Document text
Ashland's big-box ordinance continues to cause confusion By TONY BOOM Mail Tribune ASHLAND - A developer could build something out of scale with downtown's historic character while the City Council continues to delay clarification of the town's big-box ordinance, one resident claims. "Somebody could present right now to the planners a building that would be incredibly large," said Bill Street. "I don't think the City Council gets that at this point." The council's interpretation of the ordinance in fall 2000 during an appeal against the Oregon Shakespeare Festival's new theater allows buildings of up to 135,000 square feet. Street is unhappy that the council sent the issue back to the planning commission for study within four to eight months at its Feb. 19 meeting. The council ruled in 2000 that a 45,000-square-foot limit in Ashland's commercial zones applies to a building's footprint, not its entire area. Street and others say the ordinance, passed in 1992 after heated debate, should be enforced as written to limit buildings to 45,000 square feet in total. City Attorney Paul Nolte and Planning Director John McLaughlin said the ruling on the OSF building made that interpretation the prevailing guideline. "In effect it clarifies what the ordinance meant," said Nolte. "It's up to the council to interpret its own ordinances." But efforts to put the interpretation into the written ordinance have met resistance from the council. A first attempt in September was put off after public testimony against the planning commission's recommended change. The issue didn't resurface until Feb. 5, when staff asked for discussion and direction. Public testimony on Feb. 5 again supported the more restrictive interpretation. A council study session was suggested. But a motion by Councilwoman Cate Hartzell and 3-1 approval by council on Feb. 19 sent the issue back to the planning commission. "My head's kind of spinning," said Hartzell. "I hear the city attorney saying the interpretation of the City Council stands, but others question that." Hartzell wants to take more time to investigate the issues and to gain input from the public and the planning commission. "We really believe we can't give short shrift to some of the concerns being raised," said Councilman Chris Hearn. "Maybe its time to take a second look at this new interpretation and to see if (it) is warranted and appropriate." Hearn said the smaller limit could work against renovation and expansion of older downtown buildings and efforts to create a more compact urban form. He said the planning department had done a good job of not allowing inappropriate development in Ashland. Councilman Cameron Hansen, who voted against the Feb. 19 motion, said the present ordnance works and does not need change. One project has already taken advantage of the new interpretation. Ashland's YMCA has an 18,000-square-foot addition under way that will increase its size beyond 45,000 square feet. Prior to the interpretation, the organization had considered a zone change to accommodate expansion. Reach Ashland bureau reporter Tony Boom at 482-4651, or e-mail [email protected] Mail Tribune Home | Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. | Dow Jones & Co., Inc. | Privacy | Contact Us Copyright � 2001 Mail Tribune, Inc.