HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-06-19 Normal Neighborhood Plan_PACKET
Normal Neighborhood Working Group
Potential Agenda Items
th
June 19, 3:00-4:30 City Council Chambers
Meeting Schedule
Regular meeting timeand duration
Set dates
Anticipated number of meetings
Public Input
Discuss public input process
Duration per meeting (public forum?)
Written comments forwarded to Council at continuation of First Hearing
Outline Scope of Review
Housing concentration (units per acre)
Zoning provisions
Transportation connectivity and Infrastructure Improvements
Open Space and Conservation areas
Suggested Plan Changes –Working Group
Designbased neighborhood plan alternatives
Land Use
Transportation
Conservationand Open Space Area
Normal Neighborhood Plan Working Group Meeting
Council wanted the group to review and address the following:
Housing Conentrationsand Type
RPS assumptions on density
The need for NN zoning
o Zoning (units per acre)
Building height (2.5 or 3-story)
Transportation
General transportation and connectivity issues
o Transportation to the schools
o East-west transportation issues
o Public transportation
o Traffic reduction (elimination)
Improvements to East Main St.
Railroad crossing
Openspace
Wetland protection
o state established wetlands
25% open space
Infrastructure
water, sewer, and electric
o developer driven costs
Public Input
Incorporate public input and respond accordingly
Memo
To: Ashland City Council
From: Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner, Community Development Department,
Brandon.Goldman@ashland.or.us
Date:May 29, 2014
RE: Normal Neighborhood Plan Continuance
SUMMARY
Two ordinances amendingtheComprehensive Plan and Transportation System Plan to implement the
Normal Neighborhood Planare presented at First Reading for the City Council’s review.ANormal
Neighborhood District Land Use code amendmentis presented for discussion only. Itwill be reviewed
as part of a separate legislative actionin the upcoming monthsand is intended to be included in the
Unified Land Use Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
The City Council opened the public hearing, received a Staff Report and took public testimony on the
th
Normal Neighborhood Plan on May 6, 2014.Giventhe number of speakers providing relevant
commentsto helpinform the Council's decision making process,there was not adequate time for
theCouncilorsto deliberate toward a decision on the Plan. As such the public hearing wascontinued
toTuesday,May 20th, 2014at 7:00pm.
th
During the May 6hearing a number of questions were raised which hadpreviously been addressed in
materials presented to the Planning Commission. Staff has provided the following supplemental
information to provide clarification on these issues.
Plan iterations and changes to the location of the high density NN-03 Zone.
th
o Testimony received at the hearing on May6referenced changes in the size and
location of the proposed NN-03 high density residential zone . Attached as Exhibit Ais
a summary of major plan changes that have been reviewed and discussed by the
Planning Commission and the public over the last 15 months.
Density on the periphery of town:
th
o Testimony received at the hearing on May 6stated that the development of this area is
located on the periphery of town and is inappropriate for the densities proposed.
o The area is within Ashland’s established Urban Growth Boundary and is close
proximity to schools, parks, and commercial centers as shown on the quarter mile
vicinity map previously presented to the Planning Commission and attached as Exhibit
B.
Recommended increase inbuilding height from the proposed 35ft and 2½ story maximum upto
40ft and 3-stories exclusively within the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones:
Page 1of 5
o The draft Land Use ordinancepresented to Council for review currently restricts the
maximumheight of structures to2.5 stories and 35ft tall within theplan area.
o The Planning Commission has recommended the Council consideramending the
proposal to allow anincrease in building height from the proposed 35ft and 2½ story
maximum up to 40ft and 3-stories exclusively within the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones
through a ConditionalUse Permit review process.
The Planning Commission found that the added allowance (3 stories up to 40’)
would provide applicants greater site and building design flexibility in achieving
the stated densities (15 units per acre) within the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones,
while retaining a publically noticed review process to evaluate the bulk and
scale of proposed buildings to ensure neighborhood compatibility is preserved.
o Should the Council wish to retain the height maximum of 2.5 stories and 35’ consistent
with residential zones throughout the City, no Council action need be taken and the
draft code would retain thatexistinglimitation.
NN-03-Cproposed commercial overlaylocation:
o The NN-03-C zone is a residential zone which allowslimited commercial uses. It is
anticipated that the zone would initially develop for residential use exclusively while
retaining the ability to convert a portion of the ground floor for small scale commercial
use only after the neighborhood is largely developed and contains a high enough
concentration of customers in the immediate vicinity.
o Adjacency of the commercial area to the Neighborhood Collector and East Main Street
was identified as necessary to increase visibility of any neighborhood serving
commercial uses.
o The commercial overlayareahas been located in the vicinityofthe highest
concentration of housing within the plan area, and inproximity to existing housing
developments to the east and south beyond the project area’s boundary.
o Inclusion of a neighborhood serving commercial overlay within the district is largely
consistent with the interval spacing of Pedestrian Placesintended to provide a
commercial area within walking distance to residents in the vicinity,as shown on
Exhibit C.
Creek Drive Sanitary Sewer concerns:
th
o Testimony received at the hearing on May 6cited frequent backups at a sewage pump
station on Creek Drive which serves the neighborhood to the south. Public Works has
verified that due to obstructions (cloth rags)being flushed into the system one of two
pumps at the station hasclogged with some regularity. The pump being obstructed
resultsin backup or overflow thus requiring City crews to be dispatched to clear the
obstructions. Public Works recently replaced this pump with one better designedto
address such obstructions, however the potential remains for a pump to be clogged or
inoperative resulting in sewage backup.
o Theresolution to the Creek Drive sewer pump station concerns is to develop a gravity
flow system which would then eliminate the need for the pumps. An extension of sewer
lines through the Normal Neighborhood Plan area, and specifically through
development of the property to the north, would essentially resolvethe issue according
to the Public Works Department.
Page 2of 5
Water pressure issues:
th
o Testimony received at the hearing on May 6cited high water pressure in the
subdivisions south of Creek Drive being problematic and requiring installation of
pressure regulators at numerous houses.
o The water reservoir feeding water to this neighborhood is approximately 500’ higher in
elevation than this neighborhood which results in high water pressure due to the gravity
fed system.
o Developments within the Normal Neighborhood will have to accommodate high water
pressure by installing regulators at theirwater meters, and size their water systems
adequately to accommodate the existing pressure.
o According to the Public Works Department the future development of the Normal
Neighborhood area will not impact the water pressure in existing neighborhoods.
Developmentimpact on existing water wellson properties across East MainSt.:
o The proposed draft land use ordinance containsnew provisions for storm water
management. These provisions requirethat future developments retain stormwater on
site to maximize infiltration, and that post-development water run-off not exceed the
pre-development rates. Such a standard is intended to maintain the natural hydrology of
the areas to maintain existing subsurface water flow within the area.
Future Transit:
o Throughout the planning process for the neighborhood concern has been raised
regarding to the future provision of transit to the area. Currently Rogue Valley
Transportation District(RVTD)provides fixed route service with the nearest transit
stops in the vicinity of the area being located at Abbot Ave @Tolman Creek Rd, and on
Ashland Street @Ray Lane.
o The Transportation System Plan identifies a potentialnewfuture route (Route8B)
which would potentially extend down Walker Avenue from East Main Street to Ashland
Street. The construction ofnew housing in the neighborhood plan areawould result in a
potential increase in ridership.In coordination with RVTDthe Citycould define the
futurebusroute to serve the Normal Neighborhood District.
o The Planning Commission has recommended that future improvements to East Main
Street includeprovisions forthe location of a transit stop in the vicinity of the NN-O3
zone.
Infrastructure improvements:
o Consistent with Ashland’s annexation policies all local streets, shared street, alleys,
multi-use paths, and other infrastructure improvements within the plan area would be a
developer responsibility.
o East Main Street, Normal Avenue rail road crossing, and the new Normal
Neighborhood Collector are being evaluated by the System Development Charges
committee to determine the degree to which these improvements serve broader City
wide transportation system benefit. This evaluation willestablish the potential
eligibility for a contribution of SDCs, and the correspondingcontribution will be
required of developers within the plan area.
Page 3of 5
o Concern has been raised that transportation improvements along East Main Street, and
establishment ofa public railroad crossing, should be addressed prior to development
within the plan area. To this end the Planning Commission has recommendedthat the
south side of East Main Street, from Walker Avenue to Clay Street, be fully improved
to City Street Standards prior to, or coinciding with any future annexation and
development within the plan area. Further the Planning CommissionReport dated
4/22/14 recommended that it be verifiedthat the proposed public Rail Road crossing
can be installed,and financed,prior to approving any annexations within the plan area.
Wetland Delineations:
o In 2007 the City of Ashland completed and adopted a Local Wetland Inventory (LWI).
The LWI includes all lands within the Urban Growth Boundary and was prepared to
meet the Department of State Lands (DSL) Local Wetlands Inventory Standards and
Guidelines (OAR 141-086-0180 through 141-086-0240). The LWI was submitted and
approved by the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL) and the Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DLCD). The LWI and Ashland’s Water Resource
Protection Zone ordinance satisfy the statewide land use planning Natural Resources
Goal (Goal 5) to provide protections for “significant” wetlands.
o A Local Wetland Inventory is a systematic survey of anarea to locate, map and describe
the wetlands. The inventory was prepared using information sources such as aerial
photos and soils maps and by conducting field observations. The wetland scientists that
prepared Ashland’s LWI (Fishman Environmental Services, a Division of SWC
Environmental Consultants) collected data on the vegetation and soils to confirm that an
area was or was not a wetland.
o The primary purposes of the LWI are to provide information for long-range planning by
the city, and to alert landowners to the probable wetlands on their property. Because the
LWI maps the approximate wetland boundary, and may miss small wetlands, much
more detailed field work is needed prior to site development.
o Property owners in the plan area have presented preliminary wetland delineation maps
as exhibits at the public hearing that indicate wetland areas which are smaller than those
identified in the 2007 LWI. Although such preliminary delineations would require
formal review and concurrence by DSL, the more general question posed to Council is
whether the proposed Conservation Area boundaries should be subject to change to
respond to formal wetland delineations as part of future development proposals. Simply
put, a number of property owners have contended that if it is found a wetland area is
smaller than currently shown in the LWI, than the corresponding Conservation Area
should shrink to match the newly delineated area.
o The Normal Neighborhood Plan’s approach to the greenway and open space framework
is establishing “Conservation Areas” through a proposed amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan Map. As proposed these areas are intended to be preserved as
natural areas or open space within the district which absent of any environmental
constraints would provide recreational and view amenities to the districts residents. As
such a reduction in the size of a Conservation Area, even in cases where formal wetland
delineation shows a smaller wetland area, would require a major plan amendment.
Page 4of 5
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval of first reading of the Normal Neighborhood Plan’simplementing ordinances, the final
plan and ordinances, as amended, will be presented to the City Council for second reading.
The Normal Neighborhood District Land Use Ordinance will be presented for legislative approval as
part of theUnified Land Use Ordinance hearing processand will be forwarded to the City Council
following the Planning Commission’spublic hearing and deliberation.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff and Commission Recommendations are provided in the Council Communication presented on
th
May 6, 2014.
ATTACHMENTS:
th
Refer to the May 6City Council Packet and Council Communication for full listing of attachments.
Additional Attachments provided for May 20, 2014
1.Exhibit A: Plan Iteration Summary dated 2/25/2014
2.Exhibit B:Quarter Mile Vicinity Map
3.Exhibit C:PedestrianPlaces location map
Page 5of 5
City of Ashland
Existing Comprehensive Plan Designations (1981)
existing
y of
t
of Revisions
density development
-
to high
Summary
-
:
aining area of residentially
units per acre on average. Suburban
) and to ensure the orderly and
anticipates the future urbanization of this
(SFR) and approximately 50 acres of
lands. The housing density expected for the SFR
esidential
1
perty owners within the plan area with a number owning
B
Single Family R
as a mix of Comprehensive Plan designations including single family
The Normal Avenue neighborhood is situated between East Main Street to the north and the railroad tracks to the south, Clay Street to the east and the Ashland Middle School to the west.
Currently, the 94 acre area hresidential and suburban residential, and is presently outside the City of Ashland (City) city limits but within the City Urban Growth Boundary (UGB).This
area constitutes the largest remdesignated land that is suitable for mediumwhich remains largely vacant or redevelopable. The plan area contains 35 properties ranging in size between
0.38 acres up to 9.96 acres. There are 26 promultiple parcels. The Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan Area is within the Urban Growth Boundary yet presently outside the Ashland City Limits.
The CiAshland Comprehensive Plan area to ensure an orderly transition of land from rural to urban uses. The City of Ashland has an established goal to maintain a compact urban form
(Comprehensive Plan Goal 12.09sequential development of land in the City Limits. To this end the Comprehensive Plan designations within the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan Area include
approximately 41 acres of land reserved for Suburban Residentiallands would range from 4.5 to sixresidential lands typically accommodate attached housing options with densities between
7.2 and nine units per acre.
Normal Neighborhood Plan
Fyijcju
April, 2013)
City of Ashland
reproduction:
(GIS map
-
(NA
density
uses
of Revisions
.
east half of
small apartment
medium
space.
open
variety of housing types
homes in the
patterns.
Summary
(cottage housing)
townhomes,
:
amily
f
ingle
s
was designated for a
private or public
03) were located in the North east portion
an
from
-
was
t neighborhoods
lan
including
Charrette
reserved for
2013, were designated for low density residential
) which could accommodate a
and pocke
,
2mix of single family homes,
ent with existing development
th
0
-
llustrative pthe Charrette concept
constraints is located.
i
2
25
-
three day
consist
Areas currently developed as the plan area 01) The center of the plan areazone (NAincluding a complexes,Higher Density areas (NAof the plan area where large lot, undeveloped property
with limited physical Existing natural areas, wetlands, floodplains and riparian areas were identified and
evisions to
The originaldeveloped over the course ofintensiveOctober 23two neighborhood meetings and numerous meetings with area property owners and residents. Rwere presented to the Planning Commission
and public at study sessions on Feb. 26, 2013 and April 9, 2013.
Normal Neighborhood Plan
City of Ashland
,
03
-
tage)
wasexisting
.
an
of Revisions
of properties
02 and NA
-
to the Planning
.
01 (single dwelling
-
of input received at the April
Summary
:
03 zone was to allow 3 stories up
-
lan was presented
reduced to 2.5 stories up to 35 feet
density) extending 100 feet back from
-
was
eliminated to address access
Draft Pmore of the units within the plan area to be
elling high density residential) Zone
in consideration
dwmodified to include a mix of NA
-
ibuting
dwelling low
a revised
-
were
including:
03 (multi02 zone would allow for a variety of housing types
--
circulation along natural areas.
ement objectives.
3
02 (Multi
to be compatible with existing City residential zones
-
25th, 2013
The NAmodified north of Creek Drive and west of Clay Street to be zoned NAeach street. The original concept for the NAto 45 ft. in height, which tallIn the North West corner of the
plan area a number which were previously designated as NAresidential) effectively distradjacent to East Main Street and in immediate proximity to Ashland Middle School.The NAincluding
single dwelling units, townhouses, and cluster (cothousingIntroduced Shared Streets (Woonerfs) to address pedestrian and bicycleTwo local street intersections proposed along East Main
Streetadjacent to Clay Creek,managProposed street in south east area relocated to avoidhome.
istribution of density throughout the plan area
lternatives for high density housing in consideration of lowering the
ransitional standards to correlate density, height, and coverage of
Adensity adjacent to established neighborhoods.o Tnew developments with existing established neighborhoods. o D oo Street Network oo o
June
study session
th
OnCommission and the public 9
Normal Neighborhood Plan
City of Ashland
02
-
which
to NA
th
of Revisions
01
-
Analysis
ovide continuity
e spacing distance
igher density zones
.
from NA
to pr
h
03 area were moved
lands.
-
03
03
-
land use code
02
-
included:
-
NA
rural
homogonous higher density
Summary
along the Neighborhood
02
-
:
C)
ensity, and
-
area designated
NA
d
meetings
Street to ensure a variety of
03
preliminary
-
concentration of HDR along East Main
ain
(NA
M
edium
presented at the September 24
m
n incompatible
,
amily
raised that
f
introduced
in review of the
along East
th
were
ingle
the
s
zone
Planning Commission
land area designated as
th
concern over access management and th
4
Network
tion in the land area designated as
reet would create amix of
verlay
OCollector and visible from East Main Street. On June 25Commissioners discussed the scale and type of neighborhood serving commercial uses that would be appropriate in the plan area.Concerns
Ststreetscape immediately across from Awere located housing types.Properties in the Northwest corner changed to allow for an increase in density to offset the cumulative reduction
due to limiting the extent of NAFormer Greene Property changed to NAin the central plan areaStreet Connections at East Main in the NAfurther apart in consideration of the Future Traffic
citedbetween
Neighborhood Serving Commercial oo Reduc oo Increased oo Street o
The Final Draft Plan revisionsNovember 26
Normal Neighborhood Plan
City of Ashland
2/25/2014
Final Plan
open
input
of Revisions
connections to
.
allow final
regarding the
study session for
.
recommends an
and proposed
as represented in the
cted conservation areas.
, and a major
Neighborhood Collector
ortion of the Neighborhood
consideration of
Summary
prote
space
:
to correlate with existing property
correlate with natural features
alternatively
the new Normal neighborhood
proposed new street
mandatory standards relating to
revised in
housing density out of the water
Planning Commission
ffic flow on the central street
the
the three
space lands as
and zoning
has been
at
a minor amendment process to
establishing
, leaving only
:
in preparation of a final plan
streets
Planning and Transportation Commission study
, 2014
included:
conservation area/open
Commissioners identified a number of areas to be
the 90 degree turns in the final
protection zones.
to promote tra
locations to be moved to
ing
water management.
he Public Works Director
5
.
The Final Plan aligns the northern pCollector to run along a common property line.Tadditional East Main St. connection (4 total).
ruary 25
addressed
hs where appropriate adjacent to water protection zones.
limination of two of
lexibility in shared streets to alternatively be alleys or multiuse
Designation of openProvide for the transfer ofresourceEstablishment of space (future wetland locations and boundaries)amendment process if a proposal would reduce the cumulative acreage
of planFpatConsideration of stormAlignment oflines. EEast Main StreetCollector connection in its proposed locationSoftendesign
Feb
The Planning further land use ordinance oooooo The Transportation Commission recommendations Street Network o o
The Final Plan presented review received during the sessions held during September, October, and November 2014:
Normal Neighborhood Plan
Exhibit B
Normal Neighborhood Plan Area Vicinity
A quartermile is approximately a five minute Walk
D
Fyijcju