Staff Decision PLN-2009-0047.pdfOV EnM CITE' OF EDMONDS
121 5rh Avenue North • Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 Fax: 425.771.0221 o Web: www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
�n'g90 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DIVISION
TO: Richard Kirschner
a
dm- �
FROM:
Mike Clugston, AiCP
DATE: January 7, 2010
PLN -2009-0047: The applicant is proposing to remove three Douglas fir trees, one at 7616/7618
and two at 7620/7622 202 ad Place SW. Both duplex parcels are zoned
Residential Multifamily (RM -3.0). Amending an existing landscaping plan is a
Type 11 permit. Replacement vegetation is required.
A. Property Owner Applicant
Richard Kirschner Same as Property Owner
7503 Braemar Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
B. Introduction
Through a
modification to an
existing landscaping
plan, the applicant
proposes (Attachment
1) to remove three
Douglas fir trees, one
at 7616/7618 and two
at 7620/7622 202'
Place SW (see adjacent
inset and inset on page
2). The parcels are
zoned RM -3.0. While
trees on individual lots
are regulated through
ECDC 18.45, changes
to landscape plans are
subject to design
review. The subject
application does not
trigger SERA review;
Proposed fir for removal at 7616/7618 202"d Place SW
Page 1 of 5
File No. PLN -2009-0047
Kirschner 7616/7620 202nd Pl.
Landscape Plan Modification
therefore, the proposal may be approved by staff as an Administrative Staff Decision, subject to the
requirements of ECDC 20.01.003.
C. Findings and Conclusions
2.
The existing
landscaping
plans were
approved by tl:
Architectural
Design Board
through permit
ADB -98-76
(Attachment 2
and ADB -95-7
(Attachment 3;
and
implemented
with the
associated
building permi
BLD-1977-02�
and BLD -197E
0104.
the parcel immediately to the south which involved removal of all trees and vegetation from that
lot.
3. The current request is to remove three evergreens on the northern side of the duplexes. One
specific tree (Tree #2) was identified by the applicant's insurance company for maintenance
Page 2 of 5
File No. PLN -2009-0047
Kirschner 7616/7620 202"' Pl.
Landscape Plan Modification
because it sheds needles and debris on the roof and walkway in front of 7620/7622 202nd Place
(Attachment 6).
4. According to the arborist's tree hazard assessments (Attachment 7), Trees #1 and #2 are
described as being of normal and average health. There is some pavement lifting around Tree #2.
Tree #3 is described as being in slightly poorer health. The recommended course of action for
each of the trees is removal as opposed to maintenance.
5. The applicant submitted an amended landscaping plan for each site showing replacement
vegetation (Attachments 8 and 9) as well as a letter from the arborist suggesting other replanting
options (Attachment 10). The replacement vegetation proposed is insufficient to compensate for
the loss of the three evergreens, let alone the additional unpermitted loss of vegetation on the
southern portion of the parcels.
6. Two public comments were received regarding this application, one from Mahria Jordan
(Attachment 11) and the other from Claire Beach (Attachment 12). Both questioned the need for
removal of the trees since they appear to be in good health and given the environmental benefits
healthy trees provide.
7. The Comprehensive Plan offers a number of goal and policy recommendations with regard to
trees. Not all of the recommendations apply to every project, but taken together they indicate the
intent of the Council regarding trees:
a. The City's development policies encourage high quality site and building design to
promote coordinated development and to preserve the trees, topography and other
natural features of the site. (p 54)
b. Grading, filling, and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads, driveways,
access ways and other impervious surfaces. (p 63)
c. The removal of trees should be minimized particularly when they are located on steep
slopes or hazardous soils. Subdivision layouts, buildings and roads should be
designed so that existing trees are preserved. (p 66)
d. Trees that are diseased, damaged, or unstable should be removed. (p 66)
e. Grading should be restricted to building pads and roads only. Vegetation outside
these areas should be preserved. (p 66)
f. Retain significant landscape features and unique landforms such as rock outcroppings
and significant trees. (p 77)
8. According to ECDC 18.45.050.B, "[flrees should be retained to the maximum extent feasible."
9. Landscaping on multifamily parcels must be designed in accordance with the standards and
requirements found in Chapter 20.13 ECDC — Landscaping Requirements.
10. After visiting the site and examining the record, it appears that the landscaping and grounds
surrounding the structures have been minimally maintained over the past 30 years. The three
remaining evergreen trees have not been well maintained which has lead to their current health
and impact to the site regarding needle dropping and pavement heave. While it is uncertain, it is
quite likely that the illegally removed trees on the southern side of the parcels were also not well
maintained and the owner found it easier to simply remove the trees than to properly maintain
them.
Trees, like structures and other site improvements, need ongoing maintenance to ensure they
remain healthy and vigorous. Without maintenance, they more rapidly deteriorate and cause
greater impacts than they would otherwise if properly tended to over time.
Page 3 of 5
File No. PLN -2009-0047
Kirschner 7616/7620 202nd Pl.
Landscape Plan Modification
D. Decision
Based on the findings, conclusions, and attachments to this report, staff finds that the removal of the
three subject trees identified on Attachments 4 and 5 in file number ADB -2009-0047 is APPROVED
with the following conditions:
1. The approved landscaping design of the site was substantially altered by the relatively recent
unapproved removal of numerous evergreens on the southern portion of the property. The
additional removal of the three subject trees will finally result in a drastic departure from what
was originally approved for the two parcels. As a result, the originally approved landscaping for
the parcels (as identified in Attachments 2 and 3) must be re-established. All replacement
plantings must meet the size requirements found in ECDC 20.13.015.
Alternatively, the applicant may apply to the Architectural Design Board to create a new
landscaping plan for the parcels produced in accordance with ECDC 20.13. If this course is
chosen, the three subject trees may not be removed until the ADB has approved a new
landscaping plan.
2. Per ECDC 20.13.040, the applicant must submit an itemized cost estimate covering the value of
the plantings and labor necessary to re-establish the existing approved landscaping or any new
ADB -approved landscaping plan. This estimate will be used to establish a landscaping
performance bond. The performance bond is required prior to removal of any trees at the site.
Once the landscaping has been installed, a 15 percent maintenance bond is required for release of
the performance bond. Any plants that die within two years of installation must be replaced
before the maintenance bond can be released. Upon inspection and approval, the maintenance
bond may be released after two years.
3. The applicant shall schedule a maintenance inspection with the Planning Division two (2) years
after the date of installation.
4. The applicant shall obtain a right-of-way construction permit from the Engineering Division prior
to removal if work in the right-of-way is anticipated.
E. Attachments
1. Land use application
2. Original landscaping plan for 762017622 202nd Place (ADB -98-76)
3. Original landscaping plans for 761617618 202nd Place (ADB -95-77)
4. Updated landscaping plan 762017622 202nd Place
5. Updated landscaping plan 761617618 202nd Place
6. Applicant's narrative and supporting documentation
7. Arborist reports for three trees
8. Amended landscaping plan 762017622 202nd Place
9. Amended landscaping plan 761617618 202nd Place
10. Arborist's replanting plan
11. Comment letter from Mahria Jordan
12. Comment letter from Claire Beach
13. Public notice materials
Page 4 of 5
File No. PLN -2009-0047
Kirschner 7616/7620 202nd pl.
Landscape Plan Modification
F. Appeal
A party of record may submit a written appeal of a Type 11 decision within 14 days of the date of
issuance of the decision. The appeal will be heard at an open record public hearing before the
Hearing Examiner according to the requirements of ECDC Chapter 20.06 and Section 20.07.004.
G. Parties of Record
Richard Kirschner
7503 Braemar Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
Mahria Jordan
7616 202 d Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
Planning Division
Engineering Division
Claire Beach
7622 202nd Place SW
Edmonds, WA 98026
Page 5 of 5