On Tuesday October 3rd the LDS Church announced a Mixed-Use Development to replace the Crossroads Plaza and ZCMI Malls

Major features include the following:

• Commercial Class A Office Space
  • Total Proposed = 2,000,000 sq ft
  • Est. # of Employees = 8,000
  • Est. Taxable Value = $500,000,000
  • Est. Annual Property Taxes to SLC = $2,360,000

• Current Class A Office Market
  • Q2 2006 SL CBD Class A Total = 2,671,000 sq ft
  • Q2 2006 SL CBD Total Available = 51,000 sq ft
  • Q2 2006 SL CBD Total Absorption = 66,000 sq ft
  • Q2 2006 SL CBD Rents/sq ft = $23.20
  • Q2 2006 SL CBD Vacancy = 1.9%

• Mall Retail Space
  • Total Proposed = 928,000 sq ft
  • Fashion Place in Murray = 950,000 sq ft
  • Est. Annual Retail Sales = $510,400,000
  • Est. # of Retail Employees (F.T. Equiv) = 2,000
  • Est. Taxable Property Value = $157,800,000
  • Est. Annual Property Taxes to SLC = $745,000

• Current SL Co Regional Mall Market
  • Q2 2006 SL Co Regional Mall Total = 5,282,000 sq ft
  • Q2 2006 SL Co Regional Mall Total Available = 1,061,000 sq ft
  • Q2 2006 SL Co Regional Mall Total Absorption = 47,000 sq ft
  • Q2 2006 SL Co Regional Mall Rents/sq ft = $62.11
  • Years to absorb at current rate = 19 yrs

• Housing
  • Total Proposed = 400 Condo/Apt Units (+366 in future)
  • Est. # Residents = 1,280
  • Est. Taxable Property Value = $77,000,000
  • Est. Annual Property Taxes to SLC = $363,000

• Current SL Co Apartment Market
  • Q2 2006 SL Co One Bed/One Bath
    • Q2 2006 SL Co Rent (Post 1990 Const) = $673/Mo
    • Q2 2006 SL Co Rent/Sq Ft= $0.89/sq ft
    • Q2 2006 SL Co Current Vacancy = 3.2%
  • Q2 2006 SL Co Two Bed/Two Bath
    • Q2 2006 SL Co Rent (Post 1990 Const) = $828/Mo
    • Q2 2006 SL Co Rent/Sq Ft= $0.80/sq ft
    • Q2 2006 SL Co Current Vacancy = 3.2%

• Bottom Line
  • Current Taxable Value = $216,600,000
  • Current Property Taxes Paid to SLC = $3,500,000
  • Net New Annual Property Taxes to SLC = $2,450,000,000

Sources: The LDS Church, Salt Lake Tribune, Commerce CRG, Calculations Bonneville Research.

As an executive coach who works with corporations, Monica McGrath has her ear to the ground. And what she is hearing is this: A number of men and women in middle management are increasingly reluctant to take the next step in their careers because the corporate ladder is not as appealing as it used to be, and the price to climb it is too high. "These people are still ambitious, and they are still driving. They just aren't driving for the same things they were driving for 15 years ago," she says.

What may be happening, suggest McGrath and others, is that people are setting career paths based on their own values and definitions of success. They are not burned out or dropping out; they are not going back to school and changing careers; they are not having a mid-life crisis. Instead, they are redefining how they can keep contributing to their organizations, but on their own terms. Rather than subscribe to the 'onward and upward' motto, they are more interested in 'plateauing,' unhooking from the pressure to follow an upward path that someone else has set.

A number of oft-cited trends in the workplace contribute to this phenomenon: Technological advancements are breaking down the barriers between work and non-work hours, adding to the pressure to constantly be on the job or on call. Strategic decisions like restructuring, downsizing and outsourcing are adding to job uncertainty at all levels and reducing the number of promotions available to mid- and upper-level managers. The continuing influx of women into the workforce keeps raising the level of stress when it comes to work/life balance issues.

Lois Backon, a vice president at Families and Work Institute (FWI), a New York-based non-profit research organization, points to a report FWI does every five years entitled, "National Study of the Changing Work Force." The latest one was released in 2003. One of their areas of research relates to what the organization calls "reduced aspirations" among various sectors of the workforce. "This is an incredibly important issue, and it offers some of the most troubling data out there for corporate America," she notes.

For example, in one of its latest reports, "Generation & Gender (2004)," which uses data from the national study to determine differences among generations, FWI found that fewer employees aspired to positions of greater responsibility than in the past. Among college-educated men of Gen-Y, Gen-X and boomer ages, 68% wanted to move into jobs with more responsibility in 1992, versus only 52% in 2002. Among college-educated women of Gen- Y, Gen-X and boomer ages, the decrease was even higher: 57% wanted to move into jobs with more responsibility in 1992 versus 36% in 2002. (Generation Y is typically defined as those born between 1980 and 1995, Generation X as those born between 1965 and 1980.)

"We then did a more focused look at leaders in the global economy," Backon says. "We took the top 10 multinational companies -- such as Citicorp and IBM -- and conducted in-depth interviews with the top 100 men and top 100 women. Of those leaders, 34% of the women and 21% of the men said they have reduced their career aspirations."

This plateauing is part of a bigger phenomenon in the workforce -- one that also includes people putting higher priorities on activities outside their jobs, from family to volunteer work to hobbies. For example, in the FWI study, the reason that the majority (67%) of these leaders gave for their response was "not that they couldn't do the work, but that the sacrifices they would have to make in their personal lives were too great," says Backon.

"We call it 'negative spillover from their jobs to their homes,'" Backon adds. "The whole issue of overwork, of needing to multitask, of having to deal with numerous interruptions during their work day" affects employee attitude, not just toward their jobs but also their free time. "Based on our research, we know that 54% of employees are less than fully satisfied with their jobs, 38% are likely to actively look for new employment in the next year and 39% of employees feel they are not engaged in the work they are doing." Most employees "do want to feel engaged by their jobs. The term 'reduced aspirations' does not mean they are not talented or not good at what they do. They are. But in focus groups, they also say things like, 'I need to make these choices because my family is a priority,' or 'I need to make these choices to make my life work.'"

One way to look at this phenomenon, adds Wharton management professor Nancy Rothbard, is that some employees "still derive some sense of identity from their jobs but they have, or are seeking, other ways to get that fulfillment." They are no longer pushing for the bigger raise, the larger staff, the more prestigious title; "they are taking energy that had been focused primarily on goals defined by the corporation and focusing it elsewhere."

Continued Next Week!

Source: McKinsey& Co.