Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExecutive SummaryExecutive Summary BACKGROUND Ashland, like many Oregon communities, has experienced a shortage of affordable housing. Ashland's 1990 Affordable Housing Plan laid the groundwork for taking more aggressive steps toward dealing with the problem. The plan recommended implementing both land use strategies (i.e. regulatory approaches) and non-land use strategies. The majority of these recommendations have been implemented, either through codification into the Land Use Ordinance or through the creation of new housing programs. Specific strategies include system development charge (SDC) deferments, 1st time homebuyer and rental assistance loans, and land use policies intended to increase the efficiency of development. A complex set of factors affects the local housing market and individual households' ability to afford housing. Moreover, much of the data the 2000 Consolidated Housing Plan is based upon is from 1998 or earlier. Recent trends in the housing market suggest new dynamics may be affecting housing development and costs. To better understand these dynamics, the City of Ashland is conducting a housing needs assessment and developing an affordable housing strategy based on identified needs. The City contracted with ECONorthwest to provide an assessment of the current housing situation for all income and housing need categories in Ashland (the needs assessment). This report is the first part of a two-part study. The housing needs assessment contained in this report will be used by the City of Ashland Community Development Department and the Ashland Housing Commission to develop a set of strategies to address housing needs in Ashland. In summary, the overarching goal of the large project is to develop a comprehensive housing strategy to ensure a stable supply of affordable housing for current and future residents of Ashland at all income levels. More specifically, this report is intended to supplement data in the 2000 Consolidated Plan, present an evaluation of housing trends in Ashland since the last detailed assessment was complete in 1998 and project current and future housing needs. FINDINGS Following is a summary of demographic and housing trends in Ashland: Ashland is growing--but relatively slowly. The City added about 3,300 people between 1990 and 2000. The 2020 County Coordinated population forecast for Ashland is 22,846 persons. This represents an average annual growth rate of 0.8%, which is less than half the rate the City experienced during the 1990's (1.7% annually). Growth has not occurred evenly in al age groups. Ashland's share of population growth in ages under 20 and 35 to 44 is notably lower than in Oregon. Ashland's population in ages 35 to 44 actually declined by almost 700 or 21% over the decade. 52% of Ashland's population growth was in the 45 to 54 age group, compared to only 36% in Oregon. Finally, 20% of Ashland's population growth in the 1990s was in the 65 and over age group, compared to only 8% in Oregon. Despite this larger share of growth in older age groups, Ashland's current share of population aged 65 and over does not vary substantially from that of Jackson County or Oregon. Fewer households own housing in Ashland compared to other areas. Ashland's share of owner-occupied housing units is 12% to 14% less than the share in Jackson County or Oregon. Ashland's share of renter-occupied units 12% to 14% greater than Jackson County or Oregon. This trend is consistent with other University communities in Oregon. The fastest growing employment sectors in Ashland do not pay enough for a household to afford fair market rent. Services and retail sales were the fastest growing employment sectors. Service employment increased by over 1,200 between 1990 and 2000; the average annual pay for a service job in Ashland was $20,942 in 2000. Retail employment increased by 762 jobs between 1990 and 2000. The average retail job paid slightly more than $15,000 in 2000. Fair market rent for a two-bedroom unit in 2001 was $610. The number of low-income households increased between 1998 and 2001. Between 1998 and 2001, the estimated number of low-income households increased from 3,562 to 3,660, an increase of about 2.7% percent. The estimated percentage of households in the various low-income categories increased from 35% in 1998 to 42% 2001. Renters are far more likely to be low-income ~ homeowners. About 61% of renters were low-income in 2001, while only 25% of homeowners were considered low income in 2001. Housing sales prices increased nearly 50% between 1998 and 2001. The MLS reported 343 sales with an average price of $187,258 in 1998. In 2001, the MLS reported 365 sales with an average price of $277,742. Lot size affects value of single-family housing. The average value of dwellings on lots under 5,000 square feet was about $165,000 in 2001. The average value of homes on lots between 7,500 and 9,999 square feet was about $190,000 in 2001, while the average value of homes on lots between 12,500 and 14,999.square feet was over $270,000. The largest dwelling unit gap exists for households earning less than $10,000 annually. We estimate that the City needs approximately 800 additional units costing less than $250 per month. These units fall in the category of government assisted housing. Ashland has a large deficit of affordable owner-occupied housing units. Less than 4% of single-family dwellings are valued below $101,000, the minimum a household earning the median income of $40,400 could afford. Thus, 46% of households earning below the median income cannot afford to purchase a house in Ashland. Few multi-family units were built between 1990 and 2001. According to building pei-i~-,it data provided by the City of Ashland, a total of 1,842 dwelling units were permitted between 1990 and 2001. Of these, 85% were for single-family dwellings; 62% for detached single-family dwellings and 21% for attached single- family dwellings (including condominiums and townhouses). Only 9% of the permits issued were for multi-family housing types. Ashland is falling short of providing the housing types identified ~n the 1998 housing needs analysis. The number of single-family permits issued between 1998 and 2001 exceeded identified need by about 2S%, while the number of multiple family units has fallen short of the 30% need by over 20%. No government-assisted housing was built during this period. Ashland has a relatively small inventory of land zoned for multi-family housing. Only 27% of residential capacity (as measured in dwelling Units) exists on lands designated for multi-family use. The owner/renter mix in 2000 was 52%/48%. While tenure does not directly equate to housing type, this figure suggests the City does not have enough land designated for multi-family housing at this time. Following is a summary of the implications of housing trends in Ashland: · The number of affordable units in Ashland causes households to compete against each other for housing. · Land zoned for multiple family is being used for single family units. · Housing costs are forcing Ashland workers to live in other communities. · Land price appears to be a decreasing factor in total housing cost, · Housing Costs may be contributing to reductions in School enrollment. · Housing Costs may place greater demands on transportation systems and parking (i.e. with more people commuting). · Housing costs may limit economic development. RECOMMENDATIONS Following is a summary of potential land use strategies for addressing key housing issues identified in this report. Encourage more multi-family housing. The data are pretty conclusive that Ashland needs more multi-family rental housing. The permit data suggest that few apartments are being built and that most of the activity in higher density housing types is in condominiums and town homes. Not only are these higher cost multi-family types, many of these units are intended for home ownership. Potential approaches for increasing multi-family housing include: Increase the land supply. The Buildable Lands data suggest that the City has the capacity for about 525 multi-family dwellings. One approach to encourage apartment development is to designate more land for apartments. Consider restricting uses in certain zones to apartments. The building permit data suggest that a lot of the high-density housing has been single-family attached types that are owner-occupied units. Designating certain lands for rental units will encourage development of apartments. Consider policies that encourage redevelopment or adaptive reuse of structures. The location of rental units is also important. Increasing the supply of rental units near employment centers and the University will make these units more attractive. Encourage more affordable single-family housing types. The average sales price of a single-family resident was nearly $225,000 in 2001. Following are some approaches that can increase more affordable single-family housing types: Zone more land for small lot development. The data show a strong correlation between lot size and housing value. The City could decrease minimum lot sizes in certain residential zones, or could take an approach like the City of Corvallis, which requires a certain percentage of small lots (lots between 2,500 and 3,500 square feet) with subdivisions and planned unit developments. Make more land available for manufactured housing. The City identified a need of 3.5% of all housing for manufactured homes in subdivisions and manufactured homes in parks. Increasing land available for manufactured homes is one potential approach to allowing more affordable single-family housing. Develop more government-assisted housing. The data show a need for nearly 900 dwelling units that are affordable to households with annual incomes of $10,000 or less. The data suggest the City could develop as many as 50 units per year for the next 20 years to address this need. Reduce development fees for low-income projects. The City should conduct a careful review of the components of housing cost and calculate the percentage of total unit cost that is a result of development fees.