HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2007, 1:15 PM
jedikermit's Avatar
jedikermit jedikermit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,838
Thanks for the clarification, Wasatch...I've never really been in Provo, except for a 9 week stint that had me pretty much confined to pris--I mean, the MTC. And that may have left a bad taste in my mouth for the community.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasatch_One View Post

These small municipalities like P.G. and Lehi that continue to nip at its heels, taking projects out to the suburbs have finally caused Provo's leaders wake-up a bit (keeping fingers crossed.)
Now if SLC would wake up and see how Sandy's passing them up in terms of office space...
__________________
Loving Salt Lake City. Despite everything, and because of everything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2007, 3:42 PM
SLCforme SLCforme is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 408
Did you guys see this?
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,665193444,00.html

looks like it could help "put Provo on the map" so to speak. Having a belt loop could be good for Provo.

It looks like that road goes awfully close to Utah lake though. But I do think that a road that borders wetlands can act as a good barrier to future development. Like how legacy took out some wetlands but added a nature preverse to prevent all development west of the freeway (at the southern end of the corridor anyway). I think this could do the same; even if it took out some wetlands, if it preserved the majority I'd be for it.
__________________
"Orthodoxy means not thinking-not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness."
George Orwell, "1984"
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2007, 4:47 PM
Wasatch_One's Avatar
Wasatch_One Wasatch_One is online now
I want a 458
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Provo, UT & Denver, CO
Posts: 2,641
Here is a map of the actual proposed belt loop

__________________
Utah's newest development specific community: UtahUrbanForum.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2007, 5:09 PM
Wasatch_One's Avatar
Wasatch_One Wasatch_One is online now
I want a 458
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Provo, UT & Denver, CO
Posts: 2,641
I like somewhat the idea of this parking plan. I think it will achieve the ulterior motive that the city has, which is, concentrating student living into the North Joaquin neighborhood (essentially the 3 blocks directly south of BYU campus) and concentrate owner-occupied families in the South Joaquin neighborhood.

Students (as we've already seen I-215 complain about ) hate parking fees, so theyll probably want to live closer to campus so they dont need additional parking passes.

Obviously, I think the city council will need adjust this plan and by no means do I think its perfect as it stands, but concentrating the students into this specific area between 5th north and 820 north will alleviate a lot of the conflict of mixing families w/ students and raise land values in the South Joaquin neighborhood which is right next to the CBD.

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,665193164,00.html



Provo parking plan costly in first year

But program would turn profit 2nd year, memo says

By Tad Walch
Deseret Morning News
PROVO — A parking permit program that would extend eight blocks south of Brigham Young University could cost in excess of $350,000 in the first year, according to a memo provided by Provo city staff to the City Council Tuesday.
Signs alone could cost more than $130,000, reported Brent Wilde, assistant director of Provo's department of Community Development.
Adding parking meters along 800 North would add another $80,000 to $100,000 to the bill but would provide revenue for a program that might be unlike any other in the country and would turn a profit in the second year.
The signs would warn BYU students and others not to park without a permit in the area that stretches nine blocks from University Avenue on the west to 900 East and eight blocks from Center Street on the south to 800 North.
Those who own — and live in — homes and condos in the Joaquin neighborhood would get one free on-street parking permit and could purchase a second for $25, Wilde said.
Tenants renting homes, apartments or condos could purchase a single permit for $25. Tenant permits would likely be bumper stickers, so they would be hard to transfer to another person.
The initial costs would include striping parking stalls and printing permits, in addition to the ongoing cost of three enforcement officers and two vehicles.
The city would lose $115,000 the first year because of start-up costs but make a $148,000 profit the second year, according to the memo. Annual revenues would be $244,000 and expenses would be $96,000, according to the memo.
The program is designed to ease parking congestion on the streets south of campus by excluding BYU students who for years have commuted to school and parked for free in the neighborhood.
BYU provides free on-campus parking, but many students prefer to park south of campus because of the area's proximity to major classroom buildings rather than park north of campus and walk from lots at the Marriott Center or LaVell Edwards Stadium.
Many apartment complexes in the neighborhood have more tenants than on-site parking spaces, forcing tenants to park on the streets in large numbers.
"This is a really good starting place for the neighborhood and the council," said Kurt Peterson, the Joaquin neighborhood chairman who requested the parking permit district. "It's an improvement on what I and the neighborhood suggested. It's easier and better for the students. They can breathe a sigh of relief. When they stop and think about it, a $25 fee for a parking place in the Joaquin neighborhood is a bargain."
Many students are expected to balk. The city council is waiting to hold open houses on the program until September so students can provide input. Mayor Lewis Billings said the full 15-page memo and addendums should be posted soon at provo.org.
City Council Chairman George Stewart said the council hopes to finalize a program by December and have it in place by June 2008, one year before the opening of Joaquin Village. The apartment complex will add housing for 950 BYU students in the heart of the neighborhood, at 500 North and 600 East.
Other cities have parking permit areas around major universities, but Provo's research hasn't found another city that issues permits for homeowners to park on city streets or that makes a distinction between homeowners and apartment tenants.
The program wouldn't reserve space directly in front of a permitholder's residence. The cost would be too high, with a sign in front of every building and unique permits for each residence.
Instead, Wilde recommended dividing the neighborhood into six "subdistricts" and issuing different permits for residents in each subdistrict to ease enforcement and costs. Residents would park anywhere in their subdistrict.
The City Council is deeply interested in a parking permit district because it is heavily invested in helping people purchase and stay in homes in the Joaquin neighborhood because of the benefits of stable, single-family residents.
Increased traffic and on-street parking congestion have negatively impacted neighborhood stability, Wilde said.
Visitor parking permits are included in the plan. Businesses would get one parking permit for every two employees during their busiest shift, with a maximum of five permits.
All restrictions would be in effect 24 hours a day, except for Saturdays, Sundays and holidays.
BYU students have been particularly exercised about the possibility of parking meters on 800 North. The recommendation is to issue electronic permits for 80 stalls on the street. Residents could pay for a permit online with a credit card and provide vehicle and license information for enforcement purposes.
Most of the parking permit district profits would come from the meters.
__________________
Utah's newest development specific community: UtahUrbanForum.com

Last edited by Wasatch_One; Jun 14, 2007 at 5:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2007, 5:55 PM
SmilingBob's Avatar
SmilingBob SmilingBob is offline
100 days to economic ruin
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South of Manilla
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLCforme View Post
Did you guys see this?
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,665193444,00.html

looks like it could help "put Provo on the map" so to speak. Having a belt loop could be good for Provo.

It looks like that road goes awfully close to Utah lake though. But I do think that a road that borders wetlands can act as a good barrier to future development. Like how legacy took out some wetlands but added a nature preverse to prevent all development west of the freeway (at the southern end of the corridor anyway). I think this could do the same; even if it took out some wetlands, if it preserved the majority I'd be for it.

This beltloop would bring on the development of this part of Provo. Hopefully they would leave as much wetlands as possible. I've always thought of this area as being kinda soggy ground anyway. Ok to build a road, but not great for houses.

Provo seems to be growing like Lehi and American Fork with a freeway down the middle. It does create a westside/eastside feel to the town. I know most people on the east side of Lehi feel they aren't really in Lehi or Highland.

Provo needs to include more plans for what is going to be developed in this area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2007, 5:54 PM
Wasatch_One's Avatar
Wasatch_One Wasatch_One is online now
I want a 458
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Provo, UT & Denver, CO
Posts: 2,641
This poor old church... I wish they could save it and make something out of it, possibly a meeting place for the Latin community or something.

However, its looking kind of expensive to do. This would be a big historical loss for the city if it is torn down.

If it is, they better put a good sized (mid-rise) project in its place as this is near the western gateway to the city (around 1st North and State St [aka 5th west])




Reprieve for church?

Group may get a new chance to save building

By Tad Walch
Deseret Morning News
PROVO — Asbestos is the final obstacle to demolition of Provo's historic Catholic church, and the difficulty of removing the hazardous substance might provide preservationists with another chance to save the building.
Stuart Johnson, Deseret Morning NewsAsbestos woes have delayed demolition of Provo's old Catholic church. Provo has issued a demolition permit to the Catholic Church, the Deseret Morning News has learned. Church leaders now can tear down the building at 172 N. 500 West whenever they're ready.
The asbestos removal is expected to cost more than $100,000, and the complexity of the removal is delaying demolition. That has opened the door for the Historic Provo Preservation Foundation to consider taking another stab at saving the 84-year-old Spanish Mission-style building.
On Wednesday, attorney Adam Ford approached the foundation on behalf of the developers who have an option to purchase the property from the church. Ford said the development company, Landmark Properties, is willing to consider a new deal with the preservation foundation.
"While we're waiting, we're willing to entertain an offer from the foundation for an option," he said. "We said if they want to make a significant offer toward an option, we'd put that in writing and we'll consider it."
The foundation attempted to pay $1.25 million for the land by an April 19 deadline, but Landmark Properties said the money wasn't in the bank on time. The foundation continued to dispute that on Thursday, but the foundation's board met Thursday night to consider Ford's proposal and determine whether it wanted to try to resurrect its effort to save the church.
"The foundation is still committed to pursuing the St. Francis properties," Bush said, "if the developer is willing to talk about it further."
The demolition permit was issued to the Catholic Church, and the St. Francis Parish decided to tear down the unique building. Landmark Partners has agreed to pay for the demolition but won't take title to the property until after the building is removed.
"We're progressing toward demolition," Ford said, "but the demolition is not imminent. No date has been firmly set. The process is that we're still having to work through some of the issues with asbestos with the two demolition companies, one that will remove the asbestos and one to demolish the building.
"We are not trying to sneak around."
The parish is anxious to complete the sale to Landmark Partners for $1.2 million. That money will go toward a new church building in Orem. Parishioners have worshipped in a gymnasium they built next to the planned new church.
The Rev. Mike Sciumbato told parishioners from the pulpit over the weekend that there was progress and that he thought the sale would be completed sometime this summer.
Julie Boerio-Goates said parishioners are trying to patiently wait out the end game of a journey toward a new church that began seven years ago when the parish left the old building.
"There's disappointment among some of the parishioners if the building has to go," she said. "But they feel like we've done what we could do, and they are at peace with it."
Landmark Partners is negotiating with other potential buyers, but Ford said none of the offers it has are acceptable so far.
The asbestos presents a problem for the foundation, which would have to raise significant money beyond the purchase price to deal with the asbestos and to bring the building up to new earthquake codes. Estimates are that renovating the building would cost well beyond $1 million.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

E-mail: twalch@desnews.com
__________________
Utah's newest development specific community: UtahUrbanForum.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2007, 6:02 PM
Wasatch_One's Avatar
Wasatch_One Wasatch_One is online now
I want a 458
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Provo, UT & Denver, CO
Posts: 2,641
double post.
__________________
Utah's newest development specific community: UtahUrbanForum.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2007, 6:40 PM
SmilingBob's Avatar
SmilingBob SmilingBob is offline
100 days to economic ruin
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South of Manilla
Posts: 201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wasatch_One View Post
This poor old church... I wish they could save it and make something out of it, possibly a meeting place for the Latin community or something.

However, its looking kind of expensive to do. This would be a big historical loss for the city if it is torn down.

If it is, they better put a good sized (mid-rise) project in its place as this is near the western gateway to the city (around 1st North and State St [aka 5th west])




Reprieve for church?

Group may get a new chance to save building

Landmark Partners is negotiating with other potential buyers, but Ford said none of the offers it has are acceptable so far.
The asbestos presents a problem for the foundation, which would have to raise significant money beyond the purchase price to deal with the asbestos and to bring the building up to new earthquake codes. Estimates are that renovating the building would cost well beyond $1 million.


-----------------------------------------------------------------

Even the Catholic church doesn't want this building and it's their history that would be preserved. It is a sweet building, but with all the work, etc. that would need to be done I think it is time to move on.

The foundation has been given ample time to figure things out and keep this building. It reminds me of the BY Academy building. It was almost torn down, but enough money was raised to keep it. Let people vote with their pocket book whether it's worth keeping.

Not to flip-flop, but Provo does seem to be loosing more of its history every year, and this is one more piece to go. I don't know that you can make these kinds of decisions without someone being upset.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2007, 6:42 PM
SmilingBob's Avatar
SmilingBob SmilingBob is offline
100 days to economic ruin
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South of Manilla
Posts: 201
Provo is the SLC of Utah Valley.
As I look at Provo I see a city which doesn't know what it wants to be. Each area of Provo is populated differently. Things are slowly changing regarding those who want to live in Provo, but a large portion of people will not live in Provo, but will work here and shop here.
Much of Provo has been populated with students. To this end Provo is trying to focus the students around the university.
Many of the homes on the east bench are professors or others who work at BYU and have lived in their places for many years. It functions well as it currently exists. It most likely won't change much over the next 10-20 years.
The north end of Provo is high priced housing and the Riverwoods. The average person looking to buy a house for $300,000 isn't able to find much other than condos or townhomes. I don't think you can change the fact that more businesses, not less will expand out there. It does split up the business community, but it's a reality that you can't change.
The housing developments going in are $500,000+ homes. It will continue to be a place for elite, high-priced homes. Even the condo's going in are $300,000 to $500,000 condo's.
The southeast end is newer and a mix of students and long-term residents, but still mostly condo's and townhomes with people moving in and out for 2-3 years at a time. Few people setting up long-term roots that create a look and feel to the neighborhood.
The central business district is moving to create true downtown housing. The west side of downtown from University to 500 W. is still developing. You have UVRMC moving south to 800 N., more doctor offices/clinics around the hospital, and downtown business moving north. Plans have hinted at the convention center going in on Freedom Blvd. and 200 North. A couple of condo/townhome projects are being built or in the planning stage.
From 500 W. to Geneva Road is the section of the city which needs the most work. The houses are older, many of them are rentals. Grandview is okay, but the area off Grandview hill seems like an area without direction or an idea of what it is to become.
On the west side of the freeway is mostly single family housing. They need more retail on that side of town. It is the biggest open space left to develop and Provo planners have a real opportunity to decide how it will look. I wouldn't like to see office or warehouse going up over there unless it's right along the freeway.
The area I feel is most messed up is south along University Avenue. You have the viaduct over the train tracks that splits the East Bay development from Downtown. More needs to be done to connect these two centers of business. Personally a couple of nice tall buildings south, not west would work better.
Provo could drop the train tracks into a trench like Reno and work to establish more development between the two areas. They are already working on some developments south of Center St. With the commuter rail station there also you could build around that as well. But I don't think Provo has the political will to do this. It would cost $200+ million at least.
As Utah Valley grows more people are looking to Provo to lead the valley in developing. Many of us don't live in Provo, but we travel into the city for work or shopping. In that way it is similar to SLC. Provo officials need to take the lead in laying out the plans for the future of Provo and indirectly for the entire Utah Valley.

Last edited by SmilingBob; Jun 15, 2007 at 8:36 PM. Reason: Double post
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2007, 8:23 PM
poodledoodledude's Avatar
poodledoodledude poodledoodledude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 533
i think that style of building is ugly. tear the thing down and move on....

...no offense!

poodledoodledude
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2007, 8:24 PM
poodledoodledude's Avatar
poodledoodledude poodledoodledude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 533
i think that style of building is ugly. tear the thing down and move on....

...no offense!

poodledoodledude
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2007, 12:01 PM
delts145's Avatar
delts145 delts145 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,451
Hinckley building to be dedicated this Saturday.

http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0...192472,00.html



This is a beautiful building, a great addition to the city of Provo,BYU, and will age nicely. I think the historical approach in the design worked well.

I understand that the Tanner Building will be tweaked a bit? Is that for sure? I like the interior of the Tanner a lot. However, the exterior needs a little adjustment. To me the sides have always looked unfinished.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2007, 2:14 PM
wrendog's Avatar
wrendog wrendog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 3,450
I agree smilingbob... There really needs to be more retail west of the freeway in Provo. It's always shocking to see how little there is in way of stores, restaurants and other businesses.
__________________
Now is a fantastic time to refinance or buy a house! Rates are lower than ever! If you are in Utah, PM me if you are interested to see how much you can save or afford.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2007, 5:41 PM
blm3034L!fe's Avatar
blm3034L!fe blm3034L!fe is offline
Denver is the M/W Father!
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: IN THE LAND OF MILK AND HONEY WHERE HOPS AND CANNABIS REIGN SUPREME!
Posts: 2,019
Doesn't Utah Lake play a roll here as to "why" not much has developed on the "west" of I-15? I remember the Provo River flooding over about 3 times growing up in Utah County and most all of the area west of I-15 was in about 2ft of water every time. Now that would be a major concern for any developer IMHO.

Also with that nasty ass Utah Lake being so shallow and with the silt and mud that sits at the bottom makes it hard for that "pond" to hold any more water, so where does it all go when Utah's Wasatch Range get an unusual amount of snow fall for a year? Right down Provo River and into that nasty lake, then it overflows and everyone is sand bagging thier homes. What a joke I say drain that damn thing and fill in utah county...
__________________
We're either progressing or retrograding all the time.

There is no such thing as remaining constant.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Jun 20, 2007, 6:58 PM
Wasatch_One's Avatar
Wasatch_One Wasatch_One is online now
I want a 458
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Provo, UT & Denver, CO
Posts: 2,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by delts145 View Post
Hinckley building to be dedicated this Saturday.

http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0...192472,00.html



This is a beautiful building, a great addition to the city of Provo,BYU, and will age nicely. I think the historical approach in the design worked well.

I think the GBH building looks best when viewing it from around University Ave. looking east, how it drops off the BYU bench, it looks like a pretty good sized building from that vantage point.
__________________
Utah's newest development specific community: UtahUrbanForum.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Jun 21, 2007, 11:16 PM
DevdogAZ's Avatar
DevdogAZ DevdogAZ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 390
I like the parking plan mentioned above. What I'd really like to see is the city focus on getting rid of most of the old homes in the North Joaquin neighborhood and encouraging the development of larger apartment complexes like Joaquin Village (except that they'd need to have adequate parking on site). If the entire area between 820 N. and 500 N, and University Ave. and 900 E. were filled with student housing instead of tons of old decrepit homes, there would be much less problem with students parking all over. The majority of the students would live within walking distance and wouldn't have any reason to try and park elsewhere.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2007, 10:20 PM
wrendog's Avatar
wrendog wrendog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 3,450
A little birdie told me that there will be a couple 5 story office towers in East Bay over by Novell..
__________________
Now is a fantastic time to refinance or buy a house! Rates are lower than ever! If you are in Utah, PM me if you are interested to see how much you can save or afford.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2007, 11:01 PM
shrubber shrubber is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18
More smell

I'm not sure why anyone would want to build over by Novell with the sewage treatment plant there. I'm surprised Novell hasn't put more pressure on the city to put in systems that limit the smell. I'm not sure I've smelled anything worse than being in that area when the wind is blowing the wrong way.

Am I the only one that is bothered by that? Maybe I'm just over smell-sensitive. Other than that, it's a great area with good freeway access.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2007, 11:28 PM
jedikermit's Avatar
jedikermit jedikermit is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 1,838
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrubber View Post
I'm not sure why anyone would want to build over by Novell with the sewage treatment plant there. I'm surprised Novell hasn't put more pressure on the city to put in systems that limit the smell. I'm not sure I've smelled anything worse than being in that area when the wind is blowing the wrong way.

Am I the only one that is bothered by that? Maybe I'm just over smell-sensitive. Other than that, it's a great area with good freeway access.

Hey Shrubber--welcome to the forum!

And good luck with the smells.
__________________
Loving Salt Lake City. Despite everything, and because of everything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Jun 22, 2007, 11:40 PM
poodledoodledude's Avatar
poodledoodledude poodledoodledude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 533
WELCOME SHRUBBER!!!

also, wrendog, what else have you heard? 5 stories aint that bad of a development!

but im wondering where, and by who?

seems to me that this would be big news in the city! i guess i need to get out to my vinyard and water a bit!?!?

at any rate, i'm all for it, and hope to see the plans soon!

poodledoodledude
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
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 2:47 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.