It is not really sprawl. The mountain stops further progress. Most of is in
those locations can still write Salt Lake City on our mail.
Cheris,I think the difference is.. the sprawl has already happened on the
East side, it's in the past, not the future. Growth areas like South
Jordan, Riverton, Bluffdale, Harriman, Eagle Mountain, Saratoga Springs...
that's where the sprawl is still going on or yet to happen, and we can plan
it.I was talking with the Sandy building inspector years ago and he
said there were no new building lots left in Sandy (everything's already
been built on). So the NEW sprawl is happening somewhere else now (maybe the
areas they mentioned)...The East side is also very limited on how
far the sprawl can go (by the geography). Day Break is a great example of a
mistake that could have been prevented IF we had a plan back then. I hope we
can prevent mistakes like that in areas that are currently being developed or
yet to be developed.
re: MidvalieanExactly. Limited space negates the concept of
sprawl.The letter writer should work on improving his/her little
corner of the world rather than complain, whine, etc...
Re: "It is not really sprawl."That's the danger of
using disingenuous liberal rhetoric -- sometimes it comes back to bite you.The ill-defined term "urban sprawl" is just Orwellian newspeak.
It's a strawman construct that misrepresents and demonizes truth, making it
easier to apply sanctions against it. Or to favor whatever Big Government
objective is being advanced.Reality is, it's not just
East-bench collectivist elites that embrace that natural human desire to spread
out a little and to own the means of full or partial self-sufficiency. It's
a hateful concept when applied to the rest of us, to be sure. It complicates the
elitist stranglehold on control of the state. So, they concoct a negative term
that their leftist echo chambers assure them will resonate with people. Then
define it to exclude themselves."All animals are equal, but some
are more equal than others."We're not running out of room
in Utah. Along with the rest of the Inter-mountain West, Utah is dang-near
empty. Low-density human occupancy is a good idea.For East-bench
elites, and real people, too.
procuradorfiscal,We may not be running out of room... but we are running
out of water, and clean air (on some days)...I think community
planning is a "good" thing. As long as the PEOPLE in the community
(not the politicians)... do the planning.
Re: "We may not be running out of room... but we are running out of water,
and clean air . . . ."No, we're not. That's just
leftist, collectivist propaganda.Most large Utah aquifers have a
hundred-year-plus history of withdrawal, with no, or very little effect on
groundwater levels. Even the planned water theft by Las Vegas will have only a
small, though locally devastating effect, on levels in the Snake Valley
aquifer.Nationwide, underground freshwater aquifers are estimated to
contain as much as 1000 times the content of above-ground freshwater resources.
Recently, offshore fresh or near-freshwater aquifers were discovered, containing
more than all the water that has been abstracted from all underground aquifers,
worldwide, since 1900.Oceans, a literally unlimited resource, will
be readily available as a source of fresh water, as energy production and use
technologies are developed in the near future.And, Utah has plenty
of clean air. Even along the Wasatch Front, seasonal, inversion-related
concentrations of harmless visible components does not, in any significant way,
render air unhealthy, notwithstanding the disingenuous bleating of elitist
liberal, anti-business, anti-job activists.
@procuradorfiscalUtah's population is projected to double by 2030.
IDK about you but i'll still be around, and i'm pretty sure i'll
be drinking water even then. We don't live in the rain forest, we live in a
near desert climate, and it's incredibly short sighted to assume we can
waste water the way we do, build a bunch more houses with wasteful landscaping
and not face any consequences with a much larger population.
The amount of area SLC can sprawl to it's east is very limited. I
wouldn't even call that sprawl.But to the South.... and in some
areas to the West... it could go on forever...I think that's
what they are trying to get a handle on.
"The East side is also very limited on how far the sprawl can go (by the
geography). Day Break is a great example of a mistake that could have been
prevented IF we had a plan back then." I don't know but are
not the mountains on the west side of the valley a limit to sprawl also. As far
as Day Break, as I recall a lot of planning went into the development maximizing
density while still making it livable. Elitist always complain I
was here first, I was right, you are wrong. Like the poster a couple of weeks
ago, complained about sprawl, he said he moved to Magna area to escape the
urbanization of Salt Lake, then he had to move to Tooele to escape the
urbanization of Magna. All because of Urban sprawl. And yet he was the
ultimate urban sprawler. I am sure the elitist rural residence of Tooele would
have said don't bring your sprawl west. If you think Sandy is done
growing, you haven't seen nothing yet.
Noodlekaboodle it is called recycled sewer water, like half our country does.
jsf,Sorry... Did I say Day Break... I meant Sun Crest (in Draper/Alpine).
Wrong name.Day Break was pretty well planned. But I think a master
plan could have prevented urban sprawl spreading to the tops of the mountains in
the south east part of the valley (like SunCrest) and some of the problems they
have experienced there and on the Draper benches (like fire danger, landslides,
@JSFI'm perfectly aware of grey water, but even with grey water if we
continue to build houses on .25 acre lots, with Kentucky Bluegrass, and we have
to water them everyday, or the grass will die, then ya, we are going to run out
of water. I mean sure it would be fun to keep using and using until our only
options are expensive, as we don't have the time to implement less extreme
options. Or we can keep doing what we're doing, until it's too late
and we don't have a choice but to spend a lot of money to do something
drastic(ie, Las Vegas paid people to tear out their lawns) instead of something
like that why not just require new homes have pre approved grass or native