Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[delts145]

Originally Posted by sock puppet

I was informed by someone "in the know" that there would be another Boyer building just south of 102 on 200 East and one on State. That's what all the parking is about.

Good, that area needs more mid-rise infill, the more the better. I would hope that they think outside the box a little on the parking garage facade, like the ones Comrade posted earlier. Maybe it would help if a few of us lobbied Boyer a little to get creative with the parking garage.

An additional thought. It looks like you guys are going to be getting some warm weather now. Anyone planning on getting out and giving us a great Springtime, Streets of Downtown Salt Lake City photo spread?

[RosePark]

Building 101 is not the most attractive, but I do like that it pushes the feeling of downtown a little further east. I was excited to hear that they had the top three floors leased, but then I read that the law firm was already downtown in another location. Unless these buildings start leasing to brand new business or to firms/businesses that are currently located in the suburbs, I don't see how reshuffling current downtown tenants creates any value.
I also hope there's more residential options downtown, especially to lease and with it I hope more business for everyday people will become available. High end shopping is great, but sometimes I'm downtown and just need something mundane and inexpensive.

[sunflowerjka]

I cant believe I haven't seen more posts or anyone else talking about this! I have to say I'm not very impressed with the design concepts of the UPAC. I really expected allot more and I will probably elaborate more on it later. But I'm curious to know what other people think of the design so far...is it perfect for SLC? Is it just ok? Or did it completely miss the mark as a fail?

[John Martin]

Originally Posted by sunflowerjka

I cant believe I haven't seen more posts or anyone else talking about this! I have to say I'm not very impressed with the design concepts of the UPAC. I really expected allot more and I will probably elaborate more on it later. But I'm curious to know what other people think of the design so far...is it perfect for SLC? Is it just ok? Or did it completely miss the mark as a fail?

I think you missed the boat.

[jedikermit]

Originally Posted by sunflowerjka

I cant believe I haven't seen more posts or anyone else talking about this! I have to say I'm not very impressed with the design concepts of the UPAC. I really expected allot more and I will probably elaborate more on it later. But I'm curious to know what other people think of the design so far...is it perfect for SLC? Is it just ok? Or did it completely miss the mark as a fail?

Yeah, there has been more talk about it. Really, I was expecting much more; since seeing the renderings, I've been much less excited about the project. Was hoping for something that was more of a landmark. It'll be a nice theater, but certainly not as dramatic as I was hoping for. I still have hopes for the tower, but at this point those hopes are only for a "nice" building, not something that stands out in the skyline, either vertically or architecturally.

[delts145]

Myself, I just can't see something highly Gehryesque in that location. I would be very curious about some of these ideas that would be more appealing in that location, because they are more dramatic. Please post a pic of a particular theater style that would look better in your opinion. I think we all get that we definitely need a more stylized highrise tower. I just wonder if that same dramatic requirement would look appropriate sandwiched into the fronts of Main, especially at that location.

[Sight-Seer]

I'm disappointed also. This glass-front thing has been done over and over going back decades. This is Salt Lake's one and only chance at a broadway-style theatre. Whenever I see something like this I think somebody's relative is trying their hand at theatre design. This could be a chance to make a statement that Utah is not the "Pretty, bland state". It's so tempting for politicians to do the safe thing. In fact, politicians shouldn't be making this decision, especially the ones in Utah. Design by committee is always a disaster. Whenever we get outstanding architecture, like the library, it's the result of the daring vision of one person with the ability to get it done in spite of the obstacles, which in Utah are many. As far as I'm concerned, if we end up with something dead ordinary, then why even spend the millions on it. I'm not so interested in the plays, which come and go. The building is what's important. Changing the course of the great ship of Utah is very difficult. After seeing the direction it's headed, I figure it's only a matter of time before hitting the proverbial iceberg and sinking.

[DMTower]

So the warehouse where the new hotels south of the ESA are going has been demolished

[gusam26]

Dmtower you beat me to it.

[DMTower]

Here's another one

[SLC Projects]

You're right guys, the theater is just another ugly glass box that really isn't worthy of main street or downtown. Should just give it to Sandy City since the theater will do nothing to help Main Street. What was Mayor Becker thinking? Main Street is better of having those rundown ugly buildings that haven't been used in YEARS.

[SLC Projects]

Thanks for the update guys. Any word on when the Hotel/s will break ground?

[sunflowerjka]

Originally Posted by John Martin

I think you missed the boat.

You are right John Martin, I totally missed the boat! Oops my bad. I was on a road trip and hadn't properly checked the recent posts.

But I still have to say not much was said other than allot of us think its too boxy! It doesn't have to be a crazy Gehry design, but i was really hoping for something more...inspiring, grand, unique...all things said as key words in the preliminary talks of all this, and I dont feel it is any of those. Could it be worse, for sure, but at the price tag and iconic stage it is supposed to present, it has fallen short for me. I will post some examples of what I might have liked to see here and also expound a little more. Time constraints keep me from spending as much time here lurking and responding as i would like.

Btw: I really love and value everyone's opinion on the subject and crave more!

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Sight-Seer

I'm disappointed also. This glass-front thing has been done over and over going back decades. This is Salt Lake's one and only chance at a broadway-style theatre. Whenever I see something like this I think somebody's relative is trying their hand at theatre design. This could be a chance to make a statement that Utah is not the "Pretty, bland state". It's so tempting for politicians to do the safe thing. In fact, politicians shouldn't be making this decision, especially the ones in Utah. Design by committee is always a disaster. Whenever we get outstanding architecture, like the library, it's the result of the daring vision of one person with the ability to get it done in spite of the obstacles, which in Utah are many. As far as I'm concerned, if we end up with something dead ordinary, then why even spend the millions on it. I'm not so interested in the plays, which come and go. The building is what's important. Changing the course of the great ship of Utah is very difficult. After seeing the direction it's headed, I figure it's only a matter of time before hitting the proverbial iceberg and sinking.

Wow, I don't think I've ever heard broader strokes of bull!@#! on this forum. Remember, there are many on this forum who are infinitely more qualified than you to give a subjective opinion. These same people have had successful careers in various fields of design from Portland to New York. I sometimes agree with these people from project to project, and sometimes I don't, but I always respect their view. Those same forumers have given this UPAC design the thumbs up. So really, does that mean that they are bereft of any respectable taste? That their proverbial ship/career is sinking??? GET REAL!!!

I respect anyone's opinion that there's a need to create more flair to the theater front. At the very least, we should try to be respectfully subjective about differing views from individual project to project only. To lob such broad strokes about 'ALL things Utah' speaks volumes to me about the person making the critique. The only thing that an attitude like your's creates is deserving disdain.

I repeat my question from a previous post. What and how specifically would you design the Main Street facade differently?

[SLC Projects]

I don't think it's that bad. Sure it's a box, but so is everything else on Main Street. Would anything with curves even fit well on main? Maybe it would, I don't know. But either way the PAC theater is awesome and it's going to add so much more night life to Main Street. We all know that part of Main Street needs all the help it could get.
I love all the glass. Again, it looks welcoming.

As for the Tower, is it a for sure thing that HP plans to build the tower sometime after 2016 when the theater opens or will the Tower go up the same time as the theater? I'm not sure what's the latest buzz on that is since in the past I kept hearing that the theater would pull a Casade on us, meaning just like the Casade base at City Creek Center the PAC tower will only build the base/lobby first then wait later to finish the rest. I really hope that's not the case and would much rather see it all develop at once.

[jedikermit]

I love the location for the UPAC, I do think it will bring (more) vitality to Main Street, and I think it's a needed performance space that will be well-used. Like sunflowerjka said, and based on the meetings leading up to the unveiling of the design, I really was expecting more. Not necessarily bizarre/Gehryish (or garish, which can be the same thing), but more of a landmark. The example of Dayton's theater was brought up repeatedly as the UPAC was being explored, and I'd love something like that. And perhaps, as the details of the UPAC gel and we see it actually built, I'll fall in love with what we get. For now, I don't hate it, but it doesn't inspire me like I hoped it would.

[Comrade]

I would be opposed to anything that overwhelmed the area and I've seen some performing arts centers that to just that - like Kansas City's:





I'm guessing there are some here who would love that downtown. But on Main Street? It would dwarf the area - even though there are high-rises around it. Sure, it would definitely have to be scaled down to even fit in that general area, but how does that change the dynamics of the style? It's definitely 'go big or go home' mindset that can work - if you're building it outside the city center (which KC has done, as it sits south of where their skyscrapers are located) - but on Main? It limits the options and while KC's definitely will have a wider impact architecturally than what SLC is building, unless we built the theater west of downtown, it just doesn't logically make sense to have something that large here.

Here's the Portland Center for the Performing Arts:



Ordway Center for the Performing Arts in St. Paul, Minnesota:



Holland Performing Arts Center in Omaha, Nebraska:



Blumenthal Performing Arts Center in Charlotte, North Carolina:



Aronoff Center for the Arts in Cincinnati, Ohio:



That's about all the research I can do right now. But those remind me of sporting arenas more than theaters and none impressive enough to say they're definitively better than Salt Lake's.

[jedikermit]

That Holland PAC in Omaha looks awfully similar to what we're getting. That's probably just my architectural cluelessness and superficiality speaking.

I know the site limits the design, and perhaps my ideas were unrealistic. After seeing some great public architecture like the main library and public safety building, I may have been expecting less boxy, more foxy.

[delts145]

^^^
Thanks Projects and Comrade

Here's DPAC - Raleigh/Durham, completed to much fanfare approx. one year ago


http://s2.evcdn.com


http://raleightelegram.com


http://www.bigbadball.com

Originally Posted by jedikermit

I love the location for the UPAC, I do think it will bring (more) vitality to Main Street, and I think it's a needed performance space that will be well-used. Like sunflowerjka said, and based on the meetings leading up to the unveiling of the design, I really was expecting more. Not necessarily bizarre/Gehryish (or garish, which can be the same thing), but more of a landmark. The example of Dayton's theater was brought up repeatedly as the UPAC was being explored, and I'd love something like that. And perhaps, as the details of the UPAC gel and we see it actually built, I'll fall in love with what we get. For now, I don't hate it, but it doesn't inspire me like I hoped it would.

That Holland PAC in Omaha looks awfully similar to what we're getting. That's probably just my architectural cluelessness and superficiality speaking.

I know the site limits the design, and perhaps my ideas were unrealistic. After seeing some great public architecture like the main library and public safety building, I may have been expecting less boxy, more foxy.

Thanks Jedi for pointing those examples out. Yeah, there are similarities. I like the upper floors of the Holland PAC. I like the overall UPAC more, particularly because of the street level. The street level of the Holland PAC feels more closed and more like a business park office building to me.

Here's the Dayton Center below. One thing about the Dayton Center is that it made me realize that Hamilton will probably give us a much nicer tower, if the Main Street facade of 222 is any indication. I think the Hamilton Tower will be important in the overall appeal of the Main Street engagement of the entire UPAC. I like the use and design of the glass on the Dayton Center, but feel that SLC's Main also needs an additional variety of materials. Glass Only would perhaps be too 'one note' in that location, but that's just my subjective taste. I like that UPAC is able to be very open and engaging, even with solid elements working with the glass.

In studying the Dayton Center's attractive curvature we should ask ourselves a couple of questions. On Main, should we ask for the beautiful curvature of our Safdie Library or our Public Safety Complex? Or as Comrade suggested, would that stylization be overwhelming or odd at the Main Street location?

Perhaps it's just my personal taste, but I love the simple, timeless elegance of the LDS Records Library. UPAC for me has that same simple elegant level of taste. Someone also pointed out earlier how important the finish materials are going to be. I couldn't agree more. As with the records library, the finish materials on the PAC and it's accompanying tower will be very critical.


Dayton Center


http://pics4.city-data.com


http://www.vtechpublishing.com

.

[Future Mayor]

A few things that some of you obviously aren't taking into consideration. The Library and the Public safety buildings are stand alone buildings that don't blend with surrounding architecture, just as the Dayton PAC had an entire block face. The PAC has to provide a feeling of new and modern, while playing homage and respect to the neighboring architecture, and lines of the street, such as the height of cornices on the Tribune building. While many don't notice the lines flowing from building to building, you sure as hell would notice if they didn't. Something curvy like the library or the PS building simply wouldn't allow for a continuous slow along Main St and would actually do substantial harm to the look and feel of the street, with something completely in appropriate sticking out like a sore thumb. If some of you wanted more of a sweeping curved design like Dayton, where exactly would you suggest it curve to, some awkward empty space on the side of the Tribune building, that disrupts flow. I think the design is gorgeous, and is a perfect fit for the location.

As for engaging Main St and Regent St, the PAC will do just that and as the lobby space will be open most of the time, even during the day, as has been pointed out they are striving to have a cafe in the lobby area, that will allow for people to use the lobby as another gathering place. The PAC tower lobby area is projected to have substantial retail, particularly right on the corner of 100 S and Main.

As for Regent St, I think the PAC will do a fantastic job at engaging that street. The vast majority of the PAC street frontage on Regent will be retail space, and there will now be two mid block access ways from Main to Regent, one being the lobby/winter garden access at the north end of the PAC lobby and the other being the removal of the small building directly south of the Tribune building, this one will lead to an open plaza area, that will only be blocked off while trucks are pulling in and out of the completely enclosed loading docks.

As for simply saying "Hey Hamilton Partners, just build the PAC tower and it will fill up" It's not that easy, as was mentioned in regards to the Boyer building 3 entire floors are already pre-leased, that is why they able to start construction. In order to get construction financing on an office building 40-45% of the space must be pre-leased. Which is why it is going to take HP a bit longer to get to that construction financing threshold, because they need to get a lot more pre-leases signed than Boyer does. I have no doubt in my mind that HP is actively pursuing pre-leases for the PAC tower, and I'm sure they are even more anxious than we are to start building the tower. They could very easily have those pre-leases in place and construction financing ready to go when PAC construction starts, or very soon after.