Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[bob rulz]

I used to live in Bridges. They're not well designed, but they're also one of the only relatively affordable complexes within proximity of downtown that's not run by slumlords. I think there's probably enough room behind the apartments to expand I-15, but it would likely put it almost right up to people's windows. I'm still crossing my fingers that UDOT just scraps the plan entirely, of course.

As for Millcreek City Center, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think Holladay's city center is pretty decent, but I disagree that Millcreek's has less potential. You don't need a large amount of space to build a good urban area. And while it would be great if the redevelopment of that area could be worked out in tandem with Brickyard, that's unfortunately just not how things always work out.

As for the traffic issue, I hear you, but Millcreek is making an effort to create a pedestrian-friendly space. There are also plans to put BRT on 3300 South, and hopefully eventually an S-line extension to the area down Highland (though I'll believe that when it happens). Without this redevelopment, what are the chances we could've gotten any kind of public space or pedestrian-oriented development in that area?

This space was chosen for more reasons than just the long shot that Millcreek could've annexed Brickyard. It's also likely just a practicality thing. The other shopping centers mentioned that could've been locations for a Millcreek city center are doing well financially. Meanwhile, this block was rundown and dilapidated even before Millcreek started buying up the land. And the strip mall where Millcreek's temporary city hall is currently located, kitty corner from this city center, is also slated for redevelopment. Eventually Salt Lake City will redevelop Brickyard as well. This intersection could one day be an urban center on its own. It likely wouldn't be possible at all without Millcreek's investment in the area.

But we'll just agree to disagree. And for the record, I don't live too far from here, and have frequented the area almost my entire life.

[i-215]

Originally Posted by Comrade

Maybe an assumption on my part that, in an article titled '...demolishing scores of homes and businesses', the red would, you know, be areas that are prime for demolition.

In fairness, I'm not calling you out specifically. But the general outrage (in particular, Building Salt Lake) seems centered more around an "anti-freeway expansion at any cost" moral cause, rather than actually looking at what's being built.

The project has a lot of good upsides. For one, Beck Street will connect all the way to North Salt Lake, rather than forcing people onto the freeway. This gives new sidewalks and bike lanes to connect downtown with Davis County. It's also a great opportunity to engage with UDOT on getting better east-west pedestrian connectivity in those neighborhoods north of 600 North. Two new freeway interchanges between Warm Springs (replacement) and I-215 will give people walking more places to cross the freeway. A new cross street underneath I-15 in Woods Cross helps pedestrians.

But overall, I'm just not seeing this project as the demolition apocalypse they make it sound like it to be. This is not SLC's "Mount Hood Freeway," so to speak. Unless UDOT drifts significantly from the EIS maps, red likely means changes in sound levels may impact those parcels, or a noise wall may move a few feet one way or another.


New neighborhood undercrossing in Woods Cross


Extension of Beck Street into Davis County


New pedestrian-only cross access at 500 North


Wider sidewalks at 400 North

[bob rulz]

Didn't UDOT recently admit that it could potentially lead to dozens of house and business demolitions?

Anyway, the things you mentioned could be done without freeway expansion. And I still don't really see the need. There's decades of research that shows how pointless freeway expansion is. Freeway expansions are also often based on traffic estimates that are highly flawed.

Frankly even 1 house or business being demolished is too many. Demolition apocalypse or not, there's no need for it.

[RC14]

Originally Posted by i-215

red likely means changes in sound levels may impact those parcels, or a noise wall may move a few feet one way or another.

My assumption is "Affected Parcels" probably means the project will encroach on areas of those parcels. It doesn't necessarily mean everything on those parcels needs to be demolished. This isn't Sim City where the entire parcel turns to rubble when a tornado grazes a small corner of it.

[mstar]

I live in Davis County and my opinion is that “at a minimum”, I-15 through the south of Davis County (Farmington to downtown) needs to be rebuilt. It is easily the worst stretch of freeway along the metro Wasatch Front. Salt Lake and Utah counties have been updated and expanded over the past 15+ years while Davis County has only only had cheap, incomplete repavement repairs. I think adding at least one lane in each direction is warranted as well. I’m of the opinion that Davis county needs both Trax upgrades and freeway improvements. I know - that’s an expensive opinion.

[Highrise_Mike]

Originally Posted by mstar

I live in Davis County and my opinion is that “at a minimum”, I-15 through the south of Davis County (Farmington to downtown) needs to be rebuilt. It is easily the worst stretch of freeway along the metro Wasatch Front. Salt Lake and Utah counties have been updated and expanded over the past 15+ years while Davis County has only only had cheap, incomplete repavement repairs. I think adding at least one lane in each direction is warranted as well. I’m of the opinion that Davis county needs both Trax upgrades and freeway improvements. I know - that’s an expensive opinion.

I can tell you that if you’re hoping for improvement to traffic congestion, a freeway expansion will provide relief in the short-term but make it worse in the long-term. I-15 through Lehi is already starting to get congested again after all the widening that happened there. When a freeway is widened, it fuels more auto-dependent sprawl development and invites more and more people to drive. When there is congestion, it causes people to rethink when they go, if they take a different route, use a different mode, or skip the trip all together. Widening induces all the latent travel demand and the freeway will congest again at a huge cost and waste of money that could have been better spent on transit. Transit would fuel more compact growth and contribute to less auto-dependence and would lead to less worse traffic in the long run. All big cities will deal with traffic congestion, but the question is to what degree? Just as a financial investor would diversify their portfolio, we must diversify our transportation system to be as resilient and successful as possible.

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by Highrise_Mike

I can tell you that if you’re hoping for improvement to traffic congestion, a freeway expansion will provide relief in the short-term but make it worse in the long-term. I-15 through Lehi is already starting to get congested again after all the widening that happened there. When a freeway is widened, it fuels more auto-dependent sprawl development and invites more and more people to drive. When there is congestion, it causes people to rethink when they go, if they take a different route, use a different mode, or skip the trip all together. Widening induces all the latent travel demand and the freeway will congest again at a huge cost and waste of money that could have been better spent on transit. Transit would fuel more compact growth and contribute to less auto-dependence and would lead to less worse traffic in the long run. All big cities will deal with traffic congestion, but the question is to what degree? Just as a financial investor would diversify their portfolio, we must diversify our transportation system to be as resilient and successful as possible.

The problem a lot of people have with public transit is that it can take 2-to-3 times longer to get somewhere. I commuted from Utah County to downtown SLC for many years. I took Frontrunner and Trax. It would regularly take me 1 hr 20 minutes to 1 hour 30 minutes to get to my destination. After COVID I started driving. I got there in 35-40 minutes most days. If there was bad traffic, it would take 45 minutes to an hour. Still significantly less than transit.

So while transit is great for the environment, it comes with it's own set of problems. Of course, double-tracking Frontrunner will help speed things up, but there's still the "convenience" factor of taking your own vehicle vs relying on public transportation.

[taboubak]

Originally Posted by Reeder113

The problem a lot of people have with public transit is that it can take 2-to-3 times longer to get somewhere. I commuted from Utah County to downtown SLC for many years. I took Frontrunner and Trax. It would regularly take me 1 hr 20 minutes to 1 hour 30 minutes to get to my destination. After COVID I started driving. I got there in 35-40 minutes most days. If there was bad traffic, it would take 45 minutes to an hour. Still significantly less than transit.

So while transit is great for the environment, it comes with it's own set of problems. Of course, double-tracking Frontrunner will help speed things up, but there's still the "convenience" factor of taking your own vehicle vs relying on public transportation.

Do you not think the convenience factor you are referring to is directly affected by us constantly investing in car/road infrastructure while ignoring transit?? The more rail lines we build the smaller that gap becomes.

[Atlas]

Originally Posted by Reeder113

The problem a lot of people have with public transit is that it can take 2-to-3 times longer to get somewhere. I commuted from Utah County to downtown SLC for many years. I took Frontrunner and Trax. It would regularly take me 1 hr 20 minutes to 1 hour 30 minutes to get to my destination. After COVID I started driving. I got there in 35-40 minutes most days. If there was bad traffic, it would take 45 minutes to an hour. Still significantly less than transit.

So while transit is great for the environment, it comes with it's own set of problems. Of course, double-tracking Frontrunner will help speed things up, but there's still the "convenience" factor of taking your own vehicle vs relying on public transportation.

The issue with the convenience of cars is that it comes at the expense of valuable space in urban areas that could be utilized for active uses and housing. Parking literally destroyed the downtowns of most American cities including ours.

Our society is built on making it convenient to drive but it wasn't always this way and it wasn't just personal preference for cars that shaped our built environment: government policy and priorities (and lobbying) continue to play a large role. The reason driving is usually more convenient is that it's been made convenient and the built environment has been purposely reshaped with that goal. Now, we are stuck with sprawl and so convenience takes over.

Even so, a fully double-tracked and electrified FrontRunner with 15-minute service all day and 125 mph operating speeds (along with new trails, paths, and other service improvements) would probably make this freeway expansion completely unnecessary. Because of that, UDOT only consders a nerfed version of those ideas in their studies and argues that FR expansion isn't enough.

With the rise of remote work and changing attitudes about cars in younger people, I guarantee their projections for 2050 are way off base. But UDOT wants to build roads. There's too much institutional inertia.

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by Reeder113

The problem a lot of people have with public transit is that it can take 2-to-3 times longer to get somewhere. I commuted from Utah County to downtown SLC for many years. I took Frontrunner and Trax. It would regularly take me 1 hr 20 minutes to 1 hour 30 minutes to get to my destination. After COVID I started driving. I got there in 35-40 minutes most days. If there was bad traffic, it would take 45 minutes to an hour. Still significantly less than transit.

So while transit is great for the environment, it comes with it's own set of problems. Of course, double-tracking Frontrunner will help speed things up, but there's still the "convenience" factor of taking your own vehicle vs relying on public transportation.

I agree about it taking longer. When I commute into work downtown it takes me about an hour and fifteen minutes by the time I drive to the trax station, wait for trax, take trax in, then walk a couple blocks to my work. And I only live near daybreak so not too far by any stretch. With that said I still prefer taking trax to driving because of all the reckless speeders and psychos driving on 1-15. It’s scary driving in Utah with the ridiculous 70 mph (really 80mph) right through the city. Higher speeds are directly correlated with higher risk of automobile mortality when crashes occur. So I personally will take the extra hour a day to avoid the psycho speeders driving around who need to be in a mental ward. Please, more trax and more trax expansion, and more rapid bus routes instead of highway expansion.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Paniolo Man

I believe this project is called "Altitude" 27 North 800 West.

Hey Paniolo Man, This is what I have on file for The "Altitude Apartments" but it's on 800 West & 47 North.

I think the one you photographed and listed as 24 North on 800 West is actually the "Emeril". At least that's what came up from an earlier
announcement by Blah_Amazing. There's so much actually going up right now from 2 years ago announcements, especially around the North Temple Corridor it's hard to keep them straight. If you weren't photographing them, many of us wouldn't even know that they were actually under construction. Anyway, thanks for keeping up with it all. It's much appreciated, especially for those of us who aren't local at this time. If anyone knows differently about these two projects let us know.

Originally Posted by Blah_Amazing

https://citizenportal.slcgov.com/Cit...howInspection=

Location: 27 North 800 West

Commercial building permits have been filed for "Apartments at Emeril" "Multi-family apartments"

I believe this is the Highrise at Emeril project, which is shown as being 7 floors and 161 residential units.

.

[delts145]

Originally Posted by Atlas

The issue with the convenience of cars is that it comes at the expense of valuable space in urban areas that could be utilized for active uses and housing. Parking literally destroyed the downtowns of most American cities including ours.

Our society is built on making it convenient to drive but it wasn't always this way and it wasn't just personal preference for cars that shaped our built environment: government policy and priorities (and lobbying) continue to play a large role. The reason driving is usually more convenient is that it's been made convenient and the built environment has been purposely reshaped with that goal. Now, we are stuck with sprawl and so convenience takes over.

Even so, a fully double-tracked and electrified FrontRunner with 15-minute service all day and 125 mph operating speeds (along with new trails, paths, and other service improvements) would probably make this freeway expansion completely unnecessary. Because of that, UDOT only consders a nerfed version of those ideas in their studies and argues that FR expansion isn't enough.

With the rise of remote work and changing attitudes about cars in younger people, I guarantee their projections for 2050 are way off base. But UDOT wants to build roads. There's too much institutional inertia.

I can't remember his name, but he is the head of UDOT I think. The article I read a while ago seemed to strongly suggest that he is the major holdup, particularly regarding the publicly preferred Rio Grande Central Project. From what I understand he isn't even lobbying for a large amount of available Fed. funding for SLC mass transit. Seems to me that this guy needs to be booted out of his cushy all to powerful position.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by delts145

I can't remember his name, but he is the head of UDOT I think. The article I read a while ago seemed to strongly suggest that he is the major holdup, particularly regarding the publicly preferred Rio Grande Central Project. From what I understand he isn't even lobbying for a large amount of available Fed. funding for SLC mass transit. Seems to me that this guy needs to be booted out of his cushy all to powerful position.

You're thinking of Carlton Christensen. He is a good guy who has done a lot of good for UTA (also used to be on the SLC Council), but is also of the school of thought that transit is meant to ease traffic to make driving easier rather than creating a metro where car culture is seriously challenged.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by i-215

In fairness, I'm not calling you out specifically. But the general outrage (in particular, Building Salt Lake) seems centered more around an "anti-freeway expansion at any cost" moral cause, rather than actually looking at what's being built.

The project has a lot of good upsides. For one, Beck Street will connect all the way to North Salt Lake, rather than forcing people onto the freeway. This gives new sidewalks and bike lanes to connect downtown with Davis County. It's also a great opportunity to engage with UDOT on getting better east-west pedestrian connectivity in those neighborhoods north of 600 North. Two new freeway interchanges between Warm Springs (replacement) and I-215 will give people walking more places to cross the freeway. A new cross street underneath I-15 in Woods Cross helps pedestrians.

But overall, I'm just not seeing this project as the demolition apocalypse they make it sound like it to be. This is not SLC's "Mount Hood Freeway," so to speak. Unless UDOT drifts significantly from the EIS maps, red likely means changes in sound levels may impact those parcels, or a noise wall may move a few feet one way or another.

Thanks for the perspective. Some of those things would be welcomed. These discussions usually reveal the differences in philosophy. I am of the belief that roads first is a bad approach. I would prefer that money go to Frontrunner tracking and electrification. Also, building a quality BRT line into Davis County.

Further, our state needs a human powered transportation "Bill of Rights". The community shouldn't have to "engage" UDOT to avoid being screwed. A freeway should be required to maintain at minimum good pedestrian access on every intersecting road. If cars have to take the long way around, fine, but pedestrians and cyclists should always have direct routes preserved or created. All interchanges should be engineered to be low stress as well. This would probably require avoiding at grade crossings.

Lastly, I think many people would feel better about freeways if surface roads were rebalanced toward people. Let cars drive fast on the freeway, but once off they are more of guest not the king of the streets. I would cap all surface roads at 5 lanes and no speeds greater than 35.

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by Atlas

The issue with the convenience of cars is that it comes at the expense of valuable space in urban areas that could be utilized for active uses and housing. Parking literally destroyed the downtowns of most American cities including ours.

Our society is built on making it convenient to drive but it wasn't always this way and it wasn't just personal preference for cars that shaped our built environment: government policy and priorities (and lobbying) continue to play a large role. The reason driving is usually more convenient is that it's been made convenient and the built environment has been purposely reshaped with that goal. Now, we are stuck with sprawl and so convenience takes over.

Even so, a fully double-tracked and electrified FrontRunner with 15-minute service all day and 125 mph operating speeds (along with new trails, paths, and other service improvements) would probably make this freeway expansion completely unnecessary. Because of that, UDOT only consders a nerfed version of those ideas in their studies and argues that FR expansion isn't enough.

With the rise of remote work and changing attitudes about cars in younger people, I guarantee their projections for 2050 are way off base. But UDOT wants to build roads. There's too much institutional inertia.

Like it or not, autonomous cars will become the norm in the future, and we'll need roads for those. But once autonomous cars become the norm, traffic will become a thing of the past. No more stupid, slow, drunk, distracted, or crazy drivers.

Even with a double-tracked and electrified FrontRunner with 15-minute service all day and 125 mph operating speeds, there's still the time it takes to walk and wait for the bus/TRAX, then transfer between busses/trains. Time is important. If I can gain an extra 5 hours per week with my family by driving rather than taking public transit.....I will. I've tried them both and I was losing a lot of time with my kids by taking Frontrunner/TRAX.

Don't get me wrong. I want public transit to keep growing and developing. I love hearing that TRAX or Frontrunner are expanding or upgrading, etc. But until we can figure out how to keep people from losing so much time commuting on public transit, it's never going to fully replace cars and roads.

[Reeder113]

Originally Posted by TheGeographer

I agree about it taking longer. When I commute into work downtown it takes me about an hour and fifteen minutes by the time I drive to the trax station, wait for trax, take trax in, then walk a couple blocks to my work. And I only live near daybreak so not too far by any stretch. With that said I still prefer taking trax to driving because of all the reckless speeders and psychos driving on 1-15. It’s scary driving in Utah with the ridiculous 70 mph (really 80mph) right through the city. Higher speeds are directly correlated with higher risk of automobile mortality when crashes occur. So I personally will take the extra hour a day to avoid the psycho speeders driving around who need to be in a mental ward. Please, more trax and more trax expansion, and more rapid bus routes instead of highway expansion.

I'm trying to decide if I'd rather deal with the crazies on the road, or the crazies on the train and on my walk to and from the Ballpark Station.

[Ironweed]

Originally Posted by Comrade

More than my view on Millcreek, I believe Salt Lake should absorb South Salt Lake and then invest in that area around 2100 South. But the city itself is always going to struggle just due to its limitations, both economically and financially.

I agree with this.

In other news:

- Comrade and his posse have been given permission to offer paddle boat
rides for $1 at the Sears Lake.

- More dirt has been added to the pile at the Moda-Lux site, and Comrade
has raised the price of the Tanka Truck Nightly Jamboree by .25 cents.

- Comrade has petitioned the city council to name the new liquor store to:
"Pennywise Playhouse."

[TheGeographer]

Originally Posted by Reeder113

I'm trying to decide if I'd rather deal with the crazies on the road, or the crazies on the train and on my walk to and from the Ballpark Station.

This made me laugh haha

[RC14]

Originally Posted by taboubak

Do you not think the convenience factor you are referring to is directly affected by us constantly investing in car/road infrastructure while ignoring transit?? The more rail lines we build the smaller that gap becomes.

No, it isn't.
I use to have almost door to door TRAX service between Home and work with no transfers. It still takes longer than driving, not including the time spent standing in adverse weather waiting for your train. Transit will never be able to compete with cars when it comes to convenience. In my example I am only talking about going strait to work and strait home, if I ever had to go anywhere else, that's 2-4 more hours of travel added to my day. In contrast, when I drive , it's only a 15-20min detour.

The roads vs transit debate misses the point. This is a very unpopular opinion but the mistake we made in the 20th century was subsidizing transportation of any kind. Road or rail. The old rail and streetcar lines of the past were built by private industry and had to take into account economic realities. The fact that we subsidized the auto industry through highway construction has destroyed our cities. It has allowed people to live in areas that otherwise would not be viable at the expense of our cities.

I don't see a realistic way back out of this mess. We will have to subsidize transit and roads forever and traffic congestion and suburban sprawl will only get worse. (the tragedy of the commons) The solution is not simply roads or rail, the solution is walkable cities and transportation that is priced according to market realities. But I don't know how we could ever get back there now that everyone already lives in suburbs where they can't walk to anything.

[Comrade]

idk maybe we should take this to the transit news thread.

My mistake for posting the initial thing that got this rolling. Remember: this thread is for me bitching about Millcreek, talk about the MLB and NHL coming to Salt Lake and the random four-story drab condo project going up somewhere in central city.