Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by ucsbgaucho

Amazing quote from the legislator they reached out to for comment on this:
“We have to balance that availability on one hand with managing social costs on the other.”

I'd love to see the data that proves changing the licensing rules from, say, 1 for every 10,000 residents to 1 for every 5,000, doubling the number of licenses, will have ANY significant impact whatsoever. Or is 10,000 just a total arbitrary number they made up (probably)?

The authoritative legislature strikes again. The biggest difference between our legislature and the Taliban is that one wears a suit.

[JAMESEY271975]

Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC

Lol, I don’t know why his number of posts is a relevant point of criticism. I agree that those who opposed the townhomes were behaving as NIMBY’s. I assume the original poster may have been part of the opposition considering his response. With that said, I think his point is fair, in a sense, with how drastically SH is changing. It is natural for current property owners to worry about what impacts it will have, especially when they see the look of the city change so fast. While densifying is and should be the natural course of urban town centers, I am sure for many the change is so fast it is hard to accept. Density can bring extra crime and of course traffic if not done right. With proper transit support and planning, though, SH will get even more desirable as the urban dynamic develops.

I find it comical that the guy thinks because I don't spend all day posting on forums his argument is somehow proven. Honestly, I am not against the development in Sugarhouse, I never have been. I love that it's becoming more cosmopolitan. I was 100% against putting a homeless shelter next to my house -- and l was called a NIMBY for opposing it. Funnily enough I don't recall anyone who was calling folks NIMBYs putting signs up in their front yard saying please feel free to camp on my lawn! What I was trying to get across is that the posters statement of "a few" developments is like saying Tom Brady has a few career touchdowns

[JAMESEY271975]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

What, you think I'm new to Salt Lake City and Sugarhouse? Big talk from someone with 4 posts, the other 3 of which were over 6 years ago.

Yes, I have seen the number of apartment developments in the last 5 years. I am, in fact, not blind. And yes, there were literally dozens of comments opposing the construction of FIVE townhomes. You better believe I am going to call those people NIMBYs. They care about nothing but preserving the exclusivity of their neighborhood, and the property value of their homes - which, ironically, has exploded as those thousands of apartment units that supposedly ruin neighborhoods have come in. They get rich by sitting on their laurels and getting mad at the changing city around them. They got what they wanted, and now they want to prevent others from getting the same opportunities they've had. I have little patience for them.

My post has nothing to do with that homeless shelter. I made no reference or inference to my opinion on it, but that's a nice straw man.

You missed the piece about me being all for development. If you're so aware of the thousands of new apartments, why did you bother calling folks NIMBYs for "a few new townhomes". You seem like you just want to totally ignore the massive expansion of Sugarhouse in the last 5 years with new apartments and make out like its resident are simply against adding 5 townhomes.

Do i get a medal from you for now having 6 posts?

[wrendog]

Here we go again.

Anyhoo, hope y'all have a safe a great holiday season!

[airhero]

A while ago there was news about an adjacent lot to the Mode Luxe development being gobbled up by the same developers. Here’s an article from KSL about City Creek Antiques closing due to development and some thoughts from the owner:

https://www.ksl.com/article/50318099...ore-shuts-down

There was also an article recently about Ken Sanders being forced to move again as a result of this same development. The Green Ant, Urban Vintage, and others are also closing down or relocating.

I thought this quote from City Creek Antiques owner was telling:

Although von Bothmer knows of no immediate plans to build something new, cranes loom on the horizon. She says she's seen businesses moving out or closing down, all to make way for growth.

"There's nothing to do," she said. "Tourists are coming and saying 'Where are all the local shops?'"

It is sad to see some of the unique local stores closing down or moving to make way for new things. Density is great but it’s unfortunate with all the parking lots around town that places like this are having to close down or, in some cases, move to the suburbs.

[Atlas]

I wonder when we will see Ivory's plans for that corner. So far, all we've seen is businesses being displaced and the deal with the state to add 4-5 floors to that monstrous liquor store parking garage for this project. I'm not getting good vibes from this.

I'm glad Ken Sanders found a new home at the Leonardo though.

[Blah_Amazing]

I really think the city needs to develop a set of rules and possible incentives for developers to set aside affordable retail for local and small businesses. This is honestly just as important for the city to focus on as affordable housing.

The number of business displacements in Salt Lake lately has been very concerning to me. I'm typically not too sad to see their buildings getting replaced for towers or greater density, but I think it should be done in a way that brings the businesses along into a better future rather than simply displacing them with little to no alternatives.

I suspect this is only going to get worse as the more easily developable land (except for all of the landbanked land, unfortunately) has already been gobbled up. This means tough choices are ahead and Salt Lake needs to start preparing for it now. All these new buildings getting built with ground floor retail should be setting aside retail spaces that are affordable and geared towards these soon to be displaced local and small businesses. That way, these important aspects of our communities can be better preserved while also allowing for all of our new development.

Activists should also be proactively working with and encouraging developers to do this as well, rather than attacking them. Too often communities and activists simply choose to try and kill development projects rather than engaging with the developers and seeing if they can find better solutions. Amicable communication between communities, activists, developers, the city, small businesses, etc. is going to be key if we want to see these situations improve going forward. These conversations should also be ongoing and conducted with developers early on, so they can better organize their plans to pencil out.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

I really think the city needs to develop a set of rules and possible incentives for developers to set aside affordable retail for local and small businesses. This is honestly just as important for the city to focus on as affordable housing.

The number of business displacements in Salt Lake lately has been very concerning to me. I'm typically not too sad to see their buildings getting replaced for towers or greater density, but I think it should be done in a way that brings the businesses along into a better future rather than simply displacing them with little to no alternatives.

I suspect this is only going to get worse as the more easily developable land (except for all of the landbanked land, unfortunately) has already been gobbled up. This means tough choices are ahead and Salt Lake needs to start preparing for it now. All these new buildings getting built with ground floor retail should be setting aside retail spaces that are affordable and geared towards these soon to be displaced local and small businesses. That way, these important aspects of our communities can be better preserved while also allowing for all of our new development.

Activists should also be proactively working with and encouraging developers to do this as well, rather than attacking them. Too often communities and activists simply choose to try and kill development projects rather than engaging with the developers and seeing if they can find better solutions. Amicable communication between communities, activists, developers, the city, small businesses, etc. is going to be key if we want to see these situations improve going forward. These conversations should also be ongoing and conducted with developers early on, so they can better organize their plans to pencil out.

This has been one of my biggest concerns and why I am sad at what SugarHouse has become since much of the new development has prices out a lot of traditional retail businesses that uniquely made up the area. Now, much of what you see in SugarHouse is exactly what you can get in other suburban areas of the valley.

[Blah_Amazing]

https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/Cit...howInspection=

Address: 968 W Quayle Ave

Developer: TAG SLC

Project Description (from developer):
968 W Quayle Ave is currently an empty lot zoned CG (General Commercial) that until recently was the site of a condemned house that had been abandoned since at least the early-2000s. We are proposing the development of 9 townhomes on the site. In order to develop these townhomes, we are requesting a planned development for relief from landscaping and driveway requirements on Pearl Street. Specifically, the townhomes will need driveway curb cuts directly on Pearl St for each unit meaning they will be less than 100 feet apart, we will also need relief from front yard vegetation requirements on these townhomes as with the driveways it will not be possible to have vegetation covering 1/3 of the front yards.

South Building Front Perspective


West Elevation


East Elevation


North & South Elevations


Site Plan


Unit A Floor Plan


Unit B Floor Plan

[Comrade]

I've been looking to possibly maybe sell my home and move into a condo because I'm a single guy and the upkeep of a house is a lot (tho, I still lean on not selling due to the area and the fact you just don't get much asset from a condo like you do a house) - anyway, the condo market in Salt Lake is terrible. Especially downtown. I get the market is terrible all over but there's actually some really nice houses out there that, if I wanted a new house, I could definitely go for. But when you're looking through the condo market, it's utterly depressing.

It's either too expensive for what I really am wanting (definitely a more modern approach, something in a high-rise if possible) or not a very attractive style. I was looking at some units in the American Towers and they're not very attractive.

And it's not like I'm looking on the low-end here. I am willing to push into the $700,000 range potentially and there just isn't a lot of attractive options. Hopefully the next few condo towers change that but I was looking at Phoenix and Las Vegas, maybe even potentially relocating there, and it's night and day compared to the SLC market. So many nice, modern units that are perfect for a single guy like myself.

But tbh, something like this doesn't do it for me:





It's kind of ugly.

That's the American Towers condo going for $610,000.

[ThePusherMan]

I agree 100%. I was just looking for a condo for my in-laws and was truly shocked by the condo market. Price, stock, and quality are all pretty disappointing. Not to mention the HOA fees are ridiculous at places like American Towers.

[allh]

Yep condo market is old and garbage here. Was looking for some a year ago. Very little availability and the ones that were on sale were too old for my liking

[Comrade]

It's really depressing when you look at what condos are available in Vegas and Phoenix. They're on a completely different level than what we're seeing in Salt Lake City. My fingers are crossed with these new developments here because if I can buy into one unit, I think I might.

[Atlas]

SLC just doesn't have nearly enough condos for the level of demand that exists and, unfortunately, we have basically no condos in the pipeline right now. The only project that comes to mind is the Coachmen one which was recently sent back to the drawing board by the planning commission. There have been some interesting comments about the lack of condo developments over on the subreddit. Here's one:

Originally Posted by u/greeperfi

The problem is that condos are just a far inferior deal for developers than apartments right now. I developed some condos (not built yet) and have soft offers from hedge funds to buy the building outright on completion for more than I could gross (ie, revenue not counting 8% marketing) selling them as condos. (I have a bank appraisal that backs up the price too). Also, builders charge more to build condos - if they will even do it - and developers have years of liability with condos. Also, the finish quality is WAY WAY cheaper for apartments. Finally, you can sell an apartment building in one transaction, which de-risks the project a ton. This is why you see lots and lots of proposed condo projects that never come onto the market, because developers can't turn down the apartment model and the massive selling price per unit that hedge funds and REITs are willing to pay. I'm not going to get specific but it is mind blowing. So unless the commission gets a written agreement that these stay as for sale condos, don't count on it.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Atlas

SLC just doesn't have nearly enough condos for the level of demand that exists and, unfortunately, we have basically no condos in the pipeline right now. The only project that comes to mind is the Coachmen one which was recently sent back to the drawing board by the planning commission. There have been some interesting comments about the lack of condo developments over on the subreddit. Here's one:

It's a huge issue for sure. I'm amazed that there aren't one or two spec condo towers under construction. Hell. there aren't any low rise condos under construction and very very few townies for sale. It's all rental stuff. Our stock is so under-built that existing garbage condos are being over valued and the older ones have a huge amount of maintenance backlog so the HOA fees are just silly.

Developers will tell you it's because HOAs are a massive liability, but that's not stopping them elsewhere. Once again our local developers lack vision. Still huge holes in our market.

[jedikermit]

*also* in the market for a condo, *also* single dude, *also* not finding anything.

[mstar]

I was downtown yesterday and drove past a few upcoming projects in the West 200 S area. The lot where the Alta Depot is going has been cleared and there is now equipment onsite. The Cinq project on the adjoining lot to the south is moving along as they have started digging. Finally, the Zephyr lot has been cleared and fenced off. These three projects will change this area pretty dramatically when completed. Let's hope we see the Greek Town and next phase of the West Quarter projects also start soon.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Atlas

SLC just doesn't have nearly enough condos for the level of demand that exists and, unfortunately, we have basically no condos in the pipeline right now. The only project that comes to mind is the Coachmen one which was recently sent back to the drawing board by the planning commission. There have been some interesting comments about the lack of condo developments over on the subreddit. Here's one:

That helps. I just assumed a lot of these new developments were condos - not apartments. This is really unfortunate.

No way in hell would I ever sell my house to move into an apartment, unless it was temporary. This is really dispiriting and I can absolutely see this impacting population growth in the future.

[zurich]

Originally Posted by Comrade

That helps. I just assumed a lot of these new developments were condos - not apartments. This is really unfortunate.

No way in hell would I ever sell my house to move into an apartment, unless it was temporary. This is really dispiriting and I can absolutely see this impacting population growth in the future.

I follow this forum quite often as I have investments in SLC and Austin. I never thought I would see such amazing, 800-1000ft condo / office towers in downtown Austin as what's been constructed over the last decade. The biggest difference between Austin and SLC I see, is that there are massive corporations in downtown Austin -- Facebook, Oracle, Google, etc. Also the river and the hike and bike trails are all downtown. However, SLC has the mountains, the gorgeous Capital building on the hill, the Tabernacle - so there are a lot of draws to downtown SLC. The University and the airport are all so close - so I'm also very confused as to why there are no condos. Is there a stigma that SLC is still just a college town? Why doesn't the city council require condos as part of a redevelopment plan? I love a lot of the new buildings coming online - like Astra - but a majority of the 4 story, stucco apartments are what Austin is bulldozing. I'm shocked that no one on the city council says something like... "I'm not going to be the one that approves the 180th- 4-5 story, tan/brown apartments!" I think we still need more employers to move downtown and we need big time investors from other states.

[Rileybo]

Who’s ever thought of salt lake as a college town?