OCR Text |
Show 20 Legal issues most verbatim from a Caliwith the imfornia statute portant exception of a section that said nonblighted properties could be included in the redevelopment project. Oswald cited huge development areas in California as big as 325 acres as precedent for what the Salt Lake agency is doing. Pasadena has its entire city within the If a redevelopment plan. flaprika 2302 Parleys Way 484-090- 1 Continued from page one single nonblighted building on a block could stop project development, the whole thrust of the plan would be blunted, Oswald said. Now some of you might be wondering just what a "blighted area is anyway. Well, the Utah law defines it as "characterized by the existence of buildings and structures. . .which are unfit or unsafe to occupy. . .or are conducive to ill health, transmission of disease, infant mortality, juvenile delin- quency. and crime because of any number of things generally related to overcrowding and lousy buildings. The current Salt Lake redevelopment plan includes 16 Hat your butinest been paying expensive cotts because you leU monthly oucouldn't afford youCown compute Has your small business gone without the services ot a computer because you though the'eost prohibitiveTor the procedures too hard to' learn LWE VEIGOUGREAUNEWS ORJfOU! time-tharin- g i heCompulerMHoomteatures m generation ot computers ust. .right tofsmalj businessesMicro-computerscanXandl- e inventorymanagementjf payrollsales analysisjandgeneraaccountingAndJhe than"mosttime-sharinosUs'even less g plus blocks downtown including the Salt Palace, the Building, Hotel Utah, all of and the ZCMI Center which arc apparently vulnerable if city officials decide another project would better suit their plan. Campbell claimed that if the agency's policy is followed to its logical conclusion, those kinds of obviously Ken-ncco- tt nonblighted buildings could developer came in with a project for a "Thats ablarger area. surd. he said. fall if a wealthy Oswald, strangely enough, agreed that such a thing could happen, but "the chances of it ever happening are remote. He reiterated it was the agency position that it wouldnt matter if the Ziniks' building were brand new (in reality, its vacant and in need of repair). It still needed to be moved in order to facilitate a project that removed blight from the area. But. of course, the building isnt brand new and it could well be argued with its history of fires and numerous building code violations that it is indeed blighted. That, rewould have seemingly, moved the legal issue. (Ironically, two other long-tim- e holdouts who finally came to terms with developers, Utah Woolen Mills and Wasatch Meats, Inc., had much they were stronger cases businesses, clearly not blighted.) So why didn't the city simply make a finding that the on-goi- ng Zinik building blighted? itself was Oswald said it was because it wasn't necessary. The agency could deal with the property whether it was blighted or not. Campbell pointed out that standards for determin- ing what constitutes blight have yet to be judicially laid A recent Supreme down. Court case (in which Campbell was the successful attorney), Salt Lake County v. Ramosclli (No. 14726, filed July 22, 1977), states that o AV courts can determine whether there is a need or public necessity for a condemnation. So why didnt the city make the finding anyway just to have alternative legal theories to fall back on? Chitwood admitted they hadn't thought of that. Oswald said there was enough evidence in the record already for him to be able to argue the building was blighted and couldn't economically be restored if he had to. Besides, "I didnt want to adopt his (Campbells) argument that we had to do that, Oswald said. There's another important issue involved in this situation and that is whether private property can be taken by the government for the benefit of another private party. The question has come up repeatedly since plans for Crossroads were announced early this summer. Utahs Supreme Court, in a case called Tribe v. Salt Lake City Corporation (540 P. 2d 409) decided in July. 1975, said it was all right to take property even though a benefit is thus provided to a private individual. The case was a declaratory judgement action which validated the Redevelopment Agency's power to issue bonds under Utahs constitution. with the city's It dealt desire to condemn buildings along West Temple between Second and Third South and then Continued on page 28 |