HomeMy WebLinkAboutFordyce Exhibits
I Barbara Christensen: [gouncil] Co-HousingeA# 2004~128
=:,'~.~~^~.
==
H
Page 1 i ,
/;
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Colin Swales" <colin@mind.net>
"Ashland City Council" <Council@ashland.or.us>
4/5/2005 9:29:20 AM
[Council] Co-Housing PA# 2004-128
//
/
Mayor and Council;-
(cc John McLaughlin - please forward to Applicant)
RE Co-Housing PA# 2004-128
First I must point out thatJ am amazed that the Council Packet and Record of this plannin~J application [
http://www.ashland.or.us/~iles/Fordyce_Appea.-Attachments.pdf] seemed to nowhere have a copy of the
minutes from the Planning Commission and Council discussion regarding PA# 2002-086 which made the
changes to our ALUO that facillitates this request for zone change. To rectify this ommissi()n, I am
appending those minutes for inclusion in the Public Record for this action. I urge you all to read those
minutes to refresh your memories of how these changes came about by your own actions upon the
recommendation of the Planning Commission..
To balance those recent changes, you also have to weigh the Comprehensive Plan which is now 12 years
old and a decade past its due date for a revision.
Also missing from the Record seeems to be the part of the Comprehensive Plan dealing with the
problems of providing low-income housing. The "affordable housing" mantra had not at thalt time become
the now oft-repeated lingua franca of just about every public meeting, but it references the problems even
then.
I would like the Chapter 6 Housing Element also to be included in the Record by reference and not just
cherry-pick those parts of the Comp Plan deemed necessary to support the PC's denial decision. I have
appended in this email a small part of that Chapter from the Comp Plan.(see below) but I cllso urge you to
read the whole Chapter as this visionary document has to guide your decsion on this mattElr.
My own concerns during deliberation on PA 2002-086 (as a then sitting Planning Commissioner) were
about the effect of spot zoning allowing R-3 lots in our Historic Residential Districts that, although currently
R-2 multi-family zoned, predominantly contain the single family homes that led to their National
Registration. However my concerns were dismissed by the planning director and I voted wiith the majority
for approval of the Ordinance change.
So I urge you to vote consistently with your prior unanimous approval of the ordinance change PA
2002-086 by approving this appeal.
Or else if you chose to deny I feel you need to take the required procedural steps to reverse that prior
decision on 2002-086.
To do otherwise is grossly unfair to this applicant.
Colin Swales
1282 Old Willow Lane.
P.S. On a personal note, I also own a home in the immediate vicinity of this proposal and have seen the
innovative design that Ms. Mindlin has already brought to our neighborhood with her own nearby
residence. It is strikingly dissimilar from her neighbors, but nevertheless refreshingly original and probably
the only home in this otherwise conventional suburban neighborhood exhibiting any bold architectural
merit.
---------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Comprehensive Plan Page 60 of 277 online file http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/ComprehensivePlan.pdf
Section 6.07 - Housing Element Development Standards
The City's development standards also have an impact on the provisions of housing and 011 the expense
of
l Barbara Christens-en - [Council] Co-Housin,g pA#. 20~04-128 . ::.' <:: .:...,:- . '_._
- -
u _ . :~~
Page 21
each house. In the past, conventional subdivision development has resulted in attractive but sometimes
monotonous neighborhoods. The attractiveness decreases as the density increases. At the! present time,
the cost of developing land is usually too high for moderate-cost housing to be located in areas that are
zoned for 7500-10,000 square feet lot size. Also, because of the changes in housing patterns and market
perceptions, conventional subdivision regulations no longer can accommodate the full range of housing
types and residential environments desired in the marketplace. As a result, Ashland has adopted a
performance standards approach, which will govern development on most new land. The performance
standards approach will be used in the future to guide residential development. It emphasi2:es quality of
life, overall density, and the residential environment created in each neighborhood, and compatibility with
surrounding neighborhoods, with less emphasis on the type of housing to be built on the site, within the
guidelines established by the City. Several different housing types may be compatible with ;an existing
neighborhood. Subdivision standards should continue to be used where development occurs in
neighborhoods, which have largely been developed under subdivision standards and for milnor land
partitioning needs.
------------------------------------------------------------
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION JANUARY 14, 2003
http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp? AMI 0=1081
PLANNING ACTION 2002-086
REQUEST FOR AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING CHAPTER 18.108 AND 18.106 OF THE ASHLAND
MUNICIPAL CODE (LAND USE ORDINANCE) REGARDING APPROVAL STANDARDS FOR ZONE
CHANGES AND ANNEXATIONS.
APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF REPORT
Molnar said this revision started over a year ago with the Housing Commission trying to address
affordable housing through zone changes and to some degree annexations. We already require affordable
housing in annexations. The changes to the annexation ordinance are to keep it consistent with whatever
standards the community decides upon.
Molnar said this is the fourth public meeting on this ordinance change. There were some concerns at the
August meeting by some Ashland developers (Greene and Dale) primarily regarding the changes to the
annexation affordability requirements. At the conclusion of that meeting, they agreed to have a meeting
with the Greene and Dale. At this time, they have not provided Staff with any further information.
Zone changes are more subjective than other applications we review. The approval body "may" approve it.
It doesn't say "shall". The purpose of the ordinance was to provide a basis to approve a zone change
based on a formidable commitment by the applicant to produce affordable housing and gUclrantee that
affordable housing for a period of time. A lot of this came about because of an a.pplication to re-zone the
Croman mill site from Industrial to different residential zoning districts and E-1. One of the primary reasons
the applicant was arguing for a re-zone was to meet a public need for affordable housing. As they got into
the application and defined what levels of affordability and what guarantees they would make, that is when
the application began to be much more vague. It finally got down to where the applicants were going to
comply with the same affordability levels that are in the current ordinance for projects within the city limits.
Zone changes and annexations, by their nature, are voluntary acts a property owner is taking. He/she is
coming to the city to ask for the rules to be changed on their property to allow either a more! intense use
than what is allowed for or a greater density than what is allowed. The feeling was, that as part of
annexations and zone changes, the affordability requirement should be much more stringent to
acknowledge the imparting of value on that property. And, the affordable units should be guaranteed to be
in the program a certain number of years.
Molnar said they removed the density bonus provision in zone changes. They added some additional
subsections for complying with affordable housing requirements. They increased the number of units
required. The term of affordability through a restrictive covenant would be for 60 years. If the applicant
was not interested in building affordable units, there is an option that an area in the project or an amount
of land in the project equal to the area needed to build those units would be transferred to Cl non-profit
affordable housing developer. Those organizations would produce the affordable housing with the
restrictive covenants.
Molnar explained the hypothetical example in the packet.
IBarbara Christensen - ICouncil] Co-Housing PA# 2004_}?~~'~N~'=,~~"*~~"~._~::~'__.__=,,'-
:"'~,,, :~--'=
Pa e
Gardiner wondered if it is possible to combine scenarios. Molnar said that has been discussed, however,
they are trying to keep it simple.
KenCairn asked about the quality of the lower income housing. Molnar said there is some language that
they be constructed of similar quality. McLaughlin said the whole development would be afifected by what
is built for affordable housing.
Molnar said they would be subject to the city's Site Design Standards.
PHILIP LANG, 758 B Street, believes this ordinance will not provide affordable housing. How many were
developed with Systems Development Charge (SDC) abatement/density? This amendment will not
produce any affordable or even moderate priced housing, but will produce a windfall for developers at our
expense. Molnar said around 100. Not all received SDC deferments. Around 38 percent of those units are
out of the program. About 60 are still in it. Lang said it is simple how we get affordable housing. We get a
commitment to it and not fool around with hidden subsidies.
McLaughlin can request a zone change today. We are not changing those standards whatsoever. If
someone comes in and asks and gets approved, they have to provide affordable housing. The 60-year
requirement will be strictly and enforced.
Briggs moved to extend the meeting to 11 :00 p.m. The motion was seconded and carried.
BILL STREET speaking for DEBBIE MILLER. Miller said there was not enough public notice of this
process. Street has not followed this but would like to see an in-depth review of this changf~. Will this
change increase property speculations and values? Will this lead to increased taxes? WiIIlthis lead to
significant increases in the population of our town? Miller would like to be assured that the long-term
affordable be guaranteed in perpetuity. One thing that is missing for Street is visuals. It is hard to take it all
in especially at 1 0:30 p~m. at night.
Street asked about the term "area median income". Molnar said they are published once or twice a year
from HUD. The median income for a family of four in the Ashland area is slightly over $41,000. Fifty
percent of the families earn more than that.
Street believes there needs to be a continual educational piece in all of their meetings.
Chapman explained to Street that most of the legislative hearings come to them after having been
discussed at great length at previous meetings, publicly noticed.
Gardiner explained that the Commission meets twice a month and they try to get through tl1e whole
agenda. Legislative amendments come to them several times. He would encourage more lPeople to follow
the process through. The information is out there and can be accessed. People need to take the initiative
to access it. At some point, the process has to move forward.
Morris said if no one shows up at the meeting, they have to assume there is no interest.
MARY ANN STRONG, said she talked to several people about coming tonight and they said not to bother
going, that everything will be rubber-stamped. That's why she is here. How do you get representatives
from the community?
Molnar said it has been 12 years since they have had the affordable density bonus provision in the current
ordinance that allows for a 35 percent increase in density for affordable housing. Other than last week
(DeLuca - 916 E. Main) that is the first time it has been exercised in over five years. There is really not an
interest on the part of the private development community. The prices they can get for market rate
housing, they don't need to increase density. They also looked at whether there would be em interest for
people to increase their density on smaller lots in historic districts. This ordinance wouldn't change what
they could do with small lots. It is for the bigger projects and ways to partner with other non-profits.
Swales feels this seems we are encouraging spot zoning in our residential districts. We have to look at the
quality and aesthetics, especially in our historic districts as well as just squeezing in more and more and
making this too easy to attain.
McLaughlin is not sure why it is easier to attain. We are not changing the standards for a zone change.
We are making it harder and making it more restrictive. We are not creating a tool to encourage zone
changes.
Swales said if you provide affordable housing and there is not a "shall" but a "may", it seems it is pretty
much a slam-dunk - you'll get a rezone. What part of the Comp Plan will stop are-zone wl1en you are
putting in affordable housing? McLaughlin said compatibility and density issues; the same ones that would
apply if you weren't doing affordable housing.
Fields said this subject has been going on for 12 years. What are we going to do about it? This ordinance
is so stiff that no one will take advantage of it. There is no way to make money on it. We might possibly
get some affordable units out of it. If it were successful, we would have to have some legal entity for
I J~arbara C~ristenserl~:~ g~~ui'cin. ~o-Housing P A# 2004-128
==~-~ .: ~~
~_.>
~o_,~ ,,'...J5~g~~4]
enforcement. That may come and it will require regulation and could cost the taxpayers money.
Fields likes it because it involves graduated income levels.
Kistler believes our planning and land use ordinances are what have made Ashland unaffordable and why
we don't have banners here and why we don't have families with children. It seems that of all the other
options we have asked about are not legal. This isn't the strongest thing, but he doesn't know what else as
a body we can do.
KenCairn moved to move this forward to the City Council. The motion was seconded and carried favorably
with Briggs casting a vote of indecision.
--------------------------------------------'P'--________________________
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 18, 2003
http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?AMID=1166
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Public Hearing on An Ordinance Modifying Chapter 18.108 and 18.106 of the Ashland Municipal Code,
Land Use Ordinance, Regarding Approval Standards for Zone Changes and Annexations.
Staff Report:
Senior Planner Bill Molnar gave a report on the issue of Zone Changes and Annexations, illlustrating main
points with an overhead presentation. It was noted that these changes came out of some Elfforts by the
Housing Commission and some concerns within the community.
Land use Strategy
Code provision intended to increase supply of affordable housing.
Links construction low-moderate housing with market rate housing.
Voluntary provision for Zone Changes - optional for developer.
Zone Changes - results of proposed amendments
Makes the "public need" for affordable housing an optional approval criteria.
Zone Change requests still must comply with relevant Comp Plan policies.
Sets specific affordable housing targets for applications.
Guarantees affordable levels for a period of 60 years.
Amendments apply to
Zone change applications involving an increase in residential density.
A change from one residential zone designation to another.
A request for a residential overlay on Commercial or Employment land.
Approval Criteria
The change implements a public need other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the
Comprehensive Plan, or
A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning was proposE~d,
necessitating the need to adjust to new conditions, or
Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action.
New Approval Criterion (optional)
35% of the base density to qualifying buyers of renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income;
or
25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income;
or
20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of ml9dian income;
or
15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of ml9dian income;
or
Title to buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit affordable housing developer for the
purpose of complying with subsection 2 above.
Zone Changes - Request for Residential overlay - Commercial & Employment Zoned lands
Same affordable housing requirements as residential zone change requests; plus
Must demonstrate that the project will not negatively impact the City's commercial and industrial land
supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan.
Public Hearing Open: 7:25 p.m.
Jack Hardesty/575 Dogwood Way/Suggested that another hearing on this issue be scheduled and
publicized in advance in order to give more opportunity for public input.
l ~a!bara Christens~^~ - [CouncjllCo-HQu~~~9 PA# 2004--128
_n. ~'. ..
-..
~.
Page 5 ~
Colin Swales/461 Allison StreeUFelt that since Ashland is relying on a tourism economy we need to
maintain character of historic districts. He was concerned with spot zoning and the potential loss of the
historical integrity of a neighborhood.
Chris Oswald/541 Fairview StreeUMember of the Housing Commission/Spoke in support of the proposed
ordinance amendments.
Diana Shavey/694 Oak Knoll/Former member of Housing Commission/Spoke in favor of the proposed
ordinance, noting the difficulty Ashland faces in terms of land acquisition for affordable housing. She felt it
possible to maintain the integrity of residential districts through good design.
Public Hearing Closed: 7:33 p.m.
Council discussed the issue. It was noted that the issue before the Council tonight was to decide to
approve or to not approve bringing a proposed ordinance change to the Council. If approvE!d the Planning
Commission would craft the ordinance, which would come back to Council for first and second readings. It
was noted that this issue has been the subject of at least 4 public hearings.
It was noted that with annexations affordable housing requirements could not be increased, and that the
proposed ordinance would clarify those requirements.
Community Development Director John Maclaughlin noted that the proposed ordinance contains specific
requirements that neighborhood not be degraded, and that the Council and Planning Commission has
discretion in the application of policies. Design standards would always apply and all properties in an
impacted neighborhood would always be looked at. It was noted that these provisions specifically would
not allow density bonuses. Base density must be allowed.
DeBoer noted concern with creating pockets of properties within the City, noting problems with LIDs.
Maclaughlin responded that the City has a passive annexation policy, only annexing wherE~ owners are
willing. He felt that pockets are not always a bad thing.
Councilors Hartzell/Jackson m/s to approve the Ordinance amendments as proposed toni~lht and direct
Staff to bring the Ordinance back for first reading at the next meeting. Discussion: Council discussed
affordable housing requirements. Voice vote: All Ayes. Motion passed.
cc:
John Mclaughlin <mclaughj@ashland.or.us>
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
judith freese <uma@opendoor.com>
<council@ashland.or.us>
4/4/2005 1 :31 :02 AM
[Council] fordyce street cohousing
Dear Council Members--I am writing in support of the Fordyce Street
Cohousing Community. The project is a grassroots effort to build
housing that is affordable and that's environmentally friendly. The
partnership with Habitat for Humanity to build two low income units
will help those who need it most. I previously lived in Ashland for 20
years, but have recently moved to Talent because of the dramatic rise
in housing costs in the city. I am a nurse at the Ashland Hospital,
and many of my coworkers also are now unable to afford housing in the
city. Ashland needs to have alternatives for those who work in town
but aren't wealthy. Even though the neighbors may be skeptical about a
change in zoning and the slight increase in density, this is to be
expected, as changes almost always are initially met with resistance.
In this particular situation, it seems more important to do what is in
the interest of the greater community of Ashland rather than to please
the small, vocal group of neighbors who oppose the project. I urge you
to vote in favor of the zone change.
Sincerely, Judith Freese
Council mailing list
Council@pine.ashland.or.us
http://pine.ashland.or.us/mailman/listinfo/cou ncil
~~' . -=~._~= '. Page 1 I
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Dennis Freese <Dennfree@opendoor.com>
<council@ashland.or.us>
4/4/2005 1 :31 :03 AM
[Council] support for Fordyce Street Cohousing
Dear Council Members,
I urge you to vote for the zone change for the Fordyce Street
Cohousing Community. I believe that it will benefit the community to
have more affordable housing. Cohousing will contribute to the
neighborhood by its emphasis on creating community, being child
friendly, creating more open space, and using environmentally sound
design. Sincerely, Dennis Freese
Council mailing list
Council@pine.ashland.or.us
http://pine.ashland.or.us/mailman/listinfo/cou ncil
Page 1 ~
fgU;;-7" ."-
r'tf, , '::,:.:.;1
~. ".
f . iioit
-
April 4, 2005
Ashland City Council
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Re: Fordyce Street Cobousing Community Request for Spot Re-Zoning
Dear Ashland City Councilor,
I am writing in support of the request for spot re-zoning put forward by the Fordyce Street
Cohousing Community. I attended the previous council meeting where this issue was
discussed and had requested to speak but time ran out before my name was called.
Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting on April 5 due to family obligations. Please
accept these written comments in lieu of oral comments at the meeting.
.
I have a unique perspective that I would like to share with you as you move forward in making
this decision. I have a Master's degree in Community Development from Goddard College.
The focus of my thesis focused on the potential for reducing the ecological impacts of housing
by using neighborhood building models, such as cohousing. During my study, I visited
existing cohousing communities in Massachusetts, Colorado, California, Washington,
Denmark and Sweden. I also visited intentional communities ( essentially communes). The
best way I can describe cohousing is that it lies on the spectrum between the individual single
family home completely separated from its neighbors (and neighborhood) and the intentional
community, which acts in many ways as one very large extended family.
Livine: in Cohousine:
Members of cohousing communities own their own fully functional homes, work outside in the
community, and keep their finances separate from their neighbors. They also cluster their
homes and share the use of a common house and common outdoor facilities. The common
house generally has a large kitchen and meeting space capable of holding all of the members of
the community. Communities choose how often common meals will be served and
participation in community meals is entirely voluntary. Common houses also of1:en have a
children's play room, a guest room, and may have other rooms, such as workshops and
libraries. While each household also has some private outdoor space, the community generally
shares facilities such as children's play areas and garden areas. Cars are deliberately parked to
the outside of the community to facilitate casual social interaction among the residents.
As I traveled from one cohousing community to another, I made the following observations
that might be of use to you in your deliberations. The first is that people generally increased
their expectations of themselves in relation to their neighbors. For instance, cohousing
communities are typically extremely tidy - both the individual homes and the shared facilities.
People seem to rise to the occasion and do better than they would if living in a neighborhood
where they didn't care if the trash in their front yard was off putting to some neighbor they
didn't know. Living in cohousing brings with it responsibility to others and community
members take it seriously.
I also discovered that the cohousing communities in the U.S. often came up against resistance
from neighbors: who didn't understand the concept of cohousing and were concerned that this
new community was really a commune and was going to bring with it all manner of social ills
(as well as falling property values). That has not happened yet in the U.S. Most cohousing
communities have waiting lists of people hoping to buy into the community and there is very
little turnover. The idea that this cohousing community will be built and then the original
owners will flee leaving it to renters is not borne out by the evidence.
Cohousing is not a politically correct term for a "gated community." Cohousing communities
work very hard to connect with the surrounding neighborhood and very often find that once the .
initial fear is gone, neighborhood children from beyond the cohousing community start coming
over to play in the shared facilities and the cohousing community become"s an asset to the
larger neighborhood.
Cohousing is a fabulous environment in which to raise children. I interviewed children in all
of the cohousing communities I visited to determine how life was different for these children
than it was for children in typical suburban developments. One question asked them how
many people they knew in their previous neighborhood before moving to cohousing. The
answers usually fluctuated between 4 and 8 people. Every single child, however, stated that
they knew EVERYONE in their cohousing community. A cohousing community of25 homes
often has 70 - 80 men, women, and children of all ages in it. When I asked them what was
different from their old neighborhood, children would often mention that they could go to any
of the homes in their cohousing community for help if they needed it. One young man said
that his Mom now allowed him to stay home by himself occasionally because she felt safer
knowing that if anything happened he had many people to go to for help. Many adults
mentioned that they appreciated having a wide range of ages in the community because so
many of them lived far from their grandchildren or had children who lived very far away from
their grandparents.
Typically, cohousing communities accommodate between 12 and 36 households. From my
experience, the best size seems to be between 18 and 22 households. This size community is
big enough to have enough people to share maintenance tasks without being so large that
people are not able to fully connect with their neighbors. At the meeting, I heard one person
make the comnlent that they wouldn't mind the cohousing community if it had 8 houses
instead of 13, but this community is already near the lowest number possible for a viable
cohousing community. That reduction in the number of homes would also increase
significantly the price of the individual homes and destroy any potential benefit with respect to
affordable housing.
I also heard concerns at the last council meeting that the Fordyce Street Cohousing Community
was incompatible with the existing neighborhood. My research tells me differently.
Cohousing is a neighborhood made up of people who know each other well, help each other
out when they need it, and keep a collective eye on the children and elderly. It is not a hog
farm. By approving the Fordyce Street Cohousing Community, you will simply be clearing
the way for a neighborhood (rather than a line of houses) to be built within an existing
neighborhood - a complementary situation that should be the goal of every housing
development built in our city.
Affordable Housine In Ashland
As a city leader, you bear an awesome responsibility. There is no crystal ball providing a
glimpse into the future. There is no knowing exactly what result a particular decision will
have. In this position of responsibility, you must review the facts and make your best
judgment about the consequences a particular action will have, voting for change only in those
instances where the likely consequence is to move the community closer to the collective
vision that its people hold for its future.
Ashland is a very attractive community because visionary leaders put in place a system of land
use planning that would protect the characteristics most valued by our community. Those
visionary leaders protected significant open space, created a lively and prosperous downtown
area, maintained clean drinking water, and created an incredible place in which to raise
children. Their efforts created a community that is desired by many people. The incredible
demand for housing in Ashland is a direct result of the good work that community leaders did
over the course of the last hundred years to ensure a livable community. Yet that good work
may, in the end, lead to the destruction of the characteristics this community values most.
As a citizen of Ashland for over 8 years, I have watched housing prices rocket out of reach for
most people who are at the median income for the Rogue Valley. In three months we will
close the second elementary school in three years, leaving us with only three of the five
elementary schools that were open in 2000. The fact is, our community is becoming hostile to
young families. And we know it.
The issue of affordable housing was one of the top priorities of the Ashland City Council
elections last November and the closing of elementary schools has proven to be nlore painful
than we imagined. As a community, we understand that Ashland is out of reach for most
families with young children. As city leaders, you understand that as well and have passed
ordinances designed to begin to address the problem. Yet there is very little on-the-ground
evidence of success in the effort to provide a permanent supply of housing that is in reach of
median income families, let alone families who have even fewer economic means.
Weare in a quandary. Expanding the urban growth boundary would free more land up to
development, thereby bringing the land cost down and making housing more affordable. But
the risk is uncontrolled sprawl. Ifwe are truly committed to creating a community that
welcomes all ages, and yet are opposed to uncontrolled sprawl, then our only choice is to get
creative in the creation of permanent stocks of housing in Ashland that are within reach of the
average wage earner in the valley. That creativity will likely come in the form of changes in
density and the way in which we design the use of our land.
I believe that the Fordyce Street Cohousing Community is one of those creative ideas for
creating housing that is in reach of a greater range of people. It is for this reason that I support
spot re-zoning for the proj ect.
To be perfectly honest, I do not understand why the owner of the property does not simply
divide the land and sell it as individual lots. That land represents a very nice profit for the
landowner, yet they have chosen to pursue the path of cohousing as a gift to our community. I
appreciate the gift that is being offered, the spirit in which it is offered, and I believe our city
government is obliged to work in partnership with people who are willing to put their own
economic well-being second to the goals of the larger community.
In this one action, the Ashland City Council has the power to create housing that benefits the
entire community. The community has made itself clear on the issue of affordable housing and
elementary schools. We want a diverse range of economic means in our community. And we
want children in our schools. We get neither if we fail in our efforts to put housing in financial
reach of more young families.
The Ashland Cilty Council has been presented with an opportunity to change the trend of fewer
people having access to housing in Ashland. Spot re-zoning for this project will create
significant progress toward the goal of affordable housing in our community without requiring
changing the land use for other similar properties. At the last meeting, it was routinely brought
up that if the city approves the Fordyce Street Cohousing Community it would be obligated to
approve any sirnilar projects that are proposed. I say that if the City of Ashland finds itself
staring down the barrel of a similar proposal in the future that guarantees equity limits and
provides additional affordable housing, there would be worse decisions than to approve it.
It is my sincere hope that this opportunity will be seized as a step on the path toward a more
welcoming cOITlmunity for people of all economic means. If you have any questions about
cohousing and 'would like to speak with me directly, I can be reached on my cell phone at 778-
0718. Thank you for considering my comments in your deliberations.
Sincerely,
Tonya Graham
418 Lit Way
Ashland, OR 97520
3
-c
Q)
(")
r-+
o
:J
m
:J
s.
a
:J
3
CD
:J
r-+
X
I\J
~
Q3
<~
Z "'T'I -. (")
O v 00 ~
CD -. "...,.
-. r-+" I
oor-+OQ)
CD 00 .., ..,
00 r-+
::1.
-c
00
.............
x x x ~
I\Jl\Jl\Jtv
o
G)
c
CD
00
r-+
""U
Q)
..,
"
-.
:J
co
en
-c
Q)
(")
CD
00
..........
-c
-
c
00
00
r-+
CJ) CD ~
? CD ~
00 r-+ ~
o -c tv
Q)
..,
"
-.
:J
co
.............
..........
:J
o
00
r-+
CD
CD
r-+ ~
-c
Q)
..,
"
-.
:J
co
.............
~ ~CD
000 s:
-hr+ 00 Q)
-t; r+~x
en~~1\J ~
(J)q~<~;o;oN
~m~CD~mCDO
r-+ ..., ::r CD -. 00 ::1
@""U m ~ ~. 0. 0.-. CD
C/J Q) -. CD a. ~ CD
~~OOCDr-+:J
-. :J :J 00 (")
:J (") (") CD
co CD CD 00
.......... ~
~
-c
CD
.., I\J
CD ~
00 ·
-. tv
0.1\J
CD
:J
(")
CD
~
I\J
.
W
I\J
.
en
CJ)~
.0
OOc
..,
i
::1
.....
~
~
~
.
~
~
~
.
CD
(]I
"'C
CD
.., I\J
CD ~
00
-.
0.
CD
:J
(")
CD
::0
~ .
wN
~
I\J ""U ~
~ a a
(]I "'C-c
I\J 0 0
00 tn
CD CD
0.Q.
~
I\J
W
\J
...,
--
3
-0)
::J ..,
0'<
CD Z
l' 0) co
~ en --
COCO
c..:T
c-
OO
co ...,
::J ()
~_ 0
~~
co
..,
::J
en
Page 1 of5
John Mclaughlin - Fordyce Co-Housing Questions from Kate Jackson
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
cc:
John McLaughlin
City Council"
3/1/2005 12:06 PM
Fordyce Co-Housing Questions from Kate Jackson
Barbara Christensen; Bill Molnar; Gino Grimaldi; Mike Franell;
Council Members,
Councilor Jackson submitted the following 12 questions to staff for a response. We are sending the response
out to all council members, and will have copies available at the meeting as well.
Mac
Sue,
I have a series of questions about the Fordyce appeal which Council is
hearing tomorrow evening. Could you parse them out to the right people?
By the way, I was having trouble getting the Print button to work on
the pieces of the code I was reading online. I ended up copying and
pasting into a Word Doc which worked better anyway because it conserved
paper...
Thanks,
Kate
Kate Jackson
Ashland City Councilor
20 East Main Street
Ashland OR 97520
541-482-2612
katejackson@opendoor.com
Questions:
1) Where are the December Tree Commission minutes regarding this
application? They were not posted when I looked last night. Is this
development subject to the Tree Ordinance because it is attached
housing? I thought it did not apply to sfr?
The concerns and recommendations of the Tree Commission are in the record at page 54, with 4 specific
recommendations regarding this action"
If the zone change is approved, the development will occur under the R-2 zoning designation. The property is
vacant. The Tree Ordinance requires a tree removal permit for "Removal of trees greater than ~3" DBH on multi-
family residentially zoned lots (R-2, R-3, and R-1-3.5) not occupied solely by a single family detached
dwelling." (18.61.042 D.1.b.)
2) When did the mininum density ordinance go into effect? I realize
this project is not directly subject to it because it began much
earlier. I would still like to know.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\mclaughj\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM
3/1/2005
Page 2 of5
The ordinance became effective January 7,2005. This application was filed on September 10, 2004, and
deemed completH on December 7,2004.
3) How many homes on Orchid and Kirk could qualify for accessory units?
It is difficult to say. The main difficulty would be in providing the necessary off-street parking. There are
probably not anyon-street credits readily available, so it would be on lots that could meet the two spaces
necessary for the home, and still provide one additional space for a 500 sq. ft or less accessory unit, or another
two spaces if the accessory unit were larger. To determine how many could qualify would require a site analysis
of the homes regarding driveway sizes and lot coverage. We don't have that information easily accessible
without doing a nHighborhood survey.
4) Where in the code does it say what activities qualify for
Conservation density bonus points? Do we require Earth Advantage or do
other things qualilFy? 18.88.090 refers to Council policy guidelines
for Conservation Bonus Point standards. Can you direct me to or
provide a copy of those standards? Thanks.
18.88.040.B.3.a. allows up to a 15% density bonus for conservation housing. We have a specific list of
construction requirements (attached) that details how to comply with this requirement. We are planning on
amending the code to change to the Earth Advantage standards. We are working with the Conservation
Division on this ordinance amendment. The applicants are not proposing a density bonus, since the R-2 zoning
would allow for the density proposed, so this section does not apply. They are proposing to develop the site to
Earth Advantage requirements, and are indicating that as one of the merits of their proposal.
5) If the drainage is not a mapped or regulated floodplain, how are we
requiring capacity for the 100 year flow? (staff report recommended
conditions page 51 of appeal file) Is Public Works assisting with the
calculation of what the flow would be? Why don't we have more info to
share with the applicant about the origin of the flow (pg 44 appeal
file, Drainage Way Restoration, "irrigation" outlets generally
originate from a stream channel and/or TID and represent much more than
actual irrigation rUlnoff)? Does the Storm Water Master Plan help
illuminate this situation? Didn't some work by Richard Hart study the
storm drain paths of stream channels during and after the 1997 flood?
The drainage actually is a mapped and regulated floodplain corridor, and subject to the design standards of
18.62.070.8. regarding a 100 year flood. It has been on our maps since the late 1970's. I believe that it has
historically been an irrigation channel that did have some riparian characteristics, which led to it being mapped
originally. The option for the applicants was to either propose a modification of the P&E map to delete it, or
comply with the standards and incorporate it into the project design. Given all the other facets of their
application, we recommended they retain it, which they have. As Fordyce Street and the surrounding properties
have been improved, the storm drainage which used to follow this channel has been diverted to the street
system. This channel may carry some storm drainage from the railroad tracks, where there is an irrigation gate,
and perhaps some limited surface drainage. It is very small, however, and is essentially a remnant from the
agricultural past for this neighborhood.
6) The staff memo regarding council options suggests referring the
decision back to Plclnning Commission if the Council reverses the denial
of zone change. Why? The staff report contains recommended conditions
that I feel comfortable with. I object to further extending the
process for the applicant.
The Planning Commission essentially only focused on the issues associated with the zone change, and didn't
delve into the design issues raised by the neighborhood. Staff assumed that the primary focus of the issues on
appeal would be centered around the zone change again, and the Council may not want to get into the nuts and
file://C:\Documents and Settings\mclaughj\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM
3/1/2005
Page 3 of5
bolts of the actual design issues. However, there are recommended conditions in the staff report, and the
Council has the discretion to add, delete, or modify those conditions as they see fit, and could choose to
approve the entire project. Given the range of issues and complexities, staff thought it may bE~ more
appropriate, if the Council approved the zone change, to return the design review back to the Planning
Commission. You have the option to disregard that recommendation.
7) Why is the purchase price and financing of the remaining units
(after the two affordable units that are required) subject to
conditions of approval? It is good to know they are aiming for lower
prices, and it helps justify the zone change, but what leverage does
the City have to control those 11 units?
One of the merits of the proposal which the applicant's referred to in their application project would be 100%
affordable, under certain standards which they proposed. Given that the zone change request has a certain
discretionary nature to it, staff felt that if the applicants were indicating they were providing 100% affordable
housing to gain support for their request, they should be held accountable for that statement. If they were not
going to meet those standards, then we would ask that the applicants not indicate that as one of the merits of
the proposal.
8) Neighborhood Connectivity: With four streets stubbed into the
undeveloped unincorporated parcel to the west of the development, why
is a bike and ped path required of this project? Staff report notes
that this parcel was 'not accommodated' by the street grid layout at
the time of the earlier subdivisions. What are the City's plans or
intentions regarding paths, bikeways, and streets when development
occurs to the west? Will there be a through connection to North
Mountain at some time in the future? Into the Village Park? There is a
pedestrian path through the block of Village Park, that does not carry
bikes. I assume bikes would use the paved streets. Why require a
publicly accessed bike path? Why require a through ped path?
In their application to the Planning Commission" the applicants proposed a public easement for a multi-use path
as part of their proposal. Since it was proposed and considered a merit to the proposal, staff felt that a condition
to ensure it's development was warrented. It was only at the meeting, and after Staff had indicated this as
another one of the merits of the application, did the applicants object to the connection. They stated they had
some communication problem with their designer and had concerns with the neighborhood con nector"
The requirements for the path are found in the City's Transportation Element. Policies which specifically apply
are "Provide walkways and bikeways in conjunction with all land divisions, street construction and reconstruction
projects and all commercial, industrial and residential development." "Require pedestrian and bicycle
easements to provide neighborhood connectors and reduce vehicle trips." The specific ordinance requirements
comes from the Street Standards, which state: "Cul-de-sacs and other dead-end streets are not typical of
traditional neighborhood design except in areas where topographic, wetland and other physical features
preclude connection. Where extreme conditions preclude a street connection, a continuous nonautomotive
connection in the form of a multi-use path or trail shall be provided."
The City will require connections to the proposed streets and multi-use trails when the property to the west is
annexed and a development plan proposed. There will be a north-south connection to North Mountain Park, and
perhaps other connections in the future development. The path in the proposed development could be
developed similarly to that in Village Park, with compacted decomposed granite, which provides an appropriate
pedestrian path, and slow speed bicycle path. It is used by bicyclists from Village Park to the North Mountain
Park, due to the short nature of the path.
We have similar pedestrian connections that dead-end onto future developable property, with the current Clay
Street annexation request being an example, as well as pedestrian easments on the Albertsons/Rite Aid
property to the property in the county to the north. These were done to provide inter-neighborhood connections
and to meet the City's plan requirements.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\mclaughj\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM
3/1/2005
Page 4 of5
From the definition of a Multi-Use Path in the Street Standards: "Multi-use paths are off-street facilities used
primarily for walking and bicycling. These paths can be relatively short connections between neighborhoods
(neighborhood connections), or longer paths adjacent to rivers, creeks, railroad tracks and open space.
Function: For pedestrians and bicyclists, provide short connections between destinations arid longer paths in
situations where CI similar route is not provided on the street network. Enhances route options and shorten
distances traveled for pedestrians and bicyclists."
A through pedestrian path from this development provides for options for pedestrians to visit neighbors, walk to
other destinations in a shorter route, and ultimately assist in encouraging pedestrian travel from this
development to other destinations in the neighborhood, without having to travel out onto Fordyce Street. It is all
related to an interconnected system for all neighborhoods and developments.
9) The appellants materials notes that Fordyce is designed for 3,000
vtpd. Is this correct? Fordyce connects from East Main around into
the Village Park development to North Mountain. Does its design
traffic capacity match the buildout of all the developed and vacant
lands that feed into it?
Fordyce Street is identified as a "Neighborhood Collector" in the City's Transportation Element, with an
average of 1500-5000 vehicle trips per day, It was built and designed to accommodate the full buildout of the
abutting properties, and to accomodate limited through traffic which may utilize the street. It complies with the
design standards for a neighborhood collector.
10) I have looked at the Parking Standards in 18,88.060. It contains
standards for the number of parking spaces in a PUD based on the number
of bedrooms and square footage of the homes. On-street parking is not
required for the Fordyce project. What is the rationale for not
requiring on-street parking in R-2 if a public street is not created?
Do you assume that the existing public street will have the capacity
for parking? Is on-street parking required for a standard subdivision
in R-l?
18.88.060 - Parkin';] Standards for Performance Standards Developments requires that all off-street parking be
provided as required under Chapter 18.92 - Off-Street Parking of the ordinance. It is assumed in the ordinance
that if a new multi-family development (R-2) does not require a new street for development, then the existing
surrounding streets can accommodate over flow parking, if necessary, and no additional parking spaces are
required. R-1 developments require one on-street parking space for each unit in the development.
Generally speakin~j, the parking demand for multi-family developments is lower than single family homes due to
the size and nature of the uses. The ordinance recognizes this in the shared parking requirements for multi-
family developments. However, we have seen instances where the multi-family standards, when applied to a
development which functions more as a single family style, can create some peak parking issues. However, the
ordinance does not require additional parking.
11) The applicant original submittal contains a list of Comp Plan
policies which the project satisfies. It also addresses pertinent
recommendations from the Housing Needs Analysis and Action Plan. What
can you tell us about why the Planning Commission focussed only on two
policies with no apparent discussion in the meeting minutes of all the
policy implication?
The Commission heard substantial testimony on all facets of the application. However, the majority vote was
based on the issue of neighborhood compatibility, essentially an R-2 island in an area already established as R-
1. The Commission found merit in the affordable component, the cohousing design, and other issues.
However, they did not find the proposal compatible with the surrounding single family development pattern. So
the relevant comprehensive plan policies were those addressed in the findings. It is similar to the Council's
decision on the Bemis application, where there was much discussion about many of the merits of the proposal,
and many issues raised in opposition...but the Council basically focused in on the Big Box provisions, and that
was the basis for the denial. In this application, the Comprehensive Plan policies on zoning and neighborhood
file://C:\Documents and Settings\mclaughj\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM
3/1/2005
compatiblity were the focus of the decision.
12) Do you have or could you make a table with each lot square
footage, the total of the 13 lots, the public space and the total for
the entire project? The numbers are on page 92 of the packet, drawing
5-3 of the application.
I'll take a look and see what we can come up with. ..we under some other time constraints right now.
Hope this all helps.
Ashland Planning Department
file://C:\Documents and Settings\mclaughj\Local Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM
Page 5 of5
3/1/2005
Page 1 of 1
G~
.
I
Cecile Shohet <cshohet~~gmail.com>
Support from a co-ho neighbor
2 messages
David Sharken
<davids@foodbankwma.org>
To: cshohet@gmail.com
Cc: mkraus@krausfitch.com
Thursday, February 17, 2005 4: '1 0:04 PM GMT-
08:00
Dear Mayor, City Council Members, and Neighbors,
, City of Ashl.:iInd
~ Planning E>lhibit
I
I. EXhibit#_~
; PA ~..uJ.iii..~
::'::.:~,Staff...f&..:.
-
February 17, 2005
We are a family of four that live next door to the Pioneer Valley Co-.housing
project in Amherst, Massachusetts. This project is 32 family units and was built
about 6-7 years ago. At first, we were hesitant because it seemed like a large
development for our area on the north side of a small college town. But, we
witnessed the housing project being built with excellent community design and we
have found them to be wonderful neighbors.
The residents of the co-housing community are very involved in neighborhood
events such as pancake breakfast fundraiser for our local conservation area and
are active in school and town activities. My kids especially love going there
for occasional neighborhood celebrations and for Halloween because they
experience so much fun, decorations and candy!
I think one could not ask for better neighbors.
Sincerely
David Sharken
Amherst, MA
Cecile Shohet <cshohet@gmail.com>
To: David Sharken <davids@foodbankwma.org>
Thursday, February 17, 2005 4:20:4<<J1 PM GMT-08:00
David - thanks so much!!! cecile
text
http://gmail.google.com/gmail?&ik=&ik=8657f69b16&view=pt&th=1 0222cd328f970d9&... 2/17/2005
G~
Compose Mail
Inbox (12)
Starred 1:l
Sent Mail
Drafts (4)
All Mail
Spam (1)
Trash
Contacts
... Labels
Edit labels
... I nvite a friend
Give Gmail to:
Send Invite 50 left
preview invite
Page 1 of2
cshohet@gmaiLcom I SE!ttings I Help I Sigl
.
I
Show search optl
Create a filter
Search Mail
Search the Web
<< Back to Inbox
Report Spam
Archive
< Newer 52 of 197
Older)
Cohousing Impact on Neighbors Inbox
BuckRog@aol.com to rr Show options Jan 31 (4 days ago)
Cecile,
I am a direct neighbor to Co-Housing in N. Amherst MA.
Over time I have become an associate member. In
almost every way I have found the Cohousing
community to be a boon to me and my family. By the
very nature of their choice, cohousers are open to
sharing time and resources. I have never been at a loss
for a lawnmower, a drill, a cup of milk, or a shoulder to
lean on. People have cooked meals for my family when
we had sickness and have supported my kids when they
were down.
Locating next to cohousing was the best thin I ever did.
. . r pressure on
property values. It makes it a little hard to make
comparisons. I do know that the value of the units in
cohousing has far exceeded the value of "open market"
houses. There is so much interest in the concept that
there is always a waiting list for homes. I feel that if I
ever did decide to leave I would receive more for my
home and would have along list of friends of cohousing
that would line up to buy my house.
If finances were my only concern, it would be a great
deal, but finances is the smallest benefit from living in
the neighborhood with cohousers.
I wish I could find a way to reassure your neighbors. I
am glad to take phone calls any time, if they want to give
me a call.
Stephan Rogers
99 Pulpit Hill Rd
Amherst MA 01002
Cell 413-531-6884
Reply Reply to all Forward Invite BuckRog@aol.com to Gmail
Cecile Shohet to BuckR( Show options Jan 31 (4 days ago)
Stephen - this is the most perfect, fantastic letter I could've
asked
for..... thanks so, so much - cecile
. ShDVi quoted tex:t -
Reply Forward
BuckRog@aol.com to rr Show options Jan 31 (4 days ago)
Cecile,
My pleasure. I meant it when I said that I would be
http://gmail.google.com/gmail?&ik=8657f69b 16&view=cv&search=inbox&th= 101 ce 1 dl9a3 ... 2/4/2005
February 5, 2005
Dear Mayor, City Council Members, and Neighbors,
I am writing in support of the Fordyce Street Co-Housing Community
project in your Ashland. I understand that at this time they own the
land and plan to build 13 units on 1.3 acres. I also understand that 2
of the 13 units are low income housing and will be built by Habitat for
Humanity volunteers and that all the rest of the homes will affordable
for people of median income.
My family and I live next door to Higher Ground, a co-housing co~nunity
in Bend, OR. My wife and I looked at property in Bend for several
years before moving from out-of-state. We specifically chose to
purchase our house because of it's proximity to Higher Ground. In our
opinion, other neighborhoods simply did not offer the same quality of
social interaction and community spirit. We have lived in more
conventional neighborhoods and been disappointed that our neighbors did
not make "neighborlinessu more of a priority.
We enjoy living next door to a co-housing community. We participate in
their community work days and often join them for weekly community
dinners, community celebrations and other social events. We have many
friends at Higher Ground and appreciate both the diversity of the
people who live there as well as a sense of shared values.
An example of the added value of a co-housing community such as Higher
Ground is their approach with children in the community. They hired a
local parent educator to conduct a series of workshops in order to
develop a strategy for how neighbors can appropriately set limits and
establish rapport with children from other families including children
who come to Higher Ground from the surrounding neighborhood. This
process led to kids meetings that solicited feedback, ideas and
comments from the children themselves. I could not imagine another
neighborhood investing the time, energy, or money in a similar manner.
I urge you not to underestimate the value of having a co-housing
community in Ashland. I think they are an important alternative to
more traditional neighborhoods. My experience of Higher Ground is that
it offers a venue for people who want to get to know each other and
spend time together without having to drive across town, meet at a
restaurant, or find a baby sitter for their children. It does not
surprise me that it takes some special accommodation to make the
Fordyce Street Co-Housing Community fit into your local community plan.
What they are doing is like trying to fit a round peg into a square
hole...and still make it affordable.
Sincerely,
---7' R
~\ \~,~~
Tim Rusk
Neighbor of a co-housing community in Bend
Page 1 of 1
G
Cecile Shohet <cshohet@~gmail.com>
FW: Letter to ashland cohousing
1 message
ellin randel <ellrand@comcast.net>
To: Cecile Shohet <cshohet@gmail.com>
Sat, Feb 5, ~~005 at 4:42AM
Dear Mayor, City Council Members and Neighbors,
I am writing in regard to the Fordyce Street CoHousing Community
proposal. I have lived directly across the street and been a neighbor
of the Cherry Hill Cohousing here in Amherst, MA for the past 8 years.
We were fully aware of the existence of Cherry Hill Cohousing when we
purchased our land and built our house.
I must say, I am completely happy to have Cohousing as my neighbor.
They are quiet, respectful, friendly and couldn't be better neighbors.
I know if my family ever had any emergency we could call on any
Cohousing resident for help.
I would hope you would reconsider and allow this wonderful group the
zone change they need and deserve. From what I've learned over the
years as being neighbors with Cohousing is that the cohousing concept
is quite innovative, efficient as well as environmentally friendly,
family friendly, and neighborhood friendly way to live.
Sincerely,
Haleya Priest-Levy
Thom Levy
89 Pulpit Hill Rd
Amherst MA 01002
http://gmail.google.com/gmail?&ik=&ik=8657f69b 16&view=pt&th=1 01 e28b4f26739 1 7 &s... 2/5/2005
January 30, 2005
904 Garden Way
Ashland, Oregon 97520
City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit
Exhibit # 0 I"
PA# ~O -, jL
I . lk h . . h h h '11 . Oat St
t was nice to ta co- ouslng Wit you on t e p one. I WI try to
the impact of the Higher Ground Co-housing community has been on the immediate
neighborhood.
Dear Cecile,
Higher Ground is about 10 years old. I think the oldest house in the development is 9
years old, my family has been here over 6 years. I have served in many capacities
including the president of our Board. We are a planned Unit development of 40 homes
aQd about 100 people. Two Habitat for Humanity homes were built as part of the
development. Lots are small, about 5,000 to 6,000 square feet but each faces onto
common property. We share a Common House, water fall/pond, sauna, hot tub,
children's play area, and community garden and orchard. Trails inside the community
connect activity areas. We have Covenants, Codes and Restrictions that control house
appearance and use. We pay $64 per month in dues. Our home values probably range
from $150,000 to $250,000.
The adjacent neighborhood is mostly single family homes, about 20 years old. Lots look
like they are 6000-7000 square feet with the obligatory fence and a boat parked out front.
We are located in northeast Bend about Y2 mile from Mt. View High School.
I really feel we are an amenity for the adjoining neighborhood. As described above, most
of the homes outside the community are track style homes with fences. The neighborhood
is clean but unimaginative. Higher Ground (named from a John Denver song) has worked
very hard to maintain the larger trees and natural features of the original property. No
property defining fences are allowed. This helps maintain visual sight lines to op(~n space
and with jointly owned common areas helps create a park like setting. We frequently see
non-residents walking through the community on our streets and side walks which are
privately owned and maintained but open to the public.
We generally present a neater appearance to our neighbors than they do to us. We have
landscaped areas on the perimeter of our community that obscure homes. Our CC&R's
prevent the parking of boats, motor homes, snowmobiles, abandoned vehicles etc. that are
frequently eyesores. Dogs must be under the voice control of the owner at all times and
owners are responsible for picking up animal waste.
You asked about property value impacts. I knew that property values of homes at Higher
Ground had gone up but what about homes,E adjoining neighborhoods? I went on line to
the Deschutes County Assessor's web site.~~ere you can fine sale records for any known
~ddress. I looked for homes on. streets immediately adjac~nt to ~igher Gr~und, "rhich
were purchased and resold dunng the ten years of our eXlstence#I foUnd SIX homes-on
four . streets aU within.1,4 mile (440 yards )-of us. All homes showed increases in value as
determined by sale records. The range of yearly average increase in property values was
from 9.4% to 17.2%. The-yearly average in~rease was 11 ~ %. I believe that
hi~1:~t2.callx~omes appreciate at about 4% per year.
Here are the details for each property:
1749 NE Sonja Ct.
Date of sale: January 1998; Sale Price: $84, 744
Date of Sale: October 2003; Sale Price: $157,500
Average annual property value increase: 17 .20~
1726 NE Sonya Ct.
Date of sale: August 1995; Sale Price: $89,850
Date of Sale: October 2002; Sale Price: $148,500
Average annual property value increase: 9.30/0
1722 NE Meerkat
Date of sale: September 1999; Sale Price: $115,000
Date of Sale: July 2003; Sale Price: $159,900
Average annual property value increase: 9.80~
1725 NE Meerkat
Date of sale: March 1999; Sale Price: $104,600
Date of Sale: December 2001; Sale Price: $132,500
Average annual property value increase: 13.30/0
1889 NE Jackson Ave.
Date of sale: July 1998; Sale Price: $103,900
Date of Sale: July 2003; Sale Price: $155,555
Average annual property value increase: 9.90/0
1775 NE Taurus Ct.
Date of sale: May 1999; Sale Price: $85,000
Date of Sale: April 2001; Sale Price: $101,000
Average annual property value increase: 9.4%
As you can see, property values adjacent to Higher Ground have gone up, but that is
really the wrong question. Who would define themselves by their property value? The
better question is what is the value of co-housing to the community. There are several
reasons I live in a co-housing community. The key word is community. Here I have an
extended family of 100 people. Like all families, not everyone gets along, not everyone is
equally involved but the relationships are genuine. This is the safest environment I have
ever lived in. Parents with small children wouldn't live any where else. There is always
somebody home at Higher Ground. Always a set of eyes watching kids and if there is a
problem, we know who to call. You need child care on the fly; how about having 10
families you can call that live 200 yards from you.
But what about the value to the larger community? How many of your neighbors have a
lawn mower, hot tub, or utility trailer. We have one each and we share it. It makes. perfect
environmental sense. Can you imagine the environmental consequences if each
homeowner owned their own hot tub. We maintain our own streets, trails, play ar(;:as and
meeting rooms- not the city and you don't have to drive to get to any of these amenities.
Our homes are built with green materials and energy efficient technologies reducing
energy consumption, waste and greenhouse gases. We will match the social and
environmental benefits of our 40 home community to any other 40 home develoPlnent in
Oregon. The only question I have is why isn't every development a co-housing
development?
I hope these thoughts are helpful in advancing your project in Ashland.
Best,
Tom Wykes, P.E.
Bend, Oregon
January 28,2005
The City of Ashland, Oregon
Dear Mayor, City Council Members and Neighbors:
I am writing to in support of the Fordyce Street Co-Housing Community. I thought you might
like the input of someone who lives near a similar co-housing community in Washington, DC.
Specifically, I live near the Takoma Village cooperative housing development in NOIthwest,
Washington DC. Takoma Village has been an absolute and stellar success in our area. It has
become one of the nicest apartment complexes in our part of town and stands out as an attractive
building and lawn in an otherwise somewhat blighted area of Washington, DC. Property values
in our city have gone up significantly in recent years, and the Takoma Village has in no way
slowed down this growth in our particular neighborhood. To the contrary, several high-cost
apartment complexes are now being finished and opened one block from Takoma Village, so its
entirely possible that Takoma Village led the way for this development.
Also, residents of Takoma Village enjoy a unique and delightful community living experience
that reminds me more of small town America than the big city I live in. Residents help each
other with child care and other issues and have wonderful social experiences such as community
pot luck dinners and games. As I don't live in Takoma Village, I frankly am often jealous at the
benefits its residents enjoy by living there.
All of these positive aspects occurred while offering lower income residents an opportunity to
own their own homes. Given the extremely high costs of owning property in Washington, DC,
this contribution is extremely significant. Also, the land on which Takoma Village sits was
previously an abandoned tract which attracted crime. Now it is a vibrant and enviable part of our
community.
I would strongly encourage you to consider the Fordyce Street Co-Housing Community in light
of our extremely positive experiences.
~Y'1 n
~ /r ~y-'
/' 'Lars Bromley
714 Sheridan Street N
Washington, DC 20011
202-326-6495
PARKVIEW HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION
f\pril 3, 2005
Dear Mayor and City Council,
On behalf of the Parkview Homeowners Association, let it be known that we are opposed to a
proposal under appeal for a zone change of the Fordyce parcel to allow for increased housing
density in the area.
Our neighborhood consists of 24 single family residences with attached garages and driveways
for off street parking. Considering the Fordyce parcel is adjacent to our neighborhood, we want
to see the Fordyce parcel developed in a similar pattern.
Weare opposed to the proposal of a zone change that would allow for the construction of
duplexes, a triplex, small parking lots, and two residences sized as small as 500 and 800 square
feet. We do not believe those types of buildings and residences fit in with the surrounding
neighborhoods.
Weare concerned about the amount of parking that is proposed to accommodate the Fordyce
parcel. Our parking situation is stressed given there is no street parking on Rose Lalll~. The Rose
Lane residents and visitors must either park in their garages, driveways, or on nearby Orchid and
Fordyce Streets. More traffic and cars from the Fordyce parcel would overflow to our already
crowded streets.
While the current proposal for a zone change involves the development of owner-occupied co-
housing units, we cannot be assured it will remain co-housing forever. Duplexes, triplexes, and
small square footage residences as proposed for that small parcel may end up as rental property
and may cause further parking problems and lack of upkeep of the properties, negatively
affecting our property values.
We fully expect the parcel to be developed. We ask that it be developed under its current zoning
regulations and that of the surrounding neighborhoods.
Thank you,
~~' -
/~ ta
.. Jim Dyk ra
Secretary
City of Ashland
I Planning Exhibit
. Exhibit # 0/7
PA# ';00c7-/~F
. DatJD-liu::stafftt..,
. ---=--
ROSE LANE~ ORCHID AND FORDYCE STREETS~ ASHLAJVD~ OREGON
2002-03 OFFICERS
Secretary
James Dykstra
1238 Rose Lane
482-1820
President
Marian Holt
1248 Rose Lane
552-1468
Treasurer
Judy Faulkner
641 Fordyce Street
488-2927
City Council members,
~ity or A;t;iand --,
a~nmg EXhibit
, EXhibit # ~
p.~ .U
L" t~ -t
: ~ S'.~-
.~laff~ ,
~.-;
Introduction
I am speaking for Larry Mehaffey at 1270 Kirk Ln., who is unab,le to be
here tonight.
Reasonableness
You have already heard from several speakers and will no doubt hear
from many others on how wonderful co-housing is.. Let it be stalted again
that those of us who are speaking against the project are not against co-
housing.. If that is the life style people choose then ,\Te applaud them.. We
have also heard how wonderful the 'poople are involved in the p1roject I
have met a number of them and I agree; they seem like very ni(~ people.
However, it seems to me that this hearing is not about co-housing or
personalities but Dlther if this proposed project is a reasonable fit for the
property anel the neighborhood.
If you are familiar with litigation you know the issues can have many
shades of gray.. Sometimes the judge \\ill instruct the jury to deliberate
on the issues in tenns of, 'What would a reasonable person do in such a
case?'
So explore with me the reasonableness of this application. Whf~n my
family and I first looked to buy our home at 1270 Kirk Ln. I wasn't naive
enough to think that the open field, which is directly behind our home,
would always remain an open field.. But, I think it was reasonal)le to
expect that lvhat ever got built there would be in consort l,ith tne rest of
the neighborhood.
The property in question is 131 ",ide.. If you measure from my ltlack
fence to the "back fence of the house across the street it)}s approximately
270'.. So the property in question is 1f2 the size of the Kirk Ln. track, yet
the proposaI suggests squeezing in thirteen units, the same nmnber of
units as we llave on Kirk Ln.. I agree \\ith the Planning Commission
which stated, 'the project does not fit the propertv~..
We in the neighborhood look to you, our elected officials, to uphold the
uniform stalldards that have been in place for the past fifteen years or
so.. That is: R-l zoning. It doesn't seem reasonable to change the roles in
the eleventh. hour just because someone comes along "With a different
vision and dream.. (By the eleventh hour I am referring to the
neighborhood being 95% built out) .
The neighborhood also has a vision and dream, and that is to mtaintain
the density limits, a reasonable person would come to expect, fium
buying and living in an R-l zone. (Pause and make eye contact with the
council mem~bers)
WIIFM
I once heard a direct mail consultant give a talk about wiifm.. Tl13.fs
spelled W.I..I.F (like Frank).M (like Mary).. The consultant said tbat
when anyon<<~ opens a direct mail piece and reads the offering OJne thing
goes throUgll their mind. That one thing is wiifm and it's a natural part
of human nature. It stands for; ~nat's In It For Me~' or in this lease it
would read; 'What's In It For The Neighborhood.' The respollSE~ comes
from the need to be treated fairly, it's not selfishness. Unless a ]>erson
thinks they are getting at least a fair exchange for what they giv~ they
wont enter that business deal..
The Planning Commission seems to be aware of this part of hmnan
nature because the majority of them said, 'the project isn't fair to the
neighbors.'
I think the nieighborhood is being asked to give up a lot for this project.
The zone change brings with it many negative issues that have lJeen
stated repeatedly by others.
Conclusioll
In conclusio1n, as you deliberate on your decision please ask YOllrselves:
· Is this project a reasonable fit for the property and the
neighborhood? (Pause)
· Is it reasonable to change the zoning for a few that will nEgatively
impact the many? (Pause)
· Is this a fair deal for the neighborhood? That is: W]Jat's in it for the
neighborhood that would merit a zone change and the density issues
that come with it?
Thank you..
...
Q)
f
...
U)
CD
U
~
L-
o
I.L
CD
.c
...
'to-
o
~
.-
s:::
--
u
->
CD
.c
...
.5
CD
.~
-
....
U
CD
-~
e
0.
CD
.c
...
~
"t:J
S
U
ca
0.
E
--
o
....
U)
:2
.....
~
.2
cu
"t:J
s::
cu
s:::
o
;
ca
_!:!
-
0.
0.
ca
L-
-a;
.s:::
.....
CD
>
o
L-
a.
0.
ca
S
CD
.c
o
.....
.c
C)
:J
o
c:
CD
CD
In
.2
U
-
.-
U
c
::s
o
o
~
(3
CD
.s:::
....
~
en
as
i
s::
:J
E
E
o
o
0)
c
-
U)
:J
o
.c
o
o
"t:J
s::
as
as
CD
"t:J
--
"t:J
o
o
C)
ca
U)
.-
c
as
Q.
0)
c
--
U)
::s -
oaa
.s:::=
oas
uf
CDca
.c
....CD
~E
_5 0
.,cU
....CD
-.Q
(5 ~ Q) ,
eo'-
"'0 a..Ei '\
=og-~
I
\ ~\
I
to . .
"'O~o
(1)'- Q)
C :E '0-
,2> (/) '-
(/) (J) a. '
~::CD
UiD~
::JC-
DO(/)
">"_ c
CD :;:; 'm :
,-CD 0>
a. a. to
W
Zl
o
I
0...
,-i\
I
I
!
q
,~
~
i
~
!'^
I\J
.1".[\
'J
~~\
/~
,-'
~
2:tJ
rl
~
~I
s::' ~
(::..-~ " "
f ~I
"t'+1
I., '---:I
- ~
," .' t'\'1
~'J .-1
~,3't--.:!. ~. .: '
1 '01
--f 1
I
W
i.......
~il
<(~ .
21
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
!
,
I
.1
.J
(.)
CD
.-
o
...
0.
CD
.c
...,
~
"0
CD
...,
(.)
ca
0.
E
G)
.a
o
...,
.J:
C)
::J
o
C
G)
G)
tn
.2
(.)
o
..
rn
.J:
..
~
o
-
Cii
"0
s::
m
s::
o
;;
ca
(.)
Q.
0.
m
...
.i
.s::.
...,
G)
>
o
...
0.
0.
as
o
...,
..
~
C
::J
E
E
o
o
CD
c
rn
::J
o
.c
o
o
..
0)
e
..
UJ
0)
(.)
~
...
o
LL
CD
.J:
..
'to-
o
~
s::
.(3
.:;
0)
.c
..
c
.-
0)
.::!:
-
-
(.)
C
::J
o
o
~
(3
CD
.J:
..
~
II)
as
"0
s::
as
m
0)
"0
.-
"0
o
o
CD
ca
.!!
s::
as
Q.
CD
C
II) .
::J~
0._
.c -
oas
ue
<Dca
ZCD
~E
CO
.- u
.cO)
:::.a
~
J,J
o~Q)
coo
'U a........
__ a.. Q) ij
'U 0 ..of
aI-o-
-OQ)O
Q).- Q)
c :E .0'
O)(/)I-
.- (I) a.
(/) - (I) I
>.,I-..c
(j)0__
:J c-I
.Q g .~~
>.- m.
~1D0>
a..a.m
J;, ~
li' ~ '~
'-.)
~
0::::
&
(V) \[1
t-- tt\
li)
I ~I
- I
~ I
-llJ I
"'2.
w
Z
01
I
a..
~
OJ
~
Ln,
~
Q
'-
~
C/)
C/)
W
0:::
o
o
<{
w
0:::
::>
r-
<{
Z'
(!)!
C/)!
~
\.()
~i
\13
\C>()
.()()
..::1
'\
I
':>
.->>
.
"-.J
rl\. --
r'^ ~
..j--
I
~ ~
\:x:) 4
~
~ -t-
V1
u
-
.~
<---.;
Q
~ :s-
~
V\ V"
~
.~ -:.---
~
j~
:d~, ..
- I
'~I~
~j~
C<-J~
I I
W
~I!
<{~
21
I
I
~
I
I I
~
I I I
! I !
I !
I l
~
I
I I i
J
~ I ;
i i
I I i
I
x c s'on -8 h (, () {i () C." (J' '\
'\. ~ - 51 -. 1:)" ',' ?:.' 14}7.JY "1p,~> ~~t'~)j It~?y h,n'1IDPU(1)j
.~ ~ ?--C)}h d)je~r?' Q'eS S'hl / r---
A 'SnOIA3Hd ' J~ ' C<:L 1 t?m U MOW ~ ~nh 4.(
3S0ddO c_ Iv ~ f/lU
~O~0I0 3NOHd SS3HOOV 3Hm VN91S 3INVN
. ~ueaJ e awo~aq 01 S!1I1 MOne PUll! UO!I~udde
-!alll aAoJdde Oll!~uno:l ~!:l alllllse 1 pue eep! po06 e s! ueld 6u!Snoll(J,~ alllllU!lIll
l~arOJd aliI Aq Ipal~edw! aq
0lll6noue esol:J. '~!unwwo:l 6u!SnOH-0:llaaJIS a~,(pJO:l aliI JO ~!U!~!A aliI U! aA!l1
...
~
-2
::s
E
E
o
o
0)
c
-
(I)
::s
o
.c
o
o
....
CD
CD
'-
....
en
CD
(.)
>-
"'C
'-
o
LL
CD
.c
....
'I-
o
~
-2
-u
>:
CD
.c
....
c
--
CD
_2:
-
....
(.)
CD
-()
L-
a.
CD
J:
....
>-
.c
"'C
CD
....
(.)
cu
a.
E
CD
.c
o
....
J:
0)
::s
o
c
CD
CD
fI)
..2
(.)
....
(.)
CD
-cr
L-
a.
CD
.c
....
CD
fI)
o
Q.
Q.
o
~
..
c
e
L-
::s
(.)
....
o
c
o
"'C
o ~ ~~I )
c: a..e
-U a. Q)
=0 0 .01
~
as-U-
-uQ)~
Q) it:: .=-
C'- 0
0)(;) '-
.- Q) a.
(/) - Q)
>-'-..c
(/)0_
:JC-
OO~
.>~'m
~Q)C>
a. a. as
~ N
Q<:J .~
c-:J ~
\ ~i
~ 1:::'
\
~
J
1\
~I
0::'
o
o
<(
~
I
~ I
I
W ~ I
0:: i
::>
l- I
<(I
Z
C) I
en, I
I
!
(
i
I
II
I
W: I I
~I (I
~I I
i I
!
~ I I
I
~
l
...;
(,)
CD
.0-
r-
0.
CD
.c:
....
~
"'D
S
(,)
as
0.
E
.-
i-
c
::s
E
E
o
o
C)
c
(i
::s
o
.c
o
o
....
CD
f
....
U)
CD
(,)
ti'
r-
o
LL
CD
.c
....
~
o
~
.-
.5
.E
>
G)
.c
....
c
.-
CD
.~
-
CD
.a
o
....
.c
CD
::s
o
c
CD
CD
~
(,)
....
u
G)
.0'
r-
0.
CD
.c
....
G)
fI)
o
0.
0.
o
~
.;:;
r::
t!
r-
::s
u
....
o
r::
o
"'D
.....0)
0(1)0)
c:o'-
"0 a..E
=0 g-~!
~~~G
c :;:; .0'1
.9> (I) .... I
(I)<Da.
~ :::. 0)
(1)0:5
:Jc.....
.Q 0 ~
~~.-
....1Dm
a.a.~
(j'
\...o~
-o~. ~
.............
t )-
N -...
~\
\1\, '0
,,~
w'
Z~
01
g:1 ~ ~
I .~. ~
i ~ rJ
~ 1:.
~ \::S ~
w '-:J
c::
Cl
o
<(
t--
\,0
N
'-...
\
3-
f\-..
~
"-
'J I
!'{
.~
l.-..
-
....
.~
\J
\..
\)
r--
~^
N
......
_..~,. ------ .------
i i
'\ \
i I
I
I !
I
I
!
I
~
Ii
,I
!i i
I:
"
!i I
~ ~
i I
'~ Ii
{) ~
/ :1
1
\. It
~ '1
~
,( , !
!
1-0
S- I
()
{( i
'I
I I
I I
I ~
I ~ I I
I
i I
I
....
(.)
CD
.....
o
...
a.
CD
.t:
...
>.
.a
"C
CD
...
(.)
lU
a.
E
CD
.a
o
...
.&:
CD
::s
o
c:
CD
CD
tn
.2
(.)
..
~
.c
::s
E
E
o
o
Q)
c:
-;
::s
o
.t:
o
o
...
CD
CD
...
...
en
CD
(.)
>.
"C
...
o
1L
CD
.&:
...
'to-
o
>.
...
-2
-(3
>
CD
.&:
...
c:
--
CD
-~
...
(.)
CD
-0-
...
a.
CD
.t:
...
CD
en
o
a.
a.
o
>.
;;
s::
CD
...
...
::s
CJ
...
o
c:
o
"C
tU"Uo
"UQ)Q)
Q) ;;::: .=-
C.- 0,
-L-
.2> ~ a.
U)_Q)
>,L-.c:
-0_
U)C_
go~
.>~'m
G)-a>
5.~tU
,,-...,
~.~
C/) ~ :l
ff3( ~ ~
0::,
o ~
Ot~
<( Q
(J
I ~ \'J
,-
~
M
N
~
--......
.1
,
816 Roca Street
Ashland, OR 97520
5 Apr 2005
Dear Council Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to
this issue.
I wish to lend my support to the Fordyce Street
Cohousing Community Housing Project.
This project is the result of over two years and
thousands of hours of hard work and thoughtful
planning. It employs sustainable land use standards in
building smaller homes on smaller lots,
while achieving energy efficient passive solar
orientation for every home. It provides low income
individuals an opportunity to own single family homes
and it includes two much-needed Habitat for Humanity
homes.
This model co-housing community would create
affordable housing, while maximizing use of infill
property, providing open space and conserving natural
features. It would be an asset to the
surrounding community with its well-
conceived physical design and environmental land use,
its green space, play area, and community house w'hich
could host the larger neighborhood. It would
be affordable housing that Ashland will be proud to
have in its midst.
I ask that you please support this grassroots
community co-housing project and show that Ashland. is
serious about wanting to provide low income housing for
its citizens who would not otherwise have an
opportunity to own a home in Ashland.
Thank you.
Vanya Sloan
City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit
.. Exhibif# ~ J
To: Mayor and City CouncIl PA!~-/E
DaCf~ Staff v
When the Mill PondlFordyce area was incorporated into the I r
one of the few developments that benefited from having the Planltling
Process in place from the onset.
Everyone that has worked on developing this area, whether it was the
builders, planning dept, engineering, or public works, had to work
within the re:quirements ofR 1-5 zoning. When the street designs were
made years ~lgO to not allow parking on Rose and Orchid, have limited
parking on Kirk and have Fordyce be a narrow street with parking only
in bays, the decisions were based on R-I-5 zoning, which assumed that
each home had one to two spaces in a garage and probably two s)[laces
on the pad ill front of their garage. These street designs have made for
very minimal parking in this neighborhood. We almost always have 2-3
cars parked on Kirk from people that live on Fordyce.
Because the developer is trying to double the density of the prop(~rty this
leaves very little room for the residents to park, with not even 2 spaces
per household. Visitors will have no choice but to park in the
surrounding area and side streets.
The developer has indicated that she purchased this piece of prollerty
with a Co-housing development in mind. She had to have been aware of
the zoning at the time of purchase. My research has shown that there
have been VE~ry successful co-housing projects with as little as 8 owners.
I believe that the developer can work with the potential 7-8 prop4erty
owners and design a co-housing development that will meet their needs,
is affordable:, and will fit in with the existing neighborhood.
The City of .l~shland has a very experienced Planning Commission that
has researched this proposal and reached an agreement to deny this
request. I urge you to support the Planning Commissions decision.
T~ you, ..
L,... ~.;. ?</1.. 7/~
Ja ue.Notric~
1 80 Kirk Ln
Ashland, Or. 97520
LtLi
~
,~ VJ ~ ~t 1
""Ji:: \I..J~ l{) <t,~
. f ~(\~. ~ "tl'
1,\ '+1 v
'l) ~v(~
~t~
/1 ~~~ LRtf rY
,'\)" .-<<J
-\,(L ~~
/ G~
\.9
WS
~v~
My name is Glenda Rackleff I live at 52 Fordyce Street. I would be proud to
have this project in my neighborhood.
It takes a mliracle to find affordable housing in Ashland. It is a sad and
dangerous trend that folks that work here cannot afford to live here. It's time for
this city to stretch a bit to support affordable housing. This project does Ineet that
need.
Yes there vvill be more traffic, although I don't think it will be wonisome.
Cohousing by design is committed to reduced dependence on cars and encourages
more walking and biking. Perhaps it will encourage us.
Nobody wants the land behind them developed, but it will come to pass.
Best if it be by people who care about their neighbors, community and land. I
would be delighte:d to see this project happen.