Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3 - Page 186

Comrade · #**3701** Posted **May 11, 2013, 1:36 AM**

Wait...someone's design has a zip-line going from building to building downtown? Uh...

Comrade · #**3702** Posted **May 11, 2013, 1:37 AM**

Okay...this is my favorite solely because it's so fucking crazy that it'd make SLC instantly unique.

jedikermit · #**3703** Posted **May 11, 2013, 1:56 AM**

That is pretty amazing. If funding was unlimited (a big IF), would building something like that be possible? Engineering-wise? I think its cool and crazy and completely unrealistic. I kind of love it.

Comrade · #**3704** Posted **May 11, 2013, 2:02 AM**

I have no clue ... but I voted for it.

Viperlord · #**3705** Posted **May 11, 2013, 3:27 AM**

I can honestly say that I cant find any of those designs for the 69/70 really worth voting for.

Not very impressed with them at all.

Stenar · #**3706** Posted **May 11, 2013, 3:52 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delts145

It's not that I don't think that the Plaza site would make an excellent location for a Convention Hotel. I would love to see a beautiful anything there. I just am of the opinion that there is a zero chance that the convention hotel will go there. Perhaps there is a possibility for something further west though.

Someone correct me if things have changed, but isn't the Plaza residential, not a hotel. Also, unless things have changed in the last couple of years, the LDS church has been taking excellent care of the structure. Admittedly, it's by no means a city landmark, but it's not by any stretch a rundown dump either. It actually looks slightly better than when it was a Howard Johnsons. At least from what I remember, but maybe things have changed. I haven't seen it in a long while.

Anyway yes, I would love it if they put something else up there on that corner other than the current bland Plaza, I just think there's little to no chance of it being the CCH.

You can have your opinion that the hotel could never go there, but I'm of the opinion that it could be a possibility. ALSO, when I refer to the Plaza site, I don't necessarily mean on the current hotel site, but even next to it to the west. Either is a possibility.

Regardless of how well the building is maintained, the architecture looks rundown and dumpy. The Plaza Hotel is a functioning hotel, but some of the floors have been reserved for dorms.

You can book a room yourself here:
http://www.plaza-hotel.com/

SLC Projects · #**3707** Posted **May 11, 2013, 4:26 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Viperlord

I can honestly say that I cant find any of those designs for the 69/70 really worth voting for.

Not very impressed with them at all.

Same here. They're all just way too unrealistic.

gusam26 · #**3708** Posted **May 11, 2013, 6:19 AM**

I voted for E, it mentions improvements of the facade of the parking structures on regent st. I also like how the architect broke down the blocks into micro streets.

jedikermit · #**3709** Posted **May 11, 2013, 12:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmycdii

Has anyone taken a look at the sixtynine seventy finalists? Here's the link.

http://www.sixtynineseventy.com/finalists
I'd personally rather see other areas get up to par with the heart of downtown than see the heart of downtown get even better.

Yeah, I agree with a lot of that. After the Neumont University/Tribune Building renovation comes online and the UPAC opens, on Main Street there's really just the Utah Theater (please???) and the surface lot around Zions Bank that need fixing. Further into the blocks of course, there's more that needs to be done, and more opportunities--Regent Street, the enormous parking lots around Carls Jr, West Temple. Hopefully the Zims Building renovation will go spectacularly and inspire Zions (they own the Dinwoody Building, yes?) to do something similar.

delts145 · #**3710** Posted **May 11, 2013, 12:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

You can have your opinion that the hotel could never go there, but I'm of the opinion that it could be a possibility. ALSO, when I refer to the Plaza site, I don't necessarily mean on the current hotel site, but even next to it to the west. Either is a possibility.

Regardless of how well the building is maintained, the architecture looks rundown and dumpy. The Plaza Hotel is a functioning hotel, but some of the floors have been reserved for dorms.

You can book a room yourself here:
http://www.plaza-hotel.com/

Sure, I agree there's a possibility that the Hotel could go in to the west. I had understood, particularly from Ajiuo, that the Plaza itself would be replaced by the CCH.

One reason I would like to see the Hotel go in to the West, is because I am so anxious to see the vast sea of parking lots get some attention sooner than later. I fear that the LDS church will be another ten years before they feel they can turn their attention to that area.

I do also like the immediate space of the Convention Center too. Mostly because I continue to feel the Convention Center is still way underdeveloped.

In my perfect little world, both the space between Temple Sq. and 300 West, and the 2nd S. Corridor would both be developed as quickly as possible. I think we probably all would dream of that happening in the next couple of years.

Agreed, the exterior design of the Hotel is pretty dated, and also represenative of the cheaper end of a period that didn't age well, even at it's best. That's one building, along with the Shilo, where I would like to see a reclad.

jedikermit · #**3711** Posted **May 11, 2013, 12:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by gusam26

I voted for E, it mentions improvements of the facade of the parking structures on regent st. I also like how the architect broke down the blocks into micro streets.

I voted for E yesterday too; may do it again today. I like a lot of the ideas in that proposal.

The problem I have with many of these is that they're trying to duplicate things like Gallivan Center; I honestly don't know that we need another outdoor amphitheater within a block of another one. And as much as I like the idea of closing Main Street to cars and creating a pedestrian zone...that only seems to make the already great distance between buildings even greater. I don't know. Too many of them seem to de-citify two blocks at the heart of the city.

Stenar · #**3712** Posted **May 11, 2013, 3:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Same here. They're all just way too unrealistic.

I really like O. The curving of TRAX making a huge plaza outside UPAC is perfect for people meeting up before the show and hanging out after. I totally love that.

SLC Projects · #**3713** Posted **May 11, 2013, 3:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds

Okay...this is my favorite solely because it's so fucking crazy that it'd make SLC instantly unique.

Are these guys for reals? That reminds me of Final Fantasy for some reason.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lqKmQbZkA9o/TtCcY-JFd3I/AAAAAAAAC0Y/KkM7s0DXhUQ/s1600/final_fantasy_7.jpg

Future Mayor · #**3714** Posted **May 11, 2013, 5:27 PM**

One thing that needs to be taken into account on the CCH is what the county wants as far as additional space as an extension of the Salt Palace. Depending on what exactly they want could easily exclude most of the locations.

If they want more large exhibition space that is connected to the current exhibition halls, resulting in an even larger continuous space, then the RWP site is the only site that could accommodate that. If the county simply wants more meeting space/ballroom type space with a direct connection via skywalk to the SP then many sites would work.

The Plaza site could work and could provide a decent amount of additional meeting space and the hotel tower could easily be built where the plaza currently is, with meeting space built to the west towards 200 W, with a pedestrian connection over S. Temple to that SP Entrance. Or they could build a wider shorter hotel encompassing much of the block face along S. Temple or two shorter towers.

I still don't see the former DV8 location being a legitimate candidate. The site is very narrow and would limit even further the amount of meeting space that could be built. Yes they could build multiple levels of meeting space, but nothing with a lot of square footage per room. I am not in favor of them taking down the buildings on 100 S, except maybe the red brick building on the corner, because that would destroy some great old architecture in the heart of the city. Plus if they insisted on a pedestrian connection to the SP, that would be an enormous span across W. Temple or an enormous dig underneath. A skybridge connection would have limited options or where to connect to the SP, seeing as the Grand Ballroom makes up the majority of that east wall, south of the main entrance.

The Shilo site, which was already ruled out because it was stated they will not be taking down any hotels to build this one. So I won't bother going into details of the pro's or cons.

So while it is stated that there are several locations being considered, if a direct connection is required I only really see two, three as a long shot. As stated, depending on the type of space they want to add to the SP inventory could easily eliminate all but one.

jimmycdii · #**3715** Posted **May 11, 2013, 6:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jedikermit

The problem I have with many of these is that they're trying to duplicate things like Gallivan Center; I honestly don't know that we need another outdoor amphitheater within a block of another one. And as much as I like the idea of closing Main Street to cars and creating a pedestrian zone...that only seems to make the already great distance between buildings even greater. I don't know. Too many of them seem to de-citify two blocks at the heart of the city.

I agree. Open gathering spaces may already be oversupplied in downtown; how often is Gallivan being used to 100% capacity? Almost never when I'm there. So I'm confused by the desire to create more supply of that kind of space.

I also agree that shutting down streets to traffic is iffy. I love the idea in theory, but unless the sidewalks are already too full of people (e.g. Times Square) it just doesn't make sense to me. And it makes drivers go around, which ultimately increases the total miles driven in the area, which seems like the opposite of what should be happening. I think the balance of vehicle/ped/transit/bike traffic on Main Street is actually really great already (with the exception of needing more pedestrians).

DMTower · #**3716** Posted **May 11, 2013, 7:23 PM**

I really liked E. The way they proposed to break up the blocks was done very smartly and I also loved the massings for possible towers. Also, I loved the way they addressed our overly wide streets. It looked so much more urban and walkable while also being realistic.

RosePark · #**3717** Posted **May 11, 2013, 7:38 PM**

I am in favor of the Plaza Hotel for the site of the CCH. It's mostly dorms for LDS Business College anyway. Tear down the Plaza, build a beautiful CCH, then build new dorms in those awful parking lots on 300 West and North Temple. Isn't that the plan for those parking lots eventually anyway?

Why would the LDS Church wait ten years to develop that area? It's not like they don't have the cash. Seems to me, it would benefit LDS Business College because who would want to live in an old hotel room. Build some nice dorms and get rid of those eyesore parking lots.

scottharding · #**3718** Posted **May 11, 2013, 8:00 PM**

Although we've been over this before, and I've agreed with your points exactly in the past already, I think your right, Future Mayor. The RWP site is the best and really the most practical site for the hotel. It's especially valid since its actually being considered, whereas the plaza site is really only being considered on this forum, and isn't really a likely possibility. It's not too different than discussing the bizarre renderings from the design contest.

ajiuO · #**3719** Posted **May 11, 2013, 8:04 PM**

ajiuO · #**3720** Posted **May 11, 2013, 8:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by scottharding

Although we've been over this before, and I've agreed with your points exactly in the past already, I think your right, Future Mayor. The RWP site is the best and really the most practical site for the hotel. It's especially valid since its actually being considered, whereas the plaza site is really only being considered on this forum, and isn't really a likely possibility. It's not too different than discussing the bizarre renderings from the design contest.

It doesn't really matter what the city is planning... They are not paying to build this hotel nor will they be operating it.. When an actually developer and hotel operator comes in to do the job. They are going to look at all the options... They will not be able to simply dismiss the plaza hotel block because some city planning commission who knows nothing about operating a hotel on this scale didn't suggest it... It is highly likely that a hotel operator/developer will have discussions with the church.... Will they amount to anything.. Who knows... But that is a really good spot, in a really good area, with really good views, and connivance of transportation and proximity to the salt palace..

I also wouldn't think for a second that ripping half a block down along west temple is out of the question... I don't want it to happen... But in the end money talks