A response to “8 key steps to rebuilding Tabernacle”

Today Rick Soulier wrote an insightful article in the Daily Herald (Provo, UT paper) entitled “8 key stepsto rebuilding Tabernacle” concerning the proposed LDS temple in the Provo Tabernacle. He makes some interesting points and clearly understands the area and its needs. I would like to take a few paragraphs to comment on his proposals and add a suggestion of my own.

The first three points deal primarily with prudent construction, instillation of fire protection, seismic reinforcements, the stability of brick and smoke damage. These are valid points, although his concerns about the brick are probably unfounded. At this point it is more or less safe to say that the brick walls are not structural. I can only assume that plans for the new structure take this into account and will treat the brick as primarily decorative.

Rick Soulier is also suggesting that the Post office property be sold and a new location be found. He is hardly unique in this. I personally am not convinced that a new location could be found in downtown Provo, but who knows? If a new facility was built, the LDS church probably would be first in line to purchase the old property.

Another major suggestion in the article is the closing of 100 South adjacent to the temple to address security concerns. These concerns are largely unfounded. Security is always a concern at at any building, if people can get near it, there is a chance that they can do damage. This is why highly secure facilities don't let people anywhere near them without heavy screening (think military bases, the White House). For several reasons, this won't work for temples. Temples have other security measures in place. The main issue of facing a road is someone driving a car (possibly with explosives) and crashing it into the building. An effective deterrent is concrete barricades that prevent cars from driving over curbs and towards the building. At the Salt Lake Temple these take the form of attractive planters between the street and the sidewalk. Renderings of the rebuilt tabernacle include large raised planters next to the building on the street sides.

I furthermore don't think that the LDS church is interested in purchasing the street, they have had bad experiences with that sort of thing in the past and certainly wouldn't want a repeat of the problems in Salt Lake City. Although it is not completely clear, the entrance to the new temple will probably be on the north side, through what is now the side entrance, or more likely, through a new entrance structure extending to the north. This will protect the entrance by moving it away from the street. I agree that 100 South will probably need a new traffic light at 500 West since it is likely to be the main east west route to the temple.

The last suggestion is that the LDS church build underground parking on some part of the property (probably the old motel restaurant properties). This is a great idea. Underground parking is infinitely prettier than above ground and leaves room for gardens and grounds. The current (very small) tabernacle park is inadequate for temple grounds, especially since it is likely to be partially taken up by the temple entrance and possibly a drop off area or loading zone. Temple grounds are necessary since people are going to get married at the temple and want to take pictures. On a busy Saturday in June there could easily. be a dozen or more weddings, especially since BYU and UVU are so close. Since wedding parties in Utah tend to be large more space is probably better.

Even if the church opts for above ground parking I would highly recommend facing it with a complementary brick and trying to make it look as little like parking as possible.