Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by San Diego-Honolulu

Slow last couple weeks everyone in Salt Lake City? You guys make me laugh with these pipe dreams of what you think this hotel will look like.

Since when is Salt Lake City ever flashy or setting new standards with buildings? This hotel will most likely just be T or L shaped and blend in with the other buildings with a natural color look and probably be no taller than the fourth or fifth tallest in Salt Lake City.

In other news, water is still wet in Salt Lake City.

Slow day for San Diego-Honolulu? You make me laugh with your DB attitude. Since when is San Diego-Honolulu an expert on exactly what Salt Lake City is going to get? I wasn't aware that you worked for the developer and already knew the plans for the building.

[Salty Laker]

Never mind

[Wasatch Wasteland]

Originally Posted by San Diego-Honolulu

In other news, water is still wet in Salt Lake City.

This is Hilarious. I'm literally dying. Literally.


When is/was the deadline for a CCH proposal again? I've forgotten.

[Makid]

I am not sure on the timeline but I did notice this:

http://www.utah.gov/pmn/sitemap/notice/326269.html

Notice Title: CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION AGENDA

Notice Type: Meeting

Event Start Date & Time: April 26, 2016 1:00 PM

7. Building Height in Downtown Secondary Central Business District, Zoning Text Amendment ~4:15 PM
30 min.
Legislative Sponsor: Not Required - Petition from Applicant(s)
Building Height in Downtown Secondary Central Business District, Zoning Text Amendment: an ordinance amending City zoning regulations pertaining to building height in the D-4 Downtown Secondary Central Business District (amending Section 21A.30.045 of the Salt Lake City Code). The ordinance would allow for buildings of unlimited height on the Salt Palace properties bounded by South Temple, West Temple, 200 South and 200 West, while maintaining the permitted maximum height requirement of 75 feet elsewhere in the district. The change is designed to accommodate a future convention center hotel. Related provisions of Title 21A- Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petitioner-Former Mayor Ralph Becker Petition No. PLNPCM2015-00676.

This would be an update on the previous limits for the area. Didn't they already to an update with a limit to 300' or 350'?

Thinking about it, I am a bit torn on which way this should go. If this does happen and unlimited height is allowed, any design, even a large wall could go up. With a height restriction and allowing for a variance with a design review, this allows more input on the design. The downside is that the process can take longer.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by San Diego-Honolulu

Slow last couple weeks everyone in Salt Lake City? You guys make me laugh with these pipe dreams of what you think this hotel will look like.

Since when is Salt Lake City ever flashy or setting new standards with buildings? This hotel will most likely just be T or L shaped and blend in with the other buildings with a natural color look and probably be no taller than the fourth or fifth tallest in Salt Lake City.

In other news, water is still wet in Salt Lake City.

Since when is San Diego or Honolulu ever flashy or setting new standards with buildings?

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Makid

I am not sure on the timeline but I did notice this:

http://www.utah.gov/pmn/sitemap/notice/326269.html





This would be an update on the previous limits for the area. Didn't they already to an update with a limit to 300' or 350'?

Thinking about it, I am a bit torn on which way this should go. If this does happen and unlimited height is allowed, any design, even a large wall could go up. With a height restriction and allowing for a variance with a design review, this allows more input on the design. The downside is that the process can take longer.

Yes but the county owns the land right? It seems like the review is being done in advance of the developer getting the property.

[Makid]

Originally Posted by Liberty Wellsian

Yes but the county owns the land right? It seems like the review is being done in advance of the developer getting the property.

That is true. They have also stated that they want a tall and iconic tower for the CCH. I would stress tall in the previous sentence but as we know, everyone has their own definition on what tall really means.

I just hope that they do focus on limiting the wall effect. This is both along West Temple but also into the block. Having 2 or even 3 towers would be better than a massive wall.

I know it is just my opinion but I would rather have 2 taller towers than a single tower with a wide wall of a bottom. There will be some wideness for the meeting space but that bulk doesn't have to and IMO shouldn't extend higher than the current roof of the convention center.

[UTPlanner]

A change in the Zoning Ordinance would allow buildings on the Salt Palace site to request unlimited height but only if it's approved through a design review process with the Planning Commission. It is not simply a free for all in any way.

[Future Mayor]

The reality is that it's a hotel with possible 1,200 rooms, it seems to me that there is going to be at least a portion of the hotel that will be that traditional "wall" design. Simply for ease of operations in house keeping they can clean 20 rooms faster on one floor than 20 rooms spread out on three floors.

[Ironweed]

[QUOTE=Future Mayor;7423217]The reality is that it's a hotel with possible 1,200 rooms, it seems to me that there is going to be at least a portion of the hotel that will be that traditional "wall" design.

You are probably right, and it is a shame. They better do this right.

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by s.p.hansen

I just wanna say, Mr. President, that I'm a big fan. I'm gonna really miss you.

I'm not a fan at all... But I'm still going to miss him compared to Hillary Clinton or Donald trump . :-/

[Utah_Dave]

Thanks for the info MAKID. I clicked on the link and scrolled down and i want to make sure I'm reading this right. It looks like they are allowing public input on May 24th at 7:00 pm? Is this correct and for the CCH hotel? If so, we need to rally for the cause. I can just imagine a bunch of nay sayers from 99 west that are sure to show up and protest the size of the structure on the north lot. Fill me in on what this is really about if you don't mind.

It's my 14th wedding anniversary. Looks like the wife is in for a romantic public hearing date!

Lol

[ThePusherMan]

Originally Posted by Utah_Dave

It's my 14th wedding anniversary. Looks like the wife is in for a romantic public hearing date!

Lol

haha oh god. Good thing my girlfriend doesn't read this forum. I fear that quote is the ghost of Christmas yet to come.

[delts145]

Maybe we should wager on the design and placement/orientation of the hotel also, not just the height. I say there will be a fairly large pedestal, with very attractive street engagement. The pedestal will have four to six floors above ground and several below for parking. The L shape will be used in part to accommodate the lower portion or approximately 20-plus floors, yet not appear too overwhelming in length. I can actually see the wisdom in them putting the longer length, but shorter height portion of the L tower running east/west, abutting the CC itself. This way, much of the length of the longer, shorter height L portion would run inward, some of it into and above the Convention Center, yet not block the east/south/western sun from the solar panels or overly encumber W. Temple with its wall like length.The taller more slender portion of the L tower or bottom of the L, will orient its face toward West Temple, the Wasatch and Oquirrh/Lake views. The views of Mountains and Lake become critical as the upper portions of the taller tower are going to be reserved for the pricier rooms/suites, and especially the all important condo/residential portion.

The L shape could easily end up being more of a two sided square, depending on how tall they're willing to make the taller tower. The important assumption here would be that they are breaking up the too long linear massing of only one tower.

I'm also thinking that the CCH will not mimic the design exterior treatment of the Convention Center, but be more along the line of the Regent on 1st S. and Regent St. An attractive pedestal, like we see with the Regent, with two towers of similar treatment as the one Regent tower. Again, one portion being shorter than the other. Also using the same type metal materials as sheathing.

[Future Mayor]

I like the amount of thought that you've put into the layout. I agree that there will be a pedestal with meeting space, amenities, and below grade parking. I think that the L will run along W. Temple and on the north side of the UMOCA site, adjacent to Abravanel plaza. This alignment will allow sun to reach the interior of the hotel, which I am assuming will be the location of the pool area, on top of the pedestal.

I could see two towers, differing in heights, one on the SE corner of the site fronting W. Temple, and the other on the NW corner of the site, with the taller of the two towers facing W. Temple. I'm going to say around 475' and 375'.

Just off the top of my head.

Red - Pedestal 4-6 stories tall, takes up the entire footprint. Lobby, Street level retail, restaurant, bar, conference space, spas restaurants, pool and other amenities.
Orange - Traditional L shaped hotel, roughly the same width as the Marriott across the street.
Blue - Hotel Tower 36 stories (ground to top), roughly 475' tall
Green - Residential Tower 28 stories, roughly 375' tall



I'm sure we'll hear certain forumers mocking our enthusiasm, but I look at it this way. Every city that now has beautiful buildings got that first significant building at some point in it's evolution. So since the county is giving land and is requiring great design, this could very well be the tipping point for Salt Lake City.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

I could see two towers, differing in heights, one on the SE corner of the site fronting W. Temple, and the other on the NW corner of the site, with the taller of the two towers facing W. Temple. I'm going to say around 475' and 375'.

Just off the top of my head.


I'm sure we'll hear certain forumers mocking our enthusiasm, but I look at it this way. Every city that now has beautiful buildings got that first significant building at some point in it's evolution. So since the county is giving land and is requiring great design, this could very well be the tipping point for Salt Lake City.

This would be my DREAM scenario. Two nice towers contributing to our building density and add to views from all angles. And of course hosting great stay experiences and without a doubt four to five new critical food and beverage spaces. Maybe a few badly needed spas.

I don't care about what other markets think. We don't have a flashy skyline and I don't really care if ever do. We need density and interaction. We also have a BUNCH of action as a whole market/CSA. It's not like Washougal, Clackamas and Vancouver are kicking — in the Portland submarkets. Almost all western markets development is core development. We have SLC, Ogden, Lehi, Sandy/Draper and Provo who are cooking along a 75 mile development spine. That's our magic sauce.

[asies1981]

Post on the AC Hotel and apartment project. This project should help bridge the gap between downtown and the gateway area, at least on the south side of the street.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by asies1981

Post on the AC Hotel and apartment project. This project should help bridge the gap between downtown and the gateway area, at least on the south side of the street.

Really the only two things I don't like about this is that they are only going 109' with the hotel and that they are retaining 100 surface parking stalls around the Sweet Candy buildings.

Other than that I think they've put a lot of thought into the project, designing the plaza to focus on pedestrians, but allows cars, retail frontage and the design elements including different lines and varying setbacks.

Great addition to that neighborhood.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by asies1981

Post on the AC Hotel and apartment project. This project should help bridge the gap between downtown and the gateway area, at least on the south side of the street.

My one complaint about this is that I had hoped that Pierpont Ave would eventually completely bisect that block. The Apartment building extends a hair too far south and the surface parking south of the Sugar building should be removed. The bigger deal is the apt bldg. Go ahead and keep the parking but don't kill future Pierpont ext for 5 feet of footprint.

[SLCdude]

I work in the Sweet Candy Building (224 S 200 W). This is all news to me. La Fountain (the little Mexican Restaurant at 2nd and 2nd) closed a week ago. This makes sense now.

Like what others have said, this is great infill but a missed opportunity to bridge the Pierpont gap. I can't tell from the B/W site plan... will pedestrians be able to walk through the block at least if they really want to?



P.S. I will be moving to Portland this Fall for PSU's Master of Urban and Regional Planning Program!