HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3181  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 4:20 PM
sock puppet's Avatar
sock puppet sock puppet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SLC
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajiuO View Post
Another development has officially went tits up.

A couple years ago a developer purchased all of the houses on bishop place... the street right behind the old op skags building. They moved everyone out and boarded up all of the houses. They planned on tearing them all down to build town homes or somthing. It’s really sad because the houses have now been sitting abandon for two year. At least they were occupied before.

The property is officially up for sale now. So that’s apparently not happening and we are left with a whole street of abandoned houses.
Completely insane. This falls on the city for rejecting the developers request for demolition of those dilapidated buildings. Some of those buildings are see-through from having so many boards missing.
Transients rejoice!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3182  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 5:36 PM
ajiuO's Avatar
ajiuO ajiuO is offline
A.K.A. Vigo
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by sock puppet View Post
Completely insane. This falls on the city for rejecting the developers request for demolition of those dilapidated buildings. Some of those buildings are see-through from having so many boards missing.
Transients rejoice!
Actually it says on the listing that they are approved for demolition.
__________________
On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sat on a
throne of blood! What was will be! What is will be no more! Now is the season of evil!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3183  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 6:13 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,421
The developer just has to either build the development or place something non-parking on the property if they can't build the development after demolition. It sounds like the developer lost funding.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3184  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 7:02 PM
scottharding scottharding is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,532
Makid (or anyone else who might be informed on this topic)

Honest and sincere question here: What is the deal with the difficulty and incredibly long process for getting things build here in Salt Lake, especially downtown, and especially the things with the city's involvement, like the RDA? I know our construction crews are stretched a bit thin because of the airport rebuild, but with demand sky-high, and a relatively healthy economy, why do projects stall for literally nearly a decade?

I'm thinking in particular of the hole on State Street that was the La Porte debacle, the Violin School commons (for Safety building), the project to replace Salt Lake Roasting Co on 4th South, and of course, the Convention Center Hotel. As well as what seems like a maddeningly long process for projects like the Paper Box, Ritchie Group, Boyer Tower, etc.

Is it city regulations? Are we forcing developers through too many reviews, too many conditions, too many hoops? Is financing really that difficult even with demand so high? I'm genuinely perplexed at why Salt Lake seems to struggle so much to build anything of a certain scope, and other major cities are throwing up huge projects on every other block. I mean, take away anything the LDS church has built, and we've had what? Two significant completions in twenty years?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3185  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 8:01 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,798
Scott,
I think the issue is more about the developers and their ability to actually build what they propose. Also, I think it's about a lot of the tech companies building offices far away from downtown. If we could get one or two of those larger tech companies to build in or near(ie. Fleet Block) downtown, we could potentially see the Amazon affect with more highrise condos and apartments built near them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3186  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 8:04 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Makid View Post
The developer just has to either build the development or place something non-parking on the property if they can't build the development after demolition. It sounds like the developer lost funding.
I think the City has been suckered into this scenario too many times, ie. Sugarhole, The Void Center, Regent Hotel, etc. Though, I'm glad that the Regent site demoe'd that derelict suburban eatery.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3187  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 8:45 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottharding View Post
Makid (or anyone else who might be informed on this topic)

Honest and sincere question here: What is the deal with the difficulty and incredibly long process for getting things build here in Salt Lake, especially downtown, and especially the things with the city's involvement, like the RDA? I know our construction crews are stretched a bit thin because of the airport rebuild, but with demand sky-high, and a relatively healthy economy, why do projects stall for literally nearly a decade?

I'm thinking in particular of the hole on State Street that was the La Porte debacle, the Violin School commons (for Safety building), the project to replace Salt Lake Roasting Co on 4th South, and of course, the Convention Center Hotel. As well as what seems like a maddeningly long process for projects like the Paper Box, Ritchie Group, Boyer Tower, etc.

Is it city regulations? Are we forcing developers through too many reviews, too many conditions, too many hoops? Is financing really that difficult even with demand so high? I'm genuinely perplexed at why Salt Lake seems to struggle so much to build anything of a certain scope, and other major cities are throwing up huge projects on every other block. I mean, take away anything the LDS church has built, and we've had what? Two significant completions in twenty years?
I am outside of the process, I just have some inside information about some projects and do try to stay on top of projects when I have some time.

From what I have seen, a lot of it is the hoops that there are to jump through. A lot of these have been removed, which is good but there are many others still in the way.

The other is the landscape. With the CCH, it revolves more with land ownership and zoning. It has gone through 2 different RFP processes. The first one with Omni went very well until towards the end. It looked like everything was going well and things would end up in our favor but then things turned sour. Omni wanted all incentives upfront rather than post as the agreement stated. They wanted additional special incentives and more... (can't provide more details, secrets and such).

With DDRM, It took a while as there were more respondents to vet and make a final selection. DDRM did initially select the North location (VSL office and UMOCA) for the CCH. They did some initial negotiations but after the City capped the Height at 375' for the D4 area, they started to talk to Vasilios Priskos about joining forces and building the CCH on the APS site. Those negotiations ran into issues when 1 of the building occupants wouldn't sell and then Vasilios Priskos died. I don't think the family was able to continue the negotiations. DDRM does appear to be back to the County with the CCH based on the drilling that happened at the NW corner of West Temple and 2nd South in the plaza for soil testing before the Independence Day holiday. There were still cones/markings of the drill tests there in case further tests are needed.

We do have to remember though that for some projects, they do take a long time to come together. CCC was first announced in what 2003/2004? It didn't break ground until 2007 and didn't open until 2012. With 151, Boyer, while they are a larger company, they do need to have a set amount of space pre-leased. They had it sitting awaiting leases while 111 was on the drawing board. Hamilton ended up selling to CCR after the foundation was built for 111 because only the lobby would have been built due to the lack of pre-leasing. CCR has deep pockets and can afford to spec build and get the pre-leasing done during construction.

This is why 151 ended up going from Commercial to Liberty Sky and a joint project with Boyer and Cowboy Partners. It is also why Tower 8 should be under construction later this year/early 2019 as a spec build. Without a large relocation or a tenant ready, a large commercial tower is nearly impossible to build in SLC without a deep pocket developer or a bank that knows the market. The tower will end up nearly 90% or more leased at open because of the market but it will sit forever on the table and never be built if they are waiting for pre-leases because of the suburban markets. Funding for them is always available because of the market.

Want funding for an 800,000 sq ft building in the suburbs? You could probably get 3 to 5 banks that will get that for you today without pre-leases. Want that for downtown SLC? You would need 50% pre-lease before a bank would touch it. That is one of the issues.

For others, Block 67 and the CCH, they involve multiple partners/owners. In these instances, they involve SL County. So they are announced as projects in SLC. They have to go through County Processes and clearances, agreements negotiations. Once those are done, then they go through the City.

With Block 67, the County is a partner and is helping the Developer with the process so the issues are less complicated than the CCH so the process is faster in many regards. The Block 67 issues are that it is is a Master Plan project so that means that it has to be taken as a whole rather than as a partial project. If it was a partial project, Phase 1 could be under construction while Phase 2 was going through the process currently. But to get the whole project considered for what it needs to be to meet minimums for profitability at all levels and phases, it needs to be master planned. This helps it to get higher heights in the middle of blocks without needing to go through the process of getting conditional use permits for their buildings when the next phase is ready to go.

As we are seeing with housing right now, if you have the funding, once you have the permits, you can build right away. Permitting is down to only a few weeks to a month depending on the area. Some areas are longer depending on the zoning.

RDA areas are a little longer. The Pubic Safety Building/Piano School should be starting soon. The public roasting company/Barnes Bank, they have submitted their requests for conditional use permits to exceed zoning heights, once granted, they should be able to submit final plans to then get their permits for construction. They are the developers behind Project Open on 5th West and have more phases and more plans for projects downtown.

255 South should have RFP's back this month. Paperbox should start the permits later this month early next.

Yes, construction workers have been stretched thin but as phases shift at the airport, work is picking backup downtown and projects should be picking up in the next couple of months as well.

While not as informative as someone closer to the projects could get, hopefully this answers some of the questions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3188  
Old Posted Jul 12, 2018, 11:07 PM
Utah_Dave Utah_Dave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 338
It’s so unfortunate that Priskos property didn’t work out. That would have been pretty ideal. I bet the one property owner was holding out for a windfall of money and now there value is much less. Then Mr Priskos passed away before he could develop that site.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3189  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2018, 12:14 AM
Liberty Wellsian Liberty Wellsian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utah_Dave View Post
It’s so unfortunate that Priskos property didn’t work out. That would have been pretty ideal. I bet the one property owner was holding out for a windfall of money and now there value is much less. Then Mr Priskos passed away before he could develop that site.

I like those brick buildings on first and I don't particularly care for the spcc plaza on W Temple. I am glad(hopeful) that it will be built on the corner of W Temple and 2nd s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3190  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2018, 12:36 AM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,584
I'm hoping for W. Temple and 2nd So. also. I think that's the perfect solution. Thanks Makid for taking the time to take us through a lot of the process and speed bumps that we often don't readily consider. Much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3191  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2018, 12:38 AM
Utah_Dave Utah_Dave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 338
^^^

That is a silver lining with that outcome. It’s also a shame the north building site on the convention center block was so restrictive height wise. They should revisit that decision and bump it up to 475-500. An extra 100 ft will only block a little more view of the sky for the 99 west residents. That was a disappointing fiasco and unforced error by the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3192  
Old Posted Jul 13, 2018, 3:09 AM
scottharding scottharding is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,532
Thanks for the thorough replay Makid.

As an resident and urban enthusiast, I get frustrated with Salt Lake. I visit a lot of major American cities often, and jealousy sometimes is overwhelming when we seem to have just as much potential and demand as some of these other places, but can't seem to get anything off the ground here. I feel like downtown is finally on the verge of really popping the lid, so hopefully things will snowball once something really happens.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3193  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2018, 2:46 AM
ThePusherMan's Avatar
ThePusherMan ThePusherMan is offline
One Thing At A Time
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 214
I'm also glad that those buildings on first south are going to survive for a little longer. Don't get me wrong I'm all about some new modern sky scrapers but I think Salt Lake City has a real problem with scrapping it's history in the interest of trying to stay modern. I just got back from Seattle and my impression of what makes that city great isn't the new towers that Amazon brought but that it still had great character. Spaces that feel lived in. There are plenty of empty lots to build on. Let's keep some of our charm around.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3194  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2018, 11:12 AM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,584
I couldn't agree with you more PusherMan. I spent a couple of days in the heart of Downtown L.A. this past week. There has been a tremendous buildup(finally)of L.A.'s downtown in the past several years. Pretty much every block is a major construction zone or has recently had a major project completed. With all of the construction of flashy new office and housing towers, the most impressive developments are the restoration of historic icons. Yesterday the midday streets were flooded with thousands of Angeleno's and tourists. I couldn't help but notice much of the finger pointing and admiration going on was for the great architectural icons of L.A./Hollywood's golden age. Nothing is more attractive than to have a healthy mix of styles and designs. I love contemporary when done well, but contemporary gets boring fast when it's the only act in a downtown sector.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3195  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2018, 1:14 PM
Liberty Wellsian Liberty Wellsian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 718
I think SLC needs to expand D1. What's the worst that could happen? Some developer builds an office building a few blocks from DT spurring a bunch of infill in between?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3196  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2018, 4:05 PM
Marvland's Avatar
Marvland Marvland is offline
SLC Lifer
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Fairpark
Posts: 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by delts145 View Post
I couldn't agree with you more PusherMan. I spent a couple of days in the heart of Downtown L.A. this past week. There has been a tremendous buildup(finally)of L.A.'s downtown in the past several years. Pretty much every block is a major construction zone or has recently had a major project completed. With all of the construction of flashy new office and housing towers, the most impressive developments are the restoration of historic icons. Yesterday the midday streets were flooded with thousands of Angeleno's and tourists. I couldn't help but notice much of the finger pointing and admiration going on was for the great architectural icons of L.A./Hollywood's golden age. Nothing is more attractive than to have a healthy mix of styles and designs. I love contemporary when done well, but contemporary gets boring fast when it's the only act in a downtown sector.
Pusher and Delts, I totally agree. I think the more we can salvage of our history, the better. I want a tall vertical city as much as the next guy, but the magic of SLC is our neighborhood nodes, CDB just being the biggest one of them. I recently had my design crew in town from LA last week for our next project. In fact, they had a huge hand (maybe the biggest hand ??) in the revitalization of DTLA over the last fifteen years. They have been looking for an opportunity to enter our market for a while. After four days in town and in PC, they left blown away at the possibilities in SLC for adaptive re-use and by our diverse neighborhood nodes. They particular took note of the dozens of small new infill projects around town. When I asked them of the massive boom of towers down there, their response was "meh".

Culture = food, beverage, civic interests and the arts. Ask yourself this: when was the last time you walked into a huge new glass tower and were blown away by a cultural experience? Towers are nice. They are indicative of wealthy and healthy corporate culture. They do not make a city great in and of themselves. In fact the vast majority of cultural cores are located outside of the sterile constructs of glass-sheeted streets.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3197  
Old Posted Jul 14, 2018, 11:14 PM
Utah_Dave Utah_Dave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian View Post
I think SLC needs to expand D1. What's the worst that could happen? Some developer builds an office building a few blocks from DT spurring a bunch of infill in between?
Yes please. The older buildings on 100s probably would have been demolished if Priskos was alive and the CCH tower went ahead there. It appears DDRM preferred the north building site but had to look else where when the city went back on its word and caped the height at 375 on the north site. Expanding the D1 opens up all sort of possibilities for developers, particularly with cheaper land, and more historic building can be spared.

Win win. I find it difficult to find a negative with a reasonable expansion of the D1 zoning.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3198  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2018, 1:50 AM
taboubak taboubak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 12
Other towers downtown

I am so excited for some of these planned projects to get off the ground. I would love to see the skyline fill in if they all get completed. The CCH, Tower 8, Liberty Sky, and the 370 Millennium Tower would really expand our skyline to the East, West, and South. Of these I would probably think 370 Millennium is the least likely to get off the ground though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3199  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2018, 6:22 AM
bob rulz bob rulz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Salt Lake, UT
Posts: 611
Tower 8 and Liberty Sky are both essentially done deals, no? Or are there still hurdles that could trip up the process?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3200  
Old Posted Jul 15, 2018, 3:53 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob rulz View Post
Tower 8 and Liberty Sky are both essentially done deals, no? Or are there still hurdles that could trip up the process?
Tower 8 is a definite. Deep pocketed developer and can start once permits are in hand, self financed.
Liberty Sky is 80%. Costs of steel may cause some refactoring and price changes. Banks may require some changes due to recent tariff changes for financing.
370 Millennium is 80%. Steel costs as well. Deep pocketed developer that can self finance.

These are the current, 20+ story buildings, furthest in process. I think they are also listed in order for ground breaking and cranes to rise.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:01 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.