HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-09-18 Normal Neighborhood Plan_MIN
Minutes for the Normal Working Group
September 18, 2014
Page 1 of 4
MINUTES FOR THE NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD WORKING GROUP
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way
Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 4:33 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn
Way.
Mayor Stromberg, Michael Dawkins, Rich Kaplan, Mike Morris, and Brandon Goldman were
present. Community panel members present included: Sue DeMarinis, Bryce Anderson, Tom
Giardano, Randy Jones, and Alan Harper.
Marsh gave a recap of meetings to date and explained the purpose of the panel which has been
convened today. She also explained that each panelist will have 10 minutes to talk, then the
working group will ask questions, and we will have a 10 minute public forum at the end of the
meeting.
1. Panel Members
Sue DeMarinis
She explained whom she is representing, and gave an overview of the things they like in the plan
and the things they don’t like. (Please see attachment for full comments.)
Things they like about the plan(s) or which have been discussed by the working group:
Open spaces
Density gradation (though question the need for higher densities)
Transportation connections including not having Normal Avenue be a straight shot to E.
Main Street
Alteration of zoning labels to more closely reflect nearby neighborhood zoning labels
Things they don’t like about the plan(s) or which have been discussed by the working group:
Any straight north-south streets connecting to E. Main Street
Multiple east-west paved connectors
Density bonuses allowed adjacent to open spaces
Infrastructure costs being born by anyone outside of the plan limits
Bryce Anderson
He explained whom he is representing. The things his group are like or are concerned with
include:
They like the idea that the Baptist church property might be developed as it’s currently a
fire hazard
Like that overall density has been reduced. The end result should be a plan no more dense
than Meadowbrook
Like the connector path to Creek Drive and believe the shared street is important
especially as it’s currently very difficult to connect to the bike path from that
neighborhood.
They are concerned that there is no clear idea in the plan for dealing with increased traffic
on E. Main
Minutes for the Normal Working Group
September 18, 2014
Page 2 of 4
Want 4-way stops on E. Main to get in and out of neighborhood
Want a center turn lane on E. Main
Concerned about density bonuses
Want to have cluster or cottage housing, and fear this could not occur with density
bonuses as they would require higher density rates.
Is concerned that there never will be any public transportation in the area
Concerned that the public improvements will either be cost prohibitive to developers or
the costs will have to be born too heavily by residents
Not in favor of any commercial development as there is too much traffic as-is.
Randy Jones
Showed a map of the properties they believe are interested in development. It totals about 40
acres. He left out properties currently occupied. He agrees that there should be no commercial
development. Also agrees there should be no density bonuses allowed in the plan.
Jones gave numbers including, what the improvements might cost, how many homes could be
built, etc. His group believes it could be built and homes sold at reasonable prices.
Unfortunately, he thinks the affordable housing requirements would be cost prohibitive,
especially with the higher densities near the railroad, which would eliminate them from lots of
Federal Funding possibilities.
Tom Giardino
Gave an overview of his background with planning and community projects. He is very against
urban sprawl, there are lots of negatives when development goes outside of a city’s UGB.
Normal Avenue Plan area is very large and may be the last area of this size left to be planned in
Ashland. His role today was to look at the community in general and he believes that the staff
and the consultants did a god job in coming up with this plan. He believes, unlike some of the
other commenters, that there should actually be an increase in density in the plan, not a decrease.
Large lots or areas with low density won’t bring diversity into this community and that has
always seemed to be a high community goal. He reminded the group that previous action from
nd
the planning department and Council to allow for 2 units really helped increase development
and hopes that we’ll use that higher density approach here.
Giordano stated he’s glad the plan recognizes the wetlands and open space. It is important details
like this in a plan which make them successful. He recognizes that transportation issues will need
to be worked through. Believes that East Main needs to be improved now, regardless of the plan.
Giordano believes that we need to think about the general health of the community and that
involves a diversity of housing types and densities. Likes the concept of commercial activities
being allowed in the plan, but doesn’t know for sure if it fits in with the current view. It might,
however, fit in sometime in the future so we shouldn’t lose that possibility.
Alan Harper
Gave overview of his background as an attorney, and his work with Land Use Codes. Stated
every community struggles with the exact same balances this group is struggling with. Reminded
the group this is an opportunity for setting a vision for the community. People don’t always
Minutes for the Normal Working Group
September 18, 2014
Page 3 of 4
recognize what’s been planned years ago and that the vision of Ashland 50 years ago is very
different than it is now. We need to plan for the future and not just the present. He encouraged
the group to err on the side of flexibility and willingness to innovate. It’s far better if they give
staff, developers, and future Councils the tools and ability to do something great.
While the commercial option available in N. Mountain area hasn’t worked yet, that doesn’t mean
it couldn’t – the time just isn’t right yet. He reminded the group about the fight over keeping the
current Rogue Valley Roasters on E. Main Street. At the end of the day, that community
gathering space is important to the neighborhood and the community at-large. It’s better to find a
way to leave open the option for that style of commercial building. If you zone it entirely
residential those opportunities will never be available.
Harper believes family-friendly communities can be created even with higher density. Part of
what people love about traveling to other parts of the world is the higher density – lots of
communities do it well with lots of parks and increased opportunities for livability outside of the
home.
Ultimately, the best this group can do is make clear rules. Without clear rules, lawyers get to
highlight all the negatives. The clearer the plan the easier it will be for developers and
community to get the vision.
2. Working Group Questions
Group discussed affordable housing requirements. Goldman reminded the group that the mix of
affordable housing styles must be consistent with surrounding homes. CDBG funds put lots of
money into building affordable housing so long as the location of those homes are not in a
“negative” area. Noise from the railroad being so close could be considered a big enough
negative to make the area ineligible for CDBG funds. Jones stated without Federal assistance the
25% affordable housing requirement would be a non-starter for any development. Goldman and
Jones will sit down together to do better informed calculations to bring back to the group at an
upcoming meeting.
Group discussed if there were higher density, if that would make development more possible.
Jones noted this would be the case only if assistance for funding the affordable housing units
were available.
Group discussed the challenges of the required improvements and some of the funding options.
Also discussed PUDs and that they may allow for a more creative way to maximize flexibility.
Goldman reminded the group that PUDs are allowed under the original plan.
Group talked about having a plan without the streets framework but determined that without a
solid framework development likely would lack the connections needed.
3. Public Forum
Julie Mathews: had always understood that PUDs mean higher densities. The group has been
talking about density for three years – why is this discussion just occurring. Wondered if there
was a current need for development in this economy.
Minutes for the Normal Working Group
September 18, 2014
Page 4 of 4
Debbie Miller: Is upset that the discussions have gone from “if” to “when” in regards
development. People in the area haven’t been able to talk until today when Sue was part of the
panel. Feels like discussions of higher densities is a real compromise. People in this community
do care and want the group to consider that any increase in services to this community will
require more money be spent in the community as a whole. We’ve never talked about whether
Ashland is a “town” or a “city with high density and multi-story units”.
4. Next Meeting
th
The next meeting will be held on October 9 at 2:30 p.m.
Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Diana Shiplet
Executive Secretary