SLC: Official 222 S Main Construction thread - Page 46

urbanboy · #**901** Posted **Jan 24, 2009, 10:02 AM**

[QUOTE=Urban_logic;4042757]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

A much lower population base to support it? Although, SLC deffinatley could make an elevated park like that! That would be hecka awesome!

What would be great, is if we had an elevated park like that on top of our Convention Center; then it wouldn't be quite the edge in our city that it is currently.

wrendog · #**902** Posted **Jan 24, 2009, 5:12 PM**

there's an elevated park on top of the Salt Palace??

urbanboy · #**903** Posted **Jan 24, 2009, 5:24 PM**

No, but if we had an elevated park like the one proposed for San Francisco above our conventions center, I think it would be better.

wrendog · #**904** Posted **Jan 24, 2009, 5:58 PM**

whoops, I added a comma in your post in my own head.

Urban_logic · #**905** Posted **Jan 26, 2009, 6:57 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanboy

What would be great, is if we had an elevated park like that on top of our Convention Center; then it wouldn't be quite the edge in our city that it is currently.

What a brilliant idea!! After saying how SLC should build one of these, I was then trying to figure out where it would put it to actually make it look nice and blend in with the city. The Salt Palace would be an excellent spot! They could pull an LDS Conference Center and put a park right on top of it with folliage down the sides of the building. That would be perfect

urbanboy · #**906** Posted **Jan 26, 2009, 7:02 AM**

Thanks

blazefirelight · #**907** Posted **Jan 26, 2009, 5:51 PM**

Did T-Mac not make it downtown this weekend when the weather was still ok?

I'm kinda missing the weekly picture update of the progress on 222 S Main! I want to see that new level of cladding up on there!!

Come on buddy, get'cha head in the game!

ski_steve · #**908** Posted **Jan 26, 2009, 6:21 PM**

From friday

delts145 · #**909** Posted **Jan 26, 2009, 6:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blazefirelight

Did T-Mac not make it downtown this weekend when the weather was still ok?

I'm kinda missing the weekly picture update of the progress on 222 S Main! I want to see that new level of cladding up on there!!

Come on buddy, get'cha head in the game!

LOL, I think T-Mac has more than earned a little break.

Hey, very cool Steve. Thanks for the great pic fix. Wow, I really like that first one especially!!

Future Mayor · #**910** Posted **Jan 26, 2009, 6:38 PM**

I am really anxious to see the cladding they are beginning on the first three floors. I'm also anxious for the new restaurant/club to open in the Daynes building, shown in the last pic.

So this looks to be my 1,000the post, I can't believe I have posted that many times. You are all so lucky to have had a chance to read 999 previous posts filled with such wisdom and knowledge, not to mention the majority which contained babble and senseless drivel.

Thanks for bearing with me.

Stenar · #**911** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 12:50 AM**

[QUOTE=Urban_logic;4048227]

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbanboy

What a brilliant idea!! After saying how SLC should build one of these, I was then trying to figure out where it would put it to actually make it look nice and blend in with the city. The Salt Palace would be an excellent spot! They could pull an LDS Conference Center and put a park right on top of it with folliage down the sides of the building. That would be perfect

I think they should put an elevated park over I-80 in the Sugar House area or just put I-80 completely underground there.

jtrent77 · #**912** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 2:48 AM**

[QUOTE=Stenar;4049933]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urban_logic

I think they should put an elevated park over I-80 in the Sugar House area or just put I-80 completely underground there.

LOL after the fiasco in Boston (see the big dig) I don't see in freeways being put underground anytime soon, but a nice thought.

Stenar · #**913** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 5:17 AM**

[QUOTE=jtrent77;4050194]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

LOL after the fiasco in Boston (see the big dig) I don't see in freeways being put underground anytime soon, but a nice thought.

Just because the Big Dig was fraught with fraud and corruption that led to engineering mishaps doesn't mean all underground freeways are. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of freeways that go underground around the world. I've driven in several of them myself.

The biggest factor preventing SLC from ever doing that is the cost, not the mistakes of the Big Dig.

blazefirelight · #**914** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 7:25 AM**

Thank you SOOOO MUCH for the picture update! My week is incomplete without a 222 South Main picture update. Thanks, Steve! You da man! Beautiful pictures!

jtrent77 · #**915** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 1:47 PM**

[QUOTE=Stenar;4050547]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jtrent77

Just because the Big Dig was fraught with fraud and corruption that led to engineering mishaps doesn't mean all underground freeways are. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of freeways that go underground around the world. I've driven in several of them myself.

The biggest factor preventing SLC from ever doing that is the cost, not the mistakes of the Big Dig.

Agreed, however, because of the problems with the Big Dig (even though it was site specific) I doubt the federal government will start giving out money any time soon to do it again--even if the economy were doing well.

Future Mayor · #**916** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 3:18 PM**

The big dig and putting I-80 through Sugar House underground are drastically different projects. The Sugar House project would be a simple cap, yes I realize it's not "simple" but it is simple in comparison to the Big Dig. Placing a cap on the area near Sugar House park wouldn't require any wear near the engineering, time or money that even a similar length of the big dig cost. Even a simple half mile or several hundred yards of a cap would do a lot to connect the Highland Park neighborhood to Sugar House park. The cap below wouldn't require any additional depth, and a small amount of ventilation. It is only about 600 yards long.

You could put limited access to just the south side of the park and ad a ball field, and one small parking lot (possibly. I realize this is residential and that could be a hard sell), but either way you could add some paved paths from the Highland Park neighborhood that connect into the remainder of the park. Imagine how many more people they could accommodate for 4th of July fireworks.

MetroFanatic · #**917** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 6:14 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Hopefully nobody hits a homerun anytime soon.

Future Mayor · #**918** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 6:41 PM**

That is one HELL of a home run.

I moved this over to the SLC development thread.

SLC Projects · #**919** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 6:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetroFanatic

Hopefully nobody hits a homerun anytime soon.

LOL, I didn't even notice that the baseball park faces the freeway. There is nothing like driving on the freeway and then having a baseball hit your windshield.

shakman · #**920** Posted **Jan 27, 2009, 11:49 PM**

Off Topic:
...also remember that the Big-Dig involved underground freeway ramps and bodies of water.

What is envisioned here is a "deck over" concept. That is what comes to my mind. I would think this would be easier to enigneer and build than the Big-Dig.

On Topic:
It would be nice to see some granite on the bottom level. I would not surprised if it is to be metal cladding.