[ Council Communication ]  [ ORD Chapter 18.16 ] [ ORD Chapter 18.14 ]  [ Excerpt from Minutes ]

Council Communication

Title:	1.  First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Chapter 18.16 of the Ashland Municipal Code, Land Use Ordinance, Allowing Accessory Residential Units as a Conditional Use in the RR-.5 Zone. 2.   First Reading of an Ordinance Modifying Chapter 18.14 of the Ashland Municipal Code, Land Use Ordinance, Allowing Accessory Residential Units as a Conditional Use in the WR Zone.
Dept:	Department of Community Development
Date:	August 6, 2002
Submitted By:	John MeLaughlin, Director of Community Development
Reviewed By: ........................	Greg Scoles, City Administrator

Synopsis:	When the City initially adopted th% accessory residential unit ordinance in 1991, the Rural Residential and Woodland Residential zones were intentionally lef~ out of the ordinance, and the new units were limited to the R-1 zones. The main reasons for this were related to environmental concerns due to building on steeper slopes and in wildfire areas, and also concerns with transportation, specifically the distance residents would have to travel, especially through established neighborhoods. Since that time, the City has found that the accessory residential unit ordinance has been a good tool in accommodating growth within our existing boundaries and in providing an alternative housing style from standard single family detached homes in these neighborhoods. Several requests have been received from property owners in the RR-.5 zone outlining the rationale for extending this housing option to this zone. The Planning Commission has held two study sessions on this topic, and have guided Staff to prepare the appropriate ordinance amendments. The Planning Commission held a public heating regarding this issue on July 9, 2002 at which time they voted to recommend to the Council allowing accessory residential units in the RR-.5 zone. Also included in the motion was direction to also allow accessory residential units in the WR zone. The WR zone is generally more environmentally sensitive than the RR-.5 zone, and has minimum lot sizes between 2-5 acres. These are usually very steep properties, or areas within incised drainage areas. The number of potential accessory residential units in this zone very small. There are few lots to begin with, and fewer lots with developable areas less than 25% slope. However, the Council may wish to consider this further.
Recommendation:	Staff recommends that the Council approve first reading of the RR-.5 ordinance. The Planning Commission recommended that the WR zone also allow accessory residential units as a conditional use under the same requirements as the RR-.5 zone. Two separate motions are required, one for each ordinance.
Fiscal Impact:	None
Background:	The findings, minutes, and staff report outlining the proposed ordinance modifications are attached.

End of Document - Back to Top

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING CHAPTER 18.16 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, LAND USE ORDINANCE, ALLOWING ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNITS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE RR-.5 ZONE

THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 18.16.030.J. Conditional Uses is added to the Ashland Municipal Code and shall read:

"J. Accessory residential units, subject to the Type I procedure and criteria, and the following additional criteria:

1. The proposal must conform with the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone.

2. The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed 2 per lot.

3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000 sq. ft. GHFA.

4. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the off-street Parking provisions for. single-family dwellings of this Title.

5. If the accessory residential unit is not part of the pdmary dwelling, all construction and land disturbance associated with the accessory residential unit shall occur on lands with less than 25% slope.

6. If located in the Wildfire zone, the accessory residential unit shall have a residential sprinkler system installed.

7. The lot on which the accessory residential unit is located shall have access to an improved city street, paved to a rriinimum of 20'. in width, with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks.

8. No on-street parking credits shall be allowed for accessory residential units in the RR-.$ zone."

The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the _____day of August, 2002, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ____day of _______, 2002.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder

SIGNED and APPROVED this _____day of _____,2002.
Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor

Reviewed By:
Paul Nolte, City Attomey

End of Document - Back to Top

ORDINANCE NO.

AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING CHAPTER 18.14 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, LAND USE ORDINANCE, ALLOWING ACCESSORY RESIDENTIAL UNITS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE WR ZONE

THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 18.14.030.1. Conditional Uses is added to the Ashland Municipal Code and shall read:

"I. Accessory residential units, subject to the Type I procedure and criteria, and thefollowing additional criteria:

1. The proposal must conform with the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone.

2. The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed 2 per lot.

3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000 sq. ft. GHFA.

4. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the off-street Parking provisions for single-family dwellings of this Title.

5. If the accessory residential unit is not part of the primary dwelling, all construction and land disturbance associated with the accessory residential unit shall occur on lands with less than 25% slope.

6. If located in the Wildfire zone, the accessory residential unit shall have a residential sprinkler system installed.

7. The lot on which the accessory residential unit is located shall have access to an improved city street, paved to a minimum of 20'_ in width, with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks.

8. No on-street parking credits shall be allowed for accessory residential units in the RR-.5 zone."

The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the _____day of August, 2002, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ____day of _______, 2002.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder

SIGNED and APPROVED this _____day of _____,2002.
Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor

Reviewed By:
Paul Nolte, City Attomey

End of Document - Back to Top

::: Excerpt from Planning Commission Minutes, July 9, 2002 :::

TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING

PLANNING ACTION 2002-084 is a request for an Ordinance modifying Chapter 18.16 of the Ashland Municipal Code, Land Use Ordinance, allowing accessory residential units as a Conditional Use in the RR-.5 zone.

Kencairn moved to extend the meeting to 10:15 p.m. The motion was seconded and passed by unanimous consent.

APPLICANT: City of Ashland

Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - None.

STAFF REPORT

McLaughlin noted that there had been a number of study sessions on this issue, and requests from property owners. He clarified that the areas in question were primarily steeper areas in the hills, and he added that they were intentionally left out of the ordinance in the past because the half-acre zoning was intended to limit density as these areas were more remote and applicants were less likely to walk or bike to their destination. He emphasized that some of the points raised by property owners are compelling from their benefits. He indicated that the allowance of accessory units in the R-1 was successful, and he stated that he would propose a few changes here to prevent accessory units on lands that were over 25% slope, and to require fire sprinklers and improved streets for these accessory units. He also stated that there would be no on-street parking credits. McLaughlin stated that staff recommend approval.

At Briggs suggestion, McLaughlin noted that staff could add the same language in WR zones as well as the RR zones, and then send the item to council. McLaughlin added that the WR zones were usually more restricted. Briggs asked that the WR zones be included as well.

Briggs questioned the wording of item #5 relative to accessory units being attached to the primary dwelling, and she stated that she felt some clarification was needed. McLaughlin stated that this would allow an accessory unit in a basement or by converting a bedroom if the applicant could comply with design standards and locational requirements. He stated that units simply would not be allowed if the applicant were disturbing a new area. Briggs reiterated the need to clarify this wording. Briggs also questioned whether people were converting existing homes to accessory units and then building larger houses as a primary residence. McLaughlin stated that this was potentially possible, and he added that he knew of it being done once on Peachey Road. Briggs asked if there was a need for wording to address these concerns. McLaughlin asked whether others felt this was needed, and there was general agreement to make this more clear in item #5.

Briggs asked how others felt about adding the WR zone as well. Amarotico agreed with Briggs.

McLaughlin stated that with commission approval, the WR zone could be added as well and the item forwarded to council.

Fields questioned whether a conditional use permit would have site specific requirements that allow commission review or discretion to address items such as driveway slope. McLaughlin confirmed that the discretion was still there under the conditional use permit process to address site specific conditions.

McLaughlin confirmed for Morris that the lots involved would typically be 2-5 acres depending on the slope.

Swales expressed concern with the potential for creating servants' quarters for huge mansions. McLaughlin stated that he did not believe there was a way to regulate who could live in the units.

Kistler asked whether sprinklers were required in the wildfire zones; McLaughlin stated that sprinklers are not required now, but they could be under the Conditional Use Permit process. McLaughlin clarified that sprinklers could not be required in the primary structure.

Public hearing opened at 10:06 p.m.

Karen Darling/490 Strawberry Lane/Darling noted that she had submitted information included in the commissioners' packets, and she read a statement from Thomas Heuman/585 Orchard Street that was also in the packet addressing the years of advocacy for this action and Heuman's hope to create an accessory unit on his property to allow for on-site care to address personal health situations. Heuman's letter asked for accelerated passage of the ordinance, and Darling added that she would like to request accelerated passage as well.

Public hearing closed at 10:08 p.m.

Staff Response - None.

Rebuttal - None.

COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION

Chapman asked whether commissioners wanted to include the WR zone.

Kencairn/Amarotico m/s to approve Planning Action #2002-084 with the inclusion of the WR zone. Discussion: Morris indicated that he was opposed to accessory units in the WR zone. Fields stated that he did not see a problem given the review involved in getting a conditional use permit. Fields added that the city might catch some of the units that are bootlegged anyway. Morris stated that he was not sure that this was sufficient reason to change the ordinance. McLaughlin noted that this would involve a very small number of units, given the slopes involved. McLaughlin stated that most of these lots are large and have difficult access. Roll call vote: Briggs, Chapman, Swales, Fields, Amarotico, Kistler, and Kencairn, YES. Morris, NO. Motion passed 7-1.

:::End of Excerpt:::

End of Document - Back to Top