Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[SLCdude]

Hi, all! It's been a long time since I've posted here. I've been a thread lurker to stay in the know while living in Portland for five years, and I'm grateful for the updates and photos here over the years. I moved back to Salt Lake City this summer, and work for a certain transit agency in town. I will certainly be visiting these threads more often now that I'm back!

[Atlas]

Welcome back!

I poked around on the different Worthington developer websites and found this description and new (possibly old?) design of the tower on the Timberlane Properties website:

A redeveloped high-rise, located in the downtown core of Salt Lake City, with a proposed 350 apartment units and 5,000 sq. ft. of retail space

I think I like the design we have seen before more than this version.

[nushiof]

Originally Posted by SLC PopPunk

Demo permit has been filed and the new name for the Worthington Tower is Convexity Tower.

Does this make it likely Convexity will be the next major ground breaking (ahead of Astra, Main St. etc.)?

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Isn't this an argument against your previous post? A restored auditorium in this theatre would be 80% new materials and craftwork. Everything you would touch and almost everything you would see would be new, but made to look historic so that we can feel good about it: an expensive facsimile.

If you couldn't dig up the interior adornments from some warehouse somewhere, it would be much more artistically admirable to hire some top designers to completely reimagine the interior and integrate it with what remains. An artistic adaptive reuse, if you will.

No, it’s not an argument against my previous post. All the decorative plasterwork that was lost/destroyed during the piggy-backing reno of the theater can easily be recreated using 3D modeling on a computer and 3D printing. Other than that, it’s just rebuilding the proscenium/boxes and repairing/pouring/reinforcing some concrete. But all the elegant curvature of the box seats can easily just be printed.

Originally Posted by Boz

Um, because... money?

You got any spare?

Money gets set aside for public spaces and cultural facilities. AND there is a good possibility the theater will qualify for the National Historic Registry and a 20% tax credit. It would be a good/smart investment for the city to make, it aligns with the downtown masterplan and all the public input that was received. Do you know how much was spent on the police headquarters? So don’t anyone dare try to paint this as a “gilded project.”

[msbutah]

They're finally starting to put the crown glass up on 95 State today.

My 2c on the theatre: The CBD already supports Eccles, the small side theatre at Eccles, Capital, Plan B / Rose Wagner, Salt Lake Acting Company, and to some extent Kingsbury/Pioneer/Libby up at the U. Is there even a demand for that size of theatre to exist, aside from preserving it for the (remaining) aesthetics?

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by msbutah

They're finally starting to put the crown glass up on 95 State today.

My 2c on the theatre: The CBD already supports Eccles, the small side theatre at Eccles, Capital, Plan B / Rose Wagner, Salt Lake Acting Company, and to some extent Kingsbury/Pioneer/Libby up at the U. Is there even a demand for that size of theatre to exist, aside from preserving it for the (remaining) aesthetics?

The proposal is this theatre would be used as a movie palace for Sundance and independent film, and would also have additional screening rooms and educational facilities. Just because we have the Eccles doesn’t mean we don’t need Abravenell Hall, because like the Pantages, it would have a different, but complimentary use. One that is fitting for a theatre district.

There is also a great deal of caché that comes with having vaudeville era theaters in your downtown. It’s something individuals and companies look at when relocating to a new place.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Old&New

No, it’s not an argument against my previous post. All the decorative plasterwork that was lost/destroyed during the piggy-backing reno of the theater can easily be recreated using 3D modeling on a computer and 3D printing. Other than that, it’s just rebuilding the proscenium/boxes and repairing/pouring/reinforcing some concrete. But all the elegant curvature of the box seats can easily just be printed.

It's not a question of "can we remake it?" because we obviously can (given sufficient money). My point is that you're advocating for building a plastic replica of something that's actually long gone.

No matter what, it would be kitsch.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Atlas

It's not a question of "can we remake it?" because we obviously can (given sufficient money). My point is that you're advocating for building a plastic replica of something that's actually long gone.

No matter what, it would be kitsch.

It’s more like putting in a couple titanium teeth where some are missing to complete an otherwise beautiful smile. A whole lot (the majority) of the beautiful craftsman work, the authentic Alaskan marble, the gorgeous very intricate hallways, lobby, house crown ceiling and Tiffany skylight, all remain and make the theater worth saving and restoring. We just need to fix/replace some missing teeth.

[smartdev]

Originally Posted by Old&New

The proposal is this theatre would be used as a movie palace for Sundance and independent film, and would also have additional screening rooms and educational facilities. Just because we have the Eccles doesn’t mean we don’t need Abravenell Hall, because like the Pantages, it would have a different, but complimentary use. One that is fitting for a theatre district.

There is also a great deal of caché that comes with having vaudeville era theaters in your downtown. It’s something individuals and companies look at when relocating to a new place.

Sundance is two weeks out of the year and likely will not come back post-covid to the degree it was. Independent films are already supported by Broadway and Tower theaters. I'm all for salvaging historic sites, but this one is not economically viable. It doesn't make sense to spend millions of dollars in renovation and maintenence costs towards a theater that will likely only be lightly used by the public. Where was the passion for this property during the decades that it sat and became dilapidated? If this was going to be saved it should have happened 30 years ago, not in 2021. Today people are more interested in staying at home watching YouTube videos on their phones than going to watch an independent film that they have to drive to from somewhere in the valley. I like the idea of getting people back downtown via affordable housing. Let's make the city more walkable and less car-centric and we will be off to a great start.

[Atlas]

To be clear, I love the idea of having our Pantages restored and for it to become a world-class movie theatre. I just don't think it will happen and that, on top of my stated concerns about artistic integrity, there are principled concerns over the cost and viability of restoring it. The Save the Pantages group likes to throw around cost "estimates" from entities who haven't actually inspected the theatre in person, so honestly I'd trust those numbers even less than the ones the city has provided.

Like it or not, the deal is done. The city considers it legally binding. You can thank Biskupski for the way things went down. From Reddit:

Originally Posted by u/irondeepbicycle

A bit of perspective. The deal was largely brokered by Biskupski after she'd already announced she wasn't running and the RDA just signed off. The reason it was given away is because of a weird little provision in city code which says that they can dispose of property for free to adjacent parcel owners - which is why it had to be Hines getting it instead of anyone else, since they own the Kearns building directly north.

They could have sold it, which would have dragged the process on and on for a while longer, but I guess they thought that 40 affordable units + a park + a midblock walkway was worth the quicker process.

It doesn't seem like the city got a lot for it, though 400 housing units in the heart of downtown, steps away from transit is a pretty good thing all on its own. The city will get ongoing property tax revenue from the project so it's not like it's a total loss.

The good news is that something nice is replacing it (evidently, hopefully). The liability concern over the public/private space brought up by Orpheum is interesting. It might be a good question to submit to the RDA at their next meeting.

[ajiuO]

I’m not usually the one on this forum to want to stand in the way of modern skyscrapers. But I think I actually would like to see the theater saved and restored. I think there are plenty of other opportunities on that block for skyscrapers. I wouldn’t even mind seeing the theater expanded on that block to include a few other smaller autitoriums for independent film…. It might actually be nice to see the Utah film society move to that area rather then the current location on 300… and then also it would be nice to have a proper IMAX theater and maybe a few auditoriums for big budget films.. perhaps operated by regal or Cinemark. And I think the Pantages… could be used for Sundance but then also be used as part of the Utah film festival operation when it’s not in use for Sundance… that part of town could become a theater district.

The theater at Gateway is supposed to be remodeled but an IMAX theater will not be included.

even with all of that there would still be plenty of room on that block for one or two skyscrapers. And park space…

And I’m sure that one of those skyscrapers could even be luxury apartments disguised by a few affordable housing units that really aren’t even that affordable.

I think the theaters would also help act as another unofficial anchor for city Creek Center. Especially if you were able to continue a Richard Street walkway through the middle of the block. Somewhat similar to Regent Street on the adjacent block.

[Old&New]

Agreed

Originally Posted by Atlas

To be clear, I love the idea of having our Pantages restored and for it to become a world-class movie theatre. I just don't think it will happen and that, on top of my stated concerns about artistic integrity, there are principled concerns over the cost and viability of restoring it. The Save the Pantages group likes to throw around cost "estimates" from entities who haven't actually inspected the theatre in person, so honestly I'd trust those numbers even less than the ones the city has provided.

Like it or not, the deal is done. The city considers it legally binding. You can thank Biskupski for the way things went down. From Reddit:


The good news is that something nice is replacing it (evidently, hopefully). The liability concern over the public/private space brought up by Orpheum is interesting. It might be a good question to submit to the RDA at their next meeting.

I respectfully disagree, but also question your principles regarding what is valuable to a community.

There are no concerns regarding artistic integrity in a restoration, it is normal and perfectly acceptable to replicate items that were lost. Do you think the city of Paris should just tear down Notre Dame because there’s some concern about “artistic integrity?”

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Old&New

AGREED



I respectfully disagree, but also question your principles regarding what is valuable to a community.

There are no concerns regarding artistic integrity in a restoration, it is normal and perfectly acceptable to replicate items that were lost. Do you think the city of Paris should just tear down Notre Dame because there’s some concern about “artistic integrity?”

Do you think they should rebuild the 19th century spire of Notre Dame "exactly the way it was" before it burned down? I personally don't.

And this theatre is not Notre Dame. It's not the Salt Lake Temple. The community barely knows it is even there and they won't notice when it's gone.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Do you think they should rebuild the 19th century spire of Notre Dame "exactly the way it was" before it burned down? I personally don't.

And this theatre is not Notre Dame. It's not the Salt Lake Temple. The community barely knows it is even there and they won't notice when it's gone.

Yes, I do.

Funny you should bring up the Salt Lake Temple. Should we be concerned about its “artistic integrity” now that parts of it have been gutted and reconfigured? You’re suggestion that to replicate something anew during a restoration somehow brings into question it’s artistic integrity is laughable. I guess any antique piece of furniture that’s been reupholstered should not be considered an antique then.

[Old&New]

• Video Link

Sign the petition:

https://www.change.org/p/the-utah-pantag...103-years-of-utah-s-cinematic-excellence

• Video Link

Just watch, Atlas will try to show the worst of the damage to try to convince you the theatre is not worth saving …as if he’s working for Hines.

Hah, as I predicted!

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Old&New

Yes, I do.

Funny you should bring up the Salt Lake Temple. Should we be concerned about its “artistic integrity” now that parts of it have been gutted and reconfigured? You’re suggestion that to replicate something anew during a restoration somehow brings into question it’s artistic integrity is laughable. I guess any antique piece of furniture that’s been reupholstered should not be considered an antique then.

Yeah, laugh it off. Don't bother engaging with what I said critically. Just go on thinking nobody actually thinks this just as someone is literally telling this to your face.

This is the picture I have in mind, through all of this. Restoring this from scratch would be akin to reupholstering a chair, apparently.

[Boz]

Originally Posted by Old&New

Sign the petition:

Hard pass.

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by Boz

Hard pass.

Oh, Boz has only made 129 posts so far… interesting… AND, his profile picture is that of the Hines owned Kearns Building… Interesting…

Originally Posted by Atlas

Yeah, laugh it off. Don't bother engaging with what I said critically. Just go on thinking nobody actually thinks this just as someone is literally telling this to your face.

This is the picture I have in mind, through all of this. Restoring this from scratch would be akin to reupholstering a chair, apparently.

Again, not that difficult with 3D printing. It’s not quite as intricate as it looks, besides the moldings that can be 3D printed, some of that is wallpaper on flat walls with the addition of drapery.

[EPdesign]

Is that theater even seismically safe? I didn’t realize there was so much of it already missing. I don’t know if anyone is going to put in the capital for such a project. I mean, the only reason why I know it exists is because of this thread. From the outside I would never have know and most people don’t. I’m usually all about saving the art but there is not art left. Just the damaged rotting frame. I’m with letting it go

[Old&New]

Originally Posted by EPdesign

Is that theater even seismically safe? I didn’t realize there was so much of it already missing. I don’t know if anyone is going to put in the capital for such a project. I mean, the only reason why I know it exists is because of this thread. From the outside I would never have know and most people don’t. I’m usually all about saving the art but there is not art left. Just the damaged rotting frame. I’m with letting it go

Hmmm, Utah just experienced an earthquake that damaged the temple and knocked Moroni’s trumpet out of his hands, yet the theatre still stands unharmed, and only a block away. The majority of the craftsmanship is still intact and makes it worth it to restore the rest.