how are areas picked for getting a Temple

[Duncan]

I am curious as to how an area is picked to get a Temple, not the actual physical location of the Temple, but the city itself. Does the Church come to the local leaders and say we want to build a Temple here or do the local leaders make some kind of an appeal to the Church? What is the process?

[The Nehor]

I know a little bit about how two temples were built. Take it for what it is worth. Not sure how standard they were.

The Area Authorities work with the Twelve/FP to see the need. It's considered, likely usage of the temple, members in area, how many temple recommend holders are in the area. All go through whatever statistics groups. I know one the statistics said it wasn't needed but the Prophet and the Twelve (through revelation presumably) said it would be needed. The Church Building Department gets involved. The only way I know local leaders get involved in this stage is suggestions for where and working with Severnties and/or the Twelve to give them options as to where.

Then they hire people to design and build it with Seventies going over most of the work.

It's bare-bones but I was on the periphery of it.

[Duncan]

I know a little bit about how two temples were built. Take it for what it is worth. Not sure how standard they were.

The Area Authorities work with the Twelve/FP to see the need. It's considered, likely usage of the temple, members in area, how many temple recommend holders are in the area. All go through whatever statistics groups. I know one the statistics said it wasn't needed but the Prophet and the Twelve (through revelation presumably) said it would be needed. The Church Building Department gets involved. The only way I know local leaders get involved in this stage is suggestions for where and working with Severnties and/or the Twelve to give them options as to where.

Then they hire people to design and build it with Seventies going over most of the work.

It's bare-bones but I was on the periphery of it.

Interesting!

[LeSellers]

I am curious as to how an area is picked to get a Temple ... the city itself. Does the Church come to the local leaders and say we want to build a Temple here or do the local leaders make some kind of an appeal to the Church?

I have no more information than is available on the web and elsewhere in the media. However, I believe it was the Temple in northern Texas (Amarillo?) that was chosen because a stake president sent a map of Texas with an overlay of Utah and a note saying that in the Utah area, there were a dozen temples, and in that same geographic surface area around Amarillo, there were none.

As I understand it, Temples with great usage (like those in the Salt Lake Valley) are most likely to get "supplemented" because there is the greatest demand by the Saints. Here, in Denver, it is nearly impossible to get into the Saturday Temple session you arrive for because there are so many others ahead of you. On the other hand, Tuesday through Friday (except Friday night), it's two brothers in a row (and two rows empty), three sisters in a row (and one row empty). I believe there will be no new Temple in the Denver area for a while, Ft Collins notwithstanding. I'd like to see one in Colorado Springs: it's a dangerous trip in the winter and we have had several crashes (no one seriously hurt) in those months just since we've been here (seven years). But until those empty seats are full on Thursday morning, it doesn't look reasonable. (I have been wrong before, twice today, already, so don't hold me to this.)

The new Temple in Rome is another example of the needs of the Saints coming before the strict "more use, more Temples" rule. We lived in Naples (our younger daughter was born there) in the mid-to-late 70s. The local branch (non USmerican servicemen's branch) saved for three years to get enough members and money to do a "Temple trip" to Zolikoffen, Switzerland. It was in early spring (warm in Naples, cold and snowy in Switzerland), and the Neapolitan Saints were poorly prepared for the weather. The bus was full, there were whole families who crowded into three or four seats (for a nine-hour, one-way trip). They camped nearby, with no hot water, stripped to the waist and took cold "showers" the morning they went for their ordinances, especially sealings, and took turns baby-sitting each other's children so the adults could receive their endowments. It was a huge sacrifice for them. Thirty years later, I doubt any of them regret their offering, but I have no doubt, either, that they'd much have preferred having a Temple in Rome where they could take the train and worship there every month or even weekly.

The Saints in Australia used to save everything, sell everything, travel to New Zealand, and come home broke, but sealed, and count it as the Pearl of Great Price in their lives. I do not recall which (I believe President M^cKay) General Authority said it, but he told the Australians to stop going to the Temple in New Zealand and donate the money they would have spent to the Temple fund for one in their own back yard.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

I believe President Monson addressed this question, at least in part, in his closing remarks in the Sunday morning session.

As I had mentioned, the needs of the Saints play an important role in these decisions. But, in addition, we cannot rule out (and indeed, should definitely rule in) revelation. He mentioned Temples in Brazil, the first of which was in S

[cdowis]

I understand that some temples were based on the number of family file submissions for that area. They want a temple where the members show an active interest in doing their own family temple work, rather than the "welfare line".

[Kenngo1969]

I am curious as to how an area is picked to get a Temple, not the actual physical location of the Temple, but the city itself. Does the Church come to the local leaders and say we want to build a Temple here or do the local leaders make some kind of an appeal to the Church? What is the process?

Well, first, President Monson is taken into a room with a world map on a wall, he's blindfolded and spun several times in a counterclockwise direction, and ... (Sorry; couldn't resist.)

[Corvus]

As I understand it, Temples with great usage (like those in the Salt Lake Valley) are most likely to get "supplemented" because there is the greatest demand by the Saints. Here, in Denver, it is nearly impossible to get into the Saturday Temple session you arrive for because there are so many others ahead of you. On the other hand, Tuesday through Friday (except Friday night), it's two brothers in a row (and two rows empty), three sisters in a row (and one row empty). I believe there will be no new Temple in the Denver area for a while, Ft Collins notwithstanding. I'd like to see one in Colorado Springs: it's a dangerous trip in the winter and we have had several crashes (no one seriously hurt) in those months just since we've been here (seven years). But until those empty seats are full on Thursday morning, it doesn't look reasonable. (I have been wrong before, twice today, already, so don't hold me to this.)

Lehi

Given the...uh..."fundamental" nature of Colorado Springs, I'd expect there to be a huge stink about a Temple being built here. I like the area, but some of the people in this town...

[LeSellers]

Given the...uh..."fundamental" nature of Colorado Springs, I'd expect there to be a huge stink about a Temple being built here. I like the area, but some of the people in this town...

Tuffahnem.

I suspect that are other towns in the AO that would welcome a major attraction like a House of the Lord. Pueblo isn't that far, and might even be a better choice.

Lehi

[LDS Guy 1986]

I am curious as to how an area is picked to get a Temple, not the actual physical location of the Temple, but the city itself. Does the Church come to the local leaders and say we want to build a Temple here or do the local leaders make some kind of an appeal to the Church? What is the process?

They look at need among the membership, this is how all the building of the Church is done. They look at the membership needs in the area, the membership numbers (especially the number of active temple recommend holding members), and use there resources the best they can to provide the most benefit to the greatest number of members that they can.

It appears that there goal is to get enough temples so every members is within 200 miles of a temple, whenever you hear them talking about a temple they are always taking about how X% of the membership is within 200 miles of a temple. So I am guessing that they are striving to have get temples within 200 miles of areas with sufficient growth and membership numbers to fully use and staff a temple.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Given the...uh..."fundamental" nature of Colorado Springs, I'd expect there to be a huge stink about a Temple being built here. I like the area, but some of the people in this town...

No matter where a temple is built though there is always at least a little stink made, look at the Temple in AZ, the people there fought it tooth and nail, but the temple was still approved by the zoning board.

The Church doesn't look at "where will a temple cause the least amount of protest", the Boston MA temple was surrounded by controversy, the Church was sued over building the temple and even had to stop construction of it's steeple because of a lawsuit and couldn't finish construction till several years after the temple was dedicated.

The Church doesn't care about how many people will resist them, they care about the needs of the membership, if the membership is large enough to put a temple in Colorado Springs, you can bet that the Church is more than willing to do whatever is in it's power to try and see that it happens, that includes going to court if needed.

[LeSellers]

they are striving to have get temples within 200 miles of areas with sufficient growth and membership numbers to fully use and staff a temple.

Two hundred miles is still about four hours, not an insignificant trip.

There is always a cost v benefits analysis that applies, in everything. Temples are not inexpensive. Trips to the Temple are not cheap when they involve four hours or more of driving. The Brethren probably don't approach the Lord and ask if a Temple in, say, Colorado Springs is acceptable until they determine that there are enough Saints who'd use it to make the expense worth while. As there are more resources available for building Temples, I expect that the goal, if distance is the major motivation, will drop from four hours to two, then to one. Temples will, as President M^cKay promised, "dot the land". It's already happening in Utah, seems like it in California and Idaho.

But the constraints are two: we need Saints who will attend and worship there, and we need the resources to build them.

As I recall, when told that the bells of Hell ring out in opposition to new Temples, Brigham Young said, "I want to hear them more." So do I.

Lehi

[LDS Guy 1986]

Two hundred miles is still about four hours, not an insignificant trip.

When you take it in context of the numerous Saints that have spent life savings to travel over 2,500 miles to go to a temple (a trip that takes several weeks or months depending on transportation used) striving to get a temple within 4 hours or 200 miles (a distance reduction of 99.92%) that is a infinite help for members.

If you have a temple you can reach in 4 hours instead of 4 weeks, (which for Saints in North Carolina that was the case for many years, until the Washington DC Temple was built, now with the Raleigh NC Temple anyone in the State of North Carolina is within 3 hours of a temple) that makes attending temple much more achievable. There is always sacrifice involved in going to the temple even if one simply has to walk across the street, one still has to sacrifice time and energy to get across the street and have to still sacrifice parts of there agency to be worthy to hold a temple recommend.

If I currently have to make a 2,500 mile trip to go to the temple, I would be truly blessed to find out in a few short years I will have a temple 200 miles away!

[LeSellers]

If you have a temple you can reach in 4 hours instead of 4 weeks, that makes attending temple much more achievable. If I currently have to make a 2,500 mile trip to go to the temple, I would be truly blessed to find out in a few short years I will have a temple 200 miles away!

I have not argued the contrary. See here.

Lehi

[Magyar]

Sigh. I live in beautiful, historic Virginia. We may very well become the last state in the Union to get a temple. Perhaps as punishment for the Civil War. Our closest temple is in Washington D.C. I'd almost rather drive all the way to Ohio than deal with the satanic D.C. traffic. Takes the better part of a day to get through it home and one loses one's religion along the way.

But then I remember that guy who worked seven years in a nickel mine to pay for his temple trip.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Sigh. I live in beautiful, historic Virginia. We may very well become the last state in the Union to get a temple. Perhaps as punishment for the Civil War. Our closest temple is in Washington D.C. I'd almost rather drive all the way to Ohio than deal with the satanic D.C. traffic. Takes the better part of a day to get through it home and one loses one's religion along the way.

But then I remember that guy who worked seven years in a nickel mine to pay for his temple trip.

Depending on where you live in VA, you might be in the Raleigh NC temple district, I know several of the temple workers are from southern VA.

I agree though Norfolk or Richmond could use it's own temple.

I think the reason why NC got a temple before VA, was because we were simply further from the DC temple than you were.

[LDS Guy 1986]

I have not argued the contrary. See here.

Lehi

I understand I was simply pointing out that when you take things in context of the sacrifices many have made, a 4 hour drive is not as major a sacrifice. Especially if you have ward temple trips where they would rent a van and go as a group like my stake used to do after the DC Temple was built and before the Raleigh Temple was built.

Of course we still have ward temple trips but the frequency has increased (annually to monthly) and now people drive themselves or car pool since the temple is only 45 mins away.

[Magyar]

Depending on where you live in VA, you might be in the Raleigh NC temple district, I know several of the temple workers are from southern VA.

I agree though Norfolk or Richmond could use it's own temple.

I think the reason why NC got a temple before VA, was because we were simply further from the DC temple than you were.

I don't begrudge NC their temple. Would have to have been a two-day trip for them to get to DC. I have been told that most of the northern folk that used to go to DC don't come anymore, now that there are temples in NY and PA. So if a temple were to be built in VA, the gorgeous DC temple would stand empty.

[LDS Guy 1986]

Well, first, President Monson is taken into a room with a world map on a wall, he's blindfolded and spun several times in a counterclockwise direction, and ... (Sorry; couldn't resist.)

You know that this will become an instant rumor about temple site selection! ROFL

[Sky]

In the case of the newly announced temple in Fort Collins, Colorado, I believe it is a completely logical place to build it. I

[Duncan]

Sigh. I live in beautiful, historic Virginia. We may very well become the last state in the Union to get a temple. Perhaps as punishment for the Civil War. Our closest temple is in Washington D.C. I'd almost rather drive all the way to Ohio than deal with the satanic D.C. traffic. Takes the better part of a day to get through it home and one loses one's religion along the way.

But then I remember that guy who worked seven years in a nickel mine to pay for his temple trip.

One of the reasons why I asked this question! For us here in Canada,getting the new Temple, it is an EASY 6 hour drive, my word Canada HWY#1 is straight across for the most part! You have to overnight it but the saints in Regina are very accomodating and the local Hotels even have a Mormon discount thing set up