19515 94TH PL W (2).PDFiiiiiiii lill
9234
19515 94TH PL W
A
ADDRESS:
TAX ACCOUNT/PARCEL NUMBER: ZV
BUILDING PERMIT (NEW STRUCTURE):
COVENANTS (RECORDED)
CRITICAL AREAS: 9 07000 1 — DETERMINATION: Ej Conditional Waiver Xstudy Required El Waiver
DISCRETIONARY PERMIT
DRAINAGE PLAN DATED:
PARKING AGREEMENTS DATED:
EASEMENT(S) RECORDED
PERMITS (OTHER):_ cggw,�I—"
PLANNING DATA CHECKLIST DATED:
SCALED PLOT PLAN DATED: 501 oq I 1' )(0 10+
SEWER LID FEE $: LID #:
SHORT PLAT FILE: LOT:— BLOCK:
SIDE SEWER AS BUILT DATED: —
SIDE SEWER PERMIT(S) #:
SOILS REPORT DATED:
STREET USE / ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
WATER METER TAP CARD DA
OTHER:
LATEMP\DSTs\Fonns\Street File Checklist.doc
0
19515 94th
alp
%
03ION 3V V
"Nothing in thi8 permit approval process shall
interprked as allowing or permitting the
maintenance of any currently e '"
� p . . illegal,
nonconforming or unpermitted building strud
or site condition which ip out6de the scope of i
raut application, raprdlew of whethei such,
uilding, structure or condition is shown on th
9
e—,5 i W -I-_0
Pin Wo
1 �;., . Z3 'I
30 0 C),
V03 E
CL
0 -f
IX
LI
C,
Un
Ira,
41
.evil --ho"-6�L
L
cc
2
a:
a te, or drawing. Such buDding, structum v\
con ition may be the subject of a separate I V
;.-dorcement action.'
0"Of < 0:: rJ` 3
9c,
Zone
Comer
'Ie-tbacks &Lu!red Actull
Frout
RIESU13
Sides JAN 6 2oot
Rear
NIA
Other No dk� e, 'BUILDING I)EpA;_MgW
Hei.eft 11--� 3 CrrV OF ED 09
I --Zf z- ---- I -
... r v" �- IM
ST 1K L�— T
id A-
r
C';TY OF EDMONDS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
wom
67
ADDRESS..
0VVK!ER,---- X/
APPROVED DA
BLDG, OFFIC14
--�;-E —k
IT NUMBER
APPROVED AS NOTED
BY ENGINEERING
. .. ... ... .
i*.",n 0
bate:
i 19
y�C'5"'
M,4<E SORE FC-/qcE L
077,"
r-7,,(5F%,T-K,LC-7- AC-C 'C
'�7
FIND 5/8" FEBAR A A, P
UnLi T- I
LOX
Wx T- M -e T-C- P- C-A <�, To
,PP,4 —CC-T�
P PL
AT L;�,IES
L
-4- 11"4U T
�-4 A
APPROVED BY PLANNING I
cli
!75 li*
7-:0
&
W
0
m
m
A P P"K" 0 E D up"'L A N
W
STREET FILE
JAN-1.2-2007 10:32
#P20 CA File No. CO2OD-16000i
Critical Areas Checklist
Site Information (soils/ topography/ hydrology/vegetation)
1. S.,ite Address/Location:
0,*,
2- Property Tax Account Number Y 3 X&' d9 0 6) 0-5-- 9_QZ
Sl j�, V a - JC &7_
3. Approximate Site Size (acres or squMe feet); I
4. is this site cuffently developed? -L-yes; — no.
If yes; how is site developed?
5, Describe the general site topography. Check all that apply.
Flat less than 5-feet elevation change over endre site.
Rolling: slopes on site generally less than 15% (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizontal
distance of 66-feet).
fiffly: slopes present on site of more than 15% and Ims than 30% (a verdcal rise of 10-feet
over a horizontal distance of 33 to 66-feet).
Steep. grades of greater dtan 30% present on site (a vertical rise of 10-feet over a horizunW
distance of less than 33-feet).
Other (please describe).
6. Site contains areas of year-round standing water: - IV � 49 Approx. Dep&-
7. Site contains areas of seasonal standing water: /V 0 ; Approx. Depth -
What season(s) of the yew?
8, Site is in the floodway A/ 0 floodplain of a water course.
9. Site containq a creek or an area where water flows Across the grounds swface? Flows are year-round?
/V 0 . Flows are.- sessonal? — (What time of year?
10. Site is prirnarily: forested meadow shrubs---; n-dxed
urban 1&,ndscaped (lawn, shrubs etc) 77?�EFC
IL Obvious wedand is present an site: IV
For City Staff Use Only J8:h;Q, :301
1. Plan Check Number, if applicable?
2. SiteisZoned? 2�,a—la
3. SCS mapped sod type(s)? tr AAA -Al- -99:d oft
Y—A 4c, I= AT
4. Critical Areas inventory or C.A.
5.
indicates Critical Area m site?
L_7,_,a/sjjcje_ q7z�,�d Are-aL DMRMINATION
STUDY REOLMED WAIVER
JAN-t2-200? 10:31
ED
A FD City *Edmonds
Development Services Departracrit
Plannfi* Division
Phone: 425.771.0220
Fax: 42S.771.0221
toe, I S9,11
The Critical Areas Checklist contained on this form is to
be filled out by any person preparing a Development
Permit Application for the City of Edmonds prior to
his/her submittal of the application to the City.
Thr, purpose of the Checklist is to enable City staff to
determine whether any potential Critical Areas are, or
may be, present on the subject property. The inforination
needed to complete the Checklist should be easily
available fiern observations of the. site or data available at
City Hall (Critical areas inventories, maps, or soil
surveys).
2W7_0x5 19(
P. 02./03
Ewe ReCe1w.- 11,21nrl
City Receipt
Critical Areas File _�OIIT - ri
Critical Areas Checklist Fee: $135-00
DaW Mailed to Applican
A property owner, or hisiber authorized representative,
must fill out the cheoUgt, sign and date it, and submit it
to the City. The City will review the checklist, nuke a
precursory site visi� and nuke a determination of the
subsequent steps necessary to complete a development
permit application.
Please submit a vicinity map, along with the signed copy
of this form to assist City staff in fmding and locating 1he
specific piece of property described on this form. In
addition, the applicant shall include other pertinent
inforrriation (e.g. site plan, topography n-ap,. etc.) or
studies in conjunction with this Checklist to assista�tstaff
in completing their preliminary assessmomt of the site.
The undeisigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrCes
to release, indemnify, defend and bold the City of Edmonds hariniess from any and all damages, including reasonabic
attorney's fee% arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, rnisleading, inaccuTati, or
incomplete information furnished by the applicant, hiowhts agents or employ= -
By my signature, I certify that the information and tAibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my
)ax.)wledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below.
SIGNA'I'UREOFAPPLicANT/AcwEKT.�e't'i'a ;r, -DATE
Proptrty Owner's Authorization
By my signature, I certify that I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application,
and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the
purposes of ins DATE
SIGNATURE OF pecti7
0"
Owner/Appoem
zTeh /y V 1 .4 tlAwb
Name
,/ 2 " �; / S
Street Address
Applicant Representative:
IkI 4 Z-,6�—,OK
Name
Street -Address
Rdov
City �tate zip City State Zip
t -.)
Telephone: e� 21'74�� -17
Email address (optional):
Telephone:
Email Address
E
0
CITY OF EDMONDS
CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT
Site Location: 19515 — 90 Place West Tax Acct. Number: 00434600005801
Determination: Study Required Determination #: CRA-2007-0009
Applicant: Donald Miller Owner: John Vicklund
CRITICAL AREAS RECONNAISSANCE REPORT: STUDY REQUIRED
During review and inspection of the subject site, it was found that the site may either contain or be
adjacent to critical areas, including Landslide Hazard and Erosion Hazard Areas, pursuant to Chapters
23.40 and 23.80 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC).
GENERAL CRITICAL AREAS REPORT REQUIREMENTS
Critical Areas Reports identify, classify, and delineate any areas on or adjacent to the subject property
that may qualify as critical areas. They also assess these areas and identify any potential impacts
resulting from your specific development proposal. If a specific development proposal results in an
alteration to a critical area, the critical areas report will also contain a mitigation plan.' You have the
option of completing the portion of the study that classifies and delineates the critical areas and waiting
until you have a specific development proposalto complete the study. You may also choose to submit
the entire study with your specific development application.
Please review the minimum report requirements for all types of Critical Areas that are listed in
ECDC 23.40.090.D. There are additional report requirements for different types of critical areas
(see below).
Note that it is important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the
ordinance. There are options on how to complete a critical areas study, and there is an approved
list of consultants that you may choose from. You may contact the Planning Division for more
information.
General Mitigation Requirements for all Critical Areas are discussed in ECDC 23.40.110 through
23.40.140.
STUDY REQUIREMENT - LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREA
It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to a Landslide Hazard Area.
A Landslide Hazard Area is any area with a slope of forty percent (40%) or steeper and with a
vertical relief of ten (10) or more feet (except areas composed of consolidated bedrock).
0 Landslide Hazard Areas are further defined and illustrated in ECDC 23.80.020.B.
In addition to the general requirements for Critical Areas reports referenced above, specific
Critical Area report requirements for Landslide Hazard Areas are provided in ECDC 23.80.050.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH LANDSLIDE HAZARD AREAS
Development is restricted within a Landslide Hazard Area and its buffer.
Projects that will intrude into these areas will require a report by a licensed Geotechnical
Engineer.
0
0 The criteria that are applied depend on the amount that the buffer is reduced.
The buffer can be reduced to a minimum of ten (10) feet (with an additional 15' building setback
per ECDC 23.40.280) if a report is prepared that meets the standards listed in ECDC 23.80.050.
The alteration must also meet the requirements listed in ECDC 23.80.060.
In addition, proposals to reduce the buffer to less than ten (10) feet must comply with the design
standards listed in ECDC 23.80.070.A.3.
STUDY REQUIREMENT — EROSION HAZARD AREA
It appears that this property contains or is adjacent to an Erosion Hazard Area. Erosion Hazard Areas
include:
0 Those areas with Alderwood and Everett series soils on slopes of 15 percent or greater.
Any area with slopes of 15 percent or greater and impermeable soils interbedded with granular
soils and springs or ground water seepage.
Areas with significant visible evidence of ground water seepage, and which also include existing
landslide deposits regardless of slope.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ASSOCIATED WITH EROSION HAZARD AREAS
Development within an Erosion Hazard Area must meet additional criteria.
• For erosion hazard areas with suitable slope stability, the only critical area study needed is an
erosion and sediment control plan prepared in compliance with the requirements set forth in
Chapter 18.30 ECDC as part of the construction documents. This option is at the director's
discretion, per Edmonds Community Development Code section 20.80.050.G.
• In areas where the slope stability is not suitable, projects within Erosion Hazard Areas will require
a report by a licensed Geotechnical Engineer or other qualified professional. Note that it is
important for the report to be prepared by a qualified professional as defined in the ordinance.
9 Report requirements are given in ECDC 23.80.050, and more generally in ECDC 23.40.090.D.
0 Development standards are given in ECDC 23.80.060 and 23.80.070.
ALLOWED ACTIVITIES
Certain activities are allowed in or near critical area buffers as specified in ECDC 23.40.20. If you have
any questions about whether your proposed development qualifies as an allowed activity, please contact
a Planner for more information.
EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
Certain development proposals may be exempt from Critical Areas Requirements (ECDC 23.40.230). If
you think that a specific development proposal may be exempt, contact a Planner for more information.
Name Signature
Date
NOTE: Cited sections of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) can be found on the City
of Edmonds website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us.
,F)
*TREE P1 F;
PLANNING DATA
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Name: 0aX1 � vlck�o�
Date: ,
Z�\ &
Site Address: 1?
'Eg,c;, _ /
21/9 P I. yJ
" '
Plan Check #:
;100-7 -000"'s-
Project Description: Emc2koc.,e-
Reduced Site Plan Provided: Q.ES)/ NO)
Zoning: C
Map Page: -3og
'y NO)
Corner Lot: QfS
Flag Lot: (YES 0
Critical Areas Determination -0001?
,R Study Required - L--�\14- Rz,� 4 W-�,wd Ace
El waiver 4-:r Sep— co,,,eAzs Q)eAocz�k
SEPA Determination: �Qcer,\p
0 Exempt
El Needed (for 500 cubic yards of grading or site within 200 feet of Puget Sound or Lake Ballinger)
0 Fee El Checklist 0 APO List with notarized form
Required Setbacks
Street:
de: 0/
Si (5)
Side:
(E7
) tO
Actual Setbacks
Street�.)
Side:
Side:
El Detached Structures:
El Rockeries: : Nor\e� AoLar\ an
WFences/Trellise x'SV, �ere<�,.
El BayWindows/ r . ecti'ng Quiation: s\-\
El Stairs/Deck: Nooe_
Buildin Height
Datum Point: hJA
Datum Elevation: N&
Maximum Height Allowed:
_e
Actual Height:
No
*C. \N C'"Se Other
Parking Required:
Parking Provided:
Lot Area: No Ck-,,z,,xe,
Maximum Lot Coverage: 35% Proposed: N 0
Lot Coverage Calculations.
ADU Cr6a�,d: (YE
Subi LtA Z
Legal Nonconforming Land Use Determination Issued: (YES
Comments
Pet- IECDC -d3.Y0.2DJ0,C2 -zAllo"W-a/ -+/, , ,,- cr,k�,C:,A '�,re--- �z�e, i,\J.,(e -,A�VS4,0"z-,
ex�t.Z sV,,cArez� 4,.X �. 4 �Xf- OP 4-.TA0?",eA or k\,,- ""FgA-
w-1 e�,nm V"r- ?rooc) q;t.X is or\\� 4- e,,cA o!ze- �,n e,-, sA- C,�.rqoc-k, �Ild ISM 1\0�
reec,,.,-ere.A 4, , 0-1�
1 4 :z�vecl
Plan Review By: Planning Data Form 04-11-06.doc
The City of Edg-wa -F FILE
.j.
APPLICATION
for
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
NEW CONSTRUCTION REPAIRS
EASEMENT No . ..............................
.. ................... CONTRACTOR . ....................
OWNER .... ------ ..... J� .. .... 1 6
----- ... PERMIT No.
OT N
ADDRESS ....... ....... ---------- ....... ......... LEGAL DESCRIPTION: L 0. ..Z2 ................................ -BLOCK No . ............................................
NAME OF ADDITION ...... ....................... ...................................
A D
JAN 3 1 j9§
.. -0
Approved:
DATE --- / . ..... ... ...........
:�� ---- — ------------------ ",* ------
CITY OF EDMONDS Call FRospect 6-1107 when work
CIVIC CENTER — WATER -SEWER DEPARTMENT Is ready for Inspection. (No inspec-
tions Saturday, Sunday or holida,".) N? 2705
SIDE SEWER PERMIT
ADDRESS ..... P-�15 --- ----- 9-4t-h --- P.14.ce --- We-s-t .................. --------------------------------- . ............................................................... -------
.. .. .. .... ----- -- --
OWNER.... Harold C. Huseb�r ......................... CONTRACTOR_ ... .................. ........
--------------------------------------------- . .................. .............................
�j 4�Ty 31 ...... ---------- days to REPAIR or CONNECT a side sewer
Permission is granted ........... ............... 1_9. 6 8., for ..............
with City Sewers in accordance with application on file and governing ordinances.
ATTENTION IS CALLED TO THE FOLLOWING:
NOTE No. I —The owners of the property may obtain a permit to construct sewer inside property line. A licensed Side Sewer Contractor must
be employed to construct side sewer in street area. Do not cover any portion of sewer before It has been inspected.
NOrrE No. 2—Obtain full information regarding Ordinance 11.16.030 and Regulations governing side sewers when you get permit.
No. 3—Top of side sewer must have at least 30 inches coverage at property line and 12 inches Inside property line; minimum grade of 2
No bends in grade sharper than % will be permitted.
NOTE No. 4—Trenches in street must be water settled and surface of street restored to original condition. Contractors shall be responsible for
failure due to Improper work which may develop within one year of completion.
NOTE No. 5—It is unlawful to alter or do any other work than is provided for in the permit, or to do any work on the main sewer or its appUr-
tenances except to insert the pipe Into the wye.
CITY OF EDMONDS GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
Ile. sq,�,
December 26, 2001 CERTIFIED MAIL
Landsverk Quality Homes
Attn: Duane Landsverk
19511 94h Place W. 17-1, Z-�
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Right of Way Construction, Pavement Failure
Dear Mr. Landsverk:
Al&e-e
it has come to the City's attention that the pavement on Excelsior Place that you
constructed during the past year has failed. There is significant settlement and cracking
along the south edge of the pavement and settlement in -the road -shoulder for the majority
of the length of the frontage along the property �t 19515 94th Place Wes-t� The failure is a
result of materials and/or workmanship for which you, as the developer/contractor who
constructed these right-of-way improvements, are responsible.
Please advise us by January 11, 2002 of your plans and schedule for repairing the failed
right-of-way improvements. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call
Danielle Gilbert or me at 425 771 0220.
Sincerely,
DAVID K. GEBERT, P.E.
City Engineer
Incorporated August 11, 1890
.qicfor (-ifiy - WotrinAn lAn;%n
0 0
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5TH AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - (425) 771-0220 - FAX (425) 771-0221
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Planning - Building - Engineering
March 5, 2001
Mr. and Mrs. Vickland
1h p, �1_
W
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Tree removal on the adjacent Landsverk property.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Vickland:
GARY HAAKENSON
MAYOR
I want to first,take a moment to thank you for allowing Duane Bowman and myself to come to
your house and hear your concerns in December. I also appreciate the letter you had Mr. Brian
Gilles submit to us on your behalf outlining his and your concerns on the tree removal that
occurred on the Landsverk's property. I apologize for the delay in writing this letter. And while
I'm afraid our conclusions don't reflect yours, I hope that this written explanation of why the City
has acted as it has will give you an understanding of, the things we considered in this event.
The City's policy in the application of the Tree Clearing ordinance, Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC) chapter 18.45, requires that a tree -clearing permit be required to
remove trees unless the proposal is an exempt activity. Some of those exemptions apply to
properties of a certain zone without significant environmental features and other exemptions
apply to certain types of pro�ects.like maintenance or removal of hazardous trees.
In the case where a property is not exempt from the tree clearing permit requirement, and the
owner would like to have the removal of a hazardous tree considered exempt, the City will send
a staff person out to the site to confirm whether or not the trees are obvious hazards or not. My
training and experience as a Landscape Architect has taught me to look for weakness and
deformities in a tree that could lead to failure. These include conditions like forked tops,
unnatural crooks or bends in the trunk, a tree that is missing its natural leader and trees with
wounds on the trunk. Also, trees with an unnatural lean or bend would be considered to be
weak and potential hazards.
City staff is very sensitive and protective of Edmonds' natural vegetation. However, the City is
not interested in being held liable for making a property owner keep a tree on their property that
has a known structural deformity. Once the City has been made aware of a potentially
hazardous tree and confirmed its condition by a staff inspection or the report of a certified
arborist, we will inform a property owner that removal of that tree or trees meets an exemption
provision. They can then remove the tree without going through the tree clearing permit
process.
Our primary objective with all our codes is to obtain compliance with them. If someone
removes a so-called hazardous tree without the City's approval, we will tell the owner what the
correct process is, and if we can physically confirm through the remains of the tree that it was a
Incorporated August 11, 1890
Sister Citv - Hekinan. Janan
0 0
hazard, we will leave it at that. If not, we will require the owner to go through a tree clearing
permit and comply with any conditions placed on that permit including replacement plantings.
In the Landsverk case, all trees cut down prior to December of 2000 were cut down as a result
of an approved Tree Clearing Permit or an exemption approved by me in December of 1999.
The trees cut down in December 2000 were not approved by either the previous Tree Clearing
Permit or by an exemption approved by the City.
I went out to the property the day after our meeting at your house, less than a week after the
trees were cut down, and reviewed all the trees that were removed. All of the trees were still
lying on the slope leading back to their stumps. In each case I photographed wounds or
structural deformities that would lead the City to granting an exemption for their removal (see
the attached 12 photographs). With that being the case, I contacted Mr. Landsverk and
confirmed with him that no more trees would be removed without the approval of a Tree
Clearing Permit or the City's confirmation that the removal qualified as an exemption. He
apologized and explained that he had misunderstood our need to confirm the hazardous tree
before he qualified for the exemption and was allowed to remove the tree. He also confirmed
for me that he would not remove any trees without first checking with me.
ns. If not please feel free to call me at 425.771.0220.
cc. Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Brian Gilles, Arborist for the Vicklands
v/Street file for 19515 94 1h pl. W.
Attachments: 12 photo's taken December 8 1h , 2001 by Steve Bullock identifying wounds and
structural deformities on trees cut down December, 20.01.
Letter by Brian Gilles, dated January 8 1h 2001
"With,
, RI, f!
Yol"'
14
4,-A "'.4
-Pw�
To I dod�Wv n, ou t.,
" �4,
L 4-T
4tP
ty,
!4 '1
Not
for
44"
Ali 1
W
A!
sly
I
'e
IV
'71 In C(Qoked TWO
A
OIKO n4 t�r�l'!�aiOpr
10
;zk
-Ar.
* Ij
mr
IDP
Forked
540
Z-n
41�
; �t4?
tv
4 't
4
zl.
-Aw
Forked fn"AA—
el
jj*
.�;b jail I
--eader
ow,
Dj
i YTI
00-
io
-- VI.
to
>\ K
Brian&Gilles
Hazardous Tree Evaluations & Appraisals
Site Analysis & Development Review
Urban Forest Planning & Wildlife Management MEMBER
January 8, 2001
Dwane Bowman, Director of Planning
City of Edmonds
121 50'Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
SUBJECT: TREE CUTTING ON SENSITIVE SLOPE ADJACENT TO
1951594 TH PLACE WEST, EDMONDS, WA RELATED TO
IMPROVEMENTS AT LANDSVERK PROJECT, FILE #CU-99-225
Dear Mr. Bowman:
This letter is sent to you at the request of John & Shirley Vicklund of 19515 94 TH Place,
Edmonds to document their concern. about the removal of many significant trees on a
critical slope.
I spent several hours on the Vicklund property in April and again in December of 2000
reviewing the trees on their property and the adjacent property to the south. The property
to the south of the Vicklund's is steep and the soil appears to be of unconsolidated glacial
deposit. Removal of trees and associated ground vegetation imposes a significant
concern that finiher soil destabilization of this area may occur.
APRIL 2000:
On April 1, 7, & 13, 1 was on the Vicklund's property evaluating the trees on their
property and visually assessing the trees that were cut on the adjacent slope to the south
of the Vicklund's property. While there, I took photographs to document the condition of
the trees on the Vicklund property and the tree removal on the slope to the south of their
property. Since I had no pen-nission to enter the adjacent property, my evaluation of the
downed trees and their stumps was a visual assessment from the Vicklund property using
binoculars and my 22+ years of experience in the field.
I counted 12 significant trees that were cut down. Some of the trees had been removed
from the slope while others were still lying on the ground when I was there. In
examining the cut trees, I noted no structural deformities, no obvious or advanced insect
infestations, and no observable fungal infections,
CONCLUSION: There was no obvious disease or safety reason for these
trees to have been cut down from this slope.
12823 N.E. 107th Place - Kirkland, WA 98033 - 425-822m4994 * Fax: 425-822-6314 - E-mail: bkgilles@aol.com
DECEMBER 2000:
I returned to the Vicklund property on December 4, 2000. Additional trees had been cut
down on the same slope south of the Vicklund property. On this occasion, I documented
8 additional trees that were removed from the slope and an additional 12 trees that were
severely pruned. The trees removed all appeared to be in healthy condition with the
exception of one small Western Red Cedar, Thujapficata tree that had center rot. This
tree, however, was less than approximately 10 inches in diameter measured the standard
4.5 feet above the ground. The tree was located in a remote area and appeared to have no
viable target and, therefore, posed no hazard to life or property. All other removed trees
appeared to have no structural deformities, no obvious or advanced insect infestations,
and no observable fungal infections.
CONCLUSION: There was no obvious disease or safety reason for these
trees to have been cut down from this slope.
Based upon the location of the new home on the property east of the Vicklund property,
the location of the removed trees, the location of the trees that remain, and the location of
and the type of pruning done on the remaining trees, it is my judgement that the tree
removal has been for the purp'ose� of view enhancement without regard to City of
Edmonds Code or consideration of the safety or stability of the slope.
With this letter, Mr. & Mrs. Vicklund request that your Department begin a code
violation investigation and take the appropriate action to:
1) Stop any ftulher,viola.tions, specifically the removal of any more trees from the
slope,
2) Determine the appropriate remediation of the violation, and
3) Prevent any further code violations relating to this specific site and surrounding
areas.
Thank you for your time and consideration on this matter. Please call me if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
rCn K. �Gilles, Certified Arborist
PNW-0260
Cc: Mayor Haakenson
John & Shirley Vicklund
Vicklund 2d Slope Cutting
Page 2 of 2
CITY OF EDMONDS
5THEET FILE
ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
NEW
E2--ADDITION
1:1 RETIREMENT
ASSET NO.
ADDITION TO ASSET NO. -
DESCRIPTION
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION Joy
DEPT. NO.
*PURCHASE ORDER NO.
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
0
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO.
ESTIMATED LIFE
PROJECT NUMBER 10-1-2
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE
COST
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SLIBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
E2/'DEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
tnp INITIAL
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO.
DATE
DEPARTMENT FILE
CITY OF EDMONDS
EYNEW
ADDITION
RETIREMENT
4 LE ASSET INFORMATION SHEET
STREET Fl
ASSET NO
ADDITION TO ASSET NO. -
I �,, �o 1 5: �5 -
DESCRIPTION
SERIAL NO.
LOCATION
DEPT. 0
PURCHASE ORDER NO.
PURCHASE ORDER DATE
COST
_,,�7
PROJECT NUMBER A ,� /,g -�7
PROJECT COMPLETION DATE 11,OZZ�7
COST
B.A.R.S. ACCOUNT NO.
ESTIMATED LIFE
INITIATED BY DATE APPROVED BY
"SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET WITH FINAL PAYMENT REQUEST
*SUBMIT ASSET INFORMATION SHEET UPON CLOSE OF PROJECT
ACCOUNTING ONLY
TrDEPRECIATE
MONTHLY DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
ANNUAL DEPRECIATION AMOUNT
G.L. ENTRY
REFERENCE
ttnp INITIAL
DATE
A�Z,
VERIFIED BY
PROCESSED
BATCH NO. -
DEPARTMENT FILE
- vyvkli��t- -:P(acf4
cliuk (Y�- vcf'� p ope-io-�
'po
APPROVED AS NOTED
BY ENGINEERING
44KIE CQJ
)RZ
C-1 ry L/ r/
WA-rG ME77E STO k,,L
J) 1?,A-( eclr
APPROVED BY PLANN
-0
m
33
0
m
=0
W-
'n
X
m
0
C= m
"m
<
M
A
(01TY OF EDMONDS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
WOP!(—
ADDPESS
WkINER
APPROVED DATE;
BLDG. OFFICIA�*,Voj,"147��Z&�
m-- tir NUMBF—R
220 63' Z
ST5
- 1: 1. F I -j i� =1 - �,;- � 7 (0 9
�b
95.79 N 83'
/8 EBAR 8, CAP
FND 5 ' " P
L.S. 7892 0! 1
PREV10125
P PLAT LINES
P
L
2
T
ci
18 Ac,
PrL
t1th,
.C,
'o
t! L�� -
27 64'
179, IV 21) 15'
k % N89'39'04"E 30q 79'
FND 5/8' PERAR & CAD
L S. 7192"
APPROVED PLAN
FNQ
S ul
L.
L
9
6 1��01 -4
JOHN H. VICKILUND
19515 94th P1. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425-776-3487
September 11, 2001
Jason Tourtellot
Code Enforcement Inspector
City of Edmonds
1210 Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Dear Mr. Tourtellot,
oeC4�1
St. - 'r VP..,t)
BUILDyiG 174700,
C17Y OF Dp4 rk
&DQ
RkDJW.'9e'V
This letter is in response to your letter of August 18, 2001 in which you informed us of a citizen
complaint regarding a fence on our property at 19515 04' Pl. W. The issue of fencing our
property for protection f�om our neighbors was first discussed with you in December when you
came to our property to investigate a complaint we had made regarding unpermited tree cutting
on the slope adjacent to our property. Following our meeting with you two representatives from
the Planning Department were sent by the Mayor to discuss our concerns.
During this meeting on December 7, 2000, Steve Bullock and Duane Bowman explained the
City's rules, codes and guidelines for fences and together we walked our property lines and had
their approval for the fence and sport court enclosure. Please verify our meeting with Mr.
Bowman and Mr. Bullock. In our meeting we discussed fence height restrictions and they told us
that the fence that we had completed in December of 2000 did not require a permit variance if the
latticework in the fence design was installed after a proposed city ordinance was approved.
Accordingly, the latticework on the wood fence was completed after the Edmonds City Council
passed Ordinance #3348 on March 1, 200 1. As a result of these discussions, we were under the
assumption that no additional variance was required, and that our installer, Town and Country
Fence Company had the appropriate permit to complete our fencing project.
Needless to say we are confused by the inconsistent manner that the City of Edmonds has
followed in code enforcement. Are we to assume by the receipt of this letter that the City is now
actively enforcing its codes, and if so that you will be enforcing the code requiring the replanting
of trees that were removed without permit on the south slope adjacent to our property?
We have made, and will continue to make every effort to work with the City and comply with the
City's codes. It is our understanding that we are not out of compliance. If additional information
is required please inform us.
thnSincerely 4 vs,,�V
Vicklund
Vic
C Cc
c Mayor Haakenson, D. Bowman
J014N H. VICKLUND
19515 94" Pl. W.
Edmonds, WA 98020
March 1, 2004
Mike Teece
Code Enforcement Inspector
City of Edmonds
121 5h Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
RE: Fencing at 19515 94 1h pl- W.
Dear Mr. Teece
U)
LU
10 0
W
LU
U)
:z
LU
LAJ 0
LU
LU
0
We are absolutely incredulous that you are pursuing this matter. As we explained in our
letter dated September 11, 200 1, both Duane Bowman and Steve Bullock meet at our
home on December 7, 2000 and stated that no permit was required for any of our fencing.
We are especially shocked that the City of Edmonds has allowed Builder, Duane
Landsverk to destroy an environmentally sensitive area by clearing trees prior to
obtaining permits, and has then failed to enforce the code requiring the replanting of trees
that were removed.
We stand on the information given to us by Duane Bowman and Steve Bullock that no
permit was required for our fence.
Sincerely,
'hn H. Vicklund
CC Mayor Haakenson