LOGAN City officials admit they turned a blind eye while property owners illegally created extra parking spaces by paving the strip between the sidewalk and the street. Nevertheless, the city is considering ripping out the parking spaces and many property owners are upset.
"They're trying to enforce something that they have allowed for 50 years," said Bruce Rigby, who owns two small apartment buildings on 300 East in Logan.
But Jay Nielson, Logan's community development director, said parking places on the so-called "park strip" create safety hazards because automobiles often stick out into the street and block sidewalks, which forces pedestrians to walk on the streets.
Nielson said there are more than 800 illegal parking spaces, mostly at older homes in central Logan that have been converted into apartments. The proliferation of apartments is harming neighborhoods where single families once occupied most of the homes, he said.
"We've seen some disturbing trends in non-owner-occupied housing," Nielson said. "The parking in the park strip is a manifestation of deterioration."
City Councilwoman Tami Pyfer said Logan residents have asked the city to crack down on the illegal spots.
"I'm responding to what citizens have been complaining about for several years," Pyfer said.
Nearly 150 people packed City Hall on April 30 when the City Council held a hearing on a proposed resolution to direct city officials to enforce laws against parking on the park strip. And one property owner has posted a sign on his lawn reading: "Logan City Leave Our Property Alone!"
The City Council is scheduled to consider the resolution again at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 13. Logan is considering using $200,000 in federal Community Development Grants to help cover the costs of city crews tearing out the parking spaces.
Although property owners are responsible for maintaining the space between the sidewalk and curb, the park strips are city property. Some property owners have suggested the city allow parking spaces that have been on the park strip for decades to remain.
But Pyfer said such "grandfathering" would be illegal.
"Legally, you cannot adversely possess public property," she said. "By the same token, you can't 'grandfather' public use of private property."
- KSL-TV welcomes 2 new anchors, new format
- Utah woman adopted as baby faces deportation...
- Identities released in St. George fatal plane...
- Final movement: Retiring violinist reflects...
- Holiday campers surprised by canyon snowfall
- Dangerous silence: Why you need to talk to...
- Weekend rescuers save horse in basement,...
- Personal investments from Primary hospital...
- Is this dress too short? Tooele teen...
58 - Dangerous silence: Why you need to talk...
27 - Studies try to find why poorer people...
26 - Sarah Palin catches flak over her Orrin...
24 - Liljenquist pushing to make name for...
21 - Several Utah high schools moving to...
13 - KSL-TV welcomes 2 new anchors, new format
10 - Senate rejects GOP, Democrat plans on...
7






DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
— About comments