Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4 - Page 298

Orlando · #**5941** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 3:06 PM**

Oh wow. It looks good and more fitting for the area. I thought the developer gave up on this, though. Apparently not. I really like what Garbett is trying to do with all of their developments.

linguisize · #**5942** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 4:28 PM**

Also this thing across the street on 500 East is looking pretty great. I'm looking forward to some more in depth discussion about this in the near future. 500 East is going to be quite different in the next few years.

UTPlanner · #**5943** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 4:52 PM**

Garbett Homes was never going to walk away from this project. It's typical MO for developers. You don't get what you want so you threaten to walk away. The tactic works in some cases, especially smaller cities that are really hurting for tax income but it generally does not work in SLC. Having said that, I like the Hardison project. I'm looking forward to seeing that long vacant corner come back to life.

I also like the look of the project on 500 East. I love that they are preserving and rehabilitating the existing building on South Temple into housing and constructing this building on what is currently a hideous parking garage. The Landmarks Commission tabled their decision on that project last night. I think it has lots of positive elements but the street engagement is pretty terrible.

Liberty Wellsian · #**5944** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 5:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePusherMan

You talked about him specifically. Talked about his project and quoted him. You never even interviewed him in the first place so I don't know how you would misattribute a quote to him. If what you are saying is true you would have corrected the name and left the quotes but you didn't. You made up quotes. Own up to it.

Please stop feigning outrage, it's pathetic and childish.

linguisize · #**5945** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 7:40 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

Please stop feigning outrage, it's pathetic and childish.

ctobsl · #**5946** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 7:53 PM**

^^^^^^^^
It has stopped, please don't encourage it by referencing it again.

I like how the Hardison (450 East South Temple) project looks similar to the 500 East project.

Anthony

450 East South Temple

500 East

Photos Originally Posted by: linguisize

Orlando · #**5947** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 8:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctobsl

^^^^^^^^
It has stopped, please don't encourage it by referencing it again.

I like how the Hardison (450 East South Temple) project looks similar to the 500 East project.

Anthony

450 East South Temple

500 East

Photos Originally Posted by: linguisize

I was thinking the same thing. And, I believe they are both designed by the same firm...CRSA. They look nice, but good point about the similarity.

linguisize · #**5948** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 8:12 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctobsl

^^^^^^^^
It has stopped, please don't encourage it by referencing it again.

I like how the Hardison (450 East South Temple) project looks similar to the 500 East project.

Truly. A lot of red/brown brick already in that neighborhood, it should all go well together.

I am confused about the 500 east building though.. there really is no front door. No street engagement at all. It looks like it's going to be a giant wall facing the street with a garage entrance. That whole block will be a bunch of buildings with their backs turned to the street. It's amazing how much a single large door would do there...

http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/HLC/2016/00952.pdf

The report aisies posted had some solid examples of what's good.

http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/HLC/2016/00166(6).pdf

Utah_Dave · #**5949** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 11:00 PM**

I really like the 3 different brick and block colors on the south temple job. It really adds to the look for minimal $$$. The ground floor needs to be a touch taller but now I'm just nitpicking it. I've always like brick and glass midrises, makes me think of pizza for some reason.

Good work

asies1981 · #**5950** Posted **Apr 8, 2016, 11:58 PM**

Post on the Hardison approval, 100 less units than the original proposal.

delts145 · #**5951** Posted **Apr 9, 2016, 1:59 AM**

I like it. Good choice of materials and complimentary elements from S. Temple and 500 E. street side views. I also like the live work design arrangement at street level on S. Temple.

asies1981 · #**5952** Posted **Apr 9, 2016, 6:04 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delts145

I like it. Good choice of materials and complimentary elements from S. Temple and 500 E. street side views. I also like the live work design arrangement at street level on S. Temple.

The project across the street will have ground floor live/work units as well

UTAZLoVer · #**5953** Posted **Apr 9, 2016, 3:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by asies1981

Post on the Hardison approval, 100 less units than the original proposal.

fewer

s.p.hansen · #**5954** Posted **Apr 9, 2016, 4:06 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by linguisize

The approved update on the Hardison(450 East South Temple) looks quite different than before.

This is definitely an improvement! I'm really hoping the stop stucco movement is catching fire in Salt Lake City. Between this and the Trolley Square Project being a forum to bash stucco, it is my hope that we've crossed into less stuccoed era.

Also, in unrelated news, the pannels for the crown on 111 are going up.

The glass is fairly clear with thin frosted horizontal stripes.

Utah_Dave · #**5955** Posted **Apr 9, 2016, 10:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

This is definitely an improvement! I'm really hoping the stop stucco movement is catching fire in Salt Lake City. Between this and the Trolley Square Project being a forum to bash stucco, it is my hope that we've crossed into less stuccoed era.

Also, in unrelated news, the pannels for the crown on 111 are going up.

The glass is fairly clear with thin frosted horizontal stripes.

Look at that guy reaching out for the huge section of glass. What a cool place to work! Nice photo too.

Utah_Dave · #**5956** Posted **Apr 9, 2016, 10:55 PM**

If they do the lighting right, this could look really great at night.

Gastroc · #**5957** Posted **Apr 10, 2016, 12:33 AM**

I really wish the Hardison Project was twice as tall. As mentioned, it is 100 units less... Is there any reason why that is? and am I the only person who feels it should be about twice as tall?

ctobsl · #**5958** Posted **Apr 10, 2016, 1:16 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gastroc

I really wish the Hardison Project was twice as tall. As mentioned, it is 100 units less... Is there any reason why that is? and am I the only person who feels it should be about twice as tall?

I feel the same way, it should be twice as tall.
By not including the 100 units they omitted studio and affordable housing from the project.

"With the loss of 100 units and the reduction in size of the project, the developers withdrew plans to include affordable housing units. The project will also no longer include studio apartments. "
http://www.buildingsaltlake.com/hlc-approves-south-temple-project/

Marvland · #**5959** Posted **Apr 10, 2016, 4:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctobsl

I feel the same way, it should be twice as tall.
By not including the 100 units they omitted studio and affordable housing from the project.

"With the loss of 100 units and the reduction in size of the project, the developers withdrew plans to include affordable housing units. The project will also no longer include studio apartments. "
http://www.buildingsaltlake.com/hlc-approves-south-temple-project/

Development is all about unit counts. Less units, less return and less money at the table, hence no subsidized housing. Also it can't go much higher, being a "4 over 1" construction. Four stories of fire treated wood on top of post tensioned concrete decking. It's all the rage nowadays. Go taller and you're into steel construction, which could pencil as condo construction, but not rental. Not until we see $2.50-$3psf in rent.

hammersklavier · #**5960** Posted **Apr 10, 2016, 5:10 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marvland

Development is all about unit counts. Less units, less return and less money at the table, hence no subsidized housing. Also it can't go much higher, being a "4 over 1" construction. Four stories of fire treated wood on top of post tensioned concrete decking. It's all the rage nowadays. Go taller and you're into steel construction, which could pencil as condo construction, but not rental. Not until we see $2.50-$3psf in rent.

That would be $750-$900 for a 300 sf studio!