Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[DCRes]

This was the view from the dentist's chair the other morning. The crane is at the apartments on 400 E at about 250 S (or something like that). Also, I think that church is where the Hope Lodge will go.



And here is a quick drive by of those same apartments



A few pictures of the Lotus on South Temple

[UtahProjects]

Originally Posted by DCRes

This was the view from the dentist's chair the other morning. The crane is at the apartments on 400 E at about 250 S (or something like that). Also, I think that church is where the Hope Lodge will go.

And here is a quick drive by of those same apartments



A few pictures of the Lotus on South Temple

Would that be CityScape? - http://www.utahprojects.info/Project/Details/61/Cityscape-Apartments

The Lotus adds nice density, but the design of it (and others like it) from a street-facing / interaction perspective leave much to be desired.

[Future Mayor]

I didn't realize Lotus was going to have so many units. I understand what you're saying Utah Projects about the street interaction, but with the blocks as they are, and I don't forsee that block or many of the blocks being intersected anytime soon, I think they are getting the most density possible out of the situation they are presented with. Long narrow lots.

[Rock Waterman]

Originally Posted by SLC Projects

Just a dumb ass writer ( if you can even call him that ) who hates Mormons and knows NOTHING about our great city. Not even going to waste my time opening the link.

It's too bad the commenter chose not to open the link; he may have been less hasty in deciding he knew everything there was to know about me. Far from being someone "who hates Mormons," I am in fact a devout latter-day Saint in good standing. The site is called "Pure Mormonism" after all, not Pure Anti-Mormonism. The writer of the comment would do well to remember the words of Proverbs 18:13, "He that answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame unto him."

Although I currently live in Sacramento, California, I do in fact know quite a bit about Salt Lake City, having lived and worked there and in Provo for many years. My wife and I consider that area our true home, and long to return for good when circumstances permit. Contrary to the commenter's assumptions, I did not write a hatchet piece against either my religion nor my home state. I love the gospel of the Restoration and I love the Wasatch Front.

I understand the desire to see downtown Salt Lake beautified. But just as I object to tax money being diverted to unconstitutional uses, so I object to sacred Church funds being justified to build malls and hotels that the Lord did not command by revelation and that the members of His church did not approve as required by D&C 104:71.

In my piece I quote extensively from LDS cultural anthropologist Daymon Smith as to how the once egalitarian community founded by Joseph Smith was transformed into a top-down corporate hierarchy that has entangled itself in global finance. I think his words are worth reading.

Some on this thread are convinced that City Creek is a success. Only time will tell. But my sources who lease offices onsite tell me the buzz on the ground is not optimistic. (They asked for anonymity due to the sensitive nature of their employment and dependence upon the Church for much of their business. Suffice to say, they are not low-level sources.)
Anyone who honestly assesses the situation should see there is cause for concern.

At any rate, the success or failure of City Creek as a financial venture is beside the point. The real question is whether this is something the Lord's True Church should be anxiously engaged with in the first place.

We seem to be letting go of the iron rod. It may be to our benefit to assess our direction and step back onto the proper path.

[Wasatch_One]

Hey Rock, welcome to the board and sorry you were offended, however, this isn't a religious discussion forum. Let's keep the conversation development focused.

[SLC Projects]

Originally Posted by Rock Waterman

It's too bad the commenter chose not to open the link; he may have been less hasty in deciding he knew everything there was to know about me. Far from being someone "who hates Mormons," I am in fact a devout latter-day Saint in good standing. The site is called "Pure Mormonism" after all, not Pure Anti-Mormonism. The writer of the comment would do well to remember the words of Proverbs 18:13, "He that answers a matter before he hears it, it is folly and shame unto him."

Although I currently live in Sacramento, California, I do in fact know quite a bit about Salt Lake City, having lived and worked there and in Provo for many years. My wife and I consider that area our true home, and long to return for good when circumstances permit. Contrary to the commenter's assumptions, I did not write a hatchet piece against either my religion nor my home state. I love the gospel of the Restoration and I love the Wasatch Front.

I understand the desire to see downtown Salt Lake beautified. But just as I object to tax money being diverted to unconstitutional uses, so I object to sacred Church funds being justified to build malls and hotels that the Lord did not command by revelation and that the members of His church did not approve as required by D&C 104:71.

In my piece I quote extensively from LDS cultural anthropologist Daymon Smith as to how the once egalitarian community founded by Joseph Smith was transformed into a top-down corporate hierarchy that has entangled itself in global finance. I think his words are worth reading.

Some on this thread are convinced that City Creek is a success. Only time will tell. But my sources who lease offices onsite tell me the buzz on the ground is not optimistic. (They asked for anonymity due to the sensitive nature of their employment and dependence upon the Church for much of their business. Suffice to say, they are not low-level sources.)
Anyone who honestly assesses the situation should see there is cause for concern.

At any rate, the success or failure of City Creek as a financial venture is beside the point. The real question is whether this is something the Lord's True Church should be anxiously engaged with in the first place.

We seem to be letting go of the iron rod. It may be to our benefit to assess our direction and step back onto the proper path.

Oh brother, you open up an account just to carry on this debate? I'm not going to debate any more this matter other then it would seem that a lot of people tend to judge this development simply due to who owns it rather then going and seeing it in person for themselves. I'll edit out the dumb ass remark since I was out of line with the name calling. Another forum member warned us about what he said there was some anti Mormon remarks or something along those lines so I did got a bit fired up.
With that said welcome to the forum, lets don't get on the wrong foot here. Please know that everybody is welcome here.

I think City Creek Center will do just fine. IMHO.

[Comrade]

While this is not a religious forum, the LDS Church has inserted itself into development discussion and therefore, opened their faith to critiques. I see nothing wrong with having a rational, logical debate about the LDS Church and their properties - no more than I'd have a problem debating other developers and their properties downtown.

With that said, I think we've all posed similar concerns this article outlined, even before the mall opened. But it does seem there is an extreme here that won't allow forumers to address their concerns about this development lest they be called 'anti-Mormon'. To be fair, though, there are some here who simply attack because it's a LDS property - either way, I wish we could debate this topic reasonably ... and discuss the concerns.

For what it's worth, I've already said I'm thankful for the LDS Church investing in downtown. They're the only major corporation (err, religion - but you get my drift ... in this sense, they're acting as a corporation) who actually takes bold steps when it comes to developing downtown - beyond just the mall. I mentioned in a post a couple days ago that if it wasn't for the LDS Church, what would be the last residential high-rise built in Salt Lake City ... and would we even have potential high-rise units proposed?

So, I'm definitely concerned because I'm a cynic ... but I'm also optimistic - but mostly for the residential development and not necessarily the mall itself.

[Dallas Snob]

I agree wholeheartedly. Discussing development is one thing, but when it turns into debating the tenants of a religion, that moves beyond discussing the development itself. Why dont we openly find out the religion or beliefs of every person that develops something in SLC and start throwing stones at them too. Why shouldnt everyone be included in the fun!

While I understand that the LDS Church has great influence on the local development (why shouldnt it?), the FACT is that the LDS Church develops nothing except buildings of worship. City Creek was NOT funded with "sacred" tithing funds as the article writer mistakenly said, and he never answered the question regarding his other erroneous statements concerning stores/restaurants that did not leave. City Creek is a commercial venture paid for with funds from other commercial investments. While the LDS Church may have started the "arm" that oevrsees these types of ventures, it is my undersdtanding that it pays taxes just like a normal business would. The IRS ruled three years ago that religious institutions that have operations that DIRECTLY COMPETE with for-profit establishments MUST file taxes on those profits. This includes such things as gift shops, stores, restaurants, etc.

[T-Mac]

Here is the store that closed at City Creek Center and I don't think it was due to slow sales at the City Creek Center. According to the article, American Eagle was completely pulling this line and getting out of children's clothing all together. I haven't seen anyone leave yet who is paying their rent and I do see new stores opening.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/54398180-79/center-creek-ids-store.html.csp

[Just A Thought]

I just want to say that regardless of whomever it was that had the vision and resources to construct City Creek, it has been an extremely bold an worthwhile gamble that I suspect everyone in SLC, regardless of faith or political agenda, would like to see succeed.

As a side note, if I where a retailer at CC, I would be doing everything I could to encourage more residential options within in a 10 minute walk of CC. I work as a realtor in SLC and I am familiar with peoples home buying decision making processes. The condos that are directly on CC are perfect for many buyers wishing to move downtown, but not all. Many people would rather live within a 10 minute walk of CC in an equally luxury type of dwelling only in a little more of an 'urban' environment than City Creek and not quite so close to the Temple grounds. Wonderful as it is, it does lack a certain sense of edgy luxury urban. And before anyone starts mentioning the West gate lofts, the other thing many people require of downtown is more useful retail. Thats 'walk to' grocery stores, 'walk to' hardware stores, 'walk to' pet stores. Many people don't realize how big downtown is and Harmons is just to far away from much of it to walk to. "Why would anyone spend more money to live in downtown if they still have to drive everywhere" I hear that quit often.

[Orlando]

I just want to put my two cents in, and say that I agree with Comrade that I think it is relevant to discuss developers, in this case (the Mormon church), as it relates to development. I, also, think it was justified for Rock Waterman to defend himself, especially after Projects had used such a polarized comment about the article. I do think, however, that there is a fine line with this topic, because of the religious nature of the developer. I thought it was interesting to hear what Rock Waterman had to say. Though, it borders on being dangerously critical and outspoken for a member of the church, I think it's still interesting to hear that point of view. Despite whether it was appropriate or not for the church to develop City Creek Center, I sure hope it succeeds!! It would suck if it didn't. It would be an embarrassment for the church, and I wouldn't want that, since I am also a member of the church. Let's keep our discussions respectful and on topic.

[Orlando]

Originally Posted by Rock Waterman

I object to sacred Church funds being justified to build malls and hotels that the Lord did not command by revelation and that the members of His church did not approve as required by D&C 104:71.

I think you already know this, but "sacred Church funds", ie. tithing and fast offerings, were not used to build City Creek. Though, I believe I understand your point, that you believe the church should not have used any funds of any kind at all to build City Creek. And, I think you already understand that the LDS church's intent to build City Creek Center was to "protect the environs surrounding Temple Square". IMO, the best way to make a downtown or urban place better is to make it more desirable to live there.

[DMTower]

Originally Posted by T-Mac

Here is the store that closed at City Creek Center and I don't think it was due to slow sales at the City Creek Center. According to the article, American Eagle was completely pulling this line and getting out of children's clothing all together. I haven't seen anyone leave yet who is paying their rent and I do see new stores opening.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/54398180-79/center-creek-ids-store.html.csp

The store is also still there... it was just re-branded by the new owners. So no store actually closed.

[Future Mayor]

I asked my friend that is a manager at Nordstrom the following question. She was part of the opening staff.

How has business been at your store overall? Has it been as expected or better or worse than expected in almost the first year?

Her Answer;

We had a HUGE increase over our plan!! Nordstrom is doing great!!

Her reply, combined with no stores closing due to poor sales, only because the parent company shut an entire line down, and one fast food place not paying rent. LDS or not Rock appears to have his facts wrong.

I'm always leery of "unnamed sources" most of the time to me that simply means "no sources, just speculating"

[enemy87]

When I quoted your article, Rock Waterman, I left out all the religious parts of it for a reason. If you want to discuss your faith, leave it to the comments of your blog, not on this development forum. I agree with Future Mayor, speculation without factual basis or solid sources is just that: speculation.

[T-Mac]

Just throwing this out there as I am assuming that everyone already knows this but it seems to keep getting forgotten. The LDS Church does not own the mall portion of the City Creek Center.

[LookUpSLC]

I'm extremely happy that the Church invested $2b in it's downtown venture. I hope, like the rest of you on this board, that it is wildly successful, and from the comments like those from Future Mayor's Nordstrom connection, it just may be so.

But from day one, I've held the belief that retail in America--even in Utah, and even a block away from the temple--cannot survive on only one weekend shopping day. It could 50 years ago, when 2/3rds of the population spent Sundays either worshipping or putting in face time at places of worship or risk facing social criticism for not doing so.

The nation, and certain parts of Utah, are not like that any more. And the trend is we'll become more and more secular and less and less religious.

My prediction is that within 2-3 years, the Church will essentially LAND LEASE the property under city creek mall to someone for a 99 year timeframe, and step outside the day-to-day ownership of the land. Once this is done, whomever then "owns" the land can set their own restrictions on Sunday openings or not.

We'll see, but I think that's where the Church will ultimately have to go to make any mall management company want to stay and thrive.

[Future Mayor]

While I understand your perspective, I think they are going to be just fine with the closed on Sunday. Taubman never would have signed on if they didn't feel that it was a viable business plan long term, and the same with Nordstrom and Macy's.

I think CCC being closed on Sunday will actually benefit the surrounding areas like Main the south side of 100 S, Regent St, and even Gateway. Those living nearby, as well as those visiting will naturally want to find someplace to walk around and possibly shop as well as eat. With CCC being closed they will be forced to either do nothing or explore the other mentioned areas.

I don't ever see CCC being open on Sundays. IMO

[jedikermit]

Hey guys, this is somewhat off-topic...but probably not. I just finished a book called The Walkable City: How Downtown Can Save America, One Step at a Time, by Jeff Speck. It's about creating more walkable cities, and has some great advice on how to do it. It's also very very readable. I don't have the urban planning/design/architecture background that many of you do--I'm more a casual fan of planning. He gives ten steps that would promote walkability, and cites examples of how to revive downtowns.

The bad news: Salt Lake City is only mentioned twice in it, and both times as examples of problems that need to be fixed (our block size and wide streets) to make the city more amenable to pedestrians.

The good news: of his list of ten ideas, SLC is already doing most of them. There are a few things we could be doing better, but Mayor Becker and the city council seem to be heading in the right direction. Other parts of the Wasatch Front who are trying to develop or redevelop city centers would do well to read this book themselves.

Anyway. If you want to read my review of the book it's at the link up there--I picked it up at the library, so there are copies out there. Good read. I know many of you already have that planning background, so you may not need it, but I really enjoyed it.

$0.02

[Wasatch_One]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Her Answer;

We had a HUGE increase over our plan!! Nordstrom is doing great!!

I'm sure my wife has a lot to do with this...