Salt Lake:Official development news thread

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by esirhgih

Does anyone have Bill Marriott's email address?

No, but I know his daughter in law on a first name basis.

[Blueline Medic]

Thanks for all of the comments guys . . .I have to say, I really do like "Ark's" design as well.

I understand that you guys disapprove of the location . . .and upon reading your comments, I think that you are all probably right. I simply placed the tower without doing a true analysis of the location. I think a hotel would fit nicely on the north-east corner of 200 south and west temple (currently occupied by a parking garage/office building.)

Again, please understand that my proposal was very crude, so I do understand that design-wise, it needs alot of work. I didn't mean to "plagerize" your work Tangled But, great minds do think alike?!

Its seems as if the majority of your are adverse to the height of my proposal. If you examine the truly iconic towers of the world, most are built without a graudual build-up of auxillery tower. I'd venture to guess, that the reason these towers are so iconic, is because of this noticable difference between them and their surroundings. Perhaps you feel that Salt Lake is different, but as for me, I'd much rather have a 1000' 80 story mixed-use tower. Than a 500' 40 story hotel, a 250' condominum building, and a 250' office building. I think that an 80 story tower is far more impressive, than say a solid block at 20 stories.

Salt Lake will never be able to compete on the level of infill, and outright density of its downtown core . . .but we have a chance to compete with great design, aesthetics, and architecture.

I've been following this thread for a while . . . and I must say "You guys are awesome"

[TANGELD_SLC]

I completly agree with you blueline, because great minds DO think alike . As long as it is as tall as possible, and with as iconic a design as possible. While Arky's tower is undoubtedly an upgrade from our current Marriot Downtown, I REALLY think the proposal is in need of a more unique design. You all know I HATE blocky buildings. This one is no exception. SLIM IT UP AND STACK IT UP!

I think it should be a minimum 650ft tall to help prevent our skyline from being more of a plateau. It also needs a smaller footprint. I favor slender towers. Yes, 525 is almost 100 ft taller than our current tallest, but how much taller is enough for it to really stand out? Could anyone give some good renderings on how it would affect our skline at 525 ft vs. 650+?
Arky or Blueline.... can you guys do that?

[Scraperdude801]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

People can disagree, I just want everyone to be clear about how I feel. I live downtown, and appreciate the history here! I don't want insensitive people demolishing what little history we have left.

Same!


Arky's tower: I think a lot of us have been saying that this location is the ideal location for a convention center hotel for sometime now. With it being a part of the CCC, a block away from Utah's most noted historical site (Temple Square), a block from Traxx, and right in front of the Salt Palace it is practically guaranteed a success. I'm not a big fan of the blocky design, but I do agree with location.

Future Mayor; you should do us a favor and meet Bill Marriot's daughter in law for coffee, bring up the topic of City Creek Center and sell her the idea casually, but with enough knowledge displayed that she will be impressed to tell Bill he is making a big mistake by not jumping on this oppurtunity. <That's good coffee!

[arkhitektor]

I've never designed a large hotel, and my little sketch mostly just reflects my personal taste in architecture, but to a certain extent doesn't a hotel need to somewhat "blocky" to be feasable? Almost every large hotel I've ever visited seems to follow a pattern of long, rectangular floors (One central hallway that services rooms on either side).

A tower like this, while certainly iconic, seems so narrow that apart from elevators/core, it could only support 1-2 rooms per floor in the upper half of the building:



Also, I don't think it makes sense to build a tall building just for the sake of having something tall to look at. I'm much more concerned about how a building functions, looks, feels, and interacts with the city at street level than what it looks like from miles away in relation to other buildings in the skyline.

There are plenty of cities in the US that have impressive skylines but a terrible urban environment once you're actually on the ground walking around downtown.

[goldcntry]

The Salt Palace really, really needs a huge, major hotel... heck, even another Marriott would be okay! As one who has attended many conventions at the Salt Palace, accomodations are always a problem when the convention boasts more than 3,000 attendees Now that I have family in SLC again, and since I'll be moving to SLC shortly, this may be a moot point for me, but not to the tens of thousands that attend conventions here every year. Get the new hotel close enough and you may even be able to link it to CCC and the Palace with .... uhem... beautiful skybridges!

So Future Mayor, have the meeting, and stop by the Starbucks in the Marriott and pick me up a Vente Chai Latté.

[scottharding]

I prefer Arky's notion. I agree that it's a more functional design, and a more realistic one at that. Again, we have demand for a 1,000 room hotel. We do not have a demand for a 1,000 ft mixed use building. I know we're just fantasizing here, but where there is an acutal need for the hotel, I fall in with that one.
Also, in regards to the desire for an iconic tower, I understand that opinion. But I fall into the camp that would prefer better infill than some massive tower sticking way up beyond the skyline. I actually would prefer a 500 ft hotel, and two 250' towers to a 1000 footer. This is because I'm more concerned with downtown as a community than a skyline photo. It's my desire to see Salt Lake continue to evolve into a dynamic and sustainable urban center, economically healthy, diverse, and offering a vibrant lifestyle. I think this better achieved with smart planning sheep-dogging development that happens organically.
Again, I know we're just speculating here, but this forum is about opinions, after all, so I thought I'd throw out mine.

[cololi]

Agreed. Height for the sake of height is a waste of resources in my opinion. Much more important is the realtion of buildings to each other and the public realm.

[Future Mayor]

Next time she is in town I will try to have a sit down with her regarding rebuilding the Downtown Marriott, plus I have some other development proposals of my own that I am looking to throw at her.

[cololi]

Just got this email:

MEDIA ADVISORY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELESE

October 15, 2008
Mayor Ralph Becker to Announce Location of Utah’s New Downtown Performance Center Tomorrow

Salt Lake City – Mayor Ralph Becker will hold a press conference tomorrow afternoon to announce the long anticipated location of Salt Lake City’s soon-to-be built Utah Performance Center. The press conference will be held at the future site. The Mayor will unveil Salt Lake City’s plans concerning this new landmark.

Who: Mayor Ralph Becker and Distinguished Community Leaders
What: Announcement of Location of Utah’s soon-to-be-built Performance Center in Salt Lake City
Where: Downtown Salt Lake City TBA
PLEASE NOTE: Media will be alerted to the exact location of the event tomorrow morning.
When: Thursday, October 16, at 1:30 p.m.

[urbanboy]

Yaaaay, I'll be there for sure!

[Utaaah!]

Here's the D-News take on the story:

New Broadway-style theater to be built on Regent Street

[urbanboy]

Sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity indicated that the former NAC site has been chosen from the short list of six potential sites announced in July.

WooooHooooo!

Good for you: Salt Lake City Leadership and Community!

And kudos to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for stepping up and showing those Sandy residents (many of whom are mormon) where the Church thinks the new broadway-scale theater aught to be located: in Downtown!

Question: because it is "Church" owned property, would The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have any control of what productions can play in this new theater?

[Future Mayor]

Eat it Dolan! lol

[Scraperdude801]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

I've never designed a large hotel, and my little sketch mostly just reflects my personal taste in architecture, but to a certain extent doesn't a hotel need to somewhat "blocky" to be feasable? Almost every large hotel I've ever visited seems to follow a pattern of long, rectangular floors (One central hallway that services rooms on either side).

A tower like this, while certainly iconic, seems so narrow that apart from elevators/core, it could only support 1-2 rooms per floor in the upper half of the building:



Also, I don't think it makes sense to build a tall building just for the sake of having something tall to look at. I'm much more concerned about how a building functions, looks, feels, and interacts with the city at street level than what it looks like from miles away in relation to other buildings in the skyline.

There are plenty of cities in the US that have impressive skylines but a terrible urban environment once you're actually on the ground walking around downtown.

If your comment was directed at me for saying "blocky" then I think I need to clarify. I am not a fan of the narrow proposal either. I agree that a building needs to look right, feel right, be functional and interact with the street, and then we can worry about heighth. My idea of the design would be something along UTAZlover's Temple Spire Tower but to be situated where the current Marriot Hotel is. While it is "blocky" enough to be functional, it is still inspiring, functional, and iconic with its ornamented temple spire top. If you don't remember UTAZlover's tower proposal here it is:

[scottharding]

I do not think the LDS church would try to excercise control over the theatre at all. My guess (and hope) is that they will sell the property for the theatre. It's in the church's best interest to have the theatre downtown, and especially at that location. They have invested so much in downtown, and particularly in the City Creek blocks, that I'm not suprised at all that they got behind this proposal so quickly.
I love the choice. Having entrances on both Regent and Main street will be great, and help to revitalise both sides of the block! Now they just gotta turn the old Tribune Building into apartments/condos, and Howa has to do something with the Utah Theatre, and along with the Capitol and the Ballet West addition, we've got ourselves a little Arts District!

[WASDEN]

Well I was really hoping that the "broadway style" theater might be located on Broadway (300 South) but I'm not disappointed with the location. The real important issue is that the theater be built downtown. Entrances on Main and Regent street is a great idea- Regent street is still too shady a location to serve as a main entrance to the theater though, so Main should fill that role nicely. but bridging the new CCC and Galivan center Regent has TONS of potential. And I love the decorative work outside the NAC building, hopefully that will be incorporated into the theater design. Opening the theater in conjunction with the CCC can only help generate more of the synergy that both projects are going to need the way the market is going.

[urbanboy]

I too hope they keep the decorative facade of the old NAC loading docks and incorporate it into the new theater. The loading docks for the theater will be near the same spot, so hopefully they can just leave the facade where it is.

[TANGELD_SLC]

BYE BYE Perinium!!!

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Utaaah!

Here's the D-News take on the story:

New Broadway-style theater to be built on Regent Street

This is great news! I can't wait to see what Salt Lake City has in store with their plans for the new theater. I must say that having on it on Regent between 100 S. and 200 S. is the best place for the theater. That area of Main street is so dead and needs all the help it can get.
I do wounder however since the church does own some of those buildings on Main street that maybe with this project it would include that huge glass tower that is on the corner of Main and 100 S.

"The $1.5 billion residential, retail and office project calls for Regent Street to be extended to the north side of 100 South and be lined with restaurants when complete in 2012. The potential for Regent Street to become a pedestrian link between City Creek Center and the Gallivan Center also has been cited as an advantage of the former NAC site."

After reading that it sounds like this whole theater project will be another mix-use project that could take up a whole city block. Somehow I'm thinking the "Office" could be the glass tower. ( I hope so ) That would be awesome to have the glass tower as part of this theater project.

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Eat it Dolan! lol

I wouldn't rule Sandy out yet. Knowing them they will keep fighting till one of these cities breaks ground on the theater.

Originally Posted by urbanboy

Yaaaay, I'll be there for sure!

I was thinking of checking it out also. That's if it's open for anyone to stop by. That meeting would be just before I have to be at work. Maybe I'll run into you. If I do I'll make sure that my cell phone is turned off this time.