Salt Lake:Official development news thread - Part 2

[joscar]

Originally Posted by John Martin

I agree with pretty much everything you said, joscar. For perfectionists like me, it's easy to point out all those things and want them to be fixed. But there will always be many who say "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!" That's probably a good thing... if I was in charge of their finances, they'd be broke.

Lol, even if the Church is as rich as some claim I think I could make them go broke if they took all my ideas

Originally Posted by John Martin

My least favorite building has to be the northwest visitor's center, because of the way it look from outside of Temple Square. It's plain, uninviting, has those silly looking vents, and clashes with the adobe wall around Temple Square (if you ask me ).

Agreed! But hey this new model of the Temple unveiled in the South Visitors Center today is pretty cool -

[urbanboy]

I've been in all those rooms, but am no longer Mormon after realizing its a sham. Beautiful woodwork inside though! I'm impressed that the interior only took one year (exactly) to complete.

The six story building that everyone is talking about will NOT be on the corner of State and 400 South, but will be midblock on State Street.

[jmonkey]

^excellent posts, joscar!! Well-detailed and well-thought out. Thanks for sharing. I hope we see more from you!

That model is very neat indeed! Especially for people who will never be able to enter the building. I think the Salt Lake Temple is a magnificent piece of architecture.

The hippies are holding back skyscraper development??? Most of the hippies sold out a long, long time ago I-215, and the remaining few are generally completely ineffectual. The baby boom generation is focused on what it has always been focused on--taking everything they can for themselves. They aren't atoning for anything. We don't build anything in this country anymore cause we dump all our money into the military-industrial complex and corporate welfare. The wealthy don't build things for the common need. That's my take on it, anyhow.

[leerjet]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

I've been in all those rooms, but am no longer Mormon after realizing its a sham. Beautiful woodwork inside though! I'm impressed that the interior only took one year (exactly) to complete.

The six story building that everyone is talking about will NOT be on the corner of State and 400 South, but will be midblock on State Street.

Ya know Urban Boy, i can certainly identify with you but once again you have crossed a line with this forum.

I had a very unique opportunity this week to spend some time with two very promonant leaders of the church and I have tremendous respect for them and every truly practicing member of the church. These leaders are very humble, respectful and caring men. While I may not agree with their conclusions, they were very open minded and accepting of mine.

Yes some members do come accross as arrogant and condescending but as a whole these are good people and after meeting with these men, it really helped me to let go of some harbored animosity. I don't know you personally but it is my guess that you would benefit, and this forum would benefit if you were to let some of that go. Please, try to live and let live. These are good people.

[arkhitektor]

Originally Posted by joscar

Lol, even if the Church is as rich as some claim I think I could make them go broke if they took all my ideas



Agreed! But hey this new model of the Temple unveiled in the South Visitors Center today is pretty cool -

That is cool. Because you enter the SL Temple through the annex underground, I've never been able to make sense of where the different rooms are in the building in relation to the rest of the building and its exterior.

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by leerjet

Ya know Urban Boy, i can certainly identify with you but once again you have crossed a line with this forum.

I had a very unique opportunity this week to spend some time with two very promonant leaders of the church and I have tremendous respect for them and every truly practicing member of the church. These leaders are very humble, respectful and caring men. While I may not agree with their conclusions, they were very open minded and accepting of mine.

Yes some members do come accross as arrogant and condescending but as a whole these are good people and after meeting with these men, it really helped me to let go of some harbored animosity. I don't know you personally but it is my guess that you would benefit, and this forum would benefit if you were to let some of that go. Please, try to live and let live. These are good people.

I know they have good intentions, and most really believe it. But I don't think I crossed any line by sharing my opinion. Cheers.

[cololi]

Originally Posted by i-215

It's because skyscrapers represent "man conquering nature." And that seems to be out of vogue right now. People don't want to dynamite canyons to build 75 mile-per-hour freeways anymore. They don't build dams or magnificent bridges.

Part of it is ecological. Part of it is financial. Part of it is just because the hippies haven't retired yet. Their "vogue" is to "repent from the sins of the Great Depression generation" (who are guilty of the terrible crime of building America's infrastructure).

I'd argue the skyscraper era is on standby, along with other symbols of human dominance. Today it's all about small, human-scale stuff (3-6 stories) ... and I'd argue that it's because of this current vogue.

Seriously, did you really just post that hippies are partly responsible for a change in building? That is one of the most asinine things I have heard in awhile. Who are you quoting by the way "repent from the sins of the great depression". If anything, the hippie movement was an anti-establishment, leave use alone and don't send us to war without our consent type of movement. Not a "screw those that went through the great depression and built our socialized infrastructure."

You make it sound like "human-scaled stuff" is bad, when in fact is the most critical element of anyplace.

[leerjet]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

I know they have good intentions, and most really believe it. But I don't think I crossed any line by sharing my opinion. Cheers.

This isn't the place to share your opinion on that subject. You've been told over and over again and have chased quite a few people away from this forum.

[TonyAnderson]

Originally Posted by urbanboy

The six story building that everyone is talking about will NOT be on the corner of State and 400 South, but will be midblock on State Street.

Apparently we're talking about two 6-story buildings? That's why I'm confused.

[Scraperdude801]

Originally Posted by i-215

It's because skyscrapers represent "man conquering nature." And that seems to be out of vogue right now. People don't want to dynamite canyons to build 75 mile-per-hour freeways anymore. They don't build dams or magnificent bridges.

Part of it is ecological. Part of it is financial. Part of it is just because the hippies haven't retired yet. Their "vogue" is to "repent from the sins of the Great Depression generation" (who are guilty of the terrible crime of building America's infrastructure).

I'd argue the skyscraper era is on standby, along with other symbols of human dominance. Today it's all about small, human-scale stuff (3-6 stories) ... and I'd argue that it's because of this current vogue.

having taken many biology classes I can tell you that building 3-6 stories doesn't really serve the environment, in fact a 3-6 story building is far worse for the environment in terms of sprawl and humans invading ecosystems where we are currently not present. 3-6 stories means less space in are already defined city boundaries which means outward expansion of humanity, and all of our eco system degrading infrastructure, pollution and invasive spcies.

[Scraperdude801]

why is leerjet allowed to say mormons are great, but urbanboy can't say he hasn't been back to the temple because he doesn't believe the religion?

I agree that under ordinary circumstances religion is a taboo subject in a development forum. In reality, Salt Lake is rather unordinary, and the unique religion is the biggest urban developer in the region, so it is impossible to talk Salt Lake development without talking about the LDS church. If the LDS church was any other corporation undertaking the developments in our city, do you think people would be hesitant about expressing their misgivings? I don't think so, so why should it be any different with the LDS church who clearly has entered the secular world in the forms of numerous businesses?

Leerjet: - You say your fine the leaders and they are all about living and let living. I disagree. I'm fine w/ most mormons, but I'm not fine with mormon leaders because they don't attempt to live and let live. Just think about prop 8., regional alcohol consumption, etc.

If you guys are going to post pictures of your sacred grounds and want to treat them as developments, then you must be willing to accept the fact that those of us who are non LDS will treat the LDS church as a developer and express our thoughts on company policy.

[PandaUte]

Urbanboy is a child.

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by PandaUte

Urbanboy is a child.

Enough with the personal attacks people. If I offended you, that's you're problem. I don't, however, resort to personal attacks.

Originally Posted by TonyAnderson

Apparently we're talking about two 6-story buildings? That's why I'm confused.

I don't know about any other six story building. There will only be one six story building on the state street parking lot near 400 South.

[wrendog]

Originally Posted by Scraperdude801

why is leerjet allowed to say mormons are great, but urbanboy can't say he hasn't been back to the temple because he doesn't believe the religion?
[/U]

The difference is, urbanboy has a very passive aggressive style of attack. Those that defend the church are doing just that: defending. UB has a major history of snide, unprovoked remarks that just get very old. It's not like members of the church are posting their testimony all the time. The only time church defenders speak is in response to another snide remark from UB. Sorry.

[PandaUte]

Nobody argues with your right to share an opinion, UB. Time and time again, though, you use this forum to take jabs at the LDS church. You may not intend to offend, but you clearly intend to provoke.

Your prejudice is well documented. You can stop broadcasting your enlightened views.

(My apologies to the rest of the forum for taking UB's bait . . . )

[urbanboy]

Originally Posted by PandaUte

Nobody argues with your right to share an opinion, UB. Time and time again, though, you use this forum to take jabs at the LDS church.

Time and time again, Forum members who may or may not be Mormon promote the LDS church and it's buildings of worship on this forum.

You may not intend to offend, but you clearly intend to provoke.

I share my opinion in order to influence others, as does everyone else on this forum. I am also influenced by others opinions.

Your prejudice is well documented. You can stop broadcasting your enlightened views.

How can I, a returned missionary and lifetime member of the LDS church (until recently), have prejudices of an organization I know forwards and backwards?

(My apologies to the rest of the forum for taking UB's bait . . . )

It was my opinion, nothing else.

[SLC4L]

A 6-story building? Really? You might as well punch me in the junk.

[urbanboy]

After the six story building is built, there will still be room for some towers on that lot.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by cololi

Seriously, did you really just post that hippies are partly responsible for a change in building? That is one of the most asinine things I have heard in awhile. Who are you quoting by the way "repent from the sins of the great depression". If anything, the hippie movement was an anti-establishment, leave use alone and don't send us to war without our consent type of movement. Not a "screw those that went through the great depression and built our socialized infrastructure."

You make it sound like "human-scaled stuff" is bad, when in fact is the most critical element of anyplace.

It's definitely not the hippies that are anti skyscrapers. I'm a hippie and taller buildings are better for the environment/ecology than sprawl. However, building really tall buildings just for the sake of building really tall buildings isn't necessary, either.

[SLCdude]

Originally Posted by joscar

Wow! I had no idea the temple had so many rooms and levels. I've always pictured it as being like a cathedral on the inside.