Loading...
CUT-03-165 staff decision and attachments.pdfC'I'TY OF EDMONDS 121 - 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 PLANNING DIVISI®N ADVISORY REPORT FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS To: File ##CU -2003-16 From: Ste lock Senior Planner Date: DECEMBER 20, 2003 File: CU -2003-165 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page I. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................1 A, APPLICATION..........................................................................................................................................1 B. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL....................................................................................................................2 C. DECISION................................................................................................................................................2 II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................2 A. SITE DESCRIPTION..................................................................................................................................2 B. EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTCODE (ECDC) COMPLIANCE...................................................3 C. EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE....................................................................................4 D. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE.........................................................................................................................4 E. PUBLIC COMMENTS................................................................................................................................4 III. RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS.....................................................................................................4 A. REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION...........................................................................................................4 B. APPEALS.................................................................................................................................................4 C. Ti MELim ITS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS ...............................................................................4 IV. LAPSE OF APPROVAL...............................................................................................................................4 V. ATTACHMENTS..........................................................................................................................................5 VLPARTIES OF RECORD...............................................................................................................................5 A. Application 1. Applicant: Diana Clay 2. Site Location: 7316 164°i St. SW. 03165sr,doc / December 20, 2003 / Staff Report Clay File No. CU -03-165 Page 2 of 5 3. Request: A Conditional Use Permit to consider allowing the removal of trees on private property. 4. Review Process: Conditional Use Permit with an optional public hearing followed by a staff decision. Major Issues: a. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 18.45 (LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING). b. Compliance with Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Section 20.95 (APPLICATION AND STAFF REVIEW). c. Compliance with the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan (particularly VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE). B. Description of Proposal The subject property is a large single family lot, approximately 150,000 sq ft, with an abundance of native vegetation especially north and west of the single family home. The applicant is proposing to remove prune and remove trees that are located on the steep slope to the west of their home in response to their Geotechnical Engineer's recommendation. C. Decision Based on statements of Fact, Conclusions, and Attachments in this report, the application for a Conditional Use Permit for tree removal is APPROVED with the following conditions: The applicant must comply with any conditions of the Geotechnical Engineer's report. A. Site Description 1. Site Development, Neighboring Development, And Zoning: a) Facts: (1) Size: The subject property is roughly 150,000 sq, ft. in area (see Attachments 1 & 3). (2) Land Use: The property is currently developed with a single family home and the associated landscaping. (3) Zoning: The zoning of the subject property is Single -Family Residential (RS -20) (see Attachment 1). (4) Terrain and Vegetation: The subject property generally slopes down from the east with a very steep slope on the far west side of the property. North and west of the home is primarily native trees and vegetation, while a more typical ornamental landscape is surrounding the home. 2. Surrounding Development and Zoning: a) Facts: (1) North South East and West: All the surrounding properties are zoned with an RS zoning classification (see Attachment 1). 03165sr.doc / December 20, 2003 / Staff Report Clay File No. CU -03-165 Page 3 of 5 B. Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Compliance 1. ECDC Section 18.45 (Land Clearing and Tree Cutting) a) Facts: (1) ECDC Chapter 18.45 requires a permit for the removal of trees unless an exemption applies. No exemptions apply in this case and a permit is being processed. (2) Some of the purposes of ECDC Section 18.45,000.A -M state a desire to: (a) To promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Edmonds by preserving the physical and aesthetic character of the city through the prevention of indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover on undeveloped or partially developed property; (b) To implement the policies of the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 as revised in 1984; (c) To implement and further the goals and policies of the city's comprehensive plan in regard to the environment, open space, wildlife habitat, vegetation, resources, surface drainage, watershed, and economics; (d) To ensure prompt development, restoration and replanting and effective erosion control of property during and after land clearing; (e) To promote land development practices that result in a minimal adverse disturbance to existing vegetation and soils within the city; (f) To minimize surface water and ground water runoff and diversion; (g) To aid in the stabilization of soil, and to minimize erosion and sedimentation; (h) To minimize the need for additional storm drainage facilities caused by the destabilization of soils; (i) To retain clusters of trees for the abatement of noise and for wind protection; Q) To acknowledge that trees and ground cover reduce air pollution by producing pure oxygen from carbon dioxide; (k) To preserve and enhance wildlife and habitat including streams, riparian corridors, wetlands and groves of trees; (1) To promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the city's natural topographic and vegetation features while recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.1 proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvement, interference with utility services, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; (m) To promote the reasonable development of land in the city of Edmonds. (3) The performance standards for land development permits are given in ECDC Section 18.45.050. (4) The site will continue to have many trees even after the pruning and removal of some of these trees. (5) The subject permit application is the result of a violation and stop work order. b) Staff Analysis: (1) Tree removal has already occurred and re -sprouting makes it difficult to even find the stumps in and among all the other trees and understory that is on this property. Staff sees no need for additional or replacement planting. c) Conclusion: (1) The proposed tree clearing plan is justified and no replanting plan is needed. 03165sr.doc / December 20, 2003 / Staff Report Clay File No. CU -03-165 Page 4 of 5 (2) In the future, the applicant should contact the City prior to any tree clearing to determine if permits are needed. C. Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Compliance 1. Land Use a) Fact: The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property "Single Family" residential. b) Conclusion: The proposed tree cutting is compatible with the single family residential use designation. D. Technical Committee No comments were received E. Public Comments No comments were received III. RECONSIDERATION AND APPEALS The following is a summary of the deadlines and procedures for filing reconsideration's and appeals. Any person wishing to file or respond to a recommendation or appeal should contact the Planning Department for further procedural information. A. Request for Reconsideration Section 20.95.050.B.2 allows for staff to reconsider their decision if a written request is filed within ten (10) working days of the date of the posting of the notice of the decision. B. Appeals Section 20.105.020.A & B describe how appeals of a staff decision or recommendation shall be made. The appeal shall be made in writing, and shall include the decision being appealedalong with the name of the project and the date of the decision, the name of the individual or group appealing the decision, their interest in the matter, and reasons why the appellant believes the decision to be wrong. The appeal must be filed with the Community Development Director within fourteen (14) calendar days after the date of the decision being appealed. C. Time Limits for Reconsideration and Appeals The time limits for Reconsideration's and Appeals run concurrently. If a request for a reconsideration is filed before the time limit for filing an appeal has expired, the time "clock" for filing an appeal is stopped until a decision on the reconsideration request is completed. Once the Hearing Examiner has issued his decision on the reconsideration request, the time clock for filing an appeal continued for the point it was stopped. For example, if a request is filed on day 5 of the appeal period, an individual would have 9 more days in which to file an appeal after the Hearing Examiner issues his decision on the reconsideration request. Section 18.45.045.C. states "Any permit granted under the provisions of this section shall expire one year from the date of issuance. No work may commence on the permit until the appeal time limit ha expired. Upon receipt of a written request, a permit may be extended for six months." 03165sr.doc / December 20, 2003 / Staff Report Clay File No. CU -03-165 Page 5 of 5 V. ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Plan 2. Geotechnical report/letter dated October 14, 2003 3. Geotechnical report/letter dated July 8, 2003 VI. PARTIES OF RECORD Applicant Engineering Division Planning Division 03165sr.doc / December 20, 2003 / Staff Report Cornerstone • Ave.Woodinville, 1 98072 Phone: ....... iIJ � fto Geotechnical, October 14, 2003 Ms. Diana Clay Clay Enterprises 2002 — 196"' Street SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Civil Violation — Clay Residence Edmonds, Washington CG File No. 1004 Dear Ms. Clay: This letter presents our response to the Notice of Civil Violation, issued October 7, 2003, by the City of Edmonds. The residence is located at 7316 - 164`x' Street SW in Edmonds, Washington. You have asked us to provide our geotechnical opinions about the resulting exposed soils along with recommendations for temporary erosion control. Introduction and Brief Site History We have been involved in the development of your project for many years. We have recently issued a letter addressing the planned landscaping to the west of the residence "new garden area", dated May 23, 2003; and a letter providing our geotechnical opinions about the steep slope and the risk -reduction benefits of the planned tree pruning, dated July 8, 2003. Site Conditions We arrived at the site on October 8, 2003 to evaluate the geotechnical conditions. We observed the following conditions: Many of the trees to the west and northwest of the "new garden area" have been pruned, topped, or cut. The stumps, along with the surrounding underbrush, have been left in place. We did not observe significant disturbance to the steep slopes. Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Civil Violation — Clay Residence October 14, 2003 CG File No. 1004 Page 2 ➢ The area to the west of the garden has been prepared for landscaping. The grade of this area is similar to that shown in Figure 1 of our May 23, 2003 Letter. We understand that you plan to place topsoil and grass -covered sod over the exposed soil between the planter and the top of the slope as a temporary erosion control measure. The area between the planter and the top of the slope has not been significantly altered since the day of our last site visit performed on July 2, 3003. ➢ A short path, northwest of the planter area, was created by the excavator during the tree pruning, topping, or cutting. Slight soil disturbance was done by the excavator tracks. To improve the track exposed surface, you have placed biodegradable jute netting on a hydroseeded surface. ➢ A minor amount of fill had been placed at the southwest corner of the planter area to allow passage for the excavator. This fill extends slightly into the right-of-way easement. The access area to the northwest of the planter has been hydroseeded and substantially covered with biodegradable erosion control netting. ➢ A new roadway barrier has been constructed at the right-of-way easement. It is our opinion that the landscaping should be completed immediately to allow the plants to grow before the dormant winter months. We recommend that the topsoil and sod be placed west of the garden area as soon as possible. From a geotechnical standpoint, the pruning, topping or cutting of the trees located on the steep slope has reduced the slope stability risk posed by falling or leaning trees. The mulch, limbs, and underbrush left in place will help reduce slope erosion. The track disturbed area of the steep slope is currently adequate with the existing hydroseed and the jute netting. No cut and fill restoration is warranted. We recommend that continued monitoring and maintenance be completed until it is established. Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Civil Violation — Clay Residence October 14, 2003 CG File No. 1004 Page 3 We recommend that the minor amount of fill placed within the right-of-way easement be removed, thus restoring the easement to its previous condition. After the grass sod has been placed west of the garden, any remaining spots of exposed soil should be hydroseeded and covered with the biodegradable netting material until final landscaping has been established. We also recommend that the planned final landscaping be placed as soon as practicable. Of great importance to the long-term stability of the slope is the control of surface and near -surface water, and erosion protection. The planned topsoil and grass sod should be placed in a manner that directs surface water away from the steep slope. We also recommend that you monitor the vegetation and perform minor repairs and maintenance. It is our opinion that a significant amount of "grading" has not been completed since our July 2, 2003 letter. The minor amounts of soil disturbance (fill and/or cut) were the result of construction access with the excavator. These areas have been or will be repaired. M Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Civil Violation — Clay Residence October 14, 2003 CG File No. 1004 Page 4 We hope this letter meets with your needs at this time. If there are any questions concerning this letter or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. Jeff Lau,,b P,roj of s Rick B. Powell, PE Principal 95MMIDITIM Three Copies Submitted � ornerstone Geotechnical, Inc—. Cornerstone 17625 -130th Ave. NE, C102, Woodinville, WA 98072 Phone: 425844-1977 Fax: 425-844-1987 GeotechnicalW:P, Inc. July 8, 2003 Ms. Diana Clay Clay Enterprises 2002-196 1h Street SW Lynnwood, WA 98036 Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Tree Pruning, Topping or Cutting — Clay Residence Edmonds, Washington CG File No. 1004 Dear Ms. Clay: This letter presents our evaluation and recommendations to prune, top or cut various trees downslope of the west side of your residence. The residence is located at 7316 - 164t" Street SW in Edmonds, Washington. You have asked us to provide our geotechnical opinions about the steep slope and the effects of the planned tree pruning. Introduction and Brief Site History Site development included grading for a new access roadway and construction of two residential structures. You currently occupy the westernmost of the two residential structures. We, as Nelson-Couvrette & Associates, Inc. (NCA), issued a geotechnical engineering report for the project, dated January 19, 1996; a supplemental evaluation for the access roadway, dated May 7, 1998; and a supplemental letter for the grading west of your driveway, dated August 20, 1999. NCA monitored the earthwork phase of construction on a part-time basis and the observations and recommendations are documented in 26 field reports, dated between May 6, 1999 and December- 17, 1999. We also prepared two letters regarding the pruning, topping, or cutting of trees along the west- and north -facing slopes at the site, dated August 19, 1999, and October 25, 1999. Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Tree Pruning, Topping or Cutting — Clay Residence July 8, 2003 CG File No. 1004 Page 2 We, as Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc., prepared a completion letter for your residence, dated September 5, 2001, and a letter addressing the planned landscaping to the west of the residence, dated May 23, 2003. Site Conditions We arrived at the site on July 2, 2003, and walked the slopes to view the trees in question. The trees we evaluated are on the slope to the west of your residence and range from very small up to approximately 1 or 2 feet in diameter. These predominantly deciduous trees are scattered at various points downslope of the steepest portion of the west -facing slope. The geometries of the slope and a site plan are provided in our original geotechnical report. In a few cases, the deciduous trees appear to be bent and growing in a deformed fashion on the steep slope. We do not expect that the deformation of the trees is due to slope movement, but from natural growth on steep slopes. The slope is also heavily vegetated with berry vines and brush. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is our opinion that trees located on steep slopes have the tendency to fall during high windstorms. The trees that fall have the potential to be uprooted, and the surrounding soil becomes disturbed. This condition has caused a number of shallow slide events in the Puget Sound area during past storm events. Trees most susceptible to high winds are the older deciduous trees. When trees fall, they sometimes act as a "trigger mechanism" to start shallow slide events. Cutting the trees and leaving the root bundle and stump in-place may reduce the triggering mechanism that can cause surficial sloughing along the slope. From a geotechnical standpoint, pruning, topping or cutting of the trees located on the steep slope can be performed, provided the City allows this and certain precautions are taken. We recommend that the root bundle/stump of felled trees be left in place. The timber portion of the trees should be removed from the steep slopes. Pruned material from trees could be placed on the slope or ground into mulch. The mulched limbs should be spread over the slope in a thin layer. The mulch or limbs will help reduce slope erosion. Any disturbed areas should be immediately restabilized through vegetation planting or other approved means. NITIUMIN M, Geotechnical Evaluation Letter Tree Pinning, Topping or Cutting — Clay Residence July 8, 2003 CG File No. 1004 Page 3 Of great importance to the long-term stability of the slope, is the control of surface and near - surface water, and erosion protection. Surface drainage over the slope should not be permitted. We hope this letter meets with your needs at this time. If there are any questions concerning this letter or if we can provide additional services, please call. Sincerely, Cornerstone Geotechnical, Inc. (� M A: Jeff Laub Project Geologist ,Ap .rip Rick B. Powell, PE Principal JPL:RBP:nt Three Copies Submitted