Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[linguisize]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

I don't see any rendering

You don't even really have to, I'd say it's not worth your time. Just try to think of five words that describe everything else being built lately and that's what it looks like.

[Future Mayor]

Originally Posted by Orlando

It's nice to see this infill, but I hope they reject this ourtright or tell them to add storefront/ larger glazing percentage at the base along with some commercial/retail businesses fronting North Temple and 300 West at ground level. Salt Lake City is really shooting themselves in the front by allowing these developments not have better urban street frontages at the ground level

Agreed, yet another uninspiring massive development with nearly zero sidewalk engagement.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that not every building can accommodate retail, the buildings being built on top of them just aren't enough to support that amount of retail, but be a little creative. Liberty whatever on 200 E doesn't have street retail, but it built live work town homes that front and are accessed off the street rather than from the lobby. It's simply street engagement. I guess that's one of the issue with having such a massive shortage of rental units in the city is that developers simply do the bare minimum anddon't care to go beyond that.


The 600 West, from the drawings appears to be at least a little better in making the street level a bit more friendly. Still no retail but at least the windows are larger. I'm trying to find some positives. I guess the mural art concept is a pretty standard thing now along 600 W. While the first one seemed a bit odd, I guess it's something to differentiate the neighborhood for others with 5-7 story apartment buildings.

Originally Posted by linguisize

You don't even really have to, I'd say it's not worth your time. Just try to think of five words that describe everything else being built lately and that's what it looks like.

Perfectly stated.

[asies1981]

Planning Commission approved the Central 9th Row Homes last night.

[Comrade]

I feel like, in 20 years, Salt Lake is going to look like the background to an animated TV show - just three or four buildings used over and over as the characters pass on by. Our entire city is just going to be those types of condo developments - up and down every street.

They're like the modern American version late 20th Century Soviet housing.

[delts145]

If Los Angeles/So. Cal in general is any indication of what's going on in the rest of the country, then Salt Lake's spate of 2016 look-a-likes is more eclectic and varied than many cities. Particularly, when taking the exterior materials into consideration. I know that's no excuse for Salt Lake City to follow the pack. I feel as if I have to have a mission to make enough money to be a philanthropist. My philanthropy would be focused on redoing many of the facades of this decades apartment buildings for Salt Lake. Seriously, for so many of them it would not be difficult to do an amazing makeover. Lately, I've seen a couple of makeovers from the 60's crap apartment buildings here in L.A., and the improvement is definitely a 180.

[EPdesign]

Thank Delts for posting the pics of the AC and res. Building. Viper lord and Asies for the update and new developments.

I was trying to recall-the project behind West High- is there not suppose to be a shorter building with retail going up on the west side of the whole complex? If I remember I think this project was supposed to have been multiple buildings. If not at the very least two.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by asies1981

Tensions are high between city council and the mayor's office. The mayor refused to offer a recommendation on what the council should do when the moratorium on impact fees expired. Also Boulder has applied for a building permit for Sugarmont so hopefully that means we see construction start early next year. Construction workers are about to put up the protected sidewalks for construction of the 4th and 4th project (not sure what they are called, lol) so looks like that project is progressing now.

Is it really a good idea to drastically increase the impact fees on residential when we have such a housing shortage? IIRC SLC is 7,500 affordable units short, there are easily 400k people along the wasatch front that would like to live downtown, and we have one of the toughest markets in the nation for 1st time homebuyers.

Since the moratorium on impact fees was enacted we've seen much more development. How much do these fees curb development? How many sales/property tax dollars does SLC lose because a development never happens? How much worse does our pollution become when someone commutes in lieu of living in SLC?

In an already developed city why do our impact fees need to be this high in the first place? Perhaps we need to reevaluate not just how the impact fees are structured but how much we depend on them for funds? I am concerned that we are encouraging sprawl beyond SLC's borders.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by delts145

If Los Angeles/So. Cal in general is any indication of what's going on in the rest of the country, then Salt Lake's spate of 2016 look-a-likes is more eclectic and varied than many cities. Particularly, when taking the exterior materials into consideration. I know that's no excuse for Salt Lake City to follow the pack. I feel as if I have to have a mission to make enough money to be a philanthropist. My philanthropy would be focused on redoing many of the facades of this decades apartment buildings for Salt Lake. Seriously, for so many of them it would not be difficult to do an amazing makeover. Lately, I've seen a couple of makeovers from the 60's crap apartment buildings here in L.A., and the improvement is definitely a 180.

It's ugly. I don't know what any other city is doing but if it's as uninventive as the shit SLC is churning out, they're in as much of a problem as we are. Our smaller residential developments are ass and there's no spinning it.

Would love more color. More glass. More height. More diversity.

[Old&New]

I think Portland's new housing stock is a great standard to emulate.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Comrade

It's ugly. I don't know what any other city is doing but if it's as uninventive as the shit SLC is churning out, they're in as much of a problem as we are. Our smaller residential developments are ass and there's no spinning it.

Would love more color. More glass. More height. More diversity.

I should show you guys some of this similar type of housing that we are doing up here. Lots more color and variation. Glass storefronts on the bottom level.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Agreed, yet another uninspiring massive development with nearly zero sidewalk engagement.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that not every building can accommodate retail, the buildings being built on top of them just aren't enough to support that amount of retail, but be a little creative. Liberty whatever on 200 E doesn't have street retail, but it built live work town homes that front and are accessed off the street rather than from the lobby. It's simply street engagement. I guess that's one of the issue with having such a massive shortage of rental units in the city is that developers simply do the bare minimum anddon't care to go beyond that.


The 600 West, from the drawings appears to be at least a little better in making the street level a bit more friendly. Still no retail but at least the windows are larger. I'm trying to find some positives. I guess the mural art concept is a pretty standard thing now along 600 W. While the first one seemed a bit odd, I guess it's something to differentiate the neighborhood for others with 5-7 story apartment buildings.

Future Mayor, I want you to do me a favor, and all of us really, who consider ourselves reasonably objective like yourself. Go back to the Attachment with renderings of 300 W. N. Temple. Not sure if you've already done this so far, but increase the size up 100%. Notice the very lavish amount of chiseled block, and brick. Also, what would usually be an attractive accent of horizontally directed hardy siding,(very little stucco). Not only lavish in materials, but also there would appear to be a generous amount of masonry detailing. In essence it would appear this structure given the right brick will appear as a high quality structure. Here's another point. Is commercial really feasible at that specific location? Also, would anyone want front door personal street access to their residence/workspace at that particular location?

[delts145]

Contd... I'm just thinking this is not a recreation of that 400 S. monster(can't remember it's name). Zooming up the rendering, it would appear that they're going the extra mile in the quality of the materials, the masonry patterns, and overall façade in general.

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Agreed, yet another uninspiring massive development with nearly zero sidewalk engagement.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that not every building can accommodate retail, the buildings being built on top of them just aren't enough to support that amount of retail, but be a little creative. Liberty whatever on 200 E doesn't have street retail, but it built live work town homes that front and are accessed off the street rather than from the lobby. It's simply street engagement. I guess that's one of the issue with having such a massive shortage of rental units in the city is that developers simply do the bare minimum anddon't care to go beyond that.


The 600 West, from the drawings appears to be at least a little better in making the street level a bit more friendly. Still no retail but at least the windows are larger. I'm trying to find some positives. I guess the mural art concept is a pretty standard thing now along 600 W. While the first one seemed a bit odd, I guess it's something to differentiate the neighborhood for others with 5-7 story apartment buildings.




Perfectly stated.

It might not be enough new apartments to accommodate a ton of new retail... but remember. They are actually tearing down a food place to make room for this Place. There used to be tons of food selection in the area and now we're down to just crown burger. As someone who lives in the area I must say that I'm disappointed that they couldn't even add one retail slide in there to accommodate the food place that they're tearing down.... West high is right next-door they would probably get a lot of business putting a couple food places in the base of this building.... I would love some food places around here... Crown burger is good but it gets a little bit old after a while... and besides my apartment building and the one in question there are a ton of new apartments going in on fourth W. just around the corner.

I still haven't been able to see renderings of this place. I always get JavaScript errors.

Let me guess 5 to 8 floors... mostly stucco with some sort of brick or natural stone accents... and maybe some sort of metal plating or composite material????

[EPdesign]

I hope both get built.

[mattreedah]

Hey all,
I don't post much but i follow all your discussions. I have just a few random ideas/observations.

I like most of these new buildings, but also wish they would have street level access. I don't think ground floor retail needs to be in every one. Overall, they are net positives though. Some of these areas were terrible before.

I often wonder when the road on 600 W is going to get redone. You have a neighborhood starting to form in the Gateway and also near there on North Temple and 600W, but then you have the railway that forms a real barrier between the two. It really should be one neighborhood. Also, those trains are extremely annoying to wait for.

My sister used to live in some of those apartments and never thought the Gateway was very close (even though it is) or safe to walk to because of conditions (roads, sidewalks, warehouses, etc.). It just feels further away than it really is. Does anyone know if there are plans to make a bridge over the rail or go under it -- or do anything?

Also, I've been following your Gateway conversation. I worked there at a few different places so i'm super sad at what's happened. You guys are right on in thinking there needs to be a grocery store and pet store there. I also think a bowling alley would do really well, as would middle-class stores you can't find downtown or in the rose park area like Kohls, Bed Bath and Beyond, and Ulta. Yeah, they aren't local or super-cool, but they would be anchors that allow smaller stores to want to go there again.

Thanks for all the posts you guys do. Don't kill each other too much.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

It might not be enough new apartments to accommodate a ton of new retail... but remember. They are actually tearing down a food place to make room for this Place. There used to be tons of food selection in the area and now we're down to just crown burger. As someone who lives in the area I must say that I'm disappointed that they couldn't even add one retail slide in there to accommodate the food place that they're tearing down.... West high is right next-door they would probably get a lot of business putting a couple food places in the base of this building.... I would love some food places around here... Crown burger is good but it gets a little bit old after a while... and besides my apartment building and the one in question there are a ton of new apartments going in on fourth W. just around the corner.

I still haven't been able to see renderings of this place. I always get JavaScript errors.

Let me guess 5 to 8 floors... mostly stucco with some sort of brick or natural stone accents... and maybe some sort of metal plating or composite material????

You have a good point AjiuO about the eating establishments, though probably the owners of the building would prefer not to have a ton of high schoolers hanging around the establishment. Actually, this complex on 300 West and N. Temple has a high quality exterior treatment. From the rendering we see they are using a chiseled block for the lower level, and an abundance of brick. There is an accent of horizontal hardy board lathes, but only a little stucco, which is fine as a minor accent. Also, the brick has masonry creativity thrown in, and there is a defined traditional cornice at the top. Add in the large number of balconies, the very uneven juxtaposition of the street facing walls, and I think we'll have a high quality project.

While I don't think this project is at all ugly, I do agree that a variety of styles need to be added in to the projects under construction. For example, it wouldn't be any more expensive to have given this project a definitive art deco treatment on the exterior. I mean, they are using a large amount of block and brick, and adding in masonry detailing. So why not give the accent elements, the cornice, and those predictable higher elevations at the ends, a definitive art deco treatment? That, instead of the neo traditional design and brick pattern that is so prevalent today.

Guys, it would probably help a lot if some of you would call the firms designing these projects. Discuss with them the need for the introduction of differing styles. In many cases they could probably lead their clients/developers toward using a different style, instead of the over used repetition of the current crop.

I love the word Stenar used the other day regarding the current spate of repetitive designs. The word was 'compelling'. We need to make the downtown streets of Salt Lake City residentially more compelling.

[Marvland]

Vertical mixed use doesn't really work unless in extremely high density scenarios. There are literally hundreds of retail spaces that have been mandated for vertical mixed use and there only a few that have a high quality retail component. One possible exception is Sugarhouse, but Sugarhouse is a very unique situation. Even then, a bunch of those storefronts are struggling because to make it pencil, prices per square foot are pushing $40psf before CAMs (ack!). Restaurants need hoods (usually expensive horizontal HVAC systems), grease traps and fire sprinklers. They also commonly conflict with upstairs residential, so you have high cost acoustic separations.

I'd really like to see horizontal mixed use mandates on corners. That would kill densities though. Retail is hard. Apartments are easy.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Marvland

Vertical mixed use doesn't really work unless in extremely high density scenarios. There are literally hundreds of retail spaces that have been mandated for vertical mixed use and there only a few that have a high quality retail component. One possible exception is Sugarhouse, but Sugarhouse is a very unique situation. Even then, a bunch of those storefronts are struggling because to make it pencil, prices per square foot are pushing $40psf before CAMs (ack!). Restaurants need hoods (usually expensive horizontal HVAC systems), grease traps and fire sprinklers. They also commonly conflict with upstairs residential, so you have high cost acoustic separations.

I'd really like to see horizontal mixed use mandates on corners. That would kill densities though. Retail is hard. Apartments are easy.

I get it, but those on 400 south and that recent one on the corner of North Temple and 300 West, are all facing prominent streets. They should have a portion of the ground level facade with a retail or business component, and they should have zero setback/landscaping, and a high glazing percentage. Salt Lake City must not have the confidence in the ability to enforce this.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Orlando

. Salt Lake City must not have the confidence in the ability to enforce this.

Salt Lake has little confidence in development in general.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by Orlando

I get it, but those on 400 south and that recent one on the corner of North Temple and 300 West, are all facing prominent streets. They should have a portion of the ground level facade with a retail or business component, and they should have zero setback/landscaping, and a high glazing percentage. Salt Lake City must not have the confidence in the ability to enforce this.

I agree about the one on 400 S but I don't think the 300 west one would have any success with ground floor retail unless they add surface parking. Yeah it's replacing an eating establishment but it's a failed Subway. If you're walking in that area both 2nd and 4th are more enjoyable routes. If you're driving you're probably going to continue driving into downtown. I'm Ok with the 3rd west one being all residential. The extra residents will help support retail within the city.