Salt Lake MSA Development Thread

[Boiseguy]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

I just always thought it was weird and kind of uncommon for a city that in alot of ways is smaller then Salt Lake City has a bigger population within the city limits. With the size that SLC is you'd think there would be more then just 188,000 people living there. Really that's only about 84,000 more people then cities like West Jordan and West Valley that is no where near the size of SLC. I know that sprawling is to blame. But I still would like to see SLC stay as our biggest city. That's why I am really looking forward to the 2010 census to finally get a good idea of what Salt Lake's population. I'm not sure if the city will reach 200,000, but I would like to at least see it growing. And with all the new housing project that were build and getting built during the last 8 years or so I would think those numbers would be higher.



Phoenix
1 567 924 in city
4 179 427 in metro


Denver
610 345 in city
3 110 436 in metro


Boise
205 314 in city
606 376 in metro

Salt Lake City
181 698 in city
1 743 364 in metro ( we have a million MORE people in our metro then Boise , however Boise has more people living in the city. )

technically slc metro is only 1.1 million.. u are either adding in provo or ogden and that brings in a whole different issue regarding geographical terrain.
If you want to just compare 181K to 1.1 million vs boise's 205K to 606K then you have to look at the way cities grow and annex land.
Colorado springs is roughly the same metro size as boise, 600K but has almost 500K in city...

Boise city limits is actually half the size of Salt Lake City so the size of the city isn't larger, and yes boise too has area's that are not developed. Hell the entire airport is within the city limits here as well. Boise is denser than Salt Lake city when it comes to population..Sometimes you don't realize it because we associate towers with density. But much of inner boise and the surrounding neighborhoods are mixed with single family homes and large multi family complexes. The city here has also divided up existing city lots where older dwellings have been cleared away and turned them into 2 or 3 lots to which has spawned A LOT of row housing..where the row houses are 3-4 bedroom houses for families..
so where 20 years ago lived a family of 4.. on the same piece of land now has 2-3 families of 4

http://www.cityofboise.org/Departments/P...c.%20Documents/CompPlan_New-Urbanism.pdf

It would be my guess that much of salt lake city proper falls into more of a historic district limiting what types of density measures can be taken.. You have to remember Salt Lake proper was roughly the same size population wise 80 years ago. Not much has changed. The neighborhoods in salt lake city were there 80 years ago.. wheras 80 years ago boise was just a small farm town. So the clearing of old in boise to impliment new residential density is only really impacting area's post WWII..making it easier to go in and "re-do" things..where salt lake has to rely more on doing new things wherever possible on the limited vacant land it has left.. and it's hard to get people to buy into city dwelling when for the same cost you can own a 3000sqft house on an acre of grass in south jordan and have a wonderful 10 lane freeway to get you to work everyday.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

I've wondered how enormous, sprawling cities like Phoenix even manage to govern effectively on local planning issues and the like.

City council members turn into celebrities who are more concerned about their own re-election than local issues. The Los Angeles City Council comes to mind.

Smaller cities make the "stepping stones" into City Hall easier to climb. South Salt Lake, for example, can't hind behind the kind of bureaucracy Baltimore can.

[UTPlanner]

I suppose it's all a numbers game. One thing that I found is interesting is that according to statistics provided by the Governor's Office, St. George will eventually overtake SLC as the state's largest city. More information can be found here http://www.governor.utah.gov/dea/popprojections.html

If SLC were to annex portions of the unincorporated county, which is far more likely scenario then SLC annexing an incorporated entity like South Salt Lake City, they would certainly have a larger population. It is important to note that with a larger population comes the requirement to then provide services to those residents. Looking at the fact that the Millcreek area is mostly residential it would be difficult for SLC to receive enough tax revenue to offset the cost of providing services to those residents. I am only making an educated guess about that but I would not be in favor of current SLC residents having a larger tax burden placed upon them simply because the city wants a higher population.

[cololi]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

It is important to note that with a larger population comes the requirement to then provide services to those residents. Looking at the fact that the Millcreek area is mostly residential it would be difficult for SLC to receive enough tax revenue to offset the cost of providing services to those residents. I am only making an educated guess about that but I would not be in favor of current SLC residents having a larger tax burden placed upon them simply because the city wants a higher population.

I don't think it would be that big of deal for SLC. The City already provides water service to the area. The City's garbage collection is almost all generated by user fees. The City also has the ability to charge franchise taxes on utilities, including non essential utilities like cable or satellite tv, cell phones that the county cannot charge (hence the UFA "police fee" assessed this year by the county). I think it would be close enough to a wash that it will not impact taxes or fees to existing property owners in the City.

One benefit to a higher population is more CDBG and State funding for certain infrastructure.

[arkhitektor]

Live/Work Townhomes at Birkhill in Murray:

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by arkhitektor

Live/Work Townhomes at Birkhill in Murray:

These are so much nicer looking than the faux-historical first phase.

[SLC Projects]

My wife and I drove by there the other night. Those sure went up fast. I really like the Townhomes at Birkhill. I look forward to see the other buildings start popping up.

[TonyAnderson]

Those did go up fast. So basically Birkhill and Waverly Station are the only TOD's so far?

[wrendog]

So, will any of Utah's MSA's change in 2010 census? Will Ogden be added back to SLC? Will everything stay the same?

I'm guessing nothing will change, but who knows..

[TonyAnderson]

I doubt Ogden would be added back as it has become part of the CSA. What could be possible is having Utah County added to the CSA, creating a Salt Lake-Ogden-Provo CSA of over 2.2 million. That would be around the 20th largest CSA in America.

And for the record, Salt Lake City is definitely adding people. It surged up from 159,000 to 181,000 around the Olympic times, and then there was a predictable decrease the next couple of years after the Olympics. The city has gained that back and increased a couple of thousand from 2007-2008 according to the most recent estimates (2008). All the new residential buildings going up the last five years is a good sign. For instance, I estimate around 385 new units being added this year alone. (BPL, Richard's Court, Artspace, Urbana, and Citywalk). There's a lot more slated for 2011 already.

[TonyAnderson]

Originally Posted by Boiseguy

Boise city limits is actually half the size of Salt Lake City so the size of the city isn't larger, and yes boise too has area's that are not developed. Hell the entire airport is within the city limits here as well. Boise is denser than Salt Lake city when it comes to population..

Just curious if it's possible that Boise has gained sq/miles this decade? As the 64 sq/miles is from the 2000 census...

[UV4EVER]

Originally Posted by Boiseguy

Boise is denser than Salt Lake city when it comes to population..Sometimes you don't realize it because we associate towers with density. But much of inner boise and the surrounding neighborhoods are mixed with single family homes and large multi family complexes. The city here has also divided up existing city lots where older dwellings have been cleared away and turned them into 2 or 3 lots to which has spawned A LOT of row housing..where the row houses are 3-4 bedroom houses for families..
so where 20 years ago lived a family of 4.. on the same piece of land now has 2-3 families of 4

http://www.cityofboise.org/Departments/P...c.%20Documents/CompPlan_New-Urbanism.pdf

It would be my guess that much of salt lake city proper falls into more of a historic district limiting what types of density measures can be taken.. You have to remember Salt Lake proper was roughly the same size population wise 80 years ago. Not much has changed. The neighborhoods in salt lake city were there 80 years ago.. wheras 80 years ago boise was just a small farm town. So the clearing of old in boise to impliment new residential density is only really impacting area's post WWII..making it easier to go in and "re-do" things..where salt lake has to rely more on doing new things wherever possible on the limited vacant land it has left.. and it's hard to get people to buy into city dwelling when for the same cost you can own a 3000sqft house on an acre of grass in south jordan and have a wonderful 10 lane freeway to get you to work everyday.

I just have to call you out on this a little, sorry . I just don't think we have enough evidence here to say that Boise is more dense in its developed residential land, which is essentially what you are claiming. One thing that really needs to be considered is that Salt Lake City has 45 square miles on its west side that is industrial/undeveloped and 25 square miles on the east/north-east side that is undeveloped-mountain terrain. I think if we were to compare the two cities based on the developed residential and commercial land, the densities would actually be very similar. Just my two cents.

[Boiseguy]

Originally Posted by TonyAnderson

Just curious if it's possible that Boise has gained sq/miles this decade? As the 64 sq/miles is from the 2000 census...

the city has expanded a bit.. to what extent I'm not sure...I know that west boise is no different than something like south jordan.. and that would have been where the annexation has taken place since the last census. Most of the land for the city of boise to grab up out there has already been grabbed up by Meridian, which is how it went from 9K people in 1990 to 75K in 2008

[Boiseguy]

Originally Posted by UV4EVER

I just have to call you out on this a little, sorry . I just don't think we have enough evidence here to say that Boise is more dense in its developed residential land, which is essentially what you are claiming. One thing that really needs to be considered is that Salt Lake City has 45 square miles on its west side that is industrial/undeveloped and 25 square miles on the east/north-east side that is undeveloped-mountain terrain. I think if we were to compare the two cities based on the developed residential and commercial land, the densities would actually be very similar. Just my two cents.

You actually may be right overall, but don't forget Every city has these areas, Boise has this too. Large tracts of land where Micron is as well as out by the Winco Distribution Center. The airport is in the city limits as well. I would estimate these area's to actually be 1/4 of the city limits. I didn't comment to start a fight.. or be snide.. I actually do feel that inner boise and it's surrounding neighborhoods are much denser than salt lake's. It's my opinion that the density of those area's of boise factors into the overall difference in the two cities. Downtown Salt Lake has historically-past 30 years- been more commercial and office and because of the larger metro population serves as more of a "Downtown" for the entire metro area rather than it's own organically confined city. This is why people would argue that salt lake might as well annex the 400k people in the surrounding cities because they are essentially like neighborhoods that are interconnected and interdependent demographically. South Salt Lake is to salt lake city as Ballard is to Seattle. Only difference is Ballard is IN seattle city limits.. South Salt lake is not.

[UV4EVER]

I know you weren't starting an argument and I hope you didn't take offense to my comments either. I think we both just want to participate in a constructive dialog. I didn't know anything about Ballard before you mentioned it but it looks like it actually used to be an independent city before being annexed by Seattle... interesting. On a somewhat related side note, I was in the University District of Seattle just a few weeks ago. It's a nice place and since being there I've decided to take a much more proactive approach to recycling.

[SLCdude]

If Salt Lake wants to annex unincorporated land it looks like the only options are Magna, Millcreek, and maybe emigration canyon and kearns. Excuse me if i get some facts wrong, but Millcreek already pays for county services such as the Salt Lake County Police, right? so how is it different to pay for city services county services?

Also, why is there such rapid growth in St. George and where will growth happen? It looks to me like there's a lot of steep landscape within the city boundaries that would prevent outward growth.

[i-215]

Magna won't go for it. We've got multi-generational "anti-annex" feelings towards both West Valley and SLC. And I think SLC has given up. They don't want to drive trucks all the way out to Magna just for an extra 25,000.

Magna will one day annex itself (incorporation). It's just taking its sweet time enjoying Township status.

[scottharding]

As to St. George, it is one of the fastest growing cities of the last decade. It was part of the building boom in the sun belt that was centered around Las Vegas. However, I don't agree that it will ever surpass Salt Lake City in population, as was stated earlier. It has grown at a stunning rate, but it is still more than 100,000 people fewere than SLC proper, and St. George's growth has dropped drastically with the economic downturn. The growth projections for St. George were (stupidly) made assuming it would always grow at the same brake-neck rate. Of course no city is going to sustain a growth rate like that for over 50 years. St. George will continue to grow, but not much faster than any other city in Utah, including SLC, for the foreseeable future.

[Boiseguy]

I don't agree that having smaller municipalities is better.. The fact is that the larger city has to spend money on resources that resident of the smaller adjacent communities use all the time but cannot collect taxes from. Also when it comes to long term planning and growth management its hard to get all the individual city governments on board. You can go anywhere in the country and you will find the same issues.. the Large City having to drag it's suburbs kicking and screaming to get anything done to address growth and sustainability. It is my belief that one of the main reasons why we have sprawl in American cities is because of this structure. I'm all about having more localized interaction with government, but when you are part of a larger metropolitian area you share the benefits, costs, issues associated with it. Many times small suburbs enjoy all the benefits, but aren't willing to do their part in sharing the costs and responsibilities. Which is why incorporating is better, but keeping proactive and involved neighborhood associations/councils that provide insight/feedback on how ONE pot of resources/money should/could be used

[SLCdude]

Does anyone know the tax rates of Salt Lake City and unincorporated townships such as Millcreek and Magna? I'm interested in seeing the difference, if there is one.