Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[ThePusherMan]

Originally Posted by Utah_Dave

No one lives anywhere near Liberty park.

Lol. Do you live in Salt Lake? Because you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

[ToysNoiz]

Originally Posted by Utah_Dave

No one lives anywhere near Liberty park.

This is seriously confusing. Are all of the homes and businesses surrounding the park empty?

[Utah_Dave]

Originally Posted by ThePusherMan

Lol. Do you live in Salt Lake? Because you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

I stand corrected.

[Utah_Dave]

Originally Posted by ToysNoiz

This is seriously confusing. Are all of the homes and businesses surrounding the park empty?

Lol, I stand corrected. I was speaking of Pioneer Park

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Utah_Dave

Lol, I stand corrected. I was speaking of Pioneer Park

Well that's wrong too. There are condos going up around the park.

Plus, people literally live in the park too.

[Utah_Dave]

You guys may have touched upon this, but I wonder if Salt Lakes height restrictions are too tight for height. Are other cities requirements on height this tight? I've also heard they want to preserve a pyramid like shape to the skyline which would limit development outside the small core were land is more scarce. Can someone shed some light on this area? It seems they are too focused on maintaining this shape. Seems a little odd. Am I missing something?

Thanks

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by Utah_Dave

You guys may have touched upon this, but I wonder if Salt Lakes height restrictions are too tight for height. Are other cities requirements on height this tight? I've also heard they want to preserve a pyramid like shape to the skyline which would limit development outside the small core were land is more scarce. Can someone shed some light on this area? It seems they are too focused on maintaining this shape. Seems a little odd. Am I missing something?

Thanks

Portland actually has stricter height limits than Salt Lake. The height limits for Salt Lake are actually easier to get around than you think. We have had a few projects in the 80s and 90s that went into the 600+ foot range that had gotten approval but were never built.

[Future Mayor]

While the restrictions can come across as wanting to create a pyramid shape, but there is a method to the madness. As Steven F stated the height restriction are pretty easy to get past with the right plan. Example, mid-block heights can only be 100' tall, except there is conditional use approvals that can push it past that height limit. Specifically if an adjacent/nearby corner building isn't utilizing it's 375' max (which also can be exceeded) the best built example is The Regent, which exceeds the 100' mid-block height because the First Security building on Main and 1st doesn't utilize it's 375' potential and so that height was able to be shifted to the mid-block.

As for the corner heights, those two can easily exceed the 375' height if certain criteria are met, specifically additional setbacks above the 375' mark, additional public amenities (art, design elements, cultural facilities).

I think however you are speaking more specifically about the heights outside the D-1 Zone(CBD). Many cities have much grater heights in the CBD than the periphery, this allows for much greater densities around the infrastructure that is built to accommodate that density. Trax on Main St is one, combined with parking garages that can serve multiple buildings, eliminating surface lots that could occur is a taller building was built further outside the core. Attempting to centralize the density, also helps to create a more active core. The more people that are centrally located, the more retail businesses that thrive do to a much larger pool of potential customers within a much closer proximity.

There are some surrounding height restrictions that I would like to see raised a bit particularly the D-4, which is the primary zone to the west of Downtown. I would like to see both the mid-block and especially the corner heights raised about the 125' limit. My reasoning behind this is two fold, more height allows for more density, and more height reduces the visual width of the street, creating a more intimate pedestrian experience. Our D-1 Zone is currently pretty large and I would anticipate that if all the property that is undeveloped in that zone where to develop that the city would willingly extend the D-1 zone or raise the height limitations in the surrounding zones.

I prefer to have more density spread throughout the CBD as opposed to spread throughout all of downtown.

[Future Mayor]

In relation to Pioneer Park and a park in East Downtown. While I can see the desire for a park in East Downtown, Liberty Park, due to its sheer size easily serves a large portion of East Downtown. A mile is a bit of a stretch, but even if you only take 1/2 mile as the walkable distance of the area of the city that Liberty Parks draws from that is still a massive area; State St - 1100 E, 500 S to 1700 S. Throw in a bikeable distance at 1 mile and that sphere of Liberty Park extends to 100 S, 2100 S, 3rd W and on paper 15th E, but due to the topography I'd keep that around 12th E.

Is Pioneer Park currently under served by nearby residents? Yes, but with the Station Center redevelopment area a block away, and with the massive build up or residential to the north and the recent and under construction directly adjacent to the park, Pioneer Park is going to be a highly utilized park, by the neighborhood. If it were removed, once that area develops than it would be more under served in park space than East Downtown can appear to be.

[ryerop]

I know its not exactly what you are talking about wanting a park on the east side, but there is also memory grove, which when you have the trails going back into it gives it lots of area that it covers, and speaking of trails I think that is what the east side of Salt Lake has, lots of trails...it's not the same exact thing as a Central Park. But I feel like between Pioneer and Liberty they are the valley parks and the mountains are the "park" for once you head toward the east side of Salt Lake.

[Liberty Wellsian]

I like our parks. The thing I think we need, that seems to often get overlooked, is wider sidewalks in more places. The standard 4' sidewalk just doesn't cut it and should be avoided in most if not all of SLC.

Edit: The KenGarff block renovation is lame but on the bright side we won't get a carbon copy apartment building there. Maybe in 20 years it becomes something really cool.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

I like our parks. The thing I think we need, that seems to often get overlooked, is wider sidewalks in more places. The standard 4' sidewalk just doesn't cut it and should be avoided in most if not all of SLC.

Edit: The KenGarff block renovation is lame but on the bright side we won't get a carbon copy apartment building there. Maybe in 20 years it becomes something really cool.

What specific areas are you advocating for wider sidewalks, Downtown, East Downtown, residential neighborhoods?

[nushiof]

CCH news!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/29/salt-lake-county-selects-possible-convention-hotel/

They picked DDRM from Sandy. If I remember, DDRM preferred the northern Salt Palace site and was talking about a partnership with Starwood?

I wonder when we might see renderings. I image more news will leak about this in the next few days.

[nushiof]

Here is the blurb about DDRM from a couple months ago.

"DDRM is looking at using the northern parcel for a 1,200- to 1,600-room building that could include condos and hotel rooms, according to the company's operations manager, Eric Hull.

Hull said if the company wins the project, DDRM may try to partner with Starwood Hotels, which owns the St. Regis in Park City."

https://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=378214...salt-lake-convention-hotel&s_cid=queue-2

How tall would 1200 to 1600 rooms be on the northern parcel?

[tygr]

duplicate post

[nushiof]

Originally Posted by Makid

To put this in perspective:

The North option with between 1,200 and 1,600 rooms would range between 34 and 45 stories tall and would be between 500' and 600', possibly up to 650'.

The South option at 50 Stories would range between 550' and 650' with a possibility to go over 700'.

The only one we don't know about is the Austin Developers but it is probably between 400' and 450' (my estimates only).

Any of these 3 options would be a dramatic change for the skyline as well as the city. This also means that most likely the CCH and APS will be under construction at the same time. It also means that there is a good chance of 2,000+ hotel rooms coming online at nearly the same time (within 2 hotels).

These proposals are really game changers for the city. It will be interesting to see who wins the bid and if the others plan on building something as well.

As a note, it is possible that we could get 2 hotels on the convention center property. One on each end. The CCH would be required to add additional meeting space of up to 160,000 (based on the 1,600 rooms) but the other could just provide additional parking or other amenities and still be able to build on the other spot.

With that said, I don't think we will end up with 2 hotels on the properties, but it is something to think about as it is a possibility.

Here's a nice breakdown from Makid. Makid, anymore thoughts you want to add?

[Makid]

Originally Posted by nushiof

Here's a nice breakdown from Makid. Makid, anymore thoughts you want to add?

I will say that the location selected is the location that I preferred. It keeps the South plaza as open space that is often used by various events, particularly Outdoor Retailer.

I do expect that negotiations to go fairly quickly to make up as much time as possible from the Omni issues of last year.

I can also say that I don't know anyone directly that was on the selection committee so I can't say what were the reasons behind the selection.

For speculation, I do hope that they build a 1,200 room hotel and include 400 Condo/Apartments. I would also like a rooftop restaurant. I think that the views from that location would be amazing at any height above 400'.

The reason I am hopeful for the Condo/Apartments is that it would enliven the area with additional people and help encourage additional development.

I also don't think we will hear about the APS hotel/building until after the deal with DDRM is finalized. I will say it wouldn't surprise me to have a 600 to 800 room hotel build on the APS site.

Lastly, regarding the APS site, I would love to have something happen sooner than later as the western edge of the site is being used as parking which while the lot isn't paved, should still be against some city regulation.

[Future Mayor]

Starwood has some nice brands. The one I would prefer to see would be a W Hotel. W Hotels are geared toward a slightly younger demographic, and considering we have the Grand America which is very traditional luxury, maybe a W would be a nice compliment to the mix we already have. Starwood brands include: W Hotels, Four Points by Sheraton, Sheraton, a loft', Le Meridian, The Luxury Collection, Element, Westin, St Regis, Tribute Portfolio, Design Hotels and SPG.

[Clark0501]

Awesome news with the selection of the CCH. It will be interesting to see which brand they choose and if it is even a part of Starwood. I would love to see a St. Regis or W Hotel downtown. I also think that a Four Seasons or Ritz Carlton would be great in our beautiful downtown. It will be exciting to see what brands this brings!

[asies1981]

Here is an update on the Marmalade with pictures of the new library branch. The turnout was pretty impressive, it was a large diverse crowd.