I understand what you're saying, and I agree with the image problem of it being seen as an elite gesture; however, I don't find the alternative proposal to be a particularly meaningful contribution to affordable housing either. I was lucky enough the last four years to get to work with refugee and homeless issues in SLC through work, and I think 10% of units in the 60-80% is nice, but not where the greatest need really is.
A renovation of the Utah theater doesn't necessarily mean forgoing affordable housing or even a tower as some here have stated. The 2015 theater renovation proposal included a tower and affordable housing as well, but was ruled out because the numbers didn't work. But now we know that historic preservation tax credits may be possible, and that foundations and philanthropists were never even approached about the project (partially because Becker, a great mayor in many respects, but not without his faults, had rammed the Eccles theater through the RDA, a project that spoke even more of misaligned priorities in my view.)
All I'm saying is that with this additional information, the city should take another look and speak with the developer, the state preservation office, local foundations, and given this information see what might be possible. Those options have not yet been seriously considered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Always Sunny in SLC
I don’t think you will get very much public support unless you get more than 50% of the cost paid by donors. I would not support it myself unless this was the case. When affordable housing is such an issue paying over a 100 million for a unneeded theater smacks of elitism and misaligned priorities.
|