Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Waimea]

Originally Posted by wrendog

We know.

Also, welcome to the board!

Thank you! Long time follower and finally decided to join.

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

Every tower (that isn't some billion dollar project in New York, China, or Dubai) would likely fit in the category of 'boxes.'

I actually think there is significant variety in these projects, though I wish more of them would have taller or more varied crowns.

My point being, I think the only reason these projects look so similar is because their crowns are all pretty much the same. I wonder if the city will step in a request a change on any of them (I doubt it, but who knows). It doesn't help that most of them are residential towers, so they each have specific things they need to meet (amenity deck, balconies, height, etc.) But when you actually look at the facades they are different. The similarities between them all, I personally chalk up to the fact that most of these buildings have been designed within just a few years of each other. Their design reflects the overall design of the time we are in for a mid-tier market like Salt Lake City.

I think it will be a while before we can expect someone to drop huge dollars to create a tower here that will hit the cover of Architectural Digest.

To be honest, I'm actually just glad there are towers being proposed at all, let alone 12. Just five years ago the idea that we would have more than 2 or so active tower projects in development was unheard of. This is still early days yet.

[Waimea]

12 is pretty impressive but to be fair, the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat consider a skyscraper anything taller than 150 meters and I believe Salt Lake City’s tallest is around 130 meters. Still impressive though.

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by Waimea

12 is pretty impressive but to be fair, the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat consider a skyscraper anything taller than 150 meters and I believe Salt Lake City’s tallest is around 130 meters. Still impressive though.

Yeah, unfortunately that's why we have to keep calling them 'towers' instead of 'skyscrapers.'

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

To be honest, I'm actually just glad there are towers being proposed at all, let alone 12. Just five years ago the idea that we would have more than 2 or so active tower projects in development was unheard of. This is still early days yet.

I certainly agree with your statement above Mr. Amazing. What type of tops would you be looking for?

Several posters have reminded me that we are first shooting for infill.

I would imagine that until we break the actual or imagined ceiling of 375', we will continue to see fairly generic tops.

Two or three signature towers of 500+ feet would merit something different, I think.

I am just grateful that things are actually happening in SLC right now. It's
been decades since serious development has occurred in the city.

[Waimea]

Originally Posted by Ironweed

I am just grateful that things are actually happening in SLC right now. It's been decades since serious development has occurred in the city.

I wouldn’t say decades, that’s a tad bit dramatic and overblown. I would consider City Creek and that entire development “serious development” and that was just last decade.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Waimea

I wouldn’t say decades, that’s a tad bit dramatic and overblown. I would consider City Creek and that entire development “serious development” and that was just last decade.

Point well taken.

The church development acted as a catalyst to where the city is now.

In my mind, I go back to the early eighties as the last time when there was quite a bit of development that happened down-town outside of church property. (Not all of it good quite frankly.)

I am looking at things from a citywide perspective. Not just one property owner.

[Waimea]

Originally Posted by Ironweed

Point well taken.

The church development acted as a catalyst to where the city is now.

In my mind, I go back to the early eighties as the last time when there was quite a bit of development that happened down-town outside of church property. (Not all of it good quite frankly.)

I am looking at things from a citywide perspective. Not just one property owner.

I definitely agree with you on that. Take the LDS church aspect away then you’re 100% correct. Hopefully this new vertical growth in towers in Salt Lake is a new trend of development coming from developers outside the church. Nothing against the LDS church (because they’ve done incredible things for the city) but it’s good to see other ideas, ownership from different perspectives.

[ThePusherMan]

What’s the most iconic tower in the SLC skyline? Walker Center? We certainly need/could have something pretty definitive built with minimal design effort.

[taboubak]

Originally Posted by ThePusherMan

What’s the most iconic tower in the SLC skyline? Walker Center? We certainly need/could have something pretty definitive built with minimal design effort.

Salt Lakes most "iconic" tower is and has always been the church office building, towering over everything on the hill. I hope one day that will no longer be the case.

[Blah_Amazing]

• Video Link

What I found interesting was, "net positive job growth in the year 2020." I also love some of the shots of the city.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Waimea

I wouldn’t say decades, that’s a tad bit dramatic and overblown. I would consider City Creek and that entire development “serious development” and that was just last decade.

Welcome to the forum Waimea! I agree City Creek was a big deal. Most of the malls and lifestyle centers here in Los Angeles have undergone a makeover, and while improved none have turned out the equal of City Creek. Looking back I think the Salt Lake City area has been experiencing serious development since the 90's buildup to the Winter Olympics. There was a brief hiccup right after the Games, but then the Wasatch Front has never looked back since. Right now we seem to be adding a pronounced phase of increased vertical development in the CBD, which is something we've been wishing to commence ever since I joined the forum. Hopefully soon that increased number of towers will break into the 5 and 600's and also add a bit of the latest in design curves.

[Blah_Amazing]

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

Location: 61 East 2100 South

Not a tower project or anything as exciting, but it looks like Salt Lake City will be getting its first In-N-Out Burger location replacing a vacant Burger King and Scone Cutter location buildings. 1.12 acres. Will be Utah's 10th In-N-Out Burger location.

It's always a big deal when a new In-N-Out opens (even Utah's 10th), so I thought I'd post.

Project Description:

In-N-Out Burger is excited to be exploring the potential of a new, single-story In-N-Out Burger restaurant with drive-through service and outdoor patio seating (and associated site improvements to include new asphalt parking lot, parking lot lighting, and interior landscaping) at 61 E. 2100 South.

The property is currently a 3,620 square foot vacant, former Burger King restaurant with drive thru service and a recently demolished Scone Cutter restaurant building. If our project is approved, both existing buildings are proposed to be completely demolished including the corresponding site improvements and all underground facilities to make way for our brand new development. The total site area is approximately 1.124 acres, or approximately 48,961 square-feet.

Our preliminary due diligence indicates that this parcel is zoned Corridor Commercial (CC) with a South State Street Corridor (SSSC) Overlay District. Our reading and understanding of the Salt Lake City Zoning Ordinance further indicates that In-N-Out’s proposed use of a restaurant with drive through service is an allowable use by-right. The site is currently accessed via three dedicated curb cuts, one on State Street and two on 2100 South Street. (A third curb cut exists on 2100 South Street serving the existing Subway restaurant, which restaurant and existing access point shall remain in place.) Our project proposes to close the western-most curb cut along 2100 South currently serving our property, reducing the number of entry points to our development to two – one for each street frontage.

Our proposed In-N-Out building construction is with a “Bone China White” stucco finish and an “Inca Ironspot” brick wainscot. Archways are incorporated throughout the building and our drive through canopy which integrate changes in plane and wall thicknesses and are further enhanced by detailed cornices at each of their columns. Tower elements at a maximum height of 23’-0” are also incorporated into the building, including at the customer entrances, to provide vertical relief and visually-pleasing focal points. Parapets for areas of flat roof are at an elevation of approximately 19’-10” which provides ample screening of the rooftop kitchen and mechanical equipment. The top of the drive-thru canopy roof is approximately 13’-7” in height.

[Boz]

In and out is super average at best... not sure what all the fuss is about.

[wrendog]

Originally Posted by Boz

In and out is super average at best... not sure what all the fuss is about.

It's a good, quality burger at a good price. Significantly better than the other national fast food burger chains

[Waimea]

Originally Posted by Boz

In and out is super average at best... not sure what all the fuss is about.

Going to In-n-out is also about the experience and the atmosphere. Their food is nothing special compared to Whataburger, Smash Burger, Five Guys, etc.

[wrendog]

Originally Posted by Waimea

Going to In-n-out is also about the experience and the atmosphere. Their food is nothing special compared to Whataburger, Smash Burger, Five Guys, etc.

As someone who currently lives in Texas, Whataburger doesn't do if for me. That's blasphemy in these parts, but their burgers are better than the crap Mcdonald's or BK put out, but innout is much better quality.

Can't really compare to smash and five guys as they are more fast casual (no drive thru) than in n out and they are much more expensive.

[ThePusherMan]

Stumbled on some renderings for the downtown liquor store build on Edison. Really hope this gets going soon. Downtown is wildly underserved. https://www.instagram.com/p/CLchLcEM...d=z0u32mxiyig2

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Waimea

Going to In-n-out is also about the experience and the atmosphere. Their food is nothing special compared to Whataburger, Smash Burger, Five Guys, etc.

Welcome to the forum Waimea. In these parts, burgers are spelled differently: CROWN. There is no other.

PS Are you from one of the Waimeas?

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by ThePusherMan

Stumbled on some renderings for the downtown liquor store build on Edison. Really hope this gets going soon. Downtown is wildly underserved. https://www.instagram.com/p/CLchLcEM...d=z0u32mxiyig2

Holy crap that's amazing! I know it's the UDABC flagship but it is waaay above my expectations. Edison is really blossoming. That will be one of the real cherry assets the state will need to spin off when we privatize..