Cohousing-L Mailing List: Need Zoning Law Expertise

[Melanie Mindlin (sassetta]

Hi Elias,

I have been on the Planning Commission of my small city (20,000) in Oregon for 
over 10 years.  In my city, we desperately need rental housing, so our issues 
are different and the question that our City Councillors would ask would be 
more like, why should we rezone to let you do this and not let someone build 
rental housing?  If the area you want to build in does not allow the density 
you want, it sounds like you are asking for “spot rezoning”.  This is highly 
unusual as most jurisdictions prefer, and rightly so, to consider overall 
patterns of use.  That being said, my project, the Ashland Cohousing Community, 
applied for and got our zoning changed to a greater density as part of our 
specific application.  Our application went through the City’s comprehensive 
Plan and demonstrated how we met almost every one of the City’s goals, 
including such things as beneficial use of an unusual piece of property, 
sustainability goals, increased neighborhood connectivity and more.

I think Philip’s suggestions are useful.  If your City does in fact want to 
create a new zoning or overlay category, as opposed to simply allowing you to 
upzone as part of your specific project, it is possible to restrict development 
using your new category in ways that would make it unattractive for someone 
creating dense rental housing.  Extensive common space would put the costs out 
of reach for most rental projects.  In my opinion this would be the easiest way 
to approach the matter.  If a rental developer was willing to provide that 
level of amenities for their housing project, it seems like it would be as 
compatible with your neighborhood as yours will be.  It is a far more objective 
standard than most of the things we are looking for in cohousing.  Extra 
sustainability features would also tend to make it cost prohibitive for rental 
projects and helps to promote the importance of sustainability goals.

Another useful item would be a certain percentage of resident ownership.  This 
is related to Philip’s suggestions about the rules governing the transfer of 
ownership from the developer to an HOA.  This would preclude having a single 
ownership rental project from using your new category.  Another advantage is 
that if you are trying to build in a single family housing neighborhood, having 
resident ownership is a form of single family housing even if it doesn’t look 
like your neighbors in building form.  It should be considered more compatible.

The new buzz word in housing around here is “the missing middle”.  Most cities 
are lacking housing that falls between single family homes and apartment 
complexes.  Single family homes promote sprawl and the new ones are out of 
reach financially for many people.  Many neighborhoods and many people don’t 
want to live in apartment complexes.  Providing the missing middle is a big 
topic in Oregon and includes strategies such as duplexes to fourplexes, 
conversion of single family homes into multiple units, accessory dwelling 
units, cottage housing and more.  Maybe you can use this trend to support your 
project.

Good luck,
Melanie Mindlin

> On Mar 29, 2019, at 3:16 AM, cohousing-l-request [at] cohousing.org wrote:
> 
> Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 21:00:23 -0400
> From: Ellis Cohen <e.cohen [at] acm.org <mailto:e.cohen [at] acm.org>>
> To: cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org <mailto:cohousing-L [at] cohousing.org>
> Subject: [C-L]_ Need Zoning Law Expertise
> Message-ID: <bd25edbd-379d-deda-045a-25eea3d1eeae [at] acm.org 
> <mailto:bd25edbd-379d-deda-045a-25eea3d1eeae [at] acm.org>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed