Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[bob rulz]

I generally agree with Comrade's points while understand i-215's concerns to an extent. But I do think Comrade is absolutely right in saying that we finally have someone willing to make a big investment in downtown on a scale that we rarely see. I also disagree with i-215 saying "if that area were viable for development the free market would've filled it". History shows that sometimes places need a jump start. Am I happy about having to put taxpayer dollars towards this? Not really. But I also recognize that without it, it's just not happening, and if it doesn't happen, the consequences will be worse (loss of pro sports teams to the suburbs).

I also want to echo the point that the SEG plans are still VERY preliminary! Things can and will change. It's not as if what was just revealed was set in stone. They're at the "putting colored squares into Adobe" part of the project (aside from the Delta Center renovations). Things will change.

As for the IHC Hospital...yeah, that's bad. Over a year of waiting and the best we can get are glorified Sketch Up renderings of a suburban hospital campus? I'm willing to wait longer to get a better project. Good on the council for pushing back on it.

[i-215]

Community note: This library of text below is a good-faith effort to engage with Comrade's comments to better understand his viewpoints and knowledge, and better articulate my own position. It starts fiesty but grows more into a discussion that I find quite educational. Thanks for your patience as you scroll past.

Originally Posted by Comrade

I'm not trying to be flippant or rude but I don't care. You have no skin in the game. You don't live here anymore.

Salt Lake City is an important city to the entire region of the western USA. Everyone living this side of the Rocky Mountains has some skin in the game. We spend money in your city. We fly in and out of your airport. We are the "tourists" who will pay this new tax (which I still honestly think will be paid by YOU).

It's not you that has to deal with the future of Salt Lake City losing both the Jazz and this new NHL team, on top of already losing the Bees, to the suburbs. And if the Salt Lake area were to land a MLB team?

It's a real concern. I feel for you there. I do know that SLC can stand on its own feet if that did happen. The town is more than the Jazz. But I think there are many of us in the suburbs, and forgive me, out of state who would agree that the Jazz wouldn't be the Jazz without being at the Delta Center and downtown.

But it's not a promise that you'll be able to capture all the new teams that come to town. That's not unique to Salt Lake City. And I hate to see the city race to embrace bad 1970s planning simply out of fear of something — which may happen anyway.

What incentive now does the LHM Group have in entering discussions with the city on the ballpark after they basically told Ryan Smith to get lost? That is cutting off your nose to spite your face. But hey, maybe losing the MLB to Draper or wherever wouldn't be that big of a deal either, right?

Due to my early, loud vocal queasiness to the deal at large, you may now misunderstand my position on the project. Thanks to chatting this over with you and others, I've largely grown warm to the idea of this going forward. But I hate to see a regionally-important city just hand over the keys to the kingdom and get screwed by the developer.

Perhaps the city is being tough as nails behind closed doors, but in public it looks like the city is sort of shrugging and just letting SEG do whatever they want. And a lot of what SEG is initially proposing is bad.

SLC can stand up for itself and make good-faith deals with SEG to get the project done. Big cities do this all the time, and it feels like a growing pains moment for SLC. We don't want this to end up as another Triad Center mess. We don't need another Crossroads Mall (minus roof). And I don't think it has to.

It's not an all-or-nothing proposition.

As a resident of Salt Lake, someone who pays property taxes

And congratulations on being able to afford to buy in the city back when it was still possible.

and pretty much does most my shopping within Salt Lake, I have that skin in the game.

You do. You have a lot of direct skin in the game. And that makes your opinion carry a lot of weight.

SLC is not a provincial, isolated mountain town. Half of the economic activity in your city comes from people who live outside the city or — (heaven forbid) out of state. That's why we're having this entire SEG discussion in the first place, right? The goal of an entertainment district is to capture that money from people who principally live outside of the city limits.

SLC residents could not support the Jazz on their own. And that makes the rest of us have voice in the discussion too, even if it is secondary "skin in the game" so to speak. Skin is skin.

My priority as a Salt Laker is to my city first. And I've seen Salt Lake where the downtown is NOT a destination. That's how it was for a good portion of my childhood. You only went downtown for two things: a concert or the Jazz (maybe ZCMI or Crossroads if we weren't feeling Cottonwood) and the kicker here is that your dismissiveness and willingness to just let Ryan Smith go build south will take two of those options off the table entirely. You have just eliminated one of the biggest traffic drivers to downtown by letting Smith go build a new state of the art arena down south.

As I mentioned, I don't want to see the Jazz leave downtown.

Don't you also feel that butchering the downtown with a botched entertainment district that doesn't adhere to good urban design principles — would that not also wreck downtown as a destination?

As we've discussed at length, there are right and wrong ways to build pedestrian malls. And my worst fears materialized yesterday when SEG came out with a design that looks right out of Los Angeles from the 1970s. Ugly tunnels. Private property gating. Dead exterior sidewalks.

Your goals and my goals are not far removed from one another. I'm just throwing up a warning flag to say, "Hey, if they build this in its current form, it's going to harm downtown."

The good news is that if SLC's urban planning team could hire a consulting firm to work with SEG, I'm pretty sure Ryan Smith is the type of guy who would adapt his plans to something more acceptable to good planning principles. My complaint is that the city isn't doing that. They are letting a tech guy design something he has no experience designing. And it's bad.

It can be good. But that won't happen without residents like you making it clear SEG needs to do better.

If you would have actually listened to the citizen comments last night,

Fair criticism.

you would have seen a significant amount of business owners downtown supporting this development. They, even more than me, have skin in the game. Now ask yourself why they would be supportive of it if they felt their livelihood wasn't tied to the success and vibrancy of downtown?

Because we all get excited about the new thing, as we focus on the potential benefit and overlook the unintended consequences.

We loved The Gateway. We didn't know it would kill the two downtown malls.

They loved the ZCMI Center. They didn't know it would kill Main Street.

Cities across the country got excited as they modernized all the blight and replaced it with surface parking. They didn't know they just killed their downtowns.

Thankfully, experts in urban design have learned a lot since then. And they have published libraries full of dos and donts and this project is currently loaded with donts. That doesn't mean we kill the project. It just means we need to ask SEG to do better. (We're going in circles here, man.)

Cool. Then when you live in Salt Lake City, you can be so dismissive of this project.

Sigh. Next.

It's not tribalism, it's truth. It's easy for you to dismiss the idea because you're not the one who has to face the consequences of a dead downtown. Even if you move back to Salt Lake County and decide live in West Jordan, the impact isn't going to be the same.

We've seen Salt Lake County flourish despite Salt Lake's downtown being a ghost town. We saw it all through the 70s, 80s and even 90s. It wasn't until the Olympics, and the investment we saw from that, as well as the LDS Church, that Salt Lake started turning into a destination for the valley again.

So, let's not ruin it with a bad design. Let's push Ryan to make it a good design.

But that's not guaranteed. Especially when Salt Lake continues to battle a very suburban mindset. The whole Wasatch Front is suburban-oriented. Downtown Salt Lake City is still not nearly as vibrant as other regional centers because of how unique our culture is here.

But don't feel too down on your city, either. SLC is wise to aggressively court lots of mid-rise residential developments. I'd love to see more of them be condos, so people can put down roots as a viable ownership alternative to the suburbs. The population is growing.

I think cities make the mistake of courting office workers or sports attendees. But you can have a DEAD downtown with just those. Houston comes to mind.

What makes great cities great are people who live there all the time. And SLC is doing wonderful and trying to grow its population. Keep that up and downtown will be unstoppable with or without the Jazz (hopefully with).

The drivers for downtown, though, are cultural, commercial and entertainment. The commercial will never change. But that's pretty much what downtown was for a long period of its history: a commercial hub of 9-5 and then it was a ghost town. Sure you' had the Jazz out there on an island west of Main Street. But that was really it.

That we agree. I'd just rather see a design that also engages South Temple, 100 South, and has no tunnels. Those revitalize the area, rather than just being a tiny Disneyland for SEG.

You open The Point as being the entertainment destination of the Wasatch Front and downtown will lose what has ushered in its revitalization these last 20 years.

And that will then start impacting people development. Who wants to live in a dead downtown? Especially when they can go live out in Draper and commute to The Point for all their entertainment options?

Entertainment is a result of residential, not a cause. A ton of people just moved out to Eagle Mountain, since it was a place they could afford, with ZERO commercial. And it's still growing because... it's a place they can afford.

SLC can become an urban place for people to afford (see my comment above about needing more condos). The entertainment will blossom under the population because the people are there, not the other way around. (I suppose it's a bit of chicken-and-egg, but people can survive a few years without entertainment, but entertainment can't survive a few weeks without entertainment).

Like I said, then don't be surprised if in ten years, when the Utah Symphony starts discussing the needs for renovating Abravanel Hall, and now renovation is more expensive because a decade has gone by and the building is even in worse shape, the county just decides to build the new hall out where all the entertainment options are flocking.

Fair point. I wasn't aware of the needs of Abravenel. From my perspective it looked like a perfectly good symphony hall was on the chopping block for no good reason.

It's easy to think I'm being hyperbolic. But we've seen first-hand Salt Lake lose out already on the Bees. We've seen Salt Lake lose out on RSL. We've seen Salt Lake lose out on the aquarium. We almost saw Salt Lake lose out on the Broadway theater. It was almost a lock in Sandy before their leadership sunk it.

I think we're both being a tad hyperbolic (perhaps me a bit moreso) but for different reasons. You fear for SLC's future because of the loss of sports teams. I fear for a SLC that gets burdened with crushing legacy costs and gets little in return (tech vaporware).

But The Point ain't Sandy. It's got state investment. If Ryan Smith decides to build out there, it'll shift the whole paradigm of entertainment along the Wasatch Front.

The best thing for SLC would be... (and hear me out)... it turns into a low-rise wasteland of forgettable suburban offices and suburban apartment complexes. Then you have nothing to fear.

The worst thing would be for cities across the Wasatch Front to embrace urban design principles in their cores (Midvale, Magna, Murray, Pleasant Grove, etc.) and start siphoning off people who want to live or play in an urban environment. Right now SLC has a monopoly on that.

But if The Point is successful and becoming a *new* downtown, the SLC is in trouble — with or without the Jazz.

Why do you think the city is so invested in this development? Don't you think they might have an idea of what the prospects of Salt Lake losing the Jazz and this NHL team, along with all the other events that come with the Delta Center means for downtown? Don't you think they realize their limitations and the fact that, for 50 years, that area of downtown has been entirely disconnected from the heart of the city?

There was a councilperson on a podcast a few weeks ago, and I can't remember who it was, who said Salt Lake flat-out sucks at visionary development. And it's true. How many times since you have been on this forum has Salt Lake released its downtown plan that showcases these grand boulevards and urban developments? This was from 2014.

I've actually never seen this. Or if you posted it, I've forgotten. Thanks for sharing.

What's funny is that I think we're kind of saying the same thing: SLC could do great things from a planning perspective, and they aren't doing it. And we're frustrated.

The main difference is that I am skeptical that Ryan Smith is going to deliver something that (in the big picture) is really an asset to the city unless the city compels it out of him. And I think they can. But they aren't right now.

I want you to go look at the HUB portion of this PDF.

Will do.

Okay, yeah, well, they certainly don't have a Festival Street on 300 South.

How much progress has Salt Lake made at transforming the Rio Grande area? It's been ten years - even longer really - and how many proposals have come and gone about redeveloping that area into something significant? There's even a page on Block 85 that remains vacant.

I guess that's what upsets me, partially. We're tearing down an ugly (but functional... but ugly) block while Block 85 sits there as a parking lot. I suppose if SL County announces they are buying Block 85 for a new "more urban" convention center, I'll get more excited about demolition of the convention center.

But it just seems so unhelpful to demolish part of the city when there is vacant land across the street. Isn't that kind of one step forward, one step back?

[QUOUTE]I don't know why anyone would expect Salt Lake to be able to do even half of what is being proposed without SEG. And I say that confidently because they haven't already.[/QUOTE]

Fair point. I just wish SEG knew what the hell they were doing. If it was AEG and they had a few projects under their belt, I'd feel more confident.

The Gateway has always been in a period transition ever since it was built. But I promise you, Gateway would be the first impacted if the Jazz and this NHL team left downtown because they do a significant amount of business during game days (and it'll now double with the NHL team - as there will be 82 home games between the Jazz and the NHL).

No doubt. Honestly, if Ryan's goal is to make money, I'd just buy The Gateway and push all the customers to the mall he owns.

That would be bad for downtown cohesiveness, as you mention. But it would be his easiest way to make money. Props to him for having more ambition.

Never mentioned City Creek outside saying that the LDS Church invested in downtown with its creation. Didn't mention Main Street. That's not the area we're discussing. We're talking about western downtown.

Criticism withdrawn.

Again, I think you're confused. The area we're talking about is on the western side of downtown.

I spelled it out pretty clearly. We're talking about this specific area of downtown. It is not working. The western part of downtown is embarrassing. And the kicker is that we're not even talking the status quo here. That was my bad. We're talking worse than the status quo because the perspective you're coming from ends with the Jazz and this NHL team leaving western downtown. But in your weird logic, that will somehow be better overall. Do you think The Ritchie Group would be excited about losing the Delta Center next to their West Quarter development? We already know The Ritchie Group is on board with this development. Would they really support it if they didn't feel it helped that entire region of downtown?

No, no, no... let me make myself clear. SLC will suffer if the Jazz leave. Full stop! That we absolutely agree.

My concern is that if Ryan Smith butchers the central western blocks between the stadium and downtown, it may be worse than doing nothing at all because all the capacity for TIF will have been burned up on a bad development.

A good development would be a win-win. But he's nowhere close to that. Yet.

So? Your answer is to let Salt Lake lose the Jazz and the NHL and the biggest indoor concert venue (that's actually used for big shows) in the state? And you think downtown won't be negatively impacted by that, especially conceding that it's impossible to invest in multi-project development that have an overall massive impact on the region? We can continue building four-to-five story residential cookie-cutter apartments but that's not going to keep Salt Lake thriving.

Let's try to accomplish two things:

1. Don't lose the Jazz (for reasons you mention above)

2. Don't let Ryan Smith build *anything* he wants, particularly if it's bad

I think there's a way to do both. It's not binary. (If it is, then SLC is screwed either way. So, let's hope not).

Then you lose the Jazz and the NHL and the concert venues and then possibly the MLB and maybe even the symphony because Salt Lake is becoming less and less a destination as everything shifts out south - and guess what? All that investment and vibrancy that you've spent 20 year building ... it all dries up. Because people don't see the need to come downtown anymore.

It's not a destination now. The Point is. That's where everything starts to go.

And downtown Salt Lake starts to resemble Los Angeles where it has commercial buildings and a couple cultural centers but it's mostly just 9-5 again. The difference, of course, is that LA has LA Live and is a much larger downtown core. But we've been here before. Our grandparents saw Salt Lake City go from THE destination to an afterthought. It can happen again.

That's where I'm going to gently push back.

Which makes for a better urban experience? LA Live or downtown Portland? Having lived near the latter for a while, I basically never went into the central city for sports. Few people I knew did. But we went in all the time for everything else. Mostly because people lived there, so there were always people.

LA Live is great. But a block away, it's just surface parking.

For that reason, I find the 400 South renaissance FAR more important to the city's future than the Smith Entertainment block. And watching the North Temple corridor go through a similar renaissance is reassuring. A few more of those and you'll have vibrancy that won't go away, because it involves people living there.

The only way downtown (or the west side) falls into residential vacancy would be if the SLC metro saw sustainable population decline, which thankfully seems unlikely.

Especially in the new world of work from home, where there isn't as big of a need for a 30 story office tower. You can turn those into housing, but as we've seen, Salt Lake isn't known for massive amounts of residential high-rises anymore.

But those midrises, man. Those are the heart and soul of the city's growth now. Throw in strict ground-level engagement, and you might just end up with some organic "entertainment districts" that happen out of organic residential spending patterns and not because some developer built a Disneyland.

Not saying we can't do both. But don't dismiss the prior. It's pretty cool.

We already have seen the Silicone Slopes shift south. We know that the fastest growing cities are in Northern Utah County (including Lehi where, gosh, Ryan Smith is from). How does Salt Lake compete with that if you're not willing to take opportunities like this? You can't. We know they can't because they haven't been able to.

I've said multiple times in the past that Salt Lake can't just rely on the LDS Church for its major development. That's not sustainable. And here we have SEG ready to kick start a revitalization of an area of downtown that has largely been ignored, and you think, as a non-resident, it's perfectly fine to just shrug and say, "never mind" knowing the potential consequences that can have on downtown Salt Lake.

I just disagree with that mentality.

To reiterate one more time: I don't agree with the mindset you say I believe in.

But don't be so desperate for SEG that you'll take anything. Expect SEG to actually make downtown better following good design principles. (I think this is like the fourth time I've reiterated this).

The downtown malls opened because Main Street was already dying. It was an effort to keep up with the suburbs as downtown was hemorrhaging that type of traffic.

But did it save downtown? Because it kind of looked like it killed downtown.

With the addition of Crossroads, it actually kinda slowed the decline of downtown and Main Street. I mentioned already that the only reasons to go downtown in the 90s was to either attend a show at the Delta Center or hang out at the malls.

That's interesting. Being later to the game (90s), it was clear that Main Street was dead.

You're proving my point. If Salt Lake refuses to adapt, that vibrancy dies. The malls didn't kill Main Street. Losing everything to the suburbs, and the mega malls out south, did.

But turning downtown into a suburb was the wrong answer.

It's sort of like how when you go into Best Buy now, you find they have nothing on the shelves you want, but the clerk eagerly tells you to "order it on BestBuy.com." So you walk out to your car, pull out your phone, and order it from Amazon. (That's what Crossroads Plaza was. Retreating from your strengths and racing into the battlefield your enemy is winning at.)

The solution to keeping the Jazz downtown is not to make downtown more "Jazz" (they can do that anywhere). It's to bring *more downtown* to the Jazz.

SEG's development in its current form can be built anywhere. Herriman. Lehi. Bluffdale.

Building it to integrate better with the existing downtown (like Portland or Brooklyn or wherever) is not something you can replicate outside of SLC. The city should be coaxing SEG to push in that direction. If they do, it'll be a win-win for the city and the Jazz.

The city, along with the LDS Church, opened the mall to combat that shift. Did it work? That's debatable but what would Salt Lake have gained without the malls? Is your argument that Main Street would have been far more vibrant without the construction of the malls?

Well, when you put it like that I'm not as sure. There had to have been a better way of implementing it. But if you put a mic in my face and ask me for specifics of how, it would be difficult for me to list specifics — especially with the 1970s understanding of urban design.

But the good news is that we DO know better now. And we MUST build better.

Here's Main Street in 1974, a year before ZCMI opened and six years before Crossroads. It doesn't look very vibrant to me:

Fair point.

Yes, over time the downtown malls needed to be reenvisioned. But what vibrancy does City Creek actually create for all of Main Street? Wasn't the biggest issue with City Creek that it still took people off Main Street and moved 'em into the middle of each block ... just like the malls did?

I still oppose the skybridge. But they do a pretty good job making the sidewalks along the streets outside of the mall have engagement.

But that was mostly due to pushback from SLC. I just want to see similar pushback for SEG, but I'm afraid the city won't do it because they are scared of losing the Jazz. (There was never such a threat from the LDS Church).

As I said initially, it's never going to be perfect. But City Creek is still better than what existed there before. It's the same with Gateway. Gateway has reinvented itself too. It needed to to survive. That's how downtowns work.

Agreed.

But what you're putting out there is doing nothing

To again clarify: I am not saying "do nothing." I am saying that there are a great many things SEG can and will do that will, in the not to distant future, hurt the area more than leaving it alone.

Let's not squander this opportunity to push SEG into doing something good. No tunnels. Road diets. Engagement of the sidewalks on all sides. Maintaining public easements on public streets. (And a freaking plan on what's going to happen to the convention center, which could be make into multi-story venue and integrated into the plan).

SEG is not AEG. They are rookies. And they played rookie ball yesterday. Those renderings are Microsoft Paint. If we want SEG to succeed, it's going to take a lot of pushing them up the hill. And we public money at stake, it's all of our responsibility to push. (Yes, even out-of-town money like mine).

and I'm sorry, that isn't reinventing anything. In fact, it's now directly impacting the city because doing nothing will result in the city losing the Jazz, this NHL team and a major driver into downtown. And that impacts ALL of downtown. Not just the western part. All those businesses, including the new bars at Gateway, count on that traffic.

I'm curious, how many bars and restaurants can the arena theoretically support?

Would not the SEG development lead to significant vacancies at The Gateway? (Again, not saying we don't do it, but that could be a BIG unintended consequence).

Salt Lake continues to grow and adapt and every new development has forced other developments to adjust to survive - and they've done it. I see no reason to believe that won't happen here, especially with a new residential high-rise, hotel and the fact we'd be keeping the Jazz + adding 41 more home games to help with traffic. That will only help bolster downtown and continue to make it a destination to travel and live.

And the only reason we have the Gateway is because the federal government subsidized the clean up of that area through their Brownfield project. It wasn't going to happen on its own. And the only reason we have City Creek is because the LDS Church built it. It wasn't going to happen on its own. Yes, the LDS Church funded the project but it shows how impactful it was to downtown.

And so has been the Gateway. Even if it's not the best of what we had always envisioned, it's still infinitely better than what existed on that land before it was built and more impressively my friend, this development will help bridge the gap between Main and the Gateway by opening up a western part of downtown that has been completely divided from the rest of the city since really the original Salt Palace was built in the 1960s.



But that was over 50 years ago and the same issues that impacted that area of downtown then, still impact it now. This is our opportunity to rectify that problem and finally unite the two downtown areas.

But don't you feel that there's an opportunity cost if SEG screws up those blocks?

There's always "more room" (so to speak) the farther out of the city center you go. But if SEG build something really bad on those blocks, it'll sit there as a "wall" for decades.

Sure it may be slightly better than the convention center. But would it not be better to get something great from SEG?

There is no loss of easement. SEG already told the city last night that the plaza will be open to the public at all times.

And they would NOT own the easement, right?

Because I remember the LDS church saying the same thing and then doing a takesy-backsies and now it's very much private property. And NuSkin was supposed to offer 24/7 access across their lobby, but when I tried to cross it on a late night walk, the security guard yelled at me.

It's good to hear stakeholders are concerned about this, too.

But even if that was the case, which it's not, how big of an impact would that have anyway?

If you want a vibrant downtown, a lot!

The main difference between the suburbs and a downtown are the size of the blocks. SLC has been working hard to break up the blocks to be smaller, not bigger. If SEG were forced to, even the corridor through the entertainment district could become a public easement and help break up that block, too. But in its current form, it's nowhere close to that.

Because I drive down 300 West around the Delta Center and outside Jazz games, the area is dead.

The area around Downtown Disney is dead, too. Inside the mall is hoppin'. But the sidewalk on Disneyland Drive is dead. The only way 300 W gets better is if those sidewalks activate.

They disagree with you and so do I. I think the first draft is pretty exciting.

And that's the rub: it's Salt Lake asking Ryan Smith for his help. Not the other way around. Smith was content relocating the Jazz and this NHL team out south and I'm sure he'd be content saying, "I'm not interested with these demands". But if you watched the SEG presentation, you would see that they were mindful of what the council was asking - and they've already aggressively supported the need to keep Abravanel Hall if the county determines they want it part of the project.

What I think? I think you're gonna find every reason to hate this project. We're already seeing it. You spent a lot of energy drawing a redline on Abravanel Hall and now it appears that's likely to remain part of the project and you're redrawing a new line over something you don't like. You just don't want this to go through and I guess that's fine but again, you're not the one who has to potentially face the consequences of a downtown that takes a significant hit if Smith just ups and bolts for the suburbs.

I have infinitely more confidence in Ryan Smith than you do, I guess. But I'm not going to create scenarios in my head just to support some theory.

And I think that's the main takeaway. If all goes right, SEG could be the savior you've been waiting for to fix the western core.

In turn, I see Ryan Smith and SEG as rookies screwing up their first big project. And I find the first draft horrifying, because I know how much better it can be. How much better (in 2024) it needs to be.

Rocky had eight years to commit to some level of development in that area of downtown. I have defended Rocky on a lot of things but his aggression here is misplaced and his tenure as mayor is an example of why on multiple fronts. 1) again, he didn't do a damn thing about helping with vibrancy in that area outside killing the western mall that was originally planned out by the airport (good on him for that) and 2) he watched as downtown lost RSL and the stadium to the suburbs. I don't blame Rocky at all but he tried to work the RDA system to get funding for the stadium then so it's kind of funny he's up in arms over it now.

But that just proves my point. Salt Lake lost out on the stadium nearly 20 years ago. The land Rocky was willing to subsidize all the way back then was a vacant parking lot right on Main Street. A perfect location for the stadium. And we're still waiting for the full potential of that site. We're starting to get some development down that way but it's still not vibrant. It's still detached from downtown. Better than it was, but who knows how it would have developed over the last 20 years if RSL built its stadium there?

You're not just showing a bit of concern. You're outright being negative to this project and acting like it shouldn't happen.

On the contrary, I'm showing great concern, but not in the way you want me to.

It's been educational. Thank you for your thought out comments. I learned quite a bit, even if we still continue to not see eye-to-eye.

[RC14]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

I also disagree with i-215 saying "if that area were viable for development the free market would've filled it". History shows that sometimes places need a jump start.

I don't think the problem is inherent to the location. I think the problem is that the public investment has been allocated in a way that discourages development. The convention center is a wall and the west side of that wall is very unappealing (being mostly loading docks.) Also, you have the 200 W tunnel which, along with the loading docks, make that area uninviting to both pedestrians and auto traffic.

A major redesign of those convention blocks is what is needed at this point. I don't like the current SEG proposal but, as others have pointed out, I'm sure it will go through many revisions before dirt is moved.

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by taboubak

I mean counterpoint? We just got a new tallest and have had 5 towers finished in the past 3 or 4 years. We have alot of momentum that we can keep going. All those projects were mostly just killed by high interest rates, and I bet most developers still have plans to revive them once the market turns favorable again.

I agree that interest rates have slowed things down and that we have got a few nice buildings built recently. I’m happy for the new development and what it’s bringing to downtown. My larger point is usually these proposals don’t get any better beyond the initial pie in the sky proposals. Look at West Quarter. The initial rendering painted a different picture than what is being built. Here’s to hoping though that the SEG and Intermountain improve upon their initial proposals. The SEG I’m not upset about. I like the initial rendering that we’re seeing, and will be interested to see if the fidelity is bought. I’m more skeptical that those tall towers will be built. In the end keeping the Jazz and NHL team downtown with a revitalized Delta center will be great for SLC, so no complaints there. As for Intermountain it was promising that some council members were vocally against the initial proposal, so I’ll hold out hope that history doesn’t repeat itself and they improve upon what they proposed

[RC14]

Originally Posted by TheGeographer

I’m more skeptical that those tall towers will be built.

I actually think the towers are quite likely. I figure that Smith will need allot of residential to make this pencil out. Retail and office seem too volatile right now.

It is intriguing that they are proposing 600ft for the new height limit as that is, obviously, taller then anything currently in the city and this isn't even D1. Maybe it doesn't mean anything? I'm not expecting anything that tall. ...but, hopefully it's foreshadowing.

[Comrade]

Instead of rehashing the same points over and doing walls of text talking in circles, I'll end on this:

What is going to be lost? That area has been a relative dead zone for 50 years. At this point, it's pure fantasy to believe that in the next 50, someone will come along and do something better than has been presented here. Nothing has stopped that area from developing organically. It's just not happening.

But we do know what will absolutely be lost with 100% certainty if Ryan Smith decides to leave for the south-end of the valley. Salt Lake will lose the Jazz. That's not up for debate. We know for a fact Ryan Smith's intentions are to keep the Jazz and the NHL hockey team in the same arena. He will go build a new, multi-purpose arena down south and Salt Lake will lose a team that has been the staple of downtown for nearly 50 years.

That's on top of already losing the Bees.

I don't know how anyone could look at this and think downtown would both be better off with the dead zone that has existed around 300 West to West Temple for a half-century and without the Jazz/NHL bringing in a million-plus people each year.

As I've maintained from the start: it isn't perfect. There's not going to be a perfect plan. I even outlined where City Creek wasn't perfect. But it was preferred. This is absolutely a slam dunk proposal that invests in downtown, opens up the western edge and maybe most importantly, continues the commitment of the Jazz (and now the NHL team) in Salt Lake City. Clearly the city feel they have more to lose letting Ryan Smith walk or they wouldn't have perused this deal.

Remember, as I wrap this up and we can move on to other discussions, this wasn't Ryan Smith holding the city hostage over the threat of leaving. He was all set to leave. Just like Larry Miller was in the 1980s when he initially planned to build the Delta Center out in Sandy. The city came to Smith, though. They are the ones who initiated this deal. Not Smith. I trust there is a reason for that. And I think they know that downtown Salt Lake is far more vibrant with the Delta Center than without it. And this partnership does two things: it opens up that area of downtown and commits the Jazz (and NHL) to the area.

That to me is better than the alternative.

[Comrade]

Sounds like the planning commission sent a negative recommendation to the council on the proposed height change.They seem to think there shouldn't be skyscrapers as part of the development

Fortunately, the planning commission is only a recommendation and I seriously doubt the council will torpedo the request.

https://archive.is/V3MJu

[RC14]

That's annoying. The article makes it sound like their primary argument is that we're moving to fast. Which I can sympathize with, but raising the height limits seems like a no brainer to me. 175feet is far too low for that area.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by RC14

That's annoying. The article makes it sound like their primary argument is that we're moving to fast. Which I can sympathize with, but raising the height limits seems like a no brainer to me. 175feet is far too low for that area.

The thing is, they were only voting on recommending the zoning change, not the actual project. The zoning change is probably the most reasonable part of the project that can be accelerated lmao

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by RC14

I actually think the towers are quite likely. I figure that Smith will need allot of residential to make this pencil out. Retail and office seem too volatile right now.

It is intriguing that they are proposing 600ft for the new height limit as that is, obviously, taller then anything currently in the city and this isn't even D1. Maybe it doesn't mean anything? I'm not expecting anything that tall. ...but, hopefully it's foreshadowing.

I like your optimism and hope you are right. The 600 ft height limit does suggest they want to enter the 500ft skyscraper height range. We could very well have our first skyscraper as long as the planning commission doesn’t get in the way. I think it’s been said before, but why are there height limits in the downtown core. Seems silly at this juncture. Height limits make sense outside of the downtown core but not within it. Unnecessary red tape that wastes tax payers dollars and progress with more unnecessary meetings

[Atlas]

The PC forwarded a negative recommendation to the Council because they think it's all happening too quickly and there's no plan they can judge this request against except the downtown master plans that exist. So I guess that makes sense.

I expect the Council to pass the upzoning (in addition to the sales tax increase) regardless.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Atlas

The PC forwarded a negative recommendation to the Council because they think it's all happening too quickly and there's no plan they can judge this request against except the downtown master plans that exist. So I guess that makes sense.

I expect the Council to pass the upzoning (in addition to the sales tax increase) regardless.

We need to eliminate the planning commission. They're a useless bureaucratic entity filled with non-elected individuals that often lack the overall capacity to understand actual city planning (not all mind you but many).

[Sight-Seer]

In the Land Of The Message, you'll be hit over the head with messages. It's consistent that Salt Lake leaders again send an anti-skyscraper / anti-development message. Is Salt Lake burdened with a small-town mentality that won't go away? Keeping the town small has benefits if that's the future you want. It might be a pipe dream given Salt Lake's prominent geographical position in the mountain west. You can't keep it from growing, especially since people keep coming here. I'm wondering if the city's rules governing height and position of buildings is accomplishing anything. Looking at a photo of the city, I don't see any over-all shape. If that is what they want to accomplish, it isn't working It looks pretty random. It seems like the only thing the planning commission and others are accomplishing is sending a message that Salt Lake doesn't want development. Often businesses are like people and they want to be wooed and feel like they are wanted. They go where they are wanted. I thought SEGs plans looked cool and I can hardly believe that the city doesn't want it. It's nuts. Maybe if you let a grand vision take shape, you'll end up with something grand that will last, unlike the feeble attempts we usually get. Maybe the public should get more involved in city planning so that a few people don't always get their way.

[mattreedah]

Originally Posted by Comrade

We need to eliminate the planning commission. They're a useless bureaucratic entity filled with non-elected individuals that often lack the overall capacity to understand actual city planning (not all mind you but many).

Last night one of the planning commissioners literally said SEG should take this development to Sandy. He was frustrated that there wasn’t a study done on the possible gentrification of the marmalade district. Honestly. The planning commission is awful and has been for quite some time.

[airhero]

Originally Posted by mattreedah

Last night one of the planning commissioners literally said SEG should take this development to Sandy. He was frustrated that there wasn’t a study done on the possible gentrification of the marmalade district. Honestly. The planning commission is awful and has been for quite some time.

This development will be in downtown. We should encourage the highest possible level of economic development there. I'd understand his viewpoint more if this were in another neighborhood.

In any case, I think the gentrification-avoidance ship has sailed for Marmalade/Capitol Hill. The affordable pockets are disappearing fast.

[Atlas]

Hey Orlando, if you get a chance could we get a skyline massing with the towers in the SEG draft plan? The taller one is probably 500-600 ft.

Nice shot of downtown from the southwest, above Liberty Park. The new hospital would be just in front of the former RL Hotel.


Source

[mstar]

I am shocked by the comments of some of the planning commission. It sounded to me like - "We believe all large scale downtown development is bad", or "We don't want progress". It is beyond me how incompetent and non-sensical people on a planning commission are. Truly sad. Hopefully, things move forward regardless.

[Sight-Seer]

What bothers me is you have an arena taking up a whole block and a (new?) Salt Palace taking up a few flocks. It will all be about the same height. That's blocks and blocks of flat area with nothing to interest the eye. To balance out all those flat blocks you'd need a lot of height. Otherwise it will be visually boring. It's been boring for decades. Do we really want more of that for more decades?

[Rileybo]

What a comfy gig. If these people were elected they’d campaign with slogans like “No, we can’t” and “Please don’t make us do anything provocative or remotely productive” and “Fuck you and your city; I got mine”.

Anyway.. That photo from Liberty Park is cool, though I’m sad to see the University Club Tower defaced.

[Blah_Amazing]

My question is: why is there even a D-4 Zone?

All the Downtown Zones should just be consolidated into a single Central Business District Zone (D-1).

The downtown zones are already surrounded by other commercial or multifamily zones that act as mid-density buffers between the downtown zones and the lower density residential anyway.



Having a single D-Zone (made from D-1 code) replacing the areas covered by D-1, D-2, D-3, and D-4 would make things way simpler.

Salt Lake planning department officials last night claimed they want to consolidate and simplify the zoning code. Here is an excellent way to do that!



Going even further than this though, in the future we could combine the CG and GMU Zones all the way to I-15 to further simplify and expand the 'Greater CBD/Downtown Zone.'