Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

This

Also; What kind of impact would a south tower have on the cc solar array? A south tower would cast a shadow over them until ~ noon right? Would the committee prefer the northern lot for that reason?

That's a possibility, but that information was provided to the developers in the RFP. That may very well be why they project being close to 550', because they need to go slender in order to not interrupt much of the solar arrays exposure.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

This

Also; What kind of impact would a south tower have on the cc solar array? A south tower would cast a shadow over them until ~ noon right? Would the committee prefer the northern lot for that reason?

This is one reason why I think the northern spot might be the initial chosen location. The RFP does require that there is minimal blocking of the solar panels.

But if they do build on the south spot, this does increase the chances of a slender tower as it would need to minimize the impacts to the panels.

So, there is a chance that the South location would be less of a wall then the North.

Lastly, on the wall discussion, I doubt either location will be as wall like as the Main Street face of the Wells Fargo Building. That is basically 1/2 the block and neither location has that much width to allow it.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Hotel on the Northern lot
Build a new Leonardo on the southern lot
Residential tower where the current Leonardo is

[airhero]

Originally Posted by Makid

This is one reason why I think the northern spot might be the initial chosen location. The RFP does require that there is minimal blocking of the solar panels.

But if they do build on the south spot, this does increase the chances of a slender tower as it would need to minimize the impacts to the panels.

So, there is a chance that the South location would be less of a wall then the North.

Lastly, on the wall discussion, I doubt either location will be as wall like as the Main Street face of the Wells Fargo Building. That is basically 1/2 the block and neither location has that much width to allow it.

The Wells Fargo building is a great example of what we don't want. It is encouraging that neither site has a single stretch that is as wide as the Wells Fargo building, but it is close, particularly on the north side.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by airhero

The Wells Fargo building is a great example of what we don't want. It is encouraging that neither site has a single stretch that is as wide as the Wells Fargo building, but it is close, particularly on the north side.

Not even close.

The NE face of MOCA, which is by far the longest of the building is 280'. The east frontage of MOCA, following the sidewalk up to the Abravanel Plaza is 198'

The south plaza, including the adjacent loading docks, is 200' long and 185' wide at it's widest point along 200 S.

Wells Fargo frontage is 365'.

Approximate numbers, taken from Google Earth.

[EPdesign]

What's MOCA?

[SaltCityScrapers]

My two cents:

I believe Salt Lake is on the cusp of not only getting a new tallest, but two other buildings taller than what we currently have over the next 8 - 10 years. Also, another 6 - 8 towers over 325' for good in-fill. It seems to be the pattern that all midsize North American cities follow.

I've looked several other cities using the SkyscraperPage diagram and filtering by years. Denver and Calgary in particular both started booming when their skylines were similar to ours. We're just 35 years behind the curve.

It's economics at the end of the day, but it looks like we'll have an actual real skyline with a few actual legitimate skyscrapers in the next decade.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Gondola linking Canyons and Park City Resort opens forging the largest ski resort in the nation.
http://www.sltrib.com/home/3326616-155/new-gondola-makes-park-city-canyons

[airhero]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Not even close.

The NE face of MOCA, which is by far the longest of the building is 280'. The east frontage of MOCA, following the sidewalk up to the Abravanel Plaza is 198'

The south plaza, including the adjacent loading docks, is 200' long and 185' wide at it's widest point along 200 S.

Wells Fargo frontage is 365'.

Approximate numbers, taken from Google Earth.

The entire northern parcel is bigger than what you're describing. It doesn't include just the structure that houses the museum but also all the open space immediately south of the museum and a short portion of open space north of the northern-most part of the museum and south of Abravanel Plaza. My estimate is that the entire north-south stretch of the parcel is about 75-80 percent of the width of the Wells Fargo building.

[bflatflat9]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

Hotel on the Northern lot
Build a new Leonardo on the southern lot
Residential tower where the current Leonardo is

This

could..should be reality. Or how about a half block of brownstones? Built to the sidewalk. With room behind for...something cool.. June Christy.
I'm in the 600 ft. is fine camp btw.
And I agree that the height of the CCH will have nothing to do with the height of anything built afterwards, at least office or residential.
It will certainly affect in one way or another, the considerations of another hotel. It could synergistically help more hotel development, or halt current plans for a while.....
It's demand, mixed with the lot (site) you're working with, plus any additional room you may want to add for future expansion, plus....lot of variables.

Does anyone's people know Trumps' people?
Bring on 600 ft.
And like others have said, it shouldn't be long before there's others similar in height put up as a natural need.
Now there, wouldn't that feel better?

[delts145]

Well, so far this last bit of news for the pending CCH is better than I had imagined it would be. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by EPdesign

What's MOCA?

So this doesn't get missed.

MOCA = Museum Of Contemporary Art

[EPdesign]

Thank you Makid

[EPdesign]

I hope it is 550' or taller. Salt lake has become stagnant with regards to height. I get the demand, but there isn't enough ego competition in this city. If it was only demand that drives height we would see cities only incread height steadily. Towers are symbols. They represent power. Presence. Solidarity.. Not just and means to an ends. Utah has this weird culture that likes to be modest or something. I have nothing against the COB but it looks like the tallest from almost every angle. It's old and represents a city that use to be...we need something that says salt lake is here and now. Denver got three tall towers in the 80s. It's our turn. So they might be out of place for a while and your precious views of the city might be awkward for a few years with a tower standing apart from the rest....the city will keep growing. The city today isn't going to be like this forever. I say build the tower and build it tall. Give others new height to reach for.

[Scraperdude801]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

This

Also; What kind of impact would a south tower have on the cc solar array? A south tower would cast a shadow over them until ~ noon right? Would the committee prefer the northern lot for that reason?

I know I've said this before, but I think it should be revisited. We should remove the solar panels from the Salt Palace, expand the Salt Palace over RWP, and build a green roof/park from South Temple to 200 S and West temple to 300 W with entrance ramps/stairs on every block.. Hear me out:

1. The city desperately wants to find more green/open space downtown, build a staple park, yet not make downtown less walkable than it already is.
2. Conventions are expanding and will soon need more convention space, and with a new CCH, we'll be more attractive to even larger conventions. If we simply expand the convention center as we have in the past, we'll be destroying even more of our urban center, as the loading docks will have to isolate some streets, etc.
3. Currently, the convention center acts as a wall that separates the two sides of downtown, severely decreasing walkability, much like Mellon arena did in Pittsburgh (which is what stifled development and made the Hill district so dangerous there).
4. We, a mid sized city with plenty of prime locations for towers around the convention center, are worried about building to our potential because we fear we'll block the solar panels!!!
5. The environmental trade off between solar panels and a green roof (reduced heating and A/C needs) as well as increased walkability between the two malls downtown (which translates to less fossil fuel burning of cars), would be a trade off I'd make every day of the week. Also, I believe we could use those solar panels elsewhere.
6. We would be gaining an iconic park, giving us exceptional views of the city, and making us even more unique. Imagine Outdoor Retailers demonstrating in the park...

[EPdesign]

Originally Posted by Scraperdude801

I know I've said this before, but I think it should be revisited. We should remove the solar panels from the Salt Palace, expand the Salt Palace over RWP, and build a green roof/park from South Temple to 200 S and West temple to 300 W with entrance ramps/stairs on every block.. Hear me out:

1. The city desperately wants to find more green/open space downtown, build a staple park, yet not make downtown less walkable than it already is.
2. Conventions are expanding and will soon need more convention space, and with a new CCH, we'll be more attractive to even larger conventions. If we simply expand the convention center as we have in the past, we'll be destroying even more of our urban center, as the loading docks will have to isolate some streets, etc.
3. Currently, the convention center acts as a wall that separates the two sides of downtown, severely decreasing walkability, much like Mellon arena did in Pittsburgh (which is what stifled development and made the Hill district so dangerous there).
4. We, a mid sized city with plenty of prime locations for towers around the convention center, are worried about building to our potential because we fear we'll block the solar panels!!!
5. The environmental trade off between solar panels and a green roof (reduced heating and A/C needs) as well as increased walkability between the two malls downtown (which translates to less fossil fuel burning of cars), would be a trade off I'd make every day of the week. Also, I believe we could use those solar panels elsewhere.
6. We would be gaining an iconic park, giving us exceptional views of the city, and making us even more unique. Imagine Outdoor Retailers demonstrating in the park...

I like this idea

[Dallas Snob]

I completely understand and appreciate all the talk about the CCH...its wonderful to speculate...my only objection is that there are several other SLC Threads (including this one) that have basically become obsolete due to lack of posts on developments that are actually in process. Perhaps all the SLC threads should just be consolidated into one after all...

OH NO I DIDNT!

[EPdesign]

Originally Posted by Dallas Snob

I completely understand and appreciate all the talk about the CCH...its wonderful to speculate...my only objection is that there are several other SLC Threads (including this one) that have basically become obsolete due to lack of posts on developments that are actually in process. Perhaps all the SLC threads should just be consolidated into one after all...

OH NO I DIDNT!

You have just spoken blasphemous words

[Future Mayor]

While I like the concept of the green roof, I personally don't think it will be as beneficial as you make it out to sound. Yes the Salt Palace already acts as a wall, and 200 S suffers because people don't necessarily venture down 200 S because they don't see destinations along the way, particularly as they reach the RWP block.

Building a green roof park, would be pretty, would reduce the heating and cooling costs, but I don't think the average Joe on the street is going to walk along 100 S, up a flight of stairs and across through 2 blocks of park just to see what might be on the other side. Yes I can see people staying in the hotels that have a view of the roof wanting to go check it out. I essentially think it would be used less on a daily basis than the Civic Center open space does.

If people did end up using that space as a connection between W. Temple and 300 W or S. Temple to 200 S, the pedestrian experience on 200 S will continue to be very underwhelming, because foot traffic will be taking another route.

I think the solution is, and which we all anticipate is eventually going to happen, to expand the Salt Palace onto the RWP block and place another entrance to the Salt Palace on 200 S. This will bring pedestrian traffic to the street resulting in more development. I'm not against having a green roof on part of the Salt Palace, but I don't think it should be converted into a huge park. Maybe the Salt Palace expansion onto RWP block could include a taller portion along 200 S that includes some additional meeting space along with access to the roof. Another thing that has to be taken into account is green roofs are not light, the Salt Palace is obviously designed to withstand some serious amounts of weight due to snow fall, and I'm sure it's based on a 100 year storm totals, but to add a green roof, in addition to that potential 100 year storm snow fall I highly doubt it's built to withstand that amount of weights.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

Gondola linking Canyons and Park City Resort opens forging the largest ski resort in the nation.
http://www.sltrib.com/home/3326616-155/new-gondola-makes-park-city-canyons

Thanks LW for posting that. This is such a huge and important milestone for Utah, the Wasatch, and Salt Lake City in particular. This will only further cement and heighten SLC's already important emergence as a major destination for travel/tourism. I'm so excited to get back to at least living part time in the Wasatch metro area. When I return I think the Wasatch will be entering a golden era of progress.

You guys are getting some great snow at the perfect time. I see where Brighton is reporting 40-plus inches in the last 72 hrs. FANTASTIC!!