Salt Lake:Official development news thread

[delts145]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

I've never been to the Vancouver library, but I don't think it has anything like the suspended art installation.

I mean they're all great designs and have many differences, and they were all designed by the same firm, so its not like anyone is stealing others' ideas.

But aside from the design of the curved walls and atrium, look at things like the flooring, the glass curtain walls, the glass railings and the detailing of the storefronts on the retail spaces. The exact same details are used in the Vancouver and Philadelphia designs. Lame.

I've been thinking that it's a bit like a new architectural style 'in and of itself'. Something like going through a period of Richardsonian, or Edwardian, sharing many common traits from building to building. I guess we can call the Library,"Safdieism or Safdiesque."
.

[ctobsl]

Originally Posted by MetroFanatic

I think they need to do something about the back of the Frank E. Moss Courthouse when they build this new one. It'd be a terrible view to look at.

What is it that you think will need to be done to the back side Metro?

I think the view is just great the way it is on all sides including the back.
The old court house has a very nice look to it.

Anthony

[urbanboy]

Very much agreed!

[zmaj101]

Originally Posted by TANGELD_SLC

Welcome, Urban_Logic!


ANYHOOS I just wanted to say, I like the latest rendering for the Borg cube, I just wish they weren't tearing down the shubrick building. SUCH A LOSS FOR OUR CITY, IMO

This comment will probably get me hazed here, but I personally don't consider the Shubrick building a loss. I'm all about saving historic buildings, but a building is not historic simply because it's old. There is really nothing special or distinctive about the Shubrick building that justifies keeping it. It's not particularly attractive, doesn't have a distinctive or unique architectural style, possess no historical significance aside from it being the location of a well-known bar, and isn't the best economic use of that particular plot of land. If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.

[T-Mac]

Hyatt at the Gateway






Bridges at Citifront

[MetroFanatic]

Originally Posted by ctobsl

What is it that you think will need to be done to the back side Metro?

I think the view is just great the way it is on all sides including the back.
The old court house has a very nice look to it.

Anthony

The front has the pillars and both it and the sides have the big concrete bricks that make it look like a building you'd find in D.C. The back of it is just a slab of old bricks that are turning a yellowish-green color.

I think they should make it well rounded and have the back look just like the rest of the building, especially if they're going to have a space between it and the new courthouse. I'm sure they'll have a little area with benches and whatnot between the two buildings.

[SLC Projects]

Great pics as always T-Mac. Did you have fun walking around in all that snow?

Looks like the Hyatt will soon be topped out. Five floors done, just one more to go.

[T-Mac]

Thanks Projects. I really enjoyed your pics as well. Regarding the snow, it was hard to walk around as I was slipping with every step. Also, it was very cold out.

[Scraperdude801]

Originally Posted by zmaj101

This comment will probably get me hazed here, but I personally don't consider the Shubrick building a loss. I'm all about saving historic buildings, but a building is not historic simply because it's old. There is really nothing special or distinctive about the Shubrick building that justifies keeping it. It's not particularly attractive, doesn't have a distinctive or unique architectural style, possess no historical significance aside from it being the location of a well-known bar, and isn't the best economic use of that particular plot of land. If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.

You are missing A LOT! The Shubrick building is historic because it is historic, not just because it is old. It is the only hotel that would house african american visitors to our city, and because of that it housed many of the greatest Jazz musician of that era!!! Beyond its historical atributes, port 'o call is probably the most vibrant bar that our city has to offer these days. It is situated on the corner and greets the pedestrian. The borg cube DOES NOT! The borg cube won't take up even half of the amount of land they think they need. What is more, it will only serve to isolate that part of town. We will have the borg cube taking up half a block, the grand america taking up a block, little america taking up a block, and the matheson courthouse taking up a block, and also the earl holding parking lot taking up an entire block. This is horrible urban planning and makes our city sterile, uninteresting and even unsafe for the pedestrian. .... BOO TO THE BORG CUBE!!!

[WASDEN]

Originally Posted by zmaj101

This comment will probably get me hazed here, but I personally don't consider the Shubrick building a loss. I'm all about saving historic buildings, but a building is not historic simply because it's old. There is really nothing special or distinctive about the Shubrick building that justifies keeping it. It's not particularly attractive, doesn't have a distinctive or unique architectural style, possess no historical significance aside from it being the location of a well-known bar, and isn't the best economic use of that particular plot of land. If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.

Well I'm not aiming to haze you- because you're right about some things and everyones entitled to an opinion. Some people view the designation of 'historic' as a qualitative- either it is historic, or it isn't. This is a similar argument about why the Inn at Temple Square was so easily dozed for the CCC, because it wasn't 'historic' like the First Security. But I kind of like to view it as a continum, say, the Shubrick isn't as historic as the Oddfellows hall, but more so than the nearby Ken Garff building.

But regardless of wheather it's historic or not, the Shubrick provides a location where much needed night life can establish itself. Salt Lake has far too few of these places because we're always dozing them for the latest craze, tax eversion, or more surface parking. I think you will find that the kinds of businesses that give cities character tend to gravitate towards buildings with the same- and the Shubrick has character in abundance.Throw in great grainy materials and an awesome street presence and you've got a building that adds a lot to the 4th South scene. As far as its attractiveness goes- just imagine if it got a simple coat of fresh paint like the Peery Hotel.

We can hardly expect the same character and presence from the Borg cube. I think its design represents itself clearly- a post OKC 9/11 government that has been uninviting, secrative, and afraid. While I understand the reasoning for designing it that way, there are way more locations in downtown with that kind of vibe then there are Shubrick buildings. Exhibit A can be the 10 acre parking lot across the street.

I want it all man- cool old school buildings, happening clubs, and a place where the feds can do their business I know I need to be more realistic.

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by blazefirelight

So, I was looking at the renderings for the new Courthouse on www.tphifer.com and I came across the rendering that has changed my view of the Courthouse.



This rendering doesn't make the building look too bad. Although the historic Shubrick is gone, the Courthouse is still a pretty good looking building. And even though it's not too tall, it adds a little bit more to the city.

I don't really like the overall appearence of this building. It just looks so bland and boring. I mean, it's just a block. It's like something you'd find in Chicago dwarfed by much taller, slimmer, sleeker-designed buildings. It's like the ugly step-child that nobody even notices. It looks like a building that would evoke the following senario: Person A: "Oh, look, it's that one building off of 4th South. What is it again?" Person B: "Ummm...I'm not quite sure..." Person C: "I think it's some kind of courthouse or something..." Person D: "Oh."

I mean, where is the originality? It needs some kind of awesome twist to it that makes it unique! We need a court house which has a design that screams "Salt Lake City is so freaking awesome and I'm proud to contribute to its awesomeness!!!" I'm thinking it would look great if it had some ellement to it like the Cyprus Building at Jordan Landing in West Jordan. Where it has a slanted curtain-wall glass detail that off-sets the structure, like this:

http://protophoto.com/picture.html?pic=7863



Or even some contours would look great! In the city where I'm from (Walnut Creek, Ca), that seems to be the prevailing paradigm amongst the designers there. Just about every building in down town Walnut Creek has some sort of curvy or contoured look to it (with the exception of one rather bland 10-story building by the BART station). I don't know how well you can see the buildings, but here is a skyline image where you can get a bit of a feel for the building designs:

http://cache.virtualtourist.com/3875786-Downtown_Walnut_Creek_from_a_Hiking_Trail-Walnut_Creek.jpg



I'm also liking the look of San Francisco's 'Civic Tower'. I think we could incorporate a similar design into the SLC Fed Court House. I like the idea of topping the building off with a crown that juts upward into the air at a 45 degree angle. I love the colors on the Civic Tower! Then having what looks like the elevator shaft sticking out of the building and having the glass element to it is very nice! I also like the brighter, more crystal look to it as opposed to SLC's more dingy, metalic look.

http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/mn_pucgreen.jpg



So, I guess my ideal look for the building would be to have some sort of curtain-wall glass detail that off-sets the main structure with a light, crystaly glow in conjunction with some sort of contour or curvy design to the main part of the structure. I like the whole contemporary concept of the building transitioning from the dark, dingy concrete and asphault on the street level to the light, sky-blue and white colors that almost blend right in with the sky. That's how buildings should be! Instead of having a very distinct line on the horizon of City vs Sky, there should be a soft transition from City to Sky. Buildings should be bridges from the ground to the sky, not walls seperating them. Instead of 'skycrapers', they should be 'skyblenders'. I mean, the word 'skyscraper' pretty much symbolizes human attitude toward nature - harmful, painful, damaging. The idea of blending into the sky, or blending into nature rather than scraping it is so much better! And, of course, new buildings should have A+ LEED status to minimize their impact, or scraping, on nature. I have always loved cities, and I have always loved nature. I think it would be great if we could bring both together without harming one or hindering another. I don't know if you can visualize what I see, but there's my 2 cents anyways.

Hey, does anyone have some fancy, cool software and time to make some sort of rendering of my building? That would be great! Then we could have more of a visual example to look at that coelesces these three concepts together. If not, that's fine.

Oh, and thanks Tangled! I appretiate the warm welcome I've recieved from so many people on here!

[Urban_logic]

Originally Posted by WASDEN

....We can hardly expect the same character and presence from the Borg cube. I think its design represents itself clearly- a post OKC 9/11 government that has been uninviting, secrative, and afraid. While I understand the reasoning for designing it that way, there are way more locations in downtown with that kind of vibe then there are Shubrick buildings. Exhibit A can be the 10 acre parking lot across the street....

Come to think of it, it does kinda give off an Orwellian, 1984ish vibe. That's how I pictured some of the government buldings looking like when I read that book back in high school. Throw in a giant eye on the top and TV screens sorounding it at the base showing the street-level passers-by, and you've got the "Ministry of Love", or whatever the war department for Oceania was called It would be the epitome of the post 9/11 U.S. Government.

[delts145]

The Forest Service considers closing Mill Creek Canyon to routine car travel and giving way to bike lanes and shuttles.


http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11284820?source=rv


Kimberly Baker of Salt Lake, crosses the road in Millcreek Canyon on skis Tuesday, December 16, 2008. The forest service has a grant to study alternative transportation in the canyon, perhaps creating a bike lane . Paul Fraughton / Salt Lake Tribune

Mill Creek Canyon » It's the nature of a canyon to funnel the flow into the lowest slot, and up to 1,400 motorists and 400 cyclists a day can tell you that this one is narrow.
Like, no-shoulders narrow. Share-the-road-or-else narrow. Double-parked narrow -- even in winter, when Salt Lakers pack up their Nordic skis and dogs for the metro area's closest forest jaunt.
All this -- plus Boy Scout camps, two restaurants and 120 picnic sites on an 8.5-mile road that starts within view of downtown Salt Lake City -- has the U.S. Forest Service searching for a better way in Mill Creek..


Paul Fraughton / Salt Lake Tribune

.

[delts145]

Mill Creek Canyon


by Cook Cottage


by lightrocker


by kf6arnd

.

[delts145]

Utah supplants Nevada as fastest growing state

By Stephen Ohlemacher

The Associated Press

Article Last Updated: 12/22/2008 09:53:21 AM MST


WASHINGTON » Utah is the nation's fastest growing state, knocking Nevada from its usual top spot.

Utah's population climbed by 2.5 percent from July 2007 to July 2008, according to new population estimates from the Census Bureau. Arizona is the second-fastest growing state, followed by Texas, North Carolina and Colorado.

Nevada, last year's fastest-growing state, fell to eighth. Nevada had been among the four fastest-growing states each of the last 23 years.

Only two states -- Michigan and Rhode Island -- lost population from 2007 to 2008.

California remained the most populous state, followed by Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois.



By Haya El Nasser, USA TODAY

Analysis: Census data shows 8 states could lose House seats


usatoday.net by Brian Snyder, Reuters

Eight states — most in the Northeast and Midwest — would lose seats in Congress in 2010, based on an analysis of Census estimates of 2008 state populations released today.
Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania each would lose a seat, according to an analysis by Election Data Services, Inc.

Five states — Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, and Utah — would each gain one seat. Texas would be the big winner, adding three seats.


CENSUS: Data shows Utah is now the fastest growing state

The 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives are reallocated every 10 years after the decennial Census counts state populations. The analysis uses annual estimates to project changes in 2010.

"Oregon is likely to gain a seat but it's right on the cusp," says Kim Brace, president of Election Data Services. "About 13 states are right there on the cusp battling for the last six seats."

The recent data show big fluctuations in migration trends in the past year. Because of that, it's becoming more difficult to predict what state populations will be in 2010.

"We're seeing some flux and shifts from what we've seen before in these new Census numbers," Brace says. "That will definitely impact the apportionment process."

Utah was the fastest growing state in the population estimates for July 1, gaining 2.5% since July 1, 2007, to reach 2.7 million. Arizona, perennially one of the USA's fastest growing states, held the No. 2 spot, gaining 2.3% between 2007 and 2008, but its rate of increase fell from 2.8% in 2006-2007. Texas, North Carolina and Colorado rounded out the top five, each increasing 2%.

Nevada, one of the states hardest hit by the housing and foreclosure crisis, has seen its growth rate almost cut in half in the past two years. The state grew by 1.8% between 2007 and 2008, down from 3.5% two years earlier. Nevada was the nation's fastest growing state from 2006 to 2007, increasing 2.9%, but ranked No. 8 in the most recent 12-month period. Nevada had been among the four fastest-growing states each of the last 23 years.

Texas was the biggest numerical gainer, adding 484,000 between 2007 and 2008. California (379,000), North Carolina (181,000), Georgia (162,000) and Arizona (147,000) were the other biggest net gainers.

Michigan and Rhode Island, where unemployment is among the nation's highest, were the only states to lose population. Michigan had a net loss of 46,000 people (0.5%) and Rhode Island lost 2,000 (0.2%).

California remained the most populous state (36.8 million), followed by Texas (24.3 million), New York (19.5 million), Florida (18.3 million) and Illinois (12.9 million).

In another reflection of the housing crisis, more people left Florida than moved there from 2007 to 2008. The Sunshine State registered a net outmigration of 9,286.

"This, along with Nevada's dive in growth rank from first to eighth, underscores the depth of the housing crunch's impact on states that grew steadily over the last several decades," says William Frey, demographer at the Brookings Institution. "The bursting bubble has turned dependable growth to shocking standstills."
.

[Future Mayor]

I know I've posted this image before, but I am going to post it again for those that may be new and just to show that the feds aren't always near sighted on their court house designs.

This is the Carl Stokes Federal Courthouse in Cleveland, OH. Imagine a building more like this one situated behind the current Court house. It could face 400 S mid block and have access from both 400 S and Market street. It would also provide some additional height (this one is 23 floors, 430 ft) to the skyline in that portion of the city. Obviously a courthouse is never going to provide great pedestrian presence on the street level, but if they could build something that allows the Shubrick to remain and provide that pedestrian connection, and historic feel, while providing a new courthouse and an addition to the skyline that would be the ideal situation in my mind.

To bad there really is nothing we can do about it.


photo courtesy of emporis

[shakman]

The one in STL is not bad. It is taller than the one above.

[utahboozer]

I must admit that the rendering of the court Borg cube is actually much more interesting than I had imagined.

Is that glass on the facade? Good choice.

And did you notice how similar it looks to the other federal building, the Bennett:

(courtesy of United States Gov't)

[Urban_logic]

Utah supplants Nevada as fastest growing state

By Stephen Ohlemacher

The Associated Press

Article Last Updated: 12/22/2008 09:53:21 AM MST


WASHINGTON » Utah is the nation's fastest growing state, knocking Nevada from its usual top spot.

Utah's population climbed by 2.5 percent from July 2007 to July 2008, according to new population estimates from the Census Bureau. Arizona is the second-fastest growing state, followed by Texas, North Carolina and Colorado.

Nevada, last year's fastest-growing state, fell to eighth. Nevada had been among the four fastest-growing states each of the last 23 years.

Only two states -- Michigan and Rhode Island -- lost population from 2007 to 2008.

California remained the most populous state, followed by Texas, New York, Florida and Illinois.

Wow! I'm glad Utah isn't like Nevada! It's strange how our geographic neighbor fell so hard, yet we rose to the very top of the pack! I think the reason that states like Utah, Colorado, and Idaho are doing so much better than states like Nevada, Arizona, and California is due to much more moderate growth. Populations exploded in Nevada, Arizona, and California over the last decade or two, but Utah, for example, increased slower, but steadier. To use an analogy, Nevada and California partied hard and are now in severe hangover. Utah stayed sober with maybe a drink or two and now has a slight headache.

Utah also has the benefit of not having it's housing market shoot through the roof like it did in California, for example. In most parts of California, some people had no other option to buy such expensive homes than to do so with a Sub-prime or Adjustible-rate mortgage. In Utah, however, housing prices were going up, but they were still affordable with a traditional 30-year or Fixed-rate mortgage.

Now our concern in Utah should be whether we are able to hold on to #1, or if we will slide and suffer the fate of our dear friend Nevada. I think 2 things that Utah can rely on always being constant is the attraction of Mormons to the state and the state's high birth rate (two sources that will remain even when the economy crashes). Even during the deep recession in the 80's, Utah still had a high birth rate, which was its primary source of growth at the time.

[cololi]

Originally Posted by blazefirelight

GSA is pulling a fast one on SLC with this design. They can design a building that fits into the public realm and meets their security design criteria. They have done it all over the country since 2001. They can also fit it on the block without demolishing the shubrick or relocating Oddfellows. I personally think this project is along the same track as the Mecham project. Only the developer is GSA instead of an individual. 400 South already has a tough go due to the road being a state road and UDOT having no interest in modifying the number of lanes. This project makes 400 South so much worse for pedestrians. If the wall is truely for security, why are there stairs and public access on the W Temple and Market Street frontages, the building seems just as close to the street. Give the design of 400 South, a large truck parked on the street at 400 South is much more noticeable and suspicious than one on W Temple or Market Street, where they would not block traffic. GSA also needs to take into account that a Traxx station is likely at that intersection when the U line is extended to Central Station.