Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3 - Page 19

SLC Projects · #**361** Posted: **Jul 2, 2012, 10:01 PM**

I think that there's enough office demand that calls for BOTH UPAC Tower and Tower 8 at about the same time. We are seeing more and more empty office buildings filling up ( old Deseret New Building and old Trib. Building ) as well as 222 S. Main that is mostly leased and 6 Gateway that isn't even finish but is already 100% leased out. So even at 25 stories and 21 stories both towers could fill up quickly. Bring them both on.

Future Mayor · #**362** Posted: **Jul 2, 2012, 10:07 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makid

If I remember correctly, isn't Tower 8 behind the UPAC Tower?

I think I remember that there was an agreement between Hamilton Partners and CCR that stated CCR won't built Tower 8 until the UPAC Tower is constructed and 50% or 60% leased.

The agreement was to help encourage other developers to build within SLC and not have only CCR pushing development.

The article that I think this came from is a few years old so my memory might be off on this.

If it is correct, we should see a change to the design of Tower 8 as the market will have some influence in it.

Yes hopefully UPAC will be 60% leased when it opens, and Tower 8 will have to be built taller, that is what I would like to see happen. Seeing how fast 222 and Gateway have filled up, I wouldn't be surprised if this actually happened. They are going to need about 40% leased before breaking ground anyway, so another 20% seems reasonable.

Viperlord · #**363** Posted: **Jul 3, 2012, 1:16 AM**

dont forget the entirely empty former questar building.... thats 200k sq ft thats hitting the market here in the next couple of months....

http://www.loopnet.com/xNet/Looplink...CB0003&LL=true

http://www.loopnet.com/Attachments/C...BFC7A6A3C6.pdf

and as UTplanner mentioned.... gardner/boyer may be looking at building an office building on the emty parking lot across the street East from the former questar HQ building.

Reachforthesky · #**364** Posted: **Jul 3, 2012, 9:36 AM**

Here's an interesting story that yahoo did highlighting Goldman Sachs decision to move some offices from NYC to SLC.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/financ...134806883.html

Merewether · #**365** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 1:30 AM**

Financial jobs moving to Salt Lake

similarly from Sunday New York Times

Financial Giants Are Moving Jobs Off Wall Street
By NELSON D. SCHWARTZ
Published: July 1, 2012
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/bu...e&ref=business

Merewether · #**366** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 1:38 AM**

[QUOTE=
and as UTplanner mentioned.... gardner/boyer may be looking at building an office building on the emty parking lot across the street East from the former questar HQ building.[/QUOTE]

This location seems to me a nice place to put an apartment building instead Very convenient to many downtown facilities and yet feeling greener -- parking strip and trees-- and a presumably permanently protected view north over St. Mark's Cathedral.

scottharding · #**367** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 7:09 PM**

Hotel and Resort bookings are up this summer.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/5...dging.html.csp

SLC Projects · #**368** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 7:39 PM**

Nevermind.

acw007 · #**369** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 7:56 PM**

That’s not a rendering. That is an existing building in Seattle. All the photos on that website appear to be just stock images. Sorry.

Viperlord · #**370** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 7:59 PM**

Thats the 9th & Stewart Life Sciences Building in Seattle.

SLC Projects · #**371** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 9:46 PM**

Well that's misleading. Why does it say "Salt Lake City Building" above it?

stayinginformed · #**372** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 10:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Well that's misleading. Why does it say "Salt Lake City Building" above it?

It is an internet URL squatter. They link the page all over the web so that when someone types in Salt Lake Construction in Google, that page shows up on the front page. They are trying to sell the site to a Salt Lake construction company--as you can see from the top right of the page. Thus they just have stock photography on the site, and none of those are actually in Salt Lake City.

ajiuO · #**373** Posted: **Jul 4, 2012, 11:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

A mysterious rendering.

I came across a rendering late last night while looking up some images on google. This rendering shows what looks to be a 9 or 10 story office building that is only listed as "Salt Lake City Building". Could this be the 10 story boyer company office building plan for 100 S. and 200 E. ? I can't say that it is, nor can I say that it isn't. Just don't know.

ANYWAYS. Here is the link to the image.

http://constructionsaltlakecity.com/projects/

Edit: Nevermind. Just a stupid misleading website.

I'm kind of glad that is not really a salt lake building. The front most corner of that building reminds me of the old public safety building on 200 south and 300 east... I hope for the thing to be imploded when the new one opens.

Yeah yeah I know... It represents it's time.... That doesn't mean it isn't a tacky eye sore.

Comrade Reynolds · #**374** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 7:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I'm kind of glad that is not really a salt lake building. The front most corner of that building reminds me of the old public safety building on 200 south and 300 east... I hope for the thing to be imploded when the new one opens.

Yeah yeah I know... It represents it's time.... That doesn't mean it isn't a tacky eye sore.

Really, all I read was 'blah, blah, blah'.

We're so quick to want to demolish structures because they don't fit our tastes and we often replace them with something far less inspiring - if anything at all.

Stenar · #**375** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 7:53 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I'm kind of glad that is not really a salt lake building. The front most corner of that building reminds me of the old public safety building on 200 south and 300 east... I hope for the thing to be imploded when the new one opens.

Yeah yeah I know... It represents it's time.... That doesn't mean it isn't a tacky eye sore.

I LOVE the old Public Safety Bldg.

Comrade Reynolds · #**376** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 9:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

I LOVE the old Public Safety Bldg.

Me too. I mentioned it last week. I hope they keep it and convert it into something.

delts145 · #**377** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 1:06 PM**

The Old Public Safety Building has tremendous potential. It wouldn't take a lot of creative energy(with the outer appearance) to both keep it's historic integrity, and at the same time give it a polished sheen that is the ultimate in chic architectural fashion. I can't imagine them wanting to just tear it down, unless there is something terribly wrong with it structurally.

I concur, I love that building. It literally screams potential to me. I'm a big fan of the Ken Garff renewal, but I think the Public Safety Building is an even easier sell.

Future Mayor · #**378** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 3:36 PM**

I used to hate both the Ken Garff and the Public Safety Building, but that was many years ago, they have both really grown on me. I see HUGE potential for the PSB once the new one is complete. I would love to see it turned into residential, it could be a very chic remodel with plenty of sidewalk room for a restaurant or two on the ground level. Plus there is plenty of space on the property surrounding it for other mixed use development.

ajiuO · #**379** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 5:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I used to hate both the Ken Garff and the Public Safety Building, but that was many years ago, they have both really grown on me. I see HUGE potential for the PSB once the new one is complete. I would love to see it turned into residential, it could be a very chic remodel with plenty of sidewalk room for a restaurant or two on the ground level. Plus there is plenty of space on the property surrounding it for other mixed use development.

I wouldnt count on it.. I rember seing a news story on tv about how the building is literly falling apart and how it would be uneconmicle to save it for use as the public safty building... Somtimes a building that looks like a cheep peice of crap really is one :/

Aside from stripping the building inside and out.. It probably wont stay.. At least in any recognizable form.

Its not just that building such as that one and the ken garff building look bad.. They look bad because they were cheaply constructed. The metal siding wasnt only used because it was the style of the time... It was cheep and quick.. The cladding was often times not the only corner that was cut in theese building.

I doubt eaither building will exist in a recognizable form 20 years from now.. They just were not made to last.. Sure thry could be stripped down and and fixed.. But they wont be the same building when all said and done...

Future Mayor · #**380** Posted: **Jul 5, 2012, 5:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I doubt eaither building will exist in a recognizable form 20 years from now.. They just were not made to last.. Sure thry could be stripped down and and fixed.. But they wont be the same building when all said and done...

The Ken Garff Building just went through an entire restoration a few years ago. They completely updated the interior and cleaned the exterior and and fixed things that needed to be fixed. They wouldn't have done a complete restoration if they needed to do it again in 10 years.

Yes the PSB has issues, however a large portion of what the major cost would have been was the remodel of the interior, leaking pipes, bad layout etc. They building could possibly be shored up to earth quake standards if the proposed development pencils out right. It didn't for a remodeled PSB, but that doesn't mean it won't for every possible use.