Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBush_2_PA-TREE-2021-00175CITY OF '' -ASHLAND December 29, 2021 Notice of Final Decision On December 29, 2 02 1, the Community Development Director approved the request for the following: Planning Action: PA -TREE -2021-00175 Subject Property: 2 Bush St. Applicant: David Collings / Canopy Description: A request to remove one tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) at the property located at 2 Bush St. The tree is estimated to be 36 inches DBH and stands 45' tall. The tree recently experienced a large branch failure which started the removal request. Due to the age of the tree and the risk to surrounding cars the project arborist recommends removal. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multifamily Residential; ZONING: R-3; MAP: 39 1E 04 CC, TAX LOT: 7800 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 ft COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 51 Winburn Way Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 Kok www.ashland.or.us I LQ -3 SECTION 18.5.1.450 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 18.5.1.050.6, 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. 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 parry 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.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. Thne far 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 PIanning 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 PIanning 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: 541A88-5305 51 WinbarnWay Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashiand.or.us ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION FINDINGS & ORDERS PLANNING ACTION: PA -TREE -2021-00175 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2 Bush St. OWNER/APPLICANT: David Collings / Canopy DESCRIPTION: A request to remove one tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) at the property located at 2 Bush St. The tree is estimated to be 36 inches DBH and stands 45' tall. The tree recently experienced a large branch failure which started the removal request. Due to the age of the tree and the risk to surrounding cars the project arborist recommends removal. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multifamily Residential; ZONING: R-3; MAP: 39 1E 04 CC, TAX LOT: 7800 SUBMITTAL DATE: November 24, 2021 DEEMED COMPLETE DATE: November 30, 2021 STAFF APPROVAL DATE: December 29, 2021 DEADLINE TO APPEAL (4:30 p.m.): January 10, 2022 FINAL DECISION DATE: January 11, 2022 APPROVAL EXPIRATION DATE: July 11, 2023 DECISION This proposal is to remove one tree from the property that is located at 2 Bush Street. The subject property is located on the alley portion of Bush Street, between North Main Street and Central Avenue, and is within the Skidmore Academy Historic District. The approximately 6,790 square foot parcel contains a 3,000 square foot duplex, plus 704 square foot cottage and attached garage behind (east) of the primary dwelling. According to our records, the property has long been a three -unit, long-term rental prior to our modern zoning ordinances. The tree proposed for removal is identified as a tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) that is 36 inches DBH and 45 feet tall. The tree has had recent large branch failures and explains that this species is known to be brittle and `known to shed branches even without high wind or a storm. event.' The application includes a report by Mr. Weigang an ISA certified arborist and includes an ISA risk assessment form with an overall tree risk rating of "high." The arborist report makes note of a particular concerning weak point developing at the main branch union. The arborist discussed heavy pruning but concluded that due to the structure of the tree that was not a possibility In accordance with the Land Use Ordinance, Notice of Complete Application (HOCA) was mailed to all surrounding properties within 200' of the subject property as well as a physical notice posted along the frontage. No public comment received either in favor or against. At the December regular meeting of the Tree commission the application was reviewed. Staff presented the application and provided an overview for the reason to request the removal. The Tree Commission, after a brief deliberation, determined that the location of the tree and the TREE -2021-00175 2 Bush St./aa Page 1 potential risk associated consisted a hazard and voted unanimously to approve the application as submitted. To be deemed a "hazard tree" the condition or location of the tree must clearly present a public safety hazard. Or, that there is a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and, that such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation or pruning. Based on the materials provided by the applicant and a site visit by staff, it is reasonable to conclude that the subject tree is indeed posing a hazard to the foundation of the building and therefore ought to be removed. Staff finds that the tree, due to its location and size, poses an unacceptable hazard to the property that cannot be reasonably alleviated by means other than removal and replacement. Staff finds the application has sufficiently demonstrated compliance with all applicable approval criteria. The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC Chapter 18.5.7.040.6 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 18.5. 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 -2021-00175, 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 -2021-00175 is approved. If any one or more of the following conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #TREE -2021-00175 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 a mitigation tree be planted on the site at an appropriate location within twelve months of this approval. Bill Molnar, Director Department of Community Development December. 29, 2021 Date TREE -2021-00175 2 Bush St./aa Page 2 STATE OF OREGON County of Jackson The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, 2. On December 29, 2021 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 #P'A-TREE-2021- 9'0175, 2 Bush St. Signature of Employee CAUsersnichael suIIjva0D9sktcpQ Bush NOMBush 2 Tree -2021-00175 NOD AffidaA al Wkng,docx 12129Y2021 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4500 BALDWIN ROBERT 5243 PIONEER RD MEDFORD, OR 97501 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7800 COLLINGS DAVID/SCHRAN-COLLING 13236 E EVANS CREEK RD ROGUE RIVER, OR 97537 I PA -TREE -2021-00175 39IE04CC7700 KENCAIRN KERRY K REV LIVING T 147 CENTRAL AVE ''ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4600 MERCER KYLE K 258 A ST PMB 1-106 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E09BB3502 PARKER JORDAN S TRUSTEE ET AL 137 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 i PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4300 ROSS SANDRA LYNN TRSTEE FBO 10409 CLAYSTONE DR DENTON, TX 76207 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7400 SMITH ANDREW K ET AL 75 HELMAN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4100 VAN DE VELDE BEN 168 WAGNER BUTTE RD TALENT, OR 97540 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC3900 WELLS G GREELEY TRUSTEE JR ET 5253 CARBERRY CREEK RD JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E09BB700 BARD'S INN LIMITED PTNSHIP 1120 PROSPECT ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E05DD9000 FIRST METHODIST CH/ASHLAND 175 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8200 LARC FREE LIFE LLC HODGIN MICHAEL 695 WASHINGTON ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC7600 MICHAELS CYNTHIA LOUISE 145 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8300 PAULSON DIANE C TRUSTEE ET AL 156 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7500 SHIELDS JOAN DARLENE DRAGER JOAN D 123 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8400 TRAVISANO JOSEPH A 155 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E09BB1200 WARREN FAMILY LTD PARTNERSP 132 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8000 WESTON GAEL P/MARCELLA J 150 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 {�r� �xaveryca l-whil lafes PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E09BB3503 BC PARTNERS IV LLC 175 PIEDMONT DR ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8500 JONES SUSAN E 716 RILEY RD EAGLE POINT, OR 97524 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7900 LOUIE. JEN LYNN TRUSTEE 142 N MAIN ST ASHLAND;;.OR. 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8100 MUSER TIMOTHY W/REBECCA SUE 157 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8600 PEIL THOMAS HANSEN FAMILY TRU 335 GARFIELD ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC4200 SILBOWITZ ALFRED I TRUSTEE ET 160 CENTRAL ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4400 VAN AKEN LOIS E TRUSTEE ET AL 140 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 WEIGONG JOSHUA CANOPY LLC 157 MAX LOOP TALENT, OR 97540 2 Bush S# 12/29/21 NOD 26 Planning Department, 51 WinL—, Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CITY O'F 541-488-5305 Fax,541-552-2050 www,ashiand.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: PA -TREE -2021-00175 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2 Bush St� OWN ER/APPL I CANT: David Collings / Canopy DESCRIPTION: A request to remove one tree of heaven (Aifat7thus altissima) at the property located at 2 Bush St. The tree is estimated to be 36 inches DBH and stands 45' tall, The tree recently experienced a large branch failure which started the removal request Due to the age of the tree and the risk to surrounding cars the project arborist recommends removal, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multifamily Residential; ZONING: R-3; MAP: 39 1 E 04 CC, TAX LOT: 7800 NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will review this Planning Action at an electronic public hearing on Thursday, December 9, 2021 at 6:00 PM. See page 2 of this notice for information about participating in the electronic public hearing. plan I] I I g 1 :1 Will .Historic and Tree Commission Meetings Notice is hereby given that the Tree Commission will hold an electronic public hearing on 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 11ttp,s�.//w'vvw. ash land. or. us/calendar. asp. OVER AcfinnshMs by 2tiNwiGinrK .NBush 2_'HF,-2W, 1 -00 1 75_ NOC. ducx (; Oral testimony will be taken during the el, ',onic public heal If you wish to provide '31 testimony during the electronic meeting, send an email to PC -public -test oony@ash1andor.us by 10:00 a.m. on 7,- -sday, December 9, 2021. 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 well enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102.-351.104 ADA Title 1). The Ashland Planning Division Staff has received a complete application for the property noted on Page 1 of this notice. Because of the COViD-1 9 pandemic, application materials are provided ol and comments will be accepted by email. Alternative arrangements for reviewing the application or submitting comments can be made by contacting (541) 488-5305 orplati nnLc shlaR�Lorus. jQg_ _ A copy of the application, including all] documents, evidence and applicable criteria are avallable online at "What's Happening in rny City" at 11�LtZLqr§. ash land. or. u s/d eve lo prnen tpropg_saIL/, 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 Bl 51 Winburn Way, via a pre -arranged appointment by calling (541) 488-5305 or emailing p1qnni _Dgfd_)e!L[ngnd&Lr.�gs. Any affected property owner or resident has a right to submit written comments to p or to the City of Ashland Planning Division, 51 VVinburn 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 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 18.5.1.050.0). 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 an 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 #541-552-2052 Aaron .Anderson 1pashland.or.us. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (AMC 18.5.7.040.B) I 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 facilty, 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. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements AQfivuWAs by Sir aNB1Bush4Bosh 21N(PZiciny,0.Busl�.2,_IREE 2021-000 NOC docx and standards, including but n- '-sited to applicable Site Development and design F' dards 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 18.53,050, Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. Cr:lconun-devl lanninglPlanning ActionsTAs by Street\M13ushWush_2Woticing\13ush„2 1'ME-2021-Q6i75_NOC.docx STATE OF OREGON County of Jackson The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On 11/30/21 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 -2021-00175, 2 Bush St. Signature of Employee Gtomm devlp2anningFPlaiin1ngAcflo11s�PAs by Steed0Bush4Bush-2NotcinglBush-2-TREE-2021-00175-AffidaviCCfMailing.docx 110021 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4500 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E09BB700 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E09BB3503 'BALDWIN ROBERT BARD'S INN LIMITED PTNSHIP BC PARTNERS IV LLC 5243 PIONEER RD 1120 PROSPECT ST 175 PIEDMONT DR MEDFORD, OR 97501 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7800 COLLINGS DAVID/SCHRAN-COLLING 13236 E EVANS CREEK RD ROGUE RIVER, OR 97537 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC7700 KENCAIRN KERRY K REV LIVING T 147 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC4600 MERCER KYLE K 258 A ST PMB 1-106 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E09BB3502 PARKER JORDAN S TRUSTEE ET AL 137 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4300 ROSS SANDRA LYNN TRSTEE FBO 10409 CLAYSTONE DR DENTON, TX 76207 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7400 SMITH ANDREW K ET AL 75 HELMAN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC4100 VAN DE VELDE BEN 168 WAGNER BUTTE RD TALENT, OR 97540 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8000 WESTON CAEL PIMARCELLA J 150 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E05DD9000 FIRST METHODIST CH/ASHLAND 175 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8500 JONES SUSAN E 716 RILEY RD EAGLE POINT, OR 97524 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8200 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC7900 LARC FREE LIFE LLC HODGIN MICHAEL LOUIE JEN LYNN TRUSTEE 695 WASHINGTON ST 142 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC7600 MICHAELS CYNTHIA LOUISE '145 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8300 PAULSON DIANE C TRUSTEE ET AL 156 N MAIN ST E ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC7500 SHIELDS JOAN DARLENE DRAGER JOAN D 123 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8400 TRAVISANO JOSEPH A 155 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E09BB1200 WARREN FAMILY LTD PARTNERSP 132 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC8100 MUSER TIMOTHY W/REBECCA SUE 157 N MAIN ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC8600 PEIL THOMAS HANSEN FAMILY TRU 335 GARFIELD ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC4200 SILBOWITZ ALFRED I TRUSTEE ET 160 CENTRAL ST ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391E04CC4400 VAN AKEN LOIS E TRUSTEE ET AL 140 CENTRAL AVE ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA -TREE -2021-00175 391 E04CC3900 WELLS G GREELEY TRUSTEE JR ET 5253 CARBERRY CREEK RD JACKSONVILLE, OR 97530 2 Bush St 1.1/30/21 NOC 25 l ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION WAAL Planning Division C f T I%F., o P 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 # ASHLAND 541488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT TCE e a JP L. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY /' Pursuing LEER@ Certification? ❑ YES �izl NO Street Address ��5 J L � 6Q Assessor's Map No, 381E Tax Lots) Zoning APPLICANT Comp Plan Designation Name DfWN Cp Phone 3 [1 _ 2- {d E -Mail SS ct n c/� C 0 ..:.1 Address Z 713 E {: GiNdS 6 City t Tp A PROPERTY�OWNER �t Name t 1i �7 [ I) L .0U.I x LA _ Phone 941. �8&gLdt{ E -Mail Address— d skn O 4S...... , jg j?cj,; City Zip SURVEYOR EM%I EF A ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OTHER Title '�At.5` Name _J OS ice: 116r4.r<1 L Phone b 1 -©CC1 E -Mail _ Ir/f� UC a �7� :.� r s�7t1t�( cj Address tw i✓ City _'T�4 t El �}"7- _ _ Zip S- Lj Title Name Address Phone E -Mail City Zip I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of tach are in alt respects, free and correct. I understand That a# property pins must he shown on the drawings and visible upon the site Inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incormcl, the owner assumes tuff responsibility. t 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 to support this request; 2) that the findings of fact furnished justifies the yranling of the request; 3) that the findings of fact furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all strictures or fmprovements are property located on the ground Failure in this regard Wff result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in refiance thereon being required to be removed at my expense I have any doubts I am advised to seek competent professional advice and assistance. A PCan#'s ' natU Date' As owner of the property involved in this request, I have read and understood the complete applicafion and ifs consequences to me as a property owner. -L 1 2o`t Date 7pbeby�8MM Date Received Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee OVER N G.%comacdc 'Vlamdng4Fo & Ha do MZoamg Pa itAppUwgo 1m To. Ashland Planning Division Re: Tree Removal at 2 Bush St Ashland Nov 22, 2021 Enclosed is my application for tree removal at 2 Bush St. Ashland. A large branch broke off last August and we scheduled a work date of December 30 2021, the earliest they had available. Unfortunately, I only recently received the risk assessment report and I was unaware of the time it takes to receive a permit. So, 1 will have to reschedule for a later date. I hope this can be expedited as I am very concerned about the safety of the tree. Please let me know if anything is incomplete or missing Thank you David Collings Home:' 541 582-0648 Cell: 541450-7143 rA$` O P Y ac The Care of Trees caAopyarrsorca exom Ro. ftx 3511 �s�itand, UIi 975�E} MR ;s�41 sit: agar, November I st, 2021 City of Ashland Planning 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 RE: 2 Bush St tree removal permit The tree requested for removal at 2 Bush St. is a tree of heaven Milanthus altisshnaj in average health. This tree is approximately 36 inches DBH and 45$ tali. A recent large branch failure has brought up concern for parked cars, structures and pedestrians, and initiated this request for removal. Ailanthus is fast growing and brittle, commonly shedding branches even without high wind or a storm event In addition to the most recent break, the tree shows evidence of multiple past branch failures and visible decay on the trunk and in the canopy. Of particular concern is an area of missing bark and dead cambium at the main branch union; an indication of a developing weak point-. We did discuss heavy pruning to significantly reduce risk of failure and keep this tree. Unfortunately, the structural defects, lack of lower lateral branches and the tree's natural structure, rule out pruning as a viable alternative. With several parking areas and multiple homes within the target zone, this tree is not desirable in this location. Pending permit approval, the projected removal date would be Dec. 30th. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, Joshua Weigang Canopy LLC ISA Certified Arborist #PN 9018A Risk Cateeorization - Likelihood of Impacting Target . Very low Low Medium FtEglt Imminent Likelihood Somewhat likely, likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely A Likely Consequences Failure Impact Failure & Impact Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable I Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely I Unlikely (from Matrix 1) r� °' a # a r (tisk m rating Conditions '° � Target , = ;? of part t° Tree part of concern u° protection a a E ° z (from 0 rn v9 Matrix 2) Branches Brittle over 1 Minimal ✓ ,i ✓ ✓ High 1 extended branches and missing 2 Minimal ,� '� ✓ oderat 3 Minimal cambium at main ✓ - ✓ ✓ _ ✓ Latin branch connection. IN 13 4 Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impacting Target . Very low Low Medium FtEglt Imminent Unlikely Somewhat likely, likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Likely Possible Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable I Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely I Unlikely Marrix2 Risk rating matrix Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure Negligible Minor Significant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme Likely Low Moderate Nigh High Somewhat likely Low Law Moderate Moderate Unlikely LowLow Low Low Notes, explanations, descriptions Surrounding trees provide some target protection depending on size and direction of failure. Mitigation options Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Overall trete risk rating Law EI Moderate © High 0 Extreme © Work priority 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ 4 ❑ Overall residual risk Low © Moderate ❑ High Ei Extreme EI Recommended inspection interval 2 years Data EFinal ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed rulNo ❑Yes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations NNone ❑Visibility OAccess ElVines ©Root collar buried Describe This &Whmtwasprodumd by the Inurnationd Sadetyof Arborirvitare (ISA) and is Intended for use by Tree FiskkAsaessment Qualified (IRAQ) arbarfsts - 2©13 Page 2 of 2 Nor -Eh Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Overall trete risk rating Law EI Moderate © High 0 Extreme © Work priority 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 ❑ 4 ❑ Overall residual risk Low © Moderate ❑ High Ei Extreme EI Recommended inspection interval 2 years Data EFinal ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed rulNo ❑Yes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations NNone ❑Visibility OAccess ElVines ©Root collar buried Describe This &Whmtwasprodumd by the Inurnationd Sadetyof Arborirvitare (ISA) and is Intended for use by Tree FiskkAsaessment Qualified (IRAQ) arbarfsts - 2©13 Page 2 of 2 ISAL 6 --sic Tree Risk Assessment Form Client David Collings Date '11/0112021 Time 4PM Address/Tree location 2 Bush St. Tree n0. Sheet Of Tree species Ailanthus altissima dbh 36 inches Height 45 Feet Crown spread dia. 35 Feet Assessor(s) Joshua Weigang Time frame 1 year Tools used Visual inspection Target Assessment Site Factors History o#failures TopographyFlatll Slope❑ % Aspect Site changes None Ll Grade change Site clearing© Changed soil hydrology© Root cuts 0 Describe Soil conditions Limited volume 0 Saturated © Shallow 91 Compacted 0 Pavement over roots © 75 % Describe Prevailing wind direction East Common weather Strong winds [3 Ice© Snow© Heavy rain ❑ Describe n/a Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low © Normal 17 High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal) 0 None(dead)EI Normal % Chlorotic% Necrotic % Pests No Abiotic Pavement over roots, sunseaid Species failure profile Branches I7 Trunk E3 Roots ❑ Describe Fast groww bdtmue wood. Branches break under nortnal condit on& Load factors Wind exposure Protected9l Partial ❑ Full© Wind funnelingl=l Relative crown size Small[] Medium ❑ Large ❑ Crowndensity Sparser Normal❑ Dense❑ Interior branches Fewp Normal❑ Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ Recent or planned change in load factors No Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — rDead balanced crown 19 LCR 97 % Cracks 13 Lightning damage ❑ twigs/branches lO % overall Max.dia. 1.5 Inc Codominant © included bark ❑ken/Hangers Number Max, dia. Over-extended branches 0 Weak attachments 9 Cavity/Nest hole _% circ. Pruning history Previous branch failures 91 Similar branches present 0 Crown cleaned 0 Thinned El Raised 0 Dead/Missing bark 0 Cankers/Galls/Burls D Sapwood damage/decay 19 Reduced IM Topped © Lion tailed [ Conks 0 Heartwood decay 0 Flush cuts 13 Other Response growth Main concerns) Over extended branches. Missing We cambium at connection of main branches. Load on defect N/A © Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant R Likelihood of failure Improbable 0 Possible © Probable 0 Imminent ❑ —Trunk — — Roots and Root Collar. — Dead/Missing bark 2 Abnormal bark texture/color ❑ Collar buried/Not visible © Depth Stem girdling 0 Codominant sterns ❑ Included bark ❑ Cracks ❑ Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms 0 Sapwood damage/decay 17 Cankers/Galls/Burls 0 Sap ooze 0 Ooze © Cavity ❑ w. circ. Lightning damage 0 Heartwood decay 0 Conks/Mushrooms © cracks [3 Cut/Damaged mats ❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole %circ. Depth Poor taper 13Cracks plate lifting © Sail weakness ❑ Lean ° Corrected? Response growth Response growth Main concern(s) Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A M Minor © Moderate ❑ Significant ❑ Load on defect N/A 91 Minor 13 Moderate © Significant Likelihood of failure Likelihood of failure improbable 13 Possible 0 Probable 0 Imminent ❑ Improbable 11 Possible © Probable ❑ Imminent 0 Target zone W m occupancy rate � c . Target description a st 1 -rare Z -occasional 3 -frequent ,w 4-wrtmnr a 1 Vehicles ✓ 3 No No 2 €louses and attached structures ✓ 4 No No 3 People ✓ 2 No No 4 Site Factors History o#failures TopographyFlatll Slope❑ % Aspect Site changes None Ll Grade change Site clearing© Changed soil hydrology© Root cuts 0 Describe Soil conditions Limited volume 0 Saturated © Shallow 91 Compacted 0 Pavement over roots © 75 % Describe Prevailing wind direction East Common weather Strong winds [3 Ice© Snow© Heavy rain ❑ Describe n/a Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low © Normal 17 High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal) 0 None(dead)EI Normal % Chlorotic% Necrotic % Pests No Abiotic Pavement over roots, sunseaid Species failure profile Branches I7 Trunk E3 Roots ❑ Describe Fast groww bdtmue wood. Branches break under nortnal condit on& Load factors Wind exposure Protected9l Partial ❑ Full© Wind funnelingl=l Relative crown size Small[] Medium ❑ Large ❑ Crowndensity Sparser Normal❑ Dense❑ Interior branches Fewp Normal❑ Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ Recent or planned change in load factors No Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — rDead balanced crown 19 LCR 97 % Cracks 13 Lightning damage ❑ twigs/branches lO % overall Max.dia. 1.5 Inc Codominant © included bark ❑ken/Hangers Number Max, dia. Over-extended branches 0 Weak attachments 9 Cavity/Nest hole _% circ. Pruning history Previous branch failures 91 Similar branches present 0 Crown cleaned 0 Thinned El Raised 0 Dead/Missing bark 0 Cankers/Galls/Burls D Sapwood damage/decay 19 Reduced IM Topped © Lion tailed [ Conks 0 Heartwood decay 0 Flush cuts 13 Other Response growth Main concerns) Over extended branches. Missing We cambium at connection of main branches. Load on defect N/A © Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant R Likelihood of failure Improbable 0 Possible © Probable 0 Imminent ❑ —Trunk — — Roots and Root Collar. — Dead/Missing bark 2 Abnormal bark texture/color ❑ Collar buried/Not visible © Depth Stem girdling 0 Codominant sterns ❑ Included bark ❑ Cracks ❑ Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms 0 Sapwood damage/decay 17 Cankers/Galls/Burls 0 Sap ooze 0 Ooze © Cavity ❑ w. circ. Lightning damage 0 Heartwood decay 0 Conks/Mushrooms © cracks [3 Cut/Damaged mats ❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole %circ. Depth Poor taper 13Cracks plate lifting © Sail weakness ❑ Lean ° Corrected? Response growth Response growth Main concern(s) Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A M Minor © Moderate ❑ Significant ❑ Load on defect N/A 91 Minor 13 Moderate © Significant Likelihood of failure Likelihood of failure improbable 13 Possible 0 Probable 0 Imminent ❑ Improbable 11 Possible © Probable ❑ Imminent 0 co M -0 CL m --------------