Taubman Partners and CCRI released there revised plans to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission Wednesday evening. The planning commission was mostly impressed by the changes Taubman came up with. From those on the commission who spoke it appears that the closed, heated skybridge plan will get final approval.

I somewhat reluctantly decided to speak at the meeting. I knew beforehand that I would have two minutes to try to make a decent point, which is a difficult challenge when considering the nuances of the CCRI Taubman Plans. I posted my two questions here, because I only finished the first part of my first question before I was told, "your time is up, please summarize," by the lead commissioner.

I've been opposed to the skybridge from the start. Not because it will obstruct the views of Ensign Peak. I was never aware that a pedestrian could see Ensign peak until this debate began. I'm not opposed to it because of the convenience it will provide shoppers. Not having a bridge will obviously make matters more difficult for shoppers and make the second level of retail far less desirable. So why am I opposed to the bridge? Because the South-end merchants don't want a bridge and the whole plan for two levels of outdoor retail is trendy. Any time projects are developed in the fashion of the day a timeless result is rarely achieved. The malls lasted less than thrity years-- they clearly demonstrate this point.

Consider the great cities and great places, not to shop but places to just be. Gateway might be a great place to shop, but I don't want to hang out there any longer than I have to. There is nothing to see other than then shoppers and--Gap, Victoria's Secret and AppleBees. The buildings aren't interesting, there are no great local shops or hang-outs, there are two fantastic levels of retail. However, from all the cities I've enjoyed in my life none have offered a second level of retail.

I haven't been to a great city where the main design principle was to fill "critical mass" of retail to achieve success. I know Salt Lake City is full of Stephan Covey wannabes but If the project goal is to achieve retail success then their goal is no different than the goal Boyer Company set out on when the build Gateway. I can see this project will be built with "timeless materials" unlike Gateway. Brick, stone and glass buildings will no doubt be a great improvement to downtown. There will be nice water features bigger fountains than Gateway a much nicer food court and a beautiful Nordstrom facade. However, CCRI could have set their sights much higher than building a better Gateway.

Ron Loch with Taubman Partners said "We expect downtown Salt Lake City to attract 10-12 million people annually." Is this really the best you can hope for? There are currently 7 million visitors coming to Temple Square every year. There are over one million visitors coming to Salt Lake City to ski. So they are shooting for a one-third increase in five years. This goal will be attained regardless of the City Creek Center, because Temple Square and Utah powder already make Salt Lake City special.

If the City Creek Center wanted to be about anything other than CCRI controlling city life in downtown, the streets would be public rather than private. CCRI could have strong local merchants bid on sub-dividing land and buildings so there could be a world-class Sam Weller bookstore 4 stories high in downtown. Or a Gourmandies bakery three stories high. Gastronomy could bid on building a truly world-class restaurant.

Other great cities have done this but this idea was not considered by Taubman and CCRI. I would like to find this out for myself why, if they would agree to an interview.

Examine what is currently happening in Ogden. Outdoor ski retailers are flooding Ogden City because Mayor Matthew Godfrey is offering incentives for them to locate there. The Solomon Center will be an incredible facility full of outdoor retailers. If CCRI wanted to they could make the City Creek Center full of outdoor retail, great restaurants and maybe a couple of upscale bars. These things would greatly enhance the city atmosphere and likely attract another couple of million skiers to the Salt Lake Valley. Instead they believe that if they didn't have the second level of retail there would be no hope for the project in attaining "critical mass and success."

Taubman and CCRI are underestimating the greatness of Salt Lake City and rather than take any kind of gamble they are going for the safest easiest bet, which is to emulate the most popular trend of the day. Salt Lake City is naturally one of the greatest cities on earth. Four world-class ski resorts are within a twenty-minute drive of the city. Four more if you want to drive 40 minutes. Denver doesn't come close neither does Aspen, Vail or any city in Europe. God made our valley one of the most beautiful in the world and rather than see this in all its greatness and uniqueness and building something that is truly unique, like our library on 400 South. CCRI and Taubman are playing it safe, treating Salt Lake City like any one of their other developments in any other city.