Deseret News | Reader comments: Curtain goes up on Sandy project

Reader comments
Curtain goes up on Sandy project

Observer | 7:02 a.m. April 2, 2008

Not to be pessimistic, but does anyone remember the grand Triad Center? Shopping, ice rink office space, condos etc. This smells like another Triad. Build one part then the developers pull out and the City will be left with a white elephant. Oh lets not forget a new DRA property from whatï¿½s left.

At least with City Creek Center you know it will be completed.

Tom Dolan is a dreamer | 7:49 a.m. April 2, 2008

Yes I remember the Grand plans for the Triad Center, it too included an ice rink. This project is a pipe dream and it will never happen. Tom Dolan doesnt realize that you can't simply create an urban environment on a suburban infastructure. My question is how do people get here and where do they all park. Traffic and Parking are already stretching the infastructure to near the bursting point, even with the expansion and improvements to State St.

It won't happen.

JCH | 7:52 a.m. April 2, 2008

Quite an addition, indeed, Tom Dolan.

The happy motoring to Sandy will never die!!! Of course, when gas hits $5/gallon, these South Valley drones might be less-inclined to stock the Escalade with kiddies, just for a march around Sandy's latest idiotic "development."

What a ridiculous joke.

See all those pictures? Now, eliminate the people, cuz it's too cold in winter and too hot in summer to sit/parade/mill about where they're located.

Okay, what you're left with is a wind-swept soviet-style plaza, empty arcade of crappy shops, and three nightmarish (probably vacant) towers, doubtless surrounded by oceans of parking.

That the DesNes reprints this nonsense, straight from the unedited press release sent via the glistening suburban offices of whichever Californian "development" firm is behind this crock, speaks poorly of the state of journalism in Utah.

Comments continue below

Jeff | 8:12 a.m. April 2, 2008

We've had some dumb names recently. First there was Aspen, Utah. Now The Proscenium. I know what a "proscenium" is but how does it apply to a commercial development. It's too early to tell if there is any chance of success for this project, but I know the name is wrong. Maybe you could call the theatre that, not the whole project.

Michael | 8:20 a.m. April 2, 2008

A 30 foot tower doesn't sound that impressive to me?

green mormon architect | 9:19 a.m. April 2, 2008

The entire development is very cartoonish looking. Also if Sandy wants to kill downtown, they are on the right path.

error | 9:39 a.m. April 2, 2008

the towers will be 30+ floors, not feet. Why is everyone so negative about a project that a private developer wants to build? Why can't our state be excited that it's growing? And to the person who says Sandy is killing Salt Lake...since when has SLC been alive?

Lola | 9:57 a.m. April 2, 2008

Tom Dolan is not building this, unless he quit his job and became a developer overnight. This is a private project with private funds. Why all the Sandy hate? I'm far more excited about finally getting a theater that Salt LAke City has been either unwilling or unable to build.

OiS | 10:09 a.m. April 2, 2008

All of the Sandy-haters are just jealous that this project looks to be infinitely cooler than the Gateway or anything else going on in their own neighborhoods.

The Proscenium will be a success, and it will be another feather in Tom Dolan's cap.

Don't hate on Sandy because your own city couldn't do this.

Theatre Goer | 10:49 a.m. April 2, 2008

3 points:

1. What the developers fail to acknowledge is that one new theatre might be successful, however if SLC builds one, the Sandy theatre WILL fail. The reason is that Sandy cannot compete with SLC's instant fanbase and avid theatregoers, coupled with easier access from Davis and Weber counties. Everybody is talking about "The Lion King," while failing to mention "Rent." In other words, some of the broadway touring productions are family friendly, others are really not. while The Lion King would play well in Sandy, Rent would not. Accordingly, since The Lion King and Rent would both play in SLC, it is a better location, this is why New Space and Nederlander did not bid to run the Sandy location.

2. They say that there will be no public money used. This is a flat out lie. They should say that it will not be used right now, but ultimately, according to their own plans, they plan to sell it to the County in a few years.

3. Grandiose projects such as this have a hard time getting off the ground during good times, current liquidity problems in the market will make this impossible to finance.

Comment to Lola | 11:32 a.m. April 2, 2008

>>I'm far more excited about finally getting a theater

What exactly do you expect to showing at this theatre? Just off the top of your head, what shows do you expect to see?

Ed | 11:58 a.m. April 2, 2008

This project spoils the flavor and distinct quality of life in Sandy. One of the reasons people live here is to get away from an urban feel; another reason is for the views of the mountains and the valley. The current, folksy radio ads promoting the quality of life in Sandy and its uniqueness are the opposite of what this project is about.

Big city districts | 12:00 p.m. April 2, 2008

All Major and second tier cities have multiple districts throughout their metro areas. The Wasatch front is going to continue to grow. This would be a great addition so we don't have to go into downtown...think of all the gas that while save.

"broadway-style" | 12:45 p.m. April 2, 2008

have any of the people in favor of this project actually been to new york? do they follow trends in the theater world? it seems to me that the whole brouhaha over a theater - in sandy or downtown, it really makes no difference - is about the fact that Lion King didn't come here a few years back. but broadway shows are also getting smaller...the 'big hits' this year are shows that would not play well here. spring awakening is about sexual discovery among teenagers - i can count the sandy residents that will want to see that show on one hand. people need to get over the idea of being slighted by lion king and realize we already have TWO theaters in the valley that can accommodate broadway tours - the capitol theatre and kingsbury hall. broadway shows tour here all the time, and there will not be much of a need for a giant vacant theater to show productions the good mormon folk of sandy will not want their children to see.

Anonymous | 1:31 p.m. April 2, 2008

This entire idea is dumb. There is already a mall located a few feet away. How many vacant office towers are there within 1/2 mile of the proposed project, because off the top of my head I can think of 5. What makes the developers think they will actually fill the buildings? Words do not describe how stupid this idea is. I've lived in Sandy my entire life, but the way the city is being run I want to move!

Stenar | 3:04 p.m. April 2, 2008

I don't see how they can get enough tenants to fill all of those office towers, no one will want to attend theatre in Sandy and there is already a large share of retail in Sandy. I don't think there are enough shoppers to support the retail component.

Anonymous | 3:45 p.m. April 2, 2008

Sandy has a few commercial buildings in the area that are all nearly empty. Only a few have some actual tenants.

The reason they are empty is that no one wants to work in Sandy. The old theaters at South Towne closed as they didn't have any draw.

Jordan Commons survives because of the restaurants in the area and its proximity to a trax stop.

People will not walk 3 blocks or more from trax to go to the theater. Almost no one lives and works in the same building and this will increase traffic in the area.

I see this project being scaled back immensely as well as the theater closing or being remodeled after the theater opens in Downtown Salt Lake City.

The remodel will consist of a family friendly theater of say 1000 seats and a couple of smaller theaters for the smaller family friendly productions that can't fill a 1000 seat theater.

For this project to succeed, Sandy would need to have all their office space leased and a demand for the space. The residential component is another story and I really doubt 600+ people will want to live in this area of Sandy.

The King has no clothes | 3:59 p.m. April 2, 2008

Obviously Mayor Dolan and the City Council chaired by Chris McCandless don't have the personal fortitude (although they sense the truth in their hearts) that this project is one big boondoggle. Just wanting something to happen isn't enough - it has to be supportable by market data and financial capital markets. It would take two lifetimes for those residential and office towers to be filled. Why won't someone hired and paid by the public trust tell it like it is - rather than just drink the fruit punch of wild panacea?

SLC'er | 5:46 p.m. April 2, 2008

Wow, anyone want to create a pool as to when this will fail? My guess is it will be changed substantially or discarded altogether by June 1st. Unreal. Please tell me how they expect to fill 3 30 story buildings. I know not all of it will be office space, but there is not a single 30 story building in Utah. Come on lil' brother, just because you want to make a name for yourself doesn't mean you should. Sandy should rely on being the great city that it is - a great residential suburb where you have a small town feel and a great way of life. And there is absolutely no way that this project is being created without using substantial taxpayer money. Good Grief!!

Robert | 6:25 p.m. April 2, 2008

Here is why many are frustrated with Sandy (ie: leadership):

1. They build a stadium for a team that no one knows will survive, on the entire state's bill, behind the back of the County Mayor and Council's decision. No taxpayer money should ever be spent to build stadiums.

2. Convince enough voters to secede from Jordan School District against the majority's wishes. It only passed by a slight majority in Sandy and none of the west side city residents, who are directly affected, had the right to vote. In essence it makes the west side pay for all of its own schools by itself while not long ago the west side built Sandy's schools. And now they're bickering about assets.

3. Passed over a potential city center park to build a new Walmart and Lowe's, both of which already existed in the city and have since closed, leaving eyesores and empty buildings.

4. They want to build a monstrous new development in an area where it likely won't survive - at least not now. I'm skeptical.

I know many people who now refuse to visit or shop in Sandy because of the city's arrogance and disregard for others.

Sandyite | 8:26 p.m. April 2, 2008

I live in Sandy and wish I could move. The quality of life in Sandy has changed dramatically and NOT for the better. They are allowing all the green space to be covered in condos. There is nearly go green space left to talk of. There are many buildings sitting empty... just sitting there. Sandy seems to be a big mess if you ask me. IT is no longer quaint because money talks and talks and talks apparently. I agree that the radio ads about Sandy are a big lie. They talk of what Sandy used to be but is no more. It is truly a shame.

The city planners, zoning comission etc have way too much power and they do NOT like to listen to the citizens unless forced too.

Sandy used to be so much fun... it used to be kind of rural and calming... not so any more

rightintwo | 10:56 a.m. April 3, 2008

You people are hilarious! Sandy is taking the initiative that downtown has been too scared to do for years. I see the city creek center as the one that sits empty and Sandy filled with free thinkers that do not want their rights and lifestyle regulated.

BTW I am a contractor and the commercial space is being sold as fast as we can build it with a back log. I am glad that someone in this state can design anything other than the square buildings of downtown and the stucco and fake stone of the suburbs.

lifeisgood | 10:24 p.m. April 3, 2008

You people are absolutely clueless. I like the guy that tries to point to point to the support that Weber and Davis county people give downtown. As if there is nobody who lives in the South end of the valley. Clearly that person hasn't taken their mtn. bike passed Sugarhouse in a while. The problem with the south end of the valley AND northern end of Utah County is the lack of these kind of developments. Then some dude called "anonymous" says nobody wants to work in Sandy, yet office space costs $3-$4 more per SF than downtown. And that Jordan Commons "survives" because of trax? What? Buddy nobody takes trax to Jordan Commons, and Jordan Commons is one of the busiest movie theatres in the west. Then you've got the self loathing mormon haters. Bless all of you. The best part is everybody is blaming Sandy City leaders for it. It's a private development people, and while I have doubts it will go through exactly as planned especially with the current state of the economy and commercial real estate projects, these kind of developments will continue to happen in out state and it's a good thing!

jeannie | 9:04 a.m. April 4, 2008

Public money will be spent on the Sandy theatre, maybe not to build it, but Sandy is going to lease the theatre back from McQuarry. McQuarry is going to build it then turn it over to Sandy to operate and they will pay for it with city funds. the developer is taking no risk because the theatre will be the responsibility of the City to operate and manage and lose money on if they can't fill it. Yet McQuarry will get his lease payment every month for 30 YEARS!!!

LostSandy | 10:04 a.m. April 6, 2008

Again and again Sandy City leaders have shown us (those paying the bills) that they have no consideration as to what the people of Sandy want from them. Stop before the damage cannot be repaired. Sandy needs to take a big breath and catch up with is growth. Much of which Sandy residents have not wanted. Start working to create a master plan that won't change every time a developer offers you a 'Great Thing' for your city. What happened to our green space, our livability as a top suburban family city? Sandy City does not have the character for such a development and that's what makes Sandy a place many of us want to live in.

John | 9:37 p.m. Feb. 11, 2009

I think a development such as this would be great for the whole valley. Only time will tell.

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.