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