The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSixth_265_PA-TREE-2020-00132CITY OF -ASHLAND December 23, 2020 Notice of Final Decision On December 23, 2020, the Community Development Director issued a decision for the following: Planning Action: TREE -2020-00132 Subject Property: 265 Sixth Street Applicant: Quality Tree Care / Leonard Eisenberg Description: A request for approval to remove two hazard trees, the first is a 36" DBH Catalpa which has three main stems, the second tree is a 12" DBH blue spruce. The application materials include a report by an ISA certified arborist as welt as completed risk assessment forms. The application materials explain that the root system of the catalpa is damaging the nearby foundation and sewer line. The application explains that due to the shallow root system of the spruce the removal of the catalpa will expose the spruce to wind loads that may cause the tree to fall into the neighboring property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E09AB; TAX LOT: 4400. 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 Aaron Anderson in the Community Development Department at (541) 488-5305. cc: Parties of record and property owners within 200 It COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541A88-5305 51 NlinWrn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us I LA 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, T. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor may 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 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 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: 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 continents on the application to the City by the specified deadline. 2. Appeal Piling 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 o€ 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 orAppeal. The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by the required filing fee and shall contain. i. An identification ofthe 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 filly 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 1I 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 Winborn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900, A www.ashland.or.us ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: TREE -2020-00132 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 265 6°i Street APPLICANT: Quality Tree Care OWNER: Leonard Eisenberg DESCRIPTION: A request for approval to remove two hazard trees, the first is a 36" DBH Catalpa which has three main stems, the second tree is a 12" DBH blue spruce. The application materials include a report by an ISA certified arborist as well as completed risk assessment forms. The application materials explain that the root system of the catalpa is damaging the nearby foundation and sewer line. The application explains that due to the shallow root system of the spruce the removal of the catalpa will expose the spruce to wind loads that may cause the tree to fall into the neighboring property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential, ZONING: R-2; MAP: 39 1E 09 AB; TAX LOT: 4400 SUBMITTAL DATE: November 4, 2020 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: November 24, 2020 STAFF DECISION DATE: December 23, 2020 DEADLINE TO APPEAL (4:30 pan.): January 4, 2021 FINAL DECISION DATE: January 5, 2021 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: June 5, 2022 DECISION This proposal is to remove two trees identified as hazards from the property at 265 Sixth Street. The property is located on the west side of Sixth Street between A & B Streets. The subject property, and surrounding neighborhood to the east, west and south is zoned Multifamily Residential (R-2), with property zoned Eruployrnent (E-1) to the north, The property is developed with two dwellings therefor any tree over six -inches diameter at breast height (DBH) requires a tree removal permit. The application materials include a report by an ISA certified arborist and includes an ISA Risk Assessment form as well as a site map showing the location of the trees. The arborist report stated that the catalpa tree is eight feet from the foundation of the home and two feet from a known sewer line. The application further states that there is a visible crack in the foundation, however the application did not include any photos. The report concludes that cutting the root that is causing the damage would cause the tree to be unstable and reconurrends removal to prevent further damage to the foundation. The application states that the spruce tree will be affected by the removal of the catalpa in that it will expose the spruce tree to increased wind loads, and that due to the shallow nature of the spruce root system this creates a hazard. The report concludes that removal is also reconnnended for the spruce tree to mitigate the hazard. During the public comment period staff received no input from the public. TREE -2020-00132 265 Sixth St./aa Page I At the December regular meeting of the Tree Commission staff presented the application to the tree commission. There was no one in attendance in support of the application, so the information review by the tree commission was limited to the application materials submitted. After a brief deliberation, the tree commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the removal of the catalpa tree with a condition of approval that photographic evidence be submitted to be reviewed by the staff advisor showing the damage to the foundation that is being caused by the catalpa tree. The tree commission did not think that the explanation that with the catalpa removed the increased wind loads could cause the spruce the fall creating a hazard was an adequate explanation. The tree commission concluded that there was not sufficient evidence in the record to support a finding that the spruce tree posed a hazard and therefore recommended denying its removal. The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.7.040.B 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 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 18.5.7.05 Staff finds that Planning Action 41TREE-2020-00132, 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 -2020-00132 is approved ill part and denied in part. The denial is without prejudice therefore, pursuant to AMC 18.5.1.1.130.A, the applicant is free to reapply at any time with a more developed application. If any one of more of the following conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #TREE -2020-00132 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1. That photographic evidence of the damage to the foundation shall be submitted to the staff advisor demonstrating the damage that is occurring. 2. That only the Catalpa Tree is approved for removal 3. That one mitigation tree shall be planted within eighteen months of the removal. C 12/23/2020 Bill Molnar, Director Date Department of Community Development TREE -2020-00132 265 Sixth St./aa Page 2 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 12/231201 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 -2020-00132, 265 Sixth St. L�uca� Signature of Employee Ooc�W 12/232020 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB6506 645 A STREET LLC TRUSTEES OF PO BOX 1018 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4900 BANYAN DEPOT LLC 1390 ROMEO DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4600 CLAYTON GARETT SILISA R 301 DAVIDSON WAY TALENT, OR 97540 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4400 EISENBERG LEONARD & KAREN TRU 223 GRANITE ST 'ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 39IE09AB4500 KOEHLER THOMAS R TRUSTEE ET A 286 112 PATTERSON ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4700 LEWIS JAMES D TRUSTEE ET AL 640 A ST ;ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3900 PIKER EILEEN 625 B ST #A ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3701 SKINNER CAMERONIKATHRYN 20812 NE 141 ST ST WOODINVILLE, WA 98077 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3500 ' TRUGLIO KEVIN C/GABRIELLE R 695 B ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB2300 750 A STREET LLC PO BOX 306 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB6505 BANYAN PEARL PROPERTIES LLC 6705 EAGLE ROCK AVE NE ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB6508 COOPER DENNIS & KATHY FAMILY 1182 TIMBERLINE TERR ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3200 ELLIS CATHERINE E TRUSTEE ET 743 B ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3800 LAPKIN LAWRENCE TRUSTEE ET AL PO BOX 1918 TAHOE CITY, CA 96145 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4300 MAJOR MARTIN/SHEILA 25 CHESTNUT HILL LN BRIARCLIFF MANOR, NY 10510 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB2600 PREISTER KEVIN R TRUSTEE ETA 256 SIXTH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4100 ANDERSON CURTIS RILORIE S 248 5TH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3600 CAIN ROBERT ROY TRUSTEE ET AL 255 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4200 DOWNES ELLEN K 266 FIFTH ST #B ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB2400 HOUNSELL REBECCA 0 TRUSTEE ET PO BOX 851 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4800 LEWIS JAMES D TRUSTEE ET AL 640 A ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB2101 MCBRAYER KEITHILYN 764 A ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB4000 RENWICK ALLISON TRUST ET AL 236 FIFTH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3300 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB2500 STILES GLENNA SUE STOKES CHRISTINE 600 ROCA ST 215 NUTLEY ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB3700 TYWONIAK DANA OTT TRUSTEE ET 4610 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NE KIRKLAND, WA 98033 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB2401 WEISS ERIC JONATHAN 2305-C ASHLAND ST #227 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 391 E09AB6507 TREE -2020-00132 265 SIXTH WENDT BONNIE R TRUSTEE ET AL QUALITY TREE SERVICE NOD 12123120 900 REICHERT AVE #539 PO BOX 3486 29 NOVATO, CA 94945 CENTRAL POINT, OR 97502 Ogg��x�v w�� w�m�«mmo�oomc �� -- --` ' �� ASHLAND jgi o414e'o�5 Fax: 541-552-2050 �a�u��uua TTY: 1-800-735-2900 �/—�^~x u".' ~u�u�, NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING ACTION: TREE -2020-0032 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2G5Sixth Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Quality Tree Care / Leonard Eisenberg DESCRIPTION: Arequemt for approval to remove two hazard trees, the first is a 36" DBH Catalpa which has three main stems, the second tree is a 12" DBH blue spruce. The application materials include a report by an ISA certified arborist aowell oscompleted risk assessment forms, The application materials explain that the root system ofthe catalpa iodamaging the nearby foundation and sewer line, The application explains that due tothe shallow root system of the spruce the removal of the catalpa will expose the spruce to wind loads that may cause the tree to fall into the neighboring property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391 E09AB; TAX LOT: 4400 NODE: The Ashland Tree Commission will review this Planning Action at an electronic public hearing on Thursday, December 3, 2020at 6:00 PM, See page 2 of this notice for information about participating in the electronic public hearing. NOTICE OFCOMPLETE APPLICATION: November 24,2020 DEADLINE FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: December 8,2020 OVER�� Historic and Tree Commission Meeting I Notice is hereby given that the Tree Comm..sion will hold an electronic public hearing o,, the above described planning action on the meeting date and time shown on Page 1. If you would like to watch and listen to the Tree Commission meeting virtually, but not participate in any discussion, you can use the Zoom link posted on the City of Ashland calendar website ............. - .. . . ...... .... Anyone wishing to submit written comments can do so by sending an e-rnail to FC- public-tesfinionashland or.LLs with 1@_ the subject line "Advisory Commission Hearing Testimony" by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, November 30, 2020. If the applicant wishes to provide a rebuttal to the testimony, they can submit the rebuttal via e-mail to f C-R qbfic- - tesb,mony-@ jqndor,�Lq: with the subject line "Advisory Commission Hearing Testimony" by 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December - 1 , . 2 .. 020. - Written testimony received by these deadlines will be available for Tree Commissioners to review before the hearing and will be included in the meeting minutes. Oral testimony will be taken during the electronic public hearing. If you wish to provide oral testimony during the electronic meeting, send an email to PC-rp tablrc-testimonygasjg�landLor_uq by 10:00 a.m. on Monday, November 30, 2020. In order to provide testimony at the public hearing, please provide the following information: 1) make the subject line of the email "Advisory Commission Testimony Request", 2) include your name, 3) specify the date and commission meeting you wish to testify at, 4) specify the agenda item you wish to speak to, 5) specify if you will be participating by computer or telephone, and 6) the name you will use if participating by computer or the telephone number you will use if participating by telephone. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102,-35.104 ADA Title 1). 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 reviewing the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541) 488-5305 or p1pjnnjnqftqshIand.0rA1S. A copy of the application, including all documents, evidence and applicable criteria are available online at "What's Happening in my City" at h p r jjj[gpgsals/. Copies of application materials will be provided tt _sJIgis. ash land. or,..L.J,s/deveIo _iRg Under �d� 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 emailing planningland.or.us. . ........ . Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to p1gnmi iq.& L gbland.OTAIS or to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 prior to 4:30 p.rn, on the deadline date shown on Page 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 18.5.1.050.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 541-488-5306 or aaron.andeyson c ash[and.or.us . 0 \,o,,,, de0p1,,b,ST1a nog Action.,\J'A, by S1tWSi,,1h 81reeMvth, 26$V1 REE 2020 00132 NOCA.. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 18.5.7.040.8 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. G\comm-devlplavning\Plan�ing Adi—\PAs by S[,eelAS\Sirlh Slree11 Ah_265\TREE-2020-00]32WOIICing\SIUh_265. TREE-2020-00152_\OC.doc.,- TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 ELLIS CATHERINE ETRUSTEE ET 743 B ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 LEWIS JAMES D TRUSTEE ET AL 640 A ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 TRUGLIO KEVIN C/GABRIELLE R 695 B ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 645 A STREET LLC TRUSTEES OF PO BOX 1018 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 CAIN ROBERT ROY TRUSTEE ET AL 255 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 BANYAN DEPOT LLC 1390 ROMEO DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 MCBRAYER KEITH/LYN 764 A ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 WEISS ERIC JONATHAN 2305-C ASHLAND ST #227 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 LAPKIN LAWRENCE TRUSTEE ET AL PO BOX 1918 TAHOE CITY, CA 96145 265 Sixth Street 11/24/2020 NOC 27 ,dn-dod p30gai a1 ialanaJ ap uge ajng3eg el a zaildaa Mi ` alaad Asea assadpe,p sa;}arib113 s�ua�ed/cuoaR ane:fed C 1 1 tl 1•'C ��11 1 1 11 1•'C'�1� KOEHLER THOMAS R TRUSTEE ET A 286 1/2 PATTERSON ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 PREISTER KEVIN RTRUSTEE ETA 256 SIXTH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 ANDERSON CURTIS R/LORIE S 248 5TH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 COOPER DENNIS & KATHY FAMILY 1182 TIMBERLINE TERR ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 DOWNES ELLEN K 266 FIFTH ST #B ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 BANYAN PEARL PROPERTIES LLC 6705 EAGLE ROCK AVE NE ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 750 A STREET LLC PO BOX 306 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 TYWONIAK DANA OTT TRUSTEE ET 4610 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NE KIRKLAND, WA 98033 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 PIKER EILEEN 625 B ST #A ASHLAND, OR 97520 CLAYTON GARETT S/LISA R 301 DAVIDSON WAY TALENT, OR 97540 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 STILES GLENNA SUE 600 ROCA ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 MAJOR MARTIN/SHEILA 25 CHESTNUT HILL LN BRIARCLIFF MANOR, NY 10510 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 STOKES CHRISTINE 215 NUTLEY ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 EISENBERG LEONARD & KAREN TRU 223 GRANITE ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 WENDT BONNIE RTRUSTEE ET AL 900 REICHERT AVE #539 NOVATO,CA 94945 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 HOUNSELL REBECCA O TRUSTEE ET PO BOX 851 ASHLAND, OR 97520 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 SKINNER CAMERON/KATHRYN 20812 NE 141ST ST WOODINVILLE, WA 98077 TREE -2020-00132 351E09AB 4400 RENWICK ALLISON TRUST ETAL 236 FIFTH ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 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. On November 24, 20201 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 -2020-00132, 265 Sixth Street. Signature of Employee D-0 W2412020 Planning Division prwl'l 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 CITY OF ASH LAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION FILE — ig L P4 geAL �cc DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT --W( te 60 V14 L r CA t DESCRIPTION OF. PROPERTY Pursuing LEED@Gertffication? DYES DNO Street Address Assessor's Map No. 391E 0qIA-13 tA q ()C) Tax Lot(s) qLfoo Zoning MULI-1 -6qMlL y Comp Plan Designation APPLICANT Name L� o fs-W E15;etJ9G46- Phone 5q I q�4110g,E-Mail ""eax, G)CMd1cev- V Address 245 6PAIVE S (C `r city A slq� N a- zip (jq 52 (L) PROPERTY OWNER Name �V tJ i1 2 p 15gN (T -Phone -Mail e,,v ��4" -Vv� EJL 14 Address ,2 6 SNI f -e �jZ city 7ASHON7 zip q9 --5Z 0 SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER 5ql. g 813q ( eW Title Name Phone --&-h—OrLs —� C&Y^ 4E Mail vulr Address city 6c_ Zip_ -7 Title Name Phone E -Mail Address city Zip I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct. I understand that all property pills must be shown on the drawings and visible 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 will be on me to establish: 1) that I produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing 10 SUPPOrt this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the granting of the request; 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all structures or improvements are properly located on the ground. Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being builtji) reliance (hejeon being required to be removed:Bt my ex Inse. It 1 b7o any doubts, I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. Applicant's Signature Date As owner of the property involved in this request, I have read and understood the complete application and its consequences to me as a property owner. =40 -2 - Property Owner's Signature Hre�ull dl Date (ro be oaqMd W c1ty SIA Date Received 111011-151D Zoning Permit Type -ff,a, Filing Fee s 362, S...— I OVER 00 I L ndo 11V-1.9P i1 APj11WA-.1A- Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Client Date J!44 ' �'* CC. Time Address/Tree locationTree no._ Sheet of Tree species don Height Crown spread dia . 30" Assessor(s) Tools used LL4_d Time frame - Target Assessment A ....... o""P'n" E rate 2- i-1 ry --ftwcrtt Target description Target protection I 4- 1 History of failures (,C4,UTopography FlatqSlopeE3 -/. Aspect Sitechanges Noneo GradechangeD SiteclearingO Changed soil hydrologyD RootcutsE] Describe Soilconditions Urnitedvolumell Saturatecill Shallow[] CompactedEl Pavement over motsO ____—% Dt!scribe____ Prevailing wind direction Common weather StrongwindsO Ice(E] SnowD Heavy ralnO Describe Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor LowU Normal U Hlgh[k Foliage None (seasonal) 0 None(dead)[I Normal—,_% Chlorotic _% Necrotic—% Pests/BioticAblo Species failure profile BranchesO Trunk[] Roots14 Describe , ------ LoLd Factors Windexposure ProtectedD Partia[E] FuII0 Wind funneling0_ Relative crown size Small[3 MediumL] LarpeD Crownclensity SparseO Normal[] Dense13 Interior branches Few[] Normal r -I Dense 13 Vines/Mistletoe/Moss El Recent or expected change in load factors Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of failure Crown and Branches Unbalanced crown El LCR _% Cracks El lightning damage El Dead twigs/branches 13 % overall Max. dia. Codorrinant 11 included bark 11 Broken/Hangers Number Max. dia. Weak attachments ElCayjty/NL st hole % circ. Over-extended branches 11 Previous branch failures EJ 51 1 "04 braricilds present FJ Pruning history Crown cleaned 11 Thinned El Raised 11 Dead/Missing bark 0 Cankers/GaIISIBLIFISD Sapwooddamage/decayO Reduced U Topped 0 Lion -tailed rl Conks 0 Heartwooddecay E1__ Flush cuts C3 Other Responsegrowth Condition (s) ofconcern Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A 13 Minor 13 Moderate[] SlignificantO Lead on defect N/A 11 Minor 11 ModerateO signIficantO Likelihood offaiture, Improbable 13 Possible El Probable CI Imminent 0 Likelihood of failure ImprobableM Possible 0 Probable 0 imminent 0 —Trunk — — Roots and Root Collar — Dead/Missing bark IJ Abnormal bark texture/color IJ Collar buried/Not visible IJ Depth Stem girdling 11 a Codominant stems 13 included bark 0 Cracks 13 Dead 0 Decay U Conks/Mushrooms 0 Sapwood damage/decay ll Cankers/Galls/BurlsO Sap ooze 13 ooze 0 Cavity 13 —.-% circ. UightningdamageD Heartwood decay[] Conks/Mushrooms 13 Cracks D Cut/Damaged roots LJ Distance fiorn trunk Cavity/Nest hole % circ. Depth _ Roortaperl] Root plate lifting El Soil weakness Q Lean—_2 Corrected?—, Response growth Response growth Conclition(s) ofconcem Condition(s) ofconcem Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect NIA 11 Minor 0 ModerateU significzntO Lead on defect N/A 13 Minor EJ ModerateEl Significant failure Improbable[] PossibleU Probable 13 Imminent Cl P- I of Risk Categorization Target (Target number or description) Tree part Condition(s) of 1 concern Failure — — — Like], Likelihood Impact Failure & Impact Consequences 0M 5..!,,h.1 likely Risk rating awn Mrtli�2) ------- ---------------- A 'g 4 — 15 .1 E Improbable Unl1ke!y2nIIk,,Iy E .2 V Unlikely -------- A z 10 _4 re Mitigation o tions 1. -k44— ±LL Residual risk 2. Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure -7.—m-ioWnt Likelihood of impact Ve low Lnw—iZed—lu.�Igh —P—Iobabf. _ 22LUnlikel L-_-! hat Rel, Like], r likely Unlikely YLIikely 5..!,,h.1 likely Ukely _Lossiblek y2LelL kel oderate _�L_ Moderate I Low LOW Improbable Unl1ke!y2nIIk,,Iy Unlikel Unlikely Matrix 2. Risk ratinL, matrix. I. :kellhoud of ,sd ure & impact YigIikely ' Consequences of Failure --Negligible Law Minor Moderate Signifitant Severe F118h —7x,,,—, -----ItkelY ow Moderate High tliglt _LMwLh!tlikef Unlikely Low Low L-_WW Low oderate _�L_ Moderate I Low LOW Data KfFmal 0 Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ONo ElYes-Type/Reason __ Inspection limitations '�(None ElVisibility CAccess UVines Ulloot collar buried Describe Thi, &WUd—, Produced by the international Society of Arbad<ulhue (ISA) — 2017 Page 2 of 2 North Notes, explanations, descriptions _4 re Mitigation o tions 1. Residual risk 2. Residual risk 3. Residual risk 4, Residual risk Overall tree risk rating LowO Moderate High[J Extreme C" Overall residual risk Nonek Low[] Moderate High Extreme C1 Recommended Inspection interval Data KfFmal 0 Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ONo ElYes-Type/Reason __ Inspection limitations '�(None ElVisibility CAccess UVines Ulloot collar buried Describe Thi, &WUd—, Produced by the international Society of Arbad<ulhue (ISA) — 2017 Page 2 of 2 Basic Tr iAssessment For Clients G / ISA,{r'br"L,�,r, Date �(;'�Z "./�1�; c;("r Time___ Address/Tree location r, ° 4 { — �. L ' ca'kr_� _ _ Tree no. Sheet _ of Tree species Mr _ dbhHeight l j Assessor(s) __t r _ Crown s—pread dla c„ _ Tools used_ Q,111— i Time frame` Target Assessment iTarget zone e Target description Target protection wwa Site Factors History of failures �dl-1 ) �C _ _ --_ _ ---- _ Topography Fiat(, Slope❑ _ _ %Aspect Site changes NonejllifGrade change❑site clear, BE] Changed sell hydrology ❑ Root cuts Describe Sollconditions Limited volume❑Saturated❑ Shallow(, Compacted Cl Pavement over roots ❑_ % bascribe Prevailing wind direction 7 Common weather strong winds ❑ Ice ❑ Snow[] Heavy rain ❑ Describe _ y� Tree Health and Species Profile _ _ -—� Vigor Low ❑ Normal I High ❑ Foliage None. (seasonal)❑ None (dead)❑ Normal % Chlorotic %�Necrotic Pests/Biotic _ _ Abiotic _ _ Species failure profile Branches❑ Trunk❑ Roots Describe_�i f��"+ �c tay.i,,rK f�—f----- ��"� Load Factors Windexposure Protected❑ Partial❑ Full❑ Wind funneling❑ Relative crown size Small❑ MedlumV) Large[] Crowndensfty Sparse® Normal' Dense❑ Interior branches Few❑ Norma* Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑" Recent or expected change in load factors-K&�kAdL, -- Tree Defects a d C d Occupancy rate r�rare 1-a<aslvnal � � a=•�frMyuent q _...r � e' � i '� Unbalanced crown 13 LCR _% Dead twigs/branches ❑ %overall Max. dia. ' I ,. elil (J ,q tx Over-extended branches ❑ Weak attachments LI Cavity/Nesthole �6grc. Pruning history Previous branch failures ❑ Similarbranchespresent ❑ Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ n on ikons Affecting the Likelihood of Failure ®- gown and Branches -� Unbalanced crown 13 LCR _% Dead twigs/branches ❑ %overall Max. dia. Cracks ❑ - --- Lightning damage;❑ Broken/Hangers Number— -- Max. dia. Codominant ElIncluded bark ❑ --- — — Over-extended branches ❑ Weak attachments LI Cavity/Nesthole �6grc. Pruning history Previous branch failures ❑ Similarbranchespresent ❑ Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay d" Flush cuts ❑ Other Response growth Conditions) of concern Part Size __ Fall Distance Load on defect N/A 11 Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Part Size _ Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑— Llkellhoodoffailure Improbable❑ Possible Probable 0 Imminent ❑Likellhoodoffailure Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significant❑ Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminent❑ —Trunk — — Roofs and Root Collar Dead/Missfngbark IJAbnormal bark texture/color❑ Collar buried/Not visible 0 Depth Codorninant stems ❑ Included bark O Cracks 11 Ste rnglrcliing❑ Dead 0 Decay❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sap ooze ❑ Conks/Mushrooms El Lightning damage Heartwood decay[] Conks/Mushrooms❑ ❑ _--% Cavity ❑ circ. Cavity/Nest hole —%circ. Depth_ Poortaper❑ Cracks El Cut/Darnagedroots ❑ Distance from trunk > lean ') ° Corrected? _ M —_ Root plate lifting l weakness ❑ Soil Response growth _ Response growth ----_ _ Condition (s) of concern Condldon(s)ofconcern Part Size _ i "Z_`r Fall Distance`z 1 G' , Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A❑ Minor ❑ ModerataO Significant❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable[]Possible Probable Cl ��ytt Load on defect N/A 11 Minor 13Moderate,[]Significant IN Imminent ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable M imminent ❑ Pave I of 2 Risk Categorization Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood consequences of Failure Likelihood of impact Likelihood Target (Target number ordescription) Treepatt Condition(s) of concern Failure Impact Fallure&lmpact Consequences MO knminent E E Z� =Ljk.IV Ilkel, Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Ilk,fly _ Likely _ Possible _ Unlike) Risk ting (from Matrix 2) Unlikely aa=tLE�� Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood consequences of Failure Likelihood of impact Significant of Failure Very =10W Low Medium Extreme knminent _L.IkeIV Somewhat likely =Ljk.IV Ilkel, Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat Ilk,fly _ Likely _ Possible _ Unlike) unlike) Unlikely aa=tLE�� Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Data � Final El Preliminary Advanced assessment needed []No Dyes-Type/Reason Uniikely Matrix Z. KISK rating nntriy. Likelihood of Fai ure & ImpactMinor -Very consequences of Failure Negligible —L.,, Significant Severe likely —M.d �,aj,7=Hh Extreme Liked Law _.Moderate High I1( it Somewhat Iikef low Low Moderate Moderato Unlikely Low. Low low, Low North J, North expla ationS, descriptions Mitigation options, ljz.,,le- Residual risk Residual risk — Residual risk Residual risk Overall tree risk rating Low 0 Moderate • High El Utreme 0 Overall residual risk None4 Low[] Moderate[3 High Extreme Ll Recommended inspection Interval Data � Final El Preliminary Advanced assessment needed []No Dyes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations ElNone OVisibility E)Access 13vines 011crotcollar buried Describe Tits (atast"t %"sproduced hY the International Society QfArb0r1Cu1t11re (ISA) —2017 Pago 2 of 2 .. Li�stad • Bonded Insured__..�._...____.,..w...�,_�F...,...,....�.oa.�.._........w.�.,.._._- _ _ InVC11C@/ i�roposaal/Receipt: CCB# 209208 Quality Tree Service• Phone ro9 " P.O. Box 3488 Rmall. qualitytreesorvlce@yahoo_com Central Point, OR 97602 Inc,www.quaIitytreeservicernedford.com Family Owned and Operated -- - --__ SUBMITTED O PHONE /€MAIL AODRLss JOB tOCKHON CI rY, STA AND YIP ARBORIST UATF_SCHEDUt..E DATE We hereby submit specifications and estimates for: �71d�1 �'t� �,1{f.�,t J 9 �5� Q ,, . � w° u fJ. t, r :'7 1` art -c1k1 Jy _r , ' All Credil/Debil card charges have a 3% fee. , The above latices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. ' You are authorized to do the work as specified. Any cancellations within 48 hours of scheduled Customer Signature service will be charged 30% of total Job cost. ` payment due in full at time of completion unless otherwise specified bolow. ' Not responsible for any under ground water lines or any unmarked utilities. Date, O{ ACCepfarlGP, City of Ashland Community Development Department PERMIT NOMBE 51 Winburn Way TREE -2020-00132 Ashland, OR 97520 Apply nate: 111412020 Telephone: 541-488-5305 Inspection Line: 541-552-2080 Plan Type: Tree Removal Work Class: Tree Removal Permit Review Mx&Ta.Lot Pro e` ,Address` 391E09AB4400 265 Sixth St Owner: Len Eisenberg Owner 223 Granite St Address: Ashland, OR 97520 Phone: (541)482-3754 Applicant: Len Eisenberg Applicant 223 Granite St Address: Ashland, OR 97520 Phone: (541) 482-3754 I Tree removal of 1 catalpa and 1 Blue Spruce I Fee Description: Rem ovalNerification Fee (Type 1) Applicant: Amount: Date: $30.25 Toowees $30.25 4' DBH pear 0 11—Y F 263 Sixth St. Paved parking Paved parking 12" DB I multi -stem orna ental loft N Alley -----A 265 Sixth Street Tree pl�� 18" DPH fir 0 0 14" DBH multi -stem ornamental plum 12" DBH blue spruce Tree #2 18" DBH pine 16" DBH fir D 6' DBH 0 juniper 12" DBI1 hawthorns 5" DBH hawthorne 0 0 0 24" DBH tri -stern catalpa 12" DBH hawthorns 3" DBH apple 24" DBH pine Tree #11 gate! z E 0 0 0 8" DBH hawthorns E Ear 16" DBH tri stem apple 4' DBH pear 0 11—Y F 263 Sixth St. Paved parking Paved parking 12" DB I multi -stem orna ental loft N Alley -----A 265 Sixth Street Tree pl�� 18" DIM -i fir 01- 24" DBH p4ie z. Sb E E 0 E E ca ILI 4" DBH pe,'m 0 16" MH p�ne 0 0 14' DBFC muhi-stern ornarnentA purn 12" CNN blue spruce B IDM i p�ne Tree #2 0 16" DBLI fir 6' DBH �"r6peii 12" DBH hawd-wirne 0 5" DBH havvthorne 0 C) I" DHH app�e 12' DBH I,mwthorne r -su.mi cam pa 2 -72.KT . . .. ... .. .. 263 Sixth St. Paved r.Narldng 10 ft 12' DIJI ornarIkenUd AHey N 265 Sixti-i Street 'Tree plan '1'1/,'?020 0 8" DM --1 hawthorne I Eo"" DBtjri stemi ajppe Paved paddrig