HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #8641  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2020, 5:07 AM
Wasatch Wasteland's Avatar
Wasatch Wasteland Wasatch Wasteland is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatman View Post
This is excellent feedback. Thanks

Okay, okay, I can't help myself. I have to point out my favorite thing about the rendering I shared. Historically, the Rio Grande sign was joined by another sign that said "Western Pacific," which was a partner railroad to the Rio Grande:



Well, look at what cj.blakely did to the sign in his rendering!


Hatman, I don't think you're getting my messages. I spoke with CJ Blakely, turns out we've worked together and know each other well haha. I would love to help get this off the ground. I excel in the graphic design and presentation department and I believe I can help create a very compelling proposal that's beautifully presented with clear diagrams and visual explanations. Explaining these ideas visually and diagrammatically with simple graphics and stunning renderings will be much more effective than excessive text filled pages. Message me if you can!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8642  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2020, 7:52 AM
Hatman's Avatar
Hatman Hatman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,294
Oops. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to ignore you! It looks like you have private messages disabled. An error keeps coming up. I'll see if I can get your email address or something from cj.blakely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8643  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2020, 9:18 PM
berger4 berger4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 27

Last edited by berger4; Nov 21, 2020 at 9:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8644  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2020, 10:00 PM
berger4 berger4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 27
I'm trying to upload the pictures so you can actually see them and not have to go to flickr. I'm sure once I figure it out, it's super easy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8645  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2020, 10:58 PM
Comrade's Avatar
Comrade Comrade is offline
They all float down here
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hair City, Utah
Posts: 8,799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
I like our skyline. I like that it has a smattering of good quality (albeit rather short) towers from various eras that, even though they are mostly boxy, really contrast each other in terms of color and texture. And it looks good in front of our incredible mountains.

I don't think a few more condo/apartment towers would look bad at all since we have so few at the moment. The residential towers that are proposed right now (Kensington, Theater, 370 S West Temple) seem to be really good-looking, if you ask me. We don't really have a signature tower yet, other than the COB perhaps, but that could change. Wasatch Wasteland mentioned that the prospective tower at 450 Main has "incredible geometry." Hopefully the building that breaks the 500 ft glass ceiling will be a distinctive one.

That said, too many distinctive, weird towers makes for an ugly skyline too. London's skyline comes to mind. Bleh.
And see, I like London's skyline. It's unique and chaotic which I think works for the city. The only skylines that I am not a real fan of are the skylines that continue to be uniform, like Tehran:



Sadly, I think we're closer to that skyline than, say, Austin, Texas, who has seen an absolute explosion of growth tied to a significant amount of residential towers that are not all that distinctive:



But I love Austin's skyline. I think it absolutely looks 100x better than it did 15 years ago when, on the whole, it was very similar to Salt Lake's currently (stout, with a clear ceiling):



I know San Diego was brought up as another skyline with a table top feel to it, and it's true. But one big difference is that San Diego has 18 towers 400 feet or greater, whereas SLC only has two. I know it's relative but the lack of actual significant, consistent high rises does have an impact with the skyline because not only are you dealing with ground height differences, you're also seeing an abundance of towers within the 300-390 foot rage. So NONE of them begin to stand out.

San Diego, though, does have a 500 footer, and multiple towers close to it (five towers within 25 feet of 500 feet). They also have a significant amount of towers that are 300-399 feet on top of the 18 towers I mentioned that are 400+ feet. So, even though there is a cap, which has created that table top feel, there remains a strong level of height diversity among the towers in San Diego.

We're not there yet. We're not close to being there yet.

San Diego may not have a lot of high rises that stand out, but the skyline compliments every high rise well enough that it's unique in its own right:



I say this because there's diversity among the towers, even if there's no diversity among the heights. But the fact is, a lot of these buildings stand on their own:



I think that helps.

Now, of course, there's angels that are not as strong as the bay placement - but on the whole, it comes together nicely.

So, in reality, there are two options for Salt Lake:

1. We get a signature tower in the next few years that radically changes the skyline - even if it looks a tad off because the tower stands out. I am thinking Seattle when they built Columbia Center:



Minneapolis in the 1970s:



And OKC today:



...maybe not anything that extreme but a tower that is pushing 600 feet, so, something similar to, as I mentioned earlier, Austin, where they absolutely saw a jump in height once they broke the 500 foot barrier. Prior to the completion of the Frost Bank Tower (516 feet) in 2004, their tallest was 401 feet. Like I said, their skyline was on par with Salt Lake's. Then that Frost Bank Tower upped things a bit. They hit 516 feet and, within four years, they topped out another new tallest at 581 feet, while doing it again two years later at 683 feet and nine years later, and now just last year, their tallest is 690 feet.

Or we wait for a few decades before the skyline fills in enough that it can realistically stand along side San Diego.

Frankly, I'd rather have a lopsided skyline initially, with a standout tower, and see the skyline develop around that tower, maybe pushing things up, as opposed to settling with 300-399 foot towers that, while not bad in the least, are far from revolutionary.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8646  
Old Posted Nov 21, 2020, 11:07 PM
wrendog's Avatar
wrendog wrendog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 3,726
It is really strange to me that some people think a 600 footer would look bad in SLC skyline. It would look amazing
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8647  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 12:23 AM
meman meman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 60
Has anyone on this forum ever asked any developers why Salt lake has never had a 500 or 600 foot tower constructed here?????

Is really doesnt make make any sense to me; or is there just no demand for buildings that tall here???
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8648  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 12:46 AM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 3,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by berger4 View Post
I'm trying to upload the pictures so you can actually see them and not have to go to flickr. I'm sure once I figure it out, it's super easy.
Just right click on the image in flickr and copy the image address. Then when posting on here, click on the yellow square icon that has mountains and a sun on it. Paste the image address into it and and then finish your post.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8649  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 1:35 AM
Rileybo's Avatar
Rileybo Rileybo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 106
Soooo... does anyone here like Salt Lake’s skyline?? Just me?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8650  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 1:46 AM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 18,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
I guess I was assuming that there would be more than 1 person per unit. I saw something recently that put the average at something like 2.3/unit (can't remember where), so that's how I came up with 2,000. It may be more or less than that depending on the distribution of apartment sizes in the developments. I doubt they are all studios with one occupant though.
I've heard 1.5 as a general guideline for apartments, but dunno where or how relevant it is in this particular case...local economics, neighborhood, unit types, etc.
__________________
"Everyday" as one word means "ordinary."
You probably mean "every day."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8651  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 3:31 AM
bob rulz bob rulz is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: West Downtown, SLC, UT
Posts: 964
I actually don't really like Austin's skyline all that much, mainly because I think most of the buildings within it are not all that interesting. Also, most of them being from the same era doesn't help. I think skylines look a lot better when there's a variety of buildings from different eras mixed in, even if individually the buildings aren't necessarily great.

On that front, I think Salt Lake's skyline isn't actually all that bad, most likely due to the fact that there's some variety in the skyscraper stock, but the fact that it's short and with a lot of gaps means it's far from impressive. I think by the end of this decade it could really be something, if even most of the current proposals pan out and we can get at least a couple of taller ones (and hopefully a signature tower of some sort) and our downtown boom continues.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8652  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 11:55 AM
EPdesign EPdesign is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rileybo View Post
Soooo... does anyone here like Salt Lake’s skyline?? Just me?
I love it. I love Salt Lake Valley in general. Living in The suburbs of Orlando and working in Daytona Beach, I have gotten to experience two cities out here while just visiting the other larger cities. Salt Lake really has it together. This includes transit as well.

The skyline, I have always loved since I was a teen. How one tower after another changes the dynamics of downtown was always to appealing to see. I know there are draw backs to the large streets and blocks, but it’s what makes Salt Lake Different than the other cities. It is part of its history. Why it’s laid out the way it is is unique. I always loved how the city looks coming in from the north. The towers and the mountains competing for the sky. From the west too how you can see the skyline coming in from the Lake before you even see reached developed land. I loved the cluster look coming up from the south as the towers sit at the bed of the mountains. And before I left, the view coming down from the University of Utah. A skyline I wasn’t familiar with from the East. The other side of the moon almost. The Quest and 257 towers that welcome you into downtown from the east.

Even the most north view...from capital hill. Now living in a place where the land never rises higher than 200 feet, I miss being able to look down at the city we are living in, developing and building. People can be fans of buildings, but I am a fan of the city and its skyline. I for one love reading this page and seen all the growth
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8653  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 4:33 PM
ajiuO's Avatar
ajiuO ajiuO is offline
A.K.A. Vigo
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,878
Sounds like the plan to convert the UP depot into a hotel and build on to the back of it has been delayed. I honestly hope this is one development that just gets scrapped. If they want to build a hotel they should just tear down some of the unused mall such as the area where the Apple store and forever 21 use to be.
__________________
On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sat on a
throne of blood! What was will be! What is will be no more! Now is the season of evil!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8654  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 4:33 PM
Boz's Avatar
Boz Boz is offline
of SLC
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Amongst the people
Posts: 96
Well said EPDesign.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8655  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 5:08 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,768
I thought this was interesting:

Commercial construction in Utah at strong pace despite pandemic

https://www.ksl.com/article/50053471...spite-pandemic

Quote:
SALT LAKE CITY — The coronavirus outbreak's impact on the Utah economy has been varied, with major layoffs in the spring, followed by a slow but relatively steady recovery in the summer in numerous sectors, including construction.

And even with many employers allowing workers to perform their job duties remotely to avoid a COVID-19 spread, the construction industry has maintained a solid pace as building projects continue, particularly in the commercial sector.

"Certainly there are certain sectors of our economy there that are suffering more than others, (like) hospitality, hotels, airlines, restaurants, shopping malls and office can be classified in that to some extent as well," said Gary Ellis, president of Jacobsen Construction, a Utah-based firm specializing in commercial construction. "Office (construction) has definitely slowed down. People are still trying to figure out whether people will come back or not and what does that look like in the future."

Jacobsen is currently involved with several projects along the Wasatch Front, including Kensington Tower, West Quarter Tower and Liberty Sky Tower in downtown Salt Lake City, the new Primary Children's Hospital in Lehi as well as the renovation and restoration of the historic Salt Lake Temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I think this as another good sign for Kensington Tower.

Another thing mentioned in the article was this:

Quote:
"Whereas before, people were trying to cram everyone into smaller and smaller spaces, you may see actually larger office buildings in some cases," Ellis said. "Where the floor plan is of actually larger size so that they can spread people out a little bit and give people a little bit more room."
Quote:
"So any of the large developers that you typically see that would go in on a speculative basis are not going to do so with a few minor exceptions."
These 2 quotes together, at least to me, signal an end or a really long lull to the suburban offices that have been popping up all over the last many years.

When thinking about bigger offices and fewer speculators, this does bode well for SLC and additional office towers. The largest builders of Spec office space are is Real Estate arms of the LDS Church, namely City Creek Reserve.

With the Spec market crashing and leaving only a few major players, it is very likely that the CCR plans may be accelerated to take advantage of the situation. This would bode well for downtown SLC and for developers that are building highrise apartments.

If we look at the last 15 years, City Creek Center pushed through 'The Great Recession' creating jobs and reinvigorating the concept of urban living in Utah with its focus on SLC. This helped to lead to multiple apartment buildings going up throughout downtown. It also helped to push 111 S Main to happen. HP did pull out of the tower and CCR picked it up and pushed to build it faster due to some shifting factors. 111 S Main ended up being built on Spec and it wasn't until it was approximately 50% built that Goldman became the anchor tenant.

This move was a blow for Boyer's 151 S State. Boyer was able to shift their plans from Commercial to Residential. This shift coincided with CCR's push for 95 S State.

Now, 95 S State was and is being built on Spec but is also designed for Tech purposes. We don't know the leasing status of the tower but it is likely to benefit from the suburban spec slowdown. I also expect that 650 S Main will benefit from this as well.

While CCR has been cautious, they have also taken the lead to help keep things moving and growing. I could see them push their schedule forward and possibly look to start their next office project quickly after 95 S State is built rather than wait for it to hit their leased/preleased threshold.

This would put them at the leading edge, again, but this time with Tech moving and expanding downtown. This would also continue to drive for additional residential towers to accommodate the growth. It would help both restaurants and bars. It may even help to rejuvenate the hospitality industry, particularly the hotel market.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8656  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 5:20 PM
freeshavocado freeshavocado is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Posts: 6
Makid, I took it the other way. Towers with their smaller footprints and elevator reliance aren't ideal for spacing out employees. Large, less expensive suburban offices seem to be the preferred direction going forward. At least that was my interpretation of the article. Hope it doesn't turn out that way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8657  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 7:24 PM
Makid Makid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeshavocado View Post
Makid, I took it the other way. Towers with their smaller footprints and elevator reliance aren't ideal for spacing out employees. Large, less expensive suburban offices seem to be the preferred direction going forward. At least that was my interpretation of the article. Hope it doesn't turn out that way.
I think the final paragraph in the article will help to show the shift away from suburban office parks:

Quote:
"Office is going to taper off (next year) with select projects that are going to break ground, but it's not going to be of the robust nature that we saw over the last seven to eight years," Wall said.
The suburban office parks are what have grown like crazy. Downtown has had 4 commercial projects in the last decade (222 S Main, 111 S Main, 95 S State, and 650 S Main). These account for less than 15% of the total square footage added when counting the suburbs.

With the suburban slow down, the growth in office space will be in bigger towers, most probable taller towers to accommodate the need to open space.

Companies will be bringing their employees back to the office to reinforce the company culture.

This won't be possible in some suburban locations because they are limited in height and space. Most suburbs won't allow a 15 story building to be built to accommodate the same amount of people that may have been in 7 or 8 stories.

This is one reason why downtown will see an increase in commercial projects. The other reason is CCR and their ability to build on Spec without needing to have a large portion preleased. This will give them an advantage, especially when they have multiple projects already waiting in the wings.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8658  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 10:02 PM
Atlas's Avatar
Atlas Atlas is offline
Space Magi
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 612
Seems like wishful thinking Makid, but I do hope you are right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rileybo View Post
Soooo... does anyone here like Salt Lake’s skyline?? Just me?
I don't think anyone has been negative about our skyline other than maybe Comrade. I even said this on the last page:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas
I like our skyline. I like that it has a smattering of good quality (albeit rather short) towers from various eras that, even though they are mostly boxy, really contrast each other in terms of color and texture. And it looks good in front of our incredible mountains.
At the same time, I definitely think there is room to grow and improve. I think we are on a good course right now too, despite the pandemic. We have a bunch of handsome buildings under construction and proposed.

Relevant to our current discussion, the image below was posted by u/LagoPacifico today on the subreddit. This is my favorite view of downtown SLC and I think it shows the apparent heights of the various towers really well. Kensington and the Utah Theater Tower are going to look great from there, and a 500-600 footer would likewise fit in nicely imo.

__________________
Join us on the SLC Development subreddit
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8659  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 10:39 PM
SLCLvr SLCLvr is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 106
The photo of the Oklahoma City skyline made we wonder what happened to the First National Bank building in OKC (I grew up in the OKC area) and I found this news report on what has become one of the largest renovation projects in the county. Nice new life for the old attractive building, as contrasted with the Devon Energy Center which to me is bland and lifeless. https://www.news9.com/story/5ed0564c...-center-in-okc
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8660  
Old Posted Nov 22, 2020, 10:51 PM
Comrade's Avatar
Comrade Comrade is offline
They all float down here
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hair City, Utah
Posts: 8,799
I don't hate the Salt Lake skyline but absolutely I feel people who really like it are biased because they live here. The skyline is, in my view, pretty pedestrian - from the actual buildings to its placement. I think the fact a majority of the towers run north/south down essentially two streets: Main & State, handicap the skyline, as other similar skylines are given a kind of layered effect because the buildings are more spread out compared to Salt Lake's.

I am hoping, with the development of the new convention hotel, we'll see a push for more towers west of Main Street and, eventually, a few towers developed east of State.

But I disagree about the buildings. Salt Lake's skyline is obscenely boxy, with only two towers that don't have a flat roof: 99 West and One Utah Center. I guess you could throw in WTC & City Creek but even that is fairly boxy. And, despite its more rounded edges, 95 State Street at City Creek is pretty much the exact same: the top is flat.

We like to blame the height similarities on the table top effect but I also think the lack of diversity atop the towers is also a big reason for this.

I'd like to see a spire or a pyramid (more!) or a circular top or a slope.

I think that would open things up considerably.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
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 9:30 AM.

     

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