Salt Lake MSA Development Thread - Page 90

shakman · #**1781** Posted **Nov 12, 2009, 4:16 PM**

Hopefully any required infrastructure improvements and /or upgrades are done in a manner in which additional projects can be built without straining the infrastructure in place.

UTPlanner · #**1782** Posted **Nov 12, 2009, 5:53 PM**

Admittedly I don't necessarily find that Knudsen's Corner\Old Mill area is an indeal location for the development that has taken place, I would have preferred to see those jobs located in a more transit friendly, urban environment.

That being said, the development exists, the buildings are built and I think that some of them are attractive. I don't think that adding a single tower will change the environment or overwhelm the transportation system as it now exists. If companies choose to locate in an office park that is off the transit grid they must also take into consideration the vehicular traffic that comes along with it.

There are a lot of companies that really have a desire to locate in a suburban office park. When I was working as a consultant for a national company that dealt with a lot of military planning, not one of their offices was located in a downtown situation except NYC. They had dozens of offices in nearly every major city in this country. I don't necessarily have the specific answer as to why two things came up frequently. One was that suburban Class-A office was often cheaper but the overwhelmingly the reason was because executives liked to be in wealthy suburbs near their homes.

delts145 · #**1783** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 12:13 PM**

Tooele hospital expanding to meet increased demand

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...expanding.html

An architectural rendering shows the Women's Center that will be built at Mountain West Medical Center. (Rendering by Gresham Smith and Partners)

.

delts145 · #**1784** Posted **Nov 13, 2009, 12:29 PM**

Park City to buy into development

By Christopher Smart
The Salt Lake Tribune

Park City » Despite the flagging economy, Park City is jumping into the real estate development business.

By a unanimous vote Thursday evening, the Park City Council voted to join Salt Lake City-based development firm The Boyer Co. in a large residential real estate development to be called Park City Heights.

According to the terms of the deal, Park City will pony up $5.5 million for 50 percent interest in 200 acres along the town's eastern entry corridor near the intersection of U.S. Highway 40 and State Road 248.

The land is currently zoned for one unit per acre, but Park City officials said they hoped to reduce the density and reach an overall 70 percent open space for the project.

It sets the stage for a new planning phase for the project that's been on the drawing board for five years.

If a development plan cannot be agreed upon in two years, The Boyer Co. can opt out of the project by selling the remaining 50 percent to Park City for an additional $5.5 million, according to the agreement.

..

delts145 · #**1785** Posted **Nov 15, 2009, 1:50 PM**

Mayor aims to revitalize historic part of Murray

http://www.sltrib.com/midvalley/ci_13764836

Goals » Dan Snarr suggests challenges of fourth term will include maximizing growth potential.

...Now, Snarr said his new goals include the revitalization of historic downtown Murray, continuing to work with businesses and city development projects.

It's going to take a lot of cooperation among land owners, business owners and city officials to create a redevelopment plan for the mile-long strip of historic Murray along State Street, Snarr said.

It's also going to take a lot of money to maintain the area's historic integrity, he said.

"It represents what's unique about Murray," Snarr said. "We would like to see something down there that we can all be proud of and becomes a major draw." ...

.

ski_steve · #**1786** Posted **Nov 16, 2009, 11:47 PM**

I thought this was interesting. Who said Utah doesn't have a tall building? I guess this isnt really a building...

Holy smokes: Kennecott smelter, Utah's tallest man-made structure, to turn 35

The reality is that the Kennecott smokestack is one of the loftiest, free-standing structures in the world and the tallest such thing west of the Mississippi.

Rising sharply about a dozen miles west of Salt Lake City and just south of I-80, this icon, which turns 35 this fall, is by far the tallest man-made structure in Utah at 1,215 feet.

It's almost the equivalent of having an Empire State Building high structure rising up, or equal to the height of three LDS Church Office Buildings (state's runner-up highest free-standing structure).

In comparison, the Las Vegas Stratosphere is 66 feet shorter at 1,149 feet high. Seattle's Space Needle is just 605 feet tall, less than half the smokestack's height.

The Kennecott smokestack, fourth tallest chimney in the world, is the only operating smelter chimney left in Utah and will turn 35 on Nov. 17. As a working facility, with many potential hazards about, public tours are not offered at the smokestack or refinery.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...n-35.html&pg=2

urbanboy · #**1787** Posted **Nov 17, 2009, 1:52 AM**

Correction, Wells Fargo is second only to this smokestack. Therefore, the lds church office building is third tallest (notice the source of the article).

FutureCity · #**1788** Posted **Nov 17, 2009, 6:28 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanboy

Correction, Wells Fargo is second only to this smokestack. Therefore, the lds church office building is third tallest (notice the source of the article).

The average person assumes its the tallest since it sits the highest in the skyline. Personally I look forward to the day we can say its only the 5th tallest and I'm LDS. Remember when it was a rumor that no one was allowed to build taller than the COB.

If the church was actually worried about being the tallest all they needed to do was add 5 more floors to tower 1.

i-215 · #**1789** Posted **Nov 18, 2009, 6:14 AM**

I can't tell the difference, honestly. It's not like they are back-to-back.

I talk to one person, they say the C.O.B. Another says Wells Fargo. I consider them a tie.

MetroFanatic · #**1790** Posted **Nov 18, 2009, 6:17 AM**

I'm at that point where I just don't care or see why people should care. It's like the xbox vs ps3 debate. Which one has better graphics? Well they both look great to me.

i-215 · #**1791** Posted **Nov 18, 2009, 6:48 AM**

Someday (hopefully in my lifetime) we'll see a 40+ tower than dwarfs both buildings, settling the debate forever.

Or Kennecott could just move their smokestack downtown.

FutureCity · #**1792** Posted **Nov 18, 2009, 7:43 AM**

When there is only a couple feet that separate the Wells Fargo from the C.O.B. confusion is a given. The normal public can't ramble off the heights of all downtown buildings like most skyscraper junkies.

I've always thought the Wells Fargo should have been at least 35 floors to balance out its width, still a great looking building however. I too would love to see a 40+ tower that screams I am the tallest regardless of who builds it.

TonyAnderson · #**1793** Posted **Nov 18, 2009, 8:32 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetroFanatic

I'm at that point where I just don't care or see why people should care. It's like the xbox vs ps3 debate. Which one has better graphics? Well they both look great to me.

Only one comes with Blu-Ray though.

I hate how the COB (or any buildings downtown) are up on the hill. It makes the skyline look weird - plus it blocks the views of the skyline from a lot of angles.

Green Bro · #**1794** Posted **Nov 18, 2009, 9:00 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by i-215

Someday (hopefully in my lifetime) we'll see a 40+ tower than dwarfs both buildings, settling the debate forever.

Or Kennecott could just move their smokestack downtown.

I think a 40-story skyrise would look weird in SLC. I like how for now how SLC's new buildings are around 15-22-ish floors; with the exception of Tower 1. It adds to density and feels more warm and tight in the areas. If you're are facing east and looking down South Temple, I really like how the buildings on the right hand side and how they look and feel so tight and close together.

TonyAnderson · #**1795** Posted **Nov 19, 2009, 3:25 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green Bro

I think a 40-story skyrise would look weird in SLC. I like how for now how SLC's new buildings are around 15-22-ish floors; with the exception of Tower 1. It adds to density and feels more warm and tight in the areas. If you're are facing east and looking down South Temple, I really like how the buildings on the right hand side and how they look and feel so tight and close together.

Sounds like something a Portlander would say

(Portland's tallest is about 550 feet, and that was built in 1972). I want some height, and there's a perfect spot right in the middle of the skyline for it - just waiting there - as if that was its purpose all along.

Green Bro · #**1796** Posted **Nov 19, 2009, 3:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TonyAnderson

Sounds like something a Portlander would say

(Portland's tallest is about 550 feet, and that was built in 1972). I want some height, and there's a perfect spot right in the middle of the skyline for it - just waiting there - as if that was its purpose all along.

Would a 32 story tower fit in their alright and not stick out too much?

SLC Projects · #**1797** Posted **Nov 19, 2009, 3:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green Bro

Would a 32 story tower fit in their alright and not stick out too much?

Well if you are looking at the skyline from the North or South then yes it does stick out alot. But it you look from the East or the West then not as much.