HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-0909 Tree MIN
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Ashland Tree Commission
Regular Meeting
September 9, 2004
Minutes
I. Call to Order: Chair Ted Loftus called the Ashland Tree Commission meeting to order at 7:04
p.m. on September 9, 2004 at the Siskiyou Room in the Community Development/Engineering
Services Building at 51 Winburn Way.
Commissioners Present:
Ted Loftus
Bryan Holley
Bryan Nelson
Mary Pritchard
January Jennings
Laurie Sager (late)
Fred Stockwell
Cate Hartzell (late)
None
Maria Harris, Associate Planner
Donn Todt, Parks Department
Commissioners Absent:
Council Liaison:
Youth Liaison:
Staff Present:
II. Approval of Minutes: The following corrections were noted for the August 5, 2004 minutes. Page
1, Approval of Minutes, second sentence: Should read "He said that the Tree Commission does
not make recommendations on the decision for the total application." Page 1, Approval of
Minutes, fourth sentence: Prunus Blieriana should be Prunus blieriana. Page 1, Approval of
Minutes, fifth sentence: Lelyand should be Leyland. Page 2, Recommendation, Item 4: Should
read "not appropriate screen, as it is only three feet in height." Also, Lyuken is spelled wrong,
should be Luyken. Page 3, first paragraph, last sentence: Should read "It was suggested that the
Site Review standard requiring landscaping to be designed so that it occurs within five years."
Page 3, 2nd paragraph: Should read "Jennings announced that Laurie Sager and hersdf would be
leading a Tree Walk on October 23 at 2:00pm in Lithia Park." Nelson/Loftus mls to approve the
minutes of September 9,2004 with corrections. Voice vote: All A YES, Motion passed.
III. Welcome Guests & Public Forum:
No guests in attendance.
IV. Public Hearings:
Loftus moved item A under Action Items, Review of Revised Landscape Plan for 832 A Street up
in the agenda. The review of the revised landscape and tree protection plan was a I::ondition of
approval by the Hearings Board in response to Tree Commission recommendation when
reviewing this planning action at the August 5 meeting. It was noted that the applicant revised the
landscape and tree protection plan to address the Tree Commission concerns before the Hearings
Board meeting. Holley reported that he attended the Hearings Board meeting. The Tree
Commission agreed that the recommendations had been responded to, and approved the plan as
submitted.
September 9, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes
Page 1 of 5
A. PLANNING ACTION 2004-105 is a request for a seven lot Subdivision, Preliminary Plat approval,
Conditional Use Permit for an Accessory Residential Unit, and an exception to City of Ashland Street
Standards for approximately 1.75 acres of land located at the southwest corner of the intersection of South
Mountain Avenue and Prospect Street. The application includes a Tree Removal Permit, as weill as a
Variance to Off-Street Parking requirements to allow two (2) required off-street parking spaces for the
Accessory Residential Unit to be located on an adjacent parcel. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Single
Family Residential; Zoning: R-1-10; Assessor's Map #: 391 E 16 AD; Tax Lots: 3400,3500 and 3600.
APPLICANT: R & C Investments
Loftus announced that the planning action had been postponed to October. It will be
reviewed at the October 7 Tree Commission meeting, and the October 12 Plarming
Commission meeting. It was announced that Sager was coming late to the meeting
because her firm worked on the following planning action at 2205 Ashland Street.
B. PLANNING ACTION 2004-116 is a request for Site Review, Outline and Final Plan approval and a
Tree Removal Permit to construct a mixed-use commercial building (ground floor retail - upper floor
residential) and eight four-plex apartment buildings located at 2205 Ashland Street (adjacent and west of
McDonald's Restaurant). Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial (one acre) and Multi-Family
Residential (1.75 acres); Zoning: C-1 and R-2; Assessor's Map #: 391E 11 CC; Tax Lots 100 and 300.
APPLICANT: Archerd & Dresner, LLC and Redco, LLC
A staff report was given describing the project, and it was noted that 19 of the 20 trees on
site are proposed for removal. The staff recommendation to the Planning Commission
was described as the application should be continued until several items are addressed.
The areas of concern raised in regard to trees and landscaping were lack of findings
addressing the criteria for a Tree Removal Permit, unclear information on amount of area
for recreational space, and the lack of a play area for children.
The Tree Commission briefly discussed the proposal. It was noted that none of the
existing trees are in good shape. Also, the nicest tree on the site is the birch, but these
have a poor history during drought years.
Evan Archerd and John Galbraith presented on behalf of the applicant. Archerd said they
are attempting to create one of the first affordable housing projects. Eight of units will be
affordable under the city program. He said it didn't seem that there are a lot of trees that
were worth saving. Thought better to plan a community that was well landscaped.
Galbraith said the solar setback and setback between building requirements were major
issues in design. He said there is one Juniper or Arizona cypress that might be worth
saving.
There was no testimony received for or against the proposal.
The Tree Commission discussed the proposal It was noted that the best trees in the
project area are the Black Oaks in right-of-way. The feeling was that the number of
replacement trees, which number more than two new trees for every tree to be removed,
mitigates the removal of the 19 trees. It was again noted that the trees proposed for
removal have been neglected, under stress, and experienced drought for years. It was
asked if any ofthe existing trees could be tree spaded - specifically the blue spruce
identified as number seven on the tree removal/protection plan. It was noted that during
wind storms of the last two years blue spruce were most likely to fail, and with transplant
would be even more of a problem.
The Tree Commission made the following recommendations to the Planning
Commission.
September 9, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes
Page 2 of 5
Recommendation:
Revised landscape plan should incorporate the following suggestions.
1. Consider using Carpinus betulus 'Stricta' (Upright European Hornbeam) for Pyrus c.
'Glen's Form' (Chanticleer Pear)
2. Use more conifers for variety, bird habitat and texture
3. Locate Acer palmatum "Sango Kaku' (Coral Bark Maple) on plan - it is included on
the plant list for the Apartment Landscape Plan, but is not shown on the plan
The recommendation was read back to the Tree Commission by Staff, and all members
acknowledge that there were in agreement with the items as presented.
V. Action Items
A. Review of Revised Landscape Plan for 832 A Street/lllene Rubenstein
This item was addressed at beginning of public hearings
B. Tree of the Year
The time line was adjusted since last meeting, and final time line will be emailed out to the
Commission by Holley. The nomination period will close October 6. The nominations will
be reviewed and five finalists chosen at the October 7 Tree Commission meeting.
C. Heritage Tree List
Staff reported that this item will be on the October 12 Planning Commission agtmda. Since
the proposal involves an ordinance amendment to add Heritage Tree to the list of trees
requiring a Tree Removal Permit, the Planning Commission must hold a public hearing and
make a recommendation to the City Council. Sending a Commission representative to the
Planning Commission meeting was discussed, and it was agreed that Holley would represent
the Commission at this meeting for the Heritage Tree item.
D. Type I Review and Sign-Up
It was noted that the Commission had decided to review the Type I planning actions. A sign-
up sheet was included in the packet. The format would be three members would sign up for
the Type I review, and it would be the Tuesday before the regular Tree Commission meeting.
There was a discussion ofthe timing, and it was agreed that it would be at 12:30 to 1 :30 pm in
the Lithia Room at the Community DevelopmentlEngineering Services building. The
Commission members then signed up for Oct, Nov at Dec as follows: 1) October - Holley,
Sager, Pritchard, 2) Nov - Jennings, Stockwell, Loftus, and 3) Dec - Nelson, Loftus,
Pritchard.
E. Review of Misc. Concrete Projects
There was a discussion of the timing of the miscellaneous concrete project being sent out to
bid in October with the construction in November. It was agreed that this would be reviewed
at the October meeting.
September 9, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes
Page 3 of 5
V. Items from Commissioners
A. Liaison Reports
1) January Jennings, Forest Lands
Jennings said there is a public meeting tonight, and she will have more info in
October.
2) Donn Todt, Parks
Todt said there will be a walk through in Lithia Park for bidders for pruning
sometime in mid to late October. He invited Commissioners to attend. He said
recently a family in the Seattle area had a member pass away and family wants to do
something in memory of her in Ashland because she enjoyed coming here. So they
purchased 22,000 King Alfred daffodil bulbs. Todt said the Parks Department is
using 4,000 bulbs. The rest are available at the grange for members of the general
public (not commercial projects). He said he is waiting for reports from two
arborists on the Alanthus at the corner of Lithia park. N either report is very
encouraging about keeping tree in place. He said as soon as get reports, he will pass
them on to the Tree Commission. There was a discussion of using the potential tree
removal as an educational effort.
B. New Items
There was a discussion of the unresolved, old agenda items (design professional
ordinance, chapter 18.61 review, planning action checklist) being delayed because the
current meeting was anticipated to be long due to two involved planning actions.
There was a discussion of the draft Planning Action Check List. Loftus said it seemed
like a great informal tool to include in the packet for new members. Nelson said he saw
it as a tool, very informal. He suggested possibly going through checklist at the
beginning of each planning action. Holley said he thought this was being prepared for
Planning Staff.
There was a discussion ofthe letter received regarding cork trees. Todt said the issue he
is familiar with is the cork oak forests that are harvested for wine cork production. There
are a group of wine producers and cork producers that are concerned that these
phenomenal areas will not be maintained and revert to scrub oak areas. There is an
organization fighting to protect areas because of wildlife habitat. It was noted that there
about a half of a dozen cork trees in Ashland, but the cork tree is not on the A~;hland
street tree list. bout half a dozen in Ashland. Todt said cork trees don't do weill here
because they can't take freezes, especially in the first five years.
There was a discussion of letter from K.G. Stiles regarding the pruning of a tree for the
Tolman Creek Road project. Todt said he was asked to look at the tree, and that the
pruning needed to be cleaned up, but was not detrimental to the tree. The conl::rete
contractor did the pruning himself. Todt added that a couple of trees were salvaged from
the Tolman Creek Road LID project, and replanted at Bellview School. It was suggested
that correct pruning techniques might be a good example of something to include in the
"Tree Tips" pieces that had been discussed. It was noted that Medford's Watt;:rlines
newsletter and the Bandon newspaper include pieces similar to the "Tree Tips" concept.
Hartzell arrived and gave a liaison report. There is a discussion of the Lithia Street
Parking Lot next to Gen Kai parking lot potentially being used for an affordable housing
project. She noted that the Planning Director is updating the City Council about
September 9, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes
Page 4 of 5
upcoming large planning projects. She mentioned the piece on NPR on cornerstone
gardens.
There was a discussion of the Tree Commission review of planning actions. Sager said
she started thinking about this issue when a woman who recently attending tht;: meeting
told her that the Commission was more involved and detailed oriented than she had
expected or wanted. Sager said she thought some of the Commission comments on
landscape plans have gotten very detailed, and the group has given more advic:e than is
necessary. She said this seemed pertinent since the amount of time being spent on
planning actions has been a frustration of the Commission. Loftus concurred and said
that in reviewing plans prepared by a professional landscaper, designer or architect the
Commission often gets into issues that are a difference of opinion. Todt said he has
noticed over the past years that the level of comments from the Commission depends on
where the landscape architect is from. He said that if the landscape architect is from the
Willamette Valley there tend to be more comments because the person is not familiar
with the Southern Oregon climate.
VII. Adiournment: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:58 p.m.
September 9, 2004 Tree Commission Minutes
Page 5 of 5