(more…)

You can read them here, at Pete Ashdown’s blog.

Almost 30 years ago, my neighbors rose up against a destructive force in the Avenues neighborhood – the replacement of original homes with large, out-of-scale multi-family dwellings – and saved an historic neighborhood in Salt Lake City. Today that neighborhood is home to a diverse range of housing and is a wonderful place to live.

We have, however, a problem: Salt Lake City’s Planning Division has been decimated by departures and leadership vacuums. Across the city we have paid the price with disturbing interpretations of our ordinances, a failure to make timely decisions about applications for development, and increasing neighborhood conflicts because City ordinances have not kept pace with changing times and circumstances. As a professional planner and former member of the Salt Lake City Planning Commission in the early nineties, we recognized our staff and decision making as the best in the State and we worked consistently to listen to everyone and make changes that would reflect our residents’ intent for the future of the city. (During that era, we completely rewrote the City Zoning Ordinance, adopted procedures for ethical, inclusive decision making by Planning Commission, and our professional staff prepared thorough, comprehensive reports on all issues before us.)

We should have learned our lesson about the value of neighborhoods decades ago. It is time to restore strong land-use decisions to Salt Lake City because our neighborhoods, residents, and city fabric are suffering.

As mayor, this will be a first order of business for the sake of all of us in the City. I will initiate a comprehensive review of staff, land use ordinances, and overall planning policies. I will also push for a muscular sustainability ordinance.

As the candidate who has a professional background in these issues, and a proven track record of working with community councils, landowners, and businesses to make neighborhoods better, I am eager to make the changes necessary to get our Planning Division back on track.

I recently corresponded with a concerned resident of the neighborhood that lies just west of the University. She was particularly interested in what I thought about the balance between neighborhood character/historic preservation and the desire by some to develop the area more densely. My response is below.

QUESTION: I want to ask your view related to an issue that is most crucial to our immediate neighborhood of single family home owners beginning at 7th East and extending to University Street between South Temple and 5th South.

Most often developers see this area of town as a gold mine due to its location to downtown and now the TRAX line. Over the years we single family home owners have faced many city planners who have had visions of linking down town with the University by intending development straight through our neighborhoods.

Some of the proposed development has been commercial but also includes high density residential complexes which would severely impact our neighborhoods and families. While some of this area is slightly protected with a Historic designation, the majority of the base zoning and in fact the future land use map from the adopted community master plan shows high density development goals right OVER and AROUND our homes.

I have seen your response to key small business owners but have not seen a position related to single family homeowners and existing residential neighborhoods specifically our part of town. Can you please give me an idea of your position?

RESPONSE: Thank you for asking my opinion. I should tell you that I feel a need to get better educated and would welcome your help in getting me there, but let me give you some thoughts.

A great virtue of SLC are our neighborhoods that have been largely preserved, including the area between downtown and the University. When I was on the Planning Commission, for example, we made a conscious decision to drive downtown commercial development west and retain the area between about 300 East and the U as mixed use with an emphasis on residential. (That area had been increasingly trending towards commercial development.)

I believe that is still an important principle for a well-grounded community with residential development and walkable neighborhoods retained. It seems to me that we have a long ways to go in your area to have well-functioning, friendly neighborhoods with a healthy mix of residential types and commercial areas.

There will always be changes as our City evolves, but we have been fortunate to have historic district designations, downzoning in critical neighborhood areas, along with allowances for appropriate development in areas where increased density is warranted.

One example of that is along 4th South, where a TRAX line and stations change the character of the street and provide the impetus for more density and transit-oriented development. In places like that we should encourage changes in our land-use rules to take advantage of that walkable, mixed-use opportunity. Decisions about specific block faces and locations for changes in use should always be the subject of a planning process and truly meaningful community involvement.