Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Makid]

Most of the Tech Companies aren't building the buildings in Lehi and Draper. Outside of Adobe, Micron, Word Perfect, Ebay, Ancestry and the future Pluralsight complex, most of the tech companies just lease space in the buildings from developers.

This has been the bigger issue at play in that land is cheap in the suburbs. Why build up in the City, when you can build out in the 'burbs. Getting the funding for a 400,000 sq ft tower requires pre-leasing in the City but in the 'burbs, with the cheaper costs, it generally doesn't require anything other than previous history from the developer.

This is 1 big area where City size comes into play. SLC finally is over 200K for population which will finally put it into the bracket that many companies use for rankings. We know that the area is far larger than most metrics account for. Most see the City either as the 2010 Census 190K or the MSA of 1.1M for Population. The whole Wasatch Front is interconnected in ways that the numbers and commuting patterns cannot see. That is why the CSA of 2.5M is closer to the real number for the area.

Unfortunately, it is a number that won't ever be presented to companies looking at relocation or expansion because it is a third tier number and not a first (City) or second (Metro) tier number.

The best thing that we can do is hope that SLC can continue to work to encourage density and keep growing like it has this past decade. That will help spur additional growth both Residential and Commercial.

As for Tech Companies, there are multiple tech companies within SLC already, they may not be large yet but many are growing fairly quickly and they are looking for space. The ones that are growing quickly do want to stay within the City and are doing what they can to refurbish existing buildings. Many of the older buildings on Main, West Temple, 2nd West,2nd South, 3rd South and State have been refurbished by Tech Companies. The Sweet building (just south of the AC Hotel) is 90% to 95% occupied by Tech companies. The same with the old Hardware building on 4th West, Judge Building on 3rd and Main and multiple others.

The down side is that they are running out of room but need to expand. Most do let most employees work from home but many enjoy the opportunity to work downtown. The reason that the tech companies don't build their own building is the cost. They don't have the money when they only need between 40,000 to 100,000 sq ft to grow before they maybe need to expand again.

Tower 8 should help with space. Hopefully it will be between 650,000 and 750,000 sq ft of available space when complete. Patrinely will be 325,000 in Phase 1 and hopefully more in Phase 2. Between these 2 projects, this should help the tech companies expand in SLC further.

I do look at the tariffs on steel as the best things that could have happened for downtown development as it makes it more cost effective. By this I mean, why would someone pay a suburban rent of $30 sq ft when they can pay $32 sq ft for downtown and have something nearby other than a parking lot when looking to move their company from say Sandy as they expand. The ROI actually becomes cheaper due to transit options and SLC can offer business credits that other cities can't.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Utah_Dave

Post the emails to the tech CEOs if you find them. It would be great to ENCOURAGE them to move downtown and also encourage them to engage the city and GOED about how they can assist

There are ongoing meetings and the next few months will be big. Hopefully we get more info soon.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Makid

This is 1 big area where City size comes into play. SLC finally is over 200K for population which will finally put it into the bracket that many companies use for rankings. We know that the area is far larger than most metrics account for. Most see the City either as the 2010 Census 190K or the MSA of 1.1M for Population. The whole Wasatch Front is interconnected in ways that the numbers and commuting patterns cannot see. That is why the CSA of 2.5M is closer to the real number for the area.

Unfortunately, it is a number that won't ever be presented to companies looking at relocation or expansion because it is a third tier number and not a first (City) or second (Metro) tier number.

Great post, Makid. I've been arguing for years that the single best thing GOVED can do is push for reclassification for our CSA as a metro. Because it's a metro.

[Orlando]

Just a few other big reasons why a lot of tech companies are building out in Draper/ Lehi:

1) To cluster with all of the other tech companies there.
2) The demographic of these tech employees are probably more suburban and larger family like, ie. Mormon with 3 or more kids.
3) Land is cheap, and tech employees can commute from Eagle Mountain to Lehi in less than 30 minutes, and live in a larger single family home.

If there were incentives, like higher taxes for roads, etc. & higher energy, sewage, and water bills for living further out from existing infrastructure, perhaps we would see less sprawl and leapfrog development like Eagle Mountain and Saratoga Springs.. This makes sense to me, and I think this this is why cities in countries who control more of the land, control the amount of sprawl. The higher cost of infrastructure to those who live further out, should be incentive enough to infrastructure providers like local governments and private energy, water, & sewer providers, to ask them to pay more.

Lehi maybe 15 minutes away if you go 80mph on I-15 at 10pm at night, but it's more like 45 to 60 minutes from downtown SLC in rush hour.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Marvland

There are ongoing meetings and the next few months will be big. Hopefully we get more info soon.

What is it?

[Utah_Dave]

^^^^^

no offense to people that live in Eagle Mountain but it’s a bizarre little town. I don’t think that would be a draw for tech employees unless you mean the neighborhood between eagle mountain and Saratoga springs on the little ridge there. Eagle mountain feels like a bizarre little planned community by the LDS Church. Not joking.

Again, no offense, but if you have been there you know what I mean.

I do get your point though Orlando. I think the cheap land in the Saratoga springs area is a factor for tech employees starting out.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Orlando

What is it?

Tech companies are in Lehi for a number of reasons stated here, including cheap dirt (that's going away fast), easy access to college grads (fills lower level position but not upper), and also because a bunch of founders just happened to live there and around there. They have hit a recruiting wall where they cannot convince high level talent to move to Lehi or AF. They speak openly about it and there are a number of prime, juicy campus locations in SLC and the low hanging fruit (adjacency, cheap labor, high talent, cheap dirt) is disappearing fast. Their talent all dines and plays downtown anyway, hence downtown's record retail sales.

A number of tech firms are preleasing hundreds of the new units downtown, which is one of the reasons SLC has a zero effective vacancy. 2.7% vacancy is a technical vacancy. People moving in, moving out etc. The new JF building on 700 S. 300 W. was fully leased up six months before ribbon cutting with 150 people on the wait list. So when I hear that "there's nothing happening in SLC" it makes me laugh and wonder if people aren't actually walking around at all.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Marvland

3) Denver's tech scene, even the "downtown one" cannot be compared to SLC and its metro. This year will see possibly five $1 billion IPOs in SL metro.

SLC companies might capture 10-15% of the IPO value for 2018? Fascinating.

Yeah, Denver's tech scene seems to be more regional office than headquarters- which is pretty much a hit on all of the Denver economy with it's distinct lack of companies headquartered in the area.

There must be something to that underwear.

[asies1981]

The city is holding two open houses this week on expanding and redesigning the Station Center project area.

[asies1981]

Originally Posted by grasscom

Who’s building more urban infill, Salt Lake or Boise? Because I have a hard time believing one is far and above the other in urban development

Salt Lake is producing more infill than most major cities right now. While we don't have any towers under construction right now we have infill projects all over the city which are a key to increasing our density.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Makid

This is 1 big area where City size comes into play. SLC finally is over 200K for population which will finally put it into the bracket that many companies use for rankings. We know that the area is far larger than most metrics account for. Most see the City either as the 2010 Census 190K or the MSA of 1.1M for Population. The whole Wasatch Front is interconnected in ways that the numbers and commuting patterns cannot see. That is why the CSA of 2.5M is closer to the real number for the area.

Unfortunately, it is a number that won't ever be presented to companies looking at relocation or expansion because it is a third tier number and not a first (City) or second (Metro) tier number.

Perception is among the reasons I think SLC needs to merge with neighboring cities. SLC,SSL, and WVC would have a population of 360k.

That city would have some srs pull as well as economy of scale advantages.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

Perception is among the reasons I think SLC needs to merge with neighboring cities. SLC,SSL, and WVC would have a population of 360k.

That city would have some srs pull as well as economy of scale advantages.

I agree Liberty. The cities along the Front like to compete with each other for revenue. Which has also help create sprawl.

The whole thing is untenable, if the area is to add another 3-4 million people.

[bob rulz]

Salt Lake City is doing just fine on its own. No need to merge with other cities. The only one that I would maybe be okay with is South Salt Lake, because at least SSL shares a similar philosophy and politics, and wouldn't add so much land and population that it would alter the fundamental chemistry of the city.

[SLCLvr]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Salt Lake City is doing just fine on its own. No need to merge with other cities. The only one that I would maybe be okay with is South Salt Lake, because at least SSL shares a similar philosophy and politics, and wouldn't add so much land and population that it would alter the fundamental chemistry of the city.

While not a fan of the legislature mandating things, I wouldn't be opposed to them mandating six cities that cover the entirety of Salt Lake County. I would think the following might be a good division:

SLC/SSL/Millcreek: 286K
WVC/Kearns/Magna: 194K
West Jordan/Taylorsville: 174K
Sandy/Draper: 142K
Murray/CH/Midvale/Holladay: 147K
Riverton/Herriman/South Jordan/Bluffdale: 167K

East side cities would include the canyons, west side cities would pretty much straight line to the Tooele border. You wouldn't necessarily need current county services like Unified Fire and Police, township services, maintaining county roads, etc. since the six cities would be big enough to perform all those services themselves and the county could focus on health and human services, recreation, jails, property recording and taxes, the DA's office, elections, and other county-wide concerns.

I'm sure the opposition in SL County would be tremendous but perhaps Rep. Gibson (R-Mapleton) would be willing to submit a bill since he seems to enjoy trying to govern Salt Lake County from the Legislature.

Current cities map: http://recorder.slco.org/SLCR/cache/...8100730210.pdf

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by SLCLvr

While not a fan of the legislature mandating things, I wouldn't be opposed to them mandating six cities that cover the entirety of Salt Lake County. I would think the following might be a good division:

SLC/SSL/Millcreek: 286K
WVC/Kearns/Magna: 194K
West Jordan/Taylorsville: 174K
Sandy/Draper: 142K
Murray/CH/Midvale/Holladay: 147K
Riverton/Herriman/South Jordan/Bluffdale: 167K

East side cities would include the canyons, west side cities would pretty much straight line to the Tooele border. You wouldn't necessarily need current county services like Unified Fire and Police, township services, maintaining county roads, etc. since the six cities would be big enough to perform all those services themselves and the county could focus on health and human services, recreation, jails, property recording and taxes, the DA's office, elections, and other county-wide concerns.

I'm sure the opposition in SL County would be tremendous but perhaps Rep. Gibson (R-Mapleton) would be willing to submit a bill since he seems to enjoy trying to govern Salt Lake County from the Legislature.

Current cities map: http://recorder.slco.org/SLCR/cache/...8100730210.pdf

I like this idea. While the initial logic of having many cities so they never got too big and could/would be more responsive to their constituents made a lot of sense when SL County was smaller, it is now more of a negative. You have one contiguous county and the policies of one have deep impacts on the others. I would like to see all cities use Unified Police and Fire and coordinate their zoning and transit plans.

[Makid]

I had some time today and was looking for possible future developments and ran across a link and was able to data mine and found this link:

https://www.berkadia.com/wp-content/...rterly_Map.pdf

From what I can tell, the data that they have is fairly accurate. They don't have data on every project and the prospective projects aren't finalized so the numbers are still in flux. You can use the above link and go back to look at some changes over time. One that is fun to look at is Q3 for 2017. It is linked below. It is fun to look at as the Under Construction section is all, Salt Lake City.

https://www.berkadia.com/wp-content/...rterly_Map.pdf

Remember that they don't have every project listed, so the numbers may not be fully accurate.

I did take the current Q2 2018 numbers for SLC and it looks like there are currently 680 units recently completed (Lease-Up stage), 1845 units under construction, 2506 units planned, and another 2085 prospective units afterwards. That is potentially another 4600 units in the pipeline currently with most of them near the downtown area.

I did notice that it doesn't list the Block 67 residential projects, so that puts it closer to 5000 units known that could be completed or under construction in the next 5 years, if all of the projects were to get off the ground.

If the vacancy rate holds and levels stay steady for bedrooms we could be looking at adding another 15,000 to 20,000 people to SLC possibly by 2026 and nearly 1/2 would be in and directly adjacent to downtown.

[nushiof]

Originally Posted by Makid

I had some time today and was looking for possible future developments and ran across a link and was able to data mine and found this link:

https://www.berkadia.com/wp-content/...rterly_Map.pdf

From what I can tell, the data that they have is fairly accurate. They don't have data on every project and the prospective projects aren't finalized so the numbers are still in flux. You can use the above link and go back to look at some changes over time. One that is fun to look at is Q3 for 2017. It is linked below. It is fun to look at as the Under Construction section is all, Salt Lake City.

https://www.berkadia.com/wp-content/...rterly_Map.pdf

Remember that they don't have every project listed, so the numbers may not be fully accurate.

I did take the current Q2 2018 numbers for SLC and it looks like there are currently 680 units recently completed (Lease-Up stage), 1845 units under construction, 2506 units planned, and another 2085 prospective units afterwards. That is potentially another 4600 units in the pipeline currently with most of them near the downtown area.

I did notice that it doesn't list the Block 67 residential projects, so that puts it closer to 5000 units known that could be completed or under construction in the next 5 years, if all of the projects were to get off the ground.

If the vacancy rate holds and levels stay steady for bedrooms we could be looking at adding another 15,000 to 20,000 people to SLC possibly by 2026 and nearly 1/2 would be in and directly adjacent to downtown.

No Liberty Sky either. Has anyone heard more on Liberty Sky? I haven't seen anything since the first press release in February.

[Makid]

It is listed on the pdf. It is just referred to 100S and State rather than Liberty Sky. To my knowledge it is still progressing and it should be hopefully heading towards the planning commission soon to get the CBDR approval for Mid-Block height zoning height waiver and then building permit shortly thereafter.

They were finalizing the engineering prior to the tariffs in late May but may be looking at some alterations or possible height adjustments (possible increase?) to ensure that everything still comes out right for them.

Last I heard, their plan is for ground breaking towards the end of the year but this was in early May.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Salt Lake City is doing just fine on its own. No need to merge with other cities. The only one that I would maybe be okay with is South Salt Lake, because at least SSL shares a similar philosophy and politics, and wouldn't add so much land and population that it would alter the fundamental chemistry of the city.

I think WVC makes the most sense for a number of reasons; it shares the largest border with SLC, it has a large public service deptartments (opportunity to eliminate redundancies), large population that will lend the Mayor and city Council more muscle, lots of taxable land, shared transit needs, etc etc.

I do think SSL should be part of SLC but that would likely benefit SSL more than SLC. WVC and SLC would be a more mutually beneficial merger.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

I think WVC makes the most sense for a number of reasons; it shares the largest border with SLC, it has a large public service deptartments (opportunity to eliminate redundancies), large population that will lend the Mayor and city Council more muscle, lots of taxable land, shared transit needs, etc etc.

I do think SSL should be part of SLC but that would likely benefit SSL more than SLC. WVC and SLC would be a more mutually beneficial merger.

I agree that it would also benefit WVC in that the current WVC Government style is no longer supported under the Utah Government Codes. The City Manager style of Government isn't supported any longer at least within SL County if not along the Wasatch Front.

The Cities that have them currently can keep them but if they decide to change, they cannot keep the current style and must choose either a Strong Council or a Strong Mayor.

Merging with SLC would actually save WVC some money and once complete would put SLC at close to 330K if not slightly more.

This would put the southern edge of SLC just past 6300 South and 5600 West. It would give them more State Facilities but, it would also give them more open space as well as more zoning control in additional areas.

The best part though is that with the additional areas, the recent Sales tax increase would pass to additional areas. This would allow the City to work with UTA to fix the 35M (finally) and get it right. They would also be able to get 15 minute bus service to more areas to further help reduce vehicle travel and increase bus ridership and transit culture.

If, SLC were to make it work with WVC, I could see other cities and townships possibly seeking to also merge.

Lastly, the biggest benefit of the merge would be removing WVC from the MSA name. Calling it the Salt Lake City / West Valley City Metro is stupid and if it wasn't pushed by WVC I would be surprised.

As a side note: The WVC City Manager has been pushing back against transit and UTA buying any ROW and land for the 5600 BRT and space for both TOD and Park and Rides as well as the Fed Required Trax upgrade. He also has been fighting any new transit lines west of 2700 West until after the WVC downtown project is built out. The Build Out time frame is something like 2040 or so currently I think.