Hazard tree removal STF2020-0005CITY OF EDMONDS
121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT o PLANNING DIVISION
March 2, 2020
Elizabeth Lange
19121 Olympic View Drive
Edmonds, WA 98026
Subject: Hazard Tree Removal (STF2020-0005)
Dear Ms. Lange,
Pam from Edmonds Tree Service contacted the City of Edmonds on your behalf regarding
removal of a maple tree behind your house at 19121 Olympic View Drive. Your parcel sits in the
middle of a large hill that slopes down from east to west at between 25% - 30% slope. Given
the underlying soils across your site (Alderwood-Everett Gravelly sandy loams, 25-70% slopes),
your portion of the slope would be considered a geologically hazardous area, a potential
erosion hazard area.
The removal of trees or vegetation from within a critical area or critical area buffer is not an
allowed activity unless it involves the removal of invasive species or hazard trees pursuant to
Section 23.40.220.C.8 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Normal
maintenance of vegetation is an exempt activity in critical areas, however. "Normal
maintenance of vegetation" is defined as "removal of shrubs/nonwoody vegetation and trees
(less than four -inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at least every other year.
Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previously approved by the city in the
past five years." In this case, the maple tree is in excess of four inches in diameter (38") and
has not been maintained recently so it is subject to the hazard tree documentation
requirement in ECDC 23.40.220.C.8.b.
According to the submitted report prepared by certified arborist Zsofia Pasztor, the maple has a
50% dead crown, dry rot, a disturbed root system, and other signs of declining health. Removal
of the maple is recommended to mitigate the hazard.
An exemption for hazard tree removal is granted with the following conditions:
1. The subject maple tree may be removed. The stump may remain, be flush cut to the
ground, or ground out. It may not be pulled or removed mechanically.
2. The downed wood may be removed from the site or left to decay in place.
Within one year of removal, two native replacement trees must be planted near the
hazard maple (or elsewhere on the site if there is no room near the maple). Minimum
sizes are one to two inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) for deciduous trees and a
minimum of six feet in height for evergreen trees as measured from the top of the root
ball. Call for an inspection once the replacement trees have been installed.
If you have any questions, please let me know at either michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov or
425-771-0220.
Sincerely,
Mike Clugston, AICP
Senior Planner
Encl: Pasztor arborist report
TREE EVALUATION 2020
Tree Evaluation 2020
Zsofia Pasztor
Certified Horticulturist CPH 2459
Arborist PN-5795A, Tree Risk Assessor Qualified
Landscape Designer; Certified LID Consultant
10 —108th St. SE
Everett, Washington 98208
425-210-5541
zs.Pasztor2011(&2mail.com
Dear Ms. Lange,
On February 28th 2020, at your request, I performed a tree identification and evaluation at the
address of 19121 Olympic View Edmonds WA.
This report is a summary of my observations and conclusions.
Definition of the assignment
You contacted me because you are concerned about the large maple tree in the back of your
property.
As you and I discussed, my assignment was to:
• evaluate the health and condition of the tree at this time
• recommend a preservation and if needed, mitigation plan
• write and submit to you a report
Summary of findings
Visiting the site and examining the tree I found that the maple tree is showing severe dieback, a
large percentage of its branches have missing or failing bark and judging from the bud conditions,
at least 50% of the canopy is impacted.
The site had a retaining wall rebuilt a few years ago and the roots for the tree were cut near the
tree's base.
During the recent years several large limbs broke off the tree with and without wind. These
branches were dead and showed rot extending into the trunk.
The remnant of one large co -dominant trunk that failed a few months ago is still visible on the
trunk and it is decaying.
19121 Olympic View Ave Edmonds WA Page 2
p,
,A-FAI
40
Ow f�
S4 f
A UY, #?"ofl
jul
,4
00-4,
`mac 1
41el
0
A
firl-PAC,
qg-
SUM PS
I - OW
fe /A PAP AAF
PIP 44 Irlp
A 470
Al
44i,
Tree Evaluation 2020
Oozing from the area two main trunks are connected
19121 Olympic View Ave Edmonds WA Page 6
Tree Evaluation 2020
INA Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form A
Client .i IAS LAx�� Date 01 ,9 y,%1 Qz7 Time AM
Address/Tree location 10U21 O YIKNG, ulow �__ E�IjUMc UJA Treeno._j Sheet_ I off_
Tree species A-Z 1 w _ dbh 3, w Height ?X I Crown spread dia.
Assessor(s) MEA TL-'Ra IN n' CA -Tools used LEVEL 2- Time frame
Target Assessment
Target zone
Occupancy
rate
ti
s
c
c
Target description
Target protection
rr
g
�
L-
�
x
2—ao[asional
3—frequent+
>
a -constant
d E
¢ a
i
t v
1
"
2
(EIL6 W.
3
CLj1
4
Site Factors
History of failures / AAkc ]�� ! (� �j Topography Flat[] Slop_ 0 % Aspect!
Site changes None�CGrade change Site clearing Changed soil hydrologyh Root cuts Describe li )AI % L& A A $ ,
Soil conditions Limited volumejWSaturated ❑ Shallow$( CompactecW Pavement over roots % Describe
Prevailing wind direction Common weather Strong windollce❑ snow Heavy rairlk Describe
Tree Health and Species Profile
Vigor Low Normal ❑ High ❑ Foliage None (seasonalp�5k None (dead) ❑ Normal _% Chlorotic _% Necrotic %
Pests/Biotic Abiotic Species failure profile Branche$-21�Trunkl$'Rootsff Describ-=F-A,i,L6 COF-A T11,31
Load Factors
Windexposure Protected❑ Partial❑ Fug�rwindfunneling ❑ Relative crown size Small[] MediurrrLarge ❑
Crowndensity Sparse❑ NormalxDense❑ I teriorbranches Few❑ Norm Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑
Recent or expected change in load factors �t1k
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
— Crown and Branches —
Unbalanced crown ❑
LCR% - ht�sCS Cracks 1& Lightning damage ❑
Dead twigs/branche
%overall M x. dia. �' Codominant M' Included bark Rl
Broken/Hangers Number Max dia.
Weak attachments N' Cavity/Nest hole %circ.
Over -extended branches ❑
Previous branch failuresZ1 Similar branches presentDO
Pruning history
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑
Crown cleaned ❑
Reduced ❑
Thinned ❑ Raised ❑
Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay
Flush cuts ❑
Other Response growth IA
�Conditiq (s�ofc EA �l L t •c
Part Size CU t
Fall Distance Part Size I d-J r Fall Distance (11_�/
Load on defect N/A ❑
Minor ❑ Moderate❑ SignificanX load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Significantti.i
Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminentri Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable ❑ Imminen%?g
—Trunk —
Dead/Missing bark ❑
Abnormal bark texture/colop)s�
Codominant stems'iGk
Included bar2,Il Cracks ❑
Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sap ooze'
Lightning damage
Heartwood decay[] Conks/Mushrooms❑
Cavity/Nest hole _
% circ. Depth Poor taper ❑
Lean
Response growth N ( A
Condition (s of cgncerrn TRA r [
PartSize � Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ SignifiantW
Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable M imminent ❑
— Roots and Root Collar —
Collar buried/Not visible ❑ Depth
Stem girdling ❑
Dead ❑ Decay ❑
Conks/Mushrooms ❑
Ooze ❑
Cavity ❑ %circ.
Cracks ❑ Cut/Damaged root
Distance from trunk
Root plate lifting ❑
Soil weakness,.
Response growth JA
Condition (s) of concern 1 !� LEA
AAC-b jUTi
iva'rvleV4iilON' '�O�
W4��-L r� ;
Part Size *=t
Fall Distance ¢
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate❑ Signifiant�&
Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable 4imminent ❑
Page I of 2
19121 Olympic View Ave Edmonds WA Page 7
Tree Evaluation 2020
Risk Categorization
iiiiiiiiii■■�r"�
111�
�■■I�■■■r1■■■��i�■tea
Ij
Matra I. Likelihood matrix.
Likelihood
of Failure
Likelihood of Impact
Very low
Low
Medium
High
Imminent
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Very likely
Probable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Possible
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Improbable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Matra 2. Risk rating matrix
Likelihood of
Failure & Impact
Consequences of Failure
Negligible
Minor
Significant
Severe
Very likely
Low
Moderate
High
Extreme
Likely
Low
Moderate
High
High
Somewhat likely
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Unlikely
low
Low
Low
Low
Notes, explanations, descriptions
6;iei,E-.� l YEAlls A( -Co A \A1ALl lA! C
la I i 1 :4 i � is
i.l
LAW-n S' 52(n W-S SL ►1 2-Ufit , A te.
North
{
Mitigation options —�
1. �l C't-� �l-" 1- t t� Residual risk
2 Residual risk
3. Residual risk
4. Residual risk
Overall tree risk rating Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High)Sk::�Extreme ❑
Overall residual risk None Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme ❑ Recommended inspection intervals
Data tkinal ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed�Wo []Yes-Type/Reason
Inspection limitationsXlone ❑Visibility ❑Access ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe
This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 Page 2 of 2
19121 Olympic View Ave Edmonds WA Page 8
Tree Evaluation 2020
Methodology
To evaluate the trees and to prepare the report, I drew upon my 30 years of experience in the field
of horticulture, site management, and arboriculture and my formal education in natural resources
management, natural habitat ecology, plant identification, and plant physiology. I also followed
the protocol of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) for Visual and Level 2 Assessment
(VA and L2) that includes looking at the overall health of the tree as well as the site conditions.
This is a scientifically based process to look at the entire site, surrounding landscape and soil, as
well as a complete look at the trees themselves.
In examining the trees, I looked at such factors as: size, vigor, canopy and foliage condition,
density of leaves, injury, insect activity, root damage and root collar health, crown health, evidence
of disease -causing bacteria, fungi or virus, dead wood and hanging limbs.
Waiver of Liability
There are many conditions affecting a tree's health and stability, which may be present and cannot
be ascertained, such as, root rot, previous or unexposed construction damage, internal cracks, stem
rot and more which may be hidden. Changes in circumstances and conditions can also cause a
rapid deterioration of a tree's health and stability. Adverse weather conditions can dramatically
affect the health and safety of a tree in a very short amount of time.
While I have used every reasonable means to examine these trees, this evaluation represents my
opinion of the tree health at this point in time. These findings do not guarantee future safety nor
are they predictions of future events.
The tree evaluation consists of an external visual inspection of an individual tree's root flare, trunk,
and canopy from the ground only unless otherwise specified. The inspection may also consist of
taking trunk or root soundings for sound comparisons to aid the evaluator in determining the
possible extent of decay within a tree. Soundings are only an aid to the evaluation process and do
not replace the use of other more sophisticated diagnostic tools for determining the extent of decay
within a tree.
As conditions change, it is the responsibility of the property owners to schedule additional site
visits by the necessary professionals to ensure that the long-term success of the project is ensured.
It is the responsibility of the property owner to obtain all required permits from city, county, state,
or federal agencies. It is the responsibility of the property owner to comply with all applicable
laws, regulations, and permit conditions. If there is a homeowners association, it is the
responsibility of the property owner to comply with all Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions
(CC&R's) that apply to tree pruning and tree removal.
This tree evaluation is to be used to inform and guide the client in the management of their trees.
This in no way implies that the evaluator is responsible for performing recommended actions or
using other methods or tools to further determine the extent of internal tree problems without
written authorization from the client. Furthermore, the evaluator in no way holds that the opinions
and recommendations are the only actions required to insure that the tree will not fail. A second
maybe sought if client feels it's necessary. The client shall hold the evaluator harmless for any and
all injuries or damages incurred if the tree examined fails for any reason or if the evaluator's
19121 Olympic View Ave Edmonds WA Page 9
Tree Evaluation 2020
recommendations are not followed or for acts of nature beyond the evaluator's reasonable
expectations, such as severe winds, excessive rains, heavy snow loads, etc.
Should you have any questions or concerns, or if I may be of further assistance, please call.
Sincerely,
Zsofia Pasztor;
Certified Horticulturist Cert. # 2459
Certified Arborist Cert. # PN5795A;
Certified Tree Risk Assessor TRAQ
Certified LID Consultant and Designer
Landscape Designer and Construction Consultant
19121 Olympic View Ave Edmonds WA Page 10