HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-16 Housing PACKET
Ashland Housing Commission
Regular Meeting Agenda:
October 16th, 2006 6:30 - 8:30pm
Community Development & Engineering Services Building
51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR.
1. (6:30) Approval of Minutes (5 min) )njovuft!opu!jo!fmfduspojd!qbdlfu*
2. (6:35) Public Forum (5 min)
items not on the agenda
3. (6:40) Reports and Updates (35 min total)
Subcommittee/Liaison Updates
Land Use (5 min)
Finance (5 min)
Education (10 min)
Liaison reports (10 min)
Other Business from Housing Commission Members (5 min)
4. (7:15) Project Updates
None
- Lithia Lot information not yet available
5. (7:15) New Business
Review of current Pre-applications (60 min)
220-226 VanNess St. (4 unit condominium conversion) (15 min)
Grizzley View Garden Apartments (84 unit apartment and annexation) (45 min)
Survey of City Commissions (10 min)
th
Review responses as captured from September 26 study session.
8. (8:25) Meeting Agenda Items (5 min)
th
Forward items for the October 16 Agenda
Commission Coordination
October 24, 2006 :Continued Planning Commission hearing on Condo-conversion
ordinance
November 15, 2006: 6:00-7:00RVTV Housing Issues show:
November 20, 2006 Regular Meeting
Subcommittee meetings to be coordinated by subcommittee chairs:
Standing: Education- October 24, 2006 Î RVTD , Subsequent meeting TBA
Finance- Nov 13, 2006 @5:30-7:00
Land Use- Nov 9, 2006 @ 12:00-1:00
Pre-app Review if needed Î Nov 2nd, 2006 @ @ 5:00-6:00
9. (8:30) Adjournment
The comments of this pre-app are preliminary in nature and subject to change based upon the submittal
of additional or different information. The Planning Commission or City Council are the final decision
making authority of the City, and are not bound by the comments made by the Staff as part of this pre-
application.
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT SITE: 220-226 Van Ness Ave.
APPLICANT: Tom Giordano for Carl Wright
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE
COMMENT SHEET REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit to convert
DATE: October 11, 2006 non-conforming apartments into
condominiums (Site Review if
exterior changes or site changes
proposed. Variance if amount of
parking is reduced.)
ZONING: R-3, High Density Multiple-Family Residential
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: 25% of site, size, and species specific landscaping & irrigation
plan required at time of formal application. If existing landscaping has been subject to Ðdeferred
maintenanceÑ landscape upgrades will be required. Avoid using lawn. Provide irrigation system.
PARKING, ACCESS, AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION: Multi-family developments with 2-
bedroom units require 1.75 spaces per unit. Parking requirements from AMC 18.92 to be addressed in
the submittal materials.
LOT COVERAGE: A maximum of 75% if the lot may be covered with impervious surface.
SETBACKS: 15' for front yard excluding garages, 20Ó for a front-accessed garage, 10Ó from the front
property line for an unenclosed porch, 6' for side yards, 10' per story for rear yard -- plus applicable solar
setback.
OTHER: Staff has the following comments/concerns regarding the proposal:
Affordable Units
Numbers of Units - 25% of the units are required to be affordable for moderate-income persons
in accordance with the City of Ashland Housing Program. One affordable unit will be required
by the Planning Commission. An agreement is required to be signed after approval and prior to
the condominium survey identifying the affordable units. This agreement is recorded on the deed
to the property.
By-Laws - The condominium by laws are required to identify the affordable housing units in
accordance with the City of Ashland program and note the current tenants shall have the first
right of refusal. The by-laws are required to be submitted for review and approval of the
Planning Division prior to signature of the condominium survey.
First Right of Refusal - Current residents of rental units are required to have first right of
refusal to purchase the unit. Documentation of offer to current residents to purchase
condominiums shall be submitted with building permit submittals for interior work, and/or prior
to signature of the condominium survey.
Housing Information Meeting - Meet with Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist, 552.2076
for details on AshlandÓs Affordable Housing Program requirements prior to submission of
application.
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 1 of 7
Housing Commission Pre-Application Review Î Prior to submission of application, submit
preliminary materials to Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist, for review by the Housing
Commission Review Board. Materials should include the affordable units by location and
purchase price or rental cost (see Brandon Goldman for program limits).
Affordable Units Location - The application should delineate on the plans the location of the
units that are proposed to be affordable.
Building or Site Modifications
Any changes to the exterior of the buildings, additions, or new structures, or changes to the site layout
and landscaping require a modification of the previous Site Review approval. If any of these changes are
proposed, the plan requirements of 18.72.060 must be addressed as well as the written findings
addressing the approval criteria of 18.72.070. (See below) Finally, an additional fee is required of $859
+ $58 per unit.
Utilities
If a change in the public utility services is proposed, a utility plan needs to be created and reviewed with
the Building, Engineering, Water, Sewer, and Electric Divisions prior to submission of the application.
Plan must include existing and proposed connections to systems, meter locations, utility easements, and
copies of maintenance agreements.
Parking
There is not on-street credit available for this lot, as it has only 20 feet of available frontage on Van Ness
Street and 48 feet of uninterrupted frontage is required for an on-street parking credit. If a Handicap
Parking space is needed, the applicant would need a variance to reduce the number of required off-street
parking spaces.
Building Code Requirements
Meet with the Building Official prior to submission of application to review the most current code
requirements for condominiums.
Bike Parking
In accordance with 18.92.040, six covered bike parking spaces are required (1.5 sheltered spaces per 2-
bedroom unit). The site is required to be brought into conformance with current requirements. The bike
parking must be located in accordance with 18.92.040.I, and racks and shelters designed in accordance
with 18.92.040.J. (see below). Note that that each bicycle parking space must be accessible without
moving another bicycle. (18.92.040.I.6)
18.92.040.I. Bicycle Parking Design Standards
1. The salient concern is that bicycle parking be visible and convenient to cyclists and that it provides
sufficient security from theft and damage.
2. Bicycle parking requirements can be met in any of the following ways:
a. Providing a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers, or racks inside the building.
b. Providing bicycle lockers or racks in an accessory parking structure, underneath an awning or
marquee, or outside the main building.
c. Providing bicycle racks on the public right of way. This must be approved by City of Ashland Public
Works Department.
d. Providing secure storage space inside the building.
3. All required exterior bicycle parking shall be located on site within 50 feet of well-used entrances and not
farther from the entrance than the closest motor vehicle parking space. Bicycle parking shall have direct
access to both the public right-of-way and to the main entrance of the principal use. For facilities with
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 2 of 7
multiple buildings, building entrances or parking lots (such as a college), exterior bicycle parking shall
be located in areas of greatest use and convenience for bicyclists.
4. Required bicycle parking spaces located out of doors shall be visible enough to provide security. Lighting
shall be provided in a bicycle parking area so that all facilities are thoroughly illuminated and visible
from adjacent walkways or motor vehicle parking lots during all hours of use. Bicycle parking shall be at
least as well lit as automobile parking.
5. An aisle for bicycle maneuvering shall be provided and maintained between each row of bicycle parking.
Bicycle parking shall be designed in accord with the illustrations used for the implementation of this
chapter.
6. Each required bicycle parking space shall be accessible without moving another bicycle.
7. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking shall be clearly marked and reserved for bicycle parking
only.
8. Parking spaces configured as indicated in the figure at the end of this chapter meet all requirements of
this chapter and is the preferred design. Commercial bike lockers are acceptable according to
manufacturer's specifications. A bicycle parking space located inside of a building for employee bike
parking shall be a minimum of six feet long by 3 feet wide by 4 feet high, unless adequate room is
provided to allow configuration as indicated in the figure at the end of this chapter.
9. Sheltered parking shall mean protected from all precipitation and must include the minimum protection
coverages shown in the figure at the end of this chapter.
10. Bicycle parking shall be located to minimize the possibility of accidental damage to either bicycles or
racks. Where needed, barriers shall be installed.
11. Bicycle parking shall not impede or create a hazard to pedestrians. They shall not be located so as to
violate vision clearance standards. Bicycle parking facilities should be harmonious with their
environment both in color and design. Facilities should be incorporated whenever possible into building
design or street furniture.
18.92.040.J. Bicycle Parking Rack Standards.
1. All required bicycle parking racks installed shall meet the individual rack specifications shown in the
figure at the end of this chapter. Single and multiple rack installations shall conform with the minimum
clearance standards shown in the figures at the end of this chapter. Alternatives to the above standard
may be approved after review by the Bicycle Commission and approval by the Staff Advisor. Alternatives
shall conform with all other applicable standards of this section. Bicycle parking racks or lockers shall
be anchored securely.
2. The intent of this Subsection is to ensure that required bicycle racks are designed so that bicycles may be
securely locked to them without undue inconvenience and will be reasonably safeguarded from
intentional or accidental damage.
a. Bicycle racks shall hold bicycles securely by means of the frame. The frame shall be supported so
that the bicycle cannot be pushed or fall to one side in a manner that will damage the wheels.
b. Bicycle racks shall accommodate:
i. Locking the frame and both wheels to the rack with a high-security U-shaped shackle lock, if the
bicyclists removes the front wheel; and
ii. Locking the frame and one wheel to the rack with a high-security U-shaped shackle lock, if the
bicyclists leaves both wheels on the bicycle; and
iii. Locking the frame and both wheels to the rack with a chain or cable not longer than 6 feet
without removal of the front wheel.
c. Paving and Surfacing. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced in the same manner as the
automobile parking area or with a minimum of two inch thickness of hard surfacing (i.e., asphalt,
concrete, pavers, or similar material) and shall be relatively level. This surface will be maintained in
a smooth, durable, and well-drained condition.
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 3 of 7
Neighborhood Outreach
Planning Staff would strongly encourage that the applicants or their agent approach affected neighbors,
make them aware of the proposal, and try to address any concerns as early in the process as possible.
Written Findings/Burden of Proof
This pre-application conference is intended to highlight significant issues of concern to staff and bring
them to the applicant(s)Ó attention prior to their preparing a formal application. Applicants are advised
that written findings addressing the ordinance criteria are required, and the applicable criteria and
required plans are explained in writing below. Applicants are also encouraged to consider enlisting the
services of a private professional land-use planner to prepare their application. The burden of proof is on
the applicant(s) to ensure that all applicable criteria are addressed in writing and that all required maps,
written findings, and other materials are submitted even if those items were not discussed in specific,
itemized detail during this initial pre-application conference.
BUILDING DEPT: See attached comments. Contact Mike Broomfield of the Building Division for
further information - 552.2073.
ENGINEERING: See attached comments. Contact Jim Olson of the Engineering Division for further
information - 552.2412.
ENERGY CONSERVATION: See attached comments. Contact Robbin Pearce of Conservation
Services for further information - 552.2062.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: See attached comments. Contact Margueritte Hickman of the Fire Department
for further information - 552.2229.
STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION: No comments. Contact Jim Olson of the Engineering
Division for further information - 552.2412.
WATER AND SEWER SERVICE: See attached comments. Contact Terri Ellis of the Water Quality
Division for further information - 552.23335.
STORM WATER DRAINAGE: No comments. Contact Jim Olson of the Engineering Division for
further information - 552.2412.
ELECTRIC SERVICE: See attached comments. Contact the Electric Department for further
information Î 488.5357.
CODE COMPLIANCE: No Comments. Contact Adam Hanks of the Community Development
Division for further information Î 552.2046
HOUSING COMMISSION: See attached comments. Contact staff liaison Brandon Goldman for
further information Î 552.2076
HISTORIC COMMISSION: See attached comments. The Historic Commission Review Board meets
every Thursday afternoon beginning at 3:15 p.m. by appointment in the Lithia Room in the Public
Works and Community Development Building located at 51 Winburn Way. The full Historic
Commission meets the first Wednesday of every month at 7:30 in the Siskiyou Room in the Public
Works and Community Development Building.
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 4 of 7
Application Process:
Type I Permit
Two copies of plans as required in 18.104.040 for the Conditional Use Permit
A. The plan or drawing accompanying the application shall include the following information:
1. Vicinity map.
2. North arrow.
3. Depiction and names of all streets abutting the subject property.
4. Depiction of the subject property, including the dimensions of all lot lines.
5. Location and use of all buildings existing and proposed on the subject property and schematic
architectural elevations of all proposed structures.
6. Location of all parking areas, parking spaces, and ingress, egress and traffic circulation for the
subject property.
7. Schematic landscaping plan showing area and type of landscaping proposed.
8 A topographic map of the site, showing contour intervals of five feet or less.
9. Approximate location of all existing natural features in areas which are planned to be disturbed,
including, but not limited to, all existing trees of greater than six inch dbh, any natural drainage
ways, ponds or wetlands, and any substantial outcroppings of rocks or boulders.
B. An application for a conditional use permit may, but need not be, made concurrently with any required
application for site design approval under Chapter 18.72. The provisions of paragraph (1) above are not
intended to alter the detailed site plan requirements of Section 18.72.040 for site design approval.
Two copies of the all of above required plans on 8.5" x 11". Note: The 8.5" x 11" copies are used for
the Planning Commission packet and for the notices mailed to neighbors. Please submit clear,
reproducible copies.
Two copies of written findings addressing the following criteria for a Conditional Use Permit from
Chapter 18.104.050
A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is
proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not
implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development,
electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through
the subject property.
C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact area
when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the
effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall
be considered in relation to the target use of the zone:
1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage.
2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass
transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities.
3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area.
4. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
5. Generation of noise, light, and glare.
6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
7. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use.
Two copies of Plans as required in 18.72.060 for Site Review (only if requesting Site Review for
modifications of building or site):
A. Project name.
B. Vicinity map.
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 5 of 7
C. Scale (the scale shall be at least one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet or larger.)
D. North arrow.
E. Date.
F. Street names and locations of all existing and proposed streets within or on the boundary of the proposed
development.
G. Lot layout with dimensions for all lot lines.
H. Zoning designations of the proposed development.
I. Zoning designations adjacent to the proposed development.
J. Location and use of all proposed and existing buildings, fences and structures within the proposed
development. Indicate which buildings are to remain and which are to be removed.
K. Location and size of all public utilities in and adjacent to the proposed development with the locations
shown of:
1. Water lines and meter sizes.
2. Sewers, manholes and cleanouts.
3. Storm drainage and catch basins.
4. Opportunity-to-recycle site and solid waste receptacle, including proposed screening.
L. The proposed location of:
1. Connection to the City water system.
2. Connection to the City sewer system.
3. Connection to the City electric utility system.
4. The proposed method of drainage of the site.
M. Location of drainage ways or public utility easements in and adjacent to the proposed development.
N. Location, size and use of all contemplated and existing public areas within the proposed development.
O. All fire hydrants proposed to be located near the site and all fire hydrants proposed to be located within
the site.
P. A topographic map of the site at a contour interval of at least five (5) feet.
Q. Location of all parking areas and all parking spaces, ingress and egress on the site, and on-site
circulation.
R. Use designations for all areas not covered by building.
S. Locations of all existing natural features including, but not limited to, any existing trees of a caliber
greater than six inches diameter at breast height, except in forested areas, and any natural drainageways
or creeks existing on the site, and any outcroppings of rocks, boulders, etc. Indicate any contemplated
modifications to a natural feature.
T. A landscape plan showing the location, type and variety, size and any other pertinent features of the
proposed landscaping and plantings. At time of installation, such plans shall include a layout of
irrigation facilities and ensure the plantings will continue to grow.
U. The elevations and locations of all proposed signs for the development.
V. Exterior elevations of all buildings to be proposed on the site. Such plans shall indicate the material,
color, texture, shape and other design features of the building, including all mechanical devices.
Elevations shall be submitted drawn to scale of one inch equals ten feet or greater.
W. A written summary showing the following:
1. For commercial and industrial developments:
a. The square footage contained in the area proposed to be developed.
b. The percentage of the lot covered by structures.
c. The percentage of the lot covered by other impervious surfaces.
d. The total number of parking spaces.
e. The total square footage of all landscaped areas.
2. For all developments, the following shall also be required: The method and type of energy proposed
to be used for heating, cooling and lighting of the building, and the approximate annual amount of
energy used per each source and the methods used to make the approximation.
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 6 of 7
Two copies of written findings addressing the following criteria from Chapter 18.72 for Site
Review Approval (only if requesting Site Review for modifications of building or site):
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for
implementation of this Chapter.
(Note: The following sections of the Site Design and Use Standards must be addressed in
the written findings if requesting Site Review approval:
¤ Multi-Family Residential Standards, pp15-16
¤ Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening Standards, pp27-28
An electronic copy is available free on-line at http://www.ashland.or.us in the ÐDocument
CenterÑ or copies may be purchased at the Planning Department front counter.)
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development,
electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through
the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in
Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999)
(2) copies of written findings addressing the following criteria for a Variance from Chapter
18.100.020 (only if requesting a Variance from parking requirements).
A. That there are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply
elsewhere.
B. That the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent
uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City.
(Ord.2425 S1, 1987).
C. That the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed.(Ord. 2775, 1996)
NEXT APPLICATION DEADLINE: October 13 2006
NOTICES MAILED: October 25, 2006
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: November 14, 2006
FEE: Conditional Use Permit $859
Note: If a Site Review request is included, an additional $859 +$58 per unit in application fee
is required. If a Variance request is included, an additional $1720 is required.
NOTE: Applications are accepted on a first come-first serve basis. All applications received are
reviewed by staff, and must be found to be complete before being scheduled at a Hearings Board or
Planning Commission meeting. Applications will not be accepted without a complete application form
signed by the applicant(s) and property owner(s), all required materials and full payment. Applications
are reviewed for completeness within 30 days from application date in accordance with ORS 227.178.
The first fifteen COMPLETE applications submitted are processed at the next available Hearings Board
or Planning Commission meeting.
____________________________________________ October 11, 2006
Angela Barry, Assistant Planner Date
barrya@ashland.or.us
541.552.2052
220-226 Van Ness Ave.
August 30, 2006
Page 7 of 7
The comments of this pre-app are preliminary in nature and subject to change based upon the
submittal of additional or different information. The Planning Commission or City Council
are the final decision making authority of the City, and are not bound by the comments made
by the Staff as part of this pre-application.
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT SITE: Ashland Street
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE 39 1E 11D Lots 101 & 1200
COMMENT SHEET (Grizzly View Garden Apt. Community)
th
September 20, 2006
APPLICANT: Architectural Design Works
REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Map
and Zone Change, Annexation, Site Review
for 84 Unit Multi-Family Development
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment & Multi-Family (currently) and
High Density Multi-Family (proposed)
PARKING, ACCESS, AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION: Residential dwellings require 1
space per studio or 1-bedroom unit less than 500 square feet; 1.5 spaces for 1-bedroom units
greater than 500 square feet; 1.75 spaces for 2-bedroom units; and 2 spaces for 3-bedroom or
greater units.
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS: Site, size, and species specific landscaping plan
required at time of formal application. Include street trees, 1 per 30' of street frontage. Also
include trees in parking area - 1 tree per 7 parking spaces. Avoid using lawn. Provide irrigation
system.
PARKING, ACCESS, AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION: As per the Off-Street Parking
chapter 18.92
LOT COVERAGE: 75 percent
SETBACKS: Standard setbacks for the zone -- plus applicable solar standard under 18.70
SIGNS: not applicable
Grizzly View Gardens Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 1
STAFF COMMENTS:
Generally, Planning Staff believes that the proposal may be appropriate to the site given the
proximity to already relatively intense uses, the buffering of the site by the adjacent uses, the
riparian corridor and rights of way, and the proximity to adjacent services which would mean that
residents could conduct many day-to-day activities without the need to use an automobile.
However, the applicants will need to demonstrate that a public need/benefit is met by the proposal.
Initially, the avenue staff sees for making this case would be to provide significantly more affordable
housing units than would be required for an annexation. Staff also believes that the applicants will
need to go Ðabove and beyondÑ in innovative and creative design and site planning, and suggests
looking at clustering the units to reduce the impervious surface and provide more usable, child
friendly outdoor recreation space in close proximity to all units as well as relating both the units and
the open space to the Hamilton Creek riparian corridor. Staff also suggests looking at on-site
retention of stormwater and considering the incorporation of bio-swales into the project open space.
Due to the complexity of the project and the level of detail initially provided it is unclear how the
proposal would address the approval criteria. Additional information addressing the issues
raised here will need to be provided, and Planning Staff believes several additional meetings
with staff will be necessary before a final application can be submitted.
Written Findings/Burden of Proof: This pre-application conference is intended to highlight
significant issues of concern to staff and bring them to the applicantÓs attention prior to their
preparing a formal application submittal. Applicants are advised that written findings addressing the
ordinance criteria are required, and the applicable criteria and required plans are explained in writing
below. Applicants are also encouraged to consider enlisting the services of a private professional
land-use planner to prepare their application. The burden of proof is on the applicant(s) to ensure
that all applicable criteria are addressed in writing and that all required plans, written findings, and
other materials are submitted even if those items were not discussed in specific, itemized detail
during this initial pre-application conference.
Neighborhood Outreach: Given the increasing levels of scrutiny for each project, Planning Staff
would strongly encourage that the applicants or their agent approach affected neighbors, make them
aware of the proposal, and try to address any concerns as early in the process as possible. In
particular, staff would suggest working with adjacent property owners who may have concerns with
use of existing access easements to accommodate the vehicle trips to be generated by 84 residential
units and the associated improvements necessary to accommodate these trips.
Grizzly View Garden Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 2
1. Procedural Issues
o Approvals Required Î The proposal requires the following planning
approvals. The plan requirements and approval criteria for each item
are required with the application. Approval criteria section of the
Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) follows each approval listed.
1) Comprehensive Plan Map and Zone Change, 18.108.060.B
Current classification of the southern portion of the
property is Employment, the request requires a change
to Multi-Family Residential
2) Annexation of 3.87 acres, 18.106.030
3) Site Review of 84 Residential units, 18.72.070
o 45 days Î The complete application must be submitted a minimum of
45 days before the scheduled public hearing at the Planning
Commission (18.108.060.C.1.a).
o Housing Commission review required prior to application Î
Applicants are advised to s chedule a meeting with the Housing
Commission for pre-application review of project concept. Staff
recommends meeting with the Commission as soon as possible, and
before submitting an application. Contact Brandon Goldman at 552-2076
to schedule this meeting.
2. Comprehensive Map Plan and Zone Change
o Public Need, supported by the Comprehensive Plan Î The application
will need to demonstrate that there is a public need for the proposed zone
change, as required in AMC 18.108.060. If it is the applicantÓs intent to
use affordable housing as a demonstration of public need, the project will
need to provide significantly more affordable housing units than would
already be required for an annexation. Application should discuss and
justify why the property is not suitable for a permitted or special
permitted use. The proposal will remove almost 4 acres form the CityÓs
inventory of land earmarked for light commercial development. The
burden is upon the applicant to demonstrate that this is not detrimental to
the public interest of maintaining adequate land inventory for a variety of
commercial and light industrial uses. What is the impact of the request
on the City of AshlandÓs inventory of commercial and industrial lands?
In the denial of a zone change for the old Croman Mill site, the
Commission took a critical look at actions that depleted land inventories
Grizzly View Garden Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 3
identified for job growth. The burden will be on the applicant to
demonstrate that the removal of land from the E-1 land supply is
insignificant, the characteristics of the site make it difficult to develop E-
1 uses, or the proposal meets another critical need (i.e. Affordable
Housing).
3. Annexation Approval Criteria
o Adequate Transportation Î The application will need to demonstrate
that adequate transportation facilities are to be provided to address the
needs of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit users. Particular
attention should be paid to addressing bicycle and pedestrian circulation
throughout the subject parcel and to adjacent destinations, and separate
pedestrian facilities (sidewalks/pathways) should be provided within
easements.
o Five-Year Land Supply Î The annexation will have to demonstrate that
there is less than a five-year supply of land for the comprehensive plan
land classification (18.106.030.H).
o Affordable Housing Î Minimum affordability requirements are
addressed in AMC 18.106.030. All renters and buyers will have to
qualify under the City of Ashland Affordable Housing Program,
Resolution 2006-13. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, resale
and rental restriction covenants will be required to be recorded on each
property in accordance with the Ashland Affordable Housing Program
and City of Ashland Resolution 2006-13.
o Project Phasing Î Application should address project phasing, if the
project is intended to be constructed in phases. Specifically, the
application must address the timeline for the construction of affordable
units.
o Storm Drainage - A storm drainage plan is required and should be
provided for the review and approval of the Public Works Department.
This information should be provided to the Ashland Public Works
Department prior to making application and with enough time for Public
Works staff to evaluate the project engineerÓs recommendations and
conclusions.
Grizzly View Garden Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 4
o Transportation Impact Analysis - A Traffic Impact Analysis is
recommended to provide traffic estimates and identify potential impacts
to neighboring streets and to the level of service of existing intersections.
The Oregon Department of Transportation will need to review and
approve the proposal due to the potential additional traffic to be
generated onto a state highway and in close proximity to an interstate
highway interchange.
o Natural Features Î The extent of the flood plain and top of bank for
the adjacent riparian corridor should be clearly identified on plans
submitted.
o Tree Protection and Removal Plan Î An inventory of trees six
inches diameter at breast height and greater on the property and within
15 feet of the property boundaries is required with the application
(18.88.030.A.3.g and 18.61.200). The inventory must include detailed
information including but not limited to species and diameter of each
tree and drip line of each tree. The plan must clearly identify trees to
be preserved and those to be removed. Trees 18Ñdbh and greater on
proposed vacant lots require a Tree Removal Permit in accordance
with 18.61.080.
4. Streets - The Annexation and the Site Review approvals include applicable
sections of the ALUO regarding access, street and transportation
requirements. The Ashland Street Standards (a separate booklet) is the
adopted regulations referred to in Chapters 18.72 and 18.88.
o Connectivity Î The Ashland Street Standards include Street
Connectivity standards that must be addressed by the application.
Streets are required to be interconnected unless physical features of
land create severe constraints. Interconnection is required to reduce
travel distance, promote the use of alternative modes, provide for
efficient provision of utilities and emergency services and to provide
multiple travel routes.
o The Street Standards require a grid or modified grid pattern based on
traditional development patterns. Cul-de-sacs and other dead-end
streets are limited to conditions where topographic, wetland and other
physical features preclude connection. Where extreme conditions
preclude a street connection, a continuous nonautomotive connection
in the form of a multi-use path or trail is required.
o Dead End Streets Î The maximum length for a dead-end street is 500
Grizzly View Garden Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 5
feet not including the turnaround (18.88.050.C).
o Block Lengths (300- 400 feet) Î The Street Connectivity Standards
require that the layout of streets shall not create excessive travel
lengths Î block lengths are limited to a maximum of 400 feet.
5. Site Review - Site Review approval covers site and building design. The
development is subject to the following Site Design and Use Standards (separate
booklet), Multi-Family Residential Development, Parking Lot Landscaping and
Screening Standards, and Street Tree Standards. The following comments are an
initial review of the project based on the limited information provided (see
18.72.060 for plans required).
o Access Î As required in AMC 18.72.120.D, all multi-family development
which will have automobile trip generation in excess of 250 vehicle trips
per day shall provide at least two driveway access points to the
development. These driveway access points, and all necessary
improvements, will need to be clearly identified on the plans.
o Play Areas Î Play areas for children are required for projects of greater
than 20 units that are designed to include families. These areas should be
located so as to be visible and accessible to residents of all buildings.
o Landscaping Details Î Landscaping details addressing landscaping
requirements (II-B-3), natural climate control requirements (II-B-5a), and
parking lot landscaping and screening standards (II-D) need to be
provided.
BUILDING DEPT: See attached comments. Obtain all necessary permits prior to construction.
Please contact Mike Broomfield of the Building Division for further information at 552-2073.
ENGINEERING: See attached comments. Contact Karl Johnson of the Engineering Division
for further information at 552-2415.
ENERGY CONSERVATION: See attached comments. Contact Larry Giardina at 552-2065 or
Cathy Cartmill at 552-2063 of Conservation Services for further information.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: See attached comments. Please contact Margueritte Hickman of the
Fire Department for any further information at 552-2229.
Grizzly View Garden Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 6
STREETS AND TRANSPORTATION: Please contact Karl Johnson of the Engineering
Division for any further information at 552-2415.
WATER AND SEWER SERVICE: See attached comments. Contact Mike Morrison of the
Water Quality Division for further information at 552-2326.
STORM WATER DRAINAGE: See attached comments. Contact Karl Johnson of the
Engineering Division for further information at 552-2415.
ELECTRIC SERVICE: Please contact the Electric Department for service requirements and fee
information as soon as possible at 488-5357. An on-site meeting with the Electrical Department will
need to be scheduled, and they will develop and provide a preliminary plan addressing service
requirements for the site. These preliminary plan requirements will need to be incorporated into the
submitted civil/utility plans. The application will not be considered to be complete without this
information, and the applicants should allow the time (likely 4-6 weeks) for scheduling and
conducting this meeting and preparation of this plan in their considerations for preparing application
submittals.
CODE COMPLIANCE: No comments. Please contact Adam Hanks for any further
information at 552-2046.
Application Process: Public Hearings required
Type III Î Annexation/Zone Change Î Council is the Approval Authority
Type II Î Site Review Î Planning Commission is the Approval Authority
See attached materials for submittal requirements. Complete application including all required
written findings, plans and supplement materials required prior to submittal.
FEES: $11,470 + Any necessary variances or subdivision fees necessitated by the final details
of the submittal.
Comprehensive Plan Map Change $ 2,295.00
Annexation 3,444.00
Site Review for 84 units 5,731.00
Grizzly View Garden Apartment Community.dds
20-September-06
Page 7
HOUSING COMMISSION
Review of the ordinances/resolutions associated with the commission.
The following responses were provided at a Study Session of the Housing Commission on
th
September 26, 2006.
1. Is the purpose of your commission clearly stated and still applicable in the
ordinance/resolution? If not, what you are you doing that is different, what are you
not doing, what do you think you should be doing that is not stated?
Upon review of the mission (section 4 of Resolution 95-25) Commissioners felt
that it does reflect the functions of the Commission. A minor edit correction was
noted regarding the word ÐwiderÑ in reference to the range of residents where
members expressed it would make more sense to simply be Ða wide range of city
residents ÈÑ.
2. Are the powers and duties clearly stated and still applicable in the
ordinance/resolution? If not, what you are you doing that is different, what are you
not doing, what do you think you should be doing that is not stated?
Yes the powers are clearly stated and applicable however resolution 96-18
removed the CDBG oversight responsibilities (5c). This duty was re-assigned to
the Housing Commission in adoption of the 2000-2004 and 2005-2009
Consolidated plan for use of CDBG funds. Therefore this section should be
reinstated. It was also noted by commissioners that the Housing Commission
has a role in review of pre-application for current land use applications per
decision of the City Council in 2006, and a role in review and recommendation of
land use ordinance development per adoption of the 2002 Action Plan. These
roles are not addressed in the current powers and duties.
Commissioners suggested rewording section 5G to read ÐTo act in an advisory
capacity to the Mayor, City Council, and city Commissions regarding city
property, housing, and related issuesÑ
The Commission also discussed having a role in review of formal planning
applications
3. As a commission do you feel that you accomplish and succeed in carrying out the
purpose and duties listed in the ordinance/resolution?
There was general consensus that that there have been notable achievements
including: use the SDC resolution changes restructuring the affordable housing
program; land use ordinance changes including minimum densities; promotion of
use of public property (specifically air-rights) to support affordable housing;
recommending sale of surplus property (Strawberry) to fund affordable housing
projects; coordination with Parks to acquire a portion of property on Clay for use
as a new affordable housing development; oversight of the CDBG program and
affordable housing projects; public education (workshops, summit). The
definition of ÐachievementÑ was discussed as to whether number of units created
was an appropriate measure compared to legislative success and the
establishment of long term mechanisms to maintain affordability. Individual
CommissionerÓs noted that success is tempered by funding levels, staffing, and
market conditions. One commissioner stated that the commission would be
more effective if it limited what they look at and concentrated more on specific
goals. Commissioners also stated the Commission needs better collaboration
with other commissions and the City Council (see #2).
4. Does your commission establishes annual goals or has it established annual goals in
the past? If so, please provide a copy of those goals.
The goals produced by the Housing Commission include both goals identified in
the 2002 Affordable Housing Action Plan, The Consolidated Plan for use of
CDBG funds, and goals established by the Commission established through a
goal setting process. Each are attached.
5. As a commission, do you experience any frustrations or confusion with the process,
communications, commission work load, etc? If so, please explain.
Yes Î
As it relates to working with other commissions, specifically with the Planning
Commission, commissioners discussed the limitation on involvement on current
planning actions.
It was noted that the issues of housing have a considerable learning curve and a
breadth of knowledge is required and there is limited training.
The large workload makes it difficult to address all facets of the issue.
A number of Commissioners expressed frustrations on the limitations on being
advisory to something and having it drop off as a priority at the staff level or
having staff provide a recommendation that differs from the Commissions
recommendation.
6. Can you suggest any improvements in communication between your commission
and the City Council?
Deliberation at the Housing Commission level could be better informed prior to
items going to Council. Noting that any change in information should be brought
by staff back to the Commission prior to going to Council. Specifically a number
of commissioners sited the Lithia Lot RFP and discussed their frustration with the
change in legal opinion presented to the City Council, which if the Housing
Commission had benefit of that opinion earlier in the process it would have better
informed their recommendation. Commissioners felt that having an opportunity
to engage in a dialogue with the City Council, study session, as a conversation
rather than a report or presentation would be valuable. The annual 10 minute
presentation to Council seems to be more about the television audience and
seeing Ðfellow citizens at workÑ . Some commissioners expressed that a
30minute dedicated discussion at a study session would be more valuable than a
presentation.
7. Does your budget allow you to function the way you feel it should?
The Housing Commission expended their entire $750 budgeted amount last year
on sponsoring educational activities as well as minimal expenses on food for
Commission Study Sessions and costs associated with one large public meeting.
Other costs associated with the commission including printing and membership
dues ($500 dues to the Oregon Housing Alliance) were absorbed in the
departmental budget.
Aside from particular projects such as development of the Housing Needs
Analysis, Rental Needs Analysis, real estate services, and other Consultant
services which have been independently budgeted and approved by Council, the
CommissionÓs primary expenditures in 2005 related to educational forums. Most
notably the Employer Assisted Housing Workshop involved paying travel
expenses for an expert consultant to present as well as to provide advise to the
Housing Commission after the meeting. Her travel cost and 3.5 hours of
consulting time cost $1212.50 which was billed to the Consultant Services line
item of the Planning Budget. Such a cost should be directly attributable to the
Housing CommissionÓs function however there is not currently enough funds
budgeted for such expenditures. The other expert speakers fortunately came to
the event without compensation or reimbursement for travel and lodging. The
facilities for this event were provided by OSF without charge, the food was
provided at a $100 discount by Greenleaf Restaurant, and The Ashland
Chamber of Commerce also provided a contribution of $100, and yet the Housing
Commission expended approximately $400 to fund this singular event.
Commissioners expressed a desire to have Commissioner training funds
available to assist in addressing the steep learning curve associated with these
complex issues.
Noting the items above, the Housing Commission believes an increase in the
allocation of $750 would be valuable in assisting with the costs of public
education and commissioner training. Housing Commission members expressed
a desire to hold a minimum of one annual forum on affordable housing and
believe an increase in the Commissions budget would assist in making that event
feasible.
8. Does the name of your commission reflect what you are doing? If not, please
suggest an alternative?
Yes
9. Is the size of your commission, as stated in the ordinance/resolution, too small? Too
large?
Some commissioners stated that it is too small as it is to handle the varied and
sizable workload, others expressed that if it becomes too large it could become
cumbersome. Other commissioners felt that the size of 9 voting members is
appropriate and that there is not consistently a difficulty obtaining a quorum. It
was expressed that should the Council Liaison no longer be a voting member a
new commissioner should be added to have 9 voting members.
10. Do you have difficulty achieving a quorum? Do you have difficulty recruiting new
members?
Although there has been one meeting that was rescheduled for lack of a quorum,
typically a quorum is available. It is the CommissionÓs understanding that
recruiting members to fill vacancies is difficult.
HOUSING COMMISSION GOALS 2006
Housing Commission 06' Goals (Items not identified in the
Housing Action Plan Goals
Action Plan)
Goal 1-FundingLand Acquisition
A. Facilitate the Process of applying for funds by Non-Profits
(ongoing)
Vacant / Developable
B. Form Housing Trust Fund
Existing -Developed (including Vulnerable Properties)
C. Develop long term Funding Sources
Vulnerable Properties
D. Convene Employers group to develop employer assistance
approaches
Ordinance Development to protect vulnerable properties
Goal 2 -Reduce Development and Operating Costs
- Manufactured Dwelling Parks, Condo Conversions, HUD properties
A1. SDC Deferral
Land Use
A2. Limit SDC waiver total
Modify Big Box Ordinance to promote affordable Housing
B1. Reduce Planning, Utility fees
Establish Higher Density Multifamily zoning type
B2. Determine annual limit of fees waived
Increase Density Bonus for Affordable Housing
Goal 3 -Land Use
Conditionally allow ARUs in MFR zones
A1.Identify Land for rezoning
Reduce Parking Requirements for affordable housing near transit
A2. Identify target (city owned) site for vertical housing
Program Development and Review
A3. Feasibility of UGB amendment
Review Rental Assistance Program
B. Restrict Single Family in Multifamily zones
Review Down Payment Program
Improve monitoring of units regulated under the Ashland Affordable Housing
C.1 ARUs as permitted use in Single Family zones
Program
C.2 Reduce maximum lot size coverage requirements.
Document lessons from Lithia lot RFP, evaluation, and negotiation
D.Allow or Require a percentage of small lots in new
Planning Review Process
subdivisions.
Goal 4 -Preserve and Create Affordable Housing
Current Projects
A. Work with non-profits
(long range) Code review and amendments
B. Require long term affordability for fee waivers (IE 30 years)
Inventories and Research
Goal 5 -Develop organizational Capacity
Buildable Lands Inventory
A Create Housing Coordinator Position (complete)
Multifamily unit counts
Goal 6 Build Understanding and Support
Rental Needs Assessment
A. Public information program (Education ongoing)
Education and Outreach
Employer Assisted Housing Workshop
Tax Credit Workshop (or other topic)
Development of Presentation and informational materials, brochures,
powerpoints, visuals)
Establish liasons to regional housing groups including Medford
Housing Commission, JCHousing Coalition, SO Housing Present to various groups, boards and commissions, Realtors, landlords,
Resource Centerfraternal orgs, chamber etc)
Housing Commission Priorities
12-19-05
The following Priorities were identified by the Housing Commission
Subcommittees in an effort to rank which goals were seen as the highest
priorities in the short term. Although typically the goals are established by the
Affordable Housing Action Plan, the full commission and subcommittees also
added specific goals they deemed necessary to support affordable housing
preservation or creation
Land Use Subcommittee
In evaluating the various land use related goals the Land Use Subcommittee
separated the goals into low and high priority, and long and short term
designations. In some cases the subcommittee identified a ÐMediumÑ PriorityÑ.
The High Priority Short Term goals were further ranked by each member and
averaged to the following ranking.
High Priority Short Term
1) Land Acquisition
1) Restrict Single Family in Multifamily Zones
3) Rental Needs Assessment
4) Ordinance or Resolution Development to protect vulnerable (existing) affordable housing
developments
5) Recommend ways to improve regulation and monitoring of affordable units in program
6) Document Lessons learned from Lithia Parking Lot RFP and Proposal evaluations.
7) Unit Acquisition Î Existing Properties
High Priority Long Term
Identify land for rezoning
Feasibility of a UGB amendment
Allow or require a percentage of small lots in new subdivisions
Medium Priority Long term
Modify the big box ordinance to promote affordable housing
Establish a higher density multifamily zoning type. (Increased Densities)
Low Priority Short Term
Increase Density Bonus Opportunities for affordable housing development
Low Priority Long Term
Reduce maximum lot size coverage
ARUÓs as a permitted use in single family zones
Conditionally allow ARUs on small lots in multifamily zones
Reduce Parking requirements for affordable housing projects located within a designated transit
corridor.
Lastly the goal : Identify target (City owned) site for vertical housing was seen as
fitting in none of the above categories as ÐidentificationÑ is essentially complete,
but it should remain a visible goal to promote the potential development of such
properties with affordable housing
Finance Subcommittee
In evaluating the finance related Action Plan Goals the Finance Subcommittee
categorized the items into the following areas:
High Priority Short Term
Modification of the SDC Deferral Program
Inclusion of Engineering and Community Development Fees in waiver
Limitation of annual SDC deferral amount
Evaluate Section 108 Program to derive funding for an affordable housing project
High Priority Long Term
Establish a Housing Trust Fund
Establish long term funding stream
Low Priority Short Term
Planning and Utility Fees annual limitation on waivers
Low Priority Long Term
None
Education Committee
Specific Action Plan Goal (6a) relating to Education is an ongoing endeavor, or
are specifically in support of other goals (ie Land Use or Finance related).
However the Education Committee did identify some campaign strategies that
would be employed to address the public education goal:
Ongoing
Campaign: Letters to the editor
Articles
Development of a presentation (power-point) and informative materials.
Development of visuals on affordable housing
Speaking engagements and presentations
-Chamber of Commerce
- Realtor groups
- Rental Owner associations
- Fraternal Organizations
- etc.
Public Television (city talk or a show on ÐWorkforce housing works for AshlandÑ)
Establish an exchange liaisons with Medford Housing Commission and other
regional housing groups - Southern Oregon Housing Resource Center, Jackson
County Housing Coalition.