Click this link to optimize Open City Hall for screen readers Skip to Content
Open City Hall
Open Town Hall

What is your vision for Provo’s City Center and Public Safety Buildings?

216 registered responses


Rank the pros according to what appeals to you the most for Option 1 (Choose one or more)

Average priorities over 216 responses
  1. At an estimated $44.5 million, this is the lowest of the three options being considered.

    Cheapest bond option
  2. Because there would be no need for temporary offices or locations during the construction, this option would have the lowest impact on city operations. 

    Least impact on city operations
  3. Ample parking for employees and visitors is already in place.

    Sufficient parking
  4. Shortest construction time of the three options. Because the basic structure already exists, it is estimated to take one year for construction.

    Shortest construction time
  5. City would acquire 10 acres of land for parking and future expansion. City may be able to lease short term space in mall if needed in the future.

    Best opportunity for future expansion
  6. Having city hall and public safety buildings in the East Bay area could draw more economic development into the area because of the larger number of people who would regularly be there.

    Economic development in East Bay
  7. The current structure, with the buildout, will put the seismic safety at level 4 in all areas. Additional verification would need to be done and that could increase costs.

    Earthquake safety level 4
  8. Once moved to the new location, the current city center property in downtown would be available for redevelopment.

    Downtown property redevelopment
  9. A UVX (bus rapid transit) stop is located at the mall property and the Provo transit hub is nearby. 

    Close to transit

Rank the cons according to what concerns you the most for Option 1 (Choose one or more)

Average priorities over 216 responses
  1. By giving up its presence in downtown Provo, it is unlikely to be able to buy its way back in.

    Giving up presence in downtown Provo
  2. Relocating to the mall puts city hall, fire headquarters, dispatch, and the police department 11 blocks south of its current location.

    City offices further from population center
  3. The new city hall and public services building would be constructed using the former Sears building which is already 20 years old. Estimate 20-25 years before an expansion would be needed.

    Sears building 20 years old
  4. It is unknown what the impact would be on a new city hall in this location if the mall doesn't thrive and ends up going out of business. What would replace it? Would city hall be an "island" in the area?

    Unknown impact with mall
  5. Concerns have been expressed about having the police station at the mall. This is something that would need to be addressed by experts in police station construction.

    Public safety concerns
  6. Redevelopment of the downtown property can't be guaranteed. The property would be vacant until it is developed.

    Redevelopment of downtown property
  7. Construction of the police department and city offices would have to be worked around the existing building structure.

    Construction around existing structure

What other pros and cons can you think of for Option 1?

Answered
112
Skipped
104

If this option (option 1) were chosen, would you vote in favor of the bond?

Response Percent Response Count
Yes 41.7% 90
No 37.5% 81
Not Sure 20.8% 45

Rank the pros according to what appeals to you the most for Option 2 (Choose one or more)

Average priorities over 216 responses
  1. Construction of the new building and remodel of the existing city hall would happen on the property already owned by Provo City. It is possible that the remaining piece of property not owned by the city on that block would need to be purchased.

    Already own the land
  2. A new public safety building would be constructed to house the Police Department, Fire Department headquarters, and dispatch.

    Police and Fire would get a new building
  3. The current City Center location in downtown is highly walkable compared to locating at the mall.

    Walkability of downtown area
  4. Earthquake safety would be at level 4 for the public safety building only because it would be new construction.

    Earthquake safety level 4 for the public safety building
  5. Other than the impact during construction, the relationship of the City Center to downtown would remain about the same as it is today.

    No net change to impact on downtown
  6. More options for energy efficiency in the newly constructed public safety building. Very few options in remodeling the current city offices.

    Green energy potential in new building

Rank the cons according to what concerns you the most for Option 2 (Choose one or more)

Average priorities over 216 responses
  1. Older building for city offices would need replacing in 1520 years since this would involve remodeling an already 45 year old building.

    City offices would need replacing in 15-20 years
  2. Future expansion would only be possible by building on parking areas. Parking structures would need to be built.

    Little option for expansion
  3. Because the city offices would be remodeled in the existing structure, there are limits to how much the seismic safety could be improved.

    Lower earthquake safety level for city offices
  4. Net loss to parking on the block to accommodate new building. May need parking structure.

    Possible loss of parking
  5. During the remodel of the existing structure, city operations would need to be temporarily relocated. Parking at other locations may be required. 

    Temporary location issues during construction
  6. Construction would take two years for this option.

    2 years to construct

What other pros and cons can you think of for Option 2?

Answered
83
Skipped
133

If this option (option 2) were chosen, would you vote in favor of the bond?

Response Percent Response Count
Yes 16.3% 35
No 52.6% 113
Not Sure 31.2% 67

Rank the pros according to what appeals to you the most for Option 3 (Choose one or more)

Average priorities over 216 responses
  1. Best longevity of the 3 options. Could last 40 years, making it the best option for the money.

    Best longevity of the 3 options
  2. The impact of the new construction could be positive, depending on building design and layout and available land to redevelop.

    Positive impact on downtown
  3. Construction of the new building and remodel of the existing city hall would happen on the property already owned by Provo City. It is possible that the remaining piece of property not owned by the city on that block would need to be purchased.

    Already own the land
  4. Building could become more of a landmark and gateway into downtown. 

    Building could become a landmark
  5. All new construction means being able to get seismic safety at level 4.

    Earthquake safety at level 4
  6. More options for energy efficiency in the newly constructed buildings.

    Green energy opportunities are good
  7. Building all new structures means Provo City will not constrained by building to fit existing structures. The other two options have more constraints by working with existing buildings.

    Flexibility of construction
  8. The current City Center location in downtown is highly walkable compared to locating at the mall. This will increase if improvements are made to Center Street frontage.

    Walkability of downtown area

Rank the cons according to what concerns you the most for Option 3 (Choose one or more)

Average priorities over 216 responses
  1. Because it involves all new construction, this would be the most expensive of the three options presented.

    Most expensive of the 3 options
  2. Estimated construction time is 36-40 months. The new construction would need to be worked into the existing property and  there would likely be some moving of employees and offices in stages as construction is completed. This could be reduced if built at another location downtown.

    Longest construction time of the 3 options
  3. During construction there may be disruptions for city operations. Parking at other locations may also be required.

    Impact on city operations during construction
  4. Future expansion of the facilities will likely require building vertically and adding structured parking.

    Little opportunity for future expansion
  5. Likely to lose some surface parking on the block. May need additional structured parking, depending on the site plan.

    Limited parking

What other pros and cons can you think of for Option 3?

Answered
90
Skipped
126

If this option (option 3) were chosen, would you vote in favor of the bond?

Response Percent Response Count
Yes 61.1% 132
No 17.6% 38
Not Sure 21.3% 46

What additional comments do you have for Council to consider?

Answered
114
Skipped
102
Adam Robertson inside Oak Hills
August 5, 2018, 11:54 PM
  • Rank the pros according to what appeals to you the most for Option 1 (Choose one or more)
    1. At an estimated $44.5 million, this is the lowest of the three options being considered.

      Cheapest bond option
    2. City would acquire 10 acres of land for parking and future expansion. City may be able to lease short term space in mall if needed in the future.

      Best opportunity for future expansion
    3. Having city hall and public safety buildings in the East Bay area could draw more economic development into the area because of the larger number of people who would regularly be there.

      Economic development in East Bay
    4. Ample parking for employees and visitors is already in place.

      Sufficient parking
    5. A UVX (bus rapid transit) stop is located at the mall property and the Provo transit hub is nearby. 

      Close to transit
    6. Shortest construction time of the three options. Because the basic structure already exists, it is estimated to take one year for construction.

      Shortest construction time
    7. Once moved to the new location, the current city center property in downtown would be available for redevelopment.

      Downtown property redevelopment
    8. Because there would be no need for temporary offices or locations during the construction, this option would have the lowest impact on city operations. 

      Least impact on city operations
    9. The current structure, with the buildout, will put the seismic safety at level 4 in all areas. Additional verification would need to be done and that could increase costs.

      Earthquake safety level 4
  • Rank the cons according to what concerns you the most for Option 1 (Choose one or more)
    1. Concerns have been expressed about having the police station at the mall. This is something that would need to be addressed by experts in police station construction.

      Public safety concerns
    2. The new city hall and public services building would be constructed using the former Sears building which is already 20 years old. Estimate 20-25 years before an expansion would be needed.

      Sears building 20 years old
  • What other pros and cons can you think of for Option 1?
    No response.
  • If this option (option 1) were chosen, would you vote in favor of the bond?
    • Yes
  • Rank the pros according to what appeals to you the most for Option 2 (Choose one or more)
    1. Construction of the new building and remodel of the existing city hall would happen on the property already owned by Provo City. It is possible that the remaining piece of property not owned by the city on that block would need to be purchased.

      Already own the land
  • Rank the cons according to what concerns you the most for Option 2 (Choose one or more)
    1. Older building for city offices would need replacing in 1520 years since this would involve remodeling an already 45 year old building.

      City offices would need replacing in 15-20 years
    2. Future expansion would only be possible by building on parking areas. Parking structures would need to be built.

      Little option for expansion
    3. During the remodel of the existing structure, city operations would need to be temporarily relocated. Parking at other locations may be required. 

      Temporary location issues during construction
    4. Net loss to parking on the block to accommodate new building. May need parking structure.

      Possible loss of parking
    5. Because the city offices would be remodeled in the existing structure, there are limits to how much the seismic safety could be improved.

      Lower earthquake safety level for city offices
  • What other pros and cons can you think of for Option 2?
    No response.
  • If this option (option 2) were chosen, would you vote in favor of the bond?
    • No
  • Rank the pros according to what appeals to you the most for Option 3 (Choose one or more)
    1. Best longevity of the 3 options. Could last 40 years, making it the best option for the money.

      Best longevity of the 3 options
    2. Building all new structures means Provo City will not constrained by building to fit existing structures. The other two options have more constraints by working with existing buildings.

      Flexibility of construction
    3. Construction of the new building and remodel of the existing city hall would happen on the property already owned by Provo City. It is possible that the remaining piece of property not owned by the city on that block would need to be purchased.

      Already own the land
    4. All new construction means being able to get seismic safety at level 4.

      Earthquake safety at level 4
  • Rank the cons according to what concerns you the most for Option 3 (Choose one or more)
    1. Because it involves all new construction, this would be the most expensive of the three options presented.

      Most expensive of the 3 options
    2. Likely to lose some surface parking on the block. May need additional structured parking, depending on the site plan.

      Limited parking
    3. Future expansion of the facilities will likely require building vertically and adding structured parking.

      Little opportunity for future expansion
    4. During construction there may be disruptions for city operations. Parking at other locations may also be required.

      Impact on city operations during construction
  • What other pros and cons can you think of for Option 3?
    No response.
  • If this option (option 3) were chosen, would you vote in favor of the bond?
    • No
  • What additional comments do you have for Council to consider?

    1. Please add assumptions about the estimated cost for temporary locations during construction
    2. Please add assumptions on the operating costs
    3. Please show a net present value calculation of all three options including comments 1,2 above and the land sale associated with Option 1.
    4. At the cities projected growth rate, how long until Option 3 requires expansion? 'Time Horizon' for Option 3 should include a comment akin to, 'XX years before needed expansion'.

Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.

Your answers will NOT be saved

This is the form that was used to collect responses. It's here so you can try it and see how it worked when the topic was open.

The topic is now closed, and anything you enter into this form will not be saved.

Sign in and be yourself

Sign in and let others know who you are and what you think. You can sign in now or after you submit your response. You'll be able to read your response on this website and change it if you change your mind.

Read more about privacy >

Sign in and be someone

Sign in and let others know what you think. Only OpenGov will know who you are. You can sign in now or after you submit your response. You'll be able to read your response on this website and change it if you change your mind.

Read more about privacy >
* required

Be anonymous

We recommend against this option. Even though your response will be shared with staff, it won’t be shown on this public website so other community members won’t have the opportunity to see it.

Concerned about sharing your contact information with OpenGov?

Read more about privacy >

Read more about privacy >

Open City Hall has two participation channels:

  • The Registered Channel: Sign in before or just after you submit your response. Either way, Open Town Hall will show your response on this website.
  • The Unregistered Channel: Don't sign in and remain anonymous. Open Town Hall will just share your response with Provo City Council staff.

Note: The first time you sign in, you'll need to register (establish an account on Open City Hall). Registration is free.

The Provo City Council has contracted with Open Town Hall to monitor responses shown on this website.

  • To prevent any single user from dominating the forum, the Provo City Council restricts the number of responses any one user can post on selected topics. Registration helps Open Town Hall enforce this restriction.
  • Users, staff and government leaders often want to know the neighborhood from which a response is posted. Open Town Hall uses registration to show the neighborhood next to each response (not the address).
  • If a user posts a response that does not meet the Provo City Council guidelines for civility, Open Town Hall uses the user's email address to invite the user to resolve the issue.

Open Town Hall will get your contact information. The company is under contract with the Provo City Council to hold it in strict confidence per their privacy policy.

  • Since you'll see your own response on Open City Hall, you'll be able to confirm that your response was posted as you intended.
  • You'll be able to change and/or delete your response as long as the topic is open.

Yes. Sign out, then set your privacy preference to be "No - just show it without my name to staff". You won't need to register.

While no authentication procedure can perfectly detect every fraudulent registration, Open Town Hall is able to secure the registered channel against systematic fraud: cases where users submit enough statements with fraudulent registrations to sway the overall interpretation of the feedback.

Open Town Hall is unable to secure the unregistered channel against systematic fraud, because unregistered users are anonymous.

Neither the registered nor the unregistered channel represent a certified voting system or ballot box - and that caveat is footnoted on every page of feedback. Instead, both are additional channels for feedback to government.

Users can participate on the registered channel (by signing in) or on the unregistered channel (by remaining anonymous). The Provo City Council offers both channels in order to broaden participation and maximize decision makers' insights.

The registered channel enables users to assure decision makers that their feedback comes from a real person in a specific neighborhood. It also enables users to participate in a public discussion on the website, as well as manage their own response after posting it.

The unregistered channel is for users who want to provide quick feedback without registering, and/or whose privacy concerns would prevent them from participating if required to register. Because many users with valuable insights will only share them anonymously, this channel gives decision makers the option to consider those insights in their deliberations.

OpenGovl is a non-partisan company whose mission is to broaden civic engagement and build public trust in government. The Provo City Council has contracted with OpenGov to administer Open City Hall.

Option 1 - Move to former Sears building

Estimated increase in property taxes on a $265,000 home = $7.29 per month

PROS CONS
Cheapest bond option of the 3 Sears building is already 20 years old
Ample parking for employees and visitors already in place Public safety concerns with locating the police station at the mall
Shortest construction time of the 3 options Redevelopment of downtown property can't be guaranteed
Best opportunity for future expansion and additional amenities with land being purchased Once the move is made, the downtown property would be vacant until developed
Earthquake safety would be at level 4 City offices would be located further away from the population center of the city
Remodeling could occur without impact to city operations Giving up presence in downtown Provo
Close to transit - UVX stop and transit hub nearby Unknown impact if the mall doesn't thrive and ends up going out of business
Downtown property has redevelopment potential Construction must be worked around existing structure
Could be positive for economic development in East Bay area

Item Up Down Remove
Item Up Down Remove

City would acquire 10 acres of land for parking and future expansion. City may be able to lease short term space in mall if needed in the future.

Shortest construction time of the three options. Because the basic structure already exists, it is estimated to take one year for construction.

A UVX (bus rapid transit) stop is located at the mall property and the Provo transit hub is nearby. 

At an estimated $44.5 million, this is the lowest of the three options being considered.

The current structure, with the buildout, will put the seismic safety at level 4 in all areas. Additional verification would need to be done and that could increase costs.

Once moved to the new location, the current city center property in downtown would be available for redevelopment.

Having city hall and public safety buildings in the East Bay area could draw more economic development into the area because of the larger number of people who would regularly be there.

Because there would be no need for temporary offices or locations during the construction, this option would have the lowest impact on city operations. 

Ample parking for employees and visitors is already in place.


* required
Item Up Down Remove
Item Up Down Remove

The new city hall and public services building would be constructed using the former Sears building which is already 20 years old. Estimate 20-25 years before an expansion would be needed.

Relocating to the mall puts city hall, fire headquarters, dispatch, and the police department 11 blocks south of its current location.

Construction of the police department and city offices would have to be worked around the existing building structure.

It is unknown what the impact would be on a new city hall in this location if the mall doesn't thrive and ends up going out of business. What would replace it? Would city hall be an "island" in the area?

Concerns have been expressed about having the police station at the mall. This is something that would need to be addressed by experts in police station construction.

By giving up its presence in downtown Provo, it is unlikely to be able to buy its way back in.

Redevelopment of the downtown property can't be guaranteed. The property would be vacant until it is developed.


* required
* required
Check out our guidelines for civility

Fields marked with * are required

< Intro  
  Page 1 of 4