HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #8541  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 4:42 AM
Urban_logic's Avatar
Urban_logic Urban_logic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sandy, UT
Posts: 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMTower View Post
Yes, they have those plans in place, but SLC isn't just going to sit still. It already has much more in the works, and with the proposed trolley system they will have much more mass transit infrastructure by that time. Also, those areas are going to sprawl much more before they start going vertical, whereas SLC is at a point where vertical residential is exploding. If this trend continues, SLC will be cramming many more people in per square mile than those parts of the valley. Plus, when downtown had a crappy urban vibe, those that wanted to live in an urban setting went elsewhere... in the future, Salt Lake will be drawing those people in.
This is true. I didn't say SLC would stay still - 600k would mean that it would more than triple its current population. I am saying that SLC will continue to grow, but it will slow down and max out eventually. Once it maxes out, the other areas of the valley will keep growing. Then they, too, will max out eventually. When they do, then they will have caught up to SLC. So you are correct that SLC will still in many ways remain the leader. It will reach the optimal max-out "super city" status before anyone else does and hold that position for a while. But the other parts of the valley will begin to catch up. Eventually - probably well after 50 years - all four corners of the valley will be similar in composition and will draw people in from the other parts of the valley. There will probably be an exchange of people between the different parts commercialy, economicaly, demographicaly, in regards to higher education facilities, entertainment and cultural events, etc. Then don't forget the other parts of the Wasatch Front! We will be quite the booming region! Then there's other areas of the state - like St. George. Our state could totally kick butt!!
     
     
  #8542  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 7:28 AM
nickfreakingrules's Avatar
nickfreakingrules nickfreakingrules is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: S.L.U.T. (the good part)
Posts: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyguy414 View Post
Pics I took today:



WOW! Tower 1 is really going to fill in the hole in our skyline from this angle. SWEET!!!
     
     
  #8543  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 7:32 AM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by skyguy414 View Post
Pics I took today:



Hell yea. Thanks skyguy414 for those pics. I've been waiting for someone to post or take pics of the downtown skyline from that view. I love seeing all those cranes. It's like a dream come true.
You know guys I have to say that we ( Salt Lake ) are lucky to have so much happening right now in the downtown area. Even when other projects have slowed down in most other places Salt Lake is still in full swing. I don't think I have ever seen Salt Lake with that many cranes EVER.
I can now see Tower 1 starting to peak out. That Tower is going to make a big impact to the skyline. And from that view it will fill in the gap right there in the middle. Tower 5, I'm sure will stick out as well.
Can't wait.

Too bad 222 South Main from that view doesn't do too much for the skyline other then it's just hiding the Well Fargo building.
__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
     
     
  #8544  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 7:34 AM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,108
LOL, just notice that nickfreakingrules and I both made the same comment about Tower 1. Looks like we are on the same page here.
__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
     
     
  #8545  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 8:49 AM
urbanboy urbanboy is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Downtown Salt Lake City
Posts: 2,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban_logic View Post
This is true. I didn't say SLC would stay still - 600k would mean that it would more than triple its current population. I am saying that SLC will continue to grow, but it will slow down and max out eventually. Once it maxes out, the other areas of the valley will keep growing. Then they, too, will max out eventually. When they do, then they will have caught up to SLC.
The Jordans will "max out" much faster than Salt Lake City because the lack of sufficient infrastructure that cannot support very dense development. Salt Lake City with it's grid and interconnected streets will be able to handle higher densities, and grow it's population without it clogging up it's extensive, interconnected arterial streets.

Quote:
So you are correct that SLC will still in many ways remain the leader. It will reach the optimal max-out "super city" status before anyone else does and hold that position for a while.
What exactly is "super city" status?

Quote:
But the other parts of the valley will begin to catch up. Eventually - probably well after 50 years - all four corners of the valley will be similar in composition and will draw people in from the other parts of the valley. There will probably be an exchange of people between the different parts commercialy, economicaly, demographicaly, in regards to higher education facilities, entertainment and cultural events, etc.
It sounds to me like you want four Salt Lake Cities with their respective downtowns in the valley rather than just one Salt Lake City with a downtown that is four times the size.

Quote:
Then don't forget the other parts of the Wasatch Front! We will be quite the booming region! Then there's other areas of the state - like St. George. Our state could totally kick butt!!
Just because the built environment may cover a lot of ground and look big from space, doesn't mean the city is as big as it looks. It doesn't mean the area is "booming" or that it "kicks but." It usually means it was terribly planned and uses space poorly. The best cities are those that are compact and cover little ground relative to the population. This forces amenities closer together making it more feasible for an efficient public transportation system to exist, and for people to do most of their traveling on foot, thus improving public health and facilitating healthy lifestyles. It preserves more land to raise crops and livestock to support and nourish the entire population. A "kick but" city, would be one that can support itself; aka: sustainable.
     
     
  #8546  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 3:30 PM
Justnslcsugarhood.'s Avatar
Justnslcsugarhood. Justnslcsugarhood. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanboy View Post
The Jordans will "max out" much faster than Salt Lake City because the lack of sufficient infrastructure that cannot support very dense development. Salt Lake City with it's grid and interconnected streets will be able to handle higher densities, and grow it's population without it clogging up it's extensive, interconnected arterial streets.



What exactly is "super city" status?



It sounds to me like you want four Salt Lake Cities with their respective downtowns in the valley rather than just one Salt Lake City with a downtown that is four times the size.



Just because the built environment may cover a lot of ground and look big from space, doesn't mean the city is as big as it looks. It doesn't mean the area is "booming" or that it "kicks but." It usually means it was terribly planned and uses space poorly. The best cities are those that are compact and cover little ground relative to the population. This forces amenities closer together making it more feasible for an efficient public transportation system to exist, and for people to do most of their traveling on foot, thus improving public health and facilitating healthy lifestyles. It preserves more land to raise crops and livestock to support and nourish the entire population. A "kick but" city, would be one that can support itself; aka: sustainable.
Also they use up larger plots of land for their houses and ALL of the buildings are under ten stories pretty much, so if you ask me they are squandering their land.
     
     
  #8547  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 6:05 PM
blazefirelight's Avatar
blazefirelight blazefirelight is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 104
Convention Hotel

     
     
  #8548  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 6:10 PM
Urban_logic's Avatar
Urban_logic Urban_logic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sandy, UT
Posts: 360
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanboy View Post
The Jordans will "max out" much faster than Salt Lake City because the lack of sufficient infrastructure that cannot support very dense development. Salt Lake City with it's grid and interconnected streets will be able to handle higher densities, and grow it's population without it clogging up it's extensive, interconnected arterial streets.
The Jordans also have a grid with inter-connected streets. About half of the total area that the Jordans can encompass is currently vacant - that means they can do whatever they want with that land and are not limited in what the can and can't build due to exsisting development (half of their street grid hasn't even been built yet). When you look at the Daybreak models, you can see an excellent grid of streets planned to accomidate traffic flows. Then there is the Mountain View Corridor (10-lane freeway, BRT, and bike/pedestrian trails along 56th West), the Kennecott "transit spine" including light rail along U-111 that spans the west bench, and of course the two TRAX lines that will be coming shortly.

The reason I predict that the Jordans will rival SLC (even if they don't become the same city, they will still grow together and assist eachother in forming some sort of urban center) is because of all of this potential. If they use all of this empy land wisely, they can harness massive economic and political power by bringing in businesses, people, and higher education facilities. SLC has almost run out of land, so it is now revitalizing existing neighborhoods to bring in growth. West Valley is also running out of land along with Sandy - though there is still some land to develop wisely. The Jordan region has the most developable vacant land than any other part of the valley by far and can use this to its benefit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanboy View Post
What exactly is "super city" status?
Fully developed infrastructure, maxed out developable space (this also includes parks and open space), and is using exsisting development to its fullest potential. Basically, it doesn't have much farther to go to improve. It's reached its prime development.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanboy View Post
It sounds to me like you want four Salt Lake Cities with their respective downtowns in the valley rather than just one Salt Lake City with a downtown that is four times the size.
Not really. I would be good with one down town area in SLC. If I had it my way, I would have SLC have the largest and only down town, followed by Sandy and the Jordans with just an urban core, then West Valley having some sort of dense cluster. Then I would want dozens of TOD's all over the place. Regardless of what I want, the 4-core senerio is what I'm seeing is going to happen (whether I like it or not). I am looking at current trends and plans for certain areas and I am seeing this 4-core senerio as one likely to unfold.

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanboy View Post
Just because the built environment may cover a lot of ground and look big from space, doesn't mean the city is as big as it looks. It doesn't mean the area is "booming" or that it "kicks but." It usually means it was terribly planned and uses space poorly. The best cities are those that are compact and cover little ground relative to the population. This forces amenities closer together making it more feasible for an efficient public transportation system to exist, and for people to do most of their traveling on foot, thus improving public health and facilitating healthy lifestyles. It preserves more land to raise crops and livestock to support and nourish the entire population. A "kick but" city, would be one that can support itself; aka: sustainable.
As I mentioned earlier, the Jordan area is vastly undeveloped and has plans in place to wisely develop this land. When you look at the 'Jordan Hills' developments in West Jordan from New Bingham Hwy to 70th South and 56th West to 72nd West, there are tons of condos, apartments, and all of the individual houses have really small yards (smaller then even their SLC neighborhood counterparts). Then if you go farther to the south, you see Daybreak, which also has very dense housing. Then when you look at all the vacant land, you can only imagine its potential.
     
     
  #8549  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 7:35 PM
Justnslcsugarhood.'s Avatar
Justnslcsugarhood. Justnslcsugarhood. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 294
As I mentioned earlier, the Jordan area is vastly undeveloped and has plans in place to wisely develop this land. When you look at the 'Jordan Hills' developments in West Jordan from New Bingham Hwy to 70th South and 56th West to 72nd West, there are tons of condos, apartments, and all of the individual houses have really small yards (smaller then even their SLC neighborhood counterparts). Then if you go farther to the south, you see Daybreak, which also has very dense housing. Then when you look at all the vacant land, you can only imagine its potential.[/QUOTE]

I hope you're right. We, as the fastest growing state, need to properly manage our land and having dense suburbs, like the one you've mentioned, could help us sprawl more gracefully.
     
     
  #8550  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 7:48 PM
scottharding scottharding is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 1,681
I don't think any city can "max out," unless you're talking about available land, and in that sense, I'd say maxing out is a very bad thing. Look at Manahattan. It continues to grow in population, the island has been built out from end to end for about a century.
I'm with Urban boy on this one. The measure of a good city is not the space it takes up, but how it utilizes the space that it occupies. For this reason, I don't believe the Jordans, or Sandy, or any other Utah city will ever rival Salt Lake City. It is the capital. It has the history. It is years ahead in infrastructure. Cities grow organically, and Salt Lake is currently a city. The majority of the rest of the county is suburbs. They will continue to grow, hopefully admirably, and will be fine cities, no doubt. But Salt Lake will always be the anchor city for this valley. That's my prediction, and time will tell I suppose.
     
     
  #8551  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 7:53 PM
WASDEN's Avatar
WASDEN WASDEN is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Kailua HI
Posts: 391


u nailed it
     
     
  #8552  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 10:25 PM
urbanboy urbanboy is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Downtown Salt Lake City
Posts: 2,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban_logic View Post
...SLC has almost run out of land, so it is now revitalizing existing neighborhoods to bring in growth...
Actually, SLC still has it's North West Quadrant. However, I hope it is not developed, and instead is used for permaculture.
     
     
  #8553  
Old Posted Jan 30, 2009, 11:44 PM
Justnslcsugarhood.'s Avatar
Justnslcsugarhood. Justnslcsugarhood. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 294
I think that would be a good idea, it would also give us a place to naturalize the Joshua tree, which I think should be Utah's state tree, since its natural habitat is shrinking. It's also really cool looking, lol, It looks like something you would only find in Africa not southern Utah.
     
     
  #8554  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 12:43 AM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 20,655
Experts Rule The Leonardo is "Poised For Success." Mayor Becker Backing Leonardo

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705281406,00.html

..."The Leonardo has weathered a long and challenging path as a start-up organization," said Raylene Decatur, an expert in science museum management. "Based on the information I have today, the organization is poised for success at a level unimaginable 12 months ago."...


Becker gives thumbs up for The Leonardo


http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11591308

"a major temporary program or exhibition every 18-32 months would reinforce the image of Utah as a state on the move, offering the cultural and educational amenities of a large and vital metropolitan area."



.

Last edited by delts145; Jan 31, 2009 at 12:56 AM.
     
     
  #8555  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 4:24 AM
TANGELD_SLC's Avatar
TANGELD_SLC TANGELD_SLC is offline
The World Is Welcome Here
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: SL,UT
Posts: 883
Like Body Worlds II

Also, for everyone that keeps thinking SLC will end up being 2nd best needs to remember that while those other suburban areas are filling IN, SLC will be filling UP, meaning we will be getting gobbles of residential towers that will give us a much higher density than those other areas because they can't build up due to the airport.
__________________
Espavo!

Plyg, Metrosexual, & AVENian
     
     
  #8556  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 6:34 AM
skierforlife17's Avatar
skierforlife17 skierforlife17 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Park City/Salt Lake City
Posts: 141
With all this talk about salt lake growth all i can think about is how terrible the pollution would be.. I mean it snowed two days ago and the inversion is already back. Salt lake valley is going to smoggy 365 with that size of population. thats not promising..
     
     
  #8557  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 12:24 PM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,108
New Sugar House plan: Hel-condo-retail project wins approval!!!





http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_11594246

Judi Short, who lives in a 110-year-old Sugar House bungalow, is old school.

She likes the neighborhood's small scale and eclectic charm. So when she saw a California builder's blueprint to cram the Granite Block with a six-story hotel and a health club, along with 320 condominiums above national chain stores, restaurants and boutiques, it was "kind of a shock."

Then came the epiphany. After all, with the economy foundering, and developer Craig Mecham's makeover for 2100 South-Highland Drive suspended, perhaps the 5 1/2-acre project farther west is the surest way to resuscitate a once-buzzing Sugar House.

"We need something to bring the place back," said Short, the land-use point person for the Sugar House Community Council. "We're trying to do a mini-downtown with a 24/7 population. Over time, it will be."

Despite some concern over the size and traffic congestion, the Planning Commission agreed -- approving Red Mountain Retail Group's plan last week.

And unlike many developments hamstrung by the credit crunch, Red Mountain insists it has financing in place. Indeed, vice president Eric Nelson says he is "shovel-ready" -- with tenants and a hotel operator on board -- ready to dig in this summer.

"We certainly believe in Sugar House," Nelson said. "We believe we can reenergize the street and bring activity further south."

Instead of new construction, most of the work focuses on reuse.

intends to renovate the Granite Furniture warehouse, part of the Granite Furniture showroom, and the Leisure Living building. The plan also calls for new buildings on McClelland Street and Sugarmont Avenue.

"The buildings themselves and the bones of the buildings are in good shape," said Nelson who "absolutely" will pursue some level of "green" Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certification.

The large-scale restoration also includes little touches, such as preserving the Granite Furniture "star" sign. And the builder revised the original outline to create space for the Parley's Trail alignment.

Philip Carlson, a Sugar House resident and community council member, is excited. He says the hotel and high-density housing make sense, especially since capital planners have targeted the area for a streetcar link to mass transit.

"And I like the reuse of so many things," Carlson said. "I wish the other half of the block would have taken this approach."

The city hoped Red Mountain and Mecham would coordinate their development plans. But Mecham's 4.5-acre retail, office and residential project -- approved in August -- hit the skids when the economy stalled. Mecham, who says he has financing with "dangling participles," now has until the end of the month to fill the hole on the iconic Sugar House corner just south of the monument marking the neighborhood's history. The builder has been heavily criticized for bulldozing his row of kitschy shops along with the old Blue Boutique.

City Councilman Soren Simonsen says there are many "favorable" elements to Red Mountain's plan, including the hotel. But it only works, he argues, if the streetcar eventually is built. Simonsen notes the surrounding streets are too often clogged with cars and cannot afford more congestion.

"We've got to have additional systems in place to accommodate it," he said.

Nelson agrees, and both men note the streetcar is Mayor Ralph Becker's top transit priority. Once finished, Nelson predicts both projects will blend as that urban-planning buzzword: a transit-oriented development.

"The city recognized that to be a real mixed use, urban core it had to be dense," Nelson said. "And it had to be the whole block. One thing to remember is we're not ripping buildings down where we don't have to."

If Red Mountain meets its goal, the renovated buildings could be occupied by the end of this year. Nelson says he has commitments from commercial and residential tenants, but would not reveal any of the merchants.

"There's a ton of interest for the Sugar House area, especially for this block," he insisted. "Finding tenants is a lot harder than it's ever been, but it's not impossible."

Short says she'd love to see the independents come back, but with the likelihood of raised rents, "they can't pay it." She also worries about the recessionary cloud that shows little sign of lifting.

"Eric says he has funding, but that's today. Who knows what will happen when he starts working on it."

"But if he can restore the first two buildings and get that going," Short added, "that's a good start."

Nelson is realistic about the economic climate. Asked directly if he has bank funding in place, the developer responded, "I do today."



__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
     
     
  #8558  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 1:06 PM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Downtown Los Angeles
Posts: 20,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by skierforlife17 View Post
With all this talk about salt lake growth all i can think about is how terrible the pollution would be.. I mean it snowed two days ago and the inversion is already back. Salt lake valley is going to smoggy 365 with that size of population. thats not promising..
Well, I suppose if all energy and transportation technology just stood still while the population continued to increase. However, I hardly see that being the case. Infact, I've heard it from a number of people in L.A. and along the Wasatch, who remember the factory belching, leaded gasoline days of the 60's and 70's. They say it was much worse then than now, even with allot fewer people.
Although, perhaps as the old traditional forms of carbon pollution fall by the wayside, we will find ourselves with new forms of problems, such as exotic chemicals and bio-engineering.
     
     
  #8559  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 6:14 PM
Stenar's Avatar
Stenar Stenar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 3,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban_logic View Post
The Jordans also have a grid with inter-connected streets.
SLC's grid consists of blocks that are 1/8 mile or smaller. Jordan and most of the suburbs grids consist of blocks that are 1 mile or in some instances 1/2 mile, i.e. fewer major roads because the major roads are 1 mile apart.
     
     
  #8560  
Old Posted Jan 31, 2009, 6:22 PM
urbanboy urbanboy is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Downtown Salt Lake City
Posts: 2,120



Not if we move to reusable forms of energy and find new materials for car tires. Reusable/natural forms of energy have no pollutants. But what to do about the rubber dust from car tires problem is a dilemma. Perhaps our society needs to get rid of cars altogether?
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.