Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-07-10 Normal Neighborhood Plan_PACKET Normal Neighborhood Working Group th July10,4:30-6:00 Community Development Building Siskiyou Room 51 Winburn Way I.CALL TO ORDER: 4:30Community Development Building, 51 Winburn Way II.CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes o June 19, 2014Meeting. III.DISCUSSION ITEMS Housing types o Number and concentration of units o Locations for housing types Mapping exercise IV.PUBLIC FORUM 10 minutes V.FUTURE MEETINGS Discussion items Meeting date/time o Quorum Check VI.ADJOURNMENT Minutes for the Normal Working Group June 19, 2014 Page 1of 2 MINUTES FOR THE NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD WORKING GROUP Thursday, June 19, 2014 Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street Mayor John Strombergcalled the meeting to order at 3:19p.m. in the Council Chambers. Pam Marsh, Michael Morris, Michael Dawkins, Rich Kaplan, BrandonGoldman,and Bill Molnarwere present. Mayor appointed Councilor Marsh as chair pro-tem. 1.Group Scope Chair Marsh gave an overview of why this group was formed. 2.Public Input Discussion The group agreed that as is a working groupwith limited meeting time they will gladly accept input from anyoneoutside of the meeting, but will limit public testimony in the meetings to 10 minutesat the end of each meeting. 3.Outline Scope of Review Things the group would like to use thesemeetings to work through (i.e. the fundamental assumptions the group has to work with): Density Transportation and connectivity Other subjects which tie into density and connectivity: a)Railroad crossings (isthe ability to move them or not adeal breaker?what are the financing issues?) b)Role of a masterplan processes(how to make one that doesn’t sit on a shelf) c)The role of open space and conservation areas d)Zoning of area lots e)EastMain Street (how will we develop, use, and improve it?) 4.Beginning Density Discussion Staffgave overview of the history of the density of the area.The group discussed how the original comprehensiveplan’sexpected densitymay havebeen altered due to development which has occurred in the area since that time and how the Planning Commission process worked through density issues.Staff also informed the group how the RPS plan ties into the density requirements.The group discussed optionsfor housing for families and the need for a wide variety of housing options. 5.Future MeetingTopics The group will focus on one topic per meeting: Density Transportation Conservation Master Planning on this site Report backs and follow ups 6.PublicInput Randy Jones, property owner in theNormal Avenuearea, likeshow the group has broken out the discussion topics. He and his group havelots of thoughtsand the 10 minute constraint won’t work for him but he will give staff information he hopeswill help the group come to good solutions. Minutes for the Normal Working Group June 19, 2014 Page 2of 2 Bryce Anderson, 2092 Creek Drive, would like to see all the itemslisted in theCouncilminutesdiscussed. He would like the group toconsider additional areas nearby which mayhave animpacton this area. Would like the committee to consider practicalities of open space areaplanning, he talked about howlawnwas approve by Council to be planted around thecottonwoodtrees in his subdivision and now his homeowners association have incurred high costs to do wetland reparations for needing to remove the dead cottonwood trees.Also the wetlands area above Clay Street is an eye-sore. Carol Voisin, 908 Fox Street, wants to reiterate that the list of Council concerns eachbe addressed. She is also concerned with limiting public participation to only 10 minutes. Julie Matthews, 2090 Creek Drive, was under the impression that they were going to have more participation in the meetings, and finds the limitation on that to be insulting. She will do her best to submit things in writing to staff so that the meetings can move faster. She thought that the public would be allowed to participate more in the process as a way to break out of the old paradigm. If the committee starts talking about developing things and costing the tax payers lots of money for a relatively unknown part of town, they will get lots more people coming to the meetings upset. She would like to see one or two of the folks from the public on the committee so that they can participate in the discussions. 7.Future Meeting Dates The group decided to try meetingevery other week, starting: July 10, 4:30 pm, Siskiyou Room July 24, 4:00 pm, TBD Meeting adjourned at4:28p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diana Shiplet Executive Secretary Memo DATE:7/10/2014 TO:Normal Neighborhood Plan Working Group FROM:Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner RE:Working Group packet materials At the initial meeting on June 19, 2014, the working group began a discussion regarding the fundamental assumptions that were used in developing thedraft Normal Neighborhood Plan.In anticipation of a continuation of this discussion, specificallyas it relates to housing concentrations proposed, staff has assembled various materials that hadinformed the development of the plan. TheProject Objectives provide a listing of the specific objectives of the plan that were referenced throughout the planning processand included in the original statement of work. A number of these objectives explicitly speak to the intent of the plan to accommodate housing within the area in an efficient manner that will effectively accommodate future growth. The Local Demographic Trends sectionof this packet includes excerpts fromthe Housing Framework and Market Analysis completed by the Leland Consulting Group. These trends helped inform staff, the consultant design team, and the Planning Commission in developing and evaluating scenarios for the potential development of the area. Sections within the Ashland Comprehensive Plan that relate to housing need and supply are included in the packet for the working groups consideration. In addition to the Housing Element Goal and policies,the newly adopted Regional Plan Element (Chapter 14) sets forth the City of Ashland’s commitments to residential density to be achieved within the Urban Growth Boundary. To provide a common visual vernacularin discussing the housing types envisioned for the Normal Neighborhood Planarea, the packet includesexamples of the variations in housing forms that can be accommodated within each of the proposed zones. Within this meetings packet materials the working group will also find a blank area mapand a package of assorted highlighters.These are provided so members of the working group can shareideas and comments through an individualmapping exercise. Through putting pen to paper to illustratealternative zoning or transportation scenarios working group members can highlight areas of concern or opportunity. In comparing the individually produced alternativemapsthe working group can collectivelydetermine if there are elements present in each to be addressed by the group. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-488-6006 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us Normal Neighborhood Plan Project Objectives The objectives for the Normal Neighborhood Plan were initially presented to Council on May 1, 2012 and were incorporated into the Transportation Growth Management Intergovernmental Agreement (IGANo. 28461)approved by the City Council and the State of Oregon for theaward ofastate fundingto complete aland use and transportation plan for the Normal Neighborhood Planarea.The approved Statement of Work for the grant included theseproject objectives and they have been referencedthroughout the planning process in developing the final planpresented to the City Council for consideration. Project Objectives •Increase efficiency in the use of land through concentration of housing in a centrally located area within the City UGB planned for future urban development; •Achieve a development pattern that results in a balanced, multi-modal transportation system and that enhances opportunities for walking, bicycling or using transit in areas planned for transit service; •Delineate housing, neighborhood serving commercial, open space, public space, and green infrastructure improvements, in a manner that provides for preservation and enhancement of creeks and wetlands; •Develop new illustrative conceptual architectural and site plans for Project Area consistent with Transportation and Growth Management objectives. Concepts will meet City’s and the property owners’ development goals and standards. •Design a local street grid for the Project Area including connections to existing and planned street, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities outside Project Area, to more fully integrate the Project Area into the City transportation system; •Provide for pedestrian and bicycle routes and facility improvements within the Project Area that will provide safe access to local schools; •Provide alternatives to, or delay the need for, expansion of the City UGB; •Reduce emissions that contribute to climate change through changes to transportation or land use plans that reduce expected automobile vehicle miles traveled; •Provide an implementation strategy that includes supporting Comprehensive Plan and updated TSP amendments, form based codes, and design standards; and •Present the Plan and documentation necessary to support adoption to City’s Planning Commission (PC) and City Council (Council). Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 1 of 1 Normal Neighborhood Plan Local Demographic Trends Demographic Trends As discussed in the Housing Framework and Housing Market Analysis prepared as part of the Normal Neighborhood planning process anumber of national and regional trends are observable in the Ashland market. Multiple demographic groups are seeking smaller housing types and housing diversity. Seniors will increasingly drive the market and be looking for smaller housing and more diversity. Information drawn from the City’s Normal Avenue Existing Conditions Report, Housing Needs Analysis (HNA), and Ashland Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI), and from Leland Consulting Group’s research andhousing market analysis highlightlocal and nationaldemographic trends that are expected to affect housing demand in the Normal Avenue area. Ashland’s population is expected to grow, albeit relatively slowly, in the coming two decades. Population and household growth drive demand for new housing; without growth, there will be no housing demand. Between 2010 and 2030, the BLI projects that the city’s population will grow by 3,256, or about 1,604 new households. This represents an average annual growth rate of 0.75 percent—about one half the growth rate of Jackson County as a whole (1.4 percent). Nationally, Millennials or “Echo Boomers” are a fast growing population group.Along with the Baby Boomers, the nation’s other large population group is the Millennials, now aged approximately 15 to 35. This group will be moving into their own housing in the coming decade and is expected to want relatively small, affordable rental units that are in diverse and walkable neighborhoods. While there was no growth in Ashland in this group in the past decade, if Ashland follows national trends, there should be future demand for this type of housing product. Older segments of the population are growing fast, while other segments are growing slowly or not at all.As Figure 1below shows, the number of Ashland residents 55 to74 years of age increased significantly from 2000 to 2010. The city lost population in the 35 to 54 age group, while most other age groups remained about the same. While these dynamics are unique to Ashland, they also reflect the nationwide trend towards a much higher number of older Americans as the Baby Boomers, the largest generation, ages. Since Ashland, due to its climate and small-town charm, is a popular retirement destination, the aging trend will be even more pronounced here (the city was named one of the top 25 retirement destinations nationally by CNN in 2010). Housing for seniors will be very much in demand and will be the biggest driver of Ashland’s overall housing market, since it is where the largest net change in population is occurring. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 1 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Local Demographic Trends Figure 1. Ashland’s Population by Age Group, 2000 to 2010 Source: Adapted from Housing Needs Analysis, 2012. Figure 2, below, shows the changing supply and demand for housing types nationwide. Like many markets, the housing market changes, and will often not change quickly enough to satisfy new demand. Such is often the case during slow economic times, when new housing product is not being developed. Such circumstances emphasize the importance of master planning the Normal Avenue and other areas. In so doing, the community, City leaders, and development experts can develop a plan which may facilitate a transition from the previous market to the new. Developers and investorstypicallyreduce their risks by developing a product that has been successful for them in the past. What the data and national trends suggest is that the demand for the previous product (conventional lots with detached single family homes) is diminishing. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 2 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Local Demographic Trends Figure 2. Demand in 2035 for Residential Units in the largest four metropolitan areas, compared to supply for 2010 Despite the changing demand, between 2001 and 2011, 80 percent of the permits issued in Ashland were for detached single-family homes. This is notable since it is the same decade during which the senior population was expanding. The Housing Framework analysis completed by Leland Consulting found that this disparity may be partly the result of a lack of alternative housing typologies that better satisfy the needs of Ashland households, but may not yet be developed. There are more renters in Ashland compared to the county and state.About half (51 percent) of Ashland residents own homes, while the other half (49 percent) rent. This home- ownership rate is much lower than the county (63.3 percent) and state (63.8 percent)rates. This is probably due to the high number of college students (at Southern Oregon University), and the high cost of housing in Ashland. Yet between 2001 and 2011, only 20 percent of the permits issued in Ashland were for attached housing. Assuming that rental housing is not prohibited by regulation or the market, we expect a reversion to the mean. As much as 35 percent or more of all housing in the coming decades could be for rental housing, based on county, state, and national averages. Ashland’s housing is expensive compared to local incomes.A major theme of the Housing Needs Analysis (HNA)is that the cost of housing in Ashland has been quite high, even during the recession, and is unaffordable to a large share of Ashland’s residents. For example, in 2011, after four years of decreasing home sale prices, the average sales price was approximately $285,000, which is only affordable to 23.8 percent of the population earning more than $75,000 Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 3 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Local Demographic Trends per year. The average home price in Ashland in 2007, at the peak of the housing boom, was $438,750. This suggests several forces that may be impacting Ashland’s housing market: Wealth is coming in to Ashland via retirees and others relocating to the city, rather than being generated through jobs locally. The effective land supply may be lower than the supply calculated by the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI). If land supply was as adequate and elastic as suggested by the BLI, housing prices should be more affordable to a larger segment of the population. Therefore, it is possible that a significant amount of land is being kept out of the buildable supply because it is still in use (for example, as yard space), controlled by absentee owners, or owners are holding out for higher prices in the future. Many who work in Ashland may be choosing to live in Medford or elsewhere in Jackson County to take advantage of lower home prices. In any event, the HNA and BLI studies show a significant need for housing that is affordable to middle and lower income households (with annual incomes of $75,000 and below). While public policy may dictate a goal to provide housing for households of all incomes in Ashland, higher income households will tend to out bid lower income households for houses and land in the absenceof clear and effective public sector actions and incentives. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 4 of 4 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Elements Housing Concentrations Chapter II – Introductions and Definitions The Comprehensive Plan (Chapter II) statesAshland’s residential land use categories are for the purpose of “establishing land use intensities by assigning different densities to different areas”, and further clarifies “densities are not intended to specify types of uses, but rather the suggested number of units per gross acre”. Consistent with this approach thedraft Normal Neighborhood Plan’s zoning designations were designed to accommodateanumerous residential housing types within a variety of zoning designationsincludinga Single-Family Residential zone (NN-01) providing for 5 units per acre; aClustered Housingzone (NN-02) providing for 10 units per acre and intended for a mix of detached and attached housing types , and a low rise multiple-dwelling (garden apartment) zone (NN-03) accommodating a housing intensity of15 units per acre. These proposedzones allow for a range of housing types that could be provided in conformance with thesuggested units per acre and are more fully described in the Normal Neighborhood Plan Frameworkdocument. Chapter XI – Housing Element The Housing Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan establishesthe latitude to revise and update residential land designations to provide for the housing needs of Ashland’s population.In 2012 the City completed a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) which was adopted as a supporting technical document to the Comprehensive Plan’s Housing Element in September of 2013 . The HNA quantifies the projected housing needs through the year 2040, and compares those demographic needs with the currently available lands within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary. The HNA does not establish policy but rather provides technical information and a framework for future discussions by elected and appointed officials in relation to the City’s future housing needs. The Housing Elementof the Comprehensive Plan contains the City’s adopted Goals and policies for addressing Ashland’s housing needs: ASSUMPTION(6.09) : Ashland will continue to increase in the number of housing units. Existing, older residential neighborhoods will be preserved and will experience relatively few shifts in housing types and styles. New housing areas will contain housing types other than single-family residential detached units, and much of the City's new housing demands will be met by single-family detached units in unconventional Planned Unit Developments, attached units in Planned Unit Developments, and housing in higher densities than experienced in the past, such as townhouse developments and garden apartments. Rising new home construction costs and smaller households will result in housing units with relatively small living spaces in each unit compared to past housing. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 1 of 5 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Elements Housing Concentrations GOAL(6.10): Ensure A Variety Of Dwelling Types And Provide Housing Opportunities For The Total Cross-Section Of Ashland’s Population, Consistent With Preserving The Character And Appearance Of the City. POLICIES: 1) Given the scarcity and cost of land as a limited resource, conserve land and reduce the impact of land prices on housing to the maximum extent possible, using the following techniques: a)Use the absolute minimum street widths that will accommodate traffic adequately in order to reduce aesthetic impacts and lot coverage by impervious surfaces. b)Allow a wide variation in site-built housing types through the use of the City's Performance Standards Ordinance. The use of attached housing, small lots, and common open spaces shall be used where possible to develop more moderate cost housing and still retain the quality of life consistent with Ashland's character. c)Consistent with policies relating to growth form, City policy should encourage development of vacant available lots within the urban area, while providing sufficient new land to avoid an undue increase in land prices. This shall be accomplished with specific annexation policies. d)Zone lands in the single-family designation consistent with the surrounding neighborhood if the area is mostly developed. Generally, lands south of Siskiyou Boulevard-North Main should be R-1-7.5 and R-l-10, and lands south of the Boulevard should be R-l-5. 2)Using the following techniques, protect existing neighborhoods from incompatible development and encourage upgrading: a)Do not allow deterioration of residential areas by incompatible uses and developments. Where such uses are planned for, clear findings of intent shall be made in advance of the area designation. Such findings shall give a clear rationale, explaining the relationship of the area to housing needs, transportation, open space, and any other pertinent Plan topics. Mixed uses often create a more interesting and exciting urban environment and should be considered as a development option wherever they will not disrupt an existing residential area. b)Prevent inconsistent and disruptive designs in residential areas through use of a limited design review concept, in addition to using Historic Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 2 of 5 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Elements Housing Concentrations Commission review as part of the site review, conditional use permit, or variance approval process. c)Develop programs and efforts for rehabilitation and preservation of existing neighborhoods, and prevent development which is incompatible and destructive. 3.Regulation of residential uses shall be designed to complement, conserve, and continue the aesthetic character of Ashland through use of the following techniques: a)Slope protection and lot coverage performance standards shall be used to fit development to topography, generally following the concept that density should decrease with an increase in slope to avoid excessive erosion and hillside cuts. This objective shall be used consistent with the desire to preserve land by using the smallest lot coverage possible. b)Site and design review shall be used to ensure compatible multiple-family structures. Density incentives shall be used to encourage innovative, non-standardized design in single-family areas. c)Performance standards shall be used to regulate new development in Ashland so that a variety of housing types built for the site and imaginative residential environments may be used to reduce cost and improve the aesthetic character of new developments and decrease the use of traditional zoning and subdivision standards. d)Street design and construction standards shall promote energy efficiency, air quality, and minimal use of land. To this end, the City shall: i.Adopt a master conceptual plan of future streets by size and use category. ii.Adopt minimum street width standards which provide only what is needed for adequate traffic flow and parking. iii.Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian traffic planning in street design. iv.Limit street slopes, requiring curvilinear streets along contours in steeper areas. 4. Create and maintain administrative systems that will assist in all phases of housing and neighborhood planning through use of the following techniques: a)Establish and maintain a data base system which includes measurement of: vacant land and land consumption; housing conditions; land use, land values, and any other pertinent information. Simplify and strengthen the Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 3 of 5 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Elements Housing Concentrations processing approval mechanism so that the intent of state and local laws is fulfilled with the greatest possible thoroughness and efficiency. b)Cooperate fully with the Jackson County Housing Authority in locating low-income units in Ashland when this can be done in low-impact, relatively small developments, or through funding of individual home-owner loans or rental assistance. 5. The residential sector is the major user of energy in Ashland. Consistent with other housing goals, the City shall strive to promote, encourage or require energy- efficiency design in all new residential developments. Chapter XIV – Regional Plan Element The City of Ashland amended the Comprehensive Plan in September 2012 to adopt a new element (Chapter XIV)toincorporate applicable portions of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Plan (the RPS Plan)and to acknowledge revised population allocations for the City of Ashland(PA#2012-00573).Upon approving the new element the City Council found that thepopulation forecast for Ashland withinthe RPS Plan reflecteda growth rate which wasgenerally consistent the projection of growth rates currently envisioned in Ashland’s Comprehensive Planand as reflected inAshland’s historical growth trends observed from the 1970s to the current period(See attached Population Forecast Chart).Ashlandwas allocated a year 2060 population of 31,633 which is generally in keeping with historical growth patterns and current Comprehensive Plan projections. Although Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) land availability requirements typically reference an objectiveof providing a land supply sufficient to satisfy a20 year demand, it is important to note that the RPS Plan projected populationto the year 2060, and it was Ashland’s position to accommodate this future population growth without expansion of the UGB.In December of 2003, the Ashland City Council determined in Resolution #2003-037 that with more efficient land use strategies, the lands already within Ashland’s city limits and urban growth boundary could accommodate the city’s anticipated growth during the plan period without expansion. As such, Ashland is the only city participating in the RPS process that has not identified urban reserves. Ashland’s Regional Plan Elementof the Comprehensive Plan, and theadopted RPS Plan each includedensity commitments from all participating cities to provide for concentrations of housingmore likely to support a successful regional transit system, and comply with the state’s current Division 24 “Safe Harbor” density requirements for urban growth boundary expansions. For the first 25 years of the planning horizon, these density commitments involve densities of between 6.5 and 6.9 dwelling units per acre both in existing Urban Growth Boundaries and in Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 4 of 5 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Elements Housing Concentrations proposed Urban Reserve Areas, including a commitment by the City of Ashland to a 6.6 units per acre density within its existing Urban Growth Boundary. In review of landuse actions in Ashland for the past five years, new developments hadbeen approved at an average density of approximately 7.46 dwelling units per acre. The Regional Plan Element of the Comprehensive Planstates the following: Committed Residential Density. Land within a URA and land currently within an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) but outside of the existing City Limit shall be built, at a minimum, to thefollowing residential densities. This requirement can be offset by increasing the residential density in the City Limit. Dwelling units per gross acre City 2010–2035 2036–2060 Ashland (UGB only) 6.6n/a Central Point 6.97.9 Eagle Point6.57.5 Medford 6.67.6 Phoenix 6.67.6 Talent 6.67.6 Prior to annexation, each city shall establish (or, if they exist already, shall adjust) minimum densities in each of its residential zones such that if all areas build out to the minimum allowed the committed densities shall be met. This shall be made a condition of approval of a UGB amendment. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 5 of 5 Normal Neighborhood Plan Housing Typology – Visual Examples Housing Types by Zone The development standards for the Normal Neighborhood Development Plan as proposed are intended to preserve neighborhood character by providing three different zones with different residential densities and development standards. There are three distinct residential zones within the Normal Neighborhood Planas proposed: NN-01, NN-02, and NN-03.Each zone allows for a variety of housing types as reflected in the imageson the following pages. The concept for the zoning designations within the Normal Neighborhood Plan was to allow flexibility inthe types of housing provided the housing concentration is consistent with the underlying zone. . The use table below shows that a selection of housing typescould be developed in each of the NN zonesproposed: . Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 1 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Housing Typology – Visual Examples NN-01: 5 Dwellings per acre This zoning designation is comparable with the R-1-5 zoning designation within the City. This zone is conducive to detached single-family dwellingson individual 5000 sq.ft. lots. Consistent with Ashland’s existingsingle family neighborhoods the allowance for accessory residential units, and potentially provisions for cottage housing, the NN-01 zone could additionally see the development of small units such as “mother-in-law” quarters above garages or within the footprint of the home. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 2 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Housing Typology – Visual Examples NN-02:10 Dwellings per acre. A zoning designation allowing 10-15 dwellings per acre can accommodate a wide variety of detached and attached residential housing types. An increasingly popular housing type called “pocket neighborhoods” or “cottage housing” are typically developed with a concentration of 8-16 units per project. These pedestrian oriented clustered housing developments consist of one to two story cottages ranging from 500sq.ft. up to1,200 sq. ft. gathered around greens which s function as shared common open spaces. The individual private lots are typically very small, sometimes little bigger than the house with modest yards. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 3 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Housing Typology – Visual Examples NN-03:15 Dwellings per acre. Multiple Dwelling Residential Units are multiple dwellings thatoccupy a single building or multiple buildings on a single lot. Dwellings may take the form of attached residentialunits (like rowhouses) or stacked flats (like apartments) or a combination of attached and stacked units. Dwellingunits may be sold as condominiums or rented as apartments. Auto parking is provided in a shared surface area orareas internal to the lot. Meeting #2 Normal Neighborhood Plan July 10, 2014 Working Group Meeting Page 4 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan 1/4 Mile = 5 minute walk Ashland Middle School Walker Elementary School 500 Single Dwellings (5 units per acre)Wetlands (2007 LWI) Feet Riparian Buffer Clustered Housing (10 units per acre) Ashland Floodplains Multiple Dwellings (15 units per acre) Buildings in Plan area Openspace \[ Proposed Street (draft plan streets in light gray) Working Group Alternative Mapping Excercise July 10, 2014