HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4501  
Old Posted Yesterday, 6:53 PM
Hatman's Avatar
Hatman Hatman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 1,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old&New View Post
Actually, this would be pretty cool. Not only would this thrust theater be a great interactive theater space for plays, but it would be a catalyst to restore the Pantages theater into a more viable space, giving all three theaters additional flex support space, and could provide additional auditorium space for lectures during large conventions. And yes, eventually Zion's Bank wants to build its own tower here.

I love this idea! It seems that the Pantages Theater needs an implausibly large amount of money in order to be restored to operation, and this plan to connect all three and use their consistent revenue and demand to provide at least one permanent funding source seems like the only real option. As a Salt Lake City tax payer I'm on board!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4502  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:42 PM
Old&New's Avatar
Old&New Old&New is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,251
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatman View Post
I love this idea! It seems that the Pantages Theater needs an implausibly large amount of money in order to be restored to operation, and this plan to connect all three and use their consistent revenue and demand to provide at least one permanent funding source seems like the only real option. As a Salt Lake City tax payer I'm on board!
Thank you Hatman! If this were implemented I would be so so so happy.

Regarding the other topic we've been discussing recently, I was curious to see what the boundaries would look like if the suburbs we were talking about became a part of Salt Lake City, so I drew this up:


Last edited by Old&New; Yesterday at 8:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4503  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:21 PM
airhero airhero is offline
Chancellor
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 717
It's all a moot point since this will never happen but some statistics about the above city using the latest data I could find:

Area: 219.6 sq mi
Population: 704,831 (19th in the US, just ahead of Denver and just behind Seattle)

Currently:

Area: 110.4 sq mi
Population: 200,544 (116th in the US, ahead of Amarillo, TX and behind Aurora, IL)

I think a much greater possibility would be SLC+WVC+Magna+SSL:

Area: 160.2 sq mi
Population: 389,121 (51st in the US ahead of Cleveland and behind Wichita)

But even that is on the fringes of realism.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4504  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:42 PM
GrandTeton GrandTeton is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Seattle, Washington
Posts: 206
I've always wondered why Salt Lake City's density is nothing to write home about, considering that it's geography would suggest otherwise.

It's very strange that West Jordan and Sandy are leaps and bounds more dense than SLC.

Anyway, are there any development news/photos?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4505  
Old Posted Yesterday, 9:04 PM
berger4 berger4 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandTeton View Post
I've always wondered why Salt Lake City's density is nothing to write home about, considering that it's geography would suggest otherwise.

It's very strange that West Jordan and Sandy are leaps and bounds more dense than SLC.

Anyway, are there any development news/photos?
I don't respond here alot I'm a huge lurker, but I think I can answer this. A large portion of Salt Lake City limits include mountains, the airport, industry, and marshlands that cannot be developed. The parts of the city that are populated are more dense then the suburbs, but the amount of land that is not populated decreases the overall density of the city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4506  
Old Posted Yesterday, 11:45 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandTeton View Post
I've always wondered why Salt Lake City's density is nothing to write home about, considering that it's geography would suggest otherwise.

It's very strange that West Jordan and Sandy are leaps and bounds more dense than SLC.

Anyway, are there any development news/photos?
Yes. It's been quite active recently. Though, these debates sometimes swallow up development news and photos. Start here http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...28783&page=222 and move through the next few pages and you'll see some interesting new developments.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4507  
Old Posted Today, 1:03 AM
Blah_Amazing Blah_Amazing is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 4
Lowe Property Group updates

So I was on the Lowe Property Group website (developers of the recently discussed 6th and Main project) and I noticed they changed a few things on their planned projects. Interestingly, many of their URL addresses remain the same, even though the projects' names have been changed.

https://www.loweprop.com/fairmont-lofts
The 'Fairmont Lofts' project in Sugarhouse has been renamed 'Dixon Place' and there is an updated rendering.

https://www.loweprop.com/dixon-lofts
What had originally been their 'Dixon Lofts' project in Sugarhouse (on the site of the now cancelled Dixon Building (office building)) is now called 'Sugar Alley.'

https://www.loweprop.com/copy-of-6th-main
They also appear to be planning a large housing/ mixed-use project along 500 S near Pioneer Park called 'A&Z.'
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4508  
Old Posted Today, 1:12 AM
Marvland's Avatar
Marvland Marvland is offline
SLC Lifer
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Fairpark
Posts: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandTeton View Post
It's very strange that West Jordan and Sandy are leaps and bounds more dense than SLC.
Not sure where you get your information. But yeah. That's not a thing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4509  
Old Posted Today, 1:34 AM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing View Post
So I was on the Lowe Property Group website (developers of the recently discussed 6th and Main project) and I noticed they changed a few things on their planned projects. Interestingly, many of their URL addresses remain the same, even though the projects' names have been changed.

https://www.loweprop.com/fairmont-lofts
The 'Fairmont Lofts' project in Sugarhouse has been renamed 'Dixon Place' and there is an updated rendering.

https://www.loweprop.com/dixon-lofts
What had originally been their 'Dixon Lofts' project in Sugarhouse (on the site of the now cancelled Dixon Building (office building)) is now called 'Sugar Alley.'

https://www.loweprop.com/copy-of-6th-main
They also appear to be planning a large housing/ mixed-use project along 500 S near Pioneer Park called 'A&Z.'
Dixon Place


5th South and 4th West: This will be great infill. That stretch of 5th south is so embarrasing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4510  
Old Posted Today, 4:15 AM
UV4EVER's Avatar
UV4EVER UV4EVER is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Lehi, UT
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvland View Post
Not sure where you get your information. But yeah. That's not a thing.
Unfortunately it actually is a thing. It's as real as SLC being a city of just over 200k people (also very unfortunate.) SLC has a density of about 1,700 people per square mile while West Jordan and Sandy are around 3,400 and 4,200 respectively. It has to do with the large amounts of uninhabited land which is a part of SLC proper (airport and industrial land on the west side, foothills and canyons, etc).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4511  
Old Posted Today, 5:41 AM
Stenar's Avatar
Stenar Stenar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 2,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by UV4EVER View Post
Unfortunately it actually is a thing. It's as real as SLC being a city of just over 200k people (also very unfortunate.) SLC has a density of about 1,700 people per square mile while West Jordan and Sandy are around 3,400 and 4,200 respectively. It has to do with the large amounts of uninhabited land which is a part of SLC proper (airport and industrial land on the west side, foothills and canyons, etc).
The overall citywide density is lower because of the NW Quadrant, etc., but the actual neighborhoods are not less dense than the suburbs. They're far more dense. SLC is actually "leaps and bounds" more dense than the suburbs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4512  
Old Posted Today, 6:08 AM
UV4EVER's Avatar
UV4EVER UV4EVER is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Lehi, UT
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stenar View Post
The overall citywide density is lower because of the NW Quadrant, etc., but the actual neighborhoods are not less dense than the suburbs. They're far more dense. SLC is actually "leaps and bounds" more dense than the suburbs.
Totally understand and agree but overall city-wide density is what was being discussed. Unfortunately that is the most readily-available, widely-cited and commonly-compared data, just like city-proper population data rather than population numbers which would include suburbs which are natural outgrowths.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4513  
Old Posted Today, 8:20 AM
Liberty Wellsian Liberty Wellsian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by UV4EVER View Post
Totally understand and agree but overall city-wide density is what was being discussed. Unfortunately that is the most readily-available, widely-cited and commonly-compared data, just like city-proper population data rather than population numbers which would include suburbs which are natural outgrowths.
No it isn't. Density data by Census tract is publicly available(the most populous along the Wasatch Front are in SLC proper).

As far as most often compared that also isn't true. Depending on the industry/application a number of different metrics are used. Media markets, Metropolitan amd combined statistical areas, census tracts, amd sometimes even local government jurisdictions(cities). You picked a poor category to derive the data from for the question you were trying to answer(which cities on the WF have higher densities) and failed to correct for clear anomalies(National Forest within a cities border for one). That mistake is why you came up with a false conclusion.

In the future remember that if you come to a counter intuitive answer it is more likely than not that you made a mistake. Not always but most often. Recheck the data you are pulling from and reexamine your process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Mountain West
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:59 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.