Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 4

[asies1981]

Originally Posted by UTPlanner

asies1981, good article, but the Planning Division Open House tonight is actually being held at the Sorenson Unity Center and not at the City & County Building.

Thanks you I'll make the change.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by asies1981

More on the Trolley Square development. I'm interested in what the final product will be.

Me too Asies! I just hope that the tastes of the Historic Landmark Commission are sophisticated enough that they will insist on detailing like we saw in the original renderings. I don't think anyone on this forum wants something so faux looking as this last presentation, albeit claiming to be just preliminary.

[EPdesign]

[Hatman]

View from the U of U Stadium Varsity Room

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by msbutah

I'm sure y'all have already seen this but I thought I would post it anyways.
How Mormon Principles and Grassroots Ideals Saved Utah
Fearful of rampant growth, officials put control in the hands of citizens who preferred collaboration to government dictates.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2...-lake-city-utah-regional-planning-214652

So, if this is true, why is Utah a leader in the urban sprawl category?

[airhero]

Originally Posted by Ironweed

So, if this is true, why does Utah lead in the urban sprawl category?

It doesn't.

Lots of urban enthusiasts complain that the Wasatch Front sprawl has gotten out of control, and I agree (although I believe there are good examples, like Daybreak, of smarter development that you can't find in many other cities), but the area doesn't lead in urban sprawl--and it's not even close. Las Vegas, Phoenix, and Tucson are western examples of cities that have worse urban sprawl than Salt Lake. OKC and Texas cities have worse sprawl. Many cities in the Midwest are worse (KC, Indianapolis, Cincinnati). But even those cities pale in comparison to almost every city south of the Mason-Dixon line. Nashville, Memphis, Charlotte, Raleigh, Atlanta, Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa, and many of the coastal areas in Florida are sprawl heaven (or hell), and if you've ever been to any of those cities it's very apparent the sprawl is far worse than SLC.

[airportvids]

So should we just build one mega 500 floor tower and fit all 3.1 million people living in Utah in it? Yea, that's realistic. Way too much bitching about sprawl on here.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by airportvids

So should we just build one mega 500 floor tower and fit all 3.1 million people living in Utah in it? Yea, that's realistic. Way too much bitching about sprawl on here.

Sure, why not.... You like driving on I-15?

Utah may not come in at number one, but it is a leader in rapid sprawl, and rabbit hutchery. This article is a few years old, but still very relevent. Prove to me otherwise:

http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=...90/area-areas-growth-numbersusa.html.csp

Utah get's D- for sprawl. Infrastructure here is 20 years behind the curve.

Practice what you preach Utah! Envision Dense urban centers instead of parking lot and suburban suckiness.

[airhero]

Originally Posted by Ironweed

Utah may not come in at number one, but it is a leader in rapid sprawl, and rabbit hutchery. This article is a few years old, but still very relevent. Prove to me otherwise:

http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=...90/area-areas-growth-numbersusa.html.csp

I'm not going to argue that Utah has seen ugly sprawl, but the biggest thing that distinguishes Utah from almost every state with less sprawl during that time period is simply that it saw a faster growth in population. The way it's measured in that study basically guarantees the states with the highest population growth rate will be at or near the top. During that time period Utah was on par with Nevada and Arizona for the biggest growth. Nevada was the fastest growing state during that time period, so no wonder it came first in urban sprawl rate. Had Utah been 48th in population growth, it would have come in very low. So that study doesn't reveal much.

Also, Utah has seen an huge shift in urbanization since 2008 (when that study ended), but so have a lot of states, so I'm not sure how it stacks up during those years.

[airportvids]

Originally Posted by Ironweed

Sure, why not.... You like driving on I-15?

Utah may not come in at number one, but it is a leader in rapid sprawl, and rabbit hutchery. This article is a few years old, but still very relevent. Prove to me otherwise:

http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=...90/area-areas-growth-numbersusa.html.csp

Utah get's D- for sprawl. Infrastructure here is 20 years behind the curve.

Practice what you preach Utah! Envision Dense urban centers instead of parking lot and suburban suckiness.

guess you didn't notice all the new developments around trax and front runner stops? I don't even need to drive I-15.

[Comrade]

There's a lot of bitching about sprawl but tbh there's also a lot of dismissive attitude toward it - as if it's not a continued problem. It is. Is it better than 30 years ago? Absolutely. Can we do better? Yes. Especially outside Salt Lake County, where it remains unchecked.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by airhero

...
Also, Utah has seen an huge shift in urbanization since 2008 (when that study ended), but so have a lot of states, so I'm not sure how it stacks up during those years.

Urbanization just means that more people moved from rural areas to non-rural areas, which includes suburbs or ex-urbs in sprawling metro areas.

You may not have to drive on I-15, but that doesn't mean that you are not in sprawl land. All those new stand-alone office parks in Lehi are not linked together, and connected in a pedestrian oriented development. They are all auto-dependent. It there was a more centalized government authority that oversaw and controlled spending of roads and transit and other infrastructure, there would be much greater requirements and incentives to build denser. Look at Calgary Canada(same size metro area as SLC, but probably half the footprint, and yet they have lots and lots of sagebrush land to sprawl out to).

What I think is wrong with sprawl is that it is irresponsible development. It causes our metro centers to be less vibrant, and have more blight. It's part of a wrong American ethos of a throw-away society/consumerism...build new further out, discard and abandon the older. It requires more infrastructure and energy usage per capita. The U.S. is the world's largest energy consumer and polluter, and yet its population is less than 5% of the total world population.

[airhero]

Originally Posted by Orlando

Urbanization just means that more people moved from rural areas to non-rural areas, which includes suburbs or ex-urbs in sprawling metro areas.

You may not have to drive on I-15, but that doesn't mean that you are not in sprawl land. All those new stand-alone office parks in Lehi are not linked together, and connected in a pedestrian oriented development. They are all auto-dependent. It there was a more centalized government authority that oversaw and controlled spending of roads and transit and other infrastructure, there would be much greater requirements and incentives to build denser. Look at Calgary Canada(same size metro area as SLC, but probably half the footprint, and yet they have lots and lots of sagebrush land to sprawl out to).

What I think is wrong with sprawl is that it is irresponsible development. It causes our metro centers to be less vibrant, and have more blight. It's part of a wrong American ethos of a throw-away society/consumerism...build new further out, discard and abandon the older. It requires more infrastructure and energy usage per capita. The U.S. is the world's largest energy consumer and polluter, and yet its population is less than 5% of the total world population.

Can't say I disagree with any of that. Just wanted to point out Utah sprawl is nowhere close to the worst. Doesn't mean I think it's not a problem here, and I think I've made that clear. But spending as much time in the south as I have recently I believe it's ridiculous to claim Utah is the "leader in sprawl."

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Orlando

Urbanization just means that more people moved from rural areas to non-rural areas, which includes suburbs or ex-urbs in sprawling metro areas.


What I think is wrong with sprawl is that it is irresponsible development. It causes our metro centers to be less vibrant, and have more blight. It's part of a wrong American ethos of a throw-away society/consumerism...build new further out, discard and abandon the older. It requires more infrastructure and energy usage per capita. The U.S. is the world's largest energy consumer and polluter, and yet its population is less than 5% of the total world population.

Amen Orlando!

I personally feel the the Envision Utah project is a sham. I don't believe anything will change. (As was mentioned; Lehi is a disaster. That development should be in downtown SLC.) All available land along the Front will be built on, while SLC remains small, stubby, and retains the title of "Parking Lot Champion" of the world. I sincerly hope I will be proven wrong.

[asies1981]

CCIM announced the finalists for Architectural Firm and Developer of the Year. Who do you think was the best this year? I'm partial to Hardware Village.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by airportvids

So should we just build one mega 500 floor tower and fit all 3.1 million people living in Utah in it? Yea, that's realistic. Way too much bitching about sprawl on here.

I sympathize with your emotion. I felt that way when I first started posting here in 2002-ish (on a previous account).

Sprawl has, is, and will continue to happen. There is nothing in state statute that prevents sprawl. IIRC, there may even be wording in the state constitution that would prevent legal growth controls. So sprawl is legal. Sprawl is "safe."

The question at hand: Are there potential renters/buyers who would be happy to live in a more urban setting? Ones who are willing to drive less and take advantage of rail infrastructure that Utah has already spend billions building? And if so, are there policies and zoning changes cities can set to serve some of this urban high-rise customer base, often on under-used land in the established city core? Yes.

Building high-rise in urban areas reduces the pressure on new sprawl. It uses capitalism to slow sprawl, grow at a more manageable rate -- without resorting to a single draconian "anti-sprawl" law. It's Utah's red-state alternative to Oregon's blue-state growth control.

And for suburbanites, that's also good news for us, too. As more renters/buyers choose to live in urban settings, there are fewer people to compete (and out-bid) us when we try to buy a house in the suburbs or rent an apartment there.

It's a win-win!

[goldcntry]

Thank you I-215 for a beautiful response! Well said!

[asies1981]

Interesting new report looking at family-friendliness based education, safety etc. in the Wasatch Front. Side note, Salt Lake was had one of the highest rates of crime per 100,000 in the country last year.

[Future Mayor]

I'm not sure how much I trust a study conducted by Apartment List. Do they have the ability to put together statistically significant data? I didn't even realize Apartment List was a thing.

[DCRes]

The 8 story AC Marriot hotel on the corner of 200 West 200 south is starting to rise

[IMG] by , on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG] by , on Flickr[/IMG]

[IMG] by , on Flickr[/IMG]