Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 3

[gusam26]

Originally Posted by Future Mayor

Her Answer;

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

Her reply

I have some friends and a sister that are managers at ccc nordstrom and they say the store is doing okay, my sister and friends were relocated from southern california stores and how it seems is that the Utah shopper is quite cheap the departments that are doing well are the ones that have clothing that is at a price range like forever 21 and h&m and some departments that are more pricey are scheduled to close. also wasn't johny rockets opening in the fall of 2012 its seems thats a no go!

[Rock Waterman]

Wasatch One and SLC Projects, thanks for the kind words of welcome.

SLC Projects, I did not open up an account just to carry on this debate, although I felt your accusation that I did not know my way around Salt Lake was deserving of a rebuttal. I'm not normally inclined to inject myself into the middle of a conversation among strangers. But I admit I felt my ears burning, so as long as I was being discussed, felt it only proper to correct the misconceptions tossed out about me.

My other reason for registering here is that I am very much in favor of seeing viable development take place in Salt Lake City, so when a reader at "Pure Mormonism" informed me of the existence of this forum, my interest was piqued. I admit my heart skipped a beat at the sight of the renderings posted by Derrick SLC of some possible improvements by 2020. I also liked the photos provided by DCRes. I can really get into this, because, as I said before, Salt Lake is where my wife and I consider our real home.

I am not a pessimist; I'm an outspoken free market Capitalist, so I am certainly not opposed to growth. But I also don't believe that criticizing the source of funding for City Creek is off limits. I am all for investing using Other People's Money, but in this case the people who that money belonged to were not given the opportunity to authorize its use for this purpose.

I agree that approaching the question on religious grounds belongs elsewhere; after all, I do have my own forum for that. But in my defense, I don't think I argued religion here, other than to establish my bona fides which had been questioned by others. That having been said, I seem to be in the minority here in my opinion that City Creek Center may turn out to be an embarrassing failure. I hope it does not, but I fear it may.

I have some basis for my skepticism over such a development during these difficult economic times. Here in Sacramento, a massive downtown redevelopment was rolled out a few years ago to great fanfare. Downtown needed such a shot in the arm. Just as in Salt Lake, Downtown Sacramento was going to seed. So entire city blocks were demolished to make way for this shiny new attraction that was sure to breathe new life into the area.

In the meantime, in the part of the city where I lived, the mall I and my family used to frequent lost first one of its anchors, then tenant after tenant until eventually the whole thing went empty and was demolished. The lot sat vacant for a couple of years, and is now home to a thriving Walmart. That Walmart is surrounded by an open air shopping center that is also doing well, suggesting that the public's preference for shopping has evolved past the once successful paradigm of an closed pedestrian mall.

Sacramento is a government town with no shortage of money trickling down from politicians and lobbyists, so there was a lot of optimism initially among the high end retailers who inhabited the new Downtown Plaza. Today that mall is pocked with empty stores, and the idea of razing the whole thing is being seriously considered. There is no one left who believes the mall can be reinvigorated. The latest proposal -and it is being seriously considered- is to build a new basketball stadium on that site in hopes of persuading the Sacramento Kings to stay in Sacramento.

Apparently, most residents are a lot like me. After an initial few visits to Downtown Plaza, it just never seemed worth the bother to battle downtown traffic, park in an underground garage, then take the elevator upstairs just to pick up the few things I needed. From what I have been reading about malls in general, these days shoppers now prefer to pull up, get in, and get out rather than dedicate a large chunk of time wandering a mall. City Creek may prove an exception to this trend, but I have my doubts.

I happen to be a scion of the founder of Waterman Realty and Investments of Anaheim, California; and I grew up watching my beloved downtown die a slow and embarrassing death throughout most of my school years. All attempts to revive downtown Anaheim proved futile, and eventually my Father's assets were so overinvested that by the recession of 1982, the family financial empire was kaput. So I tend to be less optimistic than others when I see a lot of money poured into reviving any downtown when the market has already spoken.

That's why my experiences and observations prompt me to cast a jaundiced eye toward this particular "investment" called City Creek Center.

All that aside, I am inclined to agree with Comrade Reynolds, who wrote that "since the LDS Church has inserted itself into this development, they have therefore opened their faith to critiques."

Except I don't think this has anything to do with the faith. This move, which I maintained was "boneheaded" on purely economic grounds, has nothing to do with the religion of Mormonism. So it makes little sense to suggest that anyone casting doubts on the viability of this investment is questioning his religious faith or the religious beliefs of others.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by Rock Waterman

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.

Since you know so much about the church and Utah, you'll know the church didn't spend any "sacred Church funds," i.e. tithes, to build CCC. They used business profits to do so. This is a business transaction, not revelation from God.

EDIT:
"No tithing funds will be used in the redevelopment."
—Dec. 2006, Ensign, LDS publication

"Money for the project is not coming from LDS Church members' tithing donations. City Creek Center is being developed by Property Reserve Inc., the church's real-estate development arm, and its money comes from other real-estate ventures."
—Doug Smeath, "Downtown renovation project", Deseret News March 27, 2007.

"The entire project is being financed through the church's commercial real estate arm, Property Reserve, Inc. These funds come through for-profit, tax-paying businesses owned by the Church."
—FairMormon.org

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by LookUpSLC

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.

The church already leased the mall to Taubman before it ever opened, but the lease stipulates it be closed on Sunday.

[Sight-Seer]

DCRes, we have the same dentist. I've seen that view lots of times.

Now a comment on the Christmas season downtown. I generally can't stand enclosed malls and the Christmas merchandising push leaves me cold. However Christmas at CCC was in a whole different league in Salt Lake. The decorations and the atmosphere and the live entertainment was something we've never seen in this state before. Being a small-town boy I don't get around much, but I've spent some time in Denver and San Francisco and the holidays downtown resembled a much bigger city. I haven't done much shopping there except for Harmons. If there were a nice bookstore or maybe a music store I'd have more a reason to go there. I'm afraid others will have to support the high-end stores there because I can't afford them.

[DCRes]

Originally Posted by Sight-Seer

DCRes, we have the same dentist. I've seen that view lots of times.

Then you're probably like me and try to get there a little early to look through the book of SLC Past and Present (not sure what it's actually called) they have in their waiting room

[delts145]

Stenar, I love those times when you boldly state the facts, which totally unravels specific drivel in certain little discussions. In this case, regarding a couple of the postings dealing with the CCC development.

There are some huge differences between Salt Lake City's CCC and Sacramento's CBD retail iniatives. For one, the quality and planning are not even in the same Universe. Infact, if I were to pick a dozen of the top retail developments between New York and L.A., which I have visited or do visit regularly, the quality and planning of CCC would easily be in the top spot. Los Angeles is a huge market, and has numerous high end centers that outshine anything in Sacramento. However, even the more perfected upscale centers, such as The Grove, The Americana, or the recently completed remake of Century City Center, are not nearly as thrilling as Salt Lake's CCC. As a whole CCC is a marvel!

Briefly, allow me to explain to those such as Mr. Waterman why so many of Salt Lake's CBD projects of recent decades are of such high quality. Because of being an assistant to an executive in the past few years, when I was in Utah, I've seen this first hand on numerous occasions. It involved a gentleman, who was an executive of the LDS Church by occupation. His reponsibility was in overseeing donations/funds for a wide range of LDS Church related properties and developments.

First, there are many on this forum that if money were not an object, would give generously to the beauty and development of Downtown Salt Lake. For example, a beautiful fountain or water works of some variety. Perhaps, an amazing park, where once there was nothing but black top. Maybe the restoration of a beautiful old building and it's facade. Perhaps, very ornamental features, such as vintage lamps, or sculptures throughout, or that extra level of high quality in pavers and stone finishes, extra trees and beautiful floral plantings.

Now, I personally know for a fact that there are many many generous people who upon condition of complete anonyminity give regularly to the LDS Church for specifically targeted projects. Often, the donor will notice a need and request that the donation be specifically targeted to that project. I have seen this occur often with the Univ. of Utah, with UVU, BYU, and Downtown Salt lake, especially LDS related and or owned projects.

For example, wouldn't we all love it if many of you were suddenly worth hundreds of millions or perhaps a few billion dollars. Is there any doubt that some of your generosity would not go to a few dream projects in Downtown Salt Lake? Sure, there would be the development projects that must pencil out. However, many of Salt Lake's bells and whistles, those little extra touches that have become so common in the CBD exist because of the pure love of building the hometown by dreamers who have the means to give generously.

Much of the unsurpassed quality and beauty of Downtown Salt Lakes Temple Square Campus and surounding blocks, including CCC, is as a result of the quiet generosity from LDS members, and guess what (wealthy Non-LDS donors). Infact, we will see a beautiful transformation to those parking lots on South Temple, between West Temple and 300 West in the future. Much of the high quality of that transformation will be because of the generosity of individual donors.

World class developments, such as details within CCC, Rio Tinto Museum, O.C.Tanner's Flagship Store, The LDS Conference Center and History Library, Numerous parks and elaborate water features, the U. of U.'s phenomenal buildup, etc., etc. Often we will never know who gave what and how much. The source of monies pouring into the better than average quality of many of these projects is often not a name given out publicly.

On a side note... Watch the elaborate tranformation and beautification, which is coming for BYU's grounds right now. Some would resent that the LDS Church would seem to spend so much money on improving it's Campus. But who are we to sneer or cast a jaundice eye at those who so quietly request to contribute so generously to such projects? Some might even question the wisdon of putting so much investment in the resurrection of an old burnt out tabernacle in Downtown Provo. Transforming it into a campus of great beauty and usefullness, but at a high price tag. I imagine when the time comes in the near future to transform the Downtown South Temple parking lots, there will be those that shake their heads in disbelief. I for one might not be able to afford to give millions to the future of Salt Lake's beauty, but I want to thank those who can and do. I am grateful that these generous, anonymous people would share so much of their personal wealth, in order to create an ambiance that can be absorbed and enjoyed by many such as myself.

[Sight-Seer]

delts145, it sounds like you know something about South Temple. That usually means there is a non-disclosure agreement of some sort.

[Stenar]

Thanks, delts145.

Interesting info. I have heard and read in the past about how the church receives lots of donations for various projects.

Didn't some individual offer to pay to rebuild the Nauvoo Temple (before it was actually done), but the church rejected that because they didn't want it paid for by one individual?

I am very much looking forward to the church developing their educational campuses downtown. I hope they have some sort of retail fronting the street, though, that would be useful to the students, but also to pedestrians and others in the city.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Stenar

I think you have me confused with someone else. I didn't compare SLC to Sacramento, that was Rock Waterman.

Whenever I post something in this forum, I research online to make sure my recollection of something I'd previously read is accurate.

I was referring to your post #2423.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by delts145

I was referring to your post #2423.

Yup, my bad. I realized that right after I posted that and deleted the post you have just quoted, but not fast enough for you to not quote it.

[TinMan4L]

Anyone know what's gonna happen to the Sears space at fashion place?

[DerrickSLC]

What’s next at UTA? More frequent service, and yet more building
Transit » The building blitz will slow for foreseeable future, with focus on gradually increasing service.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/55740829-90/bus-com-lake-projects.html.csp



"UTA found demand for the FrontRunner commuter train is higher than expected after its new extension from Salt Lake City to Provo opened. So it announced this week it is adding trains during peak hours and doubling the window when trains are available to every 30 minutes instead of every hour." In addition to the new Provo-SLC FrontRunner expansion, the SLC Airport TRAX line opens this April. Construction of the Sugarhouse Streetcar Phase-1 has started and plans are in the works for the Downtown Salt Lake City Streetcar.

It is encouraging to see such expansion of transit along the Wasatch Front and even more, the large numbers of people that are using it. Increased transit options take cars off the road, reduce emissions and improve air, while saving people money on gas and expense of car maintenance. Transit gives one the option of not needing to use a car for every trip or not even needing a car. Imagine what the streetcar will do for Downtown Salt Lake City, helping connect the west end of downtown to the east end of downtown. Imagine having a transit option within two blocks of every direction.

While talking about transit, a recent comment was made about someone not wanting to spend more money on housing in downtown because you still have to drive everywhere. That's an attitude that has to change and it's inaccurate. As a downtown resident, having the opportunity to walk places and not having to drive everywhere is the exact benefit of living downtown.

Yes, there are some gaps in development but its surprising just how far one person can actually walk. You can end up walking miles some late, late nights. It's more challenging during the winter but the warmer spring, summer and fall months you see a large amount of people walking downtown. It's likely you'll drive to the grocery store. But Harmon's, Whole Foods, Trader Joes, and Sprouts are within a few minute’s drive. Smith's is also "downtown" and in the avenues. It's a different experience living in/near downtown than the rest of the valley, where a car is a necessary source to get from point A to point B.

Living closer to where one works or by utilizing transit such as buses, TRAX, and FrontRunner is a healthier alternative to driving, as it removes the stress, irritability and road rage that can occur in daily traffic and commutes. The more amount of time spent out a car is more time to be with family, friends, or to just be alone with yourself.

Thinking the next topic of discussion should be downtown pedestrian and bicycle safety. It's a serious issue that seems to continually get overlooked. I've seen a couple people get hit or nearly hit, personally been almost been hit a number and had a friend/former co-worker killed while walking to work in December of 2012. The speed limits downtown are blatantly ignored and drivers are more interested in getting from A to B then with pedestrians, bicyclists, and the surrounding environment. This needs to change and it needs to change now.

Spring is around the corner. It's the time the city comes back to life, and many more people are walking downtown and many more people are riding bicycles downtown. We need a more effective system where mid-block crossings and crosswalks don't put someone's life in harm’s way. Look forward to seeing what creative ideas and possible actions can better promote pedestrian, bicycle, and auto safety in downtown. I'm actively pursuing such a campaign and it’d be nice to have some GOOD input.

[delts145]

Speaking of the transit building blitz. I caught a Steve Forbes and company panel yesterday discussing the decay of America's transit infrastructure. Much of the discussion was regarding the current failures due to over regulation and union over reach, etc. What really caught my ear was when one of the panelists held Salt Lake City and Metro up as the shining city on the hill. Basically, "look at SLC, mega growth, low unemployment, and outstanding infrastructure investment." Immediately, Steve Forbes and the other six or so panelists laughed and chimed in that Salt lake City was such because of lower taxes, less union over reach, and less burdensome, nonsensical regulation. Also, it was interesting to me that they were all so quick to respond, all were very aware of SLC, and both very separate sides of the aisle seemed to agree that SLC was an excellent model of what should be done.

[farmerboy]

Originally Posted by delts145

Speaking of the transit building blitz. I caught a Steve Forbes and company panel yesterday discussing the decay of America's transit infrastructure. Much of the discussion was regarding the current failures due to over regulation and union over reach, etc. What really caught my ear was when one of the panelists held Salt Lake City and Metro up as the shining city on the hill. Basically, "look at SLC, mega growth, low unemployment, and outstanding infrastructure investment." Immediately, Steve Forbes and the other six or so panelists laughed and chimed in that Salt lake City was such because of lower taxes, less union over reach, and less burdensome, nonsensical regulation. Also, it was interesting to me that they were all so quick to respond, all were very aware of SLC, and both very separate sides of the aisle seemed to agree that SLC was an excellent model of what should be done.

Interesting Delts, I'm curious why they think Unions caused the decay of America's transit infrastructure? It would seem to me the decay of our transit systems was due to our governments preference for investing in Automobile vs Transit Infrastructures. How did they come to the conclusion that unions are to blame for this lack of investment?

I always have a hard time swallowing what multi-millionaires are trying to feed me when they're complaining that blue collar workers demanding to be paid a decent wage are the cause of all of our societies ills.

[Comrade]

Because it's Steve Forbes.

The infrastructural in America is eroding because we don't fund it. The federal government doesn't advocate for massive structural programs like they have in the past - you know, like the creation of the interstate system under Pres. Eisenhower. It has nothing to do with over-regulation and everything to do with a federal government that would rather spend billions of dollars overseas building communities in Iraq and Afghanistan and penny-pinch at home. You could remove every regulation and do away with the unions and it's not going to change a damn thing.

Utah is a 'shining city on the hill' (namely Salt Lake County, really) because we advocate for whatever scarce federal dollars there are and aren't afraid to increase taxes to spend on our public transit. Many states don't do that - or try and are pushed back by anti-tax advocates who don't support using public monies to fund these types of projects.

Here is an article from last year out of Indianpolis that shows what I'm talking about:

A major problem, though, for many Republicans is that so many of them have signed the Grover Norquist pledge to never raise taxes, and that pledge is interpreted to also include voter referendums for them to raise their own taxes.

What kind of bullshit is that?

Thank goodness Salt Lake County and Utah didn't operate under that pledge when they pushed through tax increases to help fund this project ... or it would've never happened.

In that regard, Salt Lake, and Utah, is fairly progressive. They understand that, you know, to have decent roads and strong public transit, you need to potentially raise taxes to help pay for it. Unfortunately, many cities, especially those cities in very conservative anti-tax states, don't operate under that same assumption and that leaves them with a depleted public transportation system because it has zero funding.

Ideally, we'd have a federal government that stepped in and advanced much of mass-transit building throughout major areas of the U.S. (including a high-speed rail system linking major cities). But that's not going to happen because so many have been conditioned to believe any federal spending is bad - and any local tax increase is worse.

[scottharding]

Very well said, Comrade. You summed up nicely what I was thinking as I read the past few posts.

The way Utah has backed it's mass-transit system, and the way it's been embraced by the public (for the most part) is one thing I'm very proud of about Utah. I really think that in 20 years, the Wasatch Front transit will be all the more recognized as a model system.

[John Martin]

Originally Posted by Comrade Reynolds

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.

The guy who wrote the article about City Creek is a fundamentalist. His premise is basically that City Creek is on a road to failure because it was developed by an apostate group.

I don't consider it an extreme to consider that type of stuff to be pretty off-the-wall. It's just pure religious bias that has no grounding in fact or objective analysis. It would be akin to me saying City Creek was developed by the LDS church and thus cannot possibly fail. Maybe for entertainment's sake that type of content could belong on a development forum... but I think we can do better than that.

[SLC Projects]

What do you guys think of UTOPIA? My wife and I are thinking about getting it for our home.

[Viperlord]

http://www.slenterprise.com/#top_stories_anchor

An article in the SL enterprise today:

http://clearwaterhomesutah.com/

SLC company to bring nearly 70 new urban style dwelling units to SLC.


After looking at the renderings....It looks to be the westgate office building on 300 west 200 south that they are turning into lofts.

Also, according to Clearwaterhome's website they are doing the Telegraph Exchange Building at 847 S. 800 East, and finishing up the Broadway park loft's south tower across from pioneer park.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/55278844-79/lofts-park-project-south.html.csp

Seems to me they are serious about bringing urban residential to downtown.