The Parkway Drive landslide, and the eleven years after it.

The honest answer is thinner than the question assumes, and pretending otherwise would be the dishonest thing. The Utah Geological Survey installed GPS monitoring stations tracking downslope displacement from August 2014 onward and increased the monitoring frequency after the two reactivations of 2016. Press coverage of the survey's statewide landslide work in 2023 named two North Salt Lake areas under active watch, the Spring Hill Lane area and Parkway Drive, with in ground instrumentation. Beyond that, no published displacement figure for Parkway Drive after 2016 could be found. Checked 15 August 2026.

So the correct thing to do with this question is to ask the agency that owns it. The survey publishes contact names and direct telephone numbers on its own Parkway Drive hazard page, and a specific question about a specific parcel is exactly what those numbers are for. That is a better answer than any number a real estate page could give you, because the number would be out of date the following spring.

One more thing worth saying plainly before anything else. There is no Utah Geological Survey report number for this landslide. What the survey publishes is a hazard web page plus emergency response and Survey Notes material, not a numbered Report of Investigation or Open File Report, and a search of the publications catalogue returns none. The nearest thing to a formal study is a Utah State University graduate report by Brianna V. Hill, which is a graduate report and not a survey publication. A 2015 lidar dataset of the slide is hosted at OpenTopography, which tells you it was surveyed to research standard. If you meet a document citing a UGS report number for Parkway Drive, it is citing something else.

The survey's own wording is the most important sentence available on the subject and it deserves to lead rather than to sit in a footnote: the slope had been part of an aggregate mining operation in the 1990s and was subsequently reclaimed. What failed on that August morning was an engineered slope, made by people, graded to a design, accepted as reclaimed and then partly developed. That is a fundamentally different fact from a mountain deciding to move, and it is the fact that everything downstream of 2014 rests on.

The geology explains why the design did not hold. The upper portion of the slope coincides with the Lake Bonneville highstand shoreline, which is about eighteen thousand years old, and the section there is Lake Bonneville sands and gravels overlying Tertiary age tuffaceous sediments. In plain language: lake sand and gravel sitting on old volcanic ash sediment that weathers to clay. The clay is the slip surface. Cut into that stack at 45 percent and you have created a hazard whether or not anyone intended to.

Two miles north, the Springhill landslide formed in an abandoned gravel quarry that exposed the same weak clay rich layer under the same lake gravels. Same recipe, same era of aggregate industry, two entirely different failure styles. The Springhill page carries that one, and the side by side table on it is the clearest way to hold both at once.

One thing this page will not do is attach a company name to either slope. The survey names no operator for either failure and neither does anything else that could be reached, and there is no defensible way to connect today's Beck Street quarry operators to a slope that was mined in the 1990s. Naming the industry is accurate. Naming a firm would not be.

The 2015 remediation came to roughly 1.9 million dollars and it was funded jointly without any party accepting fault: 625,000 dollars each from the City of North Salt Lake and from Eaglepointe Development, 375,000 from Questar Gas and 312,500 from Kern River Gas Transmission. Those four figures sum to 1,937,500, which is where the widely repeated round number of two million comes from, and it is worth carrying the components rather than the round number because the components tell you who was at the table.

The litigation ran alongside it and its shape is on the public record even though its outcome is not. The Eagleridge Tennis Club sued the City of North Salt Lake and Eaglepointe Development in spring 2015, alleging they knew of the landslide risk and were negligent. Kern River Gas Transmission filed a complaint against Eaglepointe Development seeking about a million dollars for assessing and protecting its pipelines. Eaglepointe answered and countersued, blaming Kern River Gas, the tennis club and a neighbouring homeowner. The homeowners denied that irrigation levels had triggered the slide.

And then the record stops. No verdict, no settlement terms and no dismissal could be found for any of it. The practical city guide on this site says that it will not characterise the outcomes because the public record it trusts does not state them, and that is the right position, so this page holds it too. It also declines to name the private individual named in the countersuit, who was a homeowner rather than a party with a press office, and who has no business being named on a real estate website a decade later.

The reason this page exists is that a search for this city returns a 2014 headline and almost nothing that follows it, and a headline is a bad basis for a decision in either direction. The useful version is that a mined slope failed, an ordinance followed, and a purchase on this bench now comes with a reading list the way a purchase anywhere comes with an inspection. That is a normal amount of homework for a hillside address on the Wasatch Front, and the same front produced three more landslides in this county in thirteen days of April 2023.

What has genuinely not been answered is worth listing, because a page that only tells you what it knows is only half honest. Nobody publishes the current condition of the slide area. Nobody publishes a displacement figure after 2016. No lawsuit outcome is on the record. There is no report number. And the survey's own answer to a question about today is a telephone number rather than a document, which is the correct answer and an unsatisfying one.