Loading...
APPROVED PLN Tree Removal PLN2024-0071CITY OF EDMONDS 121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION `nc. I S9� DATE: September 9, 2024 TO: David Bigelow FROM: Carmen Smith, Planner carmen.smith(@edmondswa.Rov RE: Hazard Tree Removal (PLN2024-0071) 23027 102nd PI W, Edmonds WA Thank you for applying for a hazard tree removal at 23027 102" d PI W. The site is improved with a single-family residence, is subdividable, and is located within the Deer Creek Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (CARA). Tree removal is not a regulated activity in CARAs per ECDC 23.60.030. The tree meets hazard criteria per the submitted TRAQ form and arborist report. The removal of one hazard tree has been approved per ECDC 23.10.040 and as recommended by your arborist. As mentioned, since tree removal is not a regulated activity in CARAs, the removal does not require replacements. If you have any questions, please let me know at either carmen.smith@edmondswa.gov or 425-771- 0220 ext. 1278. Feel free to print this memorandum as verification of an approved tree removal request. Disclaimer: Only the one tree indicated in this application can be removed from the property. All other tree removals on this property would require separate permits. Sincerely, Carmen Smith, Planner RECEIVED 9/5/2024 CITY OF EDMONDS CITY OF EDMONDS MyBuildingPermit.com PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Clearing and Grading Application #1542637 - Sequoia removal / replacement Applicant First Name Last Name Company Name David Bigelow Number Street Apartment or Suite Number E-mail Address 2323 Lincoln St dvdbigelow@gmail.com City State Zip Phone Number Extension Everett WA 98203 (206) 504-0355 Contractor Company Name ECOTREENW INC Number Street Apartment or Suite Number 6416 176th ST SW City State Zip Phone Number Extension LYNNWOOD WA 98037 (206) 337-2422 State License Number License Expiration Date UBI # E-mail Address ECOTRI*822KA 5/1/2026 Rn49114R1 dvdbigelow@gmail.com Project Location Number Street Floor Number Suite or Room Number 23027 102ND PL W City Zip Code County Parcel Number EDMONDS 98020 00610700201801 Associated Building Permit Number Tenant Name Additional Information (i.e. equipment location or special instructions)_ Work Location Property Owner First Name Last Name or Company Name Lesly Ann Kaplan Number Street Apartment or Suite Number 23027 102ND PL W City State Zip EDMONDS WA 98020-5133 Certification Statement - The applicant states: I certify that I am the owner of this property or the owner's authorized agent. If acting as an authorized agent, I further certify that I have full power and authority to file this application and to perform, on behalf of the owner, all acts required to enable the jurisdiction to process and review such application. I have furnished true and correct information. I will comply with all provisions of law and ordinance governing this type of application. If the scope of work requires a licensed contractor to perform the work, the information will be provided prior to permit issuance. Date Submitted: 9/5/2024 Submitted By: David Bigelow Page 1 of 2 i CITY OF EDMONDS MyBuildingPermit.com Clearing and Grading Application #1542637 - Sequoia removal / replacement Project Contact Company Name: Name: Address: David Bigelow 2323 Lincoln St Everett WA 98203 Project Type Single Family Residential Email: dvdbigelow@gmail.com Phone #: (206) 504-0355 Activity Type Scope of Work Hazard Tree Removal Tree Removal Project Name: Sequoia removal / replacement Description of Work: Sequoia mitigation Project Details Primary Use Other Tree Information Total number of trees to be removed Description (species, diameter) Location (front yard, back yard, etc.) 1 Sequoia in decline. Approximately 40 inches diameter at standard height Front yard Page 2 of 2 r RECEIVED MyBuildingPermit.com 9/5/2024 Jurisdiction: Edmonds CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Project Name: Sequoia removal replacement DEPARTMENT Application ID: 1542637 Supplemental Name: Applicant Certification - Planning The applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. The property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership of the applicant or that the application has been submitted with the consent of all owners of the affected property. I certify, under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington, that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on behalf of the owner of the subject property. I do so certify. RECEIVED 9/5/2024 CITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Prepared by: David Bigelow ISA Certified Arborist Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PN-9725A Arborist Report for 23027 102nd Pl W, Edmonds, WA Date of Report: August 27, 2024 Client: Lesly Kaplan Parcel 9 00610700201801 Scope of Work August 27th, 2024 This report details the risk assessment of a Sequoia tree located in the front yard of 23027 102nd PI W, Edmonds, WA. The primary goals were to evaluate the health and structural integrity of the tree and to provide recommendations for managing any risks identified. Summary of Findings The Sequoia (Sequoiadendron giganteum) is a mature tree approximately 80 feet tall with a 40- inch diameter at breast height (DBH) and a 30-foot crown spread. The tree is showing signs of significant decline, including dead and missing bark, sapwood decay, and structural concerns that could lead to failure. Methodology The assessment included both visual and aerial inspections, adhering to the standards set by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA). The evaluation focused on identifying defects that could compromise the tree's stability and assessing the likelihood of failure. Key Findings 1. Trunk Condition: • Dead/Missing Bark: Significant portions of the trunk have missing bark, with some areas showing sapwood decay. This suggests internal decay and weakening of the tree's structure. • Abnormal Bark Texture/Color: The bark texture is irregular and discolored in several areas, indicating stress and potential decay. • Heartwood Decay: Internal decay is suspected, which could compromise the trunk's ability to support the tree. • Sapwood Damage/Decay: Extensive sapwood decay was noted, particularly in the lower trunk, which could lead to structural failure. 2. Crown and Branches: • Dead Twigs/Branches: There are dead twigs and branches throughout the crown, with some branches having a maximum diameter of 3 inches. • Weak Attachments: Weak attachments were observed, particularly in the upper crown where the tree has been previously topped. These weak points are susceptible to failure, especially under load. • Cavity/Nest Hole: A cavity was observed in the crown, which could harbor decay and further weaken the tree structure. • Over -extended Branches: The tree has several over -extended branches, increasing the risk of breakage, especially during storms or heavy winds. 3. Roots and Root Collar: Compacted Soil: The roots are growing in compacted soil, which restricts their ability to anchor the tree effectively and can lead to instability. Pavement Over Roots: A significant portion of the root system is covered by pavement, limiting root expansion and contributing to the tree's decline. Root Damage: The presence of sap ooze and other signs of distress suggests possible root damage, though this was not confirmed with excavation. 4. Environmental Stress Factors: Wind Exposure: The tree is exposed to both partial and full wind, which increases the load on its compromised structure. This is particularly concerning given the tree's height and size. Common Weather: The tree is in an area prone to strong winds, which further stresses its structural integrity. 5. Load Factors: Relative Crown Size: The crown is normal in density but shows signs of stress from the surrounding environmental conditions. The load on the tree's weak attachments is significant, particularly with the expected increase in wind exposure due to nearby tree removals. pg. 2 6. Target Assessment: Target Description: The tree is located near a private road, infrastructure (including sewer lines), and areas frequently occupied by people. The risk to both property and public safety is high. Occupancy Rate: The occupancy rate of the area is "frequent" to "constant," meaning there is a substantial risk of impact in the event of a tree failure. Recommendations Primary Action - Complete Removal: Due to the tree's compromised health and structural integrity, full removal is recommended to eliminate the associated risks. Alternative Option - Habitat Pole: If complete removal is not feasible, consider reducing the tree to a habitat pole. However, this option will still require ongoing monitoring. Site Monitoring: Monitor the site for any changes in environmental conditions or additional stress factors, particularly if nearby tree removals proceed as planned. This could increase the wind load on the remaining tree. Additional Comments The tree poses a significant threat to nearby infrastructure and public safety. Immediate action is necessary to prevent potential hazards. The anticipated removal of nearby trees by PUD (Public Utility District) will likely exacerbate the risks by increasing wind exposure. Limitations This report is based on the tree's condition at the time of inspection. Trees are dynamic, living organisms, and their health and structural stability can change due to various factors. No guarantee is provided regarding future conditions, and further assessments may be required if conditions change. These detailed reports incorporate all relevant observations and provide comprehensive guidance for managing the risks associated with the trees. Should you need further assistance or additional assessments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully submitted, David Bigelow 2323 Lincoln St Everett WA, 98203 (206) 504-0355 pg. 3 dvdbigelow@gmail.com ISA Certified Arborist #PN9725A Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Site map North , k 'On$ 23027 i 1 f� Private road - Tree 1, Tree appears to be r ' solely on the sequoia, proposed property of 23027. �- for See arb report for removal pictures. J - �' _- � OIL.' • 11 � � - r, �c / r. '-? 23019 23029 a ,t 40 ^' �` �'r ./ r•+ Ali 9�y ;`,,jl i�-� / /.j M �,/, f tf � `1r �'V � + r •Irir A .�`. 1 r� , •� ���/' � sue. -� Y.%� 'l ,�'� r � i IPA 401 r Dead limbs - � .� ;'fir/ / �1,. ,t!'..�3 �T,.+1�' •'r. �� ��° ��5�.. � �= �y :a l� s� r rt 3 _ ` ;.-� t' :f ••r' y:s�`�'�• ; � `� ' met. �''� :i • � Via+ e•- 4P :A1)paN4tly i « ' k Vf.7� f�`J... .��"'s'�:: •'a. _ `i.. mil. `.hv f rn' n• �;w� �� �• jj h ftf_1'j.% or 10, '� � ..� �'� •f+Y t ,ivy. ,/ � < 441 LE JI m tp Tree 1 tR ` -- 2 fir tree marked for removal -by PU, V � ✓ , .r '�� ' , mac. 04 `�. E :: _ • .• � ., ,, .�� ,,-fir ,�� `s pg. 12 w7- Wk Risk Assessment Form ISA. Basic Tree Client Lesly Kaplan (425) 772-7144 lannkaplan@hotmail com Address/Tree location 23027 102nd pl w Edmonds WA Front yard Tree species Sequoia, Sequoiadendron giganteum Assessor(s) David Bigelow ISA certified arborist / tree risk assessor PN9725A Date 8/22/2024 Tree no dbh 40 inches Height 80 feet Tools used Visual / aerial inspection RECEIVED Target Assessment Time 12pm Sheet 1 of 1 Crown spread dia. 30 feet Time frame 3 months v 9/5/2024 Target zone Occupancy M1• _ 3 CITY of EDMONDs & DEVELOPMENT Target description Target protection •y •�' r ratetw 1-rare3= a R FPLANNING i DEPARTMENT a x2—occasional 3-frequent F a >'Ln F N V F F F 'Xi F 4-constant i o E a EL 1 People in area none 3 In n 2 Cars on private road none ✓ 2 in n 3 Infrastructure (road, sewer, overhead lines) soil ✓ 4 n In 4 Site Factors History of failures none known Topography FlatO Slope❑ % Aspect Site changes None ❑ Grade change ❑ Site clearing ❑ Changed soil hydrology@ Root cuts ❑ Describe Tree 1 surrounded by trees and pavement Soil conditions Limited volume ❑ Saturated ❑ Shallow ❑ Compacted @ Pavement over roots @ 80 % Describe Driveway and road on N and S Prevailing wind direction NE Common weather Strong winds @ Ice ❑ Snow ❑ Heavy rain ❑ Describe all in moderation Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low @ Normal ❑ High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal) ❑ None (dead) ❑ Normal 70 % Chlorotic % Necrotic 30 % Pests/Biotic unknown cause of tissue damage see arborist report for photos Abiotic Species failure profile Branches @ Trunk @ Roots ❑ Describe not a strong fibered wood. known to fail under seasonal load changes. Load Factors Wind exposure Protected ❑ Partial @ Full @ Wind funneling❑ proposed nearby removals by PUD Relative crown size Small ❑ Medium 0 Large ❑ Crowndensity Sparse❑ Normal@ Dense❑ Interior branches Few❑ Normal@ Dense❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ Recent or expected change in load factors proposed nearby removals by PUD of large fir trees. this will increase wind throw. Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — Unbalanced crown ❑ LCR 60 % Cracks ❑ Lightning damage ❑ Dead twigs/branches @ 30 %overall Max. dia. 31n Codominant ❑ Included bark ❑ Broken/Hangers Number Max. dia. Weak attachments@ dead branches Cavity/Nest hole 15 %circ. Over -extended branches ❑ Previous branch failures ❑ Similar branches present ❑ Pruning history Dead/Missing bark @ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay 13 Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised 0 Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ dead branches Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑ Flush cuts ❑ Other Response growth Condition (s) of concern large caliber dieing / dead top and branches unknown reason for decline. see arborist report for photos Part Size 3in/10ft long Fall Distance 75ft Part Size 16in / 25 ft tall Fall Distance 75ft Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant 0 Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant[A Likelihood of improbable Possible Probable @ Imminent ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable @ Imminent ❑ —Trunk — — Roots and Root Collar — bark @ Abnormal bark texture/color @ Collar buried/Not visible @ Depth Stem girdling ❑ stems ❑ Included bark ❑ Cracks ❑ Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Sapwood damage/decay @ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sap ooze @ Ooze ❑ Cavity ❑ % circ. Lightning damage[] Heartwood decay[] Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Cracks ❑ Cut/Damaged roots ❑ Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole 15 % circ. Depth Poor taper ❑ Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness ❑ Lean 0 Corrected? Response growth poor Response growth Damage to infrastructure above and below ground Condition (s) of concern Condition (s) of concern truck section at approximate 50ft and above Part Size 16in / 25ft tall Fall Distance 75ft Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant @ Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor @ Moderate ❑ Significant ❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible❑ Probable @ Imminent ❑ Likelihood of failure improbable Possible Probable ❑ Imminent @ Page I of 2 Risk Categorization Target (Target number or description) Tree part Conditions) of concern Likelihood Consequences Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) v m 0 fl a a 5 o a a) E 3 o L j 3 w m x > Y t 3 E con w > v � > � no Z c m c in „ A." 1 Crown upper trunk Dead / dying top 1*1 Mod 2 • • • *1 Low 3 • • • • High 3 Roots Infrastructure dam. 1 10 • • • Mod Matrix 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 Matrix 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 Removing the top will effect the tree's ability to shed snow. This will cause more branch failures Kids were frequently near the tree during my site visit. PUD is removing 2 nearby fir trees. This will increase wind load on defect. Damage to underground sewer and water lines would be "Significant". That would increase the risk rating of roots to "High". Excavation was not performed during site visit. Mitigation options 1 Removal 2 Reduce to habitat pole 3. 4. North Residual risk zero Residual risk low Residual risk Residual risk Overall tree risk rating Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High 8 Extreme ❑ Overall residual risk None ❑ Low 8 Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme ❑ Recommended inspection interval N/A Data 8 Final []Preliminary Advanced assessment needed @No ❑Yes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations ❑None ❑Visibility ❑Access ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe Roots near water and sewer lines are buried This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) 2017 Page 2 of 2