Quantcast
Utah

Salt Lake City high rise is ready for occupancy on Main

Comments

Return To Article
  • Jordan T.
    Nov. 3, 2009 6:02 p.m.

    That's really odd. I thought in order for any new office tower to get financing from a bank and be built, it had to have 50-60 percent of office space preleased to prospective tenants before construction can begin on such a highrise project.

  • Jordan T., You
    Nov. 3, 2009 10:46 p.m.

    raise a most interesting point. And I believe that from what I've read in the past that you are correct in your assumption. Business as usual...

  • jpc53
    Nov. 4, 2009 2:07 a.m.

    Two things. Hamilton Partners is a very large and successful developer out of Chicago. This record combined with the easy credit policies in existence when the project started a few years ago made it easier to get financing without the typical preleasing requirements.

  • Blue Belle
    Nov. 4, 2009 8:18 a.m.

    Maybe, instead of creating more taxes for property owners, the leases ought to go to the Police for a "relocated" Public Safety building...

  • i can't wait
    Nov. 4, 2009 9:14 a.m.

    till all comes down!

  • John
    Nov. 4, 2009 9:41 a.m.

    I am from Chicago and in Chicago 22 storys would not even be considered a low rise building.... This is Not no high rise building!

  • Well, John
    Nov. 4, 2009 12:18 p.m.

    We're from Utah.....and we don't need an ugly Willis Tower, when we have our beautiful mountains.

    We look down on YOU.

  • Jordan T.
    Nov. 4, 2009 4:16 p.m.

    John: Isn't it lame how downtown Salt Lake doesn't have a tower over 20 stories? Man, it would be so nice to get a new tallest tower in the 40-50 story range.

  • John
    Nov. 4, 2009 4:30 p.m.

    Oh yeah and there is a really big lake there that gives a new name to the word " Lake Effect" snow!

  • Brother of Mahonri
    Nov. 6, 2009 12:08 p.m.

    Wow, the two billion dollar LDS mall is now a 3 billion dollar mall.

    That's a lot of widow's mites.

  • Bennie
    Nov. 6, 2009 12:16 p.m.

    Bye bye Gateway. That cheaply constructed dog of a mall will die the moment City downtown opens. It will become a rat hole as retailers flock to the new digs.

    Remember Ogden Mall? Riverdale gave Dillards free tax incentives, then all the retailers left, mall dies, Godfrey knocks it down but keeps the city owned parking garage instead of the mall. This is Deja Vu.

  • Kindofsuprised
    Nov. 6, 2009 2:01 p.m.

    The LDS church has "no paid clergy." How can they afford a 3 Billion Dollar shopping mall?

    I remember a bishop encouraging us to increase our fast offerings. He said that if everyone in the world did so, the LDS church would have enough money to eliminate world hunger.

    Is there any chance this is one large soup kitchen, disguised as a shopping mall?

    Will people of the world be able to gather their and eat for free?

    Does anyone really know how much money from fast offerings and tithing goes to buy food for the starving nations of the world? Is there a percentage listed or discussed, or reported somewhere in the official books of the church?

  • Levi
    Nov. 6, 2009 5:38 p.m.

    Follow the dollar

  • Louie
    Nov. 6, 2009 5:42 p.m.

    "gather their" WHAT, KindofSUPRISED.

  • Nick
    Nov. 7, 2009 8:28 a.m.

    So the estimate cost of the mall has risen to $3billion so far.

    Is this why there was a message in the October Ensign from the LDS church leader about a faithfull 20% Tithe Payer? Are they trying to influence members to pay more than 10% now?

  • Steve
    Nov. 7, 2009 6:46 p.m.

    This is all about the mighty dollar. A more vibrant downtown will attract increased visitors to church headquarters, which will increase members, which will add more dollars to the church coffers. I have a hard time believing it is about saving souls.

  • Laura
    Nov. 14, 2009 2:50 p.m.

    Where does the money literally come from? And more to the point, where does the LDS church SAY the money comes from?
    Pls someone tell me!

  • Jeff
    Nov. 27, 2009 2:31 p.m.

    I live in the L.A. area. Downtown L.A. is a dump. I believe $3 billion is a cheap price to keep your downtown liveable and vibrant. L.A. will be spending billions more than that to try to return their downtown to decency.

  • Dennis
    Dec. 6, 2009 12:48 p.m.

    I just returned from a visit to Mexico via LA. LAX is a dive compared to the Mexican airports. Downtown LA looks like a third world city compared to the Mexican City that I visited.

  • Greg
    Dec. 13, 2009 2:03 p.m.

    Dennis--I'm guessing that you didn't visit more than one Mexican airport and that it was a resort city like Cancun which was built by US and Canadian tourist dollars.

    Keep in mind too that those resort cities get ruined every 10-15 years by hurricanes and have to be rebuilt or the tourists won't come. The Mexican govt knows that to keep US dollars flowing into Mexico, those resort cities have to be kept up and the airports need to be modern.

    Try visiting the Mexican interior. Your tune will change.

  • anon
    Dec. 15, 2009 4:11 p.m.

    Dennis,

    I lived for several years in Mexico and love it, but to act like LA is some kind of third-world compared to ANY city in Mexico is ridiculous. I worked in the nicest part of Mexico City and it doesn't hold a candle to even the worst-kept major cities of the US. Sorry, just being truthful. Where were you by the way?

  • Anonymous
    Jan. 23, 2010 1:56 p.m.

    I might buy one of those ahhhhh royalty