This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

It appeared like nothing more than the demolition of an old car wash. But, in fact, it could have a lot of significance.

Salt Lake City officials again face the conundrum of what to do with dilapidated structures that can sour a neighborhood and even become havens for lawlessness.

Mayor Jackie Biskupski, City Councilwoman Lisa Adams and Amy Barry, of the Sugar House Community Council, looked like they were breaking ground on something new Wednesday afternoon. In reality, they were celebrating the razing of the Ute Car Wash at 863 E. 2100 South.

The car wash had become an eyesore, but according to a 2012 Salt Lake City ordinance, it could not be pulled down until the property owner had a viable plan to replace it.

The ordinance was an outgrowth of the "Sugar Hole" that sat at the corner of 2100 S. Highland Drive for years after the 2008 economic downturn. It has since become a mixed-use development of apartments and restaurants.

At the time, the City Council found it better to have an old building than a hole in the ground. Those regulations also held that property owners must keep structures from deteriorating, whether or not they are empty.

The car wash was not kept up, and its owners, Nupetco Associates, haven't submitted new plans to City Hall.

Meanwhile, Barry and the Sugar House Community Council were pushing for demolition.

"I was told repeatedly, There is nothing we can do about this," Barry said at a news conference Wednesday.

It took about 21 months of prodding City Hall, and Barry credited Biskupski for finding a way to make it happen.

Biskupski determined to use a little-known aspect of the ordinance that allows the mayor to appoint a committee to determine whether a structure poses a public safety hazard. A four-member panel organized in March found that the Ute Car Wash fell into the "unsafe" category.

Dealing with the challenge of dilapidated structures, the mayor said, is a "learning process"; she credited the community council for pushing for the demolition.

"We will see where it all lands," she said. "But when the community is heard, we will be responsive."

Adams, whose District 7 encompasses the car wash, said the City Council will look at tuning up the ordinance to take such things into account. Getting rid of dilapidated buildings, she agreed, is no easy matter.

Among examples of such eyesores are the Zephyr Club building at the southeastern corner of West Temple and 300 South and the Yardstick Building on 300 South near State Street. Those structures in the heart of downtown were abandoned years before the 2012 ordinance and, apparently, do not need to comply with the "habitability" aspect of the regulations.

Such property owners are known as "land bankers" who are content to let buildings rot while the land beneath them grows in value.

In the case of the Ute Car Wash, however, Nupetco Associates was willing to raze the structure.

The eyesore at 863 E. 2100 South will give way to a dirt lot. The ordinance does not require property owners to landscape after a demolition.

So it's back to the original question: What's better, a muddy lot or a dilapidated structure?

Councilman Charlie Luke agreed with Adams that the council needs to look again at the ordinance and get to the original intent — dealing with eyesores.

Presently, he said, the city would have to impose eminent domain to raze a land-banked eyesore.

"Right now, it's the only tool we have," Luke said. "But it's not the tool to use — it sends a horrible message."