Provo MSA Development Thread - Page 78

delts145 · #**1541** Posted **Oct 24, 2009, 1:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by VelvetElvis

A bridge across Utah Lake is a horrible idea. Madison, WI is surrounded by 2 lakes, neither of which is quite as big as Utah Lake, and they have found no reason to build a bridge straight across either of those bodies. The natural, geographic boundaries in that area have helped create a great urban experience for a city its size. Madison is about the same size as Provo metro and Boise metro but the urban experience there is on a level all its own. There are large, growing populations on the opposite sides of the lakes, but that hasn't forced them to build a bridge! This isn't just an environmental issue, it is also an incredible waste of money. Someone's brother-in-law must stand to make a lot of money from this thing. Ridiculous...

Ditto to that Velvet. Very good points about Madison!

delts145 · #**1542** Posted **Oct 24, 2009, 1:19 PM**

Road makeover is ahead of schedule

http://www.sltrib.com/closeup/ci_13610760

Traffic passes under a new bridge as construction work progresses recently on a reconstructed 400 South interchange in Springville. (Jim Urquhart / The Salt Lake Tribune)

...At this point, barring any major construction delays, UDOT officials look to re-open the road and unveil a new freeway interchange with a week to spare before Black Friday -- the day after Thanksgiving and the Christmas shopping season's unofficial first day...

...The $89 million project required closing down 400 South between Main Street and 1750 West to have work done in the time frame. ...

.

delts145 · #**1543** Posted **Oct 27, 2009, 10:49 AM**

Hearing set on Utah Lake bridge proposal

PROVO — What do you think about the Utah Lake bridge proposal? Who decides whether it will go through? How will the bridge affect you?

The Utah Lake Commission will hold a public hearing at 6 p.m. Thursday at the Utah County Health and Justice Building (151 S. University Ave.), Room 2500, to discuss these types of questions and more concerning a possible bridge over Utah Lake. The bridge would connect 800 North in Orem to just north of Pelican Point in Saratoga Springs.

There will be presentations on the bridge proposal and the process it must go through with an opportunity for public comments.

The Utah Lake Commission will make a recommendation to the Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands as to whether or not the proposal should be granted and thus would like to hear any comments the public may have.

For more information about the proposal or the meeting, go online to www.utahlakecommission.org.

— Sara Lenz

.

delts145 · #**1544** Posted **Oct 29, 2009, 12:02 PM**

I took a drive on Redwood Rd. Monday. The new stretch between Bangerter and Lehi/Saratoga's Commercial junction is a huge improvement now. They're definitely going to need this expansion, especially with the advent of the new NSA Center. Kind of strange how that little stretch going through Riverton's old Main is still the old country two laner. Anyone know how long Riverton will be able to keep it that way? It's kind of charming, but I was wondering what kind of back up in traffic it creates, especially during rush hours.

I found this article below almost amusing. Another little interesting development in the history of this weird Midtown Village Project.

Midtown Village gets new business tenant

http://www.heraldextra.com/business/local/article_565dc435-16c2-5c10-999d-79f46f25cd13.html

Mario Ruiz/Daily Herald

.

Orlando · #**1545** Posted **Oct 29, 2009, 5:46 PM**

And, what does this have to do with Market Station??

TonyAnderson · #**1546** Posted **Oct 29, 2009, 6:20 PM**

I'm sure he meant Midtown Village. Interesting story. Midtown Village looks so close to being finished - such a shame with all the legal battles.

Orlando · #**1547** Posted **Nov 2, 2009, 7:28 PM**

That was just a bad location for that. People who want density prefer it because of walkable proximity to urban lifestyle amenities, ie. resatuurants, cafes, bars, shops, galleries, etc. With this location you have to drive on State Street, which is haphazard random strip mall stuff, to get anywhere.

Orlando · #**1548** Posted **Nov 2, 2009, 7:30 PM**

The first ever LEED certified school building will be built in Pleasant Grove. It will have solar panels, and virtual & hands-on education/discovery about the building and the environment/world.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5279/is_20091019/ai_n39392724/?tag=content;col1

StevenF · #**1549** Posted **Nov 2, 2009, 11:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

That was just a bad location for that. People who want density prefer it because of walkable proximity to urban lifestyle amenities, ie. resatuurants, cafes, bars, shops, galleries, etc. With this location you have to drive on State Street, which is haphazard random strip mall stuff, to get anywhere.

it may be a bad location now but if it is finished and other projects like it are built around it, then the other things will be put in to make it a better location.

i-215 · #**1550** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 2:33 AM**

Still a bad location. Read Jane Jacobs. Something like that needs to be in an area with small, walkable blocks ... not suburban Megablocks.

We get the worst of both worlds ... a terrible location for an urban setting, and the destruction of one of our major north-south car arterials to boot!

At minimum, Put the urban on Orem Blvd instead.

SLC Projects · #**1551** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 5:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by StevenF

it may be a bad location now but if it is finished and other projects like it are built around it, then the other things will be put in to make it a better location.

That's what I have been kind of hoping as well. Maybe in 5-10 years this area will improve then what it is now.

shakman · #**1552** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 6:02 PM**

You have to start somewhere and somehow. Starting is always the difficult part.

Boiseguy · #**1553** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 9:07 PM**

you have to start somewhere, but before you can start throwing up dense urban living options, there needs to be attractions and sense of place in that area BEFORE you start throwing big money into residential units.
An area needs to be an attraction first to drive demand for living there.. So if you're trying to sell urbanity in the realestate market.. urbanity better already be there in some form or another. this is where the city needs to get on board...

i-215 · #**1554** Posted **Nov 3, 2009, 11:52 PM**

Fine, I'm bursting to say this ... so I will.

Midtown Village is the biggest SCAM Orem's fallen for, to boot. This development is nothing more than somebody's strip mall, with an apartment that violated a whole bunch of city code slammed on top.

How does a developer get city help, all the variances in the world they want, and good P.R.? Easy. Label their stupid development as "new urbanism" or "smart growth."

This isn't smart growth. There isn't ANYTHING smart about it. 100% of the people living there will drive. It's a terrible location for urbanization. It's on a MAJOR state highway, with semi-limited access (in terms of signals). Good luck getting UDOT to agree to add an extra light or two mid-block on US-89. Ain't gonna happen. We tried very hard to get a pedestrian signal on US-189, after a BYU student died. In the end they just erased our crosswalk. UDOT told us they were more interested in adding a median wall with a fence to prevent jaywalk/crosswalk fatalities. As UDOT should! There's a place for accessibility and a place for mobility. A state highway is a place for mobility!

You don't put a center of future urbanism on a state highway. That's really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, stupid.

This isn't urbanism. This isn't smart growth. This is a developer who just wanted variances to put WAY more units on his piece of property than zoning allowed. If we're going to allow any dummy who stamps his site plan "new urbanism" provisional zoning, what's the point of zoning?

Oh well. Serves him right. Went bankrupt and now Orem's eyesore is the city's punishment for not sticking to their own municipal code.

Hopefully when the city eventually builds it's REAL downtown area, it'll choose a smarter site, with a smarter site plan. Preferably by a rail stop and away from a major arterial.

Phew! Glad to get that off my chest.

kpexpress · #**1555** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 7:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i-215

Fine, I'm bursting to say this ... so I will.

Midtown Village is the biggest SCAM Orem's fallen for, to boot. This development is nothing more than somebody's strip mall, with an apartment that violated a whole bunch of city code slammed on top.

How does a developer get city help, all the variances in the world they want, and good P.R.? Easy. Label their stupid development as "new urbanism" or "smart growth."

This isn't smart growth. There isn't ANYTHING smart about it. 100% of the people living there will drive. It's a terrible location for urbanization. It's on a MAJOR state highway, with semi-limited access (in terms of signals). Good luck getting UDOT to agree to add an extra light or two mid-block on US-89. Ain't gonna happen. We tried very hard to get a pedestrian signal on US-189, after a BYU student died. In the end they just erased our crosswalk. UDOT told us they were more interested in adding a median wall with a fence to prevent jaywalk/crosswalk fatalities. As UDOT should! There's a place for accessibility and a place for mobility. A state highway is a place for mobility!

You don't put a center of future urbanism on a state highway. That's really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, stupid.

This isn't urbanism. This isn't smart growth. This is a developer who just wanted variances to put WAY more units on his piece of property than zoning allowed. If we're going to allow any dummy who stamps his site plan "new urbanism" provisional zoning, what's the point of zoning?

Oh well. Serves him right. Went bankrupt and now Orem's eyesore is the city's punishment for not sticking to their own municipal code.

Hopefully when the city eventually builds it's REAL downtown area, it'll choose a smarter site, with a smarter site plan. Preferably by a rail stop and away from a major arterial.

Phew! Glad to get that off my chest.

Well said! I agree. Orem is such a crazy place; endless stripmalls and unwalkable neighborhoods completely disconnected from the regional context.

I used to live at Timpview Village on State near the Library, and I felt like I lived in the most walkable part of the city and would walk often to the library, stores, parks, etc. The funny thing is that whenever someone found out that I lived there, they would ask if its ghetto. I think there is an interesting stigma in Orem about walkable neighborhoods and urban density; it's such a auto-oriented town....and the traffic is horrible.

I hope that people in UT county will embrace urban density and rethink the idea of "new urbanism" (new isolationism).

TonyAnderson · #**1556** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 8:05 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i-215

Fine, I'm bursting to say this ... so I will.

Midtown Village is the biggest SCAM Orem's fallen for, to boot. This development is nothing more than somebody's strip mall, with an apartment that violated a whole bunch of city code slammed on top.

How does a developer get city help, all the variances in the world they want, and good P.R.? Easy. Label their stupid development as "new urbanism" or "smart growth."

This isn't smart growth. There isn't ANYTHING smart about it. 100% of the people living there will drive. It's a terrible location for urbanization. It's on a MAJOR state highway, with semi-limited access (in terms of signals). Good luck getting UDOT to agree to add an extra light or two mid-block on US-89. Ain't gonna happen. We tried very hard to get a pedestrian signal on US-189, after a BYU student died. In the end they just erased our crosswalk. UDOT told us they were more interested in adding a median wall with a fence to prevent jaywalk/crosswalk fatalities. As UDOT should! There's a place for accessibility and a place for mobility. A state highway is a place for mobility!

You don't put a center of future urbanism on a state highway. That's really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, stupid.

This isn't urbanism. This isn't smart growth. This is a developer who just wanted variances to put WAY more units on his piece of property than zoning allowed. If we're going to allow any dummy who stamps his site plan "new urbanism" provisional zoning, what's the point of zoning?

Oh well. Serves him right. Went bankrupt and now Orem's eyesore is the city's punishment for not sticking to their own municipal code.

Hopefully when the city eventually builds it's REAL downtown area, it'll choose a smarter site, with a smarter site plan. Preferably by a rail stop and away from a major arterial.

Phew! Glad to get that off my chest.

I'm really starting to think you don't like Midtown Village.

esirhgih · #**1557** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 8:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by kpexpress

Well said! I agree. Orem is such a crazy place; endless stripmalls and unwalkable neighborhoods completely disconnected from the regional context.

I used to live at Timpview Village on State near the Library, and I felt like I lived in the most walkable part of the city and would walk often to the library, stores, parks, etc. The funny thing is that whenever someone found out that I lived there, they would ask if its ghetto. I think there is an interesting stigma in Orem about walkable neighborhoods and urban density; it's such a auto-oriented town....and the traffic is horrible.

I hope that people in UT county will embrace urban density and rethink the idea of "new urbanism" (new isolationism).

I'm just glad that they went out of business before they started similar messes in Clearfield and Ogden as originally planned.

Orlando · #**1558** Posted **Nov 6, 2009, 8:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i-215

Fine, I'm bursting to say this ... so I will.

Midtown Village is the biggest SCAM Orem's fallen for, to boot. This development is nothing more than somebody's strip mall, with an apartment that violated a whole bunch of city code slammed on top.

How does a developer get city help, all the variances in the world they want, and good P.R.? Easy. Label their stupid development as "new urbanism" or "smart growth."

This isn't smart growth. There isn't ANYTHING smart about it. 100% of the people living there will drive. It's a terrible location for urbanization. It's on a MAJOR state highway, with semi-limited access (in terms of signals). Good luck getting UDOT to agree to add an extra light or two mid-block on US-89. Ain't gonna happen. We tried very hard to get a pedestrian signal on US-189, after a BYU student died. In the end they just erased our crosswalk. UDOT told us they were more interested in adding a median wall with a fence to prevent jaywalk/crosswalk fatalities. As UDOT should! There's a place for accessibility and a place for mobility. A state highway is a place for mobility!

You don't put a center of future urbanism on a state highway. That's really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, stupid.

This isn't urbanism. This isn't smart growth. This is a developer who just wanted variances to put WAY more units on his piece of property than zoning allowed. If we're going to allow any dummy who stamps his site plan "new urbanism" provisional zoning, what's the point of zoning?

Oh well. Serves him right. Went bankrupt and now Orem's eyesore is the city's punishment for not sticking to their own municipal code.

Hopefully when the city eventually builds it's REAL downtown area, it'll choose a smarter site, with a smarter site plan. Preferably by a rail stop and away from a major arterial.

Phew! Glad to get that off my chest.

AMEN! Though, I actually think they thought they had good intentions, but erred in their judgement of placing this on a major non-urban thoroughfare. Their needs to be an urban plan that integrates these developments before something like this is built.

SLC Projects · #**1559** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 5:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by esirhgih

I'm just glad that they went out of business before they started similar messes in Clearfield and Ogden as originally planned.

The one in Ogdan would of looked ok. It would of been downtown so it would of worked. But didn't they already broken ground on the one up in Clearfield before they went under?

TonyAnderson · #**1560** Posted **Nov 7, 2009, 8:05 PM**

Yeah 'Falcon Village' I think it's called? Part of that's broken ground, I'm not sure if it's the same developers, but it's a much larger project and involves using underutilized military space for private business offices as well as residential and commercial.