Agreed. That's a great step towards better planning. That's the perfect place to densify.

Big plans unveiled for Murray redevelopment

https://fox13now.com/2019/06/18/murr...redevelopment/

Murray has always been one of the more obvious downtown style nodes for the Salt Lake Valley. Let's hope this comes to fruition as quickly as possible. Murray's section of State Street is screaming for major development. These renderings are pretty conceptual, but I like the focus toward State.

I'm alarmed at this development.:hell: They are planning on demolishing all of these older buildings including the Murray Arts Center and some rare old brick buildings and storefronts. I'm all for developing on the vacant lots, but not demolishing the older buildings in Murray on State. I like the density, but not at the expense of demolishing the older buildings.

http://i68.tinypic.com/2vw9s3d.jpg

In this case, I would agree that I hope Murray can find a way to add this density without destroying those old buildings that are rare anywhere south of Salt Lake. It would be a shame to lose those.

I had no idea that that section was being obliterated, particularly the taller red brick. At the very least the the front areas should be stabilized and restored. I don't have a problem with something sleek, attractive and much denser/taller stepped back from the front street level.

Hillcrest High School
 

This was a surprise to see. Super cool new buildings replacing my old high school, which I think was a pretty cool modern design, but not up to modern functionalities apparently.
http://www.ffkr.com/work/hillcrest-high-school-2/

http://www.ffkr.com/wp-content/uploa...r-1200x900.jpg

http://www.ffkr.com/wp-content/uploa...s-1200x900.jpg

http://www.ffkr.com/wp-content/uploa...N-1200x806.jpg

I was out about today and even had my camera with me and was planing on taking pictures of some of the changes to the Fireclay area, the new apartments going in at Murray Central, the new theatre going in next to the Taylorsville city office and a few other places. Then I started thinking about how terrible this site is to link photos too and how I have had some photos work and others not. Decided to not waste my time. How I wish this site would be updated so images can be hosted directly to the forum instead of through a 3rd party site.

I don’t come on this particular thread very often but DAMN! I’m shocked at the number of large scale developments discussed on the last two pages alone! Pretty impressive

So there's a new proposal for the Cottonwood Mall site called "Holladay Hills".

It's still got a mixed-use with about 600 residential units, office, retail, a hotel, and supposedly a theater. So I mean, it's not terrible, but the design of it also feels like a half-assed "well, they're going to hate anything we propose, so we might as well just put minimal effort into it", and all of the different uses feels more like an attempt to satisfy everybody by jamming everything in there than the parameters of a good development. I mean all of the residential has ground-floor retail at least.

By far the worst part of it is that it also involves putting a huge parking lot on the corner of Highland Drive and Murray-Holladay Road, and it's strongly car-dominant. At first glance it appeared that there was a pedestrian plaza in the center, but closer inspection reveals parking spots along a street running RIGHT DOWN THE CENTER. There does appear to be a footpath running along the front of the retail on the Highland Drive side, but it will be crossing with the roads that cars turn into the center from Highland Drive.

It honestly just looks like a beefed-up Station Park. First public hearing is tonight.

Congratulations Holladay. This is what "preserving the character of your city" looks like.

https://holladayhills.com/holladay-hills-info

http://cityofholladay.com/file/2018/...t-07092019.pdf

Couldn't agree more. Personally I think its an absolute disaster! The other project engaged with the major streets and put the focus on pedestrian access and comfort. Yes, it had a few taller buildings and I understand why that might make a few people uncomfortable in what is a predominantly low density residential city. But the old design is 1000X better then what you are getting now. A warning to every city in Utah on the dangers of making planning and development decisions via referendums. Especially since many parts of the project still are reminiscent of Sugarhouse (which is what the residents claim they didn't want), except now they will be drowning in surface parking lots.

Speaking of the parking lots, I think people in Holladay may not care. Other than that really nice 'village' development on Holladay Blvd, everything business oriented in the city is dominated by parking lots and strip malls. So, I guess it is preserving the 'character' of the neighborhood. In reality, their goal should have been to improve upon the character of their neighborhood.

In my mind this is basically a proposal to just discard and reinvent all of downtown Murray. Wow :facepalm: :koko: Looks like the development is an L shape. Why not L shape around the historic commercial buildings?

Wow, I'm impressed. I hope this gets built exactly like the rendering.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StevenF
I think we will need to tunnel under the Oquirrh Mountains with a freeway before Tooele will become a viable growth option. There is only so much I-80 and the 201 can handle for those that live over there.


Here's the file article on that road widening. It looks like the extending of 201 to parallel with I-80 would be the best option for the closer future. However, I do think down the road over the long run a widening and tunnel will be necessary. Probably a few decades off depending on the population reached in Tooele Valley. The pressure is not there yet, but one day it probably will be. Same with some sort of bridge over Utah Lake.

A shortcut road between Tooele and Herriman would cost $329 million, causing one leader to say that’s ‘just not realistic

By Lee Davidson - https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...not-realistic/

Upgrading canyon roads to provide a relatively high-speed, safe shortcut between Tooele and southern Salt Lake County would cost an estimated $328.7 million, a new study says.

Tooele County Commission Chairman Wade Bitner said Friday with that high price tag, “It’s just not realistic at this time.” He adds, “$329 million — my goodness there’s an awful lot of things we could do with that to provide more benefit than going over the mountain.”

And Bitner said his commission agrees.

A just-completed $200,000 feasibility study funded by the Legislature for the Wasatch Front Regional Council looks at several options for shortcuts using different canyons across the Oquirrh Mountains.

The preferred option identified would allow a 50 mph drive from Herriman to Tooele, going up Butterfield Canyon in Salt Lake County and down Middle Canyon in Tooele County.

The new two-lane road — with 10-foot shoulders to allow snow storage, plus serve bicyclists and pedestrians in the summer — would require a nearly mile-long tunnel to maintain a maximum 6 percent grade.

That tunnel alone would cost an estimated $132 million.

Other options considered — one up Pass Canyon in Tooele County and down Barney Canyon in Salt Lake County, and another Ophir-Oak Canyon route — would require even longer, more expensive tunnels.

A road now exists in Butterfield and Middle canyons, but it is narrow, winding and steep with some unpaved sections in Middle Canyon. It allows speeds no faster than 35 mph. It is also closed during the winter.

And Bittner says every other year or so, some large truck trying to save mileage gets stuck in the canyon not realizing how narrow and winding it is.

The new study, performed by AECOM, figured that in 2050, the preferred, upgraded route would take 41 minutes from Herriman to Tooele, compared to an estimated 52 minutes if Interstate 80 were used instead.

“If it saves only 10 minutes or so, it’s probably not realistic,” Bitner said.

But an improved shortcut has been a dream of many officials in southern Salt Lake and Tooele counties for years — and they had even talked of perhaps of making it a toll road to allow financing.

One of its benefits would be providing an alternative when accidents close I-80 between the two counties where the Oquirrhs meet the Great Salt Lake, which also happens a few times a year and causes long delays.

Bitner said transportation officials are also exploring the possibility of extending State Road 201 there to closely parallel I-80 to provide a second option if accidents close I-80. “That would be about a third of the cost, and wouldn‘t require a tunnel,” he said.

The new Oquirrh Connection Feasibility Study Report may be viewed on the website of the Wasatch Front Regional Council at wfrc.org.


.

HARD NO to any bridge over Utah Lake, ever.

Don't forget that island project is still in the works (last I heard they are currently doing all of the scientific and environmental research) and that project would result in bridges across Utah Lake onto the islands.
https://www.sltrib.com/resizer/AEWw0...HMOEKFNG24.jpg

https://media.giphy.com/media/54PaD9dWT0go/giphy.gif


They're not going to build Miami in Utah Lake. They literally used Miami to come up with that rendering. Even the stadiums are in a similar location.

https://live.staticflickr.com/7136/7...ce55b757_z.jpg
Miami Aerial by klem@s, on Flickr

Probably not. More likely it will be similar to sugarhouse scale then anything is my guess. From the meeting they held in Utah County a few months ago, they mentioned that this was just a placeholder rendering for the investors and state officials. However, the bridges and connections to both the East and West sides of Utah Lake will definitely be part of the project.
It should be noted that they said in that meeting they indicated that already have the secured investments to build the islands (though they won't reveal the source of the funds), that's why the state granted them the rights to proceed with their environmental studies.

How big are these islands supposed to be in proportion to the entire lake?

You can kind of estimate from this:

https://i.imgur.com/1OGygBA.png

I'm sure it says somewhere in their proposal which can be accessed here:

http://utahlakerestoration.com/