Deseret News | Reader comments: S.L. Council OKs City Creek skybridge in a 6-1 vote

Reader comments
S.L. Council OKs City Creek skybridge in a 6-1 vote

Go ahead, call me Pollyanna | 6:31 a.m. April 9, 2008

I've never seen what the problem is with this project. I knew it was going to be better than what was there before. Then I saw the 3D walkthru on the DownTownRising website and it looks to me like, when completed, City Creek will do more to revitalize Main Street than anything that I can think of. It opens, on both sides, to Main Street. It is a mostly open-air structure. It will feel like Main Street is a part of the whole thing and if the City does it right, that feeling will be reinforced by things that they do to and around the Main Street area.

Patrons aren't forced to take the Skybridge to the other side of City Creek. Those at ground level can take the crosswalk right there, or just spill out onto Main Street and shop there, or go up and across. The walkthru made it feel to me that this project ties a large portion of the downtown area together into a modern, clean, and open business, retail and residential whole. It will have its naysayers, of course, but I think the overall effect will be very positive to downtown SLC. You'll see.

Me Too | 7:28 a.m. April 9, 2008

Build more skybridges. This is not a new or unique downtown addition. For years cities like Seattle, San Diego, Portland, Vancouver, Spokane and many others have proven the safety, convenience and architectural beauty of skybridges. People of SLC, why all the fuss? There has been more money spent in debate and regulation than this thing will cost. This downtown development, the entire project, will unquestionably be a first class improvement to the City and the region. Detractors offer nothing in response ... only added cost and contention. Let's get the project completed so we all can enjoy it!

Good | 8:20 a.m. April 9, 2008

Glad they're building it. In an age of astronomical gas prices, it's nice to know there won't be pedestrians tying up stoplights and forcing drives to idle for minutes on end, wasting money and polluting the air.

Part of having a "green" city is having skybridges.

Comments continue below

Green City is Walking | 8:49 a.m. April 9, 2008

Pedestrians don't pollute. Cars pollute. What kind of burb-dwelling logic is that? You people are insane. Glad you don't live in SLC.

Finally | 9:21 a.m. April 9, 2008

Thank you, Gang of Six.

Good | 9:18 a.m. April 9, 2008

OK, sounds like I'm not dealing with the sharpest tools in the shed here, so I will elaborate.

Pedestrians crossing streets require crosswalks. Crosswalks add stoplight rotations. In the case of downtown, many of those pedestrian stoplight rotations happen automatically. That forces cars (the ones who pollute) to sit there & idle while a few people (or in some cases, no people) cross the street.

By putting in skybridges, you eliminate pedestrians needing to cross the street. Therefore you can eliminate stoplight rotations, drivers are stopped less time. That means less traffic congestion and less idling......which means less pollution and wasted gas.

If you can't grasp that I think I might be dealing with a lost cause.

Ted | 10:14 a.m. April 9, 2008

No doubt the lone dissenter will be called in to speak with his Church leaders, and then the Mormon public will castigate him and make sure he is not re-elected.

The perils of a theocracy!

jay | 10:24 a.m. April 9, 2008

Ted- you must not live in Salt Lake City, or know nothing about city politics.

hmm | 10:42 a.m. April 9, 2008

i don't think luke garrott is a mormon. (but i could be wrong)

Thomas | 10:51 a.m. April 9, 2008

I think you've got it wrong, Ted. Some cogent reasons for the skybridge have been posted above. Also, we are allowed our free agency in the Church and I seriously doubt the vote on the bridge is an ecclesiastic issue.

Much Ado | 10:53 a.m. April 9, 2008

Ted, that was "offensive and lame." Practicing Mormons make up less than 50% of the populace of SLC now so it would be hard for them to determine the outcome of an election alone. How is that a theocracy?

I don't know the religious preferences of all of the City Council, but my guess is that not all are practicing Mormons and some voted for the skybridge and City Creek Project because in their esitmation it will be good for SLC.

There has been substantial criticism of the church for the City Creek project. To the critics I ask: would you have preferred the virtually dead ZCMI and Crossroads Malls to have remained shuttered and empty? How does that help vitalize downtown or mainstreet?

Former | 11:32 a.m. April 9, 2008

When in doubt blame the Mormons. Doesn't that get tiring, Ted. Please find out facts before making ridiculous statments.

Luke Garrott Logic | 11:37 a.m. April 9, 2008

"I'll be voting against this proposal because I'm against this type of development in general," Garrott said. "... I don't think you develop downtown through mega-projects."

What is this guy smoking? Does he think that tiny little mom-and-pop operations are the answer to revitalizing downtown SLC? Or is he really just hiding a hidden agenda?

Mr Reality | 11:37 a.m. April 9, 2008

I don't know the merits or the de-merits of the proposed skybridge. But I do know that Rocky Anderson is opposed to it. Therefore, I support it.

re: ted | 11:38 a.m. April 9, 2008

it is obvious the lone dissenter has an agenda, maybe he doesnt like the "mormon project" maybe he gets elected by those who dont like the "mormon project" who knows. its what he about his vote, not merely his vote that will stop his re-election. he took the risk if this city creek thing ruins downtown like he pessimisticly prophesies then he is a genius. if it does work out he is a goof and hopefully goofs dont get re-elected anywhere

This should have been | 12:00 p.m. April 9, 2008

A public Vote
Not 6 people making the decision
The Council is out of order voteing for the people
This is Un Constitutional

KF | 12:33 p.m. April 9, 2008

A little perspective here. It is a skybridge crossing a street. It is an issue for the city council - that is why they are in office. The public doesn't need to vote on every single thing that the city does.

Re: A public Vote | 12:44 p.m. April 9, 2008

Are proposing that every decision by government should be a public vote?

The Constitution provides for a representative government of elected officials. The Council members were elected by the people for the express purpose of making such decisions.

It's ok. Maybe they didn't teach that in your grade school.

A Public Vote? | 12:57 p.m. April 9, 2008

For those similarly uninformed, not paying attention in their 5th grade class, our government system is a democratic republic. This means that the population votes for representatives. These representatives than make decisions in government.

Steve - The Right Choice made | 1:18 p.m. April 9, 2008

Good! They gave the go-ahead to the skybridge as they should have and as was expected. The city council made the right choice. I'm looking forward to seeing how the skybridge and the rest of the City Creek project turns out. Thankyou to the council. :)

lost in DC | 1:23 p.m. April 9, 2008

Ted, get a grip. If SLC were a theocracy, Rocky never would have been elected.

Critics... | 1:41 p.m. April 9, 2008

In an article in another local newspaper it says that Councilman Luke Garrott (the only one who voted against the bridge) said, "...the owner is more interested in private profit, which a skywalk will enhance, than a revitalization of downtown."

Obviosly this guy doesn't know the church.

Critcics of City Creek... | 1:38 p.m. April 9, 2008

City Creek critics are also those who dislike the church. Isn't that interesting. Hmmmm.

Skybridge is critical! | 2:11 p.m. April 9, 2008

The City Council acted responsible for the Skybridge
approval.6 Council Members acted responsibly, the single oposing Member has absolutely no idea about
successful Downtown Projects in the USA! Mr Garrott
should visit and check with Indianapolis, Seattle,
Mineapolis, Vancouver, SAn Diego, Portland etc!!!!

Get real | 2:14 p.m. April 9, 2008

Wow! This message board quickly degenerated into a missive on anti-mormonism. Lets try to deal with facts here. 1) Luke Garrott is not mormon, and it doesn't make a lick of difference what people's religious beliefs are when it comes to votes on planning issues. 2) Anybody who has taken a basic planning class knows that new urbanism does teach against mega projects like this as councilman Garrott said. There are clear cut pros and cons as to the effectiveness of a skybridge on pedestrian flow on Main Street. 3) What kind of "hidden agenda" does somebody have if they are advocating against mega developments? One that brings people onto the streets where we can come together as a community? Gee, doesn't that sound frightening? 4) It's absurd to think that pedestrian traffic is a contributor to pollution. By virtue of not being in a car you're aiding in cutting down pollution. 5) Let the people vote on the skybridge? This isn't a democracy; it's a republic where we elect representatives of the people to make these votes for us. Pure democracy is anarchy, the employment of democratic principles to our republican form of gov't is what makes us great!

Arvin | 2:54 p.m. April 9, 2008

The earlier post stated that it's obvious that the lone dissenter must have an agenda.

Nothing is obvious, except that we don't know very much about anyone else's motives. So let's just respect the "lone dissenter" and give him a break. People can have legitimate concerns about issues regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Planning commissioners and city council members are easy targets for mostly-uninformed members of the communities they serve.

Re: Get real | 2:56 p.m. April 9, 2008

Can you cite some actual examples of mega projects similar to City Creek developed that have not been successful, or is this just text book Urban Planning 101 with no real basis in reality?

From everything I've seen, the openess of the City Creek project is a vast improvement from the enclosed boxes of the ZCMI and Crossroads Malls. If the planners are farsighted enough to include so much open space, I trust them when they say that including the Skybridge is critical to the success of the project.

Reader | 3:07 p.m. April 9, 2008

Note to Luke Garrott: Mega-projects are indeed how city cores are developing these days. The days of building a downtown through mom-and-pop shops is past. And that hasn't worked very well along Main Street the past 10 to 15 years. Projects like City Creek Center and The Gateway are how it's done these days.

CougarKeith | 4:38 p.m. April 9, 2008

Luke Garrott is a Liberal, plain and simple, he isn't interested in building the city and drawing attention to it's down town, he is ANTI-Mormon and ANTI-Church, and doesn't want them to have any success, he is a Anderson Buddy. He would rather see the city grief stricken with Gang Graffiti and drive by shootings like NY and Chicago and LA! That is what Down Towns are supposed to be all about, with bag ladies wandering the streets with stolen shopping carts! Yeah, that is what it's all about! Wake Up Garrott, we don't want our city to be like that!

Z | 4:56 p.m. April 9, 2008

I have watched with some amusement for the last 15 years as politician after politician in Salt Lake City has wrung his or her hands over the state of Main Street. Yet for all the official initiatives (street carts, anyone), it has slowly continued to decay.

The problem was exacerbated by the siting of the TRAX line on Main. Traffic is now so choked off that only the foolhardy drive down the street. Parking downtown continues to be a joke. In this context, the only thing that is going to save Main Street is something exactly like the City Creek project, because nothing else will have the draw to get people to drive or take transit into the city core.

Of course, the rest of Main Street can only be revitalized if someone puts the effort into making it interesing enough to walk to. And I guarantee you that it won't be a politician that does it.

Conejo | 5:30 p.m. April 9, 2008

So, the reasons the sky bridge is bad is because it. 1.) Keeps people away from main street. 2.) Blocks the view of Ensign Peak from Main street.

Umm... Main street is already dead. Anything that brings people to downtown will help main street. Why is bringing back main street back the ultimate goal of downtown? Is the goal of bringing back main street to create the opportunity for more people to view Ensign Peak? I'm not getting it.

I have lived in Utah for 30 years and never thought of Main street as a destination. It may be a quaint thought for those who experienced it in the '30's but for the rest of us it doesn't matter. The goal should be to create a fun and productive atmosphere to downtown. The Gateway has done that to some extent. City Creek will only help.

ME | 5:30 p.m. April 9, 2008

What seems crazy to me is that any city I have lived in would have bent over backwards to have someone come in and develop a portion of a city like city creek. Maybe if the church had applied for a loan from the city, Salt Lake City would bend over for them.

Walking across main street was the worst part about going to the old malls. As for the shops on main street let them shrivel up and go away, most of them really don't belong in the center of a city they, should be in a strip mall.

The thing that Salt Lake City just doesn't get is that people from outside the city are the ones that are spending the majority of the money in the malls and we go to stores that we want to go to. If someone opens a place on main street that people want to go to then a few staris will not stop us.

The city should take the opportunity now to do something with main street like make a restaurant row with a theater, that is what 90% of the state does for entertainment.

Anonymous | 6:01 p.m. April 9, 2008

There re two or more posts claiming the greatness of sky bridges in citys like seattle, portland e.t.c Perhaps you should due your research. Those cities have baned sky bridges and are currently trying to remove the ones they have built. Those cities have already determined them to be a bad idea. Salt Lake already learned this lesson years ago, but i guess we just don't learn from history. I think this project could be great and hope its built they way they promised and not as another mall.

Hoser2 | 8:53 p.m. April 9, 2008

A view of Ensign peak? Probably the ugliest hill of any surrounding SLC. All it really is is a sand bar formed from Lake Bonneville.

The Gateway skybridges block Ensign, but were approved by Rocky, so I guess they are OK? Oh, and all of the businesses on the ground level of Gateway are going out of business, I suppose.

If the city fathers want to revitalize Main street, they could start by not closing down the street for four years at a stretch while they put a friggin railroad down the middle of the street.

Samwise801 | 9:49 a.m. April 10, 2008

Yeah, I'm sure Garrott, as a "liberal," wants our city to be "stricken with Gang Graffiti and drive-by shootings." Man, wake up CougarKeith! Such vile hatred...what a waste of space...

And just because "that's how cities are doing it these days" doesn't mean a mega-mall is the right way to go about revitalizing our downtown. Look at any other thriving city core in the world - they are indeed built on mom-and-pop outlets, not huge shopping malls. If people wanted to go to a mall there are dozens of other options throughout our valley; if we're going to attract them downtown we've got to give them something unique.

I respect the church for putting up this money, and don't believe for an instant their motive is profit. They are in this to revitalize downtown and are doing what they can. (And, surprise, I'm an ardent liberal and supporter of Garrott's vote.)

But this isn't about the Church, it's about Taubman - the developer. Their goal is profit - as well it should be - but we need more than just another mall if this is going to work, and that's what Garrott is fighting for.

Much Ado | 11:36 a.m. April 10, 2008

Anonymous, perhaps you should share your references so that we can be more informed about those cities that are banning and removing skybridges and why.

Still, it is hard to imagine how one skybridge will be the undoing of main street. People who want to shop stores on main will still shop those stores. Perhaps with the City Creek Center main street will also benefit from more traffic downtown.

What I have seen of the City Creek Center is clearly more than just a mall. There will be housing, open space, paths, a creek, more parking stalls, as well as the retail. The 750 new residential units downtown would surely benefit main street retail as well as City Creek Center.

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.