Liquor licenses at Church's City Creek Center?

[Sullyute]

This "for profit" stuff the church has going on just grates on me. It's like when GA's sell books for profit. That's crazy to me.

I am glad that I am not the only one that feels this way. It is a huge pet peeve of mine. I think of this quote whenever a see a new book by a GA:

President Young then spoke to Orson Pratt & said that the book dept was the worst trouble the Saints had to content with for 6 years. Orson Pratt has done more to make that debt than any other man. So many books are forced upon the people and they are forced to take them or they will not be fellowshiped. Now stop publishing & getting your portaits taken & fill the kingdom with them & make the people pay for them. This keeps the people poor and keeps them from emigrating. Wilford Woodruff's journal, Sept 9, 1860

We hear about how busy the brethern are and how they don't get to enjoy their golden years becaue of their callings, but they have time to churn out books.

:rant: Sorry, rant over...

[pellegrino]

They will disassociate themselves from it before they allow common sense to prevail. And they won't lose a cent.

If they view it as a crucial bastion for the defense of temple square then I don't see them disassociating themselves from it.

[Moliere]

They will disassociate themselves from it before they allow common sense to prevail. And they won't lose a cent.

They'll just assign wards to shop at the mall on certain days to support the current tenants.

[NorthwestUteFan]

I don't think the $3-4BB number is correct. I recall that the Church's cash expenditure is $1B and they have financing for the balance which is another $1B. I will have to look around and see if I can verify those numbers still. If they bill is $3-4BB, I'm pissed because it is a rip-off.

If what you say is true, then they pay $1B in assets then finance the next $1B. That is still $2B.

I don't know how accurate this guy's numbers are, but based on his career (KSL Executive) he may be in a position to know:

source=http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705341784/Salt-Lake-City-high-rise-is-ready-for-occupancy-on-Main.html

"City Creek Reserve is spending more than $1 million a day on construction, and the project ultimately will cost around $3 billion, said Chris Redgrave, a KSL executive who also chairs the Salt Lake Chamber's Can-Do Coalition, which is looking for ways to jump-start the downtown economy. "

[KillerDog]

Just caught up to speed on the thread here. I've been wondering about this project a lot and am glad to find this useful thread.

This city creek project has got me thinking a bunch about my tithing money. I know they claim none is being used, but it does seem like a problematic display of priorities.

I read some arguments defending the church's stance in amassing wealth in order to allow more good to be accomplished. And I realize the church has an amazing humanitarian arm. But compared with this project, the humanitarian dollar amount looks like pocket change.

Think about the positive reaction to using this $3-4b on humanitarian efforts. That would be something I'd love to get behind. And besides, there are business owners who are church members, if the church is worried about adjacent properties being influenced by "mammon", can't they encourage members to invest in the area?

This "for profit" stuff the church has going on just grates on me. It's like when GA's sell books for profit. That's crazy to me.

I don't think the $3-4BB number is correct. I recall that the Church's cash expenditure is $1B and they have financing for the balance which is another $1B. I will have to look around and see if I can verify those numbers still. If they bill is $3-4BB, I'm pissed because it is a rip-off.

[fresca]

Just caught up to speed on the thread here. I've been wondering about this project a lot and am glad to find this useful thread.

This city creek project has got me thinking a bunch about my tithing money. I know they claim none is being used, but it does seem like a problematic display of priorities.

I read some arguments defending the church's stance in amassing wealth in order to allow more good to be accomplished. And I realize the church has an amazing humanitarian arm. But compared with this project, the humanitarian dollar amount looks like pocket change.

Think about the positive reaction to using this $3-4b on humanitarian efforts. That would be something I'd love to get behind. And besides, there are business owners who are church members, if the church is worried about adjacent properties being influenced by "mammon", can't they encourage members to invest in the area?

This "for profit" stuff the church has going on just grates on me. It's like when GA's sell books for profit. That's crazy to me.

[Non Sequitur]

It is clearly not a money making venture for the church. But yes, it will be interesting to see them caught between their principles and their desire to not see it completely fail financially. But in the end they are not going to let it fail. The church will prop it up financially forever if it has to.

They will disassociate themselves from it before they allow common sense to prevail. And they won't lose a cent.

[UtahDan]

I bet you see this slowly change. Either they can't fill the space or tenets start complaining and threatening to move out and once again the church will struggle trying to figure out if they are a business or a religious organization.

It is clearly not a money making venture for the church. But yes, it will be interesting to see them caught between their principles and their desire to not see it completely fail financially. But in the end they are not going to let it fail. The church will prop it up financially forever if it has to.

[RC Vikings]

I'll come out and say it now. that's perhaps the dumbest thing about this whole project.

I bet you see this slowly change. Either they can't fill the space or tenets start complaining and threatening to move out and once again the church will struggle trying to figure out if they are a business or a religious organization.

[pellegrino]

I didn't realize they were going to enforce the no sunday shopping. I guess it keeps with the prior policy on the ZCMI center. How will this affect restaurants or will they be exempt?

I'll come out and say it now. that's perhaps the dumbest thing about this whole project.

[Sullyute]

The Trib agrees with me.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51...-lake.html.csp

Interesting article...apparently the Church has a similar strategy in Ogden.

I didn't realize they were going to enforce the no sunday shopping. I guess it keeps with the prior policy on the ZCMI center. How will this affect restaurants or will they be exempt?

It will be anchored by Nordstrom and Macy's and up to 80 specialty stores - all to be closed on Sundays.

[venkman]

I think they're worried about Temple Square becoming a fortress in the midst of Sodom and Gomorrah. You get bars and strip clubs on South Temple and are members going to want to drive in from the suburbs? What will visitors think? Things like Main Street Plaza, City Creek, moving BYU SL downtown are attempts to create sort of a buffer between TS and the rest of the city, to retain some of the mormon-ness around TS. Call it image, PR, missionary work, but that's the thinking as far as I'm concerned.

The Trib agrees with me.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51...-lake.html.csp

Interesting article...apparently the Church has a similar strategy in Ogden.

[NorthwestUteFan]

I thought the Gateway needed the "low income" housing units to qualify for government assisted financing.

Interesting. I thought it was tied to zoning and was required to obtain the permits. The financing aspect makes a lot more sense.

FWIW when I was a student I looked into getting one of the 'low income' housing units. The location would have been perfect. I could ride Trax to school, and I worked over by the Fairgrounds.

Combined we made something like $28k, and made too much to qualify! (note I could have leased the exact same unit for ~$1450, but didn't qualify for the $600 price or whatever it was). I thought it was 'interesting' to have expensive upscale shopping and half-million dollar 3 bed condos mixed in with people who make less than $20k.

Back to the topic. In the 'mall business', the malls are typically considered to be profitable for ~3 years. This is the reason most developers will build and then sell within a year or two. This development will be somewhat different because a few self-owned companies will relocate their HQ to the site, and a few other very large companies will be involved as well (eg Questar) and big-cashflow stores (eg Harmon's).

I understand why they want to establish 'Fortress SLC' around Temple Square and HQ. However do they intend the mall portion of this project to return a profit in perpetuity? Conventional wisdom and industry standards say it won't. Perhaps this development will contain enough anchor stores, restaurants, business offices, and housing units to become somewhat self-sustaining?

Some of the jackholes will call me an ALUF for this, but I agree strongly with UtahDan and others on this. The church spending $3 Thousand-Million + on this project is not the best use of the funds. It makes me very uneasy as a contributing member.

[UtahDan]

I guess, the bigger questions is this: Does downtown SLC really have the need for two huge retail spaces with CCC and Gateway?

I am persuaded that there are defensible reasons for the project and even that it is going to produce some measurable goods for people. Building an Egyptian scale pyramid in the Salt Flats would too. Think of the jobs and economic impact that would have.

The question (partly) is this: if I handed $3B and told you to do the most possible good for the human race with it, what would give you the biggest bang for your buck? Of course, no one was trying to solve that riddle and in a moment of insanity decided the answer was to build a mall. Building the mall obviously addressed several things that were pressing concerns or they wouldn't have done it. I don't think that can be denied. The question is one of priorities and opportunity cost.

[KillerDog]

Speaking of condos, are they going to follow the standard set by the city for Gateway regarding the minimum number of these condos will be set aside as 'low income' housing units? I didn't think so.

Also if Bene Life is moving to CCC, what will they do with the old building over at TriAd?

It WILL be nice to have a Harmon's GC downtown...

I thought the Gateway needed the "low income" housing units to qualify for government assisted financing. If you know something that I don't about that, please let me know. My understanding is that the developers of Gateway agreed to a certain percentage of low income housing as a way to secure cheaper financing through government assistance. I further understand that the Gateway developer defaulted and/or found ways around the financing constraints and frustrated many people in the process. I don't have any understanding that the Church utilized such public financing.