SLC: Official 222 S Main Construction thread

[RFPCME]

T-Mac: Many, many thanks. The latest pictures are great. I just sent them to my son in SLC. He and I visited the site on the first week of June. He will not believe the progress. Also, he is moving to Georgia next week to start school here, so he and I will both be dependent on you to keep us posted on the progress of 222. So. Main.

[T-Mac]

You can count on me.

Best of luck to your son and his schooling.

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by T-Mac

You can count on me.

Best of luck to your son and his schooling.

T-Mac: Thanks. We will look forward to your updates on 222 So. Main and elsewhere.

[TANGELD_SLC]

I think I can see the steel beams from the tippy-top of the 1300 south viaduct... not sure yet if it is or not, I'll hafta go look again tomorrow. (or today, seeing's how it's past midnight.

[T-Mac]

Saturday Morning Update

[SLC Projects]

Love the new point of view.

[RFPCME]

T-Mac: Great idea to shoot that shot looking to the southwest from a higher elevation. I'm assuming you were perched on the Walker Center garage. Wonderful perspective.

[Future Mayor]

As usual, great pics, thanks T-Mac

[delts145]

This is one of my favorite shots. Also makes me appreciate what a beautiful old building the Monaco is.

[SLC Projects]

I think by this time next month 222 South main will be as tall if not taller then the Hotel Monaco building.

[MetroFanatic]

Great pictures! That images from the backside makes it seem extremely tall.

[TANGELD_SLC]

Thanks for those pics, T-mac...... as always, you da man
I especially like the first shot. It looks really tall from that angle.

[shakman]

Originally Posted by TANGELD_SLC

Thanks for those pics, T-mac...... as always, you da man
I especially like the first shot. It looks really tall from that angle.

This development will fit in quite well.

TANGELD_SLC - I question your figures within your siganture. Those look more like the numbers for Denver.

You may want to re-check your numbers for SLC.

[delts145]

^^^

Tangled is referring to the Salt Lake's adjoining, unincorporated townships on the 558,000 figure. Those familiar with the local forum understand that. As far as the 2.2 million figure, the adjoining metros of Ogden and Provo now create a populace of 2.2 million plus people. The metro Wasatch has been growing at a faster clip than metro Denver for these past 10 or so years, and will probably continue to do so, if the experts are correct. However, Denver is still larger at the moment at between 2.7 and 2.8 million, depending on who is doing the tally.

[NYC Rick]

Originally Posted by delts145

^^^

Tangled is referring to the Salt Lake's adjoining, unincorporated townships on the 558,000 figure. Those familiar with the local forum understand that. As far as the 2.2 million figure, the adjoining metros of Ogden and Provo now create a populace of 2.2 million plus people. The metro Wasatch has been growing at a faster clip than metro Denver for these past 10 or so years, and will probably continue to do so, if the experts are correct. However, Denver is still larger at the moment at between 2.7 and 2.8 million, depending on who is doing the tally.

If the same scale of contiguous population areas are considered...then Denver is well on its way to 4 million. I do know that in the extended corridor in Colorado they do include Colorado Springs to Ft. Collins which is a stretch no mater how you look at it.

I think that Ogden to Provo is a continuously populated area minus about 3 miles by Point of the Mountain. I have always wondered how differently they would look at the true CSA if that very lonely area of land was developed and populated. I wonder if the US government would then declare the whole area as a true CSA.

If you notice in the World Almanac, they always list the larger areas even if they area is very extended but when it comes to SLC, since 2000, they always list it as if there were no population that interacted past the borders of the County.

[delts145]

^^^
Point of the Mountain, or actually Traverse Ridge, from Draper up to the top at Suncrest/Lehi, and down to Alpine/Highland ,is now continuously developed and incorporated. There is no gap anymore.

How in the world they would consider Denver and Colorado Springs as one city, yet not consider Salt Lake City to Provo, is beyond belief to me.

[CPVLIVE]

Originally Posted by delts145

The metro Wasatch has been growing at a faster clip than metro Denver for these past 10 or so years, and will probably continue to do so, if the experts are correct. However, Denver is still larger at the moment at between 2.7 and 2.8 million, depending on who is doing the tally.

According to the Brookings Institute:

Denver - "Looking forward, Colorado’s Front Range is projected to
grow by nearly 70 percent to reach a population of 6.3 million
residents by 2040."

Salt Lake - "Looking forward, the Wasatch Front may add another 1.5
million people to reach a population of nearly 3.7 million by
2040."

[Northernlad]

Originally Posted by shakman

This development will fit in quite well.

TANGELD_SLC - I question your figures within your siganture. Those look more like the numbers for Denver.

You may want to re-check your numbers for SLC.

Originally Posted by delts145

^^^

Tangled is referring to the Salt Lake's adjoining, unincorporated townships on the 558,000 figure. Those familiar with the local forum understand that. As far as the 2.2 million figure, the adjoining metros of Ogden and Provo now create a populace of 2.2 million plus people. The metro Wasatch has been growing at a faster clip than metro Denver for these past 10 or so years, and will probably continue to do so, if the experts are correct. However, Denver is still larger at the moment at between 2.7 and 2.8 million, depending on who is doing the tally.

Originally Posted by NYC Rick

If the same scale of contiguous population areas are considered...then Denver is well on its way to 4 million. I do know that in the extended corridor in Colorado they do include Colorado Springs to Ft. Collins which is a stretch no mater how you look at it.

I think that Ogden to Provo is a continuously populated area minus about 3 miles by Point of the Mountain. I have always wondered how differently they would look at the true CSA if that very lonely area of land was developed and populated. I wonder if the US government would then declare the whole area as a true CSA.

If you notice in the World Almanac, they always list the larger areas even if they area is very extended but when it comes to SLC, since 2000, they always list it as if there were no population that interacted past the borders of the County.

Originally Posted by CPVLIVE

According to the Brookings Institute:

Denver - "Looking forward, Colorado’s Front Range is projected to
grow by nearly 70 percent to reach a population of 6.3 million
residents by 2040."

Salt Lake - "Looking forward, the Wasatch Front may add another 1.5
million people to reach a population of nearly 3.7 million by
2040."

I really have a hard time understanding why some local forumers are so infatuated with the Wasatch adding thousands of more people when we have so many pressing issues that need to be addressed and fixed before we add thousands and upwards of a million people. Can any of you imagine what our air quality will be like with another say 50,000 or 500,000 people crammed along the valley from Ogden to Provo? probably not. Where is our water going to come from? How much worse will our very evident homeless problem downtown become? Will we be able to count on our fingers how many days we have clear views of the mountains because of murky stagnant air obstructing our views?
Not to mention everything we consider quality of life attributes which will decrease with so many people.

Even with population surges in Utah and Salt Lake City, Denver will always be our much, much larger brother. There is not even a comparison for instance between the size of downtown Denver and Salt Lake.
I am in Denver at least 5 times a year on business and I always feel like I am in a big city when compared to Salt Lake.

[delts145]

...And I suppose the Brookings Institute will continue to include everything from Denver to Colorado Springs, and even Pueblo, which may even actually be connected by that time. Yet at the same time, they would leave off half of the Wasatch Front, both north and south. What a laughable and uninformed farce!! Not necessarily regarding the Front Range, but definately regarding the Wasatch Front. Hey, who knows, maybe by 2040 they will have at least a small semblance of actual knowledge where the Wasatch Front is concerned. What a joke!

[RFPCME]

Originally Posted by Northernlad

I really have a hard time understanding why some local forumers are so infatuated with the Wasatch adding thousands of more people when we have so many pressing issues that need to be addressed and fixed before we add thousands and upwards of a million people. Can any of you imagine what our air quality will be like with another say 50,000 or 500,000 people crammed along the valley from Ogden to Provo? probably not. Where is our water going to come from? How much worse will our very evident homeless problem downtown become? Will we be able to count on our fingers how many days we have clear views of the mountains because of murky stagnant air obstructing our views?
Not to mention everything we consider quality of life attributes which will decrease with so many people.

Even with population surges in Utah and Salt Lake City, Denver will always be our much, much larger brother. There is not even a comparison for instance between the size of downtown Denver and Salt Lake.
I am in Denver at least 5 times a year on business and I always feel like I am in a big city when compared to Salt Lake.

Northernlad: I think I'm with you on this one. Comparing Denver and SLC truly is like comparing apples and kumquats. The biggest difference is geography. In Colorado, the only limitation on development is the Front Range! There is nothing to the east, until you hit Omaha. To the north, nothing. To the south, nothing. The SLC Metro area is hemmed in on all sides. It is also exceedingly narrow.

Let Colorado have all the people. At least they have some place to put them. The SLC metro area is going to have to struggle to find places for 3 or 4M. But, of course, the Denver area is an apple that is already rotting. Let's hope we all can work to keep the SLC metro area from becoming a rotting kumquat or whatever.