Salt Lake:Official development news thread - Page 437

Northernlad · #**8721** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 5:10 PM**

Nice idea Justnslcsugarhood. The awesome photographer Sawtooth has some better pictures of the Boise skyline in his Boise City of Eden photo thread. I think these give a better idea of the layout and density of our neighbor to the northwest. There are some other great skyline shots in his picture thread too.

Sawtooth, I hope you do not mind that I pasted a few of your pics over here, that is if you even read SL threads and realize I used a few of your pics.

pics by Sawtooth

shakman · #**8722** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 5:37 PM**

The first pic of the SLC skyline in the haze is one of the best pics of the skyline I ever seen.

cololi · #**8723** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 5:54 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justnslcsugarhood.

So, Denver, In my opinion, had a much more substantial downtown twenty to thirty years ago then does SLC in the present.

And each city is in the correct role at the correct time. I believe that Denver in the 80's was a much larger city than SLC is now and much more regionally significant. Really comparing cities is fruitless in terms of their downtowns. SLC is not Denver, or Phoenix, or Boise, or Reno, or anywhere else. All of these places have some similarities, but they also have enough differences to make them each unique. And they each play a role in the region where they are located, but the role is defined by their significance. This is true of all places, not just major cities.

I think process is more of deterrent to development than ordinances. Ordinances come in to play when they make it clear what is desirable and then make it easy to built a desirable project. This is the biggest weakness in SLC in my opinion. Most developers don't mind the regulations, but they do mind long, drawn out processes that are not predictible. Not predictable in terms of approvals, but predictible in terms of time frames, steps required, etc.

SLC early booms are correleated with mining booms. Other than that, we have never really had a sector of industry that has created similar booms or that have dominated the local economy. This is both good and bad, because although the highs are not as high, the lows are not as low. We may if energy ever developes further, but until then, I just don't see it. I suspect other places with struggling downtowns have similar economic conditions in terms of booming sectors. The one thing that all of these places you mentioned do have in common, in terms of economic drivers, is the single family housing sector, which has boomed in all of these places at different times.

Future Mayor · #**8724** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 5:54 PM**

We have to remember that while the skylines may seem more impressive than the SLC skyline, that isn't what truly makes a city a great city. While I haven't read the article I am assuming that when they said Denver was at the bottom it simply meant the quality of the downtown while in downtown. That includes the vibrancy, the residential, the available arts and cultural activities, and more. So while Phoenix and Denver may have more impressive skylines it doesn't always equate to a more vibrant downtown.

I have had several associates from Denver over the years and while I know a lot has changed, they told me 10 years ago that while Denver has a bigger downtown and a larger skyline that it was simply a business oriented city and that SLC had a much better arts and culture and more welcoming downtown. This is the same thing I have heard about Phoenix in comparison to SLC.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**8725** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 5:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

We have to remember that while the skylines may seem more impressive than the SLC skyline, that isn't what truly makes a city a great city. While I haven't read the article I am assuming that when they said Denver was at the bottom it simply meant the quality of the downtown while in downtown. That includes the vibrancy, the residential, the available arts and cultural activities, and more. So while Phoenix and Denver may have more impressive skylines it doesn't always equate to a more vibrant downtown.

I have had several associates from Denver over the years and while I know a lot has changed, they told me 10 years ago that while Denver has a bigger downtown and a larger skyline that it was simply a business oriented city and that SLC had a much better arts and culture and more welcoming downtown. This is the same thing I have heard about Phoenix in comparison to SLC.

How many operating stores are on Maine street right now?

and SLC has some awesome parks in the northern part of Downtown.
Salt Lake City has cool apartments just north Of the CBD that are usually cut out of the skyline photos,
also most of our skyline photos seem to be from the North West as to include the temple which cuts out the majority of our buildings. If you look at SLC from the east, especially south east coming down on University Bl. our downtown looks amazing.

WASDEN · #**8726** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:01 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

We have to remember that while the skylines may seem more impressive than the SLC skyline, that isn't what truly makes a city a great city. While I haven't read the article I am assuming that when they said Denver was at the bottom it simply meant the quality of the downtown while in downtown. That includes the vibrancy, the residential, the available arts and cultural activities, and more. So while Phoenix and Denver may have more impressive skylines it doesn't always equate to a more vibrant downtown.

I have had several associates from Denver over the years and while I know a lot has changed, they told me 10 years ago that while Denver has a bigger downtown and a larger skyline that it was simply a business oriented city and that SLC had a much better arts and culture and more welcoming downtown. This is the same thing I have heard about Phoenix in comparison to SLC.

Exactly what I was thinking Future Mayor. While SLC might have a more impressive skyline than Boise, Boise is a much better city when experienced from the ground. On that same idea, Phoenix has a more impressive skyline than SLC, but walk around downtown Phoenix and see if you like it. Denver however, has both. Impressive skyline and vibrancy on the ground. We could take some cues from Denver and Boise, but sorry Phoenicians, I just don't care for your sprawling, soulless expanse.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**8727** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:04 PM**

[QUOTE=WASDEN; I just don't care for your sprawling, soulless expanse.[/QUOTE]

Oh my!

Future Mayor · #**8728** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justnslcsugarhood.

How many operating stores are on Maine street right now?

Well a quick count in my head came to 14 between S. Temple and 3rd south, that is not counting anything that is even around any corner from Main either. So while not wonderful, it's not completely dead. It could be worse and will only continue to improve as residential development continues.

WASDEN · #**8729** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:06 PM**

Yeah I'm a little harsh

. Phoenix is a clean/orderly downtown though, I'll give it that.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**8730** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WASDEN

Yeah I'm a little harsh

. Phoenix is a clean/orderly downtown though, I'll give it that.

Yeah, DT SLC seems to be overflowing with Jugalows right now. Im not that old but I don't understand social scenes at all, lol.

urbanboy · #**8731** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delts145

Boise and Albuquerque have an excuse in that they're metro population is much smaller than Salt Lakes. If Boise had a population base like Seattle or even Portland, I think we would see much of the same style of Pacific Northwest downtown in Boise, "give it time."

Denver, if one looks at the population base of the metro, has done an infinately better job with it's downtown than say Phoenix. But then Salt Lake also has done a much better job than Phoenix at focusing on the downtown, when you consider that metro Phoenix has over 4 million people, and should look more like Seattle.

These paragraphs seem contradictory. Couldn't what happened to Phoenix also happen to Boise as well?

Quote:

In many ways, the creative potential for much of the downtown palate that now exists, would not be possible if not for the LDS Church influence.

In many ways, the development potential for much of downtown palate that now exists, would not be possible if not for City Creek Center? Ok, after rewording it, I now understand what you are saying.

delts145 · #**8732** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:26 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanboy

These paragraphs seem contradictory. Couldn't what happened to Phoenix happen to Boise as well?

In all fairness to Phoenix, I think that it is now on the right track and will continue to make good progress downtown.

Well, I guess anything is possible, but I think it's highly unlikely that future Boise's downtown will resemble the 70's to present downtown of Phoenix.

urbanboy · #**8733** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by delts145

In all fairness to Phoenix, I think that it is now on the right track and will continue to make good progress downtown.

No, I absolutely donot think that future Boise's downtown will resemble the 70's to present downtown of Phoenix.

I'm talking about the ratio between the metro population and the density of the respective downtown.

delts145 · #**8734** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:35 PM**

Ooops, I changed my wording a little. Oh well... no matter.

Do you mean that if future Boise were to have a metro population of four million, that it's future downtown would be no more built up than the present Phoenix downtown?

Edit: I just can't see Boise moving forward with it's downtown in the same way that a Phoenix or L.A. developed in the 60's and 70's. Sure Boise will sprawl, but I think it's downtown will be much larger/denser in ratio to it's sprawl than say Phoenix is today.

Hopefully, Boiseguy will chime in soon.

WASDEN · #**8735** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:45 PM**

intelligenteconomy

I was wondering how you guys think Vegas fits into our discussion of Mountainwest cities. Vegas will always be internationally renouned for the obvious reasons, but would you like to live there? I was living there for much of last fall. While you can see a lot of shows, I just didn't really care for the place. Vegas has mastered the art of the suburb. If you like suburban living, I would say Vegas is unbeatable. Anyway my feeling has always been that Vegas is a great place to visit, but not a great place to live.

Thoughts?

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**8736** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WASDEN

intelligenteconomy

I was wondering how you guys think Vegas fits into our discussion of Mountainwest cities. Vegas will always be internationally renouned for the obvious reasons, but would you like to live there? I was living there for much of last fall. While you can see a lot of shows, I just didn't really care for the place. Vegas has mastered the art of the suburb. If you like suburban living, I would say Vegas is unbeatable. Anyway my feeling has always been that Vegas is a great place to visit, but not a great place to live.

Thoughts?

Too hot. I like the hotels and the shows but I would never live there.
PS too artificial. The buildings are all mimicking something else, nothings really unique.

what would make SLC really nice is, like I have stated earlier, is if SLC developed a local oriented core like sugarhouse did, Except maybe twice to three times as many stores and a few clubs.

Future Mayor · #**8737** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:51 PM**

While Vegas does exude all the attributes of the burb it from a population per square mile, one of the more densly populated cities in the country. This information is according the APA.

Future Mayor · #**8738** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:52 PM**

While Vegas does exude all the attributes of the burbs, from a population per square mile stand point, it is one of the more densly populated cities in the country. This information is according the APA.

And no I wouldn't want to live there.

T-Mac · #**8739** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 6:59 PM**

On the topic of the downtown broadway style theater. I have heard the argument that people don't think that we could fill it night after night. I bought my wife season tickets to the Hale Center Theater and we went to "Cash on Delivery" friday night and it was sold out. We had dinner out by the theater and the place was packed. I also have tickets to Wicked and it is sold out. I think we definitely could support this type of theater and I think that there is plenty of private money out there to support a new larger theater in downtown. That is going to be so cool when it is built. Downtown will be an awesome place to go. Just my rambling thoughts before lunch.

Justnslcsugarhood. · #**8740** Posted **Feb 9, 2009, 7:02 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-Mac

On the topic of the downtown broadway style theater. I have heard the argument that people don't think that we could fill it night after night. I bought my wife season tickets to the Hale Center Theater and we went to "Cash on Delivery" friday night and it was sold out. We had dinner out by the theater and the place was packed. I also have tickets to Wicked and it is sold out. I think we definitely could support this type of theater and I think that there is plenty of private money out there to support a new larger theater in downtown. That is going to be so cool when it is built. Downtown will be an awesome place to go. Just my rambling thoughts before lunch.

I think that "they" are always underestimating our city.
F.E. I'm not sure of actual numbers but the people of SLC were far more embracing of the trax line then "they" initially thought we would be.