Salt Lake:Official development news thread - Part 2 - Page 94

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**1861** Posted **Oct 24, 2009, 5:12 PM**

http://www.sltrib.com/utahpolitics/ci_13568056
The state's unemployment rate, for example, rose from 6 percent in August to 6.2 percent in September.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/UTURN_Max_630_378.png

So Utah still seems to be doing pretty well unemployment wise.
At least we don't have the ten percent unemployment of the mid eighties.

DMTower · #**1862** Posted **Oct 24, 2009, 6:21 PM**

- I thought I heard someone recently say construction on Liberty Gateway was supposed to resume soon... anyone know anything about this?

urbanboy · #**1863** Posted **Oct 24, 2009, 7:17 PM**

Hear it for D.I.

Salt Lake Tribune
Public Forum Letter
Updated: 10/22/2009 02:51:04 PM MDT

When the Circuit City store closed in Sugar House, some members of the Sugar House Community Council thought the now-empty building would be a good home for a Deseret Industries store, which long ago outgrew its current space. When Deseret Industries submitted a redevelopment proposal to Salt Lake City for the Circuit City building, our community council made suggestions to improve the project and to comply with the community's master plan and our vision for Sugar House. D.I. incorporated some, but not all, of those proposed changes.
When the Salt Lake City Planning Commission approved the plan, it added to the conditions of approval, bringing the proposal in line with the master plan. Once again, Deseret Industries revised its plan, and received full approval on Oct. 14.
We give Deseret Industries, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a big round of applause for their efforts to stay in Sugar House. This will be a terrific re-use of this empty building. The citizens and community council of Sugar House thank them very much!
Judi Short Land-use chairwoman, Sugar House Community Council
Salt Lake City

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_13619506

TonyAnderson · #**1864** Posted **Oct 24, 2009, 8:50 PM**

Ok guys, I personally think part of the problem is overreaction. You don't like what someone says, but you don't need to flip out about it. If it's off topic then leave it at that and don't keep it going (myself included) - if it becomes a big problem than notify a moderator. Valid and intelligent discussion regarding relevant topics should be fine though.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**1865** Posted **Oct 25, 2009, 12:21 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMTower

^^^ wow, are you not hearing any of the people say 🞵🞵🞵🞵 🞵🞵🞵 🞵🞵🞵🞵 🞵🞵 about the whole matter? We don't need any more threads closed, or personal attacks. Isn't there something development-wise to talk about?

- I thought I heard someone recently say construction on Liberty Gateway was supposed to resume soon... anyone know anything about this?

I heard this too! It was on the Trib I think.
I think I remember hearing something about underground parking and it having 135 units or something like that but not about when construction would start.

SLC Projects · #**1866** Posted **Oct 25, 2009, 5:31 PM**

City Creek Center.

Great pic of the The Regent on the City Creek Thread. Can't wait to see the rest tonight.
( I'm only going to comment about City Creek in this thread, I refuse to comment in the Lame new City Creek Thread. )

Sight-Seer · #**1867** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 12:54 AM**

Is Liberty Gateway on North Temple next to I-15?

Regarding the new thread, it's a good idea to behave yourself. I had two posts deleted immediately after posting them. Somebody is policing it with a very heavy hand. Maybe it will die out because nobody dares to say anything. It had just about the most activity of any thread on the forum. Lots of activity is good for the advertisers. Nothing like shooting yourself in the foot.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**1868** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sight-Seer

Is Liberty Gateway on North Temple next to I-15?

.

No idea. I thought it was more west then north of the Gateway.

Orlando · #**1869** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 5:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justnslcsugarhood.

Yes! and there is another development close to broadway that I saw driving with friends through that area.

What kind of development?

Orlando · #**1870** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 5:39 PM**

I posted this a while back but received no responses. So, I am reposting to see what any of you think. I think the new builindg in the style it is presented in is a mistake, and a missed opportunity. see the rest below

I know it was hard to tell what the GSBS/Hamilton partners proposal would have looked like, but it could have been very cool. In any case, the proposal to restore those two older buildings is a good idea. What I think is a terrible idea is that the new building has to be a replica of historic design. The image they show shows it only in the context of the two older buildings. I think this is a mistake. I mean, look at 222. It's squashed between very old buildings, and yet it is very contemporary, and they related the mass of the base two the mass of the older buildings.

Here are some suggested designs of mid-rise condo buildings that aren't too modern/contemporary, but have some sort of classical touches to them that can relate to both the historic buildings being restored and the modern highrises next to them.

Remember 222 main is butting up against two very historic buildings:

wrendog · #**1871** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 5:47 PM**

Sorry Orlando.. I like the rendering. I enjoy seeing retro buildings like that with all the modern amenities....

urbanboy · #**1872** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 5:50 PM**

I like the proposal the way it is. There are enough contemporary structures fronting State Street already, on that block. The examples you gave us would work very well on 200 East.

Does anyone know when this redevelopment/development will begin?

Future Mayor · #**1873** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 7:31 PM**

I like the proposal also. I like the design in that it is being built in a classic style, and I think it blends well between the new and the old.

The developer that was awarded the project has 90 days to do due diligence on the property to verify the condition of the buildings and the viability of their proposal, related to costs.

If the developer does due diligence on the properties and feels it is not viable as proposed they can decline the project. The RDA can then choose the next best proposal (this case only one other submitted, sorry guys) If deemed appropriate the RDA can take items from the accepted proposal and mandate those onto the other proposal, or the RDA can issue a new RFP for the entire project and receive new bids.

Stenar · #**1874** Posted **Oct 26, 2009, 10:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

I posted this a while back but received no responses. So, I am reposting to see what any of you think. I think the new builindg in the style it is presented in is a mistake, and a missed opportunity. see the rest below

I know it was hard to tell what the GSBS/Hamilton partners proposal would have looked like, but it could have been very cool. In any case, the proposal to restore those two older buildings is a good idea. What I think is a terrible idea is that the new building has to be a replica of historic design. The image they show shows it only in the context of the two older buildings. I think this is a mistake. I mean, look at 222. It's squashed between very old buildings, and yet it is very contemporary, and they related the mass of the base two the mass of the older buildings.

Here are some suggested designs of mid-rise condo buildings that aren't too modern/contemporary, but have some sort of classical touches to them that can relate to both the historic buildings being restored and the modern highrises next to them.

That drawing of the new building is basic enough that you can't really tell whether the final product will be "too historic" looking or whether it might look like a contemporary building with some classic elements.

jmonkey · #**1875** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 3:01 AM**

I agree with you Orlando. I tried to put it into words, but was pretty much instantly dismissed by someone, and decided not to press the issue. I don't like the scale of the project, or the slap-dash 'preservation'. Both plans presented have large flaws, IMO.

urbanboy · #**1876** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 3:26 AM**

What do you mean by "slap-dash preservation?"

Stenar · #**1877** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 4:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanboy

What do you mean by "slap-dash preservation?"

I was wondering the same thing.

Green Bro · #**1878** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 6:22 PM**

Update:

The company that is relocating to Salt Lake City will be buidling a 32 story skyrise. The original plans had renderings at 42 floors.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**1879** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 6:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green Bro

Update:

The company that is relocating to Salt Lake City will be buidling a 32 story skyrise. The original plans had renderings at 42 floors.

Oh lordy I likes the sound of that.
I'm so glad we are weathering the financial melt down so well.

Orlando · #**1880** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 6:45 PM**

42 would have been nice, but I'll take a 32 story highrise any day. I wish it was unveiling time already.