Competition Questions

Q1. The GIS files provided seem to have layers that do not line up.

A1. Not all shape files were available in the same projection. Use GIS software equivalent to ArcGIS 8.x or higher to automatically reproject all shape files.

Q2. Is the $95 million for the 100 acres of Main Street required as part of the upfront purchase price that we must assume in our proposal, or is the price limited to the $24 million for KLC land?

A2. The 100-acre Main Street area is $95 million.
The remainder of the developable portion of Magna is $24 million.
The undevelopable portion of Magna is not purchaseable.

Q3. We are unclear about what is included in the $24 million for KLC land. Specifically, a significant swath of property in the eastern extent of the site appears to be within the yellow border (excluding the cross-hatched area) of the site but outside of the KLC property line. From whom should we acquire this property and what is its valuation?

A3. Even though not all developable land is owned by KLC, assume that it can be purchased for $24 million (plus $95 million for Main Street), whether from KLC or others.

Q4. Should we assume that the zoning restrictions are binding or may they be varied?

A4. You may establish your own zoning scheme using the zoning definitions already established for Magna Township. The fact is, any large master-planned development will be considered a PUD (or a variant) by the county zoning commission.

Q5. Is it up to us propose a formula to the town government for variances or should the current de jure restrictions be taken as givens for purposes of the competition?
A5. The latter.

Q6. Must the sheets be independent of each other, or can information bleed from one page to another so that it forms one large sheet when assembled?

A6. The sheets may continue from one to another, and all sheets may be treated that way. You can consider the 5 or 6 sheets as one canvas in portrait or landscape format. Common configurations are 1 sheet x 6 sheets (66"w by 17"h, or 102"w by 11"h); 2x3 (22"w by 51"h, or 34"w by 33"h); and 3x2 (33"w by 34"h, or 51"w by 22"h).

The presentation requirement calls for the context and analysis to be shown on 1 or 2 boards and the master plan portion to be shown on 4 boards. The development scheme justification must also be shown among the 5 or 6 boards.

Q7. Should we assume that the mines have contaminated the aquifer?

A7. You need not assume that contamination has occurred. These sites would be considered greenfield projects rather than brownfield projects. The environmental concerns you may have read about are more the reflection of a region-wide consciousness of protecting and conserving the water supply and the environment in general, and KLC's sensitivity to the subject.

Q8. Are there known problems with the tailings impoundment?

A8. Tailings are not considered environmental hazards; they constitute refuse that must be dealt with, and KLC deals with it with an impoundment. The undeveloped space in both Magna and Northwest Planning Area are considered greenfields.

Q9. Are we to assume that the Union Pacific Line running through the NW area could incorporate public transit, or is it dedicated to UP purposes? Same question for the abandoned line running parallel to I-80; is this something that could potentially be re-used?

A9. The UP line running through the northwest area of the region is only for freight. The rail-line along I-80 (or simply the ROW) however, could be used as an extension to UTA’s proposed airport line. The only line that has to stay is the UP line. The others could be kept or discarded at the team’s discretion.

Q10. The brief states that a railroad line owned by Kennecott forms the spine for future development between Magna and Daybreak. We've been unable to locate that railroad line—do you have any suggestions as to where it might be?

A10. The north-south Kennecott line covers most of the distance, but does not fully extend south to Daybreak or north to Magna. An additional transit connection would be required to connect Daybreak and/or Magna.

Q11. Where are the GIS layers for elevations and topographic lines? Specifically, where can I find the topo lines for the impoundment berm?

A11. Among the GIS files, there are no topographic layers. The USGS quad maps are in 20’ increments, and elevations may be read directly from the USGS maps, which are in JPG format. Or one could convert the JPGs to georeferenced GIS layers. The on-site technical adviser offers this about converting the raster files (aerials and USGS quads) to GIS layers:

The world file (JGW file) needs to stay with the original JPG file in the same directory. Then when the JPG file is added as a layer to your project, the software will recognize the presence of the world file and automatically georeference the JPG, and it will fall where it should, with the proper dimensions. You can then lay the rest of the data on top of the USGS rasters, and everything lines up, and you can see the topo lines. This is the beauty of the world file when dealing with rasters.

Q12. We use ArcGIS 9.0, but it still didn't line up the layers.

A12. The shapefiles are in one of about 2 or 3 different projections, but that shouldn't matter to a modern GIS software package, equivalent to ArcGIS 8.x or higher. As long as the shapefiles are associated with the projection in which they were originally created, there shouldn't be a problem. The software will automatically reproject everything in the project to line up.

Q13. In one of the reports, Webster School in Magna sounds like it is a vacant building, yet in one of the images provided by ULI, it looks like a ruin. Which is it?

A13. The school burned virtually to the ground in June 2004. See http://tv.ksl.com/index.php?sid=102028&nid=5.

Q14. How will the boards be placed on the wall during the competition? May we provide a diagram for the layout of our boards or will there be a standard layout?

A14. Depending on the layout, boards are either mounted on walls or arrayed on tables. Boards are arrayed according to your specifications. Popular configurations are 6x1, 2x3, and 3x2—both landscape and portrait. You may specify any configuration, but if it is not obvious, you should draw a key on the back of the boards to indicate their proper locations.

Q15. Should the IRR calculation be leveraged or unleveraged?

A15. The IRR calculation should be based on leveraged amounts, and it should be supported with a spreadsheet. It may be self-instructive also to include the unleveraged IRR (without showing its spreadsheet) to ascertain the economic effects of debt financing. In any case, the jury will consider each team's IRR on its own merits and not use it as a basis for comparison among the submitted proposals.

Q16. Do we have to provide the sources of our data/research—either on the board(s) or on a separate sheet?

A16. No need to cite sources.

The jury assumes that students abide by the universal honor code of academics—that intellectual honesty prevails in academia. However, the jury will question data that are based on projections and assumptions not specified in the competition brief. You can obviate second-guessing by identifying your methodology, just as you would in an academic paper.

By the way, do not add a “separate sheet” for any purpose.

Q17. Is it acceptable to mount the boards on 3 sections; two 11x17 together? (Rather than 6 separate 11x17 boards.)

A17. You may, but it will be more difficult to ship.

This competition settled on the 11x17 format because it is an easily-available paper format that most commercial and academic color printers are able to accommodate. It also happens to fit snugly in the 12 1/2"x18"x4" "Large" size box that FedEx, UPS, DHL, and USPS make available freely to customers.

If you are worried that the jury will not view your boards in the proper configuration, just place a key on the back indicating the proper relationship among the boards.

Q18. The brief says that our team's code should appear on a consistent corner of each board. Would it be OK if we placed the code on the edge of the board indicating that board’s placement relative to the other boards that make up our submission? In other words, if our configuration is 2 wide by 3 high, we would place the code on the top left corner of the board that is at the top left, and on the bottom right corner of the board that is at the bottom right, and center right edge of the board that is at center right.

A18. Brilliant.