Let the hand-wringing begin.
Destined to be one of the ugliest buildings in the intermountain west.
Absolutely hideous.How were our pioneers able to build the temple
and (original) tabernacle, the University of Utah original campus buildings, the
Hotel Utah, the glorious state capitol building, all in a much poorer society,
while in modern, luxuriant America, we are churning out generic, loveless, beige
garbage like this MTC building? An abomination!
All in hopes of getting people to change their religions, which they'll
undoubtedly go back to after 80% of them leave the Mormon church within a year
This is an interesting situation. When LDS temples, meetinghouses, or other
buildings are seeking building permits outside of Utah, Utahns are quick to say
that property values are increased, 90 foot steeples, large lighted parking
lots, etc. will somehow enhance the image of the neighborhoods outside of Utah.
Perhaps even that there is discrimination when people would rather not have such
a structure built in their neighborhoods. Funny that now that this is occurring
in YOUR backyard, that there is a similar type of protest. LDS protesting
against an LDS missionary training center. kind of funny. Build it outside of
Utah. Also curious that a 30 yr old building cannot be repaired or renovated.
Were appropriate building standards met? Build more MTCs in other parts of the
US and Canada and even more in other countries in addition to the existing
non-Utah MTCs. This is a worldwide church after all. and Provo residents
appear to not want a new and enlarged MTC.
I doubt the meeting will be anything more than a dog and pony show pretending to
consider comments from neighbors. Is this the first such meeting during the last
four years and after everything has been decided?
Awesome! The Church continues to grow and so does the missionary program. The
MTC is one beautiful place with immaculate flowerbeds and landscaping. The MTC
was one of my favorite parts of my mission. I learned so much there. Glad to
see it growing!
Not a fan of the building.Informed Voter...I think you have it
pegged. My guess is this decision has already been made and will be pushed
through. (Though I hope not!)
My only question: Is this choice the most economical? If so, let the economy
dictate prudence and spend the extra 'beautification' monies on
charity and mission expenses.Our pioneer ancestors knew how to
sacrifice in a way we never will. My fine china will never be ground into
stained-glass, but if this is functional, be glad you can build anything in
these dire times.
@Chris BThe church isn't looking for numbers. (Although your
numbers are WAY off.) That isn't what the missionary program is about. It
is about offering people the chance to hear the restored gospel. Christ said
"strait is the gate and narrow is the way and FEW there be that find
it." What people do with the gospel after they've heard it is up to
them.As far as the complaining about the building, it is a training
center. It is meant to be pretty utilitarian. I'm sure it will be great
and the work will roll on. By the way, who are the neighbors who are concerned
about this? Is this really something to get worked up about?
These comments by people are intesting.Gosh-DUH, you said "Funny that now that this is occurring in YOUR backyard, that there is a
similar type of protest. LDS protesting against an LDS missionary training
center."- Who said that LDS people are complaining? It almost always
Anti-Mormons that complain. Plus 40% of the people in Utah are not LDS. "Build it outside of Utah. Also curious that a 30 yr old building
cannot be repaired or renovated. Were appropriate building standards met? Build
more MTCs in other parts of the US and Canada and even more in other countries
in addition to the existing non-Utah MTCs. This is a worldwide church after
all."- There rest of the campus is there, so how would building ONE
building else where solve anything? Being in construciton I know the instury. Of
course the building codes where met, but codes change - like over the past 30
years. Plus these buildings are used 24-7 (buildings get woren down). The LDS
Church always builds there buildings higher/beyond the standard building codes.
Also, there are already other MTCs arounds the world.
Capella in Bakersfield:I created an account for this reason. You
speak of our pioneer heritage as if you are a member of the church - Then you
question the authority of the church when you ask, "Is this choice the most
economical?".Of course it is!! When have the leaders of the
church been wrong about something like this? They haven't. They certainly would not just have dreamed up the idea overnight. I have
something to do with the building of temples and church buildings and I can
verify that the BEST planning goes into things like this. Cheers
Let's see now, there's the MTC building and other buildings on the
property. They want to tear one down and build one more; net effect = same
number of buildings, so that can't be the problem. Must be the height.But isn't there a temple across the street? That's kind of
tall. Oh, and a university somewhere close, with, uh, some really tall
buildings? Oh, and a basketball arena? And a huge football stadium? But
they're all really small buildings, so this new one is just a shocker,
Re: Chris B 4:49 p.m. March 21, 2012"All in hopes of getting people to
change their religions"There is a song about the seeds that are
sown. Some on rocky ground where the young plants soon wither and die, and some
in fertile soil where they flourish and grow. The LDS religion is based on a
total commitment ..... which many are unwilling to make or maintain.
I love the MTC and support all that it stands for, but I don't understand
how they can make a brand new building look like it is already 30 years old. I
was shocked when I saw the new building that was built about two years ago (I
think it's building 2M?) that blended in so well that it looked just as old
and plain as all the other buildings. They are special buildings and look better
on the inside, but I don't understand why they can't build it like the
Gordon B. Hinckley alumni building on campus. That's one of the most
spectacular buildings on any university campus.
JCH,"generic, loveless, beige garbage"A real
human being designed the building. That is the first thing that should be
considered when saying anything about it. In order to show respect we can all
refrain from calling it "hideous", "garbage" or "an
abomination".I like the design for the buildings intended
purpose. It wouldn't be appropriate in the middle of the City Creek Center
and much of the City Creek designs wouldn't be appropriate in the middle of
the MTC campus. In my opinion the building blends in very well and will likely
serve its intended purpose very effectively.It is nothing but good
news to see this moving forward.
The church is pragmatic----if this gets shot down, they will go to plan B.
They went down to plan Q, R and S with the Boston Temple. The Sacramento
temple had 4 years of roadblocks. The Newport Beach temple had opposition.
Buying Main Street from DEE DEE in Salt Lake took on a war of words with the
City Council. The Church said once they would build a temple in Hartford, CT,
then pulled the plug on that, said sorry and now in 2012 they are building a
temple in Hartford, CT. They have changed the location of the Philly temple
from initial plans. Change happens. Time does too.
I hope this doesn't block views of the Temple.
Of the views on the neighbor website, I'm most concerned about the view
from the temple. I love that view of Utah Lake, seems like this building will
be one of the few or only visual obstructions of that horizon. The other views
seemed tolerable, though I'm sure the building will be much more obvious
from those other locations during the winter without the tree foliage.I'm glad that green space will be added. It will make the long weeks of
training a little more bearable and therapeutic to have some space within the
campus.As for the design of the building itself, I'm not a huge
fan of the beige. I wish they'd consider going with the darker red brick
like they've started doing on the BYU campus with the Broadcasting building
and the new Heritage Halls. The orange beige is getting old, and the red brick
looks classier.If additional space is wanted, I think they could
relocate the chapel north of the MTC and expand the campus. There is some space
by the existing chapel and overflow parking up at the temple for another chapel.
I think 9 stories is to high. Its on the edge of a residential area. They have
the space to build a larger building with less stories
If you don’t even live in Provo, why would you care about this building
I have no problems with the expansion of the MTC, but my gosh, a 9 story
building right there in the middle of a residential area. There really has to
be a away of giving the MTC the additional needed capacity without such a
dramatic change to the surrounding neighborhood.9 stories... really?
A couple of 4 story buildings would impact the area so much less. But that is
just my opinion.
As I commented at the beginning....the hand wringing has come to fruition.
bluedevil:why not four two story buildings and one one story building?
maybe just go for nine one story buildings? i hate to mention it, but there is
this thing called economics. two buildings is considerably more expensive and
takes up that much more property.
I trust church officials to make the right decision economically. At least
it's not the government using my tax dollars to reward political
contributors. The church is growing as the dichotomy between good and evil
becomes more apparent. As the scriptures predicted, there would come a day when
good would be called evil and evil would be called good. That day is upon us.
If the church truly is led by prophets called of God, I certainly wouldn't
want to be on the side of those who oppose them at every turn.
Once again I recommend they name the new building after Hyrum Smith, a great
missionary and a brother to the prophet Joseph Smith. I don't know of a
building on the campus of BYU or in salt Lake City named after this great man a
What about all the old ugly houses around the MTC? Talk about eyesores. And
what about the trees? They are too tall to see over when I lie on the grass,
they block my view of the ugly houses. Get over it people!
We'll glad to know the church is doing it's part to keep Utah's
My degree is in architecture and personally, I see nothing wrong with the design
rendition - it seems to fit the overall flavor of the MTC campus. For that
reason, red brick, though "classy" would also not work.It
has always been interesting to me reading opinions on proposed construction of
temples and MTC structures on how the church doesn't really need something
that big. The church is pretty frugal with its funds, they aren't
designing and planning to be ostentatious, but to accommodate the needs at hand
and a reasonable amount of future growth.
A voice of Reason,You sure a human designed this? Looks
computer-generated to me. Whatever - “human-designed” isn’t a
useful architectural standard. Please tell us what you admire about this
design. Here’s what I deplore: 1. Homogenous blank face. This
entrance is as impressive as Costco’s rear loading dock. 2. Absence
of any curvature or grace. Utah’s original beautiful buildings were not
uniformly right-angled. They had softness and charm. Just compare Capitol
Theater’s or ZCMI’s facades and, e.g., Fashion Place Mall. 3.
Typologically indistinct. You can’t tell, from looking at it, that this is
where the Lord has called his priests to train. This edifice may as well be an
insurance claims processing center. The ICPC? There you go.4.
Soviet-style wind-swept plaza. Drawing aside, Provo in January and July is
foreboding. No pedestrians, and kiss that greenery buh-bye. The square will be
desolate and hopeless. 5. Zero exaltation of God, man, or landscape.
This building provides no adulation of God, nor celebration man’s dignity,
nor reverence for Utah’s geography. It’s just … nine stories
of glass and mortar, in the shape of a large stereo speaker.
" two buildings is considerably more expensive and takes up that much more
property."Really, since when? A 9 story building has many more
structural issues and cost than a 4 story building does per square foot cost, if
land is not an issue. And this isn't New York city, land cost are not the
highest contributing cost here. We aren't looking at maximizing revenue
here per square. There is a reason why you don't see vertical construction
when it isn't absolutely necessary."two buildings is
considerably more expensive and takes up that much more property."This isn't net new construction. This is replacement of an existing
structure. There could be very valid demolition cost issues, but when you are
replacing an existing foot print, land cost between the two examples is a moot
point.But thanks fort reminding me about economics.... gesh, forgot
all about those. Silly me.
I am a next door neighbor and while I don't like the height, I'll
accept the Church's ' decision on that, but I, too, would like a
lovely to look at building instead of the proposed generic look.