Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAvery_263_PA-TREE-2020-00120CITY OF -AS H LAN D August 20, 2020 Notice of Final Decision On August 20, 2020, the Con-nrunity Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: PA-TREE-2020-00120 Subject Property: 263 Avery Street Applicant: William Yocum Description- A request for approval to remove a total of four trees on the property at 263 Avery Street. The application includes an assessment by an ISA qualified arborist and a tree risk assessment form. The trees are identified as three chinese elms, and one incense cedar. The application materials state that all three of the elm trees have evidence of `wetwood disease' and are causing cracking of the driveway and the potential to damage the foundation of the house. The Incense cedar is less than five feet from the house and leans over it posing both a safety concern and a fire hazard. The arborist recommends removal of all four trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi -family residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP: 39 lE 10 CB; TAX LOT: 10700 The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 12"i 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 Aaron Anderson in the Community Developient Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541A88-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax:541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.orms Na--ll SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I Procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice) E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval specify otberkvise or the decision is appealed pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.G, a Type I decision becomes effective 12 days after the City mails the notice of decision. F. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor inay reconsider a Type I decision as set forth below. 1. Any party entitled to notice of the planning action, or any City department may request reconsideration of the action after 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. Reconsideration 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 making a decision. 2. Reconsideration requests shall be received within five days of availing the notice of decision. The 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 I decision pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.050.13, 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 an 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 on appeal. iv. A statement demonstrating that the appeal issues were raised during the public comment period. d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met 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 up to the Type I decision, but may include other relevant evidence and arguments. The 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 the 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 wvww.ashland.onus ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA-TREE-2020-00120 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 263 Avery APPLICANT/OWNER: William Yocum DESCRIPTION: A request for approval to remove a total of four trees on the property at 263 Avery Street. The application includes an assessment by an ISA qualified arborist and a tree risk assessment form. The trees are identified as three chinese elms, and one incense cedar. The application rrtaterials state that all three of the elm trees have evidence of `wetwood disease' and are causing cracking of the driveway and the potential to damage the foundation of the house. The Incense cedar is less than five feet from the house and leans over it posing both a safety concern and a fire hazard. The arborist reconimends removal of all four trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi -family residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP: 39 1E 10 CB; TAX LOT: 10700 SUBMITTAL DATE: July 23, 2020 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: July 27, 2020 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: August 20, 2020 DEADLINE TO APPEAL (4:30 pan.): September 1, 2020 FINAL DECISION DATE: September 2, 2020 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: March 2, 2022 DECISION This proposal is to remove four hazard trees from the property at 263 Avery Street. The property is 0.17 acres in size and is developed with a small residence and a second dwelling unit at the rear approved through planning action #96-066. The property is zoned R-2 and is located just south of Iowa St. Because it is a multi -family development a tree removal permit is required for any tree over six. inches DBH. The four trees proposed to be removed are three chinese elms and one incense cedar. Three of the trees are located within five and a half feet of the building foundation. The application includes a report by an ISA certified arborist which states that all three of the elm trees have `wetwood disease.' While wetwood disease is not fatal the report states that it causes the trees to become weak and increases the chance of limb/stem failure. In addition, the trees are lifting concrete in the driveway and the potential to damage the foundation of the home. The arborist report addresses the cedar tree stating that the main stem leaning over the home presents a `serious safety issue' and when considering the fire hazard associated with a conifer in such proximity to the residence makes the tree `unfavorable' and concludes by recommending removal. The accompanying risk assessment form indicates that all three tees are a `high -risk' rating based on the severity of the potential consequences and likelihood of failure. During the public comment period staff received one phone call inquiring about the application. TREE-2020-00120 263 Avery St./aa Page I The call was from an adjacent property owner to the north who was concerned with the loss of canopy as her yard enjoys shade provided by these trees. The caller declined to submit written comment and stated that she was resigned that the trees would be removed. Due to the Corona virus and the city's emergency declaration none of the advisory commissions have been meeting including the Tree Commission, as such, there is no recommendation from the Tree Commission. However, the Staff Advisor reviewed the application materials and determined that the proposed tree removal is consistent with the criteria for a hazard tree removal, The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.7.040.8 as follows: 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 dangler 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. Staff finds that Planning Action #TREE-2020-00120, a request to remove four hazard trees, complies with all applicable City ordinances with the imposition of the conditions attached below. Therefore, Planning Action #TREE-2020-00120 is approved. If any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #TREE-2020-00120 is denied. The following are the conditions, and they are attached to the approval: 1. That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise specifically modified herein, 2. That three (3) mitigation trees, of an appropriate stature, shall be planted on site within one (1) year of issuance of this decision. August 20, 2020 Bill Molnar, Director Date Departinent of Community Development TRFE-2020-00 120 263 Avery St./aa Page 2 PA-TREE-202-00120391E10CB1500 PA-TREE-202-00120391E10CB10100 PA-TREE-202-00120391E10CB9700 ALTUNEL JULIA BENOIT ERICA M/THOMAS A BRAIN AND GOULD REVOKABLE LIV 2007 TALENT AVE #A 270 GARFIELD ST 298 GARFIELD ST TALENT, OR 97540 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB11300 CHAMBERS CHRISTOPHER LISATURE 308 AVERY ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB10200 COCHRAN BENJAMIN A 942 HARMONY LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10400 FOSTER TAMARA K 147 N LAUREL ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10600 HOSKINSON ELIZABETH 1280 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB9900 KNEPPER SCOTT LEE 589 N OREGON ST #APT 10 PMTAROP, OR 97914 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10800 PHOTINOS PANOS J PO BOX 1362 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E1 OCB2101 SPARTAN ASHLAND RIVERGATE REA 66 WATER ST #200 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB2300 CHANDLER ERIC JOSEPH 1273 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TR E E-202-00120 391E10CB11301 D & G VENTURES FOR LIFE INC 5301 OVERLOOK CIR PIERMONT, NY 10968 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB9800 FREEMAN THOMAS WILLIAM TRUSTE 1215 TOLMAN CREEK RD ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB1400 IOWA PROPERTY LLC 114 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10000 LONGHURST JESSE M 280 GARFIELD ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10500 SCOTT MARGARET MARY 1274 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB2200 SPECTOR ROBIN HILLARY 1277IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB11600 CHRISTENSEN JAN LYNN 1312 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB11500 FERGUSON KYLA ET AL 1296 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10300 GUTHRIE JOHN G 1250 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB11400 JOHNSON BLAIR B TRUSTEE ET AL 280 AVERY ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB10901 NGAN JOEY YEE-CHO 1084 HILLVIEW DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10801 SMITH DOMINIC C TRUSTEE ET AL 965 SISKIYOU BLVD #B ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391E10CB10700 YOCUM WILLIAM A 1788 N VALLEY VIEW RD ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-202-00120 391 E10CB11601 PA-TREE-202-00120 8/2012020 ZICKLER LEANDER JEFF FORD 263 Avery NOD PO BOX 1401 662 TOLO RD 26 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 PjG Planning Departmenl, 51 Winbt'.., JWay, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y 0 F FW 541.488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland,orms TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: PA-T1-2020-00120 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 263 Avery OWN EPJAPP LI CANT: William Yocum DESCRIPTION: A request for approval to remove a total of four trees on, the property at 263 Avery Street. The appllication includes an assessment by an ISA qualified arborist and a tree risk assessment form. The trees are identified as three chinese elms, and one incense cedar. 'The application materials state that all three of the elm, trees have evidence of 'wetwood disease' and are causing cracking of the driveway and the potential to damage the foundation of the house. The Incense cedar is less than five feet from the house and leans over it posing both a safety concern and a fire hazard, The arborist recommends removal of all four trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi -family residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP: 39 1E 10 CB; TAX LOT: 10700, NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: July 27, 2020 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: August 10, 2020 21' 127 m1287101'� 6'1 015 3 M 1 1 pl K J -I-Z, 56 ��t I�. N � 126 �274 Subject Property 1"' 132 263 Avery St. 131 133U PA_ TREE_ 2020-00120 1l 1�1111 f 2 5 8 f"260 [270 1%%-.-......% 60 Y �l� 801 3 ..... .. '287,A 4 NCO . ..... 194' �301 . ..... 308 OVER q The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted on Page I of this notice. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, application materials are provided online and comments will be accepted by email. Alternative arrangements for reviewingi the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541) 488-5305 orQLan_ni_ng_((_0ashIaad_.oL, . A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable, criteria are available online at "What's Happening in my City" at JhnpsA " is,aslilaiid,or.us/deyplopmentpEgpp�qq[1. Copies of application materials will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. Under extenuating circumstances, application materials may be requested to be reviewed in -person at the Ashland Community Development & Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, via a pre -arranged appointment by calling (541),488-5305 or emailiing pLariniiig��,,,�L�Lnd.pr..,!I;.,. Any affected! property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to pLanningLd)ashIand,or.US or to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn, Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30, p.m. on the deadline date shown on Page Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use application is complete withiin 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 18.5.1.050.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. If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact Assistant Planner Aaron Anderson at 5,41-552-2052 or email Aaron.Ande,rso .5ashland.or.us. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 18.5.7.040.13 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 (ii.e,, likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable dangler 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. C %Users\trappr'vkppData\LocillN$icrosofl\NVindows#iNetCache%Content,Outlook\YQJSOX6J4,kvm,,,763—TREE-2020.00120_,N'OC docx AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON County of Jackson The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On 7/27/20 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-2020-00120, 463 Avery. Signature of Employee C.1UsersWappMppDalalocah44ccosoltYYfndoHsgNetCache',ContentODU00%XYOJ80X6.N.very_283 TREE-2020-00120_NOC_AffidaAtofi,la'ing.docx7f27]2020 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 EIOCB1500 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB10100 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 EIOCB9700 ALTUNEL JULIA BENOIT ERICA MITHOMAS A BRAIN AND GOULD REVOKABLE LIV 2007 TALENT AVE #A 270 GARFIELD ST 298 GARFIELD ST TALENT, OR 97540 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB11300 CHAMBERS CHRISTOPHER LISATURE 308 AVERY ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 39IE10CB10200 COCHRAN BENJAMIN A 942 HARMONY LN ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB10400 FOSTER TAMARA K 147 N LAUREL ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 EIOCB10600 HOSKINSON ELIZABETH 1280 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 EIOCB9900 KNEPPER SCOTT LEE 589 N OREGON ST #APT 10 PMTAROP, OR 97914 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB10800 PHOTINOS PANOS J PO BOX 1362 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 EIOCB2101 SPARTAN ASHLAND RIVERGATE REA 66 WATER ST #200 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB2300 CHANDLER ERIC JOSEPH 1273 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB11301 D & G VENTURES FOR LIFE INC 5301 OVERLOOK CIR PIERMONT, NY 10968 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 EIOCB9800 FREEMAN THOMAS WILLIAM TRUSTE 1215 TOLMAN CREEK RD ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB1400 IOWA PROPERTY LLC 114 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB10000 LONGHURST JESSE M 280 GARFIELD ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB10500 SCOTT MARGARET MARY 1274 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB2200 SPECTOR ROBIN HILLARY 1277IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB11600 CHRISTENSEN JAN LYNN 1312 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB11500 FERGUSON KYLA ET AL 1296 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB10300 GUTHRIE JOHN G 1250 IOWA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB11400 JOHNSON BLAIR B TRUSTEE ET AL 280 AVERY ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391EIOCB10901 NGAN JOEY YEE-CHO 1084 HILLVIEW DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391EIOCB10801 SMITH DOMINIC C TRUSTEE ET AL 965 SISKIYOU BLVD #B ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391E10CB10700 YOCUM WILLIAM A 1788 N VALLEY VIEW RD ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-TREE-2020-00120 391 E10CB11601 PA-TREE-2020-00120 263 Avery ZICKLER LEANDER JEFF FORD NOC 7/27/20 PO BOX 1401 662 TOLO RD 26 JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 CD N (N N N J Q W ca W ui ui U) O o O E W -0 E � uj co cu °) w W a7 C E1 = Cq U ❑ W a) w O W i�t z CO(V ❑ ca 7 co C a) U 00 r2 m 3 o S0 V N m CO U m ❑ C W � D 2 m C7 rn al 2 4 y-�t'"��J,�yt� �,ti x�''+e'7� `ti••�r��4 *i�t,n �, k7. � Q WN, At V-1- r • l � �Q Y-fi P .. a r' f .'as r''' Ch;i77v ai s 4r iy r ,r C JLS P t �r r e s el Ike 'Ya ._ •e�.r .a :xi; ''r +•�?. 'i•„ a .Ir e . - A ;70— •v s a k,}� is r - ..._ .. �* 03 l '� Y � i 4 � Ok. { Y' �s�rFg„'N � � -S " -a"; 3�1tt, 4�ry ♦ 's `,:� ?''��' "f{ys °; 3 t1s �"An��y�}�,t' 3 ;na si- sf� ,i r� t r }}, 4' tL ✓ L da ray c - a { TA IS vp Wl ' F3 f ! s r,s A•� yl ��G J... f r 'iILKr V � Yr*��i�* e_:: 7 + Y 1 4}} � ^ti"� ' �'a',�r �. �:' ♦�� aft,y ` i s: r.,r. �. iP`Sc '_ 4 °....x4a'i " d`"lpy. ��f, •" Ia(f4 I� "A i ''E4r r 4ti$1 a i t S P - < v� ti A S �F,��• w8 � -00t IV aM IN x � A .•" R�`�'�7".�F -ff'� - SN ! it�'��,A T r6 � t �?.` r�,'�c��•. � 3d� -a-� ' ti 'S. �, - s '� A �' fi n ib s �0 j ! ma tti a X,+ R i '# `v "!♦ c>w �s �� r .ice 'Y� .Y X e,_, f �Tv �� 1 k TRY! .sz �S�y, 1 -�'} r (� � 'fit a • � 'a; �� 1 `7 d'�"1��'r'w� /'; }rNY bt �Y• r�. ! gti r ,.. r: k ��}�':..iiy _�„��' -gr i' (�'# ..r ' i l'" `[[•'yp�r°/� x0.'��•rf' •�_i "j"� .�: 4 J r fit :y 1. �'�'� F'•. x a r�k•;���:'.�" � 1 , 2 `Cy 1� � 2. ! a �� )i JAM. �'If�'.' 1 �°� oaf Av R '�:� �.��,Y ✓ r�i a� �'r �':- Vic-'• y , »: �:- r Si.'.g 's • r5r+i - vnm*,51 * o ARM, F - Ism ,�. "y'�� �.:. ��i'Y jr✓'',� � r.,;,,, ' s�,"c`.' � 'a�''i�„' �;'"^�., 'r _, ; „_��,. "F�"$:�'":'.�'�r.. j r3w'h .,; � { � �a � }� �P ��� �.yr' (�..-:• �- '�' � y S�l t.,�.a+{°,`' ,�•yr.,' a '.lY' \i Ipr6I�Z #: c d i r ' �+r d is F,y ~ r 3 Y, j; ���� �a+�f[ a J (� � '� 1� ti:� 4!th ' 7� .. L� � �. •. - r:�'..`` . � %,bpi.. dr�.�! >, if E..,-,� r6 Y,'� 4 t � r . �'t $ r.� �. t, },• • r Fa � Is �� �r �' y � �`, � _ *�. . f�� t� k n� 1 �i 7� � 1 � �"� �S` a fyt� ^g4 -b. (;.'c �� Y $+:.• �� .x � k !� S- � i �r f'• r 1 l�'-. t11% S �>� ] : � -i(t s: ie r7� , a ! ` "f� 5 ,� �3 �_�'3p. �.h : �. ,' . ,+. •. r ItIE i! ".,�%. r • ! • � y� fir! ` R . �� - j1!' 1 ��- y4� ,y 'w ,.`a 1. � �. ��v`R�� +f kk -'. ;. � �� '•or.`x,"t • {"' s:.��h, 4ti �! at' r y;. kt .�J`.'n„�� �., 4 c, -�, ..,� �... lot 44 a • �� �i1ig� Yy ' i s f ° V-10 I duo Z. �' ` r ray. s, �. �y fs rk '• 1 `(-' ^'+• yl �'� ti5'Y, ,y� �Y 'Fo., ,� '+�SCP 'r�` � �' �pig?"Yy r ��` � 7 'gyp g1 47*Y�. a f'"� '� -' _..��� •� 14� � -�' . 1 41. MRS Cal �'f '�' � 1 - .>` � .t�'hy _ � 's+l_ � •' Pis a - J � i ,>% ��a :t i � ,r� a � .�:' :..; 1. +7A.. �..'r" �T ,e� :x i� ��'g$ Y '� i ma�yy'• '' � q �, � � a r4 \T1= �� � k��r r �„�S� } J •. """: "�+'^ -»tea- �- y+� .,4, ' $ gwp lYl @� r � _ � a ra• ,. i' i � p ,. � _�' � � �i ate. ,�. , a .' ,k.rN ;:k � ���}' S � , qt -de1-1 • 1 ii�" °'"Z'�> `4` e.., i. 14 R,• i' t iPUS♦ '� 1 4 51"' JQ �� t r� /f + • ask 0 ! tt�,� l �•'111` .i- . Ee oil'F 41, �� '�"�'' C r .; r}� r" r,• 1 � � `bir9ii � ? k r 1 _ � �✓ � �� � ' ' a` c � �.^t.- � s • e�4�s� s;f � � f ; r + Y rt �o Licafised - Bonclod - lilsurc l lnvoice: ccaft 209M 8322 C,,.jafify Tree ',zp, Ptv: 41,821,b9 FG, 6:)Y. 3496 Erur: Cer,,(al Point, 'R 9 7 -5 0 2 Family Owne-d and Operated E Ll:r.'l T U) I,--, . . .. .. .. ..... .......... 1130 Q r-,V U--.5 ....... . .. G I V. --TAT E A�4 C D F Ni CtC I I rXV tit L..! IC V ', 11 H U -3 & I r? Ft flie 'luo, is �VAIJ I -Vd -,r;wl I i;I,s z I a I)A r 1!6, 1) tyf, a I FIA Yad uc- ux�-cdzud -,i du f"A_, %kul as s-,vc fk-4�. P 4-t I T"i I I .)- i-, f1i I R" th P- V, I -, 41 n (A x) w� s- I I ".- n Oate of Accuplance Basic Tree Risk Assessment Four Cilent 1n%ll Ya _ Address/Trea loca�� Tree species Assessor(s) Date 164WI0 Time Tree no. 'L�" Sheet t of 3 dbh�- ' .M Height �J Crown spread dIa. _32.+y Wb� Tools used����������������������, Time frame Tarapt Assessment Target zone Occupancy rate n. [ CF Target description Target protection X 1-rase t.acatlonal Y c o rt 3-5cqueM 4 onstani 2 Z {, 3 Site Factors History of Cal€ores Topography Flato Slope❑ % Aspect Site changes Nonek Grade Imange❑ Siteclearing❑ Chan ed soil hydrology❑ Root cuts Describe _ Sall conditions limited volume El Saturated ❑ Shallow,❑ ConipactedXPavement over roots% °16 Describe Prevailing winddlrection--�-- Commonweather Strongwlnds❑ Ice❑ Snow❑ Heavyraln❑ Describe _ Tree Health and Species Profile — Vigor Low ❑ Normal High Foliage None (seasonal)❑ None (dead)❑ Normal °% ChImotic °% Necrotic % Pests/Blotic Ablotic _ Species failure profile Branches Trunk❑ Roots Describep Load Factors Windexposure Protected❑ Partial Full❑ Wfndfunneling❑ Relative crown size Small❑ Medlum Large Crown density Sparse❑ Normal Dense❑ Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mlstletoe/Moss ❑ Recent or expected change In load factors Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — Unbalartced crown LCR % cracks ❑ Lightning damage ❑ Dead tvAgs/branches'O %overall Max. dia, Codorninant A Included bark Broken/Hangers Number Max. dla' Weak attachments Cavity/Nest hole___._Yd circ. Over -extended branches Previous branch failures ❑ Similar branches present U Pruning history Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Ralsed ❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ llon•talled ❑ conks ❑ Heartwooddecay ❑ FIu511C11tS ❑ other Response growtl I I a ft~.uc GS I«C� Conditions) of concern + aIV AIL''$ Part Slta r hall Distance 1 Part Size - -1`i _ _ Fall Distance f S' N Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor © Moderate ❑ SIgnllicantg Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderateil.� Significant ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible 0 Probable � tatminent ❑ likelihood of fal€ure Improbable© Possible ❑ Probable C Imminent[) --Trunk �--- -- Roots and hook Collar -- Dead/Miss€ng bark ❑ Abnormal bark texture/color Collar burled/Nat visible ❑ Depth _ _ Stem girdling ❑ Codorninant stems 1Y included bark ❑ Cracks ❑ Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls (J Sap ooze 14 ooze ❑ Cavity ❑ °% circ. Lightning damage © Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Cracks ❑ Cut/Darnaged roots ❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole °%circ. Depth_____— Poor taper ❑ Root plate lifting I Soil weakness I:)Lean l L° Corrected? . 0 Response growth Response growth Condition(s) of concern 0 041k%$J 14t a Z _— Condition(s) of concern. t 1 Part Size ij4-Ir Fall Distance - I f' ��Part Size 1� Fall Distance ..� Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor 13 Moderatey❑,� 5lgnlficant 6 Load on defect N/A L] Minor ❑ Nueratek Significant ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable F5 Immkneat ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible CI Probable 'I imminent f] Pavn I nF 9 Risk Categorization Target (7brget number or dmdjoffon) Bill Oslo Bill .1101 ININNINN Nunn. Matrix i. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood Likelihood of Impact low low Medium HI h ikely Somewhat like) Likely Very likely M ikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely ike! Unlikel Unlikel ikely Unilkely Unlikely Unlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure Negligible Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate High H€ h Somewhat likely Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low Low Low lam N s, pl nations descriptions tint ) It S s1� Mitigation options t.. � Cat S i (+4#6 Residual risk 2. Residual risk a. Residual risk 4._ Residual risk Overall tree risk rating Low © Moderate © High 9 Extreme C] Overall residual risk None o LOW© Moderate[] High ❑ Extreme Il Recommended Inspection Interval Data Final 0 Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ©No Dyes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations�None OVfsibility ©Access ©Vines ©Root collar burled Describe this dalxsherl „ati producrcE t y Uir REVE-I EDA)BY EMAIL MAIL 7/2 2 /2 ®2 o Page 2 of 2 nk Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Client Date ZZ14 r.DtQ Time Address/Tree location ' Tree no. _ Sheet �_ of 3 Tree species G ` dbh Height �`_ Crown spread dia, Assessor(s) j t 76 Tools used Time frame Tareet Assessment Target zone [ C 6 'c Occupancy rate �• o ~ c Target description Target protection x 3-tale 2-•octailonal !f dot u MK °H 3-rtequers! f; 3... �o 4-ronslan!° 1 Z 2 3 A Site Factors History of failures Topography FlatA Slope❑ °6 Aspect Site changes None 1� Grade change❑ Site clearing❑ changed soil hydrology❑ Root cuts ❑ Describe Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated ❑ Shallow(] Compacted IX Pavement over roots❑ % Describe Prevailing wind direction .J Common weather Strong winds ice Snow❑ Heavy rain Describe Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low ❑ Normal ❑ High Foliage None (seasonal)❑ None (dead)❑ Normal % Chlorotic % Necrotic Pests/Bionic Ab lotic Species failure profile Branches❑ Trunk'{ Roots[] Describe Load Factors Wind exposure protected❑ Partialo Fuil❑ Wind funneling❑ Relative crown size Small❑ Mediumv Large Crowndensity Sparse❑ Normal❑ Dense interior branches flew❑ Normal,'] Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ Recent or expected change in load factors Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Unbalanced crown ❑ LCR % Dead twigs/branches ❑ %overall Broken/Hangers Number Cuter -extended branches ❑ Pruning history Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Flush cuts ❑ other -- Crown and Branches Cracks © Lightning damage ❑ Max. dia• Codominant ❑ Included bark ❑ Max. dia. Weak attachments ❑ Cavity/Nest hole V. arc. Previous branch failures ❑ .. similar branches present ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Lion tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ Response growth Conditions) of Concern Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A Cl Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable ❑ Imminent ❑ Trunk -- Dead/Missing bark ❑ Abnormal bark texture/color ❑ Codominant stems'l Included bark,( Cracks ❑ Sapwood dainage/decay ❑ Cankers/Galls/ouris ❑ sap ooze ❑ Lightning damage❑ Heartwood decay❑ Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Cavity/Nest hole %circ, Depth Poor taper ❑ Lean ° Corrected? Response growth condition (s) of concern 1ta Cl ',aa-io. Part Size I j�rr Fall Distance$ Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant Ci Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible ❑ Probable ❑ imminent ❑ -- Roots and Root Collar — Collar buried/Not visible Depth Stern girdling El Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Ooze ❑ Cavity© %clrc. Cracks ❑ Cut/Damaged roots ❑ Distance from trunk Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness ❑ Response growth Cond Ition (s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance Load an defect N/A Cl Minor ❑ Moderate[) Likelihood of failure RE b V L_.1 Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate[] Significant Qllhoo7o jag l n ,a r l ssible ❑ Probable ❑ Immineni Pave. Risk Categorization (rOrgef number of de4cdpt(on) SEEN 0 MEN Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact Ve low Low Medium Hi it Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely Llikely VeryElkely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely likely Passible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikel Somewhat likely ImprobabJel Unllkely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikel rrra(0X Z. Risk ratinn rmtriY_ Likelihood of Failure &impact Consequences of Failure Negligible Minor 518nificant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme LIkeI Low Moderate High High somewhatlikeiy Low Low Moderate Moderate Unlikely Low Low I Low Low otes, explarta ons, descri do s Hol th Mitigation options !. Residual risk. )A ()I& z Residual risk a. Residual risk 4. Residual risk -Mrall tree risk rating Law C] Muderaie © High Extreme 0 Overall residual risk Nonev Low El Moderate p Nigh ❑ Extreme [] Recommended Inspection Interval Data kFinal [] preliminary Adv need assessment needed qNo E lYes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations None VIVlsibility []Access []Vines Moot collar buried Describe 71i[a.Eatasilcettsaspaotiucr{by,+A i�C ,,Fn EMAIL 7/22/2020 Page 2 of 2 City of Ashland Community Development Department 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 Telephone: 541-488-5305 Inspection Line: 541-552-2080 Plan Type: Tree Removal Work Class: Tree Removal Permit Review PERMIT NUMBER' TREE-2020-00120 Apply Date: 7/23/2020 Maw&Tax Lotj Pro ert' Address 391E10CB10700 263 Avery St 1 Owner: William Yocum Owner 1788 N Valley View Rd Address: Ashland, OR 97520 Phone: (541) 292-1655 remove (4) hazard trees Fee Description: Removal/Verification Fee (Type 1) Applicant: Applicant: William Yocum Applicant 1788 N Valley View Rd Address: Ashland, OR 97520 Phone: (541) 292-1655 Amount: Date: $30.50 Total Fe.6 $30.50