HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-12-22 Planning PACKET
Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak,
please fill out a Speaker Request Form and place it in the Speaker Request Box by staff. You will then be allowed to
speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public
Hearing is closed.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
December 22, 2020
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. PUBLIC FORUM
IV.DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Changes in commercial space needs
B. Code Amendment Options for State of Oregon Middle Housing (Duplex) Requirements
V. 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).
DISCUSSION ITEM
_________________________________
Changes in commercial space needs
Memo
DATE: December 22, 2020
TO: Ashland Planning Commission
FROM: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
RE: Commercial land and space needs
Summary
This is an informational item for the Planning Commission, providing a perspective by Ashland
developers Mark Knox and Laz Ayala on the changing landscape of commercial space needs and the
potential opportunity for providing additional rental housing. No action is being requested by the
Planning Commission at this time.
Background
In June 2018, the Planning Commission held their annual retreat. Among the topics for discussion was
e-commerce. Wikipedia states that e-commerce (electronic commerce) is the activity of electronically
buying or selling of products over the internet. Some forecast that online sales may approach 20% of
American retail sales by 2025. There were none in 1999. Conversation at the retreat focused on potential
impacts to City infrastructure, site planning/design and neighborhood character given an increase in the
frequency of delivery vehicles brought about by continued growth in online purchasing. Questions were
posed as to how might land use planning assist in preparing the community, and especially our
neighborhoods, for the influx of small freight traffic? Potential concerns were noted, such as the ability
of neighborhood streets to handle rises in delivery traffic and safety concerns presented by parked
vehicles and off-loading of packages. Research suggested that increased noise and the possible impacts
on air quality from idling vehicles also could be areas for future concern.
COVID-19 has accelerated an expansion of e-commerce toward new firms, customers and types of
products. It has increased customer access to a substantial variety of products from the convenience and
safety of their homes. To some degree, e-commerce has shifted from more expensive items and services
toward everyday necessities, which are relevant to a large segment of the population. Additionally,
COVID-19 has had a dramatic impact on many employers and their employees, leading to increased
numbers of employees from specific sectors of the work force working from home through employer-
sponsored teleworking agreements. This has led to discussions about whether the potential benefits from
teleworking arrangements could spill over into the post-COVID era. If so, the combination of e-
commerce and post-COVID-19 employment arrangements may suggest a need to evaluate projections in
commercial land and space needs and corresponding land use standards and requirements.
Local developers and Ashland residents Mark Knox and Laz Ayala of KDA Homes have met with the
Interim City Administrator, Adam Hanks, and the Community Development Director to describe in their
view how e-commerce and current events are influencing the demand for commercial/employment
22
Page of
space. It was suggested that they present their perspective to the Planning Commission on the issue and
how these changes might present opportunities for responding to specific land use needs.
Attachments:
Letter submitted by Mark Knox, KDA Homes Ashland Economic and Housing Sustainability
Letter submitted by Laz Ayala, KDA Homes - Ashland Economic Sustainability Assessment
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Ashland Economic Sustainability Assessment
Laz Ayala, KDA Homes, LLC
12/11/2020
Ashland Planning Commission,
For many years, our community has been experiencing a housing supply problem
involving market rate and subsidized housing, particularly 1- and 2-bedroom units
often referred to as workforce housing. Workforce housing is essential in
attracting businesses to our community as we look to diversify our local economy.
Forrest fires, Covid-19 and E-commerce have caused serious short- and long-term
damage to economy. These phenomenons are not likely to disappear and
in fact, experts warn to expect more in the years ahead. While these phenomenons
have created economic devastation and accelerated shifts in how we live, work,
shop, and play they also bring opportunities we must embrace if Ashland is to
remain the thriving community it still is today. We have two choices: embrace
these opportunities or become collateral dammage.
We have time to assess what may or may not work in future economy
and make the necessary changes to adapt to the fast-changing world we live in. If
we agree that our tourist economy is in peril, we must respond withh the changes
needed to adapt to a more diverse and sustainable economy. As earlier mentioned,
an adequate supply of workforce housing is fundamental in this effort and as such
we must explore ways, we can provide much needed workforce housing that will
not only address our housing needs, but provide revenue to fund City services such
as fire, police, water, sewer, roads, parks, schools, affordable housing and other
public funded programs.
If we agree that demand for office and retail commercial space is in decline and
recognize the need for more workforce housing, council should consider a minor
amendment to the commercial and employment zones (C-1/ E-1) allowing for
100% residential uses at ground level (with conditions for future commercial
conversion) such as in the Transit Triangle and North Mountain neighborhoods.
Except for these two neighborhoods, 100% residential is not permitted at ground
level in other commercial zone districts in Ashland. We believe Downtown should
not be part of this amendment, but rather commercial properties located within the
fringe of Downtown, such as the commercial and employment district between
A and Hersey extending west to Laurel and east to Mountain. Why 100%
residential at ground level? There is no demand for retail or office space amd
banks will not finance these projects nor will developers take a risk building
commercial space for which there is no market.
Amending the commercial code to allow for 100% residential use makes projects
like Meadowbrook Apartments along Fair Oaks Avenue within the North
Mountain Master Plan area feasible. Below is a summary of the economic benefit
to the City in terms of revenue in addition to the workforce housing opportunities
provided:
The Meadowbrook Apartments project which is currently under construction
has contributed approximately $148,575.75 in permit fees and $206,253.19
system development fees (CDCs) for a total of $358,000. Upon completion it is
estimated to provide $72,333.57 in annual tax revenue, $52,000 of which will
go directly to the City of Ashland.
It is conceivable that amending the commercial zone requirements to allow for
100% residential would generate enough interest in similar projects and it is
conceivable to see several of these projects get built every year thereby providing
revenue for the City and its agencies and much needed workforce housing to attract
investment and businesses to diversify our economy.
Sincerely,
Laz Ayala
DISCUSSION ITEM
_________________________________
Code Amendment Options for
State of Oregon Middle Housing
(Duplex) Requirements
Memo
DATE:December 22, 2020
TO:Ashland Planning Commission
FROM:Maria Harris,Planning Manager
RE:Duplex code amendment options
Summary
This is discussionitem forthe Planning Commission regarding options for drafting the required land use
code amendments for duplexes.
Background
In the 2019 legislative session, the Oregon State Legislature passed House Bill(HB)2001which
requires“medium” cities to amend codes to allow duplexes on residentially zoned lots that allow the
development of detached single-family homes.A medium city is defined as with a population between
10,000 and 25,000 and outside the Portland Metro boundary. The 2020 population estimate from
Portland State University for Ashland is 21,105.
HB 2001allowscities toregulate the siting and design of duplexes as long as the regulations do not,
individually or cumulatively, deter the development of duplexes through unreasonable cost and delay.
The administrative rules, OAR Chapter 60 Division 46 Middle Housing, implement HB 2001 and clarify
that siting and design standards that create unreasonable cost and delay include any standards applied to
duplex development that are more restrictive than those that are appliedto detached single-family
dwellings in the same zone.
More information aboutthe state law and administrative rules that apply to cities such as Ashland in
included in the October 13, 2020Planning Commission packet.
Code Amendment Options
As discussed at the Planning Commissions October 13, 2020 study session, thenewstate law and
administrative rules prescribe the approval process and siting and design standards for the duplexes.
Duplexes must be allowed as a permitted use on residentially zoned lots where single-family dwellings
are permitted.In summary, the approval process and standards used for duplexes,such as historic
district review and dimensional requirements (i.e., minimum lot size, density, height, setback and lot
coverage),must be the same asapplied to theconstruction of a single-family home.
In Ashland, single-family homes are a permitted use and in most cases simplyrequire a building permit.
The exceptions are planning approvals required for exceeding the maximum permitted house size
(MPFA) in the historic district, exceptions for the solar setback,variances to dimensional, parking and
Page 2of 3
access requirements, tree removal permits,and permits for construction in natural hazard and resource
areas such as hillside lands (25 percent slope and greater), floodplains, riparian areas and wetlands.
There are two areas where the new law provides flexibility for local jurisdictions –the definition of a
duplex and single-family housing design standards. The attached matrix identifies the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach, as well as notes on possible discussion points for the Planning
Commission.
Cities have the option of defining a duplex as two attached dwelling units on one lot,or as two units on a
lot in any configuration(i.e., attached and detached). The dimensional requirements such as lot
coverage, height and setbacks are determined by the zoning of a property, and are the same for one unit
or two units under the current code and the duplex code. As a result, whether a property owner electsto
buildasingle-family home, a single-family home and adetached second unitor two attached units, the
building or buildings can cover the same amount of the lot, have to be the same height, must meet
standard setbacks andthe solar setback,and are allowed the same volume of building. The exception
under the current codeis that the gross habitable square footage of ARUs is currently limited to 1,000
square feet in the single-family zones and 500 square feet in the multifamily zones.
The second area of flexibility is design standards. Ashland has design standards for single-family homes
in Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.2.5.090 (see below). Compliance with the standards is reviewed
at the building permit. The standards could be expanded to capture some of the basic building
placement, orientation and design standards for residential development in AMC 18.4.2.030. The
residential development design standards in AMC 18.4.2.030 are currently applied through the planning
approval process for site design review of a detached ARU or second multifamily housing unit.
However, the standards would have to be rewritten to meet the state requirement of being clear and
objective. In addition, this would expand the requirements to building permits for all single-family
homes along with any duplex applications.
18.2.5.090 Standard for Single-Family Dwellings
A.
The following standards apply to new single-family dwellings constructed in the R-1, R-1-3.5,
R-2, and R-3 zones; the standards do not apply to dwellings in the WR or RR zones.
B.
Single-family dwellings subject to this section shall utilize at least two of the following design
features to provide visual relief along the front of the residence:
1.Dormers
2.Gables
3.Recessed entries
4.Covered porch entries
5.Cupolas
6.Pillars or posts
7.Bay window (min. 12" projection)
8.Eaves (min. 6" projection)
9.Off-sets in building face or roof (min. 16")
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTTel: 541-488-5305
20 E. Main StreetFax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Page 3of 3
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends defining a duplex as two units on a lot in any configurationand keepingthe design
standard for single-family dwellings in AMC 18.2.5.090 in the current form.
The advantages of defining a duplex as two units on a lot in any configuration, attachedor detached,
include the following.
Creates equity in approval process by havingone process, timeline and permit costs that address
allpermits for two units on a lot. The inverse of requiring a planning approval for detached
second units adds time and application costs for the property owner.
Providesmore design flexibility to tailor the unit configuration to best suit an individual
property.Common design issues are tree preservation, creating or preserving yard space and
physical constraints such as steep slopes and riparian areas.
Removesreal and perceived barriers tohousing productionof rental units and therefore,
addresses adopted housing policy andhousingneedsanalysisto address low vacancy rates,
variety of housing types and housing costs.
Enhancescustomer serviceand efficiency in administration ofthe land usecode. Will require
less staff time than having to explain two different processes, timelines and related fees.
Staff believes the impact of expanding the design standards for single-family dwellings in AMC
18.2.5.090 includes more disadvantages than advantages. Since the standards will have to apply to all
single-family dwellings, an expansion of the requirements will require more resources from applicants
as well as the Community Development department. Additional staff time will be needed to explain the
requirements to building permit applicants as well as for the additional work load to perform more
involved reviewsof building permits for single-family homes. Staff believesit is likely that thegeneral
public and thedevelopment communitymay perceive additional design requirements on building
permits as creating additional barriers to all types of housing.Finally, some of the existing building
designstandardsin AMC 18.4.2.030,such as building orientation to the street,don’t apply to detached
secondunits whenthe units are located at the rear of a lot and more than 20 feet from the street.
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTTel: 541-488-5305
20 E. Main StreetFax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Duplex Amendment Options
StandardOptionsAdvantagesDisadvantagesNotes
Definition of Attached
–Define
Retainssite design review Creates inequitable processWhat is the tangible
duplex
duplex as two
for detached units (i.e., for attached duplexunitvs. difference or greater impact
attached dwelling
1122
ARU’s, second MFRa detached second unit of a detached unit that
units on a lot or
unit).(i.e., ARU or second MFR necessitates the planning
parcel. Common
unit).Requiring a planning application process and
Retainshistoric district
examples of
approval for detached units additionaltime andfees?
review for detached units.
attached duplex
adds time and additional
What is value of having of a
configurations are
application costs.
process for detachedunits
stackedover and
Impact of noticing process butnot for attached?
under, side-by-side
on predictability for
Will bedifficult to explain to
and attached by a
applicant and
customers why one
garage wall.
neighborhood.The required
configuration (detached)
public noticingprocessfor a
involves more fees, process
planningapplicationand the
takes longer (noticing
possibilityof a public
process) and limits size
hearing request by a
while another configuration
neighborwill deter some
(attached) does not.
property owners from
Impacts public perception
pursuingdetached units.
regarding reasonableness
Can also create
and fairness of the process.
neighborhood expectations
thatdon’t align with state
requirement for clear and
objectivestandards for
neededhousing.
Disparity in size allowances
may be disincentive. Size
limitation for attached
duplex units is prohibited by
state law. Existing code for
1 ARU= accessory residentialunit
2 MFR= multifamily residential
12/22/2020 PCStudy Session
Page 1
Duplex Amendment Options
StandardOptionsAdvantagesDisadvantagesNotes
ARUs includes size
limitation.
May discourage a better
design using a detached
unit if process is retained for
detached units but not for
attachedunits.
May result in unusual
attached designs to avoid
the added planning process
and additional fees.
Creates customer service
and administrative
challenges explaining
differing processes(e.g.,
staff time costs, public
perception).
Attached and
Creates equity in approval Eliminatessitedesign Will delete ARU section.
detached
–Define
process by havingone review processfor detached
duplex as two
process, timeline and permit units (i.e., ARUs and
dwelling units on a
costs that address allsecond MFR units).
lot in any
permits for twounits on a
Eliminates maximum size
configuration.In
lot. Both attached and
for detached ARUs of 1,000
addition to the
detached second units
sf in SFR 33 zones and of
attached examples
would require a building
500 sf in MFR zones.
described above,
permit.
Eliminates site design
common examples
Provides more design
review process for detached
of detached
flexibility to tailor the unit
units in the historic district
duplexes are side-
configuration to best suit an
(unless there isan issue
by-side and front
individual property(e.g.,
with the maximum permitted
and back.
tree preservation,
floor area).
3 SFR= single-family residential
12/22/2020 PCStudy Session
Page 2
Duplex Amendment Options
StandardOptionsAdvantagesDisadvantagesNotes
preservation of yard space,
physical constraints).
Removesreal and
perceived barriers to
housing productionof rental
units and therefore,
addressesadopted housing
policy and needs to address
low vacancy rates, variety of
housing typesand housing
cost.
Enhanced customer service
andefficiency in
administration of code. Will
require less staff time than
having to explain two
different processes,
timelines and related fees.
design No change to
Absence of additional May get neighborhood Additional clear and
standardsexisting SFR
standards generally viewedconcerns if duplex violates objective approval
standards
in AMC
as facilitating housing design norms, especially in standards may not mitigate
18.2.5.090
production.existing neighborhoods.or address neighborhood
expectations.
Expandexisting
Maintain basic design Will have to be applied to all
SFR standards
in
standards suchas orienting SFR building permits
AMC18.2.5.090
the building to the street.includingbuilding permits
for one SFRunit.
Creates additional
administrative needs to
review all SFR building
permits for expanded
standards (i.e.,staff time).
12/22/2020 PCStudy Session
Page 3
Duplex Amendment Options
StandardOptionsAdvantagesDisadvantagesNotes
Increases customer service
needsexplaining standards
to customers (e.g., staff
time, public perception).
May be perceived as
creating barriers to housing
production.
12/22/2020 PCStudy Session
Page 4