HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-0819 Study Session PACKET
CITY OF
ASHLAND
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
AGENDA
Monday, August 19, 2013
Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way
5:30 p.m. Study Session
1. Look Ahead review
2. Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan update (For information only. Staff can answer
questions as necessary.)
3. Unified Land Use Ordinance project update (For information only. Staff can answer
questions as necessary.)
4. Discussion of proposed ordinance changes regarding short-term home rentals
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-
2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9
VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US
N
r
m
i
ii
4
a W - PO W W d
m (7 0 a a z
Q o
Z
~ m
Q o CD
0 V m m o
N N ^M1 m N N '
00
m
C~ O O o a 0 a o 0
~ W m m t: 1
N
w i l d d
m ° 0 0 0 0 m
O Q v
' E
c U-
t O m m
a
`p N c c c c c c w
c a c c
= v m m
U F as aU ¢U ¢ ka ¢a lu~ ~U ii ii. °¢a a¢a¢
x 'n o v c °r m y 0 P,
m °r E a v;'. 0- m xo v a w
d m = m° y m m °0 m E m i
N x d x 10 c k m c¢ mn x x> U `g ¢ m ? o
46 (mc a ovOCm c~ me mt vv0 my P? uo
m x$ ~'~y o ;voU .c cm v°
LO vrn L L E=m mL~ omo t °3 am
q~f x n Y n m a°pY o f w c ~i d v E n°~ c a~~Sc .ami ° a v
g E o E c m Imo a` w v w rn - v Im E y c L
u v a v ci°'iA° kE° o 3E cf9 ~ oju E~ mrn
«r`'°-o me
cO ([];oE vi0 c .m>~'Eju =yvm mu c rW
m
1NN~ 10 O Z E U° Of 60. u m U O ~g+i m e O U j m0 'Q
IN U c m m m m L y
N E C° C ~U m O C O E N O O_ E U N a
'`o E~E Pmt mmmc caE f !~~vr_¢mu mn
o m a ❑-2 m c c c4 ldi ° O ` li ` a o c IbS m 0 o m c c~
m~ = u °c
~~va Omi ac v=a mcN o IvL a o ° mm mU)
N a,cm om Smoco .0 m K~ m°Omc= o'y E ~r Ema cvcc
L y M O C C 'm m° D a a c a.` O m m E n ° 10 y v, O
mmm-~ c c com m E'- EE
om mO o'E NNm m mdm.m~O mEv1 Ucvfc n~oom
om m rn_„r rn cm= m 8 m ao cq
m C Q
• m 7a_ ~OIEm N Cmc'-6E j
c o m t 'CO m O m N C_ c O v m
c o N~ m C> a U a g "10 w d m>~ O a 9 17 c 0 v m~ o c
j IN S C S c m m 7 0 O {p a t+'C m m
m> ..L.. a b m C y m m 3
m o v 3 c m Tot m E g ~o _ ac E ac a 0 m° m ° v OE
n~eQ sm"m"2E vm O a`a E> mmcmnd
C7 v ~'vo '^a ov vvo -rv v d>,m°
a. mamm(h x ~.'D w CL U):0
g~ m~~-m Qc iL dEmx R7
~ lei ~ N N e m m ~ n fm's m m o ~ m~ m~ m m n m
a 1
81 I ~
111
?1111
1111 I
0111111
x=111111 I
BN1111111 I
~~11111111 I
-D~N1111111111
1 111111111 I
Y U
a= 1 111111111 I
° 1 111111111 I
C W
1 111111111 I ~
7z 1 111111111 I
'a~ 1 111111111 I
m~
to
U = w a¢ a
d
a
Ti E
x
w '2
w no _
c d
a Z m p O Ip p 1lp 8
8 c i> m
Ig N U r0 ~O r0
g O e C d'' C C C u
o a V c o, = o o. o "e e
y ap1~„I~I~rErrs
N U f- Y d~ c Y ~ S.tC ~ Y ~ c
0 U) U) 0
1~ ~J IC r E
~ N y FJ 1~ p IJ d 1~ IJ r NO
c$ y' 11U c U `o c U C U c U 1~_ 3 a g
"~~pp'' 1NNq m
r w T P i o F
c 11__ l^
F
N o ny N N pN N N a° eyyyy' s°
p c p U m E £OC @ •
m gxa 8r
.a d 'oH
a LL o o$o~
~ N N U J J J p x
d U U g o o E a 5
N t N N 11 ? I
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
August 19, 2013, Study Session
Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan Update
FROM:
Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner, Community Development
Brandon. Goldman@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The City of Ashland has received a grant award from the State of Oregon's Transportation Growth
Management Program to complete a land use and transportation plan for the 94 acre North Normal
Avenue area. At the time a property owner requests annexation into the City of Ashland, the Normal
Avenue Neighborhood Plan is intended to help guide changes to the area in a manner that creates a
system of greenways, protects and integrates existing stream corridors and natural wetlands,
accommodates future housing, and enhances overall mobility by planning for safe walking and bicycle
routes while providing convenient access to future bus service. Neighborhood planning represents an
opportunity to collectively think ahead, determine a vision, and instill a degree of confidence about
being prepared for changes, rather than merely being put in a position to react to change.
BACKGROUND
In May of 2012, the City Council initiated the planning process to develop a Concept Plan for the
Normal Avenue Neighborhood and accepted a Transportation Growth Management grant to undertake
the planning effort. The overall objective of this project is to better integrate transportation and land
use planning and develop new ways to manage the areas future growth in a manner that achieves
compact pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly development. As the area is presently outside the City
Limits, but within the Urban Growth Boundary, the future development of any properties within the
area to urban densities will require annexation approval and development review.
Upon completion of this project, the adopted Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan will provide the
underlying framework for future area development through adoption of Land Use standards for the
overlay area, a transportation circulation plan, and a redistribution of housing concentrations through
amended Comprehensive Plan designations for the area. Although future development of this area is
expected to occur in an incremental way, as individual parcels propose annexation for specific housing
developments, with an adopted neighborhood plan in place each individual development proposal can
coordinate the provision of streets, pedestrian connections; utilities, stormwater management, and open rr
space. Such an approach can ultimately help reduce development costs through appropriate sizing of
needed facilities, provision of easements, and secured street access. Additionally a significant benefit
of an adopted plan is that there is a clear expectation and understanding regarding the level of
development anticipated by both developers and neighboring residents. In this way the development.
and annexation process for all properties with the plan area is streamlined while ensuring the City can
accommodate its future growth in a systematic and efficient manner.
Pagel of 5
rr,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
THE PLAN
Throughout the last year planning and design work has been undertaken in recognition that the project
area should be considered as a system where each development decision impacts each part of the
whole. For example, the placement of streets throughout the site will ultimately have a direct impact on
the function of the sites natural resources as well as the efficiency of the development pattern. Housing
types and concentrations have been examined in an effort to meet overall city and regional housing
goals while balancing the design needs of the site and need to protect sensitive natural areas.
The working Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan is designed to provide a environment suitable for
traditional neighborhood living, working, and recreation. The Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan is a
blueprint for providing broad flexibility in housing types allowed in each zoning designation to
encourage variation in style and type while achieving the intended housing densities. The
neighborhood will be served by a connected network of streets and lanes, paths and trails, with direct
connection to the natural areas, wetlands, and streams that characterize the district. This network will
also connect to the larger network of regional trails, paths, and streets beyond the boundaries of the
neighborhood.
Project Guiding Principles and Objective
Throughout the process of developing the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan over the course of the
last year the Planning Commission, Design Team, resident participants engaged in the process, and
Staff have referenced the following objectives to help guide discussions about various plan elements:
• Increase efficiency in the use of land through concentration of housing in a centrally located
area within the City UGB planned for future urban development;
• Achieve a development pattern that results in a balanced, multi-modal transportation system
and that enhances opportunities for walking, bicycling or using transit in areas planned for
transit service;
• Delineate housing, neighborhood serving commercial, open space, public space, and green
infrastructure improvements, in a manner that provides for preservation and enhancement of
creeks and wetlands;
• Develop new illustrative conceptual architectural and site plans for Project Area consistent with
Transportation and Growth Management objectives. Concepts will meet City's and the
property owners' development goals and standards.
• Design a local street grid for the Project Area including connections to existing and planned
street, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities outside Project Area, to more fully integrate the Project
Area into the City transportation system;
• Provide for pedestrian and bicycle routes and facility improvements within the Project Area
that will provide safe access to local schools;
• Provide alternatives to, or delay the need for, expansion of the City UGB;
r" • Reduce emissions that contribute to climatd~,.hange through changes to transportation or land TO
use plans that reduce expected automobile vehicle miles traveled;
• Provide an implementation strategy that includes supporting Comprehensive Plan and updated
TSP amendments, form based codes, and design standards; and
• Present the Plan and documentation necessary to support adoption to City's Planning
Commission (PC) and City Council (Council).
Page 2 of 5
PI,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
The Planned Housing Types and Land Use Designations
The development standards for the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Development Plan will create its
own neighborhood character by providing three different residential zones with different densities and
development standards. The use regulations and development standards are intended to provide a
significant degree of flexibility as to the form and character of individual developments. The Land Use
designations NA-01 is intended to provide single family dwellings, accessory residential units, and
clustered housing. The NA-02 designation provides housing opportunities for individual households
through development of a mix of single-dwelling housing, duplexes, townhomes, accessory residential
units, and clustered housing. Clustered housing, commonly referred to as "pocket neighborhoods", are
a new housing type envisioned for the plan area where multiple compact detached or attached
dwellings occupy a single lot. These dwellings are grouped around common open space and are
separated from one another by side yards to provide privacy and single family home-type scale and
character. Through the consolidation of common open space and or parking cluster housing
developments can often achieve a housing density comparable to attached row houses or low-rise
apartments, yet with a lower profile and the appearance of traditional single-family homes. The NA-03
land use designation is intended to address Ashland's housing needs through development of multi-
dwelling housing as well as allow for limited neighborhood serving commercial uses such as a coffee
shop. Lastly the NA-OS "open-space" land use designation is intended to protect environmentally
sensitive water resource lands and provide open space recreational opportunities for individual
households throughout the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Development Plan area.
Greenway and Open Space
The Plan's approach to the greenway and open space framework is to maximize protection of the
existing natural resource areas and provide usable, connected open space within the plan area. Natural
areas, including streams, wetlands, and other environmentally sensitive features contribute
significantly to the existing character of the Normal Avenue neighborhood study area and were most
cited by neighborhood residents as needing preservation to retain the rural character of the area. The
quality of the place is enhanced by these features and the wildlife that they attract. The objective for
the open space and greenway component of the plan is to protect and enhance these existing natural
areas while also providing connected open space throughout the plan area. Open space will help
maintain the neighborhood's distinctive character, promote environmental quality, and provide
opportunities for both scenic enjoyment and active recreation.
Protected riparian corridors and wetlands will support native vegetation, provide habitat for wildlife,
and promote environmental quality by absorbing, storing, and releasing stormwater. Streams and
wetlands will be maintained as amenities with access to all area residents due to the carefully
considered transportation network that ensures that these areas are not hidden in back yards.
Accommodation of the pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile circulation along the edges of the riparian
zones provides visual and physical access and increases the buffer zones between pockets of
development enhancing the character of openness within the plan area.
Transportation
Walking and cycling, or "active transportation", is fundamental to the Normal Avenue Neighborhood
urban design plan. Designing the transportation network in consideration of the experience of a person
walking through the neighborhood allows for development and block patterns in which residents more
readily relate to their environment, feel safer, and are more comfortable on foot or bike, Despite the
inherent boundary conditions that limit connectivity, such as Ashland Middle School and the Central
Page 3 of 5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Oregon & Pacific rail line, building the transportation network on a foundation of interconnected
streets and walkability makes all modes of travel more efficient and effective. Walkability is
supported in the plan by small blocks, however there have been some variations from these block
lengths in consideration of natural resource protection areas. Care has been taken to locate pedestrian
and bicycle paths adjacent to, or across, these natural areas to enhance the user experience and increase
access to these neighborhood amenities.
The Normal Avenue neighborhood's internal street network has largely been designed to keep travel
speeds in the range of 20 mph by introducing elements such as a planted median, a traffic circle, and
subtle changes in direction at block intersections. The Normal Avenue Neighborhood plan also
introduces a new street type into the range of Ashland streets: the woonerf. A woonerf is a very low
speed street where all of the functions of the transportation system coexist in the same space. There are
no individual sidewalks separated from the street surface by curbs and planted medians. There are no
bicycle lanes separated from the street by painted lines. The low volumes, low-speeds, and narrow
cross-section make it possible for all to safely occupy the street surface by yielding to the slowest and
most vulnerable present at a given moment.
The use of rear lane alleys helps to reduce the extent of paved areas, and will support a complete grid
of finely-grained urban blocks. These alleys will provide the primary access to garages and backyards.
Where cottage cluster housing occurs, alleys are critically important to their function. Elsewhere, as in
those areas zoned NA-03, specific locations for the alley locations within the designated blocks is left
to future development needs, subject to the maximum block length and parking access standards.
Transportation Impact Analysis Study
Staff is currently working with a traffic engineering firm to complete a future traffic analysis to
evaluate the anticipated traffic volumes and impacts based on the plan's development projections
and street layout. This Future Traffic Analysis will provide information to address questions
raised at the previous Study Session as well as to determine if alternate design scenarios need to
be explored or plan adjustments made before a final plan is presented to the Transportation
Commission, Planning Commission and City Council for formal consideration.
PUBLIC MEETINGS AND OUTREACH
Early in the planning process property owners, and neighborhood residents were active in the design of
the concept plan itself through participation in a two part public workshop, or `design charrette" from
October 23-25, 2012. Following the charrette the design team has been developing a more refined
layout for the street networks in careful consideration of the natural features, topography, property
lines, existing development within the area, and the short and long term phasing of the plan.
Over the last year the Planning Commission, Housing Commission, and Transportation Commission
have each had the opportunity to review the plan during the course of its ongoing development. The
Planning Commission specifically has held five study sessions to take public feedback and provide
direction to Staff and the design team as versions of the plan have been further refined. To provide
opportunities for that effected residents and stakeholders to become familiar with the plan, and make
informed contributions to the community discussion regarding the area's future development, the City
held two well attended neighborhood meetings, two open-houses, and conducted two site visits open to
the public. Additionally City Staff solicited input from property owners within the plan area through a
questionnaire, and has attended numerous stakeholder meetings with property owners, neighboring
Page 4 of 5
ISPEW,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
residents, and Homeowner Associations to answer questions and hear concerns about the various drafts
of the neighborhood plan.
Upcoming outreach activities will include Planning and Transportation Commission study sessions, an
article regarding the project in the City Source newsletter, and the use of Open City Hall to solicit
online feedback from the area residents and the broader community regarding the Final Plan's design.
NEXT STEPS
The final draft of the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan including a land use designation map, local
transportation network map, and land use code provisions for the overlay area are scheduled for
completion in September, and the adoption process scheduled to begin in October. The Planning
Commission will hold a final study session in September to review a final draft before holding the first
formal public hearing. The finished draft will then be taken through the formal public hearing process
which involves a public hearing and recommendation by the Planning Commission and a public
hearing and decision by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
This update of the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan project is intended to provide Council with a
summary of key elements of the neighborhood plan, review the public participation and outreach
conducted to date, and inform Council of the next steps in the neighborhood planning process.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
• Charrette Concept Plan - Oct 2012
• 6/25/2013 Working Land Use Designation map
• 6/25/2013 Working Transportation Network map
• 6/25/2013 Working Street Classification map
• Wetlands and Streams map
• Density Illustrations
• Parks Vicinity map
• Aerial Vicinity map
Page 5 of 5
~r,
Normal Avenue Neighborhood Draft Conceptual Plan
170
I
i
e , ~ ,~i3 it I ,i -
a
J I
Li t
~ .f
i~
t
Presented on Oct/2512012 -Design Charrette #2
Transportation and Ginellh 51anagement
Design Team This prelect Is funded by the Transportation and
Parametrix: Derek Chisholm, Grown Management ITGM) Program. a pent
Urbsworks: Marcy Mclnelly, Joseph Readdy program of the Oregon Department of Land
QamarArchitecture & Town Planning Laurence Oamar Car"fvatlonand Dewbpmanland meOregon
Nevue Ngan: Olena Turula, Jason Hirst Department of Trarroponarlon, Trds project is
IundW in pen. by "rat sate, Accountable, FWOe,EfAclent Tragportntion Eguhy AdA
Legacy for Users local government, and State
Clty of Ashland: Brandon Goldman of Oregon tunas.
Oregon Department M Transportation: John McDonald rne[oneareo/raizeaamntnormtntnas.Nynf6rrme
vrnrs or{m'eln nr ee Sant d fkr!gnn.
I
I
I
I
I
~ I.
I I
I I
I ~ -
I~
I II
I I
i ~ I ar,; Sr,..
r't
~ I
____j ;MM
I Creek Drive
I I NA-ov Single Dwelling Residential
r I I -J NA-o]: Multi.dwelling, Low-density Residential
~ NA-03: Mulli-dwellingHigh-densar Resid-ti: I
I ~
NA-nn. Open Space
I i
a
E
z°
A
i~
~i
~I
Ashland Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan
Zones
i3_o617
0 100 300 500
5
I ! ii
I, I
I
T~\
! oil
44
I I--'-'----- j I~(ry~ 1111 ■
---J I i i al, I
i 111
F
a,
! r.
Ashland Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan
Street Network
13-0617 0 1
o oo 300 500
I■i ;
'I-
i 1 li i
I■ I I i-r EdsrMan,s
e
i I I ----------I I I et
• I I `
MOOR
*,I■/s■■/II/////■//■ ■■/■//Ra/I■■~///~► !
I ■ ■ I _ J I■
04
■ ■ ■
- ---------------------p r. i • A.
r i i i i
i • i i ■ ■ i I■
i
■/t/~~//i■/~~■////~//~■
I ~ ~ ♦1~/~ I i ii
I r-- -
t i■
■d
i i C ; . ■v
-----------------L , ■
Trr>.ri1i 41i e, to V-0 m-
9BE 9~r/Tiof
- l Creek Drive ■
■ ■
• ; - Normal Avenue
- ; i
i I ■ RMI/ ■ Neighborhood Slrcet
i I f I •••u•••• Wooner(
I •~I t
L ■ • L__.r_______~ Rear lane
I . `AIR&0
I » ~i
4
I I
l(
i
i
Ashland Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan
Street Network
13-0617
0 100 300 Soo
17,
- - "io
~ ,s tY
a of
L I A
Y
i
Creek D-0
ffm
• JL - ~.:lZ- I~ r.
- _ v..- .ice: + _ .
Ashland Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan
Webands & Sirearns - -
13_o6i7
o ioo 300 500
Density Images I Ashland Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan
Forms of Detached Dwellings
~ -7 N LM WAhq _ L N lol Orrin(
fill'
Rewhou _ ~ u Rwhou- - _ '1
I nu.a ln. ~ - ~ r (I
' mxW ow.l6nt- - ` ' podium lM Ow.t11
, ~n,n ~a ornn~n~ V I ~ m rou , ueetr,~~ne av.nq I I
SINGLE DWELLING RESIDENTIAL WITH GARAGE SINGLE DWELLING WITH ADU m~
Single Dwelling Residential Unit Accessory Residential Unit
» Detached residential building that contains a single dwelling » Located on the same lot as a single dwelling residential unit
» Self-contained living facilities on one lot. » Located within the single-family residential structure or in a separate
structure
» Separated from adjacent dwellings by private open space
»
» Set back from the public street or common green by a front yard Permitted in the NA-01 or NA-02 zoning districts.
» Auto parking in a garage or on surface lot
» Parking accessible from the lane or alley
» Garage detached or attached to the dwelling structure
» Permitted in the NA-01 or NA-02 zoning districts.
City of Ashland Parametrix I Urbsworks Qamar Architecture & Town Planning Leland Consulting Nevue Ngan
Density ll'ila J25 Shur; rri1 P v f n. P i,i I I t i pg,~~i~n
Forms of Detached Dwellings (continued)
` N Lnt Dretllntl - ! N td L~reltlr,tl
~Pv ~II III
..w FI• vmm~ yr Pu ,
t M L ~w tl 1~ MM um Ln Oivellrn 1
edrAum 1 DII 1 aAOtl II
. , t. Medum Lat OwAln~ . n . i y MSadr ~lol DwetllrK
DOUBLE DWELLING CLUSTERED DWELLING ~mWU'1
Double Dwelling Residential Unit Clustered Residential Units
» A residential building that contains two dwellings, each with self- » Multiple compact detached dwellings or cottages that occupy a single
contained living facilities. lot
» Height, massing and lot placement is similar or identical to a Single » Grouped around common open space and are separated by side yards
Dwelling Residential Unit » Design provides compact housing with privacy and single family home-
May be arranged side-by-side, like rowhouses, each with its own type scale and character
entrance, or stacked flats with one or more shared entrances » Arranged around a central common open space under shared ownership
» Permitted in the NA-01 or NA-02 zoning districts » Typically smaller than 1,000 sq. ft
» Auto parking is provided in a shared surface lot, or lots, accessible from
the lane or alley.
» Permitted in the NA-01 or NA-02 zoning districts
City of Ashland 'a, :lrir w, lwr. r%n r alrnrt e k .wn F'lanniry _-lagi nsulti~q Pl=vue ' ;jn
Density Images Density Images I Ashland Normal Avenue N^ ghborhnod Plan
Forms of Attached Dwellings
3
F~T P
J&v
r(~I
1
CeRAp Clusm_ ,
_....o w t Mad1A tel Dwllin 11 v.nuv n.r ucN iu lol Drex;rr j I
.i. • w..v. u ADU MedYV~ Ovrdn{ I I :er u. win ADV v Msdlum lc~ 1
a • r r..e V. t---
ATTACHED DWELLING MULTIPLE DWELLING
Attached Residential Unit Multiple Dwelling Residential Unit
» Single dwellings with self-contained living facilities on one lot, attached » Multiple dwellings that occupy a single building or multiple buildings on
along one or both sidewalls to an adjacent dwelling unit a single lot
» Private open space in the form of front yards, backyards, or upper level » May take the form of attached residential units (like rowhouses) or
terraces stacked flats (like apartments) or a combination of attached and stacked
units
» May be set back from the public street or common green by a front yard
» Auto parking is provided in a garage on the same lot, either detached or » Auto parking is provided in a shared surface area or areas internal to the
lot
attached to the dwelling structure, and accessible from the lane or alley
»
» Permitted in the NA-02 in selected locations or NA-03 zoning districts Permitted in the NA-03 zoning districts
City of Ashland Pararnetrix Urbsworks Qamar Architecture & Town Planning Leland Consulting I Nevue Ngan
Density Images I nshljnd Plcrrnal Averue M1c*,~,crhocd Plan
Other Forms of Attached Multiple Dwelling Residential Units
a
GARDEN APARTMENT STACKED FLATS /ATTACHED DOUBLE DWELLINGS
FTWA'~
A AL-7 - __4 A~,~A ~7;
-
iv~ R I I' SI
135'
1 135'
4' 12' 24' 56' ~
6' 12' 2C' °6'
City of Ashland '3~er,e Uiss /'arks G3 r~~ ~vh9~=~ ~P C r~wrn plj~n:rg _e'ar~ Conn;lri~, Me'+ue q~n
D L
Density Images I ,_,n 3i ,C~!U e
1 he L
Other Forms of Attached Multiple Dwelling Residential Units (continued)
5
vo~
ROWHOUSES
0 C),
I
135•
a' 1T 2a' sB
City of Ashland °:r~T ~J r',r; ^rks Gana' ?r[hifeture G'r~~~ 'la~~ Pq Lclaid Can;ultirq Ncc~:° '.].i^
Use Table
Zone Single Dwelling Accessory Dwelling Double Dwelling Clustered Residential Attached Residential Multiple Dwelling
Residential Unit Residential Unit Residential Unit Units Unit Residential Unit
NA-01
NA-02
NA-03 j
j
NA-OS 1
Legend
Permitted
Conditional base density of zone must be met
I
i
Uses Allowed Within NA-01
BASE DENSITY: 5 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
10
~r
r ,-'~5=~• ~ ~211~" - L:1 c"A~,trl, 'i'. 7 k~~. YS'T~ ~ ~-1~~i ~ -
yoN(`..
• Yt ~ it r'r~`
INNS
• n t nt I s
•~~~iir~ aiii~~~ ~~~~~~r ~i~ i iii ~'1 r I
!ow
f
Uses Allowed Within NA-02
BASE DENSITY 10 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
Vol"
44
jr -A
'I io .
t i01 i p -
- ~ t~111I_t~ ' twaar
Uses Allowed Within NA-03
BASE DENSITY: 20 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE
~ !rte \ #
h.
'y.
~J4q
F
R (7'
Oft
~~A~AUi■u■n■n■iup~rtell, i
~ v~1 r iii
vrnr' ft 11*1
"will
Sch- I
■ r Vz
i
y~
_ Q
all
- •
■ Ashlars
Middle
School -
n
'rte p ■
a
24
LSOU SGho _ n~ r
~i - + , ■
Campus
- - -
p
School ~
Grounds
i
Walker - - -
-
Elementary City
School
city
Park
SOU City Park
Campus -
V~ Cemetery ~ ~
/ O aci
~a ASww+e-sr
Q + ® O
i
ASHLAND S
U
/,r+ City a`~J
Park
~7~r r~ultn■i ti~nN•~~
~I
City
Park
Normal Ave. Neighborhood Vicinity Parks and Openspace
Parks and Openspace
illy Park (active) Cemetery
W Openspace (natural area) - School Field
0 0.125 0.25 0.5
r
Miles
' I
Normal Avenue Neighborhood
Aerial Detail
• ~ ~ ~ ; J 1~Y4 r~ • `N fir.+' ~ -
.!I V
rl~4i[ t i f r _ r ~1~ Y, ±4},`' j'it!1~ ,r•:
eC6
4E r-
-dl 1 t qJ -o
1, -,r. ii r t 1 ~y
^I 'rte n t l ~ y z•
~ O
•i I s " I ry"~- `war ~ ~Y
16
fit" I ti..a i y.• ` -,i,i,y~ » 1 T. " }j•
f t_ ry
I~4 .:.IN `1{ P'_~r I~~' . t
'ofiM.'icr- -
-16
_•N. .M M, ~ } per. ~~'CI,. ry 1 ♦ ~
Al&_~ f: ~!F ~ • ~ .y,~ ~4l'~.. ' t, . 1 . j~4 a ~:Jr~ ~ 1 ~r r~. .I. i.~~~' .
. aF•
~I t s
w ,I
41,
r ~ •~i~ b :~+tt'~~' - it ~I ~ ~ rt~~~ ~ } ~ K , l~
Y. A, y ~ ~ ~ - r'S,,., ~ ~ _ , t~ ~c ~~~yy,, N`, r ~ ~k / "r'V• b r ' 1 ` ry, r r ~ ' ~ - • • + yy ~ "1~
•~r _ r nob-ty 4N ~~5~'rx i1,. N"' '!A ~ ~ _
•aa.. t' .4 R Q-Y I i T f" '~`y~1°I r1--'ib ~
" it,
1: 4-
- g~i.. _„f - I ~ it v~r Iiril~
4 4
'•+s•"' ~rS._. • ~ ,ray ~ , 4• YY"[~~ ~ ~PC~t•. _ ~ ~ a a14~1~
i - ~ ~ ~ 111 A ~ • ~ _ IC,~~
Art
ls~ - ° ♦ - .,,~fRik~`r.~r..i~.e.'til_~~~Yr4'r ~'.~,~'':d~'!R~i~~3s'~JI -
f r~ rr.r + y s~ N
r~ - EN ti `.7 ~•dy d tea"' E, i'
r .:1 ' ✓ , r j j,~' r ty IMr '•~y, *e 1 •A'' F I
,4
INA
l LI ~ ~~w I • 1 ,z wit. ~ I ; t ~ I y....s±:r.
X1 W7,!
r
T -TIN
..d! ~ GJ
!WF
1977
"Am
_ ~,•"t: '4_ I.. ~4+ 7 - - ~I--~~ a x , + i. N1~ i~ ~~,I .i:.. 'ifZ. Z~r ` r •=.•sl
AL'
..4• ,1{j i i - ~1 ]~r.-~ A'T •f, t5h `°M i - - VIC♦~ qF
e Si-`~ ~ p'_V X11"_ , ~,yy~ 1 7~ ~ _ ~..w~ _•+~sa.~. _
,,,---ARM
ZJW
Ve,
J" e_nfl
» j R" 6:.f is 'L ~..M'- ti~ .~L . rri 'i J~~~~jj~e~l• 7
Photo 2012 0 330 660 1,320 1,980 2,640 Feet
Property lines are for reference only, not scaleable
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
August 19, 2013, Study Session
Unified Land Use Ordinance Project Update
FROM:
Maria Harris, Planning Manager, harrism@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY:
The Unified Land Use Ordinance (ULUO) project is approaching completion having gone through a
year of development and review at 15 Planning Commission meetings, five advisory commission
meetings, a focus group and an open house meeting. The project update is presented in advance of a
request to the Council to initiate the adoption process.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Project Description
The ULUO is the land use ordinance and related development standards combined into one document
with improved organization, wording, formatting and graphics. The first draft of the ULUO is
available on the project web site www.ashland.or.us/unifiedcode. The 2006 Land Use Ordinance
Review by Siegel Planning Services recommends creating a Unified Land Use Ordinance, and the
project was identified as an action item to address the 2011-2012 Council Goal to respond to the
recommendations of the 2006 Siegel report. The City received a Code Assistance grant from the
Oregon Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program for the assistance of a land use code
expert for the planning application procedure and green development evaluations, and the final draft
and graphics package.
The ULUO is organized and formatted so the document is easy to understand and navigate by the wide
variety of people that use the code (i.e. applicants, design professionals, neighbors, elected and
appointed officials, staff). The ULUO provides an approachable code framework by dividing the
document into six sections of related chapters. The six parts of the ULUO are: 1) Introduction and
General Regulations, 2) Zoning Regulations, 3) Special Districts and Overlay Zones, 4) Site
Development and Design Standards, 5) Application Review Procedures and Approval Criteria and 6)
Definitions (see attached Ordinance Outline).
Tables are used throughout the document to consolidate information for convenient reference. For
example, the current code has 12 separate chapters covering each of the base zones. The permitted uses
and dimensional regulations (e.g. lot coverage, building height, required yard areas) are repeated in
each chapter. In contrast, the ULUO covers the same information in Part 2 Zoning Regulations, but
consolidates the allowed uses and dimensional standards in tables. Users can quickly find information
such as the zones where offices are allowed, or the required front yard in residential zones (see
attached tables).
Page 1 of 6
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
The organization and format of the ULUO are based on the State's Model Development Code for
Small Cities, Third Edition, 2012. The Model Development Code is produced by the TGM program,
and has won state and national recognition for the format, graphically based standards and smart
development standards.
Staff received positive feedback at the public meetings from design and development professionals on
the consolidation of the development standards, the code organization and use of tables. Currently,
there are several documents that comprise the land use standards including the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance, Site Design and Use Standards, Street Standards, and Recommended Street Tree Guide.
While this may not seem like a significant issue, a consistently raised frustration is not having all of the
standards that apply to a planning application located in one document.
Proposed Amendments
A matrix summarizing the proposed ordinance amendments is attached. Many of the amendments fall
in three categories - recommendations from the planning application process evaluation, from the
green code evaluation and from the 2006 Land Use Ordinance Review by Siegel Planning Services.
1. Planning Application Process Evaluation
The planning application process evaluation involved reviewing the current code for improvements
to the timeliness and predictability of the land use procedures, and to determine if the City's
procedures meet the statutory requirements. The evaluation concludes that the City has completed
most of the action items focused on improving the planning application process from the 2006
Land Use Ordinance Review by Siegel Planning, and determined the City's land use procedures
meet or exceed the statutory requirements.
For example, state law requires local jurisdictions to make a decision on quasi-judicial applications
within 120 days of the application being deemed complete (ORS 227.178). In contrast, the City's
current ordinance requirement for Type I applications is a decision within 45 days of receipt of a
complete application. Type I decisions are made by the Staff Advisor, following public notice and
a public comment period with an opportunity to appeal to the Planning Commission. While the
Type II applications which involve a public hearing at the Planning Commission are the larger,
more visible and sometimes more controversial projects such as a new building in the downtown or
residential subdivisions, Type I applications represent the majority of land use applications
processed. Examples of Type I applications are accessory residential units, land divisions involving
three lots or less, and commercial and light industrial buildings outside of the downtown sized
10,000 square feet and less.
After reviewing and discussing the evaluation, the Planning Commission is recommending the
following amendments, to the planning application procedures.
• Use the more expedient administrative decision procedure (Type I) for buildings 15,000 square
feet or less, or additions less than 50% of the existing building in the Basic Site Review Zone.
The current size cap for a Type I procedure in the Basic Site Review Zone is buildings 10,000
square feet or less, or additions less than 20% of the existing building. The Basic Site Review
Zone is located in areas such as Hersey, Washington/Jefferson, the airport and Benson Way
(see attached Site Review Zones map).
Page 2 of 6
1r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
• Reduce effective date of Type II decision from 13 days to 10 days to match statutory
requirements.
• Increase planning approval time period from 12 to 18 months.
• Increase the time period for an extension of a planning approval from 18 to 24 months.
• Provide priority processing for economic development projects.
2. Green Development Evaluation
The green development evaluation found that the current code addresses most aspects of green
development. The evaluation compares the US Green Building Council's Leadership Through
Energy and Environmental Design Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) rating system with the
City's current ordinance requirements. The LEED-ND framework is used as a tool for the
assessment of the current ordinance requirements because it comprehensively addresses green
development at the regional, city, site, infrastructure and building level.
After reviewing and discussing the evaluation, the Planning Commission is recommending the
following amendments to further address green development measures.
• Allow cottage housing in the single-family zones. Cottage housing is a type of development
consisting of a group of small homes clustered around a common area.
• Design and orient residential lots, buildings and roofs with the long sides facing south to allow
the use of passive and active solar strategies where the site and location permit.
3. 2006 Land Use Ordinance Review
The 2006 Land Use Ordinance Review includes a list of potential amendments that are identified
as policy issues. The Planning Commission is recommending eleven amendments from this list,
and these code changes are identified as per the 2006 Land Use Ordinance review in the comment
column of the attached amendment matrix. Some highlights of the Planning Commission
recommendations follow.
• Use the less discretionary Site Review process, rather than the Conditional Use Permit process,
for accessory residential units (ARU's).
• Revise the required distance between buildings in multi-family zones to provide more
flexibility for cottage housing and for consistency with single-family zones.
• Allow building height in the Commercial zones (C-1 and C-1-D) to increase from 40 feet to 55
feet when the building is more than 100 feet from a residential zone.
• Exempt the Commercial zone (C-1) from the solar setback requirements, except for buildings
abutting a residential zone.
• In the Commercial and Employment zones (C-1, C-1-D, E-1), require five feet per story for
side and rear yards when abutting a residential zone rather than ten feet per story as currently
written.
4. Miscellaneous Amendments
Page 3 of 6
~A,
CITY OF
-ASH LAN D
The ULUO includes a variety of miscellaneous amendments that have come up in working through
the project. All of the amendments to date are included on the attached amendment matrix, and are
noted in the draft document. The miscellaneous amendments include adding new language to
provide standard code sections (i.e. purpose, applicability), deleting language that is no longer
applicable, editing areas staff identified as routinely confusing or problematic, and correcting
inconsistencies in the code.
• Allow reconstruction of nonconforming garages and sheds as a Ministerial over-the-counter
approval and building permit, rather than requiring a Conditional Use Permit, if the building's
three-dimensional shape, footprint and use do not change.
• Establish three types of ordinance interpretations including: 1) a Ministerial decision if the
interpretation does not require discretion, 2) a Type 1 administrative decision with public notice
that is appealable to the Planning Commission if discretion is required, and 3) a Type III
legislative process with a public hearing process if the interpretation has significant citywide
policy implications.
• Revise Variance approval criteria to provide more specificity in that the unique or unusual
circumstance is a physical characteristic of the site, the need for the variance is not self-
imposed by the property owner, and the variance is the minimum necessary to address the
unique or unusual physical characteristic.
• Allow short-term temporary uses (72 hours or less) with Ministerial over-the-counter
approval, rather than requiring a Conditional Use Permit. Examples of short-term temporary
uses are Caldera's outdoor anniversary party and the circus at ScienceWorks.
• Update design standards for manufactured homes on individual lots on home width, siding
and location on slopes to reflect statutory requirements, and to remove requirement to build
separate garage or shed for consistency with single-family home requirements. Also, update
design standards for manufactured homes in parks to make interior side and rear consistent
with statutory requirements and exterior setbacks consistent single-family subdivision
requirements.
• For subdivisions, clarify that lot coverage can be calculated on an individual lot bases, or for
entire site at the time of subdivision approval.
• Clarify that approval authority may approve a walkway at same grade as driveway if
distinguished from vehicle maneuvering areas. This is follow-up item from the re-review of the
Pedestrian Places ordinances.
Public Meetings and Outreach
The Planning Commission completed the review of the first draft of the ULUO, and the audits of the
planning application procedures and green development measures over the past year. Originally, the
schedule identified the adoption process beginning in June 2013. However, the Planning Commission's
review of the ULUO overlapped with the Transportation System Plan (TSP) and the Normal
Neighborhood Plan meetings. The TSP process was delayed and involved extra meetings each month
over the course of a year for the Planning Commission. As a result, the Unified Code project timeline
was adjusted to coordinate with the TSP and Normal Neighborhood Plan activities. In addition, the
work funded by the state grant was delayed several months because of state funding freezes.
Staff presented the project to the Conservation, Historic, Housing and Tree Commissions, and several
more updates are scheduled for August and September.
Page 4 of 6
pr,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
A focus group meeting of design and development professionals was held on June 10, and an open
house was held on June 20. Both meetings covered the code organization, amendment highlights, and
the evaluations of the planning application procedures and green development measures. The focus
group meeting included a staff presentation and informal roundtable discussion (see attached
presentation materials). The open house was an informal drop-in setting where participants could have
one-on-one discussions with staff members. A total of three hundred postcards announcing the
meetings and the project web site were mailed to design and development professionals, contractors,
City advisory commissions, and past planning applicants. The Open House was also announced in the
hard copy and online version of the Ashland Daily Tidings. At the time of writing, the Planning
Commission was scheduled to review and discuss the feedback from the focus group and open house
(see attached August 13 memo to the Planning Commission for a summary of focus group and open
house comments).
As mentioned earlier, the focus group of design and development professionals supported the
consolidation, organization, formatting and use of tables in the ULUO. There was positive feedback
on many of the proposed amendments including the increase in building height and exemption from
the solar setback in the Commercial zone in order to encourage multi-story construction, revising the
required distance between buildings in the multi-family zones, and changing the ARU approval from a
Conditional Use Permit to the Site Review process. The group supported the amendments to the
planning application procedure, and was especially vocal about the benefit of extending the planning
approval and extension timelines. The participants said there are numerous variables affecting the
timeline of a development from planning approval to construction including but not limited to sales
agreements and property acquisition, easement negotiation, securing financing and preparation of
surveys, civil engineering and building plans.
Several additional issues were identified by individuals at the open house meeting. There were several
amendment suggestions including allowing reduced rear yards setbacks adjacent to alleys to reflect the
development pattern of the historic districts, and allowing smaller residential lots of approximately
3,000 square feet in size. Other comments were specific to the current code and draft ULUO. One
suggestion was to allowing a combination design strategies for surface parking areas on larger sites.
Another recommendation was to include the Employment zone (E-1) in the proposed amendment to
allow building height to increase in the Commercial zone (C-1).
The amendment matrix as well as the draft ULUO, the ordinance outline, project information sheet and
staff contact info were available at the public meetings and prior to the public meetings on the project
web site. The project web site also includes the public meetings schedule, and links to the meeting
materials.
Upcoming outreach activities will include a focus group meeting for landscape design professionals
and Open City Hall topics. The landscape design professionals are being targeted because there wasn't
attendance from this group at the June meetings, and there are some minor amendments proposed for
the landscaping standards. Additionally, another focus group meeting may be held for the larger design
and development professionals group to review any additional amendments that may arise during the
adoption process. At the June focus group meeting, the participants requested that any additional
amendments be posted on the project web site.
Page 5 of 6
VIA
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Next Steps
The revised draft is scheduled for completion in September, and the adoption process scheduled for
October. The Planning Commission will likely hold a final study session to review the adoption-ready
draft before holding a public hearing. The finished draft will then be taken through the formal public
hearing process which involves a public hearing and recommendation by the Planning Commission,
and a public hearing and decision by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
N/A. The ULUO update provides an overview of the new code format and organization as well as a
summary of key issues and discussion points.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
Ordinance Outline
Table of Uses Allowed by Zone
Table of Standards for Urban Residential Zones
Amendment Matrix
Site Review Zones Map
Focus Group Presentation
Focus Group Meeting Notes
Memo to Planning Commission, August 13, 2013
r:
Page 6 of 6
~r,
Unified Land Use Ordinance Project 5.31.13
Page 1 of 3
Ordinance Outline
The following outline groups similar code functions together into six distinct parts of the land
use ordinance (Title 18), with each part containing a suite of related chapters, and subsections
with each chapter.
18-1 Introduction and General Provisions
18-1.1 Introduction
18-1.2 Title, Purpose and General Administration
18-1.3 Lot of Record and Legal Lot Determination
18-1.4 Non-Conforming Situations
18-1.5 Ordinance Interpretations
18-1.6 Zoning Permit Expiration, Extension and Enforcement
18-2 Zoning Regulations
18-2.1 Zoning Regulations - General Provisions
18-2.2 Base Zones - Allowed Uses
18-2.3 Special Use Standards
18-2.4 General Regulations for Base Zones
18-2.5 Standards for Residential Zones
18-2.6 Standards for Non-Residential Zones
18-3 Special Districts and Overlay Zones
18-3.1 Special District and Overlay Zone Purpose and Administration
18-3.2 Croman Mill District
18-3.3 Health Care Services District
18-3.4 North Mountain Neighborhood District
18-3.5 Southern Oregon University District
18-3.6 Airport Overlay
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900=,
w ashland.orms
Unified Land Use Ordinance Project 5.31.13
Page 2 of 3
18-3.7 Freeway Sign Overlay
18-3.8 Performance Standards Options Overlay
18-3.9 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlays (Floodplain Corridors,
Hillside Lands, Severe Constraints, Wildfire Lands)
18-3.10 Water Resource Overlay
18-3.11 Site Development and Design Overlays (Detail Site Review, Downtown
Design, Historic District, Pedestrian Place)
18-3.12 Residential Overlay
18-4 Site Development and Design Standards
18-4.1 Site Development and Design Standards Administration
18-4.2 Building Placement and Orientation
18-4.3 Parking, Access and Circulation
18-4.4 Landscaping, Fences and Walls, and Outdoor Lighting
18-4.5 [Reserved]
18-4.6 Public Facilities
18-4.7 Signs
18-4.8 Solar Access
18-4.9 Subdivision Design
18-4.10 Grading and Excavation
18-4.11 Tree Preservation and Protection
18-4.12 Disc Antennas
18-4.13 Wireless Communication Facilities
18-5 Application Review Procedures and Approval Criteria
18-5.1 General Review Procedures
18-5.2 Site Design Review
18-5.3 Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-7352900
~.ashland.or.us
Unified Land Use Ordinance Project 5.31.13
Page 3 of 3
18-5.4 Conditional Use Permits
18-5.5 Adjustments and Variances
18-5-6 Modifications to Approved Planning Applications
18-5.7 Annexations
18-5.8 Plan Amendments and Zone Changes
18-5.9 Measure 49 Claims
18-6 Definitions and Rules of Measurements
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-088-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541.552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735.2900
w .ashland.or.us
18-2.2 - Allowed Uses
Table 18-2.2.030 - Uses Allowed by Zone
R-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 RR WR C-1 E-1 M-I
3.5 Special Use Standards
Kennel (See also, "Veterinary Clinic') S S CU No animals kept outside within 200 feet
of an R zone _
Lumber Yard and Similar Sales of Building or CU P
Contracting Supplies, or Heavy Equipment
Not allowed within the Historic Interest
Nightclubs and Bars - S CU P
Area unless located in C-I-D
Office (See also Commercial Services) CU CU P P P
Outdoor Storage of Commodities or Equipment CU CU P
associated with an allowed. use
Plant Nurseries, Wholesale CU CU
Self-Service Storage, Commercial (Mini- CU P
Warehouse)
Travelers' Accommodations CU+ CU+
S S
Veterinary Clinic P P P
F. Industrial and Employment Uses
Commercial' Laundry, Cleaning and Dyeing S S P Set. 18-2.3.080
Establishments
Computer Server Hotel/Data Center
Suggested addition, as these facifties
can be mistaken for Office uses and [CU] [CU]
they typically employ few people and
have large electrical demands.
F. Industrial and Employment Uses
(continued)6
Commercial Excavation and Removal of Sand,
Gravel. Stone, Loam. Dirty or Other Earth CS+ - Sec. 18-2.3.070
Products
Concrete or Asphalt Batch Plants and Glass, CU
6 KEY: P = Permitted Use; S = Permitted with Special Use Standards; CU = Conditional Use. Permit Required -
City of Ashland 2-I6 Module I - Draft #2 -September 2012
Land Use Ordinance
18-2.5 - Standards for Residential Zones
Table I8-2.5.030.A - Standards for Urban Residential Zones
(Except as modified under chapter 18-5.7 Adjustments and Variances or chapter 18-3.8 Performance Standards Option.)
Standard - - - R-2 R-3
- R-1-10. `R-'1 7.5 R 1 5 R 1 3.5 -
Standard Yards - Minimum* (feet)
Front- Standard, except: 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft
Front- Unenclosed Porch
Front - Garage Opening 10 ft 10 ft 10 ft A••• 10 ft 10 ft loft
Side - Standard, except:
- Side - Corner-Street Side 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft
- Rear - Single-Story Building
- Rear - Multi-Story Building 6 ft 6 ft 6 ft 6 ft 6 ft 6 ft
loft loft 10 ft loft 10 ft loft
loft 10 ft 10 ft loft loft left
10 ft Bldg 10 ft Bldg 10 ft Bldg 10 ft Bldg 10 k Bldg 10 ft Bldg
Story Story Story Story Story Story
*Mm mum Front Yard is 20 ft in Historic Interest Area. Additional setbacks may be required as to avoid easement encroachments, and
to comply with Solar Access requirements. See also, section 18-2.5.040 General Exceptions.
Distance Between Buildings
- Between Principal Building NA NA NA 10 ft 10 ft 10 ft
and Accessory Building
- Between Principal Buildings NA NA NA 20 ft 20 It 20 ft
Accessed by Shared Court .
- Between Other Principal
Buildings Same Site] both NA NA oth sum sum 50% sum both {
* Additional setbacks may be 12 bot bldgs, or both bl 12 ft,
ft, or 12 it, , whichever is
required to comply with Solar whichever is whichever is greater
Access requirements. greater greater
There are no minimum building separation standards for R-1. Staff suggests updating the distance between
buildings requirements in the next draft to provide more flexibility in building placement in the R-2 and R-3 zones,
and for consistency with the R-I zones. For example, a detached garage or shed is not required to be setback
from a single-family home in the R-I zone, but is required to be separated by 10 feet in the R-2 and R-3 zones.
(Building code generally requires 3 feet of separation.) Additionally, developments using several separate
structures on one lot can be more compatible with the surrounding area, and/or considered a superior design,
but the variance required for the setback between buildings requirement can inhibit these type of proposals.
35 ft or 2'V.
35 ft or 2 A stories, whichever is less, except structures within Historic stories, except
Building Height - Maximum (feet) Interest Area shall not exceed 30 ft. up to 50 ft
with CUP
approval.
Lot Coverage - Maximum(feet)
See also, Sec. I8-2.5.090 Maximum 1
Residential FAR in Historic 40% 45% 50% 55% 65% 75% 111
District
i
City of Ashland 2-49 Module I - Draft #2 - September 2012
Land Use Ordinance
m x^ x , - ; "MIIAN1J,P- SKI ZONING'REGULNT.IONS., jA y 't;' ';j ^ r
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Title, Purpose and General Unified: • The purpose of the land Chapter expanded to
Administration 18-1.2 (pp 1-4 -1-8) use ordinance and establishing how the
enactment are covered ordinance relates to the
Existing: in Ch. 18.04 General Comprehensive Plan,
18.04 Provisions. zoning map and building
• The "enactment and permits.
effect" section excludes • Revises enactment
land uses and and effect to say
development that are land use code
permitted outright in applies to all land
commercial zones, or uses and
have Site Review, development in the
Partition, Sign Permit or City.
Variance approval. Add sections addressing
basic mechanics of
development process:
• Compliance-
section added to
explain that uses,
lots and structures
are required to
comply with the
ordinance.
• Rules of Ordinance
Construction -
clarifies how
ordinance works.
• Consistency with
Comprehensive Plan
and Laws - clarifies
relationship
between land use
1
ae.. p - 9 --LAND,- ZONING;REGULAT16
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
ordinance and
comprehensive plan,
and state and
federal
requirements.
• Zoning Map-
clarifies relationship
between zoning map
and land use
ordinance.
• Building Permits-
explains
coordination of land
use compliance and
building permits.
• Official Action -
explains who has the
authority to approve
land use actions, and
clarifies the Staff
Advisor's ability to
refer matters to the
Planning
commission.
Lot of record and legal lot Unified: When a lot does not meet Establishes criteria and a Revised chapter is
determination 18-1.3 (pp 1-9-1-10) the lot size requirements, it process for determining intended to address
is allowed to be occupied by when a lot of record state law requirements
Existing: a permitted use if it exists. for "lots of record"
18.68.130 complied with all the which are lots that were
ordinances when it was legally created in Jackson
recorded. County, or before the
City's partition and
2
? LAND,USES':'&,ZONING REGULATION53
~ a
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendmentµ Comment
subdivision regulations.
Provided for consistency
with ORS 92.010 to
92.190, which was
updated by the
Legislature in 2009.
Nonconforming garages and Not included in draft, A Conditional Use Permit is Allow rebuild of garages Garages and sheds in
sheds discussed by the Planning required to reconstruct and sheds with building historic areas often don't
Commission at 9/25/12 nonconforming structures. permit as long as three- meet current zoning
meeting dimensional shape, requirements, but serve
footprint and use do not a key function for the
Existing: change. Reconstruction properties. Additionally,
18.68.090.A.2 of all other types of rebuilding to meet
nonconforming current standards is
structures would often difficult because of
continue to require a lot size or configuration.
Conditional Use Permit. This would allow garages
and sheds to be rebuilt
in the historic form
without having to go
through a planning
approval process.
Temporary uses Unified: A Conditional Use Permit is • Exempts activities in • Activities in the
18-2.2.030(H) (p 2-10) required for short-term, the public right-of- public street right-
seasonal or intermittent way from the of-way are
Existing: uses. Conditional Use addressed through
18.08.800 Permit Process. street closure and
Temporary use is • Short-term activities special event
conditional use in 72 hours or less permits.
residential and commercial including set up and • The time and
zoning districts. clean up may be resources required
approved by Staff for a Conditional Use
3
' - ~~"-,LAND USESI'& ZONINGAEGULATIONS'• • ' 14
Code Amendment Category
Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Advisor through a Permit are cost
Ministerial review. prohibitive to short-
term events, such as
weekend
celebrations or
events.
Accessory Residential Units Unified: • Conditional use in Rural Make special permitted Amendment made per
(ARU's) 18-2.2.030 (p 2-12) Residential and single- use in residential zones, Planning Commission
family Residential and require Site Review input on Policy Issues
Existing: zones. Requires approval. and Recommendations
18.16.030.1 Conditional Use Permit. from the 2006 Land Use
18.20.030.H • Special permitted use in Ordinance Review. This
18.24.040.A.1.a multi-family zones. change has discussed by
18.28.040.A.1.a the Planning and
Housing commissions as
an infill and affordable
housing strategy.
Manufactured homes on Unified: Requires manufactured • Requirement to ORS 197.307(8) includes
individual lot 18-2.3.170 (p2-31) homes on individual lots to build a separate placement standards for
meet 10 standards intended garage or shed was manufactured homes on
Existing: for compatibility with deleted. While individual lots that local
18.20.020.H surrounding residential single-family homes governments can adopt
neighborhoods (e.g. size, are required to for consistency with ORS
roof pitch building provide off-street 197.314. While the City's
materials, foundation skirt) parking spaces, standards are mostly
there is not a consistent with the
requirement to build placement standards,
a garage, carport or the Housing Commission
similar structure. and Planning
• Width requirement Commission suggested
of 28 feet deleted as amending several items
it is not consistent so the standards are
4
1" " 4q _LAND~,USES$&;ZOIVIN6<REGl1LATI0N3 Of ; .
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
with ORS placement similar to those for
standards. single-family homes.
• Requirement to
locate on slopes 10%
or less is deleted
because it is not
consistent with ORS
placement
standards.
• Language prescribing
wood or wood
product siding is
deleted because it is
not consistent with
ORS placement
standards. Replaced
with requirement to
use similar or
superior exterior
siding and roof
material as used on
nearby residences.
• Required height of
home above grade is
increased from 12 to
18 inches to reflect
building code
requirements.
Manufactured housing Unified: • Interior side and rear • Interior side and rear Interior side and rear
developments 18-2.3.180 (p 2-34) yards required to be yards required to be yards changed for
minimum of 6 feet, with a minimum of 5 feet consistency with
Existing: a separation of at least required, with a ORS 446.100.
5
LAND USES & ZONING REGULATIONS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
18.84 12 feet between units. separation of at least • Setback to exterior
• 20 feet required form 10 feet between boundaries is
any street or exterior units. amended to reflect
property line. • Same setbacks as similar subdivision
required in the requirements.
parent zone for
exterior boundaries.
Manufactured home park- 18-2.3-180.D.13 (p 2-35) Issue is not addressed in If the park is not limited Added for consistency
play area code. to adults, a play area for with ORS 446.095.
Existing: children less than 14
N/A years of age a minimum
of 2,500 square feet in
size or 100 square feet of
play area per unit,
whichever is greater, is
required.
Vision clearance Unified: C-1, E-1 and CM districts are C-1-D is added to list of
requirements in the C-1-D 18-2.6.070 (p 2-44) exempt from the vision commercial zones
(downtown) zone clearance requirements. exempted from vision
Existing: clearance requirements.
18.68.020.8
Minimum lot size for corner Unified: Minimum lot size for a Minimum lot area and Amendment made per
lots in the R-1-5 zone 18-2.5.030(A) (p2-48) corner lot is 6,000 square width is the same for Planning Commission
(single-family) feet, and 60 feet in width. interior and corner lots, input on Policy Issues
Existing: 5,000 square feet and 50 and Recommendations
18.20.040.A feet in width, in the R-1- from the 2006 Land Use
5 zone. Ordinance Review.
Minimum lot depth in R-1 Unified: All lots required to have Minimum lot depth is Amendment made per
zones (single-family) 18-2.5.030(A) (p2-48) minimum depth of 80 feet. required to be the same Planning Commission
as minimum lot width. input on Policy Issues
Existing: 50 feet for R-1- and Recommendations
18.20.040.C 3.5 and R-1-5 from the 2006 Land Use
6
"LAND:USM- ZONINGREGULATIONS,: -
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment A
zones Ordinance Review.
• 65 feet for R-1-
7.5 zone
• 75 feet for R-1-
10 zone
Front porch setback Unified: • 8 feet is required 8 feet, or width of Amendment made per
18-2.5.030(A) (p2-49) between an unenclosed existing public utility Planning Commission
porch and front easement whichever is input on Policy Issues
Existing: property line in the greater, is required and Recommendations
18.20.040.1) single-family zone between an unenclosed from the 2006 Land Use
18.24.040.D • Outside Historic District: porch and front property Ordinance Review.
18.28.040.1) 10 feet is required line in single-family zone
between an unenclosed and multi-family zone
porch and front outside Historic District
property line in the
multi-family zones
Affordable housing density Unified: In multi-family For every affordable unit Amendment made per
bonus 18-2.5.070.D.3.d (p 2-56) developments, for every provided, a density Planning Commission
percent of units that are bonus of two market input on Policy Issues
Existing: affordable, an rate units is allowed. and Recommendations
18.24.040.B.3.d equivalent percentage from the 2006 Land Use
18.28.040.B.3.d of density bonus is Ordinance Review.
18.88.040.B.3.d allowed up to a
maximum 25% bonus.
• In Performance
Standards Subdivisions,
for every percent of
units that are
affordable, an
equivalent percentage
of density bonus is
7
LAND USES & ZONING REGULATIONS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
allowed up to a
maximum 35% bonus.
Density bonus Language will be included • In multi-family zones, Reconcile these two
in final draft. total density bonus amounts for consistency.
allowed is 40%.
Existing: • In Performance
18.24.040.B.3.d Standards Options
18.28.040.B.3.d subdivisions, total
18.88.040.B.3.d density bonus allowed
is 60%.
Setbacks in C-1(commercial) Unified: In the C-1 zone, setback In C-1 and E-1 zones, 5 Amendment made per
and E-1(employment) zones 18-2.6.030 (p 2-63) shall be 10 feet per feet per story is required Planning Commission
to adjacent residential zones story for rear yards and for side and rear yards input on Policy Issues
Existing: 10 feet for side yards abutting a residential and Recommendations
18.32.040 where abutting a zone from the 2006 Land Use
18.40.050 residential zone. Ordinance Review.
• In the E-1 zone, setback
shall be 10 feet per
story for side and rear
yards where abutting a
residential zone.
Building height in the C-1 Unified: 40 feet is the maximum Provision added allowing Amendment made per
(commercial) zone 18-2.6.030 (p 2-63) building height, except for structures greater than Planning Commission
buildings up to 55 feet may 40 feet and less than 55 input on Policy Issues
Existing: be permitted as a feet in the C-1 zone and Recommendations
18.32.040.13 conditional use in the C-1-D where located more from the 2006 Land Use
(downtown) than 100 feet form a Ordinance Review.
residential zone.
Lot coverage Language will be included Buildings, parking areas, Exempt a percentage of Amendment made per
in final draft. driveways and other solid pervious pavement from Planning Commission
surfaces that do not allow lot coverage input on Policy Issues
Existing: normal water infiltration to calculations. For and Recommendations
8
LAND USES &ZONING REGULATIONS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
18.08.160 the ground are included in example, an additional from the 2006 Land Use
the lot coverage. Residential 200 sq. ft. or 5% of the Ordinance Review.
zones include a maximum lot coverage, whichever
percentage of a site that is greater, may be
can be covered, which developed in an
ranges from 7%tO 75%. approved, pervious
paving system that
allows storm water
infiltration.
Residential uses in multiple Language will be included If there are multiple • Clarify how to Amendment made per
buildings in C-1 in final draft. buildings being developed, calculate allowed Planning Commission
(commercial) and E-1 at least 50% of the total lot residential use for input on Policy Issues
(employment) zones Existing: area shall be designated for sites with multiple and Recommendations
18.32.025.D non-residential permitted buildings. from the 2006 Land Use
18.56.050.A uses. Underground Ordinance Review.
parking is not
counted in toward
floor area.
Special yard - distance Language will be included Multi-family zones require Revise special yard Issue identified in Policy
between buildings in multi- in final draft. 10 to 20 feet between requirements in multi- Issues and
family zones buildings on the same lot. family zones. Recommendations from
Existing: In contrast, there is no the 2006 Land Use
18.24.040.E special yard required Ordinance Review. This
18.28.040.E between buildings in the change would create
single-family zones. more flexibility in
building placement in
the multi-family zones.
Development using
several separate
structures rather than
fewer larger structures
can be more compatible
9
..r ."drtW' Q,ND,lJSES'&FZONINGIREGULATIONS T
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
with the surrounding
area, but having to
request a Variance to the
required special yard
between buildings can
inhibit proposals. Also,
the Planning Commission
directed staff to create a
cottage housing
ordinance, and the
existing special yard
required between
buildings is a potential
barrier to this type of
development.
Lot coverage in Performance Unified: Issue is not clearly Provides option of
Standards options 18-3.8.070.F (p 3-55) addressed in code. calculating lot coverage
subdivisions on individual lot basis, or
Existing: for the entire site a the
N/A time of subdivision
application.
Wetland Protection zone - Unified: Perimeter mowing or Add provision allowing
mowing and thinning for fire 18-3-10.050-C-1 (p 3-85) thinning of vegetation mowing and thinning of
hazard prevention within the wetland buffer is vegetation in the
Existing: allowed for fire hazard wetland itself if it is part
18.63.060.C.1 prevention provided it is the of an approved wetland
minimum necessary to mitigation plan, or if it is
alleviate the threat. demonstrated that
native vegetation will
not be removed.
Water Resource Protection Unified: Fences can be located in the Add provision allowing
zones - Temporary tree 18-3.1.050.6.3 and 18- upper half of stream buffer, temporary tree
10
"LAND USESj& ZONING ftEGCJL4TIONS
_
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
protection fencing 3.1.050.C.2 (pp 3-84 and 3- and in the wetland buffer. protection fencing
85) required in conjunction
with a development
Existing: project to be located in
18.63.060.63 stream and wetland
18.63.060.C.2 buffers.
11
DESIGN STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Building design standards for Unified: Requires a building step Clarify that decks
Hillside Lands 18-3.9.070.E.2.c (p 3-71) back of at least 6 feet on projecting out from the
downhill building walls building wall do not
Existing: greater than 20 feet in constitute a building
18.62.080.E.2.c height, as measured above step back.
natural grade in Hillside
Lands.
Expanding nonconforming Unified: Allows additional stories to Clarify that additional
buildings in the Water 18-3.10.050.A.3.b (p 3-83) be added to nonconforming stories including decks
Resource Protection zones structures in water resource cannot project beyond
Existing: protection zones if the the building footprint
18.63.00.A.3.b footprint in the zone is not over the water resource
changed in size or shape. protection zone.
Residential standards for Unified: North Mountain Requires garages facing Applies to developments
Site Review 18-4.2.030.C.3 (p 4-9) Neighborhood design a street to not exceed of two units or greater,
standards require garages 50% of the width of the but not to subdivisions
Existing: facing the street to be set building, unless the in single-family zones.
Section II.B Multi-Family back at least 15 feet back garage opening is
Residential Development, from the front elevation, recessed at least 6 feet
Site Design and Use and garage width to be kept back from the front
Standards to a minimum. elevation of the
dwelling.
Minimum parking ratio 18-4.3.030.A.3 (p 4-35) Parking management Add option for adjusting Provides for parking
adjustments strategies allow up to a 50% minimum parking ratios flexibility for situations
Existing: reduction of required off- through a discretionary that are not covered by
18.92.050 street parking spaces for a parking demand analysis the Parking
variety of credits including process. Management Strategies.
on-street parking spaces, Allows applicants to For example, it may be
alternative vehicle parking, propose a parking useful where occupants
mixed uses, joint use of standard different of a housing type do not
12
DESIGN.STANDARDS'°;
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
facilities, shared parking than required ratios drive.
facilities, TDM plans and if supported by a
transit facilities. parking demand
analysis prepared by
a qualified
professional.
• Reviewed by the
approval authority
through a Type I or
Type 11 application
process.
Parking management Unified: Provides one off-street Amend parking
strategies - shared. parking 18-4.3.060.D and E (p 4-40) parking credit for every one reduction for shared
areas. space constructed in a facilities from 50% to
Existing: designated off-site shared 100%.
18.92.050.E parking are, or through
payment of in-lieu-of-
parking fees for common
parking, for up to a 50%
reduction in required off-
street parking.
Minimum number of bicycle Unified: Requires a minimum of one Requires a minimum of If properly positioned,
parking spaces 18-4.3.070.D and E (p 4-42) bicycle parking space for two bicycle parking the required u-rack
commercial and public uses. spaces for commercial provides two spaces
Existing: and public uses. because a bicycle fits on
18.92.060.0, D, E and F each side. Revised
requirement of two
spaces based on state
model code.
Parking area design Unified: Threshold for dividing Threshold for dividing Revision discussed
18-4.3.080 (p 4-45) and 18- parking areas and providing and providing walkways during review of
4.3.090.C.3.c (p 4-51) walkways is 50 spaces or through parking areas is Pedestrian Places
13
DESIGN STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
more. having 50 or more ordinances
Existing: parking spaces and
18.92.080. B.4 including areas where
pedestrians have to walk
across more than 100
feet.
Driveway and turn-around Unified: Requires vertical clearance Language retained, but
design 18-4.3.080.D.4 (p 4-48) of 13'6" above driveways, parking structures are
aisles, turnaround areas and exempt form this
Existing: ramps. requirement because is
18.92.080.D.4 covered by building
code.
Pedestrian access and Unified: Approval authority can Clarifies that approval Revision discussed
circulation 18.4.3.090 (p 4-54) approve walkway abutting authority may approve during review of
driveway at same grade if walkway at same grade Pedestrian Places
Existing: protected from vehicle as driveway if ordinances
18.92.090.B.1 maneuvering areas. distinguished from
vehicle maneuvering
areas through
treatments such as
mountable curbs,
alternative surface
treatment or a row of
decorative bollards.
Amendments to approved Unified: Issue isn't addressed in Provides process to Addresses periodic
landscape plans 18-4.4.020.1) (p 4-57) code. allow amendments to request to amend
approved landscape landscape plans,
Existing: plans for fire safety, especially in older
N/A decreased water use developments, to
and energy efficiency as replace plantings with
a Ministerial or Type I more water conserving
action. species, or species that
14
DESIGN STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
are fire resistant.
Landscaping requirements - Unified: Site Design and Use Add clarification that
existing trees and shrubs 18-4.4.030.13 and C (p 4-58) Standards require the existing trees and shrubs
retention of as many exiting can be counted toward
Existing: healthy tees and shrubs on required landscaping
Site Design and Use site as possible for percentages.
Standards residential and commercial
developments.
Landscaping requirements - Unified: Parking areas are required Add requirement to
bioswales 18-4.4.030.C.2.c (p 4-58) to be designed to capture landscaping standards
and treat runoff in specifying the use of
Existing: landscaped medians and water-tolerant plant
18.92.080.13.5.13 swales. species is required in
bioswales.
Landscaping requirements - Unified: Plant size isn't specified in • Trees required to be The landscaping
minimum tree and shrub 18-4.4.030.C.4.a and b (p 4- code. minimum of 1.5" standard requires 50%
sizes 59) caliper. coverage in one year,
• Street trees required and 90% coverage in 5
Existing: to be minimum of years. Whilethis
N/A 2" caliper. standard generally
• Shrubs planted for works with projects
required screens or involving landscape
buffers required to professionals, when an
be from minimum of owner does a project by
2 gallon containers. his or herself, plant
• All other shrubs sizes would be helpful.
required to be from Language based on state
a minimum 5 gallon model code.
containers.
Landscape plans - Unified: Issue isn't clearly addressed Requires landscape Language is from state
temporary and permanent 18-4.4.030.C.5 (p 4-59) in the code. plans to address model code.
erosion control measures temporary and
15
DESIGN STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Existing: permanent erosion
N/A control measures for
cut/fill, swales, storm
water detention or
similar grading.
Landscape requirements - Unified: Issue isn't addressed in Requires soil to be Language is from state
soil amendment 18-4.4.030.C.6 (p 4-60) code. amended so plants can model code.
naturalize and grow on
Existing: their own.
N/A
Landscape plans - crime Unified: The Site Design and Use Requires landscape plan Langue is from state
prevention and defensible 18-4.4.030.C.7 (p 4-60) Standards introduction to provide for crime model code.
space discusses crime prevention prevention and
Existing: and defensible space in site defensible space by
N/A analysis and planning, but using low hedges and
specific standards do not similar plants that allow
exist. natural surveillance of
public and semi-public
areas, and using
impenetrable hedges in
areas where physical
access is discouraged.
Screening and buffering- Unified: Parking abutting a property Clarifies that loading
loading facilities adjacent to 18-4.4.030.E.6 (p 4-61) line is required to be facilities are required to
residential zones screened. Commercial and be screened from
Existing: industrial service corridors adjacent residential
II-D-2 and II-D-6, Section are required to be screened uses.
ILD Parking Lot and from adjacent residential
Landscaping and Screening uses.
Standards, Site Design and
Use Standards
Plant maintenance -dead Unified: Landscaping is to be Adds 180 days to
16
ter`"- k ...r' DESIGNsSTANDARDS`. .j:H " RZ k::;...
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
plants 18-4.4.030.1 (p 4-64) maintained in good replace dead plants
condition or otherwise upon discovery.
Existing: replaced consistent with
18.72.110 approved plan.
Fences and walls Unified: Issue is not clearly Clarifies that fences and
18-4.4.0401 (p 4-67) addressed in code. walls meeting height
requirements are not
Existing: required to meet
N/A standard front, rear and
side yard setbacks.
Outdoor lighting Unified: No direct illumination of any Guideline added that
18-4.4.050 (p 4-69) residential zone is allowed lighting levels should not
form lighting in any other be greater than
Existing: zone. necessary to provide for
18.72.140 pedestrian safety,
property identification
and crime prevention.
The following standards
are added:
• Light fixtures cannot
obstruct public
ways, driveways or
walkways.
• Outdoor light
fixtures shall be
directed downward
and have full
shielding.
Streets Unified: Signs regulating on-street • Add cross reference Items are required as
18-4.6.030.D.6,7 and 8 parking are required to be AMC 13.24 on part of development,
( p 4-7) consistent with the street naming of streets. but are not clearly
17
_
s.
'DESIGN-STANpARDS`,
Code Amendment-Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
standards and the planning • Add section identified in land use
Existing: application approval. establishing traffic ordinance
18.88.060.D and street name
sign placement
approved by the
city, and cost of
signs required for
new development is
responsibility of
applicant.
• Addlanguage
regarding street
lights conforming to
city standards and
installation or
relocation required
with street
improvement
projects.
Street connectivity Unified: Adjustments to street • Add language
standards - 18-4.6.030.F connectivity to addressing
(pp 4-10-4-12) accommodate physical connecting to
constraints is provided existing and future
Existing: for in Section V Hillside streets on adjacent
18.88.020.K, Section II: Streets and Natural lands.
Connectivity Standards in Areas in the Street Add language
the Street Standards Standards. addressing locating
• Design to reduce cut- and designing
through, non-local streets to intersect
traffic is addressed in as nearly as possible
the required street to right angle.
layout and design • Add standard
18
I~L .mss Kt DESIGN STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
principles. regarding adjusting
streets for physical
constraints for
consistency with
subsection on
Hillside streets and
Natural areas.
• Add standard
regarding traffic
calming for
consistency and
continuity with
existing Cut-Through
Traffic standard.
Street dedications Unified: Requires street • Clarify that lower Existing code does not
18-4.6.040 (pp 4-35 - 4-36) dedication when level "neighborhood clearly address the
development will streets" are required extension of smaller
Existing: increase pedestrian, to serve new "neighborhood streets"
18.82 bicycle or automobile development. that are not typically
traffic. • Clarify language shown on the Street
• Requires dedications for about extending Dedication Map and
new streets, and to adjacent streets into needed for access to
bring existing streets up new developments development.
to current standards. and stubbing out
new streets to serve
future development
on adjacent vacant
and redevelopable
parcels.
• Update language
regarding required
dedication of land
19
DESIGN S,TANDARDS',
l.. S^ N9i'A
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
for streets or
greenways to reflect
more recent case
law which requires
dedications and
improvements to be
roughly proportional
to impacts of
development.
Nonconformities created by Unified: The land area used for For consistency, same Occasionally when
street dedication. 18-4.6.040.C (p 4-36) street dedications that is provision added to substandard streets are
required with a partition (lot subdivisions (18.80) and improved through a
Existing: division of 3 or less lots) or to dedications of right- grant project or local
18.76.190 Performance Standards of-way for street improvement district,
18.88.040.A.1 Subdivision (18.88) is not improvement projects. owners are willing to
deducted from the allowed dedicate street right-of-
density, and does not make way for amenities like
a lot nonconforming (e.g. lot sidewalks. However, the
size, lot dimensions, current code
setbacks). discourages these
voluntary contributions
because the subtraction
of the land area can
make lots
"nonconforming" by
reducing the lot size or
dimensions below the
required minimums for
the zone.
Water and sewer facilities Unified: New development requires Add language clarifying: Items are required as
18-4.6.060 "adequate public facilities." . New development part of development,
(p 4-39) required to connect but are not clearly
20
,DESIGN,,sfANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
to the city's water identified in land use
Existing: and sanitary sewer ordinance
Throughout code as system.
approval criteria such as New development
land divisions (18.76.050.F) may be required to
and site review size water and
(18.72.070.D). sewer lines to
accommodate
future development
within the area as
projected by
applicable facility
master plans; and
city may authorize
cost-recovery or
cost-sharing as
provided under
state law for over-
sized lines.
• Development may
be restricted by city
where deficiency
exists and the water
or sewer system
cannot be rectified
by the development.
Storm drainage Unified: New development requires Add language clarifying: Items are required as
18-4.6.070 (p 4-40) "adequate public facilities." • New development part of development,
must provide but are not clearly
Existing: adequate provisions identified in land use
Throughout code as for storm water ordinance
approval criteria such as management.
21
gc, DESIGNASTANDARD'S Sw .
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
land divisions (18.76.050.F) Drainage facilities
and site review are sized to
(18.72.070.D). accommodate
existing and
projected future
runoff from
upstream drainage
area.
• Downstream
drainage facilities
provide for storage
of additional runoff
caused by the
development.
• New development
may be required to
size storm drainage
systems to
accommodate
future development
within the area as
projected by
applicable facility
master plans; and
city may authorize
cost-recovery or
cost-sharing as
provided under
state law for over-
sized lines.
• New development is
required to provide
22
` " • DESIGN~STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
storm water
easement where
watercourse
traverses a
proposed
development site, as
applicable. '
Underground utilities Unified: Add language clarifying: Undergrounding utilities
(electric, communication, 18-4.6.080 (p 4-41) • New development is standard practice in
lighting) needs to meet utility the city, but not
Existing: provider reflected in the land use
N/A requirements. code.
• Requires
undergrounding of
electric,
communication and
lighting lines for
services to new
development.
• Allows City to waive
underground
requirement when
there are physical
constraints or
existing
development
conditions that
make placement
impractical.
Signs in HC (health care) Unified: Code is silent as to which Make commercial sign The HC zone includes
zone 18-4.7.080 (p 4-13) sign regulations apply to the standards apply to HC areas around Ashland
HC zone. Zone. Hospital, Mountain View
23
DESIGN STANDARDS
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Existing: Retirement Center (N.
N/A Main St./Maple St.), and
Mountain Meadows
(north end of N.
Mountain Ave.).
C-1 (commercial) zone Unified: Properties in the C-1-D Provision added Amendment made per
exemption from solar 18-2.6.030 (p 2-63) (downtown) and CM exempting C-1 zone Planning Commission
setback (Croman Mill) zones are from solar setback input on Policy Issues
Existing: exempt from the solar requirements, except for and Recommendations
18.32.050.0 setback requirements. buildings abutting a from the 2006 Land Use
18.53.050 residential zone. Ordinance Review.
Solar access permit for Unified: Solar access permit for solar Retain solar access Recording of solar
protection from shading by 18-4.8.070 (pp 4-26-4- energy system to be permit, but delete the access easement on
vegetation 30) protected from shading by requirement to record neighboring properties
vegetation is required to be the solar access determined legally
Existing: recorded on neighboring restriction on problematic by City
18.70.070 properties by City. neighboring properties. Attorney's office.
Disc antenna installation Unified: Requires antennas to meet Specifics on antenna
requirements 18-4.12.030 (p 4-40) manufacturers installation is deleted as
specifications and antennas it is covered by the
Existing: to be adequately grounded. Building Code.
18.72.170
24
* 4P'RC!CEDURES7.
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
Ordinance interpretation Unified: • Staff Advisor may • If interpretation The update to the
procedure 18-1.5.050 interpret an unclear does not require interpretation process is
part of land use discretion, it is based on the state model
Existing: ordinance, or refer processed through a code.
18.108.160 the provision to the ministerial process.
18.12.050 Planning Commission. A ministerial
• The Staff Advisor's decision is made by
interpretation is the Staff Advisor,
forwarded to the and does not require
Planning Commission, a public notice and
which in turn is public hearing.
forwarded to the If interpretation
Council. The does require
Commission and discretion, the Type
Council have authority l process
to modify an (administrative
interpretation. decision with notice)
is used. The
interpretation can
be called up for
review of the
Planning
Commission, who
can modify the
interpretation based
on the criteria
established in the
section.
• When interpretation
may have significant
citywide
25
:4 ,S-
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
implications, the
Staff Advisor may
refer the request
directly to the
Planning
Commission and
Council using the
legislative
procedure.
Recession extension Unified Code: Section allowed approvals Provision for recession Removed because window
18-1.6.040 (p 1-20) that were granted at the extension is deleted. for recession extensions
onset of the recession to ended January 2012.
Existing: be extended an additional
18.112.035.8 year.
Exception to the Street Unified Code: One of the criteria for an Amendment adds Performance measures
Standards 18-3.8.050 (p 3-53) Exception to the Street performance measures identified in the adapted
Standards requires that to consider when Ashland Transportation
Existing: the variance from the evaluating whether the System Plan, October 2012.
18.88.050.F.B street standards "will proposed variance
result in equal or superior provides equal or
transportation facilities superior transportation
and connectivity." facilities including:
• For transit facilities,
access, wait time
and ride experience.
• For pedestrian
facilities, feeling of
safety, quality of
experience and
ability to safely and
efficiently cross
26
PROCEDURES
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
roadway.
• For bicycle facilities,
feeling of safety and
quality of
experience and
frequency of
conflicts with vehicle
cross traffic.
Exception to the Site Unified: Outlines exception Separate downtown
Development and Design 18-4.2.060.C.11 (p 4-33) process for buildings in exception is deleted,
Standards for properties in the Downtown Design and a reference is added
the Downtown Design Existing: Standards zone, using to the standard
Standards zone Standards VI-K, Section VI similar criteria to existing Exception to the Site
Downtown Ashland, Site Exception to the Site Design and Use
Design and Use Standards Design and Use Standards. Standards.
Expedited land divisions Unified: Outlines when an Deletes section and The provision has not been
18-5.1.010 (p 5-6) expedited land division provides reference to used in Ashland. Staff
can be done, the state statue regarding believes this is because the
Existing: procedure, noticing expedited land divisions. timeline for a standard
18.108.030 requirements and partition is faster (45 days
effective date for an for a decision) than the
application. Oregon Revised Statues
(ORS) outline for an
expedited land division (63
days for a decision).
Providing a reference to ORS
is the approach used in the
state model code.
Effective date of a Type I Unified: Decision is effective on Decision is effective 12 Changed for consistency
18-5.1.050.E (p 5-14) 13thd day after notice of days after the decision is with ORS 227.175.10.a.C.
decision is mailed. mailed.
27
PKQCEDLIRES = L
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
Existing:
18.108.040.D.3
Procedures for Unified: Issues are not addressed
continuances and leaving 18-5.1.060.C (pp5-18, 5-19 in code.
the record open and 5-20)
Existing:
N/A
Type III and Legislative Unified: • The Type III procedure All applications that are
decisions 18-5.1.070 (pp 5-23) includes quasi-judicial legislative are included
and legislative actions in the Type III review
Existing: (zone changes, category.
18.108.060 (Type III) comprehensive plan
18.108.170 (Legislative) changes, map
changes, annexations
and UGB
amendments).
• A separate section
addresses legislative
procedures.
State noticing Unified: Requires 45 days between • DLCD notice time
requirements for Type III 18-5.1.070.C (pp 5-23 and the submission of a adjusted to 35 days
planning applications 5-24) complete application and to reflect recent
the scheduled change in Oregon
Existing: Commission meeting. Administrative Rule
18.108.060.C.1.a State noticing (OAR) 660-018-
requirement is not 0020. .
mentioned, but this is to New language
allow for the required added addressing
notice to DLCD. notification
requirements of ORS
227.186.
28
PROCEDURES
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
Incomplete applications Unified: When an application is When an application is Changed for consistency
18-5.1.090.A (p 5-26) incomplete, requires incomplete, requires with ORS 227.178(4) and
missing information to be missing information to ORS 215.178(4).
Existing: submitted within 31 days. be submitted with 180
18.108.017.A.2 days.
Site Review application Unified: Site Design approval Site Plan is required to Information is needed to
submittals 18-5.2-.040 (pp 5-34 and criteria require pedestrian include: evaluate consistency of
5-35) and bicycle circulation and • Pedestrian and proposal with approval
connections, bus facilities bicycle circulation criteria. Location of mail
Existing: and outdoor lighting, but and connections to boxes is an additional item
18.72.060 these items are not adjacent properties. that often comes up after a
specifically addressed in • Location of bus project is built.
the application stops.
requirements. • Location, type and
height of outdoor
lighting.
• Location of mail
boxes.
Site Review and Unified: Site Review and Change Site Review and Makes it clear that intent of
Conditional Use Permit 18-5.2.050.D (p 5-36) and Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit the language is regarding
approval criteria - paved 18-5.4.040.A.2 (p 5-61) approval criteria require approval criteria to internal circulation of
access requirement "paved access to and "paved access to and vehicles within the
Existing: through the throughout the development.
18.72.070.D (Site Review) development." development."
and 18.104.050.13
(Conditional Use Permit)
Deadline for partition and Unified: • Partitions - final Final plat required
subdivision final plat 18-5.3.030.13 and 18- partition plat must be within 18 months of
submittal 5.3.090.A (pp 5-42 and 5- submitted within 18 preliminary plan
51) months of preliminary approval for all land
plan approval. divisions.
29
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
Existing: Subdivisions-final
18.76.075 (Partitions) subdivision plat must
18.80.050.A (Subdivisions) be submitted within
12 months of
preliminary plan
approval.
Conditional Use Permit Unified: The "target use" of C-1 The "target use" of C-1 Change reflects recent
approval criteria -Target 18-5.4.040.A.5 d and f (p 5- and E-1 property is and E-1 property is increase in minimum FAR in
use for C-1 (commercial) 62) defined as general retail defined as general retail Detail Site Review Zone from
and E-1 (employment) /office commercial uses commercial uses .35 to .50.
zones Existing: developed at an intensity developed at an
18.104.020.8.4 and 6 of .35 gross floor area intensity of .50 FAR.
ratio (FAR).
Conditions of Approval for Unified: Existing subsection lists a Revise one item on
a Conditional Use Permit 18-5.4.040.13 (pp 5-63 and variety of conditions that possible list of
5-64) the approval authority conditions:
may impose as conditions Architectural design
Existing: to a Conditional Use features to minimize
18.104.060 Permit approval. environmental
impacts such as
noise, light, glare,
odor.
Add three items to
possible list of
conditions of approval:
• limit or set
standards for
location, type,
design and intensity
30
a - P,ROGEDGRES,
~'+s. ~..hd.,^, '~„i;nxi 1._ aa?_, ,.k~a,,e, -•"-*z.:,-.~.a.' s. ~ha.. .as z. ,t3<: s~~.
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
of outdoor lighting.
• Improvements to
water, sewer, storm
drainage systems.
• May require renewal
of Conditional Use
Permit renewal
annually or in
accordance with
another timetable.
Variance approval criteria Unified: Existing approval criteria Amendments to Existing
18-5.5.030 B and E (p 5-66) for a Variance require: criteria:
• A unique or unusual • More specific
Existing: circumstance which language used
18.100.020 applies to site. requiring a special or
• Benefits of the unique physical
proposal will be circumstance of the
greater than any site (topography
negative impacts, and natural features,
the proposal will adjacent
further the purpose development) that
and intent of the land the code does not
use ordinance and account for.
comprehensive plan. The need for the
• The circumstances or variance is not self-
conditions have not imposed by the
been willfully or property owner.
purposely self- Two new criteria added
imposed. requiring:
• The variance is the
minimum necessary
31
9
PROCEDURES ft. W
k.'. i,.
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
to address the
special physical
circumstances
related to the site.
• The variance does
not conflict with
other city policies or
applicable
regulations.
Variance- issuing building Unified: A building permit cannot 15 days is changed to Provides consistency
permits 18-5.5.040 (pp 5-66 and 5- be issued for a the effective date of the between the procedures,
67) development with an decision after the appeal and accounts for potential
approved variance until period has passed. appeals.
Existing: 15 days after approving
18.100.030 variance by the
Commission.
Modifications to planning Unified: Type I modifications are Add new chapter on
approvals 18-5.6 (p5-68) required to be processed creating a minor and
as a Type I, and Type 11 major modification
Existing: modifications as Type II process.
18.108.040.A.2 • Thresholds are
established for
minor and major
modifications.
• Allows some minor
modifications to be
approved as a
Ministerial approval.
• Similar to current
code, an application
for a modification is
32
a s :'PR'06ED11RES # 'm ss k
Code Amendment Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Category
processed using the
same process as the
original project.
PROCEDURES EVALUATION
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Effective date of Type II Unified: Type II decision becomes Type II decision becomes The required time period
decision 18-5.1.060.F (p 5-20) final 13 days after the City final 10 days after the by statute is 10 days.
mails the decision notice City mails the decision Provides consistency with
Existing: (adopted and signed notice. ORS requirements.
18.108.070.B.3.a findings).
Planning Approval Expiration Unified: • Planning approval Extend timeline so that all
18-1.6.030 (p 1-19) revoked within one planning approvals expire
year from date of 18 or 24 months from
Existing: approval, unless date of approval.
18.112.030 otherwise specified in
18.76.075 code.
18.88.030.B.3 • Partition approvals
expire if the final plat is
not signed within 18
months of the
preliminary approval.
• Outline plan
Performance Standards
Options subdivisions
expires if Final Plan
approval is not
approved within 18
months from date of
the approved Outline
33
mP,ROGED,URESJEVALUATION-:, . , a.;f k
.=a
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Plan.
Planning approval extension Unified: One extension of any One extension of any
18-1.6.040 (p 1-20) planning approval can be planning approval can be
granted for 18 months. granted for 24 months.
Existing:
18.112.035
Priority planning application Language will be included Developments pursuing Add provision for priority
processing in final draft. LEED certification receive processing of economic
top priority in the process development projects.
Existing: of planning actions.
18.108.017.C
Site Review threshold for Language will be included In Detail Site Review • In Basic Site Review
public hearing (Type II) in final draft. zone, public hearing zone, public hearing
Existing: (Type II) required for required for
18.108.040.A.1 buildings 10,000 sq. ft. structures larger than
and larger. 15,000 sq. ft. or
• In Downtown Design additions of more
Standards zone, public than 50% of existing
hearing required for buildings square
buildings 2,500 sq. ft. footage.
and larger, or additions Thresholds for Detail,
10% or more of Downtown and
building square Croman Mill zones
footage. remain as is.
• In Croman Mill zone,
public hearing required
for new structures or
additions 15,000 sq. ft.
or larger.
• In Basic Site Review
zone, public hearing
required for structures
34
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
larger than 10,000 so.
ft. or additions of more
than 20% of existing
buildings square
footage.
Neighborhood contact Existing: Issue is not addressed in Add requirement for Planning Commission
N/A code. applicant to contact suggested making this
neighbors of proposed voluntary or guideline.
development and hold a
meeting to preview the
proposal and provide
input prior to submitting
a Type II application.
35
"GREEN DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Cottage housing Language will be included Item is not addressed in Add provision allowing See staff memo in May
in final draft. code. cottage housing in the 14, 2013 Planning
single-family zones. Commission packet for
Existing: Cottage housing is a type more information about
N/A of development cottage housing.
consisting of a group of
small homes clustered
around a common area.
Generally 2 cottages are
allowed for each
standard single-family
home, units are limited
to 750 to 1,000 sq. ft. in
size, parking is clustered
to the side or rear in one
area, lot coverage is
limited to the percentage
allowed for the zone, and
there are required design
standards.
Solar orientation and design Language will be included Incorporate passive and Add following standards
standards in final draft. active solar strategies in for residential
the design and orientation development:
Existing: of buildings and habitable • Street and Lot
VIII-C-9, Section VIII spaces. When site and Orientation: Where
Croman Mill District location permit, orient the site and location
Standards, Site Design and building with long sides permit, design new
Use Standards facing north and south. street layouts so
streets and lots are
as close to a north-
south and east-west
access as possible so
36
GREEN DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION
Code Amendment Category Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
that buildings within
the street grid can
have south facing
sides for maximum
solar access.
• Building Orientation:
Where site and
location permit,
orient buildings with
the long sides facing
north and south.
• Passive Solar Floor
Plans: Design
habitable structures
so south wall is
available for passive
solar access, where
site and location
permit. Use south
sides of building for
primary living spaces
rather than less
frequently used area
such as utility rooms,
closets and garages.
• South Facing Roofs:
Design habitable
structures so that
30% of the roof area
faces south in order
to provide surface
for solar collection,
37
GREEN DEVEL'OPMENT,EVALUATION
Code Reference Existing Standard Proposed Amendment Comment
Code Amendment Category
where site and
location permit.
38
do ! Site Review Zones
h4L,
sc =Downtown Design Stan,
a
Detail Site Review ZonE
o t Basic Site Review (Corr
® Croman Mill Design Sta
-41
~ S
f ~V. East Main St.
4 • ~j - o
L0(J a
~Ashland,Street - ~ '
ICL-
I
,mss
N
Unified Land Use Ordinan
- ~ r r w
' area •
r
i
i
" bA
l~s
i.=
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6/10/13 Focus Group Community Development
Code Organization
Part 1-Introduction and General Provision;
Part 2 -Zoning Regulations
Part 3 -Special Districts and Overlay Zones
Part 4 -Site Development and Design Stand
Part 5 -Administrative Procedures
Part 6 -Definitions and Rules of MeasuremE
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110/13 Focus Group Community Development
f- .
LAN
a r 4 _P
lb.
71
Aid, _
ZAW
' ~r
Amendment Highlights
Land Use and Zoning Regula
*Rebuilding Nonconforming Garages and Sheds
*Accessory Residential Units as Permitted Use
*Increase Building Height in C-1 Zone
*Revise C-1 & E-1 Adjacent Residential Setbacks
•Revise Distance Between Buildings in R-2 & R-3
*Revise Affordable Housing Density Bonus
•Exempt Percentage of Pervious Pavement from Lot
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110!13 Focus Group Community Development
Nonconform'ing Structur
' x~ti ter, - v: ~ - _ ~ •i~` ire ~ ~
VA,
A 1Y 1 -
` 44 1S
I,,
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110/13 Focus Group Community Development
Residential Buffer
\
)
CO LL co
'O 2 7 MINI Z Oz
G wY V
4ji
CO
s, r` 3 i C tiq
L- ,J ' ~cq0
o i, v'o 'tiFs
Residential Buffer
>
100, Y. J ~V v . V ST~f
1161
Residential Buffer
- -
- PARKER ST
_ o
Of -
ASHLAND ST
J
Residential Buffer
-i
PARKER ST
I-R-1-5
~ a
r
_ 1100,
41ASHLAND ST
7F•*.r~.:;Y. fir. '
0A
` ~ ~ ~ 0 N E WAY
46
*.~r e
*shim
I's
Iwo
ILI
Amendment Highlights
Design Standards
*Exempt C-1 from Solar Setback
*Garage Width/Step Back Design Standard
•Parking Ratio Adjustments
*Minimum Tree and Shrub Sizes
•Require Soil Amendment
Unified Land Use Ordinance
s,1o,,3Focus Group Community Development
- - - t a
ARM. MY
1
' i = - y - Jew ~ `~P ~ - T'~...
W 4
•..S R -F ~Q'~,~[ 7~ t ~ - «J, s y1 • K~NtlVy da~
47 1.,
•4,
r
Amendment Highlights
Procedures
*Ordinance Interpretation Procedure
*Site Review Application Submittals
*Timeline for Final Plat for Land Divisions
*Amend Variance Approval Criteria
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110113 Focus Group Community Development
1
y~
id$'
low / - - t
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110113 Focus Group Community Development
Amendment Highlights
Procedures Evaluation
*Effective Date of Type II Decision
•Timeline for Planning Approval Expiration
*Timeline for Planning Approval Extension
•Priority:Planning Application Processing
Site Review Threshold for Type II (Public Hear
•Neighborhood Contact
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110113 Focus Group Community Development
es
Downtown Design 5
d AS Q Detail Site Review 2
Q Basic Site Review (t
24.'` Q Croman Milo Design
Hersey St.
w. 3
Example properties
' 1) 150-158 Litttiia Way
2) 11 Furst St
3) 210 E Hersey St (Dare
4) 7D9 Wahington St_ (Mo
3.
East Main St 5) 78!8 Jeferson St (Oaks
Ct,
n
79
Ashla-6d Street
_J
f
' S
I d
Amendment Highlights
Green Development Evaluat
*Cottage Housing
*Solar Orientation and Design Standards
✓Streets and Lots
✓Building Orientation
✓Passive Solar Floor Plans
✓South Facing Roofs
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6/10/13 Focus Group Community Development
Cottage Housing
[
from City of Milwaukie Housing Prototypes,
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6/10/13 Focus Group Community Development
ASI
y Single Family Za
ro
O
All R-1 zone
R-1-3.5; R=
10 Hersey St.
_ . ~ ode}, .s
East Main St.
S,s
0
Ashland Street a
n
%i-
i,
N
All,
Solar Setback Standan
N"ualifyi,
Mor~qur~Mirg bwWong
buwidmg ,
s
N Long am no _
greater than 15'
. ry~t ~ y
S
from LEED 2009 for Neighborhood Development
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6110113 Focus Group Community Development
I
4k
`
r
i
Ari
77
- ^r J L
0010,
rlr~`
r.,
- N:~
Next Steps
*Open House: June 20
OF p are Adoption-Ready Draft: Surnm
•Adoption Process: Sept - Dec
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6/10/13 Focus Group Community Development
Learning More/Providing Inr
*Project Page
www.ashland.or.us/unifiedcode
•0n-Line Forum
WWnI.9 ch la nd.or.us/o pencityhall
*Contact Staff
Maria Harris, Planning Manager
(541)552-2045
iharrism(c7u,asnand.or.us
r
Unified Land Use Ordinance
6/10/13 Focus Group Community Development
vtt
apt
-47
~ ~,Rf~, t _ ~ _ i f
r T• .ice.
+v .
F;
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Meeting Notes - 6110113 Unified Land Use Code
Code Organization:
• How will staff address references relating to old code? There could be instances where references to
old code will make it difficult to determine without administrative overview which will pertain to a
project. Make sure wording is in place to address the instances where this will occur.
• Suggested that staff include a matrix for existing codes compared to the rewrites.
• The code adoption will supersede any predecessor when adopted by Council. Code in place when
application is received will be the governing code throughout process of application as per State law.
• Other codes that are referenced in the Unified Code will need to be updated also. Could hotlinks be
provided in the digital formats to make cross-referencing more efficient within the document?
Land Use and Zoning Regulations:
• A table consolidating all 10 zones has been created for ease of use. Supported for ease of use and
cross-referencing.
Non-conforming garage and shed replacement
• This permit will be a building permit. Unanimous support for this update. Costs of this permit are
expensive in comparison to the actual construction.
Accessory Residential Units as Permitted Use
• ARU will now be a permitted use that will require a site review process
• Comments that making a permanent structure a conditional use was an awkward fit. The term
conditional did not seem right for this type of permanent use. An ARU will exist forever and it won't
be removed if the conditional use permit is revoked.
• Suggest changing the terminology to Conditional Permit instead of CUP.
• It was suggested to change the term to something less discretionary and it will be a cleaner approval.
Increase Building Height in C1 Zone
• In the Commercial zones if a building is a 100' from a residential zone, the building height can be 55'
(height limit is 40' now). This was agreeable.
• Does solar still apply to this change? Proposed amendment to solar setback for the C-1 zone is limit
solar setback requirement to buildings abutting a residential zone, and is based on the
recommendation from 2006 land use ordinance review. 14'
• There was a concern over competing interests for open space requirements on smaller lots such as
downtown plaza areas. This will make buildings conform to T-shape designs. This will affect quality
versus quantity of space. For building to go up something has to give at the streetscape level to
achieve the 10% public improvement requirement This becomes a conflicting balancing act.
Page I of 5
~r,
Revise C-1 and E-1 Adjacent Residential Setbacks
• Amendment is for a 5' setback per story for side and rear of building in both zones. Fire code is
believed to be 3'. Six-foot setback is better to accommodate balconies and other adjacent structures.
Six feet seems to work better in most designs.
• Make sure this is in line with porch setbacks of S feet.
Revise Distance Between Buildings in R-2 and R-3
• The distance between buildings requirement will be reviewed and changes suggested in the next
draft. Setback requirements could be a constraint for cottage housing.
Revise Affordable Housing Density Bonus:
• What staff has heard over time is that the current affordable housing density bonus, an equal
percentage increase in density for an affordable unit is not an incentive. Revision is a two market
rate units for each affordable unit. Agree that this is a better incentive as a 1 to 1 doesn't cover costs.
Exempt Percentage of Pervious Pavement from Lot Coverage
• There were questions regarding large lots with long driveways being able to meet the new criteria.
Could this be not applicable to driveways as the pavers seem to be breaking down in high traffic
areas.
• Does this associate with paths and patios?
• Use a credit on permits for SDCs as an incentive.
• Separate residential and commercial. Or do not apply to commercial.
Site Development and Design Standards:
Exempt C-1 from Solar Setback
• Unless the building abuts residential zone. General support.
Garage Width/Step Back Design Standard
• Facing street and cannot exceed 50% of parent building unless set back 6' from street. Be sure to
clarify if street includes alleys.
• Define lot width challenges if the lot is less than a certain width.
Parking Ratio Adjustments
• Concern was voiced over the degree of detail needed in a parking demand analysis. Does this
require a transportation study? This could be a large financial burden for the developer of smaller lots
and for co&using applicants for parking standards. Instances will be discretionary and addressed
by the Planning Commission in unique situations.
Minimum Tree and Shrub Sizes
• Adding size requirements of 2-5 gallon shrubs and 1-2" caliber trees. Would like to have input from
landscape designer. None were present at the meeting.
Page 2 of 5
I
• Concern was voiced over survival rates of larger size shrubs compared to smaller size shrubs, also
cost of larger shrubs is considerably more expensive.
Require Soil Amendment
• Add 3 cu/yds per 1,000 sq ft of area. There is a huge variation in the types of soil allover Ashland,
will this require a geotech for submission? Again concern over upfront costs to smaller developers
could become overwhelming.
Administrative Procedures:
Ordinance Interpretation Procedure
• No comments.
Site Review Application Submittals
• Add bike and walking paths, bus stop locations, location and height of street lights, and location of
mailboxes. These additions will drive up costs for civil involvement. Agreement that the involvement
of more professionals will bring up costs. The cumulative impression of process like this gets
overwhelming.
• This will begin to affect the outcome by limiting designs options.
• Does this factor in additional staff time to review these additions?
• It is appropriate to show the location without doing fixture types on smaller projects?
Time Line for Final Plat and for Land Divisions
• All timelines forapproval is 18 months. General support for this change.
Amend Variance Approval Criteria
• Are variances still subjective to unique or unusual physical conditions of the site?
Effective Date of Type 11 Decision
• Adjusted to be 10 days instead of 13. Supported.
Timeline for Planning Approval Expiration
• Adjusted from 12 months to 18 or 24. Supported.
Timeline for Planning Approval Extension
• Adjusted from 18 months 24. Support unanimous for the 24 months on extension and expiration.
This allows more time to work with professionals and identify contractors and to receive building
approvals.
Priority Planning Application Processing
• Adds a processing benefit for economic development projects as in place currently for LEED certified
projects. Looking at ways to introduce incentives for employment generators.
Site Threshold for Type II (Public Hearing)
Page 3 of 5
11FAW&,
• For basic site review zones recommendation is to change threshold for a public hearing from 10, 000
sq It or 20% of existing building square forage to 15,000 square feet or a 50% addition.
Neighborhood Contact
• Not in code yet, staff is wanting feedback on this topic. It would require applicant to initiate and hold
public meetings with the neighbors prior to submitting application. Planning Commission suggests
making this voluntary. If the meetings are required then feels that neighbors are more defensive then
if it is voluntary.
• Some support meetings being mandatory. Concern that if it is a requirement and some part of the
procedure is missed, then it could become something that is appealable. Staff will look into procedure
to see if it would be appealable.
• Could this be an incentive for Type II applications?
• Typically traffic and scale will determine if public hearing is required.
• Will it be mandatory for a staff member to attend to avoid appeals?
• There will need to be strict criteria for noticing and recording.
Green Development Evaluation:
Cottage Housing - Planning commission recommended introducing cottage housing.
• Density bonus would apply; 2 for 1 criteria. One single-family for two cottages. This would apply to
the R-1 zones with a minimum of 4 cottages. Orientation to streets and alleys would need to be clear.
• Need to analyze the true affordability of a cottage house. General idea is infilling more of the UGB
then the idea of affordability to meet housing needs. Some designs are elaborate to make them more
marketable.
• Parking could be a contentious item for the cottages. Cluster parking may not be welcome in
established neighborhoods.
Solar Orientation and Design Standards
• The phrase "where site and location permit" is essential to success of the solar standard.
• The 30% of roof having solar access might be a design constraint. Design standards become a
limiting factor in the design of the projects. There will not be leeway for any individuality or unique
design. The market will drive good design.
Next steps:
An Opeil House meeting is scheduled for June 20th at the Community Center from 4 - 6 p.m. After the meetings,
the final draft will be prepared during the summer with the definitions being completed and graphics added. The
formal adoption process is targeted for SeptemberlOcfober 2013.
Suggestions were made for another meeting with design professionals. Contact Maria if interested.
Page 4 of 5
~r,
Keep the review as a living document. There is a matrix online that shows the changes and it is easy to follow the
revisions as they happen. Interest was expressed in the seeing the graphics.
i:' rtf
Page 5 of 5
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE: August 13, 2013
TO: Ashland Planning Commission
FROM: Maria Harris, Planning Manager
RE: Unified Land Use Ordinance Project
Public Meeting Feedback
SUMMARY
At the July 23, 2013 meeting, the Planning Commission requested a summary of the comments from the public
meetings for discussion purposes.
BACKGROUND
A focus group meeting of design and development professionals was held on June 10, and an open house was
held on June 20. Both meetings covered the code organization, amendment highlights, and the evaluations of the
planning application procedures and green development measures. A total of three hundred postcards announcing
the meetings and the project web site (www.ashland.or.us/unifiedcode) were mailed to design and development
professionals, contractors, City advisory commissions, and past planning applicants. The Open House was also
announced in the hard copy and online version of the Ashland Daily Tidings.
A matrix summarizing the proposed code amendments is attached. The amendment matrix as well as the draft
Unified Land Use Ordinance (ULUO), the ordinance outline, project information sheet and staff contact info were
available at the public meetings and prior to the public meetings on the project web site. The project web site also
includes the public meetings schedule, including all Planning Commission meetings, and links to the meeting
materials.
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETING FEEDBACK
The following summary of comments and suggestions is taken from the notes from the June 10 Focus Group
Meeting.
A summary of the comments and suggestions that staff heard at the June 20 Open House meeting is also included.
The June 20 Open House was an informal drop-in setting where participants could have one-on-one discussions
with staff members.
June 10 Focus Group r
• General: Include a matrix that cross references existing codes with adopted ULUO. In the future,
administration could be difficult because many past planning approvals and documents reference the
current code.
• General: Provide links in the digital format for cross-references.
lorrWdia,
Page 2 of 4
• Increase Building Height in C-1 Zone: Conflicts with plaza requirements, especially for buildings
on smaller lots in the downtown. Increase in building height will also increase plaza space
requirements. In turn, more required plaza space may result in T-shaped designs where quantity is
more important than quality of plaza space. For building to go up, something has to give at street
level.
• Revise C-1 and E-1 Setbacks to Adjacent Residential: Some feedback from group to consider
using six feet to match residential zone setbacks and to better accommodate balconies.
• Revise Affordable Housing Density Bonus: Group agreed that current bonus is not an incentive to
build affordable units.
• Exempt Percentage of Pervious Pavement from Lot Coverage: Consider not allowing to use for
driveways as pervious pavement doesn't perform well in these areas, do not allow in commercial
zones, and use Systems Development Charge (SDC) credit on building permits as an incentive to use
pervious paving.
• Garage Width/Step Back Design Standard: Concern expressed about adding a design requirement.
The garage step back is already happening because of required setbacks, and will be a challenge on
narrow lots.
• Parking Ratio Adjustments: Concern expressed over the degree of detail needed in parking demand
analysis.
• Minimum Tree and Shrub Sizes: Concern voiced over survival rate of larger shrubs, and cost of
larger shrubs.
• Require Soil Amendment: Concern expressed over upfront costs to smaller developments..
• Site Review Application Submittals: Concern that additional requirements will necessitate civil
engineer involvement which will drive up costs. Especially concerned about providing lighting detail
at conceptual stage.
• Neighborhood Contact: Group split between those who said they were already holding
neighborhood meetings and believes it is good practice, and those who expressed concern about
added time and expense. Questioned if the neighborhood meetings will make applications more
appealable.
• Cottage Housing: Orientation to streets needs to be clear. Cluster parking could be a contentious
item in established neighborhoods.
• Solar Orientation and Design Standards: "Where site and location permit" is essential. 30% of
roof having solar access may be a design constraint.
• Support for the following amendments:
o Rebuilding non-conforming garages and sheds with a building permit
o Accessory Residential Units (ARU) as special permitted use requiring Site Review approval
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541488-5305
20 E. Main street Fax: 541-552-2050 Ir,
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
r .ashland.or.us
Page 3 of 4
o Increase in building height in the C-1 zone from 40 to 55 feet if building is at least 100 feet from
a residential zone
o Exempt C-1 zone from solar setback unless building is abutting residential zone
o Revising effective date of Type II decision from 13 to 10 days
o Revising distance between building requirement in multi-family zones
o Revising planning approval expiration from one year to 18 or 24 months
o Revise planning approval extension from 18 months to 24 months
June 20 Open House
• Rear Yards in Residential Zones: Allow rear yard on alleys to be less than standard ten feet per
story, this development pattern is in place in the historic districts.
• Front Yards in Residential Zones: Allow front yard in residential zones to be 12 feet (current code
requires 15 feet for front yard in most residential zones).
• Minimum Lot Sizes: Allow smaller residential lots, around 3,000 square feet, for affordability, like
lots/houses across from Ashland Food Co-op.
• Flag Lots: Opinion that front lot line of flag lot is line that parallels street has significantly impacted
ability to divide lots.
• Proposed Increase in Building Height in the C-1 zone: Why not include E-1 zone?
• Building Separation for Large Scale Development: Clarify how this standard applies to adjacent
lots under different ownership because current standard doesn't clearly address.
Buildings not connected by a common wall shall be separated by a distance equal to the
height of the tallest building. If buildings are more than 240feet in length, the separation
shall be 60 feet. (11-C-3.a.3, Additional Standards for Large Scale Projects, Site Design and
Use Standards)
• Reducing Environmental Impacts of Surface Parking (18.92.080.B.5.a): Suggest allowing
applicants to mix and match strategies from menu for larger sites
Parking areas shall be designed to minimize the adverse environmental and microclimatic impacts of
surface parking through design and material selection. Parking areas of more than seven parking
spaces shall meet the following standards.
a. Use at least one of the following strategies for the surface parking area, or put 50% of parking
underground.
i Use light colored paving materials with a high solar reflectance (Solar Reflective Index (SRI)
of at least 29) to reduce heat absorption for a minimum of 50% of the parking area surface.
ii. Provide porous solid surfacing or an open grid pavement system that is at least 50% pervious
for a minimum of 50% of the parking area surface.
iii. Provide at least 50% shade from tree canopy over the parking area surface within five years
ofproject occupancy.
iv. Provide at least 50% shade from solar energy generating carports, canopies or trellis
structures over the parking area surface.
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
w .ashland.or.us
Page 4 of 4
• Manufactured Homes: Strongly support changes to standards for manufactured homes on individual
lots and in parks
• ULUO Organization: Strongly support combining development standards into one document
because currently is cumbersome to use multiple documents
ATTACHMENTS
Amendment Matrix
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
w .ashland.or.us
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
August 19, 2013, Study Session
Discussion of proposed ordinance changes regarding short-term home rentals
FROM:
Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The Council requested a study session discussion of ordinances that were presented at the July 16
business meeting that would, if adopted, overhaul the City's regulatory structure for short-term home
rentals (STHRs). The ordinances, in a nutshell, would have made STHRs a conditional use in R-2 and
R-3 zones and clarified the business license and transient occupancy tax sections of the Ashland
Municipal Code with regard to STHRs. Council expressed concern at the July 16 meeting that it
needed more information before it could make a decision and agreed that questions would be
submitted to the Mayor or city administrator so staff could work on preparing answers in advance of
this study session. Those questions and answers, as well as other information prepared by staff are
attached to this Council communication.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
There has been explosive growth in the last few years in the number and popularity of short-term home
rentals, a type of tourist lodging in which a visitor rents an entire house with fully furnished kitchen,
bedroom and bathroom facilities, but no owner or manager living on the property. Evidence of this
growth is found in the number of advertisements on web sites such as VRBO.com and AirBnB.com.
Ashland's Municipal Code does not specifically allow for this kind of facility in residential zones and
home rentals of less than 30 days are not permitted in any residential zone (except in the unusual
circumstances in which an owner lives on the property but not in the house being rented). The
Ashland Municipal Code does allow traveler's accommodations in R-2 and R-3 (high density and
multifamily residential) zones, however, STHRs are not considered a traveler's accommodation under
the AMC or under state law.I In order to be a traveler's accommodation in an R-2 or R-3 zone, a
facility must have an owner living on-site. As such, the bed & breakfast businesses now operating in
the R-2 and R-3 zones are legal, while the STHRs operating in those zones are not. Vacation cottages
on properties where there is an owner living in the main house are also legal. In the absence of some
other regulatory path forward, the only way for an STHR to become legal in an R-2 or R-3 zone is to
become a traveler's accommodation.
Short-term home rentals are currently a conditional use in the City's E-1 and C-1 zones. These zones
are for commercial and employment-related land uses, so the opportunities for operating a STHR in
these zones is limited, simply because of the limited number of houses in the zones and bare land in
t Note that the AMC also requires that travelers accommodations have an annual inspection by the Jackson County Health Department,
as required by state law. However, STHRs are not subject to such inspection and licensure under slate law.
Page I of 4
PEr,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
these zones is arguably more valuable if developed for the zoned uses. The question of whether to
permit STHRS in residential zones first arose after the City sent code enforcement letters in May of
2012 to the owners of properties we had identified as illegal STHRS. The owner of two of these
STHRS, Mark Dennett, came to the Council's June 19, 2012, business meeting and, speaking under
public forum, requested that the Council reconsider the City's policy regarding STHRS. The Council
directed staff to bring information about the issue to a future study session.
The Council next discussed the STHR issue at its STHR Timeline
August 6, 2012, study session. According to the May 2012 - Code enforcement letters sent to 50+
minutes of that meeting, "Council had concerns illegal STHRS.
with... achieving a fair balance between vacation June 2012 - The owner of two illegal STHRS
home rentals and the Bed and Breakfast industry, asks the Council to review the ordinance.
losing rental stock, neighborhood impacts..." (among August 2012 - Council asks the Planning and
other things) and decided that the Planning Housing Commissions to review the ordinance.
Commission should evaluate the ordinance first, have Feb. 2013 - Planning Commission forwards a
the Housing Commission participate, and forward a recommendation to Council.
recommendation to the Council. March 2013 - Council unanimously accepts the
Planning Commission recommendation and asks
The "level playing field" has been a recurring theme the Commission to develop an ordinance.
in discussions and public testimony. That term has July 2013 - Planning Commission's
been used repeatedly by the B&B owners, the recommended ordinance is forwarded to Council.
Ashland Lodging Association and the Oregon
Lodging Association, which began its March 22, 2013, letter to the Council by stating that, "A level
playing field is critical to the success of any community's business environment." As such, much of
the Planning Commission's and Planning staff s focus has been on developing an ordinance that
creates a "level playing field."
The Planning Commission discussed STHRS at two study sessions and one regular meeting. The
Housing Commission discussed the STHR issue at one meeting and provided its input to the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission reported out its recommendations in February, 2013. The
recommendation included the following:
• Given the obvious growth in the number of STHRs, Ashland should amend its ordinances to
permit this kind of lodging facility and enforce compliance with regulations;
• STHRs should be a conditional use for properties in R-2 and R-3 zones if they are within 200
feet of a major street;
• On-site residency of an owner or manager should not be a requirement for an STHR; and
• The City should continue to prohibit STHRs in R-1 zones.
The Planning Commission discussed, but made no recommendation on, the question of possible
adverse impacts from concentrations of legitimately approved STHRS in residential neighborhoods.
At its March 5, 2013, business meeting, the Council unanimously approved a motion to initiate
amendments to the AMC based on the Planning Commission recommendation. On a split vote, the
Council approved an amendment to the main motion to eliminate the Planning Commission
recommendations to include a Downtown District element, to retain the current standard for distance
from an arterial, and to have the ordinance not include a cap on specific kinds of facilities. Although
there was no vote, a Council majority was clear that it did not support allowing STHRS in R-1 zones.
Page 2 of 4
11FALLA
CITY OF
ASHLAND
The ordinances amending the land use code, the business license code and the transient occupancy tax
code came to the Council for first reading on July 16, 2013. The Ashland Lodging Association
testified at the meeting that the land use ordinance was incomplete but offered no specific suggestions
as to what was missing that would make it complete. The Association's representative requested that
the Council appoint a task force with members of the Lodging Association, the Bed and Breakfast
Network and "other valid local stakeholder" groups to develop ordinance language that all of the
stakeholders agreed on. Others who testified concurred with this testimony and again raised the "level
playing field" argument, noting specifically that owners of bed and breakfasts are required to live on-
site but owners of STHRs would not be so required under the proposed ordinance.
The Council took no action and requested this study session. Among the issues specifically mentioned
by the Council were the following:
• On-site residency requirement;
• Including the entire Historic District in the area in which STHRs could be allowed;
• Business equality;
• Data on supply and capacity;
• Enforcement;
• Impacts on long-term rentals;
• Justification for the requirement that an STHR be within 200' of a major street; and
• Justification for the requirement that STHRs be in houses that are at least 20 years old.
In addition, the Council agreed to forward additional questions/concerns to me or the Mayor and those
have been compiled and addressed separately.
Attached to this Council Communication are a number of documents to aid in the Council's discussion
of this issue. They are as follows:
1. A list of the questions received from individual Councilors, along with staff answers.
2. A map showing the locations of all of the hotels/motels and travelers accommodations in
Ashland.
3. A map showing the locations of all STHRs and unlicensed travelers accommodations that have
received code enforcement letters from the City since May, 2012.
4. A complete list of all licensed lodging facilities in Ashland.
5. A revised version of the matrix presented to you at the Council meeting of July 16 that shows
current R-2 and R-3 zoning code provisions for STHRs, proposed zoning code provisions and
zoning code provisions that apply to traveler's accommodations (B&Bs).
6. A list of arguments for and against these proposed changes. This list was assembled by City
Attorney Dave Lohman and presents the arguments that have been presented to the Council over
the past year. Many of these arguments have no evidentiary basis that we are aware of. They are
simply provided to you as originally presented.
7. A position paper from the Ashland Lodging Association dated August 6, 2013.
8. A position paper dated August 12, 2013 from the STR Advocacy group in Ashland, represented
by Kim Blackwolf.
One other item of note is that of the illegal STHRs identified by code enforcement, more than two-
thirds are in R-1 zones and will continue to be illegal if these code amendments are adopted.
Page 3 of 4
rill
CITY OF
ASHLAND
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
N/A. Staff seeks Council guidance on how to proceed with these proposed updates to the Ashland
Municipal Code.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
• Proposed ordinance
• STHR questions from the Council with staff responses
• Maps of licensed hotels/motels and travelers accommodations, and unlicensed facilities that have
received code enforcement letters
• List of licensed lodging facilities in Ashland
• Revised matrix outlining proposed changes
• General arguments for and against proposed code changes
• Position paper from Ashland Lodging Association
• Position paper from Ashland STR Advocacy group
Page 4 of 4
~r,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 18.08, 18.24.030 AND 18.28.030
OF THE ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE RELATING TO
TRAVELER'S ACCOMMODATIONS AND SHORT TERM HOME
RENTALS IN MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.
Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are
bold lined through and additions are bold underlined.
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and
common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow
municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those
powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto,
shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall
have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that preservation of the character of residential
neighborhoods is a legitimate and beneficial goal; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has found an increasing number of residential dwellings are being
rented to transients on a short-term basis for less than thirty (30) days; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined short-term rentals of dwellings is a business
activity which escalates demand for City services; and
WHEREAS the City Council has determined the City has a substantial interest in ensuring that
all transient occupancy tax required to be collected and remitted is in fact collected and remitted
on a fair and equitable basis; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that non-owner occupied, short-term rental of dwellings is
not currently listed as a permitted or conditionally permitted use in any residential zoning district
in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined it is necessary to establish rules and regulations
to permit short term rentals within the City in order to ensure the safety and convenience of
transients, and to preserve the peace, safety and general welfare of the long-term resident of
neighboring properties; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised
public hearing on the amendments to the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinances on
June 11, 2013; and
Ordinance No. Page 1 of 12
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing
and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the
Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and
benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary
to amend the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance in the manner proposed, that an
adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the
comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this
proceeding.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 18.08 [Definitions] of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance is hereby
amended to newly include the following definitions:
18.08 Definitions
18.08.605 Primary Residence
The property that the taxpayer uses a maiority of the time during the year
ordinarily will be considered the taxpayer's principal residence. In addition to
the taxpayer's use of the property, relevant factors in determining a taxpayer's
principal residence, may include, but are not limited to:
(i) The taxpayer's place of employment;
(ii) The principal place of abode of the taxpayer's family members;
(iii) The address listed on the taxpayer's federal and state tax returns,
driver's license, automobile registration, and voter registration card;
(iv) The taxpayer's mailing address for bills and correspondence,
(v) The location of the taxpayer's banks; and
NO The location of religious organizations and recreational clubs with which
the taxpayer is affiliated.
18.08.658 Short-Term Home Rental
Rental of a dwelling unit in a residential zone for less than a consecutive 30-day
term is a "Short- Term Home Rental," as is rental of a dwelling unit on two or
more occasions within any 30 day period. Rental of individual rooms within a
dwelling unit is not within the definition of "Short-Term Home Rental" as used
in this chapter, and the provisions herein for approval of short-term home
rentals under certain conditions do not apply to rental of such individual rooms.
18.08.795 Traveler's Accommodations
Any establishment in a residential zone having rooms or dwellings rented or kept for
rent to travelers or transients for a charge or fee paid or to be paid for rental or use of
such facilities for a period of less than thirty (30) consecutive days. Dwelling units
Ordinance No. _ Page 2 of 12
used for short-term home rental, as defined in Section 18.08.658, are not
traveler's accommodations as defined herein.
SECTION 2. Chapter 18.24.030 [R-2 Low Density Multifamily Residential District] of the
Ashland Land Use Ordinance, is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.24.030 Conditional Uses
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with
the chapter on conditional use permits:
A. Churches and similar religious institutions.
B. Parochial and private schools, business, dancing, trade, technical, or similar schools.
C. Manufactured housing developments subject to Chapter 18.84.
D. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs.
E. Professional offices or clinics for an accountant, architect, attorney, dentist, designer,
doctor or other practitioner of the healing arts, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster,
investment or management counselor or surveyor.
F. Hospitals, rest, nursing and convalescent homes.
G. Limited personal service establishments in the home, such as beauticians, masseurs and
the uses listed in subsection E above.
H. Wholesale plant nurseries, including accessory structures.
1. Retail commercial uses located in a dwelling unit within the Railroad Historic District
approved by the City Council. Such business shall be no greater than six hundred (600) sq. fr.
in total area, including all storage and accessory uses, and shall be operated only by the
occupant of the dwelling unit uses, and the equivalent of one (1) half (%2) time employee (up
to twenty-five (25) hours per week). Such use shall be designed to serve primarily pedestrian
traffic, and shall be located on a street having a fully improved sidewalk on at least the side
occupied by the business. The street shall be a fully improved street of residential City
standards or greater.
(Ord 2624 S2 1991; deleted Ord 2942 S2 2990
J. Traveler's accommodations, subject to the following:
1. All residences used for travelers accommodation must be business-owner
occupied. During operation of a traveler's accommodation, the property on which
the traveler's accommodation is sited must be the primary residence of the
business-owner. The business owner shall be required to reside en !be pfepeft)
lotion leeation being !he « sidenee of the o r during apex tiefi ..f
the "Business-owner" shall be defined as a person or persons who
own the property and accommodation outright; or who have entered into a lease
agreement with the property owner(s) allowing for the operation of the
accommodation. Such lease agreement must te-specifically state that the property
owner is not involved in the day to day operation or financial management of the
accommodation, and that the business-owner is wholly responsible for all operations
associated with the accommodation, and has actual ownership of the business. (ORD
2806 S1, 1997)
2. The property is located within 200 feet of a boulevard, avenue, neighborhood
collector as identified on the official Street Dedication Map in the City's
Ordinance No. _ Page 3 of 12
Comprehensive Plan. Distances to the property from a boulevard, avenue or
neighborhood collector, shall be measured via a public street or public alley to a
lot line.
3.4. That the The number of accommodation units allowed shall be determined by the
following criteria:
a. That the total number of units, including the business-owner's ewner's unit, shall
be determined by dividing the total square footage of the lot by 1800 sq. ft.
Contiguous lots under the same ownership may be combined to increase lot area
and the number of units, but not in excess of the maximum established by this
ordinance. The maximum number of accommodation units shall not exceed n
9 per approved traveler's accommodation with primary lot frontage on a
boulevard arterial streets. For traveler's accommodations without primary lot
frontage on a designated boulevard, but within 200 feet of a boulevard, avenue
or neighborhood collector street, the The-maximum number of units shall be
seven , 7 ..e. ,......,...e l 1 _ 1 a,l ...:.r.,......_:~
streets; having primary front ge on an at4eri l and withi fl 200 f°et of an ..'t". ial Street
designations shall be as determined by the official Street Dedication Map of the
Ashland Comprehensive Plan. Distances to the property from a boulevard,
avenue or neighborhood collector, shall be measured via a public street or
public alley to a lot line. Distances shall ed ubli street or alle)
b. Excluding the business-owner's unit and the area of the structure it will occupy,
there must be at least 400 sq. ft. of gross interior floor space remaining per unit.
4.&. ThaHhe-The primary residence on the site be at least 20 years old. The primary
residence may be altered and adapted for traveler's accommodation use, including
expansion of floor area. Additional structures may be allowed to accommodate
additional units, but must be in conformance with all setbacks and lot coverage of the
underlying zone.
5.-2-. That eaeh Each accommodation unit shah must have 1 off-street parking space and
the owners business-owner's unit shall must have two (2) parking spaces. All spaces
shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Off-Street Parking section of this
Title.
6.& That only Only one ground or wall sign, constructed of a non-plastic material, non-
interior illuminated of 6 sq. ft. maximum size is be allowed. Any exterior illumination
of signage shall be installed such that it does not directly illuminate any residential
structures adjacent or nearby the traveler's accommodation in violation of 18.72.110.
7.6: Transfer of business-ownership of a traveler's accommodation shall be subject to all
requirements of this section and conformance with the criteria of this section. All
traveler' s accommodations receiving their initial. approvals prior to the effective date
of this ordinance shall be considered as approved, conforming uses, with all previous
approvals, conditions and requirements remaining in effect upon change of business-
ownership. Any further modifications beyond the existing approvals shall be in
conformance with all requirements of this section.
8.-7-. An annual inspection by the Jackson County Health Department shall be conducted
as required by the laws of Jackson County or the State of Oregon.
Ordinance No. _ Page 4 of 12
84-hat the property ert„ vu rr h the t.......
d'„ n odaN°° rnted is leeated
the wurnhic.
within 200 feet of a ealleetor or- ar-ter-iol street as designated in the City's
Comprehensive -Plam. Distanees shall be measured vin a publie street or alley
aeeess to the site from the eolleetor- or- or-terial.
9. Traveler's accommodations must meet all applicable building, fire and related
safety codes at all times and must be inspected by the fire department before
occupancy following approval of a conditional use permit and periodically
thereafter pursuant to Chapter 15.28.
10. The business-owner must maintain a city business license and pay all transient
occupancy tax in accordance with Chapter 4.24 and Chapter 6.04 of this code as
required.
11. Advertising for any traveler's accommodation must include the City of Ashland
Planning Action number assigned to the land use approval.
12. Presenting or offering the availability of residential property for use as a
travelers accommodation without a valid Conditional Use Permit approval,
current business license, and Transient Occupancy Tax registration is prohibited
and shall be subject to enforcement procedures.
K. Short Term Home Rental, subject to the following:
General Requirements
1. Rental of less than an entire dwelling unit is not subject to the requirements of
this Section 18.24.030K.
2. Not more than one dwelling per parcel may be used as a short-term home rental.
3. The property must be located within 200 feet of a boulevard, avenue,
neighborhood collector as identified on the official Street Dedication Map, or is
within the boundaries of Ashland's Historic District as designated in the City's
Comprehensive Plan. Distances to the property from a boulevard, avenue or
neighborhood collector, shall be measured via a public street or public alley to a
lot line.
4. The dwelling used for the short term home rental shall be at least 20 years old.
The dwelling may be altered and adapted for a short term home rental use,
including expansion of floor area.
5. The total number of occupants staying overnight in the short-term home rental at
any one time must not be greater than two times the number of bedrooms plus
two persons, up to a maximum of ten (10) persons.
6. A minimum of two off-street parking spaces must be provided for the short-term
home rental.
Management
7. The conditional use permit for the short-term home rental must be in the name
of the owner-applicant, who shall be an owner of the real property upon which
the short-term home rental is operated. One person may be holder of not more
than one conditional use permit for a short term home rental. The conditional
Ordinance No. _ Page 5 of 12
I
use permit is transferable upon a change in ownership through the ministerial
procedure, and shall be subject to all requirements and criteria of this section.
8. The owner-applicant must on file with the city the name, telephone number, and
email address of a local contact person responsible for responding to questions or
concerns regarding the operation of the short-term home rental.
a. The information required above must be posted in a conspicuous location
inside the short-term home rental dwelling.
b. The local contact person must be available twenty-four hours a day to accept
telephone calls and respond to the short-term home rental matters within
thirty (30) minutes when the short term home rental is rented and occupied.
9. Prior to April ls' for each of the three years following approval of the conditional
use permit or with a change in local contact, the owner must provide written
notice to all neighboring property owners within a two-hundred (200) foot
distance from the parcel on which the short-term home rental is located and
include the following information:
a. The name, telephone number and email address of the local contact person
provided to the city pursuant to subsection K(8) of this section.
b. The maximum number of occupants permitted to stay overnight in the short-
term home rental unit.
c. A copy of the conditions of approval and Planning Action number for the
Conditional Use Permit approving the short-term home rental.
d. Contact information for the city official that members of the public may
report violations of the short-term home rental regulations or conditions of
approval attached to the short-term home rental.
10. The owner-applicant must post "house policies" within each guest bedroom. The
house policies must be included in the rental agreement, which must be signed by
the renter and enforced by the owner applicant or the owner-applicant's
designated contact person. The house policies at a minimum must include the
following provisions:
a. Ouiet hours must be maintained from 10:00 p.m. to7:00 a.m., during which
noise within or outside the short-term home rental dwelling shall not disturb
anyone on a neighboring property.
b. Amplified sound that is audible beyond the property boundaries of the short-
term home rental dwelling is prohibited.
c. Vehicles must be parked in the designated parking areas.
d. Parties or group gatherings must be limited to two times the number of
occupants permitted to stay overnight in the short-term home rental dwelling
pursuant to subsection K(5) of this section.
11. The owner-applicant must use best efforts to ensure that the occupants and/or
guests of the short-term home rental do not create unreasonable noise or
disturbances. Upon notification that occupants and/or guests of the short-term
home rental have created unreasonable noise or disturbances, or committed
violations of this code, the owner must promptly use best efforts to prevent a
recurrence of such conduct by those occupants or guests.
Licensing, Inspections, Taxes & Advertising
Ordinance No. _ Page 6 of 12
12. Short-term home rentals must meet all applicable building, fire and related safety
codes at all times and shall be inspected by the fire department before occupancy
following approval of a conditional use permit and periodically thereafter
pursuant to Chapter 15.28.
13. The owner-applicant shall maintain a city business license and pay all transient
occupancy taxes in accordance with Chapter 4.24 and Chapter 6.04 of this code
as required.
14. All advertising for any short-term home rental must include the City of Ashland
Planning Action number assigned to the owner-applicant.
15. Presenting or offering the availability of residential property for use as a short
term home rental without a valid Conditional Use Permit approval, current
business license, and Transient Occupancy Tax registration is prohibited and
shall be subject to enforcement procedures.
L. Hostels
M. Disc antenna for commercial use.
N. Nonconforming use or structure changes required by Section 18.68.090.
0. New structures and additions to existing structures within a designated Historic District
which exceeds the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA), subject to the general
regulations set forth in Section 18.24.040.
P. Temporary uses.
Q. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existing structures and authorized
pursuant to Section 18.72.180.
SECTION 3. Chapter 18.28.030 [R-3 High Density Multifamily Residential District] of the
Ashland Land Use Ordinance, is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.28.030 Conditional Uses
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with
the Chapter on Conditional Use Permits:
A. Churches and similar religious institutions.
B. Parochial and private schools, business, dancing, trade, technical or similar schools.
C. Manufactured housing developments, subject to Chapter 18.84.
D. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs.
E. Professional offices or clinics for an accountant, architect, attorney, dentist, designer,
doctor, or other practitioner of the healing arts, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster,
investment or management counselor or surveyor.
F. Hospitals, rest, nursing and convalescent homes.
G. Limited personal service establishments in the home, such as beauticians, masseurs, and
the uses listed in subsection E.above.
H. Wholesale plant nurseries, including accessory structures.
I m_a 2624 83, 1991; DELETED Or-d 2942 SS;2007)
1. Traveler's accommodations, subject to the following:
1. That-a-All residences used for travelers accommodation must be business-owner
occupied. During operation of a traveler's accommodation, the property on which
the traveler's accommodation is sited must be the primary residence of the
Ordinance No. Page 7 of 12
business-owner. The business e e shall be _ red to _ side on the «
oeetipied by the " iteeemmedation, and oeetipaney shall be determined as the traveler's-
iiep.RFAMRdation location being the pFifnar)'Fesidenee of the owner dwing operation e
"Business-owner" shall be defined as a person or persons who
the own the property and accommodation outright; or who have entered into a lease
agreement with the property owner(s) allowing for the operation of the
accommodation. Such lease agreement must to-specifically state that the property
owner is not involved in the day to day operation or financial management of the
accommodation, and that the business-owner is wholly responsible for all operations
associated with the accommodation, and has actual ownership of the business. (ORD
2806 S1, 1997)
2. The property is located within 200 feet of a boulevard, avenue, neighborhood
collector as identified on the official Street Dedication Map in the City's
Comprehensive Plan. Distances to the property from a boulevard, avenue or
neighborhood collector, shall be measured via a public street or public alley to a
lot line.
3.4. That the number of accommodation units allowed shall be determined by the
following criteria:
a. That the total number of units, including the business-owner's a~N%e:'s unit, shall
be determined by dividing the total square footage of the lot by 1800 sq. ft.
Contiguous lots under the same ownership may be combined to increase lot area
and the number of units, but not in excess of the maximum established by this
ordinance. The maximum number of accommodation units shall not exceed n
9 per approved traveler's accommodation with primary lot frontage on a
boulevard e#erial streets. For traveler's accommodations without primary lot
frontage on a designated boulevard, but within 200 feet of a boulevard, avenue
or neighborhood collector street, the TIlte-maximum number of units shall be
seven.-7-32Fft13pf@Ved-tFayele"a-^a^uc^vn «.,.,7.,t:,.« ...:tl....:a1.,...a l,.t
streets; Itentage on designated eelleeteF e
having y Restage en aii atterial and within 200 F et of nn ...+e..:..1. Street
designations shall be as determined by the official Street Dedication Map of the
Ashland Comprehensive Plan. Distances to the property from a boulevard,
avenue or neighborhood collector, shall be measured via a public street or
public alley to a lot line. Diet..«vee =hell he measured e public feet eM alley
to the Site C em the ealleetor of arterial.
b. Excluding the business-owner's unit and the area of the structure it will occupy,
there must be at least 400 sq. ft. of gross interior floor space remaining per unit.
4.5 That the primary residence on the site be at least 20 years old. The primary residence
may be altered and adapted for traveler's accommodation use, including expansion of
floor area. Additional structures may be allowed to accommodate additional units, but
must be in conformance with all setbacks and lot coverage of the underlying zone.
5.2 That eaea Each accommodation unit shell must have 1 off-street parking space and
the owners business-owner's unit shell must have two (2) parking spaces. All spaces
shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Off Street Parking section of this
Title.
Ordinance No. Page 8 of 12
L.3-. That only one ground or wall sign, constructed of a non-plastic material, non-interior
illuminated of 6 sq. ft. maximum size is be allowed. Any exterior illumination of
signage shall be installed such that it does not directly illuminate any residential
structures adjacent or nearby the traveler's accommodation in violation of 18.72.110.
7.6: Transfer of business-ownership of a traveler's accommodation shall be subject to all
requirements of this section and conformance with the criteria of this section. All
traveler' s accommodations receiving their initial approvals prior to the effective date
of this ordinance shall be considered as approved, conforming uses, with all previous
approvals, conditions and requirements remaining in effect upon change of business-
ownership. Any further modifications beyond the existing approvals shall be in
conformance with all requirements of this section.
8.-7-. An annual inspection by the Jackson County Health Department shall be conducted
as required by the laws of Jackson County or the State of Oregon.
v. a uu, the li, vli,., aJ on .r,ua.u the traveler's
designated in the City's
a.vaup,,.......o..,, Plan. am,sa..wo o..w.l be urv°°°,.ed ••ubli.. street or alley
aeeess to the site from the eelleetor or arterial.
9. Traveler's accommodations must meet all applicable building, fire and related
safety codes at all times and must be inspected by the fire department before
occupancy following approval of a conditional use permit and periodically
thereafter pursuant to Chapter 15.28.
10. The business-owner must maintain a city business license and pay all transient
occupancy tax in accordance with Chapter 4.24 and Chapter 6.04 of this code as
required.
11. Advertising for any traveler's accommodation must include the City of Ashland
Planning Action number assigned to the land use approval.
12. Presenting or offering the availability of residential property for use as a
travelers accommodation without a valid Conditional Use Permit approval,
current business license, and Transient Occupancy Tax registration is prohibited
and shall be subject to enforcement procedures.
I Short Term Home Rental, subject to the following:
General Requirements
1. Rental of less than an entire dwelling unit is not subject to the requirements of
this Section 18.24.030K,.
2. Not more than one dwelling per parcel may be used as a short-term home rental.
3. The property must be located within 200 feet of a boulevard, avenue,
neighborhood collector as identified on the official Street Dedication Map, or is
within the boundaries of Ashland's Historic District as designated in the City's
Comprehensive Plan. Distances to the property from a boulevard, avenue or
neighborhood collector, shall be measured via a public street or public alley to a
lot line.
Ordinance No. ' Page 9 of 12
4. The dwelling used for the short term home rental shall be at least 20 years old.
The dwelling may be altered and adapted for a short term home rental use,
including expansion of floor area.
5. The total number of occupants staving overnight in the short-term home rental at
any one time must not be greater than two times the number of bedrooms plus
two persons, up to a maximum of ten (10) persons.
6. A minimum of two off-street parking spaces must be provided for the short-term
home rental.
Management
7. The conditional use permit for the short-term home rental must be in the name
of the owner-applicant, who shall be an owner of the real property upon which
the short-term home rental is operated. One person may be holder of not more
than one conditional use permit for a short term home rental. The conditional
use permit is transferable upon a change in ownership through the ministerial
procedure, and shall be subject to all requirements and criteria of this section.
8. The owner-applicant must on file with the city the name, telephone number, and
email address of a local contact person responsible for responding to questions
or concerns regarding the operation of the short-term home rental.
a. The information required above must be posted in a conspicuous location
inside the short-term home rental dwelling.
b. The local contact person must be available twenty-four hours a day to accept
telephone calls and respond to the short-term home rental matters within
thirty (30) minutes when the short term home rental is rented and occupied.
9. Prior to April 131 for each of the three years following approval of the conditional
use permit or with a change in local contact, the owner must provide written
notice to all neighboring property owners within a two-hundred (200) foot
distance from the parcel on which the short-term home rental is located and
include the following information:
a. The name, telephone number and email address of the local contact person
provided to the city pursuant to subsection K(8) of this section.
b. The maximum number of occupants permitted to stay overnight in the short-
term home rental unit.
c._ A copy of the conditions of approval and Planning Action number for the
Conditional Use Permit approving the short-term home rental.
d. Contact information for the city official that members of the public may
resort violations of the short-term home rental regulations or conditions of
approval attached to the short-term home rental.
10. The owner-applicant must post "house policies" within each guest bedroom. The
house policies must be included in the rental agreement, which must be signed by
the renter and enforced by the owner applicant or the owner-applicant's
designated contact person. The house policies at a minimum must include the
following provisions:
Ordinance No. Page 10 of 12
a. Quiet hours must be maintained from 10:00 p.m. to7:00 a.m., during which
noise within or outside the short-term home rental dwelling shall not disturb
anyone on a neighboring property.
b. Amplified sound that is audible beyond the property boundaries of the short-
term home rental dwelling is prohibited.
c. Vehicles must be parked in the designated parking areas.
d. Parties or group gatherings must be limited to two times the number of
occupants permitted to stay overnight in the short-term home rental dwelling
pursuant to subsection K(5) of this section.
11. The owner-applicant must use best efforts to ensure that the occupants and/or
guests of the short-term home rental do not create unreasonable noise or
disturbances. Upon notification that occupants and/or guests of the short-term
home rental have created unreasonable noise or disturbances, or committed
violations of this code, the owner must promptly use best efforts to prevent a
recurrence of such conduct by those occupants or guests.
Licensing, Inspections, Taxes & Advertising
12. Short-term home rentals must meet all applicable building, fire and related safety
codes at all times and shall be inspected by the fire department before occupancy
following approval of a conditional use permit and periodically thereafter
pursuant to Chapter 15.28.
13. The owner-applicant shall maintain a city business license and pay all transient
occupancy taxes in accordance with Chapter 4.24 and Chapter 6.04 of this code
as required.
14. All advertising for any short-term home rental must include the City of Ashland
Planning Action number assigned to the owner-applicant.
15. Presenting or offering the availability of residential property for use as a short
term home rental without a valid Conditional Use Permit approval, current
business license, and Transient Occupancy Tax registration is prohibited and
shall be subiect to enforcement procedures.
K. Structures in excess of thirty-five (35) feet in height, not to exceed 50 feet in height.
L. Hostels
M. Disc antenna for commercial use.
N. Enlargement, extension, reconstruction, substitution, structural alteration or reactivation
of nonconforming uses and structures pursuant to Section 18.68.090.
0. New structures and additions to existing structures within a designated Historic District
which exceeds the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA), subject to the general
regulations set forth in Section 18.28.040.
P. Temporary uses.
Q. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existing structures and authorized
pursuant to Section 18.72.180.
SECTION 4. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence
at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in
Ordinance No. _ Page 11 of 12
full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said
ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing
situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and
continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed.
SECTION 5. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance
are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the
validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses.
SECTION 6. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code
and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another
word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however
that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 2-3) need not be codified and
the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2013,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2013.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2013.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David H. Lohman, City Attorney
Ordinance No. Page 12 of 12
Short-term rental questions from Council:
1. What are the pros and cons of increasing the 200 foot requirement in R2 or R3 zoning?
Note that it appears that 200 was an arbitrarily selected number more than 20 years ago that
at the time seemed neither too long nor too short.
Pros: Allows more properties to be used as STHRs.
Cons: Puts visitor traffic deeper into neighborhoods, contravening the intent of the 200-foot
limitation. Creates inconsistency between existing traveler's accommodations (i.e., B&Bs)
and proposed STHR requirements.
2. What are the pros and cons for having the STHRs and B&Bs (traveler's accommodations) not
owner-occupied but owner living in the city limits?
STHRs are by nature stand-alone lodging facilities that do not have an on-site manager. A
traveler's accommodation is a lodging facility that by nature is the owner's primary
residence, in which the owner may or may not provide breakfast and housekeeping services.
They are two very different kinds of lodging facilities, appealing to those looking for much,
much different visitor experiences. A code provision requiring a business owner to live in
the City would probably not be Constitutional. The proposed code revision for STHRs
requires that there be a local contact person available 24 hours a day and able to respond to
matters within 30 minutes, but that local contact person need not be the owner.
3. How many current legal vacation homes are there in Ashland and where are they located?
Attached is a list of all of the licensed and permitted traveler's accommodations and hotels in
Ashland. Note that the short-term home rentals granted CUPs in the E-1 and C-1 zones were
permitted as "hotels," although they clearly are not. (The list provided by the Ashland
Lodging Association is not entirely accurate, although it's close.)
4. Can we have a map of all the lodging available in Ashland both legal STHRs and B&Bs?
Attached are two maps. One is a map of all of the licensed and permitted lodging facilities in
Ashland. The other is a map showing the location of illegal lodging facilities that have
received code enforcement letters since May 2012 and are still open code enforcement cases.
The vast majority of those are in R-1 zones. Note that there are no legal STHRs (as defined
in the proposed ordinance) in Ashland. There are legal traveler's accommodations, some of
which are stand-alone cottages, and houses or cottages in E-I and C-I zones that have been
granted a conditional use permit to provide overnight lodging.
5. What percentage of the houses currently being sold in Ashland are being sold as second
homes? Vacation homes? Long-term rentals?
This is a difficult question to answer, because there is no centralized database staff could find
that tracks this information and buyers are not required to provide it. Staff contacted some of
the larger realty offices in Ashland to see if they could tell us at least anecdotally what the
Page 1 of 5
answer to this question is as far as their buyers are concerned. Two responded. The table
below shows the responses we received from them:
Firm #1 Firm #2
Vacation rental 0% 0%
Long-term rental 20% <5%
Second home 5-10% <5%
Prima residence 70-75% 95%
6. Can we increase the 20 year limit to 30 years? What does the Historic Commission have to
say about this?
The limit can be set at whatever number the Council chooses. It appears that 20 years was an
arbitrary number when it was chosen. The 20-year requirement was not intended to deal with
historic structures, but rather to address potentially negative impacts to multi-family housing
supply. It was targeted at preventing vacant lands within a multi-family zoning district from
being developed for "new" traveler's accommodation uses and, as a consequence,
potentially eliminating the possibility for the land and structure to be used at a later date for
multi-family housing. The Historic Commission has not reviewed this.
7. Can the person who uses an LLC to own a property for the CUP process be referred to as a
"human person" so that there is no ambiguity?
This is already covered in the proposed revised definitions section of AMC Chapter 6.04
(Business Licenses), which reads: "Person. Includes a person, partner, partnership, limited
liability company or corporation"
8. Are there any conditions put on renting individual rooms within a dwelling unit (see
definition below)? Many B&Bs do exactly this.
18.08.658 Short-Term Home Rental Definitions
Rental of a dwelling unit in a residential zone for less than a consecutive 30-day term is a
"Short- Term Home Rental, " as is rental of a dwelling unit on two or more occasions within
any 30 day period Rental of individual rooms within a dwelling unit is not within the
definition of "Short-Term Home Rental" as used in this chapter, and the provisions herein
for approval ofshort-term home rentals under certain conditions do not apply to rental of
such individual rooms
Someone renting individual rooms within a dwelling unit would be subject to the existing
provisions of the City's Traveler's Accommodations ordinance, which requires the owner to
reside on the site in their primary residence. A short term home rental, as defined, is a whole-
house type of transient lodging. The visitor is required to rent the whole house (i.e., dwelling
unit) and cannot rent only a room or a portion of the dwelling unit.
8. What is wrong with the current ordinance(s) that governs this set of issues? To walk it
forward a step - what is it that the new ordinance(s) addresses that the old ordinance(s) did
Page 2 of 5
not address? - What I am looking for here is a straightforward outline that addresses the
question - bullet points and easy to follow. I'd like to see the direct correlation between
what the present ordinance(s) does not address and how the new ordinance(s) address
what is lacking.
A short-term home rental is a relatively new type of lodging facility that is not specifically
addressed in our land use code. Our code addresses hotels/motels and traveler's
accommodations (B&Bs). The STHRs that are permitted in the E-1 and C-1 zones were
essentially treated as "motels" when they applied for and received their CUPS. Most of these
CUPS were granted many years ago. Only two have been granted since 2009. These
ordinances are an effort to address something that is not explicitly addressed in the code so
there can be no confusion as to what is and is not permitted and what rules and regulations
govern this kind of land use. Though not done in bullet point/outline form, attached is a
revised matrix that shows what is in the current code with regard to STHRs in R-2 and R-3
zones, what is proposed and how it compares to current regulations that apply to traveler's
accommodations.
What is lacking in the current land use code is any regulation of STHRs in residential zones.
The Council certainly has the option of maintaining the status quo, in which case we will
make our best efforts at enforcement.
9. Do we really need the 20-year age stipulation for structures?
This is purely a judgment call on the part of the Council. Eliminating the 20-year age
stipulation may result in the design, approval and construction of new travelers
accommodations and short term home rentals that, due to their design, may be impractical to
convert back to residential.
10. Can "business equality" (B&B vs. STHR) be objectively achieved? What are the primary
considerations?
Whether equality is objectively achieved is a judgment call on the part of the Council. The
primary considerations, based on the public input and the review of the Planning
Commission, are those shown on the attached matrix.
11. Is there quantifiable evidence of lodging undersupply and unmet demand? (Is the need and
call for action based on perception or reality?)
There is no quantifiable evidence of which staff is aware. The closest thing we have to such
evidence is Rebecca Reid's 2011 study of the Ashland lodging industry which determined
the City had a 75% occupancy rate during the 2010 July-September peak season (down from
84% in 2007, arguably due to the recession). Her study did not include STHRs and it did
not provide a breakout of occupancy rates by type of lodging facility. The study does show
that 42% of B&Bs and 53% of hotels/motels had occupancy rates in excess of 75%. (For
comparison purposes, Travel Oregon reports the occupancy rate in Jackson County in June
2013 was 72.9%. The agency does not provide a breakout by city.) There is also a
legitimate question - again, a call for the Council to make - as to whether "unmet demand"
Page 3 of 5
is a criterion for accepting or rejecting this type of modification to our land use code or, if
this modification is approved, accepting or rejecting a CUP application. That is, if someone
submitted a land use application to build a grocery store, we would not require them to
prove unmet demand before approving the application. Clearly, this situation is different,
given the legitimate public interest in preserving housing stock for owner- and long-term-
rental-occupancy. But there is also a legitimate public interest in having a variety of safe,
affordable and legal lodging options in Ashland, given our dependence on tourism. Which
of these public interests should take precedence over the other, and how to protect, regulate
and balance these public interests, is a judgment call for the Council to make.
The "call for action" is based on the perception that STHRs in residential zones are here to
stay and that our fundamental choice is to either regulate them in a way that is fair to all
concerned or prohibit them and continue what may be a Sisyphean code enforcement effort.
12. How many STHRs are likely to be created by the proposed ordinance?
It's impossible to know. The ordinance as proposed would make roughly 1,500 parcels
eligible to become STHRs. Allowing any property in R-2 and R-3 to be an STHR would
make roughly 2,100 parcels eligible. Because of the time and expense involved in getting a
CUP, it seems likely that only a small percentage will go through the process to become
legal, but that is conjecture. We do know that of the illegal STHRs recently identified by
code enforcement, about a dozen are in R-2 and R-3 zones.
13. The general sense last week was the proposed ordinance language left too much to
interpretation and is subject to exploitation. Based on the feedback and lines of
questioning, does City staff have suggestions on how to address these concerns?
A representative of the Ashland Lodging Association testified on July 16 that the ordinance
is incomplete. The Association's August 6 position paper (attached) offered no suggestions
for fixing the proposed ordinance and instead suggested retaining and enforcing the existing
traveler's accommodations ordinance.
During Council deliberations, the following items were mentioned as concerns:
• On-site residency requirement;
• Including the entire Historic District in the area in which STHRs could be allowed;
• Business equality;
• Data on supply and capacity;
• Enforcement;
• Impacts on long-term rentals;
• Justification for the requirement that an STHR be within 200' of a major street; and
Justification for the requirement that STHRs be in houses that are at least 20 years old.
Questions around on-site residency and inclusion of the entire Historic District are judgment
calls that the Council has to make. Staff believes these issues were addressed in the
Planning Commission recommendation from last February, which was unanimously
endorsed by the Council and which became the basis of the ordinance that came to the
Page 4 of 5
Council in July. Similarly, whether or not the proposed ordinance provides business
equality (the "level playing field" that has been repeatedly requested by the B&B owners) is
a judgment call the Council has to make. If there is additional information the Council
needs in order pass that judgment, above and beyond what is provided in this Q&A, please
let us know what it is and we will do our best to supply it to you.
We do not have good data on supply and capacity beyond the 2011 lodging study. We
know that between May, 2012, and July of this year, we identified more than 60 illegal
STHRs in Ashland. Of the illegal STHRs identified by code enforcement, more than two-
thirds were located in R-1 zones and would continue to be illegal if these code amendments
are adopted. There are still open code enforcement cases against about a dozen illegal
STHRs in R-2 and R-3 zones that would gain a path forward to becoming legal. The hiring
of a code enforcement officer will certainly allow us to double down on enforcement, but as
explained at the Council meeting on July 16, we need to modify our ordinances as quickly
as possible to make it a violation to advertise an illegal STHR. This needs to be done
regardless of whether the Council adopts the proposed changes to the land use, business
license and TOT ordinances.
Impacts on long-term rentals were at least partially addressed in the Council
Communication for the July 16 Council meeting, as follows: "Utility billing information
was evaluated in order to determine the likelihood that properties currently operating as
unlicensed short term rentals, without the prerequisite city approvals, were previously
offered and used as long term rentals. Staff analyzed utility account information of
approximately 40 [STHR] properties and found that 16 (40%) were used as long term rental
properties over the last 10 years. Consequently, concern over the potential that increased
numbers of short term home rentals will reduce the supply of long term rental housing
appears to be supported by a review of utility account information." However, we don't
know how many single-family homes in R-2 and R-3 zones are currently used as long-term
rentals and how many are used as owner-occupied residences. (According to our Housing
Needs Analysis, 51% of the residential properties in Ashland are rentals, but the HNA does
not examine what the percentage is in different zones.) While it seems likely that some
homes that are not currently used as STHRs will convert to STHRs, it also seems likely that
the owners of some STHRs will not want to go through the permitting and licensing process
and those homes will revert to being long-term rentals. This dynamic is also moderated in
large measure by the marketplace. If too many homes convert to STHRs, the more desirable
homes will be profitable while the less desirable ones will fail and revert to other allowable
uses. The actual number that would be successful is limited by market demand, but there is
no reliable way to predict what that market demand is or will be.
The 200 foot and 20-year requirements are addressed above.
14. Can Council discuss and vote on considering R1 zone for short term rentals?
Yes. It would require a motion and a vote of the Council.
Page 5 of 5
e., S ENEVAD T Hotels (C-1 & E-1)
i
- L Travelers Accommodations (R-2 &R-3)
1 unit
MAPLE T Z 1 11-25
pl, ® 2-5
>100 '
Fq7 Q 26-100
o_ Z 6-10
WI ERS
- LIJ
if
~~sr~ Boulevards, Avenues, & Neigborhood Collectors
E HERS ST EH RSE T
o
o
3 ~ is G 9 AST.:
i 9 p w
7 0
E MAIN ST ~
~0 Y
~4 F O ~ i III
L a~
c
w
10
Oll T p ~A
F 1
Lj, 1✓ <
_ io
_ o
f1 - - rn j fL F
t'1 pp p J-
AS.L DST Y
it
xa
~ F
I w p 3 i
1\~
i ro N
2
~y
F
Data Source: City of Ashland Buisiness Licenses
0 900 1,800 3,600 5,400 7,200 Feet File: G:\comet-dev\platrrnirzg\LongRange\Ordinarices\Vacation Home Rentals\Working documents\TA-list-full_20130807
GIS Map: Bgoldman: C:\gis\9.2 projects\TOT TravelorsMap\TOT TOT-map- sites
PDF Map: G:\comm-deu\planning\LongRange\Ordinances\Vacation Home Rentals\Maps\TOT map-sites-08062013
~_j'
ST c, WNEV DASENEVAD ST
z
%
Unapproved Transient Establishments
J ~r
-JL
Advertised transient establishments operating
L
t l.._MWLE_ T without permits or land use approval
o~ Q i Boulevards, Avenues, & Neigborhood Collectors
~ I II ~ Fq~ Z
WI ER 5TH
I 7--f
I
_ kVE -
ER5 S~
\ - T I- ERSE ST
f _ -
'on
1. NCI I 1i I ~ ~ -
(TI - I J
As _ zI
I _
- I
f N~ i
I 4 or sr ~ o,' i 0
I ~ I 3 Y ~~~I
_ LLJ I m~ ' 1 3 MI p' o
Q~ W1ji f of z
al l ~i zl
(on
•i
_ AS E DST
AND
j I ~ JI
IY
zo,~~1,-
r
r
zl r I_ s & se
' ' -
1
` W'I
r ~ _ _rr ~ ~zo
Ip Q 1
= a I I~ can I ( ~1
r IL. f = a
0 900 1,800 3,600 5,400 7,200 Feet Data Source: unapproved 20130813.dbf
Working GIS file: bgoldman.: C:4gis19.2projectslTOT TravelersMaplUnapproved TA-map
PDF file: Glcomm-devlplanningV-ongRangelOrdinanceslVacation Home RentalslMapslunapproved TA-map_20130813.pdf
Licensed Lodging Facilities
Total Lodging
Accommodation Rooms Type Comment zoning Site Address
ANNE HATHAWAY'S COTTAGES 16 HOTEL B&B C-1 586 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND COTTAGES & VACATION HOMES 1 HOTEL 1 unit C-1 685 E MAIN ST
ASHLAND HILLS HOTEL 230 HOTEL C-1 2525 ASHLAND ST
ASHLAND SUPER 8 MOTEL 68 HOTEL C-1 2350 ASHLAND ST
BARD'S INN 90 HOTEL C-1 132 N MAIN ST
CEDAR HOUSE 2 HOTEL C-1 555 E MAIN ST
CEDARWOOD INN 57 HOTEL C-1 1801 SISKIYOU BLVD
DELAUNAY HOUSE I HOTEL B&B C-1 185 N PIONEER ST
FESTIVAL INN 2 HOTEL B&B C-1 550 E MAIN ST
FLAGSHIP INN 63 HOTEL C-1 1193 SISKIYOU BLVD
OAK STREET COTTAGES, INC. 4 HOTEL B&B C-1 171 OAK ST
PALM MOTEL 15 HOTEL C-1 1065 SISKIYOU BLVD
PLAZA INN & SUITES 91 HOTEL C-1 98 CENTRAL ST
RODEWAY INN 40 HOTEL C-1 2359 HWY 66
STRATFORD INN 53 HOTEL C-1 555 SISKIYOU BLVD
THE ASHLAND MOTEL 26 HOTEL C-1 1145 SISKIYOU BLVD
THE LITTLE HOUSE 1 HOTEL 1 unit C-1 675 E MAIN ST
THE MCCALL HOUSE 10 HOTEL B&B C-1 153 OAK ST
TIMBERS MOTEL 29 HOTEL C-1 1450 ASHLAND ST
WINDSORINN 91 HOTEL C-1 2520 ASHLAND ST
ASHLAND SPRINGS HOTEL 70 HOTEL C-1-D 212 E MAIN ST
CADBURY COTTAGE 1 HOTEL C-1-D 353 HARGADINE ST
COLUMBIA HOTEL 24 HOTEL C-1-D 264 E MAIN ST
LITHIA BUILDING VACATION RENTALS 2 HOTEL C-1-D 153 WILL DODGE WAY
SUITE 207 (NEW SUITE @ WINCHESTER) 1 HOTEL 1 unit C-1-D 207 ENDERS ALLEY
THE VICTORIAN SECRET 1 HOTEL 1 unit C-1-D 44 CHURCH ST
THE WINCHESTER INN 18 HOTEL B&B C-1-D 35 SECOND ST
4TH STREET INN 2 HOTEL E-1 230 FOURTH ST
ABBOTTS COTTAGES 8 HOTEL COTTAGES E-1 466 MAIN ST
ABBOTTS COTTAGES, Falcon 1 HOTEL 1 unit E-1 323 HELMAN
ABRAM'S COTTAGE 1 HOTEL 1 unit E-1 321 HELMAN ST
ASHLAND COMMONS 3 HOTEL E-1 443 WILLIAMSON WAY
ASHLAND CREEK INN 9 HOTEL E-1 70 WATER ST
BAYBERRY INN 8 HOTEL B&B E-1 438 N MAIN ST
BLUE MOON B&B 6 HOTEL B&B E-1 312 HELMAN ST
BRENDEN HOUSE 2 HOTEL E-1 431 LORI UN
HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS 65 HOTEL E-1 565 CLOVER UN
MANOR MOTEL 15 HOTEL E-1 476 N MAIN ST
MORICAL HOUSE GARDEN INN 8 HOTEL B&B E-1 668 N MAIN ST
PEERLESS HOTEL, THE 6 HOTEL E-1 243 FOURTH ST
RELAX INN 18 HOTEL E-1 535 CLOVER LN
Licensed Lodging Facilities
237 B STREET 2 TA R-2 237 B STREET
2ND ST COTTAGES ACT II 2 TA R-2 148 SECOND ST
A MIDSUMMERS DREAM B& B 5 TA B&B R-2 496 BEACH ST
B&B/
ABIGAIL'S BED & BREAKFAST INN 6 TA Cottage R-2 451 N MAIN ST
ALBION INN B&B 5 TA B&B R-2 34 UNION ST
ASHLAND ROYAL CARTER HOUSE 4 TA B&B / Cottage R-2 514 SISKIYOU BLVD
ASHLAND'S BLACK SWAN INN 4 TA B&B R-2 111 N THIRD ST
ASHLAND'S MAIN STREET INN LLC 2 TA R-2 142 N MAIN ST
ASHLAND'S TUDOR HOUSE 4 TA B&B R-2 271 BEACH ST
AUBURN STREET COTTAGE 1 TA COTTAGE R-2 549 AUBURN ST
BARKING RAVEN INN 1 TA COTTAGE R-2 900 IOWA ST
BARNHILL FAMILY LLC (Ashland Auburge) 2 TA B&B R-2 184 B STREET
BEAU SOLEIL COTTAGE 1 TA R-2 143 FOURTH ST
CC'S CITY COTTAGE I TA COTTAGE R-2 15 GARFIELD ST
CHAKRA GARDEN OF ASHLAND 3 TA R-2 348 N MAIN ST
CHANTICLEER B&B INN 6 TA B&B R-2 120 GRESHAM ST
COOLIDGE HOUSE BED & BREAKFAST 6 TA B&B R-2 139 MAIN ST
COWSLIP'S BELLE B& B 5 TA B&B R-2 159 N MAIN ST
HANNA'S HOUSE 1 TA COTTAGE R-2 39 FOURTH ST
HIGH STREET COTTAGE 1 TA COTTAGE R-2 60 WIMER ST
I LOVEASHLAND.COM 1 TA R-2 331 WIGHTMAN ST
JESSEL HOUSE 2 TA R-2 541 HOLLY ST
MAXFIELD'S 1 TA R-2 635 SISKIYOU BLVD
NIGHTINGAIL'S INN 2 TA R-2 117 N MAIN ST
OAK STREET STATION 4 TA B&B R-2 239 OAK ST
OUR HOUSE 1 TA R-2 164 B STREET
PARKSIDE COTTAGE - REID & CO. 2 TA B&B R-2 171 GRANITE ST
PELTON HOUSE 4 TA B&B R-2 228 B STREET
ROMEO INN 6 TA B&B R-2 295 IDAHO ST
SHREW'S HOUSE BED AND BREAKFAST 4 TA B&B R-2 570 SISKIYOU BLVD
STONE'S THROW BUNGALOW 1 TA R-2 125 WIMER ST
STUART HOUSE APARTMENTS 2 TA R-2 614 SISKIYOU BLVD 1-3
TERRA COTTAGE INN 1 TA COTTAGE R-2 60 WIMER ST
THE ASHLAND HOSTEL 10 HOSTEL R-2 150 N MAIN ST
THE IRIS INN, LLC 5 TA B&B R-2 59 MANZANITA ST
WISTERIA HOUSE 2 TA B&B R-2 453 ALLISON ST
ARDEN FOREST INN 5 TA B&B R-3 261 W HERSEY ST
CARRIAGE HOUSE 1 TA R-3 985 E MAIN ST
CENTRAL AVENUE COTTAGE 1 TA COTTAGE R-3 144 CENTRAL ST
OAK HILL BED AND BREAKFAST 5 TA B&B R-3 2190 SISKIYOU BLVD
TOTAL ROOMS 1281
Issue for STHR in R-2 and R-3 as Applies to Travelers Accommodations
Current Status under AMC Planning Commission Recommendation Rationale
identified b the Planning Commission BgrBs ?
Provides another choice of visitor accommodation, different from -
hotels and travelers accommodations (B&Bs). Applying for a CUP
and going through the process allows both the Planning
Commission, neighbors, and the applicant an opportunity to
Conditional use in R-2 and R-3 Not permitted Yes. Make STHRS a CUP in R-2 8 R-3. carefully review the proposed use and conditions of the short term rental
and ensures the owner is fully aware of the restrictions and
TA5 are a CUP in R-2 & R-3 zones
requirements, including securing a business license, completing
the paperwork to collect transient occupancy tax from the renters,
securing an inspection by the fire department prior to rental,
n,,fin, house r,,I,q and more
Conditional use in R-1 Not permitted No. Ordinance prohibits in R-1 zone, PC suggests Council may Council direction was to not allow STHR's in R-1 zones
TAs are prohibited in R-1 zones
want to study further.
To maintain consistency with existing TA requirements and to
minimize trips on local neighborhood streets. This requirement
minimizes additional non-resident traffic on residential streets. The
Located within 200 feet of boulevard, neighborhood collector N/A Yes. STHR's must be located within 200 feet of a boulevard, assumption is that as visitors arnve
in Ashland and are traveling on yes
or avenue. neighborhood collector or avenue; or in Historic District the major streets and then arrive at the short term rental without
traveling and navigating residential streets. NOTE: The proposed
ordinance does not impose this requirement on short term rentals
Located within the boundaries of Historic District N/A Yes. STHR's must be located within 200 feet of a boulevard, To encourage STHR's to be in walking distance
of the downtown, No. TAs only allowed within 200-feet of a boulevard, neighborhood
neighborhood collector or avenue; or in Historic District. reducing impacts on downtown traffic & parking collector or avenue
This requirement preserves the use of existing, vacant land for
multi-family housing, which is the primary purpose of the zoning
N/A. (Conditional use in E-1 and CA zones does not have to be a district. This requirement also ensures that single family homes
Dwelling unit used for STHR must be at least 20 years old 20+ year old house. Travelers accommodation must be 20+ years Yes. STHR must be 20-years of age. and condominiums
are not designed and built solely for the Yes
old ur ose of short term rentals for investments and are available for p p
long term occupancy by resident renters or owners. This
requirement helps to preserve the existing architectural character
Limiting the number of guests based upon the number of
bedrooms, with the total not to exceed a maximum of 10 keeps the
number of occupants close to the number the property is designed
N/A. (Conditional use in E-1 and C-1 zones sets no limit on total # to accommodate. It allows a formula of a four bedroom house
Total # of occupants = 2 x # of bedrooms or 10 max. of occupants. Total # of rooms is based upon # of parking spaces Yes. accommodating eight people plus two on
a fold out sofa. The Formula in existing code sets maximum # of units, but no limits on
provided.) current code requires new single family homes in Ashland to have # of occupants.
two off street parking spaces. While it is possible that a 10
member group using a short term rental may arrive in more than
two vehicles, a family living in a single family home may also have
more than can be accommodated in, two off street parking spaces.
N/A (For conditional uses in E-1 and C-1 zones, one space per TAs are required to provide off-street parking; 1 per unit + 2 per
Min. two off-street parking spaces unit, plus one for the manager. Travelers accommodations must Yes. Similar to Single Family home requirement. Require a minimum amount
of visitor parking business owner
provide one off-street space per unit plus two for owner.)
Precludes a property owner from purchasing a number of single
family dwellings (either homes or condominiums) for investment
N/A. (No limitation on the # of CUPS a person can hold for in an E- purposes and thereby reduce shrinking the inventory of long term
Only one CUP per person
1 or C-1 zone.) Yes. One per owner/applicant. rental properties available for people who want to make their No - Business owner must reside on property
homes in Ashland. It is also intended to limit speculation within
multi-family districts due to increased investment opportunities,
Fire inspection required N/A. (Fire inspection is required for hotels located in an E-1 or C-1 Yes. Require fire inspection. To increase safety for visitors unfamiliar
with interior configuration yes.
zone or for travelers accommodations in R-2 and R-3.) of structure and site
Advertising the availability for rent w/o CUP, business license It is not a violation to advertise a STHR in a C-1 or E-1 zone or any Assists with compliance efforts related to
transient Assists with compliance efforts related to transient
r accommodations through identification of unlicensed accommodations through identification of unlicensed Yes
and TOT registration is a violation residential zone without approvals in place. establishments establishments
I. GENERAL PRO AND CON ARGUMENTS ON STHRS
A. R-2 and R-3 Zones? What are the basic arguments for and against allowing Short-Term
Home Rentals ("STHRs" in R-2 and R-3 zones?
Arguments in favor of proposals to allow STHRs in R-2 and R-3 zones:
• The demand for Ashland transient housing of any type in the high tourist season
outstrips demand.
• The impacts of STHRs are barely distinguishable from those of B&Bs, which are
already allowed in R-2 and R-3 zones (subject to conditional use permits).
• STHRs are a distinct form of transient housing for which the demand appears to be
growing in absolute terms, as well as relative to other forms of transient housing;
accommodating that demand may help maintain and even enhance the City's tourism-
based economy.
• R-2 and R-3 zones are multi-family zones in which fairly frequent turnover of tenants
in Long-Term Rentals is already common.
• Unoccupied homes with absent owners tend to be neighborhood detractions; homes
kept up by their absent owners in order to appeal to visitors, some of whom become
regulars and friends of neighbors, tend to enhance neighborhood.
• Homeowners should be free to use their property as they wish as long as neighbors
are not harmed or unduly inconvenienced.
• An STHR is a form of home occupation; subject to permitting requirements in AMC
18.94.130, home occupations are allowed, in all residential zones.
o Note: A home occupation site may not have more than one customer
automobile at the site at any one time. AMC 18.94.110(E)(3).
• A homeowner whose principle residence is in Ashland but who is absent for several
months at a time, should be able to help defray high Ashland housing costs.with daily
or weekly rentals.
o Note: A possible accommodation to this interest by such homeowners could
be to limit STHRs to structures that are principal residences of Ashland
citizens. This limitation could be imposed in all residential zones or in R-1
zones only
Arguments in opposition to proposals to allow STHRs in R-2 and R-3 zones:
• Ashland's already insufficient supply of Long-Term Rentals would likely decrease
because some landlords will turn current Long-Tenn Rentals into STHRs because the
latter tend to be more lucrative.
o Note : The burden of obtaining a conditional use permit presumably would
constrain the proliferation of STHRs. Other possible requirements, such as a
limitation on distance from downtown or a limitation on concentrations of
STHRs within any one geographic area could provide additional constraints.
• Occupants of STHRs tend to make greater than average use of public infrastructure
and services:
1
o Utility records suggest occupants of STHRs use more electricity and water per
household than occupants of Long-Term Rentals.
o To date, experience in Ashland indicates occupants of STHRs use more on-
street parking than occupants of Long-Term Rentals. Presumably, this is
because some STHRs are occupied by multiple families, each with a vehicle.
• The number of B&B establishments in Ashland has declined in recent years as a
result of competition from STHRs and will decline even further if STHRs receive any
kind of City sanction.
o Note: "Leveling the playing field" by requiring conditional use permits,
business licenses, and payment of transient occupancy tax by STHRs may
improve the competitiveness of B&Bs and hotels/motels vis-A-vis STHRs.
• Residents in R-2 and R-3 zones reasonably expect transient lodgings not to become a
prominent feature of their neighborhoods.
• Residents in R-2 and R-3 zones generally want neighbors who care more about long-
term quality of life in their neighborhoods and community than visitors typically do.
• More overnight guests staying in a neighborhood generally means more traffic and
more noise for residents to cope with.
B. R-1 Zones? In addition to the pro and con arguments summarized above with respect to R-2
and R-3 zones, what are the basic arguments for and against allowing STHRs in R-1 zones?
Arguments in favor of also allowing STHRs in R-I zones:
• Allowing a few STHRs in any one neighborhood would be no more likely to detract
from neighborhood quality of life or community values than do presently unlimited
Long-Term Rentals.
• The stability and quality of neighborhood life should not receive greater protection in
R-I zones than in R-2 and R-3 zones.
• Available sites for STHRs are more plentiful in R-1 zones than in R-2 and R-3 zones.
Arguments in opposition to also allowing STHRs in R-1 zones:
• STHRs, like B&Bs and other significant business activities, should be kept out of
primary residential areas.
• Even more than in R-2 and R-3 zones, residents in R-1 zones have reasonable
expectations as a result of zoning laws that occupants of their neighborhoods will turn
over fairly infrequently and will take a personal interest in the long-term character
and amenities of the neighborhood and community.
II. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
ON THE PROPOSED STHR PROVISIONS
1, Why Change? Why consider any changes to accommodate STHRs?
Responses:
2
• To allow owners the opportunity under limited circumstances to generate some
income from the investment in their homes; the current Code does not allow a
homeowner to obtain a permit - even a conditional use permit - for an STHR in
either a single family or multifamily zone.
• To maintain or even enhance Ashland's appeal as a tourist destination.
• To partially accommodate apparent tourism market demand in a way that (1) provides
an achievable pathway to compliance (stated differently, provides a workable legal
alternative to blackmarket transactions); (2) reasonably limits impacts on
neighborhoods and on long-term rental housing availability; and (3) affords citizens
an opportunity to participate in site-specific decisions (conditional use permit
hearings).
2. STHRs vs. LTRs? Why should STHRs be regulated while Long-Term Rentals are mostly
unregulated?
Responses:
• Long-Term Rentals help meet Ashland's critical need for moderate-priced housing;
the supply of Long-Term rentals is likely to be diminished by conversions to STHRs.
• State law expressly permits imposition of a Transient Occupancy Tax on short-term
vacation rentals to help offset the costs of providing public amenities for tourists;
residents in Long-Term Rentals help pay for public amenities through other kinds of
taxes and fees.
• A Short-Term Home Rental is almost surely intended to achieve financial gain and
therefore warrants regulation as a business activity. One Long-Term Rental, on the
other hand, may well not be intended primarily for financial gain: It may, for
example, be due to temporary relocation or waiting for a qualified buyer to appear.
• B&Bs and other short-term lodging facilities similar to STHRs are similarly
regulated.
3. STHRs v. B&Bs? Why should there be any regulatory distinctions at all between STHRs
and B&Bs?
Response: While the two forms of short-term lodging are enterprise cousins, they have
slightly different characteristics and offer distinctive visitor experiences that warrant slightly
differing regulatory treatments. The few proposed regulatory requirements for STHRs that
are different from those for B&Bs stem primarily from the fact that the STHR owner is not
on site to actively manage the property and provide neighborhood continuity.
4. B&B owner on-site requirement? If STHRs are allowed in R-2 and R-3 zones pursuant to
conditional use permits without an owner on-site, should B&Bs likewise be allowed to operate
without an owner on-site?
Response: No. B&Bs offer a distinctive lodging experience, with more service and more
personalized hospitality than is available at an STHR or a typical hotel/motel. Having all
three forms of transient lodging affords visitors a full panoply of choices and thereby
3
optimizes Ashland's visitor industry. Operation of a B&B also provides an owner with a
full-time residence.
5. Employment zones only? If there is significant unmet demand for STHRs, could that
demand be accommodated exclusively in employment zones?
Response: Probably not. First, STHRs in commercial or industrial zones would likely not be
attractive to many potential customers because of lack of proximity to downtown and lack of
neighborhood "feel." Second, allowing construction of new structures or conversion of old
structures for STHR use in commercial or industrial zones would reduce the City's already
insufficient inventory of employment land.
6, Old houses only? Why should STHRs be limited to houses 20 years old or more?
Responses:
• - To preserve scarce existing vacant land for higher priority city goals, specifically for
multi-family housing;
• To preserve the existing architectural character of neighborhoods;
• To be consistent with current B&B requirements.
7. Within 200 Feet of Maior Streets? Why should STHRs have to be within 200 feet of
arterials (except within the Historic District)?
Responses:
• To minimize neighborhood "thru" traffic impacts by allowing STHRs only in the
vicinity of high-capacity streets.
• To be consistent with current B&B requirements.
8. Two rentals in within 30 days? Why should rental of one dwelling unit on two or more
occasions within any 30 day period constitute an STHR?
Response: If a house is rented to two different renters for 30 days or more within the same
30 day period, each rental is in fact for a term of less than 30 days regardless of the purported
terms of the rental agreements. This limitation is to prevent STHRs from being falsely
presented as Long-Term Rentals.
9. Whole dwelling units? Why should STHRs be limited to renting out the whole dwelling
unit?
Response: If rooms are being rented out on a daily or weekly basis with the owner on site,
this type of transient lodging is by definition a B&B and is subject to the requirements for
B&Bs, including the requirement for a business license and payment of the transient
occupancy tax.
10. Rooms in owner-occupied homes? Would rental of one or more rooms in an owner-
occupied home constitute a STHR?
4
Responses:
• No.
• Such a rental for 30 continuous days or more would be a Long-Term Rental not
regulated by AMC 18 and not requiring payment of transient occupancy tax; such a
rental would not require a business license if the rented rooms do not have a kitchen.
(See definition of "Dwelling Unit" in proposed Section 6.04.020(G).
• Such a rental on a daily or weekly basis (less than 30 days) would constitute a B&B
and would be subject to payment of transient occupancy tax, business license
requirements and the B&B requirements in AMC 18.04.
11. Conversion of B&Bs? Could a B&B be converted to a STHR?
Response: Yes, but the owner could not occupy the house because STHRs are only allowed
with the whole dwelling unit is rented.
12. Conversion of Long-Term Rentals? Could a Long-Term Rental be converted to an
STHR?
Response: Yes, if all requirements are met, including a conditional use permit and payment
of transient occupancy tax. As noted above, the burden of obtaining a conditional use permit
presumably would limit the number of such conversions. Other possible requirements, such
as a limitation on distance from downtown or a limitation on concentrations of STHRs within
any one geographic area could provide additional constraints.
13. Conversion of apartments? Could one apartment in a multiple-apartment complex be
converted to an STHR?
Response: Yes, if all requirements are met. But the owner could not have any other STHRs
in Ashland.
14. Ownership of multiple STHRs? Could one person be an owner of multiple STHRs?
Response: No. The proposed limit of one STHR conditional use permit per person is
intended to prevent this in order to avoid creating an incentive to convert Long-Term Rentals
to STHRs. This limit is also intended to deter artificial inflation of existing home values in
multi-family districts by precluding speculation in multiple properties with potential for
conversion to STHRs.
• Note: One person can own multiple Long-Tenn Rentals (with a business license if
more than one is owned); this is to encourage private provision of affordable housing
opportunities.
15. Ghost ownership of multiple STHRs? Could one or two persons create multiple limited
liability companies or corporations each owning an STHR and thereby get around the proposed
"one-owner" limitation?
5
Responses:
• Yes, but having to create, do the accounting and tax preparation for multiple legal
entities and having to get a conditional use permit for each site should minimize such
"gaming."
• The requirement that STHRs be within 200 feet of major streets would partially
constrain such "gaming."
• Assuming STHRs are permitted only in R-2 and R-3 zones, limited sites available for
STHRs in those areas would partially constrain such "gaming."
16. Enforcement? Will enforcement of whatever rules regarding STHRs are in place be
effective?
Responses:
• Presumably vigorous enforcement with the help of a new enforcement officer will
increase awareness of STHR restrictions and requirements and therefore increase
voluntary compliance.
• Enforcement still will be primarily complaint-driven; but a provision making it a
violation to advertise an illegal STHR would enable enforcement officials to uncover
and prosecute violations readily through Internet research.
17. Ownership of multiple LTRs? Could one person be owner of multiple Long-Term Rentals
and have just one business license?
Response: Yes, provided all such Long-Term Rentals are accounted for under one taxpayer
identification number.
18. Exemption for only one LTR? Why should an owner of two or more Long-Term Rentals
be required to get a business license (especially since up until now a business license was
required only for six or more Long-Term Rentals.)
Responses:
• Rental of more than one dwelling unit is unquestionably a business activity, not
unlike offering goods or services from a home-based business.
• One Long-Term Rental may or may not be intended primarily for financial gain. (It
may, for example, be due to temporary relocation or waiting out a real estate market
slump.) But a second Long-Term Rental is almost surely intended to achieve
financial gain.
• A rationale for allowing no business license exemptions for STHRs while allowing an
exemption for one Long-Term Rental is that one Long-Term Rental may be
undertaken primarily for reasons other than financial gain. See examples in
Cparentheses in the item immediately above. "
• Reducing the current business license exemption for up to five Long-Term Rentals to
just one would give the City much better current information about availability of
rental opportunities for residents.
6
August 6, 2013
From: Ashland Lodging Association
To: Ashland City Council
Re: Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.o8, 18.24 and
18.28, prepared by the planning department and supported by the planning commission
to create a new "class" of Traveler's Accommodation coined as "Short-Term Home
Rentals" (STHR) in the city.
As solicited by the Ashland City Administrator Dave Kanner, the Ashland Lodging
Association Board of Directors, on behalf of its 49 member licensed hotels, motels, bed
& breakfasts, short-term home rentals/cottages and hostel present the following
position statement:
If it ain't broke don't fix it
The questions to be addressed include the following:
1. How did this all start?
2. Who is asking for this new class of Traveler's Accommodation?
3. Why exactly are they looking to change this ordinance?
4. Who is behind this movement?
5. What's broken with the current ordinance that needs fixing?
6. What are the unintended consequences of making this change?
Preface:
There is no shortage of short-term lodging in Ashland. The demand for lodging, which
primarily comes from the number of seats at the OSF theaters, is a fixed number. The
information, the city has based its reasoning upon; to amend the ordinance is wholly
based on testimony from those individuals who have been breaking the law. A quick
poll of licensed short-term home rental operators indicates that there is plenty of unsold
capacity. In addition, there are many available homes in R-2 & R-3 zones that can
lawfully be converted to STHR without making any changes to the code. Changes to the
city ordinance must be based on accurate and reliable data;
How did this all started? The issue of unlawful short-term home rentals has been
brewing in Ashland for several years, ever since the city eliminated the Code Compliance
Officer position. Fifteen months ago, because of infiltration and sheer growth in the
number of unlawful operations and lack of code enforcement in all zones including R-1,
R-2 & R-3 became front and center. At that time over loo homeowners were renting
their homes unlawfully as short-term (under 3o days) rental to visitors. Notices of cease
and decease were sent to approximately five dozen homeowners in May 2012, over 15
months ago. Many of these homeowners have continued their unlawful activity and the
city has not addressed the issue of bringing said homeowners into compliance.
Pagel
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.o8, 18.24 and 18.28
Who is asking for this new class of Traveler's Accommodation? The
individuals who are pushing for this change are those who have been unlawfully renting
their properties, the absent out-of-town owners who bought homes in Ashland for
vacation home purposes, property managers who represent unlawful rentals and real-
estate investors who had initially purchased properties for the purpose of long-term
rental.
Why exactly are they looking to change this ordinance? As they have testified
in public meeting before the city council and the planning commission, the primary
purpose of these individuals are to rent these homes as short-term rental because they
make 3 times more than when they rented long-term,; and on top of that, they want the
ability to not live on the property, as required by the current municipal codes, simply
because most of these individuals are not Ashland residents and live out-of-town or out-
of-state. While there's nothing wrong with the principal of maximizing commercial
revenue potential the point is these properties are not commercially zoned. R-2 and
R-3 are residential zones.
Who is behind this movement? Early this year, VRBO, HomeAway, Tripadvisor,
AirBnB and others (who are usually competitors in the online short-term rental
marketplace) formed a coalition called Short Term Rental Advocacy Center,
www.stradvocacy.org. This is a well-funded lobbying group whose purpose is to
organize the local short-term rental owners (who are also customers of VRBO, AirBnB
and others) to influence local politics and change municipal codes to suit the needs of
the corporations in the online short-term marketplace. STRAC will appear to be a grass
root local advocacy group but make no mistake; this is a well-orchestrated move by
outside interest to protect their bottom line. Unfortunately for majority of Ashland
citizens, these out-of-town, multi-million dollar corporations who are making their
millions, from the same individuals who rent unlawfully, are meddling in Ashland's
affairs and are influencing the outcome. This has become clearly evident in the past
couple of months as corporate giants like VRBO.com have created local chapters of their
Short Term Rental Advocacy Center
(httn://www.stradvocacv.ore/local chapter/ashland-or/) in Ashland and are coaching
those who are unlawfully operating STHR to fight the city hall.
What's broken with the current ordinance that needs fixing? Nothing. Except
for some minor tweaking and clarifications that have been identified, there is nothing
wrong with the current ordinance as there are well-thought out and well-developed
processes in place for Short-Term Home Rentals (STHR) in R-2, R-3, C & E zones. The
difference between homes in R-2 & R-3 zones and those in C&E zones is that a homes in
R-2 and R-3 must be owner-occupied and those in C & E are non-owner occupied.
There has been a persistent misconception that Ashland does not have enough supply of
vacation home-style lodging options; and that this new kind of traveler's
accommodations will meet an increasing demand. In fact, Ashland has more than
enough lodging; and vacation homes far outnumber any other form of lodging options.
Page 2
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.o8,18.24 and 18.28
A review of the city's business license database reveals that out of 81 lodging licenses
issued by the city, ig are hotels and motels, 22 are Bed & Breakfasts, 38 are Short-Term
Home Rentals and 2 hostels. The 38 Short-Term Home Rentals and cumulatively
represent over 64 individual rental units (see included list). The reason for this
disparity is because one licensee may own more than one unit. For example, one
business license has been issued to Abbott's Cottages. Abbott's has g individual units in
3 locations in the city of Ashland. Additionally, 7 of the bed & breakfast facilities have 8
cottages that provide visitors independent lodging option, which brings the total
number of homes rentals to 72. Majority of these units are non-owner occupied.
Therefore, the rationale put forward by the planning department staff and the planning
commission that STHR is to offer visitor's "another choice" is totally wrong and
unsubstantiated. If a homeowner in R-2 and R-3 zone wants to convert his/her home to
a STHR and does not want to live on-site, he/she can live in the auxiliary unit of the
property or simply request a variance from the planning department. It appears that the
planning department doesn't want to consider variances and they rather overhaul the
code. The planning department has not done its due diligence.
What are the unintended consequences of making this change? As stated
above, the Ashland Lodging Association does not support an ordinance amendment to
allow a new "class" of Traveler's Accommodation as we presently have this lodging type,
however, for the purpose of answering the question of what are the unintended
consequences that the proposed ordinance amendment will cause, we offer the list No
one has the hard data on the salient metrics (capacity, demand and supply). If the city is
going to make changes to an ordinance that profoundly affects the economic viability of
every citizen (starting immediately and into the future); good and reliable data must be
gathered over time by which to make that decisions. Simply listening to those who are
breaking the law is not acceptable.
a) The proposed ordinance amendment creates unfair disadvantage and an unequal
playing field between various types of licensed lodging establishments;
b) The impact on the neighborhoods has not been assessed. Even though short-
term home rentals and B&Bs are presently allowed in R-2 and R-3, these
neighborhoods are still residential and are comprised of families who live year-
round in houses and apartments. They too deserve a balanced use of their
neighborhoods;
c) The impact on long-term rental housing has not been studied. There are many
families who live in rental dwellings in R-2 and R-3 who will be displaced by
passage of this ordinance. Removal of properties off the long-term rental market
for the purpose of STHR negatively impacts the supply of long-term rentals and
increases the cost. Ashland workers who cannot afford owning a home are
forced them to live out-of-town because monthly rentals are taken off the market
and rented unlawfully as STHR. On a limited scope, the planning department
staff has already substantiated this fact;
Page 3
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.08,18.24 and 18.28
d) Every business should be treated the same under the law. This proposed
ordinance discriminates against the owners of bed and breakfast operations
located in R-2 and R-3 zones and further creates an unfair condition by requiring
them to live on-site while the owners of the proposed new "class" of STHR will
not required to live on-site. This clearly discriminates against B&B owners. The
on-site living requirement for B&Bs were put in place 30+ years ago to prevent
out-of-town investors from buying multiple dwellings (mostly historic homes)
and operate remotely. Removal of on-site requirement will open R-2 and R-3
zones to absentee ownership;
e) The proposed ordinance amendment declares "rental of less than an entire
dwelling is not subject to the requirements of this section". This can be
interpreted that renting less than an entire dwelling is not regulated as it is not
addressed anywhere else in the municipal code;
f) The revised definition of "Traveler's Accommodation" is incomplete. Every
lodging establishment that accommodate a traveler, whether hotel, motel, B&B,
STHR, or hostel is a "Traveler's Accommodation";
g) The proposed ordinance encourages absentee ownership and will attract
investors who would not live in Ashland but would reap the benefits. Many of
those who testified for the change are already in this category. They either have
a second house or no longer live in Ashland, and have converted, or want to
convert the properties to investment properties. Ashland could easily become
another Sun River, Aspen, Cape Cod, or any of a number of communities that are
virtual ghost towns when their "season" is over;
h) The provision that one person can only own one vacation rental is un-
enforceable. As the city attorney validated at the July 16th council meeting, there
is no way to stop individuals from forming LLCs (at a cost of $5o each) and or
vest title in other family members' names, etc. We all know this can and will be
done to get around this provision. This provision will be completely ignored and
wealthy out of town investors will buy multiple properties and offer them as
STHR. Requiring the proprietor to reside on the premises solves this problem;
i) The provision that an absentee owner and or a property manager (who has not
been defined in the code) will respond to a problem within 30 minutes is un-
enforceable. Requiring the proprietor to reside on the premises solves this
problem;
j) The proposed ordinance amendment creates a "gold-rush" effect, where an
owner of a condominium unit who is first in line at the planning department
counter to apply for a CUP, will have a huge financial advantage over the rest of
the condominium owners in his/her complex;
Page 4
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.08, 18.24 and 18.28
k) Another obvious side effect of all of this is the devastating negative effect it will
have on property values.
Unfortunately the negative impacts of the changes in the proposed ordinance
amendment are not evident immediately and by the time the city realizes their mistake,
it will be too late and irreversible and by then the character and the charm that people
come to Ashland to experience will be altered forever.
In conclusion, approval of this amendment will send the message that if someone(s)
complains about non-enforcement of city ordinances, the city will change the
ordinance. This simply rewards those who violate the law. When effectively and
sufficiently enforced, the current ordinances provide a solid, workable framework by
which the city may strike a balance between the needs of housing its residences and
needs of lodging visitors.
Zoning laws and their proper enforcement establishes trust between home owners,
businesses and the city, and is critical to a healthy, thriving and happy community. Just
enforce the rules as they are and the city will benefit from increased revenue, the
integrity of neighborhood will remain constant and the quality of our travelers'
accommodations will remain high and profitable.
The council's responsibility is to make laws that are clear, concise and enforceable. The
laws should be applicable across the board and not prejudicially single out certain
groups. Protectionism should not play a role in making laws. City officials who have a
conflict of interest should step down.
Respectfully submitted;
Ashland Lodging Association Board of Directors
Abi Maghamfar, President
Lois VanAken; Vice President
Corrine Lombardi; Treasurer
Ellen Campbell, Secretary
Crissy Barnett At-Large
Barbara Hetland, At-Large
Annie Dunn At-Large
Attachment: I
Page 5
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.o8,18.24 and 18.28
Business Name' Address # of Rental
Units , -
1 237 B STREET 237 B ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
2 4TH STREET INN 232 FOURTH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
3 ABBOTTS COTTAGES 464 N MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 9
ASHLAND COTTAGES AND 685 EAST MAIN ST
4 VACATION HOMES ASHLAND OR 97520 3
5 ASHLAND AUBERGE 184 B ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
6 ASHLAND'S MAIN STREET INN 142 NORTH MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
7 ASHLAND'S TUDOR HOUSE 271 BEACH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
8 AUBURN STREET COTTAGE 549 AUBURN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
9 BARKING RAVEN INN goo IOWA ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
10 BEAU SOLEIL COTTAGE 145 FOURTH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
11 BRENDEN HOUSE 431 LORI LN
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
12 CADBURY COTTAGE 353 HARGADINE ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
13 CARRIAGE HOUSE 989 EAST MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
14 CEDAR HOUSE 555 EAST MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
15 CENTRAL AVENUE COTTAGE 140 CENTRAL AVE
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
16 CHAKRA GARDEN OF 348 N MAIN ST
ASHLAND ASHLAND OR 97520 2
Page 6
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.o8,18.24 and 18.28
17 CHOZU BATH & TEA GARDENS 832 A ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
18 HIGH STREET COTTAGE 358 HIGH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
19 TERRA COTTAGE INN 6o WIMER ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
20 COWSLIP'S BELLE 159 NORTH MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
21 DELAUNAY HOUSE 185 N PIONEER ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
22 NIGHTINGAIL'S INN 117 N MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
23 HANNA'S HOUSE 37 FOURTH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
24 ILOVEASHLAND.COM 331 WIGHTMAN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
25 JESSEL HOUSE 541 HOLLY ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
26 2ND ST COTTAGES ACT II 144 SECOND ST N
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
LITHIA BUILDING VACATION 153 WILL DODGE WAY
27
RENTALS ASHLAND OR 97520 2
28 MAXFIELD'S 635 SISKIYOU BLVD
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
29 ABRAM'S COTTAGE 321 HELMAN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
30 OAK STREET COTTAGES, INC. 171 OAK ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 4
31 OUR HOUSE 1641/2 B ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
PARKSIDE COTTAGE - REID & 171 GRANITE ST
32 CO. ASHLAND OR 97520 2
33 SISKIYOU HOUSE 630 SISKIYOU BV
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
Page 7
August 6, 2013
Ashland Lodging Association Position Statement
Proposed Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendment sections 18.08, 18.24 and 18.28
34 STONE'S THROW BUNGALOW 125 WIMER ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
35 STUART HOUSE APARTMENTS 614 SISKIYOU BLVD
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
36 THE LITTLE HOUSE 675 EAST MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
37 THE VICTORIAN SECRET 44 CHURCH ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
38 WISTERIA HOUSE 453 ALLISON ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
64
B&Bs With Cottages
ABIGAIL'S BED & BREAKFAST 451 N MAIN ST
1 INN ASHLAND OR 97520 1
ASHLAND ROYAL CARTER 514 SISKIYOU BLVD
2 HOUSE ASHLAND OR 97520 1
3 ASHI.AND'S BLACK SWAN INN 111 THIRD ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
4 BAYBERRY INN 438 N MAIN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 2
5 BLUE MOON B&B 312 HELMAN ST
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
6 COUNTRY WILLOWS 1313 CLAY ST 1
ASHLAND, OR 97520
7 THE WINCHESTER INN 35S DCONST S
ASHLAND OR 97520 1
8
TOTAL 72
Page 8
Dave Kanner
Subject: FW: Short-term home rentals '
From: Kim [mailto:wolf@mind.net]
Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 4:06 PM
To: Dave Kanner
Subject: Re: Short-term home rentals
Dear Dave -
It is our position that the current proposed ordinance as it is written is a great way to solve much if the issues
concerning vacation homes in the City of Ashland.
Some comments on the Vacation Home issue:
1. Limiting vacation home rentals (by not passing this ordinance) in Ashland does not and will not bring
people to Bed & Breakfasts. Most people renting vacation homes are looking for economy,
independence, making their own meals, have small children or/and pets and do not patronize the Bed
and Breakfast establishments. They are too expensive and limited for their needs.
2. The vacation home rule could limit these homes to those units that 1IAVE NOT BEEN used as long
term rentals in the last three (or five) years. Many homeowners operating vacation homes are just
trying to keep their homes and pay their expenses. Long-term rentals often do not bring enough money
in to meet the expenses of the home. It is not the huge money-maker rumored.
3. Many vacation homes will not ever be in the long-term rental housing market because the owners want
to be able to come and go from them for their own and relatives use. They are usually fully furnished
with family heirlooms and belongings.
4. My personal experience is that the long-term rental folks are far harder on the neighbors, the home, and
the neighborhood than the vacationers.
5. If the vacation home has a local owner or manager that should suffice for overseeing the home. We do
not believe living on the property should be a requirement in R-2 and R-3. Vacation homes by
definition DOES NOT have the owner or manager living on the premises. Most vacation home renters
want the privacy they do not find at hosted facilities and they do not want or expect to find the
proprietor on the premises. I know of at least two families that did not rent from a current licensed
vacation home here because the owner was on site.
6. Home owners renting their homes as vacation homes do carry liability insurance as a part of their over
all insurance package. You would just be totally stupid not to be adequately insured.
7. Most vacation homeowners would like to be paying into the support of the City. My conservative
estimate is that the City is losing $200,000 to 600,000. a year in occupancy taxes.
8. I have yet to see a single vacation home that could not pass safety inspections with flying colors. It is
just bad form to suggest these homes are in some way unsafe.
9. Ashland has a lot of empty homes in almost every neighborhood. These are the second and sometime
third homes to people who only spend some of the year here. Vacation homes at least have activity and
a sense of habitation to them. They do not pose a problem for the neighborhood. It would be like any
other short term rental establishment that needs to screen its' users. It is my experience as both a long-
term rental landlord and as some one who lives surrounded by rental units, that long-term renters pose
many more problems to the neighborhood than short-term rentals.
10. Very few short-tern rentals are large enough to have big, noisy groups in them. This is just a scare
tactic.
t
11. Ashland is not going to become " an empty beach town". The amount of work it takes to maintain a
vacation home business will self limit this option. We also have well-established neighborhoods full of
people who work and live in this community. We are talking about less than. Mof all-homes.in-__
Ashland - and that's including R-1 dwellings.
12. What needs to be changed (and may help the Bed & Breakfasts as well).
a. Licensing fees that are reasonable, including the conditional use permit process.
b. No requirement that the owner lives on the property (for B & B's too!)
c. Please do not over complicate an updated rule with more regulation than is necessary.
d. There should be amnesty for current homes operating without licensing so they don't owe back
fees and a moratorium for enforcement until this is worked out. There are a number of
homeowners who won't come forward and speak out about this because they fear the City so
much at this time.
Please support families and business in Ashland by passing the proposed R-2 / R-3 ordinance for
short- term vacation rentals and developing a similar ordinance (or the same one) for R-I as
well.
Best Regards,
Kim Blackwolf
z