APPROVED RESUB2 BLD2021-1719+Tree_Retention_or_Preservation_Plan+6.20.2022_1.42.20_PM+2942467NE 1/4, SEC 19, TWP 27N, RGE 4E, W.M.
0.0 I I I I
;ONC 1E f70.35 (E)
,ONC I1E ±70.25 (W) I
II EXIB II _
TO 83.09 / — — — _ I I ,,— I I I EX SSMH
— 8"PCONC 1E 88.57 (W)
I SD—�—SD— —�—SD— _ ® — ---—----------------------
WM
-—�T—S—--SS—G�---G— ��� --_SD — I�,�— -------------
SI I ,
G----
i .—---- SS-----G------G----
—S� 58�---SS—�--
ool I i' f/ ----- -T,-----�—��— SS ---
_ _ _ 14.00_ _ 203RD S,�' SW 15+00 — I ,-'
�I -t-w--- ,--- -- I
L--SD —I—SD \ SD--- LSD ----SD
�/ I W--—W SE) W—Ja-'W— Tj�--W----W—--W--- W�—
8 DI H
—I — — -f-- — — — — — — — 4 — — — — -- --- L------_-------------J L--------- —
lk
TREE PROTECTION FENCING AS REQUIRED. -- I ( /` %I I \�� 12"CED1
CONTRACTOR SHALL READ THE TREE
PROTECTION NOTES (ON SHEET GN-01) AND
PROJECT ARBOR/ST REPORT LETTER (BY , E
CREATIVE LANDSCAPE SOLUTIONS) PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION. THE PROJECT ARBOR/ST
SHALL BE CONSULTED AND SUPERVISE ALL
WORK WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE/CANOPY OF ANY TREE TO BE RETAINED.
TREE PROTECTION FENCING AS REQUIRED.
CONTRACTOR SHALL READ THE TREE
PROTECTION NOTES (ON SHEET GN-01) AND
PROJECT ARBOR/ST REPORT LETTER (BY
CREATIVE LANDSCAPE SOLUTIONS) PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION. THE PROJECT ARBOR/ST
SHALL BE CONSULTED AND SUPERVISE ALL
WORK WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE/CANOPY OF ANY TREE TO BE RETAINED.
�..
T_
Ow
r-
IF
XN
I
I
7)
171
I I 584
I
eN I
2
I- - - - 1\X\111A_
!/ K
I � I
V ,
EX/ST/N TREES
TO REMA N (TYP)
0
B,
,
EXISTING ROCKERY
IN TREE DR/PL/NE
TO REMAIN I a
le
d
I �
TREE PROTECTION FENCING AS REQU/REp.
CONTRACTOR SHALL READ THE TREE
PROTECTION NOTES (ON SHEET GN-01) AND
PROJECT ARBOR/ST REPORT LETTER (BY
CREATIVE LANDSCAPE SOLUTIONS) PRIOR TO
CONSTRUCTION. THE PROJECT ARBOR/ST
SHALL BE CONSULTED AND SUPERVISE ALL
WORK WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT
ZONE/CANOPY OF ANY TREE TO BE RETAINED.
LOT 1
I
SHORT PLAT S-99-167
A.F. NO. 200007055001
LOT 2
TREE RETENT/ON/MITIGATION AREA
(CROSS —HA TCHED AREA)
SEE TREE REPLACEMENT PLAN L — 1
BY WBLA, INC. DATED 12117121
SCALE. 1 " = 20'
0 10 20 40
TREE LEGEND
TREE TAG NUMBER
XXX XXX
- EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED
XXX rEXISTING
DRIP LINE
\ TREE TO REMAIN
TREE PROTECTION FENCING
(LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE)
TREE DENSITY CAL COLA T/ON
Total significant trees on site
35
-3
Note: dead or "poor" condition trees per Ctty
reviewlapprovad are not candidates for retention
or mitigation (#582, 719, 720).
Non -viable trees
Total viable trees on site
32
Proposed retained viable trees
20
Includes Tree U701 per City reviewjapproval
Proposed removed viable trees
that require mitigation per
ECDC 23.10.060,C.4
12
4 REMOVED VIABLE
TREES BY DBH
REQUIRED
MITIGATION
(3) 6-10" DBH
3 new trees
(3) 10.1-14" DBH
6 new trees
(4) 14.1-24" DBH
12 new trees
(2) >24" DBH
Appraised value total
$58,900.00
TOTAL MITIGATION BASED ON PROPOSED TREE
REMOVALS = 21 new trees + $58,900
Minimum 30% tree retention
Note: applicant exceeds the minimum 30°1
requirement for short plat
(10)
tree retention threshold by retaining 20
development
significant viable trees out of 32.
Minimum 50% retention to
Note: applicant exceeds 50% tree retention
waive fees in lieu of replacing
16
threshold by retaining 20 significant viable
appraised >24" DBH trees
trees out of 32.
TREE RETENTION NOTES
1. IF TREE RETENTION FALLS BELOW THE 509 THRESHOLD, THE
APPLICANT SHALL PAY THE APPRAISED VALUES OF REMOVED
VIABLE TREES GREATER THAN 24" DBH OR OTHER
APPLICABLE FEES IN LIEU, TO THE CI TY S TREE FUND.
2. TREE(S) IDENTIFIED FOR REPLACEMENT IN RELATION TO A
PERMIT OR PLAN, SHALL, AS A CONDITION OF PERMIT
ISSUANCE, RECORD A NOTICE ON TITLE OF THE EXISTENCE
OF SUCH PROTECTED TREES AGAINST THE PROPERTY WITH
THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY AUDITORS OFFICE.
Approved 6/30-22 TREE DPowers
OFFSITE TREES
Proposed
CRZ/TPZ/LOD
Action
Drip-
Retain
Radius in feet
Tree
Species
DBH
Adj.
line
Wind-
OK in
#
Tag
DBH
Health
Defects/Comments
>.
#
ID
inches
inches
radius
firm
Grove
feet
"
'0
a�
N
W
E
S
a)
-r-
1
A
White
20
20
20
OK
Typical of species
1
20
8
20
20
Douglas
Previous top loss, coning,
2
B
fir
18
18
15
OK
typical of species
1
15
8
15
15
6
Previous top loss,
3
C
Hemlock
14
14
over
Poor
asymmetric canopy towards
1
6
6
6
6
fence
west
Western
15
4
D
red cedar
20
20
over
OK
Typical of species
1
15
15
10
15
fence
Douglas
12
5
E
fir
22
22
over
OK
Typical of species
1
12
12
7
12
fence
4 1
ONS/TE TREES
Proposed
Action
CRZ/TPZ/LOD
0
aEi
Retain
Remove
Radius in feet
Tree
Species
DBH
Adj.
Drip-
line
Wind
OK in
c
y
a
v
#
Tag
ID
(in)
DBH
radius
firm
Grove
Health
Defects/Comments
,
,
N +_
v
m
a,
y
L
v
a�i
>
N
W
E
S
a
=
c
c
o oL
>
EE
v
1
577
Douglas
fir
14
14
14
OK
Typical of species
1
14
14
14
14
1
2
2
578
Douglas
12
12
12
OK
Co -dominant canopy,
1
12
12
12
12
1
2
fir
typical of species
Asymmetric canopy towards
3
579
Madrona
6
6
9
OK
east, lean towards east,
1
9
9
9
9
1
1
typical of species
Lean towards east,
4
581
Madrona
8
8
12
OK
asymmetric canopy towards
1
12
12
12
12
1
1
east, typical of species
Bigleaf
Dead top, asymmetric
5
582
maple
10
10
8
Poor
canopy towards east, dead
1
8
8
8
8
1
wood broken branches
Calloused wound @ 10'
6
583
Elm
10
10
15
Fair
towards west, lean towards
1
15
15
15
15
1
1
west typical of species
Western
7
584
red
32
32
21
OK
Typical of species
1
21
21
21
21
1
cedar
Western
Thin canopy, asymmetric
8
585
red
17
17
12
OK
canopy towards east, typical
1
12
12
12
12
1
1
cedar
of species
Western
9
586
red
9
9
9
OK
Typical of species
1
9
9
9
9
1
1
cedar
Douglas
Thin canopy, previous top
10
587
fir
31
31
16
OK
loss, elongated branches,
1
16
16
16
16
1
1
typical of species
Suppressed canopy,
11
588
Douglas
8
8
8
OK
asymmetric canopy towards
1
8
8
8
8
1
1
fir
west, free flowing sap,
typical of species
Douglas
Asymmetric canopy towards
12
589
fir
22
22
14
OK
south, free flowing sap,
1
14
14
14
14
1
1
tVDical of s ecies
Asymmetric canopy towards
13
590
Douglas
20
20
15
Fair
south, low live crown ratio
1
15
15
15
15
1
1
fir
<30%, exposed roots,
typical of species
Low live crown ratio <20%,
Douglas
horizontal crack @ 50'
14
591
fir
19
19
12
Fair
towards east, typical of
1
12
12
12
12
1
1
species, bulge @ 4' towards
north
Western
Co -dominant leaders with
15
592
red
14
14
14
Fair
included bark x2 @ 10',
1
14
14
14
14
1
1
cedar
hanger, typical of species
Bigleaf
Moss and lichen, previous
16
701
maple
36
36
22
Poor *1
scaffold lost @ 40' towards
1
22
22
22
22
1
1
east
Douglas
Asymmetric canopy towards
17
702
fir
23
23
16
OK
south, dead wood, broken
1
16
16
16
16
1
1
branches, typical of species
Douglas
Low live crown ratio <30%,
18
703
fir
13
13
14
OK
asymmetric canopy towards
1
14
14
14
14
1
1
southwest, typical of species
Douglas
Previous top loss, elongated
19
704
fir
24
24
16
OK
branches, thin canopy,
1
16
16
16
16
1
1
ical of species
Western
Calloused wound @ 4'
20
705
red
16
16
14
OK
towards north, thin canopy,
1
14
14
14
14
1
1
cedar
typical of species
Western
Suppressed canopy, typical
21
706
red
10
10
8
OK
of species
1
8
8
8
8
1
1
cedar
Western
Thin canopy, asymmetric
22
707
red
25
25
12
OK
canopy towards south,
1
12
12
12
12
1
1
cedar
ical of s ecies
Douglas
Previous top loss, elongated
23
708
fir
16
16
18
Fair
branches, weak laterals,
1
18
18
18
18
1
1
exposed roots
Western
co -dominant canopy, thin
24
709
red
10
10
14
OK
canopy, typical of species
1
14
14
14
14
1
1
cedar
Girdling roots, cavity @ root
25
710
Bigleaf
32
32
22
OK
crown, co -dominant leaders
1
22
22
22
22
1
1
maple
with included bark x2 @ 25',
strong leaders
Western
Column of decay @ root
26
711
red
22
22
14
OK
crown up to 8' towards
1
14
14
14
14
1
1
cedar
northeast, thin canopy,
typical of species
Western
27
712
red
6
6
8
OK
Typical of species
1
8
8
8
8
1
1
cedar
Douglas
Typical of species,
28
713
fir
14
14
12
OK
asymmetric canopy towards
1
12
12
12
12
1
2
west
29
714
Douglas
24
24
18
OK
Typical of species
1
18
18
18
18
1
ir
Self -corrected lean towards
Douglas
north, asymmetric canopy
30
715
fir
16
16
16
OK
towards north, dead wood,
1
16
16
16
16
1
3
broken branches, dead
twigs, typical of species
Western
31
716
red
21
21
15
OK
Typical of species
1
15
15
15
15
1
3
cedar
Western
Topped @ 12', strong
32
717
red
16
16
14
OK
leader, typical of species
1
14
14
14
14
1
3
cedar
Western
33
718
red
18
18
16
OK
Typical of species
1
16
16
16
16
1
3
cedar
34
719
Bitter
cherry
10
10
18
Poor
Failing towards northwest
1
18
18
18
18
1
Moss and lichen, dead
Norway
wood, broken branches,
35
720
maple
14
14
10
Poor
cavity @ root crown up to 2'
1
10
10
10
10
1
towards south, horizontal
crack @ 5' towards south
*'Healthy per City of Edmonds assessment
BLD2021-1719
20 0 3 12
35 20 21
I�
Know what's helow.
Call before you dig.
RAMI
ENGINEERING, INC.
Civil Engineering / Land Planning
19109 36TH AVE W, SUITE 100
LYNNWOOD, WA 98036
PHONE: (425) 678-6960
WWW.RAMENGINEERINGINC.COM
Z�Q
�Lo_
O
WW
v
�
t
W
QC
W
W
O
O
U
U
h
ti
\
N
�
zI — IN
J
Q
J
Z p��
Z � N
W � �
O Q
Z
O
O �
N W
O
RESUB
Jun 21 2022
CITY OF EDMONDS
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
ENGINEER:
go WA l�
d
38608 'w
�ECISTEg�9
T .�/
,6//7/22
ROB L. LONG, PE
DRAWN BY:
MIKE MORRIS
ISSUE DATE: SCALE.•
1211 JI21 AS NOTED
JOB NO:
20-020
SHEET. TR-0
SH T I OF