Holladay officials: Petition to block old Cottonwood Mall development doesn't qualify for ballot

But city officials vote to schedule special election just in case

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Hank1950 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 5, 2018 2:03 p.m.

    I do not think the people of Holladay United will be happy with anything the developer would put where the The Cottonwood Mall use to be unless it is a park . Even though this has been hashed over for years and years thousands of times, and even though numerous meetings have taken place and the developer was willing to lessen the height of the buildings and the density. There will always be people who find something wrong. I guess this will just remain a weed patch and a dump with remnants of dilapidated buildings like the old Z. C. M. I. Building, which we will have to look at everyday and is unsafe for our children to play in.
    Then after the developers have lost there money and pull out no one else will want take a chance on this place because they don’t want to go through this scrutiny with people who are never satisfied.
    The city will have to waste money on patrolling this dump and spraying for insects instead of collecting needed tax monies.
    There will always be something to complain about no matter what developers come up with, so the truth is we will have look at this mess for years to come as we drive by each morning.

  • ofer4 Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 4, 2018 11:09 p.m.

    The way that Holladay's zoning is written will make this case unique. The city council did not formally change the zoning. However, the entire zone is defined by the plan that they approved. The height, the density, the allowed uses, and all other aspects were defined by the vote in question. I suspect that the court will recognize that this vote was a de facto legislative decision. Then again, this is Utah...

  • olympus titan Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 4, 2018 12:56 p.m.

    Driving past the Cottonwood Mall property I see signs from Ivory/Woodbury highlighting “8 Restaurants” and “20-30 retail spaces”.

    Conveniently absent is any sign mentioning the 1,000 new residences. For good reason. Ivory knows most people in Holladay don’t want them.

    Highland Drive is a four-lane highway with NO TURNING LANE. Murray Holladay Road is only a two-lane road. How will people navigate those roads with 1,000 additional cars?

    The Holladay city council has sold out to Ivory. And Ivory has shown they could care less about the citizens of Holladay.

    Ivory is only interested in money – big surprise.

  • toosmartforyou Kaysville, UT
    Aug. 4, 2018 9:28 a.m.

    Developers run the cities; isn't that obvious? Citizens only pay taxes.

  • Flipphone Sandy, UT
    Aug. 4, 2018 7:48 a.m.

    The pictured purposed development looks nice and well thought out to me..what is the alternative? keeping the vacant 57 areas of weeds and that once Macy store as is?

  • Sandy Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 3, 2018 10:45 p.m.

    I’ve lived in Holladay most of my life. Most of my neighbors didn’t sign the petition and don't want another halt to progress over this property. We have already voted — for a capable city council, which has worked on this difficult problem for decades now. They’ve done the job we elected them to do, and have done it with integrity. Holladay citizens are begging the vocal minority demanding this referendum to please back off and let the work move forward.

  • Magicburro Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 3, 2018 8:15 p.m.

    Water rocket, it isn't "some malcontents" who oppose the project, it's the majority of Holladay. In 6 weeks, almost 8,000 registered voters signed petitions because they want to vote. Let's be honest, they didn't sign because they wanted to vote "YES" for a giant apartment complex. I volunteered a lot of time and talked to hundreds of people. I rarely met anyone who wants this project. Actually, I don't think I met a single person who wants this project that didn't have some personal tie to the development.

    Furthermore, the city council and mayor bypassed the planning commission. You know, the time honored process of allowing experts in city planning to do their job? So yes, they did it wrong.

  • 1Reader Alpine, UT
    Aug. 3, 2018 7:21 p.m.

    The development is still much too dense. Of course residents overwhelmingly oppose it. Government leaders rarely represent the people--especially against such nice people as developers; they just aren't built for it. It's great to see people represent and defend themselves against abject abuse.

  • water rocket Magna, UT
    Aug. 3, 2018 6:57 p.m.

    So "magicburro" are you saying that when the city followed the time honored LEGAL process for approving this development, they did wrong? Or are you saying that the land owners, who followed all the rules, spent untold sums of money, and tried to address all the best interests of the citizens, while considering their own right to create jobs, provide both housing and shopping, and of course, the hope of generating a profit from all their investment should be ignored because there are some malcontents who oppose change, now that they have what they want?

    As for your conclusion that the courts would side with the petitioners, I find that highly speculative and irresponsible. Where I to guess (and that is exactly the same thing you are doing) I would think that the courts would agree with the city, and the money these unhappy people will have spent will be wasted, along with a lot of tax payer money in city and court costs.

  • Magicburro Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 3, 2018 5:13 p.m.

    The article states that the ballot initiative failed? Not true. They got almost 8,000 signatures--well over the requisite amount. The city has scheduled a special election. As the city attorney mentioned, this will require a final determination by the courts.

    It is doubtful that the city attorney and the developers' attorneys would put money on winning in court. They should know that they'll end up on the wrong side of the court's decision.

    So, the initiative didn't fail, it was just forced to take another step. The city government is ignoring the voice of the people (as it did during the process to approve the Ivory/Woodbury plan), and now more tax dollars will be wasted in court. Once the court rules that the city's decisions can, in fact, be challenged by a referendum, it will go to a vote. When that happens, a landslide victory will clearly show that Holladay citizens didn't want this project.

    So no, the initiative didn't fail. However, the city clearly failed to listen to the people that they represent. Or worse, they listened to them but ignored them. Either way, they failed to properly represent the people that put them in office.