Garrett Neese/Daily Mining Gazette Construction equipment and Christmas decorations are seen in front of 326 Shelden Ave. Friday, the day after a Houghton County Circuit Court decision partially lifted a stay on site plan approval for the location, which had blocked construction since October.

HOUGHTON — A Houghton County Circuit Court order issued Thursday partially lifted a stay that had blocked construction from proceeding on a mixed-use development on Shelden Avenue.

Construction and construction-related activities can begin at 326 Shelden Ave, provided that no structure exceeds the current building height, Judge Charles Goodman said in the Thursday order.

Julien Properties had appealed to have the stay lifted. It had been in effect since last month, after Judge Charles Goodman imposed it in October in response to a suit from the Hall building in Houghton. Its owner, Edward Cole, alleged the new project would cause harm to his property, including the blocking of much of its eastern facade.

The Houghton Planning Commission had granted approval of the site plan in September. After Cole’s suit, which included statements that the original site plan had lacked necessary information, the commission reconvened in October to accept supplemental information and reaffirm its approval of the site plan.

The planned development at 326 Shelden will include retail on the ground floor and 16 long-term residential apartments on four additional stories above the former Hellman Transportation Center site. Another story will be at the Lakeshore Drive level.

A hearing on the appeal will be held 9 a.m. Jan. 5.

“We are pleased that the judge determined it appropriate to allow us to proceed with construction after having a chance to hear the facts of the matter from someone other than Mr. Cole and his counsel,” Julien Properties co-owner Jon Julien said in a statement.

Cole said he thought the ruling was fair. He said his goal was to respect the historical buildings and sense of place in the downtown, and make sure any development happens “in an elegant and graceful way everyone in the community is happy and proud about.”

“I think he was being very measured and very prudent in granting the developer the ability to do work on the foundational level and up to the one story that exists today and nothing more,” he said. “Hopefully by the time we get into next year, this will be resolved by both parties and we’ll get an answer either way.”

Also at Wednesday’s city council meeting, Councilor Mike Needham asked the council to consider requesting an opinion from the city attorney to determine if there was a conflict of interest or any other ethical concerns regarding Councilor Virginia Cole, Edward Cole’s sister, continuing to serve on the council.

Needham said Cole had sent him unprompted messages that were “inflammatory, often inaccurate, and seem to be intended to be intimidating. He also criticized public statements Cole had made against the Planning Commission and City Council.

“All of this has happened while he, under the guise of the Hall Building LLC, has an ongoing lawsuit against the city. I can no longer ignore whatever connection there is between Councilor Virginia Cole and her brother Edward Cole and the Hall Building LLC … I’d like an opinion regarding any potential conflict of interest or any other ethical concerns we should have regarding her continuing to serve on the city council from our city attorney.”

Needham’s request occurred during the portion of the meeting set aside for future agenda items. No action was taken Wednesday.

Cole had abstained from an October council vote on whether to vacate a city easement on the property, and did not take part in the preceding discussion.

Cole said after the meeting she is not directly employed by the LLC, instead working as an independent contractor.

After Wednesday’s meeting, Cole called Needham’s request “ridiculous.”

“I don’t think the council gets to make that choice,” she said. “You have to be recalled by the public… I think he’s just expressing his personal feelings but I don’t think they’re realistic.”

Edward Cole said his responses had been either to direct or indirect comments that were either on social media or that Needham had made in previous meetings.

“He’s a public official, and I’m free to make comments to a public official,” he said. “If that offends him, he’s probably in the wrong line of work.”

The council also directed the Planning Commission to revisit the issue of building heights in the downtown.

Virginia Cole recommended the commission present the council with a timeline and game plan for tackling the issue.

“As Eric (Waara) said, it’s an incredibly complex issue,” she said. “Building height has the ability to change the physical landscape of the city like no other thing that we’re looking at. The scale of the building is monumental to what we enjoy — the look, the physical nature of downtown.”

This is not the first time the commission has looked at the issue. When discussing a central business overlay district in 2020, the commission had proposed height restrictions, based on the tallest building on each street and the ability for fire and rescue vehicles to The proposed limits were 72 feet for Montezuma Avenue, 80 feet for Shelden Avenue and the south side of Lakeshore Drive, and 70 feet for the north side of Lakeshore Drive. The proposed development at 326 Shelden would be allowed under those restrictions.

Shelden and Montezuma avenues could have had up to two additional stories beyond the height limit if they were set back at least 12 feet from the street. Lakeshore Drive would have been allowed one.

A motion to send the recommendations on to the city council died for lack of a second. Some public commenters, including Edward and Virginia Cole, who was not yet on the council, said the proposed maximum heights were too lax and would allow new buildings to obstruct views from preexisting ones. Jon Julien also raised issues about the Lakeshore Drive height, which he said could allow buildings to block pre-existing views of the waterfront.

The council later approved the overlay district without any height restrictions.