Document text
McAndrews work hits roadblock Mail Tribune / Bob Pennell Medford�s McAndrews extension � one of the biggest road projects in the city�s history � is graded and the light poles are up, but it doesn�t look like there�s going to be any traffic soon. The project has been delayed because of a circuit court ruling Thursday that says an obscure county land-use ordinance prohibits road building on unincorporated "resource lands." Judge puts stop to $6.4 million construction project over land-use law By Chris Bristol Jane Hagle was right: An obscure Jackson County land-use ordinance really does prohibit construction of the East McAndrews Road extension across her property. Now the city of Medford and the county are trying to figure out what to do about it. In a ruling issued late Thursday, Circuit Judge Phil Arnold blocked the city from taking possession of Hagle�s property until and unless the county changes the outdated ordinance, which prohibits road building on unincorporated "resource lands." But changing the ordinance has proven to be not as simple as the city originally thought, because the county is now afraid Hagle will sue. "We�re willing to work with the city," county official Joe Strahl said Friday, "but we are not willing to accept blame for this or subject county residents to the cost of litigation." The decision further delays the long-awaited extension, one of the biggest road projects in city history. The road extension would link busy McAndrews Road in east Medford with Hillcrest Road amid new subdivisions on Roxy Ann Peak farther east. In a 1993 deal with developer Noel Moore, the city gave Moore 200 acres of prime real estate off Hillcrest Road in exchange for Moore�s agreement to build the upper section of the road. The city is building the lower section for $6.4 million, which includes a massive freeway-style overpass at Foothill Road. Hagle�s 4-acre homesite sits squarely in the path of Moore�s part of the road. Because the developer has no power to force her to sell, the city used its authority to condemn a slice of her property for the road. Hagle went to court, arguing the city abused its power to condemn her property by failing to properly oversee negotiations between her and Moore. She also claimed the proposed route cut off her well and septic tank and was too steep and dangerous for bicyclists and pedestrians. Finally, her attorneys argued the project violated a county zoning ordinance that prohibits new roads across "resource lands" outside city limits. Her property is zoned "open space reserve," a type of resource land. In his ruling, Arnold rejected Hagle�s abuse-of-discretion claim. The bike lane is an excellent design, he said, and case law gives public entities such as the city of Medford broad leeway to condemn private property for public-works projects like the McAndrews extension. But Hagle�s argument about the ordinance was right, he ruled. An Oregon Supreme Court ruling prohibits condemnation if the proposed use � in this case the McAndrews extension � is prohibited by a state or local ordinance. Existence of the ordinance apparently caught city officials off guard. They laid the blame at the feet of their predecessors. "The people responsible for it have retired," City Manager Michael Dyal said Friday. Dyal came to the city in 1998, long after the project got under way. County officials concede the ordinance is inconsistent with changes in state land-use law, which now allows new roads across resource land within urban growth boundaries. Hagle lives outside city limits but within the UGB. "There�s never been a reason to change the law until this particular matter came up," Strahl said, adding that county officials were unaware that the city did not own all the necessary right-of-way until they saw a Mail Tribune story about Hagle�s fight with the city. Still, the McAndrews extension is not a county project, and the county should not have to embroil itself in a lawsuit simply to accommodate the city, he said. "I don�t think the Board of Commissioners want to ask (county residents) to help pay the cost of this, because it�s really just affecting Medford," he said. "It�s important from the county�s perspective that the city defend the county if a lawsuit arises from this." Dyal said the two sides plan to sit down next week to "discuss" a solution. "We think we can work things out with the county," he said. "They obviously want some protection (from being sued), and we need to sit down and discuss it." Meanwhile, Hagle said she was realistic about her prospects. The court order shot her down on the abuse-of-discretion issue, she acknowledged. If the city and county in fact reach a deal on the ordinance, the city can immediately file for possession. "It�s like a stay of execution," she said. "I�m glad about it, but I�m realistic. I just want to be able to stay and live here, or have something comparable." Obituaries | Sports | Business | Classifieds | Tempo | Prime Times | So Oregon Sites | Outdoor Journal | Subscribe | Contact | Movies | Advertise | Real Estate Showcase | Archive | Editorials | Letters to the editor | Religion | Wake-up Call | NIE | Cyber Chef | Job Network | So Oregon Weather | WSJ Northwest | Forums | AP Wire | AP Money | F.A.Q. | Awards Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. The Community Newspaper Subsidiary of Dow Jones & Co, Inc Copyright �The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA