Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[EPdesign]

Sorry if it’s sideways . Took this the other day

[delts145]

Great shot. It doesn't appear sideways on my desktop.

[DCRes]

Even if the Regent Hotel ends up not happening, let's not forget that it still got the Eat-a Burger building torn down. That is a rare example of an empty lot being better than the leaving the current building.

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by DCRes

Even if the Regent Hotel ends up not happening, let's not forget that it still got the Eat-a Burger building torn down. That is a rare example of an empty lot being better than the leaving the current building.

I agree. That thing was literally sinking in to the ground on one side and the building was cracking in half.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by airhero

Here's a few excerpts from the plan. Below are the suggested streetscapes. These are the ones described as initial low-cost implementations.







Possible final implementations are shown below.

This plan must be implemented immediately!!! They need to go all in on it too!! With the exception of the new apt complex, everything from 6 south state to 2100 south looks like a skid-row. Pawn shops, tattoo parlors, dive hotels, parking lots, and used car dealers, make a poor grand boulevard. I would argue something like this be also prepared for main street over the same distance.

Salt Lake moves at a snails pace in getting things done development wise downtown. The loss of the Regent is the same old story. Incompetence and hot air rule the day.

The fed is about to go on a spree of rate increases which will put the kibosh on most of these larger projects we hear about.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Ironweed

This plan must be implemented immediately!!! They need to go all in on it too!! With the exception of the new apt complex, everything from 6 south state to 2100 south looks like a skid-row. Pawn shops, tattoo parlors, dive hotels, parking lots, and used car dealers, make a poor grand boulevard. I would argue something like this be also prepared for main street over the same distance.

Salt Lake moves at a snails pace in getting things done development wise downtown. The loss of the Regent is the same old story. Incompetence and hot air rule the day.

The fed is about to go on a spree of rate increases which will put the kibosh on most of these larger projects we hear about.

YES IMMEDIATELY! This is why everybody needs to petition their city council member and the mayor to DECLARE THE GODDANG State Street RDA area! It has been on their desk for well over two years. And they act "surprised and offended" that the state took the Inland Port away. This is why we can't have nice things. Pure systemic rot, analysis paralysis, political gamesmanship and petty vendettas.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Marvland

YES IMMEDIATELY! This is why everybody needs to petition their city council member and the mayor to DECLARE THE GODDANG State Street RDA area! It has been on their desk for well over two years. And they act "surprised and offended" that the state took the Inland Port away. This is why we can't have nice things. Pure systemic rot, analysis paralysis, political gamesmanship and petty vendettas.

Agreed!

[delts145]

Along this subject, I wanted to repost Airhero's post from this past March. I definitely agree that it's past time to move on State Street upgrades. At the very least up to the Salt Lake City/ South Salt Lake borderline.

Originally Posted by delts145

Airhero, I wanted to bump your post from a few weeks back. What an incredible difference this type of landscaping could make on streets like State. Just that median put in a while ago on 700 East, around Libery Park has made such a big difference, not only on the streetscape itself, but the surrounding properties appearance, maintenance and resale value have been significantly improved.

Originally Posted by airhero

According to the last presentation on the Life on State project (which I believe was last April), State Street could soon look like this:


https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...+-+reduced.pdf

Imagine another Hardware Village type project rising on a street like this. Would be a huge deal and a complete transformation--though it is the most expensive of all the options presented.

Compare to what it currently looks like:

.

[i-215]

Implementation 4A seems very do-able, especially if intersection volumes can be accommodated by a 4-lane cross section instead of the current 6-lane one.

4B has a safety issue with the loss of the center turn lane or median. There is a 30% head-on crash reduction when a street goes from double-yellow to a two-way turn lane. And there is an additional 30% reduction in crashes when a raised median replaces a two-way turn lane.

(1.0) - [(1.3) X (1.3)] = 0.69

This means potentially 70% more head-on crashes, which I don't see as an acceptable goal, particularly when 4A appears to offer most of the same complete street benefits as 4B. I am a huge fan of the access management benefits of 4B.

My two cents.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

I’ve heard that engineering argument holds unless there are other measurements taken to calm traffic. That came from other road engineers. The basic argument I hear from the “other side” is the very measures that are taken to improve safety have the perverse affect of making roads more comfortable to drive fast which is obviously deadly, especially for non car transport. What are your thoughts?

[i-215]

SLC's new traffic engineer (forget his name) spoke to the ITE lunch a few months back. He talked about streets (for people) and roads (for cars). He says the 20th century is one where we build a bunch of "stroads" (street/roads that are bad for people and cars).

His idea is to push "stroads" into either a "street" or "road" category. For instance, 200 West got pushed to be a street with a road diet, buffered bike lanes, on street parking, etc. Whereas highways like State Street, 300 W, and 700 W are roads.

That's not to say we don't accommodate cars on a "street" nor accommodate people on a "road." It's just that they take a secondary role.

So my take...

State Street should feel reasonably comfortable for motorists. It incentivizes through traffic to use it as an arterial. If the road feels "equal" to 100 E or 200 E (speed limit, narrow, etc.) traffic volume will shift and we'll end up with three busy-ish stroads instead of one road and two streets. Likewise, 100 E, 200 E, etc. should feel kind of uncomfortable for through traffic.

That being said, State Street does a very poor job of even providing secondary-level facilities for cyclists and pedestrians. A reconfiguration of the cross section seems very appropriate. But when it's all done, don't expect it to look like Main Street or 200 West. But I would (personally) expect it to have a signalized midblock crosswalks, landscaped median, dedicated bike lanes, and buffered sidewalks. None of those are incompatible with a "road."

[asies1981]

More on The Fairmont. It is nice to see more brick clad buildings in Sugar House.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by i-215

SLC's new traffic engineer (forget his name) spoke to the ITE lunch a few months back. He talked about streets (for people) and roads (for cars). He says the 20th century is one where we build a bunch of "stroads" (street/roads that are bad for people and cars).

His idea is to push "stroads" into either a "street" or "road" category. For instance, 200 West got pushed to be a street with a road diet, buffered bike lanes, on street parking, etc. Whereas highways like State Street, 300 W, and 700 W are roads.

That's not to say we don't accommodate cars on a "street" nor accommodate people on a "road." It's just that they take a secondary role.

So my take...

State Street should feel reasonably comfortable for motorists. It incentivizes through traffic to use it as an arterial. If the road feels "equal" to 100 E or 200 E (speed limit, narrow, etc.) traffic volume will shift and we'll end up with three busy-ish stroads instead of one road and two streets. Likewise, 100 E, 200 E, etc. should feel kind of uncomfortable for through traffic.

That being said, State Street does a very poor job of even providing secondary-level facilities for cyclists and pedestrians. A reconfiguration of the cross section seems very appropriate. But when it's all done, don't expect it to look like Main Street or 200 West. But I would (personally) expect it to have a signalized midblock crosswalks, landscaped median, dedicated bike lanes, and buffered sidewalks. None of those are incompatible with a "road."

I don't expect State Street to look like Main Street, nor should it necessarily. But I do think that once you get past 600S, if not 900S, it needs serious overhauls. Downtown shouldn't have a literal highway running through the middle of it. North of this it should get larger overhauls, and south of this not as big of overhauls but still more pedestrian-friendly.. Once you get south of 2100 South then it can start feeling like a highway again, or at least past the freeway. But it would be nice to get more pedestrian-friendly overhauls even further south than that.

Also, side note: State Street IS 100 East.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by asies1981

More on The Fairmont. It is nice to see more brick clad buildings in Sugar House.

I love the design of the building, but is this yet another apartment complex in Sugarhouse without street-level retail?

[Comrade]

Just as long as they don't displace the prostitutes...

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

I love the design of the building, but is this yet another apartment complex in Sugarhouse without street-level retail?

It certainly looks like they will be including street-level retail. Did you notice all the glass on the street level?

[i-215]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Downtown shouldn't have a literal highway running through the middle of it. North of this it should get larger overhauls, and south of this not as big of overhauls but still more pedestrian-friendly.. Once you get south of 2100 South then it can start feeling like a highway again

Yes, and...



There's no reason why State Street cannot still be three lanes (south of 2100) and still not be a lot better than it currently is. State Street must remain an "arterial" route, but there is not a single mile of it in Salt Lake County that warrants the "rural highway" feel that parts of it currently have.

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Also, side note: State Street IS 100 East.

Oh really? I grew up here my entire life and have always treated State a zero.

Now I know. And knowing is half the battle.

[ThePusherMan]

Originally Posted by i-215

Oh really? I grew up here my entire life and have always treated State a zero.

Now I know. And knowing is half the battle.

Main is zero.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by Orlando

It certainly looks like they will be including street-level retail. Did you notice all the glass on the street level?

Well all the article did mention "mixed-use" but as far as I could tell it only mentioned office space, unless I'm mis-reading something.

Originally Posted by i-215

Oh really? I grew up here my entire life and have always treated State a zero.

Now I know. And knowing is half the battle.

You never realized that the street just to the east of State Street is 200 East?

[i-215]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

You never realized that the street just to the east of State Street is 200 East?

I grew up out in Magna/West Valley. Everything east of Redwood seemed "way over on the east side."