• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Anti-Wal-Mart Group Does Have Standing, Says Lawyer

Posted on: Thursday, 1 June 2006, 21:00 CDT

By Meg Landers, Mail Tribune, Medford, Ore.

May 31--In the latest wrangling over a supercenter in Medford, a prominent anti-Wal-Mart lawyer has given a boost to a local citizen group's argument that it has standing in a coming appeal hearing.

The city of Medford says it cannot consider the Citizens for Responsible Development's demand for a more extensive traffic study on the impacts of a Supercenter because the group did not participate in the original hearing process, the appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals nor the first council remand and therefore does not have standing.

But Christine Cook, a Portland land-use attorney who has worked with citizens opposed to Wal-Mart construction in several Oregon cities, including Hood River and Gresham, argues the group does have standing because it appeared in the initial proceedings and has interests adversely affected by the decision and is aggrieved by the decision.

"No section of the Medford Municipal Code, and no state statute, permits the city to deny Citizens for Responsible Development the right to present legal argument on traffic at these proceedings," Cook states in the group's appeal.

The Wal-Mart Supercenter project approved for the former Miles Field site is back before the Medford City Council after appeals were filed by the citizens group and South Gateway Center Partners, which owns a shopping center near the site.

The City Council will consider the appeals at 7 p.m. Thursday in Council Chambers, 411 W. Eighth St., Medford.

The citizens and South Gateway groups argue that Wal-Mart should be required to conduct a comprehensive study of the 205,693-square-foot store's impacts on traffic. The citizens group also argues the size of the building makes it incompatible with adjacent development. City staff argues that the citizens group has standing on the site design portion of its appeal but not on traffic impacts.

The Wal-Mart Supercenter was first proposed for the 19.5-acre site between Center Drive and Highway 99 in 2003. The Site Plan and Architectural Commission approved the project but appeals were filed by the same two groups, and the City Council rejected its approval in 2004. Wal-Mart appealed to LUBA, which returned the issue to the council, saying it did not properly explain its reasoning for rejecting the project and did not adequately explain why a traffic study was not required for the application.

The council then sent it back to the commission, which approved the architectural and landscape portion of a revised proposal in February and in March stuck by its decision not to require any further study of traffic impacts.

Bob Kaczor of the South Gateway group has said the partners haven't changed their argument. Kaczor has argued that if a traffic study shows the current system will fail, then Wal-Mart -- not taxpayers -- should have to pay for the improvements.

Attempts to reach Kaczor, Cook, City Attorney John Huttl and Wal-Mart's attorney Greg Hathaway were unsuccessful Tuesday.

-----

To see more of the Mail Tribune, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.mailtribune.com.

Copyright (c) 2006, Mail Tribune, Medford, Ore.

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.

WMT,

Source: Mail Tribune

More News in this Category