SALT LAKE CITY | Development Thread

[delts145]

Originally Posted by T-Mac

Updates - Tower 1

by T-Mac

[delts145]

Originally Posted by T-Mac

Updates - Crossroads Block

by T-Mac

.

[delts145]

Updates - City Creek Center - Social Hall Block


by T-Mac

Originally Posted by Viperlord

Bring on tower No. 8, yep you heard me. Tower No. 8

Social Hall Block 74

Information is from the SLC planning commission meeting earlier this month.

http://www.slcgov.com/boards/plancom...ial%20Hall.pdf

All photo credits go to the Cowboy Partners and Harmons Co.













btw parking is located above the store.

Now, I know what you are thinking. Tower 8 was suposed to be taller than that. I was thinking the same thing to. To me though these documents arent about the tower, they are about harmons. Harmons is the one asking for the approval of building setbacks and what not. The Tower is probably not a final design anyways, its more of a place holder and massing to give scale to the area. I bet we'll see a completely different product once its done. Who, knows we'll just have to wait and see.

..

[delts145]

City Creek development is bucking the economic trend

Real estate » Despite downturn, condos are finding buyers.

http://www.sltrib.com/LDS%20News/ci_13670021

...Even if the seven-figure price tag on the top floor of The Regent doesn't deter you, you're still out of luck. All four penthouse units are already spoken for, and so are a growing number of units on other floors.

In fact, more than three dozen units in The Regent have been reserved, with 54 units left in the first phase still available. Local Realtors say that's pretty good for a 20-story project priced from about $300,000 to $1.7 million. The 150-unit project will be completed in phases as enough units are pre-sold...

Tower 1

The Salt Lake Tribune

Tower 5 (The Regent)

by T-Mac
.

[delts145]

S. Jordan is thriving in recession, thanks to savvy planning

Daybreak, South Jordan

library image

The number of new housing units in South Jordan last year was eight times that of its neighbors. Plus it's the only south valley city to see an increase in sales-tax revenue. (Jeffrey D. Allred, Deseret News)

...Drive through the massive Daybreak development at the west bench of the city and you'll pass a picture-perfect Pleasantville-esque community — million-dollar mansions next to townhomes, groups of young moms pushing toddlers in jogging strollers, pocket parks tucked behind rows of houses, and a variety of housing styles that seamlessly blends a southern colonial next to a modern contemporary...

...

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...ning.html?pg=5

[delts145]

Originally Posted by T-Mac

by T-Mac

..

[kpexpress]

The church must have a stock pile of the BYU-beige brick they used on tower 1. too bad.

[delts145]

^^^
The so called BYU brick you are talking about is not even remotely similar to the shade on Tower 1. Practically all of the comments on local threads relating to Tower 1 have been very positive, and I would definitely concur. Of course, judging from 100% of the comments you have made on the Wasatch Front threads in the past, objectivity was never your strong suit, was it...

[T-Mac]

Edit.

[kpexpress]

Not a big fan of cheap brick veneers in the first place, and I thought it was a missed opportunity for a more modern material palette to help diversify the skyline.

[TonyAnderson]

The bricks on the BYU Gateway thing look different to me. I also think the tower looks great - There are very few highrises in Salt Lake made of brick, so this is definitely adding diversity to the skyline. The Regent is a more modern design, as well as the new 222 South Main. There's definitely a diverse skyline continuing to evolve.

[sigmius]

I do agree with kpexpress concerning the color of tower 1, its mundane, not a fan at all. I thought the color was supposed to be neutral like an antique white

[kpexpress]

Originally Posted by TonyAnderson

The bricks on the BYU Gateway thing look different to me. I also think the tower looks great - There are very few highrises in Salt Lake made of brick, so this is definitely adding diversity to the skyline. The Regent is a more modern design, as well as the new 222 South Main. There's definitely a diverse skyline continuing to evolve.

Very few high rises in SLC made of brick? Richards Courts, Broadway Lofts, Little America, Boston Buildings, Walker Center, Old Chase Bank, and SO many more.

Maybe I've been spoiled by refreshing Southern California contemporary architecture......exposed concrete floor slabs, glass, steel and a plethora of contrasting materials and textures.





Tower 1 is too monolithic in it's material selection (so far) maybe adding a variety of material at the base might help. But that's what the Church wanted (according to my understanding), they wanted a conservative <quiet> building with not a lot of balconies as not to distract from the temple at temple square.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by sigmius

I do agree with kpexpress concerning the color of tower 1, its mundane, not a fan at all. I thought the color was supposed to be neutral like an antique white

I've noticed in many of the pics, the color appears yellowish, which in reality is not the case. I think part of the problem is that the photography is often with an HDR effect, which is affecting what you would see in reality. Often the time of day or the sunlight etc. will also affect the way the color appears in both the photo, vs. the actual real life appearance. Anyway, it's certainly not orange or yellow. The actual color is a cream, which some really like and others don't. I certainly prefer the expensive brick to stucco. I don't care what the color in Calif. pics above, if it's a stucco like glaze, it's not that attractive to the naked eye.

On some (not all) of the pics posted of So Cal. buildings above, either certain materials look very cheap, or the design treatment,(such as the last pic) is very mundane and boring. I think the CCC & Tower 1 is a big improvement in its use of material over what I'm seeing in some of those pics above. This is especially true, when one is going for a very upscale look as is the case with CCC. IMO, CCC is going to emerge as far more upscale in it's material use and subsequent apperarance than much of what is shown above. Also, those are hand laid, full brick, on Tower 1. There's nothing cheap or veneer about them. A fact, which is very obvious when seeing the building in person.

One thing is definately for sure. IMO, CCC will be a huge improvement in appearance and quality over something such as Horton Plaza. Thank goodness, downtown SLC will not have to endure something of that nature.

[TonyAnderson]

Originally Posted by kpexpress

Very few high rises in SLC made of brick? Richards Courts, Broadway Lofts, Little America, Boston Buildings, Walker Center, Old Chase Bank, and SO many more.


Tower 1 is too monolithic in it's material selection (so far) maybe adding a variety of material at the base might help. But that's what the Church wanted (according to my understanding), they wanted a conservative <quiet> building with not a lot of balconies as not to distract from the temple at temple square.

Richard's Court and the Lofts are lowrises. Most of the major buildings in SLC's skyline are non-brick: Let's be honest - One Utah Center, Wells Fargo, U.S Bank, Questar, Qwest, Library, Zions, Northwestern Mutual, 222 South Main, to name a few.



I think what you're actually saying is you would like more modern designs, especially regarding residential towers? That, to me, isn't the same as using better materials, as I think most newer structures use lesser quality materials to save on costs. Tower 1 is actually going beyond normal expenses, and instead of 'quiet' is going for more elegant and timeless, which I would guess is partly why people have already been paying a couple million for units there. Most comments I have heard are positive, and as always, not everyone will agree, especially regarding buildings.

With that said, The Regent going up now, and a couple of other proposed residential towers have more modern glassy architecture.

[kpexpress]

Originally Posted by TonyAnderson

Richard's Court and the Lofts are lowrises. Most of the major buildings in SLC's skyline are non-brick: Let's be honest - One Utah Center, Wells Fargo, U.S Bank, Questar, Qwest, Library, Zions, Northwestern Mutual, 222 South Main, to name a few.



I think what you're actually saying is you would like more modern designs, especially regarding residential towers? That, to me, isn't the same as using better materials, as I think most newer structures use lesser quality materials to save on costs. Tower 1 is actually going beyond normal expenses, and instead of 'quiet' is going for more elegant and timeless, which I would guess is partly why people have already been paying a couple million for units there. Most comments I have heard are positive, and as always, not everyone will agree, especially regarding buildings.

With that said, The Regent going up now, and a couple of other proposed residential towers have more modern glassy architecture.

I admit, I gravitate toward more contemporary designs...yes. But what I'm saying about materials, has nothing to do with what materials are used, and I don't think that "better" is relevant when discussing architectural composition. It's about how you use those materials (be it brick veneer), scale, composition, proportions, etc. In this era of architectural design and possibilities, I would frown upon cladding an entire residential condo tower in one solid material palette, and the fact that it's that BYU color brick veneers is not helping it's cause. That, to me, is not elegant, nor timeless. Is timelessness even achievable? Can we stop time, or have it seise to exist? No. Especially in architecture and design. And I don't think that people are throwing down millions of dollars for units in that building because of the use of beige brick veneer cladding. That building could be wrapped in foam and coated with stucco (BYU beige even) and people would still want to be in the heart of the city with a view of the temple.....seriously who wouldn't?

The Regent is an excellent addition to the skyline and wasatch front, and I like the funky nature of that new Harmon building just announced. Things are looking up for SLC that's for sure.

Again, I am interested in seeing what the building looks like when it's completely done and occupied (tower1) as many colors/textures come out differently in real life than they appear in design proposals.

Take the below San Diego examples for instance:
Smart Corner:


M2i:


The Mark:


Fahrenheit:

[delts145]

As has been pointed out by many in previous posts, construction of taller towers immediately adj. to Temple Square does present some quirky problems. I myself, feel the choices made so far along So. Temple, in both style and color palette are very attractive.

I agree with many of KP's comments regarding architecture in general. However, most of the examples posted above would not mesh as well with Temple Square, or it's surrounding neighbors as what is currently being chosen. The current style choices being made along 1st South, such as The Regent, Tower 2, or the Harmon's Corner, are an excellent fit for 1st South, but not necessarily for South Temple, between State and West Temple.

I am still somewhat confused about using the 60's/70's brick of BYU as an example palette. Like TonyAnderson, I see no visual resemblance. I am very familiar with the color of the brick used on the Gateway Sign, Kimball Tower, Marriott Center, etc. There is no resemblance in color with Tower 1. As far as I know there doesn't exist a building on the BYU Campus using the same color shade as Tower 1.
.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by skyguy414

Taken yesterday:

by skyguy414
.

[TonyAnderson]

Originally Posted by kpexpress

I admit, I gravitate toward more contemporary designs...yes. But what I'm saying about materials, has nothing to do with what materials are used, and I don't think that "better" is relevant when discussing architectural composition. It's about how you use those materials (be it brick veneer), scale, composition, proportions, etc. In this era of architectural design and possibilities, I would frown upon cladding an entire residential condo tower in one solid material palette, and the fact that it's that BYU color brick veneers is not helping it's cause. That, to me, is not elegant, nor timeless. Is timelessness even achievable? Can we stop time, or have it seise to exist? No. Especially in architecture and design. And I don't think that people are throwing down millions of dollars for units in that building because of the use of beige brick veneer cladding. That building could be wrapped in foam and coated with stucco (BYU beige even) and people would still want to be in the heart of the city with a view of the temple.....seriously who wouldn't?

The Regent is an excellent addition to the skyline and wasatch front, and I like the funky nature of that new Harmon building just announced. Things are looking up for SLC that's for sure.

Again, I am interested in seeing what the building looks like when it's completely done and occupied (tower1) as many colors/textures come out differently in real life than they appear in design proposals.

I actually like a lot of the designs you showed, though those type of buildings are seen more in places like San Diego and LA - You don't see them in NYC or Philly, Chicago, etc. typically. But as mentioned, that really wouldn't fit in at the area chosen, and especially for the type of the residents I think this building will attract.

One thing I disagree with regarding architecture is the idea that if it's in style today, then it's good, so use it, or if it looks 'retro' than it's an old style, and don't use it. I think certain eras of buildings show that's not always the case. What looks good looks good. When talking about timeless, I think of a lot of Chicago architecture - look how long ago a building like John Hancock went up, and it almost doesn't seem believable - it has (so far) stood the test of time. Sometimes just being trendy doesn't work.

Regarding this Tower 1, I'm really interested to see its final look - many times I've thought a building wouldn't look good even during cladding, but liked the final product. To me, the brick on this tower does seem more yellow than the original, whiter renderings. So we'll see.

[John Martin]

I think you have to see tower 1 in person to really understand what color the brick is. People keep saying it's cheap and ugly, which is somehow synonymous with several buildings on BYU's campus. They're not the same color, for one. Tower 1's brick is closer to white, BYU's brick is closer to orange. But honestly, I myself wouldn't base my opinion of the building on the fact that the brick is ever-so-slightly yellower than I wanted it to be. Could you be anymore vain.. I do think it's an interesting style, and it's certainly not something I would've come up with in a million years. I think the old wall around temple square (coincidentally) looked similar, with cream brick and dark grout. It was a very 70's, "modern," look. I personally hate the style, but tower 1 is different because they're not using it in a "modern" way. The brick may look like it came right out of the 70's-80's, but it's used in such a manner that I think it's creates a totally different, new style. I don't think the building is timeless in the sense that it will look fresh forever, I doubt it will, but I think it is a more traditional style, even if it doesn't follow the rules or look similar to many other traditional buildings from recent years. I think it's unique, daring, and original, and I don't think it's retro or copying anything else. If anything, I think of this as more of a trend-setter, even if not everyone starts building cream-colored brick highrises right away. It's not trendy now, but maybe it's just ahead of its time, which is why some of you are having trouble warming up to it.