Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Atlas]

Salt Lake City ~2001 vs. 2021, slightly different perspectives but both taken from the 600 N viaduct:

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Salt Lake City ~2001 vs. 2021, slightly different perspectives but both taken from the 600 N viaduct:

So I added some outlines of the buildings added since 2001 so we can better see the changes over the past 20 years.
From this view, 95 S. State is almost entirely obscured, with just the tip of its northwestern corner popping out.
I'm 90% sure that is Liberty Sky poking out as well (if I'm wrong, let me know).
You can’t see The Regent from this perspective.



This doesn't include other major changes, such as the renovation of the Zions Bank Building, the renovation of the Key Bank Building (mostly changed at base), the renovation of the South Temple Tower (mostly changed at base and inside), or the demolition of the old Key Bank Tower which have all occurred over the past 20 years.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

So I added some outlines of the buildings added since 2001 so we can better see the changes over the past 20 years.
From this view, 95 S. State is almost entirely obscured, with just the tip of its northwestern corner popping out.
I'm 90% sure that is Liberty Sky poking out as well (if I'm wrong, let me know).
You can’t see The Regent from this perspective.



This doesn't include other major changes, such as the renovation of the Zions Bank Building, the renovation of the Key Bank Building (mostly changed at base), the renovation of the South Temple Tower (mostly changed at base and inside), or the demolition of the old Key Bank Tower which have all occurred over the past 20 years.

You can also see Richards Court (east and west buildings) from this angle too, although it is shorter.

That is the only thing missing from your highlights. The next 10-20 years will have as big, if not bigger, impact to the skyline but I think a lot of it will be muted and hidden from the 6th North overpass.

[i2theSKY]

Without a doubt the downtown core is getting denser and more attractive from a street level perspective. Unfortunately that growth isn't accurately reflected in the skyline. I think the Astra will do wonders for the east view but will likely have a minimal impact from the west view. This is why I'm so anxiously awaiting a few towers that will truly transform the skyline from all angles. One area that is clearly improving with the current crop is the east to west width of downtown.

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by i2theSKY

Without a doubt the downtown core is getting denser and more attractive from a street level perspective.

Yes and no -- if we use the Main Street apartment tower (so shiny and I love it) as an example, at street level it's getting rid of a barber shop, a bar, a sandwich shop...something else? In addition to the long-boarded up and salvageableless Pantages Theater. Most of these towers going up with have approximately zero street level engagement, no retail, many of them just shiny walls on the sidewalk.

The building the Tavernacle was in had several other businesses as well -- I'm sure that was better for street level engagement than the tower (so shiny and I love it) that will replace it.

I want height, but I want it build on the grave of Carls Jr and surface parking lots.

[TMoneySLC]

Originally Posted by Reeder113

Well I hope they at least blend it in a little better so it doesn't scream "CONCRETE!" I mean, look at all the nasty seams, etc.

I completely agree! When I go and look at the renderings, they don't seem to make any effort to hide the fact that there will be concrete seams and no paint/siding.

From the Downtown Alliance website, "With its soaring roof-line and bold and modern glass-and-concrete architecture, Liberty Sky offers 272 apartments in a 21-story high-rise in the heart of the city."

[rockies]

IMO Liberty Sky has always been hideous in renderings and in person. I have no expectations

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by jedikermit

Yes and no -- if we use the Main Street apartment tower (so shiny and I love it) as an example, at street level it's getting rid of a barber shop, a bar, a sandwich shop...something else? In addition to the long-boarded up and salvageableless Pantages Theater. Most of these towers going up with have approximately zero street level engagement, no retail, many of them just shiny walls on the sidewalk.

The building the Tavernacle was in had several other businesses as well -- I'm sure that was better for street level engagement than the tower (so shiny and I love it) that will replace it.

I want height, but I want it build on the grave of Carls Jr and surface parking lots.

This really isn't accurate. Basically all of them have ground floor retail.

150 S. Main Street



I think it is important to remember that there will be aprox. 8,400 sq. ft. of ground floor retail/restaurant space as part of 150 S. Main (you can see it on the left side of the image), plus the inclusion of the park (though we know people have mixed feelings on the park).

Convexity Tower



Convexity Tower will also have at least 5,800 sq. ft. of ground floor retail/restaurant space (you can see it at the base of the tower).

370 S. West Temple



370 S. West Temple will have 14,000 square feet of ground floor retail space in both the tower and the hotel connected to it.

Astra Tower



Astra Tower will have a smaller space, some 1,664 sq. feet of retail space (intended for a street cafe or small restaurant) facing 200 South.

Sundial Tower

No confirmation one way or the other.

465 S. Main



465 S. Main includes 2,760 sq. feet of retail space.

255 S. State





Brinshore's project will also include over 20,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, most of which will be part of a food hall. Not to mention the wonderful pedestrian spaces the project will create.

West Quarter
Also can't forget the West Quarter, which will be filled with retail and restaurants.



All of these projects will have a tremendous impact on the pedestrian experience in the city.

[StevenF]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Salt Lake City ~2001 vs. 2021, slightly different perspectives but both taken from the 600 N viaduct:

It's an older image than that one. The one Business Insider was using was one from Getty Images and didn't have the Wells Fargo or Gateway West in it.

[TMoneySLC]

I agree, there is a fair amount of commercial space being brought forth with these new developments. But as far as the "pedestrian experience" 465, Astra, 370, Convexity, and 150 all have the same bland and insipid (glazing with a shopfront) appearance at street level. Part of the experience is a variety of textures, lighting, style, etc. The majority of the commercial spaces being brought on line, while important, are not especially unique and do not lend to a special and inviting character in the urban core. When everything is a glass window, it doesn't really make the pedestrian experience memorable.

To that end, I think the 255, West Quarter, and Post stand out as prime examples of how developers can better engage pedestrians and create a more human scale.

[TMoneySLC]

Originally Posted by rockies

IMO Liberty Sky has always been hideous in renderings and in person. I have no expectations

I agree. I've never been a huge fan of the building, but its here now.

And after looking at the units online, I can't believe so much effort was put in to making such terrible floor plans.

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by TMoneySLC

I agree, there is a fair amount of commercial space being brought forth with these new developments. But as far as the "pedestrian experience" 465, Astra, 370, Convexity, and 150 all have the same bland and insipid (glazing with a shopfront) appearance at street level. Part of the experience is a variety of textures, lighting, style, etc. The majority of the commercial spaces being brought on line, while important, are not especially unique and do not lend to a special and inviting character in the urban core. When everything is a glass window, it doesn't really make the pedestrian experience memorable.

To that end, I think the 255, West Quarter, and Post stand out as prime examples of how developers can better engage pedestrians and create a more human scale.

I don't think that is a fair assessment at all. The projects you hold up as the best examples (Post District (9 acres on one block (another 3.5 acres on another))), West Quarter (aprox 6.5 acres)) are able to have larger pedestrian engagement because they cover a large portion of a block and are multiple buildings.

The other projects you think don't do a good job are all on properties that are an acre or so. Big enough for a single structure. They can't build large pedestrian plazas because the land doesn't provide the space for it. They build street-fronting stores and businesses on the ground level. This is a very normal building method in any US city, even extremely urban places like New York.

So...I don't understand what your concerned about, really.

[Blah_Amazing]

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

Location: 1871 S 1300 E

5 townhouse units.

Project Description from developer:

The proposed project is to construct five townhomes in the heart of Sugarhouse at 1871 S. 1300 E, due south of the beautiful Allen Park. These townhomes will replace a duplex and triplex that previously occupied the lot. We are proposing a 5-unit subdivision for this lot to take place in order to maximize the lot size to enhance the quality of the building with one dwelling per lot. This subdivision will place the lot lines (east to west) in the middle of the sharing wall of each unit all the way to the property lines. The building is being proposed as a single-family attached dwelling per code 21A.24.120: RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District.

These housing units will include high-end finishes, upgraded eco-friendly appliances, and three decks including a roof top view of the Wasatch mountains. These townhomes will greatly enhance the surrounding neighborhood by replacing the overgrown and degrading buildings with landscaping that will beautify the area.

The units will be sold individually.

Project Rendering - Front


Project Rendering - Rear


Site Plan


Vicinity Map

[TMoneySLC]

The point being, that taken as a whole this design pattern creates a bland sterility which is antithetical to the "pedestrian experience." I'm loath to believe that since these are projects on a smaller scale that somehow it should exempt them from a higher design standard which benefits the streetscape and the community at large.

Just because something is a common building practice, does not on its face make it the best practice. If all of this development is happening, there needs be a higher standard from the designers as well as the city to ensure that we don't develop ourselves into a sterile and ubiquitous sea of homogeneity. Ultimately that kind of push will have to come from the citizenry demanding better design, because, as we can see, developers are content to do the minimum.

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by TMoneySLC

The point being, that taken as a whole this design pattern creates a bland sterility which is antithetical to the "pedestrian experience." I'm loath to believe that since these are projects on a smaller scale that somehow it should exempt them from a higher design standard which benefits the streetscape and the community at large.

Just because something is a common building practice, does not on its face make it the best practice. If all of this development is happening, there needs be a higher standard from the designers as well as the city to ensure that we don't develop ourselves into a sterile and ubiquitous sea of homogeneity. Ultimately that kind of push will have to come from the citizenry demanding better design, because, as we can see, developers are content to do the minimum.

Yeah, I'm sorry but they are doing exactly the right things here. The street engagement and design of these towers are superior to almost anything else added to the CBD as individual structures in over half a century.

Please, elaborate and provide specific examples for what you are suggesting would make this engagement better for a development project on 0.5 acres, using projects in the western US. That might help us understand better.

[i2theSKY]

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

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

Location: 1871 S 1300 E

5 townhouse units.

Project Description from developer:

The proposed project is to construct five townhomes in the heart of Sugarhouse at 1871 S. 1300 E, due south of the beautiful Allen Park. These townhomes will replace a duplex and triplex that previously occupied the lot. We are proposing a 5-unit subdivision for this lot to take place in order to maximize the lot size to enhance the quality of the building with one dwelling per lot. This subdivision will place the lot lines (east to west) in the middle of the sharing wall of each unit all the way to the property lines. The building is being proposed as a single-family attached dwelling per code 21A.24.120: RMF-30 Low Density Multi-Family Residential District.

These housing units will include high-end finishes, upgraded eco-friendly appliances, and three decks including a roof top view of the Wasatch mountains. These townhomes will greatly enhance the surrounding neighborhood by replacing the overgrown and degrading buildings with landscaping that will beautify the area.

The units will be sold individually.

[CENTER]
Project Rendering - Front


Project Rendering - Rear

Add 2 or 3 more of these around a central court, drop in a pool, hot tub, and a few palm trees and they would totally pass as a St George Airbnb. Certainly not a bad thing, just an observation from someone who has rented a few.

[TMoneySLC]

I kinda feel like I've elaborated my point pretty clearly?

I'm curious as to what your metric is for suggesting glazed frontage is more engaging than anything in the last half century?

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by TMoneySLC

I kinda feel like I've elaborated my point pretty clearly?

I'm curious as to what your metric is for suggesting glazed frontage is more engaging than anything in the last half century?

Actually, no. You were not clear. You do seem to have a lot of whiny complaints, though.

Honestly, what is good enough? Marble facades and gilded doors and windows?

What should a single tower on a small lot to actually provide, eh? Cause you can't fit 3 acres of plazas on a 1 acre lot.

You have provided no evidence for what you perceive is better and is feasible at the scale and price of the projects you were criticizing.


As for the second half of your question, let's take a look at some of the things built in the CBD over the last half-century:

257 Towers Building:


Parkside Tower:


Centurylink Building:


JC Penny Building:




Just to name a few. Tell me, how do these buildings have better street engagement then 370 West Temple, with its 14,000 square feet of retail, restaurants and/or street cafe?



Especially considering most of the towers built in the past half century in Salt Lake have no ground level retail at all? The few that do have dark and uninviting windows and are of a stark and barren architectural style.

[Blah_Amazing]

I watched this on CNBC's Youtube Channel yesterday and thought the cement shortages should also be added to the list of materials that is straining the construction industry right now. So we are essentially running out of glass, we have significant disruptions and skyrocketing prices in steel, lumber is still having issues, we have staggering shortages of labor, and now....cement.

• Video Link

[bob rulz]

I agree with you blah. Most of our mid-century towers are absolutely awful at street level engagement. In fact I can't think of a single one that has good engagement at the street level. This next wave of towers is going to be a massive improvement.