Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPA Exhibits I' k- 1 7/2"1/19 ORDINANCE NO. ~'1~ AN ORDINANCE ANBNDING THE ASHlAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO 'l'HB REGULATION 0,. THE CONVERSION AND CONSTRUCTION OF CONDOMINIUMS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. 'l'RE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OP ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. A new Section 18.08.102 is hereby added to the Ashland Munioipal Code, to read as follows: "l8.QS.102 Condominiums. 'Condominiumt means a dwellinq unit €hat is part of a deve~opment under sinqle ownership, and is individuallyowned." SECTION 2. A new sub.action "3" is hereby adde4 to Sec::tionl$_.:u.t)~o (~(Utional Uses in the R-2 Zoninq d.istrict), to read as follo".: ( ".1. Condominiums and eondominium conversions of rental units, ) Subject to a demonstration of pUblic need and lack of detrtmental '-----ffect on the supply of rental units or land for such units." SECTION 3. A new subsection PJ" 1s hereby added to Section 18.28.030 ~dit10nal Ose. in the R-3 Zoning di.tric~J. to read as follows, ".1. Condominiums and condominium conversions of rental units, subject to a demonstration of public need and lack of detrtmental etfecton the supply of rental units or land for suoh units." SECTION 4. Section 18.52.010 (Of~-.treet Parkinq--Generally) of the Ashland Municipal Code, is hereby amended to read as follows: "18.52.010 Off-Street Parkin --Generall. In all distriCts, except t 08e spec ca Y exempte , w enever any building is erect:ecl, enlarged, or the use ia changed (including conversion ot reneal units to condominiums), Off-street parking shall be provided as set forth in this chapter." SECTION 5. Sub.ection C (Site Approval Required) of Section 18.54.010 of the Alnland Municipal Code, is hereby amended to read as follows: "ce) All alterations to uee types requiring sitft r.eview which affect the use, intensity of use, floor area, structure location, or 11qnifieant elements of "the site plan or design: including conversion of multiple family rental units to condaminiuma.R SICTION 6. A new Seotion 15.04.115 is hereby added to the Ashland Mun!cipal Code, to re~d as follows: "15.04.115 CondCXllin1um8~ Structures beinq converted from 1'IlultiDle- familY rental unit use to condominiums shall conform to State Code standards in effect at the time of conversion, and a buildin9 per- mit shall be ob'talned for such c.'Onver.1on." Ordinanoe - 1 City of Ashla:',: P;alnning Exhibit . .~. Exl~ibl\# 001- _ PA # '200\R-Q.\2-<:J Dat~~aff~1 , . - . ~-... .. ~l!C'.I'l~ Iln -lVaney 18 he..eby decla"ed to e>t1stbaaed. Upon lIe!>U C ha.lth, Ufety and welf.....e and ~ii "..dtn",,08 ahall bacollle affective upon it. passege by the COuncU and ePP>:ovlll by' the Mayor. . '. . The' fo..egoing o"dinance wllS ft...t ..ead on the 17thdllY of __JU1~ , 1979, ..." dUly PASSED ll!ld ADOPTED' this 24th_day of 'July., 1979.. /'? "" / .~. ~ -~- ~ r~ ::~_ ~.JIII_:..__~~n_~ RobeM 1.5.. Nelso:n Act1nc C1 ty Recorder SI QN~D And APPROVED this 25th day of July - ~~.~ '~ilJY.' JIJI.. A.cting MaYQr - "6, ., I . . " 1 James M. Mgl&n<l Ordinance - 2 Summary This planning action is a CUP request from Park Street Apartments, LLC ("applicant") to convert 30 apartments to condominiums at 719 Park St (multi-family residential, Zoned R-2, Map 391 E15AA, Tax Lot 5200), each apartment being 2 bedroom-2 bath, about 950 sq ft. Planning Action 2006-01294, Appeal Before Council Dec 5, 2006 Philip C. Lang and Art Bullock We ask you to deny this application with the following findings and conclusions. Finding 101. Workforce housing affordability is a livability factor under AMC 18. 1 04.050(C)(7). Finding 102. The record shows the proposed Conditional Use Permit would significantly decrease affordability of workforce housing in the impact area and target zone by increasing housing costs. Finding 103. The proposed condo conversion would negatively impact the target zone and impact area by significantly decreasing workforce housing affordability. Conclusion 1. Based on its negative effects on the livability factor of hurting workforce housing affordability in the target zone and impact area, the application is denied. Finding 104. Working family displacement is a livability factor under AMC 18.104.050(C)(7). Finding 105. The proposed Conditional Use Permit would displace workers and working families. The record shows that current renters would not be able to afford to live in the same apartments they live in now or qualify for a mortgage for the projected condo price even if they could afford it, if those apartments are converted to condominiums. Potential future working families would also not be able to live there for the same financial reasons. Finding 106. The proposed condo conversion would negatively impact the target zone and impact area by displacing current and future working families. Conclusion 2. Based on its negative effects on livability in the target zone and impact area by causing worker/working family displacement, the application is denied. Finding 107. ORS 458.705(2) and (4) require City to meet the needs of working families for affordable housing. Finding 108. The proposed condo conversion hurts City's statutory requirement to meet the needs of working families for affordable housing. Conclusion 3. Based on its negative effects on damaging City's statutory requirement to provide affordable housing for working families, the application is denied. Major Problems With The Application Showstopper 1. Application does not satisfy 'livability' as workforce housing affordability. The core issue tonight is the proper interpretation of the word 'livability'. AMC 18.104.050(C) establishes 'livability' as the key criterion for Conditional Use Permits. The code doesn't define 'livability', though it establishes 6 sets of criteria, plus a 7th catch-all set. To interpret a word like "livability", Oregon's Rules Of Statutory Construction start with the law's text and context. So let's read the law. AMC 18.104.050 Approval Criteria A conditional use permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the proposed use conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria.... C. ... When evaluating the effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be considered in relation to the target use of the zone: 1. Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage. 2. Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities. 3. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. 4. Air quality, induding the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants. '_._. . _, 5. Generation of noise, light, and glare. City of Ashla;,d . 6. The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. P:anning Exhio.; f 7. Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. Ex~ith # OO~ I PA #:lCO\..Q:O\Z:~ That's a long list. And a broad list. Broad enough to accommodate economic factors of livability. Date\.2..{61C>~aff~ / Interpretation Question 1. In interpreting (C)(7), are you limited to the type of factors in (C)(1-6)? No. You have broad authority to interpret factor #7: "Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for "eview of the proposed use." At the Planning Commission (PC) hearing, applicant attorney Chris Hearn told PC they had to interpret the 'other 'actors' criteria as the same type as the list criteria. You have no such restriction. Hearn's argument would have you insert the nonexistent phrase "of the same type", then he would argue you can't Jse a livability factor like affordability. You have no such constraint. Oregon courts' interpretation rule. Oregon courts follow a simple interpretation rule: "Don't ignore what's there; don't insert what isn't." In applying that rule, notice the livability list. It's broad, and makes no attempt to be mutually exhaustive. It doesn't even attempt to cover the wide range of things that are considered livability. It lists broad 6 sets of factors, then includes the remainder in a criterion called 'other factors found to be relevant'. 'What's there' is "Other factors found to be relevant". What isn't there' is "Other factors of the same type found to be relevant". You're not limited to the range of the first 6 sets of factors. You are, however, required to identify other relevant livability factor(s). Thus, Council has the authority to consider other relevant factors of livability in making its decision. Further, Council has the responsibility to consider other relevant factors of livability, because the sentence says "shall". Interpretation Question 2. What's the definition of 'livability' to use to determine other relevant factors? "Endurable". Now that we've established that you are not limited to the applicant's version of 'livability', let's properly interpret it. In Oregon courts, a word or phrase is what's it's defined to be in the law. If it's undefined in the law that uses it, the meaning is the common, ordinary meaning of the word. To establish, common, ordinary meaning, Oregon Supreme Court and lower courts (Court of Appeals, LUBA, Circuit Courts, etc.) use as their standard reference Webster's New International Unabridged Dictionary. . In Ashland Municipal Code ("AMC"), 'livability' is undefined, though it's explained in this law by a list of relevant factors to assess livability. The lack of a definition means you should use the word's common, ordinary meaning. Oregon courts grant you wide though not total discretion in interpreting City's own laws. You're not required to use Webster's New International Unabridged Dictionary as Oregon courts do, though if you did, you'd be on safer grounds if and when your interpretation is appealed. Webster's New International Unabridged Dictionary (2nd Edition) defines 'livable' (or 'liveable') as "1. Such as can be lived; endurable. " In the current context, what does that mean? Our context is housing. Every home has problems. Some problems get so big, they're not "livable". The problem has gotten so bad, you have to move because you can't endure the problem. You can't live there any more because a problem is not "endurable". Question: What are 'livability' factors? Answer: Any problem that gets so bad you have to move. In this case, working families who can't afford an expensive mortgage will be evicted. An eviction notice is a livability issue. In fact, it may be the biggest livability issue. You have to move. The situation is not endurable. Affordability and workerlworking family displacement are both major livability factors. Note the issue goes beyond the families currently living there. Even if you made a condition that the condo conversion couldn't occur until after current residents moved out, you would still be displacing a future family, resulting in a decrease in working family housing in the impact area and target zone. Special Note: Preventing confusion about the use of Webster's in interpretation. Two weeks ago, I asked you to close the loophole to fluoride not being considered a medication because Oregon Courts would use Webster's Third New International Unabridged Dictionary. City attorney mistakenly "corrected" that explanation, saying you were not bound to use Webster's definition. His explanation was incorrect because in the fluoride case, you were writing a law to be grandfathered under as-yet-unpassed state legislation, and Attorney General Hardy Myers--and the Courts--would apply Webster's to City's law. When State of Oregon interprets its own law, it's not bound by City of Ashland's interpretation in the grandfathered law. Franell's explanation did NOT apply there, because the issue was State of Oregon's interpretation of Ashland's fluoride law, not your interpretation. Franell's explanation DOES apply there, because the issue is your interpretation of Ashland's livability ordinance. 'S!4l aAa!40e ueo Aa4ll!lUn Sl!Un lelUaJ 5u!Sn04 aOJOJ)!JOM paau aM 'AJ!lenb Ue:l Aa4l 'luawAed UMOp e JOJ Aauow paAes pue 'AJeleS JO sa5eM J!a4l paseaJOu! 'SII!)!S alqenleA aJOW paUJeal 'a1!4M e qo[ J!a4l U! uaaq aA,Aa4l Jaij"ii" 'Al!l!qels 'SIl!)!S 'S5U!AeS 'AJeleS :SS V a4l JO asneoaq 'a5e5lJow a4l JOJ AJ!lenb l.uPlnOM lsnf Aa4llaA. 'a5e61Jow AI4lUOW a4l pJOne Ol alqe aq uaAa l45!w Aa41. '4lUOW Jad lUaJ 000' ~$ uaAa '008$ '009$ pJOlJe Ol alqe aq l45!w Aa41. 'opuoo e se luawlJede J!a4l Anq Ol ueol )fueq e JOJ AJ!lenb Ol alq!SeaJ aq lOU PlnoM s,l! ')!JOM sasnods 4loq aAe4 pue 'qof puooas e a)!el Plnoo Aa4l J! uaA3 'opUOO puel4s"ii" pua-MOI e uaAa Anq Ol paJ!nbaJ OOO'OOZ$ a4l JO! a5e51Jow JeaA-08 e aJnoas Ol alqe l.uaJe sa!l!we! 5U!)!JOM S.pueI4S'V 'a5e51Jow e la6l,ue:l AB4l asne:laq alqeA!1 aq l.UPlnOM l! 'l! pJOne Plnoo pue 'qof Ja4l0ue pa)!JOM sluap!saJ lUaJJnOl! uaAa le4l sueaw S!41. tOla 'AJOlS!4l!paJO'AJOlS!4 aWOOu! 'AJOlS!4 )!JOM AJOpeJS!leS aJ!nbaJ 40!4M) sueOI a4l aAoJdde l,uPlnOM )!ueq a4l 'OSI"ii" '45!4 OOl aq PlnOM (a5e5lJow SA lUaJ) luawAed AI4lUOW 6141. 'aJa4l aA!I olalqe aq l,uPlnoM slUaplSaJ lUaJJnole4l SM04s pJooa~ '"Al!l!qepJOne" ue4l Ja5Jel aJe aJa4 pasodoJd SJoloe! Al!l!qeA!l 'sJuawaJ!nbaJ afiefiJjow oJ anp aJaLlJ aAH oJ alqe aq JOu II!M samwel fiU!)(JOM asne~aq .^J!I!qeAH. ^lS!J'es JOu saop UO!Je~Hdd" 'Z JaddoJSMOLlS '(8)090'VO~ '8~ 8V\1"ii" Japun Al!llqeA!110 uOllelaJWalU! ale!JdoJdde a4l S! 40!4M 'nOA aJolaq 8nss! AIUO a4l WOJJ peJlS!p le4l s6u!JJa4 paJ aJe saldpu!Jd o!leJoowap pue 'Mel aseo pue Mel AJOlnlels SalelO!A le4l '"e!Jal!JOlaJoaS" 4l!M 'Mel passedun-laA-se ue JO UO!leo!ldde s)!aas luelladde le4l sa5Je40 s,UJeaH 'lJ04S UI 'l! lnoqe "laJoaS" 5u!4l0U S,aJ841. 'Mel 5u!Sn04 alelS pue a5esn uowwoo uo paseq AlpaJ!p aJe le4l e!Jal!Jo Al!l!qeA!llueAalaJ spuawwooaJ AP!lqnd lUelladd"ii" 'aJa4 e!Jal!Jo laJoas ou aJe aJa41 '""'e!Jal!JolaJoas,, awos laaw Ol sl!e! l! le4l s!seq a4l uo pa!uap aq Plnoo UO!leo!ldde asn puel Aue AllenlJ!^" asneoaq lUapaoaJd Mau snoJa6uep e aleaJO PlnOM SJOloeJ Al!l!qeA!I JalHO 5u!sn le4l pan5Je UJeaH 'ls!Xe ApeeJle SJope! Al!l!qeA!I Ja4l0 'lS!xa l,UP!P le4l pa!ldde e!Jal!Jo aAe4 oll45nos luelladde le4l pan5Je UJeaH '//e-t.j:):;eo e //US sf //e-t.j:):;eo aLIi 'aoueu!pJo S,AlP Ja4l0 Aue 'Janew le4l JOJ JO 'aoueu!pJo pasodoJd a4l U! pa5eS!AUa as04l 5u!pnpu! 'lUeAa\EU Jap!suoo nOA SJope! Al!l!qeA!I Aue aU!WJalap Ol Al!J04lne a4l aAe4 op nOA laA. 'le4l JOJ 5u!)!se lOU aJe (shuelladd"ii" 'u!aJa4l SJope! Al!l!qeA!llUeAalaJ pUIJ nOA I! 'aoueu!pJo pasodoJd e PlnoM nOA se (L)(8)090'vO ~ '8 ~ 8V\1"ii" laJdJalU! Ol Al!J04lne a4l aAe4 00 nOA le4l Jeap aq s,lal 'as04l 5U!AJS!leS lOU se UO!le:l!ldde a4l Auap pUB 'luawaOelds!p AI!WB! 6U!)!JOM pUB Al!l!qBpJOUB a)!!I SJOPB! Al!l!qBA!I lUeAalaJ Aa)! Ja4l0 asn 'MellUaJJn:l a4l Aldde :S! palSanbaJ 5u!aq s,le4lll"ii" 'MellUaJJn:l a4l SIle41 'SJope! lUeAalaJ Ja4l0 aU!WJalap Ol Al!l!q!suodsaJ pue Al!J04lne nOA saA!5 (L)(8)090'vO~'8~ 8V\1"ii" 'aAoqe aas nOA S'V 'anJlUn S! S!41. 'e!Jal!JolUaJJn:l ue4l Ja4leJ 'papBua laA-lOu 'e!Jal!Jo aJnlnl Aldde Olldwane ue seM leadde S!4l 8d Ol pan5Je UJeaH '1-0U aSJnO:J JO 'ON i,(€L6J.) '€9 ddtfJO 9J. ':x.no 'A ':Ju/ ',vlea u/-aAIJa Jfe~ unS a1-e/oIA pue elJa1-IJo aJn1-nJ Jf/dde UOI1-e1-aJdJa1-UI aAoqe aL/1- saoa '9 UOIl-Sano UOI1-e1-aJdJa1-u/ 'Ja4l!a UO!l!U!!ap O!JOlS!4 S!4l Aq Al!l!qeA!llJoddns lOU saop l! 'eaJe pedw! pue auoz la5Jel a4l U! Sl!Un lelUaJ !O SJaqwnu a4l saonpaJ UO!leO!ldde S!4l aou!s 'Sl!Un leluaJ JO Alddns uo paua leluaW!Jlap e JO )foel a4l apnpu! SJoloe! Al!l!qeA!lle4l UO!lelaJdJalU! a4l slJoddns oSle 980Z aoueu!pJO 'VZ9Z aoueu!pJO Aq paoeldaJ Jalel 45n04ll'V ~,sf!un LIons JO} pue/ JO s:;fun /e:;uaJ }O t/ddns aLl:; uo paJJa lelUaWfJlap }O )foel pue peeu o!lqnd }O UOfleJ1SUOWap e 01 pa[qns slfun /elueJ }O suofsJal\uoo wnfufwopUOO pue swnfufwopu08 'r" :r uo!pasqns Mau e 080'8Z'8~ uo!pas Ol pappe 40!4M '980Z aoueu!pJO Aoua5Jawa ue passed 'JOAeW 5u!pe puel5e~ sawer 'IPuno8 Al!8 '6L6 ~ '9Z Alnr uo 'S€Oz a:JueulPJO aas i,UOI1-e1-aJdJa1-UI l-Sed S,MI:J uaaq self 1-eL/M 's uOf/sano UOI1-e1-aJdJa1-u/ weAalaJ lOU S! AJeuo!p!o Mel s,)!OeI8 aseo S!4l UI ',Al!l!qeA!I, aU!Jap l,usaop AJeuo!p!o Mel S,)!oeI8 'pJooaJ a4l JO.::l 'ao!040 JO AJeuo!p!p e6esn uowwoo e4l se s,JelsqeM JeAO eouepeoeJd se)fel l,usaop l! 45n04l 'AJeuo!p!p a5esn uowwoo a4l olluawalddns In!dla4 e SaW!laWOs S! S!41. 'a5esn uowwoo WOJJ AllU8Jau!p WJal e asn Aa4l M04 AJ!Jep Ol'Uo!l!pa 418 84l U! AIlUaJJno 'AJeuo!p!o Mel s,)!Oel8 asn SaW!laWOS sAaUJon"ii" 'WJal a4l !O uomu!Jap IB6al uowwoo a4l1.0N S! UO!l!U!Jap Sl! 'll sasn le4l Mel a4l U! pau!Japun S! aSeJ4d JO pJOM e II 'auo l,USI aJaL/.1 i,,veuOI1-:Jla Me1 s,)f:Je/fl ul UOI1-lulJap /efia/ aL/1- s,1-eL/M '." UOIl-SanO UOI1-e1-aJdJa1-u/ ,,'Sluap!seJ ^l!Unwwoo Ol elqepJOne S! lelU 5u!Sn04 aAe4IHM pue alqe!A Alleo!WOUooa aq II!M Sa!l!UnWWOo 5umnsaJ 6141 ""Al!I!qeA!I aoue4ua or"" :[lJed lUeAalaJ U!] (v)SOL89v S~O ,,"Al!UnWWOo aJ!lua a4l Aq passaJppe aq lsnw alq!SS8:)oe pUB alqepJOue aJe le4l sao!AJas pue UO!lelJOdsueJl'6u!snOll JO! sa!l!we! 6U!)jJOM!0 spaau 6141." :(Z)90L'S9v S~O :,Al!l!qeA!I, ap!AoJd Ol samunwwoo saJ!nbaJ alnlelS le41 "sweJ5oJd sao!AJas Al!unWW08 pue 5u!SnOH JOJ alnlels a4l S! 89v S~O 'ueaw Ol "Al!l!qeA!I" sJap!SUOo aJnlelS!5al u05aJO a4lle4M Jap!SUOo Pln04S nOA ',Al!l!qeA!I, 5u!laJdJalU! ul '"fiUISnOL/ JOj sa!l!WElJ fiUI)fJOM JO spaau aL/1-11 '1-Jed u/ i"Jf1-!/!qell.!/, JO UOfllUIJap S~O aL/1- s,1-eL/M '€ UOIl-Sano UOI1-e1-aJdJal-U/ ihowstopper 3. Granting this CUP morphs CUPs into CRULPs. This application should be denied because applicant may not make the conversion any time soon. Record shows pplicant doesn't intend to convert the units into condos immediately. He may do it gradually, over time. This causes a public policy problem. When one applies for a Conditional Use Permit, there's an expectation you ,Ian to use it for that purpose soon. The applicant isn't really applying for a standard Conditional Use Permit. 'hey're applying for 'the right to do it later' permit, perhaps years down the road. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) has morphed into a 'Conditional Right to Use Later Permit' (CRULP). In lis case, the applicant is applying for a right, with or without planning the use in the near future. Why? Rental unit owners in Ashland may want to gain this right before the law is changed to disallow easy Ipartment-to-condo conversions. The CUP/CRULP becomes a way to circumvent an upcoming law, rather than a iimple application for a conditional use under current law. It's understandable for them to do so. It's also understandable for you to deny the application as bad public policy o turn a CUP into a CRULP future rights permit. If you approve this application, you can expect a slew of "Me, Too" applications. Each could soften the affordable lousing blow by explaining they aren't going to convert to condos 'any time soon'--they just want the permit as a uture right, "just in case". Showstopper 4. This application shuts down workforce housing. That clarifies the core issue. The problem with this application is that displaces working families. When councilors 'an for office, you talked a lot about affordable housing and maintaining community for working families. This apartment building IS affordable housing. Rental units ARE workforce housing. When a family is starting out, :hey usually rent because they don't have the salary, savings, skills, or stability to justify a 30-year loan. If you want Norkforce housing, you have to include apartment rentals. That's where a lot of workers and young families actually ive. Approving this project would be a giant step backward. You'd be shutting down workforce housing. You've been 1arshly criticized for the low number of "units" of affordable housing that you're helping bring to Ashland. In this case, you'd actually be shutting down workforce housing and forcing workers and families to leave. We have a strong public interest in workforce housing in Ashland so young families can rent while they get on their feet to qualify for a mortgage, if that's what they desire. Public policy says we should be talking about how to help working families move into Ashland. Instead, we're talking about how many workers and families will be evicted. Given this reemerging pattern of apartment-to-condo conversion, displaced workers will probably end up in Phoenix or Medford. Adding conditions like a 60-day tenant's "right of first refusal" and the requirement that 25% are to be kept as affordable purchase housing are salves on the wounds of the public interest damage, and do NOT resolve the showstopper problems. Conclusion The record shows that applicant has worked hard to keep the units livable economically, charging less than maximum possible rent, accommodating special problems and financial hardships, etc.. This is how working families live in Ashland. The applicant is one of the many understanding landlords who bend over backwards to help working families live in Ashland. Landlords like the applicant are what makes Ashland livable for many, many families. Similarly, the appellant has a long history of accommodating workers and families to live in Ashland. It's unfortunate that Ashland's planning process needlessly pits applicant against appellant. From the second author's perspective, the 2 of them could teach us more about how to keep working families in Ashland than 10 Portland consultants. In workforce housing, applicant and appellant have demonstrated many years of providing workforce housing, even sacrificing their own personal financial interests so working families can live in Ashland. Applicant and appellant walk their talk. To you falls the burden of deciding public policy with this application. Do we stick with what works to keep working families in Ashland--rental units with reasonable rents and accommodating landlords--or do we convert apartments to condos and displace working families? Council talks a lot about affordable housing and workforce housing. Tonight, with this application, you vote on it.