Stokes Sounds Off: BREAKING TEMPLE NEWS: Updates Announced for Salt Lake Temple Renovation;Mantis Utah Temple To Be Renovated Later This Year

Search This Blog

Top Leaderboard

Friday, March 12, 2021

BREAKING TEMPLE NEWS: Updates Announced for Salt Lake Temple Renovation;Mantis Utah Temple To Be Renovated Later This Year

NOTE: This post was originally published not long after the announcement was made, with subsequent edits added roughly 2 hours later.

Hello again, everyone!  The Newsroom has shared new information (which was also shared in the Church News) on the Salt Lake Temple renovation, with today's announced changes likely to extend the duration of that project. That announcement also noted that the Manti Utah Temple will also close for renovation later this year. There's a lot of information to get to, so let's break it down.  

First, for the Salt Lake Temple, continuing revelation has been sought regarding that process since well before that temple's renovation got underway in December of 2019, and the Church has continued to evaluate the best options to keep that temple up and running in the future, and to serve the needs of an expanding Church at its' headquarters. Consequently, a decision has been made to add two more instruction rooms, additional sealing rooms, and a second baptistry.

Next, rather than involving a room-to-room (progressive) endowment session that involves live performances from the ordinance workers, those live presentations of that ceremony will now be replaced by single-stage endowment rooms and include the incorporation of video presentations instead of the live performances. That will expand the temple's capacity for sessions each day.  Meanwhile, to free up space for the anticipated increased capacity of that temple, the cafeteria will no longer be part of that temple's facilities, and will be repurposed. The change in plans also means that the temple murals will need to be moved and either repaired or replaced, especially to accommodate a layout change for each endowment room now that those will be stationary rather than four-stage progressive. 

Also, since these particular additions to that project were added recently through revelation and were not part of the original plans, it seems likely that the renovation process for this temple may be extended to allow for the additional alterations. I previously shared my opinion that the Church would likely complete the renovation in mid-2024, with the open house and rededication likely to follow in the third or fourth quarter of that year. But in view of the adjusted and expanded renovation plans, the estimate for the completion may be more reasonably anticipated as late 2024-early 2025, though the Church will need to confirm or correct that, if that's not the case.

Having provided details on the Salt Lake Temple renovation updates, we now turn our attention to the part of the announcement relating to the Manti Utah Temple. The Church announced today that the temple will close for its' major renovation later this year, for a multi-year project. Aside from mechanical, electrical, seismic, and systemic updates, the Church plans to shift the Manti Temple from live presentations of the endowment in a multi-stage progressive style to a stationary endowment presented by video, which will expand the availiablity of the endowment in other languages at this temple.

The murals will also be documented, photographed, and removed, and some elements of the interior and exterior of that temple will also be altered and updated, with specifications on those to be provided as those plans are developed and as the scheduled renovations begin, which, again, will occur later this year. I am anticipating that the renovation on that temple will last a minium of 3-4 years, which will put its' completion sometime in late 2024-early 2025 as well. 

I am grateful to have been able to learn about and pass along these updates to you all. I continue to monitor all Church news and temple updates and wil also pass those along as well as I learn about them. That does it for now. Any and all comments are, as always, welcome and appreciated, on any post at any time, as long as such comments are made in accordance with the established guidelines. Thank you for the privilege of your time. If you enjoyed what you read here and would like to stay informed of newly added content, please feel free to subscribe. Until my next post, I wish each one of you all the best and pray that the Lord will bless you all in everything you do

19 comments:

  1. In slight connection to the temple updates noted in the post above, the Church News also provided two other articles on temples. The first covers the addition of the angel Moroni to the Pocatello Idaho Temple, while the second offers 11 facts about the Los Angeles California Temple, which is celebrating the 65th anniversary of its' dedication:

    https://www.thechurchnews.com/temples/2021-03-12/angel-moroni-pocatello-idaho-temple-206409

    https://www.thechurchnews.com/temples/2021-03-12/los-angeles-california-temple-65th-anniversary-president-mckay-206415

    My thanks once again to you all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Some of the details in the Newsroom article, when extrapolated, reveal even more details about the Salt Lake renovation and the ramifications of the changes, all of which are good.

    If every seat in the five endowment rooms is full, that will mean 750 people in just those rooms at any given time.

    There will be 23 sealing rooms, more by far than anything else, the previous high number was 17, Provo had at least 11. Salt Lake is said to have some years ago to have had over 9k live sealings one year, so this will only add capacity to both living and deceased sealings.

    Two baptistries is a major first. That was not ever heard of before, but factors into an urban legend regarding the Provo Tabernacle fire and the eventual construction of the Provo City Center temple.

    At the time Salt Lake's renovation was announced, neither Deseret Peak or Taylorsville was announced, so the post-renovation temple district will be somewhat smaller. So they may be anticipating a much bigger surge of temple work than just the post-pandemic surge, and those two--and maybe others--will be either complete or very close to completion, when Salt Lake is, the two named most certainly will be operating.

    They had not, based on a report, maybe not have done really big stuff yet inside so I don't anticipate delays. The reason being is what I heard at a BYU stake meeting I found online, where the first speaker said Tom Holdman had been in there looking at the windows as some if not all of the art glass will likely be replaced also, ahd he was likely checking things out and taking measurements.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, Jim Anderson. Thanks for providing additional context into the changes that were announced today for the Salt Lake Temple renovation project. It is amazing to think that these adjustments can more than double the total capacity of that temple. And with that being planned, it's little wonder that the switch is being made from progressivle live-action sessions to stationary one-room sessions that utilize live recordings. That change will also take pressure off of new workers or those getting on in age from having to memorize extensive dialogue.

      Thanks also for the interesting insight from Tom Holmoe. Nice to hear about his experiences. Regarding the subject of the timing for the completion of this project (and whether or not it will be pushed back), while I can't vouch for the truth of what Tom Holmoe heard, observed, and may have said about his experience, what I can do is refer those interested to the list of questions and answers that have been provided on conjunction with today's news release. That section begins towards the bottom of the page, and the following question-and-answer set is the seventh on the list:

      Question: How much time will this add to the project?

      Answer: More information about a completion date will be provided as the project progresses.

      Again, that's the seventh question listed at the bottom of this news release. In April 2019, when the Church originally announced that the temple would close in December of that year, they were pretty definitive in stating that the temple was anticipated to reopen in 2024. At that time, the details announced today were not part of that announced plan. In conjunction with the new inspiration and additional plans mentioned today, that shifts the estimate. And if the altered plans do not enable the Church to give a definitive answer to the question of when the project is planned to be completed, that suggests t hat a completion window in 2024 is no longer as set in stone as it appeared to be this time yesterday, prior to this morning's announcement. At least, that's the impression I got based on information released in the press conference two years ago versus the new information relased today.

      Hope that helps clarify why I suggested an altered completion estimate for the Salt Lake renovation. Thanks for stopping by to share your feedback, Jim Anderson. Always a pleasure to hear from you.

      Delete
  3. This is huge news all around, especially two baptistries in one temple. Makes sense that Salt Lake is the first to do it. I'm excited. I know personally and from word of mouth by others that baptistries at temples in Utah (along with probably many other locations) were kept very busy prior to the pandemic. My assigned temple, Jordan River, was at capacity most days early morning to evening with youth even well before the closure of Salt Lake.

    I have to wonder if potentially one of the considerations for new temples, particularly in places like Utah, is due in part to the number of youth attending for baptisms at existing temples.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eric, thanks for stopping by to weigh in on this. One common report I've heard for years for both the Mount Timpanogos and Provo Utah Temples is that both are kept at near full capacity in terms of the baptistry. When I last heard a pre-pandemic report on both temples overall, both were kept at relatively full capacity, particularly on Fridays and Saturdays. So the temples in Saratoga Springs, Orem, and Lindon are needed, and there will likely be other temples needed in Utah in general and in Utah County in particular. But regardless of new Utah temples, I think that what we are seeing occur in the addition of a second baptistry for the Salt Lake Temple may be an isolated example of a second baptistry based on the particular need there. Is it possible that second baptistries could be added to other temples? On the one hand, I can't in good conscience rule that out. On the other, it seems to be a one-time thing for a specific need relative to that temple.

      But the fact that ongoing inspiration has been received for the renovation procss in Salt Lake does open the prospect that other temples could be subject to similar adjustments to the original plans while the projects are still in various phases of progress. I don't know just how reasonable it might be to conjecture about similarly unexpected tweaks elsewhere, but today's announcement does open the possibility for similar adjustments to other projects that may be unexpected. Even with the extra baptistry for the Salt Lake Temple and the projects of the Taylorsville and Deseret Peak Temples in the queue, I see at least 3 near-term feasible candidates for temples in or near the Salt Lake Valley that may meet future needs and would allow the 2-baptistry scenario to exclusively apply to the Salt Lake Temple. These are indeed exciting changes, and I was pleased to provide my thoughouts on it. Thanks for weighing in here with yours. I always appreciate hearing from you, Eric.

      Delete
  4. It seems that cafeterias are becoming less prominent in recent new temples. They are not necessary for ordanence work. I think this space will be repurposed for ordanence work. Maybe second baptistries. Some newer temples may be developed to have two.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello, Chris. Thanks for weighing in here on this. That the Church would take this step in this particular case may make snese, but is it indicative of a one-time thing, the beginning of a new tradition for temple renovations, or somethign that is done on a case-by-case basis? That's harder to answer. With only one example of this thus far, it may be too early to tell if this sets a new precedent. I can see the reasoning relative to the Salt Lake Temple. With plenty of other places to get good quality meals that are fairly close to the temple, for Salt Lake, a cafeteria is not a crucial need. And we do have examples of new temples that have been built without a cafeteria as well. I can see the rationales for retaining, repurposing, or not including them, because each make sense given the areas those temples serve. I will say this: As someone who served for a 6-year period as a temple worker, it was helpful for me to have a place where I could go and eat and take a break from my service for a short time, and I do have several fond memories of eating there with my wife before and after our marriage, but I doubt it would have been horrible to not have that available. I am grateful that the Brethren continue to seek guidance on temple projects even as those projects are making such significant progress. And in either case, it will be interesting to see if Salt Lake is a one-time exception, a scenario that establishes precedent for multiple projects in the future, or something that is used on a case-by-case basis. In either scenario, it is good to see that the Church has announced these updates. I hope that means that we may also hear about plans for the Logan Utah Temple renovation in the coming months. Thanks for taking time to weigh in here, Chris. Always a pleasure to hear from you.

      Delete
  5. Does this also do anything to our thinking on possible temple announcements?

    They said this would more than double capacity of the temple, over what had been before. It is almost like they announced a new temple in terms of additional capacity. Does it take away from the possibility of an eastside temple mid-valley? The Herriman site would be well south so that possibility is definitely still there.

    Worked with a filmmaker in the 2000s, and one of the writers has gone into real estate, said the number of people wanting to move here and buy is so hot that they are finding it difficult to get a place they can get in to, they just can't build fast enough apparently. The south end of Salt Lake County, particularly the Herriman/Bluffdale area is one, and anything north of American Fork and to the west of same is another.

    There is also some open land where, after Syracuse is built and the freeway corridor it is next to is better defined, that will fill with homes too, that part of north Davis has had various surges of homebuilding over thenyears and it has led to Syracuse being needed.

    Have not heard about south Utah County, but that area could start to get hot rather soon given the fill in the north.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good question, Jim Anderson. I know in the past that we've talked about Holladay Utah as a potential temple location. The announcement on the adjusted plans for Salt Lake could negate that particular prospect. I was trying just now to go back and look at some of our past exchanges here to determine whether any other locations you mentioned in the Salt Lake Valley could be off the radar as well, but didn't find anything. With both the Taylorsville Utah and Deseret Peak Utah Temples set to help with the high level of activity in the Salt Lake Temple, between that, the additional plans to repurpose and add capacity to the Salt Lake Temple, and the fact that a temple in Herriman may be one of the next prospects in Utah to be announced, it could be that the Salt Lake Valley may be adequately covered for the time being. Could that change? Of course, as anything else easily could. But it seems that the unexpected newly-announced measures to expand the worship spaces in the Salt Lake Temple will at least eliminate the need for any other nearby cities in the Salt Lake Valley to get a temple in the near term. That's a good observation, and I agree completely.

      I also believe that, with northern Utah County filling up, the southern part of Utah County may be a key focus for temple announcements in the near future. Regarding Utah County, I have prospects listed for Lehi (in the northern portion) and Heber Valley and Mapleton (for the southern portion of Utah County), though it does seem probable that, if current trends continue, in the more distant term, temples might also potentially be announced for areas like Alpine and Springville/Spanish Fork. It will be interesting to see what happens with Utah temples going forward. In the meantime, thanks for your additional comment here, Jim Anderson. Always a pleasure to hear from you.

      Delete
    2. Yes Holladay being roughly between 39th and about 62nd South would be too far north given the Salt Lake plans, but south of that, maybe between 72nd and about 110th South, and east of about 7th or 9th East could be considered, maybe a little more north of about 102nd South. Not sure what they might have as far as properties that are the right size in there as east of I-15 was developed first then the west side.

      But that area south of 72nd and northeast of Jordan River might be what they might just be looking at, it is far enough away from Downtown given the 6 2/3 blocks to the mile model for Salt Lake Valley, and the slightly smaller size of Draper, means that at some point something will happen on the east side.

      Delete
    3. Jim Anderson, thanks for these additional thoughts. I just want to clarify some things on my end to ensure I understand what you're saying. I believe you are saying that, because of the plans to more than double the available space in the Salt Lake Temple for use in temple worship, those plans for expansion will eliminate the immediate need for a temple in Holladay. I can agree with that, and Holladay has been taken off of my list for the time being.

      With that said, I'm less clear on what else you were trying to indicate with the rest of your comment. I've mentioned in the past that I'm geographically challenged, so when it comes to figuring out parts of the Salt Lake Valley from street addresses, that's harder for me to envision. I base my temple predictions more on city names than on street addresses or intersections.

      So if it wouldn't be too much trouble, would you mind giving me the names of cities in the range of addresses you're talking about that I could look at for my temple list? I may need to overhaul my predictions for the April General Conference, some of which may involve making a few adjustments or changes to my list of specific cities for which a new temple may be announced that weekend. So if I have specific cities to examine when incorporating your feedback into those changes, that would help me out a lot.

      Sorry for any additional inconvenience this request may cause you. I'm sure that many of my readers know what you're talking about when you mention those street address ranges; for whatever reason, that information is trickier for me to consider when address ranges are involved. Thanks, James Anderson, for your continued willingness to dialogue about this with me. I always appreciate hearing from you.

      Delete
  6. That would be Sandy and the east half of Fort Union, a largely unincorporated area in Salt Lake County between Holladay and Sandy.

    I think the analogy of a man wearing a double breasted coat or vest would illustrate what could be happening and that east area of Salt Lake County would fill the 'buttons', the person's head would be the Salt Lake Temple, one side would represent the west side of the valley with Taylorsville, Oquirrh Mountain, and an eventual third temple being one side of the coat, the east side has the idea of something mid-valley, Jordan River, and Draper being the buttons on the other side of the coat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Jim Anderson. That analogy is much more helpful to me in terms of visualizing what you are talking about. So your suggestion would be replacing Hollanday with Sandy then? That seems reasonable. I will make that change. Thanks.

      Delete
    2. More likely northern part of Sandy, it goes to about 78th South, Sandy goes up to around a line around where 78th South would be if that major on the west side went all the way through. But anywhere east of 9th East in Sandy cannot be entirely ruled out either, as the south line is about 114th South, and Draper is at 140th South, and that is more than five miles from that line, but I am also thinking that they would not site it too close to straight line east of Jordan River which is about 102nd South either.

      Delete
    3. Thanks for this aditditional clarification. I have taken time to reprioritize my picks specifically for the Utah Area, which are now ordered as follows: Herriman Utah: Lehi Utah; Evanston Wyoming; Preston Idaho; Sandy Utah; Heber Valley Utah; Hurricane/Washington City Utah; Mapleton Utah. I could also potentially see other Utah cities, but since Herriman seems like a lock for the next round, only one of the other locations might potentially also be announced, unless more than 4 US cities have a temple announced this time around, which might actually occur. It will be interesting to see what happens in that respect. Thanks again, Jim Anderson.

      Delete
    4. I would keep north Lehi in the mix, not sure where, as just after Lindon was announced, a rumor went around that they also had been scouting for a site in the general area there.

      Delete
    5. Jim Anderson, your ability to hone in on specific spots or even a generalized range of street addresses where a temple could be built inspires me a great deal. Keep sharing that information here. I'm probably the only one who has trouble envisioning regions based on addresses, so I also appreciate you simplifying that information for me. I'm probably the only one reading your comments that needs that clarification, so I appreciate it for that reason as well.

      I'd have to go back and confirm this, but it seems as though you've been pretty accurate with your suggestions of specific potential locations for temples announced anywhere in Utah. With my predictions focusing on the most feasible candidate cities within each area, I haven't been able to focus as much on researching specific spots, so if you happen to notice, based on your indication of specific spots for temples in any location, that I am overloking any candidate cities that should be considered based on the general range or specific locations you've mentioned, please let me know so I can fix that oversight. And if anything you've found leads you to believe I need to adjust the order in which candidate city locations in any areas of the Church are listed, I hope you'll be sure to let me know about that as well. Thanks again for your remarkable contributions to the dialogue about subjects covered here. I always appreciate hearing from you.

      Delete
    6. I would put the 2nd Temple in Cache Valley in Smithfield, Utah instead of Preston, Idaho. Trust me on this one. Watch for it to be announced in April

      Delete
    7. Craig, firstly, thanks for weighing in here. I always appreciate the chance to hear thoughts from someone who, to my knowledge, has never commented by name here before. Secondly, do you have any solid shareable source supporting Smithfield, or suggesting that that city will be the next one in Utah to get a temple? I ask because I've tried to keep my eyes open for any such tidbit, but haven't come across anything leading me to be that definitive about any prospect not presently on my list. But perhaps if I could look over the sources supporting your reasoning, or knew how it is that you can speak so definitively on this matter, I'd be able to better judge the feedback you're providing here. Current evidence presented here seems to point more to the idea that Herriman will be the next Utah city to have a temple announced, and Smithfield hasn't been on any other radars for the near term. That said, I'd welcome the chance to hear your reasoning and look over supporting material in whatever form you can present here. Thanks for stopping by to share your thoughts. It's a pleasure to hear from you.

      Delete

In addition to my life-long love for the subjects which I cover in the posts of this blog, I have long held the belief that we can disagree without becoming disagreeable. Differences of opinion are natural, while being disagreeable in expressing those differences is not. And in that sense, I have no desire to close the door on anyone who earnestly desires to contribute to the ongoing dialogue on subjects covered in the posts on this blog.

At the same time, however, I recognize that we live in a time when incivility, discourtesy, unkindness, and even cyber-bullying has regrettably become part of online interactions. With that in mind, while anyone who wishes can comment on anything if they choose to do so, I hereby reserve the right to immediately delete any comments which are critical, unkind, lack civility, or promote prodcuts, services, and values contrary to either the Church, or to the rules of online etiquette.

I'd also like to remind all who comment here that I try to respond personally to each individual comment as I feel is appropriate. Such replies are not meant to end the conversation, but to acknowledge earnest feedback as it is submitted.

And in order to better preserve the spirit and pure intentions for which this blog was established, I also hereby request that anyone not commenting with a regular user name (particularly those whose comments appear under the "Unknown" or "Anonymous" monikers, give the rest of us a name to work with in addressing any replies. If such individuals do not wish to disclose their actual given names, a pseudonym or nickname would suffice.

Any comments made by individuals who opt to not give a name by which they can ber identified may, depending on the substance and tone of such comments, be subject to deletion as well. I would respectfully ask that all of us do all we can to keep the dialogue positive, polite, and without malice or ill-will. May the Lord bless us all in our discussion of these important matters.