Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by tchild2

Secondly, Utah with its larger LDS population and family oriented workforce values family life and that is not a hipster condo downtown SLC.

I am cheering the growth of SLC with you brother.

I'm really glad so many of your brethren don't actually think like you anymore. Bunch of young professional Mormons moving downtown. Hell they even come into my bar because they understand that the typical stereotypes, the little dog whistles you include in your confused diatribes, you know "I don't need bars and nightlife" (I assume because you're so High On Life), "Hipster condos" (which mostly sell to Mormons downtown BTW) are utter bullshit. Life is not a CBS after school special bro. People don't necessarily go to bars to get drunk. People go to bars to connect to each other, talk about issues, laugh, cry, feel alive. Hell, our country was actually founded in bars, not soda fountain bars like Swig. Lindon is a really pretty place with ZERO culture. As in ZERO. Wait long enough and you'll get your own Lindon page on this forum. Then you will feel at home. In the meantime, we are talking about Salt Lake City.

BTW I live a pseudo suburban life in Fairpark. I'm also 3 minutes away from one of the finest regional orchestras on the planet and hundreds of other cultural attractions. There is a life outside of your busy soccer practice life. All power to you but this isn't a child rearing forum. And you don't speak for all Mormons. Thank God for that.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by tchild2

Except, no one said that. my statement was" The area is developing exactly the way that the 2 million people living here want it to"

Meaning, SLC is developing with new downtown residential buildings because that is the way 2 million living here want it (demand) . The Wasatch is growing tits commercial zones in nodes all along the WF...because that is the way 2 million people want it (demand).

The collective is determining how growth occurs along the WF...Urban living, suburban living etc. etc. It is all demand driven, nothing more.

Arguing for a certain type of urbanization and growth is productive and enjoyable, but explaining what is actually occuring is something else.

You cannot separate the supply from the demand. People will live where they can afford, not necessarily where they want to. Sure, when demand in an area starts ticking up, more housing is built in that area, but the will of land owners, developers, and zoning codes are king. How many people do you know who live exactly where they want to? How many people do you think are actually satisfied with the way growth in Salt Lake City - or anywhere for that matter - is happening? Sure, individuals are not the collective whole, but I think it's way off-base to say that the development is happening how 2 million people along the Wasatch Front want it to. In reality, those 2 million people have little say.

[tchild2]

Originally Posted by Marvland

I'm really glad so many of your brethren don't actually think like you anymore. Bunch of young professional Mormons moving downtown.

I am an ex-Mormon and I drink alcohol and the herb (occasionally). Don't let your petty judgements cloud your thinking though.

Originally Posted by Marvland

Hell they even come into my bar because they understand that the typical stereotypes, the little dog whistles you include in your confused diatribes, you know "I don't need bars and nightlife"

I like bars, and I like drinking, but I don't revolve my social life around them. My family comes first because I am a grown ass man. The point I made was to counter this notion that there is no culture or life unless there is this city with hip bars and restuarants on every corner that a person can escape away to. That somehow bars and restuarants are culture and represent the apex of the human urban experience. They don't. First thing I do when I go into a new city is to hit the bars, so I enjoy them, but I am on vacation. When I am home, I go home to my family as do most others. Just an observation Marv, not a judgement about which is better or preferable for every person. You understand?

(I assume because you're so High On Life), "Hipster condos" (which mostly sell to Mormons downtown BTW) are utter bullshit. Life is not a CBS after school special bro. People don't necessarily go to bars to get drunk. People go to bars to connect to each other, talk about issues, laugh, cry, feel alive. Hell, our country was actually founded in bars, not soda fountain bars like Swig. Lindon is a really pretty place with ZERO culture. As in ZERO. Wait long enough and you'll get your own Lindon page on this forum. Then you will feel at home. In the meantime, we are talking about Salt Lake City.

I love SLC and hope to see it grow into a wonderful multi-cultural melting pot. I just don't think that every commercial building needs to be built downtown SLC and I listed the reasons why earlier. People are flummoxed as to why companies are relocating to Sandy/Draper or Lehi and I listed the reasons why. This head-scratching was the very reason I initially chimed in with my opinions. I am not anti-city, I am just anti-city based on posters romantic notions of city life, what it is and what it is not, what it provides and what it does not.

You realize Marv that people living in the suburbs get the home, backyard, barbecue, mountain retreats...and then have the city 30 min. away? Not a bad trade off IMO. Is it better? That isn't the point. The point is that this is the way it IS, so individuals and families are making the choices that best fit their lives. My earlier comments were only to voice this side of the dialogue as to the WHY.

Originally Posted by Marvland

BTW I live a pseudo suburban life in Fairpark. I'm also 3 minutes away from one of the finest regional orchestras on the planet and hundreds of other cultural attractions. There is a life outside of your busy soccer practice life. All power to you but this isn't a child rearing forum. And you don't speak for all Mormons. Thank God for that.

I don't like Suburban life, but it is the life I have. The trade off over a hip, urban experience are the reasons I listed. For others, the suburban trade-off is superior to the urban experience. Again, these are just my observations living in Utah for the last 40 years.

I am not Mormon Marv, and I am only offering insights as to WHY the WF is developing the way it is. Maybe go to a bar and get yourself drunk instead of judging other people.

[tchild2]

Dupe post whoops.

[tchild2]

Originally Posted by Stenar

Cities set zoning rules and then 9 times out of 10 when a developer asks to rezone, they allow it. So, they have little input, in actuality... which is a large part of why SLC is developing into a mess like L.A.

Right, that is the city caving to the developer and yes, the SLC valley is a mess. It has never been not a mess. Recently, with more thoughtful planning, state and city leaders are trying to develop long term master plans. I truly hope they succeed.

[tchild2]

Originally Posted by ThePusherMan

Lol this is a perfect example of why people living in the Utah County bubble should have no say in how SLC develops. You love the suburbs. Good. Stay there. To act like people coming from out of state want to live how mormons live in Utah county is absolutely hilarious. Unless you are mormon Salt Lake City is the only livable place in this state. Also, I'm pretty sure the word hipster died in 2014. This forum is about progress. Get with the times or get out of our way.

Hey Pusher, tell me, why are developers choosing Sandy/Draper, Lehi and now PG to develop? I didn't tell them to. I didn't petition any city planners. It is just the demand that is why; cost of land, availability of land and proximity to workforce. People scratched their head and asked "Why" and I responded with my observations as to the why, nothing more.

Pusher, I am an ex-Mormon. My family is ex-Mormon and my whole Utah county social circle are ex-Mormon...hundreds of us. I am not in your way dingbat.

[tchild2]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Tech companies like to locate where other tech companies are. That's probably part of it.

I do feel like we are reaching a tipping point though. The planning of the PoM area has been disastrous and people are starting to take note. All I ever hear - even from people who are not urbanist-oriented - is how bad the traffic has gotten, how poorly-planned it is, etc.

Just for the sake of dialog, what larger metro city in the US does not have traffic problems or sprawling suburbs? It is up to the state and city leaders to develop master plans and hold developers to those plans. Otherwise, market forces will build according to availability and cost.

Originally Posted by bob rulz

I wonder if these office parks going up in Lehi will even be occupied in 25 years, or if we will start to see some of them being abandoned as the trend for suburban office parks goes away.

Sort of like Bellevue Wash going away? Century City, Sandy Springs? It is all here to stay. We moved into Thanksgiving point in 2006, back when there was one little mom and pop gas station with an Iceberg hamburger/shake cafe inside.

Originally Posted by bob rulz

I suppose it's unlikely, but they were not built with long-term sustainability in mind. If these big companies DO leave these buildings forever, they will be essentially useless and they will have no choice but to redevelop. Unfortunately I do agree with the sentiment that it would take decades for the damage to be undone and for there to be any chance of those areas becoming walkable and urban.

The Utah envision project projects 5 million people along the WF by 2050. Where are they all going to live? There will be one massive downtown and homes stretching past Goshen into Nephi, out west in Saratoga Springs, Tooele valley all full and everyone commutes into SLC?

How come Apple didn't build their world corporate headquarters in downtown San Fran. and instead built in the suburban sprawl of Cupertino? Nobody is more "tech" than Apple.

The whole WF will urbanize around built up commercial nodes and mass transit will connect them all - as is happening now. When the auto-centric world we live in diminishes or dies, the built up commercial nodes will be made walkable, and not any time sooner IMO. Just my thoughts on how I see the WF actually developing and why.

My son works in Draper at the Mercedes Dealership. He bought a beater car, parks it at the Trax station and commutes into work everyday via Trax, killing an extra hour of his day, standing in the cold waiting for the train, but he wants the change to happen. It takes a village.

[UV4EVER]

I live in Lehi and work for a fast-growing tech company in Provo. From what I can see, typically two types of people come to Utah to work for the company; young people straight out of college who typically live in Salt Lake City and commute to Provo and people with experience looking to advance their careers with more leadership opportunities who typically live in Park City or Salt Lake County and commute to Provo. Very few of the out of staters want to live in Utah Valley. Some do but most of the younger people want a city life. Even many of the younger people from Utah want that now. I think this business would do much better at recruiting if it moved to Downtown or even Point of the Mountain. Unfortunately, as we've opened other offices (like Seattle), we're now having a harder time getting people to come to Provo when they can go to Seattle. Salt Lake would do better at that.

I would gladly commute to the office on FrontRunner if the office were within walking distance. I live about a 10 minute walk to a FrontRunner station but unfortunately my office is nowhere near one.

[SLCLvr]

I just hope someone announces a new development downtown soon so we can change the topic to how terrible it is and we wish it was taller.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by SLCLvr

I just hope someone announces a new development downtown soon so we can change the topic to how terrible it is and we wish it was taller.

Lol, if core sampling at the Car’ls Jr location is an indication then that could be our next opportunity to complain.

[ThePusherMan]

Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC

Lol, if core sampling at the Car’ls Jr location is an indication then that could be our next opportunity to complain.

New tallest or we riot!

[SaltCityScrapers]

Originally Posted by SLCLvr

I just hope someone announces a new development downtown soon so we can change the topic to how terrible it is and we wish it was taller.

Agreed, it would be nice. The dialogue is heading toward the tired old "You're Hitler" comments again. Some people's children.

[ajiuO]

Tower 8: 05/27/19

[bob rulz]

Thanks for the Tower 8 update! I've been wanting to get some more pictures, but I don't think there's going to be any shortage of pictures on it.

I asked it before but got no response, but what do you guys think about making a separate topic for Tower 8? Or do you guys think it would be better to keep the Tower 8 discussion in the main topic?

Originally Posted by tchild2

Just for the sake of dialog, what larger metro city in the US does not have traffic problems or sprawling suburbs? It is up to the state and city leaders to develop master plans and hold developers to those plans. Otherwise, market forces will build according to availability and cost.

I agree, and most of these suburban areas are poorly developed messes, too. All I'm saying is that the tides are slowly turning against these big, poorly-planned suburban developments. I do think it's possible to find a balance. I am not inherently anti-suburb. I understand their appeal. I'm just anti-bad suburb. And most suburbs happen to be badly-developed.

Sort of like Bellevue Wash going away? Century City, Sandy Springs? It is all here to stay. We moved into Thanksgiving point in 2006, back when there was one little mom and pop gas station with an Iceberg hamburger/shake cafe inside.

I never said these places will go away, but give it 20-30 years and these huge suburban office parks are going to face some serious trouble, if not sooner. See what's happening to suburban strip malls recently? It's going to be the same with office parks eventually. The bigger and more specially-developed the office parks are as well, the harder they will be to fill in the future. That doesn't mean Lehi will "go away". It just means all of these huge office parks are going to be forced to be redeveloped and a bunch of us are going to be able to say "I told you so" to all the people who weren't worried about it or just didn't think ahead.

Bellevue is also better developed than Lehi, not to mention there's actually things to do in Bellevue. What is there to do in Lehi? And yes, most people like to be near things to do if they have a choice, especially if they're considering making a huge move out of state. They don't even necessarily have to be bars and nightlife, but there's not a whole lot to do in Lehi.

How come Apple didn't build their world corporate headquarters in downtown San Fran. and instead built in the suburban sprawl of Cupertino? Nobody is more "tech" than Apple.

Partially BECAUSE Apple is so huge, perhaps. Just as I don't like what Apple has done with their campus, I also don't particularly want the Amazon/Seattle example either. Also, maybe Apple isn't as forward-thinking as we all believe? In fact, Apple got a LOT of flak for their choice to build that campus.

The Utah envision project projects 5 million people along the WF by 2050. Where are they all going to live? There will be one massive downtown and homes stretching past Goshen into Nephi, out west in Saratoga Springs, Tooele valley all full and everyone commutes into SLC?

I am not opposed to putting offices in suburbs. I'm just opposed to shitty, short-sighted development that's going to need to be redeveloped again 20 years down the road. I get that you're just trying to show the other side of the argument, but I also don't necessarily think this "everything works out the way it's meant to" line of thinking is helping much either. The urgency needs to be there NOW. But I don't think we're going to get anywhere continuing to debate this, as we're just going to go around in circles. We seem to be in agreement about ideology, just have differences about how to reach that ideology.

[ajiuO]

I say just leave tower 8 hear. There isn’t a lot of construction going on in salt lake. I don’t like having to many threads to follow. I also think the transit thread and airport thread should be merged into one.

[FullCircle]

I vote to keep tower 8 in this main thread.

Also, this is a good idea. I'm glad to see a company move it to fill this space to make adding ADU's easy for home owners.
https://www.ksl.com/article/46560372/now...cal-company-is-looking-to-fill-the-space

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by tchild2

Cost of land, availability of land, proximity to workforce. I work in the thanksgiving point area. I live in Lindon. The last thing I want to do is to commute all the way up to Salt Lake City everyday. Hell no. Nobody living in Utah county wants to commute to SLC. I don't need bars and nightlife. I want quality of life; mountain access, skiing. The Wasatch front has cities all along its mountain range. People want to live where they can have a home, nice backyard for a barbeque and to raise a family. Yes, you lose that hipster, walkable city life, but you gain in other ways.

My commute is barely 15 min, traffic is rarely bad. I don't want to go to a bar after work. I want to go home to my family, strike up a barbeque, go for a jeep ride, head to the mountains for a bike ride, walk in the foothills etc etc.

The area is developing exactly the way that the 2 million people living here want it to and that fit the geography of the area IMO. Utah is a very special place. Once you have been to LA, or San Fran, or New York, you get it.

Tchild2,
First of all, we're not saying that the only major employment center should be downtown SLC. Downtown provo, or southtowne, or downtown Ogden, or even Lehi. But, the primary point of employment for the region should be downtown SLC. The region is dependent on the vibrancy of its center. The majority of new office development is being encouraged to be in Lehi and south Salt Lake valley, and as a result, the vibrancy of downtown SLC is drained. Therefore, blight, homelessness, vacant lots, etc. are what people see in downtown SLC, along with some spots of vitality.

Second of all, a car-centric, low-density suburban sprawl, and stand-alone auto-dependent office buildings are bad from a sustainability perspective, and ignorant of good planning, and a lot of other things. It's throw-away American consumerism. It takes more infrastructure, ie. more roads, more sewage, more water lines, etc. to build when places are built further apart. There is no pedestrian quality or environment, either. You would think that conservatives would understand that this also requires more taxes per individual. Pretty simple. The more that development is spread out, the more infrastructure is required per capita. Smarter development with development located closer together and more interconnected = less infrastructure required per capita, and more interconnected, pedestrian friendly, and vibrant places arise from it.

Third, you don't have to be a bar lover to appreciate smart urban planning. There are all sorts of great cities that are very dense and full of life and vitality.

I get the appeal of having a nice home on your 1/4 to 1/3 acre lot, and enjoying the outdoors. I grew up in Sandy, and would often go skiing up in the cottonwood canyon resorts. But, I see so much sprawl that is continuing to push further and further out into the desert, and draining the vibrancy of the center of the region, downtown Salt Lake City. There has got to be better education given and better controls. I feel like many of Utahns don't understand or either don't care or don't want to give up the suburban dream and we will see endless sprawl out into the dessert. It's ignorant, and very out-dated.

[ucsbgaucho]

Originally Posted by Orlando

Tchild2,
First of all, we're not saying that the only major employment center should be downtown SLC. Downtown provo, or southtowne, or downtown Ogden, or even Lehi. But, the primary point of employment for the region should be downtown SLC. The region is dependent on the vibrancy of its center. The majority of new office development is being encouraged to be in Lehi and south Salt Lake valley, and as a result, the vibrancy of downtown SLC is drained. Blight, homelessness, vacant lots, etc. are what people see along with some spots of vitality.

Second of all, a car-centric, low-density suburban sprawl, and stand-alone auto-dependent office buildings are bad from a sustainability perspective, and ignorant of good planning, and a lot of other things. It's throw-away American consumerism. It takes more infrastructure, ie. more roads, more sewage, more water lines, etc. to build when places are built further apart. There is no pedestrian quality or environment, either. You would think that conservatives would understand that this also requires more taxes per individual. Pretty simple. The more that development is spread out, the more infrastructure per capita. Smarter development with development located closer together and more interconnected = less infrastructure per capita, and more vibrant.

Third, you don't have to be a bar lover to appreciate smart urban planning. There are all sorts of great cities that are very dense and full of life and vitality.

I get the appeal of having a nice home on your 1/4 to 1/3 acre lot, and enjoying the outdoors. I grew up in Sandy, and would often go skiing up in the cottonwood canyon resorts. But, I see so much sprawl that is continuing to push further and further out into the desert, and draining the vibrancy of the center of the region, downtown Salt Lake City. There has got to be better education given and better controls. I feel like many of Utahns either don't care or don't want to give up the suburban dream and we will see endless sprawl out into the dessert. It's ignorant, and very out-dated.

Respectfully disagree, as this has being going on for decades. What is sort of ignorant, in my mind, is the idea that govt can somehow control the masses by dictating how development MUST happen, with these grandiose ideas of walkable neighborhoods and urban development. Yet the market will follow what people want to buy. Where land is expensive and limited, like San Francisco, you get more urban development, more skyscrapers, more dense. You can't build homes on the Bay or the Pacific Ocean. Yet look at LA, with almost unlimited flat land, and it's an endless desert of suburban cities. As people get married and start families, they don't want to be in apartments and high rises. They want space, they want a yard. It's the younger demo that typically will gravitate to cities and urban lifestyle.

In Salt Lake, land is cheap, therefore you can have a 1/2 acre lot and house for the same price as a downtown condo. That's what a lot more people want here than want the highrise lifestyle. As SLC attracts more young people with the influx of tech companies, that demand for urban living will probably rise, and then you'll see a rise in construction. But developers aren't going to build urban walkable neighborhoods just for the principle of the idea. The idea of a neighborhood surrounding a commercial center, where people can walk to work, is a fantasy considering people don't stay in one job for very long anymore. Pretty quickly, all those residents will be working elsewhere, and you have another neighborhood just like all the others.

City planners and developers should work together on smart growth, but not try to create a utopia in the minds of the planners of what a city SHOULD look like. Otherwise you'll end up like the ghost cities in China.

[DMTower]

Originally Posted by ucsbgaucho

Respectfully disagree, as this has being going on for decades. What is sort of ignorant, in my mind, is the idea that govt can somehow control the masses by dictating how development MUST happen, with these grandiose ideas of walkable neighborhoods and urban development. Yet the market will follow what people want to buy. Where land is expensive and limited, like San Francisco, you get more urban development, more skyscrapers, more dense. You can't build homes on the Bay or the Pacific Ocean. Yet look at LA, with almost unlimited flat land, and it's an endless desert of suburban cities. As people get married and start families, they don't want to be in apartments and high rises. They want space, they want a yard. It's the younger demo that typically will gravitate to cities and urban lifestyle.

In Salt Lake, land is cheap, therefore you can have a 1/2 acre lot and house for the same price as a downtown condo. That's what a lot more people want here than want the highrise lifestyle. As SLC attracts more young people with the influx of tech companies, that demand for urban living will probably rise, and then you'll see a rise in construction. But developers aren't going to build urban walkable neighborhoods just for the principle of the idea. The idea of a neighborhood surrounding a commercial center, where people can walk to work, is a fantasy considering people don't stay in one job for very long anymore. Pretty quickly, all those residents will be working elsewhere, and you have another neighborhood just like all the others.

City planners and developers should work together on smart growth, but not try to create a utopia in the minds of the planners of what a city SHOULD look like. Otherwise you'll end up like the ghost cities in China.

Portland, Oregon proves all of what you say here wrong. I moved here two years ago, and the mindset toward development is night and day. It's not just that people here expect better urban planning, the government also zones and regulates land use to make it happen. Portland is dense, walkable, and you can drive 15 mins down the road and be in a forest. Salt Lake and its suburbs let developers get away with murder.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by DMTower

Portland, Oregon proves all of what you say here wrong. I moved here two years ago, and the mindset toward development is night and day. It's not just that people here expect better urban planning, the government also zones and regulates land use to make it happen. Portland is dense, walkable, and you can drive 15 mins down the road and be in a forest. Salt Lake and its suburbs let developers get away with murder.

This is why Oregon doesn't sprawl out forever and is more dense:

"Urban growth boundary. Under Oregon law, each of the state's cities and metropolitan areas has created an urban growth boundary around its perimeter – a land use planning line to control urban expansion onto farm and forest lands. Metro is responsible for managing the Portland metropolitan area's urban growth boundary."

This urban growth boundary law was instituted in the 1970s.