Loading...
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