The URL can be used to link to this page

Hazard Tree Removal Approval.pdfCITY 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 //)c. 189v June 28, 2018 Carin Clampitt 7721-168th Place SW Edmonds, WA 98026 Subject: Hazard Tree Removal Dear Ms. Clampitt, You have contacted the City of Edmonds regarding a tree that was stuck by lightening located within the common area of the Haines Point development. The tree sits on top of a slope that exceeds 40% which is considered a potential landslide hazard area pursuant to ECDC 23.80. Additionally this common area (Tract 999 of the Haines Point plat) was created as a Native Growth Protection Easement (NGPE) to be left in a "substantially natural state." Generally the removal of trees, or any vegetation, within a critical area or critical area buffer is not an allowed activity, unless, pursuant to ECDC 23.40.220.C.8, it involves the removal of invasive species or hazard trees. An ISA Tree Risk Assessment form was filled out by certified arborist Douglas Smith documenting the tree as an extreme risk. Your email dated June 25, 2018 indicated the intent to create a wildlife snag out of the tree both for habitat and to maintain slope stability. Creating a wildlife snag out of the tree is consistent with ECDC 23.40.220.C.8.b.ii. Since the tree is being converted to a wildlife snag instead of being removed, tree replacement is not required. An exemption for the tree cutting is granted with the following conditions: 1. This approval only pertains to the Douglas fir tree identified in the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Form. 2. If the tree is converted into a wildlife snag of approximately 20 feet tall, tree replacement is not required. If the tree is cut down to a stump, replacement trees consistent with ECDC 23.40.200.C.8.b.iv will be required. Stumps of the tree cut must be left in place to provide slope stability and prevent erosion. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions at kernen.lien@edmondswa.gov, or 425-771-0220. Sincerely, Kernen Lien Environmental Programs Manager End: June 25, 2018 Email ISA Tree Risk Assessment Form Aerial Photo Lien, Kernen From: Paul Clampitt <pfishcl@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2018 10:12 AM To: Lien, Kernen Subject: Haines Point neighborhood tree removal Attachments: Haines Pt. Tree_LI jpg; img086 jpg; img087 jpg Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi, Mr Lien - Carin Clampitt here.We spoke last month about the large Douglas fir tree on our community property which is dying. It sits on a slope next to the City of Lynnwood sewage treatment plant and the train tracks. We have had a certified arborist out to do a ISA Tree Risk Assessment form which I have attached. I also attached a Google Earth aerial picture of the tree site. The arborist deems it a hazardous tree and we would like to have it taken down to about 20 feet and have it remain as a habitat snag in order to help preserve the integrity of the slope. We would employ a professional arborist to do this. The address of our neighborhood is 7721 168th PI SW, Edmonds, 98026. My phone number is 425-239-5840. 1 look forward to hearing from you. Thank you. Carin Clampitt ow Client Date 6 S Time �. Address/Tree location Tree no.�— Sheet ofQ Tree species rX dbh �S�" Height NC' f Crown spr ad dia, Assessors) — Time frame Tools used T. Target zone Z a �r Occupancy rate n. c c ~ c Target description x i 1—re °^—' Bet P — 5 x t^ z-«wsionai 3-Frequent L p 1L3 pL v § a •" 4-constant U > o ae E X. In n ' N y Q N Aj z N 3 4 c rauura � History of failures r �u l �- Topography Flat❑ Slope U q, Aspect Site changes None Grade cRangeEYSIte ange Site clearing❑ Changegall Rootcuts❑ Describe Soil conditions Limited volume❑ Saturated❑ Shallow❑ CompactedyPavementover roots ❑�% Describe ... Prevailing winddirection.J Common weather Strongwinds ice❑ Snow❑ Heavyrain Describe Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low Normal ❑ High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal)❑ Species failure profile Branches[] Trunk[] Roots[] Wind exposure Protecte Partial[] FUIII] Crown density Sparse Normal❑ Dense❑ Recent or planned change in load factors _ None (dead)[] Normal�go Chlorotic_% Necrotic % Abiotic Wind funneling Relative crown size Small❑ Medium LGJ�arge0 Interior branches Few❑ Normal❑ Dense[] Vines/Mistletoe/Moss❑ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure —Crown and Branches — Unbalanced ❑ / LCR crown yam% Cracks ❑ Lightning damage ❑ Dead twigs/branches d kl-%overall Max. dia. Codominant ❑ Included bark ❑ Broken/Hangers Number Max. dia. Over -extended branches ❑ _ Weak attachments ❑ Cavity/Nest hole %circ. — Pruning history Previous branch failures ❑ - Similar branches present ❑ Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Buds ❑ Sapwood damage/decay❑ Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑ Flush cuts ❑ Other Responsegrowth Mainconcern(s) j4L.5, A170 e k 16T S r.A Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable ❑ Imminent —Trunk — Dead/Missing bark ❑ Abnormal bark texture/color❑ Codominant stems Included bark ❑ Cracks ❑ Sapwood damage/d y ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sap ooze ❑ Lightning damage He, decay❑ Conks/Mushrooms ❑ Cavity/Nest hole_%circ. Depth P6ortaper❑ Lean Corrected? Response growth Mainconcern(s) .Ti4o" ;4,r-, S [1� Cce..CL e, Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant ❑ Likelihood of failure — Roots and Root Collar — Collar buried/Not visible ❑ Depth Stem girdling ❑ Dead ❑ Decay ❑ Conks/Mushrooms ❑ ooze ❑ Cavity ❑ _% circ. Cracks ❑ Cut/Damaged roots ❑ Distance from trunk Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness ❑ Response growth Maf one s) C • ." CC 4� 4c'e Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant 13 Likelihood of failure Page 1/1 Risk Categorization 10 Tree part Conditions , of concern C INN WE* WXr1r-1Xr~rM►1►1r�WFr. I I XC OZENIN WE�Cr,AA ---- �i �� C1T WE WE mmom ®®�® . sW . A G RJR CXJ a C9 :9: Im r1Wr'1rx Wr,rr!--,, Wr1nWj W IV, Wrj�. , M� MWWr, Imo! r•r'r, f/��nl'\^f^_ r1r1X N = ---_W 20 Ee I W 101 W, Are, E�EWj re, `,WWE MMM r1r1r1r1 ��NAXL�Cir,'.�0C�� ter, �r� n r1r1r� Matrix/ Likelihood matrix. Likelihood Likelihood of Impacting Target of Failure 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 Unlikelv Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Marrix2 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 Noes, explanations, descriptions a c - v 44 c c,rein, II, At—.,Jf Residual risk _ Residual risk Residual risk Residual risk overall tr risk rating Low O Moderate O High O Extreme IV Work Work priority 1 W 2 ❑ 3 ❑ 4 ❑ Overall sidual riskineoroeWOVisibility O Moderate O High O Extreme fY Recommended inspection interval Data Flnal OPrelimiAdvanced assessment needed ❑No❑Yes-Type/Reason Inspection limitations OAccess OVines ❑Root collar buried Describe L•y Page 1/1