Estimated read time: 2-3 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — The historic Utah Theater on Main Street could soon be razed and replaced with a skyscraper with word that Mayor Jackie Biskupski recently agreed to sell the 101-year-old landmark.
Developers Hines Interests LP and the Lasalle Group are proposing a 375-foot high-rise with 300 housing units, parking, ground-floor retail space and outdoor public space where the theater now sits at 144 S. Main.
The property has been appraised at just over $4 million, and Biskupski would like to drop the price in exchange from concessions from the developers, including affordable housing.
Technically, the deal hasn’t been approved, yet, and some city residents are trying to fight it.
Advocates like Darby McDonough say the theater is too historically important to just tear down.
“The Utah Theater is part of a historic chain built over 100 years ago called The Pantages, and there are mirroring theaters around the country. Two of which were in worse (condition) than the Utah Theater is now, and have been saved,” McDonough said Tuesday.
She was one of dozens of advocates who urged members of the City Council, acting as the city’s Redevelopment Agency board, to spare the historic theater from the wrecking ball during a Tuesday meeting.
She’s hoping to spread the word of fundraising efforts that are happening that she believes could save the theater, but she acknowledges it’s a tough battle.
“I believe historic architecture actually changes the nature of a city. It changes how we think and how we interact with each other,” she said.
The city bought the property in 2009 for $5.5 million, and the Redevelopment Agency tried to find ways to rejuvenate it but ultimately determined the estimated cost of roughly $60 million for restoration and seismic retrofitting was too much.
Matthew Rojas, Bisupski’s spokesman, said the city can’t justify spending that kind of money on what would become a single-screen movie theater.
“If the (Redevelopment Agency) were to bond to cover that cost of just $40 million, it would essentially limit the RDA’s ability to do any further bonding for the downtown RDA project area until about 2050,” Rojas said.
There are benefits to selling the building at a loss. Rojas says in order to qualify for the write-down, the developers would have to agree with certain terms.
“We can require the developer to include affordable housing for a period of about 50 years,” according to Rojas.
He also said the developers would be required to preserve the historic features that are still inside the theater, and they would have to provide for a downtown green space.
The Redevelopment Agency is expected to revisit the matter in the next few months.
