

SLC ranks 26th in CSA vs. being the 48th largest MSA. That's a significant difference! I analyzed the top 50 CSA's. Salt Lake's CSA of 2,423,912 is 110% larger than its MSA population of 1,153,340. Only Harrisburg (121%) and Greensboro (118%) have a larger % discrepancy among the top 50 CSA's. For whatever it is worth, San Francisco/San Jose is the next highest at 87%.

Perhaps, even more telling (at least to me), is that from a raw population standpoint, the only cities that add more people than Salt Lake (1,270,572) adds when analyzing CSA vs. MSA are as follows:

Los Angeles: 5,288,068 (2)
San Francisco: 4,013,363 (5)
New York City: 3,539,839 (1)
Washington DC: 3,512,842 (4)
Boston: 3,367,414 (6)
Cleveland: 1,434,253 (16)

With the exception of Cleveland, those are all top 6 overall markets (ranking in parenthesis). The only other cities that add more than 1,000,000 people are Philadelphia (1,113,620) and Detroit (1,018,640), which are the 8th and 12th largest CSA's, respectively.

Several cities, including Phoenix, Austin, San Antonio and San Diego have the exact same size CSA as MSA.

It just seems like SLC suffers more than its fair share, when solely looking at MSA figures. I know we talk a lot about the unique cultural and demographic factors in the SLC market, but could this also be a contributing factor to perception and appetite from developers and companies looking at Salt Lake? I would be curious to hear everybody's thoughts on this.

Thank you, for finally putting this into words.

I think that this is definitely an issue, and it inaccurately represents Salt Lake City as a whole. In reality, it is a mid-sized to large city of 2.45 million, but is almost always represented as a smaller city of 1 million. Cities of 1 million many times don't even make the first cut when being considered for various investments, or business ventures. For example, a long while back, someone asked the NFL if SLC was in the running for a future team, and they said they would never consider a city so small. This is not true, as the wasatch front is larger, and even much larger than many other NFL markets.

I wonder if there is a way for such census designation to be changed. It really does not represent the area in the correct way. Literally tens of thousands commute every day for work and other reasons between the three "separate" metros, which by the way, no longer have the geographical separation of open land with little development. It is one long city from Ogden to Provo, and those obscure lines dividing these cities are rapidly disappearing.

Also, the fact that the MSA to CSA over doubles the population count, and is comparable with the 5 largest in America, further proves the need for this to be resolved somewhere higher up the political chain. But this also leads me to ask, who, how, and when would this be changed?

[gusam26]

I screenshot a frame of a YouTube video, I think this will be a beautiful angle when The AUC,Regent hotel, 111 main and 151 state are completed. (maybe one of you Photoshop wizards can Photoshop some of the buildings in.)

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Merewether

Photo I took today showing state of Abravanal Plaza. Earlier they were pouring concrete next to Hall's entrance.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/23283802@N05/shares/b3530h

Originally Posted by Twothirty8

Such beautiful concrete planters Abravanel is getting!!! I can't wai for the concrete walkways, maybe they'll be stamped even!!! Does no one in SLC have a sense of design or a desire to build with materials that last? I'm going to start a cobblestone company and force the damn city to use my materials on every single project from here on out. Anyone want in? Just think, SLC could like maybe look like some quaint cosmopolitan Euro city. Shit.

I'm going to assume that what we're seeing is the concrete core, but will have some sort of marble/stone panels added as the finished product. At least I hope that's the case. Cobblestone probably wouldn't work with that area aesthetically,(if you were being serious) but there are a lot of options that would certainly work much more attractively than just that cold, bland, cheap looking concrete as a finish.

Merewether, could you place the pic on the thread. You have it on protected mode at the moment. Not sure if that's intentional or not.

Pic By Merewether

.

[delts145]

Cool shot Gusam, I agree that it is going to be a nice bit of progress when those projects are finished. While I'm a big fan of mid-rise infill and 20-plus towers, I do wish we could get started with few 40-50 plus towers dispersed here and there. I hope the pending CCH will break the glass ceiling, and become a new tallest. At least enough to make a visual height impact on the skyline.

Originally Posted by gusam26

I screenshot a frame of a YouTube video, I think this will be a beautiful angle when The AUC,Regent hotel, 111 main and 151 state are completed. (maybe one of you Photoshop wizards can Photoshop some of the buildings in.)

Originally Posted by Wasatch Wasteland

Thank you, for finally putting this into words.

I think that this is definitely an issue, and it inaccurately represents Salt Lake City as a whole. In reality, it is a mid-sized to large city of 2.45 million, but is almost always represented as a smaller city of 1 million. Cities of 1 million many times don't even make the first cut when being considered for various investments, or business ventures. For example, a long while back, someone asked the NFL if SLC was in the running for a future team, and they said they would never consider a city so small. This is not true, as the wasatch front is larger, and even much larger than many other NFL markets.

I wonder if there is a way for such census designation to be changed. It really does not represent the area in the correct way. Literally tens of thousands commute every day for work and other reasons between the three "separate" metros, which by the way, no longer have the geographical separation of open land with little development. It is one long city from Ogden to Provo, and those obscure lines dividing these cities are rapidly disappearing.

Also, the fact that the MSA to CSA over doubles the population count, and is comparable with the 5 largest in America, further proves the need for this to be resolved somewhere higher up the political chain. But this also leads me to ask, who, how, and when would this be changed?

Wasatch, Periodically in the past we have discussed at length the whole NFL / MLB question. Someone recently mentioned that the Wasatch Front will never have another big league franchise. IMO, that is about one of the most incorrect statements (putting it politely) made in recent memory on his forum. However, in the current evolution of major league franchises some of the requirements that were historically viable have changed. In my mind two things must occur before we can see another major league added to the Wasatch CSA, and I believe we most definitely will when these two issues reach the mark. First, it isn't just about the CSA itself anymore. Decades ago before the digital revolution, a major city like say Denver could establish an NFL team without having the same greater regional requirements that are in place today. Simply, the regional market of Utah, Southeastern Idaho, Eastern Nevada and Southwestern Wyoming have not reached a critical population mass large enough to support the digital market required for these type of Major League teams. When the Greater Regional Market of the Wasatch reaches between 5 and 6 million, then we can start getting serious about another Major League team. I don't expect Wyoming or Nevada to be adding much to the factor. Vegas would be difficult to depend on as a major follower of Wasatch franchises. They're more geared to Los Angeles/So. Cal. However, Southeastern Idaho could be a big help to Utah as a whole in rapidly increasing that 5 million benchmark. Southeastern Idaho is growing rapidly, and it's not difficult to see it contributing a million-plus to the equation in the not too distant future. Second, we'll need an individual and or their corporate entity with the same local homeboy passion as a Miller or Checketts. Someone with a passionate love of the Wasatch and the Sport, and the ability to either individually finance or put together the cartel to move a multi-billion dollar investment like an NFL or MLB would require to go forward.

[ctobsl]

Thank you Airhero.

[UTPlanner]

Projects reviewed by the Planning Commission are no longer appealed to the City Council. They are appealed to the Appeals Hearing Officer. The Council will not have an opportunity to review this application. The height standard when reviewed is looking mainly at design. It is important that those buildings that are taller and will make a significant impact on our city's skyline are well designed. The commission will also be focused on ensuring that it is unique to keep the streetscape from becoming monotonous.

[Boz]

From the Trib:
Photo gallery: Lightning illuminates Salt Lake City skies

[asies1981]

Photo update of the Encore Apartments.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Except in the City Weekly Article when the candidates were asked what building they would tear down if they could she mentioned the DV8 Building. Really you want the torn down, years ago after the fire, DV8 building to be torn down? Interesting, do we really want a mayor that has no idea what buildings are even still around in the city.

Becker is the Mayor for me.

I noticed her comment about the DV8 building. LOL.

When I worked at the Utah AIDS Foundation, I had to deal with her on several occasions and she was very arrogant, so I would never vote for Biskupski, even though I'm gay. I know a lot of gay friends who are voting for her just because she's a lesbian.

I'd rather vote for the best candidate, which is Becker.

[rlayton]

Originally Posted by Wasatch Wasteland

Thank you, for finally putting this into words.

I think that this is definitely an issue, and it inaccurately represents Salt Lake City as a whole. In reality, it is a mid-sized to large city of 2.45 million, but is almost always represented as a smaller city of 1 million. Cities of 1 million many times don't even make the first cut when being considered for various investments, or business ventures. For example, a long while back, someone asked the NFL if SLC was in the running for a future team, and they said they would never consider a city so small. This is not true, as the wasatch front is larger, and even much larger than many other NFL markets.

I wonder if there is a way for such census designation to be changed. It really does not represent the area in the correct way. Literally tens of thousands commute every day for work and other reasons between the three "separate" metros, which by the way, no longer have the geographical separation of open land with little development. It is one long city from Ogden to Provo, and those obscure lines dividing these cities are rapidly disappearing.

Also, the fact that the MSA to CSA over doubles the population count, and is comparable with the 5 largest in America, further proves the need for this to be resolved somewhere higher up the political chain. But this also leads me to ask, who, how, and when would this be changed?

Only about 6 months ago I edited the Salt Lake City Wikipedia page to add the CSA, and point out that there was well over 2 million. I travel for a living and on one occasion I met a fella that quoted Wikipedia to prove that SLC was much smaller than their city. Specifically Kansas City. I have even seen US maps where the size of the name was based on city proper population. SLC is underestimated pretty bad when the numbers are presented the way they are. Meanwhile metros like San Antonio look massive by the numbers when they are as a whole about the same size as the SLC area.

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by delts145

Wasatch, Periodically in the past we have discussed at length the whole NFL / MLB question. Someone recently mentioned that the Wasatch Front will never have another big league franchise. IMO, that is about one of the most incorrect statements (putting it politely) made in recent memory on his forum. However, in the current evolution of major league franchises some of the requirements that were historically viable have changed. In my mind two things must occur before we can see another major league added to the Wasatch CSA, and I believe we most definitely will when these two issues reach the mark. First, it isn't just about the CSA itself anymore. Decades ago before the digital revolution, a major city like say Denver could establish an NFL team without having the same greater regional requirements that are in place today. Simply, the regional market of Utah, Southeastern Idaho, Eastern Nevada and Southwestern Wyoming have not reached a critical population mass large enough to support the digital market required for these type of Major League teams. When the Greater Regional Market of the Wasatch reaches between 5 and 6 million, then we can start getting serious about another Major League team. I don't expect Wyoming or Nevada to be adding much to the factor. Vegas would be difficult to depend on as a major follower of Wasatch franchises. They're more geared to Los Angeles/So. Cal. However, Southeastern Idaho could be a big help to Utah as a whole in rapidly increasing that 5 million benchmark. Southeastern Idaho is growing rapidly, and it's not difficult to see it contributing a million-plus to the equation in the not too distant future. Second, we'll need an individual and or their corporate entity with the same local homeboy passion as a Miller or Checketts. Someone with a passionate love of the Wasatch and the Sport, and the ability to either individually finance or put together the cartel to move a multi-billion dollar investment like an NFL or MLB would require to go forward.

I wanted to interject on a few things with sports teams coming here. Back in 1999 ish the Twins were making a serous push to move to Salt Lake City because they wanted a new stadium but were not getting one at the time in Minneapolis. It's obvious what happened and they stayed, but that team back then thought they could make Utah work and that's the closes we came to getting MLB.

I don't think we will ever get an MLB team for 2 reasons 1- all the teams have new stadiums in the last 20 years save 2; Oakland and Tampa bay. MLB will not expand ever so don't hold your breath on that. 2- out of Oakland and Tampa, MLB will not want to lose the Tampa market. So we are left with Oakland they have a lease for another 10 years and really that is the last chance for a salt lake team. So keep dreaming.

For the NFL; we have one big problem and it's not Mormons and Sunday games. It's money. Salt lake has rich people but for an NFL team you need a lot more. The market size is fine in salt lake even with the population we have, but the amount of coorprate money is lacking. We are the same size as cinncinatti who has an NFL team. But cincy has more coorprate money and older money as well. But in 20 even 10 years that could really change. There is a reason 3 NFL teams want to move to LA the amount of money they can make in that area is so high that the owners are willing to put a lot more of their money into the stadium build then in other cities. You need a billionaire to own your football team not a millionaire. ( maybe 10 millionaires would work).

There might be a few more issues but that is what matters the most to the NFL.

NHL could come but we would need a new arena for it. ESA is not a good hockey place and the maverick is too small. So when the Jazz want to build another arena they could be building for hockey too. Plus I think the NHL would want a team in Seattle before salt lake.

And that's the major sports leagues in the U.S. I see it as more of a timing issue than a population one. Also I never post from my phone so I apologize for how this post turns out.

[Merewether]

Originally Posted by delts145

Merewether, could you place the pic on the thread. You have it on protected mode at the moment. Not sure if that's intentional or not.

Another try.
[IMG]http://[url=https://flic.kr/p/uHA2Ft][/url]image by duckbay, on Flickr[/IMG]

[Comrade]

If Becker is the best Salt Lake can do we've really got a dearth of candidates. It isn't a surprise, though, because we have a limited amount of traditionally strong candidates that are capable of running a city like Salt Lake City. It was like this the last open election cycle, too, when Becker won in a watered down, pretty meh field of candidates. Even our city council members traditionally lack vision are bush league in their approach to the city.

I'm not the biggest Jackie fan but she kinda wins by default. Becker brings so little to the table now that I think another four years will only harm the city.

Though, I think Luke Garrott is arrogant and outspoken enough that I could envision him being a good mayor - someone who'd get something done. Basically, the polar opposite of Becker. Unfortunately, he's also probably a bit too much like Rocky.

I wish there was a Deedee-type candidate running. Instead, we've got a wimp, do-nothing with Becker, an untested, uncertain Jackie and the small-time Garrott. But i know what we're getting with Becker, and I'm unimpressed (this coming from a three-time voter, someone who backed him in the '07 primary, the general and his reelection).

The best candidate I think who could step in and actually lead would be former councilman Søren Simonsen - but he seems uninterested in running. It's too bad Salt Lake lacks the heavy hitters you get in most major regional city mayoral races. But oh well.

[delts145]

^^^
^^^

Thanks Merewether

[delts145]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

Projects reviewed by the Planning Commission are no longer appealed to the City Council. They are appealed to the Appeals Hearing Officer. The Council will not have an opportunity to review this application. The height standard when reviewed is looking mainly at design. It is important that those buildings that are taller and will make a significant impact on our city's skyline are well designed. The commission will also be focused on ensuring that it is unique to keep the streetscape from becoming monotonous.

Sounds encouraging UTPlanner.I like the way they're thinking.

[brankrom]

I never had a problem with Boring Becker. There has been a lot of positive from his administration. The thing that concerns me is that there seems to be a lot of chaos and a lack of vision or leadership and Boring Becker seems to be a hands off kind of leader, not really pushing any kind of vision IMO. I'm upset with his election grandstanding by deep sixing a really good PR oriented police chief. I like Becker in that he does seem to be proactive with regards to environmental and air quality issues. When it comes time to vote I very well may vote for Becker.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

Projects reviewed by the Planning Commission are no longer appealed to the City Council. They are appealed to the Appeals Hearing Officer. The Council will not have an opportunity to review this application. The height standard when reviewed is looking mainly at design. It is important that those buildings that are taller and will make a significant impact on our city's skyline are well designed. The commission will also be focused on ensuring that it is unique to keep the streetscape from becoming monotonous.

I appreciate the correction on approval. Thank you.

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

Originally Posted by Comrade

If Becker is the best Salt Lake can do we've really got a dearth of candidates. It isn't a surprise, though, because we have a limited amount of traditionally strong candidates that are capable of running a city like Salt Lake City. It was like this the last open election cycle, too, when Becker won in a watered down, pretty meh field of candidates. Even our city council members traditionally lack vision are bush league in their approach to the city.

I'm not the biggest Jackie fan but she kinda wins by default. Becker brings so little to the table now that I think another four years will only harm the city.

Though, I think Luke Garrott is arrogant and outspoken enough that I could envision him being a good mayor - someone who'd get something done. Basically, the polar opposite of Becker. Unfortunately, he's also probably a bit too much like Rocky.

I wish there was a Deedee-type candidate running. Instead, we've got a wimp, do-nothing with Becker, an untested, uncertain Jackie and the small-time Garrott. But i know what we're getting with Becker, and I'm unimpressed (this coming from a three-time voter, someone who backed him in the '07 primary, the general and his reelection).

The best candidate I think who could step in and actually lead would be former councilman Søren Simonsen - but he seems uninterested in running. It's too bad Salt Lake lacks the heavy hitters you get in most major regional city mayoral races. But oh well.

Originally Posted by brankrom

I never had a problem with Boring Becker. There has been a lot of positive from his administration. The thing that concerns me is that there seems to be a lot of chaos and a lack of vision or leadership and Boring Becker seems to be a hands off kind of leader, not really pushing any kind of vision IMO. I'm upset with his election grandstanding by deep sixing a really good PR oriented police chief. I like Becker in that he does seem to be proactive with regards to environmental and air quality issues. When it comes time to vote I very well may vote for Becker.

I hope you guys see the irony in these comments. You have created the largest liberal/Democrat enclave in the state were you don't have to deal with Conservative/Republican candidates. But it turns out the candidates you are given are not what you want or lack in to many areas. I mean it's kind of the cards you're dealt with when you have no opposition to ideas, so enjoy it.

If it makes you feel better the Mayor of West Jordan is an ass. And the city Council of Herriman is piratically all related to each other, Eagle Mountain has had 10 mayors in a decade (slight embellishment) and West Valley had a mayor that lied about posting articles on a news site with a fake name.

Sooooooo is it really that bad.

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

I wanted to share this with everyone.

Some of you probably saw it but I hadn't and by chance came across it on Youtube. It's 47 minutes long but breaks down the evolution of skyscrapers. And just think that in 10 years their could be 5 or more skyscrapers taller then Burj Khalifa.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eigBF19aYmA