Document text
- Subscribe - Contact Us - Rate Card - Place an Ad Archives Revels Classifieds Real Estate Menu Guide Wedding Weather Subscribe Contact Us May 24, 2005 Setback definition delays Northlight decision Developers say they were told 20-foot boundary didn’t apply; await legal opinion on the issue By Robert Plain Ashland Daily Tidings The developers of the proposed Northlight project, which has dominated the agenda of recent regular Ashland Planning Commission meetings, have asked the city to postpone the continuation of its hearing scheduled for tonight because of a recently-discovered ordinance provision that could prevent the project from being in compliance with local regulations. Bill Molnar, an Ashland senior planner, said he received an e-mail from the developers just prior to Monday’s 4 p.m. deadline indicating that they were not prepared to proceed with tonight’s meeting. Northlight is a proposed four-building, 75,183-square-foot, residential, commercial and retail project for the former Copeland Lumber site on the corner of Lithia Way and First Street. Molnar said it had come to the attention of the city planners and the legal staff that the project is not in compliance with a city ordinance (ALUO 18.68.050) that requires all new buildings be set back 20 feet from the road. Assistant city attorney Mike Reeder said on Monday that he was in the process of writing a summary of the situation for the members of the planning commission and that he did not feel comfortable discussing it until he had offered his opinion to them. Molnar said he had heard from the city legal department that the Northlight project should adhere to this provision of the city statutes. To date, this issue had gone unnoticed largely because city planners had thought the 20-foot setback did not apply to buildings in the downtown area, said Ashland Community Development Director John McLaughlin. Former planning commissioner Colin Swales first brought this matter to the attention of the applicant and the city at last Tuesday night’s meeting. After the meeting, at which Swales requested the record stay open for seven days so that he could file a written comment, he wrote, “... 18.68.050 Special Setback Requirements is still in full force and effect and applies to the Copeland property ... The proposal of the applicants fail to meet the burden of proof necessary to show compliance with this requirement and therefore is reason to deny the project.” Molnar said unless the applicants could prove otherwise, they will have to either revise their proposal or ask the commission for a variance. Either scenario, he said, would require the public hearing to be re-opened. “They might consult a land-use attorney and talk it over with our attorney and see if there is a difference of opinion,” Molnar said.”The burden is on the applicant if they feel there is a different way to interpret it.” Molnar said he could not recall an instance in which a proposal had been postponed and possibly even re-opened this far into the process. Evan Archerd, one of the developers for the project, said it was not their intention to circumvent a city ordinance. He said they asked if this provision applied to their proposal in their pre-application process and were told that it did not, he said. “There seems to be some question as to whether or not this applies to us,” he said. “Up until today we were told that it did not. As of today, it appears there is some question as to whether or not it does. It’s really up to them to decide which one is correct and we’ll proceed from there.” In Swales report, he lists six other provisions that need to be remedied or addressed before it would be deemed in compliance. Swales has also brought up the point that the applicants may not have met the criteria that 50 percent of lot be utilized for commercial use. Molnar said there are still issues concerning the two largest buildings‚ relationship with one another; questions about the amount of open space it provides and traffic questions. Also, 91 Ashland residents, most of whom reside in the general neighborhood of the Copeland Lumber site, submitted a petition that states that they “oppose the approval ... of the Northlight project” because its “bulk and scale ... are inconsistent with downtown Ashland.” Staff writer Robert Plain can be reached at 482-3456 x 3040 or [email protected] DailyTidings.com Home Page Archives | Revels | Classifieds | Real Estate Guide | Weather | Subscribe | Contact Us Copyright 2005 Ashland Daily Tidings and Ottaway Newspapers All Rights Reserved Deep Muscle Stimulator Ceramic Piggy Banks FREE Entertainment Guide Women's & Men's Slippers Accelerate Weightloss Products Backpacks Online Pharmacy Vegas Travel Guide Search Engine Optimization Student Loans Hotel & Airline Reservations Hammocks Water Filter Helzberg Diamonds Online Casinos Community Bonus Casino Mortgage Calculator Security Systems Mailing Lists Click Here Advertisement .:Advertisements:. Site Search: RESOURCES - Mail Tribune News - ODOT Road Cams