Loading...
Exhibit 3 - 2-20-15 Letter from Glenn Clark.pdf! , i ! BUILDLANDSCAPING PLAN * DESIGN * Edmonds Landscaping, Inc. 22319 7611, Avenue West Edmonds, WA 98026 Phone (425) 775-0427 Fax (425) 774-9459 wwcvedmondslandscaping.com Good Afternoon Gentlemen: 2.20.15 1 met with John today on site to go over condition of remaining trees and to talk about Alders that were removed. Following are my observations: 1) There are 2 dead stags that were left after the clearing on the site they are located on the SE side of the property. They should be removed ASAP. 2) Now with the property cleared I see (3) firs trees with their tops blown out making them hazardous going forward no matter what is decided on other trees. 3) Citing my 1" report on biology of tree/ root growth, the trees that were left on the south and east side of the property are now hazardous as they have a target (homes) they could impact when they `Wind Throw' causing property damage, injury or death . With the lot cleared what protection the other trees provided being gone it is only a matter of time before we have an incident. Also with the foundation installation there is a high likelihood that a large amount of roots that have been compromised further compounding the problem. 4) Removal of "unauthorized trees: I will address the Alders only: When I first surveyed the site the existing Alders were in bad shape with dead branches hanging in the canopy. While the site was unoccupied this posed little threat but with the clearing of the lot and personnel working on the first house theses trees needed to be removed because the posed a clear and present danger to those working in and around them. This emergency removal was a proper choice to protect those working on the site from 'widow makers' that can fall at any time. 5) Last: With construction underway causing root damage that will be ongoing and that most of the lots being cleared removing any protection from the winds it is more important than ever to finish the removal ASAP to prevent any unseen tragic events. Any questions please feel free to contact me. Glenn Clark Certified Arborist #24160 Ednloaads Landscaping, Inc. Contractor License *:FDN40NL1072B5 EIN: 91.1548880 When the City told you that tree clearing would be limited, even though you submitted an arborist report; 1. Did they tell you that any additional information might sway their decision? Two parts, the first part implies you maybe never saw my letter of July 24th, attached. Yes, the first arborist report was in response to them. They said this decision could change if we had an arborist report. It was important enough we decided to do that. This was really not just about the remaining trees on the first Lot. I always presumed (wrongly I discovered later) that we would have a second chance to re -discuss this when we got the property subdivided. It was mostly about common sense and losing a lot of money to do it in two stages and safety in taking them down in one stage. The second report was after they told me the first report wasn't specific enough and they needed each tree evaluated and reported by the arborist. They did not specify that they only wanted such a report on the remaining trees on the first lot. The discussion was always about the entire lot because it was not yet subdivided. His second report said that none of them were diseased, but together they would each become hazardous on rembving the allowed ones. And they did not argue that point, so why would anyone need to label each one as hazardous for the same reason? They were all hazardous. The argument is they are a grove, removing some weakens the rest. I also told them the neighbors were afraid of them and wanted them down. All of the trees on that lot can reach at least one house if they fell. Really Jen's only argument was that the new owner might disagree with us and want to retain them. 2. Did they tell you what the deficiencies were with the arborist report as submitted? Only as above. They just said, it said nothing new. 3. Did they tell you that they needed a specific report for each tree? Yes, as above and it is what I asked Glenn for. 4. Did they cite the code section that leads the City to require a different report for each tree? Definitely not. There was never any mention of how to handle Hazardous Trees. And in response to your discussion below, they never ever told us we could file a Hazardous Tree request for any remaining trees, let alone individual tree requests. They appeared to agree that the trees they allowed to be removed would cause the remaining ones to become more hazardous, but never said anything about what to do about that. We didn't ask because we thought the problem would go away with the second lot after the subdivision. 5. If the answer to any of these above is yes, what did you do to address their request? As above 6. Did you ask if there was an appeal method Absolutely. With Jen I just told her that I was going to ask Shane Hope for an exception about waiting for the second Building Permit (which would include all the trees). 7. If yes, what was the response? I wrote Shane asking for an exception to the waiting time of the second permit so we could take down all the trees at once. She wrote back and said she can't do that. followed with a phone conversation with her and specifically asked if I had any recourse, specifically the City Council or Mayor. She said there was no recourse. I believed her, took a deep breath, and stopped pursuing it, again believing that the remaining trees on the first lot would be reviewed again with the second Building Permit. (This is also covered on the email thread I think I gave you.) I presume there is no phone record on their end, only my reference to it in the email before her last comment. I wrote the City Council, Shane Hope and the Mayor a year ago, before this all started, telling them about this Project coming back to Edmonds after many years. I didn't ask for any special considerations, just that we had a timing for school starting problem and asked that they would voluntarily make suggestions to help us get ready for school. (Attached) An example: One desk planner actually did this. We needed two water lines and meters and asked right from our first planning meeting with the City, if they could put both in when they cut the street, save the City work and time, etc.. Everyone said, No. After we got the Building Permit and applied for the water meter at the desk and repeated our desire to do both at once, a woman planner who was walking by and overheard the desk planner with whom we were talking, stopped and he asked her for help. She simply said we were allowed a permit on the first house to put in an "accessory meter" right now, so we paid for a second line and the two boxes are already in and ready for meters when it is time to hook them up. Creativity, care, and wants her son to take the class. None of that with the tree situation.