Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[Merewether]

As someone who lives on a higher floor than all but probably a couple hundred Utahans I am convinced it is a fine way of life. I suspect the limiting factors are:

Zoning ..this sometimes in response to neighborhood pressure ?
http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/MasterPlansMaps/Maps/CentralCity_Zoning.pdf

Construction costs.. An apartment in a building which needs hunks of steel and concrete and elevators is more per square foot and that limits the potential tenants.

Perhaps someone conversant with building costs could say whether the differential between low /mid/ high rise construction has increased over past 30 years due to material and labor costs and building regulations.

[Stenar]

Back in college, a friend of mine moved into a fairly tall tower in SLC and when visiting her I was really surprised, because it's so different from what the norm is in SLC. It's so unexpected, but I liked it.

I don't want to see too many skyscrapers in SLC, though. I love buildings and tall buildings, but I don't really want any buildings in SLC over 30 stories, especially after seeing a recent rendering someone posted on here. From the angle where most of the scenic photos of SLC are taken, the rendered building was almost as tall as the mountains. We don't need to block the view of the mountains. Skyscrapers are for flat places that need to build their own artificial mountains and canyons.

When I was younger, I had a different opinion and would have welcomed lots of tall buildings, was annoyed at the 25-story height limits, but now, I'm fine with 25-30 stories.

Originally Posted by Merewether

As someone who lives on a higher floor than all but probably a couple hundred Utahans I am convinced it is a fine way of life. I suspect the limiting factors are:

Zoning ..this sometimes in response to neighborhood pressure ?
http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/MasterPlansMaps/Maps/CentralCity_Zoning.pdf

Construction costs.. An apartment in a building which needs hunks of steel and concrete and elevators is more per square foot and that limits the potential tenants.

Perhaps someone conversant with building costs could say whether the differential between low /mid/ high rise construction has increased over past 30 years due to material and labor costs and building regulations.

[ajiuO]

I would actually hope to have something in the 40 story range within the next 10 years and 50-60 within the next 20. There are spectacular view of the mountains in most of the valley. If you don't want tall building to block your view then I suggest not living in a metropolitan area! If you want the best of both world live on the south / east end of down town. You can always get good photos from the right angle.

I live on th NW corner of down town and the building that we have already block a good portion of the mountains


We are not suddenly going to get have a bunch of 60 story building poking up... It will slowly happen over time.. The city will gradually cover both more area and become taller.. It will seem naturle as it happens and it will look just fine.... Popping random tall building in the middle of salt lake as part of an idea or rendering can seem odd... Because it is... When an actually skyscraper is built a lot of thought is usually put in to it... It will blend a lot better then people's wishful thinking :-)

[Reachforthesky]

Originally Posted by Makid

Outdoor Retailer - and $40 million impact - staying in Utah

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55677546-78/salt-lake-outdoor-state.html.csp

Nice!!
Now lets keep that ball rolling on the Hotel so we can keep them here!

Also, If the salt palace were to expand, where realistically could they do so?

[Orlando]

The original expansion plan of the Salt Palace was to expand over 4 blocks. The last, remaining block is between 200 and 300 west and 100 and 200 south. Currently, there is a Expomart building/US post office ugly building, and an ugly 14 story HUD apartment building on that block. My guess is that they will build the hotel there, and expand the convention center over the roads somehow.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Stenar

Back in college, a friend of mine moved into a fairly tall tower in SLC and when visiting her I was really surprised, because it's so different from what the norm is in SLC. It's so unexpected, but I liked it.

I don't want to see too many skyscrapers in SLC, though. I love buildings and tall buildings, but I don't really want any buildings in SLC over 30 stories, especially after seeing a recent rendering someone posted on here. From the angle where most of the scenic photos of SLC are taken, the rendered building was almost as tall as the mountains. We don't need to block the view of the mountains. Skyscrapers are for flat places that need to build their own artificial mountains and canyons.

When I was younger, I had a different opinion and would have welcomed lots of tall buildings, was annoyed at the 25-story height limits, but now, I'm fine with 25-30 stories.

Well I'm not expecting Salt Lake to look like this anytime soon:


Tehran, Iran

But ten or so additional 10-20 story residential towers placed throughout the city would be tolerable, I think.

[Reachforthesky]

Originally Posted by Orlando

The original expansion plan of the Salt Palace was to expand over 4 blocks. The last, remaining block is between 200 and 300 west and 100 and 200 south. Currently, there is a Expomart building/US post office ugly building, and an ugly 14 story HUD apartment building on that block. My guess is that they will build the hotel there, and expand the convention center over the roads somehow.

That would look way better that whats there now! Hopefully they can expand the tunnel from So. Temple to 2nd S. My ultimate hope though, is that they do not chose to do a stubbly Hotel like the "L" shaped one from Houston they mentioned:
http://arquitectonica.com/blog/portfolio...ericas-houston-convention-center-hotel/#

We need something tall and sleek to complement our city and to fill the Gap between our "2 Downtown" cores.

[ajiuO]

As much as I would love a new hotel. I personally would not support any plan that includes closing any more streets off around the salt palace... It's already bad enough..

Here is what I'm curious about. Is this new convention space going to completely take the place of the tents that are set up on the LDS property??? I wonder because that property is not going to be open for ever.

[Reachforthesky]

Look at the Hotel design the City showcased on page 26!

http://www.slccouncil.com/agendas/2013Agendas/Jan22/012213A4.pdf

Could you imagine something this grand being built! It would be awesome and really complement the skyline!

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by Reachforthesky

Look at the Hotel design the City showcased on page 26!

http://www.slccouncil.com/agendas/2013Agendas/Jan22/012213A4.pdf

Could you imagine something this grand being built! It would be awesome and really complement the skyline!

Looks pretty nice.

I estimate 21 floors just for standard guest rooms, plus 4 floors convention space.. Ect. That puts us at 25... Plus 50 suits. That could easily add 2 extra stories.. But it looks like the top part of the building does not do the full "L"... So it could be up to 4.

I think we are talking about a 28-30 story building... I would like to see that pushed by about 5-10 stories... But still nice none the less :-)

[SLC Projects]

It looks like Mayor Becker could be unveiling designs of the PAC as early as next month. Can't wait.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

Looks pretty nice.

I estimate 21 floors just for standard guest rooms, plus 4 floors convention space.. Ect. That puts us at 25... Plus 50 suits. That could easily add 2 extra stories.. But it looks like the top part of the building does not do the full "L"... So it could be up to 4.

I think we are talking about a 28-30 story building... I would like to see that pushed by about 5-10 stories... But still nice none the less :-)

I'm not following your numbers ajiuO

I can go with the image in on page 26 having about 21 guest rooms per floor, based on the 45 the L shaped version had and the other image is probably half the size per floor, but here is how I would figure the rest.

The hotel needs to be between 800 - 1000 rooms, so at 21 rooms per floor to equal 950 rooms that gives us 45 floors. Add in 50 suites, if suites are twice the size of a standard room, that would allow for approx 10 suite per floor adding another 5 floors, that puts us at 50 stories. Add in the 4 floors for lobby and meeting space and we're at 54 stories. At an average height of 16.5' per floor were nearing the 900' mark at 891', more than twice as tall as the Wells Fargo tower.

That height results in the 3rd tallest tower in the West, behind LA at 1018' and Seattle at 937'.
While I would love to eventually see a tower that size in SLC, I think that height at this time would stick out like a sore thumb.

[jedikermit]

I'm very glad that Outdoor Retailers has decided to stay in Salt Lake City for the next few years...I'm hoping the decision makers don't see that as "breathing room" for the need for the Convention Center hotel. Happily, things seem to be moving forward, and in the right direction for those of us that would like to see one built.

[Orlando]

oops. deleted post.

[H4vok]

Underneath the photo it says Tehran.

[UTPlanner]

The lack of high rises in and around SLC is based on a number of different issues but as it was mentioned earlier, I think primarily it is due to zoning and cost of construction.

There was a time in SLC that some leaders and some residents thought that most of Central City/East Downtown from downtown to the University should be mostly high rise buildings. That is why you will see a lot of taller buildings built in the 1970's and early 80's. At some point, more of a preservationist movement began in the city and most of the area was "down zoned", meaning that densities and height limitations were lowered. This doesn't mean that the Zoning Ordinance doesn't allow any height. In fact, most of the area east of Downtown is zoned R-MU Residential Mixed Use and allows heights of 125' with no density limitations.

With regard to construction costs, once a project involves steel construction rather than wood frame, the cost soars. Recently most developers have not been willing to pay that cost.

[scottharding]

I think the picture on page 30 would be a good fit for SLC. The height would be good, and it would compliment the Salt Palace well. I'd love to see something like this on the post-office block.

[Makid]

I am somewhat hoping to see the convention hotel continue with the cylinders that are along West Temple (main entrance and underground parking entrance).


Photo by: Steve Greenwood

A cylinder for a convention hotel would be different and I think could be done well. If the height becomes an issue, 2 towers could be built.

I think this would not only give us an different convention hotel look, but would possibly give us a signature tower(s) in the process.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

The lack of high rises in and around SLC is based on a number of different issues but as it was mentioned earlier, I think primarily it is due to zoning and cost of construction.

There was a time in SLC that some leaders and some residents thought that most of Central City/East Downtown from downtown to the University should be mostly high rise buildings. That is why you will see a lot of taller buildings built in the 1970's and early 80's. At some point, more of a preservationist movement began in the city and most of the area was "down zoned", meaning that densities and height limitations were lowered. This doesn't mean that the Zoning Ordinance doesn't allow any height. In fact, most of the area east of Downtown is zoned R-MU Residential Mixed Use and allows heights of 125' with no density limitations.

With regard to construction costs, once a project involves steel construction rather than wood frame, the cost soars. Recently most developers have not been willing to pay that cost.

See, and I wish the city had continued that trend. Obviously preservation is important, and I would not support the idea of razing historic buildings for the sake of a tower, but there's still a great deal of unused, or underused, land between 200 E and 1300 E that a sprinkling of towers would add, I think, a lot of viability to the region.

You know, if it's about maximizing the population, you can really only go up - as these two-story or four-story condos and the smaller proposals add only minimal amount to the city.

So, I still would like to see a healthy mix of residential high-rises in that region, especially, as I've said, on 400 S because that area is in dire need of being revamped.

[Lilljemalm]

delete