HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-04-25_Planning PACKET
Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak,
please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record.
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
APRIL 25, 2017
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER:
7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street.
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES
IV. PUBLIC FORUM
V. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A.Housing Element Public Involvement Update.
VI. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
A. Missing Middle Housing.
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).
Memo
DATE: 04/25/2017
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist
RE: Community Feedback to Housing Element Policies
The City is undertaking an update of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. As part
of that update process a Public Participation Planning Group (PPPG), which was comprised of
two Planning Commissioners and two housing commissioners, was established. The PPPG
decided upon a public involvement plan to gain feedback from the community on efficacy and
relevancy of the current policies and suggestions for changes to make the policies more effective
for the community in the coming years. The public involvement plan included a questionnaire
posted on the City’s website and two outreach events; an open house and a community forum.
City staff and the PPPG developed and posted a questionnaire on Open City Hall from January
st
through March 31. Availability of the questionnaire was advertised in the City Source utility
bill mailer, on the City’s website, and on public access channels. The Open City Hall topic
received 324 visits and 144 responses (56 registered respondents and 88 unregistered
respondents). The City also held two public meetings; one open house and one facilitated public
forum. The feedback from the forum is fully detailed in the Executive Summary attached. The
feedback received from the public outreach process has been included in the summary below,
and will be considered in the policy refining process.
Summary of Public Feedback
The public overwhelming agreed that the current language is too cumbersome, overly wordy and
ultimately unclear. The majority of survey and forum participants commented that the City
should use plain language that provides more clarity of purpose to laypeople. The summary
provided below pulls from a fraction of the feedback provided through the various outreach
methods and is provided as examples of the feedback received. The full 594 page document
with all respondents comments can be found on the City’s website at the following link:
http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/responses_03312017_summary.pdf
The existing policies were organized into four broad categories. These categories were used to
organize the forum discussion groups.
Encouraging Housing Diversity, Quality and Compatibility
Accommodating future population growth and demographic changes
Encouraging Conservation and Environmental Preservation
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Promoting Development of Affordable Housing
There were several specific words called out for omission in the current policies. The words
were cited as being limiting to future development, and inhibiting flexibility and diversity in
housing types and therefore demographic composition. As evidenced by statements such as the
ones below:
“Appearance” and “character” are limiting words which could eliminate housing
options.
Remove the words “incompatible and destructive”
Remove the word “disruption” too subjective
Diversity was a word that came up over and over again, both in the context of demographic
character of the City’s population as well as with regard to the types of housing developed.
The aesthetic character of Ashland is diversity.
Not enough new nice multi-family developments spread throughout the town.
More variety of housing types across neighborhoods
Would like to see diversity of housing developed.
There is a problem in that some kinds of housing are overrepresented (single-family
dwellings on city lots) vs. the need for denser housing and more affordable housing. So
any housing plan needs to seek to rebalance the mix.
The topic of affordable housing dominated the responses in both the housing forum and the open
City Hall questionnaire. The responses predominantly offered solution oriented comments
which were not necessarily broad enough to be incorporated into policy language, but the
reoccurring nature of the theme reinforces the continued need for a broad policy or set of policies
that maintains affordable housing as a priority and a goal for future policy development.
“Preserving the appearance of the City” should not be the excuse for not considering
new, different, innovative, and highly affordable options for housing. (in reference to
Goal 1)
Ashland has 20% of its population living in poverty. Ashland need to allow, encourage,
and support workforce housing. This means using zoning and all other available means
to build homes that the people who wash our dishes and cook our meals can afford. We
must wonk on this end of the spectrum.
I think it’s more important to increase the number of lots zoned R-3 and to increase the
maximum density without resorting to bonuses.
Respondents to the online survey and at the public forum had mixed opinions on maintaining
data and outcomes. Some respondents felt very strongly that the City should continue to
maintain data on housing stock, available land and housing need, and even advocated for an
expansion of the data that the City should track, while others thought that it was a waste of City
resources, and even suggested that the data the City currently tracks is flawed. The City is
required by the state to maintain such information.
Buildable lands may include lands that are not as buildable, such as floodplains or steep
slopes.
Do the minimum required by the State and spend time on things that will produce results.
Even the buildable lands inventory has flaws…We count x# of units per acre per zone but
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
ignore the fact that existing land use codes (setback, driveway standards, solar, etc.)
significantly reduce the potential # of units per acre so it appears we have enough
buildable inventory but in fact we don’t. So these reports and databased don’t really do
much for us.
Goals and policies should have some measurable outcomes
Generally respondents were strongly in support of maintaining the existing environmental and
conservation themed policies and some advocated for an expansion of such policies to include
greater efficiency and conservation measures in housing development as well as strengthening
policies to reduce automobile dependence and incentivize multi-modal transportation. Some of
these comments overlapped with affordable housing themed responses.
Is environmental and green a priority even if it increases the cost of housing? i.e., bio
swales.
Require all structures to meet LEED standards
Respondents were generally mixed on the subject of growth and preservation of rural land and
neighborhood character. While the words infill, density, multi-family, mixed use (referring to
both commercial/residential development as well as multi-family/single-family development)
and small clustered unit/tiny house development certainly dominated the responses of both the
forum and the questionnaire, proponents of preserving open space, maintaining less density in
certain neighborhoods and rural areas were also well represented.
More infill!
Infill in R-1,
Preserve rural areas.
Need more infill and mixed use housing.
Ashland needs to avoid sprawl, so it’s not clear how “providing sufficient new land is
accomplished.
Most lands are already that density (referring to policy 1(d) single family zones) Ashland
needs to be increasing density, not maintaining status quo.
Yes to having a variety of dwelling types. No to preserving character and appearance
everywhere in town. There are only several key areas that need preserving, i.e.
downtown core and railroad district, plus we already have historic zones, don’t add to
the rules. All other neighborhoods could use some dynamic and creative changes to
improve housing options.
Staff has provided the existing Housing Element policies with example comments from the
questionnaire as an attachment to this memo. The comments included are not meant to be
exhaustive, but are provided as a sample of the public comments received in response to
individual existing Housing Element policies. City staff will consider the feedback from the
public outreach process in any revisions or refinements made to the policies. The revised
policies will be brought back to the Commission for review and comment at a future meeting.
Attachments:
Housing Policy Summary Likert Scales
Executive Summary
Existing housing policies with comments
Affordable Housing Poster
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Conservation Environment Poster
Housing Diversity poster
Population growth poster
Implementation strategies poster
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
March 10, 2017
To: Linda Reid, City of Ashland Housing Program
From: Kevin Preister, Center for Social Ecology & Public Policy (CSEPP), Inc.
Re: Executive Summary of Housing Forum of Wednesday, March 8, 2017
The City of Ashland Planning Department hosted an Open House and a Housing Forum on March 8, 2017.
Three people attended the Open House from 5:00 to 6:00 pm, and about 18 residents attended the Housing
Forum from 7:00 to 8:30 pm. After a brief orientation about the CityÔs interest in updating the Housing
Element of the Comprehensive Plan, and the schedule for the planning process, two workgroups were
created to discuss the four topic areas:
1.Promoting Development of Affordable Housing
2.Encourage Housing Diversity, Quality and Compatibility
3.Encouraging Conservation and Environmental Protection
4.Accommodating Future Population Growth and Demographic Changes
Each workgroup addressed each topic area, the summary of which follows.
1.Promoting Development of Affordable Housing
Group One
With annexation, 25% of new units are to be affordable. This is good. Bring annexation back. You can also
annex within the UGB.
Expand urban reserves. State pilot project would allow if an affordable housing component was part of it.
Adopt inclusionary zoning on every development of a certain size.
Get definition of affordability. Who is the demographic? Apply to certain types of affordability need like
Ñvery low income.Ò
How to structure so developers want to do it.
Affordable Housing Trust Fund, a way to incentivize.
How do we use county lands for affordable housing. ItÔs not legal now.
I saw affordable housing incentivized in Moscow, Idaho. If the unit was owner-occupied, a tax break was
provided. If they are rental units, they pay more to fund affordable housing. (There was opposition to this
notionÐpeople should not be penalized if they want to rent their house.)
Differences in the types of affordable housing must be clarified: Ñlow income,Ò Ñworkforce,Ò Ñhomeless.Ò
Then get a good inventory for each category and make sure metrics are consistent (Ñ60% AMI vs. 30%
1
rental income, for example). Technical definitions should be clear. We donÔt have an accurate picture and we
need it.
Group Two
Deed restrictions are a plus.
The Housing Trust Fund is not fully developed but should become a useful tool.
City-owned property should be used to develop affordable housing.
4b, the words Ñrelatively small developmentÒ should be struck.
Are the metrics in place to measure affordable housing supply and demand ever evaluated? (The City
evaluates through a yearly document, a ÑPerformance Evaluation ReportÒ). Discussion centered on
categories of housing need, such as Ñhomeless,Ò Ñworkforce,Ò Ñaffordable.Ò If definitions could be agreed
on, and then that category measured, city policy could more precisely be aimed at real targets.
The city goal apparently is that 10% of units have some affordability target. (or maybe the comment was the
city goal should be something like this.)
A $300,000 house in Talent is not Ñaffordable.Ò
In Ashland, affordable housing is deed restricted, a positive feature. There is a sliding scale used by
developers ranging from 60% AMI to 120% AMI which provides flexibility to developers while
contributing to the goal. With 2000 people below the poverty line in Ashland, how do we accommodate
them?
If the affordable housing standard is 120% AMI, fire fighters could afford to live here.
Ashland ÑcharacterÒ is gentrification.
What about co-housing?
Target the tools to the affordable housing ÑtypeÒ. Can we beef up the tools?
We like mixture so we donÔt ghetto-ize.
2.Encourage Housing Diversity, Quality and Compatibility
Group One
There is support for greater flexibility in zoning categories. We could expand uses in R-1 zoning, for
example, allowing for more affordability and greater density.
Create R-21 zone, as other places have done, to allow for higher densities than 20 units per acre.
Newcomers leave their houses empty. Can we do a dark tax for those who are not living here?
2
Consistency of zoning should be re-evaluated. Allow mixed uses of commercial and residential.
Keep 2a. Allow office with an apartment.
How to get incentives? Rewards and punishments. In San Francisco, the developer had to pay the
tenants $30,000 each to change the use. More expensive but created a benefit for those most
impacted. The real estate transfer tax is 15% in Vancouver BC.
If the private sector cannot do it, the public sector must (as in France).
Tiny houses, get young people, senior citizen co-housing
Bring ideas to the Housing and Human Services Commission and the Planning Commission.
Group Two
Have flexibility if options are found.
Zoning constrains options.
What about 900 sf cottages? Tiny houses?
Exceptions should address needs.
We need a diverse community so we should have diverse housing. All different kinds are better.
Versus
A planning zone indicates a certain lifestyle, like senior housing. What is the value? Is it diversity or
homogeneity?
Owner occupied and other types of units are positive, allows affordability. Some multi-family housing has
characteristics of single family houses.
Some areas are different standards? The railroad district versus another area = different standards are
appropriate and desirable. What is the balance we are after?
Bottom line: lots of flexibility is valuable. Standards are expensive. Compatibility of design is less important.
Observation note: The overall theme of this discussion, shared by many in the group, is that the city should
exhibit as much flexibility as possible in encouraging housing diversity. However, strong dissent was voiced
by one person who said that city standards around ÑcharacterÒ of a neighborhood should be retained
because home buyers have a sense of predictability about what they are buying into, the kind of lifestyle
associated with a particular neighborhood. How these two sentiments play out in the general population is
not known.
Allow a greater mix of housing in all zones. Re-evaluate 1-D
Lack of diversity
3
ÑDark taxÒ for vacation homes.
Increase density. Create a new zone for larger, denser development.
Keep 2a.
Incentives for development, rewards and punishment
Real estate transfer tax.
Government subsidy.
Absentee homeowners.
InnovationÐdifferent value system
3.Encouraging Conservation and Environmental Protection
Group One
ÑAppearanceÒ and ÑcharacterÒ are limiting words which could eliminate housing options.
The word complement helps allow housing to fit in, helps bring things into balance.
The aesthetic character of Ashland is diversity.
Not enough new nice multi-family developments spread throughout the town.
Would like to see diversity of housing developed.
We need to have more teeth in floodplain protections to keep development out of danger.
Maintain slope restrictions.
We like 3D narrow streets that have pedestrian and bicycle amenities.
Group Two
Buildable lands may include lands that are not as buildable, such as floodplains or steep slopes.
When protection creeks, allow transfer of development outside of constrained areas. Flexibility.
Is environmental and green a priority even if it increases the cost of housing? i.e., bio swales.
Auto electric Ïuse of renewable energy for transportation could allow for recapture of high value farmland
by directing development in areas previously off limits.
City influence on regional fire safety concerns.
4
City purchase of property outside UGB for parks, farms, trails to protect environment.
Pilot project of housing on imperitice (?) property.
4.Accommodating Future Population Growth and Demographic Changes
Group One
Market forces push prices up, as long as they are able.
Housing as a means of wealth creation means housing (roof over your head) is not considered a right.
Developing underdeveloped lots will increase supply.
Expansion of UGB into county to increase supply
Not favorable to infill
Favorable toward non-traditional subdivision
Retain existing residents, otherwise they are priced out by Ñequity migrants.Ò Strive to keep long-term
residents. It is a loss for the City when they are displaced.
Group Two
Accommodate housing types to correlate with incomes of existing residents and those that Ñwash
dishesÒ (increase the job base).
Need large scale apartments to accommodate
One per cent vacancy rate makes finding rentals difficult.
Small clustered units (500 SF) to provide smaller, more affordable units.
Figure out how to house our wage workers.
Are we a complete community accommodating everyone or are we going to be a retirement community?
We are on the path toward exclusivity.
Accommodate college students, all demographic categories to Ñgive the town flavor.Ò
Aim to accommodate ARUs. Entice homeowners to build them by reducing fees. It addresses an
un-met housing need.
5
Existing Policies (Section 6.11)
1.Given the scarcity and cost of land as a limited resource, conserve land and reduce the
impact of land prices on housing to the maximum extent possible, using the following techniques:
a. Use the absolute minimum street widths that will accommodate traffic adequately
in order to reduce aesthetic impacts and lot coverage by impervious surfaces.
b. Allow a wide variation in site-built housing types through the use of the City's
Performance Standards Ordinance. The use of attached housing, small lots, and
common open spaces shall be used where possible to develop more moderate cost
housing and still retain the quality of life consistent with Ashland's character.
c. Consistent with policies relating to growth form, City policy should encourage
development of vacant available lots within the urban area, while providing
sufficient new land to avoid an undue increase in land prices. This shall be
accomplished with specific annexation policies.
d. Zone lands in the single-family designation consistent with the surrounding
neighborhood if the area is mostly developed. Generally, lands south of Siskiyou
Boulevard-North Main should be R-1-7.5 and R-l-10, and lands south of the
Boulevard should be R-l-5.
Comments Received through the questionnaire:
Land is Ashland is currently about $1M/acre. Building costs are increasing dramatically
o
due to a lack of skilled labor. It’s imperative to increase density to reduce the cost of
development.
Don’t agree with increase in temporary dwellings such as vacation rentals
o
Get rid of the term “site-built”
o
Get rid of 1d.
o
More infill!
o
Infill in R-1, preserve rural areas
o
Use infill no to expanding urban areas. We do not have water and sewer capabilities to
o
annex new properties into urban growth area.
When there is density of housing there must be corresponding gardening or green space
o
in the picture.
Again, I think the tendency of developers, city planners, and most other stakeholders is to
o
build and build more. “Quality of life” is a subjective term but many here, including
myself, moved here for the small size, the quiet, the low traffic, the 10-minutes-across-
town, the feeling of neighborliness, and everything else that growth sneaks up upon and
undermines. Once those qualities are gone they’re gone.
The planning Dept. has relatively strict guidelines for allowing site built housing. The
o
City should relax these.
I don’t wish to see high-density housing because of the congestion that it brings.
o
Higher density in some areas is good, but it can be accomplished through raising height
o
limits, for one, instead of smashing people into tiny warrens.
How can we keep attached housing and small lots affordable? In big cities like San
o
Francisco and New York, for example, even tiny apartments are incredibly expensive. In
other words, the size of dwellings and lots doesn’t ensure the costs will be “more
moderate” unless other actions are taken.
Yes! Row houses, tiny home clusters, etc. are sorely needed here!!
o
Ashland should remain fairly compact-walk-and bike-ability are very important.
o
Sometimes City staff in the Planning department can be a barrier to developing vacant
o
lots within the urban area.
Vacant lots should be used for parking, especially for those who work here.
o
I think more can be done with the existing land available within the urban area. We need
o
to be really careful about encouraging sprawl in the effort to deal with affordability.
All building in keeping with the general housing style of Ashland. No more apartments
o
or rental types.
Increase density. Create a new zone for larger, denser development.
o
Consistency of zoning should be re-evaluated. Allow mixed uses of commercial and
o
residential. Keep 2a. Allow office with an apartment.
We need a diverse community so we should have diverse housing. All different kinds are
o
better.
Versus
o
A planning zone indicates a certain lifestyle, like senior housing. What is the value? Is it
o
diversity or homogeneity?
There also needs to be more flexibility in this. The current requirement that some areas
o
must have commercial on the first floor is very limiting in a city that apparently has too
much commercial property, given the large number of unoccupied or underoccupied
commercial sites. It would be good to lift some of the restrictions on residential
development in commercial areas, since commercial is overbuilt and residential
underbuilt.
2. Using the following techniques, protect existing neighborhoods from incompatible
development and encourage upgrading:
a. Do not allow deterioration of residential areas by incompatible uses and
developments. Where such uses are planned for, clear findings of intent shall be
made in advance of the area designation. Such findings shall give a clear rationale,
explaining the relationship of the area to housing needs, transportation, open
space, and any other pertinent Plan topics. Mixed uses often create a more
interesting and exciting urban environment and should be considered as a
development option wherever they will not disrupt an existing residential area.
b. Prevent inconsistent and disruptive designs in residential areas through use of a
limited design review concept, in addition to using Historic Commission review as
part of the site review, conditional use permit, or variance approval process.
c. Develop programs and efforts for rehabilitation and preservation of existing
neighborhoods, and prevent development, which is incompatible and destructive.
Comments Received through the questionnaire:
You should develop programs for preservation of existing neighborhoods but not at the
o
cost of prevention of other development. Kind of like protectionism, really unfair.
There are two question here with only one answer. Incompatible is a very subjective and
o
unspecific standard that could deny creative affordable projects.
You need to more clearly define "incompatible and destructive". The current restrictions
o
on acceptable ways to develop a property with an existing structure that is economically
unfeasible to remodel without a teardown are far too onerous, without the city providing
historic area maintenance subsidies.
Need more infill and mixed use housing.
o
Designate which neighborhoods should be considered "historic". Let the other areas
o
develop with newer concepts.
o
Remove words inconsistent, disruptive, incompatible and destructive these words
o
promote homogeneity in design and housing type going against the statement “Mixed
uses often create a more interesting and exciting urban environment”
Technical supporting documents state that the City has too many Single family homes
o
and that the market has a preference for developing single family homes even in multi-
family zone-this language promotes a continuation of that trend.
Preserving charm is a good idea, but extra costs and subjective opinions of city staff
o
could become an unfair burden on homeowners
The idea that anything in America is historic and worth preservation, especially on the
o
west coast, is laughable. The city should be allowed to develop and change free of
nostalgic emotional attachment to archaic design trends of whoever is in charge's
childhood.
Again, you mix two policies in one. I can say yes to the encouragement of rehab and
o
preservation in existing neighborhoods; but isn't the zoning and whatever other
procedures you have in place already designed to avoid 'incompatible development.
What on earth is destructive development?
New development should enhance existing micro communities. The design of any one
o
building is not as important as how development integrates with existing neighborhoods.
For example, it is not destructive when a "modern" designed home goes into the Briscoe
neighborhood, but it is very destructive when the homes are built over the Scenic ridge
with no street planning and no options but to travel on neighborhood streets, making
conditions so dangerous family's with small children leave the neighborhood.
3. Regulation of residential uses shall be designed to complement, conserve, and continue the
aesthetic character of Ashland through use of the following techniques:
a.Slope protection and lot coverage performance standards shall be used to fit
development to topography, generally following the concept that density should
decrease with an increase in slope to avoid excessive erosion and hillside cuts. This
objective shall be used consistent with the desire to preserve land by using the
smallest lot coverage possible.
b. Site and design review shall be used to ensure compatible multiple-family
structures. Density incentives shall be used to encourage innovative, non-
standardized design in single-family areas.
c. Performance standards shall be used to regulate new development in Ashland so
that a variety of housing types built for the site and imaginative residential
environments may be used to reduce cost and improve the aesthetic character of
new developments and decrease the use of traditional zoning and subdivision
standards.
d. Street design and construction standards shall promote energy efficiency, air
quality, and minimal use of land.To this end, the City shall:
1. Adopt a master conceptual plan of future streets by size and use category.
2. Adopt minimum street width standards which provide only what is needed
for adequate traffic flow and parking.
3. Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian traffic planning in street design.
4. Limit street slopes, requiring curvilinear streets along contours in steeper
areas.
Comments Received through the questionnaire:
Protection of natural resource/compatible with natural environment.
o
We need to have more teeth in floodplain protections to keep development out of danger.
o
Maintain slope restrictions.
o
We like “3D” narrow streets that have pedestrian and bicycle amenities.
o
This policy is a one size fits all; however there are NOT slope and erosion concerns in the
o
FLATS (the majority) of Ashland! Application of this policy with no intelligent analysis
actually CREATES undue HARDSHIP and is a disincentive to the areas in the flats!
Water flows down our steep slopes in myriad ways, so downhill homes need to be
o
protected from development upslope that could divert flows in dangerous ways.
While I agree with slope density controls, I think the City is far too rigid in its lot
o
coverage restrictions. There are other equally effective ways of controlling erosion that
don't require uncompromising restriction of lot coverage.
While erosion guidelines are needed, Ashland's current policies seem excessive and add
o
exorbitant cost to utilization of existing properties.
It would be even better if the city did not allow development of steep or forested slopes.
o
I think Ashland needs to encourage the development of rental housing in multi-family
o
structures. If you are really trying to affect the housing issue, you should be looking at
allowing density increases particularly along major thoroughfares. You cannot hope to
address the housing shortage, or property values by allowing development at 6-10
units/acre. This should not just be limited to the south end of town. Areas around the
downtown and above the boulevard should not be sacrosanct.
There should be room for the mother in law dwellings, tiny houses.
o
Yes. Innovative. Non-standard. Multi-family.
o
Yes, with additional allowances for % of lot coverage and taller maximum heigh
o
allowances.
My only fear with density incentives is that it will take away from green space and the
o
City will allow developers to do so since it means more tax revenue for the city which is
really what it's all about, right?
The planning process does currently not encourage innovative design.
o
`Innivative' always rings alarm bells in development contexts.
o
High density housing leaves very little to the wildlife within city limits and means more
o
traffic, more road maintenance, more noise, and more crime, more everything -- simply
because it means more people. I'm not talking low-income vs high-income so much as I
mean sheer numbers of human beings living and driving around in Ashland.
Increasing density with multi-family structures does not preserve the character of our
o
town.
4. Create and maintain administrative systems that will assist in all phases of housing and
neighborhood planning through use of the following techniques:
a.Establish and maintain a data base system, which includes measurement of: vacant
land and land consumption; housing conditions; land use, land values, and any
other pertinent information. Simplify and strengthen the processing approval
mechanism so that the intent of state and local laws is fulfilled with the greatest
possible thoroughness and efficiency.
b. Cooperate fully with the Jackson County Housing Authority in locating low-income
units in Ashland when this can be done in low-impact, relatively small
developments, or through funding of individual home-owner loans or rental
assistance.
Comments Received through the questionnaire:
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
4(a) presents two different concepts. Should be separated.
o
Differences in the types of affordable housing must be clarified: “low income,”
o
“workforce,” “homeless.” Then get a good inventory for each category and make sure
metrics are consistent (“60% AMI vs. 30% rental income, for example). Technical
definitions should be clear. We don’t have an accurate picture and we need it.
Remove the words “low-impact and relatively small developments”
o
The scope of this could be enormous and very costly - or more reasonable in terms of
o
cost, but contain less information. Whatever we track, we should know why we are
tracking it so that we are making the best investment of public resources possible.
This would be helpful for planners, realtors, and developers.
o
If it doesn't involve another full-time highly paid employee who does nothing else.
o
Such a database can provide a common factual underpinning for discussions regarding
o
matters of opinion - social, economic, aesthetic, quality of life, etc.
Ashland's taxpayers should not be required to subsidize low-income housing. Salary
o
supplements for designated Ashland workforce members (e.g., teachers, public safety
first responders) who live in Ashland, maybe - but not generic low-income housing.
This is not the business of government.
o
The City should partner with the Housing Authority but "cooperate fully" is extreme
o
language.
As long as it does not depress existing housing values of nearby homes, then agreed, it
o
makes sense.
If you can't afford to live here, you shouldn't live here.
o
Why only low-impact and small developments? Why not multi-income level integrated
o
units and neighborhoods that the research supports.
Your use of the words "low-impact," implies that the poor living adjacent to the not-poor
o
is a detractor. That's classist and insulting, and the fact that it's on a city document as a
question should be an embarrassment. The city should cooperate fully. End of story.
Everyone deserves a place to live, and if someone else doesn't like looking at them, that's
their problem. They can look away.
We are seriously lacking rentals and housing for low to middle income!!!
o
This is a small valley with many housing options. Marketplace is more efficient than
o
government interference.
I think pressure should be put on Jackson County and the State for more money to pay for
o
affordable housing. It is a larger problem than the City can handle on its own.
5. The residential sector is the major user of energy in Ashland. Consistent with other
housing goals, the City shall strive to promote, encourage or require energy- efficiency design in
all new residential developments.
Comments Received through the questionnaire:
Require all structures to meet LEED standards???!
o
Because most homes in the city are energy inefficient they are energy hogs. Solar, LEED
o
certified and updated appliances are part of the answer but cash incentives, rebates and
trade-outs for new appliances are what is needed.
Xeriscape vs lawns and solar panel support for affordable units for energy conservation
o
along with requiring low VOC materials.
Again this causes an increase in costs and reduces affordability.
o
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
Energy efficiency is one of the most important things the City can promote as it works to
o
address climate change and ensure the availability of affordable housing. Housing costs
are not just rent or mortgage. The cost of utilities is very important as well.
I believe the codes we have now are doing the job! Making them even more stringent
o
increases the cost of building and increases housing costs.
Should also provide incentives or other means to encourage in existing housing when
o
renovations or remodeling is done.
It would largely depend on the specifics and costs of the measure that the city is
o
considering.
I agree with this concept. However, an impartial unbiased approach should be used to
o
determine requirements with strict adherence to cost versus benefit metrics. It is
important to remember we do live in a mild climate and a "green for the sake of green"
mind set can be very costly to people who need affordability.
Current building codes are pretty effective in doing that, and we have energy
o
conservation expert on staff who is helpful.
I agree with this only in mixed commercial and residential development and in multi-
o
family developments. Private single family homes on private land should be exempt
from this.
The market should determine via supply and demand which elements are utilized.
o
Ok, so which is it? Promote? Encourage? or Require? Very different meanings with
o
significantly different consequences for a builder, and therefore significant difference in
the cost to the buyer. What are you trying to accomplish, and exactly how will you do it?
I could imagine very punitive methods as well as beneficial methods. Carrot and stick.
What will you choose, and why?
I would add water use to this. Both water and energy will be in shorter and shorter supply
o
in the future. We should be trying to encourage greywater use.
Require. Not encourage, require.
o
Sustainability is really key along with lowering rental costs and capping housing cost
o
increases would really help keep Ashland beautiful and diverse.
NEW ONLY
o
I believe the City should require energy-efficient design in all non-residential
o
developments as well.
Stop spending our money on your political assumptions! How about leaving us alone and
o
stop wasting our money on your political beliefs.
Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305
51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
PromotingtheDevelopmentofHousingthatis
AffordabletoModerateandLowIncome
Households
ŷĻIƚǒƭźƓŭ9ƌĻƒĻƓƷźƓĭƌǒķĻƭƦƚƌźĭźĻƭ toprovidehousingthatis
affordableto ğƩğƓŭĻƚŅźƓĭƚƒĻƭΛƷŷĻƒźƭƭźƓŭƒźķķƌĻͲğƓķƌƚǞƷƚ
ƒƚķĻƩğƷĻźƓĭƚƒĻŷƚǒƭĻŷƚƌķƭΜ͵
Maintaininghousingoptionsforavarietyofhousehold
incomesisnecessarytomaintainavibrantanddiverse
community.Housingaffordabilityislinkedtoavarietyof
positivesocialandeconomicoutcomesincludinghousehold
stability.
Safe,Habitableandaffordablehousingisafundamental
humanneed.Providinghousingaffordabletolowincome
householdsiscriticaltoensuringthatlowincomehouseholds
canhaveaccesstothediverseopportunitiesthatexistinthe
Cityandthatexistingdisparitiesarereduced,ratherthan
exacerbated.
EncourageConservationandEnvironmental
Preservation
IƚǒƭźƓŭ9ƌĻƒĻƓƷƦƚƌźĭźĻƭƦƩƚƒƚƷĻƷŷĻƦƩƚƷĻĭƷźƚƓƚŅƓğƷǒƩğƌƩĻƭƚǒƩĭĻƭ
ΛǞĻƷƌğƓķƭͲƭƷĻĻƦƭƌƚƦĻƭͲğƓķƩźƦğƩźğƓğƩĻğƭΜͲĻƓĻƩŭǤĻŅŅźĭźĻƓĭǤͲǞğƷĻƩ
ĭƚƓƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓͲƷŷĻƩĻķǒĭƷźƚƓƚŅǞźƌķŅźƩĻƩźƭƉͲğƓķƷŷĻƩĻŷğĬźƌźƷğƷźƚƓğƓķ
ƦƩĻƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓƚŅĻǣźƭƷźƓŭŷƚǒƭźƓŭƭƷƚĭƉ͵
TheCityhasastrongcommitmenttotheprogramsthat
conserveresourcesandconsiderimpactstotheenvironmentas
awhole.Manypoliciesandordinanceshavebeenimplemented
toprioritizetheprotectionofnaturalresourcesinthedesign
andconstructionofdevelopmentswithintheCity.
Thedesignanddevelopmentofresidentialneighborhoodscan
contributetoareductioninenergyusebyproviding
opportunitiesforsolarcollection,andamenitiesthatencourage
tripsbybicycleandfootratherthanbyautomobile.
PhotobyFredStockwell
EncouragingHousingDiversity,Qualityand
Compatibility
IƚǒƭźƓŭ9ƌĻƒĻƓƷƦƚƌźĭźĻƭğźƒƷƚĻƭƷğĬƌźƭŷƓĻźŭŷĬƚƩŷƚƚķĭƚƒƦğƷźĬƌĻ
ķĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷğƓķtƩƚǝźķĻŅƚƩğǝğƩźĻƷǤƚŅƓĻĻķĻķŷƚǒƭźƓŭƷǤƦĻƭ͵
Policiesinthissectionaddressboththedevelopmentofnew
housingandtheadaptationofexistinghousingtomeettheneeds
andpreferencesofthecurrentandexpectedresidentsoftheCity.
TheCityseekstoencourageinvestmentinhousing,minimize
displacementoflowincomeresidentsduetogentrification,and
toensurethatmiddleincomehouseholdscontinuetofind
opportunityforsafeanddecenthousingwithintheCity.
The/źƷǤƭzoninganddevelopmentregulationsareintendedto
allowdevelopmentofhousingthatwillsatisfyvariedconsumer
preferences.TheCityneedstoinsurethatavarietyofhousing
typesaredeveloped,including;singlefamilyhomes,townhouses,
duplexes,apartments,grouphousing,smallcottages,and
accessoryunits.
IllustratedexampleofvariousHousingTypes
Accommodatingfuturepopulationgrowthand
demographicchanges
IƚǒƭźƓŭ9ƌĻƒĻƓƷƦƚƌźĭźĻƭƭĻĻƉƷƚƦƌğƓŅƚƩƷŷĻĻŅŅźĭźĻƓƷǒƭĻƚŅƌğƓķͲ
źƓǝĻƓƷƚƩǤğǝğźƌğĬƌĻǝğĭğƓƷƌğƓķƭͲğƓķĭƚƓƭźķĻƩĭŷğƓŭźƓŭ
ķĻƒƚŭƩğƦŷźĭƭΛƦƩĻķźĭƷźƚƓƭƚŅƦƚƦǒƌğƷźƚƓͲźƓĭƚƒĻƭğƓķŷƚǒƭźƓŭ
ƓĻĻķƭΜźƓķĻƷĻƩƒźƓźƓŭğƦƦƩƚƦƩźğƷĻƌğƓķǒƭĻƭ͵
TheCityplansfor!ƭŷƌğƓķƭpopulationgrowthandexpected
regionalhousingdemand.Because!ƭŷƌğƓķƭhousingmarket
isinfluencedbytheregionalhousingmarket,Ashlandand
otherjurisdictionscooperativelyplanforfuturegrowthwithin
theRogueValley.
TheCityplansforsufficientresidentialdevelopmentcapacity
toallowthemarkettodevelophousingtomeetexpected
demand.
!ƭŷƌğƓķƭPopulationfrom1940(actual)to2065(projected)
ImplementationStrategies
.ĻƌƚǞğƩĻƭƚƒĻƚŅƷŷĻğĭƷźǝźƷźĻƭƷŷğƷƷŷĻ/źƷǤğƌƩĻğķǤǒƓķĻƩƷğƉĻƭƷƚƦƩƚƒƚƷĻƷŷĻ
ƦƚƌźĭźĻƭźķĻƓƷźŅźĻķźƓƷŷĻIƚǒƭźƓŭ9ƌĻƒĻƓƷƚŅƷŷĻ/ƚƒƦƩĻŷĻƓƭźǝĻtƌğƓ͵tƌĻğƭĻŅĻĻƌ
ŅƩĻĻƷƚƭǒŭŭĻƭƷƓĻǞğƓķźƓƓƚǝğƷźǝĻƭƷƩğƷĻŭźĻƭ͵
Developmentofhousingthatisaffordabletomoderateand
lowincomehouseholds
Requiringaffordablehousingwithannexationsandzone
o
changes.
Waivingandreducingfeesfornewaffordablehousing(System
o
DevelopmentChargesandbuildingpermitfees)
Providingdensitybonusesforaffordablehousingprojects
o
Deedrestrictingaffordablehousingunitstoremainaffordable
o
for3099years.
PrioritizingtheuseofCommunityDevelopmentBlockGrants
o
(CDBG)towardaffordablehousing.
CreatingaCityofAshlandHousingTrustFund.
o
UseofsurplusCitypropertyforaffordablehousing
o
developments
AdministeringtheCityofAshlandAffordableHousingProgram
o
EstablishmentoftheHousingandHumanServicesCommission
o
Accommodatingfuturepopulationgrowthand
demographicchanges
BuildableLandsInventory
o
HousingNeedsAnalysis
o
RegionalPlanning
o
(GreaterBearCreekValleyRegionalProblemSolving(RPS)
Plan)
NeighborhoodMasterPlanningforareaswithintheexisting
o
UrbanGrowthBoundary
Planningforinfillontransitcorridorsandmixeduse
o
developments.
ImplementationStrategies
HousingDiversity,QualityandCompatibility
Zoningforavarietyoflotsizes,housingtypes,and
o
residentialdensities
AccessoryResidentialUnitspermittedinallresidential
o
zones
MixedUseDevelopment(commercialgroundfloor/
o
residentialabove)permittedincommercialzones
HistoricDistrictDesignStandards(compatibility)
o
MaximumHouseSizeOrdinance(HistoricDistricts)
o
ConservationandEnvironmentalPreservation
Restrictingdevelopmentinwaterresourceprotectionareas
o
(floodplains,riparianareas,andwetlands)
Restrictingdevelopmentonsteepslopeareas(25%or
o
greater)
Providingaconservationdensitybonusestopromote
o
energyefficienthousingprojects
SolarAccessOrdinance
o
TreePreservationOrdinance
o
Promotingonsitestormwatermanagementpractices
o
Flexiblesubdivisionstandardstoallowclusteringofunitsto
o
preservecommonopenspace
Wildfiremitigationrequirements
o
ͻ/ƚƒƦƌĻƷĻ{ƷƩĻĻƷͼstandardsprovidingsidewalks,bike
o
lanes,minimumstreetwidths,andparkrowswithstreet
trees.
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan
by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing goals and policies.
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AM
Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is
voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of
any government agency or elected officials.
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan
by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing goals and policies.
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AM, this forum had:
Attendees:325
All Responses:144
Hours of Public Comment:7.2
This topic started on January 9, 2017, 3:31 PM.
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 2 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Responses
Goal 1.
Do you agree with this current housing goal?
“Ensure a variety of dwelling types and provide housing opportunities for the total cross section of
Ashland’s population, consistent with preserving the character and appearance of the city.”
%Count
Strongly Agree41.7%60
Agree37.5%54
Neutral11.1%16
Disagree6.3%9
Strongly Disagree3.5%5
Please provide any further comments that you feel should be considered regarding goal 1 above
(optional):
Answered78
Skipped66
Policy 1. Do you agree with allowing a wide variation in site-built housing types, including attached
housing, and small lots, to develop more moderate cost housing while still retaining the quality of life
consistent with Ashland's character?
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 3 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
%Count
Strongly Agree45.1%65
Agree39.6%57
Neutral4.2%6
Disagree8.3%12
Strongly Disagree2.8%4
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 1 (optional):
Answered52
Skipped92
Policy 2. Do you agree that City policy should encourage development of vacant available lots within
the urban area, while providing sufficient new land to avoid an undue increase in land prices?
%Count
Strongly Agree34.0%49
Agree34.7%50
Neutral17.4%25
Disagree9.0%13
Strongly Disagree4.9%7
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 4 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 2 (optional):
Answered57
Skipped87
Policy 3. Do you agree the City should zone lands in the single-family designation consistent with the
surrounding neighborhood if the area is mostly developed? Generally, lands south of Siskiyou Blvd.-
North Main would be R-1-7.5 and R-1-10, and lands north of the Boulevard would be zoned R-1-5.
%Count
Strongly Agree9.7%14
Agree22.2%32
Neutral43.1%62
Disagree19.4%28
Strongly Disagree5.6%8
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 3 (optional):
Answered50
Skipped94
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 5 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Policy 4. Do you agree with the existing City policy that states that mixed uses \[commercial with
residential\] often create a more interesting and exciting urban environment and should be considered
as a development option wherever they will not disrupt an existing residential area?
%Count
Strongly Agree38.2%55
Agree42.4%61
Neutral8.3%12
Disagree7.6%11
Strongly Disagree3.5%5
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 4 (optional):
Answered49
Skipped95
Policy 5. Do you agree with City policy intended to prevent inconsistent and disruptive designs in
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 6 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
residential areas through use of a limited design review concept, in addition to using Historic
Commission review as part of the site review, conditional use permit, or variance approval process?
%Count
Strongly Agree14.6%21
Agree32.6%47
Neutral31.3%45
Disagree17.4%25
Strongly Disagree4.2%6
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 5 (optional):
Answered49
Skipped95
Policy 6. Do you agree that the City should develop programs and efforts for rehabilitation and
preservation of existing neighborhoods, and prevent development which is incompatible and
destructive?
%Count
Strongly Agree30.6%44
Agree43.1%62
Neutral15.3%22
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 7 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
%Count
Disagree6.3%9
Strongly Disagree4.9%7
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 6 (optional):
Answered48
Skipped96
Policy 7. Do you agree the City should have slope protection and lot coverage policies intended to fit
development to the topography, generally following the concept that density should decrease with an
increase in slope to avoid excessive erosion and hillside cuts?
%Count
Strongly Agree52.8%76
Agree31.9%46
Neutral11.1%16
Disagree4.2%6
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 7 (optional):
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 8 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Answered33
Skipped111
Policy 8. Do you agree that the City should require site and design review to ensure compatible
multiple-family structures, and that density incentives should be used to encourage innovative, non-
standardized design in single-family areas?
%Count
Strongly Agree30.6%44
Agree36.8%53
Neutral17.4%25
Disagree9.0%13
Strongly Disagree6.3%9
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 8 (optional):
Answered36
Skipped108
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 9 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Policy 9. Do you agree that non-traditional zoning and subdivision standards may be used to create a
variety of housing types, and imaginative residential environments, to reduce cost and improve the
aesthetic character of new developments within the City?
%Count
Strongly Agree34.0%49
Agree36.8%53
Neutral15.3%22
Disagree8.3%12
Strongly Disagree5.6%8
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 9 (optional):
Answered31
Skipped113
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 10 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Policy 10. Do you agree that street design and construction standards should promote energy
efficiency, air quality, and minimal use of land? (Specifically using the minimum street width necessary
for traffic flow and parking, while accommodating bicycle and pedestrian amenities).
%Count
Strongly Agree44.4%64
Agree31.9%46
Neutral11.1%16
Disagree6.9%10
Strongly Disagree5.6%8
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 10 (optional):
Answered43
Skipped101
Policy 11. Do you agree that the City should establish and maintain a data base system, which includes
measurement of: vacant land and land consumption; housing conditions; land use, land values, and
any other pertinent information?
%Count
Strongly Agree21.5%31
Agree41.7%60
Neutral26.4%38
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 11 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
%Count
Disagree6.9%10
Strongly Disagree3.5%5
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 11 (optional):
Answered39
Skipped105
Policy 12. Do you agree that the City should cooperate fully with the Housing Authority of Jackson
County in locating low-income units in Ashland when this can be done in low-impact, relatively small
developments, or through funding of individual home-owner loans or rental assistance?
%Count
Strongly Agree42.4%61
Agree29.9%43
Neutral9.0%13
Disagree9.0%13
Strongly Disagree9.7%14
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 12 (optional):
Answered50
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 12 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Skipped94
Policy 13. Do you agree with the following existing housing policy: “The residential sector is the major
user of energy in Ashland. Consistent with other housing goals, the City shall strive to promote,
encourage or require energy-efficiency design in all new residential developments.”?
%Count
Strongly Agree52.8%76
Agree35.4%51
Neutral4.9%7
Disagree5.6%8
Strongly Disagree1.4%2
Please provide any additional comments relating to Policy 13 (optional):
Answered42
Skipped102
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 13 of 594
Housing Policy Questionnaire
The City is asking citizens to help inform an update of the Housing Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan by completing a brief questionnaire regarding the City's existing housing
goals and policies.
Please provide any further general comments that you feel should be considered in updating the
Housing Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan (optional)
Answered65
Skipped79
If you would like to receive email notifications regarding future meetings (public open houses, Planning
Commission meeting, and City Council hearings) relating to the update of the Comprehensive Plan
Housing Element please include your email address below (optional and kept private):
Answered39
Skipped105
All Responses sorted chronologically
As of April 13, 2017, 10:20 AMhttp://www.peakdemocracy.com/4265Page 14 of 594