Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Atlas

I'm with Paniolo Man. The first is better because it would have connected directly with the Ambulatory Care Center. The design is also more monumental and clean, imo, with less space dedicated to cars.

The second design is fine but continues the U of U tradition of having a great master plan and ignoring it. Each building on campus is built without any consideration for its context. See the "Kahlert Village" as a primary example.

Also, the newer Kem Gardner building that replaced OSH was, and continues to be, a huge miss. I can't think of a better location on the campus for a monumental, iconic clock tower. The U still needs a signature building and one in that spot would have been perfectly positioned over the library plaza. Instead, we get a brown and gray wall of a building.

The first one is boring.

[mattreedah]

As a Republican, I’m voting “None of the Above” like in Brewster’s Millions.

[TheGeographer]

I guess this is a political forum now

[bob rulz]

Talking about who will be the next mayor of Salt Lake City is important in an urban development thread about Salt Lake City. Sorry if you think those things are unrelated.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by Atlas

I'm with Paniolo Man. The first is better because it would have connected directly with the Ambulatory Care Center. The design is also more monumental and clean, imo, with less space dedicated to cars.

The second design is fine but continues the U of U tradition of having a great master plan and ignoring it. Each building on campus is built without any consideration for its context. See the "Kahlert Village" as a primary example.

Also, the newer Kem Gardner building that replaced OSH was, and continues to be, a huge miss. I can't think of a better location on the campus for a monumental, iconic clock tower. The U still needs a signature building and one in that spot would have been perfectly positioned over the library plaza. Instead, we get a brown and gray wall of a building.

I don't have a strong opinion on the school of medicine building, but I disagree strongly on your other points. The variety of interesting and unique architecture is one of the U of U's strengths. I also assume you mean Gardner Commons, which I think is a beautiful building (albeit as someone who has taken classes there, it has some functionality issues).

I also think modern clock towers mostly just look tacky 9 times out of 10.

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Talking about who will be the next mayor of Salt Lake City is important in an urban development thread about Salt Lake City. Sorry if you think those things are unrelated.

I certainly think that declaring your party affiliation and not tying it back to development is completely unrelated to this forum. I don’t care if people talk politics and relate it back to development. There’s a big difference between the two

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

I don't have a strong opinion on the school of medicine building, but I disagree strongly on your other points. The variety of interesting and unique architecture is one of the U of U's strengths. I also assume you mean Gardner Commons, which I think is a beautiful building (albeit as someone who has taken classes there, it has some functionality issues).

I also think modern clock towers mostly just look tacky 9 times out of 10.

Agree to disagree. The Gardner Commons building is a massive missed opportunity in terms of campus architecture. It could have been so much better, clock tower or not. I don't mind the "every building is different" style in principle (University of Cincinatti's campus is amazing) but I think they've largely done a poor job improving the walkability and cohesiveness of the campus in general. Each new building seems like it was designed in a vacuum and plopped into its location.

The best part of the campus has always been, and will clearly continue to be, President's Circle.

[i2theSKY]

I wish this image from DCRes (thanks for the images) included the Main Street Apartments tower under construction as well. Multiple properties on that block are practically begging for towers! With little to no news I'm really curious what's going to become of that project.

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Agree to disagree. The Gardner Commons building is a massive missed opportunity in terms of campus architecture. It could have been so much better, clock tower or not. I don't mind the "every building is different" style in principle (University of Cincinatti's campus is amazing) but I think they've largely done a poor job improving the walkability and cohesiveness of the campus in general. Each new building seems like it was designed in a vacuum and plopped into its location.

The best part of the campus has always been, and will clearly continue to be, President's Circle.

Presidents Circle is for sure the best part of the U campus in terms of architecture. Not a CU fan but one of my favorite campuses architecturally is CU with all the red brick buildings and red tile roofs.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by i2theSKY

I wish this image from DCRes (thanks for the images) included the Main Street Apartments tower under construction as well. Multiple properties on that block are practically begging for towers! With little to no news I'm really curious what's going to become of that project.

I can't begin to tell you how much I agree, and I think the rest of the forum would say ditto to that. Every time I see these great aerials from the CCH looking down on that block I daydream of a future City Creek 2.0 but with an emphasis on a couple of new tallests in the 550 to 600 ft. range.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by delts145

I can't begin to tell you how much I agree, and I think the rest of the forum would say ditto to that. Every time I see these great aerials from the CCH looking down on that block I daydream of a future City Creek 2.0 but with an emphasis on a couple of new tallests in the 550 to 600 ft. range.

Remember this? Something like this would be amazing, complete with a rebuilt Pantages Theater, connected to the convention center. It’s a win win for everyone! <3

Concept massing/rendering of what I posted earlier. Could be a phase 2. Would be more cost-efficient as a phase 1 though.
Tentatively calling it South Creek Performing Arts District, or just South Creek.




And with the skyway (I'm sure a prettier one can be designed):

[delts145]

Ha! In fact, Old&New as I was posting that comment I was thinking of asking you to repost some of your ideas from the past regarding that block. I remembered you had some really great ones.

Great minds think alike. What you envisioned for the northeast and northwest corners of 1st South is exactly what I was also thinking this morning as I was looking at DCRes's photo. I think a classic-style mixed-use hotel/residential would be perfect for that northwest corner across from the CC. Also, I think it's high time for a Ritz a St. Regis, or another one of Marriott's high-end hotels at that sight. Not sure we'll ever get the theater replaced at that location, but that would certainly be an excellent location for it. Also, appreciate how the Dinwoody, The Bennett, etc. have been restored and the Dinwoody has an appropriate wrap-around on its east side. Speaking of which, I love where you've placed the inner block street along with the resurfaced creek. I especially like how you demoed that idiotic parking structure to the east of the Capitol Theatre. I remember seeing some historic pics of the very ornate beautiful commercial fronts that existed at that location, what a shame. Also, I would much rather Hide Development eliminate the proposed exposed parking structure at the rear and only approve a tower that is taller with the parking structure set within the tower's base, then wrap its face attractively around the lobby, etc., particularly on Main.

[i2theSKY]

Originally Posted by delts145

I can't begin to tell you how much I agree, and I think the rest of the forum would say ditto to that. Every time I see these great aerials from the CCH looking down on that block I daydream of a future City Creek 2.0 but with an emphasis on a couple of new tallests in the 550 to 600 ft. range.

A City Creek 2.0 with a couple ceiling busting towers would be awesome no doubt! I wonder what it would take to get SLC on board with a master plan for the entire block?

Originally Posted by Old&New

Remember this? Something like this would be amazing, complete with a rebuilt Pantages Theater, connected to the convention center. It’s a win win for everyone! <3

I remember your plans and always thought it was a great idea! How cool would it be to have a flowing mid-block from City Creek that connects the Hyatt, Convention Center, Main, and the Hotel Monaco. Downtown would be a much more walkable and attractive place.

[Schmoe]

I wanted to share a few pics from my climb up the Astra Tower crane. It gave me a glimpse of what the views might be from a 500'+ tower.







The crane operator's view looking down toward the pool deck

[wrendog]

Awesome! Thanks for sharing

[rockies]

Would rocky mtn power ever give up that facility on w temple? I used to walk past it daily and wonder why it wasn't underground or relocated else because the land would be high valuable. No idea if it is critical and immovable but its ugly and rocky mtn seems to be pro development so why not

[bob rulz]

Do you mean the one on 400 W?

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Do you mean the one on 400 W?

I think they were referring to this:

[i2theSKY]

Nice shots Schmoe! You have a stronger stomach than I do. The thoughts of standing out in the open breezes 500 feet above the ground, standing on what appears to be a little metal platform about does me in lol.

[meman]

Hey Schmoe, are there any plans for a topping-out ceremony for the Astra Tower? If so when?

By the way great pictures from the top of the tower crane!!!