Loading...
STF2021-0011 Hazard landmark tree removalCITY OF EDMONDS 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION `ne. I STJ April 19, 2021 Monica Littlejohn mon2danizzle@yahoo.com Subject: Hazard Landmark Tree Removal at 18410 90th Ave. W Dear Ms. Littlejohn, Thank you for contacting the City of Edmonds regarding the removal of a 33-inch Douglas fir located at 18410 901h Ave. W. The subject tree has a diameter at breast height (DBH) greater than 24 inches and so is subject to the emergency ordinance for landmark trees adopted under Ordinance No. 4217. Ordinance No. 4217 allows for the removal of landmark trees outside of the development review process only if the tree is a hazard or nuisance as defined by Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 23.10.020.G and 23.10.020.K. Ordinance No. 4218 adopted new tree code in Chapter 23.10 ECDC, which includes the documentation required to justify the removal of hazard and nuisance trees exempt from permit in ECDC 23.10.040.F. For landmark hazard trees not located on slopes greater than 25%, ECDC 23.10.040.F.2 provides: Hazard tree located outside a critical area with a tree risk assessment prepared by the applicant's qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. On April 19, 2021, you provided documentation to justify that the subject fir meets the standard for removal as a hazard tree: "Hazard tree" means a tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, structurally defective or exposed by recent removal of adjacent trees, which makes it subject to a high probability of failure as determined by a qualified tree professional. The attached arborist report identifies the fir as a high hazard due to a poorly formed top, a twisted trunk, a lean toward the house, and fungal growth in a cavity near the base. The proposed method to cure the various defects is to remove the tree. As a result, the removal of the referenced fir tree as a hazard per ECDC 23.10.040.F.2 is allowed subject to the following conditions: 1. Trees shall be fell onto private property. 2. Vehicles and equipment shall be located on private property. Should it be necessary to utilize any portion of the City right-of-way, including the street or sidewalk, to perform any of this work then the contractor shall apply for and obtain a right-of-way construction permit in advance of starting work. A traffic control plan will be required as part of the right-of-way permit application. 3. Contractor/owner is responsible for keeping all debris on site and preventing any silt laden runoff from leaving the site and/or entering the city storm system. 4. Contractor/owner shall repair/replace any damaged sections of curb/gutter, sidewalk, or other public improvements in City right-of-way per City standards that is caused by or occurs during the permitted project. 5. Contractor/owner is responsible for locating all on -site utilities and any utilities on neighboring properties that could be impacted by the tree removal. Relocation/revision/repair to any utilities may require separate permit. If you have any questions, please contact me at michael.clugston@edmondswa.gov or 425-771- 0220. Sincerely, Mike Clugston, AICP Senior Planner Attachments ABC Herron Tree LLC P.O. Box 64 Gold Bar, WA 98251 425-293-2443 FROW. NO mountainredd@comcast.net Certified Tree Risk Assessor (TRAQ) Journeyman Tree Trimmer ISA certified Arborist PN-6967A April 16, 2021 Monica Littlejohn 18410 90th Ave W Edmonds, WA 98026 RE: 18410 90th Ave W, Edmonds 98026 Parcel00638500000300 Lot Size — .31 sq acres Dear Ms. Littlejohn, ABC Herron Tree LLC is pleased to submit this report compiling the Visual Tree Risk and Evaluation Assessments performed on one tree located on Parcel 00638500000300, as shown on the map in my report. Visual Tree Assessments is an outlined process in accordance with TRAQ (Tree Risk Assessment Qualification) program and is a recognized standard of care by the ISA International Society of Arboriculture to evaluate tree health and risk. All tree assessments were made with a level 2 inspection. Our services were required as per our agreement dated and authorized to begin on April 14, 2021. I have included a detailed report of my findings below, along with a formal Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form. Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have. Yours, CB'71 yi/VL219,111 Cody Herron Page 2 of 8 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds Contents: • Assignment • Personal qualifications, scope of work and methodology • Methods used to determine tree location and tree health • Site Plan • Tree Assessment Matrix • Discussion • Photos • References • Waiver of Liability Attachments: • Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Assignment On April 14, 20211 was asked to complete a tree risk evaluation regarding one tree located on the property at 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds as addressed per the Snohomish County Assessor. Personal qualifications, scope of work and methodology: The knowledge I used to evaluate the trees comes from 22 years of experience in the tree care industry, including two years of schooling from South Seattle Community College. I am a recognized Journeyman Tree trimmer through IBEW with 12 years of experience (International Brotherhood Electrical Workers). I also have 10 years' experience as an ISA certified arborist, including six years working for Snohomish County PUD as an arborist I am also currently employed by King County as a Vegetation Specialist Arborist for the DOT. In addition, I have worked for Seattle City Light and Washington Department of Transportation in performing tree maintenance, mitigation and noxious weed control. In addition to my experience and ISA certification maintained and in good standing, I am also TRAQ certified (Tree Risk Assessment Qualified). I have relied on my training in these areas to perform the duties outlined. I followed the protocol delineated by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) for Level 2 Visual Assessment Process. By doing so I am examining each tree independently as well as collectively as groups or stands of trees provide stability and can lower risk of independent tree failure. This scientific process examines tree health (e.g. size, vigor, and insect and disease process) as well as site condition (soil, conditions nursery stumps, anaerobic conditions, compaction etc.). A key part of tree risk assessment is to categorize the likelihood of failure, of one or more branches, the stem, or the roots. Visual assessment includes looking for and determining the significance of the defects and structural conditions. Some structural defects or conditions are Cody Herron ABC Herron Tree LLC 425-293-2443 ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6967A Certified Tree Risk Assessor mountainredd@comcast.net Page 3 of 8 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds more likely to lead to failure than others. Individual defects or conditions may not by themselves indicate a serious structural problem, but in combination with other conditions they may contribute to failure. All tree species have widely varying lifespans and tolerance capabilities to wound healing from damage caused by biotic and abiotic forces. Knowledge of failure patterns (Disease, lifespan, environmental conditions and species characteristics) associated with different species is critical in making effective reports. Methods used to determine tree location and tree health: Tree diameter was measured with forester's tape. Tree dripline and height were measured with a Nikon Pro laser range finder or tape. Tree is tagged with Dymo Rhino aluminum labeler numerical impression and pink ribbon. All measurements and notes are recorded in digital formatting on site. An Wad Generation 7 is used to record the data and pictures to help illustrate the findings. Nikon , PRO TAPE 9MMOT W GRAN Cody Herron ABC Herron Tree LLC 425-293-2443 ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6967A Certified Tree Risk Assessor mountainredd@comcast.net Page 4 of 8 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds Site Map Discussion I arrived on site at about 9:00am on April 16, 2021.The assigned tree was a large Douglas fir. This tree is close to the fence line on the south side of the property. This tree has a defective top that was likely damaged at some point in its existence. This tree also has a small cavity with some minor fungal activity present. The north side of the tree is exhibiting signs of dieback with dead limbs throughout. This tree top is overhanging the neighboring property to the south 18508. Because of the defective nature the top, this tree is a high risk and removal is recommended. Page 5 of 8 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds ABC Herron Tree Tree Assessment Matrix Consulting Tree Risk Arbonst 425-293-2443 ABC HERRON TREE • Mountainredd@conicast.net Tree Species DBH (in) Drip (ft) I CRZ (ft) Vigor Structure Risk Pres. Value Recommendations I Douglas fir 33.2 20.0 33.2 3 fair 2 Poor High 4 Wj- remova Pscudotsuga men�esii N "his tree has a small cavity with fungal evidence at the base. This tree has limb die back on the north side. This tree has an abnormal trunk structure with top/canopy damage at about 70 feet n u m O W Z O Page 7 of 8 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds References: ANSI A300 (Pat 1) — 2008 American National Standards Institute. American National standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance: Standard Practices (Pruning). New yok: Tree Care Industry Association, 2008. Coder, Dr. Kim D. Construction Damage Assessments: Tree and Sites. University of Georgia. October 1996. Ashley, Burl S. 1980 Reference handbook for foresters. USDA NA-FR-15. 35 pp. Dirr, Michael A. Manual of Woody Landscape Plants, Their Identification, Ornamental Characteristics, Culture, Propagation, and Uses. Champaign: Stipes Publishing Company, 1990. Dunster & Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd. Assessing Trees in Urban Areas and the Urban- Rural Interface. US Release 1.0. Silverton: Pacific Northwest Chapter ISA, 2006. Dunster, J. A. 2003. Preliminary Species Profiles for Tree Failure Assessment. Bowen Island: Dunster & Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd. Dunster, Julian A., E. Thomas Smiley, Nelda Matheny and Sharon Lilly. Tree Risk Assessment Manual. Champaign, Illinois: International Society of Arboriculture, 2013. Harris, Richard W, James Clark, and Nelda Matheny. Arboriculture, Integrated Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs, and Vines. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2004. Lilly, Sharon. Arborists' Certification Study Guide. Champaign, IL: The International Society of Arboriculture, 2001. Matheny, Nelda and Clark, James R. A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas. Second Edition. Champaign, IL: The International Society of Arboriculture, 1994. Matheny, Nelda and Clark, James R. Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees during Land Development. Champaign, IL: The International Society of Arboriculture, 1998. Mattheck, Claus and Breloer, Helge. The Body Language of Trees: A Handbook for Failure Analysis. London: HMSO, 1994 Schwarze, Francis W.M.R. Diagnosis and Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in Urban Trees. Australia: ENSPEC Pty Ltd. 2008 Sinclair, Wayne A., Lyon, Howard H., and Johnson, Warren T. Diseases of Trees and Shrubs. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1987.Prince, Susan Duvall Visual Tree Assessment Feb 2018. Smiley, E. Thomas, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly, Tree Risk Assessment Best Management Practices, ANSI A300 Part 9: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management— Standard Practices (Tree Risk Assessment: Tree Structure Assessment). The International Society of Arboriculture Press. Champaign. IL. 2011. Thies, Walter G. and Sturrock, Rona N. Laminated root rot in Western North American. United States Department of Agriculture. Pacific Northwest. Resource Bulletin PNW-GTR-349. April 1999 Cody Herron ABC Herron Tree LLC 425-293-2443 ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6967A Certified Tree Risk Assessor mountainredd@comcast.net Page 8 of 8 18410 901h Ave W, Edmonds Waiver of Liability There are many conditions affection 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 trees' health and stability. Adverse 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. Any legal description provided to the consultant -appraiser is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matter legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management the tree evaluation consists of an external visual inspection of an individual tree's root flare, trunk, and canopy from the ground. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/appraiser can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. Sketches, maps, diagrams, graphs and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aid, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or survey. 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 insured. It is the responsibility of the property owner to obtain all required permits form city, county state, for federal agencies. It is the responsibility of the property owner to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and permit conditions. If there is a homeowner's 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 authorizations from the client. Furthermore, the evaluator in no way holds that the opinions and recommendations are the only actions required to ensure that the tree will not fail. A second opinion is recommended. The client shall hold the evaluator harmless for any and all injuries of damages incurred if the evaluator's recommendations are not followed of for acts of nature beyond the evaluator's reasonable expectations, such as severer winds, excessive rains, heavy snow loads, etc. The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of the report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement This report and all attachments, enclosures, and references, are confidential and are for the use of the client concerned. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. They may not be reproduced, used in any way of dispersed in any form without the prior consent of the client concerned and ABC Herron Tree LLC. This report constitutes a whole. No single piece of part can be used without the entire text. Any use or restricted copying nullifies the entire report. Cody Herron ABC Herron Tree LLC 425-293-2443 ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6967A Certified Tree Risk Assessor mountainredd@comcast.net ISA. Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Client Monica Littlejohn Address/Tree location 18410 90th Ave W Edmonds WA Tree species Douglas Fir Pseudotsuga menziesii Assessor(s) Cody Herron PN 6967A Date 4/16/2021 Tree no dbh 33.2" Height 100' Time frame 30 min Tools use Target Assessment Time 9:00am i Sheet 1 _ Crown spread dia. 40' Rangefinder/Tape/I pad of 2 Target zone Occupancy M1• r a 3 = y t 2 rate 1—rare $ ,, m c F Target description d a c 3 x u1 z—occasional F W ` F F 1Z ai ~ —frequent3 u> u Fv 3 4—costant a` E W a 1 House ✓ 4 N N 2 Fence ✓ 4 N N 3 4 Site Factors History of failures Several significant Topography FlatM Slope❑ N/A % Aspect N/A Site changes None 0 Grade change ❑ Site clearing❑ Changed soil hydrology❑ Root cuts❑ Describe None Soil conditions Limited volume 0 Saturated ❑ Shallow Compacted ❑ Pavement over roots ❑ 0 % Describe N/A Prevailing wind direction SW Common weather Strong winds 0 Ice ❑ Snow ❑ Heavy rain ❑ Describe Winter winds Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low 0 Normal ❑ High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal) ❑ None (dead) ❑ Normal 75 % Chlorotic 0 % Necrotic 25 % Pests Sapsuker Abiotic Species failure profile BranchesE TrunkM Roots❑ Describe nvPrhalanrariPxtPnriarllimhs Load Factors Wind exposure Protected ❑ Partial0 Full ❑ Wind funneling❑ None Relative crown size Small ❑ Medium 0 Large ❑ Crowndensity Sparse0 Normal❑ Dense[] Interior branches Few❑ Normal0 Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ None Recent or planned change in load factors Removal of several trees may impact windfirmenss Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — Unbalanced crown 0 LCR 70 % Cracks ❑ None Lightning damage ❑ Dead twigs/branches ❑ 25 %overall Max. dia. 5" Codominant ❑ None Included bark ❑ Broken/Hangers Number 0 Max. dia. 0 Overextended Weak attachments 0 Cavity/Nest hole n % circ. Over -extended branches 0 Pruning history Previous branch failures 0 5 Similar branches present 0 Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ Flush cuts 0 Other Response growth o.,,,,- li-1- Ai- h,,L .,+h Main concern(s) Limb die back on the north side of the tree crown has a abnormal growth shape Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant 0 Abnormal trunk disfigurement at 70' Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable 0 Imminent ❑ Weak attachment at abnormal trunk attachment —Trunk — — Roots and Root Collar — Dead/Missing bark ❑ Abnormal bark texture/color 0 Collar buried/Not visible ❑ Depth 0 Stem girdling ❑ Codominant stems ❑ Included bark ❑ Cracks ❑ Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms 0 Sapwood damage/decay ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sap ooze ❑ Ooze ❑ Cavity 0 15 % circ. Lightning damage ❑ Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Cracks 0 Cut/Damaged roots ❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole % circ. Depth Poor taper ❑ Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness 0 Lean 15 ° Corrected? None Response growth None Response growth None Main concern(s) Abnormal trunk canopy area twist. Heavy Main concern(s) Fungal growth around the base of the tree lean towards the house to the south. with a minor cavity. Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant 0 Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant 0 Likelihood of failure Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable 0 Imminent ❑ Improbable ❑ Possible 0 Probable ❑ Imminent ❑ Page I of 2 Risk Categorization Likelihood -0 E u a) -0 Consequences Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) c N +° Risk rating s „ a c Conditions L ° °' uLa Tar et g o a N o f 2 3 m v v, £ Y Y �, r- G a) of part (from c°� Tree part of concern a LL protection £ a a > ° _ ° > z 0 0 Matrix 2) Trunk/ 25" 70' 1 None 0000000 • 0000000 High 1 Canopy 25" 70' 2 None 0I0I0O 000I 1 aOI 0 000 High 01000 0 00 00 000 0000 O( 00 00 000 0000 0000 0 000 2 00000 0 000 0000 0000 000 O O 3 0000 0000 00000001 00I0101000010010000000 0000 O 00 000 000 4 101010111001000000100 010100 O 00 OI00 000 Matrix I. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impacting Target 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 Matrix2. 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 This tree has several defects. The Top canopy trunk has a abnormal twist with a heavy lean towards the south. There is a minor cavity at the base of the tree that also exhibits fungal growth. Because of the defects and potential targets removal of thsi tree is recomended. Mitigation options Removal and mitigation of tree 1:1 replanting or city code and spec. North Residual risk Low Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk Overall tree risk rating Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High 0 Extreme ❑ Work priority 1 ❑ 2 ❑ 3 M 4 ❑ Overall residual risk Low 0 Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme ❑ Recommended inspection interval None Data M Final ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ONo ❑Yes-Type/Reason Level II inspection Inspection limitations ONone ❑Visibility ❑Access ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe None This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and is intended for use by Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (TRAQ) arborists — 2013 Page 2 of 2