Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[(Eco)nomy_404]

Utah unemployment rate edges down, employment up.


Phot by dooce.com

The unemployment rate in Utah edged down an additional tenth-of-a-percent in May 2013, sinking to a 4.5-year low of 4.6%. At the height of the state`s employment boom in March 2007, only 2.5% of the total state workforce of 1,358,655 were out of work. From the record-low levels of 2007, unemployment soared to a recession high of 8.4% two and a half years later. By December 2009, the state had lost 104,388 jobs from early 2007. Since then, the state has been able to recover 71,117 jobs, pushing the unemployment rate down to 4.6%. Over the same time period, the state`s labor market has increased by 30,061 due to population growth. Adding the new eligible participants in the state labor market to the number of jobs lost to the recession, Utah has lost a real figure of 63,332 jobs from March 2007 through May 2013.

Utah Job Market: March 2007 – May 2013
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LASST49000003

104,388 – Jobs Lost to Recession
71,117 – Jobs Gained Since Recession
33,271 – Net Job Growth (March 2007-May 2013)
30,061 – Natural Increase in Labor Market (Population Growth)
63,332 – Total Real Jobs Deficit

Compared nationally, Utah`s 4.6% rate is well below the national average of 7.6%. The state ties for 5th place along with Iowa and Wyoming for the lowest unemployment rate in the country. Notably, California`s unemployment rate has improved substantially recently, dropping almost 4% in just 2 years and 8 months. The state went from its recession high of 12.4% in late 2010 to a 4.5-year low of 8.6% in mid-2013, falling nearly half a percent over just the past month.

Best States:

1) 3.2% - North Dakota
2) 3.8% - Nebraska
3) 4.0% - South Dakota
4) 4.1% - Vermont
5) 4.6% - Iowa, Utah, Wyoming

Worst States:

46) 8.8% - North Carolina
47) 8.9% - Rhode Island
48) 9.1% - Illinois, Mississippi
50) 9.5% - Nevada

http://www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

[wrendog]

That is a sweet pic!

[delts145]

Very cool pic Eco!

[Merewether]

Although lacking the professional quality of many forum pics, I'm posting these as an angle on downtown less commonly shown. These pictures were taken about a five minute walk apart from the ridgeline above the Avenues. It always amazes me that so close to the city center one can have a view with virtually no sign of manmade objects.

view of City Creek Canyon from short spur north of ridge above Avenues


IMG_0173 by duckbay, on Flickr


view from ridge above Avenues by duckbay, on Flickr

from just above 18th Avenue

IMG_0182 by duckbay, on Flickr

[CountyLemonade]

Merewether, I like it. Another angle that I've never in my life seen photographed, but with which I am absolutely smitten, is when you're driving south on Victory Road heading into downtown. It's that turn-off from Beck Street that takes you right by the state capitol and feeds into Main Street. As you begin to ascend the hill after turning from Beck Street, a magnificent view of the skyline presents itself. And I mean magnificent. I'm terrible at describing it, and there isn't really a good spot to stop on Victory Road to get a photo.

[John Martin]

I don't adore it, but it doesn't impact the streetscape much anyway.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by John Martin

I don't adore it, but it doesn't impact the streetscape much anyway.

I just cringe when I see those electrical boxes prominently out there by the street. Either the architect neglected to direct the the aesthetically challenged electrical engineer, or SLC has got some unchallenged requirements about electrical boxes. This is just professional stupidity at its best!!! I've seen so many electrical boxes just right out in front by the street like that in SLC. Something has got to change.

[livedowntown]

Thanks for saying that. I always feel like I am making negative comments so I didn't want to say anything but that transformer could have been put somewhere else. It almost ruins the building's street engagement. That entrance also seems like an afterthought. The top half of the building looks unremarkable but I don't hate it. Looks interesting next to the stacked barrel vaults of the old IBM building.

Originally Posted by Orlando

I just cringe when I see those electrical boxes prominently out there by the street. Either the architect neglected to direct the the aesthetically challenged electrical engineer, or SLC has got some unchallenged requirements about electrical boxes. This is just professional stupidity at its best!!! I've seen so many electrical boxes just right out in front by the street like that in SLC. Something has got to change.

[CountyLemonade]

The originally-proposed Madeleine would have looked much better on South Temple. . . But, when I compare the Lotus to those hideous stucco apartments on the south side of South Temple at around 8th East, I'm pretty content. The Lotus is okay, all things considered—and, most importantly, original. Exactly what we need in Salt Lake.

[(Eco)nomy_404]

Originally Posted by wrendog

That is a sweet pic!

Originally Posted by delts145

Very cool pic Eco!

I think the best angle to make down town SLC look the densest is from the south looking north. Since down town is stretched from north to south, that angle really fills in the gaps nicely and makes the buildings build upon each other with the mid/low-rises in front and the higher ones behind. When looking the opposite way (from north to south) the taller buildings block the smaller ones to the south, so it lessens the view by blocking those out. East/west views can be good if done right, yet even then you can`t help but notice the gaping holes. I think the least flattering angle is the one from the northwest looking to the south east because the angle blunts the height of the southern anchors around Galavan Plaza.

[livedowntown]

I tend to agree. At least it is trying to have some type of personality and not starting off as the worse type of background building.

Originally Posted by CountyLemonade

The originally-proposed Madeleine would have looked much better on South Temple. . . But, when I compare the Lotus to those hideous stucco apartments on the south side of South Temple at around 8th East, I'm pretty content. The Lotus is okay, all things considered—and, most importantly, original. Exactly what we need in Salt Lake.

[livedowntown]

My favorite view is from the big curve (by the U) on 400 south looking to the west. The reason that we see so many views from the northwest looking to the southeast is because it shows off the mountain backdrop which is stunning especially if you are not from SLC and not use to a city that sits so close to big craggy mountains. Denver bills it self at times as being a mountain city but it is really a plains city with nearby mountains. Salt Lake is right on the foothills of the mountains as merewether's picture illustrates.

Unfortunately when you look from the south to north the city shows well but the mountains in that direction are just foothills. Consequently we don't get a lot of pictures from that direction.

Originally Posted by (Eco)nomy_404

I think the best angle to make down town SLC look the densest is from the south looking north. Since down town is stretched from north to south, that angle really fills in the gaps nicely and makes the buildings build upon each other with the mid/low-rises in front and the higher ones behind. When looking the opposite way (from north to south) the taller buildings block the smaller ones to the south, so it lessens the view by blocking those out. East/west views can be good if done right, yet even then you can`t help but notice the gaping holes. I think the least flattering angle is the one from the northwest looking to the south east because the angle blunts the height of the southern anchors around Galavan Plaza.

[John Martin]

Originally Posted by Orlando

I just cringe when I see those electrical boxes prominently out there by the street. Either the architect neglected to direct the the aesthetically challenged electrical engineer, or SLC has got some unchallenged requirements about electrical boxes. This is just professional stupidity at its best!!! I've seen so many electrical boxes just right out in front by the street like that in SLC. Something has got to change.

I agree. The new one on 400 S is particularly unsightly. It amazes me how architects in general can put so much effort into a house (I use a house as an example simply because it's more of a personal canvas), the windows, the trim, the landscaping, the lighting.. everything.. and then a spattering of ugly tin chimneys poking out of the roof wherever they happen to occur. such a shame.

One example in Yalecrest (I think this might be Prescott Muir's house but I can't say with any certainty). Gorgeous, except for all the fixtures cluttering the roof:

[Orlando]

Ya, that's a good example of where the architect neglected a certain issue. An easy fix to that particular problem would be to place a slatted metal screen wall around those pipe penetrations.

[dshane73]

Originally Posted by Orlando

Ya, that's a good example of where the architect neglected a certain issue. An easy fix to that particular problem would be to place a slatted metal screen wall around those pipe penetrations.

Those appear to be furnace and plumbing vents. building codes require certain heights and horizontal clear space around them. Nothing an architect can do about it.

[livedowntown]

Originally Posted by dshane73

Those appear to be furnace and plumbing vents. building codes require certain heights and horizontal clear space around them. Nothing an architect can do about it.

There are code requirements for everything in a house or building but almost every time there are choices on how to meet the requirements while being sensitive to the architectural vision and aesthetics of the building. There is plenty that could have been done to the referenced home, including but not limited to, moving the location of plumbing, creating a plumbing chase to gather the vents into groups so they are less scattered, building a parapet wall or screen around them (if it is perforated as orlando suggests it wouldn't impinge on air flow) and many other options. There are always options. Some may cost more so they aren't considered when ROI is the only factor in a project.

For instance I know for a fact that you can bury a transformer in a vault to hide it from the street. Costs money and takes time and approvals but it can be done. That could have been done on the Lotus project.

[(Eco)nomy_404]

Originally Posted by livedowntown

My favorite view is from the big curve (by the U) on 400 south looking to the west. The reason that we see so many views from the northwest looking to the southeast is because it shows off the mountain backdrop which is stunning especially if you are not from SLC and not use to a city that sits so close to big craggy mountains. Denver bills it self at times as being a mountain city but it is really a plains city with nearby mountains. Salt Lake is right on the foothills of the mountains as merewether's picture illustrates.

Unfortunately when you look from the south to north the city shows well but the mountains in that direction are just foothills. Consequently we don't get a lot of pictures from that direction.

It`s too bad we have to choose between a great mountain view with a blunted cityscape or great city view with a blunted mountainscape. The mountains aren`t going anywhere so the only solution is to beef up the southern skyline and fill in the gaps. I`m pretty sure the next decade or two will do good to our skyline.

I agree that is a great view of down town!

[livedowntown]

And missing from this picture is the cathedral on the hill and the Grand and new court building on the south end. Being there is even better.

I hope that the 111 at the new performing arts center, and the last towers of city creek center are a catalyst to just a few more towers along the east west axis on 100 or 200 south to help fill in the southeast view from the north. Then the skyline will really shine against those mountains and we will have the best of both worlds.

Originally Posted by (Eco)nomy_404

It`s too bad we have to choose between a great mountain view with a blunted cityscape or great city view with a blunted mountainscape. The mountains aren`t going anywhere so the only solution is to beef up the southern skyline and fill in the gaps. I`m pretty sure the next decade or two will do good to our skyline.

I agree that is a great view of down town!

[CountyLemonade]

You're right. I was surprised by how much the area between the COB and the cathedral added to the skyline.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by dshane73

Those appear to be furnace and plumbing vents. building codes require certain heights and horizontal clear space around them. Nothing an architect can do about it.

That's not true. The architect definitely can do something about it. He can't change those code requirements, but the architect always has the opportunity to coordinate where they should go, and how to screen or utilize them in an aesthetically appropriate manner. A prominent example in SLC where the architect cleverly coordinated and designed a similar type of a utilitarian element are the vent towers prominently featured along the front ramp/walkway at the conference center. Plus, that kind of building would require all sorts of mechanical vents, and pipe outlets, etc., but yet we see no transformer boxes on the street, or untility pipes and vents poking out on the sides or top of the building or plaza.