Document text
Council halts R.V. Manor's expansion By DAVID PRESZLER The Rogue Valley Manor's hopes of expanding sooner rather than later were dashed Thursday by Mayor Lindsay Berryman and the Medford City Council. The mayor broke a tie that denied the Manor a chance to bring its expansion plans back for a council decision before this summer. The Manor wanted to get its plans for a $100 million commercial center approved while a little bit of traffic capacity at the south Interstate 5 interchange is being doled out. But the council voted to delay any decision on reconsidering the Manor's plans -- some of which it rejected in 1998 because of traffic concerns -- for 90 days. "My read was that if you get a split vote, the council needs more time to review the issue," Berryman said, explaining her vote. "It came up pretty quickly." The defeat stunned Rogue Valley Manor attorney Rob Patridge, a state representative and former city council president. "They had no rational, legal basis on which to oppose us," he said. The Manor wanted to take advantage of a window of opportunity for building on land in southeast Medford. The Manor wants to build a 25-acre commercial center off Ellendale Drive as part of a $100 million expansion plan. But traffic congestion at the interchange has stalled building in the area for several years. A recent transportation policy shift allows projects that don't significantly add to congestion to go forward, even before the interchange is fixed. Until the change late last year, projects that added even one car trip were denied. Developers are positioning themselves to take advantage of additional traffic capacity as it becomes available. Several projects have already been presented to the city, including a plan by developer Mike Mahar to build 267 homes on 67 acres. Last week, Mahar opted to delay a public hearing on his plans until May 25; city planning officials say the delay is tied to the Manor's concerns. With other projects poised to move ahead, Patridge said the Manor's plans should be considered too. "We asked the City Council to treat the Manor like everyone else," he said. "They are letting a bunch of other people's projects in ahead of ours and that's the problem. We want to be treated equally." Patridge said the Manor wanted "to make sure that our rights to the capacity were protected." The Manor's fear is that state transportation policy will shift again. The policy declares 25 trips or fewer during peak hours to be insignificant to congestion. Officials have said they will review the policy if congestion worsens. The Manor's expansion plans, which include a 25-acre commercial development, were debated in the fall of 1998. The city approved two of three phases, nixing the commercial development until area traffic problems were solved. But all three phases are tied together in an appeal the Manor made to the state land-use board, which is set to hear the case in June. Thursday, the Manor asked the city to ask for the case back from the land-use board and reconsider the Manor proposal, given the shift in traffic policy. But Councilman Skip Knight and others worried that reconsidering the Manor's plans now would affect the coming decision on how to fix the interchange. One of the three options for fixing the interchange involves Ellendale Drive. Knight said approving a commercial development there could complicate the interchange decision. Knight said studies on the freeway options will be finished in 90 days, and he'd rather wait for those before reconsidering the Manor's plans. The council didn't take public testimony Thursday, although Patridge was allowed to speak after he raised his hand, motioned several times and even stood from the audience to get the council's attention. He told the council that officials studying the interchange options aren't opposed to the plan. The Manor's original commercial development would have added 138 peak trips to the interchange. Partridge said it could be built in pieces to comply with the 25-trip limit. Berryman said she didn't buy into the Manor's plea for fairness, and felt the right thing to do was take more time. Councilman Jim Key, who also opposed the Manor request, said a delay would permit the council to examine "the full ramifications." Today's Edition : News | Sports | Business | Weather | Tempo | Classifieds Mail Tribune Copyright � The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA