The Cottonwood project is the redevelopment of the 57.37 acre Cottonwood Mall site, located at Highland Drive and Murray-Holladay Road in Holladay, Utah, as a mixed-use (retail, office and residential) project. The currently proposed Cottonwood redevelopment project consists of a total estimated cost of over $550 million by the developer, with construction occurring over an estimated four year period. The first phase of the project is anticipated to be completed by Fall 2010. Of the 57.37 acres of property, the completed project will include 24 acres of commercial and residential structures, 20 acres of parking and streets and 13 acres of plazas, parks and public green space. A range of 454 to 614 residential housing units (inclusive of town homes, single family lots, cottages, condominiums and apartments) and approximately 579,000 to 772,000 square feet of commercial retail and office will be constructed on the site.
The Cottonwood Mall exists today as one of the oldest malls “West of the Mississippi.” Built in 1962, the mall site did not have the building and land code requirements that are enforced by today’s building code specifications. As a result, the entire mall today lies in the flood plain and sits on top of a high water table. In order to meet required codes, new bridges, site elevations, and building foundations will be required in order to build any type of project on the existing site. In addition to the federal and state requirements for the land improvements at the site, underground utilities, replacement of antiquated utilities, and overall infrastructure enhancements will be required, totaling over $100 Million in infrastructure costs alone.
Speculation that this project will proceed regardless of whether the TIF money is approved is false. Without infrastructure funding, General Growth Properties cannot feasibly or reasonably build the proposed project. Without funding, General Growth Properties’ $550 million will be invested in another community where a more acceptable return can be generated for General Growth Properties. Any project constructed on this site (whether Big Box, Mall, Residential) will have the same associated infrastructure costs regardless of the developer or project scope.
Who is Supporting This Project?
Economic growth is important to the community, the city, state and county. A vibrant Cottonwood project will be a key driver of that economic growth. Mayor Webb and the Holladay City Council, Holladay City Planners, state and local elected officials, including Senate and Representative Officials as well as the Holladay Chamber of Commerce and an overwhelming support from the Holladay Community.
How is Funding being Proposed?
Funding for the project will come from General Growth Properties’ investment. The Budget results are as follows:
- Value of Cottonwood Mall Property Today: $30 Million
- Value of FUTURE Cottonwood Property (if GGP invests $550 Million): $550 Million
- Property Tax Contribution of Cottonwood Today (All Taxing Entities): $330,921
- Property Tax Contribution of Cottonwood FUTURE (All Taxing Entities): $6,045,010
- Taxing Entities Receive 22% of Total Increment Per Year ($1.3 Million).
- Infrastructure Receives 78% of Costs per Year ($4.4 Million After 20 years).
- Taxing Entities Receive Full Increment per Year ($5.7 Million).
- All Taxing Entities receive a 500% increase in Property taxes during 20 year period, and receive a 2500% increase after the 20 year period, thus resulting in an economic benefit for all taxing entities and the development. This represents NO risk to any of the taxing entities and secures the redevelopment of the Cottonwood Mall by one of the world’s most financially stable developers.
Who Uses TIF?
California has used the TIF tool since 1952 and today, 49 states and the District of Columbia have TIF enabling legislation. While TIF is used as an economic staple in cities like Chicago and San Diego, smaller and mid-sized communities such as Salt Lake City are also using TIF as a financing tool to advance economic development priorities. TIF is attractive to governments and residents because TIF-generated funds can only be used to improve elements within the TIF district.
18 comments:
I received an anonymous mailer yesterday which attempts to incite fear and uncertainty regarding the proposed cottonwood mall development project. It does not provide contact coordinates for the people who created and circulated it, nor does it provide any unbiased information intended to actually inform my opinion about this matter. How do I put a stop to this sort of behavior?
In response to drinnovator - The mailer that has been sent out was sent by a citizens group in Holladay called 'Holladay Citizens United.' They are not related to the Holladay Chamber of Commerce, but as a Chamber we have been informed that they are in support of the Cottonwood Mall Project and are attempting to educate people by drawing them to our Chamber's Blog Site. The Chairman for this group is Mark Hurst as the mailer states on the front and the Treasurere of the group is Mark Mately. Both these individuals are listed in the phone book and can be contacted directly. Please contact the Holladay Chamber or visit our official website at www.holladaychamber.org to contact us directly.
Dave and Others,
Thank you for the information you have added to our site. The Holladay Chamber of Commerce established this site for the purpose of creating a forum for open discussion on the RDA. We have determined that the Cottonwood project cannot proceed without the funding made available under the TIF guidelines.
The City has already approved the Master Plan for the site. Hence, any debate on how the site will be developed is no longer relevant. Any concerns you may have should be directed to Holladay City or General Growth (The project developer).
As a Chamber it is our mission to promote a healthy business environment while enhancing the quality of life for the residents of Holladay City. Our support of this project is based on our active participation in all 37 of the public hearings held for the benefit of the residents of Holladay. In addition, we have carefully reviewed the proposed RDA plan and have been in direct discussions with its author, the developer, and Holladay City Officials.
As the Holladay Chamber Board Member responsible for overseeing this project I can assure you that my support of this development is based on fact, not emotion. Having personally attended the majority of public hearings regarding this issue I witnessed the painstaking effort that went into the design of a development that created the best of both worlds for the citizens of Holladay. Thousands of hours went into this process and no stone went unturned. The Mayor and City Council Members went to great efforts to protect the citizens of our fine city.
The rhetoric displayed by Mr. McAllister on this blog. is unfortunate because it seems to be voiced from a position ignorance to the facts. Public hearings were held and at times the debate on this issue was quite flavorful. During the 37 public meeting I don’t recall ever hearing a public or written statement from Mr. Mc McAllister. Concession were made but not by the residents. Several citizens voiced concerns about various issues and these issues were addressed and resolved to their satisfaction.
I feel confident in expressing my opinion that this is a wonderful project for the citizens of Holladay. I am also confident that my view is factually based and represents an overwhelming majority of individuals who support this improvement to our community.
Sincerely
Scott Kiser DDS
Great Stuff!
So what's the big deal? We are crazy if we stop this community development and I need a new place to shop that isn't 20 miles away
I don't have a problem with the mailer received regarding the need for a public-private partnership. What I do have a problem with is a mailer cluttering my desk without any real call for action. If Holladay Citizens United wants support of TIF funding it would be helpful to ask for more than simply visiting a blog. Do they want my money? Do they want me to call someone? Do they want me to email the various members of the Granite School Board or Salt Lake County Council as they have listed? I get it, NO TIF = NO GGP. Guess what . . .I have read the blog, I have read the comments, and we are no closer to funding then before. So what can we, as residents of the community do to get this done as quickly as possible? That is the real issue here, isn't it?
Jay Hart,
Please take a few minutes and share your thoughts with the contacts provided on your mailer. Your voice is important. The Citizens of Holladay are overwhelmingly in favor of the proposed plan but its future now rests in the hands of individuals who reside outside of our community. Your opinion does count.
Scott,
I don't understand where you're coming from. Why would it be ok for me to express my opinions in a public hearing, but I get slammed by you when I express them in a public blog?
Also, I wouldn't be so proud of supporting this development based on fact rather than emotion. The appearance of a neighborhood is an emotional thing. Traffic and convenience are emotional things. The kind of stores one chooses to shop at is an emotional thing.
This development needs to be designed and discussed based on both emotion and fact. I don't see anything wrong with expressing my emotions about what I think it should be like in this public forum. I think it should include, at least partly, an enclosed mall that's pleasant in the winter. Other people have left similar comments. I think all parking should be free. I think the residential and commercial parts of the project do me absolutely no good, except as tax base, and are an inconvenience.
You claim that "Several citizens voiced concerns about various issues and these issues were addressed and resolved to their satisfaction." And yet elsewhere in this blog you say that four or five people were persistently dissatisified with the plan. There are other people on this blog who have unresolved concerns, too. Holladay has over 20,000 people and I know that I'm not the only one who still has concerns about this development.
That's the emotions. Now the facts. Tax Increment Funding is giving future, guaranteed tax breaks to the developer that they would otherwise have to pay if their development existed but the TIF did not. In this case the current proposal is to give a tax break of an estimated $4.4 million per year for 20 years, or $88 million.
The big question is what if we (or rather the taxing entity boards) don't agree to that? What if we think the tax laws should apply equally to everyone, or that the burden this development places on the city and school district requires some of that $88 million as compensation, or for some other reason we don't choose to give that tax break? The answer is, we don't know because we can't see the future. In the absence of that absolute knowledge we have to do what people always do in these situations - work it out through thought, information, and negotiation. We never just give a private company $88 million of public money without lots of time, discussion, and study.
Now, that discussion and study is well under way by several people much closer to the situation than me and I trust that they're doing their best for their constituent groups. But the process is not over. It's only in the middle. GGP claims, "If we are unable to reach an agreement on the infrastructure assistance, we will be unable to move forward with our proposed plan." That's a fine and obvious step in the negotiation, but it's not the last step. Note that he didn't say, "If we do not receive the full $88M...". He's saying he wants to reach an agreement, or in other words, that he's willing to bargain. So let's encourage the Granite school board and the others to continue bargaining and arrive at a more fair amount of TIF. $88M is the starting number, not the final number.
What I would like to see is for this project to happen in approximately the way it's currently planned, but with us giving up as little of our rightful tax revenue as possible. It's a balancing act, and let's encourage the boards to get us the best deal they can.
David K. McAllister, Ph.D.
Dave, I've been involved in this process from the beginning and know how diligent the city and the developer have been to make this project work for Holladay. We live in a unique place in this valley. We have a great community and I believe that our elected officials and the developer have done all they can do to assure that this project fits in to our cultural, emotional and architectural landscape. There has been opposition in the city, but you represent a very small minority, some of whom, once they have invested the time to attend the meetings, meet with the developer and talk to the city, have become supporters. I don't recognize your name from any meetings, so either you have been silently in the background until now, or are just jumping on the bandwagon. That is not a criticism, but all of your arguments have been put on the table in numerous forums and I can't find anything in what you say to has merit at this stage of the game.
I want to make a couple of points regarding your arguments. First, regardless of what you think about TIF, the reality is that no one will develop this property without some kind of RDA or TIF Funding. Someone has floated this idea that if GGP doesn't develop the land, someone else will. I can tell you from what I know about the project and having been involved in numerous meetings, this will not happen. If you want the Cottonwood Mall property to remain a vacant lot, possibly for decades, then we should embrace your approach and wait for someone else with the money to come along. No matter the developer, no matter the project, the economics don't pencil out without some kind of TIF. Look at the numerous projects in this state that have relied on funding that WOULD NOT exist but for this resource. If you want a list of those projects, like the Gateway, let me know.
Second, you are right, we don't know the future. So, your option is to close our eyes and hope something happens. I believe a stronger, more visionary response is to encourage responsible development, inviting developers to utilize all of the tools that have been set up to create that development. Lacking the absolute knowledge that you seek, not much would ever happen anywhere.
Third, GGP is not being given $88 million in private money. But, since you have come very late to the game, I have to remind you again that there has been "lots of time, discussion and study." Over 40 public meetings. Several million dollars of money invested in the project by the developer to find the right plan that fits in to our community. There has been a lot of "thorough thought, information and negotiation." I am sorry you have not been privy to that, but I am not sure if we stop the train so you can catch up.
Finally, we are at the end of the day. General Growth has invested a lot of time, resources and money and while some would drag this out for ever, they want to start building or move on. This is not a threat, this is reality. At some point, they have to cut their losses. The GSD has all the information they need. This deal is wonderful for the kids in our school district. The GSD is not going to get a better deal. If fact, this deal is close to collapse. I would not want my legacy on that school board to be that I voted against a proposal that would have raised income streams from $37,000 per year to over a million for the next 20 and then to at least $4 million after that. At a time when education funding is scarce, I am amazed this is even an issue for the district.
I acknowledge your right to oppose this project on what ever grounds you feel are right. But, after lots of public comment, lots of meetings, lots of "thorough thought, information and negotiation," the will of the vast majority of the citizens of Holladay, our local and state elected leaders and community groups like the chamber should be heard and this project should go forward.
Scott Kiser DDS
Holladay Chamber Board Member
Wow. For a post with the word "facts" in all caps, it sure has surprisingly few of them.
You say "the reality is that no one will develop this property without some kind of RDA or TIF Funding." Is that one of your facts? How have you proven it, or how was it proven to you? You are trying to predict the future, which is not a fact. You can become convinced that you're right, which is totally fine, but that still doesn't make it a fact. It's still just your best assumption.
You say "Look at the numerous projects in this state that have relied on funding that WOULD NOT exist but for this resource." For every development you point to that used a TIF or RDA in Utah I will point to ten that didn't. So again, not a fact.
You say "Lacking the absolute knowledge that you seek, not much would ever happen anywhere." I don't seek absolute knowledge. My whole point is that we go forward and negotiate without absolute knowledge of what GGP will do. This is the opposite of being convinced that a certain outcome is a "FACT" if we don't give up all the money they want us to.
You and "OlyGuy" repeatedly mention the many meetings that you have attended and how convinced they have made you that things are as you say - that if we don't give up the full amount of TIF money being asked for then GGP will walk away and the land will sit vacant. I appreciate you going and I have no problem with you drawing that conclusion for yourself based on what you've heard. But I would sincerely like to hear what you have heard that makes you so convinced. For example:
* What have you heard or read that makes you believe that the TIF amount has to be $88M? What indicates to you that if the GSB voted to approve only half of that then GGP would walk away?
* What makes you so convinced that GGP is unwilling to negotiate anymore, when the quote in the flyer says that they want to reach an agreement?
* What is the Granite School Board's position? Why are you concerned that they won't approve this? What have they said? What are their reasons? You say "the will of our local and state elected leaders should be heard." What is the GSB saying?
I read the PDF file title “Facts_about_the new_cottonwood.”
http://www.cityofholladay.com/
Page 2, second paragraph
“Why is Tax Increment Financing Necessary for Cottonwood Redevelopment?” Some
have suggested that if the district votes no, another project will move forward with
private money. That is highly unlikely.
When did the chance of another project moving forward change from being “highly unlikely”, to being factually impossible.
Dave-
I can only respond to you by the FACTS of this project as the City, Developer, and Experts have presented them to the public. I give these FACTS not on speculation, but on what information is currently available to the entire public through the City Offices:
FACT: The total site infrastructure costs for the proposed development is $101 Million dollars Net Present Value (not to be confused with Future Value over a 20 year period). This cost includes, roads, flood plain raising, utilities, bridge structures, creek relocation, and seismic upgrades to the site. This is a public document that is available at the city and is available for all public to review. This spreadsheet includes a detailed breakdown of all infrastructure costs as reviewed and approved by the city’s engineer and consultants.
FACT: GGP and the City have apparently negotiated the TIF amounts to the final breakpoint of the developer for the past months. The negotiations finalized where 22% of the 100% of the new tax value would flow back to the taxing entities. Thus, only 78% of the TOTAL tax incentives would be available to put towards infrastructure costs. The AVERAGE of the 20 year period of Tax Revenues generated is $5.7 Million per year. 22% of that amount flows back to the taxing entities (i.e. City, School District, County, etc.) which yield a yearly average of approximately $1.3 Million during the 20 year RDA. This means that $4.4 Million per year average yields $88 Million over 20 years as you’ve calculated. Remember, however that the $88 Million is NOT Net Present Value, and thus with a standard discount rate applied, the $65 Million NPV that has been negtioated yields a Future Value of $94 Million, according to the City RDA Budget (also available at the city offices for public review). The necessary funds to make this project happen with the 22/78% split are still approximately $6 Million short over the 20 years, which will most likely come from Sales Tax Incentives. It’s also important to note that $10 Million of the RDA budget will be used by the City for Road improvements on highland drive, and other Public Places that the developer does not own.
The developer also has demonstrated with again PUBLIC DOCUMENTATION to the city (as was reported to over 100 citizens at a public meeting on December 4th) that with the current proposed $65 Million in Net Present Value Tax Increment Funding it will still only be able to achieve a single digit return. When the developer was asked why the company was willing to take a single digit return, it was expressed that General Growth Properties is trying to make a statement with this new type of development regarding sustainability, green, and responsible development growth. It was explained that Cottonwood is one of the first types of this development for the company, and as a flagship for future development, it is willing to take a less optimal return in order to make a statement of responsible development. Based on these FACTS, it seems that your accusation that we are “giving up everything” is simply not true. You mentioned in one of your posts earlier that $20 Million seemed like a more appropriate number. What are you basing that on? Is there another RDA of this caliber that used $20 million? RDAs are a government tool that has been approved by the legislature in order to encourage development. According to the RDA “But4” test, this meets all of the requirements established by law. If you want to argue the law that has been established by our Government, that’s fine; but as far as the Chamber is concerned, we must support following the guidelines that our government has established.
In short, the facts are that the city and GGP have participated in many negotiates and it appears that they have gone from a 100% Tax Increment to a 78% Tax Increment. Who knows, over the course of the next few weeks before the Granite School District Meeting, this may change in other negotiations. It is important to note, however that the City of Holladay is driving this budget negotiation process with the Taxing Entities and not the Developer. Thus, it behooves us as citizens to rally behind our elected officials as they approach the other taxing entities such as the school and county and assure that our interests as the citizens of Holladay are taken into account when these other taxing entities are making decisions.
FACT: No one knows what truly will happen if the TIF and RDA are not approved by the Taxing entities. This is the BIG question we should all be asking… As a Chamber, we agree 100% with your comment Dave that we should not approve the RDA IF and ONLY IF this project will move forward anyways without the assistance of a subsidy. The only facts we can trust is what has been presented to us by the developer, the city, and other experts. All of this information has been presented and is available for public review. Even if the developer is “bluffing” as you claim they are; are we really willing to take a gambled risk on the future of Holladay? I ask if you or anyone for that matter has factually proof that the developers is bluffing? All the factually information I have seen shows that they are NOT bluffing and have disclosed all the facts. I certainly for one do not think it is sound and prudent judgment on any of our part to gamble the risk of losing this project all together!
FACT: The developer is willing and has been in negotiations for months and has reached an agreement with the majority of taxing entities except Granite School District. Granite School District is very apprehensive to vote for this project because a special interest group called the Utah Taxpayers Association that is headed by Howard Stephenson, a Senator in Draper, has threatened the School Board that if they approve Cottonwood, the legislature will not give them any more funding at the capitol; which is simply not true; and all of the Senators and Representatives of Holladay are in full support of the RDA. The group threatening the School District is a small interest group that would rather see Taxes go up in Holladay, and has caused much doubt in the School Board Members minds. This is where we need to unite as citizens. The Granite School Board is represented by 1 member on the East side (Carol Canon) and the rest all reside on the West side. Comments have been made by these board members during the Board Meetings that have been attended by members of the Chamber that indicate there is still some resentment with the School Board on the residnent's of Holladay desire to split the district. Hopefully the Granite School District will make a decision based solely on the merits of this project, however there are definitely politics at work on other issues that may effect their ability to make an unbiased decision for the Cottonwood RDA Approval.
Dave, I truly believe that you have the same objectives at the end of the day as the Holladay Chamber of Commerce, which is to assure the future viability of our community. We may agree to disagree on some of the minor issues, but we all want what is best for our community in Holladay. We need to unite together and call the school board members and express our support in this project.
The Bottom Line of what we need from all residences of Holladay: Call the School District Board Members and express your support for this project and encourage the School District to Vote for the RDA and Tax Increment financing on January 15th. Don’t let the School Board and this other special interest group dictate or hinder the future of Holladay! The future of Holladay is literally at stake here! For those individuals who have questions, we encourage them to contact the City of Holladay as well as the developer. Both are very open to discussions and are very willing to discuss all issues with citizens.
Thanks for that additional explanation, Scott. A fair amount of it was new information. Can I suggest that you make a new blog entry out of an edited version of it? The paragraph with the detailed percentages and the part about the Granite school board politics in particular, and why, exactly, this mailer wants people to get involved.
Just edit out the word "FACT". For example, "FACT: GGP and the City have apparently..." The words "fact" and "apparently" are contradictory. This is not a fact, but your assumption based on the facts.
Also, as an "expert" on a few small things I can tell you that reports by experts, such as traffic studies, contain factual past data, factual average trends, etc., but their projections of future traffic, future tax flow, future spending, etc. are not facts. They are factually-based estimates and educated guesses. We can't accept them as prophesy.
For example, I am skeptical of the study claiming that the future traffic at that site, with over 500 new residences, many stores, and tons of offices could possibly have less traffic than the old mall. And yes, I know that study didn't come from the developer.
I also want to make the point that just because TIFs and RDAs are allowed by state law doesn't mean it's right to use it on this project. And saying that this one meets all the requirements of the state law isn't saying much.
The big question, as we've both mentioned, is still whether we can get away without it. Or, as other commentors have asked, is it the right and fair thing to do? I'm not convinced either way. I'm an egalitarian kind of guy and don't like to see any company get special treatment. On the other hand, this development would be a nice looking place and if it has free parking, accessible stores (physically and price-wise), and doesn't cause big traffic problems then it's probably worth us giving up some tax income for, but not 78%.
Well, I'd better get on with my life and not spend any more time writing here. I did write to all of the granite school board and asked their opinions on the matter. If I hear anything noteworthy maybe I'll pass it along.
Dave
I am just done reading this long list of comments...I hope Ms McKitrick from SLC Tribune is taking notes on these excellent points brought forward by all parties and making these interesting issues more well known to the general community at large.
I have a grandmother living within a mile of this proposed development and she tells me that very little information has been available to the general public on this new development...although older, she reads local media very carefully and has been a long term resident. Suffice to say, she is very concerned about what is not being broadcasted to the overall populace.
I appreciate Cary and Dave and Paula's comments... we need to address these larger issues well before any discretionary actions are taken by our City leaders. I have personally made attempts to gain information at City Hall and only been told "how large this project is and how this deal is being pushed through" ...essentially, information was not available at the counter -- this was last August 2007 -- however, City Council was being organized for a vote prior year end!
Why is such a large development, especially one that has such serious implications, not being more openly discussed and transparent to the constituents of our Holladay? How many community meetings have taken place on this development? please point me to the source of information that has publicized the answers to all of the pertinent questions.
We really need to get this communication string out to our general population and make certain that all the facts are well known. Again, for a $550 Million investment opportunity to only have a few SLC Tribune articles seems very suspicious. Paula, Dave and Cary bring up issues that absolutely need more information, discussion and transparency.
I heard that a Master Plan was approved by the City Planners...is this true and how far along is this development discretionary approval?
Concerned and Cautious
As an additional note, i just finished reading the January 04 2008 articles written by Ms McKitrick of SLC Tribune. She did locate and broadcast some opinions not supporting the GGP Cottonwood Mall makeover, however, as shown by this blog and replies to her articles within the www.sltrib.com website, we appear to be scratching the surface of a very significant development.
Ms McKitrick did make note that the Holladay City Council made some adjustment to the Master Plan to allow buildings OVER 90 feet in height? what does this exactly mean -- can the buildings be built more than 90 feet -- is there any height limitation imposed? 90 feet translates into possible 10 story buildings off the surface elevation -- and this is not the limit according to the article!
I am concerned about the following issues not being reflected in the documents shown on the City of Holladay website -- Cottonwood Mall Redevelopment by General Growth Properties:
* community contributions to Parks and Open Space(offsite of the development);
* commitments being made to developing a "green and sustainable" project;
* mitigation of traffic impacts as a result of a possible 1,000 plus new automobiles in the neighborhood;
* community center contributions being built onsite or offsite;
* contributions to our local public schools/education system --
what are the possible impacts to the local elementary schools with new population moving into area over next ten(10) years?
These are just a few thoughts about what should be discussed PRIOR to obtaining entitlement approvals by Holladay City Council. i am growing more concerned about the recent speed of approval for such an ambitious development, esp with so many "moving parts" concerning the community.
GGP is well respected and an international group with the experience and capital to make this vision a reality. A combined effort is necessary between Government(Holladay), Private Industry(GGP) and Community(residents).
Planning is a long exhaustive effort which should yield the best outcome for the long term investors - the residents of the community.
Concerned and Cautiously Optimistic
Over 40 public meetings have been held on this subject, including a meeting on December 4 that all Holladay residents were invited to attend. Residents were notified of this meeting by mail.
thanks for your updated information. Since you seem to have a lot of community information, can you refer us to where we can obtain information on the results of these Community meetings. I assume you are speaking about either Community "Key Stakeholder's" meetings and/or Community General Public meetings. I can not find any literature that highlights either the announcements or the results of these 40 meetings. Since about July, i really have only known about approx 5 meetings at most.
Pls alert GGP that highlighting these meetings and summarizing their extensive effort to gain local Community support would be a huge benefit -- especially if shown on their website. This could help all of us understand that we apparently missed the announcements. You were correct in that a mailer was sent out for the Dec 4th meeting -- which i believe is a statutory requirement imposed upon the City Council whenever they consider a General Plan amendment being voted and ratified.
I look forward to your immediate reply.
back to cautious and concerned again
Public meetings have included meetings of the city council, planning commission meetings, neighborhood meetings, Chamber of Commerce meetings and general public meetings with this issue as the primary agenda item. The city is probably the best place to seek highlights of those meetings.
General Growth Properties has provided to us the key facts and figures related to his project which we have posted on the front page of this blog. Additional information is available at the city offices. We also suggest that if you have questions, General Growth Properties has been very willing to meet with individual citizens on this issue and address their concerns.
The December 4 meeting was not required by statute, but was hosted by the city in an effort to invite anyone who had missed previous meetings to attend and see the presentation by GGP and ask questions of the mayor and the developer. It was hoped that by sending a mailer directly to each home in the city detailing the purpose of this meeting that anyone who had not been aware of previous meetings could attend. About 150 people attended this meeting. This meeting was not required by law but held as a courtesy to the citizens. There have been three additional meetings (planning council and city council) since that December 4 meeting that citizens were encouraged to attend. ( Under Utah Code Sec 10-9-103.5 all of the 40 plus public meeting were advertised in the legal section of both major newspapers, the city website, posted at the city hall as well as the city hall's of Murray and Cottonwood Heights)
Unfortunately, you have many questions that have been raised and answered over the past many months and rather than try and "unring the bell" on this project, the Chamber recommends that you contact either the city or the developer to respond to your individual questions.
I am not familiar with the term "Unring the Bell", however, i do feel that the taxpayer constituents of the Holladay community deserve more clarity and transparency about this very significant development. $550 Million investment is a large sum and the $70 Million funded by future taxes is even more dramatic since this impacts individual households. Understanding the impacts to the local community is the primary issue.
Taking your advice, i went to the City of Holladay website and found an EMPTY page when linking to the "Cottonwood Mall" link. When is researched deeper into the announcements made by City of Holladay, i only found broadcasts of the recent decisions by City of Holladay leadership concerning this ambitious Cottonwood Mall development.
Most concerning, was the PRESS RELEASE dated July 5th by developer General Growth Properties from Chicago. I am curious if the SLC Tribune might have picked up on this Press announcement. Concerning to me is that the entire $550 million development has been Master Planned and APPROVED by City Council within a SIX MONTH window. As of December 2007, this deal was completed and approved by our City leaders. btw, I was in the City of Holladay planning department as of August 2007 seeking information and i could not find any relevant information about the impacts this development would have on the local Holladay community...schools, traffic, taxes, floodplains, etc. In fact, i was told by City staff that more information was forthcoming and was being pushed through like a locomotive through the City approval process... although, none of that key information was available at that time. Since late August, planning staff somehow organized themselves to support a key staff report to City Council to approve this plan?
Within six(6) short months, holidays included, City leadership was able to host over 40 meetings which were accessible to the public?
I have looked and researched for the documentation on these supposed 40 meetings -- which should be clearly outlined in some sort of Community plan that the developer would sponsor...i can not locate. Pls answer my question about where i can find that the information was provided to the public -- further, that the Community was provided sufficient time to read & understand the information and potential impacts -- both financial and environmental.
I ask you to show me how this large scale developer has worked with the Community at large and how they have communicated about the progress made in the Community.
Your references seem correct, however, my own personal investigation has been that the City of Holladay(which is chartered with this responsibility) has not done very well in maintaining a clear and open communication. I would assume that their(City of Holladay) well organized website would be the best forum, esp since the GGP developer has done so well in creating all documents in electronic format. However, my best efforts have not found the 40 meetings you describe.
The Holladay Community members deserve better information and clarification of the potential impacts.
growing more concerned
Post a Comment