HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-06-14 Planning MIN
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Minutes
June 14, 2022
I.CALL TO ORDER:7:00 PM,viaZoom
Chair Haywood Norton called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m.
Commissioners Present:Staff Present:
Michael DawkinsBill Molnar, Community Development Director
Haywood NortonBrandon Goldman, Planning Manager
Doug KnauerDerek Severson, Senior Planner
Kerry KenCairnMichael Sullivan, Administrative Assistant
Lisa Verner
Lynn Thompson
Eric Herron
Absent Members:Council Liaison:
Paula Hyatt
II.ANNOUNCEMENTS
Chair Norton began by welcoming Eric Herron to the Planning Commission
Community Development Director Bill Molnarinformed the Commission thatagendaitem C, a presentation on Ashland’s
Characteristics, Demographics and Urban Form, had been removed from the agenda and would be discussed at the June 28,
2022meeting.
Mr. Molnar made the following announcements:
He confirmedthat the Commission’s annual retreat willbe held on June 16, 2022. The Commission will meet at
8:30a.m.at Moxie Café & Market before conducting site visits. The sites visited will be 329 Granite Street, the
West Village Subdivision, and Clear Creek Drive. They will then reconvene at the Community Development and
Engineering Services Building located at 51 Winburn Way.
Staffwas informed that theOregonLand Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) had affirmed the City’s decision to
approve aWireless Communication Facilityat 351 Walker Ave. The appellants had identified four assignments
of error on the part of the City whichwereultimatelydismissed by LUBA.
III.CONSENT AGENDA
Approval of Minutes
1.May 10, 2022 Regular Meeting
Commissioners Verner/Knauerm/s to approve the Consent Agenda.Commissioner Herron abstained due to the meeting
taking place before his appointment to the Commission. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 6-0.
IV.PUBLIC FORUM-None
Ashland Planning Commission
June14, 2022
Page 1of 4
V.OTHER BUSINESS
A.Housing in E1/C1 Zones
Staff Presentation
Senior Planner Brandon Goldman gave a presentation regarding an amendment regarding housing in E-1 and C-1
Zones. City Council had sent the proposed amendment back to the Commission with suggested changes.One of the
suggested changes would be to allow mixed-use commercial buildings to convertup100% rental housing on the ground
floorwith a Conditional Use Permit (CUP),andwith the condition that they would returnto commercial use at a later date
(see attachment #1).
Project Goals and Objectives
Ordinance Development Timeline
Ordinance Provisions
Ordinance Applicability
Employment Lands Need
Council Hearing -Direction
Considerations
Next Steps
Questions of Staff
Commissioner Thompson voiced approval for the City Council’s recommendations. She noted that one of the main obstacles to
approving up to 100% rental housing in mixed-use buildings was the 2007 Economic Opportunity Analysis (EOA)issue of
removing employment lands without conducting a new EOA beforehand.Commissioner Thompson asked if the City’s Chamber of
Commerce study would make a new EOA unnecessary. Mr. Goldman responded thatit may be premature to consider whether
the study conducted by the Chamber of Commerce wouldbe sufficient to eliminate the need for another EOA.Mr. Molnar stated
that staff had been in contact with the state regarding the ordinance, but it was unclear if a new EOA would be required.He noted
that the state was supportive of the proposed amendment. Mr. Molnar addedthat mixed-use property owners would still have a
great deal of flexibility in determining the percentage of employment housing on the ground floor, and that the new amendment
would only apply if they passed the 65% mark. Commissioner Thompson inquired if the City Council would be able to adopt an
ordinance if uncertainty remained around this issue. Mr. Molnar responded that the review period should provide sufficient time to
determine if a new EOA is necessary.
Commissioner Dawkins inquiredif theordinance would only apply to new buildings, or if it wouldalsoinclude existing vacant
commercial properties.Mr. Goldman responded that the ordinancewould apply to any developmentwishing to utilize this
provision, provided that the development not be more than ten acres or only one-story tall. However, an existing two-story building
on a lot that is less than ten acres could utilize the provisions in the ordinance as previously recommended by the Commission.
CommissionersDawkinsand Vernercommended the presentation as a good summary of the work done by the Commission on
this topic,andwhile also providinga good blueprint moving forward.
Mr. Molnar pointed out that 40% of the City’s Employmentand CommercialZones do not allow for residential developments, so
their uses would be unchanged. He added thatnot all developments, particularly those in commercial zones, choose to operate
as mixed-use buildings. Commissioner KenCairn expressed concern over the difficulty of mixed-use buildings transitioning back
to commercial once the time-frame had lapsed, and inquired if this ordinance would be driven by market-driven factors. Mr.
Goldman responded that it wouldgive developments far more flexibility intheir use, but that there is no guarantee that these
developments will expand their residential use as a result of the ordinance. Mr. Molnar added that staff is considering some
flexibilityin the ordinance,particularly bynot imposing a term of affordability, and that the target is instead based on household
income. This is due to some developers raising concerns over the financial feasibility ofdevelopments under deedrestrictionsthat
requirespecific terms.
Ashland Planning Commission
June14, 2022
Page 2of 4
Chair Norton commented that a CUP will be much easier to implement, which could appeal to potential developers.He added that
a CUP could influence how futurecommercialbuildings are developed in order to accommodate residential use. Chair Norton
stressed the important of affordable housing in a community, and was encouraged by the City Council’s approach to creatingthe
necessaryhousing.
B. Middle Housing Lot Division & Expedited Land Division Code Changes
Staff Presentation
Senior Planner Derek Severson provideda presentationregarding Senate Bill 458,which includechanges toMiddle Housing Lot
Divisions (MHLD) and Expedited Land Division codes. He gave a brief background on House Bill 2001 and Senate Bill 458 on
MHLDsand their implementation.Under SB 458Expedited LandDivisions wouldnotbeconsidered land use actions,and as
such could not be appealed to the PlanningCommission. Instead, an initial administrative decision could be appealed to a
referee/hearings officer,and would not be subject to appeal to LUBA.The noticing area for Expedited Land Divisions will be
reduced to 100ft, with a final decision needing to be made by the City within 63 days, unless extended by the City Council. This is
in contrast to the current 120 day decision period for land use actions(see attachment #2).
Questions of Staff
Commissioner KenCairn inquired ifstaff’sdecision to not include existing Accessory Residential Units (ARUs) and duplexes in the
codechange was a strategy to keepthem as rentals.Mr. Seversonresponded that it shouldbe considered, and that parking
should also be taken into account in those discussions. Commissioner KenCairn voiced support for retaining their rental status,
but commented that whether an ARU or duplex can be rented or sold should not be based on when it was developed. Mr. Molnar
stated that this discussion has been ongoing since the City adopted its first Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) ordinance,and that
the state seems to be offering flexibility in how to adopt the new code changes.
Commissioner Knauer asked how much of the City’s housing stock would be affected by the code changesand if staff has a
targeted numberof rental units in the Citythatthey areattempting to reach. Mr. Goldman responded thatthe City contains 47%
rental and 53% ownership units, but that many rentals are detached single-family dwellingsthat could be converted into
ownershipunits.He commentedthat some of those rental units would not be able to be converted and sold because they would
not be able to separateitsutilities from the main dwelling, or because they would not comply with fire safety requirements.
Commissioner Thompson noted that, when the duplex ordinance was first considered,it was decided thatdetached and attached
structures could be defined as duplexes.She asked what would be required for an ARU to be converted into a duplex in order to
be sold, and also what thenewcode said about vertical duplexes.Mr. Severson stated that they will likely see applications to
convert an ARU into a duplex as long as the building meets the requisite criteria. He statedthat cities would not be required to
allow vertical duplexes, but that they could be discussedby the Commission.Mr. Molnar added that vertical duplexes would likely
not be permitted because they would share the same lot space.
Chair Norton inquired if staff had received any applications for dwellings to be converted into a duplex since the provision for
duplexes had been passed. Mr. Severson stated that he was not aware of any. Chair Norton speculated on the number of buyers
who would purchase a Single Family Residence (SFR)with the purpose of selling part of it as a duplex, and asked staff what the
parking requirements would be for an SFR.Mr. Severson responded that parking could take upno more thana25ft widepaved
area,or 25% of the front yard,whichever is greater. He addedthat no cover for parking would berequired.
D. Election of Officers
Chair Norton stated that both offices of the Commission, Chair and Vice-Chair, are up for election. He added that he hadbeen
Chair for the past two years, and that no member can be Chair for more than three. Chair Norton also informed the Commission
that a significant amount of support and insight from staff would be imparted to whomever isChair of the Commission.
Ashland Planning Commission
June14, 2022
Page 3of 4
Commissioner Thompson/Dawkins m/s to elect Commissioner Norton as Chair. Voice Vote: ALL AYES. Motion passed.
7-0.
Commissioner Thompson/Dawkinsm/s to nominate Commissioner Verner as Vice-Chair. Voice Vote: ALL AYES.
Motion passed.7-0.
V.ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:25p.m.
Submitted by,
Michael Sullivan, Administrative Assistant
Ashland Planning Commission
June14, 2022
Page 4of 4
Housing in
employment lands
code update
Review of code amendments
targeted at increasing housing
on City zoned employment
lands.
Planning Commission Update 6/14/2022
Project Goal and Objectives
Project Goal:
Provide more flexibility in the employment zones to respond to
fluctuations and changes in the economy and demand for housing.
Project Objectives
Maintain an inventory of employment parcels in a variety of sizes
and locations to encourage new business development.
Increase the supply of moderately-priced rental and for-purchase
housing.
Jumpstart redevelopment in areas that have trouble attracting
projects and/or are in proximity to public transit and walking
distance to daily service needs, such as groceries, shops, parks,
etc.)
Ordinance
March 16, 2021
December 2020
Development
Timeline
Planning
Council Directs Staff to
Commission
2021
2020
Develop ordinance with
Informational
Planning Commission
Item
November 23,
August
June 22,
October 26,
2021
24, 2021
2021
2021
PC Study
PC Study PC Study
PC Study
Session
SessionSession
Session
Research and Development
June 14,
February 1,
January 4,
December
2022
20222022
14, 2021
CouncilCouncil
1
st
Council
PC
PC
PC
Reading
2022
Study 1st 2
nd
Public
Review
Update
Requested
ReadingReading
Session
Hearing
changes
Ordinance Review
Future Public Hearings
Ordinance Provisions
Nearly doubles the allowance for ground floor residential
•
currently 35% ground floor residential allowed in mixed use buildings
•
proposed 65% allowance for ground floor residential.
•
currently all stories above the ground floor can be residential
•
Residential density caps in C-1, C-1-D, and E-1 removed
•
Encourages a variety of housing types
•
No change in the maximum size of buildings.
•
Ordinance Applicability
Amendments apply in
•
C-1 zones (outside of
downtown) and E-1
zones with residential
overlay.
buildings that are 2 or
•
more stories
lots that are less than
•
10 acres in size
Ordinance Applicability
E-1 zone: 272.6 total acres
114.3 acres with Residential overlay
o
158.3 acres without Residential
o
overlay
C-1 zone: 175.3 acres total acres
95.5 acres within the Transit Triangle
o
79.7 acres outside of the Transit
o
Triangle
6.1 acres of this amount are
within the downtown overlay
C-1-D zone: 34.13 acres
Proposed Amendments do not apply
o
Employment Lands Need
The 2007 EOA forecasted more employment growth than has
•
occurred over the last 15 years.
The 2007 EOA projected Ashland would have 15,220 jobs by 2027.
•
Recent employment data shows there are 10,237 jobs in the
Ashland UGB (2019).
The 2007 EOA stated that about 30% of employment growth will
•
not require consumption of vacant land.
Employment growth in residential areas continues to increase as
•
more people work from home.
The Fregonese analysis concluded that in consideration of the
•
proposed ordinance the supply of employment lands would likely
remain sufficient to accommodate employment growth.
Council Hearing -Direction
Council held First Reading of the draft ordinance on February 1, 2022and postponed
the item recommending the following:
Postpone the item until the end of May 2022 to give staff time to analyze the
economic information that comes forward from the Chamber Study
Revert this item back to the Planning Commission to specifically have a conditional
use permit on the 35% that would be commercial to be used as residential rental only
between 80-100% AMI revertible upon expiration of lease between 5–10-year period.
Considerations
Council Recommendation Alternative Code Provisions for discussion:
issues to Consideration:
The 35% of the groundfloorarea, requiredtobe
•
Approval Process?commercial, could allow affordable rentalhousing as a
•
Special Permitted Use
Conditional Use
•
Special Permitted UseAffordable to renters earning 80%the Area Median
••
Income or less.
Rental Affordability Targets?
•
The 35%groundfloorareashall be constructed to be
•
80-100% AMI
•
commercial ready, allowing conversion to commercial
Term ofaffordability?
•
use upon termination of use as affordable rental housing.
5-10 years
•
No minimum or maximum term of affordability.
•
Require affordable rental occupants be income qualified
•
by the City at any change in tenancy.
Require a deed restrictionclarifying the35% ground floor
•
area cannot be used as market rate housing.
Next Steps
1.Receipt and review of the
Economic Diversification study
from the Ashland Chamber of
Commerce.
2.Planning Commissionreview of
potential code options, including
an opportunity for public
comment.
3.Forward recommendations to the
City Council for consideration at
the continuation of First Reading.
Middle Housing Land Divisions
Background
•
First Draft of Middle Housing Land Divisions &
•
Expedited Land Divisions Code Amendments
Next Step: Initiate a legislative amendment
•
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
Legislative Timeline
House Bill 2001 Middle Housing
•
effective August 8, 2019
•
Senate Bill 458 Middle Housing Land Divisions
•
effective January 1, 2022
•
Cities required to amend local code
•
by June 30, 2022 or implement directly from Senate Bill
•
458
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
HB 2001 Requirements
1.Have to allow duplexes on residentially-zoned lots that
allow development of detached single-family dwellings
2.Approval process and standards used for duplexes must
not be more restrictive than those applied to detached
single-family dwellings
3.Jurisdictions cannot require off-street parking or owner-
occupancy requirements for accessory residential units
(ARUs)
6/14/2022 PC Study Session
With HB2001 Code Changes…
Duplex
2 units on 1 lot, in attached detached structures
•
2 on-site parking spaces required
•
On-street parking credits not permitted
•
Permitted with approval of building permit
•
Accessory Residential Unit (ARU)
Must meet size limits (50% of GHFA & <500 s.f. for MFR, <1,000 s.f. for SFR)
•
No on-site parking spaces required
•
Permitted with approval of building permit
•
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
Middle Housing Land Divisions
AppliestoanylotthatallowsMiddleHousingunderORS197.758(i.e.HB2001).Draftiswrittentofocusonduplexes.
MHLDmustresultinexactlyonedwellingperlot,exceptthatcommonareasmaybelocatedonaseparatelotorashared
tract.
Separateutilitiesarerequiredforeachdwellingunit.
Easementsarerequiredtobeprovidedfor:
Pedestrianaccess
Commonareas
Drivewaysandparkingareas,ifshared
Utilities
AnMHLDproposalmustmeettherequirementsoftheOregonResidentialSpecialtyCode.Forexample,ifanattached
duplexisbeingdivided,theremustbefirewallconstructionbetweenthetwounits.
Inatypicallanddivision,thelanddivisionisapproved,infrastructureinstalledandplatsignedpriortobuildingpermits
beingreviewedandissuedforconstruction.MHLDscouldoccurpriortosubmissionofanapplicationforbuildingpermits,
afteramiddlehousingdevelopmentisapprovedfordevelopment,orafteritisconstructed.SB458givescitiestheoption
ofallowingconcurrentreviewofbuildingpermitsandthelanddivision,butinanycase,MHLDapplicationsmustincludea
middlehousingdevelopment(eitherproposedorbuilt)thatcomplieswiththebuildingcodeandtheCity’smiddlehousing
developmentcode.
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
SB 458 Limitations
Citiesmayrequire…
SubmittalofTentative&FinalPlatsforApproval
ReviewforOregonResidentialSpecialtyCodeCompliance
Right-of-WayDedication&City-StandardStreetFrontageImprovements
Citiesmaynot…
Apply any approvalcriteriaotherthantheapprovalcriteriaspecifiedinSB458to
applicationsforanMHLD—i.e.theallowablecriteriaincludetheCity’sstandardsfor
middlehousingdevelopment,separateutilities,easements,onedwellingoneachlot,
andbuildingcodecompliance.
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
Expedited Land Divisions Procedure
Cities are required to apply the Expedited Land Division (ELD) process from ORS 197.360 to 197.380 to
•
Middle Housing Land Divisions (MHLDs) to streamline review. The ELD process is outlined below:
Submittal requirements are consistent with typical land divisions.
•
Completeness review must occur by the City within 21 days of application submittal.
•
Notice is given to properties within 100 feet of the site, to utility providers and to applicable neighborhood
•
association(s).
There is a 14-day comment period.
•
A decision must be made by the city within 63 days after a complete application is submitted, unless extended by
•
the Council under limited circumstances. This is in contrast to the 120 days typically allowed for land use actions.
An ELD is not considered to be a land use decision, and would not be heard by the Planning Commission.
•
The Staff Advisor makes the initial administrative decision, and any appeals go to a referee who cannot be a city
•
employee or city official, but could be a hearings officer.
Only the applicant and any person or organization who files written comments in the time period specified in the bill
•
may appeal. An appeal must be filed within 14 days of mailing the Notice of Decision. A $300 deposit to cover costs
must be paid with the appeal submittal, and the referee may levy additional fees to cover hearing costs up to $500.
The city-appointed “referee” decides any appeal decision—often this is a city’s Hearings Officer -who must issue a
•
decision within 42 days of the appeal being filed. The decision of the referee is the final local decision on the MHLD
application. Any appeals of the referee’s decision go to the Oregon Court of Appeals rather than to the Land Use
Board of Appeals (LUBA).
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
Decision Points
If there is discretion under state law, should the Middle Housing Land Division procedure
•
apply to those duplexes permitted prior to House Bill 2001?
Broader application of the allowance for MHLDs would create additional ownership opportunities, but at the
•
expense of existing, established rental housing.
If allowable under state law, should the Middle Housing Land Division procedure apply to
•
accessory residential units as well as duplexes?
Senate Bill 458 is not clear with regard to its applicability to ARUs.
•
DLCD guidance issued at the time the bill passed indicated the MHLD procedure would not apply to ARUs.
•
Some other cities are allowing ARUs to be divided off using the MHLD procedure in their draft codes.
•
As with older duplexes, applying the allowances for MHLDs to ARUs would create additional ownership
•
opportunities, but at the expense of existing, established rental housing.
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
Items for Next Draft
Question of ARU’s & Older Duplexes
•
References in other areas of the code
•
Definitions
•
Administrative details –notice templates, fees
•
Hearings officer
•
4/27/2021 PC Study Session
Legislative Amendment
Initiate a planning application for a legislative
•
amendment
To amend Ashland Land Use Ordinance by adding
provisions for Middle Housing Land Divisions and
Expedited Land Divisions as required by Senate Bill
458 from the 2021 Regular Session of the Oregon
Legislative Assembly
6/14/2022 PC Meeting
Next Steps
Planning Commission Public Hearing
City Council Study Session
City Council Hearing/1Reading
st
City Council 2Reading
nd
4/27/2021 PC Study Session