HomeMy WebLinkAboutTolman_Creek_295_PA-TREE-2020-00118CITY OF
-ASH LAN D
August 20, 2020
Notice of Final Decision
On August 20, 2020, the Community Development Director approved the request for the
following:
Planning Action:
Subject Property:
Applicant:
TREE-2020-00118
295 Tolman Creek Rd.
Kira Volynskaya
Description: A request to approve the removal of a Cedar tree located to the west of the
condominium complex on the common area lot. The application materials indicate that the roots
have grown into the irrigation system and are beginning to encroach on the foundation of the
building. The applicant states that consultants have informed them that repair of the irrigation is
not possible without the removal of the tree. The application also states that the property owners
are concerned of the fire hazard the tree poses. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION:
Multi -family residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP: 39 lE 11 CD; TAX LOT: 90000
The Community Development Director's decision becomes final and is effective on the 121h 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 Development Department at (541) 488-5305.
cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 ft
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:541A88-5305
51 Winbu€n Way Fax:541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
w.
wwashland.or.us
SECTION 18.5.1.050 Type I Procedure (Administrative Decision with Notice)
E. Effective Date of Decision. Unless the conditions of approval specify otherwise 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 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
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 mailing 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 shalt 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:
1. 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.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 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 docurnentation,
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 It public hearing procedures,
pursuant to section 18.5.1.060, subsections A rn- I:, 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:541488-5305
51 Winhum Way Fax: 541.552.2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 .
www.ashland.onus
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION
FINDINGS & ORDERS
PLANNING ACTION: TREE-2020-00118
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 295 Tolman Creek Rd.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Kira Volynskaya
DESCRIPTION: A request to approve the removal of a Cedar tree located to the west
of the condominium complex on the common area lot. The application materials indicate that the
roots have grown into the irrigation system and are beginning to encroach on the foundation of the
building. The applicant states that consultants have informed them that repair of the irrigation is
not possible without the removal of the tree. The application also states that the property owners
are concerned of the fire hazard the tree poses.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi -family residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP:
39 1E 11 CD; TAX LOT: 90000
SUBMITTAL DATE:
July 20, 2020
DEEMED COMPLETE DATE:
July 27, 2020
STAFF APPROVAL DATE:
August 20, 2020
DEADLINE TO APPEAL (4:30 p.m.):
September 1, 2020
FINAL DECISION DATE:
September 2, 2020
APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE:
March 2, 2022
DECISION
This proposal is to remove one large cedar tree from the property at 295 Tolman Creek Road.
The property is 0.43 acres in size and is the common area associated with the Tolman Park
Condominiums. The property is on the west side of Tolman Creek Rd. north of Ashland St. and
is zoned R-2.
The cedar tree proposed to be removed is approximately twenty-four inches DBH and forty feet
in height. The tree immediately next to the foundation of the building and next to the main
irrigation valves for the properties landscaping. The tree root system has completely grown
around multiple irrigation lines. Significant portions of the south facing side of the trees root
network have been cut to access and repair the irrigation system.
The applicants land scape company ultimately determined that there was simply no way to repair
the irrigation without removing the tree. The present situation poses a hazard as significant roots
have been cut potentially destabilizing the tree, as well as the physical damage that has been
caused to the irrigation, and the potential for that damage to affect the building foundation as
well.
During the public comment period staff received no input from the public.
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
TREE-2020-00118
295 Tolman Creek Rd./aa
Page 1
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 18.5.7.040.13 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 (Le., 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.
AMC 18.6.1.030 Hazard Tree. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree
that it is clear the tree is likely to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also
include a tree that is located within a public right of way and is causing damage to existing
public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services cannot be relocated.
Staff finds that Planning Action #TREE-2020-00118, a request to remove one hazard tree,
complies with all applicable City ordinances with the imposition of the conditions attached
below. Therefore, Planning Action #TREE-2020-00118 is approved. If any one or more of the
following conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action
#TREE-2020-00118 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 one (1) 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
Department of Community Development
TREE-2020-0011 S
295 Tolman Creek Rd./aa
Page 2
•. ..,
• T • • •
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD1900 TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90000 TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD200
ASHLAND INVESTMENT GROUP BONIN DARYL K/ANNETTE L MAININI ERIC
1010 RACQUET CLUB DR #103 359 KEARNEY ST 106 E BUTLER LN
AUBURN, CA 95603 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90001 TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90003 TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD100
PALACIOS CORBY ATRUSTEE ETA PATTERSON JANET L TERWILLIGER CONNIE L F TRUSTE
PO BOX 13178 PO BOX 788 9100 SW PARKVIEW LOOP
BURTON, WA 98013 ASHLAND, OR 97520 BEAVERTON, OR 97008
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90007
VOLYNSKIY VALERIY TRUSTEE ET
765 SAN ANTONIO RD #16
PALO ALTO, CA 94303
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90005
WILDERSON KARL KEVIN
295 TOLMAN CREEK RD #5
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD1700
YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIAT
540 YMCA WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118
8.20.2020 NOD
295 Tolman Creek
i
r
e,� 4
a
r,
ru �
6 #a
5 ;C411Aif
4 �D
k
r 8
co
r �
rr J
1 j r
i s
Q
�M1
U' /�/// /
/110
�/
/i
10100/0111
% i
/!
nrOF
c,
OF
00
( # /fir, lru
4 "0/� i
an V ��� ion// °f
( I 4D
mM `r W w�Y % ILI
all
7u ti
si
if � nr 3
o 10
� I
s c
X
0'
lea.
Planning Department, 51 Winb,—, Way, AsNand, Oregon 97520 CITY OF
541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www,ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND
VOTICE OF APPLIGATIOV
PLANNING ACTION: TREE-2020-00118
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 295 Tolman Creek Rd.
OWNER/APPLICANT: Tolman Creek Condominium HOA/ Kira Volynskaya
DESCRIPTION: A request to approve the removal of a Cedar tree located to the west of the condominium complex on the
common area lot. The application materials indicate that the roots have grown into the irrigation system and are beginning to
encroach on the foundation of the building. The applicant states that consultants have informed them that repair of the
irrigation is not possible without the removal of the tree. The application also states that the property owners are concerned
of the fire hazard the tree poses. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Mufti -family residential; ZONING: R-2; MAP:
39 1E 11 CD; TAX LOT: 90000,
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: July 27, 2020
DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: August 10, 2020
2-41 5 1
245,
<
24651
245,3 2 2, J�,",�4,
245 '24 ' 5 5
0,
'0I
Subject Property
f 295 Tolman Creek Rd.
--,124PA-TREE-�2020-00:118
1 §
5 �
30245 2452gg
—261
-------------- -
315
N
OVER
G lconini-dcv\pl.inning\Piatinitig Aclions\Ms by SlreetMTolman Creek\TohnanCreek 295\TRrE-2020-001 I S\INTDticingNTaInian-295_TltEE-2020-001 18 NOC,docx (;
The Ashland Planning Division Staff , ) received a complete application for the p. , arty noted on Page I of this notice.
Because of the COVID-1 9 pandemic, application materials are provided online and comments will be accepted by email.
Alternative arrangements for reviewing the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541) 488-5305
or 2Lanninc�ashland,or,us.
A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria are available online at "What's
Happening in my City" sat hits 1bs.ashlaiid.oi,.u_s/"develop_Meij!pro i_ __p l. 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 caning (541) 488-53015 or emaifing 1?Ianiiiiiiq6,)ashilarid.or.us.
Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to planning Paqh1g!]APL1!q 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
1,
Ashland Planning Division Staff determine if a Land Use appllication 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
18.5.1.050.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 Aaron Anderson at 5411-488-5305 or
apronand eL§pt1&g hL�Lnd...q[,.1Ls , _q_ _
TREE REMOVAL PERMIT
18.5.7.040.13
1Hazard'Froo A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can
e 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 18,51,050, 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 ofkhe 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.
cl, 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.
ActionsWAs by Streeffffolrymn CreckVf'oliiianCTCCL,-295VI'kEr-2020-001 IMNIolicingWolman.,295 IRE :2020-001I 8.,N0C.doCx
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 97520, in the Community Development Department.
2. On July 27, 2020 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 the Planning Action #TREE-2020-00118, 295 Tolman
Creek Rd.
ASi01r
�W
re of Employee
C:4UsersTappr4NeskloplTempl3tesWFli7AVIT OF I.WLING_Regan.doa Y/M2026
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD100
TERWILLIGER CONNIE L F TRUSTE
9100 SW PARKVIEW LOOP
BEAVERTON, OR 97008
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90003
PATTERSON JANET L
PO BOX 788
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90000
BONIN DARYL K/ANNETTE L
359 KEARNEY ST
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD200
MAININI ERIC
106 E BUTLER LN
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90005
WILDERSON KARL KEVIN
295 TOLMAN CREEK RD #5
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90001
PALACIOS CORBY A TRUSTEE ETA
PO BOX 13178
BURTON, WA 98013
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD1700
YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIAT
540 YMCA WAY
ASHLAND, OR 97520
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD1900
ASHLAND INVESTMENT GROUP
1010 RACQUET CLUB DR #103
AUBURN, CA 95603
TREE-2020-00118 391E11CD90007
VOLYNSKIY VALERIY TRUSTEE ET
765 SAN ANTONIO RD #16
PALO ALTO, CA 94303
TREE-2020-00118
295 Tolman Creek
9 NOC
RMT
w
r
•
r
I""'R Ed F`� -- 2 0 2 0 — 0 0 1. 18
Liz Hamilton
From: Kira Volynskaya <kiravolynskaya@hotrnaiLcom>
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2020 11:32 AM
To: planning
Cc: nathan.ernerson@ash[and.or.us
Subject: Application for the tree removal permit at Tolman Creek Condominium
Attachments: 295TolmanCreekRoad-IrnageOfCe,darTreeLocation-JuIY20200001 pdf; Tree removal applicaitonjpeg;
BasicTreeRiskAssessmentFori-n-Fillable-FirstEdition-295TolmanCrkRd_Cedar tree (003).pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
To whom it may concern,
On behalf of (Homeowners association at Tolman Creek Condominium I would like to apply for the permission to remove
cedar tree on our property. The trees roots have tangled up with irrigation system and damaged. Two consultants
were invited to assess the situation and both concluded that it is impossible to repair and restart irrigation without
removing the tree first. The roots also reaching to building foundation and posing the risk to the foundation of the
building. Current dry season and elevated risk of fires make the tree removal an urgent project. We would like to have
ask for expedited permission, processing if possible. Attached please find Zoning Permit Application, Basic Tree Risk
Assessment and the topographical picture of the tree that has to be removed. Please confirm the receipt of this email
and let me know if you need any additional information. I understand there is a fee to be paid. Please let me know if it
can be paid online or over the phone or if it is only to be paid by check, where the check is to be mailed, for how much
and what notations to write on the check to get it connected to the application.
Sincerely,
Kira Volynskaya
ZZ
f'R`El� C, E.-I'VED IIIIIIIIIII)lY EMAIL.., 7/220/2020
LC.g3jpTpN OF pRojECT tr(je re�MoVal at Tolman Creek Condominh,--
Pursuing LEED@) Certification? El YES El NO
M 10. 1 Fir, 11
Assessor's Map No. 39 1 E _ Tax Lol(s)
Zoning R2 Comp Plan Designation
022U0,11H
Name Kira Volynskaya Phone 660-996-5875r-Mail kiravolynskaya@hotmail.com
Address 765 Sari Antonio Road, Unit 16 -.City Palo Alto zip 94303
PROPERTY OWNER
Name 89 above ort behaff of Tolman Creek Condominium HOA Phone 650-996L-5875E-_Mail kiravolynsl(aya@hotmaii.com
Address 295 Tolman Creek, Unit 6 cityA5hland _Zip_
M—VEXQ-11,.ENGINEER ARCHITECT L�ANDSCA�PEARC�WECT �WHER
Title — Name Phone
Address city
Title ---Narne
Address
Phone
City
am
E-Wit
Z71P
E
lhereby ceffilythat the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects,
hrueandcoffect. I understand that all property pins must be shown 017 the drawings and *ible upon the site inspection, In the event the pins are not shown or their
location found to be incorrect the owner assumes full responsibility. I further understand that If this request is subsequently contested the burden 01 be on me to
establish.,
1) that I produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request;
2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request,
3) that the findings of fad turnished by me are adequate; and further
4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground.
Failure in this regard MY result most likely in not only tile request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to
be removed at my expense If have any doubts, 18M advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance,
20 120
AppliCant's Sign re
Y Date
As owner of the property involved in this request, I have toad and understood the complete application and its collseqjences to 0
07W in asepropeffy
Property QwneaklSilg nature (required) Date
ITO be C0WVDd by olyslaiq
Matt; Received Zoning Permit TYK__ Ailing Pee
OVER O�
& Hmdauftllft2 Permit Applitzlion 4oc
yr
ENAA17/20/2020
NA Bas'ic Tre�e Risk Assessmen�t Form
Client Tolman Park Condominiums
Address/Tree location 295 Tolman Creek Road, backyard
Tree species Cedar
Assessor(s) Tolman Park HOA, grounds committee
dbh 30"
Time frame asap
Target Assessment
Date July 20, 2020 Time 13:00
Tree no..1 Sheet of
Height 30' Crown spread dia. 8'
Tools used professional tree removing service
Target zone
Occupancy
rate
E4
0 a.
Target description
L1
3-frequent
1-constant
0
E
9.
2
3
4
Site Factors
History of failures No failures - roots entangled in irrigation system causing its failure and Topography FIat9 SlopeD _% Aspect_
Site changes None M Grade changeD Site clearingEl Changed soil hydrology[] Root cutso Describe
Soil conditions Limited volume W Saturated 0 ShallowD CompactedEl Pavement over rootsEl % Describe
Prevailing wind direction W & S Common weather, Strong winds El Ice El Snow 0 Heavy rain 0 Describe Rogue Valley
Tree Health and Species Profile
Vigor Low 0 Normal W High 0 Foliage None (seasonal)0 None(dead)0 Normal 100 % Chloratic: —% Necrotic %
Pests N/A Ablotilc N/A
Species failure profile Branches[] TrunkEl RootsD Describe No, Failures -this is a nuisance tree planted too Close to building foundation
Load Factors
Windexposure Protected ll PartialEl FuII0 WindfunnelingO Relative crown size Small R MediumD LargeD
Crown density Sparse[3 Normal N DenseO interior branches Few il Normal0i Dense[] Vines/Mistietoe/Moss 0
Recent or planned change in load factors N/A
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
— Crown and Branches —
Unbalanced crown 0 LCR
%
Dead twigs/branches 0 —%overall
Max. clia.—
Broken/Hangers Number
Max,cja�
aver -extended' branches 0
Pruning history
Crown cleaned 0 Thinned Ll
Raised' G)
Reduced 0 Topped 0
Lion -tailed 0
Cracks 0
Codominant 0
Weak attachments 0
Previous branch failures 0
Dead/Missing bark 0 Cankers/Galls/BuOsO
Conks Ll Heartwood decay 0
Lightning damage 0
Included bark 0
Cavity/Nest hole % circ.
Similar branches present El
Sapwood darnage/clecay 0
Flush cuts 0 Other Response growth
Main concern(s) This is a nuisance tree, the roots from which have damaged the irrigatin system and threatening the adjacent buib
Load on defect N/A 11 Minor El Moderate El Significant El
Likelihood of failure Improbable C1 Possible 0 Probable 0 Imminent 0
—Trunk —
Dead/Missing bark 0 Abnormal bark texture/color 0
Codominant stems 0 included bark 0 Cracks El
Sapwood damage/decay O Cankers/Galls/BurlsiEl Sap ooze D
Lightning damage 0 Heartwood decayD Conks/Mushrooms 0
Cavity/Nest hole _% circ, Depth_ Poor taper 0
Lean-' Corrected?
Response growth
Main concern(s) .
Load on defect N/AEl MinorEl ModeratelEl SignificantO
Likelihood of failure
Improbable El Possible El R1JW'bJg I JZfi `nn(,'Q
— Roots and Root Collar —
Collar buried/Nat visible 0 Depth Stem girdling 0
Dead 0 Decay 0 Conks/Mushrooms 11
Ooze 11 Cavity El % circ.
Cracks El Cut/Damaged roots 0 Distance from trunk
Rootplate lifting 0 Soil weakness 0
Response growth
Main concern(s) Roots are massive
and are entering adjacent buildina's sill.
Load on defect N/AO MinorlEl ModerateD SjgnificantO
Likelihood of failure
1&6.bI;ff ') 0IWd") (') Probable 0 Imminent 0
Page I of 2
Risk Categorization
M
M
W
1*1
X
11
W
1011011#1
r*-
11
M
on
1*1101❑M
10:
�■
M
mw�
HERE
1011*11#1
co
IWW
on
MENS:
M,
WHER
[WINVE
[011rolrols
Nuffll
I■
a
101
N
M
1011011*1
co
10,14
51
W
M
X
11*1
MMM
M
M
[01
[01
[011011011015:
M
51
W
M
W
[1
MM
I
ME=
M
M
W
1011*1
N
X
[01
cel
31
N
101
[6i
M
M
101
M
M
11
=
Motrix 1. Likelihood matrix,
Likelihood
of Failure
Likelihood of impacting Target
very I-wT
Low
Medium
High
Imminent
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Very likely
Probable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
P;1,15i1Ie,,
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
MatrixZ Risk rating matrix.
Likelihood of
Failure & impact
Consequences of Failure
Negligible
Miinor
Significant
Severe
Very likely
Low
Moderate
Fligh
Extreme
Likely
Low
Moderate
High
High,
Somewhat likely
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Unlikely
Low
Low
Low
Low
Notes, explanations, descriptions
Irrigation system is damaged by roots and can't be repaired unless the r,
this creates fire hazard on site due as the grass is getting too dry
despite watering from the hose
Nsot the roots are threatening the building foundation,
North
Mitigation options Felling and removal is the only reasonable option that will address the threat Residual risk None
to the adjacent building. The site will be replanted with varigated beech tree. Residual risk
Residual risk
Residual risk
Overall tree risk rating Low El Moderate 1:1 High 0 Extreme 0 Work priority 10 20 30 40
Overall residual risk Low 11 Moderate 17-1 High 11 Extreme 0 Recommended inspection interval
Data B Final [I Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ONo [:]Yes-Type/Reason
Inspection limitations LINone EIVIsibility DAccess OVines DRoot collar buried Describe
7hjs datasheet was produced by the E3,Yr.E[0, At, L.2,12012020.s- 2013 Page 2 of 2
Flim;�n��r��k Rtl�/�se�Qlr�an;reek �� �r��,T(olrm�ra creek R��n��,'��grr�an�Gre�k Rd ;r r 7
� ����Pf�i'r"��, /'r r�✓!�rP �'"GJ"I���r f� Nti 4� �I(' f/i�ri�'�l l�v���✓"rl�" �'riJJ ,�,�,,"0 Irlp�/�r "���'''r��������/��r7✓f✓N��i �P y� /'�"r 9�' ' ��!1,
f� �������r l,:J����'ii J���,f�;,lr-. ����� f������P �h�i✓r���y�G /'�' rfJ/'/�Il'A
Di>„�r�✓,i/l� ii ;}/� ✓r ✓ i % f,lj� � �"�iJ Ili � i�y ' � Z
�"Jr " , ' f / l 9 � 91r rr ✓ � � A / /ro � r
liG/ )� f / r ✓� r r e r' '✓�l
"� .✓vb ��.. ri����il f'1��i �/(1✓�r ��j'�f�fyr}��'�il � `1 %� 'i� r
"Yi�,, ,➢r ���, if�r�Gy �i��NM P%t' ��i�p���i� %15/ f,i i >r 9, i a ,--,
r,
� F
r ,�% � � �Ni � , i/y ,� t✓ �j// 7 'ry6
fi �� � �✓ �k� � �� � '✓y✓ d � aY 111,�. 1 /ll�� Jj� / �/�
1 ��/ ,, rr° ✓�rrr� r/ ✓r xr'� ✓'// ✓1r/i/h//lJ�f +
rr i h✓ / r rrt � / / r/ /
y'� � � ✓ // /,1✓ �i %F f x S i � it �/ / �✓ r K / + it/1 r /7/
r � i r�'1 �l�l �I�r �'�'Mt'r� LJ r /✓J i /i/,!l ('� i
� � m ���ir'�r,�'y�/ l✓ �� r✓ �'�) � it /l✓�/w / f''✓'li✓/ / F1' // /r'i�a °f
�, �Y �'�� �, ��✓ ,p/ l)"rr( ri i;!✓^� r �FrF ����� �4 � w I/ Y U/ r/ �` / � �:
r r ,�✓ d �✓ r 1 k� "-,
PI
�/ u''� rr,� �Y �j�i %'�Yi �y�g � e/„ra1'/' ri✓. � �i,r) ✓/ J" / rd /�
i i (Y% �r��j�.. �� ✓ i9u�l4 p�fly',✓/� /ir�i uy'.m iJ�''✓/' �✓ ✓ �� r y 1J +fir ,
!. F�l � fE,�'f J��A�"/,( ;, )�,�i �i%f l'� //✓%%/ �J� "{ / � i4 �r'A /� "` ' / � ! it � f ;k /
WH
T, ;� / ��i �// )/tA�r�k;;/,e, ryrr' rr w�✓{f��ai �`,� o f ✓ja yi r r
r f fPG ,r'i6Ei �,✓7e� /,����/'' i ' ii/�ri� '✓4p/" ✓� � fi ✓, �✓ r a1 W
140 �j�,15�° y�� Iql�/�r'f�rv/� p' �;i� `r�,i°jh✓1/ dr'/r✓ d ,r;
o >, J r r/y �` �r ✓ r ✓ / ✓ ✓
�✓i✓l��l��/4� �i�ar✓��i�� 61 yr, / y '/�1/ l
� � 4'r �wi ��if"'rr %` % � �� ����'Gr b ir� ✓' ir�J�{r/�'rr �6'�N
� � � F / f �k ✓t W / I � /r/� �� V Y / � rU �,
Fi r✓"r �r � I ' rfw ,✓�'�,4 �//rl� �,�� � ,,.� `��i",° PNl),� ✓ '�r� ' �111 �� ��y �i�%��)`l y���d �,1 �r
� �✓ � h r �s rllZlf �yu % i � �� r � �F`''rn N N� ," �r��Y ��w`Y� �✓� �° l �h! i ✓f� i ! /�
��'l� ✓ �:Iahrd;r,✓l;/ y r rli� � r �tirh""1�+�1���' ���
(�/� �' f � � r, & ✓; l�im�(✓i�r Jiry�i � M���l?J�i`/��{rWi'����rrof����k �✓1fD�q
P � r�� �+f � r � r ql Ji ✓H✓i Y ��h 4��r N✓i r/ °i✓l/�+ Z r� !� E �
,��/� a ��ww"'� u���ri/1 �����h rjl�i��j �"rri ,�C irr�✓/����^.'j%//
'���r�r, a �i� ��N✓ � ��/r ✓ whir ilk � r,Jiki/✓ ✓,�wy��G�'
' '4 ,r r �' r � 11/ w'r�✓ rl r � �/ �j ++�,'irfi
�1fi�I"F�
✓ rY�m Tf sl nryy✓� Now /
y� a yl ! r i,! ✓ r �' M✓✓ n�Uw�' '� iiirJm
i / ✓ r� �d �fdM�' ' J,✓ ; 9far
/
NEW
/�jli 'f x. 1r i i
r �r
"��A de/)� i�'f a/)
d r'rv'1w,� l'J'Y(' , // FY�(i��� �r� �/✓� i l � /� y ,/ / / �/ l / f G /, �� � ..,.
4 // Id �9 ✓
ill
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-2020-00118
Apply Date: 7/20/2020
Ma' &Tax Lot....
F',ro erf" Address
391E11CD90000
295 Tolman Creek Rd
Owner: Kira Volynskaya
Owner 765 San Antonio Rd #16
Address: Palo Alto, CA 94303
Phone: (650) 996-5875
Applicant: Kira Volynskaya
Applicant 765 San Antonio Rd #16
Address: Palo Alto, CA 94303
Phone: (650) 996-5875
I Remove Cedar Tree located next to units #6 & #8 1
Fee Description: Amount:
Tree RemovalNerification Fee (Type 1) $30.50
Applicant: Date:
Total Fees: $30.50