Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-07-13 Planning PACKET ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING July 13, 2021 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. June 22, 2021 Special Meeting IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2021-00028 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 364 Walker Avenue (Walker Elementary School) APPLICANT/OWNER: HMK Company for the Ashland School District DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission will conduct an initial public hearing to review details of the proposal and take public comments on a request for Site Design Review approval for a 22,450 square foot, single-story addition to Walker Elementary School at 364 Walker Avenue. As part of the proposal, the parking lot and drop-off lane would be relocated and expanded, with access to be taken via Hunter Court (the driveway serving Hunter Park) and a new courtyard would be created. The application also includes requests for a Conditional Use Permit to modify the School Distri-00899) to allow new signage for Walker Elementary School in conjunction with the proposed addition, and Tree Removal Permits to remove 20 trees. An existing 9,700 square foot classroom will be demolished in conjunction with the proposal. No final decision will be made at this initial public hearing; the item will come back to the Planning Commission for a decision at the April 13, 2021 meeting. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-5; MAP: 39 1E 10; TAX LOT #: 3600. VI. LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-L-2021-00011 APPLICANT: City of Ashland DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to review and make recommendations to the City Council regarding an ordinance adopting the 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis as a technical supporting document of the Housing Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. VII. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 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 1). ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES - Draft June 22, 2021 I. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Haywood Norton called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Michael Dawkins Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Alan Harper Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Kerry KenCairn Derek Severson, Senior Planner Haywood Norton Dana Smith, Executive Assistant Roger Pearce Lynn Thompson Lisa Verner Absent Members: Council Liaison: Paula Hyatt II. ANNOUNCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar announced the Walker Elementary School project would come before the Commission in July. Staff received an application for a 10-acre annexation off North Mountain behind the City yard that was tentatively scheduled for the August meeting. With the City starting to open soon, there was a possibility of having a Planning Commission retreat in September or October. The City Council will be the first to start in person meetings but have not established a date yet. Once they have a date, the Planning Commission will resume in person meetings shortly after. Other commissions may have the option of retaining electronic meetings. III. PUBLIC FORUM - None IV. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. May 11, 2021 Regular Meeting 2. May 25, 2021 Special Meeting Commissioner Dawkins/Pearce m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. V. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Housing in C-1 and E-1 Zones Mr. Molnar provided background and explained Mark Knox and Laz Ayala brought this to the Planning Commission of 2020. The City Council expressed interest and took formal action this past March. Staff engaged Fregonese and Associates and Scott Fregonese would provide initial findings on allowing housing in the C-1 and E-1 zones. Mr. Fregonese provided background on Fregonese and Associates, noting past projects with the City. He thought allowing housing in commercial and employment zones fit with the Transit Triangle. He gave a presentation on commercial space analysis (see attached): Ashland Planning Commission June 22, 2021 Page 1 of 4 Ashland Commercial Space Analysis Evaluation of Ground Floor Commercial Space in the C1 & E1 Zones Commercial Real Estate Trends Before COVID Current Commercial Real Estate Trends Office Usage Still Lagging Commissioner Verner asked about the need for smaller residential units as workforce housing. Mr. Fregonese explained some of the units in the code modification would be for families. Larger rentals made it less affordable. The rental market in Ashland had many single-family homes for rent. The Transit Triangle Overlay included 1-3- bedroom units. There was a need for multiple bedroom units. The key issue was making them affordable. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman further explained the project pertained to C-1 and E-1 zones that was mixed use development. Single-family homes were not permissible, but three-bedroom apartments could be included. Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) Map - Acres, people and jobs Map - Number of acres available in the C1 and E1 zones Map - number of acres available in the C1, E1, C1-D, CM and M1 zones Chart - Buildable Land Acres by Zoning Map - Size of buildable acres available in the in the C1 and E1 zones Commissioner Harper confirmed it was vacant land. Commissioner Pearce clarified it also pertained to underdeveloped land. Mr. Goldman explained the Buildable Land Inventory had two classifications, totally vacant land and partially vacant land. Commissioner Thompson confirmed the modification would apply to new development and not existing structures. She wanted to know the number of existing commercial buildings. Mr. Fregonese explained they had focused on future development and had not looked at current development. With the modifications to the code, an existing vacant building built to commercial standards in the C-1 or E-1 zone could be rented as residential space. It would be difficult to determine the which buildings were vacant. Commissioner Harper thought it was important to know the amount of existing vacant commercial space. If converting it to residential generated a return of investment, spaces the City wanted to remain commercial might be converted. Mr. Fregonese suggested language could be added to the ordinance regarding protections for existing versus new development. It was worth investigating further. Table - Showing Acreage, Parcel Size, and Number of Parcels BLI Chart of the number of parcels in terms of size Historic permit trends for Ashland over the past 11 years Chart - Commercial Permits Mr. Fregonese confirmed many of the permits were for Southern Oregon University. Map - Showing the 50 commercial permits pulled over the last 10 years for expansion or new construction Mr. Fregonese clarified the permits were pulled for commercial or mixed use. Maps - Showing the location of the 50 commercial permits pulled over the last 10 years in the C-1 and E-1 zones for expansion or new construction Map - Showing permits pulled sin 2019 BLI Clear Creek Drive Clear Creek Drive lot development over the years Lithia Way First Street Ashland Planning Commission June 22, 2021 Page 2 of 4 Table - Showing BLI Acreage, Cost, Commercial and Residential Sq. Ft. of Clear Creek Drive, Lithia Way and First Street Mr. Fregonese clarified the commercial square footage shown in the table was ground floor only. Existing Employment - Number of Jobs by Zoning Map - Indicating 20% of jobs are in residential zones Map - Showing where the highest concentration of employment is located Map - Showing where the highest concentration of employment is located minus SOU and OSF Chart - Total Commercial Permits 2011-2021 Total Commercial Permits, Excluding Additions/Accessory Buildings 2011-2021 Map - Showing Commercial and Residential Square Footage Chart - Commercial Permits by Type 2011-2021 Chart - Commercial Permits by EOA Type 2011-2021 Chart - Total Permitted Commercial Square Footage (EOA Types) 2011-2021 Commissioner Harper commented once the ground floor converted to residential it would never revert to commercial. Mr. Fregonese thought it would depend on how the ordinance was written. It could have a time limitation or track the square footage until it reached a specific number. It would be difficult for residential space to convert back to commercial. Mr. Molnar explained that most of the downtown projects whether in C-1D or C-1 and all the mixed use on A Street that were E-1 did a minimum amount of residential. He did not know if any of the residential went back to commercial. The North Mountain neighborhood was a residential master plan with an allowance for neighborhood commercial. It allowed residential on the ground floor if there was no demand for neighborhood commercial. Staff provided an example of a building that converted from residential to commercial several times. Mr. Fregonese explained the ideal was having spaces that would react to the market demand. He agreed it would be difficult to convert back to commercial if there was no market demand. Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) 2007 Potential Zoning Recommendations City of Bend 2.7.3245 Commercial-Ready Space Potential Zoning Recommendations Next Steps Commissioner KenCairn liked the idea of limiting the change to one area initially instead of opening it to all properties. Starting with the Transit Triangle made sense. Commissioner Harper agreed. He wondered if allowing it in the Croman Mill area would be an incentive for developers. It worked as a commercial ready area. Mr. Fregonese added the owners were interested in extending the Transit Triangle to the Croman Mill property. Mr. Molnar spoke to the cleanup involved on the land and explained it would not happen soon. Chair Norton thought the Commission should determine specific areas to apply the modification to prior to introducing amendments. Commissioner Thompson agreed. There was a lot of ground floor commercial in those zones they had not discussed. Starting in the Transit Triangle or Croman Mill area might be easier to manage. Mr. Fregonese suggested having a couple more work sessions where they discussed proposed code language and looked at impacts more geographically specific, so they knew the affects. Additionally, he would bring back information on how much existing commercial space was available. Chair Norton noted property owned by Irving Roberts and asked if commercial space on the ground floor in the downtown would be eligible to convert to residential space. Mr. Goldman explained the amendments would not apply to buildings in the C-1-D zone. However, the former parking lot could develop 65% commercial and 35% residential in Irving parking lot. Ashland Planning Commission June 22, 2021 Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Pearce thought the applicability was neighborhood specific in areas where commercial was not feasible in some economic cycle. He asked Mr. Fregonese if they had considered defining a new commercial use for live-work scenarios. Mr. Fregonese explained live-work units were typically two stories. Live-work code would still have the 35% requirement. Commissioner Pearce added that some live-work units were classified as commercial with the owner or proprietor living there. Commissioner KenCairn preferred Mr. Fregonese come back with examples of the effect the modification would have on certain areas. Commissioner Verner agreed. Mark Knox/Ashland/ Explained the origins of the potential amendments allowing residential on first floor commercial space. He spoke how the rise of ecommerce affected brick and mortar commercial buildings. He did not think it should be permitted downtown but areas within walking distance of the downtown should be considered. Laz Ayala/Ashland/ This was about recognizing the financing limitations that exist currently mostly due to the impact Amazon was having as well as the pandemic. Both justified revisiting the code to adapt to present circumstances. The Almeda fire decreased housing. There was a two-year supply of larger detached housing but only a few weeks supply of smaller unit type housing. Banks were not financing mixed use, recognizing the trend was here to stay. There was a need for small unit housing. Staff would come back with potential impacts on what might work or not. They would address concerns promoting conversion of existing commercial space and areas that had little demand. Mr. Fregonese would forward the presentation and narrative to staff for distribution to the Planning Commission. VI.ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:26 p.m. Submitted by, Dana Smith, Executive Assistant Ashland Planning Commission June 22, 2021 Page 4 of 4 TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING _________________________________ PA-T2-2021-00028 364 Walker Avenue (Walker Elementary School) Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 PLANNING ACTION: PA-T2-2021-00028 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 364 Walker Avenue (Walker Elementary School) and 1751 Homes Avenue (Hunter Park) APPLICANT: HMK Company OWNERS: Ashland School District City of Ashland/Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval for a 22,450 square foot, single-story addition to Walker Elementary School at 364 Walker Avenue. As part of the proposal, the parking lot and drop-off lane would be relocated and expanded, withaccess to be taken via Hunter Court (the driveway serving Hunter Park) and a new courtyard would be created. The application also includes requests for a Conditional Use Permit to modify the School Master Sign Permit Program (PA#2012-00899) to allow newsignage for Walker Elementary School in conjunction with the proposed addition, and Tree Removal Permits to remove 14 significant trees. An existing 9,700 square foot classroom will be demolished in conjunction with the proposal. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-5; MAP: 39 1E 10; TAX LOT #: 3500 (Hunter Park) & 3600 (Walker Elementary School) NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will review this Planning Action at an electronic public hearing on Thursday, July 8, 2021 at 6:00 PM. See page 2 of this notice for information about participating in the electronic public hearing. ELECTRONIC ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 7:00 PM G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\W\\Walker\\Walker_364_Walker School\\PA-T2-2021-00028\\Noticing\\Walker_364_PA-T2-2021-00028_NOC #2.docx Tree Commission Meetings Notice is hereby given that the Tree Commission will hold an electronic public hearing on the above described planning action on the meeting date and time shown on Page 1. If you would like to watch and listen to the Tree Commission meeting virtually, but not participate in any discussion, you can use the Zoom link posted on the City of Ashland calendar website https://www.ashland.or.us/calendar.asp . Anyone wishing to submit written comments can do so by sending an e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 6, 2021. If the applicant wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to PC-public- testimony@ashland.or.us Wednesday, July 7, 2021. Written testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Tree Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes. Oral testimony will be taken during the electronic public hearing. If you wish to provide oral testimony during the electronic PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 6, 2021. meeting, send an email to In order to provide testimony at the public hearing, please provide the following information: 1) make the subject line of Commission Testimony testify at, 4) specify the agenda item you wish to speak to, 5) specify if you will be participating by computer or telephone, and 6) the name you will use if participating by computer or the telephone number you will use if participating by telephone. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact -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). G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\W\\Walker\\Walker_364_Walker School\\PA-T2-2021-00028\\Noticing\\Walker_364_PA-T2-2021-00028_NOC #2.docx Notice is hereby given that the Ashland Planning Commission will hold an electronic public hearing on the above described planning action on the meeting date and time shown above. You can watch the meeting on local channel 9, on Charter Communications channels 180 & 181, or you can stream the meeting via the internet by going to rvtv.sou.edu and selecting RVTV Prime. The ordinance criteria applicable to this planning action are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision makers an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, application materials are provided online and written comments will be accepted by email. Alternative arrangements for reviewing the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541) 488-5305 or planning@ashland.or.us. A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and a copy of the staff report will be available on-line at www.ashland.or.us/PCpackets seven days prior to the hearing. Copies of application materials will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. Under extenuating circumstances, application materials may be requested to be reviewed in-person at the Ashland Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, via a pre-arranged appointment by calling (541) 488-5305 or emailing planning@ashland.or.us. Anyone wishing to submit comments can do so by sending an e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the July 13 PC Hearing Testimony 10:00 a.m. on Monday, July 12, 2021. If the applicant wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us with the subject line July 13 PC Hearing Testimony 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 13, 2021. Written testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Planning Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes. Oraltestimony will be taken during the electronic public hearing. If you wish to provide oral testimony during the electronic meeting, send an email to PC-public-testimony@ashland.or.us by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, July 12, 2021. In order to provide July 13 testimony at the public hearing, please provide the following information: 1) make the subject line of the email Speaker Request , 2) include your name, 3) the agenda item on which you wish to speak on, 4) specify if you will be participating by computer or telephone, and 5) the name you will use if participating by computer or the telephone number you will use if participating by telephone. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please -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). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Senior Planner Derek Severson, the staff planner assigned to this project, at 541-552-2040 or via e-mail to derek.severson@ashland.or.us. SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.5.2.050 The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards: The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\W\\Walker\\Walker_364_Walker School\\PA-T2-2021-00028\\Noticing\\Walker_364_PA-T2-2021-00028_NOC #2.docx approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 18.5.4.050.A A Conditional Use Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. 1. 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. 2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. 3. 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, pursuant with subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. 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. a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. e. Generation of noise, light, and glare. f.The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed use. 4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted pursuant to this ordinance. 5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each zone are as follows. a. WR and RR. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones. b. R-1. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones. c. R-2 and R-3. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones. d. C-1. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 0.35 floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0.50 floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements. e. C-1-D. The general retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 1.00 gross floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements. f.E-1. The general office uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, developed at an intensity of 0.35 floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements; and within the Detailed Site Review overlay, at an intensity of 0.50 floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements. g. M-1. The general light industrial uses listed in chapter 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses, complying with all ordinance requirements. h. CM-C1. The general light industrial uses listed in chapter 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0.50 gross floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements. i.CM-OE and CM-MU. The general office uses listed in chapter 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0.60 gross floor to area, complying with all ordinance requirements. k. CM-NC. The retail commercial uses listed in chapter 18.3.2 Croman Mill District, developed at an intensity of 0.60 gross floor to area ratio, complying with all ordinance requirements. l.HC, NM, and SOU. The permitted uses listed in chapters 18.3.3 Health Care Services, 18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood, and 18.3.6 Southern Oregon University District, respectively, complying with all ordinance requirements. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 18.5.7.040.B 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\W\\Walker\\Walker_364_Walker School\\PA-T2-2021-00028\\Noticing\\Walker_364_PA-T2-2021-00028_NOC #2.docx b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. Demolition and Relocation Standards AMC 15.04.216 A. For demolition or relocation of structures erected more than 45 years prior to the date of the application: 1. The applicant must demonstrate that either subparagraphs a or b apply: a. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on site as part of any economically beneficial use of the property. In determining whether an economically beneficial use can be made of the property, the Demolition Review committee may require the applicant to: (i) Furnish an economic feasibility report prepared by an architect, developer, or appraiser, or other person who is experienced in rehabilitation of buildings that addresses the estimated market value of the property on which the building lies, both before and after demolition or removal, or (ii) Market the property utilizing a marketing plan approved by the Demolition Review Committee or by advertising the property in the Ashland Daily Tidings and Medford Mail Tribune at least eight times and at regular intervals for at least 90 days and by posting a for sale sign on the property, four to six square feet in size and clearly visible from the street, for the same 90 day period. b. The structure proposed for demolition is structurally unsound despite efforts by the owner to properly maintain the structure. 2. In addition to subparagraphs a or b above, the applicant must also: a. Submit a redevelopment plan for the site that provides for replacement or rebuilt structure for the structure being demolished or relocated. The replacement or rebuilt structure must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet, unless the structure being demolished or relocated is less than 1,000 square feet. If the structure is less than 1,000 square feet, the replacement structure must be a minimum of 500 square feet. The redevelopment plan must indicate in sufficient detail the nature, appearance and location of all replacement or rebuilt structures. No replacement structure is required, however, if: (i) the applicant agrees to restrict the property to open space uses and a finding is made that such restriction constitutes a greater benefit to the neighborhood than redevelopment would, or (ii)the structure being demolished or relocated is a nonhabitable accessory structure. b. Demonstrate, if the application is for a demolition, the structure cannot be practicably relocated to another site. 3. If a permit is issued and the redevelopment plan: a. Requires a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the site review permit has been issued, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.A.2. b. Does not require a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the building permit has been issued for the replacement or rebuilt structure, unless the site is restricted to open spaces uses as provided in section 15.04.216.A.2. 4. The Demolition Review Committee may require the applicant to post with the City a bond, or other suitable collateral as determined by the City administrator, ensuring the safe demolition of the structure and the completed performance of the redevelopment plan. B. For demolition or relocation of structures erected less than 45 years from the date of the application: 1. The applicant: a. Has the burden of proving the structure was erected less than 45 years from the date of the application. Any structure erected less than 45 years from the date of the application, which replaced a structure demolished or relocated under section 15.04.216, shall be considered a structure subject to the standards in subsections 15.04.216. b. Must submit a redevelopment plan for the site that provides for a replacement or rebuilt structure being demolished or relocated. The replacement or rebuilt structure must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet, unless the structure being demolished ore relocated is less than 1,000 square feet. If the structure is less than 1,000 square feet, the replacement structure must be a minimum of 500 square feet. The redevelopment plan must indicate in sufficient detail the nature, appearance and location of all replacement or rebuilt structures. No replacement structure is required, however, if: (i) the applicant agrees to restrict the property to open space uses and a finding is made that such restriction constitutes a greater benefit to the neighborhood than redevelopment would, or (ii)the structure being demolished or relocated is a nonhabitably accessory structure. 2. If a permit is issued and the redevelopment plan: a. Requires a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the site review permit has been issued, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.B. b. Does not require a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until a building permit has been issued for the structure or structures to be replaced or rebuilt, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.B. C. For any demolition approved under this section, the applicant is required to salvage or recycle construction and demolition debris, in accordance with a demolition debris diversion plan that complies with the requirements adopted the Demolition Review Committee. The applicant shall submit such a plan with the application for demolition. For any relocation approved under this section, the applicant must also comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.08. (Ord. 2925, amended, 04/18/2006; Ord. 2891, amended, 11/19/2002; Ord. 2858, amended, 06/20/2000; Ord. 2852, added, 01/21/2000) G:\\comm-dev\\planning\\Planning Actions\\PAs by Street\\W\\Walker\\Walker_364_Walker School\\PA-T2-2021-00028\\Noticing\\Walker_364_PA-T2-2021-00028_NOC #2.docx Walker Elementary School PA-T2-2021-00028 requestsSiteDesignReviewapprovalfora22,450squarefoot, single-storyadditiontoWalkerElementarySchoolat364WalkerAvenue.Aspartofthe proposal,anewcourtyardwillbecreatedandtheparkinglotanddrop-offlanewillbe relocatedandexpanded.TheapplicationincludesrequestsforaConditionalUsePermit tomodifytheMasterSignPermitProgramtoallowanewwallsignfacing HomesAvenueontheproposedaddition,andforTreeRemovalPermitstoremove14 significanttrees.Anexisting9,700squarefootclassroomwillbedemolishedtomake roomfortheaddition. Proposal Theexistingdrop-offloop,parkinglotanda9,700squarefootclassroombuildingwillberemoved toaccommodateanew22,450squarefoot,single-storyaddition,arelocatedandexpanded parkinglotanddrop-offlane,andanewcentralcourtyardarea.HunterCourt,thedrivewayon parkpropertythroughHunterPark,willbeprovideingressandegresstotherelocatedparkinglot throughanagreementwiththeAshlandParks&RecreationCommission. Site Description Thesubjectpropertyis9.7acresatthenortheastcornerofWalkerandHomesAvenues,andis zonedSingleFamilyResidential(R-1-5).Theschoolwasdesignedandbuiltin1948andhas expandedsince.Currently,buildingsandparkingareclusteredonthesouthernhalfofthe propertywithplayground,twobaseballfieldsandlawntothenorth.Theplaygroundandasphalt courtareaaretoremainavailabletothepublicoutsideschoolhours,andschoolparkingistobe availabletoHunterParkusersoutsideofschoolhours. Landscaping & Trees Theapplicationidentifies92treesonandimmediatelyadjacenttothecampus.Withthe redevelopmentofthepropertyproposed,14significanttreesaretoberemoved.Thesetreeswill bereplacedwithnewtrees,andnewwaterconservinglandscapingwithanewirrigationsystem willbeplanted. 1 Walker Elementary School PA-T2-2021-00028 requestsSiteDesignReviewapprovalfora22,450squarefoot, single-storyadditiontoWalkerElementarySchoolat364WalkerAvenue.Aspartof theproposal,anewcourtyardwillbecreatedandtheparkinglotanddrop-offlane willberelocatedandexpanded.TheapplicationincludesrequestsforaConditional UsePermittomodifytheMasterSignPermitProgramtoallownewsignage inconjunctionwiththeproposedaddition,andforTreeRemovalPermitstoremove 14significanttrees.Anexisting9,700squarefootclassroomwillbedemolishedto makeroomfortheaddition. Key Issues Parking & Circulation Theproposalshiftstheparentdrop-offloopfromthecornerofWalkerandHomesAvenuesto welldownHomesAvenue,withaccesstotherelocatedandexpandedparkinglottobeaccessed fromHomesAvenueandHunterCourt.Thereisnoincreaseinstudentcapacityorvehicletrips planned,andshiftingtheaccessishopedtoreduceconflictpointsonWalkerandtobetter accommodatepick-upanddrop-offtripsontheschoolsitewhilereducingimpactstothe surroundingstreets.Theprojecttransportationengineerconcludesthatwiththechangesto circulation,HomesandHunterwilloperatesafelyduringpeakschooltraffic. AnewturnlaneonthepropertyisproposedtoaccommodateadditionaltrafficonHunter Court,andafive-footwidebicycleandpedestrianpathisproposedonthewestsideofHunter CourtfromthenewdrivewaynorthtotheCentralAshlandBikepath(CAB)sostudents fromtheCABcanaccessthecampuswithoutinteractingwithcarsonHunterCourt. Therelocatedandexpandedparkinglotaccommodatesthefull66off-streetautomobileparking spacesrequiredfortheschool,adding20spacestothosepresentlyavailable.Thesespacesareto beavailabletoHunterParkusersoutsideofschoolhours.Atotalof70bicycleparkingspacesare alsoproposed. Demolition Anexisting9,700squarefootclassroombuildingwillbedemolishedtoaccommodatethenew addition,relocatedandexpandedparkinglotandnewcentralcourtyardarea. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the application be approved with the conditions detailed in the draft July 2021 meeting packet. 2 New Vicinity Map SE CNAFD ORNEROFEWDDITIONROMRIVEWAY Proposed Site Plan NE CNAD-O(LCY) ORNEROFEWDDITIONFROMROPFFOOKINGTOOURTARD SW CNAFCW& H ORNEROFEWDDITIONROMORNEROFALKEROMES DRAFT BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION July 27, 2021 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #PA-T2-2021-00028, A REQUEST FOR ) SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 22,450 SQUARE FOOT, ) SINGLE-STORY ADDITION TO WALKER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT 364 ) WALKER AVENUE. AS PART OF THE PROPOSAL, THE PARKING LOT AND ) DRAFT DROP-OFF LANE WOULD BE RELOCATED AND EXPANDED, WITH NEW ) FINDINGS, ACCESS TO BE TAKEN VIA HUNTER COURT, THE DRIVEWAY FOR HUNTER ) CONCLUSIONS & PARK, AND A NEW COURTYARD WOULD BE CREATED. THE APPLICATION ) ORDERS ALSO INCLUDES REQUESTS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO MODIFY ) THE ASHLAND ) (PA #2012-00899) TO ALLOW NEW SIGNAGE FOR WALKER ELEMENTARY ) SCHOOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROPOSED ADDITION, AND TREE ) REMOVAL PERMITS TO REMOVE 14 TREES. AN EXISTING 9,700 SQUARE FOOT) CLASSROOM WILL BE DEMOLISHED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE PROPOSAL. ) ) APPLICANT: HMK COMPANY ) OWNERS: ASHLAND SCHOOLD DIST. #5 ) CITY OF ASHLAND/ ) ASHLAND PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION ) ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: 1) Tax lot #3600of Map 39 1E 10 is the Walker Elementary School campus located at 364 Walker Avenue and is zoned Single Family Residential (R-1-5). Tax lot #3500 of Map 39 1E 10 is Hunter Park, a public park which is also zoned Single Family Residential (R-1-5). 2) The applicant is requesting Site Design Review approval for a 22,450 square foot, single-story addition to Walker Elementary School at 364 Walker Avenue. As part of the proposal, the parking lot and drop-off lane would be relocated and expanded, with new access to be taken via Hunter Court, the driveway serving Hunter Park, and a new courtyard would be created. The application also includes requests for a Conditional Use Permit to modify the School Master Sign Permit Program (PA#2012-00899) to allow new signage for Walker Elementary School in conjunction with the proposed addition, and Tree Removal Permits to remove 14 significant trees. An existing 9,700 square foot classroom will be demolished in conjunction with the proposal. The proposal is outlined in plans on file at the Department of Community Development. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 1 AMC 18.5.2.050 3) The criteria for Site Design Review approval are detailed in as follows: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. AMC 18.5.4.050.A 4) The approval criteria for a Conditional Use Permit are detailed in as follows: 1. 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. 2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. 3. 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, pursuant with subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. 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. a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. e. Generation of noise, light, and glare. f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 2 g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of the proposed use. 4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted pursuant to this ordinance. 5. For the purposes of reviewing conditional use permit applications for conformity with the approval criteria of this subsection, the target uses of each zone are as follows. b. R-1. Residential use complying with all ordinance requirements, developed at the density permitted by chapter 18.2.5 Standards for Residential Zones. AMC 18.5.7.040.B 5) The approval criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in as follows: 1.Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a.The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 3 AMC 15.04.216 6) The Demolition and Relocation Standards are described in detail in as follows: A. For demolition or relocation of structures erected more than 45 years prior to the date of the application: 1. The applicant must demonstrate that either subparagraphs a or b apply: a. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on site as part of any economically beneficial use of the property. In determining whether an economically beneficial use can be made of the property, the Demolition Review committee may require the applicant to: (i) Furnish an economic feasibility report prepared by an architect, developer, or appraiser, or other person who is experienced in rehabilitation of buildings that addresses the estimated market value of the property on which the building lies, both before and after demolition or removal, or (ii) Market the property utilizing a marketing plan approved by the Demolition Review Committee or by advertising the property in the Ashland Daily Tidings and Medford Mail Tribune at least eight times and at regular intervals for at least 90 days and by posting a for sale sign on the property, four to six square feet in size and clearly visible from the street, for the same 90 day period. b. The structure proposed for demolition is structurally unsound despite efforts by the owner to properly maintain the structure. 2. In addition to subparagraphs a or b above, the applicant must also: a. Submit a redevelopment plan for the site that provides for replacement or rebuilt structure for the structure being demolished or relocated. The replacement or rebuilt structure must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet, unless the structure being demolished or relocated is less than 1,000 square feet. If the structure is less than 1,000 square feet, the replacement structure must be a minimum of 500 square feet. The redevelopment plan must indicate in sufficient detail the nature, appearance and location of all replacement or rebuilt structures. No replacement structure is required, however, if: (i) the applicant agrees to restrict the property to open space uses and a finding is made that such restriction constitutes a greater benefit to the neighborhood than redevelopment would, or (ii) the structure being demolished or relocated is a nonhabitable accessory structure. b. Demonstrate, if the application is for a demolition, the structure cannot be practicably relocated to another site. 3. If a permit is issued and the redevelopment plan: PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 4 a. Requires a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the site review permit has been issued, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.A.2. b. Does not require a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the building permit has been issued for the replacement or rebuilt structure, unless the site is restricted to open spaces uses as provided in section 15.04.216.A.2. 4. The Demolition Review Committee may require the applicant to post with the City a bond, or other suitable collateral as determined by the City administrator, ensuring the safe demolition of the structure and the completed performance of the redevelopment plan. B. For demolition or relocation of structures erected less than 45 years from the date of the application: 1. The applicant: a. Has the burden of proving the structure was erected less than 45 years from the date of the application. Any structure erected less than 45 years from the date of the application, which replaced a structure demolished or relocated under section 15.04.216, shall be considered a structure subject to the standards in subsections 15.04.216. b. Must submit a redevelopment plan for the site that provides for a replacement or rebuilt structure being demolished or relocated. The replacement or rebuilt structure must be a minimum of 1,000 square feet, unless the structure being demolished ore relocated is less than 1,000 square feet. If the structure is less than 1,000 square feet, the replacement structure must be a minimum of 500 square feet. The redevelopment plan must indicate in sufficient detail the nature, appearance and location of all replacement or rebuilt structures. No replacement structure is required, however, if: (i) the applicant agrees to restrict the property to open space uses and a finding is made that such restriction constitutes a greater benefit to the neighborhood than redevelopment would, or (ii) the structure being demolished or relocated is a nonhabitable accessory structure. 2. If a permit is issued and the redevelopment plan: a. Requires a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until the site review permit has been issued, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.B. b. Does not require a site review permit, no demolition or relocation may occur until a building permit has been issued for the structure or structures to be PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 5 replaced or rebuilt, unless the site is restricted to open space uses as provided in section 15.04.216.B. C. For any demolition approved under this section, the applicant is required to salvage or recycle construction and demolition debris, in accordance with a demolition debris diversion plan that complies with the requirements adopted the Demolition Review Committee. The applicant shall submit such a plan with the application for demolition. For any relocation approved under this section, the applicant must also comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.08. (Ord. 2925, amended, 04/18/2006; Ord. 2891, amended, 11/19/2002; Ord. 2858, amended, 06/20/2000; Ord. 2852, added, 01/21/2000) 7) On April 15, 2020 Governor Kate Brown issued Executive Order #20-16 Keep Government Working: Ordering Necessary Measures to Ensure Safe Public Meetings and Continued Operations by Local Government During Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak public bodies hold public meetings by telephone, video, or through some other electronic or virtual means, whenever possible; that the public body make available a method by which the public can listen to or virtually attend the public meeting or hearing at the time it occurs; that the public body does not have to provide a physical space for the public to attend the meeting or hearing; that requirements that oral public testimony be taken during hearings be suspended, and that public bodies instead provide a means for submitting written testimony by e-mail or other electronic methods that the public body can consider in a timely manner. The Oregon Legislature subsequently passed House Bill #4212 which authorizes local governments to hold all meetings of their governing bodies, including taking public testimony, using telephone or video conferencing technology or through other electronic or virtual means provided that they supply a means by which the public can listen to or observe the meeting. This bill requires that recordings of the meetings be made available to the public if technology allows, and includes provisions similar to the in writing via e-mail or other electronic means. 8) The Ashland Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held an electronic initial evidentiary hearing on March 9, 2021. The applicant then provided a 90-day extension to the 120-day timeclock to allow adequate time for their negotiations with the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission to secure permission for the use Hunter Court. l materials provided, the Planning Commission, following property public notice, then held an electronic public hearing on July 13, 2021. In keeping with Executive Order #20-16, both of these meetings were broadcast live on local television channel 9 and on Charter Communications channels 180 & 181, and were also live-streamed over the internet on RVTV Prime at rvtv.sou.edu. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 6 STAFF NOTE: Agreement with AP&RC for Use of Hunter Court Since the initial hearing in March, the Ashland School District has met with Parks Department staff and the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission (AP&RC) multiple times and received approval to use Hunter Court for access as part of the revised circulation plan for Walker Elementary School at the June 9, 2021 AP&RC meeting. The AP&RC agreement was predicated on the following: That the School District provide at least a five-foot wide bicycle and pedestrian path surfaced in decomposed granite to allow students to access the school directly from the Central Ashland Bikepath (CAB) without the need to interact with traffic on Hunter Court. AP&RC noted that specifying a granitic surface was their minimum expectation and that this was not intended to prevent the path from being paved. That a turn lane be added on the west side of Hunter Court, on the school property, to better accommodate parent traffic. The School District is to re-pave the widened section of Hunter Court from curb-to-curb. AP&RC recognized that the widening would entail the removal of some trees in this section if existing on-street ADA- accessible parking is to be maintained for the Senior Center, and AP&RC indicated that it was supportive the necessary Tree Removal Permit request. (The turn lane pocket has been lengthened to 75 feet at the recommendation of the Traffic Engineer to reduce a constriction point near the intersection of Homes Avenue & Hunter Court.) That the new Walker Elementary School parking parking spaces be available to Hunter Park patrons outside of regular school hours and school events, including during the summer and over other school breaks. That school traffic would be able to use Hunter Court for ingress and egress to the reconfigured parking lot. That a previous request by the Ashland School District to use private storm drainage facilities on the Hunter Park property was withdrawn as the District was able to develop a plan to otherwise address its storm drainage. That this agreement would be revisited in 50 years which coincides with the minimum anticipated lifecycle of the new school building. As a result of this agreement being reached, the alternative site plan presented at the March 9 th evidentiary hearing is no longer proposed, and the improvements now proposed are generally in keeping with the original proposal with some relatively minor adjustments necessary to address the six points above. A condition has been included to require that prior to permit issuance for the new classroom building or associated site work, the applicant shall provide a signed copy of the agreement with the AP&RC. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 7 The application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria relied upon by the applicant, and the staff report were made available on-line seven days prior to the public hearing, with in-person review available by appointment, and printed copies available at a reasonable cost. Those wishing to provide testimony were invited to submit written comments via e-mail by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, July 12, 2021, and the applicant was able to provide written rebuttal to this testimony by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 13, 2021. Comments and rebuttal received were made available on-line and e-mailed to Planning Commissioners before the hearing and included in the meeting minutes. As provided in the Executive Order #20-16, testimony was also taken electronically during the tele-conferenced meeting from those members of the public who had pre-arranged to provide oral testimony by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 13, 2021. After the closing of the hearing and the record, the Planning Commission deliberated and approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the index of exhibits, data, and testimony below will be used: Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the staff report, written public testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Site Design Review approval, Conditional Use Permit, and Tree Removal Permit meets all applicable criteria for Site Design Review described in AMC 18.5.2.050; for Conditional Use Permit described in AMC 18.5.4.050; and for a Tree Removal Permit described in AMC 18.5.7.040.B. 2.3 The Planning Commission concludes that the proposal satisfies all applicable criteria for Site Design Review approval. The first approval criterion addresses the requirements of the underlying zone, requiring that, The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 8 not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, The Planning Commission finds that the building and yard setbacks and other applicable standards have been evaluated to ensure consistency with the applicable provisions of part 18.2, and all regulations of the underlying R- 1-5 zoning will be satisfied. The Planning Commission finds that this criterion is satisfied. The second approval criterion deals with overlay zones, and requires that,The proposal complies with The Planning Commission finds that the subject property is located within the Wildfire Lands Overlay, and as such a Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressing the General Fuel Modification Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 will need to be provided for the review and approval of the Fire Marshal prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property. New landscaping proposed will need to comply with these standards and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List per Resolution 2018-028. Conditions to this effect have been included below and are attached to this approval. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission finds that this criterion is satisfied. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by The Planning Commission notes that the applicable standards here are the Building Placement, Orientation and Design (AMC 18.4.2); Parking, Access and Circulation (AMC 18.4.3); Landscaping, Lighting and Screening (AMC 18.4.4); Tree Preservation and Protection (AMC 18.4.5); and Solar Access (AMC 18.4.8). Public Facilities (AMC 18.4.6) are addressed separately under the next approval criterion, and Signs (AMC 18.4.7) are addressed unde Sign Permit Program Conditional Use Permit in section 2.4 below. With regard to the Building Placement, Orientation and Design Standards in AMC 18.4.2, the Planning Commission finds that the Walker Elementary School campus has an established orientation to Walker Avenue, the higher order of the two streets it fronts upon, and the proposed addition has been placed and designed to function with the proposed changes to site circulation while not detracting from the established sense of entry or orientation to Walker Avenue. The application notes that a local historic preservation specialist has been consulted. The historic preservation specialist has indicated that Walker Elementary will likely prove to be a historically significant building and has worked with the applicant team through the design phase in seeking to minimize impacts to the historical significance while still meeting the needs of the district. To that end, the proposed design is compatible with the existing The Planning Commission finds that the existing Walker Elementary School buildings do not occupy the large majority os street frontage and includes parking and circulation between the buildings and the street. AMC 18.4.2.040.B.6 provides that for sites that do not conform to the Non-Residential Development Standards, an equal percentage of the site must be made to comply with the standards as the percentage of building expansion. In this instance, the Commission finds that with the demolition of a 9,700 square foot classroom building and construction of a new 22,450 square foot classroom building, PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 9 approximately 12,750 square feet are being added which equates to an approximately 52 percent addition to the existing 24,650 square foot school. The Commission finds that the removal of the parent pick-up and drop-off loop between the building and the intersection of Walker Homes Avenues, the relocation of parking and circulation to the rear of the building, and the placement of the addition nearer to, and extending eastward along, Homes Avenue proportionally addresses these non-conformities. With regard to the Parking, Access and Circulation standards in AMC 18.4.3, the Planning Commission notes that the off-street automobile parking requirement for an elementary school is the greater of 1.5 spaces per classroom or one space per 75 square feet of public assembly area. The application materials explain that the public assembly area on campus is the 4,938 square foot gymnasium which requires 66 (4,938 square feet/75 square feet per space = 65.84 spaces) off-street parking spaces . The Planning Commission finds that the 66 automobile parking spaces proposed satisfy the off-street parking requirements for Walker Elementary School. The Commission further notes that the bicycle parking requirement for elementary schools is that one sheltered bicycle parking space be provided for every five students. The application explains that the student capacity for Walker Elementary is up to 350 students, which means that 70 sheltered bicycle (350 students/1 space per 5 students = 70 spaces) parking spaces are required . The application notes that there are presently only 22 covered bicycle parking spaces on campus, located on the north side of the gym building, and proposes to add two banks with of 24 bicycle parking spaces \[22 existing spaces + (2 x 24 proposed spaces) = 70 total spaces\]. The Planning Commission finds that with the addition of two banks of 24 sheltered bicycle parking spaces, the bicycle parking requirements for the school satisfy the requirements of AMC 18.4.3.070. Conditions have been included below to insure that the racks installed are consistent with the bicycle parking design (AMC 18.4.3.070.I) and bicycle parking rack (AMC 18.4.3.070.J) standards. STAFF NOTE: Pedestrian Access & Circulation (AMC 18.4.3.090) The Pedestrian Access & Circulation Standards in AMC 18.4.3.090.B.2.a call for a pedestrian route that does not deviate unnecessarily from a straight line or a route that does not involve a significant amount of out-of-direction travel f northernmost driveway on Hunter Court should be adjusted so that the walkway crossing the driveway has a direct connection to the proposed path to the north, and the path to the north should have a ramp for cyclists using Hunter Court, as illustrated below: PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 10 In addition, the Public Works/Engineering Division has recommended that at the crosswalk crossing Hunter Court the applicant will need to install fully-accessible ADA ramps (meeting federal and state standards) on both the west and east sides of Hunter Court so that someone crossing can cross completely to ensure that accessibility is provided to all users. Condition to this effect have been included below. The parking lot will include requisite landscaping buffers, the planting of new parking lot shade trees, and a bio-swale for the on-site detention and treatment of stormwater on-site. Parking lot shade trees are to include a mix of Zelkovas, Maples and Kentucky Yellowwood trees, all of which have been selected for their large canopies, for not causing root damage, and for not dropping materials on vehicles or pedestrians. With regard to the Landscaping, Lighting and Screening standards in AMC 18.4.4, the Planning Commission finds that the application includes a proposed landscape plan created by a local landscape architect and uses a variety of deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground covers. Due to the wildfire hazards PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 11 overlay, no evergreen trees are proposed. The plants selected are appropriate for the local climate and exposure, and water-tolerant species are proposed within the stormwater detention facilities. The planting plan allows for natural surveillance of the public space. New street trees are proposed along Homes Avenue behind the sidewalk. There is a large stature Raywood Ash tree on the Hunter Court frontage that is preserved with the proposed street improvements. Additional street trees are proposed behind the sidewalk and in the landscape park row planting strip between the parking area and Hunter Court. The proposed landscaping plant materials are low water use and meet the requirements of 18.4.4.030.I. With regard to the Tree Preservation and Protection standards in AMC 18.4.5, the Planning Commission finds that the application materials include a Tree Protection and Removal Plan which identifies the trees on and adjacent to the property, and identifies those which are to be removed and protection for those that are to be preserved. The application explains that 14 significant trees are proposed for removal and require Tree Removal Permits, and that the removals are proposed because the trees are within the areas of construction of the addition, the relocated parking area, or the improvements adjacent to Hunter Court and would be unable to survive the impacts from construction. The Planning Commission finds that the tree protection measures proposed are consistent with the standards, and conditions have been included below to require that 14 mitigation trees be identified in the final landscape plan provided with the building permit submittals, and that tree protection be installed and site-verified by the staff advisory prior to site work, staging or storage of materials. STAFF NOTE: Tree Commission Review While this action was scheduled for review by the Ashland Tree Commission in conjunction with the initial public hearing in March, uncertainty over the use of Hunter Court meant that Tree Commission review was delayed. As this is being written, the Tree Commission has not yet reviewed the current proposal, but they are scheduled to do so on Thursday, July 8 th and their comments and recommendations will be provided to the Planning Commission prior to the July 13 th public hearing and included as part of the staff presentation on the 13 th. Condition #9.d.6) as currently written includes language to incorporate the recommendations of the Tree Commission into the final landscape plan. This condition will be modified prior to findings adoption to detail the specific recommendations the Tree Commission which the Planning Commission decides to attach to the decision. With regard to the Solar Access standards in AMC 18.4.8, the Planning Commission finds that the R-1-5 zoned Walker Elementary School prope over the properties north property line to no greater shadow than would be cast by a six-foot fence on the With the subject property having a north slope of approximately -0.032, a -foot parapet height \[(20 feet 6 feet)/(0.445 - 0.032) = 33.89 feet required solar setback\]. Here, the single-story addition is being placed at the south end of the property, and is roughly 570 feet from the north property line. As such, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed addition easily complies with the Standard A solar setback. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 12 The Planning Commission concludes that the third approval criterion has been satisfied. The fourth approval criterion addresses city facilities, specifically requiring that, The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property The Planning Commission finds that adequate capacity of city facilities, paved access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. The Commission notes that existing public facilities are in place and currently serve the Walker Elementary School campus and its buildings. The applicant asserts that adequate city facilities exist to service the proposed new classroom building, and further indicates that the proposal substantially upgrades the storm drainage facilities, which are currently inadequate. The applicant emphasizes that the civil engineering plans (Sheets C2.1 Erosion Control Plan, C3.0 Overall Civil Site Plan, C.4 Overall Grading Plan, C.5 Overall Site Utility Plan) provide necessary details to demonstrate proposed site development and construction can comply with city standards. The applicant further details: Water: There is a four-inch main in Walker Avenue, and a six-inch main in Homes Avenue. Fire hydrants are in place on Walker Avenue, Homes Avenue and Hunter Court. A new fire vault will be installed to the west of the relocated driveway from Homes Avenue. The water line sizes are substantial and provide adequate water pressure for the additional classroom area and the fire suppression system. Sewer: There is an eight- and ten-inch sewer lines in place in Walker Avenue; a ten-inch sewer main within the Homes Avenue right-of-way; and a six-inch sanitary sewer line in Hunter Court. A new sanitary sewer later is proposed to extend from the new addition to Walker Avenue. After discussions with Public Works, there are no known sewer capacity issues. Electrical: There are overhead electrical facilities in place along Walker Avenue, and private electrical facilities (i.e. junction boxes, vaults) in place. The project team is unaware of any capacity issues. A new transformer is proposed on the east side of Walker Avenue, north of the bus loop, to serve the additional classroom space and upgrade the existing services. The applicants also note that new LED lighting automatic shut-off timers will be used throughout to gain conserve power with the project. Urban Storm Drainage: There are existing eight-inch storm sewer mains in place in the Walker Avenue right-of-way and in Hunter Court. The application proposes substantial stormwater quality improvements with a large, landscaped bio-swale to be constructed on the north side of the new Quality (DEQ) permitting standards. Paved Access & Adequate Transportation: Walker Avenue is considered an Avenue in the Transportation System Plan (TSP), and is currently improved with paving, curbs, gutters, and curbside -foot curb-to-curb width in a 60-foot right- of-way. Other than the removal of the current parent drop-off and pick-up looped driveway near the corner, no modifications are proposed to the Walker Avenue frontage. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 13 Homes Avenue is also considered a neighborhood street in the TSP. City street design standards would typically call for a right-of-way width of from 47- to 57-feet, depending on the on-street parking configuration, however the existing Homes Avenue right-of-way is only 16-feet with an additional 24-long the north (i.e. school) side which contains paving, curbs, gutters and curbside sidewalks. The existing curb-to-curb improvement is 26 feet in width. With the current Site Design Review request, a condition of approval has been included to require that this public right-of-way. With the proposal, an existing parent drop-off and pick-up looped driveway near the Homes and Walker Avenues intersection will be relocated to the east toward Hunter Court. The existing parking lot for staff, parents and visitors is accessed via a curb cut from Homes Avenue. This parking area lacks required landscape buffers, and there are no landscape islands, no designated pedestrian access, and no parking lot shade trees. Just to the parent drop-off loop which enters from Homes Avenue and exits to Walker Avenue. The existing driveways on Homes Avenue are further from the intersection than required under the controlled access standards in AMC 18.4.3.080.C.3, but the two driveways are relatively close together, at roughly 40 feet apart, given the traffic volumes during drop-off and pick-up times. For Homes Avenue, a combination of factors including the narrow right-of-way and narrow improved street width, vehicular turning movements, heavier pedestrian activity in addition to pick-up and drop-off traffic lead to congestion at the intersection of Walker and Homes not only from Walker Elementary, but also from Ashland Middle School, which is located a short distance to the north along Walker Avenue and sees parent drop-off and pick-up traffic at roughly the same times. Hunter Court is identified in the Transportation System Plan (TSP) as a future neighborhood street, however it is not dedicated as public right-of-way and is instead located on the private tax lot for Hunter Park and serves as a private driveway for park patrons. Existing improvements include paving, curbs and gutters with a five-foot curbside sidewalk on the east (park) side. From Homes Avenue north, the first 130-feet of Hunter Court has an approximate curb-to-curb width of 25-feet, after which it widens to approximately 37 feet. The narrower width section was installed to accommodate the Senior Center, which predates Hunter In allowing the school to utilize Hunter Court, the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission (AP&RC) sought to have the new school driveway align with the driveway across Hunter Court serving the pool, to increase the paved width to avoid constriction points in the narrower segment near the intersection with Homes Avenue, and to ensure that student bicycle and pedestrian circulation from the Central Ashland Bikepath (CAB) onto the campus was provided for without elementary school-age students having to directly interact with cars on Hunter Court. The application materials explain that with the current site layout at Walker Elementary is that there is inadequate parking in place for the school (i.e. 46 spaces are in place, while 66 spaces are required under current standards) and inadequate space for safe student drop-off and pick-up separate from both the surrounding street traffic and from parking lot circulation. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 14 The proposed modifications to the site layout and access bring the property closer to compliance with design standards by shifting the parking spaces and student drop-off area to the rear of the building, away from Walker Avenue and Homes Avenue, increasing separation between intersections, providing the required number of parking spaces, planting parking lot shade trees and providing landscape bio-swale for the treatment of stormwater on the site. A five-foot granite path is proposed to be installed on the west (school) side of Hunter Court to connect the Central Ashland Bikepath(CAB) to campus north of the new driveway as required by the AP&RC. New pedestrian crossings will be provided at the driveway, and south of the new driveway Hunter Court is to be widened to provide two travel lanes as well as landscaped parkrow and sidewalk. Existing trees along Hunter Court are proposed to be removed to accommodate these improvements, including a large multi-trunked Ash (Tree #16). In the discussions between the applicant and the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission (AP&RC) it was noted that these tree removals were necessary to accommodate the proposed improvements while retaining two on- street accessible parking spaces which serve the Ashland Senior Center in Hunter Park. The application also proposes to provide a new ADA-accessible pedestrian ramp and crossing of Hunter Court. The application includes a technical memo from Sandow Engineering which evaluates the access and vehicle routing for the proposal. This memo indicates that entering vehicle routes will not change substantially enough to have a different effect on the street system, outside of the specific changes to Homes Avenue, than the existing access. Similarly, Sandow finds that exiting trips will likely have no change in their routing, and will likely travel out to Walker Avenue rather than crossing turning traffic to head toward Normal Avenue when Walker Avenue provides a quicker, safer and easier route to either Ashland Street or Siskiyou Boulevard. The Technical Memo indicates that the relocation of the access point will reduce conflict points and improve overall safety (for automobiles, pedestrians and bicycles) along Walker Avenue, and explains that the current drop-off loop allows 11 vehicles to queue on-site before they spill into Homes Avenue, where an additional ten cars can queue before they impact the intersection of Walker and Homes, where they have the potential to frequently block the intersection. The memo notes that with the proposed changes to the circulation plan, the available queuing area on campus increases to 15 vehicles, with room for another 11 to queue on Hunter Court before Homes Avenue is impacted. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 15 White pavement markings be provided to delineate pick-up and drop-off circulation. That the five parking spaces north of the new parking lot be designated spaces (staff or authorized parking only) to keep them from being used during pick-up and drop-off times. No on-street parking on the north side of Homes Avenue from Hunter court to 25 feet west of the site driveway during drop-off and pick-up times. No parking on the west side of Hunter Court from Homes Avenue to the new driveway during drop-off and pick-up times. That the turn lane proposed on Hunter Court be a minimum of 75 feet in length. safely within typical peak school traffic conditions and will provide adequate and safe access and circulation for school traffic. Condition recommendations conditions of this approval. The Planning Commission finds that facilities are in place to serve the existing campus buildings, that adequate key city facilities can and will be provided to serve the new classroom building, and that based on applicant and staff consultations with representatives of the various City departments (i.e. water, sewer, streets and electric) the proposed addition will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity. The Commission further finds that the project is intended to improve accessibility, safety, security and site circulation, but with the demolition and addition proposed, student enrollment capacity, staffing and anticipated vehicle trip generation are not increasing. The application includes civil drawings to address the changes in site grading, drainage, utilities and access associated with the proposal, and includes a determination by the project traffic engineer that with the proposed changes to circulation, Homes Avenue and Hunter Court will operate safely during peak school traffic. Conditions have been included below to require that final civil drawings detailing the final utility and infrastructure improvements be provided for review and approval prior of the Building, Planning, Fire, Public Works and Electric Departments prior to building permit issuance. The Commission concludes that this criterion has been satisfied. The Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards.No exceptions have been request, and the Commission concludes that this criterion is not applicable here. The Planning Commission concludes that as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the proposal complies with the requirements for Site Design Review approval. 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal satisfies the applicable standards for Conditional Use Permit asign permit program under AMC 18.4.7.120 Governmental agencies may apply for a Conditional Use Permit to place a sign that does not conform to this chapter when it is determined that, in addition to PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 16 Planning Action PA-2012-00899. Approved signage for Walker Elementary included two wall signs, noting that one wall sign was existing in 2012 to identify the school along the front of the building facing Walker Avenue. A second wall sign is not clearly identified, although the proposal discussed eventually completing a wall graphic as student art to encourage school pride, improve student art skills, enhance the by the Public Arts Commission. Wall sign size/area was also not clearly discussed for Walker, although other campus signage allowed for one foot of sign area for each lineal foot of building frontage for 60 square feet (which is similar to the commercial wall sign area limits). The building frontage along Homes here is significantly more than 60 linear feet, and the new sign proposed is 52.5 square feet. Other approved signage included an existing ground sign with reader board at the corner of Walker and Homes to identify the school and announce special events, activities, holidays and PTA events. Additionally, the sign program allowed for two directional signs per driveway entrance/exit to guide students, parents and visitors who are driving but not necessarily aware of traffic patterns, and miscellaneous signs such as temporary banners to evoke school pride and student participation in various school events. These temporary miscellaneous signs are to be posted for one week, removed the day after the event, and are limited to four events per year. The first criterioThat 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. The application materials explain that the proposal seeks to modify the existing Ashland School District Sign Program for Walker Elementary School by adding a wall sign along on the Homes Avenue façade of the new -inch tall letters approximately 35 feet long which equates to a sign area of approximately 52.5 feet. This is within the 60 square foot wall signage area limitation that would apply to a commercial building, and similar to other wall sign limits discussed in the sign permit program. The wall where the sign would be placed is more than 35 feet from Homes Avenue. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property Commission finds that the proposed signage will have no effect on the provision of public facilities. The third criterion for a Conditional 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, pursuant to subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. 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: a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage; b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities; c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area; d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants; e. Generation of noise, light, and glare; f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan; and g. Other factors found to be relevant by the approval authority for review of PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 17 the propo The application materials explain that the target use for the property within the R-1-5 zone would be residential development with a minimum density of approximately 44 residential parcels, and asserts that the proposed signage for the school will not have any greater adverse material effects on the livability of the impact area than would residential development of the full density allowed. The application emphasizes that the installation of additional signage to identify the building from Homes Avenue and delineate the entrance will not adversely affect the neighborhood as it will not be illuminated, and will not negatively impact the expansive façade of the frontage. The application recognizes that while schools are not similar in bulk, scale, or coverage to structures in the surrounding residential area, they serve the surrounding neighborhood and are in similar scale to nearby public buildings including the Ashland Middle School and buildings on the nearby Southern Oregon University campus. The application concludes that the proposed signage is intended to identify the specific school for the neighborhood population served by the school. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted according to this ordinance school is an outright permitted use within the R-1-5 zoning district here, and further finds that the sign code allows Governmental agencies may apply for a Conditional Use Permit to place a sign that does not conform to this chapter when it is determined that, in addition to meeting the criteria for a In was a unique public entity serving a large and diverse audience including students, parents, visitors and the general public and providing both educational services and public gathering places, and that appropriate signage improved transportation to and through the school property for this audience by providing clear visual markers. The Commission finds that the proposed additional signage for the new classroom here is in keeping with that original sign program approval and will continue to support the The Planning Commission concludes that as detailed above, the proposal complies with the requirements for Conditional Use Permit ap purpose. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal satisfies the applicable standards for Tree Removal Permits to remove 14 significant trees. The first approval criterion for a Tree Removal Permit to remove a tree that is not a hazard The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.3.10. The Commission notes that 14 significant trees are proposed for removal, and that the application materials explain that the removals are to permit the proposal to be consistent with applicable ordinance requirements and standards, including applicable Site Development and Design Standards. The Planning Commission finds that the removals are proposed to accommodate the addition of a new classroom building and to accommodate the widening of Hunter Court as part of a new site circulation plan intended to better accommodate school traffic on the school property and on Hunter Court to limit impacts to the surrounding public street. The Commission further finds that the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission has expressed support for the removals necessary for the widening of Hunter Court in order PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 18 to maintain existing on-street accessible parking on Hunter Court necessary to serve the adjacent Senior Center. The Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. The applicant indicates that the requested tree removals will not have significant negative impacts on erosion, soil stability, the flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks, and further explains that the areas where trees are to be removed will be redeveloped with structures, hardscaping, or will re-landscaped. The application materials also emphasize that there are more than 100 trees on the campus and adjacent to Hunter Court on the adjacent Hunter Park property. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone.tion materials indicate that there are more than 100 trees on the subject property and along the Hunter Court corridor, and further suggest that the proximity to Hunter Park, which is heavily vegetated, provides substantial species diversity, canopy coverage, and tree densities within 200 feet of the subject property. The application materials conclude that the proposal replaces canopy, tree densities, sizes, and species diversity with required mitigation trees. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance.The Commission finds that there is no residential component associated with the current application. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.Commission finds that mitigation trees sufficient to meet this requirement are proposed throughout the property. There are 14 significant trees proposed for removal, and the landscape plan includes more than 30 replacement trees including Kentucky yellow trees, zelkova, maple, and lindens, and includes the planting of new required street trees and 26 proposed shade trees for the parking areas to reduce the microclimatic impacts of the pavement. The Commission finds that the remaining trees which are to be preserved are proposed to be protected with six-foot tall chain link fencing as recommended by the arborist and required in the City Preservation & Protection Ordinance (AMC 18.4.5). Conditions have been included to require tree protection fencing installation and verification before site work. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 19 STAFF NOTE: Tree Commission Review While this action was scheduled for review by the Ashland Tree Commission in conjunction with the initial public hearing in March, uncertainty over the use of Hunter Court meant that Tree Commission review was delayed. As this is being written, the Tree Commission has not yet reviewed the current proposal, but they are scheduled to do so on Thursday, July 8 th and their comments and recommendations will be provided to the Planning Commission prior to thth the July 13 public hearing and included as part of the staff presentation on the 13. Condition #9.d.6) as currently written includes language to incorporate the recommendations of the Tree Commission into the final landscape plan. This condition will be modified prior to findings adoption to detail the specific recommendations the Tree Commission which the Planning Commission decides to attach to the decision. The Planning Commission concludes that as detailed above and with the conditions discussed, the proposal complies with the requirements for Tree Protection and for Tree Removal Permits to remove 14 significant trees. 2.6 With regard to the proposed demolition of the 9,700 square foot classroom, the Planning Commission notes that the demolition and relocation of existing buildings is regulated through AMC Chapter 15 Buildings and Constructionapproval of permits by the Building Official and the potential for appeal to the Demolition Review Committee. The Commission finds that the applicant has indicated that the 9,700 square foot classroom building is be demolished as part of the larger, bond- funded project which includes the construction of a new 22,450 square foot classroom building, the creation of a central courtyard, and reconfiguration of the on-site parking and circulation plan. A condition has been included below to make clear that the applicant will need to obtain requisite permits for demolition through the Building Official prior to commencement of demolition work. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for Site Design Review, Conditional Use and Tree Removal permit approvals to construct a new 22,450 square-foot, single-story addition and associated changes to the campus site planning, modify approved signage and remove 14 significant trees is supported by evidence contained within the whole record. For the Commission, the proposed addition has been thoughtfully designed and placed with the help of a local historic preservation consultant to ensure that the building will not detract from or compete with the original portion of the building oriented to Walker Avenue. The proposed placement creates a better relationship to Homes Avenue, helps to frame a more central courtyard area, and supports a reorganization the parking and circulation plan which, with the use of Hunter Court, will help to lessen the impacts of parent drop-off and pick-up traffic to the surrounding public streets by better accommodating queuing off- street. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 20 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #PA-T2-2021-00028. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2021-00028 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1.That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein, including but not limited to the applicant adding an additional lane and repaving Hunter Court from curb-to-curb, and providing a pedestrian and bicycle path for students from the Central Ashland Bikepath, as illustrated in the draft agreement with the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission provided. 2.That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify this approval shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3.That a sign permit shall be obtained prior to the installation of signage. Signage shall be consistent with that described herein and shall be placed in a manner consistent with the vision clearance standards of AMC 18.2.4.040. 4.That all requirements of the Fire Department shall be satisfactorily addressed, including approved addressing; fire apparatus access including aerial ladder access, turn-around, firefighter access pathways and work area; fire hydrant spacing, distance and clearance; fire flow; fire sprinkler system if applicable; fire extinguishers; limitations on gates or fences; providing required fuel breaks; and meeting the general fuel modification area standards. 5.That mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from the surrounding streets, and the location and screening of all mechanical equipment shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. 6.That the applicant shall obtain applicable demolition permits through the Building Division if deemed necessary by the Building Official prior to the commencement of any building demolition on site. 7.That the applicant shall dedicate the existing 24-foot wide street reservation area on the north side of Holmes Avenue as public right-of-way prior to final occupancy approval for the project. In addition, the applicant shall provide a consent to dedicate or street reservation of the widened portion of Hunter Court which would be dedicated as public street should the remainder of Hunter Court ever become a public street. 8.That the recommendations of the Public Works/Engineering Division shall be conditions of approval here, including but not limited to the requirements that new accessible ramps meeting federal and state standards shall be installed on both sides of the crosswalk where Hunter Court meets Homes Avenue (near the Senior Center); that permits be obtained prior to work in the public rights-of-way; and that necessary stormwater permits be obtained. PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 21 9.That building permit submittals shall include: a.The identification of all easements, including but not limited to public or private utility, irrigation and drainage easements, fire apparatus access easements, and public pedestrian access easements. b.The identification of exterior building materials and paint colors for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Colors and materials shall be consistent with those described in the application and very bright or neon paint colors shall not be used. c.Specifications for all exterior lighting fixtures. Exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. d.Revised landscape and irrigation plans shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor with the building permit submittals. These revised plans shall address: 1) required size and species-specific planting details and associated irrigation plan modifications, including the requirements for programmable automatic timer controllers and a maintenance watering schedule with seasonal modifications; 2) final lot coverage and required landscaped area calculations, including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas, and landscaped areas. Lot coverage shall be limited to no more than 50 percent, and the calculations shall demonstrate that the requisite 50 percent landscaping and seven percent parking lot landscaping are provided; 3) the mitigation requirements of AMC 18.5.7 by detailing the mitigation for the 14 significant trees to be removed on a one-for-one basis through replanting planting on-site, replanting off-site, or ; 4) sight-obscuring screening of the parking lot with a landscape buffer in keeping with the requirements of AMC 18.4.3.080.E.6.a.iv and 18.4.4.030.F.2.; 5) the staff recommendations that the driveway crossing connect directly (in a straight line) to the five-foot path leading to the Central Ashland Bikepath and that a ramp for bicycles to access this path from Hunter Court be provided where the path turns into the campus; and 6) the recommendations of the Tree Commission from their July 8, 2021 regular meeting. e.A Fire Prevention and Control Plan addressing the General Fuel Modification Area requirements in AMC 18.3.10.100.A.2 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance shall be provided prior to bringing combustible materials onto the property, and any new landscaping proposed shall comply with these standards and shall not include plants listed on the Prohibited Flammable Plant List per Resolution 2018-028. f.Final storm water drainage, grading and erosion control plans for the review and approval of the Engineering, Building and Planning Departments. The storm water plan shall address Public Works/Engineering standards requiring that post-development peak flows not exceed pre-development levels. Any necessary drainage improvements to address the Storm water from all new impervious surfaces and run-off associated with peak rainfall events must be collected on PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 22 site and channeled to the city storm water collection system (i.e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through an approved alternative in accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029. On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. g.A final utility plan for the project for the review and approval of the Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions. The utility plan shall include the location of any necessary connections to public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins. The utility plan shall also address Water Department requirements relative to cross connections and premises isolation. Meters, cabinets, vaults and Fire Department Connections shall be located outside of pedestrian corridors and in areas least visible from streets, sidewalks and pedestrian areas, while considering access needs. Any necessary service extensions or upgrades shall be completed by the applicant h.A final electric design and distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including any transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric, Engineering, Building and Planning Departments prior to the issuance of excavation or building permits. Transformers, cabinets and vaults shall be located outside the pedestrian corridor in areas least visible from streets, sidewalks and pedestrian areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. Any necessary service extensions i.That the applicants shall provide final engineered plans for any work in the street rights- of-way including any changes to sidewalks, driveway aprons or pedestrian crossings for the review of the Planning and Public Works/Engineering Departments. j.Identification of required bicycle parking, which includes a total of 70 covered bicycle parking spaces. Inverted u-racks shall be used for the new outdoor bicycle parking, and all bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with the standards in 18.4.3.070.I, inspected and approved prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking spacing and coverage requirements are met. k.A signed copy of the agreement with the Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission for the use of Hunter Court shall be provided with the building permit submittal and prior to any site work on the new parking lot or driveways. 10.That prior to any site work including staging, storage of materials, demolition or tree removal, the applicant shall mark the trees to be removed and install protection fencing for the trees to be retained, and obtain a Tree Verification Inspection so that the Staff Advisor can verify that the PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 23 trees identified on site for removal are consistent with the approved plan, and that those trees to be protected have tree protection fencing in place in a manner consistent with the approved plans. 11.That prior to the issuance of a building permit all necessary building permits fees and associated charges, including permits and connections fees for any new utilities, and applicable system development charges for water, sewer, storm water, parks, and transportation (less any credits for existing structures) shall be paid. 12.That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final project approval: a.That the required automobile and bicycle parking shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. b.All hardscaping including the sidewalk corridor, on site circulations routes, parking lots and driveways; Hunter Court improvements; landscaping; and the irrigation system shall be installed according to the approved plans, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor. c.That the screening for the trash and recycling containers shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Development Standards prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be included in the trash enclosure in accordance with 18.4.4.040. d.That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. e.All required utility service and equipment installations and street frontage improvements, shall be installed under permit from the Public Works Department and in accordance with the approved plans, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. f.14 replacement trees to mitigate the trees removed shall be planted and irrigated according to the approved plan, or alternative mitigation demonstrated. 13.As proposed by the applicant, perimeter gates shall remain unlocked during non-school hours so as to not limit or restrict access school playgrounds and greenspaces. 14.That the recommendations of the Sandow Engineering Tech Memo dated April 27, 2021 shall be conditions of this approval, including that: a.White pavement markings be provided to delineate pick-up and drop-off circulation. b.That the five parking spaces north of the new parking lot be designated spaces (staff or authorized parking only) to keep them from being used during pick-up and drop-off times. c.No on-street parking on the north side of Homes Avenue from Hunter court to 25 feet west of the site driveway during drop-off and pick-up times. d.No parking on the west side of Hunter Court from Homes Avenue to the new driveway during drop-off and pick-up times. e.That the turn lane proposed on Hunter Court be a minimum of 75 feet in length. July 27, 2021 Planning Commission Approval Date PA-T2-2021-00028 July 27, 2021 Page 24 STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM STAFF EXHIBIT S.1 APPROVED SIGN PROGRAM Public Works/Engineering Division Comments for Walker Elementary School (PA-T2-2021-00028) At the two proposed ADA ramps, with crosswalks crossing Hunter Ct, they will need to install fully accessible ADA ramps on the east-side of Hunter Ct as well. They will be putting in locations that are directing someone to cross there to a ramp so they will need to complete that connection and ensure that accessibility is provided to all system users. Where handicap access ramps are required as part of a proposed project, the ramps shall meet current United States Access Board Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) and shall be designed in accordance with the current Oregon Department of Transportation design guidance. Use of the ODOT Standard Drawings for curb ramps as guidance for design is recommended however a curb ramp detail sheet, similar to ODOT DET 1720-Example of Minimum Sidewalk Ramp Details, is required for each curb ramp corner that is being proposed. Referencing standard drawings for curb ramps in plans in lieu of curb ramp detail sheets is no longer acceptable. An ODOT ADA Curb Ramp Design Checklist shall also be completed and submitted with the civil design drawings. If the following items are not submitted with the civil design drawings the City of Ashland Engineering Department will view the submittal as incomplete. Required ADA submittals: o ODOT ADA Curb Ramp Design Checklist Curb Ramp Detail, similar to ODOT DET 1720, for each proposed curb ramp Any construction or closure within the public right of way will require a Public Works permit and MUST be obtained before any work in the right of way commences. All development or redevelopment that will create or replace 2,500 square feet or more of impervious surface (buildings, roads, parking lots, etc.) area that discharges to an MS4 (municipal separate storm sewer systems), must comply with the requirements of the DEQ MS4 General Permit phase 2. Applicant MUST follow the guidance and requirements set forth in the current Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual which can be found at the following website: https://www.rvss.us/pilot.asp?pg=StormwaterDesignManual All stormwater calculations, reports, drawings, etc. shall be submitted to the City of Ashland Engineering Department for review. The proposed decomposed granite path should follow guidance from the United States Access Board to comply with accessibility standards related to trails. Site Design Review and Conditional Use Permit ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC June 24, 2021 Site Design Review for Addition of more than 10,000 SF to non-residential structureand Conditional Use Permit to modify the Walker Elementary School Sign Program SUBJECT PROPERTY: ADDRESS: 364 Walker Avenue MAP & TAX LOTS: 39 1E 10; Tax Lot: 3600 PROPERTY OWNER: Jackson County School District #5 Walker Elementary School 885 Siskiyou Boulevard Ashland, Oregon 97520 Contact: Steve Mitzel, Director of Operations OWNER REPRESENTATIVE: HMK Company PO BOX 1176 Medford, OR 97501 Contact: Mike Freeman ARCHITECT: BBT Architects 1140 SW Simpson Ave, Suite 200 Bend, Oregon 97702 Contact: Matthew Guthrie STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: ZCS Engineering & Architecture 45 Hawthorne Street Medford, OR 97504 Contact: Sylas Allen CIVIL ENGINEER: PowellEngineering 1874 Rossanley Drive Medford, OR 97501 Contact: Todd Powell LANDSCAPE: Kencairn Landscape Architecture 545 A Street, Suite 3 Ashland, OR 97520 Contact: Kerry KenCairn Page 1 of 37 PLANNING CONSULTANT: Rogue Planning & Development Service 1314-B Center Dr., PMB# 457 Medford, OR 97501 Contact: Amy Gunter Proposal: In 2018, the voters approved a School Bond measure. The primary goals of the bond are to improve the safetyand wellbeingof all students in the district. With respect to Walker Elementary School, drop off and pick up created unworkable traffic impacts. The core focus of the Walker Elementary School renovation has been focused on the safety of the students getting to the campus and on campus safety. The present location of the parent drop off-lane near the intersection of Walker and Homes would cause congestion onto both streets during morning drop off and afternoon pick up. This impacted not only the vehicular traffic on both of the city street, but also impacted the busy pedestrian crossing for the students at that intersection. Additionally, to avoid the dedicated lane, parents would park on Hunter Court and the kids would cross the school ground and go to their parents vehicle. Other parents would park in the staff/visitor parking area accessed from Homes on the south side of the school and the kids would go to their vehicles in the parking area. As existing, Walker Elementary School layout and orientation are towards Walker Avenue and toward the parking area between the building and Homes Avenue. No changes are proposed on Walker, but the proposed entry plaza area, the improved parking areas, and the perimeter security fencing and gates upgrades will increase the safety of the teachers, students, classified employees, volunteers, and community members that utilize the elementary school campus. Additionally, seismic upgrades, HVAC, Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electrical upgrades with a focus on green technologies and renewable energy-focused design and construction are proposed. Walker Elementary School has a site-based special education, and students receiving those services will have their classroom and activity areas improved. The project team, BBT Architect, and HMK Management worked with the Walker Elementary School staff, the school districts Core Team, the School User Groups, and the Site Core teams to refine the layout and design. The proposal is the result of many months of community collaboration. The proposed design, layout, and construction are consistent with the policies of the Climate Energy Action Plan, and a review of the proposal from Brightworks Sustainability is provided in the application materials. The proposal includes the demolition of a 9,700 square foot existing classroom wing. This structure is to the rear of the main Walker Avenue portion of the building and is on the north side of the existing parking Page 2 of 37 area. The area from where this structure is removed will be redeveloped with a classroom building addition and the courtyard area north of the new addition. Substantial renovations of the existing 1940 and 1950 (main building facing Walker) interior renovations to the existing administration office areas, classrooms, and restrooms are proposed. A 22,450 square foot, single-story classroom building is the largest improvement proposed for Walker Elementary School. The new classroom building is proposed at the south end of the Walker Elementary School campus area. The new classroom wing is proposed to have general classrooms, a sensory classroom, and SPED dedicated classroom area. There are new kindergarten classrooms with kinder- sized restrooms, general activity spaces for small group breakout areas. The central campus area is made larger with the design and removal of the existing classroom wing. This area will become a central courtyard area and with redevelopment, soft paths and a possible outdoor ‘amphitheater” could be added. These features are shown on the plan but are not central to the proposal. The proposal includes the removal and reconfiguration of an existing non-conforming parking area and creating a conforming parking lotarea. The proposed parking area is to be accessed from Hunter Court, a private driveway that provides access to Hunter Park and the Daniel Meyer Memorial Pool. The current parking lot area and parent drop off lane arenot ideally situated relativeto the main office. enter through the Visitors to the site either need to walk around the building to the main entrance or unsupervised south entrance. While intercom and camera technologies can assist with somesecurity aspects, the lack of supervision and a secure entry is something the school needed to be addressed. The proposal includes some new perimeter security fencing. The proposed fencing secures the courtyard area of the school, but the playground area and the large field area will remain accessible to the public outside of school hours. A new mechanical equipment enclosure area is proposed. This area is central to the campus and is not visible from any public right-of-way. Access and Site Circulation: The majority of the improvements on Walker Avenue are proposed to remain. The bus loop will remain in its present location. There is a curb cut on the south side of the structure for the parent drop off lane. This curb cut will be removed and the asphalt driveway removed and replaced with landscape areas. There are two, driveway approaches to the Walker Elementary School site from Homes Avenue. There is a one-way vehicular loop from Homes Avenue to Walker Avenue. This is proposed to be removed. The Page 3 of 37 other access is to the school parking area adjacent to Homes Avenue. This driveway leads to the 40+ space parking lot. This parking area and the two driveways are proposed to be removed with new access from Hunter Court. Hunter Court is a private driveway that is noted on the TSP as a future public street. There are street like improvements to Hunter Court proposed, these include parkrow, sidewalk and pedestrian crossings of Hunter Court. After numerous meetings and discussions regarding the school th districts use of Hunter Court, agreement was made on June 9 that allows the joint use of facilities. The draft agreement has been provided withthe application document. A Transportation Memo was provided by Traffic Engineer Kelly Sandow from Sandow Engineering that discusses existing and estimated traffic impacts from the proposed driveway and parking area access relocation. Trips to and from Walker Elementary School are primarily from the south on Walker Avenue and from the south and east from Normal to Homes. The traffic generated by the school is not changing with the request for the additional school area. It is not anticipated that the direction of travel will change for most of the inbound or outbound traffic as theyalways chosen the route that best serves their destination following leaving the school. If they need to go to Walker Avenue, they will still proceed that direction and if they need to go to Normal Avenue, they would go that route. The traffic engineer notes that the proposal increases safety for pedestrians and bicyclist because the conflict points from driveways on Walker and Homes are reducedor removed. The studentenrollment is between 300 –350 students. The proposal does not modify the number of students, teachers or support staff. Students dropped off in the parking lot will ideally use the drop off queuinglane. If they chose to park in the lot, where previously there were no designated pedestrain crossings in the parking lot to the school yard, there will be designated crossing and everyone in the parking lot is aware that there are children present due to the nature of the use. Parking: There are 46, onsite vehicle parking spaces. Based on the 4,938 square foot area of the assembly spaces, there should be 63, on-site parking spaces. The proposal includes an increase in the number of parking spaces provided on-site through the creation of a new, 66space parking area accessed from a requested easement from Ashland Parks to use Hunter Court. This parking area is proposed to have parking lot shade tree islands and accessible parking spaces and raised walkways. Walker Elementary School requires 70 bicycle parking spaces, all covered. Though several Walker Elementary School students ride their bicycles to school, never have anywhere near 70 bicycles been present at campus. There are presently 22 covered bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the gymnasium building. This is a pre-existing, non-conforming situation. The proposal adds bicycle parking on the east side of the campus, just north of the proposed classroom addition. Two, banks of 24 bike racks for a total of 66 secure bicycle parking spaces are proposed. Page 4 of 37 Trees and Landscaping: A detailed Landscape and Tree Protection and Removal Plan have been provided. There are more than 100 trees on-site. There are 14 significant trees proposed for removal to facilitate site construction and development. A significant tree is a conifer tree having a trunk 18 caliper inches or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH), or a deciduous tree having a trunk 12 caliper inches in DBH. The trees proposed for removal include one, 12-inch DBH Oak tree (Quercus); a 17-inch DBH, 14-inch DBH and a 12-inch dual stemmed DBH maple trees (Acer); a 22-inch DBH, and a 19-inch DBH Raywood Ash (Fraxis); a 14-inch DBH spruce (Picea); four Incense Cedars (Calocedrus decurrens) including a 33- inch DBH, a double stemmed with two 16-inch DBH stems, a 28-inch DBH, and a 21-inch DBH; one12- inch DBH Tulip trees (Liriodendron tulipifera); a 12-inch Sweet Gum (Liquidambar) and a 19-inch, Apple (Morus). The proposed tree protection plan retains a substantial number of trees on-site, and the landscape plan uses a variety of deciduous shade trees, shrubs, and ground covers. Implementing water-conserving landscape and irrigation design, the proposed landscape plan and the future irrigation plan can demonstrate compliance with the standardsand is appropriate in a school grounds setting. Findings of Fact: The following information addressing the findings of fact for the applicable criteria from the Ashland Municipal Code is provided on the following pages. For clarity, the criteria are in Arial font and the applicant’s responses are in Times New Roman font. Page 5 of 37 Criteria from the Ashland Land Use Ordinance Site Development Design Standards Approval Criteria: 18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria An application for Site Design Review shall be approved if the proposal meets the criteria in subsections A, B, C, and D below. A. Underlying Zone. The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. Finding: The subject property is zoned single-family residential (R-1-5). Public schools are a permitted use in the R-1-5 zone. The proposed classroom addition exceeds all the setbacks in the zone and the structure is more than 10- feet from Homes Avenue,a side yard. The proposed building is less than 35-feet, the maximum building height in the R-1-5 zone. The maximum allowed lot coverage in the zone is 50 percent. The existing site coverage is 66 percent of the site area. The proposed redevelopment, removed surfaces,and existing surfaces reduce lot coverage by three percent to 63 percent of the campus. Existing Impervious: 146,947 sf (other) 34% of lot Existing Pervious: 291,203 sf (green & brown) 66% of lot Total Area: 426,544 sf Proposed Impervious: 157,741 sf (yellow) 37% of lot Proposed Pervious: 280,409 sf (grey) 63% of lot Total Area: 425,544 sf These pervious totals include paving along Homes that are on the District's property. The street and sidewalk along this edge is 13,992 SF, if the street were a dedicated right of way, the impervious surfaces would be reduced to 59 percent. This is a non-conforming situation that is not being increased but is being reduced through the proposal. The property is exempt from density and floor area ratio standards. The proposed architecture is consistent with elementary school design. Though not residential, the proposed new structure has pitched roofs and eaves which are common design elements found in residential construction. The site development standards place substantial emphasis on the pedestrian accessibility to the commercial business and the layout of sites requiring the parking be to the rear or side of the structure. Due to the nature of elementary school campus safety and security, the structure has substantial setbacks from the street, and the entrances are not accessible from the sidewalks. The parking and vehicular circulation occur between the structure and the street as well. Page 6 of 37 The proposed new classroom wing is oriented towards Homes Avenue with large windows, doors that access the classroom areas, the new building is not accessible to the public from the sidewalk due to safety considerations. B. Overlay Zones. The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). Finding: The proposed landscape plan complies with the Wildfire Hazards Overlay. No other overlays apply to the site development. C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. 18.4.2.040 Non-Residential Development Finding: The property is developed with a public elementary school that was first constructed in the late 1950s. The Walker Elementary School campus and the development layout are non-residential but serve the surrounding residential neighborhood. The development of the majority of the campus including the locations of the parking areas, orientation to the streets, setbacks, site coverage, are non-conforming concerning the present site development standards. Additionally, other standards that typically apply to commercial development or typical residential development when developed to the standards for placement, orientation, and design of building from the Site Development Design Standard, conflict with the student and staff campus safety goals. The proposed modifications to the site layout and access bring the property closer to compliance with the standards by shifting the parking spaces and student drop off area away from Walker Avenue and Homes Avenue increasing separation between intersections, providing the required number of parking spaces, planting parking lot shade trees and providing landscape bioswale for the treatment of stormwater on the site. The proposal provides for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the students through a design that supports resource conservation and renewable energy sources and high- efficiency construction, HVAC, mechanical and plumbing efficiencies, and electric upgrades. The building is proposed to have a wide building facade along Homes Avenue with windows into classroom areas along the facade. Page 7 of 37 The proposed site alterations to remove the curb-cuts nearest the southwest corner of the property from Homes Avenue and from Walker Avenue shifting the vehicular traffic and parking areas away from the busy intersection increasing pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Bus riders will continue to use the historic Walker Avenue entrance. The proposed addition provides a clearly defined, secure entry on the west façade of the new addition. The proposed addition is built to a similar façade line as the existing historic building area of the library addition. As typically with school development, the setback proposed is substantially further from the public street than a commercial or employment development due to the nature of the use as a public, elementary school. The proposed design though does provide a positive impact on the streetscape with traditional forms that resemble the 1950s historic construction. Materials of the proposed addition include wood frame construction, Portland cement stucco, fiber cement siding, and aluminum windows. The Portland cement stucco will match the existing, and the fiber-cement to provide massing breaks between historic structure and materials and the new. Also, to reduce overall volume at addition where massing changes occur. The architects are working to match the historic color, a light grey color as seen in the attached photos. Landscaping is proposed to enhance the site and provide screening of the parking lot and trees to provide cooling of the surface parking areas. B. Basic Site Review Standards. 1. Orientation and Scale. a. Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street and not a parking area. Automobile circulation or off-street parking is not allowed between the building and the street. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings or to one side. See Figure . 18.4.2.040.B.1 Finding: See finding g. b. A building façade or multiple building facades shall occupy a large majority of a project’s street frontage a illustrated in Figure 18.4.2.040.B, and avoid site design that incorporates extensive gaps between building frontages created through a combination of driveway aprons, parking areas, or vehicle aisles. This can be addressed by, but not limited to, positioning the wider side of the building rather than the narrow side of the building toward the street. In the case of a corner lot, this standard applies to both street frontages. Page 8 of 37 Spaces between buildings shall consist of landscaping and hard durable surface materials to highlight pedestrian areas. Finding: See finding g. The property is large, more than 700-feet of frontage along Walker Avenue and Homes Avenue, the wider sides of the building occupy the majority of the façade. c. Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. The entrance shall be designed to be clearly visible, functional, and shall be open to the public during all business hours. Finding: See finding g. d. Building entrances shall be located within 20 feet of the public right of way to which they are required to be oriented. Exceptions may be granted for topographic constraints, lot configuration, designs where a greater setback results in improved access, or for sites with multiple buildings, such as shopping centers, where other buildings meet this standard. Finding: See finding g. e. Where a building is located on a corner lot, its entrance shall be oriented toward the higher order street or to the lot corner at the intersection of the streets. The building shall be located as close to the intersection corner as practicable. Finding: The new construction is to the rear of the existing campus building. The historic façade faces Walker Avenue. The proposed classroom wing extends along the Homes Avenue façade and the addition is closer to Homes than existing structures on the campus. There The proposal does not seek to alter the historic entry. f. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street along the street frontage. Finding: There are public sidewalks adjacent to all ofthe public street frontages. The property frontage is bound by curbside sidewalks. The curbside sidewalks are pre-existing, non- conforming. Excepting where the curb cut on Homes Avenue is proposed to be closed, no changes to the existing curbside sidewalks are proposed. Page 9 of 37 g. The standards in a-d, above, may be waived if the building is not accessed by pedestrians, such as warehouses and industrial buildings without attached offices and automotive service stations. Finding: The proposal seeks to waive the standards of a. – d. above because though the new classroom building is accessed by students/parents/guardians as pedestrians from the neighborhood, the building is not a business that is accessible to the general public and the structure is not “open to the public during business hours”. The existing building has a historic orientation toward Walker Avenue and the bus loop. The proposal does not alter the historical building orientation towards the higher order street. The proposed entry area modifications and improvement parent drop off isle will provide a better orientation to the Homes Avenue campus entry. Under Oregon law (ORS 358.653) the school district is required to consult with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to avoid inadvertent impacts as the result of any new construction project involving historic properties under its control. A local historic preservation specialist, George Kramer of Kramer & Company. has been in consultation with the project architects to believes that Walker Elementary will likely prove to be historically significant and will work with BBT and the District during the design phase to minimize any impacts to the degree feasible while still meeting district needs. The proposal increases the separation of the driveway on Homes from the Walker Avenue intersection. This is to increase the amount of vision clearance and on-street vehicle maneuvering area. The increased length of the drop off and the enhancements to the parking area and the student drop-off lane will improve the vehicle stacking that at times occurs onto Homes Avenue during the morning and afternoon drop off and pick up. 2. Streetscape. One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage for that portion of the development fronting the street pursuant to subsection 18.4.4.030.E. Finding: There are new street trees proposed to be installed according to the standards of 18.4.4.030.E. There are existing trees that may affect the number of new street trees, but along Homes Avenue and Hunter Court, where not restricted by hydrants, intersections, existing, trees, etc., every 30-feet, behind the curbside sidewalk, new trees will be planted. 3. Landscaping. Page 10 of 37 a. Landscape areas at least ten feet in width shall buffer buildings adjacent to streets, except the buffer is not required in the Detail Site Review, Historic District, and Pedestrian Place overlays. Finding: The existing and proposed structures are buffered by at least ten feet from the streets. There are no changes along Walker Avenue. The building is more than 30- feet from the sidewalk on Homes Avenue. b.Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4. 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening B. Minimum Landscape Area and Coverage. All lots shall conform to the minimum landscape area standards of the applicable zoning district (see Table 18.2.5.030.A - C for residential zones and Table 18.2.6.030 for non- residential zones). Except as otherwise provided by this chapter, areas proposed to be covered with plant materials shall have plant coverage of not less than 50 percent coverage within one year and 90 percent coverage within five years of planting. Finding: The areas of disturbance from the construction are proposed to be landscaped with a formal landscape plan. A large area of the property is lawn area and will remain as such. Due to the nature of the use of the property as a public elementary school, lawn area, and hardscape are the primary landscape materials. Within the new parking area, landscape islands with shade producing trees are proposed. The parking areas and vehicular maneuvering areas drain to the parking lot bioswale. All areas of proposed landscaping provide for plant materials that grow to 90 percent coverage within five years of planting. C. Landscape Design and Plant Selection. The landscape design and selection of plants shall be based on all of the following standards: 1. Tree and Shrub Retention. Existing healthy trees and shrubs shall be retained, pursuant to chapter 18.4.5. Consistent with chapter 18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection, credit may be granted toward the landscape area requirements where a project proposal Page 11 of 37 includes preserving healthy vegetation that contribute(s) to the landscape design. Finding: The tree protection and preservation plan and the tree removal plan call for the removal of the trees that are within the areas of construction of the addition, the relocated parking area, the improvements adjacent to Hunter Court and that would not survive the impacts from construction. Of the more than 100 trees on the site, there are only 14 significant trees proposed for removal. The majority of the site's trees are retained. 2. Plant Selection. a. Use a variety of deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, and ground covers. b. Use plants that are appropriate to the local climate, exposure, and water availability. The presence of utilities and drainage conditions shall also be considered. c. Storm Water Facilities. Use water-tolerant species where stormwater retention/detention or water quality treatment facilities are proposed. d. Crime Prevention and Defensible Space. Landscape plans shall provide for crime prevention and defensible space, for example, by using low hedges and similar plants allowing natural surveillance of public and semi-public areas, and by using impenetrable hedges in areas where physical access is discouraged. e. Street Trees. Street trees shall conform to the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission. See the Ashland Recommended Street Tree Guide. Finding: The proposed landscape plan has been created by a local landscape architect. The landscape plan uses a variety of deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground covers. Due to the wildfire hazards overlay, no evergreen trees are proposed. The plants selected are appropriate Page 12 of 37 for the local climate and exposure. Water tolerant species are proposed within the stormwater detention facilities. The planting plan allows for natural surveillance of the public space. New street trees are proposed along Homes Avenue behind the sidewalk. There is a large stature Raywood Ash tree on the Hunter Court frontage that is preserved with the proposed street improvements. Additional street trees are proposed behind the sidewalk and in the landscape park row between the parking area and the parallel parking on Hunter Court. 3. Water Conserving Landscaping. Commercial, industrial, non- residential, and mixed-use developments that are subject to chapter 18.5.2 Site Design Review, shall use plants that are low water use and meet the requirements of 18.4.4.030.I Water Conserving Landscaping. Finding: The proposed landscaping plant materials are low water use and meet the requirements of 18.4.4.030.I. 4. Hillside Lands and Water Resources. Landscape plans for land located in the Hillside Lands overlay must also conform to section 18.3.10.090 Development Standards for Hillside Lands, and in the Water Resources overlay must also conform to section 18.3.11.110 Mitigation Requirements for Water Resource Protection Zones. Finding: Not applicable. 5. Screening. a. Evergreen shrubs shall be used where a sight-obscuring landscape screen is required. b. Where a hedge is used as a screen, fire-resistant and drought-tolerant evergreen shrubs shall be planted so that not less than 50 percent of the desired screening is achieved within two years and 100 percent is achieved within four Page 13 of 37 years. Living groundcover in the screen strip shall be planted such that 100 percent coverage is achieved within two years. Finding: There are no areas where evergreen screening shrubs are required. 6. Plant Sizes. a. Trees shall be not less than two-inch caliper for street trees, and 1.5-inch caliper for other trees at the time of planting. b. Shrubs shall be planted from not less than one-gallon containers, and where required for screening shall meet the requirements of 18.4.4.030.C.5 Screening. Finding: All plant and tree species will be planted per the specifications. D. Tree Preservation, Protection, and Removal. See chapter 18.4.5 for Tree Protection and Preservation and chapter 18.5.7 for Tree Removal Permit requirements. Finding: Findings addressing tree removal have been provided. E.Street Trees. The purpose of street trees is to form a deciduous canopy over the street. The same effect is also desired in parking lots and internal circulation streets; rows of street trees should be included in these areas where feasible. All development fronting on public or private streets shall be required to plant street trees in accordance with the following standards and chosen from the recommended list of street trees. 1. Location of Street Trees. Street trees shall be located in the designated planting strip or street tree wells between the curb and sidewalk, or behind the sidewalk in cases where a planting strip or tree wells are or will not be in place. Street trees shall include irrigation, root barriers, and generally conform to the standards established by the Community Development Department. Finding: Page 14 of 37 There are existing street trees along Homes Avenue that will be retained. Where proposed, new street trees are behind the existing curbside sidewalk and on the private property due to lack of right of way. The new street trees along the school district side of Hunter Court are also planted behind the sidewalk where the parking bay is adjacent to the curb line. All street trees will have irrigation and will conform to the standards of the Community Development Department. 2. Spacing and Placement of Street Trees. All street tree spacing may be made subject to special site conditions that may, for reasons such as safety, affect the decision. Any such proposed special condition shall be subject to the Staff Advisor’s review and approval. The placement, spacing, and pruning of street trees shall meet all of the following requirements. a. Street trees shall be placed at the rate of one tree for every 30 feet of street frontage. Trees shall be evenly spaced, with variations to the spacing permitted for specific site limitations, such as driveway approaches. Finding: Due to the existing locations of established trees along the street improvements of Homes Avenue and the proposed improvement to Hunter Court, the street tree planting spacing is not a standard 30-foot interval. Tree planting area specified on the landscape planting plans. b. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 25 feet from the curb line of intersections of streets or alleys, and not closer than ten feet from private driveways (measured at the back edge of the sidewalk), fire hydrants, or utility poles. Finding: No street trees will be planted within 25-feet of the intersections of Homes Avenue and Walker Avenue or Homes Avenue and Hunter Court. Proposed street trees will be located on the final landscape plans more than ten feet from the driveway. Fire hydrants are not within ten feet of street trees. Page 15 of 37 c. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 20 feet to light standards. Except for public safety, no new light standard location shall be positioned closer than ten feet to any existing street tree, and preferably such locations will be at least 20 feet distant. Finding: No street trees will be planted within 20-feet of streetlights. d. Street trees shall not be planted closer than 2.5 feet from the face of the curb. Street trees shall not be planted within two feet of any permanent hard surface paving or walkway. Sidewalk cuts in concrete for trees, or tree wells, shall be at least 25 square feet; however, larger cuts are encouraged because they allow additional air and water into the root system and add to the health of the tree. Tree wells shall be covered by tree grates in accordance with City specifications. Finding: The street trees are proposed behind the existing curbside sidewalk. No tree wells are proposed. e. Street trees planted under or near power lines shall be selected so as to not conflict with power lines at maturity. Finding: There are no street trees proposed that would conflict with the power lines. f.Existing trees may be used as street trees if there will be no damage from the development which will kill or weaken the tree. Sidewalks of variable width and elevation, where approved pursuant to section 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards, may be utilized to save existing street trees, subject to approval by the Staff Advisor. Finding: The existing, healthy street trees that will not be damaged during construction are proposed to be preserved and Page 16 of 37 counted towards the total number of street trees along the frontages where development is proposed. 3. Pruning. Street trees, as they grow, shall be pruned to provide at least eight feet of clearance above sidewalks and 12 feet above street roadway surfaces. Finding: The existing street trees will be pruned to provide adequate clearance above the street. There are trees along Hunter Court that are proposed for removal, but none are street trees as there is not a public right-of-way. 4. Replacement of Street Trees. Existing street trees removed by development projects shall be replaced by the developer with those from the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission. The replacement trees shall be of size and species similar to the trees that are approved by the Staff Advisor. See the Ashland Recommended Street Tree Guide. Finding: Street trees removed, will be replaced with appropriate species with the proposed site improvements. F.Parking Lot Landscaping and Screening. Parking lot landscaping, including areas of vehicle maneuvering, parking, and loading, shall meet the following requirements. Single-family dwellings and accessory residential units are exempt from the requirements of subsection 18.4.4.030.F.2, below. 1. Landscaping. a. Parking lot landscaping shall consist of a minimum of seven percent of the total parking area plus a ratio of one tree for each seven parking spaces to create a canopy effect. Finding: There are is one redevelopment parking area proposed or modified as part of this request. There is more than seven percent of the area for the 66 parking spaces devoted to the landscape area. These areas include landscape islands and a large bioswale/pond area. Page 17 of 37 b. The tree species shall be an appropriate large canopied shade tree and shall be selected from the street tree list approved by the Ashland Tree Commission to avoid root damage to pavement and utilities, and damage from droppings to parked cars and pedestrians. See the Ashland Recommended Street Tree Guide. Finding: The parking lot shade trees are a mixture of Zelkovas, Maple trees, and Kentucky yellowwood trees. These species have large canopies and are not known to cause root damage or droppings onto vehicles or pedestrians. c.The tree shall be planted in a landscaped area such that the tree bole is at least two feet from any curb or paved area. Finding: The trees are at least two feet from any curb or paved areas. d. The landscaped area shall be distributed throughout the parking area and parking perimeter at the required ratio. Finding: The landscape areas are distributed in the parking area and at the perimeter. e. That portion of a required landscaped yard, buffer strip, or screening strip abutting parking stalls may be counted toward required parking lot landscaping but only for those stalls abutting landscaping as long as the tree species, living plant material coverage, and placement distribution criteria are also met. Front or exterior yard landscaping may not be substituted for the interior landscaping required for interior parking stalls. Finding: There are substantial buffers around the parking area and within the parking lots landscaped with tree species and living plant material distributed to meet the placement standards. The area of landscaping that screens and buffers the parking areas exceed the minimum areas required. Page 18 of 37 2. Screening. a. Screening Abutting Property Lines. A five-foot landscaped strip shall screen parking abutting a property line. Where a buffer between zones is required, the screening shall be incorporated into the required buffer strip, and will not be an additional requirement. Finding: The parking areas where abutting a property line are proposed to be buffered from the sidewalk by five feet or more. b. Screening Adjacent to Residential Building. Where a parking area is adjacent to a residential building it shall be set back at least eight feet from the building and shall provide a continuous hedge screen. Finding: There is no parking adjacent to a residential building. c. Screening at Required Yards. i. Parking abutting a required landscaped front yard or exterior yard shall incorporate a sight obstructing hedge screen into the required landscaped yard. Finding: Where the new parking spaces are proposed along Homes Avenue, the parking spaces are more than 10-feet from the property line. This exceeds the required yard area. No hedges are proposed due to the substantial setback and bioswale planting area. ii. The screen shall grow to be at least 36 inches higher than the finished grade of the parking area, except within vision clearance areas, section 18.2.4.040. Finding: Not applicable, there are no hedges proposed due to the substantial setback from the parking area to the property lines and the landscape area between the parking area and the street. Page 19 of 37 iii. The screen height may be achieved by a combination of earth mounding and plant materials. Finding: Not applicable. iv. Elevated parking lots shall screen both the parking and the retaining walls. Finding: The parking area is not proposed to be elevated. G. Other Screening Requirements. Screening is required for refuse and recycle containers, outdoor storage areas, loading and service corridors, mechanical equipment, and the City may require screening other situations, pursuant with the requirements of this ordinance. 1. Recycle and Refuse Container Screen. Recycle and refuse containers or disposal areas shall be screened from view by the placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall five to eight feet in height to limit the view from adjacent properties or public rights- of-way. All recycle and refuse materials shall be contained within the screened area. Finding: The recycle and refuse area is within the campus area, north of the new classroom addition. This area is proposed to have a masonry wall that is between 5 to 8 feet tall. 2. Outdoor Storage. Outdoor storage areas shall be screened from view, except such screening is not required in the M-1 zone. Finding: Not applicable 3. Loading Facilities and Service Corridors. Commercial and industrial loading facilities and service corridors shall be screened when adjacent to residential zones. Siting and design of such service areas shall reduce the adverse effects of noise, odor, and visual clutter upon adjacent residential uses. Page 20 of 37 Finding: The service corridor area is proposed to be developed to the north of the new classroom wing addition. A chiller area that is screened from view and is not seen from outside of the campus area. 4. Mechanical Equipment. Mechanical equipment shall be screened by placement of features at least equal in height to the equipment to limit view from public rights-of-way, except alleys, and adjacent residentially zoned property. Mechanical equipment meeting the requirements of this section satisfy the screening requirements in 18.5.2.020.C.4. Finding: The mechanical equipment will be screened within the mechanical room addition. A chiller area that will be behind building facades, and screening material, will be developed as shown on the site plan. The placement of any equipment will not be visible from the public right of way and the adjacent residential zoned properties. a. Roof-mounted Equipment. Screening for roof-mounted equipment shall be constructed of materials used in the building’s exterior construction and include features such as a parapet, wall, or other sight-blocking features. Roof- mounted solar collection devices are exempt from this requirement pursuant to subsection 18.5.2.020.C.4. Finding: Not applicable b. Other Mechanical Equipment. Screening for other mechanical equipment (e.g., installed at ground level) include features such as a solid wood fence, masonry wall, or hedge screen. Finding: All mechanical equipment on the ground level will be screened. H. Irrigation. Irrigation systems shall be installed to ensure landscape success. If a landscape area is proposed without irrigation, a landscape Page 21 of 37 professional shall certify the area can be maintained and survive without artificial irrigation. Irrigation plans are reviewed through a Ministerial process at the time of building permit submittals. Finding: There isan irrigation system is proposed. The irrigation system will comply with the water-conserving landscape standards of the city of Ashland. I. Water Conserving Landscaping. Water has always been a scarce, valuable resource in the Western United States. In the Rogue Valley, winter rains give way to a dry season spanning five to seven months. Lack of water during the dry summer season was a major problem facing early settlers. Their creative solutions greatly altered the development of this region. Talent Irrigation District's and other district's reservoirs and many miles of reticulating canals are an engineering marvel. Finding: Water-conserving landscape design has been proposed within the non-turf areas. The plants proposed around the landscape areas excepting the bio Swale are drought tolerant and are suited for the Rogue Valley climate that way. J. Maintenance. All landscaping shall be maintained in good condition, or otherwise replaced by the property owner; dead plants must be replaced within 180 days of discovery. Replacement planting consistent with an approved plan does not require separate City approval. (Ord. 3158 § 6, amended, 09/18/2018; Ord. 3155 §§ 12, 13, amended, 07/17/2018) Finding: All landscaped areas will be maintained in good condition or will otherwise be replaced. 18.4.4.040 Recycling and Refuse Disposal Areas A. Recycling. All residential, commercial, and manufacturing developments that are subject to chapter 18.5.2 Site Design Review shall provide an opportunity-to- recycle site for use of the project occupants. 1. Residential. All newly constructed residential units, either as part of an existing development or as a new development, shall provide an opportunity-to-recycle site in accord with the following standards. Page 22 of 37 Finding: Not applicable 2. Commercial. Commercial developments having a refuse receptacle shall provide a site of equal or greater size adjacent to or with access comparable to the refuse receptacle to accommodate materials collected by the local sanitary service franchisee under its on-route collection program for purposes of recycling. Finding: The WalkerElementary School students and staff recycle as much paper, plastics, food waste, etc., as possible to reduce the flow of materials into the landfill. A refuse receptacle that provides an adequate collection area of materials produced at the school including recycling has been provided within the service yard area. B. Service Areas. Recycling and refuse disposal areas shall be located to provide truck access and shall not be placed within any required front yard or required landscape area. Finding: The recycling and refuse disposal area are provided within the new screened service yard that is accessed from the parking lot on the Hunter Court side of the property. The recycling and refuse disposal areas are not within the front yard or a required landscape area. C.Screening. Recycle and refuse disposal area screening shall be provided pursuant to section 18.4.4.030.G.1. Finding: A five to an eight-foot-tall masonry wall or fence is proposed to prevent the view from the public right of way of the refuse and recycle area. 18.4.4.050 - Outdoor Lighting Finding: All exterior lighting is attached to the buildings and will be directed on to the subject property. No artificial lighting will be directed to illuminate adjacent residential properties. New light standards within the parking area will be pedestrian-scale and will not illuminate adjacent residential properties. Page 23 of 37 18.4.4.060 - Fences and Walls B. Design Standards. Fences, walls, hedges, and screen planting shall meet the following standards, where height is measured pursuant to subsection 18.4.4.060.B.2, below. See Figure 18.4.4.060.B.1 for illustration of maximum fence heights. Finding: The majority of the perimeter fencing exists. The fencing at the perimeter of the school area is a six-foot, chain link fence. The existing chain-link fencing is set back more than 20 feet from the front property along Walker Avenue and more than 10 feet from the Home Avenue side of the property. Since the fence is outside of all of the setback areas it is allowed to exceed the fence height standards from 18.4.4.060.B.2. Metal gates and decorative fencing is proposed to be added. All proposed fencing is outside of setback areas and not subject to the height standards. 18.4.3 Parking Access and Circulation: Finding: Walker Elementary school requires 66vehicle parking spaces. Per Table 18.4.3.040: 1 space per 75 square feet of public assembly area, whichever is greater Public Assembly Area: Gymnasium = 4,938 / 75 = 65.8 Required Parking based on the largest assembly space at capacity = 66 spaces. There are 46 parking spaces available on the site. This is non-conforming as the assembly area parking calculations are not increasing due to the new construction but are required for the gymnasium area. The proposal increases the on-site parking by through the development of the new parking area. The proposal is to provide the required number of parking spaces and increases the number of spaces on-site to be closer to conformance with the parking standards. The proposed parking area relocation adds Accessible Parking spaces and expands the onsite parking to accommodate the parking demands of the elementary school. The 66 spaces are not more than a ten percent increase and are permissible under AMC 18.4.3.030.B. Accessible parking spaces as required by the Oregon building code and federal regulations are being provided in the parking area. Page 24 of 37 Walker Elementary School requires 70 bicycle parking spaces, all covered. Though several Walker Elementary School students ride their bicycles to school, never have anywhere near 70 bicycles been present at campus. There are presently 22 covered bicycle parking spaces on the north side of the gymnasium building. This is a pre-existing, non-conforming situation. The proposal adds bicycle parking on the east side of the campus, just north of the proposed classroom addition. Two, banks of 24 bike racks for a total of 66 secure bicycle parking spaces are proposed. 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design A. Parking Location 1. Except for single and two-family dwellings, required automobile parking facilities may be located on another parcel of land, provided said parcel is within 200 feet of the use it is intended to serve. Finding: All required parking is on parcels owned by Ashland School District. There are parking spaces parallel to Hunter Court proposed, these are on the School Districts' property. 2. Except as allowed in the subsection below, automobile parking shall not be located in a required front and side yard setback area abutting a public street, except alleys. Finding: The parking area on Homes is presently adjacent to the sidewalk and forward of the building façade. The proposal provides a setback from the parking area to the public street. The parking area is outside of the required front and side yard. B. Parking Area Design. Finding: The reconstructed and new parking areas are proposed to be designed in accordance with the standards. The proposed parking spaces are 9’X 18’with up to 50 percent of the provided parking spaces as compact. The parking spaces have the required back up, necessary for the types of spaces, head-in, and angled. The parking area has been designed to minimize adverse environmental impacts. One shade tree is provided for every seven spaces. Fifty percent more shade Page 25 of 37 created by shade trees is proposed to address the microclimatic effects of the parking area. The parking lot is designed to capture and treat surface run-off through a large, landscape swale. C. Vehicular Access and Circulation. Finding: The proposed access modifications remove a curb cut on Homes Avenue that is close to the intersection and relocates the current parent drop off lane that is near the intersection of Walker and Homes to be accessed from Hunter Court. The proposed layout improveson-site circulation and maintains and improves transportation system safety and operations. The proposed access is from Hunter Court. This access would serve the proposed parking area and the dedicated drop off lane. The proposed driveway to the site is aligned with the driveway to Hunter Park, across Hunter Court. The proposal provides pedestrian crossing of Hunter Court at the intersection of the driveways. The proposed circulation system accommodates expected traffic on the siteand improves the traffic congestion that is presently experienced at the intersections of Homes and Walker Avenue by providing a fully compliant parkng area with pedestrian connections through the parking lot. There is a substantial parent drop off/pick up que lane. The proposal takes into account that both of the public streets are available for the use by the public and that the proposed improvements will decrease congestion at the intersection and will improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety. The on-site circulation system incorporates street-like features such as sidewalks, plaza areas for gathering, and shade trees. Pedestrian connections on the site and adjacent sidewalks are proposed. A gravel surfaced pathway will be provided north of the driveway on Hunter Court that extends to the bicycle path to encourage more student a direct access to the path without crossing the parking lot of Hunter Park. No obstructions will be placed in the vision clearance areas of the driveways. D. Driveways and Turn-Around Design. Finding: Page 26 of 37 There are pedestrian sidewalks provided adjacent to the streets, the driveways and through the parking area. Adequate drive aisles are provided so that all vehicles enter the street in a forward manner. No obstructions will be placed in the vision clearance areas. E. Parking and Access Construction. Finding: All required parking areas, aisles, turn-arounds, and driveways will be paved with an asphaltsurface. The new parking areas, aisles, and turn arounds will have an onsite collection, treatment, and detention of drainage waters on the north side of the proposed driveway for parent drop off and pick up. All parking spaces will be clearly and permanently marked. The existing parking area is directly adjacent to the curbside sidewalk on Homes Avenue. The new parking area is proposed to be reconstructed and a 10-foot landscape buffer from the street. A site obscuring hedge or other site obscuring barrier is not proposed. There is more than seven percent landscaping in and immediately adjacent to the parking areas. The landscaping is uniformly distributed throughout the parking area and provided with irrigation facilities and protective curbs. 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation Finding: The proposal is intended to provide the students, staff, parents, a safe, reasonably direct, and convenient walkway connections between primary building entrances and all adjacent streets. The proposed improvements along Hunter Court, through the parking area, from the direction of the bike path area, in particular, provide clear pedestrian access through the site. The intersection width of Homes and Hunter has been reduced to decrease pedestrian crossing of the driveway. 18.4.5.030 Tree Protection. Page 27 of 37 Finding: The trees proposed for protection and removal were evaluated by a local landscape architect with extensive arborist knowledge. All trees on the tree protection plan will have a six-foot chain link fence installed at the dripline of the trees (or as depicted on the plan) to protect them from the impacts of construction. (See Sheet L1.1) 18.4.7 Signs. Finding: There is an existing sign program for Walker Elementary School and the Ashland School District (2009-0322).The only requested change is to add a “Walker Elementary School” sign and address numbers on the Homes Avenue façade. 4. Designated Creek Protection.Where a project is proposed adjacent to a designated creek protection area, the project shall incorporate the creek into the design while maintaining required setbacks and buffering, and complying with water quality protection standards. The developer shall plant native riparian plants in and adjacent to the creek protection zone. Finding: Paradise Creek is an ephemeral stream. It is present along the Walker Avenue frontage. The creek is partially culverted and partially above ground. There are no changes, modifications, or other site disturbances in the area of Paradise Creek. 5. Noise and Glare. Artificial lighting shall meet the requirements of section 18.4.4.050. Compliance with AMC 9.08.170.c and AMC 9.08.175 related to noise is required. Finding: All artificial lighting will meet the lighting standards. 6. Expansion of Existing Sites and Buildings. For sites that do not conform to the standards of section 18.4.2.040 (i.e., nonconforming developments), an equal percentage of the site must be made to comply with the standards of this section as the percentage of building expansion. For example, if a building area is expanded by 25 percent, then 25 percent of the site must be brought up to the standards required by this document. Finding: It can be found that the existing Walker Elementary School Site largely conforms to the standards. It appears that the parking area may be less than what is required thus an increase in the parking area. The proposed site development complies with the standards for Site Design Review. Page 28 of 37 Substantial elements of the site are being brought into conformance with the site development standards. The installation of stormwater detention bioswales, planting of street trees, increasing driveway separation from the intersection, an increase in covered bicycle parking spaces all increase site conformity. The proposed site improvements reduce adverse effects on surrounding property owners and the general public through increased safety. The site modifications, the new classroom structure, and the modified administration buildingurther energy conservation f efforts within the City, to enhance the environment for students walkingand cycling to campus. D. City Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities, and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. Finding: Adequate city facilities exist to service the proposed additional classroom building area. The proposal substantially upgrades the storm drainage facilities, where inadequate facilities exist. The Civil engineering plans provide necessary details to demonstrate proposed site development and construction can comply with city standards. See sheets C2.1 Erosion Control Plan, C3.0 Civil Site Plan, and C.4 Overall Grading and Drainage Plan. Utility details are provided on C5.0 Overall Site Utility Plan. Water: There is four-inch water main in Walker Avenue. There is also a six-inch main in Homes Avenue. There are fire hydrants on Walker Avenue, Homes Avenue, and Hunter Court. A fire vault is proposed to be installed to the west of the relocated driveway from Homes Avenue. The water line sizes are substantial and there is adequate water pressure needs for the additional structure area and the fire suppression system. Sanitary Sewer: There is an eight-inch and a ten-inch sanitary sewer line in Walker Avenue. A ten-inch sewer main is present on Homes, and there is a six-inch sanitary sewer line in Hunter Court. A new sanitary sewer lateral is proposed to extend from the new addition to Walker Avenue. There are no know capacity issues with the public sanitary sewer line on Walker Avenue. Electrical: There are major overhead electrical facilities along Walker Avenue. There are private facilities including junction boxes and vaults. To the project team’s knowledge, there are no capacity issues. A new utility transformer is proposed on the east side of Walker Avenue to the north of the north driveway of the bus loop. This transformer will service the new loads generated with the replacement construction, and upgrades to the existing services. Using LED lighting throughout the structure, lights with timers for automatic shutoff, electrical energy efficiencies are sought throughout the development of the new construction. Page 29 of 37 Storm Sewer: There is an eight-inch Storm sewer main in Walker Avenue. There is an eight-inch storm sewer main in Hunter Court. The development proposal includes substantial stormwater quality improvements. There is a large, landscaped bioswale proposed on the north side of the improved parking area and driveway aisle. The final Civil engineering will be designed to the standards of the DEQ MS4 General Permit Phase 2. The system will be designed to comply with all of Ashland’s specific stormwater quality design standards. Transportation: One of the primary issues at Walker Elementary is the site layout and that there is inadequate parking and inadequate area that allows for safe student drop off and pick up that is separated from the public traffic on the streets and away from the parent, teacher, visitor, school district employee parking lot area. The proposal, as evidenced by the information in the record including a transportation memo that analyzed the proposal find that the proposal provides additional pedestrian safety and student safety and will not increase traffic nor will not substantially alter the direction of inbound or outbound traffic. The existing parking lot for staff, parents and visitors, is accessed via a curb cut from Homes Avenue. Just to the west of this driveway is the parent drop off lane that exits onto Walker Avenue. The driveways on Homes Ave are further from the intersection than required by code, but these driveways are close (30-feet) together. With Homes Avenue, a narrow width street, vehicular turning movements, pedestrian activity, narrow right-of-way, lead to repeated issues from all of the transportation activity in the area not only generated at Walker Elementary but at the same/similar time, the middle school just down the street with parents and students going to both schools as part of their routine, places more the traffic onto the Walker and Homes intersection. This parking area is immediately adjacent to Homes Avenue without landscape buffer, and there are no landscape islands, designated pedestrian access, or parking lot shade trees. There are curbside sidewalks on Homes Avenue. No changes to the non-conforming, curbside sidewalks are proposed. Homes Avenue has a 16-foot-wide right-of-way and a 24-foot street reservation area. Homes Avenue is considered a Residential Street. The proposal removes an existing driveway that is near the Homes and Walker intersection and shifts it to the east towards Hunter Court. The proposal seeks to provide improvements to Hunter Court and shift the parking lot access from both Homes with a new driveway curbcut and the improved Hunter Court. Hunter Court is a private driveway and is not a dedicated public street. The Transportation System Plan speaks to Hunter Court dedicated as a neighborhood street. Due to the uses of Hunter Court, access to the public park and the public-school parent drop off and parking area, that the street Page 30 of 37 improvements are installed generally consistent with the standards, is a benefit to the functions of the Homes Avenue intersection. There are eight trees directly behind the existing hunter avenue curb, these trees will need to be removed to accommodate improvements. The improvements call for widening of the street to provide for two travel lanes, a landscape parkrow and a sidewalk. There is a pedestrian crossing of Hunter Court proposed to increase cross access. The proposed improvements include ADA pedestrian access and crossings to the sidewalk on the east side of Hunter Court that serves Hunter Park. The proposed changes improve pedestrian safety by increasing driveway spacing away from the most heavily used intersection. The proposed changes to the parking area and increasing the length of the driveway and vehicular maneuvering area onsite to facilitate parent drop off and pick up without pushing traffic onto the public streets. The one-way vehicular traffic circulation is proposed which increases student and pedestrian safety. Walker Avenue is considered an Avenue. No modifications are proposed to the Walker Avenue frontage. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or Finding: None requested. 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards; or Finding: Not applicable, see finding above. 3. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements for a cottage housing development, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of section 18.2.3.090. Page 31 of 37 Finding: Not applicable. 18.5.4.050 Conditional Use Permit A. Approval Criteria. 1. 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. Finding: The proposal seeks to modify the existing Ashland School District Sign Program for Walker Elementary School. The proposal seeks to add an identification address sign on the Homes Avenue façade of the new, addition. This sign is requested to be 18” tall letters that say Walker Elementary School. This wall is more than 35-feet from Homes Avenue. Public Schools are addressed in Chapter 9 of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal adds much needed updated classroom spaces and student activity areas. The proposal improves the restrooms and provides a SPED specific classroom area. This achieves the goals of the Comprehensive Plan to make a maximum effort toward the utilization of present and future educational and recreational facilities and resources through public (bond measure), private (PTO, Ashland Booster Clubs, community support), and city cooperation.Comprehensive Planencourages cooperation between the City and School District The when new school facilities are considered or when City action affects the School District, this provides the city discretion to offer leniency instead of strict adherence to the site development standards that apply to non-residential development. Though the campus will be completely secured with fencing, options to retain community access outside of school hours are being discussed. The primary issue with allowing access outside of school hours is that too many community members allow dogs to run free and dog debris and school settings are highly incompatible. There is a place holder area for a track shown on site plans. This is not part of the project scope. 2. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the development, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. Finding: No impacts from signage. 3. 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, pursuant to subsection 18.5.4.050.A.5, below. 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. Page 32 of 37 Finding: The target use in the zone is residential development with a minimum density of approximately 44 residential parcels. The proposedadditional sign area will not have any greater adverse material effects on the livability of the impact area than a 50+ residential parcel subdivision. a. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. b. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. c. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. d. Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. e. Generation of noise, light, and glare. f. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Finding: This installation of additional signage at Walker Elementary School to delineate the entrance will not adversely affect the neighborhood as it is not an illuminated sign and the sign is not going to negatively impact the expansive façade of the Walker Elementary School frontage. Schools are not similar in bulk, scale, or coverage to structures in the surrounding residential area. Schools are similar to the school buildings in the nearby areas at Ashland Middle School and Southern Oregon University. The proposed signage is intended for the specific school and is directional for the neighborhood population served by the school. The site does have less coverage than allowed in the residential zone. 4. A conditional use permit shall not allow a use that is prohibited or one that is not permitted according to this ordinance. Finding: Public schools are a permitted use in the residential zone. 18.5.7.040 Tree Removal Permit. 4. Removal of significant trees as defined in part 18.6, on lands zoned SOU, on lands under the control of the Ashland School District, or on lands under the control of the City. Significant Tree. A conifer tree having a trunk 18 caliper inches or larger in diameter at breast height (DBH), or a deciduous tree having a trunk 12 caliper inches in diameter at breast height. Tree That is Not a Hazard. a. The tree is proposed for removal to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.3.10. Page 33 of 37 Finding: The 14trees are proposed for removal to permit the applicant to be consistent with other applicable ordinance requirements and standards applicable to the Site Design Standards. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. Finding: The tree removals will not have significant negative impacts on erosion, soil stability, the flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. Areas from where trees are removed will be redeveloped with structures, hardscaping, and re-landscaped. There are more than 100 trees six-inches in diameter at breast height and larger on the Walker Elementary School Campus and along the Hunter Court c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grantan exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Finding: There are more than 100 trees on the subject property and several trees within 200-feet of the subject property. The proximity to Hunter Park which is heavily vegetated provides substantial species diversity, canopy coverage, and tree densities. The proposed development replaces canopy, tree densities, sizes, and species diversity. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. Finding: No residential components. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. Finding: Page 34 of 37 Mitigation trees are proposed throughout the property. There are 20 significant trees proposed for removal. The landscape plan calls for over 30 replacement trees. These include Kentucky yellow trees, Zelkova, maple, and Lindens. Required mitigation of 20 removed trees, is achieved through the installation of the required street trees and the proposed shade trees for the parking areas to reduce the microclimatic impacts of the pavement. Attachments: Transportation Memo – Kelly Sandow, P.E. Coverage area calculations Draft Parking and Access Agreement between ASD and Ashland Parks and Rec. Site Plans: General: G0.00 – Cover Sheet G0.01 – Standards Sheet G0.02 – Code Analysis Plan G0.03 – Code Analysis G0.04 – Assemblies Civil Engineering Sheets: C1.2 – Site Demolition Plan C2.1 – Erosion Control Plan C3.0 – Civil Site Plan C4.0 – Overall Grading and Drainage Plan C5.0 – Overall Site Utility Plan Landscape: L1.0 – Site Materials Plan L1.1 – Tree Protection and Removal Plan L2.0 – Irrigation Plan L2.1 – Irrigation Details L3.0 – Planting Plan L3.1 – Planting Details Architectural: AD2.01 – Overall Demolition Floor Plan A1.01 – Site Plan A1.02 – Site Details A2.01 – Overall Plan A2.02 – Roof Plan Page 35 of 37 A2.10 –Floor Plan Sector A A2.11 –Floor Plan Sector B A2.12 –Floor Plan Sector C A3.01 –Overall Elevations A3.02 - Elevations A3.03 - Elevations A3.04 –Historic and Perspective Views A9.01 – Finish Schedules Electrical: E1.01 – Electrical site Plan E1.02 – Communication Site Plan Page 36 of 37 Page 37 of 37 DRAFT LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARINGS _________________________________ PA-L-2021-00011 Housing Capacity Analysis ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT PLANNING ACTION: PA-L-2021-00011 APPLICANT: City of Ashland ORDINANCE REFERENCES: Ashland Comprehensive Plan Chapter VI Housing Element Oregon Administrative Rules (Chapter 660, Divisions 7 and 8 and ORS 197.307). REQUEST: Amendments to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan to Adopt the 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis as a Technical Supporting Document to Chapter VI \[Housing Element\]. I.Relevant Facts A.Background The Housing Capacity Analysis (HCA) includes an assessment of housing needs, residential land supply, and identifies a variety of strategies and actions for accommodating needed housing. The primary purpose of the HCA is to ensure that Ashland has an available land supply sufficient to accommodate our population’s housing needs over the next 20 years. The City’s Buildable Lands Inventory(BLI) was updated in 2019 (Resolution 2020-01) and adopted on January 21, 2020. This recently completed BLI provided a factual basis toevaluate land availability within Ashland’s Urban Growth Boundary. In 2019 the Oregon State Legislature passed HouseBill2003which established a mandated deadline for Ashland to complete an update of the HCA by December 31,2023.In May of 2020 the City Council authorized an application for State of Oregon funding assistance to updatethe City's 2012 Housing Needs Analysisto comply with HB 2003. The City of Ashland received a grant from the State Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) to undertake an update of Ashland’s 2012 HousingNeeds Analysis. Following the award of a State Grant from the Department of Land Conservation and Development, EcoNorthwest Consultants and City staff began an analysis of Ashland’s housing capacity in October 2020. Thework by EcoNorthwestconcluded withthecompletion of a hearings-ready draft of the Housing Capacity Analysis, and a Memorandum of Housing Strategies, in May 2021. The Housing Capacity Analysis provides the City with a starting point for the future development of a Housing Production Strategy. A Housing Production Strategy shall be developed within one year of the updated HCA according to Planning Action PA-L-2021-00011Ashland Planning Division–Staff Report Applicant: City of AshlandPage 1of 5 HB2003, and will involve reviewing the recommended strategies and actions provided as Appendix A of the HCA, assessing whether additional strategies are necessary, providing more detail about each selected strategy, and setting an implementation schedule for specific actions to be undertaken bythe City over the following eight year period. Virtual Open House stth From April 1through April 15the City of Ashland held a “virtual open house” in which Ashland residents could review information relating to Ashland’s housing market, demographics, land need, and needed housing types. The open-house also included a series of survey questions for respondents to provide their perspective on the community’s housing needs, preferences, and values. Approximately 400 people attended the open house and 267 people responded to the survey. Ad-Hoc HCA Advisory Group To assist in the development of the Housing Capacity Analysis, an advisory group was formed comprised of members of the Planning Commission, Conservation Commission, Housing and Human Services Commission, a member of the Ashland School Board, and members of both the non-profit and market-rate housing development communities. This advisory group discussed general project assumptions, results, and implications at four meetings held between December2020 and April 2021. The group also explored and suggested a range of housing policy options and strategies for the City of Ashland to further consider as it addresses its housing needs. Commission Study Sessions On January 21. 2021 the Planning Commission and Housing and Human Services Commission held a joint study session to review initial findings presented by EcoNorthwest relating to the land supply and projected housing needs. The Planning Commission held a study session on the HCA on March th 23, 2021. The Housing and Human Services Commission met on March 25, 2021, to further discuss the draft analysis and housing strategies presented for consideration. Public Hearings The Housing and Human Services Commission (HHSC) reviewed the final draft of the HCAat their regular meeting on June24, 2021and forwarded recommendations to the Planning Commission and City Council. The Planning Commission public hearingisscheduled for July 13, 2021, and the City Council public hearingand first reading is scheduled for August 3, 2021, Both public hearingshave beenpublicly noticed in accordance with 18.5.1.070.D of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance, and the Department of Land Conservation and Developments requirements for legislative ordinance changes. B. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: Theamendment to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Housing Capacity Analysis as a supporting document to Chapter VI,Housing Planning Action PA-L-2021-00011Ashland Planning Division–Staff Report Applicant: City of AshlandPage 2of 5 Element,is necessary inorder to provide a factual basis reflectingchanges in land supply, household demographics, population projections, and housing market conditions. Oregon Statewide Planning Goals -Goal 10 Housing To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. Buildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried and plans shall o encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density. TheHousing Capacity Analysis as presented included data and conclusions which assist in forecastingand planning for Ashland’s future housing needs. This development of this data directly addressesthe State Goal 10 planning requirement that each city inventory its buildable residential lands, project future housing needs, and provide the appropriate types and amounts of land within the urban growth boundary necessary to meet those needs. The City of Ashland has an acknowledged Buildable Lands Inventory (2019) and in combination with the 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis report, these technical documents provide a factual basis for assessing needed housing types and available land supply. The City already has acknowledged zoning ordinance standards relating to residential development including provisions for housing density, setbacks, parking requirements, lot coverage, types, and development in environmentally of physically constrained areas. The adoption of the 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis does not implement any land use ordinance amendments relating to these general residential development standards or authorize development inconsistent with these established requirements. The 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis further addresses AshlandComprehensive Plangoals and policyidentified in the Housing Element which was adopted in 2019: Goal 4: Forecast and plan for changing housing needs over time in relation to land supply and housing production. Policy 23: Encourage development of vacant land within the City Limits, while looking to the lands within the Urban Growth Boundary to provide sufficient land for future housing needs. C.Ordinance Amendments The proposed ordinance adopts the City of Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis, (2021),” as a Technical Report and Supporting Document of Chapter VI, \[HOUSING\]of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. The 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis report includes a housing needs projection addressing housing types and price levels, residential needs analysis, buildable lands inventory and identification of measures for accommodating needed housing as described in Oregon Administrative Rules (Chapter 660, Divisions 7 Planning Action PA-L-2021-00011Ashland Planning Division–Staff Report Applicant: City of AshlandPage 3of 5 and 8)and Oregon Revised Statute197.307. AMC 18.5.9.020.B permits legislative amendments to meet changes in circumstances and conditions. The original 2012 Housing Needs Analysis, which was adopted on September 3, 2013 (Ord#3085), contains data and forecasts that were limited to specific time periods and conditions which are no longer representative of existing conditions within the City. The proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan Housing Element,to includethe 2021 Housing Capacity Analysisreportas a technical report,is consistent with the requirements for Legislative Amendments in AMC 18.5.9.020.B. II.Procedural 18.5.9.020Applicability and Review Procedure Applications for Plan Amendments and Zone Changes are as follows: B.Type III.It may be necessary from time to time to make legislative amendments in order to conform with the Comprehensive Plan or to meet other changes in circumstances or conditions. The Type III procedure applies to the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy requiring City Council approval and enactment of an ordinance; this includes adoption of regulations, zone changes for large areas, zone changes requiring comprehensive plan amendment, comprehensive plan map or text amendment, annexations (see chapter 18.5.8for annexation information), and urban growth boundary amendments. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type III procedure. 1.Zone changes or amendments to the Zoning Mapor other official maps, except where minor amendments or corrections may be processed through the Type II procedure pursuant to subsection 18.5.9.020.A, above. 2.Comprehensive Plan changes, including text and map changes or changes to other official maps. 3.Land Use Ordinance amendments. 4.Urban Growth Boundary amendments. III.Conclusions and Recommendations The 2021 HCA demonstrated that Ashland has enough land to accommodate its housing forecast between 2021 and 2041. Ashland can accommodate the expected growth of 858 dwelling units over the next 20-years with a surplus of capacity remaining. The analysis further concluded that over the 2021 to 2041 period, Ashland will need to plan for more multifamily dwelling units in the future to meet the City’s housing needs. The summary of the report’s conclusions are provided on pages 83-84 of the report. Thecompletionof theHCAallowstheCitytofulfillrequirements setforth in HouseBill 2003which established a mandated deadline for Ashland to complete an update of the HCA by December31,2023.The availability and award of the Department of Land Conservation and Development grant funding allowed the City to accelerate the completion of the HCA in advance of this deadline. The Housing Strategy appendix to the draft Housing Capacity Analysis (Appendix A) provides the City with a starting point for the future development of a Housing Production Strategy. A Housing Production Strategy shall be developed within one year Planning Action PA-L-2021-00011Ashland Planning Division–Staff Report Applicant: City of AshlandPage 4of 5 of the updated HCA according to HB 2003, and will involve reviewing the recommended strategies and actions provided inthis document, assessing whether additional strategies are necessary, providing more detail about each selected strategy, and setting an implementation schedule for specific actions to be undertaken by the City by the year 2030. It is through the preparation of the HPS that the specific implementation strategies to address Ashland’s unmet housing needs will be identified. Recommendations Staff recommends approval of the ordinanceadopting the 2021 HCA. The Housing and Human Services Commission (HHSC) reviewed the proposed HCA at their regular meeting onJune 24, 2021 and unanimously recommend approval of the 2021 Housing Capacity Analysis as a technical support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. The HHSC further encourages that in the future development of the Housing Production Strategy that the City Council and Planning Commission prioritize strategies that support the development of Multi-Family and High-Density residential housing. ThePlanning Commission’srecommendations regarding theattached ordinance amendmentswill be presented to the City Council for consideration at thepublic hearing and First Readingscheduled onAugust 3, 2021. Attachments : Draft Ordinanceadoptingthe City of Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis, (2021),” as a Technical Report and Supporting Document of Chapter VI, \[HOUSING\]of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit A -2021 Housing Capacity Analysis Appendix A-Housing Strategies o Appendix B-BLI (approved in 2019) o Appendix C–BLI Summary o Exhibit B -Technical Reports and Supporting Documents HCAOpenhouseSurveyResults4/16/2021 Planning Action PA-L-2021-00011Ashland Planning Division–Staff Report Applicant: City of AshlandPage 5of 5 ORDINANCE NO.______ 1 2 AN ORDINANCE AMENDINGTHE CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE 3 PLAN TO ADOPT THE HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS AS A 4 SUPPORTING DOCUMENT TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE 5 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN . 6 Annotated to show deletions and additionsto the Ashland Municipal Code sections being 7 bold lined throughbold underlined. modified. Deletions are , and additions are 8 9 WHEREAS 10, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: 11Powers of the CityThe City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and 12common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow 13municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those 14powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, 15shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall 16have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, 17the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative 18powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. 19International Ass’n of Firefighters, Local 1660, Beaverton Shop20 Or. App. 293; 531 P 2d 730, 20734 (1975); and WHEREAS, 21Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10, Housing, requires all local governments to 22“provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state,” and specifically to “encourage the 23availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levelswhich 24are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility 25of housing location, type and density” through a specific element within their Comprehensive 26Plans; and WHEREAS, 27in 2012, the City of Ashllandpassed Ordinance 3085 adopting a Housing Needs 28Analysiswhich then reflected the projected housing need in comparison to the supply of 29developable land within the Ashland City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary based upon 30specific land classifications and constraints to development according to the Buildable Lands Inventory adopted in 2011;and 14 ORDINANCE NO. Page of WHEREAS, 1in 2020, the City of Ashland passed Resolution 2020-01updating and adopting the 22019Buildable Lands Inventory as a technical supporting document to the Comprehensive Plan 3in compliance with ORS 197.296(2); and WHEREAS, 4The2019 Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 2003 which requires Oregon's 5cities over 10,000 population to study the future housing needs of their residents and to develop 6strategies that encourage the production of housing their residents; and WHEREAS, 7In 2019 theOregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) 8made technical assistance grants available forcities to update housing needs analysis; and WHEREAS, 9The City of Ashland qualified for and received technical assistance to update the 10City’s 2012Housing Needs Analysis, in the preparation of the 2021Housing Capacity Analysis, 11in compliance with the requirements of HB2003; and WHEREAS 12, the 2021Housing CapacityAnalysis updates information regarding land supply, 13 population growth, household demographics, housing supply and housing coststo assist the City 14 in addressing growth andneeded housingwithin its urban growth boundary through the year 152041; and WHEREAS 16, the development of the 2021 Housing CapacityAnalysis involved citizen 17 involvement in the form onevirtual open house, four meetings of an ad-hoc advisory group, 18 publicstudysessions with the AshlandCity Council,Planning Commission, and Housing 19Commissionto review key documents, review assumptions,and provide inputduring the 20drafting of the analysis; and, 21WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced 22 recommended amendments to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan at a duly advertised public 23hearing onJuly 13, 2021 and, following deliberations, unanimously recommended approval of 24the amendments;and WHEREAS 25, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing 26on the above-referenced amendments on ____________; and WHEREAS 27, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing 28and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the 29Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; and WHEREAS 30, 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 24 ORDINANCE NO. Page of 1to amend the Ashland Comprehensive Plan in manner proposed, that an adequate factual base 2exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that 3such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. 4 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 5 6SECTION 1.The City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Appendix entitled “Technical Reports Exhibit B 7and Supporting Documents” is attached hereto and made a part hereof as . Previously 8added support documents are acknowledged on this Appendix. 9 SECTION 2. 10The document entitled “The City of Ashland Housing Capacity Anlaysis, Exhibit A 11(2021),” attached hereto as , and made apart hereof by this reference is hereby added 12to the above-referenced Appendix to support Chapter VI, \[HOUSING\]the Comprehensive Plan. 13 SECTION 3.Savings 14.Notwithstanding this amendment, the City ordinances in existence at the 15time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full 16force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinances(s) 17or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that 18 nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under 19the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. 20 SECTION 4.Severability 21. The sections, subsections, paragraphs,and clauses of this ordinance 22are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the 23validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs,and clauses. 24 SECTION 5.Codification 25. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code 26and the word “ordinance” may be changed to “code”, “article”, “section”, “chapter” or another 27word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however 28that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 2-4) need not be codified and 29the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. 30 The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, 34 ORDINANCE NO. Page of th 1Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the ___day of _________, 2021, th 2and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ___day of _________, 2021, 3 _______________________________ 4 Melissa Huhtala, City Recorder 5 6 SIGNED and APPROVED this ___ dayof _________, 2021. 7 8 9 ________________________ Julie Akins, Mayor 10 11 Reviewed as to form: 12 13 _______________________________ Katrina Brown, InterimCity Attorney 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 44 ORDINANCE NO. Page of City of Ashland 2021—2041HousingCapacity Analysis May 2021 Prepared for: City of Ashland FINALREPORT KOIN Center 222 SW Columbia Street Suite 1600 Portland, OR 97201 503-222-6060 This page intentionally blank Acknowledgements ECONorthwest prepared this report for the City of Ashland. ECONorthwest and the City of Ashland thank those who helped develop the Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis. This project is funded by Oregon general fund dollars through the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the State of Oregon. Project Advisory Committee Jim Westrick Lynn Thompson Kerry KenCairnRyan Haynes Echo FieldsRobert Kendrick Heidi ParkerMark Knox Christopher BrownGil Livni State of Oregon Josh Le Bombard, Regional Representative, DLCD Kevin Young, Senior Urban Planner, DLCD City of Ashland Bill Molnar, Director of Community Development Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist Consulting Team (ECONorthwest) Beth Goodman, Project Director Sadie DiNatale, Project Manager Luna Ou, Technical Manager I City ofAshland Contact: ECONorthwest Contact: Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Beth Goodman, Project Director City of Ashland, Planning Division ECONorthwest 20 East Main Street 222 SW Columbia, Suite 1600 Ashland, OR 97520 Portland, OR 97201 541-552-2076 503-222-6060 brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us goodman@econw.com This page intentionally blank Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ I WA? ........................................................................................................... HAT ARE THE KEY HOUSING NEEDS IN SHLANDII HA? ....................................................................................... OW MUCH POPULATION GROWTH IS SHLAND PLANNING FORIII HA? ................................................................................................................. OW MUCH HOUSING WILL SHLAND NEEDIII HA? ...................................................................... OW MUCH BUILDABLE RESIDENTIAL LAND DOES SHLAND CURRENTLY HAVEIV H? ....................................................................................................... OW MUCH LAND WILL BE REQUIRED FOR HOUSINGIV WHCA? .................................................................................. HAT ARE THE KEY FINDINGS OF THE OUSING APACITY NALYSISV 1.INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 FHCA ........................................................................................................... 2 RAMEWORK FOR A OUSING APACITY NALYSIS PP........................................................................................................................................................ 3 UBLIC ROCESS OR ................................................................................................................................... 5 RGANIZATION OF THIS EPORT 2.RESIDENTIAL BUILDABLE LANDS INVENTORY................................................................................................. 6 R2019I................................................................................................................................ 6 ESULTS OF THE NVENTORY 2020IU.......................................................................................................................................... 8 NVENTORY PDATE 3.HISTORICAL AND RECENT DEVELOPMENT TRENDS ........................................................................................ 9 DUA ..................................................................................................................................... 10 ATA SED IN THIS NALYSIS THM .......................................................................................................................................... 12 RENDS IN OUSING IX TT................................................................................................................................................... 16 RENDS IN ENURE VR...................................................................................................................................................... 19 ACANCY ATES G-AH ............................................................................................................................. 20 OVERNMENTSSISTED OUSING MH .......................................................................................................................................... 21 ANUFACTURED OMES 4.DEMOGRAPHIC AND OTHER FACTORS AFFECTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN ASHLAND .................... 22 DSFAHC .................................................................... 23 EMOGRAPHIC AND OCIOECONOMIC ACTORS FFECTING OUSING HOICE RLTAAA ............................................................................. 51 EGIONAL AND OCAL RENDS FFECTING FFORDABILITY IN SHLAND SFAA’HN................................................................................ 65 UMMARY OF THE ACTORS FFECTING SHLANDS OUSING EEDS 5.HOUSING NEED IN ASHLAND ....................................................................................................................... 68 PNHUNN20Y .................................................................................... 68 ROJECTED EW OUSING NITS EEDED IN THE EXT EARS NHIL ........................................................................................................................... 74 EEDED OUSING BY NCOME EVEL OHN............................................................................................................................................ 75 THER OUSING EEDS 6.RESIDENTIAL LAND SUFFICIENCY IN ASHLAND ............................................................................................. 78 CA .................................................................................................................................................. 78 APACITY NALYSIS RLS ................................................................................................................................. 80 ESIDENTIAL AND UFFICIENCY C ......................................................................................................................................................... 83 ONCLUSIONS APPENDIX A: ASHLAND HOUSING STRATEGY ....................................................................................................... 85 APPENDIX B: CITY OF ASHLAND’S 2019 BUILDABLE LANDS INVENTORY............. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX C: ADDITIONAL BUILDABLE LANDS AND HOUSING CAPACITY INFORMATION .. ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. This page intentionally blank Executive Summary Over the last two decades, Ashland has changed considerably. The city grew from 19,522 people in 2000 to 20,960 people in 2019, an addition of 1,438 people or 7% growth. Housing affordability is a challenge across Jackson County, with housing costs in Ashland considerably above regional averages. In 2020, the median home sales price in Ashland was $434,000, more than $130,000 above the median sales prices for Medford, Central Point, and other cities in the region. The only other city with sales prices comparable to Ashland was Jacksonville. In addition, 46% of Ashland’s households were cost burdened, more than the county average of 39% of households. Cost burden in Ashland increased from 41% in 2000 to 46% in 2014-2018 1 based on data from the Census’ American Community Survey. The Almeda wildfire increased the regional need for affordable housing by destroying about 2,549 dwellings in September 2020. The Almeda fire burned from north Ashland to just south of These losses Medford, with the cities of Phoenix and Talent losing the majority of housing. 2 increased regional need for affordable housing and overall pressure on the Ashland housing market. This report presents Ashland’s Housing Capacity Analysis for the 2021 to 2041 period. It is intended to comply with statewide planning policies that govern planning for housing and residential development, including Goal 10 (Housing) and OAR 660 Division 8. The methods used for this study generally follow the Planning for Residential Growth guidebook, published by the Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program (1996). The primary goals of the housing capacity analysis were to (1) project the amount of land needed to accommodate the future housing needs of all types within the Ashland Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), (2) evaluate the existing residential land supply within the Ashland UGB to determine if it is adequate to meet that need, (3) fulfill state planning requirements for a twenty-year supply of residential land, and (4) identify policy and program options for the City to meet identified housing needs. Throughout this project ECONorthwest solicited public input from an ad-hoc Project Advisory Committee that met four timesto discuss project assumptions, results, and implications. The project relied on the Project Advisory Committee to review draft products and provide input at key points. The City of Ashland and ECONorthwest additionally solicited input from the Housing and Human Services Commission (HHSC) and the Planning Commission in January 2021 and March 2021 as well as from the public at a virtual open house held online in April. The Cost burdened households pay more than 30% of their income on housing 1 Based on information from Jackson County. 2 https://jcgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/9c9c796ff7ff44c0b1e5d21f2d71c9fb ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis i open house provided information about Ashland’s housing market and inquired about the community’s housing needs, preferences, and values. What are the key housing needs in Ashland? Ashland’s population is forecast to grow at a similar pace as in the past. Ashland UGB is forecast to grow from 21,936 people in 2021 to 23,627 people in 2041, an increase of 1,691 people. This population growth will occur at an average annual growth rate of 0.37%. Ashland’s housing stock is predominantly single-family detached housing units. 66% of the housing stock is single-family detached housing, 25% is multifamily housing and 9% is single-family attached housing. The majority of Ashland homeowners (88%) lived in single-family detached housing, while almost half of renters (51%) live in multifamily housing. Since 2000, Ashland’s housing mix has remained relatively static. The housing stock grew by about 18% (about 1,634 new units) between 2000 and the 2014-2018 period, with the share of single-family detached housing increasing from 62% to 66% of all housing. Single-family housing accounted for more than half of new housing growth in Ashland between fiscal year 2010-11 and fiscal year 2019-20. About 63% of new housing permitted in that time was for single-family housing units (417 dwelling units), 25% was for multifamily housing (163 dwelling units), and 13% was for accessory dwelling units (83 dwelling units). Demographic and economic trends will drive demand for affordable and diverse housing in Ashland. Key demographic and economic trends affecting Ashland’s future housing needs are the aging of the baby boomers, the aging of the millennials and Generation Z, and the continued growth in Hispanic and Latino population. Baby boomers are expected to remain in their homes as long as possible but demand for specialized senior housing, such as age-restricted housing or continuum of care housing, may grow in Ashland. The ability to attract millennials and Generation Z will depend on the City’s availability of renter- and ownership-housing large enough to accommodate families while still being relatively affordable, as homeownership decline among Millennials and Generation Z may have more to do with financial barriers rather than the preference to rent. Growth in Latino households will drive demand for housing for families with children and possibly multiple-generation households. Given the lower income average for Latino households (especially first-generation immigrants), growth will also drive demand for affordable housing, for ownership and renting. Ashland lacks enough housing that is affordable, both for renter and homeowners. Ashland’s median household income was $50,613, in line with the County’s median ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis ii household income of $50,851. Approximately 26% of Ashland’s households earn less than $25,000 per year, compared to 24% in Jackson County and 20% in Oregon. About 46% of Ashland’s households were cost burdened, compared to the countywide average of 39%. About 63% of Ashland’s renters are cost burdened and about 31% of homeowners were cost burdened. Housing affordability is a growing challenge in Ashland. Housing prices are increasing faster than incomes in Ashland and Jackson County, which is consistent with state and national challenges. On average, the reported value of a house in Ashland was 5.8 times the median household income in 2000, and 8.5 times median household income in the 2014-2018 period. Ashland’s median home sales price in August-October 2020 was $434,000, which is about $130,000 higher than other cities in the county, except for Jacksonville. According to a review of currently available rental properties as of December 2020, the typical rent for a two-bedroom unit ranged from $1,145 to $1,560 and the typical rent for a three-bedroom unit ranged from $1,595 to $1,995 (CPM Real Estate Services). The Almeda wildfire increased the regional need for affordable housing. The Almeda fire burned from north Ashland to just south of Medford, destroying about 2,549 dwellings in September 2020. These losses increased regional need for affordable housing and overall pressure on the Ashland housing market. How much population growth is Ashlandplanning for? Ashland’s population within its urban growth boundary is projected to grow by over 1,691 people between 2021 and 2041, at an average annual growth rate of 0.37%. Exhibit 1 Forecast of Population Growth, Ashland UGB, 2021 to 2041 Source: Oregon Population Forecast Program, Portland State University, Population Research Center, 2018. 21,936 23,627 1,6918% increase Residents inResidents in New residents 0.37% AAGR 20212041 2021 to 2041 How much housing will Ashlandneed? To accommodate the city’s forecasted population growth of 1,691 people, Ashland needs to plan for 858 new dwelling units between 2021 and 2041. About 300 units of new housing will be single-family detached (35%); 86 units of new housing will be single-family attached (10%); 172 units of new housing will be duplexes, triplexes, or quadplexes (20%); and about 300 units will be multifamily housing with five or more units per structure (35%). This housing mix is a shift from the 2014-2018 period, when 66% of Ashland’s housing stock was single-family detached, 9% was single-family attached, 11% was multifamily (with two to four units per structure), and 14% was multifamily (with five or more units per structure). ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis iii How much buildable residential land does Ashlandcurrently have? In 2019, the City of Ashland’s Department of Community Development prepared the City’s BLI. ECONorthwest worked with City staff to update the 2019 BLI results based on development that was permitted between July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, which accounted for housing development that occurred after development of the 2019 BLI. The 2020 BLI results determined that Ashland’s UGB has 643 net buildable acres with a capacity for 2,764 dwelling units. Exhibit 2. Net Buildable Acreage and Housing Capacity by Plan Designations, Ashland UGB, 2020 Source: City of Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory (2019) and City of Ashland building permit data. How much land will be required for housing? In total, Ashland is forecast to grow by 858 dwelling units and has capacity for 2,764 dwelling units. Ashland has capacity for 1,455 dwelling units within its city limits and 1,299 dwelling units in the urbanizing area. Accommodating this growth will require annexing land into the city limits. Exhibit 3 shows a comparison of Ashland’s land capacity within the urban growth boundary with demand for new units (including land for group quarters). It shows that Ashland has enough land in all of its Plan Designations to accommodate the forecast of housing growth. Low Density Residential: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 764 dwelling units (with 368 units inside City Limits and 396 units inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Suburban Residential: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 26 dwelling units. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis iv Normal Neighborhood: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 224 dwelling units. Multifamily Residential: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 158 dwelling units. High Density Residential: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 15 dwelling units. Croman Mill District: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 209 dwelling units (with 49 units inside City Limits and 160 units inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Commercial and Employment: Ashland has a surplus capacity of 443 dwelling units (with 389 units inside City Limits and 54 units inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Exhibit 3. Final comparison of capacity of existing residential land with demand for new dwelling units and land surplus or deficit, Ashland UGB, 2021 to 2041 Source: Calculations by ECONorthwest. *Note: Low Density Residential includes SFRR, Low Density, Single family residential, and North Mountain Commercial & Employment includes Commercial, Employment, Downtown, Health Care, and Southern Oregon University What are the key findings of the Housing CapacityAnalysis? The key findings of the Ashland’s Housing Capacity Analysis are that: Ashland has sufficient land to accommodate its housing forecast between 2021 and 2041 and can accommodate growth (858 dwelling units) over the next 20-years with a surplus of capacity. Some development in the Suburban Residential, Normal Neighborhood, and Multifamily Residential Plan Designations will need to be accommodated in the City’s urban growth boundary, outside the City Limits. Ashland is planning for the continued growth of single-family detached units, however, more opportunities for multifamily and single-family attached will need to occur to meet the City’s needs. The factors driving the shift in types of housing needed in Ashland include changes in demographics and decreases in housing affordability. The aging of the baby boomers and the household formation of the millennials and Generation Z will drive demand for renter- and owner-occupied housing, such as single- family detached housing, townhouses, duplexes, tri- and quad-plexes, and apartments. Both groups may prefer housing in walkable neighborhoods, with access to services. Over the 2021 to 2041 period, Ashland will need to plan for more multifamily dwelling units in the future to meet the City’s housing needs. Historically, 66% of Ashland’s housing was single-family detached. While 35% of new housing in Ashland is forecast to be single-family detached, the City will need to provide opportunities for the ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis v development of new single-family attached (10% of new housing); duplex, triplex, and quadplex housing (10% of new housing); and multifamily units (35% of new housing). Ashland has unmet needs for affordable housing. Ashland has unmet housing needs for households with extremely-low and very-low-income households, as well as households with low- and middle-income. The forecast shows 273 of Ashland’s new households will have incomes of $32,600 (in 2019 dollars) or less. These households can afford monthly housing costs of $820, which is considerably below market rate rents starting around $1,145 for a two-bedroom unit. About 127 of Ashland’s new households will have incomes between $32,600 and $52,000 and can afford $820 to $1,300 in monthly housing costs. Ashland will need more diverse housing types to meet these housing needs and address demographic changes. These housing types include rental and ownership opportunities such as: small single-family detached housing, accessory dwelling units, cottage housing, townhouses, duplexes, tri- and quad-plexes, and apartments. Without the diversification of housing types, lack of affordability will continue to be a problem, possibly growing in the future if incomes continue to grow at a slower rate than housing costs. The memorandum Ashland Housing Strategy (Appendix A of this report) was developed to present recommendations for policy changes to address Ashland’s unmet housing needs. Based on this Housing Capacity Analysis report and using the Ashland Housing Strategy for guidance, Ashland will need to develop a Housing Production Strategy within one year of adoption of this report. The Housing Production Strategy will further describe Ashland’s housing needs based on the information in this report and will include specific strategies to address Ashland’s unmet housing needs. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis vi 1.Introduction This report presents Ashland’s Housing Capacity Analysis for the 2021 to 2041 period. It is intended to comply with statewide planning policies that govern planning for housing and residential development, including Goal 10 (Housing) and OAR 660 Division 8. The methods used for this study generally follow the Planning for Residential Growth guidebook, published by the Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program (1996). Over the last two decades, Ashland has changed considerably. The city grew from 19,522 people in 2000 to 20,960 people in 2019, an addition of 1,438 people or 7% growth. Housing affordability is a challenge across Jackson County, with housing costs in Ashland considerably above regional averages. In 2020, the median home sales price in Ashland was $434,000, more than $130,000 above the median sales prices for Medford, Central Point, and other cities in the region. The only other city with sales prices comparable to Ashland was Jacksonville. In addition, 46% of Ashland’s households were cost burdened, above the county average of 39% of households. Cost burden in Ashland increased from 41% in 2000 to 46% in 2014-2018, based on data from the Census’ American Community Survey. The Almeda wildfire increased the regional need for affordable housing by destroying about 2,549 dwellings in September 2020. The Almeda fire burned from north Ashland to just south of These losses Medford, with the cities of Phoenix and Talent losing the majority of housing. 3 increased regional need for affordable housing and overall pressure on the Ashland housing market. This report provides Ashland with a factual basis to update the Housing Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning code and to support future planning efforts related to housing and options for addressing unmet housing needs in Ashland. This report provides information to inform future planning efforts, including development and redevelopment. This report also provides the City with information about the housing market in Ashland and describes the factors that will affect future housing demand in Ashland, such as changing demographics. This analysis will help decision makers understand whether Ashland has enough land to accommodate growth over the next 20 years. Based on information from Jackson County. 3 https://jcgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/9c9c796ff7ff44c0b1e5d21f2d71c9fb ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 1 Framework for a Housing CapacityAnalysis Housing is a bundle of services for which people are willing to pay: shelter, certainly, but also proximity to other attractions (job, shopping, recreation), amenities (type and quality of fixtures and appliances, landscaping, views), prestige, and access to public services (quality of schools). Because it is impossible to maximize all these services and simultaneously minimize costs, households must, and do, make tradeoffs. What they can get for their money is influenced both by economic forces and government policy. Moreover, different households will value what they can get differently. They will have different preferences, which in turn are a function of many factors like income, age of household head, number of people and children in the household, number of workers and job locations, number of automobiles, and so on. The majority of housing in the United States is built by the private market, and therefore responds to economic and market factors. These economic and market forces have resulted in the production of units that have housed most of our nation’s households. However, they have consistently left lower-income communities and communities of color with fewer housing options and competition for a limited supply of affordable housing units. The last two decades have seen significant increases in housing costs, with much slower growth in household income, resulting in increasing unmet need for affordable housing. This report provides information about how the choices of individual households and the housing market in Jackson County and Ashland have interacted, focusing on implications for future housing need in Ashland over the 2021 to 2041 period. This report and the Ashland Housing Strategy memorandum discuss ways that the City of Ashland’s policies can influence future housing development and consider opportunities to increase access to affordable housing for lower-income communities and communities of color as well as housing needs for all residents of Ashland. Statewide Planning Goal 10: Housing Oregon has long been a national leader in planning to accommodate growth. The state mandates local government compliance with 19 statewide planning goals which include public engagement, planning for natural areas, planning for housing, and planning for adequate land to support economic development and industry growth, among others. Oregon’s Goal 10 requires each city to develop a Housing Capacity Analysis, which must tie twenty years of projected household growth to units of varying densities, and then determine whether there is adequate land inside the city’s urban growth boundary to accommodate those units. Goal 10 directs cities to plan for “…housing that meets the housing needs of households of all income levels.” Oregon’s statewide land use planning system requires one of the most comprehensive approaches to planning for housing in the country. Goal 10 provides guidelines for local governments to follow in developing their local comprehensive land use plans and implementing policies. At a minimum, local housing policies must meet the requirements of Goal 10 and the statutes and administrative rules that ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 2 implement it (ORS 197.295 to 197.314, ORS 197.475 to 197.490, and OAR 600-008). Goal 10 4 requires incorporated cities to complete an inventory of buildable residential lands. Goal 10 also requires cities to encourage the numbers of housing units in price and rent ranges commensurate with the financial capabilities of its households. Goal 10 defines needed housing types as “all housing on land zoned for residential use or mixed residential and commercial use that is determined to meet the need shown for housing within an urban growth boundary at price ranges and rent levels that are affordable to households within the county with a variety of incomes, including but not limited to households with low-incomes, very low-incomes and extremely low-incomes.” ORS 197.303 defines needed housing types: (a) Housing that includes, but is not limited to, attached and detached single-family housing and multiple family housing for both owner and renter occupancy. (b) Government assisted housing. 5 (c) Mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks as provided in ORS 197.475 to 197.490. (d) Manufactured homes on individual lots planned and zoned for single-family residential use that are in addition to lots within designated manufactured dwelling subdivisions. (e) Housing for farmworkers. DLCD provides guidance on conducting a Housing Capacity Analysis in the document Planning for Residential Growth: A Workbook for Oregon’s Urban Areas, referred to as the Workbook. Ashland must identify needs for all of the housing types listed above as well as adopt policies that increase the likelihood that needed housing types will be developed. This Housing Capacity Analysis was developed to meet the requirements of Goal 10 and its implementing administrative rules and statutes. Public Process At the broadest level, the purpose of the project was to understand how much Ashland will grow over the next 20 years. The project can be broken into two components (1) technical analysis, and (2) housing strategies. Both benefited from public input. The technical analysis required a broad range of assumptions that influence the outcomes; the housing strategy is a series of high-level policy choices that will affect Ashland residents. ORS 197.296 only applies to cities with populations over 25,000, which does not currently include Ashland based on 4 Portland State University’s estimate of 20,960 people within the Ashland UGB in 2019. Government assisted housing can be any housing type listed in ORS 197.303 (a), (c), or (d). 5 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 3 The intent of the public process was to establish broad public engagement throughout the project as work occurs. Public engagement was accomplished through various avenues. We discuss the three primary avenues below. Project Advisory Committee Engagement The City of Ashland and ECONorthwest solicited public input from an ad-hoc Project Advisory Committee. The Project Advisory Committee met four times to discuss project assumptions, The project relied on the Project Advisory Committee to review draft results, and implications. 6 products and provide input at key points (e.g., before recommendations and decisions were made and before draft work products were finalized). The project required many assumptions and policy choices that the committee needed to vet and agree upon, as these choices affect current and future residents. In short, local review and community input were essential to developing a locally appropriate and actionable Housing Capacity Analysis and housing strategy. Housing and Human Services Commission(HHSC)and Planning Commission Meetings The City of Ashland and ECONorthwest solicited input on the preliminary results of the Housing Capacity Analysis from the HHSC and the Planning Commission at a joint meeting held on January 28, 2021. The process also involved another meeting with the Planning Commission on March 23, 2021 and the HHSC on March 25, 2021 to gather their input on the preliminary results of Housing Capacity Analysis. Public Engagement The City of Ashland and ECONorthwest solicited input from the general public at a virtual open house, held on-line in April. The open house provided information about Ashland’s housing market and inquired about the community’s housing needs, preferences, and values. The Virtual Open House was open from April 1 to April 15, 2021. About 394 people attended the open house and 267 people responded to the survey. The City advertised the Open House through Engage Ashland, on the City’s website as a news item, and on Facebook and Twitter. The local news station (KDRV) also had a segment about the Open House. Project Advisory Committee meeting dates: December 7, 2020; January 11, 2021; March 1, 2021; and April 26, 2021. 6 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 4 Organization of this Report The rest of this document is organized as follows: Chapter 2. Residential Buildable Lands Inventory presents the methodology and results of Ashland’s inventory of residential land. Chapter 3. Historical and Recent Development Trends summarizes the state, regional, and local housing market trends affecting Ashland’s housing market. Chapter 4. Demographic and Other Factors Affecting Residential Development in Ashland presents factors that affect housing need in Ashland, focusing on the key determinants of housing need: age, income, and household composition. This chapter also describes housing affordability in Ashland relative to the larger region. Chapter 5. Housing Need in Ashland presents the forecast for housing growth in Ashland, describing housing need by density ranges and income levels. Chapter 6. Residential Land Sufficiency in Ashland estimates Ashland’s residential land sufficiency needed to accommodate expected growth over the planning period. Appendix A: Ashland’s Housing Strategy Appendix B: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory Appendix C: Additional Buildable Lands and Housing Capacity Information ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 5 2.Residential Buildable Lands Inventory This chapter presents Ashland’s residential buildable lands inventory (BLI). A BLI estimates the number of unconstrained buildable acres a jurisdiction has within its urban growth boundary (UGB). The methodology and detailed results of the Ashland BLI are documented in the report which was adopted by the City of Ashland in City of Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory (2019), 7 January 2020 (see Appendix B for more information). 8 The Housing Capacity Analysis uses the inventory to assess whether Ashland has sufficient land within its Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to accommodate future population growth and resulting need for new housing.The legal requirements that govern the BLI for the City of 9 Ashland are defined in Statewide Planning Goal 10 and OAR 660-008. Results of the 2019 Inventory In 2019, the City of Ashland’s Department of Community Development prepared the City’s BLI. buildable acres in The 2019 analysis determined it had approximately 648 net, unconstrained, 10 Plan Designations that allow housing outright with clear and objective standards. These 648 acres result in a capacity of 2,847 dwelling units. About 26% of Ashland’s housing capacity is located in its Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. Exhibit 4 presents the results from the 2019 analysis and Exhibit 5 shows the results of the 2019 BLI in a map. The report can be downloaded from the City’s website: https://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavID=11740 7 Resolution No. 2020-01 8 Additional information about Ashland’s buildable lands (1) inside City Limits and (2) outside City Limits and 9 inside the UGB is presented in Appendix C. Land constraints taken into account: slopes greater than 35%, lands within the floodway or flood plain, and lands 10 within resource protection areas. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 6 Exhibit 4. Net Buildable Acreage and Housing Capacity by Plan Designations, Ashland UGB, 2019 Source: City of Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory, 2019. Exhibit 5. Buildable Land, Ashland UGB, 2019 Source: City of Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory (2019) and City of Ashland building permit data. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 7 2020 Inventory Update ECONorthwest worked with City staff to update the 2019 BLI results based on development that was permitted between July 1, 2019 and June 30, 2020, which accounted for housing development that occurred after development of the 2019 BLI. In the July 2019 – June 2020 period, the City permitted 83 dwelling units, which consumed about 5.8 net acres of buildable land. ECONorthwest subtracted these acres of land and capacity for new housing from the 2019 results, as shown in Exhibit 6. Thus, the 2020 BLI results determined that Ashland’s UGB has 643 net buildable acres with a capacity for 2,764 dwelling units. Exhibit 6. Net Buildable Acreage and Housing Capacity by Plan Designations, Ashland UGB, 2020 Source: City of Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory (2019) and City of Ashland building permit data. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 8 3.Historical and Recent Development Trends Analysis of historical development trends in Ashland provides insight into the functioning of the local housing market. The mix of housing types and densities, in particular, are key variables in forecasting the capacity of residential land to accommodate new housing and to forecast future land need. The specific steps are described in Task 2 of the DLCD Planning for Residential Lands Workbook as: 1.Determine the time period for which the data will be analyzed. 2.Identify types of housing to address (all needed housing types). 3.Evaluate permit/subdivision data to calculate the actual mix, average actual gross density, and average actual net density of all housing types. This Housing Capacity Analysis examines changes in Ashland’s housing market from 2000 to 2018. We selected this time period because the period provides information about Ashland’s housing market before and after the national housing market bubble’s growth and deflation. and the more recent increase in housing costs. Data about Ashland’s housing market during this period is readily available from sources such as the Census and the City building permit database. The Housing Capacity Analysis presents information about residential development by housing type. There are multiple ways that housing types can be grouped. For example, they can be grouped by: 1.Structure type (e.g., single-family detached, apartments, etc.). 2.Tenure (e.g., distinguishing unit type by owner or renter units). 3.Housing affordability (e.g., subsidized housing or units affordable at given income levels). 4.Some combination of these categories. For the purposes of this study, we grouped housing types based on: (1) whether the structure is stand-alone or attached to another structure and (2) the number of dwelling units in each structure. The housing types used in this analysis are consistent with needed housing types as defined in ORS 197.303: 11 Single-family detached includes single-family detached units, manufactured homes on lots and in mobile home parks, and accessory dwelling units (accessory residential units). ORS 197.303 defines needed housing as “…all housing on land zoned for residential use or mixed residential and 11 commercial use that is determined to meet the need shown for housing within an urban growth boundary at price ranges and rent levels that are affordable to households within the county with a variety of incomes.” ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 9 Single-family attached is all structures with a common wall where each dwelling unit occupies a separate lot, such as row houses or townhouses. Multifamily is all attached structures (e.g., duplexes, tri-plexes, quad-plexes, and structures with five or more units) other than single-family detached units, manufactured units, or single-family attached units. In Ashland, government assisted housing (ORS 197.303(b)) and housing for farmworkers (ORS 197.303(e)) can be any of the housing types listed above. Analysis within this report discusses housing affordability at a variety of incomes, as required in ORS 197.303. Data Used in this Analysis Throughout this analysis(including the subsequent Chapter 4), we used data from multiple well-recognized and reliable data sources. One of the key sources for housing and household data is the U.S. Census. This report primarily uses data from three Census sources: The Decennial Census, which is completed every ten years and is a survey of all households in the U.S. The Decennial Census is considered the best available data for information such as demographics (e.g., number of people, age distribution, or ethnic or racial composition), household characteristics (e.g., household size and composition), and housing occupancy characteristics. As of 2010, the Decennial Census does not collect more detailed household information, such as income, housing costs, housing characteristics, and other important household information. Decennial Census data is available for 2000 and 2010. The American Community Survey (ACS), which is completed every year and is a sample of households in the U.S. The ACS collects detailed information about households, including demographics (e.g., number of people, age distribution, ethnic or racial composition, country of origin, language spoken at home, and educational attainment), household characteristics (e.g., household size and composition), housing characteristics (e.g., type of housing unit, year unit built, or number of bedrooms), housing costs (e.g., rent, mortgage, utility, and insurance), housing value, income, and other characteristics. Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), which is a custom tabulation of American Community Survey (ACS) data from the U.S. Census Bureau for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). CHAS data show the extent of housing problems and housing needs, particularly for low-income households. CHAS data are typically used by local governments as part of their consolidated planning work to plan how to spend HUD funds and by HUD to distribute grant funds. The most up- to-date CHAS data covers the 2013-2017 period, which is a year older than the most recent ACS data for the 2014-2018 period. This report uses data from the 2014-2018 and 2015-2019 ACSs for Ashland. Where information is available and relevant, we report information from the 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 10 Among other data points, this report includes data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Oregon Department of Housing and Community Services, Property Radar, Costar, and the City of Ashland. The foundation of the Housing Capacity Analysis is the population forecast for Ashland from The forecast is prepared by the Portland State the Oregon Population Forecast Program. 12 University Population Research Center. Using this population forecast is required under State law for planning purposes like developing a housing capacity analysis. 13 It is worth commenting on the methods used for the American Community Survey. The 14 American Community Survey (ACS) is a national survey that uses continuous measurement methods. It uses a sample of about 3.54 million households to produce annually updated estimates for the same small areas (census tracts and block groups) formerly surveyed via the decennial census long-form sample. It is also important to keep in mind that all ACS data are estimates that are subject to sample variability. This variability is referred to as “sampling error” and is expressed as a band or “margin of error” (MOE) around the estimate. This report uses Census and ACS data because, despite the inherent methodological limits, they represent the most thorough and accurate data available to assess housing needs. We consider these limitations in making interpretations of the data and have strived not to draw conclusions beyond the quality of the data. The Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 12 2018-2068 can be found at this location: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=opfp In 2015, the Land Conservation and Development Commission adopted rules (OAR 660-032) to require the use of 13 PSU’s Population Research Center’s forecasts for comprehensive planning purposes by cities within Oregon. A thorough description of the ACS can be found in the Census Bureau’s publication “What Local Governments 14 Need to Know.” https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2009/acs/state-and-local.html ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 11 Trends in Housing Mix This section provides an overview of changes in the mix of housing types in Ashland and compares Ashland to Jackson County and to Oregon. These trends demonstrate the types of housing developed in the area historically. Unless otherwise noted, this chapter uses data from the 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census and the 2014-2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. This section shows the following trends in housing mix in Ashland: Ashland’s housing stock is predominantly single-family detached housing units. Sixty-six percent of Ashland’s housing stock is single-family detached housing, 25% is multifamily housing (inclusive of smaller and larger multifamily structures), and 9% is single-family attached (e.g., townhouses). Since 2000, Ashland’s housing mix has remained relatively static. Ashland’s housing stock grew by about 18% (about 1,634 new units) between 2000 and the 2014-2018 period, with share of single-family detached housing increasing from 62% to 66% of all housing. Single-family housing accounted for more than half of new housing growth in Ashland between fiscal year 2010-11 and fiscal year 2019-20. About 63% of new housing permitted in that time was for single-family housing units (417 dwelling units), 25% was for multifamily housing (163 dwelling units), and 13% was for accessory dwelling units (83 dwelling units). Housing Mix The total number of dwelling Exhibit 7. Total Dwelling Units, Ashland, 2000 and 2014-2018 units in Ashland increased by Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census, SF3 (Table H030) and 2014-2018 ACS (Table B25024). 18% from 2000 2014-2018. In this time, Ashland added 1,634 units. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 12 Sixty-sixpercentof Ashland’s Exhibit 8.Housing Mix, Ashland, JacksonCounty, andOregon, housing stock was single-2014-2018 family detached. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Table B25024. Ashland had a larger share of multifamily housing than Jackson County. From 2000 to 2014-2018, Exhibit 9. Change in Housing Mix, Ashland, 2000 and 2014-2018 the share of multifamily Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census, SF3 Table H030, and 2014-2018 ACS Table B25024. housing (with five or more units per structure) decreased by 6% in Ashland. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 13 Exhibit 10 shows the types of dwelling units by race and ethnicity in Ashland. It shows that households that identified as Asian Alone were most likely to live in single-family detached housing (78%). Households that identified as Black/African American Alone or Some other Race Alone were most likely to live in multifamily housing. Of any race, about 41% of the households that identified as Latino lived in single-family detached housing. Exhibit 10 includes an indication of margin of error (the “whisker” lines shown in the graph). The number of people of color in Ashland is relatively small. Exhibit 30 shows that groups like Black or American Indian account for less than 2% of residents in Ashland. Exhibit 10 shows a high margin of error in the data for these groups, with either a long “whisker” line or an asterisk (*) to indicate that the margin of error exceeds 50% (indicating high uncertainty about the data). The take-away point from Exhibit 10 is that some people of color (not including Asians) are more likely to live in multifamily housing than the Ashland average in Exhibit 8, which shows that 14% of households live in multifamily housing. Exhibit 10. Occupied Housing Structure by Race and Ethnicity, Ashland, 2014-2018 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Table B25032 A-I. Note: Margin of errors marked with an asterisk (*) indicate the value exceeds 50%. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 14 Building Permits Exhibit 11 shows dwelling units permitted in Ashland over the fiscal year 2010-2011 to 2019- 2020 period. In this time, Ashland issued permits for 663 new dwelling units, at an annual average of 66 per year. Of these 663 permits, 63% were for single-family units, 25% were for multifamily units, and 13% were for accessory dwelling units. Exhibit 11. Building Permits Issued for New Residential Construction by Type of Unit, Ashland, Fiscal Year 2010-11 through Fiscal Year 2019-20 Source: City of Ashland, Residential Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 15 Trends in Tenure Housing tenure describes whether a dwelling is owner- or renter-occupied. This section shows: Homeownership rates in Ashland were lower than rates in Jackson County and Oregon. About 54% of Ashland’s households owned their home in the 2014-2018 period. In comparison, 63% of Jackson County households and 62% of Oregon households were homeowners in that time. Homeownership rates in Ashland increased between 2000 and 2014-2018. In 2000, 52% of Ashland households were homeowners. This increased to 54% in 2014-2018. The majority of Ashland homeowners (88%) lived in single-family detached housing, while almost half of renters (51%) live in some form of multifamily housing (duplexes on through units in larger multifamily structures). The homeownership rate in Exhibit 12. Tenure, Occupied Units, Ashland, 2000 - 2014-18 Ashland increased by 2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census SF1 Table H004, 2010 Decennial Census SF1 Table H4, 2014-2018 ACS Table B24003. from 2000 to 2014-2018. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 16 Ashland hada lower Exhibit 13. Tenure, Occupied Units, Ashland, 2014-2018 homeownership rate than Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table B24003. Jackson County and Oregon. The majority of Exhibit 14. Housing Units by Type and Tenure, Ashland, 2014-2018 homeowners (88%) lived in Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Table B25032. single-family detached housing. In comparison, less than half of Ashland’s renters (40%) lived in single-family detached housing; over half lived in some form of multifamily housing (51%) ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 17 Exhibit 15 shows housing tenure by race and ethnicity of Ashland’s households. Households that identified as White Alone or Asian Alone had the highest rates of home ownership (55% and 42%). About 34% of households who identified as Latino (of any race) owned their own home. Exhibit 15 includes an indication of margin of error (the “whisker” lines shown in the graph). The number of people of color in Ashland is relatively small. Exhibit 30 shows that groups like Black for about 1.4% of residents of Ashland. Exhibit 15 shows a high margin of error in the data for Black and “some other race” groupings, with either a long “whisker” line or an asterisk (*) to indicate that the margin of error exceeds 50% (indicating high uncertainty about the data). The take-away point from asterisk is that some people of color are more likely to rent their housing than the Ashland average in Exhibit 13, which shows that 54% of Ashland’s households are homeowners. Exhibit 15. Tenure by Race and Ethnicity, Ashland, 2014-2018 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Tables B25003A-I. Note: Margin of errors marked with an asterisk (*) indicate the value exceeds 50%. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 18 Vacancy Rates Housing vacancy is a measure of housing that is available to prospective renters and buyers. It is also a measure of unutilized housing stock. The Census defines vacancy as: "Unoccupied housing units… determined by the terms under which the unit may be occupied, e.g., for rent, for sale, or for seasonal use only." The 2010 Census identified vacancy through an enumeration, separate from (but related to) the survey of households. Enumerators are obtained using information from property owners and managers, neighbors, rental agents, and others. According to the 2014-2018 Census, the vacancy rate in Ashland was 8.3%, compared to 7.5 % for Jackson County and 9.1% for Oregon. About 30% of Ashland’s vacant units are vacant for seasonal, recreational, or other occasional use reasons (see Exhibit 16). Real estate professionals who work in Ashland indicate that vacancy rates in 2020 and 2021 are 1% or below for housing for sale or for rent. The difference between this vacancy rate and the one reported by the Census (8.3%) is: Time period. The vacancy rate from the Census is reported for the 2014 through 2018 period, while real estate professionals are focused on more recent vacancy rates. Type of vacancy. The vacancy rate from the Census includes vacancies for many reasons, including vacant for rent or sales but also vacant for seasonal/recreational uses (e.g., second homes) and vacant for migrant workers. Exhibit 16. Vacancy by Reason, Ashland, 2014-2018 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Table B25004. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 19 Government-Assisted Housing Governmental agencies and nonprofit organizations offer a range of housing assistance to low- and moderate-income households renting or purchasing a home. There are 10 government- assisted housing developments in Ashland. Exhibit 17. Government Assisted Housing, Ashland, 2019 Source: Oregon Health Authority. (November 2019). Affordable Housing Inventory in Oregon. The Jackson County Continuum of Care (CoC) region has 133 emergency shelter beds, 272 transitional shelter beds, and 857 permanently supportive housing beds supporting persons experiencing homelessness in the Jackson County region. Exhibit 18. Facilities and Housing Targeted to Households Experiencing Homelessness, Medford/Ashland/Jackson County Continuum of Care Region, 2019 Source: HUD 2019 Continuum of Care Homeless Assistance Programs, Housing Inventory Count Report, Medford, Ashland/Jackson County CoC (from Medford’s 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan). ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 20 Manufactured Homes Manufactured homes provide a source of affordable housing in Ashland. They provide a form of homeownership that can be made available to low- and moderate-income households. Cities are required to plan for manufactured homes—both on lots and in parks (ORS 197.475-492). Generally, manufactured homes in parks are owned by the occupants who pay rent for the space. Monthly housing costs are typically lower for a homeowner in a manufactured home park for several reasons, including the fact that property taxes levied on the value of the land are paid by the property owner, rather than the manufactured homeowner. The value of the manufactured home generally does not appreciate the way a conventional home would, however. Manufactured homeowners in parks are also subject to the mercy of the property owner in terms of rent rates and increases. It is generally not within the means of a manufactured homeowner to relocate to another manufactured home to escape rent increases. Living in a park is desirable to some homeowners because it can provide a more secure community with on-site managers and amenities, such as laundry and recreation facilities. OAR 197.480(4) requires cities to inventory the mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks sited in areas planned and zoned or generally used for commercial, industrial, or high-density residential development. Exhibit 19 presents the inventory of mobile and manufactured home parks within Ashland as of November 2020. It shows that Ashland had a total of 255 manufactured home spaces in five communities within the UGB. As of November 2020, about 21 spaces were vacant. Exhibit 19. Inventory of Mobile/Manufactured Home Parks, Ashland, 2020 Source: Oregon Manufactured Dwelling Park Directory as of November 2020. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 21 4.Demographic and Other Factors Affecting Residential Development in Ashland Demographic trends are important for a thorough understanding of the dynamics of the Ashland housing market. Ashland exists in a regional economy; trends in the region impact the local housing market. This chapter documents demographic, socioeconomic, and other trends relevant to Ashland at the national, state, and regional levels. Demographic trends provide a context for growth in a region; factors such as age, income, migration, and other trends show how communities have grown and how they will shape future growth. To provide context, we compare Ashland to Jackson County and Oregon. We also compare Ashland to nearby cities where appropriate. Characteristics such as age and ethnicity are indicators of how the population has grown in the past and provide insight into factors that may affect future growth. A recommended approach to conducting a Housing Capacity Analysis is described in Planning for Residential Growth: A Workbook for Oregon’s Urban Areas, the Department of Land Conservation and Development’s guidebook on local housing needs studies. As described in the workbook, the specific steps in the Housing Capacity Analysis are: 1.Project the number of new housing units needed in the next 20 years. 2.Identify relevant national, state, and local demographic and economic trends and factors that may affect the 20-year projection of structure type mix. 3.Describe the demographic characteristics of the population and, if possible, the housing trends that relate to demand for different types of housing. 4.Determine the types of housing that are likely to be affordable to the projected households based on household income. 5.Determine the needed housing mix and density ranges for each Plan Designation and the average needed net density for all structure types. 6.Estimate the number of additional needed units by structure type. This chapter presents data to address steps 2, 3, and 4 in this list. Chapter 5 presents data to address steps 1, 5, and 6 in this list. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 22 Demographic and Socioeconomic Factors Affecting Housing Choice 15 Analysts typically describe housing demand as the preferences for different types of housing (e.g., single-family detached or apartment) and the ability to pay for that housing (the ability to exercise those preferences in a housing market by purchasing or renting housing; in other words, income or wealth). Many demographic and socioeconomic variables affect housing choice. However, the literature about housing markets finds that age of the householder, size of the household, and household income are most strongly correlated with housing choice. Age of householder is the age of the person identified (in the Census) as the head of household. Households make different housing choices at different stages of life. This chapter discusses generational trends, such as housing preferences of baby boomers (people born from about 1946 to 1964), millennials (people born from about 1980 to 2000), and Generation Z (people born after 1997). Size of household is the number of people living in the household. Younger and older people are more likely to live in single-person households. People in their middle years are more likely to live in multi-person households (often with children). Household income is probably the most important determinant of housing choice. Income is strongly related to the type of housing a household chooses (e.g., single-family detached, duplex, or a building with more than five units) and to household tenure (e.g., rent or own). This chapter focuses on these factors, presenting data that suggests how changes to these factors may affect housing need in Ashland over the next 20 years. The research in this chapter is based on numerous articles and sources of information about housing, including: 15 D. Myers and S. Ryu, Aging Baby Boomers and the Generational Housing Bubble, Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 2008. Davis, Hibbits, & Midghal Research, “Metro Residential Preference Survey,” May 2014. L. Lachman and D. Brett, Generation Y: America’s New Housing Wave, Urban Land Institute, 2010. George Galster. People Versus Place, People and Place, or More? New Directions for Housing Policy, Housing Policy Debate, 2017. Herbert, Christopher and Hrabchak Molinsky. “Meeting the Housing Needs of an Aging Population,” 2015. J. McIlwain, Housing in America: The New Decade, Urban Land Institute, 2010. Schuetz, Jenny. Who is the new face of American homeownership? Brookings, 2017. The American Planning Association, “Investing in Place; Two generations’ view on the future of communities,” 2014. Transportation for America, “Access to Public Transportation a Top Criterion for Millennials When Deciding Where to Live, New Survey Shows,” 2014. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 23 National Trends 16 This brief summary on national housing trends builds on previous work by ECONorthwest as well as Urban Land Institute (ULI) reports and conclusions from The State of the Nation’s Housing report from the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. The Harvard report (2020) summarizes the national housing outlook as follows: Given the profound impact of the pandemic on how US households live and work, there is plenty of reason to believe that it could bring meaningful changes to housing markets. With millions of people forced to work remotely, employers and employees alike may find this an attractive option even after the pandemic ends. If so, demand would likely increase for homes large enough to provide office space, as well as easy access to outdoor spaces to exercise and socialize. And if long commutes are no longer everyday requirements, many households may move to lower-density areas where housing is less expensive. However, a major shift in residential development patterns is far from certain. What is certain is that the need for more housing of all types, locations, and price points will persist. In the near term, the outlook for housing markets is bright, fueled by very low interest rates as well as unabated demand from more affluent households. If the pandemic persists, however, it will remain a serious drag on the labor market and wage growth, and ultimately on household formations. Still, the pandemic’s negative impact on markets should be relatively muted given historically tight conditions on the supply side. However, challenges to a strong domestic housing market remain. Rising mortgage rates, the tight credit market, and a limited inventory of entry-level homes make housing unaffordable for many Americans, especially younger Americans. In addition to rising housing costs, wages have also failed to keep pace, worsening affordability pressures. Single-family and multifamily housing supply remains tight, which compounds affordability issues. The State of the Nation’s Housing report emphasizes the importance of government assistance and intervention to keep housing affordable moving forward. Several challenges and trends shaping the housing market are summarized below: Bounce back in residential construction led by single-family starts. New construction made a sharp comeback in summer 2020 led by single-family construction. Single-family starts in 2020 began at about a 900,000-unit annual rate (the fastest pace since the Great Recession), before dipping to a below 700,000-unit annual rate in April due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Then, single-family starts hit a 1.1-million-unit annual rate in September 2020—marking it as the strongest month for single-family homebuilding in over 13 years. Multifamily unit starts also continued to climb, increasing by 7.5% from about 374,000 units in 2018 to about 402,000 units in 2019. Notably, 2019 marked the first These trends are based on information from (1) the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University’s 16 publication “The State of the Nation’s Housing 2020,” (2) Urban Land Institute, “2021 Emerging Trends in Real Estate,” and (3) the U.S. Census. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 24 year since 1988 that multifamily starts topped 400,000. In 2019, home sales averaged 3.9 months which is below what is considered balanced (six months), with lower-cost and moderate-cost homes experiencing the tightest inventories. The State of the Nation’s Housing report cited lack of skilled labor, rising construction costs, land use regulations (particularly density restrictions), and development fees as constraints on new construction. Demand shift from renting to owning. After years of decline, the national homeownership rate increased slightly from 64.4% in 2018 to 64.6% in 2019. Trends suggest the recent homeownership increases are among householders of all age groups; however, new growth in homeownership since the post-Great Recession low of 2013 resulted from households with higher incomes. About 88% of net new growth (2013 to 2019) was among households with incomes of $150,000 or more. Housing affordability. Despite a recent downward trend, 37.1 million American households spent more than 30% of their income on housing in 2019 which is 5.6 million more households than in 2001. Renter households experienced cost-burden at more than double the rate of homeowners (46% versus 21%) with the number of cost-burdened renters exceeding cost-burdened homeowners by 3.7 million in 2019. Affordability challenges continued to move up the income ladder, with the share of cost-burdened middle-income households increasing slightly from 2018 to 2019 even as the share of low-income households experiencing cost burden declined slightly over the same period. Households under the age of 25 and over the age of 85 had the highest rates of housing cost burden. Long-term growth and housing demand. The Joint Center for Housing Studies forecasts that nationally, demand for new homes could total as many as 12 million units between Much of the demand will come from baby boomers, millennials, 2018 and 2028. 17 Generation Z,and immigrants. The Urban Land Institute cites the trouble of 18 overbuilding in the luxury sector while demand is in mid-priced single-family houses affordable to a larger buyer pool. Growth in rehabilitation market.Aging housing stock and poor housing conditions 19 are growing concerns for jurisdictions across the United States. With almost 80% of the nation’s housing stock at least 20 years old (and 40% at least 50 years old), Americans are spending in excess of $400 billion per year on residential renovations and repairs. As housing rehabilitation becomes the go-to solution to address housing conditions, the The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. The State of the Nation’s Housing 2019. 17 According to the Pew Research Center, Millennials were born between the years of 1981 to 1996 and Generation Z 18 were born between 1997 to 2012 (inclusive). Read more about generations and their definitions here: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/01/defining-generations-where-millennials-end-and-post-millennials- begin/. These findings are copied from: Joint Center for Housing Studies. (2019). Improving America’s Housing, Harvard 19 University. Retrieved from: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Harvard_JCHS_Improving_Americas_Housing_2019.pdf ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 25 home remodeling market has grown more than 50% since the recession ended— generating 2.2% of national economic activity (in 2017). Despite trends suggesting growth in the rehabilitation market, rising construction costs and complex regulatory requirements pose barriers to rehabilitation. Lower-income households or households on fixed incomes may defer maintenance for years due to limited financial means, escalating rehabilitation costs. At a certain point, the cost of improvements may outweigh the value of the structure, which may necessitate new responses such as demolition or redevelopment. Declining residential mobility.Residential mobility rates have declined steadily since 20 1980. Nearly one in five Americans moved every year in the 1980s, compared to one in ten Americans between 2018 and 2019. While reasons for decline in residential mobility are uncertain, contributing factors include demographic, housing affordability, and labor-related changes. For instance, as baby boomers and millennials age, mobility rates are expected to fall as people typically move less as they age. Harvard University’s Research Brief (2020) also suggests that increasing housing costs could be preventing people from moving if they are priced out of desired neighborhoods or if they prefer to stay in current housing as prices rise around them. Other factors that may impact mobility include the rise in dual-income households (which complicates job-related moves), the rise in work-from-home options, and the decline in company-funded relocations. While decline in mobility rates span all generations, they are greatest among young adults and renters, two of the more traditionally mobile groups. Changes in housing preference. Housing preference will be affected by changes in demographics, most notably: the aging of baby boomers, housing demand from millennials and Generation Z, and growth of immigrants. Baby boomers. In 2020, the oldest members of this generation were in their seventies and the youngest were in their fifties. The continued aging of the baby boomer generation will affect the housing market. In particular, baby boomers will influence housing preference and homeownership trends. Preferences (and needs) will vary for boomers’ moving through their 60s, 70s, and 80s (and beyond). They will require a range of housing opportunities. For example, “aging baby boomers are increasingly renters-by-choice, \[preferring\] walkable, high-energy, culturally evolved communities.” Many seniors are also moving to planned retirement 21 destinations earlier than expected as they experience the benefits of work-from-home trends (accelerated by COVID-19). Additionally, the supply of caregivers is decreasing as people in this cohort move from giving care to needing care, making more inclusive, community-based, congregate settings more important. Senior households earning different incomes may make distinctive housing choices. For instance, low-income seniors may not have the financial resources to live out their Frost, R. (2020). “Are Americans stuck in place? Declining residential mobility in the US.” Joint Center for Housing 20 Studies of Harvard University’s Research Brief. Urban Land Institute. Emerging Trends in Real Estate, United States and Canada. 2019. 21 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 26 years in a nursing home and may instead choose to downsize to smaller, more affordable units. Seniors living in proximity to relatives may also choose to live in multigenerational households. Research shows that “older people in western countries prefer to live in their own familiar environment as long as possible,” but aging in place does not only mean A broader definition exists, which explains that growing old in their own homes. 22 aging in place means “remaining in the current community and living in the residence of one’s choice.” Some boomers are likely to stay in their home as long as 23 they are able, and some will prefer to move into other housing products, such as multifamily housing or age-restricted housing developments, before they move into to a dependent living facility or into a familial home. Moreover, “the aging of the U.S. population, \[including\] the continued growth in the percentage of single-person households, and the demand for a wider range of housing choices in communities across the country is fueling interest in new forms of residential development, including tiny houses.” 24 Millennials. Over the last several decades, young adults have increasingly lived in However, as multigenerational housing—more so than older demographics. 25 millennials move into their early to mid-thirties, postponement of family formation is ending, and millennials are likely to prefer detached, single family homes in suburban areas. At the beginning of the 2007–2009 recession, millennials had only started forming their own households. Today, millennials are driving much of the growth in new households, albeit at slower rates than previous generations. As this generation continues to progress into their homebuying years, they will seek out affordable, modest-sized homes. This will prove challenging as the market for entry-level, single-family homes has remained stagnant. Although construction of smaller homes (less than 1,800 sq. ft.) increased in 2019, they only represented 24% of single-family units. Millennials’ average wealth may remain far below boomers and Gen Xers, and student loan debt will continue to hinder consumer behavior and affect retirement savings. As of 2020, millennials comprised 38% of home buyers, while Gen Xers comprised 23% and Boomers 33%.“By the year 2061, it is estimated that $59 trillion 26 Vanleerberghe, Patricia, et al. (2017). The quality of life of older people aging in place: a literature review. 22 Ibid. 23 American Planning Association. Making Space for Tiny Houses, Quick Notes. 24 According to the Pew Research Center, in 1980, just 11% of adults aged 25 to 34 lived in a multigenerational family 25 household, and by 2008, 20% did (82% change). Comparatively, 17% of adults aged 65 and older lived in a multigenerational family household, and by 2008, 20% did (18% change). National Association of Realtors. (2020). 2020 Home Buyers and Sellers Generational Trends Report, March 2020. 26 Retrieved from: https://www.nar.realtor/research-and-statistics/research-reports/home-buyer-and-seller- generational-trends ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 27 will be passed down from boomers to their beneficiaries,” presenting new opportunities for millennials (as well as Gen Xers). 27 Generation Z.In 2020, the oldest members of Generation Zwere in their early 20sand the youngest in their early childhood years. By 2040, Generation Z will be between 20 and 40 years old. While they are more racially and ethnically diverse than previous generations, when it comes to key social and policy issues, they look very much like millennials. Generation Z was set to inherit a strong economy and record- low unemployment. However, because the long-term impacts of COVID-19 are 28 unknown, Generation Z may now be looking at an uncertain future. While researchers do not yet know how Generation Z will behave in adulthood, many expect they will follow patterns of previous generations. A segment is expected to move to urban areas for reasons similar to previous cohorts (namely, the benefits that employment, housing, and entertainment options bring when they are in close proximity). However, this cohort is smaller than millennials (67 million vs. 72 million) which may lead to slowing real estate demand in city centers. Immigrants. Research on foreign-born populations shows that immigrants, more than native-born populations, prefer to live in multigenerational housing. Still, immigration and increased homeownership among minorities could also play a key role in accelerating household growth over the next 10 years. Current Population Survey estimates indicate that the number of foreign-born households rose by nearly 400,000 annually between 2001 and 2007, and they accounted for nearly 30% of overall household growth. Beginning in 2008, the influx of immigrants was staunched by the effects of the Great Recession. After a period of declines, the foreign-born population again began contributing to household growth, despite decline in immigration rates in 2019. The Census Bureau’s estimates of net immigration in 2019 indicate that 595,000 immigrants moved to the United States from abroad, down from 1.2 million immigrants in 2017–2018. However, as noted in The State of the Nation’s Housing (2020) report, “because the majority of immigrants do not immediately form their own households upon arrival in the country, the drag on household growth from lower immigration only becomes apparent over time.” Diversity. The growing diversity of American households will have a large impact on the domestic housing markets. Over the coming decade, minorities will make up a larger share of young households and constitute an important source of demand for both rental housing and small homes. The growing gap in homeownership rates between Whites and Blacks, as well as the larger share of minority households that are cost burdened warrants consideration. White households had a 73% PNC. (n.d.). Ready or Not, Here Comes the Great Wealth Transfer. Retrieved from: https://www.pnc.com/en/about- 27 pnc/topics/pnc-pov/economy/wealth-transfer.html Parker, K. & Igielnik, R. (2020). On the cusp if adulthood and facing an uncertain future: what we know about gen 28 Z so far. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/essay/on-the-cusp-of-adulthood- and-facing-an-uncertain-future-what-we-know-about-gen-z-so-far/ ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 28 homeownership rate in 2019 compared to a 43% rate for Black households. This 30- percentage point gap is the largest disparity since 1983. Although homeownership rates are increasing for some minorities, Black and Hispanic households are more likely to have suffered disproportionate impacts of the pandemic and forced sales could negatively impact homeownership rates. This, combined with systemic discrimination in the housing and mortgage markets and lower incomes relative to White households, leads to higher rates of cost burden for minorities —43% for Blacks, 40% for Latino, 32% for Asians and 25% for Whites in 2019. As noted in The State of the Nation’s Housing (2020) report “the impacts of the pandemic have shed light on the growing racial and income disparities in the nation between the nation ̦ s haves and have-nots are the legacy of decades of discriminatory practices in the housing market and in the broader economy.” Changes in housing characteristics. The U.S. Census Bureau’s Characteristics of New Housing Report (2019) presents data that show trends in the characteristics of new housing for the nation, state, and local areas. Several long-term trends in the characteristics of housing are evident from the New Housing Report: 29 Larger single-family units on smaller lots. Between 1999 and 2019, the median size of new single-family dwellings increased by 13% nationally, from 2,028 sq. ft. to 2,301 sq. ft., and 14% in the western region from 2,001 sq. ft. in 1999 to 2,279 sq. ft in 2019. Moreover, the percentage of new units smaller than 1,400 sq. ft. nationally decreased by more than half, from 16% in 1999 to 7% in 2019. The percentage of units greater than 3,000 sq ft increased from 17% in 1999 to 25% of new one-family homes completed in 2019. In addition to larger homes, a move toward smaller lot sizes was seen nationally. Between 2009 and 2019, the percentage of lots less than 7,000 sq. ft. increased from 25% to 33% of lots. Based on national study about homebuying preferences that differ by race and ethnicity, African Americans home buyers wanted a median unit size of 2,664 square feet, compared to 2,347 sq ft for Hispanic buyers, 2,280 sq ft for Asian buyers, and This same study found that minorities were less likely 2,197 sq ft for White buyers. 30 to want large lots. Larger multifamily units. Between 1999 and 2019, the median size of new multifamily dwelling units increased by 3.4% nationally. In the western region, the median size decreased by 1.9%. Nationally, the percentage of new multifamily units with more than 1,200 sq ft increased from 28% in 1999 to 35% in 2019 and increased from 25% to 27% in the western region. Household amenities. Across the United States since 2013, an increasing number of new units had air-conditioning (fluctuating year by year at over 90% for both new U.S. Census Bureau, Highlights of Annual 2019 Characteristics of New Housing. Retrieved from: 29 https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/highlights.html Quint, Rose. (April 2014). What Home Buyers Really Want: Ethnic Preferences. National Association of Home Builders. 30 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 29 single-family and multifamily units). In 2000, 93% of new single-family houses had two or more bathrooms, compared to 96% in 2019. The share of new multifamily units with two or more bathrooms decreased from 55% of new multifamily units to 45%. As of 2019, 92% of new single-family houses in the United States had garages for one or more vehicles (from 89% in 2000). Additionally, if work-from-home dynamics become a more permanent option, then there may be rising demand for different housing amenities such as more space for home offices or larger yards for recreation. Shared amenities. Housing with shared amenities grew in popularity, as it may improve space efficiencies and reduce per-unit costs/maintenance costs. Single-room cottage clusters, cohousing developments, and multifamily occupancies (SROs), 31 products are common housing types that take advantage of this trend. Shared amenities may take many forms and include shared bathrooms, kitchens, other home appliances (e.g., laundry facilities, outdoor grills), security systems, outdoor areas (e.g., green spaces, pathways, gardens, rooftop lounges), fitness rooms, swimming pools, tennis courts, and free parking. 32 State Trends In August 2019, the State of Oregon passed statewide legislation – Oregon House Bill 2001 and 2003. House Bill 2001 (HB2001) required many Oregon communities to accommodate middle housing within single-family neighborhoods. “Medium Cities”—those with 10,000 to 25,000 residents outside the Portland metro area—are required to allow duplexes on each lot or parcel where a single-family home is allowed. “Large Cities”—those with Middle housingis over 25,000 residents and nearly all jurisdictions in the Portland generally built at a similar metro urban growth boundary (UGB)—must meet the same duplex scale as single-family requirement as well as allow triplexes, fourplexes, townhomes, and homes but at higher residential densities. It cottage clusters in all areas that are zoned for residential use and provides a range of allow single-family homes. Note that middle housing types (other housing choices at different price points than duplexes) do not have to be allowed on every lot or parcel that within a community. allows single-family homes, which means that larger cities maintain some discretion. House Bill 2003 (HB2003) envisions Oregon’s housing planning system is reformed from a singular focus (on ensuring adequate available land) to a more comprehensive approach that also achieves these critical goals: (1) support and enable the construction of sufficient units to Single-room occupancies are residential properties with multiple single-room dwelling units occupied by a single 31 individual. From: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2001). Understanding SRO. Retrieved from: https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/Understanding-SRO.pdf Urbsworks. (n.d.). Housing Choices Guidebook: A Visual Guide to Compact Housing Types in Northwest Oregon. 32 Retrieved from: https://www.oregon.gov/lcd/Publications/Housing-Choices-Booklet_DIGITAL.pdf Saiz, Albert and Salazar, Arianna. (n.d.). Real Trends: The Future of Real Estate in the United States. Center for Real Estate, Urban Economics Lab. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 30 accommodate current populations and projected household growth and (2) reduce geographic disparities in access to housing (especially affordable and publicly supported housing). In that, HB 2003 required the development of a methodology for projecting regional housing need and allocate that need to local jurisdictions. It also expanded local government responsibilities for planning to meet housing need by requiring cities to develop and adopt Housing Production Strategies. Prior to the passage of these bills, Oregon developed its 2016–2020 Consolidated Plan which includes a detailed housing needs analysis as well as strategies for addressing housing needs statewide. The plan concluded that “a growing gap between the number of Oregonians who need affordable housing and the availability of affordable homes has given rise to destabilizing rent increases, an alarming number of evictions of low- and fixed- income people, increasing homelessness, and serious housing instability throughout Oregon.” It identified the following issues that describe housing need statewide: 33 For housing to be considered affordable, a household should pay up to one-third of their income toward rent, leaving money left over for food, utilities, transportation, medicine, and other basic necessities. Today, one in two Oregon households pays more than one- third of their income toward rent, and one in three pays more than half of their income toward rent. More school children are experiencing housing instability and homelessness. The rate of K–12 homeless children increased by 12% from the 2013–2014 school year to the 2014– 2015 school year. Oregon has 28,500 rental units that are affordable and available to renters with extremely low incomes. There are about 131,000 households that need those apartments, leaving a gap of 102,500 units. Housing instability is fueled by an unsteady, low-opportunity employment market. Over 400,000 Oregonians are employed in low-wage work. Low-wage work is a growing share of Oregon’s economy. When wages are set far below the cost needed to raise a family, the demand for public services grows to record heights. Women are more likely than men to end up in low-wage jobs. Low wages, irregular hours, and part-time work compound issues. People of color historically constitute a disproportionate share of the low-wage work force. About 45% of Latino, and 50% of African Americans are employed in low-wage industries. The majority of low-wage workers are adults over the age of 20, many of whom have earned a college degree or some level of higher education. 33 These conclusions are copied directly from the report: Oregon’s 2016–2020 Consolidated Plan. Retrieved from: http://www.oregon.gov/ohcs/docs/Consolidated-Plan/2016-2020-Consolidated-Plan-Amendment.pdf. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 31 In 2019, minimum wage in Oregon was $11.25, compared to $12.50 in the Portland Metro, and $11.00 for nonurban counties. 34 Oregon developed its Statewide Housing Plan in 2018. The Plan identified six housing priorities to address in communities across the State over the 2019 to 2023 period (summarized below). In August 2020, Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) released a summary of their The following section includes summaries and excerpts from their status report: progress. 35 Equity and Racial Justice. Advance equity and racial justice by identifying and addressing institutional and systemic barriers that have created and perpetuated patterns of disparity in housing and economic prosperity. OHCS built internal organizational capacity through staff trainings on Equity and Racial Justice (ERJ) and hired an Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Manager. OHCS established a workgroup to support equity in their data system and approved an internal organizational structure to advance and support ERJ within all areas of OHCS. Now, OHCS is developing funding mechanisms to encourage culturally specific organizations to increase services to underserved communities and to increase the number and dollar amounts of contracts awarded to minority, women, and emerging small businesses (MWESBs). Homelessness. Build a coordinated and concerted statewide effort to prevent and end homelessness, with a focus on ending unsheltered homelessness of Oregon’s children and veterans. The Homeless Services Section (HSS) made progress in building a foundation for planning and engagement across intersecting economic, social, and health systems. The OHCS Veteran Leadership team established recurring information-sharing sessions with federal, state, and local partners. HSS convened Oregon Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) stakeholders to build recommendations and co-construct a path toward a new HMIS implementation and data warehouse. HSS established successful workflows to analyze demographic data of people entering and exiting the homeless service system. Permanent Supportive Housing. Invest in permanent supportive housing (PSH), a proven strategy to reduce chronic homelessness and reduce barriers to housing stability. OHCS funded 405 of their 1,000 PSH-unit targets. Almost half of these units were the result of the NOFA tied to the first PSH Institute cohort. The 2016 Oregon Legislature, Senate Bill 1532, established a series of annual minimum wage rate increases 34 beginning July 1, 2016, through July 1, 2022. Retrieved from: https://www.oregon.gov/boli/whd/omw/pages/minimum-wage-rate-summary.aspx This section uses many direct excerpts from the OHCS Statewide Housing Plan Year One Summary August 2020 35 Report to HSC. Oregon Statewide Housing Plan, Status Reports. https://www.oregon.gov/ohcs/Documents/swhp/SWHP-Report-Y1-Summary.pdf ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 32 Affordable Rental Housing. Work to close the affordable rental housing gap and reduce housing cost burden for low-income Oregonians. OHCS implemented a new electronic application and widespread adoption of system work modules. They also established a capacity building team to assess and recommend opportunities for growth in their development priorities and began training and technical assistance to potential PSH and rural developers. OHCS increased their units by 8,408 representing 22.8% of their 25,000 unit 5-year target. Homeownership. Provide more low- and moderate-income Oregonians with the tools to successfully achieve and maintain homeownership, particularly in communities of color. OHCS pursued a strategy to align programs with the needs of communities of color, improved their Homeownership Center framework and Down Payment Assistance product, began developing their TBA program and focused on low-cost homeownership through manufactured housing. Additionally, they began developing the Restore Health and Safety program and reopening the Oregon Homeownership Stabilization Initiative (OHSI) program. OHCS also supported the Joint Task Force on Racial Equity in Homeownership and advocating for additional funds to support communities of color. OHCS provided 678 mortgage lending products of their 6,500 5-year goal with 170 products going to households of color. Rural Communities. Change the way OHCS does business in small towns and rural communities to be responsive to the unique housing and service needs and unlock the opportunities for housing development. OHCS focused on developing a better understanding of rural community needs and increasing rural capacity to build more affordable housing. OHCS hired a full-time capacity building analyst who has conducted outreach to key stakeholders across the state representing rural communities and developed a strategy to address those needs. OHCS has funded 532 units in rural communities, out of a total of 2,543 units in the 5- year goal (21% of target). ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 33 Regional and Local Demographic Trends May Affect Housing Need in Ashland Demographic trends that might affect the key assumptions used in the baseline analysis of housing need are (1) the aging population, (2) changes in household size and composition, and (3) increases in diversity. An individual’s housing needs change throughout their life, with changes in income, family composition, and age. The types of housing needed by a 20-year-old college student differ from the needs of a 40-year-old parent with children, or an 80-year-old single adult. As Ashland’s population ages, different types of housing will be needed to accommodate older residents. The housing characteristics by age data below reveal this cycle in action in Ashland. Housing needs and Exhibit 20. Effect of Demographic Changes on Housing Need preferences change in Source: ECONorthwest, adapted from Clark, William A.V. and Frans M. Dieleman. 1996. Households and Housing. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy predictable ways over Research. time, such as with changes in marital status and size of family. Changes in income, which changes over a person’s life with age, strongly influence the types of housing selected. Families of different sizes need different types of housing. Changes in income is also a key factor in housing demand. This graphic illustrates an example of changes in housing needs across a person’s life. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 34 Growing Population Ashland’s population growth will drive future demand for housing in the City over the planning period. Exhibit 21 shows that Ashland’s population (within its city limits) grew by 8% between 2000 and 2020. Ashland added 1,583 new residents, at an average annual growth rate of 0.4%. Exhibit 22 shows that the population within Ashland UGB is also forecast to grow over the planning period (2021-2041). The official population forecast, from the Oregon Population Forecast Program, finds that Ashland will add 1,691 people, at an average annual growth rate of 0.37%. Exhibit 21. Population, Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, U.S., 2000, 2010, and 2020 Source: U.S. Decennial Census and Portland State University, Census World Clock, and Population Research Center. Ashland’s population Exhibit 22. Forecast of Population Growth, Ashland UGB, within its urban growth 2021 to 2041 boundary is projected to Source: Oregon Population Forecast Program, Portland State University, Population Research Center, 2018. grow by over 1,691 people between 2021 and 2041, 21,93623,6271,6918% increase at an average annual Residents in Residents in New residents 0.37% AAGR growth rate of 0.37%. 36 20212041 2021 to 2041 This forecast of population growth is based on Ashland UGB’s official population forecast from the Oregon 36 Population Forecast Program. ECONorthwest extrapolated the population forecast for 2020 (to 2021) and 2040 (to 2041) based on the methodology specified in the following file (from the Oregon Population Forecast Program website): http://www.pdx.edu/prc/sites/www.pdx.edu.prc/files/Population_Interpolation_Template.xlsx ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 35 Aging Population This section shows two key characteristics of Ashland’s population, with implications for future housing demand in Ashland: Seniors. Ashland has a larger share of people over 60 years old compared to Jackson County and Oregon. As Ashland’s senior population grows, it will have increasing demand for housing that is suitable for elderly residents. Demand for housing for seniors will grow over the planning period, as the baby boomers continue to age and retire. The Jackson County forecast share of residents aged 60 years and older will account for 32% of its population in 2040, up from 30% in 2020. The impact of growth in seniors in Ashland will depend, in part, on whether older people already living in Ashland continue to reside there as they retire. National surveys show that, in general, most retirees prefer to age in place by continuing to live in their current home and community as long as possible. 37 Growth in the number of seniors will result in demand for housing types specific to seniors, such as small and easy-to-maintain dwellings, assisted living facilities, or age-restricted developments. Senior households will make a variety of housing choices, including remaining in their homes as long as they are able, downsizing to smaller single-family homes (detached and attached) or multifamily units, or moving into group housing (such as assisted living facilities or nursing homes), as their health declines. The challenges aging seniors face in continuing to live in their community include changes in healthcare needs, loss of mobility, the difficulty of home maintenance, financial concerns, and increases in property taxes. 38 Ashland has a smaller share of younger people than Jackson County and Oregon. About 19% of Ashland’s population is under 20 years old, compared to 23% of Jackson County’s population and 24% of Oregon’s population. By 2040, the millennial generation will be about 40 to 60 years of age and Generation Z will be between 25 and 40 years old. The forecast for Jackson County shows a decrease in millennials and Generation Z as a percent of overall population from about 46% of the population in 2020 to about 41% of the population in 2040. Millennials and Generation Z will be drivers in housing need over the planning period. Ashland’s ability to attract people in these age groups will depend, in large part, on whether the city has opportunities for housing that both appeals to and is affordable to millennials and Generation Z, as well as jobs that allow younger people to live and work in Ashland. A survey conducted by the AARP indicates that 90% of people 50 years and older want to stay in their current 37 home and community as they age. See http://www.aarp.org/research. “Aging in Place: A toolkit for Local Governments” by M. Scott Ball. 38 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 36 In the near-term, millennials and Generation Z may increase demand for rental units. Research suggests that millennials’ housing preferences may be similar to the baby boomers, with a preference for smaller, less costly units. Surveys about housing preference suggest that millennials want affordable single-family homes in areas that offer transportation alternatives to cars, such as suburbs or small cities with walkable Little information is available about the effect that Generation Z will neighborhoods. 39 have on the housing market and their future housing preferences. A survey of people living in the Portland region shows that millennials prefer single- family detached housing. The survey finds that housing price is the most important factor in choosing housing for younger residents. The survey results suggest 40 millennials are more likely than other groups to prefer housing in an urban neighborhood or town center. While this survey is for the Portland region, it shows similar results to national surveys and studies about housing preference for millennials. Growth in millennials and Generation Z in Ashland will result in increased demand for both affordable single-family detached housing (such as small single-family detached units like cottages), middle-income housing types (such as townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes), and multifamily housing. One of the barriers to household formation and homeownership for these groups is potential for greater levels of debt than the baby boomers or Generation X, which may delay household formation and delay or prevent some from becoming homeowners. Over the long-term, growth in these groups will result in increased demand for both ownership and rental opportunities, with an emphasis on housing that is comparatively affordable. There is potential for attracting new residents to housing in Ashland’s commercial areas, especially if the housing is relatively affordable and located in proximity to services. The American Planning Association, “Investing in Place; Two generations’ view on the future of communities.” 39 2014. “Access to Public Transportation a Top Criterion for Millennials When Deciding Where to Live, New Survey Shows,” Transportation for America. “Survey Says: Home Trends and Buyer Preferences,” National Association of Home Builders International Builders Davis, Hibbits, & Midghal Research, “Metro Residential Preference Survey,” May 2014. 40 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 37 From 2000 to 2014-Exhibit 23. Median Age, Ashland, Jackson County, and Oregon, 2000 2018, Ashland’s median to 2014-2018 age increased from 37.9 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census Table B01002, 2014-2018 ACS, Table B01002. to 44 years. In the 2014-2018 period, Exhibit 24. Population Distribution by Age, Ashland, Jackson County, 50% of Ashland’s and Oregon, 2014-2018 residents were between Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS, Table B01001. the ages of 20 and 59 years. Ashland had a larger share of people over the age of 60 than the county and state and a smaller share residents under the age of 20. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 38 Ashland has a larger Exhibit 25. Population by Ageand Sex, Ashland, 2014-2018 female population, Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS, Table S0101. compared to the county average and they are generally older than males in the city. About 54% of Ashland’s population is female, compared to 51% of Jackson County’s population. On average, Ashland’s female population is older than the male population. About 31% of Ashland’s population is females over 40 years old, compared to 24% of the city’s male population in this age category. Between 2000 and the Exhibit 26. Population Growth by Age, Ashland, 2000 to 2014-2018 2014-2018period, the Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census Table P012 and 2014-2018 ACS, Table B01001. population aged 60 and older grew the most. In this time, those aged 60 years and older grew by 2,909 people (from 3,509 people in 2000 to 6,499 people in 2018). ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 39 By 2040, Jackson Exhibit 27. Fastest-growing Age Groups, Jackson County, 2020to County’s population 2040 over 60 years old is Source: PSU Population Research Center, Jackson County Forecast, June 2017. forecast to grow 27%. 11% 8% 25% 27% This is an increase in 5,363 People 4,211 People 13,901 18,458 18,458 people. People People Under 20 20-39 Yrs40-59 Yrs 60+ Yrs By 2040, Jackson County Exhibit 28. Population Growth by Age Group, Jackson County, 2020 residents 60 years of age and 2040 and older are forecast to Source: PSU Population Research Center, Jackson County Forecast, June 2017. comprise 32% of the total population, up from 30% in 2020. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 40 Increased Ethnic Diversity The number of Latino residents increased in Ashland, by 714 people, from 2000 to the 2014-2018 period. The U.S. Census Bureau forecasts that at the national level, the Latino population will continue growing faster than most other non-Latino populations between 2020 and 2040. The Census forecasts that the Latino population in the U.S. will increase 93%, from 2016 to 2060, and foreign-born Latino populations will increase by about 40% in that same time. 41 Continued growth in the Latino population may affect Ashland’s housing needs in a variety of ways. Growth in first and, to a lesser extent, second and third generation Latino immigrants, will increase demand for larger dwelling units to accommodate the, on average, larger household sizes for these households. In that, Latino households are twice as likely to include multiple generations households than the general populace. As Latino households change 42 over generations, household size typically decreases, and housing needs become similar to housing needs for all households. According to the State of Hispanic Homeownership report from the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals: the Latino population accounted for 31% of the nation’s 43 new households in 2019, up 2.8 percentage points from 2017. The rate of homeownership for Latino households increased from 45.6% in 2015 to 47.5% in 2019. In that time, Latino households were the only demographic that increased their rate of homeownership. The share of Ashland’s Exhibit 29. Latino Population as a Percent of the Total Population, households that identified Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, 2000 and 2014–2018 as Latino increased Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census Table P008, 2014–2018 ACS Table B03002. between 2000 and 2014– 2018. However, Ashland was less ethnically diverse than both Jackson County and Oregon in 2000 and in the 2014– 2018 period. U.S. Census Bureau, Demographic Turning Points for the United States: Population Projections for 2020 to 2060. 41 Pew Research Center. (2013). Second-Generation Americans: A Portrait of the Adult Children of Immigrants. National 42 Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals (2019). 2019 State of Hispanic Homeownership Report. National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals (2019). 2019 State of Hispanic Homeownership Report. 43 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 41 Racial Diversity While the majority of Ashland’s population is White, Ashland has residents of many races, as shown in Exhibit 30, consistent with Jackson County’s population. About 92% of Ashland’s Exhibit 30. Non-White Population by Race as a Percent of Total population was White in Population, Ashland and Jackson County, 2014–2018 2014-2018. The largest Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census Table P008, 2014–2018 ACS Table B02001. communities of color were people from two or more acres, Asians, and Blacks. Household Size and Composition Ashland’s household composition shows that households in Ashlandaredifferentcompared households in Jackson County and Oregon. In that, over half of Ashland’s households (53%) are comprised of non-family households (i.e., one-person households or two or more unrelated people living together), compared to 36% in Jackson County and 37% in Oregon. On average, Ashland’s households are smaller than Jackson County’s and Oregon’s households. Ashland’s average Exhibit 31. Average Household Size, Ashland, Jackson County, and household size was Oregon, 2014-2018 smaller than Jackson Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B25010. County and Oregon’s. 2.06 Persons 2.41 Persons 2.51 Persons Ashland Jackson CountyOregon ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 42 Ashland had a larger Exhibit 32. Household Size, Ashland, Jackson County, and Oregon, share of one-person 2014-2018 households compared to Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B25010. the County and State. Ashland hada larger share Exhibit 33. Household Composition, Ashland, Jackson County, of nonfamily households Oregon, 2014-2018 than Jackson County and Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table DP02. Oregon. About 20% of Ashland households were family households with children, compared with 25% of Jackson County households and 26% of Oregon households. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 43 Income of AshlandResidents Income is one of the key determinants in housing choice and households’ ability to afford housing. Income for residents living in Ashland is lower than the Jackson County median household income and Oregon median household income. In the 2014-2018 period, Exhibit 34. Median Household Income, Ashland, Jackson County, Ashland’s median Oregon, and Comparison Cities, 2014-2018 household income Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B19013. ($50,613) was similar to the counties, but about $8,700 less than the state’s median household income (MHI). ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 44 In the 2014-2018period, Exhibit 35. Household Income, Ashland, Jackson County, and about 50% of Ashland’s Oregon, 2014-2018 households earned less Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B19001. than $50,000 per year, compared to 49% of Jackson County’s households and 42% of Oregon’s households. From 2000 to the 2014-Exhibit 36. Change in Median Household Income (2018 inflation- 2018 period, and after adjusted), Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, 2000 to 2014-2018, adjusting for inflation, Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census, Table HCT012; 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B25119. Ashland’s median household income (MHI) increased by 5% or about $2,400. Earnings for females in Exhibit 37. Mean Earnings in the Last Year by Sex (2018 dollars), Ashland were lower than Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, 2014-2018, for males, consistent with Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table S2001. countywide averages. Females in Ashland had average earnings that were 78% of male earnings, compared to 75% for the county average ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 45 Commuting Trends Ashland is part of the complex, interconnected economy of Southern Oregon. Of the more than 9,799 people who work in Ashland, 66% of workers commuted into Ashland from other areas, most notably Medford. More than 4,000 residents of Ashland commute out of the city for work, many of them to Medford. About 6,400 people Exhibit 38. Commuting Flows, Ashland, 2017 commuted into Ashland for Source: U.S.Census Bureau, Census On the Map. work and more than 4,200 people living in Ashland commuted out of the city for work. About 3,400 people lived and worked in Ashland. About 34% of people who Exhibit 39. Places Where Workers at Businesses in Ashland Lived, worked at businesses in 2017 Ashland also lived in Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census On the Map. Ashland. 34% 19% 7% AshlandMedfordTalent About 44% of Ashland Exhibit 40. Places Where Ashland Residents were Employed, residents worked in 2017 Ashland. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census On the Map. 44% 24% 2% Ashland MedfordGrants Pass ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 46 Almost half of Ashland Exhibit 41. Commute Time by Place of Residence, Ashland, Jackson residents (46%) had a County, Oregon, 2014-2018 commute time that took Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B08303. less than 15 minutes. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 47 Populations with Special Needs People Experiencing Homelessness Gathering reliable data from individuals experiencing homelessness is difficult precisely because they are unstably housed. People can cycle in an out of homelessness and move around communities and shelters. Moreover, the definition of homelessness can vary between communities. Individuals and families temporarily living with relatives or friends are insecurely housed, but they are often neglected from homelessness data. Even if an individual is identified as lacking sufficient housing, they may be reluctant to share information. As a result, information about people experiencing homelessness in Ashland is not readily available. This section presents information about people experiencing homelessness in Jackson County based on the following sources of information: Point-in-Time (PIT) count: The PIT count is a snapshot of individuals experiencing homelessness on a single night in a community. It records the number and characteristics (e.g., race, age, veteran status) of people who live in emergency shelters, transitional housing, rapid re-housing, Safe Havens, or PSH; as well as recording those who are unsheltered. HUD requires that communities and Continuums of Care (CoC) perform the PIT count during the last ten days of January on an annual basis for sheltered people and on a biennial basis for unsheltered people. Though the PIT count is not a comprehensive survey, it serves as a measure of homelessness at a given point of time and is used for policy and funding decisions. McKinney Vento data: The McKinney Vento Homeless Assistance Act authorized, among other programs, the Education for Homeless Children and Youth (EHCY) Program to support the academic progress of children and youths experiencing homelessness. The U.S. Department of Education works with state coordinators and local liaisons to collect performance data on students experiencing homelessness. The data records the number of school-aged children who live in shelters or hotels/motels and those who are doubled up, unsheltered, or unaccompanied. This is a broader definition of homelessness than that used in the PIT. Although these sources of information are known to undercount people experiencing homeless, they are consistently available for counties in Oregon. Jackson County’s Point-in-Exhibit 42. Number of Persons Homeless, Jackson County, Point- Time Homeless count in-Time Count, 2015, 2017, and 2019 Source: Oregon Housing and Community Services. increased by 5% from 2015 to 2019. 679 Persons 633 Persons 712 Persons 201520172019 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 48 Between 2015and 2019, Exhibit 43. Number of Persons Homeless by Living Situation, the number of persons that Jackson County, Point-in-Time Count, 2015, 2017, and 2019 experienced sheltered Source: Oregon Housing and Community Services. homelessness stayed about the same while the number of persons that experienced unsheltered homelessness increased by about 10%. About 135 students in the Exhibit 44. Number of Students Homeless by Living Situation, Ashland School District School District, 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 experiences homelessness Source: McKinney Vento, 2017-18 and 2018-19 Homeless Student Data. in the 2018-2019 school year. Jackson County comprises eight school districts. Of the total student population experiencing homelessness in these districts, 6% attended the Ashland School District in the 2018-2019 school year. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 49 People with Disabilities Exhibit 45 presents data on the share of residents living with disabilities in Ashland, Jackson County, and Oregon. Persons with disabilities often require special housing accommodations such as single-story homes or ground floor dwelling units, unit entrances with no steps, wheel in showers, widened doorways, and other accessibility features. Limited supply of these housing options poses additional barriers to housing access for these groups. Exhibit 45. Persons Living with a Disability by Type and as a Percent of Total Population, Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, 2014-2018 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2014-2018 ACS, Table S1810_C02. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 50 Regional and Local Trends Affecting Affordability inAshland This section describes changes in sales prices, rents, and housing affordability in Ashland, compared to cities and submarkets in Southern Oregon, as well as Jackson County and Oregon. Changes in Housing Costs Ashland’s median home Exhibit 46. Median Home Sales Price, Ashland and Comparison sales price was higher than Cities, August-October 2020 most other Southern Oregon Source: Southern Oregon Multiple Listing Service. submarkets. Since 2017, the median Exhibit 47. Median Home Sales Price, Ashland and Comparison price of a home in Ashland Cities, 2017 through 2020 typically stayed above Source: Southern Oregon Multiple Listing Service. $400,000. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 51 Exhibit 48 shows that, since 2000, housing costs in Ashland have increased faster than incomes, and to a greater degree than in Jackson County and Oregon. The household reported median value of a house in Ashland was 5.8 times the median household income (MHI) in 2000, and 8.5 times MHI in the 2014-2018 period. Decline of housing affordability was also more extreme in Ashland compared to other cities within the region. Exhibit 48. Ratio of Median Housing Value to Median Household Income, Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, and Comparison Cities, 2000 to 2014-2018 44 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census, Tables HCT012 and H085, and 2014-2018 ACS, Tables B19013 and B25077. This ratio compares the median value of housing in Ashland (and other places) to the median household income. 44 Inflation-adjusted median owner values in Ashland increased from $278,840 in 2000 to $4,28,100 in 2014-2018. Over the same period, inflation-adjusted median income increased from $48,226 to $50,613. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 52 Rental Costs Rent costs in Ashland are higher than average for Jackson County. The following charts show gross rent (which includes the cost of rent plus utilities). Exhibit 49 shows that the median gross rent in Ashland was $1,003 in the 2014-2018 period. However, in a review of currently available rental properties as of December 2020, the typical rent for a two-bedroom unit ranged from $1,145 to $1,560 and the typical rent for a three-bedroom unit ranged from $1,595 to $1,995 (CPM Real Estate Services). Exhibit 49. Median Gross Rent, Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, 2014-2018 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS 5-year estimate, Table B25064. About 52% of renters in Exhibit 50. Gross Rent, Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, 2014- Ashland paid less than 2018 $1,000 per month. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Table B25063. About 32% of Ashland’s renters paid $1,250 or more in gross rent per month. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 53 Exhibit 51 shows asking rent for multifamily housing in Ashland based on CoStar data. Additional research shows that asking rents for currently available rental properties in Ashland in December 2020 were $1,145 to $1,560 for a 2-bedroom unit and $1,595 to $1,995 for a 3- bedroom unit. 45 The average asking price Exhibit 51. Average Multifamily Asking Rent per Unit, Ashland, per multifamily unit in 2010 through 2019 Ashland has increased Source: CoStar. steadily over the past few years after dropping slightly in 2015. Between 2015 and 2019, Ashland’s average multifamily asking rent increased by about $95, from $701 per month to $796 per month. In 2019, Ashland’s average Exhibit 52. Average Multifamily Asking Rent per Square Foot and multifamily asking rent was Average Multifamily Vacancy Rate, Ashland, 2010 through 2019 $1.06 per square foot, up Source: CoStar. from $0.93 per square foot in 2015. In this time, Ashland’s multifamily vacancy rate decreased from 2.8% in 2015 to 2.0% in 2019. CMP Real Estate Services, Inc., December 2020. 45 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 54 Housing Affordability A typical standard used to determine housing affordability is that a household should pay no more than a certain percentage of household income for housing, including payments and interest or rent, utilities, and insurance. The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s guidelines indicate that households paying more than 30% of their income on housing experience “cost burden,” and households paying more than 50% of their income on housing experience “severe cost burden.” Using cost burden as an indicator is one method of determining how well a city is meeting the Goal 10 requirement to provide housing that is affordable to all households in a community. About 45% of Ashland’s households are cost burdened and 24% are severely cost burdened. About 63% of renter households are cost burdened, compared with 31% of homeowners. About Overall, Ashland has a slightly 27% of households in Ashland are rent burdened households. 46 larger share of cost-burdened households than Jackson County and Oregon. The information in this section does not reflect the impact of the Almeda wildfire, with destroyed more than 2,500 dwelling units located between Ashland and Medford. Many of these dwelling units were relatively affordable, such as manufactured housing. The loss of this housing decreased the supply of affordable housing and increases need for it, within the region and within Ashland. Cities with populations >10,000 are required, per HB 4006, to assess “rent burden” if more than 50% of renters are 46 cost burdened. In Ashland as of the 2014-2018 period, 63% of total renters were cost burdened. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 55 Overall, about 46% of all Exhibit 53. Housing Cost Burden, Ashland,Jackson County, Oregon, households in Ashland were and Comparison Cities, 2014-2018 cost burdened. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Tables B25091 and B25070. From 2000 to the 2014-Exhibit 54. Change in Housing Cost Burden, Ashland, 2000 to 2018 period, the number of 2014-2018 cost-burdened and severely Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Decennial Census, Tables H069 and H094 and 2014-2018 ACS Tables B25091 and B25070. cost-burdened households increased slightly. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 56 Rentersweremuch more Exhibit 55. Housing Cost Burden by Tenure, Ashland, 2014-2018 likely to be cost burdened Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Tables B25091 and B25070. than homeowners in Ashland. In the 2014-2018 period, about 63% of Ashland’s renters were cost burdened or severely cost burdened, compared to 31% of homeowners. About 35% of Ashland’s renters were severely cost burdened, meaning they paid 50% or more of their gross income on housing costs. Nearly all of Ashland’s Exhibit 56. Cost Burdened Renter Households, by Household renter households earning Income, Ashland, 2014-2018 less than $20k per year Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2014-2018 ACS Table B25074. were severely cost burdened, spending 50% or more of their income on housing costs. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 57 Exhibit 57 to Exhibit 59 show cost burden in Oregon for renter households for seniors, people of color, and people with disabilities. This information is not readily available for a city with a 47 population as small as Ashland, which is why we present regional information. These exhibits show that these groups experience cost burden at higher rates than the overall statewide average. Renters 65 years of age and Exhibit 57.Cost Burdened Renter Households, for People 65 Years older were of Age and Older, Oregon, 2018 disproportionately rent Source: S. Census, 2018 ACS 1-year PUMS Estimates. From the Report Implementing a Regional Housing Needs Analysis Methodology in Oregon: Approach, Results, and Initial burdened compared to the Recommendations by ECONorthwest, August 2020. state average. About 60% of renters aged 65 years and older were rent burdened, compared with the statewide average of 48% of renters. From the report Implementing a Regional Housing Needs Analysis Methodology in Oregon, prepared for Oregon 47 Housing and Community Services by ECONorthwest, March 2021. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 58 Compared to the average Exhibit 58.Cost Burdened Renter Households,by Race and renter household in Oregon, Ethnicity, Oregon, 2018 those that identified as a Source: U.S. Census, 2018 ACS 1-year PUMS Estimates. From the Report Implementing a Regional Housing Needs Analysis Methodology in Oregon: non-Asian person of color or Approach, Results, and Initial Recommendations by ECONorthwest, August 2020. as Latino were disproportionately rent burdened. Renters with a disability in Exhibit 59. Cost Burdened Renter Households, for People with Oregon were Disabilities, Oregon, 2018 disproportionately cost Source: S. Census, 2018 ACS 1-year PUMS Estimates. From the Report Implementing a Regional Housing Needs Analysis Methodology in Oregon: Approach, Results, and Initial burdened compared with Recommendations by ECONorthwest, August 2020. the statewide average. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 59 While cost burden is a common measure of housing affordability, it does have some limitations. Two important limitations are: A household is defined as cost burdened if the housing costs exceed 30% of their income, regardless of actual income. The remaining 70% of income is expected to be spent on non-discretionary expenses, such as food or medical care, and on discretionary expenses. Households with higher incomes may be able to pay more than 30% of their income on housing without impacting the household’s ability to pay for necessary non- discretionary expenses. Cost burden compares income to housing costs and does not account for accumulated wealth. As a result, the estimate of how much a household can afford to pay for housing does not include the impact of a household’s accumulated wealth. For example, a household of retired people may have relatively low income but may have accumulated assets (such as profits from selling another house) that allow them to purchase a house that would be considered unaffordable to them based on the cost burden indicator. Cost burden does not account for debts, such as college loans, credit card debt, or other debts. As a result, households with high levels of debt may be less able to pay up to 30% of their income for housing costs. Another way of exploring the issue of financial need is to review housing affordability at varying levels of household income. Exhibit 60 and Exhibit 61 provide some information about housing costs and necessary wages to afford housing in Jackson County. Fair Market Rent for a Exhibit 60. HUD Fair Market Rent (FMR) by Unit Type, 2-bedroom apartment Jackson County, 2021 in Jackson County is Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. $1,039. $727 $788 $1,039$1,487 $1,799 Studio1-Bedroom2-Bedroom3-Bedroom4-Bedroom A household must earn Exhibit 61. Affordable Housing Wage, Jackson County, 2021 at least $17.98 per hour Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries. to afford a two-bedroom unit at Fair Market Rent $17.98 per hour ($1,039) in Jackson Affordable housing wage for two-bedroom unit in Jackson County County. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 60 A household earning median family income ($65,100) can afford a monthly rent of about $1,600 or a home roughly valued between $228,000 and $260,000. Exhibit 63 shows that about 35% of Ashland’s households earn less than $32,550 (less than 50% of MFI) and cannot afford a two- bedroom apartment at Jackson County’s Fair Market Rent (FMR) of $1,043. To afford the average asking rent for a 2-bedroom unit of $1,145 to $1,560, a household would need to earn about $46,000 to $62,000 or 70% to 96% of MFI. About 45% of Ashland’s households earn less than $50,000 and cannot afford these rents. In addition, about 19% of Ashland’s households have incomes of less than $19,500 (30% of MFI) and are at-risk of becoming homeless. To afford the median home sales price of $435,000, a household would need to earn about $109,000 or 167% of MFI. Less than one-quarter of Ashland’s households have income sufficient to afford this median home sales price. Exhibit 62. Financially Attainable Housing, by Median Family Income (MFI) for Jackson County ($65,100), Ashland, 2020 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Jackson County, 2020. Oregon Employment Department. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 61 Exhibit 63. Share of Households MFI for Jackson County ($65,100), Ashland, 2019 Source: U.S. Department of HUD, Jackson County, 2020. U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019ACS Table 19001. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 62 Exhibit 64 illustrates the types of financially attainable housing by income level in Jackson County. Generally speaking, however lower-income households will be renters occupying existing housing. Newly built housing will be a combination of renters (most likely in multifamily housing) and homeowners. The types of housing affordable for the lowest income households is limited to government subsidized housing, manufactured housing, lower-cost single-family housing, and multifamily housing. The range of financially attainable housing increases with increased income. Exhibit 64. Types of Financially Attainable Housing by Median Family Income (MFI) for Jackson County ($65,100), Ashland, 2020 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Ashland, 2020. Oregon Employment Department. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 63 Exhibit 65 compares the number of households by income category with the number of units affordable to those households in Ashland. Ashland currently has a deficit of housing units for households earning 0-50% of the MFI (less than $32,500 per year) with nearly 40% of households occupying units that are not affordable to their income level, resulting in cost burden of these households. Similarly, approximately 26% of Ashland households with incomes that are 50-80% of the MFI ($32,500 to $52,080) are cost burdened. This indicates a deficit of more affordable housing types (such as government-subsidized housing, existing lower-cost apartments, and manufactured housing). For households earning more than 80% of the MFI, 26% are renting or buying down, which means that they are occupying units affordable to lower income households. These households could afford more costly housing but either choose to live in less costly housing or cannot find higher cost housing that meets their needs. Exhibit 65. Unit Affordability by Household Income, Ashland, 2013-2017 Source: CHAS, 2013-2017, Table 18. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 64 Summary of the Factors Affecting Ashland’sHousing Needs The purpose of the analysis thus far has been to provide background on the kinds of factors that influence housing choice. While the number and interrelationships among these factors ensure that generalizations about housing choice are difficult to make and prone to inaccuracies, it is a crucial step to informing the types of housing that will be needed in the future. There is no question that age affects housing type and tenure. Mobility is substantially higher for people aged 20 to 34. People in that age group will also have, on average, less income than people who are older and they are less likely to have children. These factors mean that younger households are much more likely to be renters, and renters are more likely to be in multifamily housing. The data illustrates what more detailed research has shown and what most people understand intuitively: life cycle and housing choice interact in ways that are predictable in the aggregate; age of the household head is correlated with household size and income; household size and age of household head affect housing preferences; and income affects the ability of a household to afford a preferred housing type. The connection between socioeconomic and demographic factors and housing choice is often described informally by giving names to households with certain combinations of characteristics: the "traditional family," the "never-marrieds," the "dinks" (dual-income, no kids), and the "empty-nesters." Thus, simply looking at the long 48 wave of demographic trends can provide good information for estimating future housing demand. Still, one is ultimately left with the need to make a qualitative assessment of the future housing market. The following is a discussion of how demographic and housing trends are likely to affect housing in Ashland over the next 20 years: Growth in housing will be driven by growth in population. Between 2000 and 2019, Ashland’s population grew by 1,438 people (7%). The population in Ashland’s UGB is forecasted to grow from 21,936 people to 23,627 people, an increase of 1,691 residents (8%) between 2021 and 2041. 49 Housing affordability is a growing challenge in Ashland. Housing affordability is a challenge in most of the Southern Oregon region in general, and Ashland is affected by these regional trends. Housing prices are increasing faster than incomes in Ashland and Jackson County, which is consistent with state and national challenges. Ashland has a modest supply of multifamily housing (about 25% of the city’s housing stock), but over half of renter households are cost burdened (63%). See Planning for Residential Growth: A Workbook for Oregon's Urban Areas (June 1997). 48 This forecast is based on Jackson County’s certified population estimate and official forecast from the Oregon 49 Population Forecast Program for the 2021 to 2041 period, shown in Exhibit 22. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 65 Ashland’s key challenge over the next 20 years is providing opportunities for development of relatively affordable housing of all types, such as lower-cost single- family housing, townhomes, cottage housing, duplexes, tri- and quad-plexes, market- rate multifamily housing, and government-subsidized affordable housing. In addition, the region has a lack of housing and services for people experiencing homelessness. Ashland can play a role in both addressing housing needs of people currently experiencing homelessness and ensuring that people at risk of homelessness do not become homeless. About 19% of Ashland’s households have income below 30% of MFI and are at-risk of becoming homeless. Without substantial changes in housing policy, on average, future housing will look a lot like past housing. That is the assumption that underlies any trend forecast, and one that is important when trying to address demand for new housing. The City’s residential policies can impact the amount of change in Ashland’s housing market to some degree. If the City adopts policies to increase opportunities to build smaller-scale single-family and a wide range of multifamily housing types (particularly multifamily that is affordable to low- and moderate-income households), a larger percentage of new housing developed over the next 20 years in Ashland may begin to address the city’s needs. Examples of policies that the City could adopt to achieve this outcome include: increasing the allowable densities in the Multi-Family Residential (R- 2), High Density Residential (R-3), and parts of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Designations; evaluating decreasing multifamily parking requirements; increasing the supply of High Density Residential lands by rezoning lands within lower density Plan Designations that have a surplus of capacity; supporting development of income- restricted affordable housing through use of incentives like the Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption; and identifying opportunities to participate in a land bank and/or land trust to support development of affordable housing. If the future differs from the past, it is likely to move in the direction, on average, of smaller units and more diverse housing types. Most of the evidence suggests that the bulk of the change will be in the direction of smaller average house and lot sizes for single-family housing. This includes providing opportunities for the development of smaller single-family detached homes, townhomes, and multifamily housing. However, the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic may trigger a reversal of these trends, if more working-aged persons transition to permanent work-from-home situations. Key demographic and economic trends that will affect Ashland’s future housing needs are: (1) the aging of the baby boomers, (2) the aging of the millennials and Generation Z, and (3) the continued growth in Hispanic and Latino population. The baby boomer’s population is continuing to age. The changes that affect Ashland’s housing demand as the population ages are that household sizes and homeownership rates decrease. In addition, Ashland has a larger share of female population, who are on average older and have lower earnings than their male ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 66 counterparts. The majority of baby boomers are expected to remain in their homes as long as possible, downsizing or moving when illness or other issues cause them to move. Demand for specialized senior housing, such as age-restricted housing or housing in a continuum of care from independent living to nursing home care, may grow in Ashland. Millennials and Generation Z will continue to form households and make a variety of housing choices. As millennials and Generation Z age, generally speaking, their household sizes will increase, and their homeownership rates will peak by about age 55. Between 2021 and 2041, millennials and Generation Z will be a key driver in demand for housing for families with children. The ability to attract millennials will depend on the City’s availability of renter and ownership housing that is large enough to accommodate families while still being relatively affordable. It will also depend on the location of new housing in Ashland as many millennials prefer to live in more urban environments. The decline in homeownership among the millennial 50 generation has more to do with financial barriers rather than the preference to rent. 51 Housing preferences for Generation Z are not yet known but it is reasonable that they will also need affordable housing, both for rental and later in life for ownership. Some millennials and Generation Z households will occupy housing that is currently occupied but becomes available over the planning period, such as housing that is currently owned or occupied by Baby Boomers. Some need for housing large enough for families may be accommodated in these existing units. The Latino population will continue to grow. Latino population growth will be an important driver in growth of housing demand, both for owner- and renter-occupied housing. Growth in Latino households will drive demand for housing for families with children and possibly multiple-generation households. Given the lower income for Latino households on average (especially first-generation immigrants), growth in this group will also drive demand for affordable housing, both for ownership and renting. In summary, an aging population, increasing housing costs, housing affordability concerns for Millennials, Generation Z, and Latino populations, and other variables are factors that support the conclusion of need for smaller and less expensive units and a broader array of housing choices. Choi, Hyun June; Zhu, Jun; Goodman, Laurie; Ganesh, Bhargavi; Strochak, Sarah. (2018). Millennial 50 Homeownership, Why is it So Low, and How Can We Increase It? Urban Institute. https://www.urban.org/research/publication/millennial-homeownership/view/full_report Ibid. 51 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 67 5.Housing Need in Ashland ProjectedNew Housing Units Needed in the Next 20 Years The results of the Housing Capacity Analysis are based on: (1) the official population forecast for growth in Ashland over the 20-year planning period, (2) information about Ashland’s housing market relative to Jackson County, Oregon, and nearby cities, and (3) the demographic composition of Ashland’s existing population and expected long-term changes in the demographics of Jackson County. Forecast for Housing Growth This section describes key assumptions and presents an estimate of new housing units needed in Ashland between 2021 and 2041. The key assumptions are based on the best available data and may rely on safe harbor provisions, when available. 52 Population. A 20-year population forecast (in this instance, 2021 to 2041) is the foundation for estimating needed new dwelling units. Ashland’s UGB will grow from 21,936 persons in 2021 to 23,627 persons in 2041, an increase of 1,691 people. 53 Persons in Group Quarters.Persons in group quarters do not consume standard 54 housing units; any forecast of new people in group quarters is typically derived from the population forecast for the purpose of estimating housing demand. Group quarters can have a big influence on housing in cities with colleges (dorms), prisons, or a large elderly population (nursing homes). In general, any new requirements for these housing types will be met by institutions (colleges, government agencies, health-care corporations) operating outside what is typically defined as the housing market. Nonetheless, group quarters require residential land. They are typically built at densities that are comparable to that of multifamily dwellings. A safe harbor is an assumption that a city can use in a Housing Capacity Analysis thatthe State has said will satisfy 52 the requirements of Goal 14. OAR 660-024 defines a safe harbor as “… an optional course of action that a local government may use to satisfy a requirement of Goal 14. Use of a safe harbor prescribed in this division will satisfy the requirement for which it is prescribed. A safe harbor is not the only way, or necessarily the preferred way, to comply with a requirement and it is not intended to interpret the requirement for any purpose other than applying a safe harbor within this division.” This forecast is based on Ashland UGB’s official forecast from the Oregon Population Forecast Program for the 2021 53 to 2041 period. The Census Bureau's definition of group quarters is as follows: A group quarters is a place where people live or 54 stay, in a group living arrangement, that is owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents. The Census Bureau classifies all people not living in housing units (house, apartment, mobile home, rented rooms) as living in group quarters. There are two types of group quarters: (1) Institutional, such as correctional facilities, nursing homes, or mental hospitals and (2) Non-Institutional, such as college dormitories, military barracks, group homes, missions, or shelters. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 68 The 2015-2019 American Community Survey shows that 3.5% of Ashland’s population was in group quarters. For the 2021 to 2041 period, we assume that 3.5% of Ashland’s new population, approximately 58 people, will be in group quarters. Household Size. OAR 660-024 established a safe harbor assumption for average household size—which is the figure from the most recent Decennial Census at the time of the analysis. According to the 2015-2019 American Community Survey, the average household size in Ashland was 2.06 people. Thus, for the 2021 to 2041 period, we assume an average household size of 2.06 persons. Vacancy Rate. The Census defines vacancy as: "unoccupied housing units are considered vacant. Vacancy status is determined by the terms under which the unit may be occupied, e.g., for rent, for sale, or for seasonal use only." The 2010 Census identified vacancy through an enumeration, separate from (but related to) the survey of households. The Census determines vacancy status and other characteristics of vacant units by enumerators obtaining information from property owners and managers, neighbors, rental agents, and others. Vacancy rates are cyclical and represent the lag between demand and the market’s response to demand for additional dwelling units. Vacancy rates for rental and multifamily units are typically higher than those for owner-occupied and single-family dwelling units. According to the 2015-2019 American Community Survey, Ashland’s vacancy rate was 10.8%. After deducting units vacant for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use, Ashland’s vacancy rate was 8.2%. For the 2021 to 2041 period, we assume a vacancy rate of 8.2%. Ashland will have Exhibit 66. Forecast of demand for new dwelling units, Ashland demand for 858 new UGB, 2021 to 2041 dwelling units over the Source: Calculations by ECONorthwest. 20-year period, with an annual average of 43 dwelling units. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 69 Housing Units Needed Over the Next 20 Years Exhibit 66 above presents a forecast of new housing in Ashland’s UGB for the 2021 to 2041 period. This section determines the needed mix and density for the development of new housing developed over this 20-year period in Ashland. Over the next 20-years, the need for new housing developed in Ashland will generally include a wider range of housing types and housing that is more affordable. This conclusion is based on the following information, found in Chapter 3 and 4: Ashland’s housing mix is predominately single-family detached (although the city has a smaller share of this housing type than Jackson County). In the 2014-2018 period, 66% of Ashland’s housing stock was single-family detached, 9% was single-family attached, 11% was multifamily (with two to four units per structure), and 14% was multifamily (with five or more units per structure). Demographic changes across Ashland suggest increases in demand for single-family attached housing and multifamily housing. The key demographic trends that will affect Ashland’s future housing needs are the aging of the baby boomers, the household formation of the millennials and Generation Z, and growth in Latino populations. The implications of these trends are increased demand from older (often single person and more likely to be female) households and increased demand for affordable housing for families, both for ownership and rent. Ashland’s median household income was $50,613, in line with the County’s median household income of $50,851. Approximately 26% of Ashland’s households earn less than $25,000 per year, compared to 24% in Jackson County and 20% in Oregon. About 46% of Ashland’s households are cost burdened (paying 30% or more of their household income on housing costs). About 63% of Ashland’s renters are cost 55 burdened and about 31% of Ashland’s homeowners are cost burdened. Cost burden rates in Ashland are slightly greater compared to cost burdened rates in Jackson County. Ashland needs more affordable housing types for homeowners. The median housing sales price in typically stayed above $400,000 over the last three years. These prices are unattainable for many households in the region. A household earning 100% of Ashland’s median household income ($50,613) could afford home valued between about $177,100 to $202,500, which is less than the median home sales price of about $434,000 in Ashland. A household can start to afford median home sale prices at about 167% of Ashland’s median household income. Ashland needs more affordable housing types for renters. A household can start to afford typical asking rents of currently available properties in Ashland at about 70% to The Department of Housing and Urban Development’s guidelines indicate that households paying more than 30% 55 of their income on housing experience “cost burden,” and households paying more than 50% of their income on housing experience “severe cost burden.” ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 70 96% of Ashland’s median household income. High rates of housing cost burden for Ashland renters suggests a need for more affordable housing types for renters. Limited multifamily housing was built in Ashland between 2010 and 2016. However, since 2017, 60% of new housing permitted was accessory dwelling unit or multifamily housing. These factors suggest that Ashland needs a broader range of housing types with a wider range of price points than are currently available in Ashland’s housing stock. This includes providing opportunities for the development of housing types across the affordability spectrum such as: single-family detached housing (e.g., small-lot single-family detached units, cottages, accessory dwelling units, and “traditional” single-family), townhouses, duplexes, tri- and quad-plexes, and multifamily structures with five or more units. Exhibit 67 shows a preliminary forecast of needed housing in the Ashland UGB during the 2021 to 2041 period. The projection is based on the following assumptions: Ashland’s official forecast for population growth shows that the City will add 1,691 people over the 20-year period. Exhibit 66 shows that the new population will result in need for 858 new dwelling units over the 20-year period. The assumptions about the mix of housing in Exhibit 67 are: About 35% of new housing will be single-family detached, a category which includes manufactured housing. About 66% of Ashland’s housing was single-family detached in the 2014-2018 period. About 13% of new housing developed in Ashland over the 2011 to 2020 period were accessory dwelling units (accessory residential units). If 13% of Ashland’s new housing are accessory dwelling units, then 111 new dwelling units may be accessory dwelling units. Nearly 10% of new housing will be single-family attached. About 9% of Ashland’s housing was single-family attached in the 2014-2018 period. Nearly 20% of new housing will be duplexes, triplexes, or quadplexes. About 11% of Ashland’s housing was duplex, triplex, or quadplex housing in the 2014-2018 period. About 35% of new housing will be multifamily housing with five or more units per structure. About 14% of Ashland’s housing was multifamily in the 2014-2018 period. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 71 Ashlandwill demand 858 Exhibit 67. Forecast of demand for new dwelling units, Ashland new dwelling units over UGB, 2021 to 2041 the 20-year period, 35% of Source: Calculations by ECONorthwest. which will be single-family detached housing. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 72 Exhibit 68 allocates needed housing to Plan Designations in Ashland. The allocation is based, in part, on the types of housing allowed in each Plan Designation. Exhibit 68 shows: Low Density Residential land will accommodate new single-family detached and 56 attached housing and cottage cluster housing. North Mountain also accommodates broadly defined “residential uses.” Suburban Residential land will accommodate new single-family detached and attached housing, multifamily housing (duplexes and larger). Normal Neighborhood land will accommodate new single-family detached and attached uses, cottage clusters, multifamily housing (duplexes and larger), and manufactured housing on lots and in parks. Multifamily Residential land will accommodate new single-family detached and attached housing and multifamily housing (duplexes and larger). High Density Residential land will accommodate new single-family detached and attached housing and multifamily housing (duplexes and larger). Croman Mill District land will accommodate new multifamily housing. Commercial and Employment land will accommodate new multifamily housing. 57 Exhibit 68. Allocation of Needed Housing by Housing Type and Plan Designation, Ashland UGB, 2021 to 2041 Source: ECONorthwest. This group includes the Single-Family Rural Reserve, Low Density Residential, Single Family Residential, and 56 North Mountain Plan Designations. The group includes the Commercial, Employment, Downtown, Health Care, and Southern Oregon University Plan 57 Designations. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 73 Needed Housing by Income Level The next step in the Housing Capacity Analysis is to develop an estimate of need for housing by income and housing type. This analysis requires an estimate of the income distribution of current and future households in the community. Estimates presented in this section are based on secondary data from the Census and analysis by ECONorthwest. The analysis in Exhibit 69 is based on Census data about household income levels for existing households in Ashland. Income is distributed into market segments consistent with HUD income level categories using Jackson County’s 2020 Median Family Income (MFI) of $65,100. The estimate assumes that approximately the same percentage of households will be in each market segment in the future. About 32% of Ashland’s Exhibit 69. Future (New) Households by Median Family Income (MFI) future households will have for Jackson County ($65,100), Ashland, 2021 to 2041 income below 50% of Source: U.S. Department of HUD, Jackson County, 2020. U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 ACS Table 19001. Jackson County’s median family income (less than $32,550 in 2019 dollars). About31%will have incomes between 50% and 120% of the county’s MFI (between $32,550 and $78,120). This graph shows that, as Ashland’s population grows, Ashland will continue to have demand for housing across the affordability spectrum. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 74 Other Housing Needs ORSs 197.303, 197.307, 197.312, and 197.314 require cities to plan for government-assisted housing, farmworker housing, manufactured housing on lots and in parks, and housing for people with disabilities and people experiencing homelessness. Government-subsidized housing. Government subsidies can apply to all housing types (e.g., single family detached, apartments, etc.). Ashland allows development of government-assisted housing in all residential Plan Designations, with the same development standards for market-rate housing. This analysis assumes that Ashland will continue to allow government-subsidized housing in all of its residential Plan Designations. Because government-assisted housing is similar in character to other housing (with the exception being the subsidies), it is not necessary to develop separate forecasts for government-subsidized housing. Farmworker housing. Farmworker housing can also apply to all housing types. The City allows development of farmworker housing in all residential zones with the same development standards as market-rate housing. This analysis assumes that Ashland will continue to allow farmworker housing in all of its residential zones. Because it is similar in character to other housing (with the possible exception of government subsidies, if population restricted), it is not necessary to develop separate forecasts for farmworker housing. To the extent that farmworkers have lower than average incomes, they, like other low-income households, may have difficulty finding affordable housing in Ashland. Manufactured housing on lots. Ashland explicitly allows manufactured homes on lots in its Normal Neighborhood Plan Designation, which is composed of the NN-1.5, NN 1- 3.5, NN 1-3.5a, and the NN-2 zone. In addition, manufactured homes on lots are permitted with special use standards in the R-1, R-1-3.5, R-2, and R-3 zone. Manufactured housing in parks. Ashland allows manufactured homes in parks (referred to as Manufactured Housing Developments in Ashland’s code) in the R-1-3.5 and the R-2 zone, except within the Historic District Overlay. In addition, manufactured homes in parks are allowed in the Normal Neighborhood, which is composed of the NN-1.5, NN 1-3.5, NN 1-3.5a, and the NN-2 zone. OAR 197.480(4) requires cities to inventory their mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks sited in areas planned and zoned for (or generally used for) commercial, industrial, or high-density residential development. According to the Oregon Housing and Community Services’ Ashland has four manufactured home parks Manufactured Dwelling Park Directory, 58 within its UGB, with 255 spaces. ORS 197.480(2) also requires Ashlandto project need for mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks based on: (1) population projections, (2) household income levels, (3) housing market trends, and (4) an inventory of manufactured Oregon Housing and Community Services, Oregon Manufactured Dwelling Park Directory. 58 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 75 dwelling parks sited in areas planned and zoned or generally used for commercial, industrial, or high density residential. Exhibit 66shows that Ashland will grow by 858dwelling units over the 2021to 2041 period. Analysis of housing affordability shows that about 32% of Ashland’s new households will be considered very-low or extremely-low-income, earning 50% or less of the region’s median family income or less. One type of housing affordable to these households is manufactured housing. Manufactured housing accounts for about 2% (about 225 dwelling units) of Ashland’s current housing stock within city limits. At 2% of all housing, Ashland may have 17 new manufactured units over the planning period. National, state, and regional trends since 2000 showed that manufactured housing parks are closing rather than being created. For example, between 2000 and 2015, Oregon had 68 manufactured parks close, with more than 2,700 spaces. Discussions with several stakeholders familiar with manufactured home park trends suggest that over the same period, few to no new manufactured home parks have opened in Oregon. The households most likely to live in manufactured homes in parks are those with incomes between $19,530 and $32,550 (30% to 50% of MFI), which includes 13% of Ashland’s households. However, households in other income categories may live in manufactured homes in parks. National and state trends of closure of manufactured home parks, and the fact that no new manufactured home parks have opened in Oregon in over the last 15 years, demonstrate that development of new manufactured home parks in Ashland is unlikely. Thus, our conclusion from this analysis is that development of new manufactured home parks or subdivisions in Ashland over the 2021-2041 planning period is unlikely. The forecast of housing assumes that no new manufactured home parks will be opened in Ashland over the 2021-2041 period. However, if the City has need for a new manufactured home park, it would be for 24 new units (2.8% of new units), which at about 8 dwelling units per acre will need three acres of land. The City has sufficient capacity if a new manufactured home park was developed in Ashland to accommodate it (in the R-2 or R-3 zones). The housing forecast includes new manufactured homes on lots in the category of single-family detached housing and the City has capacity for them in the R-1 zone). Over the next 20 years (or longer) one or more manufactured home parks may close in Ashland. This may be a result of manufactured home park landowners selling or redeveloping their land for uses with higher rates of return, rather than lack of demand for spaces in manufactured home parks. Manufactured home parks ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 76 contribute to the supply of low-cost affordable housing options, especially for affordable homeownership. While there is statewide regulation to lessen the financial difficulties of manufactured home park closures for park residents,the City has a role to play in 59 ensuring that there are opportunities for housing for the displaced residents. The City’s primary roles are to ensure that there is sufficient land zoned for new multifamily housing and to reduce barriers to residential development to allow for development of new, relatively affordable housing. In addition to these required housing types, this section also addresses housing for people with disabilities and housing for people experiencing homelessness. Housing for People with Disabilities. Housing for people with disabilities can be any housing type. It can also apply to other residential/group living uses (such as nursing homes, residential care homes or facilities, or room and boarding facilities) as well as government-subsidized housing (including units which are population restricted). Broadly, housing options for people with disabilities include (1) living in housing independently – alone or with roommates/family, (2) living in housing with supportive services (e.g., with help from a live-in or visiting caregiver), or (3) living in housing in a supervised residential setting. Housing for people with disabilities may include physical characteristics needed to address disabilities (such as ramps or wider doorways for people with ambulatory disabilities), services for people with cognitive or other disabilities, or adaptations needed by people with other disabilities. Ashland may want to consider policies to support housing for people with disabilities. Housing for People Experiencing Homelessness. Housing for people experiencing homelessness can apply to all housing types, with the same development standards as market-rate housing. It can also apply to other residential/group living uses and government-subsidized housing. Housing needs for people experiencing homelessness range, including temporary shelter to rapid re-housing, permanently supportive housing, rental assistance, and income-restricted affordable housing. ORS 90.645 regulates rules about closure of manufactured dwelling parks. It requires that the landlord must do the 59 following for manufactured dwelling park tenants before closure of the park: give at least one year’s notice of park closure, pay the tenant between $5,000 to $9,000 for each manufactured dwelling park space, and cannot charge tenants for demolition costs of abandoned manufactured homes. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 77 6.Residential Land Sufficiency in Ashland This chapter presents an evaluation of the sufficiency of vacant residential land in Ashland to accommodate expected residential growth over the 2021 to 2041 period. This chapter includes an estimate of residential development capacity (measured in new dwelling units) and an estimate of Ashland’s ability to accommodate needed new housing units for the 2021 to 2041 period, based on the analysis in the Housing Capacity Analysis. The chapter ends with a discussion of the conclusions and recommendations for the Housing Capacity Analysis. Capacity Analysis The buildable lands inventory summarized in Chapter 2 (and presented in full in Appendix B) provided a supply analysis (buildable land by type), and Chapter 5 provided a demand analysis (population and growth leading to demand for more residential development). The comparison of supply and demand allows the determination of land sufficiency. The Ashland Buildable Lands Analysis (in Appendices B and C) presents an estimate of capacity for new housing in Ashland. The capacity analysis shows capacity of land within city limits distinct from the capacity of land in the urbanizing area (the area between the city limits and urban growth boundary). The reason for presenting information this way is to address one of the concerns expressed by members of the Project Advisory Committee (and echoed by members of the Ashland HHSC and Planning Commission) about whether Ashland has enough capacity to accommodate the forecast of housing solely on lands within the city limits. Annexing land into the city limits from the urbanizing area (the area between the city limits and urban growth boundary) can be time consuming and require greater infrastructure costs, creating barriers to development. Exhibit 76 and Exhibit 78in Appendix C show dwelling unit capacity in 2020 for areas within the city limits and within the urbanizing area, excluding land were development occurred between 7/1/2019 and 6/30/2020. Exhibit 70 summarizes the results of these tables. Ashland has capacity for 1,455 dwelling units within its city limits and 1,299 dwelling units in the urbanizing area. Altogether, Ashland has capacity for 2,754 dwelling units on buildable land within its urban growth boundary. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 78 Exhibit 70. Estimated capacity, Ashland city limits and urbanizing area, 2020 Source: Buildable Lands Inventory; Calculations by ECONorthwest.*Note: Low Density Residential includes SFRR, Low Density, Single family residential, and North Mountain Commercial & Employment includes Commercial, Employment, Downtown, Health Care, and Southern Oregon University This estimate excludes the Woodland Plan Designation, which is intended for minimal development and only has capacity for 12 dwelling units ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 79 Residential Land Sufficiency The next step in the analysis of the sufficiency of residential land within Ashland is to compare the demand for housing by Plan Designation (Exhibit 68) with the capacity of land by Plan shows that Ashland has sufficient land to accommodate Designation (Exhibit 70). Exhibit 71 housing development within the urban growth boundary. In total, Ashland is forecast to grow by 858 dwelling units and has capacity for 2,754 dwelling units. Accommodating this growth will require annexing land into the city limits. In particular, development of 231 dwelling units in the Normal Neighborhood will require annexation of land from the urbanizing area into the city limits. While Exhibit 71 shows assumes that land within the city limits will develop before development occurs on land in the urbanizing area, in all likelihood, some land in the urbanizing area may annex and develop before some land within the city limits. Exhibit 71. Preliminary comparison of capacity of existing residential land with demand for new dwelling units and land surplus or deficit, Ashland UGB, 2021 to 2041 Source: Buildable Lands Inventory; Calculations by ECONorthwest. *Note: Low Density Residential includes SFRR, Low Density, Single family residential, and North Mountain Commercial & Employment includes Commercial, Employment, Downtown, Health Care, and Southern Oregon University ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 80 For the 2021 to 2041 planning period, 57 group quarter units were deducted from the housing forecast. The analysis still must account for their land need. For purposes of this analysis, new group quarters are assumed to develop proportionally in the Normal Neighborhood, Multifamily Residential, and High-Density Residential Plan Designations, shown in Exhibit 72. Exhibit 72. Land Needed for Group Quarters, Ashland UGB, 2021 to 2041 Source: Calculations by ECONorthwest. Note: Group quarters assumes one person per dwelling unit. *Note: Low Density Residential includes SFRR, Low Density, Single family residential, and North Mountain Commercial & Employment includes Commercial, Employment, Downtown, Health Care, and Southern Oregon University ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 81 Exhibit 73 presents a revised version of Exhibit 71 to account for land needed for new dwelling units as well as group quarters. In summary: Low Density Residential Plan Designations have a surplus capacity of 764 dwelling 60 units (with 368 dwelling units inside Ashland’s City Limits and 396 dwelling units inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Suburban Residential Plan Designation has a surplus capacity of 26 dwelling units (all of which are inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Normal Neighborhood Plan Designation has a surplus capacity of 224 dwelling units (all of which are inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Multifamily Residential Plan Designation has a surplus capacity of 158 dwelling units (all of which are inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). High Density Residential Plan Designation has a surplus capacity of 15 dwelling units (all of which are inside Ashland’s City Limits). Croman Mill District Plan Designation has a surplus capacity of 209 dwelling units (with 49 dwelling units inside Ashland’s City Limits and 160 dwelling units inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Commercial and Employment Plan Designation has a surplus capacity of 443 dwelling units (with 389 dwelling units inside Ashland’s City Limits and 54 dwelling units inside Ashland’s urbanizing area). Exhibit 73. Final comparison of capacity of existing residential land with demand for new dwelling units and land surplus or deficit, Ashland UGB, 2021 to 2041 Source: Calculations by ECONorthwest. *Note: Low Density Residential includes SFRR, Low Density, Single family residential, and North Mountain Commercial & Employment includes Commercial, Employment, Downtown, Health Care, and Southern Oregon University Low Density Residential includes SFRR, Low Density, Single family residential, and North Mountain 60 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 82 Conclusions The key findings of the Ashland’s Housing Capacity Analysis are that: Ashland’s population is forecast to grow at a similar pace as in the past. Ashland UGB is forecast to grow from 21,936 people in 2021 to 23,627 people in 2041, an increase of 1,691 people. This population growth will occur at an average annual growth rate of 0.37%. Ashland is planning for 858 new dwelling units. The growth of 1,691 people will result in demand for 858 new dwelling units over the 20-year planning period, averaging 43 new dwelling units annually. Ashland has enough land to accommodate its housing forecast between 2021 and 2041. Ashland can accommodate growth (858 dwelling units) over the next 20-years with a surplus of capacity remaining. However, some development in Ashland’s Suburban Residential, Normal Neighborhood, and Multifamily Residential Plan Designations will need to be accommodated in the city’s urbanizing area. Ashland has unmet needs for affordable housing. About 63% of Ashland’s households that rent are cost burdened (with 35% severely cost burdened) and 31% of Ashland’s households that own their own home are cost burdened. Ashland has unmet housing needs for households with extremely-low and very-low-income households, as well as households with low- and middle-income. About 32% of Ashland’s households have extremely low-income or very low-income, with household income below $32,600. At most, these households can afford $820 in monthly housing costs. Median gross rent in Ashland was $1,003 in the 2014-2018 period and has increased since. Home sales are very rarely affordable to households with these levels of income. This is shown in the high rates of cost burden for renters, with nearly 51% of renter households in cost burdened. Development of housing affordable to these households rarely occurs without government subsidy or other assistance. Meeting the housing needs of extremely-low-income households and very-low-income households will be a challenge to Ashland, as it is in all cities. About 31% of Ashland’s households are low-income or middle-income, with household income between $32,600 and $78,100. These households can afford between $820 to $1,950 in monthly housing costs. Households at the lower end of this income category may struggle to find affordable rental housing, especially with growing costs of rental housing across Southern Oregon. Middle-income households may still struggle to afford Ashland’s median home sales price of $434,400. Development of rental housing affordable to households in this income category, especially those at middle-income, can occur without government subsidy but the City’s zoning code will need to provide opportunities for development of a wider range of housing types in more places to accommodate more of this type of housing (as shown in Exhibit 64). Homeownership opportunities for households in this income category ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 83 may be limited to existing housing, unless there are opportunities to build new housing at lower costs. Over the 2021 to 2041 period, Ashland will need to plan for more multifamily dwelling units in the future to meet the City’s housing needs. Historically, about 66% of Ashland’s housing was single-family detached. While 35% of new housing in Ashland is forecast to be single-family detached, the City will need to provide opportunities for development of new single-family attached (10% of new housing); duplex, triplex, and quadplex housing (10% of new housing); and multifamily units (35% of new housing). The factors driving the shift in types of housing needed in Ashland include changes in demographics and decreases in housing affordability. The aging of the baby boomers and the household formation of the millennials and Generation Z will drive demand for renter- and owner-occupied housing, such as single-family detached housing, townhouses, duplexes, tri- and quad-plexes, and apartments. Both groups may prefer housing in walkable neighborhoods, with access to services. About 46% of Ashland’s households are cost burdened (paying more than 30% of their income on housing), including a cost burden rate of 63% for renter households. Without the diversification of housing types, lack of affordability will continue to be a problem, possibly growing in the future if incomes continue to grow at a slower rate than housing costs. A continuation of the current situation into the future suggests that 273 of Ashland’s new households will have incomes of $32,600 (in 2019 dollars) or less. These households often cannot afford market-rate housing without government subsidy. More than 268 of Ashland’s new households will have incomes between $32,600 and $78,100. These households will all need access to affordable housing, such as the housing types described above. The memorandum Ashland Housing Strategy (Appendix A of this report) was developed to present recommendations for policy changes to address Ashland’s unmet housing needs. Based on this Housing Capacity Analysis report and using the Ashland Housing Strategy for guidance, Ashland will need to develop a Housing Production Strategy within one year of adoption of this report. The Housing Production Strategy will further describe Ashland’s housing needs, based on the information in this report, and will include specific strategies to address Ashland’s unmet housing needs. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 84 Appendix A: Ashland Housing Strategy This appendix presents Ashland’s Housing Strategy memorandum, developed with the Housing Capacity Analysis. DATE: April 26, 2021 TO: City of Ashland Planning Commission and Housing and Human Services Commission FROM: Beth Goodman, ECONorthwest SUBJECT:FINAL ASHLAND HOUSING STRATEGY ECONorthwest is working with the City of Ashland to develop a Housing Capacity Analysis. The Housing Capacity Analysis will determine whether the City of Ashland has enough land to accommodate 20 years of population and housing growth. In addition to this analysis, ECONorthwest is working with the City of Ashland and an advisory committee to develop a Housing Strategy. The Housing Strategy is meant to propose actions that can address Ashland’s strategy housing priorities. This project is funded by Oregon general fund dollars through the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the State of Oregon. Ashland Housing Strategy Ashland’s housing strategy presents a comprehensive package of interrelated actions that the Ashland HCA Advisory Committee has evaluated, with input from the Planning Commission and Housing and Human Services Commission, to implement and address the City’s strategic housing priorities over the next eight years. The City will need to develop a Housing Production Strategy within one year of adopting the Housing Capacity Analysis. This Housing Strategy will provide the City with a starting point for the Housing Production Strategy. Developing the Housing Production Strategy will involve revisiting the recommended actions in this document, providing more detail about each strategy, setting an implementation schedule, getting stakeholder input on the strategies in this document, and assessing whether there are additional strategies that should be incorporated into the Housing Production Strategy. Implementation of the Housing Production Strategy will occur over an eight year period and will require additional public and stakeholder involvement. Introduction Ashland last updated its Comprehensive Plan, including policies in the Housing Element, in June 2019. As a result, Ashland does not need an analysis to revise all of its housing policies in the Comprehensive Plan. The City needs a housing strategy that provides guidance on ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 85 strategies the City could implement to meet the unmet housing needs identified in the Housing Capacity Analysis. This housing strategy recognizes that the City does not build housing. The strategy focuses on tools to ensure there is adequate land planned and zoned to meet the variety of housing needs and opportunities for a variety of housing types, whether market rate or subsidized. This strategy strives to provide opportunities for lower-cost market rate housing, to the extent possible, to achieve more housing affordability without complete reliance on subsidies if and when possible. The housing strategy primarily addresses the needs of households with middle, low, very low, or extremely low income. It distinguishes between two types of affordable housing: (1) housing affordable to very low-income and extremely low-income households and (2) housing affordable to low-income and middle-income households. The following describes these households, based on information from the Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis. Very-low-income and extremely-low-income households are those who have an income of 50% or less of Jackson County Median Family Income (MFI) which is an 61 annual household income of $32,600. About 34% of Ashland’s households fit into this Development of category. They can afford a monthly housing cost of $820 or less. 62 housing affordable to households at this income level is generally accomplished through development of government-subsidized income-restricted housing. Low-income and middle-income households are those who have an income of 50% to 120% of Jackson County’s MFI or income between $32,600 to $78,100. About 31% of Ashland’s households fit into this category. They can afford a monthly housing cost of $820 to $1,630. The private housing market may develop housing affordable to households in this group, especially for the higher income households in the group. Summary and Schedule of Actions Exhibit 74 presents a summary of actions items, listed in this strategy. This strategy recognizes that some actions will be more productive than others; thus, Exhibit 74 also identifies the scale of impact for each action. A low impact strategy may result in 1% or less of new housing, a moderate impact strategy may result in 1% to 5% of new housing, and a high impact strategy may result in 5% or more of new housing. Median Family Income is determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. In 2020, 61 Jackson County’s MFI was $65,100. This assumes that households pay less than 30% of their gross income on housing costs, including rent or 62 mortgage, utilities, home insurance, and property taxes. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 86 Exhibit 74. Summary and Schedule of Actions Source: Summarized by ECONorthwest. Scale of Impact Action LowModerate High Strategy 1: Ensure an adequate supply of land is available and serviced Evaluate increasing the maximum allowed densities in the X 1.1 Multi-Family Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), and parts of the Normal Neighborhood designations. Evaluate increasing allowed height in the R-2 and R-3 multi- X 1.2 family residential zones, outside of designated historic districts. Identify opportunities to increase allowances for residential X 1.3 uses on the ground floor of buildings within commercial and employment zones. X 1.4 Evaluate decreasing multifamily parking requirements. Evaluate decreasing parking requirements for affordable 1.5 X housing developments in areas with access to transit. Evaluate increasing lot coverage allowances slightly in the R-2 X 1.6 and R-3 zones. Identify opportunities to create greater certainty and clarity in X 1.7 the annexation process Evaluate changes to Ashland’s zoning code to disallow single- X 1.8 family detached housing in the High Density Residential Plan Designation (R-3 zone). Increase supply of High Density Residential lands by rezoning X 1.9 lands within lower density Plan Designations that have a surplus of capacity. Create processes and materials necessary to support X 1.10 developers in their development applications. Strategy 2: Provide opportunities for housing development to meet the City’s identified housing needs Broaden the definition of dwelling unit to include other types X 2.1 of units such as shared housing and co-housing, single-room occupancies, and other dwelling units. Evaluate opportunities incentivize smaller units through X 2.2 amendments to allowable densities. Identify and reduce any local obstacles to building with less X 2.3 conventional construction materials. Evaluate increasing allowances for residential dwellings in commercial and employment zones, such as allowing an X 2.4 increased amount of residential uses in ground floor commercial spaces.. X 2.5 Develop an equitable housing plan. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 87 Scale of Impact Action LowModerate High Encourage development of diverse housing types in high X 2.6 opportunity neighborhood. Strategy 3: Provide opportunities for development affordable to all income levels Create processes and materials necessary to support X 3.1 developers in development of affordable housing. X 3.2 Evaluate using the Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption. Adopt a property tax exemption program for affordable rental X 3.3 housing developed by nonprofit affordable housing developers. X 3.4 Evaluate participating in or establish a land bank. Evaluate opportunities to participate in a land trust to manage and develop housing that is affordable for rent or ownership at 3.5 X below-market pricing for households earning 120% or less of MFI (or possibly 80% or less of MFI). Evaluate whether the City or other public agencies have 3.6 vacant or redevelopable publicly owned property could be X used for development of affordable housing. Identify opportunities to purchase land in Ashland’s urbanizing X 3.7 area (within the Ashland UGB and outside of the City limits) as part of a land banking strategy. Identify partnerships with area employers to increase X 3.8 development of housing affordable to workers in Ashland. Continue to collaborate with community partnerstowork X 3.9 towards providing housing and support services to alleviate homelessness. Evaluate opportunities to make development of housing less X 3.10 costly to the development through changes in City fees. Strategy 4: Identify funding sources to support development of infrastructure and housing affordability programs X 4.1 Evaluate establishing a Construction Excise Tax. Evaluate using Urban Renewal to support development of X 4.2 infrastructure necessary to support housing development. Coordinate Capital Improvements Program and Transportation X 4.3 System Plan infrastructure investments. Continue to identify a variety of funding sources to support the 4.4 X Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Identify additional funds to support development of new X 4.5 affordable housing. Strategy 5: Align housing planning with the Climate and Energy Action Plan Evaluate opportunities to decrease dependence on X 5.1 automotive transportation in areas planned for housing. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 88 Scale of Impact Action LowModerate High Evaluate opportunities to incorporate elements of the CEAP 5.2 X into housing developments. Initiate a process to identify opportunities for development or X 5.3 redevelopment of mixed-use districts and initiate an area planning process to guide redevelopment. Evaluate opportunities to develop new housing closer to X 5.4 downtown and commercial centers to reduce dependance on automobiles for transportation. Evaluate opportunities for planning transit-oriented X 5.5 development as transit becomes more available in Ashland. Evaluate sustainable building practices, including certifications, to determine whether the City should offer X 5.6 incentives for certification or require certification of new buildings as sustainable. Strategic Issue 1: Ensure an adequate supply of land is available and serviced This strategy is about ensuring an adequate land supply—not only a 20-year supply (as Goal 10 requires) but also a pipeline of serviced land that is available for immediate development. The following recommended strategies and actions are intended to ensure an adequate supply of residential land through a combination of changes to development standards, annexation policies, and other changes. Efficient use of Ashland’s residential land is key to ensuring that Ashland has adequate opportunities to grow from 2021 to 2041 and beyond. Issue Statement Statewide planning Goal 10 (Housing) requires cities to inventory residential lands and provide a 20-year supply of land for residential uses. Moreover, land in the UGB is not necessarily development ready. Land requires the full suite of backbone services (water, wastewater, transportation) before it is development ready. The experience throughout Oregon in recent years is that the cost of services is increasing, and cities are turning to creative ways to finance infrastructure. This priority addresses both long- and short-term supply and availability of land. a)Provide a 20-year supply of land for residential use. The HNA concluded that Ashland has enough residential land and housing capacity within the Ashland UGB. b)Ensure short-term supply to support development. Land in the UGB is not necessarily development ready. Land requires the full suite of backbone services (water, wastewater, transportation) before it is development ready. In addition, HCA Advisory Committee members suggested that there were opportunities to improve the ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 89 annexation process for bringing land from Ashland’s urbanizing area into the city limits by creating greater certainty that in turn could expedite approvals and reduce costs. The Housing Capacity Analysis provides a thorough analysis of the existing supply and affordability of housing in Ashland. It concludes that Ashland will need 858 new housing units between 2021 and 2041. It shows that Ashland has sufficient land within the UGB to accommodate growth over the 2021-2041 period but has very limited capacity (and nearly a deficit of land) for housing in the High-Density Residential zone. Ashland is expected to add 1,691 people, resulting in demand for 858 dwelling units. Ashland has capacity for development of 2,754 dwelling units within the UGB under current policies, with much (36%) of the current capacity within Low Density Residential Plan Designations. However, about 1,299 dwelling units of total capacity (47%) is in the urbanizing area (the area between the city limits and UGB) and will require annexation before development occurs. The Plan Designations with the most capacity in the urbanizing area are Normal Neighborhood and Single-Family Residential. Ashland needs land that is vacant with urban services that support residential development such as municipal water service, sewer and wastewater service, stormwater management systems, and transportation connections with adequate capacity to accommodate growth. A part of ensuring that there are development opportunities is making zoning code changes to allow for a wider range of development, especially multifamily housing types, and streamlining the annexation and development process to make annexation faster and provide more predictability in the process to developers. Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 1 under consideration include: Action 1.1: Evaluate increasing the maximum allowed densities, or removing density limitations, in the Multi-Family Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), and parts of the Normal Neighborhood designations. Prior analysis shows that two to three as many units per acre as allowed under the current density standards can potentially fit on a typical site with limited changes to other development standards.Higher 63 densities are especially important for small infill sites where efficiency is at a premium. Allowing more housing on a given infill site helps the City meet its housing needs with less outward expansion and spreads the land and infrastructure cost across more units. Action 1.2: Evaluate increasing allowed height in the R-2 and R-3 multi-family residential zones, outside of designated historic districts, 35 to at least 40 feet. ECONorthwest, Ashland Housing Strategy Implementation Plan, June 2019. 63 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 90 Action 1.3: Identify opportunities to increase allowances for residential uses on the ground floor of buildings within commercial and employment zones. Action 1.4: Evaluate decreasing multifamily parking requirements. Parking reductions increase efficiency and reduce costs when combined with increases in density. In addition, parking reductions may be an important part of Strategic Issue 5, Action 5.1. Action 1.5: Evaluate decreasing parking requirements for affordable housing developments in areas with access to transit. In addition, parking reductions may be an important part of Strategic Issue 5, Action 5.1. Action 1.6: Evaluate increasing lot coverage allowances slightly in the R-2 and R-3 zones to support the other code amendments discussed in Actions 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. Action 1.7: Identify opportunities to create greater certainty and clarity in the annexation process through evaluation of the level of design necessary for assessment of compliance with development standards, with the goal of reducing the time and expense of preparing annexation applications. Action 1.8: Evaluate changes to Ashland’s zoning code to disallow single-family detached housing in the High Density Residential Plan Designation (R-3 zone), to preserve this zone for higher-density housing. Such a change would not include very small existing lots, where single-family detached housing is all that is buildable. Action 1.9: Increase supply of High Density Residential lands by rezoning lands within lower density Plan Designations that have a surplus of capacity, such as land in the Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. The purpose of increasing the supply of High Density Residential land is that Ashland has a small surplus of land in this zone and increasing the supply now, while there is a surplus of land in other zones, provides an opportunity to coordinate long-term planning for multifamily land with other planning processes that the City engages in over the next five to 10 years. Action 1.10: Create processes and materials necessary to support developers in their development applications, with the purpose of increasing clarity and certainty of in the development review process. Areas for further consideration The following are actions suggested by members of the HCA Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and Housing and Human Services Commission that should be further considered by the City of Ashland as it develops it housing policies. Evaluate revision to development standards that may result in lower density development, such as requirements for traffic analysis for developments that generate more than 50 trips per day. Evaluate the impacts on housing capacity and density of development resulting from Ashland’s physical and environmental constraints and water resources protection zone overlays. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 91 Evaluate the impact of the Ashland Solar Ordinance on limiting development of multi- story multifamily and mixed-use housing in consideration of energy conservation goals. Evaluate requiring more housing as part of new development in commercial and employment zones. Evaluate allowing smaller single-family detached housing on 2,500 sq ft lots, such as part of cottage clusters or stand-alone single-family detached units. Identify opportunities to up-zone land from lower density to medium- or high-density land, to provide more opportunities for developing smaller single-family units and multifamily housing. Strategic Issue 2: Provide opportunities for housing development to meet the City’s identified housing needs This strategy focuses on actions that are intended to ensure new residential structures developed in Ashland are diverse and include affordable housing for households with incomes below 60% of MFI, housing affordable to households with incomes of between 60% and 120% of MFI, housing for families with children, low- to moderate-income households, senior housing, and other housing products to achieve housing affordability for households and to meet Ashland’s 20-year housing needs. Issue Statement Continued increases in housing costs may increase demand for denser housing (e.g., multifamily housing, single-family attached housing, and compact single-family detached housing). To the extent that denser housing types are more affordable than larger housing types (i.e., single-family detached units on larger lots, such as 2,500 square foot dwelling units on lots larger than 5,000 square feet), continued increases in housing costs will increase demand for denser housing. Ashland’s housing mix in the 2015–2019 period was 66% single-family detached, 9% single- family attached, 12% duplex/triplex/quadplex, and 13% multifamily with 5 or more units per The HCA assumes that the housing mix of new dwelling units in Ashland will be structure. 64 about 35% single-family detached, 10% single-family attached 20% duplex/triplex/quadplex, and 35% multifamily with 5 or more units per structure. To achieve this mix, Ashland will need to implement policies that allow a wider variety of housing types, including smaller housing and housing produced with innovative processes or building materials, as well as more mixed-use housing. In addition, Ashland will allow for development of housing that is affordable to workers in Ashland and is located in proximity to employment opportunities to attract needed labor force for its employment and mixed-use lands. These types of housing include (but are not limited to) Based on 2015–2019 ACS five-year estimates for Ashland. 64 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 92 live-work units, “skinny” single-family detached housing, townhouses, cottage housing, duplexes and triplexes, and less costly types of multifamily housing. Ashland is in the process of amending the land use code to allow duplexes wherever a single- family dwelling unit is permitted per the requirements of HB2001. Code amendments will be enacted before July 1, 2021. Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 2 under consideration include: Action 2.1: Broaden the definition of dwelling unit to include other types of units such as shared housing and co-housing, single-room occupancies, and other dwelling units. Broadening the definition of dwelling units, which would broaden the types of units allowed in residential districts, would allow for greater flexibility of housing type. Action 2.2: Evaluate opportunities incentivize smaller units through amendments to allowable densities, such as allowing tiny house clusters or smaller units in medium density zones such as units as small as 200 square feet. Action 2.3: Identify and reduce any local obstacles to building with less conventional construction materials, such as shipping containers, prefabricated construction materials, 3-D printed materials, etc., with the purpose of allowing for development of more affordable housing. However, the building code is managed and applied by the State and not under local control. Action 2.4: Evaluate increasing allowances for residential dwellings in commercial and employment zones, such as allowing an increased amount of residential uses in ground floor commercial spaces. Action 2.5: Develop an equitable housing plan, which could include initial steps, action plan with goals and a method to measure progress to achieve more equitable housing and continuously examine ways to make improvements to the housing system to achieve equity. The equitable housing plan could address the issues identified in the 2020-2024 Fair Housing Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Update for the City of Ashland. This report identified impediments such as: limited community awareness about fair housing protections and resources, instances of discrimination in housing transactions, and a lack of affordable housing. Action 2.6: Encourage development of diverse housing types in high opportunity with a goal of reversing historical patterns of racial, ethnic, cultural neighborhoods, 65 and socio-economic exclusion. HUD defines high opportunity neighborhoods as areas that have a positive effect on economic mobility of 65 residents, such as access to jobs, high quality schools, and lower concentration of poverty. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 93 Strategic Issue 3: Provide opportunities for development of housing affordable to all income levels The following recommended strategy and actions are intended to use a deliberate set of mandates and incentives to support the development of new affordable housing and preserve existing affordable housing. Issue Statement The Housing Capacity Analysis clearly identifies a lack of housing that is affordable to households with lower and moderate incomes. It is clear that the private sector cannot feasibly develop lower cost housing without government intervention. The amount of government support that is available for lower cost housing is insufficient to meet identified needs. Availability of housing that is affordable to households at all income levels is a key issue in Ashland. For the purposes of this strategy, affordable housing is defined as: (1) housing for very-low–income and extremely-low–income households at 50% or below the median family $32,600 in 2020); (2) housing for low-income households with incomes between income (MFI) 66 50% and 80% of the MFI ($32,600 to $52,100 in 2020); and (3) housing for middle-income households with incomes between 80% and 120% of the MFI ($52,100 to $78,100 in 2020). In Ashland, 63% of renter households and 31% of homeowner households are considered cost burdened (paying more than 30% of their income on housing). These are households struggling to find affordable housing, at all points along the income spectrum. This strategic priority is to evaluate mechanisms (mandates and/or incentives) that will support development of affordable housing in Ashland. The City’s policy options for providing opportunities to build housing, especially affordable housing (both market-rate and government-subsidized affordable housing) are limited. The most substantial ways the City can encourage development of housing is through ensuring that enough land is zoned for residential development and within the city limits, in addition to assembling and purchasing land for affordable housing development, eliminating barriers to residential development where possible, and providing infrastructure in a cost-effective way. A key part of this strategy is providing informational resources to developers of housing affordable to both very-low- and extremely-low-income households, as well as low- and middle-income households. Smaller, local developers need resources to better understand the kinds of support that is available to build more affordable housing, such as funding opportunities, partnerships, etc. The affordable housing realm is very complex and existing developers/builders would benefit from additional assistance and clarification about the requirements for development and management of affordable housing, as well as City Based on U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Median Family Income of $65,100 for Jackson 66 County in 2020. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 94 assistance identifying potential non-profit affordable housing development partners that can secure funding for affordable housing development. In addition to supporting development, an important angle of this strategic priority is to identify strategies that preserve naturally occurring affordable housing that already exists in Ashland. Naturally occurring affordable housing are dwelling units that are unsubsidized, yet affordable to households earning incomes below the area’s median household or family income. Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 3 under consideration include: Action 3.1: Create processes and materials necessary to support developers in development of affordable housing, with the purpose of making it easier to develop affordable housing in Ashland. The City could act as a convener between “market-rate developers” required to provide affordable housing and those nonprofits and other organizations who are well versed in the complexities of developing affordable housing. 67 Action 3.2: Evaluate using the Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption to incentivize preservation and development of housing for low- to middle-income households for needed housing types. Action 3.3: Adopt a property tax exemption program for affordable rental housing developed by nonprofit affordable housing developers. Evaluate which of the two available options under state statute is better suited to the needs of housing providers in Ashland. The options are the Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption and the Nonprofit Corporation Low Income Housing Tax Exemption. Action 3.4: Evaluate participating in or establish a land bank for development of housing affordable to households within incomes below 80% of MFI for renters or below 120% of MFI for homeowners. The land bank may best be run by a nonprofit, with the City participating as a partner in the land bank. Action 3.5: Evaluate opportunities to participate in a land trust to manage and develop housing that is affordable for rent or ownership at below-market pricing for households earning 120% or less of MFI (or possibly 80% or less of MFI). Action 3.6: Evaluate whether the City or other public agencies have vacant or redevelopable publicly owned property that is not being otherwise used and could be used for development of affordable housing. This property could be used for affordable housing, either as part of a land bank (Action 3.4) or directly in development of an affordable housing project. Action 3.7: Identify opportunities to purchase land in Ashland’s urbanizing area (within the Ashland UGB and outside of the City limits) as part of a land banking strategy. The The City of Medford is developing a toolkit to help developers gain support for development of affordable housing 67 in Medford. This toolkit may provide good ideas that could be customized for use in Ashland. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 95 City could acquire land and write down land costs for developers who are willing to build housing either affordable to households with incomes below 60% of MFI or for households with incomes between 60% and 80% of MFI. Action 3.8: Identify partnerships with area employers to increase development of housing affordable to workers in Ashland. Potential partnerships may be with Southern Oregon University (SOU), for development of workforce housing for people employed at SOU or students at SOU, Ashland School District, or with the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. Action 3.9: Continue to collaborate with community partners to work towards providing housing and support services to alleviate homelessness for families with children, domestic violence victims, veterans, and other vulnerable populations. Action 3.10: Evaluate opportunities to make development of housing less costly to the development through changes in City fees. For example, the City might allow a develop to pay application fees over time, rather than requiring the fee at the beginning of the development process. The City might also set a cap on application fees. Areas for further consideration The following are actions suggested by members of the HCA Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and Housing and Human Services Commission that should be further considered by the City of Ashland as it develops it housing policies. Identify opportunities to increase affordable homeownership for households with children. Identify barriers to development of housing that is affordable for families with children, both regulated affordable housing and market-rate affordable housing. This could include small changes to the zoning code to allow development of housing for families with children. Strategic Issue 4: Identify funding sources to support development of infrastructure and housing affordability programs The following recommended strategy and actions are intended to consider a range of funding tools that Ashland may implement and use to support residential development. Issue Statement A primary barrier to residential development, particularly for housing for very low-income and low-income households, is costs and financing. This strategic priority intends to evaluate opportunities for the City of Ashland to support needed residential development by evaluating creative funding and financing mechanisms that reduce development costs. Funding opportunities may include options to reduce the cost of land, reduce hard costs (such as ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 96 infrastructure development), and reduce soft costs (such as system development charges or permit costs). Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 4 are: Action 4.1: Evaluate establishing a Construction Excise Tax (CET) for residential, When the City evaluates implementing a commercial, and industrial development. 68 CET, the City should consider how much funding the CET could produce and decide if that funding would meaningfully help in production of affordable housing. The City may want to consider a methodology that exempts a portion of the permit value (such as the first $100,000 or more permit value), as a way of focusing CET charges on units with a higher permit value. Action 4.2: Evaluate using Urban Renewal to support development of infrastructure necessary to support housing development, as well as to support development of housing affordable to households with incomes below 80% of MFI. For example, a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) set-aside of a minimum of 30% for affordable housing development to serve households earning 0-60% Median Family Income, to apply to existing and future urban renewal areas in the City. TIF set-aside funds would also potentially be available for affordable housing units within market rate, mixed-use and mixed-income development. If the City wants to use Urban Renewal on areas currently outside the city limits, the City will need to annex the land into the city limits before implementing the Urban Renewal District. Action 4.3: Coordinate Capital Improvements Program infrastructure investments and Transportation System Plan to strategically develop needed infrastructure within areas where residential growth is expected. Action 4.4: Continue to identify a variety of funding sources to support the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Action 4.5: Identify additional funds to support development of new affordable housing, including housing options for people experiencing homelessness, increasing housing stability and reducing risk of homelessness, and housing for households with incomes of less than 60% of MFI. These funds may be contributed to Ashland’s existing Affordable Housing Trust Fund. One funding option with substantial revenue potential is a General Obligation (GO) bond. Cities or other jurisdictions can issue bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the jurisdiction to pay for capital construction and improvements. The Ashland School District has an existing CET of $1.07 per square foot of residential construction or $0.53 per 68 square foot of commercial construction. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 97 Strategic Issue 5: Align housing planning with the Climate and Energy Action Plan The following recommended strategy and actions are intended ensure that planning for housing is aligned with Ashland’s plans for climate change. Issue Statement The City of Ashland adopted its Climate and Energy Action Plan (CEAP) in March of 2017 “to reduce its emissions and improve its resilience to future impacts of climate change on its The plan identified six strategic initiatives: environment, infrastructure, and people.” 69 Transition to clean energy Maximize conservation of water and energy Support climate-friendly land use and management Reduce consumption of carbon-intensive goods and services Inform and work with residents, organizations, and government Lead by example To the extent possible, housing planning and actions to address Ashland’s housing needs should emphasize these initiatives and allow them to guide decision-making. The nexus between the CEAP and housing development includes: Location of housing. Housing that is located in areas where less driving is necessary, either through more use of transit or a closer location to services and work, may help the City meet its CEAP goals. Some of Ashland’s residential development is located in areas with access to transit and closer to services and employment, but some land does not have these locational advantages. In addition, some people will choose to locate in Ashland but work in other parts of the region. Energy efficiency of housing development and the structures. Housing that is developed with energy-efficient processes, uses energy-efficient materials, and operates in an energy efficient way over time can also help the City meet its CEAP goals. Increasing energy-efficiency can both increase development costs, through more expensive materials or development process, as well as lower long-term energy costs. Ashland should be careful to consider the advantages and disadvantages when requiring energy-efficient development, to make sure that the requirements do not make housing substantially less affordable in Ashland. Climate and Energy Action Plan: 69 http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Ashland%20Climate%20and%20Energy%20Action%20Plan_pages.pdf ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 98 Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 5 are: Action 5.1: Evaluate opportunities to decrease dependence on automotive transportation in areas planned for housing, such as increased focus on development in walkable and bikeable areas and increases in transit service (amount and frequency of transit, as well as increased destinations for transit). The prior action that suggests parking reductions (Action 1.3) may reduce reliance upon automobiles and decrease of impervious surfaces dedicated to parked vehicles. Action 5.2: Evaluate opportunities to incorporate elements of the CEAP into housing developments, including increased energy efficiency, solar access, electrical vehicle parking and charging opportunities, reduction of fossil fuels dependency, and increased resilience to natural hazards resulting from a changing climate (such as the risk of wildfire). Action 5.3: Initiate a process to identify opportunities for development or redevelopment of mixed-use districts and initiate an area planning process to guide redevelopment. Action 5.4: Evaluate opportunities to develop new housing closer to downtown and commercial centers to reduce dependance on automobiles for transportation. For example, redevelopment of the Railroad property provides such an opportunity. Action 5.5: Evaluate opportunities for planning transit-oriented development as transit becomes more available in Ashland, consistent with mixed-use planning. Action 5.6: Evaluate sustainable building practices, including certifications, to determine whether the City should offer incentives for certification or require certification of new buildings as sustainable. Potential Housing Policies and Actions This section provides the City with information about potential policies that could be implemented in Ashland to address the City’s housing needs. This appendix provides a range of housing policy options for the City of Ashland to consider as it addresses its housing needs. These policy options are commonly used by cities in Oregon and other states. Policy options are categorized as follows: Land Use Regulations Increase Housing Types Financial Assistance to Homeowners and Renters Lower Development or Operational Costs Funding Sources to Support Residential Development ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 99 The intention of this memorandum is to provide a toolbox of potential policies and actions that the City can use to address strategic issues. For many of the policy tools described below, we give an approximate scale of impact. The purpose of the scale of impact is to provide some context for whether the policy tool generally results in a little or a lot of change in the housing market. The scale of impact depends on conditions in the City, such as other the City’s other existing (or newly implemented) housing policies, the land supply, and housing market conditions. We define the scale of impact as follows: A small impact may not directly result in development of new housing or it may result in development of a small amount of new housing, such as 1% to 3% of the needed housing. In terms of housing affordability, a small impact may not improve housing affordability in and of itself. A policy with a small impact may be necessary but not sufficient to increase housing affordability. A moderate impact is likely to directly result in development of new housing, such as 3% to 5% of needed housing. In terms of housing affordability, a moderate impact may not improve housing affordability in and of itself. A policy with a moderate impact may be necessary but not sufficient to increase housing affordability. A large impact is likely to directly result in development of new housing, such as 5% to 10% (or more) of needed housing. In terms of housing affordability, a large impact may improve housing affordability in and of itself. A policy with a large impact may still need to work with other policies to increase housing affordability. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 100 LandUseRegulations These policies focus on ways the City can modify its land use regulations to increase housing affordability and available housing stock. ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact Regulatory Changes ScaleofImpact- AdministrativeRegulatorydelaycanbeamajorcost-inducingfactorin Small andProceduraldevelopment.Oregonhasspecificrequirementsforreview.Theimpacton Reformsofdevelopmentapplications.However,complicatedproductionofhousing projectsfrequentlyrequireadditionalanalysissuchasandhousing trafficimpactstudies,etc.affordabilityis small anddependson Akeyconsiderationinthesetypesofreformsishowto changesmadetoCity streamlinethereviewprocessandstillachievethe procedures. intendedobjectivesoflocaldevelopmentpolicies. Streamlining procedures may not be sufficient to increase production. ScaleofImpact- Expedited/Fast-Expeditebuildingpermitsforpre-approveddevelopmentPriority planning action Small trackedBuildingtypesorbuildingcharacteristics(e.g.greenbuildings).processing and building permit.Expedited Permitissuance for affordable housing permit processing will CityofBendoffersexpeditedreviewandpermittingfor is not codified in Ashland benefit a limited affordablehousing.Anyresidentialormixed-use Municipal Code. Ashland does number of projects. It developmentthatreceiveslocal,stateorfederalaffordable provide priority plan check and may be necessary but housingfundingiseligibletoreceiveawrittendecisionby planning action processing for not sufficient to thePlanningDepartmentwithintwoweeksofthedateof green buildings pursuing increase housing submittal.Forprojectsthatrequiremorecomplexplanning certification under the production on its own. review,adecisionwillbewritten,orthefirstpublichearing Leadership in Energy and willbeheldwithinsixweeksofthedateofsubmittal. Environmental Design (LEED) rating system. ScaleofImpact- StreamlineComplexityofzoning,subdivision,andotherordinances Smalltomoderate ZoningCodeandcanmakedevelopmentmoredifficult,timeconsuming,. otherOrdinancesThelevelofimpacton ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis101 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact andcostly.Streamliningdevelopmentregulationscanproductionofhousing resultinincreaseddevelopment. andhousing affordabilitywilldepend Aspartofthestreamliningprocess,citiesmayevaluate onthechangesmade potentialbarrierstoaffordable workforce housingand tothezoningcodeand multifamilyhousing.Potentialbarriersmayincludeheight otherordinances. limitations,complexityofplannedunitdevelopment regulations,parking requirements, and other zoning standards. Many of the remaining tools in this section focus on changes to the zoning code. ScaleofImpact – Planned Unit Developments in AllowSmallSmallresidentiallotsaregenerallylessthan5,000SF and Smalltomoderate ResidentialLotssometimes closer to 2,000 SF. Thispolicyallowsindividualall SFR and MFR zones will. smalllotswithin a subdivision.Smalllotscanbeallowedallow for small lots (up to zero Citieshaveadopted outrightintheminimumlot size anddimensionsof a zone,lot line) at allowable Densities. minimumlot sizes as ortheycouldbeimplementedthroughthesubdivisionorAdditionally,cottage housing smallas 2,000SF. plannedunitdevelopmentordinances.developmentsin SFR zones (R-However,itis 1-5 & R-1-7.5)allow lots uncommontosee This policy is intended to increase density and lower smaller than the minimum lot entiresubdivisionsof housing costs. Small-lots limit sprawl, contribute to a more size for the zone in conjunction lotsthissmall.Small efficient use of land, and promote densities that can with common openspace.lotstypicallygetmixed support transit. Small lots also provide expanded housing inwithotherlot sizes. ownership opportunities to broader income ranges and This tool generally provide additional variety to available housing types. Ashland’s R-1-3.5 zone has a increases density and Cities across Oregon allow small residential lots, including minimum lot size of 3,500 SF. amount of single-family many cities in the Metro area. detached and townhouse housing in a given area, decreasing housing costs as a result of decreasing amount of land on the lot. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis102 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact ScaleofImpact— MandateThispolicyplacesanupperboundonlotsizeandalowerAshland does not have a Smalltomoderate MaximumLotboundondensityinsingle-familyzones.Forexample,amaximum lot size or minimum . Sizesresidentialzonewitha6,000SF minimumlotsizemightdensity requirement in Single Mandatingmaximum havean8,000SF maximumlotsizeyieldinganeffectiveFamily Residential zones, lotsizemaybemost netdensityrangebetween5.4and7.3dwellingunitsperalthough market development appropriateinareas netacre.typically maximizes the number wherethemarketis of units provided. buildingatsubstantially Thisapproachensuresminimumdensitiesinresidential lowerdensitiesthan zonesbylimitinglotsize.Itplacesboundsonbuildingat areallowedorincities lessthanmaximumallowabledensity.Maximumlotsizes In cases where lot sizes are thatdonothave canpromoteappropriateurbandensities,efficientlyuse proposed that exceed the minimumdensities. limitedlandresources,andreducesprawldevelopment. minimum lot size it is often in This tool generally This tool is used by some cities but is used less frequently response to physical or increases density and than mandating minimum lot sizes.environmental constraints that amount of single-family limit the buildable portion of a detached and site (e.g. steep slopes, townhouse housing in floodplains, wetlands and a given area, riparian areas) decreasing housing costs as a result of decreasing amount of land on the lot. ScaleofImpact— MandateThispolicyistypicallyappliedinsingle-familyresidentialMinimum Density requirements Smalltomoderate Minimumzonesandplacesalowerboundondensity.Minimum(80% base density) are in place . Residentialresidentialdensitiesinsingle-familyzonesaretypicallyin MFR zones (R-2 and R-3) on Increasingminimum Densitiesimplementedthroughmaximumlotsizes.Inmultifamilylots large enough to densitiesandensuring zones,theyareusuallyexpressedasaminimumnumberaccommodate 3 or more units. clearurbanconversion ofdwellingunitspernetacre.SuchstandardsaretypicallyMinimum densities and are plansmayhavea implementedthroughzoningcodeprovisionsinapplicablerequired of any residential smalltomoderate residentialzones.Thispolicyincreasesland-holdingannexation (90% Base impactdependingon capacity.MinimumdensitiespromotedevelopmentsDensity).theobservedamount consistentwithlocalcomprehensiveplansandgrowthofunderbuildandthe assumptions.Theyreducesprawldevelopment,eliminateminimumdensity underbuildinginresidentialareas,andmakeprovisionofstandard.For cities servicesmorecosteffective.Mandating minimum density that allow single-family ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis103 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact is generally most effective in medium and high-density detached housing in zones where single-family detached housing is allowed. high density zones, this The minimum density ensures that low-density single-policy can result in a family housing is not built where higher-density multifamily moderate or larger housing could be built.impact. ScaleofImpact— IncreaseThisapproachseekstoincreaseholdingcapacitybyAshland recently removed the Smalltomoderate Allowableincreasingallowabledensityinresidentialzones.Itgivesmaximum residential densities . Residentialdeveloperstheoptionofbuildingtohigherdensities.Thiswithin the Transit Triangle Thistoolcanbemost DensitiesapproachwouldbeimplementedthroughthelocalzoningOverlay area (Ashland Street, effectiveinincreasing ordevelopmentcode.Thisstrategyismostcommonlyportions of Siskiyou Blvd, and densitieswherevery appliedtomultifamilyresidentialzones.Tolman Creek Road). A form-lowdensityiscurrently based approach is used where allowedorinareas Forcitieswithmaximumdensities,considerremoving limitations on height, lot whereacitywantsto maximumallowabledensities.Thischangemaybemost coverage, and setback encouragehigher relevant. requirements create the 3D densitydevelopment. Higherdensitiesincreaseresidentiallandholdingcapacity. envelope in which units can be This tool generally Higherdensities,whereappropriate,providemore developed. This allows for increases density and housing,agreatervarietyofhousingoptions,andamore many smaller units within the amount of single-family efficientuseofscarcelandresources.Higherdensities same space when compared to detachedand alsoreducesprawldevelopmentandmaketheprovision a base density approach which townhouse housing in ofservicesmorecosteffective. can produce fewer, large a given area, apartments or condominiums. decreasing housing Ashland has not increased costs as a result of residential densities outside of decreasing amount of land on the lot. the this Overlay area. ScaleofImpact— AllowClusteredClusteringallowsdeveloperstoincreasedensityonAshland permits Planned Unit Moderate. Residentialportionsofasite,whilepreservingotherareasofthesite.Developments in SFR and MFR Clustering DevelopmentClusteringisatoolmostcommonlyusedtopreservezones which allows clustering canincreasedensity, naturalareasoravoidnaturalhazardsduringof units and transfer of density however,ifotherareas development.Itusescharacteristicsofthesiteasafrom naturally constrained ofthesitethatcould primaryconsiderationindeterminingbuildingfootprints,areas to the developable otherwisebe access,etc.Clusteringistypicallyprocessedduringtheportion of the site.developedarenot sitereviewphaseofdevelopmentreview.developed,thescaleof impactcanbereduced. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis104 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact ScaleofImpact— ReducedParkingJurisdictionscanreduceoreliminateminimumoff-streetAshland provides parking Smalltomoderate Requirementsparkingrequirements,aswellasprovideflexibilityinreductions for small units city-. meetingparkingrequirements.Reducingparkingwide (one space per unitfor TheCitycouldrequire requirementspositivelyimpactdevelopmentofanytypeofunits 500 SFor less). thedevelopertoprove housing,fromsingle-familydetachedtomultifamily Within the Transit Triangle theneedandpublic housing. Overlayparking requirements benefitorreducing Reducedparkingrequirementsaremostfrequentlyusedinare reduced to one space per parkingrequirements conjunctionofdevelopmentofsubsidizedaffordableunitfor units 800 SFor lesstoincreasehousing housing,butcitieslikePortlandhavereducedoraffordability. Cottages of 800 SF or less eliminatedparkingrequirementsformarket-based within approved cottage Reducing parking multifamilyhousinginspecificcircumstances. housing developments require requirements can have CityofBendoffers parkingreductionsforaffordableone space per unit.a moderate to large housingandtransitproximity.Parkingforaffordableimpact on housing Many parking credits may be housingunitsis1spaceperunitregardlessofsize,affordability if little or allocated to projects including: comparedto1spaceperstudioor1-bedroom unit,1.5no parking is required. An off-street parking credit for spacesper2-bedroomunit,and2spacesper3-ormore each on-street space along the bedroomunitformarket-ratemultifamilydevelopmentor2 properties frontage; joint use spacespermarketratedetacheddwellingunit.Affordable and mixed-use development housingunitsmustmeetthesameeligibilitycriteriaasfor credits (sharing the same space otherCityofBendaffordablehousingincentives between a commercial use and CityofPortlandoffers parkingexceptionsforaffordableresidential use when housingandsitesadjacenttotransit.TheCityofPortlanddemonstrated their time of use allowshousingdevelopmentsthatmeettheinclusionaryis not in conflict); off-site shared zoningrequirementstoreduceparkingrequirementstoparking; transit facilities credit; zeroiflocatednearfrequenttransitservice,andtoexcludeTransportation Demand theaffordablehousingunitsfromparkingrequirementsforManagement plan developmentslocatedfurtherfromfrequenttransitservice.implementation. TheCityalsoallowsmarketratehousingdevelopments Ashland does not have a locatednearfrequenttransitservicetoprovidelittleorno specific parking reduction parking,dependingonthenumberofunitsinthe available for units designated development. and regulated as affordable housing. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis105 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact ScaleofImpact— ReduceStreetThispolicyisintendedtoreducelandusedforstreetsandAshland haslongimplemented Small WidthStandardsslowdowntraffic.Streetstandardsaretypicallydescribeda “NarrowStreet” standard .Thispolicyis indevelopmentand/orsubdivisionordinances.Reducedthrough the Street Standards mosteffectiveincities streetwidthstandardsaremostcommonlyappliedonlocaland Transportation System thatrequirerelatively streetsinresidentialzones.ThisstrategycouldbeappliedPlan. widestreets. toalleys,whenrequired,toensurethatalleysarerelatively narrowtoreducedevelopmentandmaintenancecosts. Narrowerstreetsmakemorelandavailabletohousingand economic-baseddevelopment.Narrowerstreetscanalso reducelong-termstreetmaintenancecosts. ScaleofImpact— Ashland does have ordinances PreservingHousingpreservationordinancestypicallyconditionthe Smallto moderate ExistingHousingdemolitionorreplacementofcertainhousingtypesonthethat regulate the closure of . Supplyreplacementofsuchhousingelsewhere,feesinlieuofmanufactured home parks and Preservingsmall replacement,orpaymentforrelocationexpensesofdisplacement of the residents, existinghousingcan existingtenants.Preservationofexistinghousingmayas well as the conversion of makeadifferencein focusonpreservationofsmaller,moreaffordablehousing.apartments into condominiums, theavailabilityof Approachesinclude:wherein longer notice periods affordablehousingina prior to tenant displacementcitybutitislimitedby Housingpreservationordinances and relocation assistance can theexistingstock Housingreplacementordinances be required.housing,especially Manufactured home preservation smaller,more Ashland’sdemolition ordinance affordablehousing. Single-room-occupancyordinances does regulate demolitions but Cities with older does not have standards Regulatingdemolitions housing stock are more relating to tenant displacement. likely to benefit from this policy. ScaleofImpact— InclusionaryInclusionaryzoningpoliciestiedevelopmentapprovalto,Ashland requires a percentage Smalltomoderate Zoningorprovideregulatoryincentivesfor,theprovisionoflow-of affordable housing (25% of . andmoderate-incomehousingaspartofaproposedthe base density exclusive of Inclusionaryzoning development.Mandatoryinclusionaryzoningrequiresunbuildable areas) as part of hasrecentlybeen developerstoprovideacertainpercentageoflow-incomeannexations and zone changes madelegalinOregon. housing.Incentive-basedinclusionaryzoningprovidesfor residential developments.Thescaleofimpact densityorothertypesofincentives.woulddependonthe inclusionaryzoning ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis106 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact Thepriceoflow-incomehousingis often passedontoAshland has not implemented policiesadoptedbythe purchasersofmarket-ratehousing.Critics of inclusionaryan inclusionary zoning city. zoningcontend it impedesthe"filtering"processwhereordinance for residential residentspurchasenewhousing,freeingexistinghousingdevelopments within the City forlower-incomeresidents.Limits for proposed structures containing 20 units or more Oregon’s inclusionary zoning lawsapply to structures with under the State’s newly 20 or more multifamily units, with inclusion of units that are approvedinclusionary zoning affordable at 80% of the median family income of the city. legislation. The City of Portland has implemented an inclusionary zoning program. While Portland’s inclusionary zoning program is resulting in production of affordable multifamily units, there is considerable discussion and disagreement about the impact of number of multifamily units being built and potential changes in the location of units. Rezoning land in Ashland is not Re-designateorThetypesoflandrezonedforhousingarevacantor rezonelandforpartiallyvacantlow-densityresidentialandemploymenta common practice. housinglandrezonedtomultifamilyormixeduse.Inrezoningland, The City has implemented a itisimportanttochooselandinacompatiblelocation, number of master planning suchaslandthatcanbeabufferbetweenanestablished Efforts (Normal Neighborhood, neighborhoodandotherdenserusesorlandadjacentto North Mountain Plan, Croman existingcommercialuses.Whenrezoningemployment Mill District) which have land,itisbesttoselectlandwithlimitedemployment identified lands to be developed capacity(i.e.,smallerparcels)inareaswheremultifamily as multifamily or mixed-use housingwouldbecompatible(i.e.,alongtransitcorridors development. Individual orinemploymentcentersthatwouldbenefitfromnew property owners have housing). requested and received Thispolicychangeincreasesopportunityforcomparativelyrezoning of their properties to affordablemultifamilyhousingandprovidesopportunitiesmultifamily zones for specific formixingresidentialandothercompatibleuses.development proposals. However, there has not been Cities across Oregon frequently re-zone and re-designate an effort to examine vacant low land to address deficits of land for new housing. density and employment properties within the City Limits as candidates for a ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis107 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact comprehensive plan and zone change to increase the supply of multifamily zoned properties. ThistoolseekstoencouragedensermultifamilyhousingMixed use projects are Encourage multifamilyaspartofmixed-useprojectsincommercialzones.Suchpermitted and encouraged in residentialpoliciesloweroreliminatebarrierstoresidentialAshland Commercial and developmentindevelopmentincommercialormixed-usezones.TheyEmployment zoned. There is commercialincludeeliminatingrequirementsfornon-residentialusescurrent discussion regarding zonesincommercialzones(e.g.,requirementsforgroundfloorthe percentage of the ground retail)orrequiringminimumresidentialdensities.floor that is to be reserved for commercial uses and whether Thispolicycanincreaseopportunitiesformultifamily those ratioscan be modified in developmentoncommercialormixed-usezonesor consideration of changing increasethedensityofthatdevelopment. market demands for in retail Cities across Oregon frequently encourage multifamily and office space. housing development in commercial zones, either as stand-along residential buildings or as mixed-use buildings. ThispolicyisintendedtomovedevelopmentfromAshland does not have a Transferor Purchaseofsensitiveareastomoreappropriateareas.DevelopmentTransfer of Development Rights Developmentrightsaretransferredto“receivingzones”andcanbeprogram or designated Rightstradedandcanincreaseoveralldensities.Thispolicyisreceiving zones. usuallyimplementedthroughasubsectionofthezoning codeandidentifiesbothsendingzones(zoneswhere decreaseddensitiesaredesirable)andreceivingzones (zoneswhereincreaseddensitiesareallowed). Transfer of development rights is done less frequently in Oregon, as cities generally zone land for higher density housing where they would like it to occur. This policy is frequently used by cities outside of Oregon. ProvideDensityThelocalgovernmentallowsdeveloperstobuildhousingAshland has four density Bonusestoatdensitieshigherthanareusuallyallowedbythebonuses, one of which is for Developersunderlyingzoning.Densitybonusesarecommonlyuseddevelopment of affordable asatooltoencouragegreaterhousingdensityindesiredhousing at higher densities and ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis108 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact areas,providedcertainrequirementsaremet.Thisanother for energy-efficient strategyisgenerallyimplementedthroughprovisionsofhousing. thelocalzoningcodeandisallowedinappropriate Affordable housing projects residentialzones. meeting eligibility requirements Bonusdensitiescanalsobeusedtoencourage(including rental or ownership developmentoflow-incomeorworkforceaffordablehousing affordable to housing.Anaffordablehousingbonuswouldallowforhouseholds at 80% or less of morehousingunitstobebuiltthanallowedbyzoningiftheAMI for a min.of 30 years) proposedprojectprovidesacertainnumberofaffordablereceive a density bonus of two units.units for each affordable unit provided, up to a max.of a 35% City of Bend offers affordable housing density and height increase in density. bonuses. Qualifying affordable housing projects are eligible for a 10-foot building height bonus for multifamily The max.density bonus housing when affordable housing units are gained and for inclusive of other bonuses a density bonus. The density increase is based on the (openspace, conservation) can percentage of affordable housing units within the proposed be 60%over the base density development: if 10% of the units are affordable, the within the zone. maximum density is 110% of the standard maximum Ashland’s Cottage Housing density. The maximum density bonus is 50% above the Development ordinance base density. Qualifying projects must be affordable to effectively provides a doubling households at or below 60% of the AMI for rental housing of the allowable density in the and at or below 80% of the AMI for ownership housing and zone for provision of the small require development agreements and restrictions to cottage housing units. ensure continued affordability. Ashland classifies small units, Kirkland, WA offers density bonuses for duplex, triplex, of 500 SF or less, as only 75% and cottages. Cottage homes (limitedto 1,500 SFof floor of a unit for the purposes of area) and two-and three-unit homes (up to 1,000 SFof density calculations. A greater floor area average per unit) are allowed at double the number of small units can be density of detached dwelling units in the underlying zone. developed within existing density allowances without employing a density bonus. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis109 IncreaseHousing Types The following policies focus on ways in which the City can increase the types of housing available in order to increase housing affordability. Policies focus on increasing housing density or the number of residents within existing City lots. ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact – AllowDuplexes,AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallAshland is in the process of Smallto moderate Cottagehousing,densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmayamending the land use code . Townhomes,Rowencourage a higherpercentageofmultifamilyto allow duplexes wherever a Allowingthesetypesof Houses,andTri- housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbesingle-family dwelling unit is housinginmore andQuad-Plexesimplementedthroughthelocalzoningorpermitted per the zoningdistrictsmay inlow density developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingrequirements of HB2001. providerelativelyfew zonestypesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatenumberofnew, Code amendments will be residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesproviderelativelyaffordable, enacted before July 1, 2021. additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandallowhousingopportunities. moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedby detachedhomesalone. House Bill 2001 requires cities to allow these housing types in single-family zones. AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallAshland passed a cottage ScaleofImpact – Smallto Large densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmayhousing ordinance in 2018 . AllowCottage encourage a higherpercentageofmultifamilyand allows cottage housing Allowingthesetypesof housing,Tri- and housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbedevelopments in the R-1-5housinginmore Quad-Plexes implementedthroughthelocalzoningorand R-1-7.5 zones on lots zoningdistrictsmay Townhomes,Row developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingthat are greater than 1.5 provideup to a large Houses,Stacked typesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatetimes the minimumlot size numberofnew, Townhouses, residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesprovidefor the zone. Cottage relativelyaffordable, Cottage Courts, additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandallowHousing developments canhousingopportunities. Duplex/Townhouse moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedbybe between 3 to 12 units The scale of impact Courts, & Garden detachedhomesalone.depending on lot size. will depend, in part, on Apartments in the amount of vacant Tri- andQuad-Plexes medium density or redevelopable land Townhomes,RowHouses, zones in medium density Stacked Townhouses are zones, as well as the permissible in Ashland’s types of housing newly ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis110 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Medium Density zone (R-2), allowed in the medium and Townhomes are further density zone. permitted in the R-1-3.5 zone or other residential zones (R- 1-5, R-1-7.5, R-1-10) through planned unit developments. ScaleofImpact– AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallStacked townhomes, Smallto Large densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmaycondominiums, garden . encourageahigherpercentageofmultifamilyapartments andlarger-scale Allowingthesetypesof housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbeapartments are permitted in housinginmorezones implementedthroughthelocalzoningorR-2 and R-3 zones. However mayprovidea large AllowStacked developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingdue to small lot sizes of numberofnew, Townhouses, typesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatevacant/partially vacant relativelyaffordable, Garden residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesprovideproperties available in these housingopportunities. Apartments and additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandallowzones, larger scale The scale of impact larger-scale moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedbyapartments are not often depends on the Apartments inhigh detachedhomesalone.achievable given existing lot amount of density zones sizes, height limitations, and vacant/redevelopable density allowances.land in high density zones and the housing types allowed in the zones. ScaleofImpact– AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallLive-work housing and Smallto Large densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmaymixed-development would be . encourageahigherpercentageofmultifamilya permitted use within Allowingthesetypesof housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbecommercial zonesalthough housinginmore implementedthroughthelocalzoningornot specifically listed in the zoningdistrictsmay Allow Live-Work developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingallowable use table for either provideup to a large housing or Mixed- typesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatecommercial orresidential numberofnew, use housing in residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesprovidezones.Home Occupations relativelyaffordable, commercial zones additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandalloware special permittedin all housingopportunities. moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedbyzoning designations with the detachedhomesalone.exception of industrial (M-1). ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis111 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact - AsofJuly1,2018,ORS197.312requirescitiestoAshland allows Accessory Small allowatleastoneADUforeachdetachedsingle-Residential Units (ARU or . Oregonlaw familydwellinginareaszonedfordetachedsingle-ADU) as an accessory use to recentlychangedto familydwellings.single-family homesrequirecitiestoallow throughout the City, and ADUs. JurisdictionscanmakedevelopmentofADUsmore Remove barriers to further provides reduced likelybylimitingrestrictivestandardsand Development of SDCs for small units of less procedures, such asreducing systems Accessory than 500 SF. developmentchargesforADUs, reducing or DwellingUnits eliminating parking requirements, or allowingADUsPer ORS 197.312 no (ADUs)insingle- regardlessofwheretheprimarydwellingisowner-additional parking is required familyzones occupied.for ARUs in Ashland, and there has never been any owner-occupiedrequirement for the development of an ARUwithin the City. ScaleofImpact - “Tiny”homesaretypicallydwellingsthatare500SF Small, or tiny, units that are Small: orsmaller.Sometinyhousesareassmallas100tobuilt on a foundation are Scaleofimpact 150SF. Theyincludestand-aloneunitsorverypermitted in Ashland and dependsonregulation smallmultifamilyunits.have been developed as oftinyhomes,where ARUs. Tiny homes on theyareallowed,and Tinyhomescanbesitedin a varietyofways: wheels would have to be marketdemandfortiny locatingtheminRVparks(theyaresimilarinmany located in an RV park, and homes. respectstoParkModelRVs),tinyhome there are thus limited subdivisions,orallowingthemas accessory opportunities for their Allowsmallor dwellingunits. placement in Ashland. “tiny”homes Smallerhomesallowforsmallerlots,increasing As an emergency provision landuseefficiency.Theyprovideopportunitiesfor in response to the Almeda affordablehousing,especiallyforhomeowners. fire, RVs, campers, and Portland and Eugene allow tiny homes as trailers can be located on temporary shelter for people experiencing residential properties in homelessness. Ashland as temporary shelter provided, they are connected to sanitation and utilities. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis112 ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis113 LowerDevelopmentorOperationalCosts The following policies focus on ways in which the City and other entities involved in development can provide financial assistance to lower development or operational costs in a city in order to increase housing affordability and available housing stock. ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Programs or policies to lower the cost of development ScaleofImpact- ParcelAssemblyParcelassemblyinvolvesthecity’sabilitytopurchaselandsforThe City has limited Smalltolarge. thepurposeoflandaggregationorsiteassembly.Itcandirectly experience acquiring property addresstheissuesrelatedtolimitedmultifamilylandsbeingfor the future development of Parcelassemblyis availableinappropriatelocations(e.g.,neararterialsandaffordable housing, having mostlikelytohavean commercialservices).Typicalgoalsofparcelassemblyacquired 10 acres on Clay effectonalocalized programsare:(1)toprovidesitesforrentalapartmentsinStreet in cooperation with thearea,providingafew appropriatelocationsclosetoservicesand(2)toreducetheHousing Authority of Jackson opportunitiesfornew costofdevelopingmultifamilyrentalunitsCounty. Over the last decade multifamilyhousing this property providedadevelopmentover Parcelassemblycanlowerthecostofmultifamilydevelopment . location for 120 units of time becausetheCityisabletopurchaselandinstrategiclocations affordable housing(60 units overtime.Parcelassemblyisoftenassociatedwith developed, 60 units under developmentofaffordablehousing(affordable to households construction). with income below 60% of MFI),wheretheCitypartnerswith nonprofitaffordablehousingdevelopers.The City typically relieson affordable housing partners Parcel assembly can be criticallyimportantroleforcitiestokick to identify property for a startqualityaffordablehousingandworkforcehousingprojects proposed development and thatcanbepositivecatalyststooformarketratedevelopment. has provided financial assistance (CDBG or Affordable Housing Trust Fund(AHTF)) to assist in acquisition. Most recently the City helped purchase a parcel using AHTF for Columbia Care to develop a 30-unit affordable housing project. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis114 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Landbankssupporthousingdevelopmentbyreducingor ScaleofImpact - LandBankingThere is no administrator of a eliminatingland cost fromdevelopment,withthegoalof Smalltolarge. Land Bank within Ashland. A increasingtheaffordabilityofhousing.Theycantakeseveral landbankwillhave forms.Manyareadministeredby a non-profitornon- thebiggestimpacton governmentalentitywith a missionofmanaging a portfolioof productionoflow- and propertiestosupportaffordablehousingdevelopmentover moderate-income manyyearsordecades.Ideally, a landbankissetupto affordablehousing. managefinancialandadministrativeresources,including Consideringhow strategicpropertydisposal,fortheexplicitpurposeof difficultitistobuild supportingaffordablehousingdevelopment.Citiescanpartner thistypeofaffordable withnon-profitsorsometimesmanagetheirownlandbanks. housingandthelevel Citiesmayalsodonate,sell,orleasepublicly ownedlandfor ofneedforaffordable thedevelopmentofaffordablehousingevenwithout a formal housing, a landtrust ‘landbank’organization. couldincrease nonprofits’capacityto Landbanksarepurposedforshort-termownershipoflands. buildaffordable Landsacquiredareoftenvacant,blighted,orenvironmentally housing. contaminated.Landbanksmayalsoacquirelandswithtitle defectsorofwhichderelictstructuressit.Landsareeventually transferredtoanewownerforreuseandredevelopment. ScaleofImpact - LandTrustsA landtrustistypically a nonprofitorganizationthatownslandThere are 49 units within Smalltolarge. andsellsorleasesthehousingonthelandtoincome-qualifiedAshland that are operated A buyers.Becausethelandisnotincludedinthehousingpriceunder the land Trust model. landtrustwillhave fortenants / buyers,landtrustscanachievebelow-marketBeginning in 2000 the thebiggestimpacton pricing.Landtrustsaremostcommonlyusedas a methodforAshland Community Land productionoflow- and supportingaffordablehomeownershipgoals. Trust developed 18 land moderate-income trusted affordable housing affordablehousing. Landtrustsarepurposedforlong-termstewardshipoflands units, which are currently Consideringhow andbuildings.Lands / buildingsacquiredmayhaveneedfor administered by ACCESS difficultitistobuild remediationorredevelopment.Lands / buildings may have also Inc. thistypeofaffordable been acquired to preserve affordability, prevent deferred housingandthelevel maintenance, or protect against foreclosureRogue Valley Community ofneedforaffordable Development Corporation Proud Ground (Portland Metro Area) was founded in 1999 and housing, a landtrust developed 31 units under the has grown into one of the largest community land trusts in the couldincrease land trust model which were country. The organization focuses on affordable nonprofits’capacityto homeownership and controls ground leases associated with ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis115 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact 270 homes in Multnomah, Washington, Clackamas, and Clark transferred to NeighborWorks buildaffordable County.Umpqua for administration.housing. NeighborWorks Umpqua was granted $50,000 in Ashland’s Affordable Housing Trust Funds in 2020 to assist in refining thelegal structure of the land trust agreements for use in Ashland. ScaleofImpact– Ashland has dedicated PublicLandThepublicsectorsometimescontrolslandthathasbeen Smallto moderate. Dispositionacquiredwithresourcesthatenableittodisposeofthatlandforsurplus City property for the privateand/ornonprofitredevelopment.Landacquiredwithdevelopment of affordable Dependsonwhether fundingsourcessuchastaxincrement,EB-5,orthroughhousing or sold surplus City theCityhassurplus federalresourcessuchasCDBGorHUDSection108canbeproperty and directed the landthatwouldbe appropriateforfuture soldorleasedatbelowmarketratesforvariousprojectstohelpproceeds into the Ashland achieveredevelopmentobjectives.ThisincreasesdevelopmentHousing Trust Fund to housingdevelopment. feasibilitybyreducingdevelopmentcostsandgivesthepublicsupport affordable housing sectorleveragetoachieveitsgoalsviaadevelopmentdevelopment. agreementprocesswiththedeveloper.Fundingcancomefrom Ashland is a CDBG TaxIncrement,CDBG/HUD108,orEB-5. entitlement community and Cities across Oregon use publicly land to support affordable prioritizes the use of CDBG and market-rate of housing development. In some cases, funds to support affordable municipalities put surplus public land into land banks or land housing development and trusts.preservation. Local non-profit affordable housing providers Tri-Met is evaluating re-use of construction staging sites for including ACLT, RVCDC, future affordable housing and/or transit-orient development ACCESS Inc, Habitat for sites. Humanity and the Housing Cottage Grove is working with the school district to discuss and Authority of Jackson County plan for use of surplus school district land for future housing have utilized Ashland’s development. CDBG funds to acquire property or complete public improvements for affordable housing developments. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis116 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Ashland has not utilized the section 108 loan program to leverage up to 5 years of CDBG allocations for land acquisition for affordable housing. ScaleofImpact- Reduced/ProgramsthatreducevariousdevelopmentfeesasanAshland waives or defers all Small WaivedBuildingincentivetoinducequalifyingtypesofdevelopmentorbuildingSystem Development . Permitfee,features.ThereareanumberofavenuestoseekreducedorCharges including Parks, Planningfees,waivedfees.Forexample,stormwaterimprovementscanbeTransportation, Water, Sewer orSDCsmadethroughtheCommercialStormwaterFeeReduction.and Storm Water SDCs for Therearecommonlyusedtools,oftenimplementedinqualified affordable housing conjunctionwithdevelopmentagreementsorotherunits targeted to households developmentnegotiationprocesses.earning 80% AMI or less and meeting the rent or sale CityofPortlandoffers SDCexemptionsforaffordablehousing. requirements of the Ashland Portland’sSDCExemptionProgramexemptsdevelopersof Housing Program. qualifyingaffordablehousingprojectsfrompayingSDCslevied bytheCityofPortlandfortransportation,water,parksandAshland waives Community environmentalservices.EligiblerentalprojectsmustserveDevelopment Fees, and householdsearningatorbelow60%oftheAMIfora60-yearEngineering Services fees for period.Portland also offers SDC waivers for development of voluntarily provided ADUs.affordable housing units that remain affordable for 60 CityofMcMinnvilleoffers SDCexemptionsandreducedpermit years. feesforaffordablehousing.Buildingandplanningpermitfees forneworremodelhousingconstructionprojectsarereducedAffordable ownership units by50%foreligibleprojectsandSDCsfortransportation,that leave the program after wastewaterandparksareexemptedat100%.30 years, but less than 60 Reductions/exemptionsareproratedformixeduseormixed-years, must repay a prorated incomedevelopments.Thepropertymustbeutilizedforamount of SDCs, Community housingforlow-incomepersonsforatleast10yearsortheDevelopment Fees, and SDCsmustbepaidtothecity.Engineering Services Fees that were deferred. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis117 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact– Scaling SDCs to Cities often charge a set SDC per dwelling unit, charging the Ashland’s SDC method Small to moderate Unit Sizesame SDCs for large single-family detached units as for small charges 50% of the single-family detached units or accessory dwelling units. Some calculated per unit SDC cities have started scaling SDC based on the size of the unit in amount for units less than SF. Offering lower SDC for smaller units can encourage 500SFand 75% of the development of smaller units, such as small single-family calculated per unit SDC detached units or cottage cluster units.amount for units between 500 and 800 SF.Thus,smaller Newport Oregon scales SDCs for water, wastewater, units pay proportionately less stormwater, and transportation. The City has a base SDC rate SDCs for Transportation, (per SF) of built space. For example, a 1,000 SF unit would be Parks, and Sewer andWater charged $620 for water SDC ($0.62 per SF). A 2,000 SF unit compared tofull size units would be charged $1,204 for the water SDC ($0.62 per SF for due to their potential for the first 1,700 SF and $0.50 for the additional 300 SF). smaller household sizes and commensurate impacts. Storm Water SDCs are based on lot coverageandthus, smaller units have lower Storm Water SDCs. Ashland amended the SDC ScaleofImpact– SDCFinancingMayhelptooffsetanSDCcharge,whichisaone-timefeethat Smallto moderate. Creditsisissuedwhenthereisnewdevelopmentorachangeinuse.collection of charge provisions in 2019 withinthe TheCitymay SDCfinancingenablesdeveloperstostretchtheirSDC Ashland Municipal Code considerchangesin paymentovertime,therebyreducingupfrontcosts.Alternately, (4.20.090). These SDCstoallow creditsallowdeveloperstomakenecessaryimprovementsto amendments allow SDCs to financing,buttheCity thesiteinlieuofpayingSDCs.NotethattheCitycancontrolits be paid over a 10-year period wouldwanttoensure ownSDCs,butoftensmallcitiesmanagethemonbehalfof in semi-annual installments. thattheimpactshould otherjurisdictionsincludingtheCountyandspecialdistricts. bespread-outand SDCsaregrantedwhentheprojectmakeslasting A one-year installment loan non-negativelyimpact improvements,suchasimprovingroads,reducingnumberof shall not be subject to an oneentity. trips,createorimproveparksorrecreationalcenters,andannual interest rate provided permanentlyremovingwaterservices. all charges are paid prior to the City’s issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, time of sale, or within one ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis118 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact year of when the charge was imposed, whichever comes first. For installments that exceed one year, repayment interest on the unpaid balance at annual rate of six percent (6%) is assessed for a five- year installment loan or seven percent (7%) for a 10- year installment loan. ScaleofImpact– SoleSourceRetainsSDCspaidbydeveloperswithinalimitedgeographicAshland does not employ a Smallto moderate. SDCsareathatdirectlybenefitsfromnewdevelopment,ratherthangeographic area specific beingavailableforusecity-wide.ThisenablesSDC-eligiblededication of SDCs, rather Dependsonhowthe improvementswithintheareathatgeneratesthosefundstothey are applied to the capital toolisimplemented keepthemfortheseimprovements.Improvementswithinprojects outlined in the andwhetheritisused smallerareascanenhancethecatalyticandredevelopmentrespective masterplan withothertools,such valueofthearea.Thistoolcanalsobeblendedwithother(Water/Sewer, asLIDsorUrban resourcessuchasLIDsandUrbanRenewal(TaxIncrementTransportation, Parks). Renewal. Financing).FundingcancomefromanSDCfundorgeneral Ashland does not have an fund.Insomecases,theremaybenofinancialimpact.The Urban Renewal District for housingcancomeintheformofstudent,low-income,or Tax Increment Financing. workforcehousing. FeesorOtherDirectsuserfeesintoanenterprisefundthatprovidesAshland has an Affordable Dedicateddedicatedrevenuetofundspecificprojects.ExamplesofthoseHousing Trust Fund, and the Revenuetypesoffundscanincludeparkingrevenuefunds,City Council has dedicated stormwater/sewerfunds,streetfunds,etc.TheCitycouldalsoMarijuana Tax revenue (up to usethisprogramtoraiseprivatesectorfundsforadistrict$100,000 annually) to support parkinggaragewhereintheCitycouldfacilitateaprogramthe AHTF through the annual allowingdeveloperstopayfees-in-lieuor“parkingcredits”thatbudgeting process. developerswouldpurchasefromtheCityforaccess “entitlement”intothesharedsupply.Thesharedsupplycould meetinitialparkingneedwhenthedevelopmentcomesonline whilealsomaintainingtheflexibilitytoadjusttoparkingneed ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis119 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact overtimeaselasticityinthedemandpatternsdevelopinthe districtandinfluenceslikealternativemodesareaccountedfor. Fundingcancomefromresidents,businesses,anddevelopers. Also,thesefeesorrevenuesallowfornewrevenuestreams intotheCity. ScaleofImpact– ReimbursementAReimbursementDistrictisacostsharingmechanism, Ashland’s municipal code Smalltomoderate DistricttypicallyInitiatedbyadeveloper.Thepurposeistoprovidea. (13.30.0150) was amended in reimbursementmethodtothedeveloperofaninfrastructure 2010 to enablea developer to improvement,throughfeespaidbypropertyownersatthetime request the City establish a thepropertybenefitsfromtheimprovement.Adeveloper Reimbursement District to appliestocreateaReimbursementDistrictbydemonstrating collect public improvement benefittopropertiesbeyondtheirown.Inaddition,thesizeof costs that exceedthose theimprovementmustbemeasurablygreaterthanwould attributable to service the otherwisebeordinarilyrequiredfortheimprovement property owned by the EligibleReimbursementDistrictprojectstypicallyinclude(but applicant. arenotlimitedto)constructionorconnectionsofasewer, water,stormwaterorstreetimprovements.Applications Examplesof excess costs typicallyinclude:afeesufficienttocoverthecostof include (but are not limited administrativereview,adescriptionoftheproject,properties to):Full street improvements thatwouldbeimpacted,andadetailedmethodologyand instead of half street calculationofhowtheestimatedcostswouldbereimbursedby improvements;Off-site paymentsfrombenefittedpropertiesoveraspecified sidewalks;Connection of timeframe.AreportfromtheCityEngineerisgeneratedin street sections for continuity; reviewofthesubmittedapplication.Afterapublichearing Extension of water lines; and process,thecouncilwillapprove,rejectormodifytheproposal. Extension of sewer lines. TheapprovalofaReimbursementDistrictresultsina resolutionanddistributionofnoticeamongbenefitted propertiesbeforeconstructioncanbegin. BenefittedpropertiesmustpaytheReimbursementFeewhen theymakeaphysicalconnectiontotheimprovement(orinthe caseofasewerproject,whenthebenefittedpropertycreates animpervioussurfacethatdrainsintothepublicsewer)within theReimbursementDistrictArea.Reimbursementfeesare collectedbytheCityandaredistributedtothedeveloperforthe ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis120 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact durationoftheReimbursementDistrict,whicharetypically10- 15years. Paidbybenefittedpropertiesatthetimethepropertybenefits fromtheimprovement,typicallyatconnectiontothesewer, waterorstormdrainsystem. ScaleofImpact– LinkageFeesLinkagefeesarechargesonnewdevelopment,usuallyAshland does not assess Smalltomoderate commercialand/orindustrialdevelopmentonly,thatcanbelinkage fees on new . usedtofundaffordablehousing.Toimplementthem,acitydevelopments within the City, mustundertakeanexusstudythatidentifiesalegalconnection betweennewjobshousedinthedevelopments,thewages thosejobswillpay,andtheavailabilityofhousingaffordableto thoseemployees. Canbeusedforacquisitionandrehabilitationofexisting affordableunits. Canbeusedfornewconstruction. Tax abatement programs that decrease operational costs by decreasing property taxes ScaleofImpact– VerticalHousing The2017LegislaturepassedlegislationmovingtheOn December 15, 2020, TaxAbatement Smalltomoderate administrationofVerticalHousingProgramfromOregonAshland passed a Vertical . (LocallyEnabled HousingandCommunityServices(OHCS)tothelocalCityandHousing Tax Credit and Thedesignofthetax andManaged) CountybeginningOct6th,2017.OHCSnolongeradministersdesignated Commercially abatementprogram thisprogram.zoned properties within the willimpactwhether Transit Triangle overlay area andhowmany Thelegislationsubsidizes"mixed-use"projectstoencourage as an eligible Vertical developersusethe densedevelopmentorredevelopmentbyprovidingapartial Housing Development Zone. taxabatement,which propertytaxexemptiononincreasedpropertyvaluefor willaffectthescaleof qualifieddevelopments.Theexemptionvariesinaccordance theimpact. withthenumberofresidentialfloorsonamixed-useproject withamaximumpropertytaxexemptionof80percentover10 years.Anadditionalpropertytaxexemptiononthelandmaybe givenifsomeoralloftheresidentialhousingisforlow-income persons(80percentofareaismedianincomeorbelow). ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis121 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact– Multiple-UnitThroughthemultifamilytaxexemption,ajurisdictioncanincentAshland has not enacted a Smalltomoderate LimitedTaxdiversehousingoptionsinurbancenterslackinginhousingMulti-Unit Limited Tax . Exemptionchoicesorworkforcehousingunits.ThroughacompetitiveExemption program. Thedesignofthetax Programprocess,multi-unitprojectscanreceiveapropertytaxabatementprogram (LocallyEnabledexemptionforuptoten-yearsonstructuralimprovementstowillimpactwhether andManaged)theproperty.Thoughthestateenablestheprogram,eachCityandhowmany hasanopportunitytoshapetheprogramtoachieveitsgoalsdevelopersusethe bycontrollingthegeographyofwheretheexemptionistaxabatement,which available,applicationprocessandfees,programrequirements,willaffectthescaleof criteria(returnoninvestment,sustainability,inclusionoftheimpact. communityspace,percentageaffordableorworkforcehousing, etc.),andprogramcap.TheCitycanselectprojectsonacase- by-casebasisthroughacompetitiveprocess. ThepassingofHB2377-MultiunitRentalHousingTax Exemptionallowscitiesandcountiestocreateapropertytax exemptionfornewlyrehabilitatedornewlyconstructedmulti- unitrentalhousingwithintheirboundariesdependingonthe numberofunitsmadeavailabletolow-incomehouseholds,for upto10consecutiveyears.Thebillwascraftedtostrengthen theconnectiontoaffordabilitybyrequiringcitiesandcounties toestablishascheduleinwhichthenumberofyearsan exemptionisprovidedincreasesdirectlywiththepercentageof unitsrentedtohouseholdswithanannualincomeatorbelow 120percentofMFI,andatmonthlyratesthatareaffordableto suchhouseholds.Whilenotspecificallyreferencedinthe measure,ORS308.701defines“Multi-unitrentalhousing”as: “(a)residentialpropertyconsistingoffourormoredwelling units”and;“doesnotincludeassistedlivingfacilities.” Allnewmultifamilyunitsthatarebuiltorrenovatedthatoffer rentbelow120%ofAMIarepotentiallyeligibleforthistax exemption.InacitywithanAMIof$55,000(commonoutside ofPortland),that'srentof$1,650permonthorless.Thetax exemptionisforalltaxingdistrictswhichisadministeredbythe ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis122 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact City.Duetothis,smallerjurisdictionsmayhavemoretrouble managingthisprogram. Localtaxingjurisdictionsthatagreetoparticipate–cities,school districts,counties,etc. TheCityofEugeneoffersaten-yearMulti-UnitPropertyTax Exemption(MUPTE)forprojectsinitseasterndowntowncore. Eugene’scriteriaforgrantingMUPTEinclude:Projectmust provide5ormoreunitsofhousing(notincludingstudent housing), development mustmeetminimumdensitystandards, developmentmustcomplywithminimumgreenbuilding requirements,aportionofconstructionandothercontracting requirementsmustbethroughlocalbusiness,thedevelopment mustprovide30%oftheunitsaffordableat100%ofAMIorpay afeeof10%ofthevalueofthetaxabatementtoward supportingmoderateincomehousingdevelopment, demonstratethattheprojectwouldnotbefinanciallyfeasible withouttheexemptionbyproviding10-yearproformawithand withoutMUPTEandcomplywithothercriteria. TheCityofSalem’sMulti-UnitHousingTaxIncentiveProgram (MUHTIP)wasadoptedin2012tospurtheconstructionof “transitsupportive”70multi-unithousinginthecity’sdowntown core.Inordertoqualifyfortheexemption,projectsmust consistofatleasttwodwellingunits,belocatedinthecity’s “corearea,”andincludeatleastonepublicbenefit. ScaleofImpact– NonprofitNote: These are twoseparatetaxexemptionsavailableunderAshland has not implemented Small to moderate CorporationLowstatute(ORS307.515to307.523/ORS307.540to307.548). a low-income rental housing . IncomeHousingThey are grouped together for their similarities (but differences tax exemption for market rate Theexemption Tax Exemptionare noted).developers that provide low-reduces operating income housing.costs, meaning it is a Land and improvement tax exemption used to reduce operating tool more useful to costsforregulatedaffordablehousingaffordableat60%AMIor and property ownersof City of Salem, “Multi Unit Housing Tax Incentive Program,” https://www.cityofsalem.net/Pages/multi-unit-housing-tax-incentive-program.aspx. 70 ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis123 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Low-Incomebelow. Requires the Cityto adoptstandardsandguidelinesforTheJackson County affordable housing RentalHousingapplicationsandenforcementmechanisms. Assessor office has projects. Developers, Tax Exemptionhistorically worked with the who do not own and Thelow-incomerentalhousingprogramexemptionlasts20 City of Ashland to reduce the operate their own years. Thenonprofitcorporationlow-incomehousingprogram assessed value of ownership projects, may be less mustbeappliedforeveryyearbutcancontinueaslongasthe units within Ashland inclined to use the propertymeetsthecriteria.Rentsmustreflectthefullvalueof Affordable Housing Program, program. thepropertytaxabatementandCitycanaddadditionalcriteria. and as such they are taxed at There is no requirementthatconstructionmust becomplete their restricted resale value priortoapplication. instead of their Real Market Programs both workwellintandemwithotherincentives, such Value (RMV). aslandbanking. Affordable Multifamily rental units owned by non-profit affordable housing providers are also provided with property tax relief by the Jackson County Assessor office due to their non-profit status. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis124 Funding Sources to Support Residential Development These policies focus on ways to pay for the costs of implementing the affordable housing programs and infrastructure development. ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact TIF revenuesaregeneratedbytheincreaseintotalassessedAshland does not have an UrbanRenewal/ –Moderateto TaxIncrementvalueinanurbanrenewaldistrictfromthetimeit isfirstUrban Renewal District. Large Finance(TIF)established.Aspropertyvaluesincreaseinthedistrict,the.Urban increaseinpropertytaxespaysoffbonds.WhenthebondsareRenewalfunding paidoff,thevaluationisreturnedtothegeneralpropertytaxisaflexibletool rolls.TIFsdeferpropertytaxaccumulationbytheCityandthatallowscities Countyuntilthedistrictexpires/paysoffbonds.Overthelongtodevelop term(typically 20+years),thedistrictcouldproducesubstantial essential revenuesforcapitalprojects.Fundscanbeinvestedintheinfrastructureor formoflow-interestloansorgrantsforavarietyofcapitalprovidesfunding investments:forprogramsthat lowerthecosts Redevelopmentprojects,suchasmixed-useorinfill ofhousing housingdevelopments development Economicdevelopmentstrategies,suchascapital (suchasSDC improvementloansforsmallorstartupbusinesses reductionsorlow whichcanbelinkedtofamily-wagejobs interestloan Streetscapeimprovements,includingnewlighting, programs). trees,andsidewalks Portlandused UrbanRenewal Landassemblyforpublicor privatere-use tocatalyze Transportationenhancements,includingintersection redevelopment improvements acrosstheCity, Historicpreservationprojects includingthe PearlDistrictand Parksandopenspaces South Urban renewal is a commonly used tool to support housing Waterfront. development in cities across Oregon. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis125 ScaleofImpact ConstructionCETisataxassessedonconstructionpermitsissuedbylocalAshland does not collect a –Dependson ExciseTaxcitiesandcounties.ThetaxisassessedasapercentoftheConstruction ExciseTax for theamountof (CET)valueoftheimprovementsforwhichapermitissought,unlessaffordable housing as allowed funding theprojectisexemptedfromthetax.In2016,theOregonby SB 1533. available LegislaturepassedSenateBill1533whichpermitscitiesto. adoptaconstructionexcisetax(CET)onthevalueofnew constructionprojectstoraisefundsforaffordablehousing projects.CETsmayberesidentialonly,commercialonly,or residentialandcommercial.IftheCityweretoadoptaCET, thetaxwouldbeupto1%ofthepermitvalueonresidential constructionandanuncappedrateoncommercialand industrialconstruction.TheallowedusesforCETfundingare definedbythestatestatute.TheCitymayretain4%offundsto coveradministrativecosts.Thefundsremainingmustbe allocatedasfollows,iftheCityusesaresidentialCET: 50%mustbeusedfordeveloperincentives(e.g.fee andSDCwaivers,taxabatements) 35%maybeusedflexiblyforaffordablehousing programsdefinedbythejurisdiction. 15%flowstoOregonHousing&CommunityServices Dept. forhomeownerprograms. IftheCityimplementsaCEToncommercialorindustrialuses, 50%ofthefundsmustbeusedforalloweddeveloper incentivesandtheremaining50%areunrestricted.Therate mayexceed1%ifleviedoncommercialorindustrialuses. TheCityofPortland’sCETwentintoeffectin2016.Itleviesa 1%CETonresidential,commercial,andindustrial developmentvaluedat$100,000ormore,withallrevenues goingtowardaffordablehousing.Therevenuespayfor productionofhousingatorbelow60%AMI,developer incentivesforinclusionaryzoning,alongwithstate homeownershipprograms. CityofBendadoptedaCETof0.3%onresidential, commercial,andindustrialdevelopmentin 2006,withrevenues dedicatedtoloanstofunddevelopmentsbyprofitandnonprofit ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis126 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact affordablehousingdevelopers.Thefeehasraised$11million asof2016,allowingtheCitytolendmoneytofund615units. Thefundhasleveraged$63millioninstateandfederalfunding and$14millioninequity. TheCityofMilwaukieadoptedaCEToncommercial, residential,andindustrialdevelopmentinNovemberof2017. TheCityexempteddeed-restrictedaffordablehousing,ADUs, andimprovementslessthan$100,000frompayingtheCET. Theadoptingordinanceallocatesfundsasrequiredbystate statutes,specifyingthatflexiblefundsfromthecommercial improvementswillbeused50%towardhousingavailableto thosemakingupto120%ofMFI,and50%foreconomic developmentprogramsinareaswithsub-areaplans(suchas Downtown,Riverfront,andurbanrenewalareas). ScaleofImpact GO bonds provide capital project fundingthat is notdependentGeneral Funds in the form of GeneralFund –Moderateto andGeneralonrevenuefromtheprojecttobackthebond.the Affordable Housing Trust large Obligation(GO)fund are set aside annually to .GOBonds Citycanusegeneralfundmoniesonhandorcanissuebonds Bondssupport the development and canbeusedto backedbythefullfaithandcreditofthecitytopayfordesired preservation of affordable developessential publicimprovements.Propertytaxesareincreasedtopayback housing. infrastructureor theGObonds. providesfunding The City has not utilized or CityofPortlandpassed$258millionbondforaffordable forprogramsthat presented to the voters a housingin2016.Thegoalwas tobuildorpreserveupto1,300 lowerthecosts general obligation bond to unitsinthenext5to7years.Thecitysought opportunitiesto ofhousing support the development of acquireexistingpropertiesof20ormoreunitsorvacantland development affordable housing or thatisappropriatelyzonedfor20+housingunits and looked for (suchasSDC acquisition of property for this bothtraditionalandnontraditionaldevelopmentopportunities. reductionsorlow purpose. interestloan programs). ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis127 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact Ashland has utilized LIDs for LocalEnablesagroupofpropertyownerstosharethecostofa –Dependson Improvementprojectorinfrastructuralimprovement.specific public improvement theamountof District(LID)projects within the City. Aspecialassessmentdistrictwherepropertyownersare funding assessedafeetopayforcapitalimprovements,suchas availableand streetscapeenhancements,undergroundutilities,orshared Bonding openspace.Forresidentialproperty,theestimated capacity . assessmentcannotexceedthepre-improvementvalueofthe propertybasedonassessorrecords. Anordinancemustbepassedthroughapublichearingprocess whichmustbesupportedbyamajorityofaffectedproperty owners.Partofthisprocessincludesanestimationofthe improvementcostsandtheportionofthosecostsinwhich propertyownerswillberesponsibletopayfor.Thepublic hearingprocessallowsforLIDstobechallengedbyproperty owners. TheCitycollectsfundsandregardlessiftheactualcostis greaterthantheestimatedcost(onwhichtheassessmentwas based),theCitymaymakeadeficitassessmentforthe additionalcost,whichwouldbeproratedamongallbenefitted properties.Anotherpublichearingwouldbeheldintheevent thatanadditionalassessmentwasplacedpropertyowners (duetounderestimation). ScaleofImpact Ashland’sAffordable Housing GeneralFundAcitycanusegeneralfundortaxincrementdollarstoinvestin –Dependson GrantsorLoansspecificaffordablehousingprojects.ThesegrantsorloanscanTrust Fund is part of the theamountof serveasgapfundingtoimprovedevelopmentfeasibility.ThereGeneral Fund and is used to funding areoptionsforusinggeneralfundgrantsorloans,includingthesupport the development of available potentialforbondstogenerateupfrontrevenuethatisrepaidaffordable housing. The City . overtime.Anotheroptionusesgeneralfunddollarstohas not issued a bond to contributeto successfullyoperating programs,suchasnon-generate revenue for profitlandtrustsorgovernmentagenciesthathavetheaffordable housing. administrativecapacitytomaintaincompliancerequirements, usingintergovernmentalagreements. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis128 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact Ashland collects Transient TransientGeneratesrevenuebyprimarilytaxingtouristsandguests –Small. LodgingTaxusingtemporarylodgingservices.TaxesfortemporarylodgingOccupancy Taxes (TOT), and The (TLT)athotels,motels,campgrounds,andothertemporarylodgings.applies them toward tourism amountof OregonhasastatewideTLTandcitiesandcountiescanalsorelated activities,economic fundingfromTLT chargealocalTLTsubjecttocertainlimitations.Thestatutesdevelopment grants, and islikelytobe specifythat70%mustbeusedfortourismpromotionorsocial service grants annually relativelysmall, tourismrelatedfacilitiesand30%isunrestrictedinuse,andin accordance to the giventhatonly therecannotbeareductionofthetotalpercentofroomtax.restricted/unrestricted use 30%ofTLT . Thestatetaxisspecifiedat1.8%;localgovernmenttaxratesparametersfundshave varyaslocalgovernmentssettheratefortheirjurisdictionbyunrestricteduse. ordinance.Citiesandcountiesmayimposetaxesontransient lodging.Alternatively,somecitieshaveanagreementforthe countytoimposethetaxandcitiesshareinapercentofthe revenue. TheCommunityDevelopmentBlockGrantsprogramisa ScaleofImpact CDBGAshland is a direct CDBG flexibleprogramthatprovidesannualgrantsonaformulabasis –Dependson entitlement community and tobothlocalgovernmentsandStates.Grantsareawardedon theamountof receives HUD allocations of a1,2,or3-yearperiod.Itisrequiredthatatleast70%ofthe funding approx.$175,000/year.The CDGBfundsareusedforactivitiesthatbenefitlow-and available 5-year Consolidated Plan for . moderate-income.Additionally,eachactivitymustaddressany use of CDBG funds prioritizes threatstohealthorwelfareinthecommunity(forwhichother capital restricted CDBG funds fundingisunavailable).Thesefundscanbeusedfor toward affordable housing acquisitionandrehabilitationofexistingaffordableunits,as and shelter and 15% of the wellasnewconstructionthatprioritizescommunity award is typically provided to developmentefforts. service providers benefiting extremely low-income individuals. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis129 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 130 Appendix A: Ashland Housing Strategy This appendix presents Ashland’s Housing Strategy memorandum, developed with the Housing Capacity Analysis. DATE: April 26, 2021 TO: City of Ashland Planning Commission and Housing and Human Services Commission FROM: Beth Goodman, ECONorthwest SUBJECT:FINAL ASHLAND HOUSING STRATEGY ECONorthwest is working with the City of Ashland to develop a Housing Capacity Analysis. The Housing Capacity Analysis will determine whether the City of Ashland has enough land to accommodate 20 years of population and housing growth. In addition to this analysis, ECONorthwest is working with the City of Ashland and an advisory committee to develop a Housing Strategy. The Housing Strategy is meant to propose actions that can address Ashland’s strategy housing priorities. This project is funded by Oregon general fund dollars through the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the State of Oregon. Ashland Housing Strategy Ashland’s housing strategy presents a comprehensive package of interrelated actions that the Ashland HCA Advisory Committee has evaluated, with input from the Planning Commission and Housing and Human Services Commission, to implement and address the City’s strategic housing priorities over the next eight years. The City will need to develop a Housing Production Strategy within one year of adopting the Housing Capacity Analysis. This Housing Strategy will provide the City with a starting point for the Housing Production Strategy. Developing the Housing Production Strategy will involve revisiting the recommended actions in this document, providing more detail about each strategy, setting an implementation schedule, getting stakeholder input on the strategies in this document, and assessing whether there are additional strategies that should be incorporated into the Housing Production Strategy. Implementation of the Housing Production Strategy will occur over an eight year period and will require additional public and stakeholder involvement. Introduction Ashland last updated its Comprehensive Plan, including policies in the Housing Element, in June 2019. As a result, Ashland does not need an analysis to revise all of its housing policies in the Comprehensive Plan. The City needs a housing strategy that provides guidance on ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 1 strategies the City could implement to meet the unmet housing needs identified in the Housing Capacity Analysis. This housing strategy recognizes that the City does not build housing. The strategy focuses on tools to ensure there is adequate land planned and zoned to meet the variety of housing needs and opportunities for a variety of housing types, whether market rate or subsidized. This strategy strives to provide opportunities for lower-cost market rate housing, to the extent possible, to achieve more housing affordability without complete reliance on subsidies if and when possible. The housing strategy primarily addresses the needs of households with middle, low, very low, or extremely low income. It distinguishes between two types of affordable housing: (1) housing affordable to very low-income and extremely low-income households and (2) housing affordable to low-income and middle-income households. The following describes these households, based on information from the Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis. Very-low-income and extremely-low-income households are those who have an income of 50% or less of Jackson County Median Family Income (MFI) which is an 1 annual household income of $32,600. About 34% of Ashland’s households fit into this Development of category. They can afford a monthly housing cost of $820 or less. 2 housing affordable to households at this income level is generally accomplished through development of government-subsidized income-restricted housing. Low-income and middle-income households are those who have an income of 50% to 120% of Jackson County’s MFI or income between $32,600 to $78,100. About 31% of Ashland’s households fit into this category. They can afford a monthly housing cost of $820 to $1,630. The private housing market may develop housing affordable to households in this group, especially for the higher income households in the group. Summary and Schedule of Actions Exhibit 74 presents a summary of actions items, listed in this strategy. This strategy recognizes that some actions will be more productive than others; thus, Exhibit 74 also identifies the scale of impact for each action. A low impact strategy may result in 1% or less of new housing, a moderate impact strategy may result in 1% to 5% of new housing, and a high impact strategy may result in 5% or more of new housing. Median Family Income is determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. In 2020, Jackson 1 County’s MFI was $65,100. This assumes that households pay less than 30% of their gross income on housing costs, including rent or mortgage, 2 utilities, home insurance, and property taxes. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 2 Exhibit 1. Summary and Schedule of Actions Source: Summarized by ECONorthwest. Scale of Impact Action LowModerate High Strategy 1: Ensure an adequate supply of land is available and serviced Evaluate increasing the maximum allowed densities in the X 1.1 Multi-Family Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), and parts of the Normal Neighborhood designations. Evaluate increasing allowed height in the R-2 and R-3 multi- X 1.2 family residential zones, outside of designated historic districts. Identify opportunities to increase allowances for residential X 1.3 uses on the ground floor of buildings within commercial and employment zones. X 1.4 Evaluate decreasing multifamily parking requirements. Evaluate decreasing parking requirements for affordable 1.5 X housing developments in areas with access to transit. Evaluate increasing lot coverage allowances slightly in the R-2 X 1.6 and R-3 zones. Identify opportunities to create greater certainty and clarity in X 1.7 the annexation process Evaluate changes to Ashland’s zoning code to disallow single- X 1.8 family detached housing in the High Density Residential Plan Designation (R-3 zone). Increase supply of High Density Residential lands by rezoning X 1.9 lands within lower density Plan Designations that have a surplus of capacity. Create processes and materials necessary to support X 1.10 developers in their development applications. Strategy 2: Provide opportunities for housing development to meet the City’s identified housing needs Broaden the definition of dwelling unit to include other types X 2.1 of units such as shared housing and co-housing, single-room occupancies, and other dwelling units. Evaluate opportunities incentivize smaller units through X 2.2 amendments to allowable densities. Identify and reduce any local obstacles to building with less X 2.3 conventional construction materials. Evaluate increasing allowances for residential dwellings in commercial and employment zones, such as allowing an X 2.4 increased amount of residential uses in ground floor commercial spaces.. X 2.5 Develop an equitable housing plan. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 3 Scale of Impact Action LowModerate High Encourage development of diverse housing types in high X 2.6 opportunity neighborhood. Strategy 3: Provide opportunities for development affordable to all income levels Create processes and materials necessary to support X 3.1 developers in development of affordable housing. X 3.2 Evaluate using the Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption. Adopt a property tax exemption program for affordable rental X 3.3 housing developed by nonprofit affordable housing developers. X 3.4 Evaluate participating in or establish a land bank. Evaluate opportunities to participate in a land trust to manage and develop housing that is affordable for rent or ownership at 3.5 X below-market pricing for households earning 120% or less of MFI (or possibly 80% or less of MFI). Evaluate whether the City or other public agencies have 3.6 vacant or redevelopable publicly owned property could be X used for development of affordable housing. Identify opportunities to purchase land in Ashland’s urbanizing X 3.7 area (within the Ashland UGB and outside of the City limits) as part of a land banking strategy. Identify partnerships with area employers to increase X 3.8 development of housing affordable to workers in Ashland. Continue to collaborate with community partnerstowork X 3.9 towards providing housing and support services to alleviate homelessness. Evaluate opportunities to make development of housing less X 3.10 costly to the development through changes in City fees. Strategy 4: Identify funding sources to support development of infrastructure and housing affordability programs X 4.1 Evaluate establishing a Construction Excise Tax. Evaluate using Urban Renewal to support development of X 4.2 infrastructure necessary to support housing development. Coordinate Capital Improvements Program and Transportation X 4.3 System Plan infrastructure investments. Continue to identify a variety of funding sources to support the 4.4 X Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Identify additional funds to support development of new X 4.5 affordable housing. Strategy 5: Align housing planning with the Climate and Energy Action Plan Evaluate opportunities to decrease dependence on X 5.1 automotive transportation in areas planned for housing. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 4 Scale of Impact Action LowModerate High Evaluate opportunities to incorporate elements of the CEAP 5.2 X into housing developments. Initiate a process to identify opportunities for development or X 5.3 redevelopment of mixed-use districts and initiate an area planning process to guide redevelopment. Evaluate opportunities to develop new housing closer to X 5.4 downtown and commercial centers to reduce dependance on automobiles for transportation. Evaluate opportunities for planning transit-oriented X 5.5 development as transit becomes more available in Ashland. Evaluate sustainable building practices, including certifications, to determine whether the City should offer X 5.6 incentives for certification or require certification of new buildings as sustainable. Strategic Issue 1: Ensure an adequate supply of land is available and serviced This strategy is about ensuring an adequate land supply—not only a 20-year supply (as Goal 10 requires) but also a pipeline of serviced land that is available for immediate development. The following recommended strategies and actions are intended to ensure an adequate supply of residential land through a combination of changes to development standards, annexation policies, and other changes. Efficient use of Ashland’s residential land is key to ensuring that Ashland has adequate opportunities to grow from 2021 to 2041 and beyond. Issue Statement Statewide planning Goal 10 (Housing) requires cities to inventory residential lands and provide a 20-year supply of land for residential uses. Moreover, land in the UGB is not necessarily development ready. Land requires the full suite of backbone services (water, wastewater, transportation) before it is development ready. The experience throughout Oregon in recent years is that the cost of services is increasing, and cities are turning to creative ways to finance infrastructure. This priority addresses both long- and short-term supply and availability of land. . The HNA concluded that Ashland a)Provide a 20-year supply of land for residential use has enough residential land and housing capacity within the Ashland UGB. b)Ensure short-term supply to support development.Land in the UGB is not necessarily development ready. Land requires the full suite of backbone services (water, wastewater, transportation) before it is development ready. In addition, HCA Advisory Committee members suggested that there were opportunities to improve the ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 5 annexation process for bringing land from Ashland’s urbanizing area into the city limits by creating greater certainty that in turn could expedite approvals and reduce costs. The Housing Capacity Analysis provides a thorough analysis of the existing supply and affordability of housing in Ashland. It concludes that Ashland will need 858 new housing units between 2021 and 2041. It shows that Ashland has sufficient land within the UGB to accommodate growth over the 2021-2041 period but has very limited capacity (and nearly a deficit of land) for housing in the High-Density Residential zone. Ashland is expected to add 1,691 people, resulting in demand for 858 dwelling units. Ashland has capacity for development of 2,754 dwelling units within the UGB under current policies, with much (36%) of the current capacity within Low Density Residential Plan Designations. However, about 1,299 dwelling units of total capacity (47%) is in the urbanizing area (the area between the city limits and UGB) and will require annexation before development occurs. The Plan Designations with the most capacity in the urbanizing area are Normal Neighborhood and Single-Family Residential. Ashland needs land that is vacant with urban services that support residential development such as municipal water service, sewer and wastewater service, stormwater management systems, and transportation connections with adequate capacity to accommodate growth. A part of ensuring that there are development opportunities is making zoning code changes to allow for a wider range of development, especially multifamily housing types, and streamlining the annexation and development process to make annexation faster and provide more predictability in the process to developers. Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 1 under consideration include: Action 1.1: Evaluate increasing the maximum allowed densities, or removing density limitations, in the Multi-Family Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3), and parts of the Normal Neighborhood designations. Prior analysis shows that two to three as many units per acre as allowed under the current density standards can potentially fit on a typical site with limited changes to other development standards. Higher densities 3 are especially important for small infill sites where efficiency is at a premium. Allowing more housing on a given infill site helps the City meet its housing needs with less outward expansion and spreads the land and infrastructure cost across more units. Action 1.2: Evaluate increasing allowed height in the R-2 and R-3 multi-family residential zones, outside of designated historic districts, 35 to at least 40 feet. ECONorthwest, Ashland Housing Strategy Implementation Plan, June 2019. 3 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 6 Action 1.3: Identify opportunities to increase allowances for residential uses on the ground floor of buildings within commercial and employment zones. Action 1.4: Evaluate decreasing multifamily parking requirements. Parking reductions increase efficiency and reduce costs when combined with increases in density. In addition, parking reductions may be an important part of Strategic Issue 5, Action 5.1. Action 1.5: Evaluate decreasing parking requirements for affordable housing developments in areas with access to transit. In addition, parking reductions may be an important part of Strategic Issue 5, Action 5.1. Action 1.6: Evaluate increasing lot coverage allowances slightly in the R-2 and R-3 zones to support the other code amendments discussed in Actions 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3. Action 1.7: Identify opportunities to create greater certainty and clarity in the annexation process through evaluation of the level of design necessary for assessment of compliance with development standards, with the goal of reducing the time and expense of preparing annexation applications. Action 1.8: Evaluate changes to Ashland’s zoning code to disallow single-family detached housing in the High Density Residential Plan Designation (R-3 zone), to preserve this zone for higher-density housing. Such a change would not include very small existing lots, where single-family detached housing is all that is buildable. Action 1.9: Increase supply of High Density Residential lands by rezoning lands within lower density Plan Designations that have a surplus of capacity, such as land in the Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. The purpose of increasing the supply of High Density Residential land is that Ashland has a small surplus of land in this zone and increasing the supply now, while there is a surplus of land in other zones, provides an opportunity to coordinate long-term planning for multifamily land with other planning processes that the City engages in over the next five to 10 years. Action 1.10: Create processes and materials necessary to support developers in their development applications, with the purpose of increasing clarity and certainty of in the development review process. Areas for further consideration The following are actions suggested by members of the HCA Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and Housing and Human Services Commission that should be further considered by the City of Ashland as it develops it housing policies. Evaluate revision to development standards that may result in lower density development, such as requirements for traffic analysis for developments that generate more than 50 trips per day. Evaluate the impacts on housing capacity and density of development resulting from and water resources protection zone Ashland’s physical and environmental constraints overlays. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 7 Evaluate the impact of the Ashland Solar Ordinance on limiting development of multi- story multifamily and mixed-use housing in consideration of energy conservation goals. Evaluate requiring more housing as part of new development in commercial and employment zones. Evaluate allowing smaller single-family detached housing on 2,500 sq ft lots, such as part of cottage clusters or stand-alone single-family detached units. Identify opportunities to up-zone land from lower density to medium- or high-density land, to provide more opportunities for developing smaller single-family units and multifamily housing. Strategic Issue 2: Provide opportunities for housing development to meet the City’s identified housing needs This strategy focuses on actions that are intended to ensure new residential structures developed in Ashland are diverse and include affordable housing for households with incomes below 60% of MFI, housing affordable to households with incomes of between 60% and 120% of MFI, housing for families with children, low- to moderate-income households, senior housing, and other housing products to achieve housing affordability for households and to meet Ashland’s 20-year housing needs. Issue Statement Continued increases in housing costs may increase demand for denser housing (e.g., multifamily housing, single-family attached housing, and compact single-family detached housing). To the extent that denser housing types are more affordable than larger housing types (i.e., single-family detached units on larger lots, such as 2,500 square foot dwelling units on lots larger than 5,000 square feet), continued increases in housing costs will increase demand for denser housing. Ashland’s housing mix in the 2015–2019 period was 66% single-family detached, 9% single- family attached, 12% duplex/triplex/quadplex, and 13% multifamily with 5 or more units per The HCA assumes that the housing mix of new dwelling units in Ashland will be structure. 4 about 35% single-family detached, 10% single-family attached 20% duplex/triplex/quadplex, and 35% multifamily with 5 or more units per structure. To achieve this mix, Ashland will need to implement policies that allow a wider variety of housing types, including smaller housing and housing produced with innovative processes or building materials, as well as more mixed-use housing. In addition, Ashland will allow for development of housing that is affordable to workers in Ashland and is located in proximity to employment opportunities to attract needed labor force for its employment and mixed-use lands. These types of housing include (but are not limited to) Based on 2015–2019 ACS five-year estimates for Ashland. 4 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 8 live-work units, “skinny” single-family detached housing, townhouses, cottage housing, duplexes and triplexes, and less costly types of multifamily housing. Ashland is in the process of amending the land use code to allow duplexes wherever a single- family dwelling unit is permitted per the requirements of HB2001. Code amendments will be enacted before July 1, 2021. Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 2 under consideration include: Action 2.1: Broaden the definition of dwelling unit to include other types of units such as shared housing and co-housing, single-room occupancies, and other dwelling units. Broadening the definition of dwelling units, which would broaden the types of units allowed in residential districts, would allow for greater flexibility of housing type. Action 2.2: Evaluate opportunities incentivize smaller units through amendments to allowable densities, such as allowing tiny house clusters or smaller units in medium density zones such as units as small as 200 square feet. Action 2.3: Identify and reduce any local obstacles to building with less conventional construction materials, such as shipping containers, prefabricated construction materials, 3-D printed materials, etc., with the purpose of allowing for development of more affordable housing. However, the building code is managed and applied by the State and not under local control. Action 2.4: Evaluate increasing allowances for residential dwellings in commercial and employment zones, such as allowing an increased amount of residential uses in ground floor commercial spaces. Action 2.5: Develop an equitable housing plan, which could include initial steps, action plan with goals and a method to measure progress to achieve more equitable housing and continuously examine ways to make improvements to the housing system to achieve equity. The equitable housing plan could address the issues identified in the 2020-2024 Fair Housing Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Update for the City of Ashland. This report identified impediments such as: limited community awareness about fair housing protections and resources, instances of discrimination in housing transactions, and a lack of affordable housing. Action 2.6: Encourage development of diverse housing types in high opportunity with a goal of reversing historical patterns of racial, ethnic, cultural and neighborhoods, 5 socio-economic exclusion. HUD defines high opportunity neighborhoods as areas that have a positive effect on economic mobility of residents, 5 such as access to jobs, high quality schools, and lower concentration of poverty. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 9 Strategic Issue 3: Provide opportunities for development of housing affordable to all income levels The following recommended strategy and actions are intended to use a deliberate set of mandates and incentives to support the development of new affordable housing and preserve existing affordable housing. Issue Statement The Housing Capacity Analysis clearly identifies a lack of housing that is affordable to households with lower and moderate incomes. It is clear that the private sector cannot feasibly develop lower cost housing without government intervention. The amount of government support that is available for lower cost housing is insufficient to meet identified needs. Availability of housing that is affordable to households at all income levels is a key issue in Ashland. For the purposes of this strategy, affordable housing is defined as: (1) housing for very-low–income and extremely-low–income households at 50% or below the median family $32,600 in 2020); (2) housing for low-income households with incomes between income (MFI) 6 50% and 80% of the MFI ($32,600 to $52,100 in 2020); and (3) housing for middle-income households with incomes between 80% and 120% of the MFI ($52,100 to $78,100 in 2020). In Ashland, 63% of renter households and 31% of homeowner households are considered cost burdened (paying more than 30% of their income on housing). These are households struggling to find affordable housing, at all points along the income spectrum. This strategic priority is to evaluate mechanisms (mandates and/or incentives) that will support development of affordable housing in Ashland. The City’s policy options for providing opportunities to build housing, especially affordable housing (both market-rate and government-subsidized affordable housing) are limited. The most substantial ways the City can encourage development of housing is through ensuring that enough land is zoned for residential development and within the city limits, in addition to assembling and purchasing land for affordable housing development, eliminating barriers to residential development where possible, and providing infrastructure in a cost-effective way. A key part of this strategy is providing informational resources to developers of housing affordable to both very-low- and extremely-low-income households, as well as low- and middle-income households. Smaller, local developers need resources to better understand the kinds of support that is available to build more affordable housing, such as funding opportunities, partnerships, etc. The affordable housing realm is very complex and existing developers/builders would benefit from additional assistance and clarification about the requirements for development and management of affordable housing, as well as City Based on U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Median Family Income of $65,100 for Jackson 6 County in 2020. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 10 assistance identifying potential non-profit affordable housing development partners that can secure funding for affordable housing development. In addition to supporting development, an important angle of this strategic priority is to identify strategies that preserve naturally occurring affordable housing that already exists in Ashland. Naturally occurring affordable housing are dwelling units that are unsubsidized, yet affordable to households earning incomes below the area’s median household or family income. Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 3 under consideration include: Action 3.1: Create processes and materials necessary to support developers in development of affordable housing, with the purpose of making it easier to develop affordable housing in Ashland. The City could act as a convener between “market-rate developers” required to provide affordable housing and those nonprofits and other organizations who are well versed in the complexities of developing affordable housing. 7 Action 3.2: Evaluate using the Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption to incentivize preservation and development of housing for low- to middle-income households for needed housing types. Action 3.3: Adopt a property tax exemption program for affordable rental housing developed by nonprofit affordable housing developers. Evaluate which of the two available options under state statute is better suited to the needs of housing providers in Ashland. The options are the Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption and the Nonprofit Corporation Low Income Housing Tax Exemption. Action 3.4: Evaluate participating in or establish a land bank for development of housing affordable to households within incomes below 80% of MFI for renters or below 120% of MFI for homeowners. The land bank may best be run by a nonprofit, with the City participating as a partner in the land bank. Action 3.5: Evaluate opportunities to participate in a land trust to manage and develop housing that is affordable for rent or ownership at below-market pricing for households earning 120% or less of MFI (or possibly 80% or less of MFI). Action 3.6: Evaluate whether the City or other public agencies have vacant or redevelopable publicly owned property that is not being otherwise used and could be used for development of affordable housing. This property could be used for affordable housing, either as part of a land bank (Action 3.4) or directly in development of an affordable housing project. Action 3.7: Identify opportunities to purchase land in Ashland’s urbanizing area (within the Ashland UGB and outside of the City limits) as part of a land banking strategy. The The City of Medford is developing a toolkit to help developers gain support for development of affordable housing 7 in Medford. This toolkit may provide good ideas that could be customized for use in Ashland. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 11 City could acquire land and write down land costs for developers who are willing to build housing either affordable to households with incomes below 60% of MFI or for households with incomes between 60% and 80% of MFI. Action 3.8: Identify partnerships with area employers to increase development of housing affordable to workers in Ashland. Potential partnerships may be with Southern Oregon University (SOU), for development of workforce housing for people employed at SOU or students at SOU, Ashland School District, or with the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. Action 3.9: Continue to collaborate with community partners to work towards providing housing and support services to alleviate homelessness for families with children, domestic violence victims, veterans, and other vulnerable populations. Action 3.10: Evaluate opportunities to make development of housing less costly to the development through changes in City fees. For example, the City might allow a develop to pay application fees over time, rather than requiring the fee at the beginning of the development process. The City might also set a cap on application fees. Areas for further consideration The following are actions suggested by members of the HCA Advisory Committee, Planning Commission, and Housing and Human Services Commission that should be further considered by the City of Ashland as it develops it housing policies. Identify opportunities to increase affordable homeownership for households with children. Identify barriers to development of housing that is affordable for families with children, both regulated affordable housing and market-rate affordable housing. This could include small changes to the zoning code to allow development of housing for families with children. Strategic Issue 4: Identify funding sources to support development of infrastructure and housing affordability programs The following recommended strategy and actions are intended to consider a range of funding tools that Ashland may implement and use to support residential development. Issue Statement A primary barrier to residential development, particularly for housing for very low-income and low-income households, is costs and financing. This strategic priority intends to evaluate opportunities for the City of Ashland to support needed residential development by evaluating creative funding and financing mechanisms that reduce development costs. Funding opportunities may include options to reduce the cost of land, reduce hard costs (such as ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 12 infrastructure development), and reduce soft costs (such as system development charges or permit costs). Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 4 are: Action 4.1: Evaluate establishing a Construction Excise Tax (CET) for residential, When the City evaluates implementing a commercial, and industrial development. 8 CET, the City should consider how much funding the CET could produce and decide if that funding would meaningfully help in production of affordable housing. The City may want to consider a methodology that exempts a portion of the permit value (such as the first $100,000 or more permit value), as a way of focusing CET charges on units with a higher permit value. Action 4.2: Evaluate using Urban Renewal to support development of infrastructure necessary to support housing development, as well as to support development of housing affordable to households with incomes below 80% of MFI. For example, a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) set-aside of a minimum of 30% for affordable housing development to serve households earning 0-60% Median Family Income, to apply to existing and future urban renewal areas in the City. TIF set-aside funds would also potentially be available for affordable housing units within market rate, mixed-use and mixed-income development. If the City wants to use Urban Renewal on areas currently outside the city limits, the City will need to annex the land into the city limits before implementing the Urban Renewal District. Action 4.3: Coordinate Capital Improvements Program infrastructure investments and Transportation System Plan to strategically develop needed infrastructure within areas where residential growth is expected. Action 4.4: Continue to identify a variety of funding sources to support the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Action 4.5: Identify additional funds to support development of new affordable housing, including housing options for people experiencing homelessness, increasing housing stability and reducing risk of homelessness, and housing for households with incomes of less than 60% of MFI. These funds may be contributed to Ashland’s existing Affordable Housing Trust Fund. One funding option with substantial revenue potential is a General Obligation (GO) bond. Cities or other jurisdictions can issue bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the jurisdiction to pay for capital construction and improvements. The Ashland School District has an existing CET of $1.07 per square foot of residential construction or $0.53 per 8 square foot of commercial construction. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 13 Strategic Issue 5: Align housing planning with the Climate and Energy Action Plan The following recommended strategy and actions are intended ensure that planning for housing is aligned with Ashland’s plans for climate change. Issue Statement The City of Ashland adopted its Climate and Energy Action Plan (CEAP) in March of 2017 “to reduce its emissions and improve its resilience to future impacts of climate change on its The plan identified six strategic initiatives: environment, infrastructure, and people.” 9 Transition to clean energy Maximize conservation of water and energy Support climate-friendly land use and management Reduce consumption of carbon-intensive goods and services Inform and work with residents, organizations, and government Lead by example To the extent possible, housing planning and actions to address Ashland’s housing needs should emphasize these initiatives and allow them to guide decision-making. The nexus between the CEAP and housing development includes: Location of housing. Housing that is located in areas where less driving is necessary, either through more use of transit or a closer location to services and work, may help the City meet its CEAP goals. Some of Ashland’s residential development is located in areas with access to transit and closer to services and employment, but some land does not have these locational advantages. In addition, some people will choose to locate in Ashland but work in other parts of the region. Energy efficiency of housing development and the structures. Housing that is developed with energy-efficient processes, uses energy-efficient materials, and operates in an energy efficient way over time can also help the City meet its CEAP goals. Increasing energy-efficiency can both increase development costs, through more expensive materials or development process, as well as lower long-term energy costs. Ashland should be careful to consider the advantages and disadvantages when requiring energy-efficient development, to make sure that the requirements do not make housing substantially less affordable in Ashland. Climate and Energy Action Plan: 9 http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Ashland%20Climate%20and%20Energy%20Action%20Plan_pages.pdf ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 14 Recommended Actions The recommended actions to address Strategic Issue 5 are: Action 5.1: Evaluate opportunities to decrease dependence on automotive transportation in areas planned for housing, such as increased focus on development in walkable and bikeable areas and increases in transit service (amount and frequency of transit, as well as increased destinations for transit). The prior action that suggests parking reductions (Action 1.3) may reduce reliance upon automobiles and decrease of impervious surfaces dedicated to parked vehicles. Action 5.2: Evaluate opportunities to incorporate elements of the CEAP into housing developments, including increased energy efficiency, solar access, electrical vehicle parking and charging opportunities, reduction of fossil fuels dependency, and increased resilience to natural hazards resulting from a changing climate (such as the risk of wildfire). Action 5.3: Initiate a process to identify opportunities for development or redevelopment of mixed-use districts and initiate an area planning process to guide redevelopment. Action 5.4: Evaluate opportunities to develop new housing closer to downtown and commercial centers to reduce dependance on automobiles for transportation. For example, redevelopment of the Railroad property provides such an opportunity. Action 5.5: Evaluate opportunities for planning transit-oriented development as transit becomes more available in Ashland, consistent with mixed-use planning. Action 5.6: Evaluate sustainable building practices, including certifications, to determine whether the City should offer incentives for certification or require certification of new buildings as sustainable. Potential Housing Policies and Actions This section provides the City with information about potential policies that could be implemented in Ashland to address the City’s housing needs. This appendix provides a range of housing policy options for the City of Ashland to consider as it addresses its housing needs. These policy options are commonly used by cities in Oregon and other states. Policy options are categorized as follows: Land Use Regulations Increase Housing Types Financial Assistance to Homeowners and Renters Lower Development or Operational Costs Funding Sources to Support Residential Development ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 15 The intention of this memorandum is to provide a toolbox of potential policies and actions that the City can use to address strategic issues. For many of the policy tools described below, we give an approximate scale of impact. The purpose of the scale of impact is to provide some context for whether the policy tool generally results in a little or a lot of change in the housing market. The scale of impact depends on conditions in the City, such as other the City’s other existing (or newly implemented) housing policies, the land supply, and housing market conditions. We define the scale of impact as follows: A small impact may not directly result in development of new housing or it may result in development of a small amount of new housing, such as 1% to 3% of the needed housing. In terms of housing affordability, a small impact may not improve housing affordability in and of itself. A policy with a small impact may be necessary but not sufficient to increase housing affordability. A moderate impact is likely to directly result in development of new housing, such as 3% to 5% of needed housing. In terms of housing affordability, a moderate impact may not improve housing affordability in and of itself. A policy with a moderate impact may be necessary but not sufficient to increase housing affordability. A large impact is likely to directly result in development of new housing, such as 5% to 10% (or more) of needed housing. In terms of housing affordability, a large impact may improve housing affordability in and of itself. A policy with a large impact may still need to work with other policies to increase housing affordability. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 16 LandUseRegulations These policies focus on ways the City can modify its land use regulations to increase housing affordability and available housing stock. ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact Regulatory Changes ScaleofImpact- AdministrativeRegulatorydelaycanbeamajorcost-inducingfactorin Small andProceduraldevelopment.Oregonhasspecificrequirementsforreview.Theimpacton Reformsofdevelopmentapplications.However,complicatedproductionofhousing projectsfrequentlyrequireadditionalanalysissuchasandhousing trafficimpactstudies,etc.affordabilityis small anddependson Akeyconsiderationinthesetypesofreformsishowto changesmadetoCity streamlinethereviewprocessandstillachievethe procedures. intendedobjectivesoflocaldevelopmentpolicies. Streamlining procedures may not be sufficient to increase production. ScaleofImpact- Expedited/Fast-Expeditebuildingpermitsforpre-approveddevelopmentPriority planning action Small trackedBuildingtypesorbuildingcharacteristics(e.g.greenbuildings).processing and building permit .Expedited Permitissuance for affordable housing permit processing will CityofBendoffersexpeditedreviewandpermittingfor is not codified in Ashland benefit a limited affordablehousing.Anyresidentialormixed-use Municipal Code. Ashland does number of projects. It developmentthatreceiveslocal,stateorfederalaffordable provide priority plan check and may be necessary but housingfundingiseligibletoreceiveawrittendecisionby planning action processing for not sufficient to thePlanningDepartmentwithintwoweeksofthedateof green buildings pursuing increase housing submittal.Forprojectsthatrequiremorecomplexplanning certification under the production on its own. review,adecisionwillbewritten,orthefirstpublichearing Leadership in Energy and willbeheldwithinsixweeksofthedateofsubmittal. Environmental Design (LEED) rating system. ScaleofImpact- StreamlineComplexityofzoning,subdivision,andotherordinances Smalltomoderate ZoningCodeandcanmakedevelopmentmoredifficult,timeconsuming,. otherOrdinancesThelevelofimpacton ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis17 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact andcostly.Streamliningdevelopmentregulationscanproductionofhousing resultinincreaseddevelopment.andhousing affordabilitywilldepend Aspartofthestreamliningprocess,citiesmayevaluate onthechangesmade potentialbarrierstoaffordableworkforcehousingand tothezoningcodeand multifamilyhousing.Potentialbarriersmayincludeheight otherordinances. limitations,complexityofplannedunitdevelopment regulations,parking requirements, and other zoning standards. Many of the remaining tools in this section focus on changes to the zoning code. ScaleofImpact– Planned Unit Developments in AllowSmallSmallresidentiallotsaregenerallylessthan5,000SF and Smalltomoderate ResidentialLotssometimes closer to 2,000 SF. Thispolicyallowsindividualall SFR and MFR zones will . smalllotswithinasubdivision.Smalllotscanbeallowedallow for small lots (up to zero Citieshaveadopted outrightintheminimumlotsizeanddimensionsofazone,lot line) at allowable Densities. minimumlotsizesas ortheycouldbeimplementedthroughthesubdivisionorAdditionally,cottage housing smallas2,000SF. plannedunitdevelopmentordinances.developmentsin SFR zones (R-However,itis 1-5 & R-1-7.5)allow lots uncommontosee This policy is intended to increase density and lower smaller than the minimum lot entiresubdivisionsof housing costs. Small-lots limit sprawl, contribute to a more size for the zone in conjunction lotsthissmall.Small efficient use of land, and promote densities that can with common openspace.lotstypicallygetmixed support transit. Small lots also provide expanded housing inwithotherlotsizes. ownership opportunities to broader income ranges and This tool generally provide additional variety to available housing types. Ashland’s R-1-3.5 zone has a increases density and Cities across Oregon allow small residential lots, including minimum lot size of 3,500 SF. amount of single-family many cities in the Metro area. detached and townhouse housing in a given area, decreasing housing costs as a result of decreasing amount of land on the lot. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis18 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact ScaleofImpact— MandateThispolicyplacesanupperboundonlotsizeandalowerAshland does not have a Smalltomoderate MaximumLotboundondensityinsingle-familyzones.Forexample,amaximum lot size or minimum . Sizesresidentialzonewitha6,000SF minimumlotsizemightdensity requirement in Single Mandatingmaximum havean8,000SF maximumlotsizeyieldinganeffectiveFamily Residential zones, lotsizemaybemost netdensityrangebetween5.4and7.3dwellingunitsperalthough market development appropriateinareas netacre.typically maximizes the number wherethemarketis of units provided. buildingatsubstantially Thisapproachensuresminimumdensitiesinresidential lowerdensitiesthan zonesbylimitinglotsize.Itplacesboundsonbuildingat areallowedorincities lessthanmaximumallowabledensity.Maximumlotsizes In cases where lot sizes are thatdonothave canpromoteappropriateurbandensities,efficientlyuse proposed that exceed the minimumdensities. limitedlandresources,andreducesprawldevelopment. minimum lot size it is often in This tool generally This tool is used by some cities but is used less frequently response to physical or increases density and than mandating minimum lot sizes.environmental constraints that amount of single-family limit the buildable portion of a detached and site (e.g. steep slopes, townhouse housing in floodplains, wetlands and a givenarea, riparian areas) decreasing housing costs as a result of decreasing amount of land on the lot. ScaleofImpact— MandateThispolicyistypicallyappliedinsingle-familyresidentialMinimum Density requirements Smalltomoderate Minimumzonesandplacesalowerboundondensity.Minimum(80% base density) are in place . Residentialresidentialdensitiesinsingle-familyzonesaretypicallyin MFR zones (R-2 and R-3) on Increasingminimum Densitiesimplementedthroughmaximumlotsizes.Inmultifamilylots large enough to densitiesandensuring zones,theyareusuallyexpressedasaminimumnumberaccommodate 3 or more units. clearurbanconversion ofdwellingunitspernetacre.SuchstandardsaretypicallyMinimum densities and are plansmayhavea implementedthroughzoningcodeprovisionsinapplicablerequired of any residential smalltomoderate residentialzones.Thispolicyincreasesland-holdingannexation (90% Base impactdependingon capacity.MinimumdensitiespromotedevelopmentsDensity).theobservedamount consistentwithlocalcomprehensiveplansandgrowthofunderbuildandthe assumptions.Theyreducesprawldevelopment,eliminateminimumdensity underbuildinginresidentialareas,andmakeprovisionofstandard.For cities servicesmorecosteffective.Mandating minimum density that allow single-family ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis19 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact is generally most effective in medium and high-density detached housing in zones where single-family detached housing is allowed. high density zones, this The minimum density ensures thatlow-density single-policy can result in a family housing is not built where higher-density multifamily moderate or larger housing could be built.impact. ScaleofImpact— IncreaseThisapproachseekstoincreaseholdingcapacitybyAshland recently removed the Smalltomoderate Allowableincreasingallowabledensityinresidentialzones.Itgivesmaximum residential densities . Residentialdeveloperstheoptionofbuildingtohigherdensities.Thiswithin the Transit Triangle Thistoolcanbemost DensitiesapproachwouldbeimplementedthroughthelocalzoningOverlay area (Ashland Street, effectiveinincreasing ordevelopmentcode.Thisstrategyismostcommonlyportions of Siskiyou Blvd, and densitieswherevery appliedtomultifamilyresidentialzones.Tolman Creek Road). A form-lowdensityiscurrently based approach is used where allowedorinareas Forcitieswithmaximumdensities,considerremoving limitations on height, lot whereacitywantsto maximumallowabledensities.Thischangemaybemost coverage, and setback encouragehigher relevant. requirements create the 3D densitydevelopment. Higherdensitiesincreaseresidentiallandholdingcapacity. envelope in which units can be This tool generally Higherdensities,whereappropriate,providemore developed. This allows for increases density and housing,agreatervarietyofhousingoptions,andamore many smaller units within the amount of single-family efficientuseofscarcelandresources.Higherdensities same space when compared to detached and alsoreducesprawldevelopmentandmaketheprovision a base density approach which townhouse housing in ofservicesmorecosteffective. can produce fewer, large a given area, apartments or condominiums. decreasing housing Ashland has not increased costs as a result of residential densities outside of decreasing amount of land on the lot. the this Overlay area. ScaleofImpact— AllowClusteredClusteringallowsdeveloperstoincreasedensityonAshland permits Planned Unit Moderate. Residentialportionsofasite,whilepreservingotherareasofthesite.Developments in SFR and MFR Clustering DevelopmentClusteringisatoolmostcommonlyusedtopreservezones which allows clustering canincreasedensity, naturalareasoravoidnaturalhazardsduringof units and transfer of density however,ifotherareas development.Itusescharacteristicsofthesiteasafrom naturally constrained ofthesitethatcould primaryconsiderationindeterminingbuildingfootprints,areas to the developable otherwisebe access,etc.Clusteringistypicallyprocessedduringtheportion of the site.developedarenot sitereviewphaseofdevelopmentreview.developed,thescaleof impactcanbereduced. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis20 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact ScaleofImpact— ReducedParkingJurisdictionscanreduceoreliminateminimumoff-streetAshland provides parking Smalltomoderate Requirementsparkingrequirements,aswellasprovideflexibilityinreductions for small units city-. meetingparkingrequirements.Reducingparkingwide (one space per unitfor TheCitycouldrequire requirementspositivelyimpactdevelopmentofanytypeofunits 500 SFor less). thedevelopertoprove housing,fromsingle-familydetachedtomultifamily Within the Transit Triangle theneedandpublic housing. Overlayparking requirements benefitorreducing Reducedparkingrequirementsaremostfrequentlyusedinare reduced to one space per parkingrequirements conjunctionofdevelopmentofsubsidizedaffordableunitfor units 800 SFor lesstoincreasehousing housing,butcitieslikePortlandhavereducedoraffordability. Cottages of 800 SF or less eliminatedparkingrequirementsformarket-based within approved cottage Reducing parking multifamilyhousinginspecificcircumstances. housing developments require requirements can have CityofBendoffers parkingreductionsforaffordableone space per unit.a moderate to large housingandtransitproximity.Parkingforaffordableimpact on housing Many parking credits may be housingunitsis1spaceperunitregardlessofsize,affordability if little or allocated to projects including: comparedto1spaceperstudioor1-bedroom unit,1.5no parking is required. An off-street parking credit for spacesper2-bedroomunit,and2spacesper3-ormore each on-street space along the bedroomunitformarket-ratemultifamilydevelopmentor2 properties frontage; joint use spacespermarketratedetacheddwellingunit.Affordable and mixed-use development housingunitsmustmeetthesameeligibilitycriteriaasfor credits (sharing the same space otherCityofBendaffordablehousingincentives between a commercial use and CityofPortlandoffers parkingexceptionsforaffordableresidential use when housingandsitesadjacenttotransit.TheCityofPortlanddemonstrated their time of use allowshousingdevelopmentsthatmeettheinclusionaryis not in conflict); off-site shared zoningrequirementstoreduceparkingrequirementstoparking; transit facilities credit; zeroiflocatednearfrequenttransitservice,andtoexcludeTransportation Demand theaffordablehousingunitsfromparkingrequirementsforManagement plan developmentslocatedfurtherfromfrequenttransitservice.implementation. TheCityalsoallowsmarketratehousingdevelopments Ashland does not have a locatednearfrequenttransitservicetoprovidelittleorno specific parking reduction parking,dependingonthenumberofunitsinthe available for units designated development. and regulated as affordable housing. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis21 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact ScaleofImpact— ReduceStreetThispolicyisintendedtoreducelandusedforstreetsandAshland haslongimplemented Small WidthStandardsslowdowntraffic.Streetstandardsaretypicallydescribeda “NarrowStreet” standard .Thispolicyis indevelopmentand/orsubdivisionordinances.Reducedthrough the Street Standards mosteffectiveincities streetwidthstandardsaremostcommonlyappliedonlocaland Transportation System thatrequirerelatively streetsinresidentialzones.ThisstrategycouldbeappliedPlan. widestreets. toalleys,whenrequired,toensurethatalleysarerelatively narrowtoreducedevelopmentandmaintenancecosts. Narrowerstreetsmakemorelandavailabletohousingand economic-baseddevelopment.Narrowerstreetscanalso reducelong-termstreetmaintenancecosts. ScaleofImpact— Ashland does have ordinances PreservingHousingpreservationordinancestypicallyconditionthe Smallto moderate ExistingHousingdemolitionorreplacementofcertainhousingtypesonthethat regulate the closure of . Supplyreplacementofsuchhousingelsewhere,feesinlieuofmanufactured home parks and Preservingsmall replacement,orpaymentforrelocationexpensesofdisplacement of the residents, existinghousingcan existingtenants.Preservationofexistinghousingmayas well as the conversion of makeadifferencein focusonpreservationofsmaller,moreaffordablehousing.apartments into condominiums, theavailabilityof Approachesinclude:wherein longer notice periods affordablehousingina prior to tenant displacementcitybutitislimitedby Housingpreservationordinances and relocation assistance can theexistingstock Housingreplacementordinances be required.housing,especially Manufactured home preservation smaller,more Ashland’sdemolition ordinance affordablehousing. Single-room-occupancyordinances does regulate demolitions but Cities with older does not have standards Regulatingdemolitions housing stock are more relating to tenant displacement. likely to benefit from this policy. ScaleofImpact— InclusionaryInclusionaryzoningpoliciestiedevelopmentapprovalto,Ashland requires a percentage Smalltomoderate Zoningorprovideregulatoryincentivesfor,theprovisionoflow-of affordable housing (25% of . andmoderate-incomehousingaspartofaproposedthe base density exclusive of Inclusionaryzoning development.Mandatoryinclusionaryzoningrequiresunbuildable areas) as partof hasrecentlybeen developerstoprovideacertainpercentageoflow-incomeannexations and zone changes madelegalinOregon. housing.Incentive-basedinclusionaryzoningprovidesfor residential developments.Thescaleofimpact densityorothertypesofincentives.woulddependonthe inclusionaryzoning ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis22 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact Thepriceoflow-incomehousingis often passedontoAshland has not implemented policiesadoptedbythe purchasersofmarket-ratehousing.Critics of inclusionaryan inclusionary zoning city. zoningcontend it impedesthe"filtering"processwhereordinance for residential residentspurchasenewhousing,freeingexistinghousingdevelopments within the City forlower-incomeresidents.Limits for proposed structures containing 20 units or more Oregon’s inclusionary zoning laws apply to structures with under the State’s newly 20 or more multifamily units, with inclusion of units that are approvedinclusionary zoning affordable at 80% of the median family income of the city. legislation. The City of Portland has implemented an inclusionary zoning program. While Portland’s inclusionary zoning program is resulting in production of affordable multifamily units, there is considerable discussion and disagreement about the impact of number of multifamily units being built and potential changes in the location of units. Rezoning land in Ashland is not Re-designateorThetypesoflandrezonedforhousingarevacantor rezonelandforpartiallyvacantlow-densityresidentialandemploymenta common practice. housinglandrezonedtomultifamilyormixeduse.Inrezoningland, The City has implemented a itisimportanttochooselandinacompatiblelocation, number of master planning suchaslandthatcanbeabufferbetweenanestablished Efforts (Normal Neighborhood, neighborhoodandotherdenserusesorlandadjacentto North Mountain Plan, Croman existingcommercialuses.Whenrezoningemployment Mill District) which have land,itisbesttoselectlandwithlimitedemployment identified lands to be developed capacity(i.e.,smallerparcels)inareaswheremultifamily as multifamily or mixed-use housingwouldbecompatible(i.e.,alongtransitcorridors development. Individual orinemploymentcentersthatwouldbenefitfromnew property owners have housing). requested and received Thispolicychangeincreasesopportunityforcomparativelyrezoning of their properties to affordablemultifamilyhousingandprovidesopportunitiesmultifamily zones for specific formixingresidentialandothercompatibleuses.development proposals. However, there has not been Cities across Oregon frequently re-zone and re-designate an effort to examine vacant low land to address deficits of land for new housing. density and employment properties within the City Limits as candidates for a ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis23 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact comprehensive plan and zone change to increase the supply of multifamily zoned properties. ThistoolseekstoencouragedensermultifamilyhousingMixed use projects are Encourage multifamilyaspartofmixed-useprojectsincommercialzones.Suchpermitted and encouraged in residentialpoliciesloweroreliminatebarrierstoresidentialAshland Commercial and developmentindevelopmentincommercialormixed-usezones.TheyEmployment zoned. There is commercialincludeeliminatingrequirementsfornon-residentialusescurrent discussion regarding zonesincommercialzones(e.g.,requirementsforgroundfloorthe percentage of the ground retail)orrequiringminimumresidentialdensities.floor that is to be reserved for commercial uses and whether Thispolicycanincreaseopportunitiesformultifamily those ratioscan be modified in developmentoncommercialormixed-usezonesor consideration of changing increasethedensityofthatdevelopment. market demands for in retail Cities across Oregon frequently encourage multifamily and office space. housing development in commercial zones, either as stand-along residential buildings or as mixed-use buildings. ThispolicyisintendedtomovedevelopmentfromAshland does not have a Transferor Purchaseofsensitiveareastomoreappropriateareas.DevelopmentTransfer of Development Rights Developmentrightsaretransferredto“receivingzones”andcanbeprogram or designated Rightstradedandcanincreaseoveralldensities.Thispolicyisreceiving zones. usuallyimplementedthroughasubsectionofthezoning codeandidentifiesbothsendingzones(zoneswhere decreaseddensitiesaredesirable)andreceivingzones (zoneswhereincreaseddensitiesareallowed). Transfer of development rights is done less frequently in Oregon, as cities generally zone land for higher density housing where they would like it to occur. This policy is frequently used by cities outside of Oregon. ProvideDensityThelocalgovernmentallowsdeveloperstobuildhousingAshland has four density Bonusestoatdensitieshigherthanareusuallyallowedbythebonuses, one of which is for Developersunderlyingzoning.Densitybonusesarecommonlyuseddevelopment of affordable asatooltoencouragegreaterhousingdensityindesiredhousing at higher densities and ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis24 ActionNameDescriptionImplementation in AshlandScale of Impact areas,providedcertainrequirementsaremet.Thisanother for energy-efficient strategyisgenerallyimplementedthroughprovisionsofhousing. thelocalzoningcodeandisallowedinappropriate Affordable housing projects residentialzones. meeting eligibility requirements Bonusdensitiescanalsobeusedtoencourage(including rental or ownership developmentoflow-incomeorworkforceaffordablehousing affordable to housing.Anaffordablehousingbonuswouldallowforhouseholds at 80% or less of morehousingunitstobebuiltthanallowedbyzoningiftheAMI for a min.of 30 years) proposedprojectprovidesacertainnumberofaffordablereceive a density bonus of two units.units for each affordable unit provided, up to a max.of a 35% City of Bend offers affordable housing density and height increase in density. bonuses. Qualifying affordable housing projects are eligible for a 10-foot building height bonus for multifamily The max.density bonus housing when affordable housing units are gained and for inclusive of other bonuses a density bonus. The density increase is based on the (openspace, conservation) can percentage of affordable housing units within the proposed be 60%over the base density development: if 10% of the units are affordable, the within the zone. maximum density is 110% of the standard maximum Ashland’s Cottage Housing density. The maximum density bonus is 50% above the Development ordinance base density. Qualifying projects must be affordable to effectively provides a doubling households at or below 60% of the AMI for rental housing of the allowable density in the and at or below 80% of the AMI for ownership housing and zone for provision of the small require development agreements and restrictions to cottage housing units. ensure continued affordability. Ashland classifies small units, Kirkland, WA offers density bonuses for duplex, triplex, of 500 SF or less, as only 75% and cottages. Cottage homes (limitedto 1,500 SFof floor of a unit for the purposes of area) and two-and three-unit homes (up to 1,000 SFof density calculations. A greater floor area average per unit) are allowed at double the number of small units can be density of detached dwelling units in the underlying zone. developed within existing density allowances without employing a density bonus. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis25 IncreaseHousing Types The following policies focus on ways in which the City can increase the types of housing available in order to increase housing affordability. Policies focus on increasing housing density or the number of residents within existing City lots. ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact– AllowDuplexes,AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallAshland is in the process of Smallto moderate Cottagehousing,densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmayamending the land use code . Townhomes,Rowencourageahigherpercentageofmultifamilyto allow duplexes wherever a Allowingthesetypesof Houses,andTri-housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbesingle-family dwelling unit is housinginmore andQuad-Plexesimplementedthroughthelocalzoningorpermitted per the zoningdistrictsmay inlow density developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingrequirements of HB2001. providerelativelyfew zonestypesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatenumberofnew, Code amendments will be residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesproviderelativelyaffordable, enacted before July 1, 2021. additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandallowhousingopportunities. moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedby detachedhomesalone. House Bill 2001 requires cities to allow these housing types in single-family zones. AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallAshland passed a cottage ScaleofImpact– Smallto Large densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmayhousing ordinance in 2018 . AllowCottage encourageahigherpercentageofmultifamilyand allows cottage housing Allowingthesetypesof housing,Tri-and housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbedevelopments in the R-1-5housinginmore Quad-Plexes implementedthroughthelocalzoningorand R-1-7.5 zones on lots zoningdistrictsmay Townhomes,Row developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingthat are greater than 1.5 provideup to a large Houses,Stacked typesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatetimes the minimumlot size numberofnew, Townhouses, residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesprovidefor the zone. Cottage relativelyaffordable, Cottage Courts, additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandallowHousing developments canhousingopportunities. Duplex/Townhouse moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedbybe between 3 to 12 units The scale of impact Courts, & Garden detachedhomesalone.depending on lot size. will depend, in part, on Apartments in the amount of vacant Tri-andQuad-Plexes medium density or redevelopable land Townhomes,RowHouses, zones in medium density Stacked Townhouses are zones, as well as the permissible in Ashland’s types of housing newly ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis26 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Medium Density zone (R-2), allowed in the medium and Townhomes are further density zone. permitted in the R-1-3.5 zone or other residential zones (R- 1-5, R-1-7.5, R-1-10) through planned unit developments. ScaleofImpact– AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallStacked townhomes, Smallto Large densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmaycondominiums, garden . encourageahigherpercentageofmultifamilyapartments andlarger-scale Allowingthesetypesof housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbeapartments are permitted in housinginmorezones implementedthroughthelocalzoningorR-2 and R-3 zones. However mayprovidea large AllowStacked developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingdue to small lot sizes of numberofnew, Townhouses, typesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatevacant/partially vacant relativelyaffordable, Garden residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesprovideproperties available in these housingopportunities. Apartments and additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandallowzones, larger scale The scale of impact larger-scale moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedbyapartments are not often depends on the Apartments inhigh detachedhomesalone.achievable given existing lot amount of density zones sizes, height limitations, and vacant/redevelopable density allowances.land in high density zones and the housing types allowed in the zones. ScaleofImpact– AllowingthesehousingtypescanincreaseoverallLive-work housing and Smallto Large densityofresidentialdevelopmentandmaymixed-development would be . encourageahigherpercentageofmultifamilya permitted use within Allowingthesetypesof housingtypes.Thisapproachwouldbecommercial zonesalthough housinginmore implementedthroughthelocalzoningornot specifically listed in the zoningdistrictsmay Allow Live-Work developmentcodeandwouldlistthesehousingallowable use table for either provideup to a large housing or Mixed- typesasoutrightallowableusesinappropriatecommercial orresidential numberofnew, use housing in residentialzones.Thesehousingtypesprovidezones.Home Occupations relativelyaffordable, commercial zones additionalaffordablehousingoptionsandalloware special permittedin all housingopportunities. moreresidentialunitsthanwouldbeachievedbyzoning designations with the detachedhomesalone.exception of industrial (M-1). ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis27 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact- AsofJuly1,2018,ORS197.312requirescitiestoAshland allows Accessory Small allowatleastoneADUforeachdetachedsingle-Residential Units (ARU or .Oregonlaw familydwellinginareaszonedfordetachedsingle-ADU) as an accessory use to recentlychangedto familydwellings.single-family homesrequirecitiestoallow throughout the City, and ADUs. JurisdictionscanmakedevelopmentofADUsmore Remove barriers to further provides reduced likelybylimitingrestrictivestandardsand Development of SDCs for small units of less procedures,suchasreducingsystems Accessory than 500 SF. developmentchargesforADUs, reducing or DwellingUnits eliminating parking requirements, or allowingADUsPer ORS 197.312 no (ADUs)insingle- regardlessofwheretheprimarydwellingisowner-additional parking is required familyzones occupied.for ARUs in Ashland, and there has never been any owner-occupied requirement for the development of an ARUwithin the City. ScaleofImpact- “Tiny”homesaretypicallydwellingsthatare500SF Small, or tiny, units that are Small: orsmaller.Sometinyhousesareassmallas100tobuilt on a foundation are Scaleofimpact 150SF.Theyincludestand-aloneunitsorverypermitted in Ashland and dependsonregulation smallmultifamilyunits.have been developed as oftinyhomes,where ARUs. Tiny homes on theyareallowed,and Tinyhomescanbesitedinavarietyofways: wheels would have to be marketdemandfortiny locatingtheminRVparks(theyaresimilarinmany located in an RV park, and homes. respectstoParkModelRVs),tinyhome there are thus limited subdivisions,orallowingthemasaccessory opportunities for their Allowsmallor dwellingunits. placement in Ashland. “tiny”homes Smallerhomesallowforsmallerlots,increasing As an emergency provision landuseefficiency.Theyprovideopportunitiesfor in response to the Almeda affordablehousing,especiallyforhomeowners. fire, RVs, campers, and Portland and Eugene allow tiny homes as trailers can be located on temporary shelter for people experiencing residential properties in homelessness. Ashland as temporary shelter provided, they are connected to sanitation and utilities. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis28 ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis29 LowerDevelopmentorOperationalCosts The following policies focus on ways in which the City and other entities involved in development can provide financial assistance to lower development or operational costs in a city in order to increase housing affordability and available housing stock. ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Programs or policies to lower the cost of development ScaleofImpact- ParcelAssemblyParcelassemblyinvolvesthecity’sabilitytopurchaselandsforThe City has limited Smalltolarge. thepurposeoflandaggregationorsiteassembly.Itcandirectly experience acquiring property addresstheissuesrelatedtolimitedmultifamilylandsbeingfor the future development of Parcelassemblyis availableinappropriatelocations(e.g.,neararterialsandaffordable housing, having mostlikelytohavean commercialservices).Typicalgoalsofparcelassemblyacquired 10 acres on Clay effectonalocalized programsare:(1)toprovidesitesforrentalapartmentsinStreet in cooperation with the area,providingafew appropriatelocationsclosetoservicesand(2)toreducetheHousing Authority of Jackson opportunitiesfornew costofdevelopingmultifamilyrentalunitsCounty. Over the last decade multifamilyhousing this property providedadevelopmentover Parcelassemblycanlowerthecostofmultifamilydevelopment . location for 120 units of time becausetheCityisabletopurchaselandinstrategiclocations affordable housing(60 units overtime.Parcelassemblyisoftenassociatedwith developed, 60 units under developmentofaffordablehousing(affordable to households construction). with income below 60% of MFI),wheretheCitypartnerswith nonprofitaffordablehousingdevelopers.The City typically relieson affordable housing partners Parcel assembly can be criticallyimportantroleforcitiestokick to identify property for a startqualityaffordablehousingandworkforcehousingprojects proposed development and thatcanbepositivecatalyststooformarketratedevelopment. has provided financial assistance (CDBG or Affordable Housing Trust Fund(AHTF)) to assist in acquisition. Most recently the City helped purchase a parcel using AHTF for Columbia Care to develop a 30-unit affordable housing project. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis30 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Landbankssupporthousingdevelopmentbyreducingor ScaleofImpact- LandBankingThere is no administrator of a eliminatinglandcostfromdevelopment,withthegoalof Smalltolarge. Land Bank within Ashland.A increasingtheaffordabilityofhousing.Theycantakeseveral landbankwillhave forms.Manyareadministeredbyanon-profitornon- thebiggestimpacton governmentalentitywithamissionofmanagingaportfolioof productionoflow-and propertiestosupportaffordablehousingdevelopmentover moderate-income manyyearsordecades.Ideally,alandbankissetupto affordablehousing. managefinancialandadministrativeresources,including Consideringhow strategicpropertydisposal,fortheexplicitpurposeof difficultitistobuild supportingaffordablehousingdevelopment.Citiescanpartner thistypeofaffordable withnon-profitsorsometimesmanagetheirownlandbanks. housingandthelevel Citiesmayalsodonate,sell,orleasepublicly ownedlandfor ofneedforaffordable thedevelopmentofaffordablehousingevenwithoutaformal housing,alandtrust ‘landbank’organization. couldincrease nonprofits’capacityto Landbanksarepurposedforshort-termownershipoflands. buildaffordable Landsacquiredareoftenvacant,blighted,orenvironmentally housing. contaminated.Landbanksmayalsoacquirelandswithtitle defectsorofwhichderelictstructuressit.Landsareeventually transferredtoanewownerforreuseandredevelopment. ScaleofImpact- LandTrustsAlandtrustistypicallyanonprofitorganizationthatownslandThere are 49 units within Smalltolarge. andsellsorleasesthehousingonthelandtoincome-qualifiedAshland that are operated A buyers.Becausethelandisnotincludedinthehousingpriceunder the land Trust model. landtrustwillhave fortenants/buyers,landtrustscanachievebelow-marketBeginning in 2000 the thebiggestimpacton pricing.LandtrustsaremostcommonlyusedasamethodforAshland Community Land productionoflow-and supportingaffordablehomeownershipgoals.Trust developed 18 land moderate-income trusted affordable housing affordablehousing. Landtrustsarepurposedforlong-termstewardshipoflands units, which are currently Consideringhow andbuildings.Lands/buildingsacquiredmayhaveneedfor administered byACCESS difficultitistobuild remediationorredevelopment.Lands/buildings may have also Inc. thistypeofaffordable been acquired to preserve affordability, prevent deferred housingandthelevel maintenance, or protect against foreclosureRogue Valley Community ofneedforaffordable Development Corporation Proud Ground (Portland Metro Area) was founded in 1999 and housing,alandtrust developed 31 units under the has grown into one of the largest community land trusts in the couldincrease land trust model which were country. The organization focuses on affordable nonprofits’capacityto homeownership and controls ground leases associated with ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis31 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact 270 homes in Multnomah, Washington, Clackamas, and Clark transferred to NeighborWorks buildaffordable County.Umpqua for administration.housing. NeighborWorks Umpqua was granted $50,000 in Ashland’s Affordable Housing Trust Funds in 2020 to assist in refining the legal structure of the land trust agreements for use in Ashland. ScaleofImpact– Ashland has dedicated PublicLandThepublicsectorsometimescontrolslandthathasbeen Smallto moderate. Dispositionacquiredwithresourcesthatenableittodisposeofthatlandforsurplus City property for the privateand/ornonprofitredevelopment.Landacquiredwithdevelopment of affordable Dependsonwhether fundingsourcessuchastaxincrement,EB-5,orthroughhousing or sold surplus City theCityhassurplus federalresourcessuchasCDBGorHUDSection108canbeproperty and directed the landthatwouldbe appropriateforfuture soldorleasedatbelowmarketratesforvariousprojectstohelpproceeds into the Ashland achieveredevelopmentobjectives.ThisincreasesdevelopmentHousing Trust Fund to housingdevelopment. feasibilitybyreducingdevelopmentcostsandgivesthepublicsupport affordable housing sectorleveragetoachieveitsgoalsviaadevelopmentdevelopment. agreementprocesswiththedeveloper.Fundingcancomefrom Ashland is a CDBG TaxIncrement,CDBG/HUD108,orEB-5. entitlement community and Cities across Oregon use publicly land to support affordable prioritizes the use of CDBG and market-rate of housing development. In some cases, funds to support affordable municipalities put surplus public land into land banks or land housing development and trusts.preservation. Local non-profit affordable housing providers Tri-Met is evaluating re-use of construction staging sites for including ACLT, RVCDC, future affordable housing and/or transit-orient development ACCESS Inc, Habitat for sites. Humanity and the Housing Cottage Grove is working with the school district to discuss and Authority of Jackson County plan for use of surplus school district land for future housing have utilized Ashland’s development. CDBG funds to acquire property or complete public improvements for affordable housing developments. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis32 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Ashland has not utilized the section 108 loan program to leverage up to 5 years of CDBG allocations for land acquisition for affordable housing. ScaleofImpact- Reduced/ProgramsthatreducevariousdevelopmentfeesasanAshland waives or defers all Small WaivedBuildingincentivetoinducequalifyingtypesofdevelopmentorbuildingSystem Development . Permitfee,features.ThereareanumberofavenuestoseekreducedorCharges including Parks, Planningfees,waivedfees.Forexample,stormwaterimprovementscanbeTransportation, Water, Sewer orSDCsmadethroughtheCommercialStormwaterFeeReduction.and Storm Water SDCs for Therearecommonlyusedtools,oftenimplementedinqualified affordable housing conjunctionwithdevelopmentagreementsorotherunits targeted to households developmentnegotiationprocesses.earning 80% AMI or less and meeting the rent or sale CityofPortlandoffers SDCexemptionsforaffordablehousing. requirements of the Ashland Portland’sSDCExemptionProgramexemptsdevelopersof Housing Program. qualifyingaffordablehousingprojectsfrompayingSDCslevied bytheCityofPortlandfortransportation,water,parksandAshland waives Community environmentalservices.EligiblerentalprojectsmustserveDevelopment Fees, and householdsearningatorbelow60%oftheAMIfora60-yearEngineering Services fees for period.Portland also offers SDC waivers for development of voluntarily provided ADUs.affordable housing units that remain affordable for 60 CityofMcMinnvilleoffers SDCexemptionsandreducedpermit years. feesforaffordablehousing.Buildingandplanningpermitfees forneworremodelhousingconstructionprojectsarereducedAffordable ownership units by50%foreligibleprojectsandSDCsfortransportation,that leave the program after wastewaterandparksareexemptedat100%.30 years, but less than 60 Reductions/exemptionsareproratedformixeduseormixed-years, must repay a prorated incomedevelopments.Thepropertymustbeutilizedforamount of SDCs, Community housingforlow-incomepersonsforatleast10yearsortheDevelopment Fees, and SDCsmustbepaidtothecity.Engineering Services Fees that were deferred. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis33 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact– Scaling SDCs to Cities often charge a set SDC per dwelling unit, charging the Ashland’s SDC method Small to moderate Unit Sizesame SDCs for large single-family detached units as for small charges 50% of the single-family detached units or accessory dwelling units. Some calculated per unit SDC cities have started scaling SDC based on the size of the unit in amount for units less than SF. Offering lower SDC for smaller units can encourage 500SFand 75% of the development of smaller units, such as small single-family calculated per unit SDC detached units or cottage cluster units.amount for units between 500 and 800 SF.Thus,smaller Newport Oregon scales SDCs for water, wastewater, units pay proportionately less stormwater, and transportation. The City has a base SDC rate SDCs for Transportation, (per SF) of built space. For example, a 1,000 SF unit wouldbe Parks, and Sewer andWater charged $620 for water SDC ($0.62 per SF). A 2,000 SF unit compared tofull size units would be charged $1,204 for the water SDC ($0.62 per SF for due to their potential for the first 1,700 SF and $0.50 for the additional 300 SF). smaller household sizes and commensurate impacts. Storm Water SDCs are based on lot coverageandthus, smaller units have lower Storm Water SDCs. Ashland amended the SDC ScaleofImpact– SDCFinancingMayhelptooffsetanSDCcharge,whichisaone-timefeethat Smallto moderate. Creditsisissuedwhenthereisnewdevelopmentorachangeinuse.collection of charge provisions in 2019 withinthe TheCitymay SDCfinancingenablesdeveloperstostretchtheirSDC Ashland Municipal Code considerchangesin paymentovertime,therebyreducingupfrontcosts.Alternately, (4.20.090). These SDCstoallow creditsallowdeveloperstomakenecessaryimprovementsto amendments allow SDCs to financing,buttheCity thesiteinlieuofpayingSDCs.NotethattheCitycancontrolits be paid over a 10-year period wouldwanttoensure ownSDCs,butoftensmallcitiesmanagethemonbehalfof in semi-annual installments. thattheimpactshould otherjurisdictionsincludingtheCountyandspecialdistricts. bespread-outand SDCsaregrantedwhentheprojectmakeslasting A one-year installment loan non-negativelyimpact improvements,suchasimprovingroads,reducingnumberof shall not be subject to an oneentity. trips,createorimproveparksorrecreationalcenters,andannual interest rate provided permanentlyremovingwaterservices. all charges are paid prior to the City’sissuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, time of sale, or within one ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis34 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact year of when the charge was imposed, whichever comes first. For installments that exceed one year, repayment interest on the unpaid balance at annual rate of six percent (6%) is assessed for a five- year installment loan or seven percent (7%) for a 10- year installment loan. ScaleofImpact– SoleSourceRetainsSDCspaidbydeveloperswithinalimitedgeographicAshland does not employ a Smallto moderate. SDCsareathatdirectlybenefitsfromnewdevelopment,ratherthangeographic area specific beingavailableforusecity-wide.ThisenablesSDC-eligiblededication of SDCs, rather Dependsonhowthe improvementswithintheareathatgeneratesthosefundstothey are applied to the capital toolisimplemented keepthemfortheseimprovements.Improvementswithinprojects outlined in the andwhetheritisused smallerareascanenhancethecatalyticandredevelopmentrespective masterplan withothertools,such valueofthearea.Thistoolcanalsobeblendedwithother(Water/Sewer, asLIDsorUrban resourcessuchasLIDsandUrbanRenewal(TaxIncrementTransportation, Parks). Renewal. Financing).FundingcancomefromanSDCfundorgeneral Ashland does not have an fund.Insomecases,theremaybenofinancialimpact.The Urban Renewal District for housingcancomeintheformofstudent,low-income,or Tax Increment Financing. workforcehousing. FeesorOtherDirectsuserfeesintoanenterprisefundthatprovidesAshland has an Affordable Dedicateddedicatedrevenuetofundspecificprojects.ExamplesofthoseHousing Trust Fund, and the Revenuetypesoffundscanincludeparkingrevenuefunds,City Council has dedicated stormwater/sewerfunds,streetfunds,etc.TheCitycouldalsoMarijuana Tax revenue (up to usethisprogramtoraiseprivatesectorfundsforadistrict$100,000 annually) to support parkinggaragewhereintheCitycouldfacilitateaprogramthe AHTF through the annual allowingdeveloperstopayfees-in-lieuor“parkingcredits”thatbudgeting process. developerswouldpurchasefromtheCityforaccess “entitlement”intothesharedsupply.Thesharedsupplycould meetinitialparkingneedwhenthedevelopmentcomesonline whilealsomaintainingtheflexibilitytoadjusttoparkingneed ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis35 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact overtimeaselasticityinthedemandpatternsdevelopinthe districtandinfluenceslikealternativemodesareaccountedfor. Fundingcancomefromresidents,businesses,anddevelopers. Also,thesefeesorrevenuesallowfornewrevenuestreams intotheCity. ScaleofImpact– ReimbursementAReimbursementDistrictisacostsharingmechanism, Ashland’s municipal code Smalltomoderate DistricttypicallyInitiatedbyadeveloper.Thepurposeistoprovidea. (13.30.0150) was amended in reimbursementmethodtothedeveloperofaninfrastructure 2010 to enablea developer to improvement,throughfeespaidbypropertyownersatthetime request the City establish a thepropertybenefitsfromtheimprovement.Adeveloper Reimbursement District to appliestocreateaReimbursementDistrictbydemonstrating collect public improvement benefittopropertiesbeyondtheirown.Inaddition,thesizeof costs that exceedthose theimprovementmustbemeasurablygreaterthanwould attributable to service the otherwisebeordinarilyrequiredfortheimprovement property owned by the EligibleReimbursementDistrictprojectstypicallyinclude(but applicant. arenotlimitedto)constructionorconnectionsofasewer, water,stormwaterorstreetimprovements.Applications Examplesof excess costs typicallyinclude:afeesufficienttocoverthecostof include (but are not limited administrativereview,adescriptionoftheproject,properties to):Full street improvements thatwouldbeimpacted,andadetailedmethodologyand instead of half street calculationofhowtheestimatedcostswouldbereimbursedby improvements;Off-site paymentsfrombenefittedpropertiesoveraspecified sidewalks;Connection of timeframe.AreportfromtheCityEngineerisgeneratedin street sections for continuity; reviewofthesubmittedapplication.Afterapublichearing Extension of water lines; and process,thecouncilwillapprove,rejectormodifytheproposal. Extension of sewer lines. TheapprovalofaReimbursementDistrictresultsina resolutionanddistributionofnoticeamongbenefitted propertiesbeforeconstructioncanbegin. BenefittedpropertiesmustpaytheReimbursementFeewhen theymakeaphysicalconnectiontotheimprovement(orinthe caseofasewerproject,whenthebenefittedpropertycreates animpervioussurfacethatdrainsintothepublicsewer)within theReimbursementDistrictArea.Reimbursementfeesare collectedbytheCityandaredistributedtothedeveloperforthe ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis36 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact durationoftheReimbursementDistrict,whicharetypically10- 15years. Paidbybenefittedpropertiesatthetimethepropertybenefits fromtheimprovement,typicallyatconnectiontothesewer, waterorstormdrainsystem. ScaleofImpact– LinkageFeesLinkagefeesarechargesonnewdevelopment,usuallyAshland does not assess Smalltomoderate commercialand/orindustrialdevelopmentonly,thatcanbelinkage fees on new . usedtofundaffordablehousing.Toimplementthem,acitydevelopments within the City, mustundertakeanexusstudythatidentifiesalegalconnection betweennewjobshousedinthedevelopments,thewages thosejobswillpay,andtheavailabilityofhousingaffordableto thoseemployees. Canbeusedforacquisitionandrehabilitationofexisting affordableunits. Canbeusedfornewconstruction. Tax abatement programs that decrease operational costs by decreasing property taxes ScaleofImpact– VerticalHousing The2017LegislaturepassedlegislationmovingtheOn December 15, 2020, TaxAbatement Smalltomoderate administrationofVerticalHousingProgramfromOregonAshland passed a Vertical . (LocallyEnabled HousingandCommunityServices(OHCS)tothelocalCityandHousing Tax Credit and Thedesignofthetax andManaged) CountybeginningOct6th,2017.OHCSnolongeradministersdesignated Commercially abatementprogram thisprogram.zoned properties within the willimpactwhether Transit Triangle overlay area andhowmany Thelegislationsubsidizes"mixed-use"projectstoencourage as an eligible Vertical developersusethe densedevelopmentorredevelopmentbyprovidingapartial Housing Development Zone. taxabatement,which propertytaxexemptiononincreasedpropertyvaluefor willaffectthescaleof qualifieddevelopments.Theexemptionvariesinaccordance theimpact. withthenumberofresidentialfloorsonamixed-useproject withamaximumpropertytaxexemptionof80percentover10 years.Anadditionalpropertytaxexemptiononthelandmaybe givenifsomeoralloftheresidentialhousingisforlow-income persons(80percentofareaismedianincomeorbelow). ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis37 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact– Multiple-UnitThroughthemultifamilytaxexemption,ajurisdictioncanincentAshland has not enacted a Smalltomoderate LimitedTaxdiversehousingoptionsinurbancenterslackinginhousingMulti-Unit Limited Tax . Exemptionchoicesorworkforcehousingunits.ThroughacompetitiveExemption program. Thedesignofthetax Programprocess,multi-unitprojectscanreceiveapropertytaxabatementprogram (LocallyEnabledexemptionforuptoten-yearsonstructuralimprovementstowillimpactwhether andManaged)theproperty.Thoughthestateenablestheprogram,eachCityandhowmany hasanopportunitytoshapetheprogramtoachieveitsgoalsdevelopersusethe bycontrollingthegeographyofwheretheexemptionistaxabatement,which available,applicationprocessandfees,programrequirements,willaffectthescaleof criteria(returnoninvestment,sustainability,inclusionoftheimpact. communityspace,percentageaffordableorworkforcehousing, etc.),andprogramcap.TheCitycanselectprojectsonacase- by-casebasisthroughacompetitiveprocess. ThepassingofHB2377-MultiunitRentalHousingTax Exemptionallowscitiesandcountiestocreateapropertytax exemptionfornewlyrehabilitatedornewlyconstructedmulti- unitrentalhousingwithintheirboundariesdependingonthe numberofunitsmadeavailabletolow-incomehouseholds,for upto10consecutiveyears.Thebillwascraftedtostrengthen theconnectiontoaffordabilitybyrequiringcitiesandcounties toestablishascheduleinwhichthenumberofyearsan exemptionisprovidedincreasesdirectlywiththepercentageof unitsrentedtohouseholdswithanannualincomeatorbelow 120percentofMFI,andatmonthlyratesthatareaffordableto suchhouseholds.Whilenotspecificallyreferencedinthe measure,ORS308.701defines“Multi-unitrentalhousing”as: “(a)residentialpropertyconsistingoffourormoredwelling units”and;“doesnotincludeassistedlivingfacilities.” Allnewmultifamilyunitsthatarebuiltorrenovatedthatoffer rentbelow120%ofAMIarepotentiallyeligibleforthistax exemption.InacitywithanAMIof$55,000(commonoutside ofPortland),that'srentof$1,650permonthorless.Thetax exemptionisforalltaxingdistrictswhichisadministeredbythe ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis38 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact City.Duetothis,smallerjurisdictionsmayhavemoretrouble managingthisprogram. Localtaxingjurisdictionsthatagreetoparticipate–cities,school districts,counties,etc. TheCityofEugeneoffersaten-yearMulti-UnitPropertyTax Exemption(MUPTE)forprojectsinitseasterndowntowncore. Eugene’scriteriaforgrantingMUPTEinclude:Projectmust provide5ormoreunitsofhousing(notincludingstudent housing), development mustmeetminimumdensitystandards, developmentmustcomplywithminimumgreenbuilding requirements,aportionofconstructionandothercontracting requirementsmustbethroughlocalbusiness,thedevelopment mustprovide30%oftheunitsaffordableat100%ofAMIorpay afeeof10%ofthevalueofthetaxabatementtoward supportingmoderateincomehousingdevelopment, demonstratethattheprojectwouldnotbefinanciallyfeasible withouttheexemptionbyproviding10-yearproformawithand withoutMUPTEandcomplywithothercriteria. TheCityofSalem’sMulti-UnitHousingTaxIncentiveProgram (MUHTIP)wasadoptedin2012tospurtheconstructionof “transitsupportive”10multi-unithousinginthecity’sdowntown core.Inordertoqualifyfortheexemption,projectsmust consistofatleasttwodwellingunits,belocatedinthecity’s “corearea,”andincludeatleastonepublicbenefit. ScaleofImpact– NonprofitNote: These are twoseparatetaxexemptionsavailableunderAshland has not implemented Small to moderate CorporationLowstatute(ORS307.515to307.523/ORS307.540to307.548). a low-income rental housing . IncomeHousingThey are grouped together for their similarities (but differences tax exemption for market rate Theexemption Tax Exemptionare noted).developers that provide low-reduces operating income housing.costs, meaning it is a Land and improvement tax exemption used to reduce operating tool more useful to costsforregulatedaffordablehousingaffordableat60%AMIor and property owners of City of Salem, “Multi Unit Housing Tax Incentive Program,” https://www.cityofsalem.net/Pages/multi-unit-housing-tax-incentive-program.aspx. 10 ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis39 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact Low-Incomebelow. Requires the Cityto adoptstandardsandguidelinesforTheJackson County affordable housing RentalHousingapplicationsandenforcementmechanisms.Assessor office has projects. Developers, Tax Exemptionhistorically worked with the who do not own and Thelow-incomerentalhousingprogramexemptionlasts20 City of Ashland to reduce the operate their own years.Thenonprofitcorporationlow-incomehousingprogram assessed value of ownership projects, may be less mustbeappliedforeveryyearbutcancontinueaslongasthe units within Ashland inclined to use the propertymeetsthecriteria.Rentsmustreflectthefullvalueof Affordable Housing Program, program. thepropertytaxabatementandCitycanaddadditionalcriteria. and as such they are taxed at There is norequirementthatconstructionmust becomplete their restricted resale value priortoapplication. instead of their Real Market Programs both workwellintandemwithotherincentives,such Value (RMV). aslandbanking. Affordable Multifamily rental units owned by non-profit affordable housing providers are also provided with property tax relief by the Jackson County Assessor office due to their non-profit status. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis40 Funding Sources to Support Residential Development These policies focus on ways to pay for the costs of implementing the affordable housing programs and infrastructure development. ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact TIF revenuesaregeneratedbytheincreaseintotalassessedAshland does not have an UrbanRenewal/ –Moderateto TaxIncrementvalueinanurbanrenewaldistrictfromthetimeit isfirstUrban Renewal District. Large Finance(TIF)established.Aspropertyvaluesincreaseinthedistrict,the.Urban increaseinpropertytaxespaysoffbonds.WhenthebondsareRenewalfunding paidoff,thevaluationisreturnedtothegeneralpropertytaxisaflexibletool rolls.TIFsdeferpropertytaxaccumulationbytheCityandthatallowscities Countyuntilthedistrictexpires/paysoffbonds.Overthelongtodevelop term(typically 20+years),thedistrictcouldproducesubstantial essential revenuesforcapitalprojects.Fundscanbeinvestedintheinfrastructureor formoflow-interestloansorgrantsforavarietyofcapitalprovidesfunding investments:forprogramsthat lowerthecosts Redevelopmentprojects,suchasmixed-useorinfill ofhousing housingdevelopments development Economicdevelopmentstrategies,suchascapital (suchasSDC improvementloansforsmallorstartupbusinesses reductionsorlow whichcanbelinkedtofamily-wagejobs interestloan Streetscapeimprovements,includingnewlighting, programs). trees,andsidewalks Portlandused UrbanRenewal Landassemblyforpublicor privatere-use tocatalyze Transportationenhancements,includingintersection redevelopment improvements acrosstheCity, Historicpreservationprojects includingthe PearlDistrictand Parksandopenspaces South Urban renewal is a commonly used tool to support housing Waterfront. development in cities across Oregon. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis41 ScaleofImpact ConstructionCETisataxassessedonconstructionpermitsissuedbylocalAshland does not collect a –Dependson ExciseTaxcitiesandcounties.ThetaxisassessedasapercentoftheConstruction ExciseTax for theamountof (CET)valueoftheimprovementsforwhichapermitissought,unlessaffordable housing as allowed funding theprojectisexemptedfromthetax.In2016,theOregonby SB 1533. available LegislaturepassedSenateBill1533whichpermitscitiesto. adoptaconstructionexcisetax(CET)onthevalueofnew constructionprojectstoraisefundsforaffordablehousing projects.CETsmayberesidentialonly,commercialonly,or residentialandcommercial.IftheCityweretoadoptaCET, thetaxwouldbeupto1%ofthepermitvalueonresidential constructionandanuncappedrateoncommercialand industrialconstruction.TheallowedusesforCETfundingare definedbythestatestatute.TheCitymayretain4%offundsto coveradministrativecosts.Thefundsremainingmustbe allocatedasfollows,iftheCityusesaresidentialCET: 50%mustbeusedfordeveloperincentives(e.g.fee andSDCwaivers,taxabatements) 35%maybeusedflexiblyforaffordablehousing programsdefinedbythejurisdiction. 15%flowstoOregonHousing&CommunityServices Dept. forhomeownerprograms. IftheCityimplementsaCEToncommercialorindustrialuses, 50%ofthefundsmustbeusedforalloweddeveloper incentivesandtheremaining50%areunrestricted.Therate mayexceed1%ifleviedoncommercialorindustrialuses. TheCityofPortland’sCETwentintoeffectin2016.Itleviesa 1%CETonresidential,commercial,andindustrial developmentvaluedat$100,000ormore,withallrevenues goingtowardaffordablehousing.Therevenuespayfor productionofhousingatorbelow60%AMI,developer incentivesforinclusionaryzoning,alongwithstate homeownershipprograms. CityofBendadoptedaCETof0.3%onresidential, commercial,andindustrialdevelopmentin 2006,withrevenues dedicatedtoloanstofunddevelopmentsbyprofitandnonprofit ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis42 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact affordablehousingdevelopers.Thefeehasraised$11million asof2016,allowingtheCitytolendmoneytofund615units. Thefundhasleveraged$63millioninstateandfederalfunding and$14millioninequity. TheCityofMilwaukieadoptedaCEToncommercial, residential,andindustrialdevelopmentinNovemberof2017. TheCityexempteddeed-restrictedaffordablehousing,ADUs, andimprovementslessthan$100,000frompayingtheCET. Theadoptingordinanceallocatesfundsasrequiredbystate statutes,specifyingthatflexiblefundsfromthecommercial improvementswillbeused50%towardhousingavailableto thosemakingupto120%ofMFI,and50%foreconomic developmentprogramsinareaswithsub-areaplans(suchas Downtown,Riverfront,andurbanrenewalareas). ScaleofImpact GO bonds provide capital project fundingthat is notdependentGeneral Funds in the form of GeneralFund –Moderateto andGeneralonrevenuefromtheprojecttobackthebond.the Affordable Housing Trust large Obligation(GO)fund are set aside annually to .GOBonds Citycanusegeneralfundmoniesonhandorcanissuebonds Bondssupport the development and canbeusedto backedbythefullfaithandcreditofthecitytopayfordesired preservation of affordable developessential publicimprovements.Propertytaxesareincreasedtopayback housing. infrastructureor theGObonds. providesfunding The City has not utilized or CityofPortlandpassed$258millionbondforaffordable forprogramsthat presented to the voters a housingin2016.Thegoalwas tobuildorpreserveupto1,300 lowerthecosts general obligation bond to unitsinthenext5to7years.Thecitysought opportunitiesto ofhousing support the development of acquireexistingpropertiesof20ormoreunitsorvacantland development affordable housing or thatisappropriatelyzonedfor20+housingunits and looked for (suchasSDC acquisition of property for this bothtraditionalandnontraditionaldevelopmentopportunities. reductionsorlow purpose. interestloan programs). ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis43 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact Ashland has utilized LIDs for LocalEnablesagroupofpropertyownerstosharethecostofa –Dependson Improvementprojectorinfrastructuralimprovement.specific public improvement theamountof District(LID)projects within the City. Aspecialassessmentdistrictwherepropertyownersare funding assessedafeetopayforcapitalimprovements,suchas availableand streetscapeenhancements,undergroundutilities,orshared Bonding openspace.Forresidentialproperty,theestimated capacity . assessmentcannotexceedthepre-improvementvalueofthe propertybasedonassessorrecords. Anordinancemustbepassedthroughapublichearingprocess whichmustbesupportedbyamajorityofaffectedproperty owners.Partofthisprocessincludesanestimationofthe improvementcostsandtheportionofthosecostsinwhich propertyownerswillberesponsibletopayfor.Thepublic hearingprocessallowsforLIDstobechallengedbyproperty owners. TheCitycollectsfundsandregardlessiftheactualcostis greaterthantheestimatedcost(onwhichtheassessmentwas based),theCitymaymakeadeficitassessmentforthe additionalcost,whichwouldbeproratedamongallbenefitted properties.Anotherpublichearingwouldbeheldintheevent thatanadditionalassessmentwasplacedpropertyowners (duetounderestimation). ScaleofImpact Ashland’sAffordable Housing GeneralFundAcitycanusegeneralfundortaxincrementdollarstoinvestin –Dependson GrantsorLoansspecificaffordablehousingprojects.ThesegrantsorloanscanTrust Fund is part of the theamountof serveasgapfundingtoimprovedevelopmentfeasibility.ThereGeneral Fund and is used to funding areoptionsforusinggeneralfundgrantsorloans,includingthesupport the development of available potentialforbondstogenerateupfrontrevenuethatisrepaidaffordable housing. The City . overtime.Anotheroptionusesgeneralfunddollarstohas not issued a bond to contributeto successfullyoperating programs,suchasnon-generate revenue for profitlandtrustsorgovernmentagenciesthathavetheaffordable housing. administrativecapacitytomaintaincompliancerequirements, usingintergovernmentalagreements. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis44 ActionNameDescriptionImplemented in Ashland?Scale of Impact ScaleofImpact Ashland collects Transient TransientGeneratesrevenuebyprimarilytaxingtouristsandguests –Small. LodgingTaxusingtemporarylodgingservices.TaxesfortemporarylodgingOccupancy Taxes (TOT), and The (TLT)athotels,motels,campgrounds,andothertemporarylodgings.applies them toward tourism amountof OregonhasastatewideTLTandcitiesandcountiescanalsorelated activities,economic fundingfromTLT chargealocalTLTsubjecttocertainlimitations.Thestatutesdevelopment grants, and islikelytobe specifythat70%mustbeusedfortourismpromotionorsocial service grants annually relativelysmall, tourismrelatedfacilitiesand30%isunrestrictedinuse,andin accordance to the giventhatonly therecannotbeareductionofthetotalpercentofroomtax.restricted/unrestricted use 30%ofTLT . Thestatetaxisspecifiedat1.8%;localgovernmenttaxratesparametersfundshave varyaslocalgovernmentssettheratefortheirjurisdictionbyunrestricteduse. ordinance.Citiesandcountiesmayimposetaxesontransient lodging.Alternatively,somecitieshaveanagreementforthe countytoimposethetaxandcitiesshareinapercentofthe revenue. TheCommunityDevelopmentBlockGrantsprogramisa ScaleofImpact CDBGAshland is a direct CDBG flexibleprogramthatprovidesannualgrantsonaformulabasis –Dependson entitlement community and tobothlocalgovernmentsandStates.Grantsareawardedon theamountof receives HUD allocations of a1,2,or3-yearperiod.Itisrequiredthatatleast70%ofthe funding approx.$175,000/year.The CDGBfundsareusedforactivitiesthatbenefitlow-and available 5-year Consolidated Plan for . moderate-income.Additionally,eachactivitymustaddressany use of CDBG funds prioritizes threatstohealthorwelfareinthecommunity(forwhichother capital restricted CDBG funds fundingisunavailable).Thesefundscanbeusedfor toward affordable housing acquisitionandrehabilitationofexistingaffordableunits,as and shelter and 15% of the wellasnewconstructionthatprioritizescommunity award is typically provided to developmentefforts. service providers benefiting extremely low-income individuals. ECONorthwestAshland Housing Capacity Analysis45 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 46 Appendix B: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory This appendix presents Ashland’s Buildable Lands Inventory, which was developed by City of Ashland staff. This appendix presents the sections of the report related to buildable land, excluding the demographic analysis portions of the report. The City of Ashland adopted the Buildable Lands Inventory Report in 2019. 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 1 Introduction The purpose of conducting an update of the “Buildable Lands Inventory” (BLI) is to quantify the amount vacant and partially-vacant land available within the political boundaries of the City of Ashland (City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary). In combination with a Housing Needs Analysis, and an Economic Opportunities Analysis, a BLI allows a community to determine whether or not there exists an adequate supply of buildable land to accommodate future housing and business development. The BLI is prepared in accordance with OAR 660-24-0050(1) requiring that cities maintain a buildable lands inventory within the urban growth boundary (UGB) sufficient to accommodate the residential, employment and other urban uses such as public facilities, streets, parks and open space needed for a 20-year planning period. The BLI is a effectively an analysis of development capacity. The use of the City’s geographic information systems (GIS) enables the City to evaluate development potential using 4 basic steps: 1.Identify developed property throughout the City and Urban Growth Boundary 2.Calculate development potential in terms of number of future single-family residential lots, multifamily housing units, and available commercial lands. 3.Identify development parcels that significantly underutilize their allowed (or proposed) development capacity; 4.Quantify physical constraints to development (steep slopes, floodplains, etc.) to refine estimated development capacity on a parcel by parcel basis. If it is determined that future population growth,or economic development,will require more buildable land than is available, the community’s governing bodies can make informed decisions, and implement appropriate measures to provide for the unmet housing and commercial landneeds.As a companion document to the BLI the Housing Needs Analysis (HNA)provides data necessary to determine the mix of housing types will be neededto accommodate population growth and demographic changes. The City completeda Housing Needs Analysis in 2012. In combination with this BLI, the 2012 HNA, and any future updates, will allow the City to assess whether the supply of available residential land is sufficient to accommodate each needed housing types through the 20-year planning period. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 2 Section 1: Buildable Land Inventory Land Use Classifications The BLI maintains an accounting of all lands within Ashland’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by Comprehensive Plan designation and by zoning designation within the city limits. Each City zone relates to a specific Comprehensive Plan designation as shown below. The BLI provides an assessment of buildable land for both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations. Comprehensive Plan Zoning Suburban ResidentialResidential - Suburban (R-1-3.5) Single Family ResidentialResidential - Single-family (R-1-10, R-1-7.5, R-1-5) Low Density Residential Residential Low Density (R-1-10) Residential - Woodland (WR) Residential -Rural (RR) Multi-Family Residential Residential - Low Density Multiple Family (R-2) High Density ResidentialResidential - High Density Multiple Family (R-3) CommercialCommercial (C-1) DowntownCommercial - Downtown (C-1-D) Employment Employment (E-1) Industrial Industrial (M-1) Health Care Health Care Services Zone (HC) Croman Mill Croman Mill District Zone (CM) includes various district zones (CM-NC, CM-MU, CM-OE, CM-CI, CM-OS) Normal Neighborhood Normal Neighborhood District (NN) includes various district zones (NN-1-3.5, NN-1-3.5 C, NN-1-5, NN-2) North Mountain North Mountain Neighborhood (NM) includes various Neighborhood district zones (NM-R-1-7.5, NM-R-1-5, NM-MF, NM-C, NM- Southern Oregon University Southern Oregon University (SOU) City Parks Various zones Conservation Areas Various zones The residential densities used to determine the number of dwelling units expected per acre of land for all zones and Comprehensive Plan designations is provided in Table 1. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 3 Table 1: Residential Density ZoneAssumed DensityType Suburban Residential (SR), Townhouses, R-1-3.57.2 units per acre Manufactured Home R-1-5 & R-1-5-P4.5 units per acreSingle-Family Residential (SFR) R-1-7.5 & R-1-7.5-P3.6 units per acreSingle-Family Residential (SFR) R-1-10 & R-1-10-P2.4 units per acreSingle-Family Residential (SFR) R-213.5 units per acreMulti-Family Residential (MFR) R-320 units per acreHigh Density Residential (HDR) RR-.5 & RR-.5-P1.2 units per acreRural Residential, Low-Density (LDR) HC13.5 (as R-2)Health Care WRSlope contingentWoodland Residential RR-10.6 units per acreRural Residential, Low-Density (LDR) Definitions and common terms The following definitions were used in evaluating land availability: Buildable Land Residentiallyand commerciallydesignated vacant, partially vacant, and, at the option of the local jurisdiction,redevelopableland within the urban growth boundary that is not severely constrained by natural hazards,(Statewide Planning Goal 7) or subjectto natural resource protection measures (Statewide Planning Goals 5 and 15). Publicly owned land is generally not consideredavailable for residential use. Land with slopes of 35-percent or greater and land within the 100-year flood plain wasnot considered buildable in conducting this BLI.For the purposes ofupdating the Buildable Lands Inventory,“redevelopable lands” as defined below were not included as “Buildable Land”. This is consistent with the methodology used in the 1999,2005, and 2011Buildable Lands Inventory’s methodologies for identifying properties with additional development potential.Properties considered “Redevelopable”that otherwise had further development potential,were included instead in the “Partially Vacant” categoryin order to capture that net buildable land area. Residential Density The number of units per acre (density) for residential properties with development potential was determined by referencing the base densities established in the City’s zoning ordinance. The density allowance coefficient (e.g. 13.5 dwelling unit per acre in ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 4 the R-2 zone) was initially established to include accommodations for needed public facilities land, thus a “gross buildable acres”-to-“net buildable acres” reduction, specifically to accommodate future public facilities, has been omitted. Vacant: Vacant lots were those parcels that were free of improvements (structures) and were available for future residential or commercial development. Alternative designations were assigned to those parcelsthat, although physically vacant, were not considered suitable for residential or commercial development. Vacant/Undevelopable = Unbuildable acres due to physical constraints including: 1) with slopes in excess of 35% 2) within the floodway 3) within the 100-year flood plain 4) in resource protection areas Vacant/Airport = Land reserved for Ashland Municipal Airport uses. Vacant/Open Space = land reserved as private open space Vacant/Parks = land reserved as public parks and open space Vacant/Parking = paved parking lots Partially Vacant: Partially vacant lots were determined to have buildable acreage if the lot size was equal to, or greater than, the minimum lot size requirements set for residential density \[in each zone\]. In Commercially zoned lands, those parcels with additional undeveloped land area yet containing a building on a portion of the property were likewise considered partially vacant. Collectively, these partially vacant parcels account for a considerable amount of Ashland’s future land supply. For example, a five-acre parcel occupied by only one home is considered partially vacant, however the percentage of land that is available may be 80% due to the location of the existing home. Thus, in this hypothetical example, the partially vacant property would yield four acres of net buildable land. Redevelopable: Redevelopable property is traditionally defined as property on which there are structures valued at less than30% of the combined value of the improvements and the land. For example, were a building valued at $100,000 located on a property with a land value of $300,000 this property would be mathematically defined as re- developable:$100,000/($100,000+$300,000) = 25% Within Ashland, the high land cost relative to building valuations makes the above standard calculation method a poorindicator of future supply of land for housing and commercial land needsin our community. However, in mapping all such “redevelopable” properties utilizing the Jackson County Assessors Department’s Real Market Values (RMV) for Land Value (LV) and Improvement Value (IV) the City was better able to ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 5 identify many properties that were underdeveloped and more appropriately defined as “Partially Vacant”. Land Inventory The City of Ashland contains a grand total of 4,250 acres within the City Limits. The Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) contains a total of 4,732 acres. An area of 226 acres in the southwest corner of the city is inside the city limits but outside the UGB.For this reason, the combined total area of Ashland political boundaries is 4,958 acres. When dedicated public rights-of-way 1 are removed, there remains 4,161 (84%) net acres within the City’s urban area. Public rights-of-way, parks/open space and civic uses accounted for 27.8% of the City’s total gross acreage. The remaining land is classified as Residential (60.1%), commercial (11.4%), and industrial (0.4%). Quantifying Land Availability & Methodology The primary data sources used in order to determine the amount of land available within Ashland’s UGB included: 2010Buildable Lands Inventory data and map Jackson County assessor parcel data (as of June 28, 2019) Citywide Aerial photos (taken inAprilof 2018) City of Ashland GIS database (for building footprints, slope, flood, and impervious areas) Ashland Building Permit data (April 1, 2011 –June 30, 2019) Each of these data sources were used to closely examine properties designated as available and to identify physical or other constraints to future development.Propertieswere analyzed for their available buildable land, and to ascertain whether the property was suitable for further development. BuildingPermit data, current as of June 30, 2019, was mapped to showall residential development that hadoccurred since April 1,2011, the date of the last Buildable Lands Inventory’s dataset.Mapping the City’sbuilding permit data further ensuredan accurate accounting of lands represented as “vacant” in theJackson CountyAssessor’s records, but for whichbuilding permits had alreadybeen issued.Properties that received building permits for new dwellings or commercial developments after June 30,2019, but before the publication of this inventory, are included as an appendix to this document. ‘Within the City’s Urban Area’ includes both land within the City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary combined. If 1 reference is being made to the UGB area exclusive of land within City Limits, we will refer to ‘UGB alone’. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 6 In the 2019 BLI’s GIS project, each parcel within the City and UGB has been categorized as one of the following: Developed =D Vacant = V Partially-Vacant = PV Undevelopable = UnDev In addition to the primary categories above there are several sub-types of vacant lands that were classified to indicate they are not available for future development such as Airport, Parks, Open space, parking lots, and other public or quasi-public land. In general, a vacant parcel from the 2010 BLI was classified as developed if there was an existing building, or a recent building permit issued, unless the property was large enough to be further subdivided or able to support additional dwelling units due to multi-family zoning. If a property had previously been categorized as ‘partially vacant’ in the 2011 BLI, it was evaluated to determine the number of additional dwelling units (or sub-dividable lots) that currently could be provided. Properties that have received Planning approval for development within the last 18 months, but have yet toobtain building permit approval by June 30, 2019, are counted as buildable in this BLI. However, as they are likely to develop in the near term they have been categorized as ‘Vacant-in process’ in the 2019 BLI GIS project, and are listed in Appendix B. Using the spatial analysis tools in the GIS, the area of each individual parcel that was constrained by steep slopes (over 35%), flood zones (FEMA 100yr. floodplain), and impervious surface was calculated to better assess the likely level of future development on the property. The resultant figure was called ‘Net Buildable Acres’ and informed an adjustment to the number of dwelling units (Adjusted DU) in the tables provided in this inventory that present future dwelling potential. To verify the accuracy of the draft BLI map, staff conducted site visits to numerous areas throughout the City that had experienced significant development since 2011. The ‘ground truthing’, and examination of an aerial photograph taken in April of 2018, allowed for refinement of the BLI to appropriately represent the consumption of property within the City. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 7 Buildable Land Due to the careful reassessment of each individual parcel within the Urban Growth Boundary and City Limits, and the use of improved GIS spatial analysis tools, severe constraint areas not suitable for development were more readily identified and therefore this BLI provides a more accurate assessment of developable property than did the 2011 BLI. The difference between Gross Acreage, and Net Buildable Acres in the tables below represents reductions in available land area due to severe physical constraints, developed portions of properties, and other constraints to development. In total,there are approximately 733net buildable acres of land within the UGB that are developable (across all Comprehensive Plan designations). When considering properties within the city limitsalonethere are 368net buildable acres that areclassified as developable acrossall zones. Table 2 - Total Net Buildable acreage (V&PV) City Limits BLI_STATUS# of ParcelsGross AcreageNet Buildable Acres Vacant330275.6164.4 Partially Vacant327249.1149.1 Vacant/Airport994.254.5 Vacant/UnDevelopable95237.80.00 (not buildable) Vacant /Open Space or 371570.20.00 (not buildable) Park Vacant /Parking7319.70.00 (not buildable) Table 3 - Total Net Buildable acreage (V&PV) UGB alone BLI_STATUS# of ParcelsGross AcreageNet Buildable Acres Vacant56170.6118.5 Partially Vacant112351.4230.7 Vacant/Airport121Per Airport Plan Vacant/UnDevelopable86.90.00 (not buildable) Vacant /Open Space or 28.30.00 (not buildable) Park Vacant /Parking44.50.00 (not buildable) ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 8 Table 4 - Total Net Buildable acreage (V&PV) UGB & City Limits combined BLI_STATUS# of ParcelsGross AcreageNet Buildable Acres Vacant386446.2282.9 Partially Vacant439600.5379.9 Vacant/Airport101152Per Airport Plan Vacant/UnDevelopable103244.80.00 (not buildable) Vacant /Open Space or 373568.50.00 (not buildable) Park Vacant /Parking7724.10.00 (not buildable) The following tablesshow thenumberof net-buildable acres by Comprehensive Plan Designationsfor City Limits, UGB alone, and total Ashland Urban area (UGB + City Limits), and net-buildable acres by Zoning designation for propertieswithin the City Limits. Table 5 - Total Net Buildable acreage By Comprehensive Plan (V&PV) City Limits Comprehensive Plan# of ParcelsNet Buildable Acres Commercial2312.3 Croman Mill1343.8 Downtown80.4 Employment6050.7 HC31.2 HDR5811.7 Industrial35.4 LDR5718.8 MFR11422.1 NM1316.3 SFR289119.9 SFRR32.5 SOU31.8 Suburban R10.1 Woodland96.6 Totals666368.0 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 9 Table 6 - Total Net Buildable acreage By Comprehensive Plan (V&PV) UGB alone Comprehensive Plan# of ParcelsNet Buildable Acres Airport1Per Airport Master Plan Commercial64.4 Croman Mill 917.3 Employment2841.7 Industrial39.2 MFR520.1 Normal NBHD2969.7 NM10.1 SFR3785.2 SFRR4594.1 Suburban R57.5 Totals169365.1 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 10 Table 7 - Total Net Buildable acreage by Comprehensive Plan (V&PV) UGB & City Limits combined Comprehensive Plan# of ParcelsNet Buildable AcresGross Acres Airport10Per Airport Master Plan115.2 Commercial2916.726.8 Croman Mill 2261.185.7 Downtown80.42.9 Employment8892.4141.6 HC31.21.8 HDR5811.714.7 Industrial614.616.3 LDR5718.863.5 MFR11942.264.8 Normal Neighborhood2969.787.9 NM1416.431.7 SFR326205.1322.4 SFRR4896.7154.2 SOU31.82.3 Suburban R67.58.0 Woodland96.622.3 Totals835733.11,161.9 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 11 Table 8 - Total Net Buildable acreage By City Zone (V&PV) City Limits ZONE# of ParcelsNet Buildable Acres C-1 2412.5 C-1-D 80.4 CM1243 E-1 5750.4 HC 31.2 M-1 46.3 NM1216 R-1-10 6020.0 R-1-3.5 10.1 R-1-5 8960.5 R-1-7.5 13540.2 R-2 11522.5 R-3 5811.7 RR-.5 5315.1 RR-1 32.5 SO 70.1 WR 52.0 Totals313.5 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 12 Dwelling Unit Assessment The number of potential dwelling units as shown in Table 9 indicates that an approximate total of 1,563 new dwelling units could be accommodated upon lands within the existing City Limits using current zoning and density assumptions. This accounts for a 275 dwelling unit capacity reduction from what was estimated in the 2011 BLI. The number of potential dwellingunits that can be accommodated in the entire UGB is 2,847 (see Table 10). Table 9 - Potential Dwelling Units by Zoning Designation, City Limits Calculated Dwelling Permitted DensityAdjusted Units Zone units per acreDwelling Units (Gross acres x Density) C-130 597199 C-1-D60 17248 CMMaster Plan 23783 E-115 977248 HC13.5 2416 M-1na 0 NMMaster Plan 17373 R-1-102.4 8969 R-1-3.57.2 11 R-1-54.5 390268 R-1-7.53.6 251164 R-213.5 437180 R-320 294132 RR-.51.2 5454 RR-11 33 SOMaster PlannaMaster Plan WRSlope contingentna10 Total1563 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 13 The estimated number of dwelling units assumes that upon remaining buildable lands within the City’s commercially zoned properties, with mixed-use potential2, that such commercial properties will provide only 50% of the residential units that are otherwise permitted at the base densities. This 50% reduction was done at the Calculated Dwelling Unit stage of the analysis, and then further adjusted based on site constraints and existing development to estimate the number of Adjusted Dwelling Units. Ashland has experienced a history of mixed-use development on commercial lands given the strong market for housing. However, to provide conservative estimates of future housing on commercial lands the 50% reduction from permitted densities is intended to recognize that a number of commercial developments may not elect to incorporate housing into their developments as housing is not a requirement within the zones. Efforts taken by the City to promote inclusion of mixed-use developments within commercially zoned lands along transit routes can function to accommodate more housing on such lands than is presently projected in this BLI. Table 10 - Potential Dwelling Units by Comprehensive Plan Designation UGB & City Limits combined Comprehensive PlanCalculated Dwelling Adjusted Dwelling Units Units Airport00 Commercial803245 Croman Mill237243 Downtown17248 Employment2127256 HC2416 HDR 294132 Industrial00 LDR6465 MFR874352 NM17773 Normal NBHD 607474 SFR 1308744 SFRR363145 SOU20 Suburban R5744 Woodland710 Total2847 E-1 with a residential overlay, C-1, and C-1-D 2 ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 14 Figure 1. Dwelling Unit Capacityby Comprehensive Plan Designation (number of potential units) Modification to base zoning densities, density bonuses, zoning or overlay changes, area master plans, or comprehensive plan changes intended to concentrate development within the UGB, could further extend the supply of buildable lands by effectively accommodating more dwelling units upon less land area. To more accurately project the number and type of needed housing the City’s Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) should be referenced. By carefully examining income, age demographics, household sizes, and local housing costs, the HNA helps quantify the expected proportions of rental to ownership, household sizes and needed housing types. City Property-Public Use Properties under public ownership are regarded as unlikely to be developed for additional residential uses because they are dedicated for public purposes such as public rights-of-way, parks, power substations, public works yards, or other public facilities. These city owned lands are therefore excluded from the inventory of vacant and partially vacant lands. In the event the City determined a property was not needed for public uses, the City could proceed with disposition of the property through procedures set forth in Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS 270.100-140). At such time the property was no longer restricted for public use, it would then be added to the inventory of buildable lands provided it had further development potential. Municipalities in Oregon are currently authorized to provide transitional housing on public lands in the form of campgrounds within their urban growth boundaries for persons who lack ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 15 permanent housing but for whom there is no available low-income alternative, or for persons who lack safe accommodations. House Bill 2916enacted in 2019 expands the allowance for transitional housing campgrounds with the expressed intent that such housing is temporary and may include yurts, huts, tents, and other similar structures. Such temporary housing units on public property would not be considered permanent dwellings, and as such the potential for such campgrounds does not increase dwelling unit capacity of inventoried buildable lands. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 16 Vacant Properties–In process of development Lands Categorized as“Vacant/In-process”. These properties had received Planning Action approval but had not yet received building permits at as of July1, 2019. As such these projects are expected to be developed in the near future and will further reduce available lands. Map & Tax Zone Address AcresUnitsStatus Lot Planning Approval = PA Building Permit = BP 04CB 8800 R-1-5 Mountain View / .75 12 BP issued after 7/1/2019 Laurel (12 cottages) 04BC 143 R-1-5 702 N Laurel 0.141 BP issued after 7/1/2019 10BB 600R-1-5520 Fordyce St.0.141BP issued after 7/1/2019 05AD 200 R-1-5 Otis Street5.9227 lots PA approval only –no building permits 04CA 1900R-1-5 657 Oak Street0.393 PA approval only –no building permits 23BA 319 R-1-7.52326 Blue Sky Ln 0.421 BP issued after 7/1/2019 23BA 323 R-1-7.52321 Blue Sky Ln 0.591 BP issued after 7/1/2019 09BC 7805 R-1-7.5126 Fork St. 0.311 BP issued after 7/1/2019 11C R-2380 Clay Street 3.3560 PA approval only –no building 2504/2505(HAJC) permits 10CB R-3Garfield St.2.1 70 PA approval only –no building 2100/2102permits 09SF 2000 R-31010/1014/990 0.193 BP issued after 7/1/2019 Eureka St 10DC 9201C-1 1675 Ashland St.1.0930 PA approval only –no building (Columbia Care) permits 09BA C-1 Lithia Way 0.3334 BP issued after 7/1/2019 10102/10103 (First Place -OSF) 04CD 1803E-1 121 Clear Creek0.568 BP issued after 7/1/2019 for one building; PA approval for 4 additional buildings ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 17 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory Map ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 18 Appendix C: Additional Buildable Lands and Housing Capacity Information This appendix presents additional buildable lands inventory (BLI) data and housing capacity data for lands within Ashland’s City Limits and lands outside Ashland’s City Limits but inside its Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). This appendix provides information from the Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory in Appendix B and updated information about development that was permitted between July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, which accounted for housing development that occurred after development of the 2019 BLI (as described in Chapter 2). Buildable Land and Capacity InsideCity Limits Exhibit 75 shows that Ashland’s has about 292 net buildable acres inside its city limits. Of these 292 acres, 117 (40%) are located withing the Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. Exhibit 1. Net Buildable Lands Inventory, Ashland, City Limits, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 19 Exhibit 76 presents Ashland’s capacity for dwelling units inside its city limits. It shows that Ashland has capacity for 1,465 dwelling units inside its city limits. Within Ashland’s city limits, Ashland has capacity for nearly 463 dwelling units within its Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. Exhibit 2. Housing Capacity, Ashland, City Limits, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 20 Buildable Land and Capacity OutsideCity Limits and InsideUGB Exhibit 77 shows that Ashland’s has about 350 net buildable acres outside its city limits, but inside its UGB. Exhibit 3. Net Buildable Lands Inventory, Ashland, Outside City Limits and Inside UGB, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 21 Exhibit 78 shows that Ashland has a capacity of 1,299 dwelling units outside its city limits, but inside its UGB. Exhibit 4. Housing Capacity, Ashland, Outside City Limits and Inside UGB, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 22 Appendix C: Additional Buildable Lands and Housing Capacity Information This appendix presents additional buildable lands inventory (BLI) data and housing capacity data for lands within Ashland’s City Limits and lands outside Ashland’s City Limits but inside its Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). This appendix provides information from the Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory in Appendix B and updated information about development that was permitted between July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2020, which accounted for housing development that occurred after development of the 2019 BLI (as described in Chapter 2). Buildable Land and Capacity InsideCity Limits Exhibit 75 shows that Ashland’s has about 292 net buildable acres inside its city limits. Of these 292 acres, 117 (40%) are located withing the Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. Exhibit 1. Net Buildable Lands Inventory, Ashland, City Limits, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 1 Exhibit 76 presents Ashland’s capacity for dwelling units inside its city limits. It shows that Ashland has capacity for 1,465 dwelling units inside its city limits. Within Ashland’s city limits, Ashland has capacity for nearly 463 dwelling units within its Single-Family Residential Plan Designation. Exhibit 2. Housing Capacity, Ashland, City Limits, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 2 Buildable Land and Capacity OutsideCity Limits and InsideUGB Exhibit 77 shows that Ashland’s has about 350 net buildable acres outside its city limits, but inside its UGB. Exhibit 3. Net Buildable Lands Inventory, Ashland, Outside City Limits and Inside UGB, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 3 Exhibit 78 shows that Ashland has a capacity of 1,299 dwelling units outside its city limits, but inside its UGB. Exhibit 4. Housing Capacity, Ashland, Outside City Limits and Inside UGB, 2020 Source: City of Ashland’s 2019 Buildable Lands Inventory and Building Permit Database. ECONorthwest Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis 4 Exhibit B Appendix A: Technical Reports and Supporting Documents City of Ashland, Oregon Comprehensive Plan Periodically, the City may choose to conduct studies and prepare technical reports to adopt by reference within the Comprehensive Plan to make available for review by the general public. These studies and reports shall not serve the purpose of creating new city policy, but rather the information, data and findings contained within the documents may constitute part of the basis on which new policies may be formulated or existing policy amended. In addition, adopted studies and reports provide a source of information that may be used to assist the community in the evaluation of local land use decisions. Chapter II, Introduction and Definitions The following reports are adopted by reference as a supporting document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter II, Introduction and Definitions. 1. Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) by Ordinance 3030onAugust 17, 2010 2. Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework (2015)by Ordinance3117onDecember 15, 2015. Chapter IV, Environmental Resources The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter IV, Environmental Resources. 1. City of Ashland Local Wetland Inventory and Assessment and Riparian Corridor Inventory (2005/2007) by Ordinance 2999 on December 15, 2009. Chapter VI, Housing Element The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter VI, Housing Element. 1) City of Ashland: Housing Needs Analysis (2012) by Ordinance 3085 on September 3, 2013Housing Capacity Analysis (2021) by Ordinance \[number\] on \[date\] Chapter VII, Economy The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter VII, The Economy. 1. City of Ashland: Economic Opportunities Analysis (April 2007) by Ordinance 3030 on August 17, 2010 Chapter XII, Urbanization The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter XII, Urbanization. 1. City of Ashland: Buildable Lands Inventory by Ordinance 3055onNovember 16, 2011.Updates of the Buildable Lands Inventory may be approved by Resolution of the City Council. Uif!Gvuvsf!pg!Ipvtjoh!jo!Btimboe; Wjsuvbm!Pqfo!Ipvtf Dpoufout j/Tvnnbsz!pg!sftqpotft3 Uif!Gvuvsf!pg!Ipvtjoh!jo!Btimboe;!Wjsuvbm!Pqfo!Ipvtf Uif!Djuz!pg!Btimboe!jt!xpsljoh!po!b!qspkfdu!up!voefstuboe!boe!beesftt!uif!dpnnvojuz(t!ipvtjoh!offet/!Bt!qbsu!pg uijt!qspdftt-!uif!Djuz!jt!joufsftufe!jo!ifbsjoh!gspn!Btimboe(t!sftjefout!tp!uibu!npsf!fggfdujwf!boe!xjefmz!bddfqufe tpmvujpot!dbo!cf!dsfbufe/ 2!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Tvnnbsz!Pg!Sftqpotft Bt!pg!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN-!uijt!gpsvn!ibe;Upqjd!Tubsu Buufoefft;4:5Nbsdi!2:-!3132-!22;22!BN Sftqpotft;378 Ipvst!pg!Qvcmjd!Dpnnfou;24/5 RVFTUJPO!2 Rvftujpo!2;!!Xibu!ep!zpv!wbmvf!nptu!bcpvu!mjwjoh!jo!Btimboe@ Tbgfuz!pg!ofjhicpsippet &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf2/2&4 Njops!Wbmvf4/1&9 Wbmvbcmf68/3&262 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf49/4&212 Ipvtjoh!pqujpot &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf7/2&27 Njops!Wbmvf29/7&5: Wbmvbcmf59/2&238 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf35/7&76 Dpnnvojuz!dibsbdufs 3!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf2/6&5 Njops!Wbmvf7/2&27 Wbmvbcmf61/1&243 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf51/3&217 Fbtf!pg!usbwfm!)usbotju-!dbs-!cjlf-!xbmljoh* &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf3/4&7 Njops!Wbmvf23/2&43 Wbmvbcmf58/1&235 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf47/8&:8 Fnqmpznfou!pqqpsuvojujft &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf23/:&45 Njops!Wbmvf39/9&87 Wbmvbcmf48/:&211 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf28/5&57 4!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Tipqqjoh!boe!ejojoh!pqqpsuvojujft &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf3/4&7 Njops!Wbmvf31/2&64 Wbmvbcmf67/2&259 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf31/2&64 Qbslt!boe!pvuepps!sfdsfbujpobm!bsfbt &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf2/6&5 Njops!Wbmvf4/9&21 Wbmvbcmf45/2&:1 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf71/3&26: Obuvsbm!bsfbt &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf2/6&5 Njops!Wbmvf6/4&25 Wbmvbcmf44/4&99 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf6:/2&267 5!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Tdippmt!boe!fevdbujpobm!pqqpsuvojujft &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf4/9&21 Njops!Wbmvf28/9&58 Wbmvbcmf51/3&217 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf46/7&:5 Dvmuvsbm0Bsut0Nvtjd!bdujwjujft &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf4/5&: Njops!Wbmvf:/6&36 Wbmvbcmf59/2&238 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf48/6&:: Sfmjhjpvt!ps!tqjsjuvbm!fwfout!boe!bdujwjujft &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf4:/9&216 Njops!Wbmvf47/8&:8 Wbmvbcmf27/4&54 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf5/6&23 6!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Pqqpsuvojujft!up!qbsujdjqbuf!jo!dpnnvojuz!nbuufst &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf3/4&7 Njops!Wbmvf33/4&6: Wbmvbcmf64/5&252 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf31/2&64 Bwbjmbcjmjuz!pg!nfejdbm!tfswjdft &Dpvou Op!Wbmvf1/9&3 Njops!Wbmvf27/8&55 Wbmvbcmf61/1&243 Nptu!Wbmvbcmf41/8&92 RVFTUJPO!3 Rvftujpo!3b;!!Xibu!Ipvtjoh!jttvft!bsf!zpv!nptu!dpodfsofe!xjui!jo!Btimboe@!)tfmfdu!bt!nboz!bt!zpv!mjlf* &Dpvou Dptu!pg!Ipnf!Pxofstijq!0!Cvzjoh!b!Ipnf7:/9&294 Dptu!pg!Sfou74/1&276 Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!boe!Bwbjmbcjmjuz74/5&277 Upp!Nvdi!Hspxui39/3&85 Upp!Mjuumf!Hspxui26/4&51 Rvbmjuz!pg!Bwbjmbcmf!Ipvtjoh53/1&221 Ejtdsjnjobujpo!jo!Ipvtjoh3:/5&88 Bddfttjcjmjuz!gps!uiptf!xjui!Ejtbcjmjujft31/3&64 Puifs35/1&74 7!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN RVFTUJPO!4 Rvftujpo!3c;!!Pg!uif!bcpwf!Ipvtjoh!jttvft-!xijdi!pof!bsf!zpv!nptu!dpodfsofe!xjui!jo!Btimboe@!)qjdl!pof* &Dpvou Dptu!pg!Ipnf!Pxofstijq0!Cvzjoh!b!Ipnf32/6&67 Dptu!pg!Sfou29/1&58 Ipvtjoh!Pqujpot!boe!Bwbjmbcjmjuz35/2&74 Upp!Nvdi!Hspxui25/:&4: Upp!Mjuumf!Hspxui4/9&21 Rvbmjuz!pg!Bwbjmbcmf!Ipvtjoh6/1&24 Ejtdsjnjobujpo!jo!Ipvtjoh2/6&5 Bddfttjcjmjuz!gps!uiptf!xjui!Ejtbcjmjujft3/4&7 Puifs9/9&34 RVFTUJPO!5 Rvftujpo!4;!Xibu!ipvtjoh!uzqft!ep!zpv!uijol!Btimboe!offet@ Tjohmf.Gbnjmz!Efubdife &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf35/3&74 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf48/8&:9 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf37/6&7: Upxoipnft &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf7/6&28 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf49/2&:: Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf52/3&218 8!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Dpuubhf!Ipvtjoh &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf6/5&25 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf32/:&68 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf71/9&269 Nbovgbduvsfe!Ipvtjoh &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf32/6&67 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf44/6&98 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf32/:&68 Bddfttpsz!Exfmmjoh!Vojut &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf22/6&41 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf31/5&64 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf66/5&255 Evqmfyft &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf6/9&26 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf34/6&72 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf61/9&243 9!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Usjqmfyft &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf9/2&32 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf34/2&71 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf59/2&236 Rvbeqmfyft &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf:/7&36 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf34/2&71 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf59/6&237 Nvmujgbnjmz &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf9/6&33 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf2:/3&61 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf67/6&258 Njyfe.vtf!)ipvtjoh!bcpwf!dpnnfsdjbm* &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf7/6&28 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf37/3&79 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf64/9&251 Puifs!Joopwbujwf!Ipvtjoh!Uzqft &Dpvou Xf!ibwf!upp!nvdi!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf7/6&28 Xf!ibwf!uif!sjhiu!bnpvou!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf27/6&54 Xf!offe!npsf!pg!uijt!ipvtjoh!uzqf52/6&219 :!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN RVFTUJPO!6 Jg!zpv!tvhhftufe!#Puifs!Joopwbujwf!Ipvtjoh!Uzqft#!bsf!offefe!qmfbtf!eftdsjcf!uif!uzqft!pg!ipvtjoh!zpv!bsf fowjtjpojoh/ Botxfsfe 213 Tljqqfe276 21!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN RVFTUJPO!7 Rvftujpo!5;!Xpvme!zpv!tvqqpsu!jodsfbtjoh!uif!bnpvou!pg!uif!hspvoe!gmpps!jo!dpnnfsdjbm!cvjmejoht!uibu!dpvme!cf vtfe!gps!sftjefoujbm!exfmmjoht@ &Dpvou Zft53/1&214 Zft-!jg!hspvoe!gmpps!bsfbt!vtfe!bt!sftjefoujbm!dpvme28/7&54 cf!dpowfsufe!up!dpnnfsdjbm!vtft!jo!uif!gvuvsf Op25/4&46 Nbzcf-!ju!efqfoet!po!uif!bsfb37/2&75 RVFTUJPO!8 Rvftujpo!6;!!Tipvme!uif!Djuz!bmmpx!bo!jodsfbtf!jo!cvjmejoh!ifjhiu!gps!nvmujgbnjmz!ipvtjoh@! Dvssfoumz!sftjefoujbm!cvjmejoht!dbo!cf!vq!up!3!boe!203!tupsjft!ubmm-!ps!46!gffu!jo!ifjhiu/!!Jodsfbtjoh!bmmpxbodft!up 4.tupsjft!xpvme!bmmpx!sftjefoujbm!!nvmuj.gbnjmz!cvjmejoht!up!cf!vq!up!51!gffu!jo!ifjhiu/ &Dpvou Zft-!4!tupsjft!jt!plbz45/2&96 Zft-!4!ps!npsf!tupsjft!jt!plbz29/6&57 Op35/6&72 Nbzcf-!ju!efqfoet!po!uif!bsfb33/:&68 22!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN RVFTUJPO!9 Rvftujpo!7;!Xibu!xpvme!zpv!tvqqpsu!gps!uif!gvuvsf!ejsfdujpo!pg!Btimboe(t!ipvtjoh@ &Dpvou Bjn!up!sfevdf!ipvtjoh!dptut;!Fodpvsbhf!b!xjefs72/6&263 wbsjfuz!pg!ipvtjoh!uzqft!bu!ijhifs!efotjujft!xifsf bqqspqsjbuf Tpnfuijoh!jo!cfuxffo!)cvu!hfofsbmmz!usz!up!sfevdf28/9&55 ipvtjoh!dptut* Tpnfuijoh!jo!cfuxffo!)cvu!hfofsbmmz!bddfqu!ijhifs26/1&48 ipvtjoh!dptut* Bddfqu!ijhifs!ipvtjoh!dptut;!Dpoujovf!cvjmejoh6/8&25 ipvtjoh!jo!uif!fyjtujoh-!usbejujpobm!tuzmf!)tjohmf. gbnjmz!efubdife!ipvtjoh* RVFTUJPO!: Rvftujpo!8;!!Tipvme!uif!Djuz!dpotjefs!sfevdjoh!njojnvn!qbsljoh!sfrvjsfnfout!up!qspnpuf!uif!efwfmpqnfou!pg ipvtjoh@ &Dpvou Zft42/2&89 Op36/:&76 Nbzcf-!efqfoet!po!uif!bsfb54/1&219 RVFTUJPO!21 Rvftujpo!9;!Ipx!tipvme!Btimboe!qsjpsjuj{f!jut!ipvtjoh!qpmjdjft@ Sfevdf!sjtl!pg!obuvsbm!ib{bset &Dpvou Mpxftu!Qsjpsjuz7/5&27 Nfejvn!Qsjpsjuz39/4&82 Ijhiftu!Qsjpsjuz71/7&263 23!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Fyqboe!uif!Djuz(t!Vscbo!Hspxui!Cpvoebsz!)VHC* &Dpvou Mpxftu!Qsjpsjuz57/3&227 Nfejvn!Qsjpsjuz44/2&94 Ijhiftu!Qsjpsjuz28/6&55 Nbjoubjo!dpnqbdu!efwfmpqnfou!xjui!npsf!uxp!boe!uisff!tupsz!cvjmejoht &Dpvou Mpxftu!Qsjpsjuz36/2&74 Nfejvn!Qsjpsjuz3:/:&86 Ijhiftu!Qsjpsjuz52/5&215 RVFTUJPO!22 Jt!uifsf!bozuijoh!fmtf!sfmbufe!up!ipvtjoh!jo!Btimboe!uibu!zpv!xpvme!mjlf!up!dpnnfou!po@ Botxfsfe 232 Tljqqfe257 24!}!xxx/pqfoupxoibmm/dpn0215::Dsfbufe!xjui!PqfoHpw!}!Bqsjm!27-!3132-!!9;69!BN Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 Question 5: If you suggested "Other Innovative Housing Types" are needed please describe the types of housing you are envisioning. 1Housing complexes built from used railroad containers. Housing cooperatives. 2A specified area of town needs to be dedicated to the homeless year around. It appears to me that it needs to be in the south end of town, where they have gathered over the 25 years I have lived here. Near the bus stops. Near Shop and Kart, Bi Mart , Goodwill because that is where they have typically gathered for years. There must be some vacant lot in that area that could be purchased or annexed at this time, for temporary shelters. 3We need to reduce lot sizes and increase density to allow for more housing and employment development. 4pallet shelters 5N/A 6Rent control 7More high-rise (>10 story) housing with large open areas around them (innovative for Ashland, maybe) 8More allowance of tiny homes, tiny villages, in yards, we have too many huge mansions with 1-2 people in them 9I have not been following closely enough but I like the idea of dedicated housing for homeless, eg the transition of one of the old hotel, that would be staffed with social services, maybe mental and physical health providers 10Eco friendly 11Mixed aged population within apartments 12Seniors should have options beyond nursing homes. Coops or communes or some type of situation where our elders can age with dignity, friendships, and choices they can make without oversight from a shareholder bottom line perspective. Should be inspiring and empowering housing for seniors to want to downsize. Traditional elder care makes it very difficult to want to go to next phase of living options. 13Shipping container homes. The current building codes for the county and city make it very difficult to utilize alternative and innovative housing options. 14Coop housing 15co housing - as I understand there is only one co-housing project in town. At the time the neighbors resisted it being built. which was also resited by neighbors. Prehaps the cottage project recently built would be a type of co- housing Ashland HCA_Survey 20211 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 161. Mountain Meadows is a good example. Existing near the freeway, the stories could go to three or four with creative design, there is a community garden, a walking trail, lovely ponds and a creek. What if part of it specifically provided homes for people living and working in Ashland, meeting the goal of "low-income" housing but have a greater goal of creating a safe and active community? (we have teachers that cannot find or afford a place.) 3. In Minnesota, St. Paul Mayor Melvin Carter approved tax breaks requiring property owners to keep a fifth of their units affordable. 4. Find properties to buy and convert into affordable housing, preventing developers from building expensive housing. 5. Integrate housing and provide assurances so that families will feel secure and in charge of their lives. 17Tiny house communities 18In Europe they use recycled shipping containers and build apartment buildings. These companies can quickly build housing for more people while using recycling existing resources. This would also require buildings to be taller than two story. Maybe areas on the north or south sides of town can have high rise buildings that can accommodate more housing with a smaller footprint? 19Co-housing, including caretaker community options 20Tiny house villages, with common rooms/laundry/bathing spaces & garden areas 21Housing Co-ops 22If the city wants to use tax payers money to build housing for low income families, it is important to create a safe but separate place for those families. Also, it is imperative the tenants contribute in order to feel valued. 23Single family type house that allows multiple non-related people to share common living areas; cottages with common open space and some shared facilities 24Tiny houses and shelter areas like the ones in Eugene 25Perhaps some pods or container homes for the homeless. 26not sure ... tiny homes? 27We need to house our houseless community, those displaced by fires first and foremost. We need homes built with fire proof materials and to start thinking climate crisis and how to maximize materials that are fire resistant at the very least. 28We need to reduce lot sizes and increase density to allow for more housing and employment development. 29housing co-operatives, and other ways to allow people to afford housing without a large upfront down payment Ashland HCA_Survey 20212 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 30developments with 3-D printer houses, which can be made at minimal cost and can increase accessibility to affordable housing. 31certified small green housing units with multigenerational occupants 32Parking should not drive planning. We need more units within walking distance from downtown 33Change building codes to allow Tiny Homes to be built. Ban cigarette smoking in affordable housing apt. units. 34I strongly favor an increase in the "missing middle" housing types that maintain the character of single family residential neighborhoods (ADUs, cottage housing, duplexes and triplexes) to increase the housing supply with a variety of smaller and more affordable options.. 35Housing eleigible for subsidies 36co housing. tiny home villages 37Perhaps a tiny house village where people can rent a space from the city at a subsidized cost. Have quality covenants and a requirement that residents perform landscape maintenance and general tidying up of the surrounds. Thank you for asking. 38Group ownership 39I've seen interest in establishing another co-housing community, but mostly I see lots of interest in all the types I checked above as "need more" 40Co-op or shared facilities.....for higher density and community living where families and mixed groups can enjoy more of an all age environment .community 41what about co-housing? And what about rezoning so that in-law housing (multigenerational) can be OK? I think we need to reconsider zoning restrictions! Take a fresh look at them, are they too restrictive if members of a family want to live together on a lot (if big enough); in other words multigenerational housing. And how do we limit the airbnb rentals so that housing stock does not get limited by that! We stand in serious problems if the people who help the aging population cannot live in Ashland too (teachers, police, nonprofit employees) but have to commute here, especially since Talent and Phoenix are decimated. My daughter lived in Talent, lost her job due to covid, and her home was burnt to the ground so she is living with us here in Ashland. She doesn't feel like she has recourse to any help for her (she lived in a 2 bedroom/garage/washer-dryer, 1 1/2 bath townhome as a renter for $1250/mo.) She really wants to live close by, and is trying to start an online business at age 60. 42Container homes, eco-friendly or upcycled homes Ashland HCA_Survey 20213 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 43Tree houses 44I like the idea of cottage housing, but the ones they built by Helman school were $350,000 and that is too much money. I think its important to look at tiny homes and tiny home communities as well 45Off the grid, natural (safe) materials. 46using containers for housing/I don't know other options-but probably we haven't explored all of them 47homeless housing 48Shared community spaces, artist lofts (mixed use) 49Tiny houses on wheels. Work parties to help people build their own for a reduced cost, and to code for safety. Create sense of community, reduce house-poverty & encourage young families. Allow them as ADUs also. 50Sustainable housing possibly a permaculture community. cooperative housing. 51Developments with mixed sizes and price points to encourage multigenerational community. Lifelong housing standards. 52Small mobile home, less than the 800sqft of Cottage. 53Tiny homes, apartments, condos, lofts, studio apartments 54Energy efficient Cooperative neighbor hoods 55Tiny houses, tiny houses communities 56Tiny Houses 57affordable housing. Especially in the wake of the fire! 58affordable appartments downtown to increase density and make up for all the people that leave Ashland for the winter 59Supportive housing (use of old super 8 motel & the newly proposed campground are good starts.) 60Car-free (or mostly so) development with reduced requirements commensurate with lack of accommodation of private autos 61Low income (this should be standard), other based on established "Eco-villages" around the country Ashland HCA_Survey 20214 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 62Eco - villages. Some of the "affordable" housing - like the project next to Ashland High School are so urban looking and ugly. Aesthetics need to be considered too. 63Tiny 64Progressive building materials, ie. straw bale, hemp crete. Tiny houses. Multi family units built around common spaces. 65Co-housing. Inexpensive, innovative options for the unhoused, e.g., converting Motel 8 to housing. 66Campgrounds, tiny home villages, and dorm style low income housing for low wage seasonal workers 67co-housing 68Coop housing 69Meet the needs of lower income service providers and even municipal employees who cannot afford what we now have. 70Rent controlled housing, affordable housing units, co housing 71We need more options for lower income families and individuals, however that looks. There aren't more families here because they can't afford it. Consider adding tiny houses as an approved option. 72Cottage housing CLT's that are fast forwarded, instead of seven years to reach development, developers and builders do not earn as much from CLT's, so they resist 73Small units for supplemental HUD housing 74Tiny house villages; ecovillages; cottage neighborhoods. Walkable, car/truck-free neighborhoods; old English Shakespearian villages. 75Tiny Homes and other impermanent housing. 76Tiny homes 77Eco, tiny 78Land and Tiny Homes. Rvs. Trailers. People need safe, peaceful, affordable places to live. 79Like cottage housing, but with slightly larger homes for families. 80Tiny houses 81Tiny houses and low-income housing such as apartments and mobile homes Ashland HCA_Survey 20215 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 82Tiny homes 83It would be great to have a few tiny home communities with community recreation and gardens (both food and recreation) 84"Social housing" like residence halls, re-invented. Especially to help the student population find affordable housing, but also could be a good transitional option for unhoused residents. 85Possible mixture of above options on the same property (for instance, a single home with a duplex and/or cottage and/or ADU on the same property to meet different needs and utilize available land. 86Multi units on the same plot, with a yard, but not connected. Tiny homes, low income options, and grants to help with deposits and other costs for low-income. 87Maybe something similar to https://www.squareonevillages.org/emerald 88Passive solar design, smaller footprint, energy efficient. These designs are not new but sadly not "common". Include rainwater catchment options along with solar ready, permeable surfaces instead of asphalt and concrete. 89Self-contained off grid living spaces seperate from a traditional single family house such as a yert, off-grid cabin or any other self-sustaining living space designated for overnight lodging. 90High-rises (>6 stories) 91Tiny home villages 92Tiny home villages, smart growth live-walk neighborhoods 93too many single or couples living in a single home. 94Cooperative communities sharing facilities for dining, recreation, transportation options, Also multigenerational housing 95I am mostly concerned about 'infill housing' and increased density that increases the population without enough parking available or access to sufficient roads for evacuation during fire, earthquake disasters. 96cohousing, ecovillage (zero net energy & water), tiny homes 97allow tiny homes or groups of smaller homes. Encourage ADU development 98Due to the economy, more multigenerational families are living together, but need privacy. I'm not sure where that fits in your models. Ashland HCA_Survey 20216 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 99No idea what is out there but interesting floor plans in a peaceful setting that don’t make traffic for owners or nearby neighborhoods unbearable. 2,000 to 3500 sq feet. 100Co-operatve Housing 101xxxx 102Co-housing. The above question is confusing. You include all of these types of housing "manufactured homes, cottage housing, and tiny homes" as "Single-family detached homes", but then you ask about each separately. And while we need more of all of the above, it needs to be affordable. What we don't need is more $500+ single family homes. Ashland HCA_Survey 20217 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 Final Comments: Is there anything else related to housing in Ashland that you would like to comment on? 1Surtax on property owners who do not live here, but own a house here and use it as a vacation rental for income. Tax on properties with large squarefootage. 2We’ll see when more info comes out. 3Hopefully we are living in different times at this time. But, if not, we need to plan for future needs. 4The homeless will be here forever, because we are adjacent to I-5. We need to accommodate these people at this time, but not make their lifestyle so comfortable that they don't seek other options. It is such a complicated issue that there is no easy answer. But it is extremely important that we address this issue. 5Ashland is blessed to have citizens concerned with these issues, therefore having multitudes of ideas. We all want the "character" of this town to continue. Those elected to direct our town have an obligation to call on those knowledgeable and educated residents to come forth with opinions. 6Above all. Quit hiring outside others who do NOT live here to conduct "surveys", "studies", 7"concepts", etc. I'm so tired of hearing about the cost added to our utility bills for yet another "survey", "study", "evaluation"! 8I’ve experienced high-density, multi-family and low-income housing in places I’ve lived. They are well-intentioned but end up ruining towns. Ashland is big enough don’t ruin it by continuing to build and crowd more people in. Besides, how can you continue building when we experience water shortages every year!?! 9We need rent control! 10High-rise buildings to allow compact land use and large open (park) areas around them. 2- and 3- story limits encourage sprawl and require more vehicle travel miles; build tall to allow more units in downtown or south Ashland, while allowing walking to essential and desirable services and activities. 11Life is what you make of it. Frankly, if you cannot afford Ashland, move somewhere else. 12Quality towns have a cost that must be met. 13Save the highrise apartment multiplexes for Medford. 14Those needing lower costs can live there and use our subsidised bus service to travel. Ashland HCA_Survey 20218 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 15I don't know what "reduce risk of natural hazards" in last question means- some context or explanation of what this entails would be good, I do NOT want any more expansion into hills and watershed, or subdivision of rural blocks on East side of valley this is a natural fire hazard risk increase. 16Why are we trying so hard for affordable housing? There are many reasons it’s a bad idea that I won’t get into. But it’s simple - the market is the market. And too many people are intentionally free loading to work less. People need to contribute to society fo succeed. And if they don’t, they don’t reap the benefits. I don’t know the homeless solution, but Ashland sure as hell wasn’t built to accommodate a homeless community. We need to be stricter not looser and more giving or in 20+ years Ashland will never be what it once was. The valley is extremely large, work with other towns to find an inclusive solution. 17I don't think the law of supply and demand works in a community undergoing gentrification and with older residents moving here. The City allows higher density in an attempt to reduce housing costs but very quickly those units rise in value and price and the residents are left holding the bag of more traffic and reduced parking. You can't just cram more units in and maintain the quality of life. Do not reduce parking requirements. Make all new projects conduct a traffic analysis. As we cram in more units how are we going to evacuate when the next big fire comes? 18I am concerned about housing the homeless and I’m not sure that these options are going to be low cost enough to do that. I am even more concerned about climate change. With likely increased drought, how will Ashland supply enough water for everyone? Also concerned about what happens to traffic and parking with more housing density. The city wasn’t really designed to accommodate lots of traffic. This plan for housing needs to move in concert with water availability and public transportation goals like more bike routes that feel safe for families and seniors to get to the retail areas, at least from spring through fall. I’d suggest just making sure plans are integrated and presented to the public to show how homelessness, traffic, community character, fire prevention, and water availability are considered within context of housing. Codes for all new housing should also prioritize wildfire/embers and drought tolerant landscaping, but I’m sure that they probably already do. Thank you! 19Was consideration taken into account for the fluctuating population that SOU provides? As SOU increases their enrollment, housing for their student community contributes to the lack of affordable housing for those working and living in Ashland. The lack of housing also plays a role in those SOU higher Ed grads deciding to stay and build lives in Ashland, resulting in a brain drain, lack of diversity and stunted economic growth. Ashland HCA_Survey 20219 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 20I have lived her 20 years. I have participated in two development projects - Normal and the old lumberyard property. Neither of the projects have never generated any new housing. They both have potential of substantially increasing our housing stock. I know many issues would need to be addressed but many families, people could live in work in Ashland if that land was usable. 21I have a ADU in my home which I have rented for 18 years. I think the city should make it easier for owners of single family homes to build ADUs in their homes or on their properties. As this report says more and more households are single people who only need small living spaces. 22Our area already supports too many people for the natural resources we have- namely water. The new building increases the fragility of an already taxed ecosystem. We saw what can happen on Sept 8. We also saw what happens with dense housing. Convert some already standing housing to duplexes. Otherwise I say, leave it alone. Without SOU or OSF a the drive to live here will not be so great. Focus on helping bolster those businesses 23Convert more motels into housing for the unhoused citizens and change codes so tiny houses can be built in yards, lots, and wherever there is space and get these people sheltered to reduce risk of crime and wildfires 24The city should lift the vacation rental regulations to allow owners to subsidize their income and make it easier to be a home owner. If the city continues to make it harder for people to make money on what they own already, how can they expect to help this seriously suffering community with zero job growth and businesses closing. 25Housing quality in a changing climate is also important. The City should prioritize (and in some cases require) that new housing have the smallest environmental footprint possible, including by building all-electric rather than natural gas, siting and design to maximize total solar factor resources, and reducing use of highly flammable materials. 26A direct link exists between how much it costs to live here and housing. Stop using utility's as a way to finance city look at high cost of fringe benefits employees can pay percentage of health and retirement benefits Do not fund capitol expenses we can not afford. No new pool!! No bridge over Nevada !!all of these costs add to our ability to afford housing reign in city spending so people can afford to rent or live here 27Stop allowing unlicensed air bib vrbo to operate this is happening all over city causing rents to climb. Enforce code compliance requiring owners to live in property. Require compliance by requiring licensing and paying lodging taxes. Ashland HCA_Survey 202110 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 28Housing should be required to have adequate evacuation exits. I live in a mobile home park with over 110 units (Wingspread on Clay St.) but there's only one way in and one way out. Across the street there are lots of multiple family housing units (more are being built as I write) with only one way in and one way out. They exit to the same street my mobile home park does. It seems like a dangerous situation. How can this be addressed? 29I am vehemently opposed to growth and density without infrastructure and fire evacuation opportunities including more than one way in and out, and more freeway exits. I am not unsympathetic to housing needs but I am more afraid of fire. 30The city should initiate: 1. Land bank 2. Land trust projects 3.citywide inclusionary zoning, 4.increase revenue for Housing Trust Fund by MJ tax, construction excise tax, and go to ballot for housing levy, 5. change zoning for more diverse neighborhoods, and 6. more focus on racial equity and housing discrimination. 31Why are we building more houses when we do not have sufficient water to support the homes we have? It is stupid to think that the water will come from somewhere. We should NOT build any more homes until we can guarantee sufficient water to support the community. 32Stop the road diet. It is unsafe for evacuations! 33I support increasing building height only if it doesn’t affect established home owners view. Home owners buy their houses with the understanding that it comes with a certain view. To erect a 4 story apartment complex in front of someone’s view of Grizzly Peak feels like a betrayal. Put short apartment buildings near the university and tall ones on south end of town near freeway. 34We could find spaces around the parks for housing but never to take away the parks, the heart and soul of Ashland. 35We definitely need more affordable housing in Ashland! Our workers can't even afford to live here (let alone find available apartments or housing). Many are living with others or even in their cars! 36(And many have jobs but just can't afford housing.) Because of the fire and the absence of housing for so many, we need to start working on this problem right away. 37It has become vividly clear that Ashland's priority has become to gentrify this community. It seems like it is already a done deal: a town for rich white people only. We need rent control, utility tax control because it is getting more and more bloated every year. We need to stop fixating on rich people with money to burn and support our essential workers to not have to move out of town while still serving the town with their sadly low wages. Ashland HCA_Survey 202111 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 38We hear a lot of hand-wringing about housing and homelessness, but there seems to be very little political will in this community to rethink housing. Whenever there's talk about higher density the NIMBYs come out in force. One of the great things about towns like Ashland is that they are built, at least in the older commercial areas like downtown, to be walkable and bikeable. Density is good! Given the city's alleged commitment to sustainability, reducing wildfire risks, conserving water, and combating climate change, you'd think there'd be more of an effort to build more housing at increased densities in areas close to already developed commercial zones. No one in city leadership appears to be taking the lead on this, because of course they're more interested in catering to affluent people who want to drive everywhere and find a convenient place to park. A truly community oriented approach to our housing issues would plan housing in a fashion that reduces incentives for driving, and comes in tandem with better transportation options and mixed use development. In Ashland, this will be particularly important, since this is an aging community, where many people can't (or shouldn't) drive. I hope to see some clear statements about housing plans and priorities from the city soon, but I'm not optimistic. 39Again, many houses here are second homes or vacation homes that are only occupied seasonally. These homes should be taxed at a higher rate in order to subsidize affordable housing for middle and lower income residents. If you can afford a vacation home, you can afford increased taxes. 40Affordable housing is a noble and humane goal, but it won't solve the problem of transient camping. The Greenway and the Park should never be a nightly crash-pad for the voluntary homeless. One of their campfires will someday burn a lot of Ashland. 41Although this may sound snotty, we can't all live wherever we want. If an area is out of one's price range, one looks elsewhere. Good public (and human-powered) transportation options are important for those who may want to work in an area, but can't afford to live there. 42Allowing residents to expand their living area into existing garages should be STOPPED. Street parking is becoming more and more difficult in residential areas.My short, narrow street has 6 cars parked on it, daily because they can't park in their driveways or their (non-existent) garages. 43Continue to promote and support transitional housing and social services for lowest income/ homeless threatened families. Ashland HCA_Survey 202112 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 44I lived in Ashland’s low income Senior Housing on Siskiyou Blvd, Ashley Senior Housing. My current age is 71. I was shocked to learn that residents were allowed to smoke cigarettes in their apartments and management could do nothing about it as it’s Federally Subsidized housing & the Federal Government Dept of Rural Housing has no guideline about it. Low income housing is typically built with shared air vents & ducts, I soon learned, which is different with townhomes or Condos which have shared walls but separate air ducts & vents. 45I moved out because my next door neighbor’s cigar & cigarette smoking was making me sick. Therefore, I am hesitant about any low income housing complexes with shared walls. I believe people need physical space around them & would support Tiny Home Villages where homes are set apart from each other & there are community meetings when issues arise. People have a right to clean air! I have visited Square One Village in Eugene, OR. I would suggest Ashland look into housing models such as that. 46Thank you 47I understand there is a need for more affordable housing, but we live in an area where it is not a hardship to commute from Talent or Medford into Ashland (5-20 minutes). I think you need to consider the overall cost of housing in the valley vs just Ashland. For instance, you would not expect everyone to be able to afford higher priced communities in Southern California, but there are towns nearby that are more affordable and people commute for work. Because of the cultural activities, Ashland is drawing Bay Area buyers who will continue to drive up prices. These same people would probably not be relocating to Medford. 48I'm very excited about Ashland's implementation of HB2001 and hope the city will promote and make it easier to develop additional smaller housing types (ADUs, cottages, duplexes and triplexes) in single family residential neighborhoods. City planning and permitting process needs to be less expensive, easier, and more timely. City could promote middle housing with an information pamphlet to current homeowners in single family neighborhoods. ...Separately, I also believe we need additional land permitted for manufactured home parks to help fill the void for very low income housing. 49You survey questions/answers says nothing about assisted living facilities as a type of housing (beyond a predicted need in your text) or universal design principles. 50I value mixed neighborhoods rather than developments of same size/type buildings. Given the rising construction costs, it is particularly important that our zoning and construction requirements dovetail with available housing subsidy programs because it seems unlikely contractors will choose to build less profitable affordable (without subsidies) housing. Ashland HCA_Survey 202113 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 51I am not sure what reduce natural hazards means. I am for expanding UGB if it gives us a lot of affordable homes. I am for intentionally making this a diverse income place again. I want young families, people of all races and economic background. it is why I came here 34 years ago. 52Having lived in Ashland for 50+ years, there have been so many changes with housing. The RR district was the affordable area and then proceeded to gentrification. It’s not a nice outcome from an affordability perspective but we also need to be careful to not jam affordable housing in a cheap fashion into the mix as it will adversely change the community. Let’s face it, people buy or rent in Ashland strictly on its “status” which isn’t nice but we must accept that if we were living in Los Angeles, we wouldn’t be able to buy or rent in Beverly Hills. We live where our budget allows. 53Water needs to be available before housing. SOU is sitting on hundreds of dorms and SFR. This is wasted. Also their decades of boarded homes decrease value and make development not happen. There needs to be consequences just like there is for Airbnb's replacing residence.SOU does the same. I have approx 12 homes, most sfr in my neighborhood owned by sou that are vacant. Some for over 10 years. There needs to be city ordinances against the boarded vacant homes so they get used 54I think a $1300/month goal is quite high for 'affordable rent' in this town. In community Facebook groups, many people are looking for a small cottage for around $800/month, and there don't seem to be many of those. I prioritize keeping young adults here, so I would like to see attention paid to how much millennials in Ashland are actually earning, and have their rent indexed to that amount. I don't know which type of housing provides the lowest rent, although I'd guess multi-unit. We have some weird open spaces that seem like they would be good for multi-units, such as the land next to Shop 'n' Kart behind the old hardware store, or the Ross Johnson tire store property - they're both on the bus line and near the grocery stores. And whatever happened to developing the Croman Mill property? Now there's illegal camping and tons of trash along the tracks alongside it. 55I think you have covered a lot of good forward thinking ground. 56Reduce costs for new projects. The city overhead is bloated. Reduce number of city employees. Get rid of wastewater treatment plant that is not cost effective!!! 57Desperately need more section 8 housing for disabled and elderly 58Property taxes are too high, it's part of the reason rent prices are high. I would suggest allowing property owners to build more readily on their own land. Obviously there should be restrictions around this and it's a large conversation - but I do feel that direction would help. Ashland HCA_Survey 202114 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 59I would also suggest allowing Ashland to *grow* - it's very difficult to develop in Ashland due to restrictions coming from city ordinances. If we have a larger supply of housing and the demand stays the same, prices will naturally be driven down - we cannot force the market, we have to adapt to it. 60I think when it comes to affordable housing in general, there is a need, yes - but I think this should happen naturally by allowing more development in Ashland (aka let Ashland grow). 61Early on, you mentioned cottage and tiny houses (the latter were called something like auxiliary dwelling units). Then these two options weren't mentioned. I believe that making these two housing options more available, readily increases low-cost housing, especially for individual, low- income people. 62Allow multiple tiny homes on a lot. Allow a home owner to match their square footage in tiny homes. Example, if I own a 2,000 square foot home and I have a large lot, allow 4 tiny homes that are 500 square foot. 63I am very concerned overall livability will decline with growth of 860 new dwellings -- a minimum of 2,000 more people!! And, there's a real question in my mind about water supply especially during persistent drought and fire conditions. What if the drought persists? Current residents must be protected before new development occurs. 64Please make housing affordable 65there needs to be AFFORDABLE housing in Ashland. Too many rich people ruin the diverse quality of life Ashland needs. 66Make decisions based on an ideal future. Build using recycled material (paper- or plastic-crete), set up for solar energy, collect water from roof tops and allow it to go into our own aquifer. Have many green spaces in-between developments. Set a precedent for keeping older trees and planting new ones. Set a precedent for fire safety and other possible natural disasters. Make sure there are sidewalks and bike paths. Restrict large trucks going through town to avoid weigh station. 67Thank you for asking! 68While Ashland remains a tourist destination (assuming it still is, after covid) demand will always outpace supply, so I don't think you will be able to do much about the cost of single-family housing. So, focus on the rental sector and the building of multi-family condo buildings. Increase density. 69What is MFI?-need a glossary Ashland HCA_Survey 202115 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 70A map of what is considered 'enough ' land would have been helpful Part of Ashl. 's charm is no homes on hills, not a lot of night lights It disturbs me that city allows large homes to be build-look at the monstrosity and carbon footprint of the new home next to Pioneer Hall. Builders have to get on the band wagon and think of carbon footprints as well as citizens-size of homes matter. There are not enough evacuation routes in our town.We need another access to I5 on N.Mtn Ave-for instance Look at the new homes going up near Billings Ranch and the number of cars for each home. Also you mention transportation-public transportation needs to be in the mix-in a much bigger way. The only way to reduce GHG emissions from trans is to provide public transit-and at 10:30 pm after a show. There is little ease in walking-at night the sidewalks r not safe-due to roots lifting concrete. Bike safety is lacking also. 71Housing is regional. Don't over focus on just the city limits of Ashland. Keep local county housing options in the statistical considerations. 72I think we don’t need to expand the UGB. We should focus on restoration of the natural ecosystems for our land outside the main part of the city. I also think that we should make more of the city look like downtown, with less sprawl and more of that charming close-together look that downtown has. We should build housing on top of the businesses. I don’t see a problem with building several stories. The more stories, the more housing, the better. We should have a walkable city, where one can easily walk from their home to the store and other necessary places. We should also have a better public transportation system to lessen the need for cars in the city. 73Expanding the UGB is the best way to increase the tax base. That is the essential element. 74Growing up here (in my 40s now) I’ve seen a major shift in Ashland’s vibrancy and community feel. I believe it’s directly related to housing and jobs. It used to be artists and lower income residents could live here, now it’s not possible. The innovation and creative spirit has moved on, as well as families (all those elementary schools which have closed!) Many people live in houses/apts with roommates like collage dorms. Since many already live densely in small spaces, I urge the city to look into the tiny house movement. It’s the sort of progressive movement Ashland should be embracing. A program where we can help each other out building tiny homes for our neighbors (even ones who can’t afford it) is one of the most humane, community building solutions imaginable for the times. And Ashland could be a leader. It’s the perfect opportunity. Ashland HCA_Survey 202116 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 75When thinking about expanding, we have to consider we have some of the most fertile soil in the country. The midwest has lost about a third of its fertile soil and in the decades to come we may regret developing our fertile farmlands. Instead I believe we need more compact housing instead of expanding into our forests which increase the burden on our fire department to protect or into our farmlands which develop in fertile soil. We also want a more diverse community so prioritizing multi family structures is more sustainable, more accessible for lower income families and more cost effective to build. I also believe providing housing for the homeless makes us all safer both from fire risk and preventing psychosis and severe mental health issues so I am looking forward to seeing how this is addressed. Thank you! 76Allowing people to camp throughout the community in tents is not a good alternative. If a community were to set up a campground with proper bathroom facilities to include flush toilets and showers, that might be part of the answer. Placing a porta-potty in a parking lot and erecting a sign, “camping okay” is not good enough. That is bad for our communities and doesn’t address the needs of people who need a secure place to keep their possessions and lay their heads down at night to rest. 77We should have transitional housing for the homeless in relation to our size as a city. 78We need to make more affordable housing available. I want to live in a diverse community. 79Rent control, change policy for subsidies for 2nd home and 3rd home policy, invest in land trust, land lease. 80Generally, we need more housing supply. Ashland's growth has not kept up with the region's growth, and the upward pressure on housing costs is not surprising. 81Keep the community small and desirable. I did not move here to have the city council diminish the safety and lifestyle afforded to tax paying homeowners. I would like to live large beyond my means, my sense of self discipline and responsibility prevailed until I could afford what I want. 82encourage infill through reduced fees, paperwork and land use code barriers for ARUS and duplexes. FIre safety is important but additional costs to construction should be carefully weighed. 83We need to allow increased density not only to reduce housing costs. It is also better for the natural environment - not to reduce risk of natural hazards, but for climate change and protecting open spaces. Nothing in this survey addressed reasons to increase density other than to impact housing prices... 84Get the city budget under control to help make Ashland more affordable. Please cut the fat. Ashland HCA_Survey 202117 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 85Utilities are too high. Taxes are too high. People can't afford them. 86As a homeowner who bought in 2009 and a low-income renter before then I don't know how my former self would make it in Ashland as it is today. We couldn't have afforded to buy at these prices either. It's crazy. 87Please no more awful, soulless cookie-cutter developments. They’re ruining Ashland. There are whole sections of suburb that feel completely detached from the city. Hell, you wouldn’t know they were in Ashland at all if you were looking at them without context. There’s nothing wrong with keeping Ashland small. Unlimited grow is unsustainable; it should be discouraged instead of accommodated. The city shouldn’t just end up as a glorified South Medford. 88Thank you for the good information shared in the survey. The survey questions need more explanation though in order to make well informed responses. For example: What does “reducing risk of natural hazards” entail? What is the current UGB? What are the city’s minimum parking requirements and how does this effect housing development? What are the impacts of unused ground floor commercial spaces? How would you reverse use back to commercial once occupied by residents? The cost of rent is not the only expense regarding housing. Utilities, including internet, also directly effect affordability. Adopting one of the many iterations of a “mansion tax” on very large homes would generate funds which could help to alleviate some of Ashland’s high housing/utilities costs for low earning residents. I am also curious how the high rate of 60+ residents who live on savings or have substantial financial resources but do not have “income” are reflected in the statistics and might effect how they are interpreted. We should also be asking how we can break up the monopoly effect on rental properties, most of which seem to be owned by one or two California companies, which undoubtedly is driving rental increases. What can the city do to incentivize building affordable and low income housing? How can we support initiatives where there are new units in every building project specifically designated for moderate, low and very low income households? I would love to have a conversation with someone about these topics. Thank you for your work on Ashland’s important housing issues. 89It is critical to maintain the character of existing neighborhoods near the downtown core, this is part of what makes Ashland a special place to be and visit. 90Construction in the WUI is a big concern of mine, along with others I have spoken to. After this past summer's wildfires, it is clear that we need to prioritize fire-wise building strategies (incentives for metal rooves, siding materials etc) and stop building houses in the hills. 91I support 3 story buildings outside of developed neighborhoods. Ashland HCA_Survey 202118 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 92ADUs without off street parking as well as single family home rentals to students usually mean 4+ cars per house--I am very opposed to reducing off street parking requirements!! Walking or biking on streets with parked cars is already dangerous. 93Can Ashland support the water needs for 800 more housing units? 94Did anyone look at how an additional 200+ units will affect a fire evacuation route. Will the city of Ashland be responsible for the cost of an additional hwy 5 exit/on ramp? 95I have seen decreasing K-12 enrollment as the children of baby boomers age--has Ashland considered the death rate of boomers as a source homes becoming available within the next 20 years? 96It is easy to reduce the cost burden on Ashland households. The cost of owning and operating an automobile is second, only to housing itself, as a percentage of household expenditures. In fact, transportation expenditures account for almost 20 percent of households’ budgets. Improving public transportation, citing affordable housing near streets with public transit service, and making bicycling safe and practical for everyone will significantly reduce the cost of living in Ashland. The Council needs to make it practical to live in Ashland without owning a car. 97The City has little control over the cost of housing but it can and should make the city’s transportation system more equitable by ensuring that all modes are safe and convenient; as safe and as convenient as driving an automobile. Bicycle facilities must be reconstructed in order to serve all ages and abilities and to make them safe and convenient from anywhere to everywhere in the city. Mode choice is not a choice when the choice is between a safe mode of travel (driving an automobile) and an unsafe one (riding a bicycle). 98Increasing bicycling and walking mode share by one percent reduces emissions from the transportation sector by approximately one percent. Redesigning existing bicycle facilities and constructing new separated cycle tracks along major streets in the city will boost the safety and, thereby, the use of bicycles for transportation. Further, people riding bicycles patronize local stores rather than traveling to regional centers. 99In summary, making bicycling, walking and transit viable forms of transportation will; a) reduce carbon emissions from the transportation sector, reduce the cost burden of Ashland households, improve public health, boost local discretionary purchases, improve the city’s attractiveness to visitors, and enhance residents quality of life. Ashland HCA_Survey 202119 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 100SOU is struggling with its large amount of land - decreasing student population - and crumbling buildings and financial worries. Can the city buy up some SOU land and develop there? Rather than infill so much that the Ashland becomes less amenable - more urban? I know SOU is trying to find ways to sell off properties. Education may become more remote in the future too. Please explore this idea. 101Multi Unit developments should be sure to have common spaces and green spaces. New development should be as carbon neutral as possible, we tax or permit reductions for solar/wind and water-wise landscaping and useage/appliances. Amidst development, we must maintain the amount of shade and tree coverage and overall vegetation to ensure our charm and continued quality of life. 102Young families with kids are priced out of the market. And if some do manage to afford it, the overall cost of living - taxes, fees, cost of utilities, cable & other telecom services - are all through the roof. We pay the staff too much (more than other cities of comparable size) and with too many benefits. So even tho we're taxed through the roof, our streets aren't well-paved or well- maintained. 103Preserve historic areas, while also allowing ADUs 104The federal government needs to get back in the housing business. At the very least we should be studying these issues regionally. A town of 20 thousand people can’t fund affordable housing in a way that will get much done. 105It is not helpful when the Mayor goes on the local news and says Ashland does’t have affordable rent/housing because powerful, important people are against it. 106The Almeda fire was a wake up call. I looked around afterwards and many of the newer developed housing zones have very narrow streets (an example is the dense housing between Clay St. and Tolman Creek road, but there are others. These streets are narrow, winding and would be jammed with cars trying to get out in a fire. This needs to be addressed in future development and planning for a future disaster. 107We need to find land whether already city owned or annexed for affordable housing and partner with existing or new non profits to build permanent affordable housing insuring reserves for maintenance. Look for creative options, other less expensive materials, reduce requirement for development and reduce fees 108Landlords making a killing on renting units should be taxed heavily. Tax benefits for offering units that are affordable. 109I don't have enough information to answer the last question. 110Discrimination against animals. This is truly wrong. They serve as great therapy and love for all people. Ashland HCA_Survey 202120 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 111De-incentivize on-street parking. Do not allow overnight on-street parking in residential zones; create more car/truck-free zones. De-incentivize fossil fuel burning and burning in general. More trails and natural spaces. More dog-friendly open space protected from cars. 112Work out the logistics of the normal UGB 113Please make it a permanent change to let tiny homes, yurts, and other temporary dwellings qualify as ADU's on a property. If the dwelling moves, or the property owner decides to build a real, permanent ADU, then the tiny home or yurt would no longer be allowed to stay. 114Get helpful, encouraging, honest, creative, friendly, HELPFUL City staff, fire the rest!!! Comissioners rely on staff info almost 100% to make decisions, staff can lie, be bias and flat out ruin opportunities. We tried to start a project but Derek was going to lie to the commissioner regarding code and our project so, we backed out after 2+ years and $200k in design fees and services. Derek is a liability, we could file suit if we wanted to. 115Restructure SDC fees, loosen solar setbacks between A and B standard, make a standard in the middle. Write in code to allow for more creativity of building types and ideas. There is no mention about the cost of city services which is another huge burden on anyone who lives there. Off set that cost, Ashland needs to go green and supply power at a much cheaper rate. Allow net metering in a wider area. 116I own space for 50 units but, so many builders don't want to work in this city, the staff makes it hard, the fees are unportional. I'm not interested in building anymore, my land will pass on to my kids and maybe in 2-3 decades be built on. 117Also it is not acceptable how some developers can waltz into an approval and get approved with very little information and then the average Joe has to give 10x more information. 118PS. Studios are going for $1300/mo. Clearly in order for the city of Ashland to reach its goals, the city itself has to give and change big time!!!!!! 119Also, if Ashland wants affordable housing, Ashland needs to donate land and partner with non profit builders. 120More affordable housing is needed, so that families with children can live here. Communities benefit from having a diversity of age ranges. 121Cap rent costs at existing rates. Ashland HCA_Survey 202121 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 122As much infill as possible, ADUs and split lots, no more (none) growth into fire prone areas, look at innovations like community trusts for low income housing, stop letting people build crazy giant wasteful houses, hoyses over a certain value or square footage should be 100% renewable enery homes and cars with drought-tolerant gardens. No more natural gas in new construction. 123Services for unhoused equals more unhoused. 124Please make MORE than 50% of the new housing affordable. The prices here have gone sky-high, and so many are being forced out, while rich opportunists come and gentrify. Gross. 125Please put up solar on the east side of I-5, tons of solar energy going to waste. Take it easy on the taxes, be more frugal with the city budget, lower the spending on frivolities. Develop the east side of I-5. We don't need to house every person who drives through town and falls in love with the place! If there are vacancies at SOU in student housing, open it up for rent to people in the community. Give priority of subsidized housing to people who have lived and worked in OR 5 or more years, not transients or illegal immigrants. I know they're being shipped up I-5, not our problem! Please don't let Ashland turn into Eugene or Portland. I live here because I owned property and went to SOU. Would be great to find a job after the city opens back up post-covid- hysteria! 126Multnomah Village in Portland has done a good job recently of infill with mixed-use development while retaining a lot of it's charm as a neighborhood hub. But much of the development in Portland has proved that creating more multifamily housing doesn't necessarily equal affordable housing. We do need additional housing: smaller single family lots, more townhomes or du-tri-quadplexes, mixed-use, etc. But as a desirable area with a tight housing market and not many places to commute from, I think we will continue to see rents rise as people use the Ashland housing market as an "investment" when housing is a human right. Citywide rent control to discourage real estate "investments" and protect renters and owner-occupiers who are already over-burdened by housing prices could be key to protecting a community where people can afford to live where they work. Continuing a trend of moving lower-income people and families up the valley will just result in greater inequality, segregation, and traffic as the community grows. I rent in Ashland and wish I could buy, but according to your chart I can only "afford" a 100,000 home, but I have kids and need more space than a tiny home. Even the apartments and condos I see for sale here are inching towards half a million. Can new housing supply in Ashland be reserved for renters in the Rogue Valley who would like to become owners, or for people who have been forced out of Ashland due to cost, but would rather live closer to where they work? Can new housing supply in Ashland be committed to meeting the needs of the existing community here at below-market rates, rather than attracting more out-of-state retirees? https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/06/10-ways-cities- are-tackling-the-global-affordable-housing-crisis/ Ashland HCA_Survey 202122 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 1271. Reduce the number of building and site development restrictions to allow for increased housing density on single home properties 1282. Simplify the building/property development process, and reduce the paperwork and systems fees, to make it easier to build in Ashland. Consultants should not have to be hired to navigate a system that should work for its citizens. 1293. Consider creative and site-specific solutions for property development to increase housing and affordability options, instead of applying the same rules (and more fees for variances) to all properties. Yes, there needs to be basic standards to which all properties adhere, but individual properties are not cookie-cutter lots where all rules apply equally or for good reason. 130Limit giant single family houses unless shared by more than 2 -3 people. Put a tax on homes over 2000 square feet using the money to help build real affordable housing. Exempt homes of "family" groups of more than 3 people. 131housing types is a serious equity issue, for a number of types of groups from students to immigrants to seniors on fixed income to the workforce wages our tourist and theater dependent businesses say they can afford. how do we crack the affordability nut without serious discussion of revised financing criteria and acceptance of quality that does not reflect only what the richest can afford: the modest housing produced after WWII served the population at the time and was affordable/not too fancy, but now we want to be compact, have neighborhoods people can know their neighbors, and not have to drive for basic necessities. our design stds need to allow this. how do you get around NIMBY: the basis of inequity in our country. 132Allowing multiple families to share the same house, protected by law. Many home owners won't allow this to renters at the moment which feels discriminatory especially to single parent households who need to be able to share housing in order to afford living here. Also tiny home living should be explored, as well as allowing RV living or simplifying the process of building out buildings for extra living options attached to houses. 133As a small scale landlord, I have dealt with the city on multiple occasions in the process of converting a garage to ARU. It has been an expensive and misleading process. I’ve gotten conflicting information from the city planning office versus the inspectors, which creates added, unexpected cost for the home owner. If the goal is to create more affordable rental options, the city planning office and inspectors are absolutely working against that. It has made me think twice about continuing rent my units versus sell for current market value, which would be unlikely to attract rental investors or future landlords. Ashland HCA_Survey 202123 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 134Future developments need to prioritize livability that encourages walking, biking and become less car centric. To promote equity in Ashland, landlords cannot continue to be allowed to charge such high rents. It drives up costs and contributes to an unaffordable city. Landlords currently (in general) take advantage of limited housing and this discourages people that work here to live here. Landlords also charge business too high a rent. This issue needs to be addressed at the city level or at the state or both. 135Lack of affordable housing is keeping Ashland from growing. Ashland jobs don't compensate people enough to afford housing in Ashland. People who live in Ashland and shop in Ashland work outside of Ashland. The aging population in making Ashland less attractive to families with children and families with college students. Ashland is just feeling like an old home facility. 136I see Ashland just approved building 250 units at the North end of town near Butler Hill. Does this count towards the 860 projected units needed by 2041? We need to continue to provide educational opportunities for people to get higher paying jobs. 137If the city wants more land it would be cheaper for the city to pay for improvements in the existing urban growth boundary and remove stc fees to encourage building than it would to expand the boundary . 138Question for 139I would be open to increasing the ground floor commercial space if the rental space was officially “affordable housing and would stay that way in perpetuity 140Consider how fees and taxes disproportionately effect middle class citizens who do not qualify for "help". 141Such costs are passed on by Landlords and businesses. Lower income residents may have these fees subsidized but the middle class are being priced out of housing- with rent increases bringing housing to more than 63% of fixed income. Utility fees and taxes come very, very close to doubling our bill. We are reaching a tipping point which may push Ashland to the point of having a population of independent homeowners having to support increasingly lower income residents 142The quality of rentals is abysmal. Slum lords need to be regulated and penalized 143I think that new building and growth should not be encoraged or supported. 144More consideration for multigenerational living within planned communities within Ashland. Allow for older adults requiring universal design, living next door to families who need recreation areas. Ashland HCA_Survey 202124 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 145The problem is not housing - the problem is TAXES. 146I have lived in Ashland since 1980 and have been pleased with the lack of growth during that time. We have limitations on water and also have a road infostructure that does not allow for more cars and traffic during fire, earthquake emergencies. Until we can solve those problems, we should not encourage growth that taxes our resources. Many years ago, the three new office buildings next to the post office were represented as being affordable housing on the upper level with commercial space below. Not only is the living space above not 'affordable housing', but it has caused more traffic density downtown. It also was allowed to be three stories, not reflecting the two story buildings across the street, and it also destroyed the beautiful view of Grizzly Peak from downtown. I need to see the City of A build trust with its community members over the vision of this beautiful town. If you are going to build, do so transparently and responsibly. You don't need to grow the downtown or the neighborhoods above the Boulevard. I am not a Republican; I just love my town:). 147Since nothing in this document discussed natural hazards, it's strange to bring it up here. Are you asking about the urban woodland interface? Potential for flooding. We definitely should not be building in flood zones. This also does not discuss that there is lots of land in the UGB that has not been able to annex due to city policies. This seems like a first step before expanding the UGB. I'm in favor of expanding in both ways for special projects--cottage housing, cohousing, ecovillages (net zero energy and water), tiny homes. I think that expanding for ecovillages would be a great solution. It prioritizes climate policy and living within limits. Net zero energy and water standards can be found at the Living Building Challenge. This would allow us to bring in housing without further stretching our energy and water resources. 148The proliferation of ADU's has negatively impacted the neighborhood character by causing congested parking and traffic and reduced housing attractiveness for families. 149Too much crowded building in Ashland is changing the nature of the town. 150The costs of utilities, fees and taxes are making it increasingly difficult for already "cost burdened" households to continue living in Ashland 151As the population ages we need to consider ways to make housing handicapped accessible without requiring elderly to leave their homes. Assisted living is not a good solution for most of the elderly; aging is place is better if we can provide the supports in their own home. 152Not your area but we need annual wildfire evacuation drills. If we have an Almeda fire here it is going to be br pandemonium. Ashland HCA_Survey 202125 Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis Survey Written Responses 4/16/2021 153Please don’t sell out to special needs groups and money-hungry developers. Keep Ashland small and quaint. Please don’t let it become another Medford! 154Young folks (of which I am one) are not having children in the same way of earlier generations and the concept of single family homes may not be realistic. Also, some people have huge houses with very few people living in them. There is a real problem with classism here and we need more affordable housing. I work in Ashland and only barely found a place I was able to afford. Many of my co-workers don't live in Ashland because they can't afford it. 155If we want people who work here to be able to live here, if we truly want a diverse community, if we want young people to stay here or come back when they graduate, if we want families with young children to live here, if we want divorcing couples to be able to stay in the community, if we want older people on fixed incomes to find a home here, we have to create affordable housing options that people in all these groups can truly afford. We need areas of mixed housing so we don't end up with communities that are segregated by housing type and income. We need to tax second homes that are empty much of the year. 156An increase in housing means an increase in water demands. We must enhance and enlarge our municipal water supply (Reeder Reservoir). We cannot depend on TID or TAP to supply water, especially in drought years such as this year and forecasted in the future. Reeder reservoir and the dam must be upgraded and enlarged or we will find ourselves facing a housing moratorium. With drought facing much of the Western U.S., there will be Federal funds available for such projects. Ashland HCA_Survey 202126