Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[bob rulz]

You can have a block of short buildings and nothing going on. You can have a block of short buildings and lots of street activity. You can have a block of tall buildings with nothing going on. You can have a block of tall buildings and lots of street activity. The height is only part of the equation - it's engagement at street level and the mix of uses that matters.

And even on blocks with lots of street activity, there are going to be times of day and days of the week that are relatively dead (outside of a few prime examples).

Originally Posted by i-215

I'd take 2 thirty story buildings over 1 sixty, any day!

Most of us wouldn't argue that, I wouldn't think. Assuming we're talking about Salt Lake specifically. But why not a 40 story tower? Or a 40 story tower AND a 30 story tower?

Originally Posted by Denvergotback

In my opinion, if your going to build soulless office buildings, let’s keep them more contained that way you have more space for recreational space and larger sections of the city full of activity where apartments and hotels and nightlife could be held

Or mix in the soulless office buildings with a mixed-use street. Or, even better, build office buildings with soul.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Meliorem

A photograph captures a moment and can be edited in numerous ways to help establish and support the direction of the photographer. In this case, I think it does a good job of supporting the article in question. Often, a photographer will want to keep interfering elements out of the frame so that the focus is on what's being portrayed. Vice versa.

Found at another website




Remember, the photographer decides what's being portrayed.

Yes. Chicago and New York are amazing. I actually like the push higher in Denver, it works for them and the scale of the city. But to me the really interesting action is CBD periphery, LoHi, Berkely, Rino etc. I find that's almost always the case outside of the legacy cities, all the cool stuff gets squeezed out of the high tower districts because nobody except banks and Subway can compete against the Korean REITs. Ground floors of towers demand high rents because of the costs of building them. That's what's fun about CBD Salt Lake, we have a great downtown cultural mix that's building momentum.

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by airhero

Just another update on this. Another building permit has been submitted for this project, this time for the Liberty Uptown building. Looks like this project may finally be happening. Thought it might have died.

That's great news. Anybody know if they figured out what the plan is for the midmod Public Safety Building on 200 South?

[Orlando]

Cool. So, is the Uptown building the one that fronts onto 200 South? Just the tower is left then?

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by i-215

Maybe I'm contrarian here, but I sort of like having 300' as a ceiling of sorts. It makes the skyline look a bit more full (and the city more substantial), rather than being dominated by a single tower (which would diminish the others by comparison).

I'd take 2 thirty story buildings over 1 sixty, any day!

What skyline is this, though?

I can't recall any skyline, at least in the United States, that looks more attractive topping out at 300 feet than, say, Charlotte's or Cleveland's:





Two cities with one tower dominating it.

I'd guarantee you, whether you'd take it or not, most people would not say SLC's skyline is anywhere near as attractive. And, sadly, they'd be right.

I do agree that it's all about balance - and SLC's skyline has a balance ... it's just not particularly aesthetically pleasing balance.

As for a skyline of nothing but 300 footers? I don't know about that...

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Marvland

Yes. Chicago and New York are amazing. I actually like the push higher in Denver, it works for them and the scale of the city. But to me the really interesting action is CBD periphery, LoHi, Berkely, Rino etc. I find that's almost always the case outside of the legacy cities, all the cool stuff gets squeezed out of the high tower districts because nobody except banks and Subway can compete against the Korean REITs. Ground floors of towers demand high rents because of the costs of building them. That's what's fun about CBD Salt Lake, we have a great downtown cultural mix that's building momentum.

I give credit to SLC for really committing, the last twenty years or so, to infuse life back into downtown and I think they've done a good job of it. But it does your point no good to mischaracterize things by suggesting Salt Lake is somehow in a league of its own, or at least a different league, than many other cities whose downtowns have significantly taller development.

Portland, Seattle, hell, even Phoenix, out west rival, or easily beat, Salt Lake in terms of that unique, classic experience that helps drive entertainment options and foot traffic. It's never been an all or nothing proposition - a lot of major US cities have done a good job of that balance. Especially older cities. Granted, maybe that flair isn't there in the Sun Belt cities, or at the level as, say, Columbus or St. Louis or Kansas City, but, like with Salt Lake, it's an ever evolving trait.

But this is downtown Charlotte:











Honestly, how is that any worse than downtown Salt Lake City? In fact, those last two pictures, of the Latta Arcade, is probably cooler than most of what downtown SLC has to offer.

You can have both a downtown dominated by office towers and the type of street-level engagement we crave in SLC. I would wager downtown SLC is no more active, and in some instances, way less active, and with way less bars, restaurants and interesting entertainment options, than many other US cities. So, let's have both!

[Marvland]

Originally Posted by Comrade

But this is downtown Charlotte:

Honestly, how is that any worse than downtown Salt Lake City? In fact, those last two pictures, of the Latta Arcade, is probably cooler than most of what downtown SLC has to offer.

You can have both a downtown dominated by office towers and the type of street-level engagement we crave in SLC. I would wager downtown SLC is no more active, and in some instances, way less active, and with way less bars, restaurants and interesting entertainment options, than many other US cities. So, let's have both!

I'm glad you chose Charlotte as your red herring to beat me over the head with. It is truly a shining example of a city that is booming right. Charlotte and, even better, Raleigh Durham are kicking ass right now and are really good measuring sticks. Charleston too. They all have one thing in common: they are being them. SLC needs to be itself. And it's not a super vertical city and I'm happy about that. I'd love to see a bunch more 15 to 30 story buildings. I do not covet other people's phallic symbols.

[Mountain man]

Originally Posted by Marvland

I'm glad you chose Charlotte as your red herring to beat me over the head with. It is truly a shining example of a city that is booming right. Charlotte and, even better, Raleigh Durham are kicking ass right now and are really good measuring sticks. Charleston too. They all have one thing in common: they are being them. SLC needs to be itself. And it's not a super vertical city and I'm happy about that. I'd love to see a bunch more 15 to 30 story buildings. I do not covet other people's phallic symbols.

This, this ladies and gentlemen is what a losers mentality looks like!

We have a short, aesthetically unpleasing skyline and I actually prefer that! We are being ourselves! These are the reasons why I will be justifying a smaller, stockier, less attractive skyline and why it is so much better and why I am so much more pleased for it! I hope we never get a tall building, it just isn't Salt Lake!

So much for ambition man!

[FullCircle]

Originally Posted by Marvland

I'm glad you chose Charlotte as your red herring to beat me over the head with. It is truly a shining example of a city that is booming right. Charlotte and, even better, Raleigh Durham are kicking ass right now and are really good measuring sticks. Charleston too. They all have one thing in common: they are being them. SLC needs to be itself. And it's not a super vertical city and I'm happy about that. I'd love to see a bunch more 15 to 30 story buildings. I do not covet other people's phallic symbols.

I'm pretty sure this is an Abrahamic commandment: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbors phallic symbols! Even if their symbols haven't been snipped, I mean, are lengthier, I mean are taller than thine own!"

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Marvland

I'm glad you chose Charlotte as your red herring to beat me over the head with. It is truly a shining example of a city that is booming right. Charlotte and, even better, Raleigh Durham are kicking ass right now and are really good measuring sticks. Charleston too. They all have one thing in common: they are being them. SLC needs to be itself. And it's not a super vertical city and I'm happy about that. I'd love to see a bunch more 15 to 30 story buildings. I do not covet other people's phallic symbols.

What is Salt Lake, then? A boxy, uninspiring skyline that levels out well below any city its relative size? Zzzz

Salt Lake can have a unique, aesthetically pleasing skyline and still maintain the flow that has developed downtown rather easily. As is, though, no one is looking at Salt Lake's skyline and thinking, beyond the backdrop, that's a beaut.

And I get it. The backdrop is our thing. But this isn't NaturalBackDropPage.com and I want both and I think Salt Lake can absolutely have both. I also think, as I've stated a couple days ago, the fact that nearly every city that is comparable in size, or even marginally smaller, when you factor in the CMA of Salt Lake, has a more impressive tallest, if not multiple buildings taller than Salt Lake's tallest, is a massive negative to the city.

We have a beautiful backdrop. I'd love to add some beautiful towers to it. I'm not asking for a 800 footer - but something over 500 feet, with a crown, would be great.

But it feels like the counter argument to that is that we'd all rather have 10 new 300-400 foot towers than one 500 foot tower. To be honest, I'd be okay with that ... but how likely is that to happen? In the last ten years, Salt Lake has had three towers constructed downtown that are above 300 feet. Hell, the last nineteen years, it's only been four (counting the Grand America). We're going to be waiting a long while to get to that point. But it only takes one development to dramatically alter the skyline - a 600 footer right in the heart of the skyline.

[tchild2]

Originally Posted by Mountain man

This, this ladies and gentlemen is what a losers mentality looks like!

We have a short, aesthetically unpleasing skyline and I actually prefer that! We are being ourselves! These are the reasons why I will be justifying a smaller, stockier, less attractive skyline and why it is so much better and why I am so much more pleased for it! I hope we never get a tall building, it just isn't Salt Lake!

So much for ambition man!

Salt Lake City is not a person, but an economic collective, and its economic decisions are based on economic realities. It isn't about aesthetic preferences for skyscraper loving geeks (like us here), but financial decisions and ROI. When the ROI for taller skyscrapers makes sense, they will be built. The point that people are making is that since we are not getting taller buildings because of the economics of building them, at least we can look forward to a larger urban footprint because more mid level high rises are infilling the city.

People want a vibrant downtown; walk-able, livable, enjoyable. large skyscrapers do not necessarily make that a reality. People living downtown will.

[Mountain man]

Originally Posted by tchild2

Salt Lake City is not a person, but an economic collective, and its economic decisions are based on economic realities. It isn't about aesthetic preferences for skyscraper loving geeks (like us here), but financial decisions and ROI. When the ROI for taller skyscrapers makes sense, they will be built. The point that people are making is that since we are not getting taller buildings because of the economics of building them, at least we can look forward to a larger urban footprint because more mid level high rises are infilling the city.

People want a vibrant downtown; walk-able, livable, enjoyable. large skyscrapers do not necessarily make that a reality. People living downtown will.

[berger4]

A couple things:
Alot of infill projects are either starting or well underway, I may go out and take some pictures soon.
There was a groundbreaking today for the Centro Civico site, expecting a 6 story senior housing 61 units. 155 south 600 west.
Work(demolition) has started on the first step house emergency homeless housing at 440 south 500 east, looks like 75 units. 440 south 500 east.
The Exchange site demolition is well underway, I'm excited for this project.
Alot of other projects are well underway including:
Quattro
Liberty Square
Hardison Apartments
Looks like a couple sites on North Temple and the viaduct as well.

[asies1981]

Originally Posted by Comrade

I give credit to SLC for really committing, the last twenty years or so, to infuse life back into downtown and I think they've done a good job of it. But it does your point no good to mischaracterize things by suggesting Salt Lake is somehow in a league of its own, or at least a different league, than many other cities whose downtowns have significantly taller development.

Portland, Seattle, hell, even Phoenix, out west rival, or easily beat, Salt Lake in terms of that unique, classic experience that helps drive entertainment options and foot traffic. It's never been an all or nothing proposition - a lot of major US cities have done a good job of that balance. Especially older cities. Granted, maybe that flair isn't there in the Sun Belt cities, or at the level as, say, Columbus or St. Louis or Kansas City, but, like with Salt Lake, it's an ever evolving trait.

But this is downtown Charlotte:











Honestly, how is that any worse than downtown Salt Lake City? In fact, those last two pictures, of the Latta Arcade, is probably cooler than most of what downtown SLC has to offer.

You can have both a downtown dominated by office towers and the type of street-level engagement we crave in SLC. I would wager downtown SLC is no more active, and in some instances, way less active, and with way less bars, restaurants and interesting entertainment options, than many other US cities. So, let's have both!

Not to add fuel to the fire but Charlotte's downtown has 13 towers and the expansion of its streetcar underway. Though of the 13 towers, only 4 or 5 will have a residential component, the rest will be office and hotels. https://www.charlotteagenda.com/156197/v...ve-guide-to-charlottes-changing-skyline/

[asies1981]

Also, to those that miss BSL, it should be back up and running soon with new ownership.

[EPdesign]

Sorry to interrupt the conversation. They are half way through demolishing the black glass building north of the PSB. It’s been a while since there’s be a demo of an office building

[jubguy3]

yikes

[Hatman]

Originally Posted by asies1981

Also, to those that miss BSL, it should be back up and running soon with new ownership.

That's great! Thanks for reporting on all the development in SLC for so long, and best of luck to your new endeavors!

And Old&New, thanks for posting those pictures of the Pantages a page or two back. I'd never seen them before. That theater definitely deserves a second life!

[Blah_Amazing]

Originally Posted by EPdesign

Sorry to interrupt the conversation. They are half way through demolishing the black glass building north of the PSB. It’s been a while since there’s be a demo of an office building

I hope that means we will see the construction of The Exchange this year then. Typically, if they are willing to go far enough to demolish, they are pretty much ready to build.

[StevenF]

Skyscraperpage was down all morning and into the afternoon. My understanding of this site is nobody really maintains it anymore and is nobody claims it. Might be a good time of maybe taking our discousion to Discord instead. We can set up voice channels and individual channels for different areas and projects.