HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7881  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:11 PM
scottharding scottharding is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,609
The old Ace Automotive Warehouse on 700 South (across the street to the North of the Sears block) has construction fencing around it this morning. The guy on the site said the warehouse is being restored and included in the new design.
Anyone know anything?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7882  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:09 PM
ChickenBurgers ChickenBurgers is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: West Jordan
Posts: 8
^^^
It's that CW Urban project that's been planned for a while now and good to see it finally start construction. 60 units in a six story building that I guess now includes a restored warehouse as well. BSL has an article about it here. On a side note that block is really coming together with the 600 Lofts, 6th & Main, The Iris, a new TRAX station, and talk of another taller building south of 6th & Main.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7883  
Old Posted Yesterday, 9:46 PM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 16,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottharding View Post
The old Ace Automotive Warehouse on 700 South (across the street to the North of the Sears block) has construction fencing around it this morning. The guy on the site said the warehouse is being restored and included in the new design.
Anyone know anything?
I had a hard time placing it until I looked at the BSL article ChickenBurgers pointed to. Isaac Riddle reported on it almost two years ago. I remembered the name and the warehouse component.

The Charli - https://www.buildingsaltlake.com/dev...al-boundaries/

Rendering of the east façade of the proposed Charli development as designed by Method Studio. Image courtesy Salt Lake City public documents.


Rendering of the north façade of the proposed Charli development as designed by Method Studio. Image courtesy Salt Lake City public documents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7884  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:32 PM
berger4 berger4 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by delts145 View Post
I had a hard time placing it until I looked at the BSL article ChickenBurgers pointed to. Isaac Riddle reported on it almost two years ago. I remembered the name and the warehouse component.

The Charli - https://www.buildingsaltlake.com/dev...al-boundaries/

Rendering of the east façade of the proposed Charli development as designed by Method Studio. Image courtesy Salt Lake City public documents.


Rendering of the north façade of the proposed Charli development as designed by Method Studio. Image courtesy Salt Lake City public documents.
Actually the Charlie which you have referenced is already framed and far along, the iris is referenced further down in the article and is where the ace warehouse was I’m pretty sure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7885  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:47 PM
scottharding scottharding is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,609
That's right. The Charli (the old Taffy town) is topping out right now. In the BSL article it says they were building it in two phases, with the conversion of the old warehouse being the second, but it appears they've gone ahead and done them both at the same time.

As for the Iris, that's definitely the site. I wonder if this rendering is still the case though. My short conversation with the man on location said the old Ace warehouse was going to be restored, and there's no mention of that in the article or indication of it in the image.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7886  
Old Posted Yesterday, 10:49 PM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 16,015
Thanks Berger4 for the heads up. I should have scrolled further down. ^^^Your're information is probably more current Scott since the article is about two years old. Someone needs to get a few photos of all this. I'm super curious about what the warehouse at the Iris site looks like.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7887  
Old Posted Today, 1:50 AM
jedikermit's Avatar
jedikermit jedikermit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob rulz View Post
This was completed 2 years ago. I've taken a few classes in this building. It's a beautiful building both inside and out, but it's at the expense of the interior functionality. The layout is a mess and some of the classrooms don't have any outlets to plug laptops into - in a school building built in the year 2018.

I know that's outside the scope of this thread, but a good example of how not to prioritize form over function.
Oh hey, I teach in that building.

And it is beautiful, and does have great amenities, and does have some really messy things like rooms with no outlets and large rooms that bisect into smaller rooms (which is great) but then the controls for the projector, AV etc for Room B and C are on the wall of Room A. They're sorting some of that out. My classes this semester will all be online, so it's moot...but sometimes the newest shiniest still has some kinks to work out.
__________________
Loving Salt Lake City. Despite everything, and because of everything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7888  
Old Posted Today, 3:17 PM
Makid Makid is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,713
There was a discussion during the SLC Council work session regarding zoning heights, specifically the area direction East of the Central Station.

Video Link


The discussion starts about an hour 20 into the video.

There are also a few documents that are provided on this as well:

Staff Report: https://slc.primegov.com/Portal/viewer?id=15947&type=2

Administrative Transmittal: https://slc.primegov.com/Portal/viewer?id=15859&type=2

There are a few other documents that are linked to this under the Meeting Documents for the overall meeting.

I did notice that there were a few reasons given against raising the heights, as of right.

1: Historic Preservation, increased heights could lead to demolition of historic buildings to get a better use of the land.
2: Reduces/Removes incentives the city can offer to increase affordable housing.

I don't like the idea of Historic Preservation via limiting zoning height. It doesn't save the building, as someone could still demolish the building as long as it was within the height requirement.

I also don't think that any incentive is lost with increased zoned heights. Sure, developers could all build taller as of right, but the incentive would still be there to build taller with the inclusion of affordable units.

Next, I noticed that there is a conflicting set of issues that the City is starting to realize. For some reason, there are some in the City that are set on the pyramid shape with the CBD (D-1 zoning) being the tallest and then extending downward to the West.

At the same time that they reference the pyramid shape, there is also reference to diminishing space within the CBD area for taller buildings. They call out that the recent building boom has reduced and removed many of the remaining D-1 parcels. There are now very limited spaces available due to either planned projects or land banking.

Here is the conflict: The City has it codified that as the CBD/D-1 area fills out, the D-1 would eventually extend to the West over time.

So the City knows it is running out of space in the D-1 area but also hamstrings itself by not wanting to allow taller buildings in the GMU, D4 and D3 areas. This is done to again, preserve the Pyramid.

How can the increased D-1 heights be extended Westward as planned when there are those that are against this.

Additionally, there is a reference to both the CCH and Block 67 Phase 2. Both project areas are in the D4 zone, both are adjacent to D1 and requested to have their project area zoning changed to D1 to allow for increased heights.

It is mentioned in one of the documents that both projects were scaled down to fit into a D4 overlay zone with a 375' cap on height.

I think that this is the City shooting itself in the foot, while giving more power to the Land Bankers. The good thing is that there is an appetite for changing the heights and work is being done to make this happen.

I do think that in many ways STACK development should get a lot of credit for this push to increase zoning heights. They are still pushing for the area East of the Central Station to have the heights increased, both min and max heights.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7889  
Old Posted Today, 4:42 PM
Rileybo's Avatar
Rileybo Rileybo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 74
^^^

Watching that video
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7890  
Old Posted Today, 5:32 PM
scottharding scottharding is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,609
That was unbearable.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:53 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.