The URL can be used to link to this page

17220 MEADOWDALE BEACH RD.PDFIIIIIIIIIIIIII 12284 17220 MEADOWDALE BEACH RD �t -'? C. 1 89�1 i CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - �AX (425) 771-0221 DEVELOPMENT SERVIPES DEPARTMENT Planning - Building - Engineering June 19, 2001 Eugene Gibson 17220 Meadowdale Beach Rd. Meadowdale Beach Rd. Edmonds, WA 98020 Re: Address Change Dear Ms. Gibson: GARY HAAKENSON MAYOR Thank you for the request to change your address. In response to your letter, your address has been changed from 17220 Meadowdale Beach Road to 7020 Meadowdale Beach Road. I will inform all City Divisions including Fire, Police, Utility Billing, Public Works and Building. It is your responsibility to inform the Post Office and all other interested parties of this correction. We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause you and greatly appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Permit Coordinator Cc: Fire Department Police Department Utility Billing Public Works Building Official/Street File L\Temp\DST's\Master Letters\correctaddress Incorporated August 11, 1890 Sister City - Hekinan, Japan ir -NORTHREST CONSULTING ARBORISTS, LLC February 21, 2002 Jennifer Mantooth APPROVED BY PLANNING Dear Ms. Mantooth, 17he following report was prepared for you at your request. The subject of this reWrt is certain trees situdedon the property commonly referred to as 7220 N. Meadowdale Road. The trees of interest am gene4mily WcaW along the ridge of saM property. A sketch of the ridge and the relative location of the trees is included and thereby made a part of this report. While the location of the trees relative to each other and relative to the existing onsite stakes that indicate flature construction building envelopes has been indicated on the sketch, no attempt was made to locate the trees with regard to actual propoty lines. The nature of this report is tD assess the current health of these colon trees and their "%ood to Offive during and after proposed construction. For reference, I have numbemd the trees #1 - #12 and have indicated the numboing sequence on the attached sketth. I measmed the circumference of each tree at brow height and then calculated the diameter. End tree is therefore refltrenced by inches at DBH or Diameter at Breast Height. Trees #1 through #11 are located along the rk1ge of the property while tree # 12 is located opposite of the ridge near the silt fencing or near the native growth protection area (NOPA). Tree 01 is a 32"DBH Thuja plicsta, western red cedar. While it has a fawn war of approidmately 4" by IS" low on the trunk, probable caused by clearing activity, the tree is in good condition &W is located well away from the indicaW building envelope. Tree #2 is a 30" DBH Acer macrophyllum, big leaf maple. This trot is in need of some corrective pruning to remove dead wood. It is located 12' from the indicated building excavation. Mthis, 12 feet is not adhered to, the structural integrity of the root zone should be called into question. Ibis tree is providing good slope and soil retention values and should be preserved. Tree #3 is a 2r'DBH Acer macrophyllum, big leaf maple located slightly to the west of the ridge. The proposed construction would be a target of this tree therefore I would recommend re -assessing the need to prune dead wood once it has leafed out in late Spring. Tree #4 is a 16"DBH western red cedar with significant recent damage to the trunk. Nearly 30 percent oTOW-c'u-vurnferenot of the tree has had bark and interior wood damaged fiom the pvund and as high as 12 fee up the tree. T1* tree will surely decline quickly over time and would strike the proposed structure if it were to fall'in that direction. I would recommend the removal of this tree but not the removal of the stump. The stump and remaining toot structure could provide vital slope retention values fbr a number of years whilt a replacement tree becomes re-establisbed. Tree #5 is a 2oC DBH Tsup Heterophylla, western hemlock that appears to be in owellent Tree #6 is a 15" DBH big leaf maple that is located on the down slope opposite of the proposed construction that has no significance other than its role in slope and. soil retention. Tree #7 is a 12" DBH western red cedar that has hat some soil disruption but otberwise appears to be in good health. It nay be noted here that the soil in the area of the trees #1 - #11 appears to be native soil with Ift& recent dbruption. There am native groundcovers growing in this am as well as ferns, mahonia, twinberry and salmonberry. Tree #8 is a 10" DBH big leaf maple that has some dead wood. This tree would not likely created 4ny threat to the proposed construction therefore no action is needed. Tree #9 is a 15" DBH western red cedar with evidence of an old injury. No recommended action. Tree #10 is a 22" Dl3H western hemlock that has been topped at approximately 40 -45 feet. This ourd-n-MMy be a good candidate for rumoval but because it likely would not impact any proposed structures, the tree could retained as it will continue to contribute to slope and soil retention for a number of years. At the homeowners discretion this tree should be allowed to be removed because of its poor structure. I would not recommend the removal of this or any other stumps insomuch as stump removal would contribute to sod disruption. 16507 140th Place NE Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone 425-398-1223 Fax 425-450-0033 Email consultingarborist@msn.com Tme #I I is an i r DBH western hemlock of poor muctural quality do is pmvidinS significant slope and soil mWKion vabms. Tree # 12, &&rementioned as being located opposite from the slope is herein refixencW because of the obvious appearance of poor health. This tree has some significaut bark damage, which most likely occurred during clearing and utility work. The original soil line of the tree is not apparent and the root zone has had heavy equipment operating thereon. If this tree were to be wind thrown or in any other way were to fall, it could impact the proposed construction area 7bis tree should be removed, however it could be dropped into the NGPA and add signifiew value to the native hW*wt. Plea" feel ftee to contact me If you need Wier vq)lanations. Thomas L. Quigley YS-655 - ISA Certified Arborni 55 r'—dMa I/ 1p ---a)v;05 4P(Y `40(V 4- * 0) 0 0 m M(j ye;illlolv --a-Av+s -Z ovzh.//z "OIAI ),03 -vo�wqw Jennifer Mantooth PO Box 462 Edmonds, WA 98020 Kathleen Taylor Planning Department City of Edmonds, Edmonds, WA 98020 R C- C'r- � IV 5-. D SEP 18 'L�32 PERMIT CCUNTER Dear Kathleen, This letter is in response to the Plan Review Corrections faxed to me dated September 4, 2002. Trees for Removal: Trees numbered 4 and 12 on the arborists list were located and redlined on the landscape plans submitted for review, which you have in your possession. Tree number 1.0 will be left standing. If you have any questions please feel free to call. 425-776-0223. Sincerely, Vn ferM�antoo h a "TREET FILE APPROVED BY PLANNIN N 71 71-1 % 20.12.015 Plant schedule. A. The plant schedule shall indicate for all plants the scientific and common naines, quan - tities. sizes and spacing. Quantities are not required on a preliminary landscape plan. A preliminary plan may also indicate. shrubs as masses rather than showing the individual plants. The final plan must show individual shrubs and quantities. B. Minimum sizes at installation are as fol- lows: one and three quarters inches caliper eettreeson and one-hallf inches ,,L le caliper other deciduous tre-as; eight feet minimum height vine rnaples and other multi-sternmItal trees; six fcz�t runim-lim height - evergreen t1V&s eighteen feet minimum height for Tnedium and tali shrubs small shrub = less than three and one- half feet tali &t maturity medium shrub = three and one-half to six feet tall at maturity large shrub = more than six feet tali at maturity C. -Maximurn size: Species approved within a landscape plan shall have a growth pattern in scale with the dcvelopment and -be consistent with the preser- vation of significant views and height limit for the zoning district. D. Maximum spacing - large shrubs = six feet on center medium shiVbs = four and one-half feet or, center small shrubs = three feet on center E. Groundcover is required in all planting bed areas as follows - one gallon 30 inches on center four -inch pom 24 inches on center two and one-quarterinch pots 15 inchp--s on center ooted cuttings 12 inches on center All groundcovar shall be living plant mate- rial approved by the ADB. 7- e- -14 /V A- 11 Kimberly , Ettali, WCN NOW PTAI. 5 C LANDSCAPE SCBEDULE-: Mantooth Residence Symbol Botanical Naine Common Name TREES: Cornus kousa Korean Dogwood Thuja plicata 'Excealsa' Excelsa Western Red Cedar Exi� evergreen trees �xig deciduous trees SHRUBS: Rhododendron species Rhododendron assorted Groupings of miscellaneous ferns: (Sword, Maidenhajr� Lady, painted, etc.) [El I Assorted shade groundcovers: Bunchberry T) 15 k-eV TZ> S& APPROVED BY PLANNING C-1 or OLY M P//�,, "Irly Mirn Ettarl CertifiedArborist, WCN 16507 - 140th Place N.E. - Woodinville, WA 98072 (425) 483-9254 - Fax: (425) 485-9451 1-800-570-8883 www.olympicnursery.com - e-mail. sale.s@olympicnurseiy.com' SCALE: APPROVED BY: BY :�DATE: REVISED [Z�J'SsUT—D I DRAWING NUMBER 2002 cily 0�- .1c, S A - D EL "ATP,"; STREET FILE -0 V\/ t1d 1AVA DEVELOPlIfIFNT CITY OF EWI�ONDS N"V14 V) s - �U- qs\�Vj "��CELC Ec�,, 61-KEET FILE _IX