Reader comments
Going underground — LDS Church asks to buy land under streets

Page:
1
2
Next >

Underground | 1:43 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

While they are at it, put tracks underground east of Energy Solutions and West of 200 East...

Sam Hofer | 6:47 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I know it's all been hashed over before, but wouldn't it be interesting if all this money had been used charitably?

Ken Baguley | 7:52 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Wow! I can't wait until the Rock says something about this...I'll bet he can't resist his internal impulses to put a quietus on this one. Even though this will keep traffic congestion and parking problems to a minimum

Comments continue below

Mark | 7:57 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Since I do not know what traffic is like in SLC it soud like a bad idea. What !!! you want traffic congestion? Houston took away part of Main Street for their light rail and business suffered. Especialy during the construction. The mayor did not seem to care.

Howard Tayler | 8:51 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Mark: This portion of SLC has two issues -- commerce has been moving away from it, and there are two massive convention centers there. Traffic is only part of the problem. Where to put the cars after people get out of them is just as serious.

Most major metropolitan areas "go vertical" with all kinds of things. I like thet fact that private capital is being used for this, because it means downtown development and revitalization is not coming at the taxpayer's expense.

Ken Baguley | 9:07 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

How is it that my comment can't be published??? All I was saying is that this will keep parking and traffic congestion at a minimum. But also predicting the Rock's quietus.

Ken Baguley | 9:15 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Great! This will keep traffic and parking congestion to a minimum...

Richard G. | 9:24 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I hope we are safe to assume rules will be imposed in secret regulating these median ramps so that no one's tender eyes or ears will be exposed to gum chewing, protesting, gay hand-holding, pamphleteering (LDS missionaries excepted), tatoo displaying, talking too loud or any other behavior deemed offensive by the majority, who, after all, made Utah the democratic Eden it is today. And if you don't like it you can leave.

Matt | 9:53 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I agree with Mark about the affect this could have on traffic and small businesses. Having recently moved from a city where light rail is going up (Phoenix), I can personally attest to the extremely negative effect construction has on local businesses. However, this seems like a much smaller project, in an area with few small mom and pop companies--the kind that would be truly and irreversibly affected for the worse by this. Even if there were, Temple Square (the largest tourist attraction in Utah) is still nearby to ensure that all small businesses would have a steady flow of interested tourists and visitors.

I say go for it.

Paul P | 9:55 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Richard G. It is their money, they can do as they wish. When you invest $1 billion plus into something you can make your own rules.

grundle | 10:13 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Sam Hofer,

The LDS church's expenditure on welfare and charitable giving massively eclipes what they have spent on downtown revitalization. The Church can do these revitalizations because of it many business investments and income.

Because of the charitable opportunities afforded every member, the LDS church's programs for the needy, indigent, unemployed, and under-employed are vast and extremely active. They are under publicized and perhaps that is the reason you ask this question.

There is much critsism leveled at the LDS Church most of it is done in ignorance and the fact that it is an easy target.

I have been involved at a very "rubber meets the road" level with the charitable arm of the church and I am still amazed at how much is done to assist not only far away needs but the needs of the people right here in our own community. Many of our local assistance programs would be far less effective than they are without the support of the LDS Church.

Thanks for asking!

JP | 10:34 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

The Church should stay inside Temple Square. I don't want my city developed by a church, especially the LDS Church. Let them give the money to the city if the city wants to put in subsurface parking.

ron | 10:57 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Thanks grundle, I couldn't have said it better.

Hello! | 11:15 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Dear Sam: Yes it has been discussed many times. Apparently it is not interesting to you, or you simply do not care, but much of what is going on downtown with the Church making the area beautiful and useful is to protect the integrity of Temple Square. With 5 million people going in and out of Temple Square it needs to be protected from what happens to many cities, inner city collapse. President Hinckley has made that fairly clear before. Having served as a senior missionary at Temple Square it is a very special place and one which has a special place for the Church and the millions of visitors. Daily visitors commented to me how beautiful it is and they are glad to hear that the Church is investing to keep it a vitally beautiful area.

You may want to visit the Humanitarian center and Welfare Square to get a better picture of how much the Church does do for humanitarian good. This doesn't even count the amount of money the local wards contribute through fast offering and is used locally. Yes, they will present the doctrine of the Church in both of these places, but it is up to you what you do with this doctrine.

It seems that some of you would rather have monstrous parking structures, rather than the structures underground and easy access to these structures without closing down many streets.

Larry | 11:18 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

It is amazing to me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints does so much good for so many, even those who are not Mormons,just ask who funded most of the renovation cost of the Cathedral of the Madaline a few years ago,to mention only one. And we still have tose people who are so hateful that, if the Church found a cure for cancer and offered it to them, they would refuse the help out of spite. Ask yourself, do say these nasty things because I believe them or because I'm a hateful person who cannot ever look for the good in anything. p.s. Glad you're not my neighbor.

Ridiculous | 11:29 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

What is preventing the LDS Church from buying the entire city piece-by-piece?

RE: JP | 11:38 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Not to burst your bubble, but this isn't your city. Also, I hate to break it to you but SLC was pretty much a result of the LDS church...I could care less what the church does with this project, but have some sense man. Also, what do you mean the church should stay inside temple square? I think you should stay inside your house with no access to the internet.

mrobison | 11:39 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Grumble, grumble, grumble...

Any of you who are taking the Church to task for this development will be hypocrites the day you set foot on the City Creek complex, now won't you?

RE: Larry | 11:47 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

How do you know I am not your neighbor?

Ethan | 11:51 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

JP, before calling it 'your city,' you ought to consider who founded SLC in the first place. The church has much more to do with this area than just a couple of blocks downtown.

Obvious | 11:57 a.m. Sept. 5, 2007

to the who was here first comment - The Native American's were here first

Anonymous | 12:08 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

JP
PRETTY SMALL THINKING

stressedmommy | 12:16 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Rocky and the city council has spent years shouting we need to clean up downtown and bring in new business and things like that. Dispite the trouble with Rocky and the LDS church the church has stepped up to say they will help. They honestly didn't have to do that. They are doing this for many reasons, dispite those reason they are willing to clean it up. I don't see any one else stepping up to say I will help clean up downtown. So let them build underground. Many cities in the US build underground. If they are willing to help and spend their money to do it go for it!

JamieLB | 12:23 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Very well said Grundle. For those handful of people who are in opposition of the City Creek project, it will be interesting to find many of them ENJOYING IT when it has been completed. If such individuals believe that at some future point in time THAT might occurr, not because of coercive circumstance, but because they really do find that it is (or will be)a beautiful addition to everything (including the additional renovation to the parking structures, ramps, etc.); they should try to be a proponent to its cause. In other words if you think that you are going to partake of the fruit at some future time then help cultivate it now!

NorthboundZax | 12:25 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Ummmm...grundle, that isn't actually the case. Gordon B. Hinckley noted church's charitible giving on the order of $500M over the previous ten years. The downtown projects are estimated at $1-2B, significantly larger than the charitible giving number, even if compressed into the same time scale.

That aside, this project seems like a great idea for SLC that they should be happy to jump on. A significant addition to underground parking in the city center financed by private funds. Sure there will be some construction snafus, but there always will be when one is concerned about the infrastructure. This looks like a good improvement all around to the downtown. It's hard to see any downside for the city other than those that come with any infrastructural improvements.

Workerbee | 12:30 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I just hope that my building I work in will not collapse due to all the underground 1 rider vehicle parking.

Tage | 12:37 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

To claim that the underground parking lots, to be developed by the LDS church, is improper just because the church is doing it, is bigoted and shortsighted. The church has just as much right to develop as does any other business or individual. Even though bigotry exists through out the land, there really is no place for it here or any where else the this great country of ours.

jfs | 12:42 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Which native americans, the ones who ran off the fremont natives, the clovis people? Who was the first to replace the puddle they call Lake Bonneville?

utahkeith | 12:50 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

The LDS developement group is trying to modernize the city to bring it to the "frontier" of technology among modern cities. Nobodies building is going to cave in with the church in charge of it, if anything it is safer! Why all the naysayers? Do you know what this will do for Salt Lake City? Do you people have a clue? We will be one of the most advanced cities in the nation! Here is everyone crying about it and a mayor whining about it and trying to put the brakes on it at every turn! Open your eyes people, who is really at work here in opposition to what the church is trying to do to revitalize the downtown area? The truth could smack you right in the face in black and white and 90% of the people wouldn't realize it. There are only two real forces, Good vs Evil, God & Satan, Light & Dark, or whatever you want to call it. The Ying and the Yang, it all adds up to the same thing, so stop, take it in, and soak up the "Feeling", your heart will truly tell you in the end.

NorthboundZax | 1:05 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Take a deep breath, utahkeith. Discussion over whether the city should allow the church to build a large underground parking lot is hardly a battle between the forces of good & evil. There may be a lot of different economic and social tensions at work, but it is over the top to claim that not building this underground structure is a victory for Voldemort.

MoJules | 1:08 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I have moved away from Utah, and lived in Southern Utah the last eight years I was in Utah, I did see some of the changes up north and it was so clean and inviting. My question is, who cares who flips the bill? I live close to Downtown St. Louis, and the Catholic church is the predominate church in this area, but they are not flipping any bills to build up the area and improve it. The burden is on the citizens and private donations, and there is a lot of work to be done. Sadly the Catholic church is having to close down many of their schools and churches, they do not have the money in this area, from my observation to help out the community. The LDS church has so many resources and also different areas of interest and the charity and the business are totally different, the charity is from donations from the members and they designate where they want that to go. The church had a plane loaded with supplies and was there in Peru after the earthquake, they respond to all the major disasters. But in a totally unrelated area is the business end and I know that they are very capable in what they do. Oh, if the Catholic Church were to put in a reflecting pond in this area, I would respect their request of certain things not happening there, and like the LDS church, I do not think that they would be making anyone say their prayers or sing their hymns or practice or believe what they do, they would just ask for respect. I liked Utah and I left, miss many things there, but for those of you who have commented, that hate Utah, leave.

Rocky Anderson | 1:24 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Perhaps they could put the skybridge underground?

spencer | 1:38 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

no because it would no longer be a skybridge it would be a tunnel. DUH!

Tia | 1:40 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Hmm...no taxpayer's money will be used.

I've heard that somewhere before...could it have been the Olympics? With the buildings, roads, light rail....and afterwards we were in debt, with a few empty buildings to gawk at.

Let's just hope this doesn't happen again.

Jon | 1:58 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I've worn shorts to temple square exposing my tattoos and i was never run off...

I'm rather happy they banned smoking...I can go somewhere and breath fresh...I can sit and relax and not worry about being bothered (as in pested by kids or panhandlers) I hope they do it to all downtown, it might actually get me to come back.

Then having a place to park - that just sweetens the deal.

MarkS | 2:05 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Tia, help me understand who got in debt. The Olympic Committee? No. The State? No. The City? No. The Federal Government? Maybe, they did throw in millions on light rail and I-15. Give me some data that shows anyone was more in debt in Utah after the Olympics.

Northz, I wonder if the 500M figure was only humanitarian efforts--stuff the LDS church sends out when there's a hurricane, earthquakes, and literacy/wells/healthcare assistance, since that amount doesn't seem large enough to even cover fast offerings, which go to individuals in local communities that are down on their luck, for food/rent/utilities etc.

SLC gal | 3:01 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I'm not sure I like what's going on downtown. I am a member of the LDS church, but I'm actually kind of steamed about the way they handled the closures of Crossroads, and ZCMI (does anyone realize ZCMI was being gutted out and Deseret Book was STILL there???? Talk about trying to kill it!) As for the parking, wait and see...

Tia | 3:01 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Well since I have limited internet time at work I can't pull up the figures at this moment, but don't you remember the countless articles that ran in both the desnews and the trib about how we came out in the negative after the 2002 Olympics? The only city to ever stay in the positive was L.A. We are no different than the rest of the world that hosted the games. They say the only way to make any kind of profit is to host them a second time, when the facilities are already available.

Richard G. | 3:09 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Thanks to all of you who rose to the bait I hurled.

Wake me when the Mormon Vatican is finished, sometime around 2010 when everybody in downtown has moved elsewhere, like beautiful downtown Murray.

NorthboundZax | 3:39 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

MarkS, the public is not privy to what the 500M number includes or where it comes from, so your question quickly takes us into the realm of speculation. However, given that fast offerings are really members giving to members with the church simply acting as executor, it seems that fast offerings shouldn't be counted in that number. The truer measure of charitible giving of an organization would be what comes out of the discretionary funds.

Ned | 3:50 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

No, Tia, I don't remember those countless articles. Actually, all the articles I read in several papers both local and national all expressed amazement at how Utahns had turned out in record volunteer numbers and pulled of one of the few profitable Olympic games in history. So much so that SLOC paid the city back all it had invested and more.

Richard G. sorry, apparently you missed the bulletin. The LDS church has owned the ZCMI center mall for many a year before they added the crossroads mall to fix up. In all that time, they have never regulated it so that tender eyes or ears were not exposed to gum chewing, protesting, gay hand-holding, pamphleteering (by pro or anti LDS), tattoo displaying, talking too loud or any other behavior deemed offensive by the majority. No, they have only asked that their standards be observed on those properties that they deem sacred, namely properties that they use for actual worship and church administration. They do differentiate between ecclesiastical and commercial. But that has never been secret. They were very open in expressing their hope that others would respect their standards during the main street issue, and were willing to let the easement stand. But since people deliberately sought opportunity to cross those lines (I was with a wedding party as hecklers and protesters belittled, disrupted, and went out of their way to offend), the church understandably sought ways to contain the situation. So they bought a road between two city blocks. You may pass through it or stop and enjoy the serene beauty. They just ask that you show a little courtesy. You are free to pursue such behavior as you complain is curtailed anywhere else in the valley, including the church-owned malls and their median ramps.

TIA | 4:24 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Why are you blogging on your job? Aren't you suppossed to be working?
Hopefully the facts you work with at your work are more accurate than what you are dispelling here......

Tia | 5:31 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

Wow, people get mean and bitter on this site. I said I have LIMITED internet time, i.e. I was on my lunch. And the facts are real, just look it up yourselves you lazy people.

Cari | 5:31 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

SLC gal, Why do you care about the Deseret Book in ZCMI? Don't you realize that that book store is in a lot of different locations? The Malls needed to be gutted and redone! Downtown has been looking sad the past couple years after Gateway mall opened. I think this Citycreek development is a great idea and will bring a lot of buisness back to downtown.

Tia was right | 5:37 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I found lots of stuff online, look it up.

Straight from a SLOC member:

"Kelner said up to 60 million dollars in public debt had been piled up in direct costs while "many millions" more were going towards infrastructure projects related to hosting the Games.

"They claim we've broken even," says Kelner of the Salt Lake Organizing Committee. "But you very seldom see a full accounting of how much the public pays so a few private individuals can get wealth and prestige by putting on the Olympics."

---------------------------------------------------

even before the games:

"This is how the figures stack up: the Games will cost $1.5 billion to stage and SLOC is still $250 million short; the bribery scandal makes new sponsorship harder to come by and old sponsors are talking about jumping ship. There are four investigations into the scandal under way and if they were to uncover further misdemeanours - to verify the call-girls story, for instance - then SLOC would be finished.

Who pays the debt? The city council, probably mindful of the financial disaster that hit Montreal after the 1976 Olympics, once signed a contract indemnifying them from any debt. They are now told that this is unconstitutional, so it seems they pay."

--------------------------------------------------

Thanks Tia for pointing this out.

beautifulmotherdear | 5:40 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

I live on the east coast near a large, crowded, dirty, noisy, impossible-to-park-in city. I enjoy reading the comments posted by people in the wide open spaces of Salt Lake City. It seems like you might want to keep the spaces wide open. Underground parking sounds like a winner!

Onan Dingus | 6:03 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

You silly utah people are fun to watch. You argue and bicker about a corporation that is nary a blip on the radar of the world, but to you guys it's a big deal. So what if this real estate arm...i mean church wants to spend it's money on more underground parking? big deal! Let it spend itself into oblivion is my thought.

Gretzky | 6:05 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

this is a great idea! since the LDS church owned it all to begin with way back when. anything to decrease traffice congestion and increase overall esthetics including the airspace walkway are welcome additions to the city that showcases the state of Utah so nicely. the only thing i am hoping that happens as well is that a downtown ice rink gets put in just like Times Square in NYC. outstanding!!! Go Cougars!!! Go Utes!!!

Larry | 8:06 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

The project makes since for SLC and the LDS Church for all the right reasons. Both economic and faith based. To have any private organization willing to step up with its own funds to help revitalize a downtown City area is refreshing. I would gladly support any fund raising to help my City. This is not to say that agencies don't need to monitor the process going forward.

Henry Vander Veur | 8:38 p.m. Sept. 5, 2007

THE CHURCH DOES NOTHING BUT GOOOOOOOOD FOR UTAH!!!

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.