Hello everyone,

This is a copy of an email sent to Mayor Biskupski.  

From: Casey McDonough
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2019 1:06 AM
To: 'mayor@slcgov.com' <mayor@slcgov.com>
Subject: Re: RDA Utah Theater Redevelopment Proposal - Save the Utah Theater!
Importance: High
 

Mayor Biskupski,

Firstly, I want to give a little background on me.  I was born and raised near 9th and 9th, lived in Salt Lake City, always living and working close to downtown, until I moved to Seattle and lived there from 2001-2004.  I then moved back to Salt Lake City, still always living and working near downtown, and have lived here since.  I started working in architecture, drafting for an architect when I was 15 years old and have worked in architecture and construction since then.  I have been the project manager on various historic projects including the Walker Center on the corner of 200 South Main in downtown Salt Lake City for which I helped make a city landmark, place on the national register of historic places, and obtain historic tax credits for.  I mention all this to give some context on me and who I am, and moreover my experience as it relates to this particular issue.

In late August, articles and news stories appeared in the local news about a proposal to replace the Utah Theater and adjacent retail buildings with a new residential tower.  There were renderings of the tower, and I will admit, they looked pretty good.  But every article implied that saving the theater would be too costly, that historic tax credits might not be possible, that the stage was too small, that the loading dock was too small and hard to get too, that there wasn’t parking, that we need more housing and more affordable housing, etc.  But I believe all of those arguments are simply a means to an end in support of demolishing the theater and building the tower.

Then, last week I became aware that the word on the street was that the Mayor was resolved to sign a purchase and sale agreement with the proposed developers to sell the theater property, and only around two months after the public even became aware that this proposal even existed.  Hearing that, I had to ask myself, what is going on?  It just doesn’t make sense to me.  Around two months after the proposal is made public, and with only one RDA meeting for the public to give input, and it’s as good as done?

It is my opinion that when our government acts so quickly, with little public input, particularly on an issue like this one, it is not a reflection of being efficient or getting things done, but implies that something is being ram rodded through the system in the hopes that the public won’t have time to do anything about it and once it’s done it will be so hard to do anything about it, the public will loose interest.  It brings to mind how the city proceeded with the homeless services site selection process or how the state proceeded with making the north west quadrant an inland port.  If only evidenced by the backlash on both those issues, they are great examples about how pressing forward without public input is a bad idea. 

I keep asking myself why the city is pressing to make this happen without adequate public input, knowing that residents are in fact interested in the fate of the building if only by the input received at the last RDA meeting on this issue.  But on top of that, a web site (www.savetheutahtheater.org two FaceBook pages, one of which is mine (Save the Utah Theater), an Instagram account is gaining a following (#savetheutahtheater), and a petition is underway already receiving over 1,000 signatures (https://www.change.org/p/salt-lake-city-mayor-save-the-utah-theater-f9521f21-7b65-4836-95e2-558141eb6110  

Having said all that, I know we can’t talk about things forever, but like any good relationship we have to talk enough, and we have not talked enough about this proposal and the possible loss of the Utah Theater.  So I am going to start talking, and here are some thoughts about what has been proposed.

Why can’t we do both?  While I think the proposed residential tower is a good one, I am asking myself why we can’t save the theater and build the tower.  Look at the new Eccles Theater and how 111 South Main is hung over the theater so that both goals could be met.  What I am talking about would look like what I show in the attached images.

Expounding on that idea after looking through the proposed tower renderings I quickly came to the following conclusions.

1.       The renderings show a proposed park like pathway and roof garden on top of a new parking garage behind the Kearns Building and news articles commented those would be provided as a replacement for the loss of the theater in the efforts of providing a public benefit in the proposed development.  So we are spending millions of dollars to provide a public amenity as a trade for the loss of the irreplaceable theater.  Can’t those dollars be spent to save the theater?  Don’t we already have underutilized park areas like the Gallivan Center, Regent Street Plaza, small park between West Temple and Main Street on the south side of 100 South, etc. nearby already?  We could meet in the middle and provide the roof garden for the new tower and accessible to the theater and Kearns building for everyone’s use couldn’t we?  Or maybe no roof garden and another level of parking to serve the new tower, theater, and Kearns building?  Interestingly, just north of the theater entry had a stair, assumable leading up to something upstairs, but could lead to a pathway into the new tower, the Kearns Building, and the possible roof garden.  I mention that stair was there historically because that makes it applicable in the context of obtaining historic tax credits.

2.       It is said the theater doesn’t have enough parking and stage and loading area aren’t big enough.  As too parking, I think we answered that questions when the Eccles Theater was built.  There is public parking at all the lots on the Gallivan Center block, at the Walker Center, at the Regent Street garage, the City Creek parking garage, and to put a cherry on top of all that, part of this proposal is building a new parking garage behind the Kearns Building.  Maybe that parking garage gets bigger?  As to the loading dock, not only could the loading access be improved for the Utah Theater, but for the Capital Theater as well as part of doing both the residential tower and the Utah Theater restoration.

3.       I heard in a news article that no price for the properties had been determined yet.  Looking at the Salt lake County tax records, the properties and building proposed to be sold are valued at $5,757,700.  Not taking into account that the property would be valued much higher than that when priced for a new mixed use tower, whatever the value is could be spent on the theater restoration and as I have pointed out, both goal could be met. A A great new residential tower and a restored Utah Theater.

4.       As soon as the news articles appeared and implied that tax credits might not be available, I called the state historic preservation office and asked about that very question and got the answer I expected.  Tax credits are very likely obtainable and leaving the Utah Theater 1930’s façade and restoring it’s neon marquee could be a great option rather than restoring the Pantages façade which could help bring restoration costs down while still getting tax credits.  But taking into account the theater will still need 50 million to restore, and that 40 million of that would be applicable for tax credits to be conservative, that would be 8 million in tax credits.

5.       So with a 50 million dollar price tag to save the theater, less the almost 6 million in value of the property, I’ll say 5 million in savings for the public walkway, and 8 million in tax credits, that brings the cost to save the theater to 31 million!  We could be give the developers more height for their project, to garner more profit so that they can contribute to the theater restoration as well.  We could make the parking garage bigger so that other nearby property owners without parking can take advantage of more parking and they could help pay for the added parking and theater restoration as well.

6.       I understand that part of this project includes an aspect of affordable housing, but I can’t find exactly what that means.  What exactly does this proposed development include?  Is this a rental tower or market rate condo’s?  The public deserves to know exactly what this means before the project is given a green light.  The devil is in the details.

7.       I don’t hear anyone talking about the displaced existing business in these properties.  For those of us who remember, when the light rail went in on main street, making sure a project didn’t kill local businesses in the process seemed to be low on the priority list.  I would like to know where that priority is as part of this proposed development.  Again, the devil is in the details.

Like I said before, this proposal and how it came into the public light and is proceeding just doesn’t make sense.  Especially taking into account what I think are such obvious ways we can accomplish both the goal of redevelopment with a new residential tower, but also restoring the Utah Theater façade with the amazing Pantages interior, and give what many have called Salt Lake City’s theater district something spectacular!  Just as no one laments that we saved the City and County Building, once restored, I have no doubt that anyone will lament having saved the Utah Theater.   Just like we didn’t buy into the story that saving the City and County Building was too expensive, that it didn’t have enough parking, that tearing it down and replacing it with something new and easier, we can do the same with the Utah Theater.  But city leadership today has to believe just like city leadership did back then, that we have to take the longer harder road, because the reward will be far greater then if we don’t.  I believe that you can be part of that leadership.  

So, knowing I am long winded (as evidenced by this email), I will end with saying that this issue is far too important to ram rod through without at least the public input and review it deserves.  I believe a promise was made when theater was purchased by the city.  That promise was in the highest degree a promise that the theater was far too significant a historic and irreplaceable cultural resource in the city to leave its fate in the hands of private interests.  That promise was that it needed to be protected and preserved because doing so was in the best interest of the city and its residents moving into the future, if not in the best interest of the entire state.  That promise was at least one that should give the building it’s fair shake which is to let the residents of Salt Lake City look at it again, in detail, before letting it be lost forever.  If we simply let the building go without our fair say about it, then we will add ourselves to the long list of other cities who lament the loss of their historic and cultural assets. 

We CAN find a way.

Casey O’Brien McDonough

801-971-9053

yalpyesacnac@hotmail.com