Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by FullCircle

I made a post several months ago stating that I went downtown and it was dead. Apparently that was an anomaly, because I've been back a handful of times since then and there have been lots of people out and about. Two weeks ago I spent a night at Hotel Monacco, which was funny, spending a night in a hotel in one's own town, but it was a pretty cool view looking north from the 15th floor. We went to two different bars and both were crowded, and even the next morning there were folk around on the streets. I have to agree that aspect of the city is improving.
I also agree that skyscrapers don't make a city. To echo Always Sunny in SLC, my favorite cities, particularly in Europe, don't have many skyscrapers, at least not in the downtown areas, and they are beautiful, interesting and crowded with pedestrians. Skyscrapers are cool (this is Skyscraperpage after all), but they definitely don't make a city great. These residential infill projects going up will help SLC more than skyscrapers, and are a stepping stone that will facilitate more towers in the future.
In a way SLC is the tortoise to some other cities hare. Slow and steady growth, not as much of the boom bust cycle (yes, there was definitely urban flight to the suburbs and stagnation here, but less so than many other cities). The highs aren't as high, but the lows aren't as low either.

If people are like me patience is hard because life is short. I am 36 so I have about 45ish more years on this rock so you want to see things progress quickly. Also, we are so accustom to fast iteration on many technologies that seeing how painfully slow construction is can be really frustrating. A great example is the Regent Street tower. I am sure the investors feel it too, but man that project, if it is ever is built, is a classic example of snail paced construction. Such is life.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by (Eco)nomy_404

In an ideal world, yes, there would be no sprawl. I definitely agree with you there. As a realist (an optimistic realist to be precise), I tend to support and encourage more practical solutions that are effective, yet still palatable to people’s tastses and preferences. In comparing UT to other places, my intention is not to justify the sprawl that exists in the state. I mean to show how far ahead the Wasatch Front is from peers like Charlotte, Kansas City, Milwaukee, and even larger cities like Atlanta and Jacksonville.

I think trends will continue to shift as they have recently. Hopefully, with more people living in dense suburban developments, the step into the urban center won’t be as “scary” for them. Even in a multi-polar development model with urban centers popping up across the front, I think that is ok too. It’s actually more environmentally friendly for someone in the south valley to commute to Daybreak, Lehi, or Sandy than to go to SLC. It also would more evenly distribute traffic flows. Plus, with a robust transit system, people would be able to access these hubs that way as an alternative to the automobile (which is what already sets apart suburban office parks in UT from its sprawlier peers.)

It doesn't seem like that is what is happening. There is definitely an awful lot of reverse commuting. I swear everyone who works in Lehi lives in SLC and everyone who works downtown lives in Sandy. The traffic sucks in 2 directions now instead of just one. That's pretty bad for the air. It seems to me that it would be better to focus more jobs downtown and for people to take transit. Transit seems like it works best when you are funneling people into a downtown core rather than trying to serve scattered employers. Besides one larger downtown is more dynamic than 2 half the size.

I understand the thought process behind having a multi-polar city but I think it is flawed in practice and not all that desirable.

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Is the the Pollo Loco opening the #1 development story for 2017? Honestly? I can't think of another...2017 was kind of a crap year for development.

Yes.

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by FullCircle

I made a post several months ago stating that I went downtown and it was dead. Apparently that was an anomaly, because I've been back a handful of times since then and there have been lots of people out and about. Two weeks ago I spent a night at Hotel Monacco, which was funny, spending a night in a hotel in one's own town, but it was a pretty cool view looking north from the 15th floor. We went to two different bars and both were crowded, and even the next morning there were folk around on the streets. I have to agree that aspect of the city is improving.
I also agree that skyscrapers don't make a city. To echo Always Sunny in SLC, my favorite cities, particularly in Europe, don't have many skyscrapers, at least not in the downtown areas, and they are beautiful, interesting and crowded with pedestrians. Skyscrapers are cool (this is Skyscraperpage after all), but they definitely don't make a city great. These residential infill projects going up will help SLC more than skyscrapers, and are a stepping stone that will facilitate more towers in the future.
In a way SLC is the tortoise to some other cities hare. Slow and steady growth, not as much of the boom bust cycle (yes, there was definitely urban flight to the suburbs and stagnation here, but less so than many other cities). The highs aren't as high, but the lows aren't as low either.

Droves of 6 story stucco apartment buildings with no retail in the base also don’t make a great city.

SLC is always busier in December. Try coming back in late January.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

More density downtown = more restaurants, more bars (well, in theory, if the legislature would get the f out of the way that would help), more street life, more pedestrian/bicycle traffic, etc. Not to mention more people living close to their work, cutting down on car travel and perhaps even encouraging people to give up their cars completely.

More density in the suburbs mostly just means more cars and more shopping centers. Location matters.

Seriously I'm tired of the negativity. Have you been downtown in the last few years? There is a noticeable improvement in the vibrancy downtown and it's only getting better.

BIG MARQUEE PROJECTS ARE NOT NECESSARY FOR URBAN VIBRANCY.

I live in Salt Lake City.

Salt Lake is still miles behind other cities in terms of urban development. What we're seeing right now is what places like Portland, Denver, Seattle, Austin and other cities saw 20 years ago.

10 years ago, the development we're seeing today would impress me. It doesn't right now. Especially not with the state of the economy. The fact the economy has been, the last four or so years, at its best since the late 90s, and we don't have much substantial development to show for it, concerns me. When Salt Lake City is more in line with Boise in terms of urban development, as opposed to cities roughly its size, that tells me all I need to know.

Like I've said before - thank god for the LDS Church because without it, we wouldn't have a significant downtown residential project since the Parc at the Gateway in, what, 2000? Beyond that, the city is still struggling to expand its downtown area beyond Main. Most these developments remain retail neutral at best.

Now get me The Exchange, Block 67, 370 Millennium Tower, Regent Street Hotel (lol still waiting on this) and I'll be content. That isn't even demanding the convention center hotel or the large tower planned on State Street.

But these micro developments, without anything major, just isn't cutting it for me anymore. Sooner or later Salt Lake is going to have to make the leap to an actual city and not one that has more in common with, say, Spokane and Boise than it does with its population peers.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

It doesn't seem like that is what is happening. There is definitely an awful lot of reverse commuting. I swear everyone who works in Lehi lives in SLC and everyone who works downtown lives in Sandy. The traffic sucks in 2 directions now instead of just one. That's pretty bad for the air. It seems to me that it would be better to focus more jobs downtown and for people to take transit. Transit seems like it works best when you are funneling people into a downtown core rather than trying to serve scattered employers. Besides one larger downtown is more dynamic than 2 half the size.

I understand the thought process behind having a multi-polar city but I think it is flawed in practice and not all that desirable.

Hurrah For Liberty and Comrade! Truth spoken!

[jubguy3]

If you want more urban development, support leaders that embrace urban land policy. Our semi-nomadic Riverton faux cowboy republican leaders would rather see every single person in this state with their own 10 acres, two chevy suburbans, and 6 crotch fruit to drive around in them all day. SLC's democratic leaders are too weak to drive meaningful change on their own being constantly stifled by the state legislature. People keep voting for individualistic leaders and then wondering why the air is getting worse, the traffic is getting worse, and we've crept up the other side of the mountain already. Land policy in Utah needs to change immediately. I would have kept some hope that it could if I hadn't lived in this state my entire life.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by Comrade

I live in Salt Lake City.

Salt Lake is still miles behind other cities in terms of urban development. What we're seeing right now is what places like Portland, Denver, Seattle, Austin and other cities saw 20 years ago.

10 years ago, the development we're seeing today would impress me. It doesn't right now. Especially not with the state of the economy. The fact the economy has been, the last four or so years, at its best since the late 90s, and we don't have much substantial development to show for it, concerns me. When Salt Lake City is more in line with Boise in terms of urban development, as opposed to cities roughly its size, that tells me all I need to know.

Like I've said before - thank god for the LDS Church because without it, we wouldn't have a significant downtown residential project since the Parc at the Gateway in, what, 2000? Beyond that, the city is still struggling to expand its downtown area beyond Main. Most these developments remain retail neutral at best.

Now get me The Exchange, Block 67, 370 Millennium Tower, Regent Street Hotel (lol still waiting on this) and I'll be content. That isn't even demanding the convention center hotel or the large tower planned on State Street.

But these micro developments, without anything major, just isn't cutting it for me anymore. Sooner or later Salt Lake is going to have to make the leap to an actual city and not one that has more in common with, say, Spokane and Boise than it does with its population peers.

Honestly I'm just tired of people constantly comparing Salt Lake City to other cities. We are not any of those cities. Also since when were Denver or Seattle population peers? Austin and Portland are more apt comparisons, but even they are bigger metro areas. There is no way that SLC is equivalent in downtown vibrancy or urbanity to Spokane, or even Boise. If you're looking at Portland or Denver and thinking "man, I wish SLC was as vibrant and urban as those places" you are ALWAYS going to be disappointed.

And I'm also not saying that I don't experience the frustration sometimes, too. The fact that we don't have solid plans for a CCH yet is a joke, or the fact that there's still a suburban-style Carl's Jr. right in the heart of downtown at a prime location. But why is it so hard to acknowledge the positive developments?

My point is, why do we only compare ourselves with the MOST vibrant cities in the western U.S.? What about Omaha, or Oklahoma City, or Phoenix, just as a few examples? Why are we a failure if we're not as good as the best cities?

[delts145]

Bob, I agree with much of what you are saying. There are some points, if we don't stray too far to one side that are point on. When Comrade is talking size, I'm sure he's referring to the overall connected CSA. It won't be long before the three combined and interconnected metros reach and pass the 3 million mark. There are very important areas where I think the Wasatch Front is actually doing a much better job than quite a few cities such as Austin. The progress that Salt Lake City and it's surrounding communities are making with its multi-model means of infrastructure investment, and its higher surrounding residential density is very noteworthy. If we are to believe the national accolades, there are many similar sized or larger communities that can't even begin to touch the per capita ease of investment in the Wasatch Front's infrastructure. There are also many higher density niches within the development of Wasatch real estate that are experiencing a definite boom. Missing middle and mid-rise construction is at historic levels, and that's only one example. The billions that have gone into just individual sectors of SLC, such as the U of U or Sugar House would equal or eclipse entire mid-sized metros throughout the west and the nation, including a couple noted above. (Let's not forget that post a couple years back, where the tally of major mayors of the U.S. named Salt Lake City as one of a handful of communities they most looked to for development progress.)

However, and I think this is one of the areas where Comrade makes a really good point. The flashy High-Rise projects of 400-600 feet are lagging. I completely agree that it's high time that the Capital of a CSA approaching 3 million begins to build taller office and rentable residential in the historic heart of it's vast Wasatch Metro. I do think that we're going to see some favorable game changing moves this year, that will shortly lead to taller density in the CBD.

To be very brief, as many on the local forum have noted, a major missing component is now filling in the gap that Salt Lake City has been missing. The LDS Church as a major developer is now being joined by many additional major national players. Salt Lake City has always been a very provincial capital. In many ways its provinciality is much more enhanced than your typical American regional capital, because of its unique religious ties. Perhaps, among other points this has historically led to a reluctance by national capital and its developers to believe in Salt Lake's potential for cosmopolitan profit. This year however we have finally seen a seemingly major break-through by multiple national development players into the Salt Lake City's, CBD market. Announcement proposals and construction phased starts, such as SALT, Ritchie, Patrinely, Held have become so common that we have become a bit complacent. No longer will Salt Lake be only the occasional benefactor of a major Property Reserve development or a once in a great while Hamilton venture.

I live in Downtown/Central L.A., surrounded by large projects under construction. These projects are being developed by major national/international interests with bigger, deeper pockets than your typical Wasatch centric developer like Cowboy. Any of the above projects such as Hardware or Ritchie would be major, even here in the heart of Los Angeles's current booming construction buildup. I would advise anybody who is understandably impatient for taller density in the SLC, CBD to give the new players in town these next six months to make their proposals gel. If after this upcoming year we haven't seen a significant up tick of the number of mega project starts and continuing announcements, with a solid promise of an accelerated vertical climb, then let's get militant. The multiple singular hundred's of millions to billion-plus projects by diverse national players are just beginning their entrance in a way that changes the Salt Lake City's CBD game. I think the having to wait for a once-in-a decade announcement of something game changing is ending. Multiple large, dense, costly projects like Ritchie, SALT and Patrinely will only lead to the increased verticle climb along State, Main, W. Temple, and the East/West streets between.

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Honestly I'm just tired of people constantly comparing Salt Lake City to other cities. We are not any of those cities. Also since when were Denver or Seattle population peers? Austin and Portland are more apt comparisons, but even they are bigger metro areas. There is no way that SLC is equivalent in downtown vibrancy or urbanity to Spokane, or even Boise. If you're looking at Portland or Denver and thinking "man, I wish SLC was as vibrant and urban as those places" you are ALWAYS going to be disappointed.

And I'm also not saying that I don't experience the frustration sometimes, too. The fact that we don't have solid plans for a CCH yet is a joke, or the fact that there's still a suburban-style Carl's Jr. right in the heart of downtown at a prime location. But why is it so hard to acknowledge the positive developments?

My point is, why do we only compare ourselves with the MOST vibrant cities in the western U.S.? What about Omaha, or Oklahoma City, or Phoenix, just as a few examples? Why are we a failure if we're not as good as the best cities?

[Denvergotback]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when many of the people I've met around the Salt Lake area, that's not downtown, tend to be fresh from small towns and most of them were college students of schools like BYU and just never really left. And I remember some time ago someone on this thread mentioned that most people in the Wasatch Front were "fresh off the farms", Now if this person is right, then it seems to me that its just a matter of these people just weren't ready to make a jump to the big city yet so therefore you get suburban sprawl that goes on endlessly. But even with uninspiring development, more and more people are getting comfortable with living downtown, maybe in a few decades people will be more ready to make the leap that most aren't ready for yet. Now I know you guys don't like being compared to Denver, especially since its a competing city, but bare with me since its where I live and its what I know best, but I recall downtown Denver in the 90's as being a dangerous place, homeless mecca, drug ridden, very non-vibrant place. Yes we had office buildings but it was not worth going downtown unless you worked there. That was twenty years ago. Salt Lake today looks more vibrant and safe that Denver did in the 90's. Now look at Denver today, Its extremely safe, vibrant, and booming like you wouldn't believe. That just goes to show you how fast things can and usually will change. Who knows, maybe in 10 years from now you will see a complete make-over of Salt Lake that many of you have been drooling to see! I certainly will be excited!

I also wonder, and this is complete speculation, if the other part of reason why Salt Lake has troubles urbanizing is because the Wasatch Front makes people too comfortable with suburban living? It reminds of Phoenix in many ways, and no I'm not comparing you guys to Phoenix, but bare with me. In Phoenix they are now trying so hard to have a downtown and urbanize but are constantly disappointed. I wonder if its because they have created a comfort level with living in the suburban communities that people think, "why change"? They have a class A freeway system (much like a lot of Salt Lake) They created these cute little comfortable communities that have every necessity of need, instead of putting all there main attractions downtown drawing people in from all sides of the valley, they instead have them dotted all around the metro so there really isn't a need or want to go downtown and experience the city. In a way, they have created themselves a "why change" attitude in the metro. In Denver they keep very little lanes on the freeways so there's always traffic, eventually people get tired of the commute and either start taking the light-rails or they move to the city to be close to work and all the sudden they realize that the city really isn't all that bad.
Sometimes I wonder if Salt Lake has also created a "why change" attitude. Now Salt Lake is doing better than Phoenix in my opinion when it comes to transit and urban living. But going from traffic ridden Denver with their slower speed freeways to Salt Lake where there's not nearly the same amount of traffic and much higher speeds, I sometimes get the feeling "this is nice" Its almost a relief. And you guys don't have most of your main attractions downtown, so I can see why some people can just get "too" comfortable.

Now don't destroy me if I'm wrong on any of that! That was pure speculation!

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by Denvergotback

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when many of the people I've met around the Salt Lake area, that's not downtown, tend to be fresh from small towns and most of them were college students of schools like BYU and just never really left. And I remember some time ago someone on this thread mentioned that most people in the Wasatch Front were "fresh off the farms", Now if this person is right, then it seems to me that its just a matter of these people just weren't ready to make a jump to the big city yet so therefore you get suburban sprawl that goes on endlessly. But even with uninspiring development, more and more people are getting comfortable with living downtown, maybe in a few decades people will be more ready to make the leap that most aren't ready for yet. Now I know you guys don't like being compared to Denver, especially since its a competing city, but bare with me since its where I live and its what I know best, but I recall downtown Denver in the 90's as being a dangerous place, homeless mecca, drug ridden, very non-vibrant place. Yes we had office buildings but it was not worth going downtown unless you worked there. That was twenty years ago. Salt Lake today looks more vibrant and safe that Denver did in the 90's. Now look at Denver today, Its extremely safe, vibrant, and booming like you wouldn't believe. That just goes to show you how fast things can and usually will change. Who knows, maybe in 10 years from now you will see a complete make-over of Salt Lake that many of you have been drooling to see! I certainly will be excited!

I also wonder, and this is complete speculation, if the other part of reason why Salt Lake has troubles urbanizing is because the Wasatch Front makes people too comfortable with suburban living? It reminds of Phoenix in many ways, and no I'm not comparing you guys to Phoenix, but bare with me. In Phoenix they are now trying so hard to have a downtown and urbanize but are constantly disappointed. I wonder if its because they have created a comfort level with living in the suburban communities that people think, "why change"? They have a class A freeway system (much like a lot of Salt Lake) They created these cute little comfortable communities that have every necessity of need, instead of putting all there main attractions downtown drawing people in from all sides of the valley, they instead have them dotted all around the metro so there really isn't a need or want to go downtown and experience the city. In a way, they have created themselves a "why change" attitude in the metro. In Denver they keep very little lanes on the freeways so there's always traffic, eventually people get tired of the commute and either start taking the light-rails or they move to the city to be close to work and all the sudden they realize that the city really isn't all that bad.
Sometimes I wonder if Salt Lake has also created a "why change" attitude. Now Salt Lake is doing better than Phoenix in my opinion when it comes to transit and urban living. But going from traffic ridden Denver with their slower speed freeways to Salt Lake where there's not nearly the same amount of traffic and much higher speeds, I sometimes get the feeling "this is nice" Its almost a relief. And you guys don't have most of your main attractions downtown, so I can see why some people can just get "too" comfortable.

Now don't destroy me if I'm wrong on any of that! That was pure speculation!

4 out of 7 people in Down town Salt Lake who are on the public sidewalks are panhandlers... that’s how few people we have. When I walk to the store on a Sunday it’s like the twilight zone.

[Denvergotback]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

4 out of 7 people in Down town Salt Lake who are on the public sidewalks are panhandlers... that’s how few people we have. When I walk to the store on a Sunday it’s like the twilight zone.

Try focusing on all the other points also besides just homeless all the time. You guys do have Temple Square, that in itself brings in many [Utah'n's (?)]

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by Denvergotback

Try focusing on all the other points also besides just homeless all the time. You guys do have Temple Square, that in itself brings in many [Utah'n's (?)]

I’m not really focusing on the homeless. I’m focusing on the fact that there are so few people in Down town salt lake that it seems like it’s mostly panhandlers.

Does anyone know if the city approved building that apartment building at warm springs park and selling the pool house to the developer... I was way against this project. I want that property to remain for public use... I think the pool house should be restored and used as a swimming facility... possibly even adding some outdoor pools behind the building.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Honestly I'm just tired of people constantly comparing Salt Lake City to other cities. We are not any of those cities. Also since when were Denver or Seattle population peers? Austin and Portland are more apt comparisons, but even they are bigger metro areas. There is no way that SLC is equivalent in downtown vibrancy or urbanity to Spokane, or even Boise. If you're looking at Portland or Denver and thinking "man, I wish SLC was as vibrant and urban as those places" you are ALWAYS going to be disappointed.

And I'm also not saying that I don't experience the frustration sometimes, too. The fact that we don't have solid plans for a CCH yet is a joke, or the fact that there's still a suburban-style Carl's Jr. right in the heart of downtown at a prime location. But why is it so hard to acknowledge the positive developments?

My point is, why do we only compare ourselves with the MOST vibrant cities in the western U.S.? What about Omaha, or Oklahoma City, or Phoenix, just as a few examples? Why are we a failure if we're not as good as the best cities?

Bob, no disrespect but I think you need to get out more. SLC's downtown scene is great. The bar/food density of 300 S./Main/State is as concentrated as you'll find in any market, period. I go to most of the cities that people mention on this forum multiple times per year. Our cocktail scene is one of the best for our market size in the USA and our touring music scene is untouchable. No, we don't have the bubble of some other markets but because of that we don't have the constant rash of closings/openings and space churn. (You shoulda seen our bars this week). Many do NYC downtown types of numbers consistently but our rent is 25% of theirs and it won't stop until President's Day. Alas, we are a ski town and we die in April. Sometimes I get the sense that the people who complain the most aren't out and about. Go, get out there and spend your money, support your neighbors who are risking their livelihoods to provide cultural amenities to our city. "Be the change that you want to see.".

[delts145]

...And thank you Marvland. Knowing what I know about you, your one of those forum members who actually invests a tremendous amount of time, money, blood and sweat equity in building downtown. I always appreciate your non doom and gloom matter of fact reports. Reports from a business owner who's actually working in the business trenches.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by delts145

...And thank you Marvland. Knowing what I know about you, your one of those forum members who actually invests a tremendous amount of time, money, blood and sweat equity in building downtown. I always appreciate your non doom and gloom matter of fact reports. Reports from a business owner who's actually working in the business trenches.

Thanks for the kind words, Delts. I do appreciate this forum and I think everybody on here just wants our market to do better and better things. the thing is, this place is on absolute fire right now across our entire urban spine and that's good for all of us. Infill is being gobbled up and the vast majority of cash is coming in from outside for the first time. I think we should cheer Lehi and Provo on just as well. The better they do, the better downtown will become.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Denvergotback

Correct me if I'm wrong, but when many of the people I've met around the Salt Lake area, that's not downtown, tend to be fresh from small towns and most of them were college students of schools like BYU and just never really left. And I remember some time ago someone on this thread mentioned that most people in the Wasatch Front were "fresh off the farms", Now if this person is right, then it seems to me that its just a matter of these people just weren't ready to make a jump to the big city yet so therefore you get suburban sprawl that goes on endlessly. But even with uninspiring development, more and more people are getting comfortable with living downtown, maybe in a few decades people will be more ready to make the leap that most aren't ready for yet. Now I know you guys don't like being compared to Denver, especially since its a competing city, but bare with me since its where I live and its what I know best, but I recall downtown Denver in the 90's as being a dangerous place, homeless mecca, drug ridden, very non-vibrant place. Yes we had office buildings but it was not worth going downtown unless you worked there. That was twenty years ago. Salt Lake today looks more vibrant and safe that Denver did in the 90's. Now look at Denver today, Its extremely safe, vibrant, and booming like you wouldn't believe. That just goes to show you how fast things can and usually will change. Who knows, maybe in 10 years from now you will see a complete make-over of Salt Lake that many of you have been drooling to see! I certainly will be excited!

I also wonder, and this is complete speculation, if the other part of reason why Salt Lake has troubles urbanizing is because the Wasatch Front makes people too comfortable with suburban living? It reminds of Phoenix in many ways, and no I'm not comparing you guys to Phoenix, but bare with me. In Phoenix they are now trying so hard to have a downtown and urbanize but are constantly disappointed. I wonder if its because they have created a comfort level with living in the suburban communities that people think, "why change"? They have a class A freeway system (much like a lot of Salt Lake) They created these cute little comfortable communities that have every necessity of need, instead of putting all there main attractions downtown drawing people in from all sides of the valley, they instead have them dotted all around the metro so there really isn't a need or want to go downtown and experience the city. In a way, they have created themselves a "why change" attitude in the metro. In Denver they keep very little lanes on the freeways so there's always traffic, eventually people get tired of the commute and either start taking the light-rails or they move to the city to be close to work and all the sudden they realize that the city really isn't all that bad.
Sometimes I wonder if Salt Lake has also created a "why change" attitude. Now Salt Lake is doing better than Phoenix in my opinion when it comes to transit and urban living. But going from traffic ridden Denver with their slower speed freeways to Salt Lake where there's not nearly the same amount of traffic and much higher speeds, I sometimes get the feeling "this is nice" Its almost a relief. And you guys don't have most of your main attractions downtown, so I can see why some people can just get "too" comfortable.

Now don't destroy me if I'm wrong on any of that! That was pure speculation!

The second part is accurate. The SLC CSA is 120 miles of suburban towns that have grown together into one giant suburb. There are 3 cities that have a decent historic downtown core(SLC, Provo, Ogden). The rest is strip malls and single family homes.

As far as the 90's go SLC experienced the same thing as Denver it was just smaller. Lots of blight, closed store fronts, junkies, gangs, slumlords, etc. The difference between SLC now and in 2005 is massive, let alone the 90's. Honestly part of me mosses it. I definitely miss the super cheap housing.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by jubguy3

If you want more urban development, support leaders that embrace urban land policy. Our semi-nomadic Riverton faux cowboy republican leaders would rather see every single person in this state with their own 10 acres, two chevy suburbans, and 6 crotch fruit to drive around in them all day. SLC's democratic leaders are too weak to drive meaningful change on their own being constantly stifled by the state legislature. People keep voting for individualistic leaders and then wondering why the air is getting worse, the traffic is getting worse, and we've crept up the other side of the mountain already. Land policy in Utah needs to change immediately. I would have kept some hope that it could if I hadn't lived in this state my entire life.

Pretty much all they're building in Riverton right now are townhomes. By my sister, they just built 100 units on 6 acres.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Honestly I'm just tired of people constantly comparing Salt Lake City to other cities. We are not any of those cities. Also since when were Denver or Seattle population peers? Austin and Portland are more apt comparisons, but even they are bigger metro areas. ...

Austin is smaller than Salt Lake and doesn't have half as much going for it. Portland is pretty close to Denver in size.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Denvergotback

...
I also wonder, and this is complete speculation, if the other part of reason why Salt Lake has troubles urbanizing is because the Wasatch Front makes people too comfortable with suburban living? It reminds of Phoenix in many ways, and no I'm not comparing you guys to Phoenix, but bare with me. In Phoenix they are now trying so hard to have a downtown and urbanize but are constantly disappointed. I wonder if its because they have created a comfort level with living in the suburban communities that people think, "why change"? They have a class A freeway system (much like a lot of Salt Lake) They created these cute little comfortable communities that have every necessity of need, instead of putting all there main attractions downtown drawing people in from all sides of the valley, they instead have them dotted all around the metro so there really isn't a need or want to go downtown and experience the city. In a way, they have created themselves a "why change" attitude in the metro. In Denver they keep very little lanes on the freeways so there's always traffic, eventually people get tired of the commute and either start taking the light-rails or they move to the city to be close to work and all the sudden they realize that the city really isn't all that bad.
Sometimes I wonder if Salt Lake has also created a "why change" attitude. Now Salt Lake is doing better than Phoenix in my opinion when it comes to transit and urban living. But going from traffic ridden Denver with their slower speed freeways to Salt Lake where there's not nearly the same amount of traffic and much higher speeds, I sometimes get the feeling "this is nice" Its almost a relief. And you guys don't have most of your main attractions downtown, so I can see why some people can just get "too" comfortable.

Now don't destroy me if I'm wrong on any of that! That was pure speculation!

This is pretty accurate. Throw in the fact that downtown isn't very suited towards raising large families and everyone wants a yard for their kids to throw a ball around in, and you end up with suburban sprawl.