Loading...
REVIEWED ENG RESUB3 BLD2023-0799+TREE ASSESSMENT+9.3.2024_9.53.13_AM+4476091BLD2023-0799 RESUB Sep 03 2024 CITY OF EDMONDS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ARBOR INFO LLC 2406 N Casde Way Brier, WA, 98036 Tree Assessment For Ryan and Sydney Cochran at 8475 Fredrick Place Edmonds, WA Date August 8, 2024 -------------- Reviewed by City of Edmonds ; Planning Division ' --------------- Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick Pl., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 Table of Contents 1. Introduction............................................................................................................... 3 2. Competence............................................................................................................... 3 3. Client........................................................................................................................ 3 4. Assignment, Purpose and Use of Report........................................................................ 3 5. Limits of Assignment.................................................................................................. 3 6. Site Description.......................................................................................................... 4 7. Methodology............................................................................................................. 4 8. Tree Description......................................................................................................... 5 9. Tree Removal/Retention............................................................................................. 7 10. Fee in Lieu Tree Appraisal........................................................................................ 7 11. Discussion and Tree Protections................................................................................ 9 12. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions...................................................................... 10 Tables Table-1 On -site Tree Summary.........................................................6 Table-2 Off -site Tree Summary........................................................6 Table-3 Root Zone Impacts............................................................10 Addenda I. Site Development Plan Proposal with Tree Locations and Planting Plan II. Tree Assessment Summary Table III. Landmark Tree Appraisal IV. Tree Protections Arborinfo LLC Page 2 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PL, Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 1. Introduction I was contacted by Ryan and Sydney Cochran to describe and assess the condition of trees at 8475 Fredrick Pl. in Edmonds, Washington. This report summarizes my observations and conclusions in compliance with Edmonds Code 23.00.000-23.10.110. 2. Competence • Certified Arborist (International Society of Arboriculture, ISA #23136, PN 0426A) • Registered Consulting Arborist (American Society of Consulting Arborists #499). • Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (ISA)-1/22/2026. • Seattle Tree Service Provider Lic: TSP 18581 • Certified forester (Society of American Foresters #951) • Bachelor of Science degree in Forest Management from the University of Washington • Practicing Consulting Forester since 1971 and Consulting Arborist since 1985 3. Client The client to whom this report is addressed is: Ryan and Sydney Cochran 902 N 81 st St. Seattle, WA 98103 ryancochranA gmail.com copy to: Sarah Thompson, Project Architect 1-121) Architecture & Design 23020 Edmonds Way #113 Edmonds, WA sarahkh2 darchitects. com 4. Assignment, Purpose and Use of Report The assignment is to describe and assess the condition of onsite and offsite trees potentially affected by proposed residential construction on the subject property and to prepare a tree protection plan for those to be retained or planted in replacement. 5. Limits of Assignment The assignment is limited to the information gathered during the site visit October 6, 2022 and March 22, 2023 (dates of assessment) and references noted in this report. No Arborinfo LLC Page 3 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 excavation or sampling was undertaken to determine unseen defects. No inspection of trees not reported herein was made. A site plan showing the location of trees and proposed new building footprint was provided (attached). It is included with this report indicating the tree numbers and locations. 6. Site Description The subject property is currently composed of a single parcel identified as 8475 Fredrick Pl., Edmonds, Washington: Snohomish County Parcel No. 00594400006402; 20,2020 square feet (0.46 acres) The property is currently vacant and undeveloped on nearly level ground. 7. Methodology Each tree was measured for diameter at 4.5-feet above ground, total height, percentage of live green crown, dripline (extent of live limbs) and viability. They are identified on site with numbered (on site trees) and lettered (offsite trees) aluminum tags. Note that trees preceded by "T" were added after the original assessment in 2022 due to in -growth and the addition of missed trees. I examined the trees to the standards of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) level 2 TRAQ assessment. (Tree Risk Assessment Qualified) TRAQ Level 2 Assessment INV • Locate and Identify Subject Trees • Assess Tree Health, Structural Issues --Vigor • Inspect: ocular, mallet, probes etc. • Record Observations: defects, site conditions, growth rates A summary Tree Assessment Form is found in the Addenda that provides information for each tree. Onsite significant (viable trees over 6-inches diameter at 4.5') trees total fifty- six. Offsite viable trees within the project area total twenty-five. Trees are assessed for viability based on the following criteria. ArborInfo LLC Page 4 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 Vigor or condition: Health: Biotic • Good: No evidence of fungal infection or decay; expected to survive without disturbance to its normal life expectancy. (40-100 years in this case) • Fair: Tree has fungal decay or evidence of insect habitat and is less likely to survive to normal life expectancy. Some with minor defects, are rated viable, Poor: Tree has significant fungal decay and defects that render it not likely to survive three years. Structural/Mechanical: Abiotic Viability: Good: no significant abiotic or mechanical defects Fair: less than preferred form, defects such as breaks in the bole, poor limb attachments, included bark, poor root contact, etc. Poor: Broken or cracked bole or limbs; root plate compromised A measure of whether the tree is likely to live to its "normal" life span or has defects limiting that potential or poses a risk to the residence or proposed development is a simple `Viable/Not Viable or Monitor rating. Trees considered in decline and not likely to survive 10 years are noted as "monitor". Trees rated with fair vitality and fair structure are rated as Not Viable. 8. Tree Description The on -site tree cover is summarized following. Refer to the attached Site Development Plan Proposal with Tree Locations and Planting Plan in Addendum I. ArborInfo LLC Page 5 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 Table-1 On -site Tree Summary On site Tree Retention/Removal Summary Replacement No.to Remove No. Total Total Trees 66 Total Significant Trees 56 Total Non Significant Trees 10 Total Significant Trees 6-10" 19 6 1 6 Total Trees Signficant 10.1-14" 14 9 2 18 Total Trees Significant 14.1"-24" 11 11 3 33 Total trees Significant (Landmark) 24.1 "+ 12 12 Fee in Lieu Total Significant Trees 56 38 57 No. to be Retained 18 Retention Percent 1 1 32% *Landmark trees are those that are viable over 24-inches diameter, per Edmonds City Development Code (ECDC 23.10.080). See discussion following in sections 9 and 10 for tree replacement calculations and options. Off -site trees within the City of Edmonds Right of Way may be removed to facilitate access to the site. Tree removals required will be described under a separate permit application to the City Engineering Department. Table 2 — Off Site Tree Summary Off site Tree Retention/Removal Summary Replacement No.to Remove No. Total Total Trees 27 Total Significant Trees 25 Total Non Significant Trees 2 Total Significant Trees 6-10" 8 2(ROW) 1 1 Total Trees Signficant 10.1-14" 4 1(ROW) 2 4 Total Trees Significant 14.1 "-24" 10 2(ROW) 3 6 Total trees Significant (Landmark) 24.1"+ 3 1(ROW) 5 15 Total Significant Trees 25 6 26 No. to be Retained 19 Retention Percent 1 76% ArborInfo LLC Page 6 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 9. Tree Removal/Retention Overall, 38 of the 56 viable on -site trees are planned for removal, leaving 18 trees or 32- percent retention. Tree replacement is required per ECDC 23.10.080 as noted in the No. Replacement column in Table 2 above. Trees B, C,D,Q and S, offsite trees are required to be removed as stated following. • Trees `B' and `C' : trenching required for dry utilities extensions; • Tree `D': excavation required for new driveway; • Trees `Q' and `S': trenching required for sanitary sewer extensions. • Additionally within the ROW, a clump of deciduous shrubs of insignificant size will be cleared near the dry utilities extensions, and two trees (`TA' and `TB') will be removed as they are currently non -viable, as indicated on the tree assessment spreadsheet. Per code, at least 30-percent of the viable significant trees must be retained. That criterion is met. However, replacement for removed trees is required. On -site replacement plantings are preferred, however as can be seen in Addendum I, planting area opportunities for on -site replacement are limited to about 1,576 square feet in three areas without considering sethaeks from property liftes-, structures and utilities. Allowing 75 square feet per planted tree, 21 trees can be reasonably planted in the areas. The code (ECDC 23.10.080(D)(3) specifies replacement trees as indicated following: Replacement Specifications. 1. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be: a. one -and -one -half -inch caliper for deciduous trees; b. Six feet in height for evergreen trees. 2. The director may consider smaller -sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. 3. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species. Trees will be selected from the City of Edmonds "Tree Choices for Homeowners" list. The planting plan details are included on the permit site plan. EDC 23.10.060(B)(2)(b)(vii) provides for planting mitigation trees offsite. However, it is understood that this section will not be required on this project in light of the payment of the "Fee in Lieu" option. 10. Fee in Lieu Tree Appraisal EDC chapter 23.10.080.4 states that an appraisal of those trees over 24-inches in diameter to be removed is required. Addendum III, Landmark Tree Appraisal summarizes the fee in lieu for those on -site Landmark trees to be removed. The following discussion and appraisal methodology is ArborInfo LLC Page 7 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PL, Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 based on the Guide for Plant Appraisal, 1 Oth Edition, Published by the Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers, 2018. The Guide has been developed by consensus of professional landscape, tree care, forestry and arboricultural representatives. It is not prescriptive, but rather provides advisory recommendations to the appraisal of landscape plants. The IOth edition, replaces the 9th edition and is updated to more fully align with the larger appraisal profession and follows the standards of the Appraisal Foundation. It considers Cost, Income and Sales Comparison Approaches to the valuation of trees and plants. Typically, in residential tree and plant appraisals the Income and Sales Comparison approaches are not applicable or are not within the scope of plant appraiser expertise, leaving the Cost approach. Within the Cost Approach, the Trunk Formula Technique, the Cost Compounding Technique and Direct Replacement are considered. For the purposes of this analysis, I observed that the subject trees would provide a significant amenity and environmental forest benefit. As such, amenity vegetation appraisal techniques are considered commonly utilized in residential situations. Appraisal approaches commonly utilized in tree appraisals as found in the Guide loth edition, Chapter 5 are: • Repair • Reproduction • Functional Replacement Techniques for estimating Cost are: • Direct Cost • Trunk Formula Technique • Cost Compounding Technique Common techniques that might be applicable to the subject trees are Functional Replacement (replacement of equivalent utility, benefits or function) as in the Trunk Formula Technique and Cost Compounding Technique. Repair techniques are generally utilized for partial tree damage. Direct Cost techniques are used to replace exact replicas of trees. Repair is not at issue here as the trees are removed and Replacement is not feasible for trees the size of the subjects. In the Functional Replacement Technique, the assumption is "that a prudent person would not spend more to purchase an item or restore its benefits than the cost of a substitute item that produced similar benefits." (Guide for Plant Appraisal, 1 Oth edition). The Trunk Formula and Cost Compounding techniques are extrapolations of the cost to plant and "grow" trees. The Functional Replacement approach known as the Trunk Formula Technique (TFT) is most utilized to estimate the value of residential trees and begins the process with "...the largest commonly available" replacement tree, or Basic Cost and "grows" it to the size of the tree to be replaced. The basic assumption is that a purchaser of a tree would pay the same unit cost ($/square inch of trunk) for a large tree as a small one. Adjustments, or ArborInfo LLC Page 8 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 depreciation factors that are basically measures of comparability to perfect trees perfectly located, are then made for physical deterioration (condition), functional limitations and external limitations. Functional Limitations are factors associated with the interaction of the tree that affects its condition or could limit its utility. External limitations are factors outside the property and out of the control of the owner, for instance, the effects of insect infestation. These adjustments are renamed from the 9th edition that identified the adjustments as species, condition and location. The approach has applicability in urban landscape situations. As stated in the Guides, "Application (of the Trunk Formula Method or Technique) is generally limited to residential and urban landscape settings." Costs of removal, clean-up, etc. were incurred at the time of tree cutting and are not applicable at this time. Tree stump removal (grinding, vibration excavation, etc.) is not recommended in order to maintain soil stability. I base my cost estimate on a variety of local nursery price solicitations and experience with similar replacement projects. The Appraisal Summary found in Addendum III provides individual tree data, adjustments to Basic Cost and finally an estimate of the appraised value. The appraised value of the eleven on -site Landmark trees to be removed is $286,800. The total potential fees in lieu are therefore $286,800. The code chapter 23.10.080.4 does cap the fee at $2.00 per square feet of area, or in this case $2.00 x 20,020 = $40,000, well under the calculated $286,800 in the discussion above. 11. Discussion and Tree Protections Several trees that will be retained could be impacted by construction excavation (See attached proposed site development plat). Table 5, following provides an opinion of root zone impact based on the following incursions. • None: Activity is outside of dripline/root zone radius • Minor: Activity affects less than 5-percent of the outer root zone • Moderate: Activity encroaches to, or is a minor encroachment of the inner root zone and affects up to 30-percent of the total the root zone • Significant: Activity encroaches into the inner root zone and affects more than 30-percent of the total root zone ArborInfo LLC Page 9 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 Table 3 - Root Zone Impacts Root Zone Impacts- Retained Trees Root Zone (radius) Distance tree face to: Impacted Comment Impact Tree # Species DBH Outer Inner Excavation Fill Root Zone (in) (ft) (ft) (ft) (8) (%)* On Site 8 W. red cedar 22.2 22.2 11.1 17.25 NA 22.3 Building Foundation Moderate 14 Bigleaf maple 20.5 20.5 10.25 18.5 NA 9.7 Building Foundation Moderate 33 Bitter Cherry 12.7 12.7 6.35 10.5 NA 17.32 Building Foundation Moderate O W. red cedar 25.5 25.5 12.75 19.83 NA 22.24 Building Foundation Moderate T Cedar 8 8 4 >8 NA 0 Sewer Connections None T9 Cedar 15 15 7.5 >15 NA 0 Sewer Connections None 38 Hemlock 10.3 10.3 5.15 >10 NA 0 Infiltration Drainage None Off site V Grand fir 30.2 30.2 15.1 23 NA 23.84 Stormwater infiltration Moderate 20 W. red cedar 25.8 25.8 12.9 17.92 NA 30.54 Building Foundation Significant R Cedar 17 17 8.5 >17 NA 0 Sewer Connections None None Deciduous Clump - - - NA 0 Utility Connections None *A calculation of the total area (square feet) of proposed disturbance in the outer half of the tree's drip line divided by the total area of the outer half of the dripline (square feet) that cannot exceed 33 percent or 1 /3 of the outer dripline. Root zone impacts are approximate based on the indicator of root zone extent based on one foot per one inch of diameter and estimate of actual root structures that will be encountered. For all excavation activities, a certified arborist should be on site to monitor and suggest severed root remediation. In the event of root damage determined to jeopardize the long-term viability of any tree, the arborist may recommend removal or other remedial measures. Edmonds City Code, 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development is attached in Addendum III. 12. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Ownership of the subject trees as provided by the client is assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for legal matters. No opinion as to the property line location is made. ArborInfo LLC Page 10 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. The consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 3. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including additional fees. 4. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and the consultant's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. 5. The exhibits in this report are included to assist the reader and are not necessarily to scale. 6. Unless expressed otherwise, the information in this report covers only items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection. The subject site was cleared of all vegetation at the time of inspection therefore the extent of removals is inferred from adjacent undisturbed areas. The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible portions of the trees and plants. 7. Loss or alteration of any part of the report invalidates the entire report. Ownership of any documents related to this report passes to the client only. 8. The liability of ArborInfo LLC, its contractors and employees is limited to the client only and only up to the amount of the fee actually received for the assignment. 9. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long-term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. 10. NEARLYALL TREES INANY CONDITION STANDING WITHIN REACH OF IMPROVEMENTS OR HUMAN USE AREAS REPRESENT HAZARDS THAT COULD LEAD TO DAMAGE OR INJURY. THE ASSESSMENT IS VALID FOR TWO YEARS FROM THE DATE OF INSPECTION, ONLY. 11. PERTINENT JURISDICTION RULES AND REGULATIONS SHOULD BE CONSULTED PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF ANY TREE. Respectfully Submitted, Thomas M. Hanson, CA 23136, RCA 499 TRAQ to 1/22/2026 PN 0426A ArborInfo LLC Page 11 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 Addenda I. Site Development Plan Proposal with Tree Locations and Planting Plan II. Tree Assessment Summary Table III. Landmark Tree Appraisal IV. Tree Protections ArborInfo LLC Page 12 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PL, Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 Addendum IV City of Edmonds Tree Protections 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved in accordance with ECDC 23.10.060.13 shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate City staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines B. Placing Materials near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state at a minimum "Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited" and provide the City phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. Attachment A Amendments to Code adopted by City Council on April 13, 2021 Page 10 of 14 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. ArborInfo LLC Page 13 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PL, Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. Limit the time period that the critical root zone is covered by mulch, plywood, steel plates or similar materials, or by light soils, to protect the trees critical root zone. 7. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six (6) inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand -excavating a 2-foot-deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director's authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half (1/2) of the area of the tree's critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree's survival. 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree's critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree's survival and to minimize the potential for root -induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree's survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. Attachment A Amendments to Code adopted by City Council on April 13, 2021 Page 11 of 14 E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. ArborInfo LLC Page 14 Cochran Tree Assessment, 8475 Fredrick PI., Edmonds, WA August 8, 2024 F. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices ArborInfo LLC Page 15 PLACEMENT TREE NOTES )TAL PROPOSED PLANTING AREA FOR REPLACEMENT TREES = +/-1,576 5F ,OPOSED AVERAGE AREA ALLOWED PER TREE = 75 SF )TAL REPLACEMENT TREES PROPOSED = 21 TREES )TE: PLANTING SHALL CONSIST OF NO LE55 THAN (11) NATIVE SPECIES TREES AND > MORE THAN (10) NON-NATIVE SPECIES TREES ,OPOSED TREE SPECIES (SUBJECT TO AVAILABiLITY AT TiME OF PLANTING): / NATIVE SPECIES: PACIFIC DOGWOOD (CORNUS NUTALii) i�IGTdI I TC7CC YJL7nTC(`Tin�l CCAI/`if\I/� 9000"E '57A� \ i PROP05 ^` \ OVERF WD ,DRYWELL, -SE�E C PLANS \ POOL FENCE GATE AXlfl YJnnl Cart- Y>I All `. I1NDFIR c�FP PFRMiT— —ss ss — -- TREE RETENTION & PROTECTION PLAN SCALE: 1" =10' NOTE: 1. REFER TO SURVEY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. 2. REFER TO ARDORiST REPORT FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCLUDING TREE RETENTION & PROTECTION PLAN (SHT. 03) FOR REPLANTING REQUIREMENTS, NEW TREE LOCATIONS, AND OTHER SiTE REQUIREMENTS. i � \ I 20.5"M [14] / , 6°M I [T2] / I HATCH LEGEND REFER ALSO TO STRUCTURAL AND CiViL DRAWINGS FOR SPECIFIC DIMENSIONS AND FINISHED GRADES/ELEVATIONS OF CONSTRUCTION NEW BASEMENT CONCRETE WALLS/SLAB +/- 9'-0" BELOW GRADE CONCRETE SiTE WORK +/- 4'-0" TO 9'-0" BELOW GRADE CONCRETE SiTE WORK 9 GRADE (U.N.O.) CONCRETE OR ASPHALT DRIVEWAY WiTHiN R.O.W. 9 GRADE APPROX. FiN. GRADE OR SURFACE ELEVATION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION (VERIFY SiTE FINISHES W/ CiViL ENGINEER) AREA DESIGNATED FOR PLANTING REPLACEMENT TREES - SEE ADDITIONAL BOX NOTE, TH15 SHEET TREE LEGEND REFER TO ARBORiST'S REPORT FOR TREE TABLES INCLUDING IDENTIFICATIONS & DESIGNATIONS 27 F TREE DIAMETER, SPECIES, AND TAG [25] G EX. TREE TO REMAIN W/ CRITICAL ROOT ZONE INDICATED ( X ) EX. TREE TO DE REMOVED TREE DESIGNATED BY ARDORiST AS x DEAD, DYING, INJURED, OR D15EA5ED (TO DE REMOVED AND NOT COUNTED TOWARD SIGNIFICANT TREE TOTALS) 0 EX. OFF -SITE TREE TO REMAIN W/ CRITICAL ROOT ZONE INDICATED TREE PROTECTION FENCING AS REQUIRED BY CiTY OF EDMONDS TO BE PROVIDED AT DRiP LiNE OR GREATEST EXTENT P055113LE OUTSIDE AREA OF WORK ARDORiST SHALL BE CONSULTED ON PROTECTION FENCING LOCATIONS AND SHALL EVALUATE TREE CONDITIONS PRIOR TO AND DURING EARTH DISTURBANCE AND CONSTRUCTION. ENCOUNTERS WiTH ROOT SYSTEMS SHALL DE REPORTED TO ARDORiST FOR MITIGATION MEASURES. SEPARATE R.O.W. PERMIT TO INCLUDE REMOVAL OF TREES AS INDICATED, NECESSARY FOR UTILITY TRENCHING AND DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION. SEE ALSO SiTE PLAN, CiViL PLANS, AND ARDORiST REPORT. TREE REPLACEMENT REQ'S PER ECDC 23.10.080 MiN. 30% OF EX15TING ViADLE SIGNIFICANT TREES MUST DE MAINTAINED. CURRENT RETENTION PERCENTAGE FOR TH15 PROJECT = 35.71% FOR TH05E TO BE REMOVED: 6" -10" PIA. = 1 REPLACEMENT TREE 10.1" -14" = 2 REPLACEMENT TREES 14" - (LESS THAN) 24" = 3 REPLACEMENT TREES 24" AND GREATER = SEE NOTES DELOW REPLACEMENT NOT REQUIRED iF: - TREE 15 HAZARDOUS, DEAD, DISEASED, INJURED, OR DECLINING COND. - EXISTING TREE CAN DE MOVED TO A SUiTA13LE PLANTING SiTE FEES iN LiEU: iF REPLACEMENT ON SiTE 15 iNFEASiDLE (AND THiS MUST DE VERIFIED WiTH AN ARDORiST'S REPORT), THEN FEES MUST DE PAiD INSTEAD: $1,000 PER EACH REPLACEMENT TREE THAT CANNOT DE PLANTED TREES GREATER THAN 24" PIA. ("LANDMARK TREES") TO DE REMOVED CANNOT BE REPLACED AND MUST DE MITIGATED BY FEES. FEE WiLL DE THE ASSESSED VALUE OF TREE (ASSESSMENT PROVIDED iN ARDORiST'S REPORT). EXCEPTIONS: iF AT LEAST 50% OF EXi5TiNG ViADLE SIGNIFICANT TREES ARE DEiNG MAINTAINED, THEN FEES iN LiEU - INCLUDING ASSESSED VALUES OF LARGER TREES - MAY DE WAIVED. HOWEVER, REPLACEMENT 15 ALWAYS THE FIRST OPTION. (EXCEPTION 15 CURRENTLY NOT DEiNG MET.) CAPPED FEES: iN NO CASE SHALL THE REQUIRED FEE-iN-LIEU PAYMENTS EXCEED $2.00 PER SQUARE FOOT OF LOT AREA. LOT AREA = 20,020 SF. FEES FOR TREE MITIGATION FOR THiS PROPERTY SHALL NOT EXCEED $40,040.00. LL1 U z w J n Cfl cN o O 00 � W U w � Q 0 cn Z LLJ � Z Z LL L U 00 w O U H 2 D A R C H IT E C T U R E D E S I G N 23020 EDMONDS WAY, #113 EDMONDS, WA 98020 P.206.542.3734 www.h2darchitects.com DATE: 6/28/2023 REV 1: 2/27/2024 REV 2: 8/1 /2024 PERMIT SET TREE RETENTION & PROTECTION PLAN 03 00���0�mm00000�0��� �0�®m�mmmm®00�0�� 00����o0om0000�0�� �0�®�0000000��m�� ®0��000000000�0�� mm���mm00®o0om�m��� , 00��©m00000©©0�0��� ra T— ioW TreearoRdaio 25 1311 ORSile BiReet'®ple evnpxyttum19.9 7G 7G 5 28 28 12 20 W W. rei Mar TM1up➢times19.7 90 U 2 12 12 20 10 Good Cmd wi— C TM1 la➢tlmeo 9 4 Good Gaud W. rei Mar TM1ujv➢t— 11 6 Good Goad — swi- 17.6 '10 0 14 18 1 — Y ga vtrat Basic Tree Cost Condition Limitations Additional Costs Trunk Orrumlcrc— �.(round . 00���00omm©�©000��� o0��mm0000000om��� : : Tree Assessment 8ke: Cochreq 8498 Fredrick Plece, Ed—.ds, WA Dale: 10/6/2022 rev 6/7/2024 Project 2022-142 Tng d (bohwl l%1 (!cell !Intl • RNnW Claw Rabin R CommenM1 th Sih TC W.rd crier TAujaplicam 1].9 50 90 15 19 15 15 IB 9 Good Good Yes Sigrdficam Retain TD White bitch Berelapapyrjra 12 80 50 15 15 15 15 12 6 Pair Pair Yea 8igdficsat Reain Brovze birch hater, Ibee vol overhavg vte TE W.rd miv TAviaPlicam 11 45 90 12 12 12 12 11 6 Good Good Yes Si�ificant Retain ml Trey 2/ icml Trewm Rebin 22 •sm pk (&emlr2i(slem2N2i(-)-2) of Edmonds. Tree Protections 23.10.070 Tree Protection Measures During Development Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved in accordance with ECDC 23.10.060.B shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate City staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines B. Placing Materials near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state at a minimum "Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited" and provide the City phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. Attachment A Amendments to Code adopted by City Council on April 13, 2021 Page 10 of 14 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. Limit the time period that the critical root zone is covered by mulch, plywood, steel plates or similar materials, or by light soils, to protect the trees critical root zone. 7. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six (6) inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand -excavating a 2-foot-deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director's authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half (1/2) of the area of the tree's critical root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree's survival. 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree's critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree's survival and to minimize the potential for root -induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree's survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. Attachment A Amendments to Code adopted by City Council on April 13, 2021 Page 11 of 14 E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. F. Additional Requirements. The director may require additional tree protection measures that are consistent with accepted urban forestry industry practices.