Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by felixg

Some random thoughts not in response to one particular post or user —

Regarding the 700 E proposal, I’d just like to state how much backward-facing architecture like this kind irks me, especially when replacing something truly representative of its time. This project is far from the worst offender, but to me, things that are built to look vaguely older than they are feel so corny and dishonest to me.

You want the “character” characteristic of an older city? Too bad, shouldn’t have knocked it all down then, as anything built now will be representative of contemporary codes, ordinances, trends and broader social mentalities, despite how much or little brick it has plastered to its exterior. This ultimately negates the whole draw of older buildings — it’d be like going to the Met and being told everything in there was actually just made by a couple guys from Brooklyn last year as their vague interpretation of world history. We really should be championing projects that take and utilize everything unique about the present, as that is how you create valuable, interesting architecture for the future. For as much hate as all the “glass cubes” get on this forum, you can’t deny that at least they’re trying for this

Other cities have built great high quality brick architecture around the existing older brick buildings. Look to the union station area in Denver as an example, specifying McGregor Square. Look at McGregor Square and tell me it would have looked good with a bunch of stucco slapped on it, or even more glass. Especially in the context of the building being next to Coors Field that is all brick facade. The building in question in SLC is next to Trolley square that has been preserved and is all brick facade. Imagine how much better the building would look if it matched Trolley Square and Trolley Corners instead of only half way matching it. Even the smaller buildings on the northeast corner are all brick. So by diverting and going half brick half stucco the new building is not matching the character of thaw older buildings and diverging. That’s fine if the future goal is the replace those other buildings, which I’m not in favor of.

As for stucco, I have stucco on my house. It’s fine, but comes with many issues as it wears over time. I’m not going to claim to be an expert on how various building materials age over time, but if I were to guess based on my empirical observations I would say stucco does not age as well as brick. So that’s really my main beef with all the stucco, the longevity of it isn’t bad but it’s not the best. It cracks over time and starts to look tacky if not done perfectly right to avoid post settling cracking issues. I can only imagine these issues are compounded on a 5-10 story building. I’m with you on glass and modern architecture though. I’m all for the new slick looking glass towers we have going up or have gone up. The Worthington and Hyatt look great in terms of the glass work in my opinion. I’m all for more of that architecture, even at smaller scales over stucco or brick.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by felixg

Regarding the 700 E proposal, I’d just like to state how much backward-facing architecture like this kind irks me, especially when replacing something truly representative of its time. This project is far from the worst offender, but to me, things that are built to look vaguely older than they are feel so corny and dishonest to me.

Define "backward-facing". Using bricks? Having elements that echo older styles? In a postmodern world, even glass cubes could be seen as tacky and backward-facing. And what if a defining feature of our current era is a "backward-facing" or "meta" mentality more broadly?

Quality design is timeless and I definitely think it's possible to incorporate elements of older styles tastefully, particularly when the design fits its context. Case in point:

[UT_Presto]

The empty Yardstick building on Broadway was fenced off this morning.

[SL,UT]

Originally Posted by Enemy4thePeople

Man, that NW Pipeline building is just so much garbage. It's going to be such a waste of money to renovate and update the exterior and it will still woefully underperform on that site. For the life of me, I will never understand the rationale behind its national listing or how the application actually went through. It's an insignificant example by an insignificant architect that adds no value to the community except for the self-congratulatory back pats for the preservationists.

Glad this piece of garbage isn't on any sort of preservation committee.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Define "backward-facing". Using bricks? Having elements that echo older styles? In a postmodern world, even glass cubes could be seen as tacky and backward-facing. And what if a defining feature of our current era is a "backward-facing" or "meta" mentality more broadly?

Quality design is timeless and I definitely think it's possible to incorporate elements of older styles tastefully, particularly when the design fits its context. Case in point:

I think you hit the nail on the head to the overall point maybe without intending to. This design is extremely hit or miss and when it misses - it misses. Your example isn't a bad building. It looks good. It's a decent balance of modern and classic.

This:



...it ain't it.

It looks cheap. It looks like something you'd see as a backlot building prop for a TV show.

If it's not done even remotely right, it just looks cruddy.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by SL,UT

Glad this piece of garbage isn't on any sort of preservation committee.

That might be a bit of an extreme thought but yes, I am glad Salt Lake is working or preserve the building. I guarantee it's likely better than anything that could replace it.

Hell, we'd just get another cookie-cutter, four-story stucco/brick mess I'm sure.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Comrade

This...it ain't it.

It looks cheap. It looks like something you'd see as a backlot building prop for a TV show.

If it's not done even remotely right, it just looks cruddy.

I agree. I'm not defending that VE'd design in particular, albeit I do think there are considerations beyond pure aesthetics that should be weighed.

The idea that new buildings should not look like old buildings is what I'm contesting.

[bob rulz]

The billboards really are a travesty. I don't get how anybody can look at that and think it's a victory for anybody, but money talks I guess.

EDIT: Totally missed the most recent page lol.

I think the Dixon is a wonderful example of "classic modern" architecture. Much better than The Crossing at the heart of Sugarhouse.

I don't think the 700 E development is terrible. I think if it weren't for the black (what I assume are stucco) bits coming down from the top it would be respectable imo. Still a shame we didn't get the old design.

As for the black stucco on the Post District, I think it actually looks fine.

[felixg]

Originally Posted by Atlas

Define "backward-facing". Using bricks? Having elements that echo older styles? In a postmodern world, even glass cubes could be seen as tacky and backward-facing. And what if a defining feature of our current era is a "backward-facing" or "meta" mentality more broadly?

You raise some good points about the nature of postmodernism, I think my main gripes with this stuff really lie at the extreme ends of the spectrum — with stuff either so superficially old looking, like most new stuff in Holladay, or so detailed that it genuinely causes confusion as to when it was built — there’s something very “theme park” about that and I find it distasteful to potentially misrepresent or embellish a city’s actual historical architectural fabric

i like Dixon fine from a visual perspective but feel it kind of falls into the second camp, as the brick parts of it could legitimately be mistaken for a much older building — something I find dishonest, as most of the functional elements of the structure are probably very different to the actual warehouses you’d see in the hardware district. The beauty in adaptive reuse style buildings is that they’re just that — reuse, not rebuilt

Who knows though, maybe this stuff ages better than I’m giving it credit for, like a lot of the US’s old world revival stuff from the 1930s. Maybe I’ll also change my tune if any authentic, legitimately Bauhaus or Midcentury revival stuff ever starts coming back hahah

[Enemy4thePeople]

Originally Posted by UT_Presto

The empty Yardstick building on Broadway was fenced off this morning.

I saw that Wednesday. I find it hard to believe anyone has found a way to make money off of improving someone else's property for so short a timeframe. Best of luck to them. Almost anything would be better than the blight that's been there since the 90s.

[Enemy4thePeople]

Originally Posted by SL,UT

Glad this piece of garbage isn't on any sort of preservation committee.

That building can't serve on a preservation committee. I'm pretty sure no building can serve on such a committee, probably any committee. Especially committees that have to do with building preservation. Would represent a conflict of interest.

[Schmoe]

Originally Posted by UT_Presto

The empty Yardstick building on Broadway was fenced off this morning.

I saw this and wondered what's happening. Does anyone know?

[msbutah]

It's being demolished.
https://twitter.com/slcmoves/status/1710074155851468827

The Yardstick building will be demolished this month so we issued the construction contractor a permit to close the sidewalk and part of the street. We are working with them to get required signage in place for people walking and biking.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by felixg

i like Dixon fine from a visual perspective but feel it kind of falls into the second camp, as the brick parts of it could legitimately be mistaken for a much older building — something I find dishonest, as most of the functional elements of the structure are probably very different to the actual warehouses you’d see in the hardware district. The beauty in adaptive reuse style buildings is that they’re just that — reuse, not rebuilt

I understand the point you're making, which is that there isn't enough distinctive, high-quality modern architecture that people will want to preserve in the future, so we should be trying something new as opposed to copying old styles, even if it's done well.

I do agree that modern architects should be bolder and more forward-thinking. I think there's a lot of reasons this doesn't happen, from the fact that so much stuff needs to be built that there isn't enough of that exceptional talent to go around, to restrictive zoning codes that discourage bold architecture, to the fact that building exceptional structures is much more expensive (the latter is probably the biggest factor).

That said, good architecture is good architecture. The Dixon may be harping an older style, but it also looks very good. And I think there's enough modern elements that make it obvious that it is not actually a historic structure. And even more impressively, the modern and classic elements go together very well.

Meanwhile, across the street you have the Sugarmont, which is basically just a bunch of disparate boxes of legos arranged together with no rhyme or reason. When we keep building things like that, something like the Dixon feels refreshing.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by msbutah

It's being demolished.
https://twitter.com/slcmoves/status/1710074155851468827

Is there going to be anything that replaces it? or is it going to be Broadway Hole?

[Blah_Amazing]

https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/Cit...howInspection=

Address: 29 W 800 S and 850 S Richards Street
Developer: The Boyer Company

Basic Description: Construction of two apartment buildings.
Elliott North (29 W 800 S): 8 floors, 278 units (74 studio, 164 1-bed, 40 2-bed), 2,000 sf retail, 320 parking stalls.
Elliott South (850 S Richards Street): 7 floors, 60 units (27 1-bed, 33 2-bed), 90 parking stalls.

Project Description (from Developer): We are pleased to present the Elliot, a 338-home multifamily community spanning five separate parcels in two buildings along 800 S and Richards Street. Currently, the site houses Downtown Self Storage, a self-storage and RV parking business, as well as a single-story office building. The Boyer Company has partnered with long-time owners of the property, the Wolfe family, who founded and sold Salt Lake City-based Wolfe Sporting Goods.

The community will focus on providing spaces that enable our resident’s innate creativity while promoting the incredibly talented creative community of Salt Lake City. Along the podium wall on Richards Street, the project will provide outdoor stamped concrete frames for local artists to mount their canvases, effectively creating a pedestrian “art walk.” These frames can be used seasonally and rotated throughout the year. Within the building itself, we focus on creator spaces for musicians, podcast creators, and artists in addition to health and wellness amenities expected by our residents. The smaller 60-home building will provide larger floorplans geared towards young families looking for a quiet, safe, and secluded refuge. Each building provides distinct courtyards with ample green space and vegetation, a quiet space or an active fitness deck depending on each resident’s preference.

The building façade provides breaks both vertically and horizontally using architectural projections, fur-outs, and enhanced materials that change in color and texture. The articulation is a tribute to the cape chisel technique for rough-cutting slabs of granite out of quarry walls, while the layers below are smoothed and processed. There are an array of architectural inserts and reveals expressed as recessed balconies and vertical circulation visible from the outside. Together, these design choices seek to enrich the urban environment and emphasize the dynamic pedestrian realm at the project’s base.

The community is an 8-minute walk from the 900 S 200 W Trax Station, a 2-minute walk to the 900 S bus stop and adjacent to the newly reconstructed pedestrian-friendly 900 South corridor. The north building is an 8-story mixed-use community with 2,000 square feet of retail along 800 South, 278 homes, a subterranean parking garage, and almost 14,000 square feet of outdoor and indoor amenities. The south building is a 7-story community with 60 homes catering to residents seeking larger spaces along with 2,700 square feet of shared amenities. Our goal is to create a community that will allow residents to thrive where they live and continue to grow, beautify, and invest in their neighborhood well into the future. The creative force in Salt Lake City is at the vanguard of bringing to life authentic, vibrant places. Through thoughtful placemaking and tailored spaces we aim to foster this engine of creative growth and ultimately create a true sense of place that will last for decades.

Elevations:

[tygr]

I attended a conference in Raleigh last week and was surprised by the similarities between SLC and Raleigh. I think Raleigh is probably SLC's closest current twin in the U.S. (data from Wikipedia and SkyscraperPage)

Wake County
population: 1,129,410
area: 857.02 sq mi
Salt Lake County
population: 1,185,238
area: 807 sq mi

Raleigh
population: 467,665
urban density: 1,994.6/sq mi
tallest (roof): 131.4 m
2nd tallest (roof): 130.1 m
3rd tallest (roof): 118.9 m
27 structures diagramed in SSP
shortest diagramed: 38.4 m
Salt Lake City
population: 200,133
urban density: 3,923.0/sq mi
tallest (roof): 136.8 m
2nd tallest (roof): 128.6 m
3rd tallest (roof): 128 m
27 structures diagramed in SSP
shortest diagramed: 58.5 m

While Raleigh didn't have the large open parking lots that SLC does, they do have a large number of dilapidated and/or vacant buildings that are vastly under-utilized. Some lots were empty where old buildings were torn down and fenced off. While the city had a lot of people walking around, the city itself seemed very tired. There wasn't much energy and it seemed like the retail side of things was very much in need of a revitalization.

I will say that I prefer seeing a parking lot that gets some use compared to a fenced-off empty lot where a building once stood.

It felt that SLC is leaps and bounds ahead of Raleigh when it comes to sports, public transit, and retail. However, SLC will never have as many drinking establishments.

Overall, I enjoyed seeing the history that is Raleigh and enjoying the Eastern-style BBQ at Sam Jones and Clyde Coopers.

[taboubak]

Salt Lake's metro is a deeply flawed number. The reason our transit, sports, and retail are better is probably because our area is still a fair amount larger than Raleighs. But still not a bad comparison at all from a tower perspective.

[Comrade]

Originally Posted by tygr

I attended a conference in Raleigh last week and was surprised by the similarities between SLC and Raleigh. I think Raleigh is probably SLC's closest current twin in the U.S. (data from Wikipedia and SkyscraperPage)

Wake County
population: 1,129,410
area: 857.02 sq mi
Salt Lake County
population: 1,185,238
area: 807 sq mi

Raleigh
population: 467,665
urban density: 1,994.6/sq mi
tallest (roof): 131.4 m
2nd tallest (roof): 130.1 m
3rd tallest (roof): 118.9 m
27 structures diagramed in SSP
shortest diagramed: 38.4 m
Salt Lake City
population: 200,133
urban density: 3,923.0/sq mi
tallest (roof): 136.8 m
2nd tallest (roof): 128.6 m
3rd tallest (roof): 128 m
27 structures diagramed in SSP
shortest diagramed: 58.5 m

While Raleigh didn't have the large open parking lots that SLC does, they do have a large number of dilapidated and/or vacant buildings that are vastly under-utilized. Some lots were empty where old buildings were torn down and fenced off. While the city had a lot of people walking around, the city itself seemed very tired. There wasn't much energy and it seemed like the retail side of things was very much in need of a revitalization.

I will say that I prefer seeing a parking lot that gets some use compared to a fenced-off empty lot where a building once stood.

It felt that SLC is leaps and bounds ahead of Raleigh when it comes to sports, public transit, and retail. However, SLC will never have as many drinking establishments.

Overall, I enjoyed seeing the history that is Raleigh and enjoying the Eastern-style BBQ at Sam Jones and Clyde Coopers.

Not really.

Salt Lake City is the regional center of the entire state of Utah and has no city anywhere within the region that can even compare. Provo and Ogden are not anywhere near Salt Lake's size in scope, importance or influence.

Raleigh, by factor of being the capital of North Carolina, has some influence but it's more a secondary city in North Carolina than the center - which goes to Charlotte. Even more, it has an semi-equal partner in Durham, which is located just down the street.

I've said this already but it's difficult finding a twin city because of the uniqueness of Salt Lake. It's not only the largest city in Utah, but it's the economic, governmental and social center of the state. The entirety of the Wasatch Front revolves around it and by default, that means pretty much most the state's population as well (over 80% of Utah's population lives on the Wasatch Front).

Because Salt Lake is either too small to match other similar cities (like Denver or Phoenix, which dominate both Colorado and Arizona respectively in almost every facet of policy) or too big (like Boise, which is a similar set-up to Salt Lake), there really isn't a direct twin.

There just aren't many cities that are all of the following:

1. Are the state's largest city.
2. The state's capital.
3. The state's economic epicenter.

Off the top of my head:

Arizona (Phoenix)
Arkansas (Little Rock)
Colorado (Denver)
Georgia (Atlanta)
Hawaii (Honolulu)
Idaho (Boise)
Indiana (Indianapolis)
Massachusetts (Boston)
Rhode Island (Providence)
Virginia (Richmond)

But even some of these cities aren't exact, either.

Like, Utah is home to the University of Utah, which to be fair Raleigh is home to NCSU, but neither of Colorado's two major state universities are located in Denver - it's the same with Little Rock and Indianapolis or Virginia.

Atlanta is way too big to compare to Salt Lake. Same with Boston.

Richmond, while the state's capital, often takes a backseat to NoVa, which is an extension of the federal government.

Honolulu just feels unique to every US city to be honest.

Boise, as I mentioned, is just too small.

That leaves (waving the university requirement):

Denver
Little Rock
Phoenix
Providence

Denver is a nice comparison but just not believable.

Little Rock may be the most accurate - especially with Utah and Arkansas having similar state populations.

Phoenix, like Denver, feels a bit too big.

Providence is unique as it's dwarfed by other NE cities like Boston, which is only 50 miles away (or about the distance between Salt Lake and Provo).

Drop the capital requirement and the city that probably matches more closely with Salt Lake is Milwaukee. I've said as much in the past. Both have similar MSAs and somewhat similar CSAs, while being the undisputed center of both states. The difference is that Wisconsin still has more important cities than Utah. Madison is more important than any other Utah city outside Salt Lake.

But it might be the actual twin all things considered.

[Rileybo]

Portland and Milwaukee are the two domestic cities most similar to SLC.