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

Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #9921  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 2:23 AM
Stenar's Avatar
Stenar Stenar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 2,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlando View Post
... The lasest expansion is awful, IMO. They should have expanded to the SE corner of S. Temple and 3rd West and fill in the gap between there and the old Double Tree Hotel. and then they should have continued along 3rd West to the NE corner of 1st S. and 3rd West. On top of that, they really didn't check the architects design with the community. It doesn't match anything from the original new Salt Palace. The ugly orange concrete is a crying shame. And, whoever designed the windows and canopy of the portion on S. Temple did not do it well, at all....

I quite like the orange concrete and the rest as well.
     
     
  #9922  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 2:36 AM
Comrade's Avatar
Comrade Comrade is offline
They all float down here
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hair City, Utah
Posts: 7,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLC Projects View Post

It's not just trying to keep the "Outdoor Retailer" convention, but also trying to get those other conventions who have otherwise looked over SLC for not having enough space, hotel rooms, whatever. I'm glad they keep bitching, maybe then something will finally get done with that convention hotel.

I do agree with not wanted to see the S.P expand over anymore blocks.
I think if the S.P. was design the same way Provo did theirs it wouldn't of taken up two and a half + blocks.
I'm not saying I oppose the convention hotel, but the expansion of the Salt Palace. That's just my view, tho.
     
     
  #9923  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 2:37 AM
Old&New's Avatar
Old&New Old&New is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,055


Expanding the Convention Center to the South (over 100 S.) would only be expanding the center in on itself. I wouldn't be adding any additional barrier between the east and west ends of downtown. Also, locating a convention hotel on the Royal Wood Plaza would fill in a large gap between east and west, helping to restore the urban fabric and connectivity along 200 South.

Last edited by Old&New; Apr 29, 2012 at 3:17 AM.
     
     
  #9924  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 4:11 PM
Future Mayor's Avatar
Future Mayor Future Mayor is offline
Vote for me in 2019!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,978

Exactly! It will help to create a link between Main and Gateway because the Convention Hotel would add street presence to 200 S between 200 and 300 W. I like how the SP engages 200 S between W. Temple and 200 W, it would be even more engaging with the hotel on the next block.

I realize the 2025 map was an exaggeration, but have the Salt Palace take up nearly four full blocks isn't that big of a deal. As Old & New pointed out it would simply be coming back around on itself. It's already at 3 blocks, and including the hotel in the 4th block would be a great final expansion plan.

The problem with saying that the Salt Palace should have been designed more like the Utah County Convention Center, is a horrible argument. Yes the one is Convention Centers that host large national conventions need to have a massive amount of continuous exhibit space. The space needs to flow, to allow attendees to continue to walk and walk and view the exhibits that are present. Multiple levels are fine for meeting spaces, but not for exhibit space. If the SP were twice the size of it's current square footage, but that large exhibit space was split between three floors, the SP would have half the business, and OR would have already left.

When the former Salt Palace was built in the 60's or 70's, the version with the arena, it was on the edge of downtown. As the SP expanded over 200 W in the 80's the county acquired leases on the property. So while moving the entire thing further west in the 90's would have been a great idea it would have been potentially very cost prohibitive. The 80's expansion was already built, and it allowed them to connect the new SP and provide a large amount of continuous exhibit space for without the need to build all of it from the ground up.
     
     
  #9925  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 8:05 PM
Comrade's Avatar
Comrade Comrade is offline
They all float down here
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hair City, Utah
Posts: 7,915
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old&New View Post


Expanding the Convention Center to the South (over 100 S.) would only be expanding the center in on itself. I wouldn't be adding any additional barrier between the east and west ends of downtown. Also, locating a convention hotel on the Royal Wood Plaza would fill in a large gap between east and west, helping to restore the urban fabric and connectivity along 200 South.
Expanding it south would ultimately take up yet another city block and create a two-block dead zone between 300 W and West Temple. No bueno. That block should be used for the hotel and nothing more. Add additional retail, commercial and mixed-use space there and I'm fully on board. I do not support the idea of expanding the convention center another entire city block, though. Especially when, between 200 W & West Temple, we've already got a massive structure that does not interact at all with the street.

If they want to expand into that block, they should only go halfway and that's it. But if it goes all the way to 200 S, I will be very disappointed and will pretty much write off the western end of downtown.

So, I say no to further expansion. If the OR don't like it - if they feel it isn't adequate enough for their convention, well, too bad so sad. Enjoy Denver.
     
     
  #9926  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 8:21 PM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Mayor View Post

The problem with saying that the Salt Palace should have been designed more like the Utah County Convention Center, is a horrible argument. Yes the one is Convention Centers that host large national conventions need to have a massive amount of continuous exhibit space. The space needs to flow, to allow attendees to continue to walk and walk and view the exhibits that are present. Multiple levels are fine for meeting spaces, but not for exhibit space. If the SP were twice the size of it's current square footage, but that large exhibit space was split between three floors, the SP would have half the business, and OR would have already left.
No, it's not a horrible argument since I'm sure the Utah Convention Center isn't only for meeting space. I really don't see how having exhibit spaces split up on floors is that big of a deal. Sure as hell alot better to have it in the SAME building on split floors then to have to split up in different buildings. ( ex ESA )
Don't see why companies would leave only because they are what?.....too lazy to go up a flight of stairs? But yet they already have to walk across the street to other buildings. Hell companies are already leaving or talking about leaving.
What if the SP had a semi loading dock kind of like the one that is at the CCC by the Regent that takes the trucks underground? Only in this case it takes the trucks upwards to the upper levels. Would something like that work? I'm just brain storming here.

I don't know, I'm sure money is the biggest issue here. ( It always is ), but I can't help but to think there has to be a better/smarter way of expanding it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Mayor View Post


I realize the 2025 map was an exaggeration, but have the Salt Palace take up nearly four full blocks isn't that big of a deal. As Old & New pointed out it would simply be coming back around on itself. It's already at 3 blocks, and including the hotel in the 4th block would be a great final expansion plan.
And how do we know this will be their FINAL expansion plan? What if they keep out growing? When does it stop? Sure the 2025 map was a bit of a exaggeration, but it's also not that far off from the truth. At some point SP needs to grow upwards and not outwards. Sure it was once on the outer edge of downtown, but that was 40 years ago and now we have the west-side of downtown ( Gateway area ) The SP has now become the center of downtown. And I don't want to see a big grant grey roof the size of a runway right in the middle of our downtown as well as having a downtown broken up because of loading docks. UB's plan could work as long as it stays within those four blocks and if it has to expand again find a way to STAY within those same block and don't eat up anymore of our downtown.
__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
     
     
  #9927  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 8:29 PM
SLC Projects's Avatar
SLC Projects SLC Projects is offline
Bring out the cranes...
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Salt Lake City
Posts: 6,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds View Post
Expanding it south would ultimately take up yet another city block and create a two-block dead zone between 300 W and West Temple. No bueno. That block should be used for the hotel and nothing more. Add additional retail, commercial and mixed-use space there and I'm fully on board. I do not support the idea of expanding the convention center another entire city block, though. Especially when, between 200 W & West Temple, we've already got a massive structure that does not interact at all with the street.

If they want to expand into that block, they should only go halfway and that's it. But if it goes all the way to 200 S, I will be very disappointed and will pretty much write off the western end of downtown.

So, I say no to further expansion. If the OR don't like it - if they feel it isn't adequate enough for their convention, well, too bad so sad. Enjoy Denver.

I agree with about 95% of your post only up towards the end. We can't just allow the outdoor retailers show to move away, Especially to Denver. We have already lost a lot of business, money and what not to Denver and I for one am sick of SLC being Denver's little brother.
I agree I don't want to see the SP keep expanding outwards, but at the same time we got to find a way to keep the OR here.
__________________
1. "Wells Fargo Building" 24-stories 422 FT 1998
2. "LDS Church Office Building" 28-stories 420 FT 1973
3. "111 South Main" 24-stories 387 FT 2016
4. "99 West" 30-stories 375 FT 2011
5. "Key Bank Tower" 27-stories 351 FT 1976
     
     
  #9928  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 8:46 PM
Future Mayor's Avatar
Future Mayor Future Mayor is offline
Vote for me in 2019!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,978
If you look at the proposal on the map on the previous page it accomplished just what you are saying. It expands the convention center half way down the block to the south and the southern half of the block is occupied by the hotel, solving two problems with one project, (more convention space, and a convention hotel with a direct connection to the convention center.)

Yes there needs to be plans to build taller, but again, for the majority of large conventions and vendors, those paying to be there want to be as much in the same space as possible. Yes some people will take stairs and elevators to other floors, but many won't. The convention centers that OR is considering have more space, including more contiguous expo space. Creating more expo space on a second floor would result in the first floor expo space being hindered by the supports required for the second level of expo space. If contiguous space wasn't a important to convention planners, it would be the first bullet point on Convention Center layouts. http://www.visitsaltlake.com/include...floorplans.pdf

By the vertical rational, then they might as well have simply built the ST Expo Center on two levels and saved a lot of space for land, but imagine the supports necessary on the first level to support a second level able to hold hundreds of boats. Again peoples tendency wouldn't be to explore the second level. I would venture to guess that the tents on the parking lot and ESA don't have the same number of people viewing the booths during OR as the main expo hall does. The clear span and open sight lines is often times what is so desirable about massive convention space. As you will notice on the UT Valley CC, the first floor has few pillars, with a fair amount of clear span space. On the second floor the space is divided up much more, with I'm sure much stricter weight requirements than the first. To attempt to match expo space on multiple levels while providing clear span and open sight lines for large vendors would be an engineering miracle. Here is the floor plan link to the UT Valley CC http://www.utahvalley.com/!userfiles...%203-10-11.pdf

I never said the Utah Valley Convention Center was just for meetings, but it isn't designed for large conventions either. Some meeting rooms, some expo space. I would venture to guess that the upper levels don't have vast expo space, the is most likely all on the main floor.

Last edited by Future Mayor; Apr 29, 2012 at 9:16 PM.
     
     
  #9929  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 9:40 PM
Comrade's Avatar
Comrade Comrade is offline
They all float down here
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hair City, Utah
Posts: 7,915
I'm not going to support the expansion on the whim that they'll do what someone online proposed. Obviously, my opinion could dramatically change based on each proposal they put out and I'll readily admit as much. But nothing said on this message board is official and certainly, while there are some valuable insights, in the end, what we get could be what I fear - and, unfortunately, I wouldn't be shocked if, in the end, that's exactly what happened.

So, I'm inclined to be skeptical from the start and if the city is bullied into expanding its convention center, I don't trust the officials who will draw up the plans to have the commonsense displayed, at times, in this thread.

Moreover, in urbanboy's proposal, the same basic problem still exists. The hotel takes up the entire east-west area of that block. It doesn't matter if it's the convention center or the hotel, unless it's a multi-use project, with ground-level retail, maybe some residential and whatnot, my objection still remains. Unfortunately, there is just no walkable development in any part of this area and I think it's quickly becoming a lost opportunity.

The area around the ESA, not counting the Gateway, is utter trash. It's ugly. It's littered with nasty parking lots, crappy, cheap one-story warehouses, hardly any retail development, almost zero residential development and I don't see anyone doing anything to change that.

What I want is the convention center & convention center hotel to act as an anchor for a more entertainment district between West Temple & the Gateway. There is a foundation, but no plans. The way I see it, and again, this is just my opinion, that block the convention center wants to expand into should house the hotel. I have no problem with that. But that block, and not just the mid-block area where the apartments would be located (I do like the idea), should offer more options on that 200 S border to start creating some semblance of connectivity.

I know, I know, the current Salt Palace hurts and it's here to say. I get that. But if there's retail, residential and entertainment options on the north side of the 200 S block between 300 W & 200 W, along with these developments on the south side, which hardly has any good development, I think we would be able to overcome the dead space currently created by the Salt Palace.

So, while I like urbanboy's proposal and think it's a start, it would be important to integrate some other type of developments into the hotel. Ground level retail, maybe a night club for hotel patrons, some bars (though, with our laws, this is unlikely), a restaurant, you know, whatever. Just something that creates foot traffic. Because if you walk down 200 S right now, outside the cluster of businesses across from the Salt Palace, it's dead. No one wanders down that area because there's nothing to do. A hotel helps, and like I said, I'm fully on board with the hotel idea, but then again, if the hotel is set up like any other hotel in SLC (just look at the foot traffic around the Grand & Little - it's minimal), we run into the same problem.

Sadly, like I said earlier, I don't think this is what we're going to get. I think the expansion would take over that entire block, with the convention hotel built, not at the convention center, but somewhere next to it - like where the Marriott is or the area by the Shilo. If that's the case, then I stand by my position: convention hotel? Yes, convention center expansion? No. No. Hell no.
     
     
  #9930  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 9:56 PM
Future Mayor's Avatar
Future Mayor Future Mayor is offline
Vote for me in 2019!
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 3,978


I agree with you 100%, if something along the lines of UB's proposal did happen as part of the SP/Hotel, it would have to offer some retail opportunities that front 200 S. If that were the case, with retail on the street level of the hotel, along with the main entrance of the hotel both on 200 S, there is a really good chance it would spur something to happen on the south side of 200 S. I would be all for a few retail/bars/clubs/restaurants on the south side as part of some larger developments. It would also be a great location for some mixed use mid-rise buildings 10-20 or even a great place to continue to expand the skyline further west with an office tower, considering the hotel will already expand the skyline west. Wouldn't make the hotel seem so out of place over there on 200 W.

Combine the 30+ story convention hotel on the Oakwood Plaza site, with a 25 story office building, maybe a 10-15 story apartment/condo building or two on the block to the south. Throw in a 20+ story hotel south of ESA, and streetcar along 200 S, and we've got ourselves a nice link between Main and Gateway, not to mention a nice westward expanding skyline.
     
     
  #9931  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2012, 10:10 PM
Comrade's Avatar
Comrade Comrade is offline
They all float down here
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Hair City, Utah
Posts: 7,915
Yes. Perfect. Add the potential trolley and now you're getting somewhere in that area.
     
     
  #9932  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 5:29 PM
CofIKid CofIKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 200
Federal Courthous Glass

They have started installing Glass on level 2. I really like the looks of it.

     
     
  #9933  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 7:23 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stenar View Post
I quite like the orange concrete and the rest as well.
It might have been fine somewhere else. But, the biggest problem is that there's no relation to the rest of the Salt Palace! Besides the orange concrete looks like it should be used for one of EDA's rec centers in some town in Southern Utah. The original Salt Palace II by EDA in the early 80's looked better than what the new EDA put up in its place. Another problem, is that it doesn't really add any value to the street. I know the previous one didn't either, but it doesn't help. From what I understand, the commissioner pushed for max. convention space and less architectural transition, etc. At least MHTN's expansion on the southern end tried to relate to the original new Salt Palace immediately to the north, albeit, MHTN's version was a cheapened version of it.

I wish the commissioner's wouldn't have been so cheap and went with cheaper expansion's at the expense of a higher architectural quality and continuity and greater value to the urban experience of Salt Lake City. They should have rehired TVS for every expansion from the original new one. They are the best in the business, and I believe the result will outlast the cost of their services. see www.tvsa.com
     
     
  #9934  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 7:24 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by CofIKid View Post
They have started installing Glass on level 2. I really like the looks of it.

Thanks for the updates!
     
     
  #9935  
Old Posted Apr 30, 2012, 7:32 PM
Orlando's Avatar
Orlando Orlando is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,216
Check out USA Today today. They rank the states that have the most active populous. Guess which one is #1?

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...ans-inactive/1

This link doesn't show the percentage. I saw it on the printed version. I'm guessing Utah is #1 because of their high birthrate and thus their young population.
     
     
  #9936  
Old Posted May 1, 2012, 4:29 AM
ajiuO's Avatar
ajiuO ajiuO is offline
A.K.A. Vigo
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds View Post
Four blocks?

Downtown Salt Lake City, circa 2025:



Really, tho, I have a hard time believing anything with that much dead space should take up four city blocks - and we're talking four SLC blocks. The Salt Palace has effectively divided downtown. The continued expansion will only deepen that divide for years to come. I know, I know, it needs to happen and who cares, anyway, right? But I do. I think western downtown is a hole and I'm afraid this isn't going to help matters.

The city really dropped the ball building the convention center so close to the city center. It should have been built west of the ESA, as most city convention centers are built on the outskirts of downtown, not just a mere block from the core - or tucked 'em away in a spot where they wouldn't act like a wall between areas.

Whatever. Build it out. What's a whole extra block, right? It's just a shame 200 S on the western end of downtown is quickly becoming isolated from the rest of downtown. I just fear, in 20 years, we'll be dreading having the convention center so close to the core. I feel, though maybe I'm wrong, it will stunt the growth of our center and create two downtowns that rarely, if ever, connect to one another.

The city should integrate some type of mixed-use development into the 200 S side of the convention center if they want to continue expanding westward. I think there is potential in the area, especially with the street car, but it's going to take investment and smart planning. 200 S should be the southern link between Main & the Gateway, while South Temple acts as the northern link (and can I say how much I hate that 100 S is cutoff here?). Support the redevelopment of the northern block on 200 S between 200 & 300 W. It's ugly. It's got an abandoned storefront, more parking than businesses and it's also what convention center goers see when they arrive into the city.

I guess my point is is that I think western SLC could turn more into an entertainment district with the convention center being where it is. But because it's such a hodgepodge of parking lots, lame-ass retail and shitty cheap hotels, there is no incentive whatsoever to wander through that area of the city. Between Main & the Gateway, you literally pass by more parking lots than businesses. That could be acceptable, to a degree, if it was on the outskirts of downtown. But it's not. The outskirts are still around the area of the Gateway now, not West Temple.

I mean, I've liked what they've sorta done with 200 S west of 300 West, but it needs to continue eastward and truly bridge that gap. Salt Lake is just too scattered right now and it's sad. Our downtown is great at Main and on the eastern side of the city, but everything west of Main, up until the Gateway, sucks donkey ass. It's ugly. It's desolate and I want to change that.

You know what? Fuck the Outdoor Retailer. I'm tired of their whining every few years. If they want out that badly, tell 'em to go. Yeah, it would hurt economically, but we'd get over it. No reason for the city to be held hostage by these people. Yes, build the convention center hotel. No, do not expand the Salt Palace any further.
I agree about the salt palace being in a horrible location. I think they should build a new convention center along the west edge of the city and then demolish the salt palace once the new convention center is compleat. The salt palace is a horrible monstrosity that divides and isolates... Possibly west of west high or even west of gateway. That is an area that is already limited because of rail and freeway. There would be lots of room and little disruption.


With the salt palace gone a lot of development could take place between city creek and gateway and the future byu campus.... It would be really nice


P.s. if the salt palace ever gets as out of hand as it is in that photo I will seriously move.... And I would have to move because they would have to rip down where I live to make it look like that
__________________
On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sat on a
throne of blood! What was will be! What is will be no more! Now is the season of evil!
     
     
  #9937  
Old Posted May 1, 2012, 5:56 AM
RC14's Avatar
RC14 RC14 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 323
The Salt Palace can't really expand much beyond 4 blocks. I think it would make much more since to move it now then to delay the inevitable but merely expanding while allowing the west side of downtown to fall behind the east in development.
It is kind of nice that convention goers can be so close to Main ST, Temple Square, CCC, etc., but I think we are approaching the point of "diminishing returns" for this location.
I think we should move the convention center over by SL Central Station and re-plan the Salt Palace blocks to have mid-block pedestrian walkways. There would be a great opportunity here in that, we would have three blocks, almost in the center of town, that we could re-develop in a way that would be best for the vitality of downtown and we wouldn't have to acquire any private property to do it.
     
     
  #9938  
Old Posted May 1, 2012, 2:45 PM
DCRes's Avatar
DCRes DCRes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 381
I would be highly surprised if the Salt Palace gets torn down and moved anytime soon. It would cost way to much money and that move would never get approved. I think if the convention hotel gets built at the RWP location and retail/dining is included along 200 S, that would go along way to furthering 200 S as an east/west link between the two "downtowns's". 200 S already has a pretty good start. On the other side of the Salt Palace, if the BYU-SL campus is eventually built, that will further connect east and west along South Temple. I'm all for extending the skyline west, and these two developments would help. The mid-rise structures in the Gateway area along with Triad and the Radison are already in place, they just need some structures to the east of them to tie it all together. This would really help downtown feel bigger.

Side note, does anybody else think that we should boot Fidelity out of the building on the corner of 300W and South Temple and open a sports bar there?
     
     
  #9939  
Old Posted May 1, 2012, 2:50 PM
UTPlanner's Avatar
UTPlanner UTPlanner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 790
I'm always one to respect the dreamers out there when it comes to development in any city but I would like to inject some realism into the conversation. To construct a new convention center would take hundreds of millions of dollars. SLC hasn't even come close to paying off the bonds from the last expansion(s) and it's not even a city facility. The facility is in fine shape and I personally do not think that the community in general would ever support its demolition and then replacement with...?

I think that if the Salt Palace truly needs to expand and can justify the expense there is still plenty of room on adjacent blocks. I would like to know that this is being done with an eye to the future and not because Outdoor Retailers is making an idle threat.

Whatever happens here, keep in mind, that they would ultimately be using public funds and will have to justify their use to the public. There is a large contingency in the valley that will not support the use of public funds to build a private convention hotel in downtown SLC. I was speaking with Ben McAdams at the Democratic Convention a few weeks ago and he mentioned that he has heard a lot of negative feedback about the project from legislatures and from the public. The Republican candidates for SL County Mayor have been vocally opposed to the project.

Anyhow here is a just a little food for thought, I suppose.
     
     
  #9940  
Old Posted May 1, 2012, 7:38 PM
UTPlanner's Avatar
UTPlanner UTPlanner is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 790
Some quick good news 2 projects have recently come into get engineering permits to close the sidewalk or portions of the street due to imminent construction. The Liberty at the Gateway Apartments and the State Street Plaza both have building permits and it looks like construction is a go.

The apartments at 644 W. North Temple also have an approved permit and can start construction whenever they would like to.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Closed Thread

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 9:42 AM.

     

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