Jump to content

Locals in Erda, Ut Complain Re: Temple Development, Church Responds....


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

It happens over and over again. A temple is announced and local NIMBYs get nasty about letting it in. The Church jumps through all the hoops, finally gets it built, property values skyrocket in the surrounding neighborhood, and nobody really remembers what the fuss was about. 
 

Somebody told Brigham Young he hated to see construction continue on the Salt Lake Temple, because whenever the Church had begun to build a temple in the past, the “bells of hell” would begin to ring. 
 

Brigham’s reply: “I want to hear them ring again.”

Brigham's confidence is something I hope to one day obtain.

Building a temple will make the "bells of hell ring"? Ring 'em louder!

The Church will be destroyed by the incoming railroad? Build it faster! 

Brigham was just fearless. He didn't care. He just bulldozed. Perhaps some restraint may have been in order on some things, but darned do I admire his absolute conviction that God was with him and the work and hell or high water would just have to get out of the way. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Lot easier to say Doo-SHANE. 

lot easier to say doosh if we're going for easy.

Link to post
2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yeah.  Property proximate to Salt Lake and its environs (north, west, and south) will have a hard time staying "rural."  And at some point the preferences of the property owners will turn from "I like my cows and a quiet way of life" to "I like the millions of dollars I can make selling my farm to a developer."  And the Powers-that-Be will like the added business and tax revenues that inevitably follow such development.

I have memories growing up in the 80s of Orem having all sorts of orchards.  They are very few and far between now.  North Utah County has exploded over the last 20+ years.  The same will happen in Erda, methinks.

Thanks,

-Smac

We lived with my grandma for a few months in 69 in Provo, went to BYU late 70's and early 80's and it was already looking too crowded to me.  We have been here on our third move after marriage over 15 years now (longer than we were in Canada sniff) and I still can't really connect what I see now with what I saw then in many places.  It is disorienting to drive through a neighbourhood that looks like it did in the 60's and then hit something from the last 5 years.  Downtown Provo is weirdest because you have the old homes surrounding it and then the towers.  Orem business zone is most confusing because it seems rather random, especially where they placed the taller development.

Mapleton was around 6,000 when we first moved in, now over 10,000.  With the newer developments of small condos and townhouses, the under 3% growth rate may change soon.  Sewer limits is probably what has kept the growth relatively slow and steady.  They have had a problem ensuring enough infrastructure without raising property taxes too much as they don't have very much commercial at all...though this is starting to change a bit.  We will likely be moving out into a more manageable home within 5 years or so (I want to build at least one home I live in rather than having to make do and don't want to wait until I am too tired to care, pretty much waiting for the dog to die at this point before we start getting serious as she handles change even worse than I do and I want to skip the hair in every nook and cranny and the pee pads), but if we could afford the home we need to build here, I would so stay.  Best location in Utah Valley imo and probably will stay that way until at least I am dead.   So many trees, much more green compared to elsewhere.  No billboards that I can remember...  Can still hear sheep and roosters at night, enjoy the horses on my walks though no longer see them when washing dishes.

I back the residents wanting their neighborhood to stay the way they like it, the way they paid for when they moved in, but I also understand the desire of others to have a pleasant place to live.  Hopefully they can keep much of the character through careful planning rather than a hodgepodge approach.

  • Like 1
Link to post
7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I had never been there before learning the pronunciation at a very young age. The knowledge never left me. 
 

And if you regularly view or hear local newscasts in Utah, you’re apt to hear the name quite a bit. 

I can’t remember ever hearing it on the news, but maybe I haven’t paid attention.

Maybe the struggle comes from reading it so many times before I knew how to pronounce it. In my head it’s always du-ches-ney first and then du-SHANE second. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

e before learning the pronunciation at a very young age.

That tends to make a big difference.

  • Like 2
Link to post
3 minutes ago, Calm said:

That tends to make a big difference.

Umm, don’t think so in this case. 
 

Despite having lived in Utah my whole life, I had never heard the local pronunciation of Mantua until I moved to Brigham City in my late-20s to cover Box Elder County for the Ogden Standard-Examiner. I only had to hear it once to have it down. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
Link to post
48 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I thought we were going for correct. 

Yeah I did too.  It's Scott's fault that he did what he did.

 

edited to add:  oh that comment was from you!  Great Scott!

Edited by Ahab
Link to post

Three guesses Scott on how to pronounce the name Dalzeil . No fair googling. Also, I mis- pronounced the name of Dubois Idaho when I had to stop there once. The locals gave me an odd look. Apparently my high school French was wrong. 

By the way, if you are looking for a place to be by yourself, Canada has 3.5 million sq. km. of forest or 35% of its total land area so you can really get lost. Mind you, it can be a bit nippy at times. Note: one sq km is about 250 acres. 

Edited by strappinglad
  • Like 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The same scenario happened in Draper, which is just over the boundary from where I live. 
 

I wonder how many of those objecting have strong roots in the area. It’s not uncommon for newcomers to move into an area and then want to shut the door on anybody else coming in afterward. 

I am in awe of the Draper Temple.  One of my favorite peaceful places.  I bicycle up there often. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
10 hours ago, smac97 said:

"A developer is someone who wants to build a house in the woods. An environmentalist is someone who already has a house in the woods." --Dennis Miller

I empathize with everyone, the long-timers and newbie interlopers alike.  We all have property rights.  We all want a nice place to live.  We all need a place to live that is affordable, and within reasonable distance of good jobs.  And we want to keep things the way we like them.  These interests are somewhat in competition with each other, as are homeowners and developers.  

Satisfaction with your home, and where your home is located, are big factors in your overall quality of life.

Thanks,

-Smac

I like your Dennis Miller quote. That pretty much nails it. 
 

We all hope for a certain quality of life, but at the end of the day, our hopes and expectations have to be within the parameters of what the law and local governing entities allow or prohibit. I think it unrealistic to expect an isolated or rural area to retain that character permanently. 
 

I’m reminded of when I bought my home new back in 1993. Behind my house were abandoned former farm fields. Between the fields and my house was a set of railroad tracks. I remember clearly that the written real estate appraisal made note of the tracks and said they did not adversely affect the value of the property because they were rarely used and in fact were rusty. If anything, they were a benefit, because they would preclude encroachment behind the house. 
 

A lot has happened since then. A residential subdivision soon sprang up on the former farm fields as dense as the one my house is in. The state transit authority built a high-speed, light-rail system  for which they bought up the rail right-of-way that runs behind my house. There is now a passenger platform with a park-and-ride lot behind my house, and the trains come through and stop there three or four times an hour going each direction. Parallel to the railroad, a paved and well-used pedestrian and bicycle trail has been constructed. 
 

I haven’t really minded. The occupants of the newer homes have generally been good neighbors, and the light-rail line and trail have been useful amenities. But it goes to show: Don’t expect your isolation to be a permanent thing. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
  • Like 2
Link to post
2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

I am in awe of the Draper Temple.  One of my favorite peaceful places.  I bicycle up there often. 

My mother-in-law's home has a wonderful view of the Draper Temple. She's in an older neighborhood on Boulter street. Well, she was. It's been sold. And she's in a retirement community now. My husband lived there all his growing up years, and when we dated, there were fields and fields. Nothing like today.

Edited by Tacenda
Link to post

Think the locals will get nasty?  Reason I ask is I've heard stories from Idaho about how nasty they get with CA transplants, even here in CO they're getting mean.  Friend of mine married someone from a Nebraska farm family, he almost had a gun pulled on him in a Walmart parking lot as well as many middle fingers given to him for having CO plates.  I know AK can be very hostile to outsiders as well once you're outside of Anchorage or Wasilla. 

Times are bad, people are tired of outsiders changing their way of life, there's not many places for people with kids to flee too.  I do wonder how Utah will adjust to all this, time will tell.

Edited by poptart
Link to post

The Erda residents aren’t opposed to development—just high density development. They are accustomed to 1 to 5 acre lots mainly. The common phrase you hear is that they don’t want to turn into another Daybreak. My guess is the church will still develop the surrounding land with larger lots. 

Link to post
22 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I wonder what came of this proposed development by the church's real estate arm. https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=3265668&itype=CMSID

I don't know.  What relevance do you think that has to the topic of discussion in this thread?  If it's not relevant to this thread, perhaps you could ask someone to start a topic for you to discuss it.

Link to post
12 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

I don't know.  What relevance do you think that has to the topic of discussion in this thread?  If it's not relevant to this thread, perhaps you could ask someone to start a topic for you to discuss it.

Ahead of you, I did think about it being part of the conversation. I should have mentioned what that was, my bad. I was wondering if it fell through therefore the reason the church thought of doing another development.

Edited by Tacenda
Link to post

If I understand the situation correctly, this sort of feels like a shakedown.  

The locals want the temple and everything that comes with it.  But to build it, the Church will have to run utilities out there.  So it tries to plan a surrounding residential community of sufficient density that the costs of running utilities will be somewhat offset, and the locals say “no, you must not do that! (But please do go ahead and build your temple and run utilities out to the few-dozen houses we’ll actually let you build!  That way, when we cash out on our farms in twenty years, we can get top dollar by advertising our land as ‘developer-ready’)”.

  • Like 3
Link to post

If I understand the situation correctly, this sort of feels like a shakedown.  

The locals want the temple and everything that comes with it.  But to build it, the Church will have to run utilities out there.  So it tries to plan a surrounding residential community of sufficient density that the costs of running utilities will be somewhat offset, and the locals say “no, you must not do that! (But please do go ahead and build your temple and run utilities out to the few-dozen houses we’ll actually let you build!  That way, when we cash out on our farms in twenty years, we can get top dollar by advertising our land as ‘developer-ready’)”.

The town I grew up in, played the same game.  Church wanted to build on a piece of farmland on the edge of town, but a canal separated it from the rest of the town.  City told the church “no one needs to cross that canal but you guys, so if you want the bridge, you gotta pay for it.”  The Church ponies up, and then—mirabile dictu!—the city went ahead and re-zoned the surrounding land across the canal for development, since there was now a shiny new bridge connecting that area to the rest of town.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
42 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Ahead of you, I did think about it being part of the conversation. I should have mentioned what that was, my bad. I was wondering if it fell through therefore the reason the church thought of doing another development.

As far as I can tell from google map, they are building in the area. The shopping center mentioned with it has been built, Mountain View Village.  I am not sure if that was on church land or not. I think they sold it to the developer. 

Edited by Calm
Link to post
3 hours ago, mgy401 said:

If I understand the situation correctly, this sort of feels like a shakedown.  

The locals want the temple and everything that comes with it.  But to build it, the Church will have to run utilities out there.  So it tries to plan a surrounding residential community of sufficient density that the costs of running utilities will be somewhat offset, and the locals say “no, you must not do that! (But please do go ahead and build your temple and run utilities out to the few-dozen houses we’ll actually let you build!  That way, when we cash out on our farms in twenty years, we can get top dollar by advertising our land as ‘developer-ready’)”.

With property values inflated to boot by the proximity to a temple. You may have a point here. 

Link to post

@mgy401 lays out a startling case for local government duplicity in this matter. I'm intrigued now.

Link to post
18 hours ago, bluebell said:

I lived in Utah for almost a year before I realized it wasn’t pronounced Tooley. 

Duchesne and Mantua are also tricky for newbies. 

Yep. And Hurricane, Hooper, and Spanish Fork.

Link to post
14 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Yep. And Hurricane, Hooper, and Spanish Fork.

I get the other two, but Spanish Fork?

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...