Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThird_70_TREE-2018-00036 CITY OF ASHLAND December 21, 2018 Notice of Final Decision On December 21, 2018, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: TREE-2018-00036 Subject Property: 70 Third Street Applicant: John Fields/Natalie Ives-Drouillard Description: A request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove 36" Ponderosa Pine. The tree was proposed to be protected as part of PA-T1-2018-00015. The application states the owner wishes to remove the tree for garden space and the addition of solar panels to the roof. The tree is crowded and the addition of an accessory unit on the property will severely impact the tree's health as the unit will require excavation in its root zone and limbs to be removed to provide clearance. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE 09 BD; TAX LOT: 1400. The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12"' day after the Notice of Final Decision is mailed. Approval is valid for a period of 18 months and all conditions of approval identified on the attached Findings are required to be met prior to project completion. The application, all associated documents and evidence submitted, and the applicable criteria are available for review at the Ashland COMmUnity Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. Copies of file documents can be requested and are charged based on the City of Ashland copy fee schedule. Prior to the final decision date, anyone who was mailed this Notice of Final Decision may request a reconsideration of the action as set forth in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) 18.5.1.050(F) and/or file an appeal to the Ashland Planning Commission as provided in ALUO 18.5.1.050(G). The ALUO sections covering reconsideration and appeal procedures are attached. The appeal may not be made directly to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact Fotini Kaufman in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax, 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashlantl.orms - SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I Procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice) E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval spccify otherwise or the decision is appealed pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.G, a Type I decision beconies effective 12 days after tine City mails the notice of decision. F. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may reconsider a Type I decision as set forth below. I. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City department may request reconsideration of the action alter the decision has been made by providing evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred through no fault of the party asking for reconsideration, which in the opinion of the Staff Advisor, might affect the decision. Recoils iderationn requests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of an issue to be raised by letter or evidence during the opportunity to provide public input on the application sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an opportunity to respond to the issue prior to malting a decision. 2. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five days of mailing the notice of decision. Tile Staff Advisor shall decide within three days whether to reconsider the matter. 3. If the Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall withdraw the decision for purposes of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten days to affirm, modify, or reverse the original decision. The City shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm, modify, or reverse to any party entitled to notice of the planning action. 4. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision, the Staff Advisor shall deny the reconsideration request. Notice of denial shall be sent to those parties that requested reconsideration. G. Appeal of Type I Decision. A Type I decision may be appealed to the Planning Commission, pursuant to the following: I. Who May Appeal. The following persons have standing to appeal a Type I decision. a. The applicant or owner of the subject property. b. Any person who is entitled to written notice of the Type 1 decision pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.B. c. Any other person who participated in the proceeding by submitting written comments on the application to the City by the specified deadline. 2. Appeal Filing Procedure. a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.050.G.1, above, may appeal a Type I decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this subsection. The fee required in this section shall not apply to appeals made by neighborhood or community organizations recognized by the City and whose boundaries include the site. If all appellant prevails at the hearing or upon subsequent appeal, the fee for the initial hearing shall be refunded, b. Time for Filing. A notice of appeal shall be filed with the Staff Advisor within 12 days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. c. Content of Notice ofAppeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall contain. i. An identification of the decision being appealed, including the date of the decision. ii. A statement demonstrating the person filing the notice of appeal has standing to appeal. iii. A statement explaining the specific issues being raised our appeal. iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period. d. Tine appeal requirements of this section Must be fully niet or the appeal will be considered by the City as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. 3. Scope of Appeal. Appeal hearings on Type I decisions made by the Staff Advisor shall be de novo hearings before the Planning Commission. The appeal shall not be limited to the application materials, evidence and other documentation, and specific issues raised in the review leading Lip to the Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and arguments. Tine Commission may allow additional evidence, testimony, or argument concerning any relevant ordinance provision. 4. Appeal Hearing Procedure. Hearings on appeals of Type I decisions follow the Type 11 public hearing procedures, pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A E, except that the decision of the Planning Commission is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type I decision. A decision on an appeal is final the date the City mails the adopted and signed decision. Appeals of Commission decisions must be filed with tine State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 wtiyw.ashland,or.us - ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: TREE-2018--00036 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 70 Third Street APPLICANT/OWNER: John FieldslNatalie Ives-Drouillard DESCRIPTION: A request for a Tree Removal Permit and Modification to the original planning application T1-2018-00015 to remove a 36" Ponderosa Pine at the rear of the property at 70 Third Street. The tree was proposed to be protected as part of a Site Design Review approval for an accessory residential unit (ARU) in PA-T1-2018-00015. The tree is located approximately eight feet from the foundation of the ARU and the application states the construction will severely impact the tree's health as the unit will require excavation in its root zone and limbs to be removed to provide clearance. SUBMITTAL DATE: November 15, 2018 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: November 28, 2018 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: December 21, 2018 DEADLINE TO APPEAL (4:30 p.m.): January 3, 2018 FINAL DECISION DATE: January 4, 2018 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: July 2, 2020 DECISION Planning Action #TREE-2018-00036 requests a Tree Removal Permit and Modification to the original planning application T1-2018-00015 to remove a 36" Ponderosa Pine at the rear of the property at 70 Third Street. The lot is approximately 0.12 acres in size and is zoned R-2. A pre- existing single-family residence is located at the front of the lot. PA-T1-2018-00015 was a request for Site Design Review for a 499 square-foot ARU to be built at the rear of the lot and the tree was proposed to be saved at that time. The tree is located approximately eight feet from the foundation of the Ai U. Due to the close proximity between the tree and the proposed building site, a condition was added to the Site Design Review approval to require further findings "to determine the best treatment for the tree's protection zone during construction. . - The request to remove this tree meets the following approval criteria for a "Tree That is Not a Hazard." The first criterion states, "The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent iidth other-Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. " In order to comply with the newly adopted Wildfire Ordinance, the application says the tree would have to have limbs removed 26-feet above the ground level to provide the 10-foot clearance above the new structure. The removal of limbs 26-feet above the ground constitutes a third of the existing branch structure and the loss of foliage weakens a tr'ee's natural defenses. In addition, a ten-inch diameter root is observed headed in the direction of the proposed building site from the tree. The application states that the large root likely has additional lateral roots. The subsoil level beneath the structure would need to remain intact to not disturb the roots and save the tree, and the height of the structure would need to be raised to accommodate the foundation. The application states that raising the foundation of the ARU will not meet the property owners need to have an accessible residential PA-TREE-2018-00036 70 Third Street/fk Page l unit. In addition, the application estimates the needed change in the foundation will significantly raise the construction cost. The second criterion states, "Removal of the free will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, jloiv ofsurface waters, protection ofadjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. " The lot is relatively flat and located less than 150-feet from Downtown. The removal of this tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees or existing windbreaks. The third criterion states, "Removal of the tree tit,ill not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to alloiv the property to be used as permitted in the zone. " The tree removal's impact on the tree density and canopy is proposed to be mitigated with the planting of four deciduous trees, more appropriately sized for the lot's density and location. The fourth criterion states, "Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced belmi, the permitted density allowed by the zone. " The property is zoned for multi-family development and this R-2 zoning allows the addition of an accessory residential unit to the subject property. The lot is relatively long and narrow with a historic home situated in the front half of the property and off-street parking provided at the rear of the property and accessed by the alley. At. 12 of an acre or 5, 227 square feet, the lot is slightly larger than the minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet for the R-2 zone. The placement of the historic home at the front and the parking at the rear leaves a limited building area at the rear of the lot. Approximately half of the building is occupied by the tree and tree roots with the canopy almost reaching the north property line. As a result, there is not an alternative location on the subject property to locate an ARU. The fifth criterion states. "The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.. " As stated earlier, the application-proposes four new trees to be planted to mitigate the Ponderosa's removal. Staff received one comment from an adjacent neighbor who felt the tree was beautiful, contributes to the character of the neighborhood and should be saved. The comment also remarked that the proposed addition should be rethought if it is not compatible with the preservation of the tree. The Land Use Ordinance explicitly states that Tree Removal cannot be used to require permitted density to be reduced. The Ashland Tree Commission reviewed this request at their meeting on December 6, 2018. The commissioners discussed their belief that the tree would not survive construction, but recommended requiring the original exploratory excavation and assessment by an arborist to determine the trees ability to withstand construction. If the arborist determined saving the tree is not feasible, the conunission reconnnended conditionally approved removing the tree. The Conunission additionally felt tree could be removed with mitigation and replaced with large stature native conifer if it was found not able to be saved. PA-TREE-2018-00036 70 Third street/M Page 2 The Modification to the previously approved PA-TI-2018-00015 requires the application for a Tree Removal Permit. Subsequent to PA-T1-2018-00015, the Land Use Ordinance was changed to allow properties with ARUs to be exempt from a Tree Removal Permit per 18.5.7.020.C. Under current Land Use Ordinance requirements, an application for the addition of an ARU is exempt from the Tree Removal Permit process. As a result, a Tree Removal Permit is not currently required for the same situation. Staff finds the application has sufficiently demonstrated compliance with all applicable approval criteria. The criteria for Tree Removal Permit approval are described in AMC section 18.5.7.040.B as follows: 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Rernroval Permit shall he granted if the approval authorityy finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can he nnade to connfornnn through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i. e., likely to fall and injure persons or propert)) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure on• facdrty, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6 h. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. Tree That is Not a Lazard. A Tree Removal Permit far a tree that is not a hazard tree shall be granted if the approval authorityfinds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The tree-is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent tivith other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in pent 1& 3.10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative intpact on erosion, soil stability, jlaw of sunface-ivatens, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. c. Removal of the tree ivill not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the s ubject propero The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this deternnination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that ivould lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this on dinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pia suant to section 18.5.7.050. Stich mitigation requirements shall be a condition PA-TREE--2018-00036 70 Third Street/fk Page 3 of approval of the permit. The application with the attached conditions complies with all applicable City ordinances for a Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard. Planning Action #TREE-2018-00036 is therefore approved. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval. If any of the following conditions are found not to be true, then Planning Action #TREE-2018-00036 is denied: 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 2) That one (1) mitigation tree shall be planted on site within 18 months of issuance of this decision. 3) That the mitigation tree shall be planted at a minimum of a I%-inch caliper consistent with the requirements of AMC 18.5.7.050. I r'~ b - Bill Molna , Director Date Commuri Development Department PA-'TREE-2018-00036 70 Third Streat/fk Page 4 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) !County 'of Jackson The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am' employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On December 21, 2018, 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid„ a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action ##TREE-2018-00036, 70 Third Street. gnature of Employee C:MUserslsm~ihdaAF'NIiEWesktap4A,FFIDNWI'T OF MAILING-ds.docx 12J2112018 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 2500 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1100 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 500 37 THIRD LLC ALLEN BARBARA A TRUSTEE ET AL CHALLMAN KENNETH W/SARAH R PO BOX 1018 200 HELMAN ST 39 4TH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1400 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 400 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1800 IVES-DROUILLARD NATALIE MAY TRT LARSON WENDY D/MATTHEW W LEMANNE DAWN TRUSTEE ET AL 1038 W HOMESTEAD RD 47 FOURTH ST 435 GRANITE ST SUNNYVALE, CA 94087 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 700 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 300 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 80003 MAINSTREETASHLAND LLC MCINTYRE MARTHA M TRUSTEE ET AL MCNEAL KATHLEEN DAYLE 485 E MAIN ST 58 FOURTH ST 450 C ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 2400 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 80002 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1801 MITTLEMAN PROPERTIES U S BANK PEARCE DARREL RANDOLPH HAYS LLC PROPERTIESIFLEAHMAH LEIGH 448 C ST PO BOX 1220 2800 E LAKE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1000 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 100 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 200 ROGUE FEDERAL CREDIT UN10N ROGUE VALLEY UNITARIAN ROGUE VALLEY UNITARIAN/ ATTN ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 87 FOURTH ST 65 4TH ST PO BOX 4550 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 80001 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1500 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1300 SLATTERY DENNIS ET AL STANLEY MICHAEL J/PAUL KIRSTEN THIRD STREET PROPERTIES LLC 94 N 3RD ST 4435 HARDING AVE 129 ALMOND ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 LOS ANGELES, CA 90066 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 2100 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 2300 TREE-2018-00036 391 E09BD 1600 VAN VLEET & ASSOCIATES INC WELLES RANDAL TRUSTEE ET AL WILLIAMS JONATHAN L TRUSTEE 375 LITHIA WAY 1126 BACKLUND PL 78 N THIRD ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 EUGENE, OR 97401 ASHLAND, OR 97520 FIELDS JOHN CARLOS DELGADO ARCHITECT ROGUE PLANNING & DEV 845 OAK ST 217 FOURTH ST AMY GUNTER ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 33 N CENTRAL AVE STE 213 MEDFORD, OR 97501 KEELEY NANCY 70 Third St 78 THIRD ST 12-21-18 - NOD ASHLAND, OR 97501 25 Planning Action: Tree-2018-00036 Subject Property: 70 Third Street We have received the above referenced Notice of Application with request for tree removal. We are strongly opposed to removal of the 36" Ponderosa Pine at 70 Third St. We were comfortable with the initial application for an addition on that property that included proposed protection of the tree. That was very appropriate since Ashland prides itself on being a "Tree City". This tree contributes to the character of the neighborhood in the Historic Railroad District. The tree in question is a well established heritage tree and we have enjoyed its beauty ever, since we moved into our home on Third St in 1979. What is a "heritage tree" if it can be easily removed for the convenience of'a builder,/property owner" The current application for removal states that the tree is "crowded". The tree is no more crowded now than it was when I moved into the neighborhood in 1979. The application also states that the owner wants the tree removed' for "garden space". The tree is currently part of a lovely garden space, so this does not make sense. If preservation of the tree is not compatible with the proposed addition then perhaps that permit needs to be reviewed. ! V Planning Department, 51 Winbu.., day, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y F \ 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 H LAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: Tree-2018-00036 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 70 Third Street OWWNERIAPPLICAANT: John Fieldsf?Natalie Ives-Drouil lard DESCRIPTION: A request for a. Tree Removal Permit to remove 36" Ponderosa fine. The tree was proposed to be protected as part ofPA-T1-2018-0001.5. The application states the owner wishes to remove the tree for garden space and the addition of solar panels to the roof. The tree is crowded and the addition of an accessory unit on the property will severely impact the tree's health as the unit will require excavation in its root zone and limbs to be removed to provide clearance, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2 ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1E 09 IUD; TAX LOT: 1400. MOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 6:40 PGA in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 winburn Way. NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: November 28, 2018 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: December 112, 2018 :F 455 4, 5 I+ J 107/ 87 l \2\ CID !r` 44 PLA rv f 1 4~ 44 l/2 X375 SUBJECT PROPERTY 70 THIRD ST 70 . I, _.w 30 4 - / 7 r ~ . 1 - a7o 6 r _ r 65 - DSO - _ / " J 57 3 2 3-4 57 l 1 <Q' 3 S3 64 4 J ~ ! 3 3 6 4 395 3 37 38 ,r l I 3,96 2 27. 39 The Ashland Planning Division Staff has receiv+:d a complete a9plication for the property noted above. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland,, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.m. on the deadline date shown above. Ashland Planning Division staff determine if a Land Use application is complete within 30 days of submittal. Upon determination of completeness, a notice. is sent to surrounding properties within 200 feet of the property submitting application which allows for a 14 day comment period, After the comment period and not more than 45 days from the application being deemed complete, the Planning Division Staff shall make a final decision on the application. A notice of decision is mailed to the same properties within 5 days of decision. An appeal to the Planning Commission of the Planning Division Staff's decision must be made in writing to the Ashland Planning Division within 12 days from the date of the mailing of final decision. (AMC 18.51.050.G) The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional) or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Department to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Division, Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at 541-•488-5305. Document, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 18.5.7.040.B 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5,7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. Document ] I" u B' y ,P I a 8406 ,y v Sit, I y , 0 I.', w 1 ' ~ i a' V is r" SMd} r Y c i E o 4 bd '.l 11 V'4F ~ ~yv ~~'M'V' II' ~ ~ _ g Y{ Nv ' a f y ~ v VLVV I Y °I72V7!' ' w 1 f IN N~ ( I 5i4(b s, '14 0 " y o ~ 1 o 7400 ~ ~I A dL~ afF V G "7 3700 bowl how 2tOo 50{}U3 ; o" ~1. 160 23JDO two ,p 1.00 ,.,'M14 .141-RI .7dlV 2400 1300 ~0 . 3W 1200 5700 d5'Iu ~ 1 Seat 40 1 Into 5911'0 .,h o 1 UURi I 4 501 1 II y pv q u y~~ ~ o.,~. 1 ~ ~ VM1l y n I t A 3f9ju'V Ww INN, 5710 M 1520,0 11,~11",°"' p i~1900 9 'x "yN'""~uy 6 Y R 1 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that; 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street„ Ashland, Oregon 97526, in the Community Development Department. 2. On November 28, 2018 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #TREE-2018-00036, 70 Third St. NOC. n Signature of Employee G.4comm-de^V,plannVnglTemplaYeshTP6iPLATP_Affidavit of Making-Planning Acton Natca.dou 1112W018 r iTree-2018-00036 391E09BD 2500 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1100 Tree-201.8-00036 91E09BD 1200 37 THIRD LLC ALLEN BARBARA A TRUSTEE ET AL ALLEN BARBARA A TRUSTEE ET AL PO BOX 101.8 2.00 HELMAN ST 200 HEL,v'Ii N ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 500 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1.400 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 400 CHALLMAN KENNETHW/SARAH R IVES-DROUILLARD NATALIE MAY REVTR LARSON WENDY D/MATTHEW W 39 4TH ST 1038 W HOMESTEAD RD 47 FOURTH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 SUNNYVALE, CA 94087 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1800 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 700 Tree-2.018-00036 391E09BD 300 LEMANNE DAWN TRUSTEE ET AL MAINSTREETASHLAND LLC MCINTYRE MARTHA M TRUSTEE ET AL 435 GRANITE ST 485 E MAIN ST 58 FOURTH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 80003 Tree-2.018-00036 391E09BD 2400 Tree-2018-00036 391 E09BD 80002 MCNEAL KATHLEEN DAYLE ~MITTLEMAN PROPERTIES PEARCE DARREL 450 C ST 2800 E LADE ST 448 C ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55406 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1.841 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1000 Tree-201.8-00036 391E09BD 100 RANDOLPH HAYS LLC ROGUE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION ROGUE VALLEY UNITARIAN! PO BOX 1220 PO BOX 4550 87 FOURTH ST MEDFORD, OR 97501 MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 200 Tree-2018-00030 391E09BD 80001 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1500 ROGUE VALLEY UNITARIAN/ SLATTERY DENNIS ET AL STANLEY MICHAEL J/PAUL KIRSTEN 65 4TH ST 94 N 3RD ST 4435 HARDING AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 LOS ANGELES, CA 90066 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1300 1"ree-2018-00036 391E09BD 2100 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 2300 THIRD STREET PROPERTIES LLC VAN VLEET & ASSOCIATES INC WELLES RANDAL TRUSTEE ET AL 129 ALMOND ST 375 LITHIA WAY 1126 BACKLUND PL. ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520, EUGENE, OR 97401 Tree-2018-00036 391E09BD 1600 TREE-2018-00036 WILLIAMS JONATHAN L TRUSTEE ET AL JOHN FIELDS 78 N THIRD ST 845 OAK STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 r' t i J t ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION ! Division Planning 51 burn Way, Adbland OR 97520 -.S I. ` l~ID 541-488-,5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES I] NO e, Street Address ! ! w Tax Lot(s) Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E u Zoning Camp Plan Designation ~k ik,t~ APPLICANT Name . _ ~ ~ Phone P._. - 7 'W Ile Address cif zip r„ . War ~t a PROPERTY OWN I Name E-Mail Address 1 ` y vn,"I 1-~ qL 4a u, zip, r. SURVEYOR ENGINEER ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER .a _ . Title Name Phone E-Mail Address clay Zip Tike Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip - 1 hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in ali respects, true-and correct, i understand that all propertypr"ns most be shown an the dragags and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shovrn'or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibflft -1 further understand that if this request is subsequently contested, the burden Wit be on me to establish. 1) that 1 produced sufrcleni factual evidence at the hearing to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnishe Esy ifi ofthe request; dr'ngs of me are adequat; d-further 4) that all s ures onor~ edly located o the.ground Failure f -this regard sv` re ult most ilk y in not on y s sing sef aside, but also possibly in mgr structures being built in reliance thereon being-required to beremoved y p if l a bts, m adwis o seek competent professional advice nd ass), ' anca: _ _ pilcant's gnature Date s owner of the property involve fn this request, 1 have read and understood the complete application and its consequences tome as a property . Property Ownees Signature (required) Date [To bs ma plated by Cry Wi] Rate Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee OVER I•} . G:lromm-dew4plemniu~lFgnns Bc f3aa~dauts'~Oning Pcnnt et~rlwr,~4taa.doa ZONING PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ❑ APPLICATION FORM must be completed and signed by both applicant and property owner. ❑ FINDINGS OF FACT - Respond to the appropriate zoning requirements in the form of factual statements or findings of fact and supported by evidence. List the findings criteria and the evidence that supports it. Include information necessary to address all issues detailed in the Pre-Application Comment document. ❑ 2 SETS OF SCALED PLANS no larger than 11"x17". Include site plan, building elevations, parking and landscape details, (Optional -1 additional large set of plans, 2'x3', to use in meetings) ❑ FEE (Check, Charge or Cash) ❑ LEED® CERTIFICATION (optional) - Applicant's wishing to receive priority planning action processing shall provide the following documentation with the application demonstrating the completion of the following steps:- • firing and retaining a LEED® Accredited Professional as part of the project team throughout design and construction of the project; and The LEED® checklist indicating the credits that will be pursued. NOTE: • Applications are accepted on a first come, first served basis. • Applications will not be accepted without a complete application form signed by the applicant(s) AND property owners), all required materials and full payment. • All applications received are reviewed for completeness by staff within 30 days from application date in accordance with ORS 227.178. • The first fifteen COMPLETE applications submitted are processed at the next available Planning Commission meeting. (Planning Commission meetings include the Hearings Board, which meets at 1:30 pm, or the full Planning Commission, which meets at 7:00 pm on the second Tuesday of each month. Meetings are held at the City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main St). • A notice of the project request will be sent to neighboring properties for their comments or concerns. • If applicable, the application will also be reviewed by the Tree and/or Historic Commissions. G:1cort -dev`)Iwmi ,ffomis& HandoutslZooing Pemut Applicz6mdoc 11/15/2018 70 Third Street 1 Reply all v Delete Junk v 0 Third Street II John Field's <goldenfields22 gnnail.eom> Reply all I v Today, 11:09 AM Fotini Kaufman Inbox rotini, here are a few photos for the tree removal. You can see the second pink line to the left is where the foundation line is for the proposed structure. The new walkways, the bike racks, the garbage recycling not to mention staging the construction on the root zone are all detrimental to the trees ultimate survival. Thanks for your help. 1N r- t+ r t Y% rle pcyr ~r Ir s i ~ A,kt r i 1'r~ ,^5 ~ ' 14 i i ~?Y~f l 1 Coo 0 i& k r N ! r Z, 1'. 1 Irv 42 V ! t 14, Y Y .y~Jv, t1~rs{ 7~tiW~ r t ' o Y• ~~r z~, ~t i. 1 ~ ✓ ~ * E ^C ~ 4 `tea -,i w; Kl ^K + • of ~ ~Y~' k'~ rr.Nt ._.»..y.. A,`N r ti Y u https:/Ioutlook.office355.cornlowalprojection.aspx 114 11/15/2018 70 Third Street L j Rep'', ali llp Delete dunk ~ v 1 NN rat, e 5 ~titi~ill't^f e`a x fµ~ r 9t + ~ ~t~{~~ Vk ' .t y r L i I Y ~ ,c J f ~l r of S~{ 'r- v '.aF At 1 af~~ t .a~~, t,~ ,r -lt~plst e~ l a,, ~ ~{1 ci,~/ ~ k , Y L;T iSL;` r~} r 1 Y1~Q~~I~ ~jti%riflrr~ r ' t ~~ol ad'w e - ~ rM ~ t ,s s, ~C ffj'.. ~ r` y f.- IAI r 11 Jr~~~ ~ i ~)1~ ) ~tY o its C@rI~ A,~~ fG'~"i~ 'i,~w,:!1 Yl k~u" }~5~' `i t',rt i+,r- ~-f,,~~~ Y'om`' 'kl3~r~% yips i ~ ~ . ~ 4 ~~"r~ ~~`^r''k r ,>;b"l ' ~ { ti, i J y'. ~ I f : , ~`~i r k,~~ r )r~ , ~ s ~ ~~f IL ~~~i r•.'F pp yYt ij . ~t/ r ~lr~iiy 1~( r ~r -t l~ z{C~ S ~y mod! Eck, W J r f r1~U/j / r k,n Id-t ,j "rl ►7titt, p 7~ k. F a f' ~~y y t~~ k Yo f "VII, . } )J' 4M Y 7 i 4 t i y4f. t _ r~~ rryyrl ?,~3.~ y, ~f `~'l.r V~ I r]•~{p `,N +_V~y y ~~f]r i. V 1~~Vt1'~Ik{~~i~b~]r fr; ~ ~TQ + /r~ai;, }Ise' - ti,{. i. t., ~ ~Jt Iii 1 ~i, ir• ~ ~~`1 "II ,l,~ r'i )Y Y r s 1~` of b tI I i 1~ + '.?t 91 9 a + yl_; t ii}t ~r i~ n Pm 17~,-+ ~.eft'( 'Film w m https:/IoutCook.office365.cony/owa/projectioTi.aspx 2/4 11/15/2018 70 Third Street I j Reply A11- Delete Junk 14 v a.~ r Y r "t K _ 5~;- ~c s ~11 ~l n j mss;' J ! ~t i -94, - r nr F, rl~ f - , I r n , S we z r JJ k , 4ay r r., 7y } 5 l Y r ~ i ~ / f 15 '3•A r~ 1~~~~~ A ♦1i1 f 1~ t 1r.f~, \f ":r, it k'1 i ~f°•LtY.R~~ ~a 4 i _ r _ y r Y~ t J, d s 1 {if FittlosWoutlook.office365.coi-ntowa/projection.aspx 314 Tree removal request- . J Third Street 11/14/2018 TD: City Of Ashland- Planning and Tree Commission. FROM: John FIelds-Golden-Fields Construction and Design - Agent 541-482-8442 John rr7g1delr-fields.net Natalie Ives-Drouillard RI?: Finding of Fact for Tree Removal for Property situated 70 Third Street 39 IB 09 BD TT, 1400- Ashland, Oregon Modification of planning action PA-2018-TI-00015 To whorn it may concern: The Subject property had the Final decision hosted on August 29, 2018. Within that approval the 36" diameter Ponderosa fine was slated for preservation. In the discovery, of information to move forward on this project several facts and problems have arisen and we are requesting a tree removal permit for the tree. The original desire of the home owner was for the removal of the tree. She is terrified about fire danger and felt the pine and constant shedding of needles was a hazard. The A<hland Fire Department successfully developed ami ordinance requiring all : iructures within City limits to have to Dines within 30' of new structures prohibited. I met with the Fire Department regarding this tree in particular and apparently the Tree advocates and property ownership advocates had convinced them to back off of this requirement regarding existing trees. I do believe that in this kind of small scale development, if a property owner would like to keep a tree that it should not be a hardship in the planning process. But we do feel that if an owner does not want an existing tree on single fancily residence that they should be given the latitude to rci-nove it. 3. Removal of trees in multi-family residential and health care zones on tots occupied only by a single-family detached dwelling and associated accessory structures where the property cannot be further developed with additional dwelling units other than an accessar residential unit except as otherwise regulated by chapter 113 Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay, and chapter f 8 9 9 Water Resource Protection Zones (Overlays). What we have in this case is a homneowner who prefers the tree to be removed. There are competing considerations that she would like brought into this decision.. 1. The owner would like to have a garden with fruit trees. Right now the entire back half of the property is covered in shade and has a constant layer of pine needles. 2. The design has the tree approximately 8' away from the foundation. a. The tree would have to have the limbs removed 26' above the ground level to provided the 10' elearance above the new structure. This is approximately 173 of the existing branch structure. b. The mitigation required to save this tree requires that the roots be air- spaded free to reveal the structure and then have the engineer conic to ilhc site and design a pier and grade beam foundation structure over therrmt Page l Tree removal rec nest- , o "Third street 11l14l2018 YOU can observe a 10" diameter, toot ]leading towards the proposed structure. "]'here are probably additional lateral roots. If we were to leave this giant root extending under the new structure we will have to have the subsoil level under the structure remain intact. The height of the building, will need to be raised all addition Y plus higher than proposed, The crawl space will also be more susceptible to rodent and animals getting into the crawl space due to the fact that the foundation grade beam will not be into the grade at the point it passes over the roots. c. There is a requirement to protect the root zone from construction. There is no way to build this structure without impact to the root structure. There is no other area to stake the work.. d. The plan also shows the gate entry moving to the 'Jest. When tale required garbage enclosure and bike structure are built, this will be further encroachment into the drip zone. The Plan does not show the pathway, but the owner would like to have a concrete walkway connecting parking, garbage enclosure and bike rack to both the existing house this proposed ADU.. e. Although everyone wants to save a beautiful tree, there seems to be a certain level of denial that does not see the impact of these necessary improvements to the trees ultimate health. It's a risk that will cost an additional $10,000 and will create a liability for the new ADD in the event that it has to be renxoved or there is significant damage from limbs dropping or disruption of the foundation by the encroaching root structure. It the tree is removed after construction the cost ofreMoval will double on. top of all the extra expense for all attempt to save it. 2. Tree That is Not.a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the apprc~ anal authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. `r. The ti-ee is proposed for- rerrroval in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requh,enaents rand str ndards, inclu(Iing but not limited to applicable Site Development anddesign Standards in part and Physical and Environmental Constraints in par-t 18.3.10. 3. She would like to regain leer solar access so that she can install solar panels. Fight now the tree deprives the solar rights of not only this property, but also effects the neighbor to the ]North. Rcirioval of the tree would allow excellent access. The owner would like to have ability to install a Photo "Voltaic array supplying green energy to the ADU reducing carbon impact of the development Page 2 Tree removal request- 70 Third Street 1 1l14l201 & r b.Removal of the tree will not har,e as significant negatit,e inq)act on erosion, soil stability, fora of saarfrace waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing tiviradbreaks. 4. There will be no significant impact oil erosion by removal of this tree. In fact removal of the tree will allow the project to manage its storm water as required by the findings and order. Currently there is no storm water facility in the street or the alley of this subject project. We have discussed this mwith the City Storm water- management department they agreed that we will provide a French drain (a sump with drain rock to handle the storm water from the roof) which will be accommodated in the removed tree's location. c.ltermwal of the tree will not har,e a significant negative impact on the tree alensities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity r0thin 200 feet of the subject prol)erttx, The Gifu shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree rernor,al have been consi(tered and no reasonable alternative exists to aallorr) the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Although there will be all impact on the tree density and canopy, ,v~,e will mitigate the impact by providing 4 deciduous trees that are on the preferred fire saf, list, Probably three fruit trees and one Oak or Maple that will replace the lost canopy. We will meet the goal of the Wildfire Ordinance in goal to reduce fire hazard and create 30' buffer from. flammable Ponderosa fines. al.Nothing in this section shall require that the residential (tensity to be realueecd below the pern, fitted density allowed by the zone. In making this (leterrrrination, the City naatr consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscal)ing designs that )vault lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to cornl)ly with the other- provisions of this ordinance. There is no alternative placement of this ADU structure on the property. If we there is going to be this kind of investment in this property, the current location of the tree is consequential in the decision to develope the ADU on this site. e. The City) shall require the meant to rnitigate.for the removal of each tree granted apl)roval pursuant to sectr`orr `mot?."~d Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approilarl of the permit. We will replace the removed the tree with four new trees as stated above. Page 3 l aee; removal request- , k) I "l hird Street 1 11/14/2018 In summary, l be]leve the alternative for the owner in lieu on not getting; a tree removal permit would be to withdraw the ADD approval .and reapply for all accessory building without the stove. With this modification the owner could remove the requirements fat- a separate electric service, bike storage facility, and garbage enclosure and simultancotosly have the ability to remove the tree without a permit. -Sonietinles we have to accept that trees get planted in the wrong place, It is 70 year old tree that is quite lovely, but creates a looming hazard that the owner prefers not have to contend Nvith. In addition to this, it deprives her of the ability to grow a garden, have solar access and landscape appropriately for her desired use, I am hoping that this clarifies our request for the M-110val-ofthe.tree at 70 Third street. Let the know if you have any ques(ions. R s dtf y, J hn Fields _C:Iolden-Fields Construction and Design, Ltd. Page 4 au.[ 1 l Y City of Ashland 75 ' Community Development Department PERMIT NUMBER 51 Winburn, ` TREE-2018.00036 s, y Ashland, OR 97520 Apply Date: 11l1512018 Telephone: 541-488-5305 Inspection Line; 541-552-208,0 Plan Type: Tree Removal Work Class: Tree Removal Permit Review Ma & Tax Lot 'Property Address 391 E09BD1400 70 Third St Owner Information Applicant Information Owner: Natalie Ives-Drouillard Applicant: Golden Fields Constr,tction & Design Ltd Owner 70 Third Applicant 345 Oak St Address: Ashland„ OR 97520 Address: Ashland„ OR 97520 Phone: (408) 483-3311 Phone: (541) 482-8442 Projec! Clescription Tree Removal Fees Fee Description: Arnount: Tree RemovalNerification Fee (Type 1) $30.00 y wr Applicant. ° " a. Date: I Total Fees: $30.00