HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-0504 Tree MIN
Ashland Tree Commission
Minutes, May 4th, 2000
Call to order: The meeting was called to order at 5:10pm by acting chair
January Jennings. Additional commissioners in attendance included Bryan
Nelson, Dan Moore, Tom Piel, Greg Covey and Donn T odt. Staff present were
Robbin Pearce and John McLaughlin.
New Business: Site Review - Planning Action 2000-039 City at the Library.
Staff presented the project as a request for a Comprehensive Plan map
Amendment (Multi Family to Downtown Commercial), Zone Change (R-2 to
C-1-D) and Site Design and Use Review. Staff stated this discussion would
primarily address the interior space and the parking along the alley as the
parking and landscaping on Gresham and Siskiyou will be reviewed and
determined through public hearing within the next 6 months,
The application was represented by Carol Mayer-Reed, Landscape Architect
of Portland. Ms, Mayer-Reed gave an overview of the project including the
challenge of balancing all aspects of the project: grade changes, drainage,
existing buildings and plant material, size of the proposed new building while
remaining sensitive to restoration and creating a long term project
designed in accordance with Site Design and Use Standards, Ms. Mayer-
Reed recommended thinning out some of the existing plant material. She
reiterated the street improvements will be designed within the next six
months after an extensive public hearings process and any changes to the
plan including Siskiyou and Gresham parking will come back to the full
Commission.
Additional public testimony was as follows:
Anna Hirst (655 Reiten Drive) - Anna is a member of the Friends of the
Library Board, She felt confident about the long term final project based on
all the experience and professionals involved. She also felt native plant
species were important to this project.
Treva Tumbleson (655 Leonard) Treva felt the long term project and effect
were very important.
Bob Wilson (410 Siskiyou) Bob is the head librarian in Ashland. He stated
this site has multiple problems only one of which is drainage. He looks
forward to creating a safe environment.
Barbara Ryberg (373 Vista) Barbara stated we need a new library and we
need trees. There must be some trading. We should memorialize the trees
being removed, This will e the very best type of building - "green" - for the
future.
Dennis Donahue - (48 & 54 Gresham) Dennis feels the choice of the trees
on the Boulevard is very important. Dennis doesn't want to loose the view of
the hills. He also felt the library is one the most heavily used public buildings
in the City and that creates serious paring issues.
Amy Blossom (140 Susan) Amy is a reference librarian in Ashland. She
stated drainage is a big problem. The proposed size of the new building
meets the future needs of the citizens of Ashland.
Edmund Dews (470 Siskiyou) Edmund has been a library patron for 70
years. He doesn't believe they are saving the maximum amount of healthy
plants. He is also concerned about saving the Ethel Reed Park. And the
proposed parking plan won't meet the needs of the library patrons.
Colin Swales (143 8th and 461 Alison) Colin believes the original plan didn't
take into account zoning or the impact on the historic neighborhood, The
mature trees at this juncture carry the downtown into the historic
residential district, There is no reason to remove the landscaping around
the front 'original' door if the door isn't going to open. And why should you
remove the existing street trees and replace them with flowering 'pom-
poms''?
John Freedom (Holly Street) John is opposed to the comprehensive plan
change and sideyard setback from commercial to residential. The
Comprehensive Plan plans the development to develop the building in
accordance with the comprehensive plan. John recommends any
recommendation to the Planning Commission be clearly stated and the
library plans and any comprehensive plan changes apply only to the library
project. Each development should either follow the comprehensive plan or
request a change of its own.
Russ Silbiger (562 Ray Lane) Russ stated the tenants of the new library
will be the sme tenants as the old one, who didn't maintain the existing
landscaping.
Bryan Holley (324 Liberty) Bryan stated - who speaks for the trees? Why
must you support the trees and oppose the library? We must protect our
urban forest.
Jim Lewis (640 A Street) Jim stated - This is a Tree City USA which has a
slogan of 'Sustainable Ashland - Where green is mainstream', Jim asked, "Is
this lip service or reality?" The zone change puts the new trees that will be
planted at risk. The type of trees being proposed to be planted won't ever
reach the size of the existing trees.
Cheryl Lewis (640 A. St) Cheryl said Be strong and say NO! Make a
statement for Planning. Be creative - this is not the right location for this
project.
Beth Towner (1120 Oak Knoll) Beth shared - After numerous forums - no
one spoke up for the trees. The best effort has been made. Additional
parking was not possible.
Charles Ryberg (373 vista) Charles stated 67% of the voters approved this
project and the limited amount of money to renovate and expand the
existing library.
Rebuttal - Ray Kistler, as a member of the design team stated the ginkgo
and the evergreens on the alley were considered for over a year. Ms, Mayer-
reed stated this is not about 'tweeking'. This isa direct hit, This new plan is
planting for the next generation - looking at this project and this site for
the long term.
This concluded the public hearing (7:35pm)
Commission Discussion and Motion - Each commissioner summarized his or
her main points and due to the shortness of time the meeting moved to the
jury room.
Staff read back the discussion points of each commissioner and the points
were summarized as the following
The Tree Commission unanimously approved the Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment, the Zone Change and the Site Design and Use Review for this
project with the following recommendations:
· On Siskiyou keep the Red Maple at the corner of Siskiyou and
Gresham. Consider species with a larger stature for the
parkrow along Siskiyou and utilize a structural soil mix in future
changes in the parkrow. We believe the library grounds
represent a gateway to the residential area and as such
should have a more densely landscaped appearance, Views from
the library should not be the main consideration for tree
selection,
· On Gresham Street the existing elms should be retained, We
encourage underground utilities provided this can be done
without disturbing the existing trees. Protection during
construction should be required for the existing trees. And
structural soil mix should be used for any changes to the
pa rkrow.
· The Tree Commission would like more history 0 the existing
Ethel Reid Park. They also recommend the Mt. Fuji cherries be
replaced with trees of a larger stature in order to blend the
new addition into the landscape.
· If proven necessary, the Tree Commission supports the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zone change for this
project only
· In regards to the interior landscaping: 1)AII trees to be planted
should be of larger caliper (min 3") depending on species and
location; 2)an arborist should be on site during initial
construction and throughout the development process to
ensure protection of existing trees.
· In the parking lot in the alley structural soil should be used in
the parking islands.
· The trees to be planted in the alley should be large stature
solar friendly trees and a comparison should be made of the
cost/benefit of these proposed trees ability to reduce
heating/cooling cost vs. the cost/benefit of the proposed solar
system.
· The Tree Commission requests the trees proposed for removal
to be tagged for review and requests the opportunity to meet
on site with the design team to review the decision to remove
the trees in order to see if retention is possible for any of the
trees and to determine whether or not the maximum amount of
vegetation has been saved.
· The Tree Commission retains the opportunity to review the
revised landscape plan.
· These recommendation do not imply support for the location of
the building footprint. However, should the building placement
remain as drawn the Tree Commission recognizes the Ginkgo
will not be saved.
Due to the length and complexity of the Planning Action the balance of the
business on the agenda was tabled until June
Adjourned - Meeting was adjourned at 8:45p.m.