Salt Lake: If you could tear down one building - Page 4

SLCdude · #61 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 5:11 AM**

Just wait until we get that giant earthquake we've been expecting for decades and we have no choice but to rebuild.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DByPiCkznE0

John Martin · #62 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 5:20 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMTower

That is exactly why it is so infuriating... many of the mid-block buildings are priceless which means Salt Lake may never be a truly walkable, intimate scale kind of city. Unless we raze entire blocks at a time and rebuild, any new mid-block access will probably be hap-hazard and off alignment (which means less visibility and less utilization).

I don't really understand your statement. You make it sound as if blocks can't be split up and walkable with out having a strict, secondary half-scale grid. But surely they can. Mid-block (wherever that may be, certainly not strictly in the middle in many cases) connections can still be made around most mid-block buildings. Heck, it would give Salt Lake a more European feel if our blocks were split up with random web-like connections. Cities like London manage to be walkable despite a near-total lack of foresight and organization.

ajiuO · #63 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 5:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLCdude

Just wait until we get that giant earthquake we've been expecting for decades and we have no choice but to rebuild.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DByPiCkznE0

That was a pretty interesting video... The background music made it a little weird thoug.. Give you nightmares.

What if we has a climate shift and lake bonaville fills back up?

Old&New · #64 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 5:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMTower

That is exactly why it is so infuriating... many of the mid-block buildings are priceless which means Salt Lake may never be a truly walkable, intimate scale kind of city. Unless we raze entire blocks at a time and rebuild, any new mid-block access will probably be hap-hazard and off alignment (which means less visibility and less utilization).

It doesn't have to be a perfect grid to be walkable. sometimes the unexpected is more interesting to the pedestrian.

Future Mayor · #65 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 6:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Martin

I don't really understand your statement. You make it sound as if blocks can't be split up and walkable with out having a strict, secondary half-scale grid. But surely they can. Mid-block (wherever that may be, certainly not strictly in the middle in many cases) connections can still be made around most mid-block buildings. Heck, it would give Salt Lake a more European feel if our blocks were split up with random web-like connections. Cities like London manage to be walkable despite a near-total lack of foresight and organization.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old&New

It doesn't have to be a perfect grid to be walkable. sometimes the unexpected is more interesting to the pedestrian.

Both statements very well said. There is room for connections on nearly every block. Those connections in most cases won't be direct line of site for say Main to State or Main to W. Temple, but with the right design it can easily happen.

Here's an example that I drew up on the State St RDA site. The State st connection to floral ave is already planned, simply by extending walkways appropriately through other redevelopment in the middle of the block, an engaging walkway could be created from State St. to 200 E, not to mention the already existing N/S connection on Edison St from 200 S to 300 S, this could also be vastly improved with the right redevelopment.

DMTower · #66 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 6:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Martin

I don't really understand your statement. You make it sound as if blocks can't be split up and walkable with out having a strict, secondary half-scale grid. But surely they can. Mid-block (wherever that may be, certainly not strictly in the middle in many cases) connections can still be made around most mid-block buildings. Heck, it would give Salt Lake a more European feel if our blocks were split up with random web-like connections. Cities like London manage to be walkable despite a near-total lack of foresight and organization.

No, it doesn't have to be perfect to be walkable... but even the zig-zag streets of europe have sight lines. One reason CCC was redesigned was to maintain sight lines on Regent Street. I agree that a perfect grid inside a grid throughout downtown isn't necessary for walkability... but even if you went to the side of one building, many times it's still not a straight shot through the block... I don't think pedestrians generally feel comfortable entering a space they can't see their way through... so in that regard I think Salt Lake's blocks are a bit of a mess and it's going to take a large effort on the city's part to ever open them up and make them walkable.

Here is a map I posted years ago to see how we might break the blocks up... it can be done, but it will take a concerted effort

[IMG]

[/IMG]

T-Stan · #67 Posted **Mar 9, 2012, 10:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLCdude

Photo: Kevin Delaney

I wouldn't mind if something happened to the Royal Wood Office Plaza.

The Department of Workforce Services office in Royal Wood Plaza closed a few weeks ago. Maybe that is a first step to the building closing and facing the wrecking ball

ajiuO · #68 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 5:56 PM**

I don't like anything on that block. The building behind it looks like a housing projects building.

Future Mayor · #69 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 6:37 PM**

It's a low income senior housing building. So you're right, it pretty much is a housing project building.

ski_steve · #70 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 7:24 PM**

Refineries in the Marmalade.

sltrib

Or:

SL power plant

en.db-city.com

Stenar · #71 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 7:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevena07

Refineries in the Marmalade.

sltrib

Or:

SL power plant

en.db-city.com

YES!!! Those aren't exactly A BUILDING, but they'd be the first on my list to tear down and relocate.

UTAZLoVer · #72 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 9:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

YES!!! Those aren't exactly A BUILDING, but they'd be the first on my list to tear down and relocate.

Agreed. I daydream about that pretty much every time I go into SLC.

s.p.hansen · #73 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 9:50 PM**

I really like the Power Plant. It's natural gas too (which makes it pretty easy to live by).

ajiuO · #74 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 10:26 PM**

I don't mind the south temple power plant... I would love to see the refineries go though..

Future Mayor · #75 Posted **Mar 12, 2012, 10:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by UTAZLoVer

Agreed. I daydream about that pretty much every time I go into SLC.

Just another reason to never venture into the burbs. You don't have to see them on your way out or on your way in.

CountyLemonade · #76 Posted **Mar 13, 2012, 12:24 AM**

My main issue with the North Temple power plant is that visitors see it when coming in from the airport, either via I-80 or on TRAX (once the Green Line extension opens). Plus, whose idea was it to build a power plant ten blocks from downtown? I mean, really.

Future Mayor · #77 Posted **Jul 6, 2012, 5:23 PM**

Everything on N. Temple between I-15 and 215. Except the Fairpark and the new Natural Resources building.

stayinginformed · #78 Posted **Jul 6, 2012, 5:58 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Everything on N. Temple between I-15 and 215. Except the Fairpark and the new Natural Resources building.

Especially the Allstar and Gateway Motels. I hope with the North Temple RDA power of eminent domain for the first five years of the redevelopment zone that they will use it to get rid of those two trashy places.

ajiuO · #79 Posted **Jul 10, 2012, 5:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by stayinginformed

Especially the Allstar and Gateway Motels. I hope with the North Temple RDA power of eminent domain for the first five years of the redevelopment zone that they will use it to get rid of those two trashy places.

Why stop there. Here is a list of north temple motels that should be demolished.

- Motel 6
- Dream Inn
- The Overnighter
- Gateway Inn
- All Star Inn
- Econolodge
- Howard Johnson Express
- The Lodge
- Quality Inn

Probably one or two that I'm missing. Getting rid of the motels would be a huge first step. They are the main driving force behind the drugs and prostitution in the area. I personally agree with Future Mayor... Just rip it all down and start fresh. I know some people don't want to see the old blue boteeqe and red iguana building go.... I do. We don't need to save every building over 50 years old... They are run down, falling apart, and look like crap... We have plenty of little old brick building elsewhere. I think the base of the old biomat building would be a great place for the red iguana... They would probably get a lot more business there as well.

Future Mayor · #80 Posted **Jul 10, 2012, 5:44 PM**

I do have to make a correction on my blanket statment regarding N. Temple.

Sorry ajiuO, but I love the Red Iquana, I think the fact that the building is such a pile of crap is what gives it part of its gritty charm. I don't think it would have made it on Diners, Drive Ins and Dives if it was in a nice location. I don't think they are worried about more business, they already have way more than they can handle, that is why the built Red Iquana 2 on S. Temple.

I think there are a few hotel/motels that could be kept and simply updated, at least initially. Honestly though, I think many of the old motels have huge potential as boutique/eclectic motels, or even condos or apartments. I could see a niche growing across the country were these old "motor lodges" become a swanky/chic place to stay, particularly those in places like N. Temple that have transit access and are in up and coming, dare I say gentrifying, neighborhoods. Imagine many of the old Motor Lodge signs dotting N. Temple along with 5-10 story buildings next to them. That would be truly a colorful, and unique neighborhood.