17-105537 RECEIVED REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
CITY OF DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Federal Way NOV 15 2017 33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way,WA 98003-6325
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT www.citvoffederalway.com
FILE NUMBER ' - - C / Date c 15—A 7-
Applicant
NAME p PRDIARY PHONE
easrN�s/oRVANrsA O / ALTERNATE ONE
5n/t/e6
r �
ITT STATE ZIP PAX *i
FteA — ‘011 w - q goad
Property Address/Location l 1Rk t—i C. /1)`2 rA J ' 3,4 c - 1-y
Description of Request �R�l�_ �N2 pv "� 11:10Lu4 b'`'t t ' `
List/Describe Attachments E.I'Y) 0 �-�-.% 3 (`,Z
slie °�"` ''s' �� 02+' — j(,1-u, j ' ,-1-
For Staff Use
❑ Code Interpretation/Clarification - No Fee
❑ Critical Areas Letter/Analysis/Peer Review - No Fee(Actual Cost if Applicable)
❑ Request for Extension(Land Use/Plat Approval) - Check Current Fee Schedule
❑ Revisions to Approved Permit Check Current Fee Schedule
0" Tree Removal - No Fee
❑ Zoning Compliance Letter - Check Current Fee Schedule
CI
Bulletin#079—January 4,2016 Page 1 of 1 k:'�for Administrative Decision
From: t4earl.home@comcast.net [mailto Peme :net-
Sent:Tuesday, November 14, 2017 1:16 AM
To: Stacey Welsh
Cc: sjpsparky; Brien Warder;jsanzgiri@comcast.net; t4earl.home@comcast.net
Subject: REQUEST TO HAVE TREE FELLED IN NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREA
Hello Stacey,
My name is Thomas Moss and I am the Vice President of the Grande Vista Estates
(42nd Avenue SW, Federal Way, WA) Homeowners Association. We are seeking
approval/permission to fell a tree within the native growth protection area tract, located
on the south side and adjacent to Grande Vista Estates. A homeowner living outside of
Grande Vista Estates, has concerns that it poses a potential threat to his home and may
topple over during severe, inclement weather.
Once notified of the homeowners concerns, we hired a certified Arborist to conduct an
assessment of the tree in question. He completed his assessment and recommended
the tree be removed. While it is not situated within the boundary of Grande Vista
Estates, it is located in the NGPA tract, which we are apparently responsible
for. Therefore, the purpose of my email, is to inquire how we go about obtaining
from the city of Federal Way in allowing us to have the tree removed from
the N What procedures, documents or forms have to be completed/submitted (if
any), for city approval? Any assistance or guidance you can provide will be greatly
appreciated.
Thank you.
Regards,
T. E. Moss
XFINITY Connect:Inbox(420) https://web.maiLcomcast.net/zimbra/mail?app=mail#2
Hello!
Sign Out
Email I Search
Email Voice Address B
Mailboxes Close New Get Mail
Inbox(420) REQUEST TO HAVE TREE FELLED IN NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTIC
Sent
Drafts Sent By:Stacey Welsh On:Nov 11/14/17 10:21 AM
To:t4earl.home@comcast net
Spam
Trash tree removal(90.1 KB)
Mr. Moss,
I've attached the email that I previously sent to Mr.Tibebe. He came to City Hall late
Grande Vista HOA must make application and he could not because the tree is not lc
Permit Center, who can be reached at 253-835-2607. If you have any questions, plea
Stacey Welsh, AICP
Senior Planner
Federal Way
33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way,WA 98003-6325
Phone: 253/835-2634 Fax: 253/835-2609
www.cityoffederalway.com
From: t4earl.home@comcast.net [mailto:t4earl.home@comcast.net]
Sent:Tuesday, November 14, 2017 1:16 AM
To: Stacey Welsh
®2015 Comcast Cable Communications Privacy Statement Terms of Service
PROMOTIONS
Introducing Xflmty
XFINITY yFi
Xfinitymobile
Ad Info Ad Feedback
1 of 1 � 11/I4/2017, 12:57 PM
October 20,2017
End of road (south most end)or 42nd Ave SW, Federal Way
Prepared by:Sean Joey Murphy,Certified Arborist(PN-8136A)
Hazard Tree evaluation: Pacific Madrone(Arbutus menziesii)
Tree characteristics:There is one mature Pacific Madrone with a DBH of approximately 27"'with.one
dominant leader and with a large vertical branch (not co-dominant). The tree is approximately 75 ft.tall
with a spread of approximately 35 ft.Tree is asymmetrical. The tree is mature and has dead branches,
die back,and possible decay on previously dead branches.
Tree Health: The trees health appears to be less than optimal from observation of bark inconsistencies,
sub-optimal tree response to wounds,and die back.
Site Conditions: The tree is located at the end of a public road. The tree has some root competition
from surrounding vegetation(black berries. Tree is exposed to wind from the south and is a standalone
tree.
Target: There is frequent resident activity in the strike zone of the tree and a house that would be
subject to damage in the event of a full failure of the tree.
Recommendation:
Overall the tree has been given a hazard rating of 7 out of 12. The tree is significantly sloped towards a
home with play equipment in the backyard. While sloping is a common characteristic of a madrone, not
necessarily indicating failure is imminent, it is also in a poor location in relation to possible target.
In my opinion,there is not a high possibility of immediate total failure. The most likely parts for
immediate failure are individual dead branches and pasts of the tree.
My recommendation would be for strong consideration of removal of the tree. The tree is growing in an
unfortunate area because of its proximity to a residential home and the home's backyard which appears
to be a frequent use area for recreation. There are not overwhelming factors with the tree that would
indicate a total failure in the short term, however there is enough factors including bark health, dead
branches, poor recovery,angle of lean,and most importantly the potential affected targets affected by
failure,that would make tree removal the safest route.
Sean Murphy
PN-8136A
\���
A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas
e TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM 2nd Edition
site/Address: �n.! .�Y.�rn7 Y� T y a�G 3-4/ I HAZARO RATING:
8iarxt.acatarr: F.
- =
cr{ Failure . Size + Target = Hazard
Owner public ' ._ private k __unknown other _,. Potential of part Rating Rating
Date-J 0/1o/on Inspector: .Sr.. M.rP )l 4 Immediate action needed
Date of last inspection: AVA: _-_._.Needs further inspection
Dead tree
TREE CHARACTERISTICS
Tree fe. L.._Species: 1042‘...._Nl�r.�A�
eoftrunks: ._Heigttt'X,7-S_. Spread: .._.
Force f,"i genoralec symmet ie .-I minor asymmetry rnalcr asymrnetr r'stump%meur —sing-treaded
Crown class: 74 dominant co-dominant : I intermediate •:suppressed
Live crown ratio: % Age loss: ;yyoung ;lsemi-mature mature iJ over-mature/senescent
Pruning history: crown cleaned U excessively thinned U topped J crown raised J pollarded LI crown reduced tU flush cuts U cabled/braced
2(none 3 muttipie pruning events Approx.dares
Special Valve i"1 specimen Chi heritage/historic -I wildlife unusual "I street tree +-lscreen shade 11 indigenous 71 protected by gore agency
TREE HEALTH
Faiiageceioi anormai Qchlorottc v necrotic Epics/miss? Y Growth obstructions:
Foliage density: Onormal U sparse Leaf size: teif normal L small U stakes wire/ties U signs L cables
Annual shoot growth: ;excellent *average ;.poor Twig Diehack? ® N ccrbipaverrorr a.,ards
-
WowWwood detrelcprnerrt ;excellent tlf;average `_:.paw C_.none LC other,_../✓.
Vigor Bass: L excellent bfaverage L fair U poor
Rialto pests/diseases: /4nc.pr(ras eI1�
SITE CONDITIONS
SNeCbaractec ?(residence L:commerce! Utnduslrial ._:tame -1.513eespace natural t_woodtan6torest
Landscape type: parkway L raised bed ,Container lemound lawn LI shrub border :_ wind break
Irrigation: L none it adequate I_J inadequate I,'excessive i trunk wettled
Recent site disturbance? Y 0 C-i construction i soil disturbance grade change I i line Gearing , site clearing
%dripilne paved: a, 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lilted? Y
%driplhre w/fill soil: 40 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
%dripilne grade lowered: (/a 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
Soil problems: drainage n sha low r I compacted i 1"roughly 21 saline alkal!ne TT acidic 'small volume disease center 0 history of fail
cS 'axpprsve i(eiepe '"' aspec'.
Obsiraettons: 1 lights I i signage 1 fine-of-sight n view 77 overhead lines n Underground utilities ' !!traffic %adjacent veg 1
Exposure to wild: t single tree Cl below canopy Fl above canopy CI recently exposed .l!rindward,canopy edge plf area Prom to wundthrov
Preva0ing wind direction: 5 occurrence of snow/ice storms '7 never seldom n regularly
TARGET
Use Under lies: buildingtraffic parking g 64pedestrrun tltrecreatron llandsgpe ` hardscape small features • Inpi:itylines
Can target be moved? Y e Can use be restricted? Y Q
°cawpaow I;occasional use intermittent use 'Ir enf use '-constant use
The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form.
TREE DEFECTS
ROOT DEFECTS.
Suspect met rot: Y CD Masttroant/mnik/hracketpresent: Y ( ID-
Exposed roots: ,severe r 7 moderate Pt low Undermined: I severe L.moderate ,<.i low
Root pruned:_. __ distance horn trUrk Root area affected:_.2..__-_.N Buttress wounded: v ) When:Cr n
Restricted root area: "1 severe !'moderate ,low Potential for root failure: U-1 severe rL"moderate )low
LEAN:_10_i__., deg.from vertical C.natural -unnatural 'eel`-corrected Soil heaving: Y N
Decay in plane of lean: Y 01 Roots broken Y LR Soll cracking: Y all
Compounding tailors _ _ _ _....__._ . .-_ Lean severity. C'severe IV moderate i.. low
'CWtl :1v74,o::.Eii'>.hc,./1 Crta.,.c.a'.tit Y.1s a.''r:..'Teat i!`f.YE j 15.¢$evi t.''41. tviooki'a 1.t+-..,s:
DEFECT ROOT CROWN TRUNK SCAFFOLDS BRANCHES
Poortapei L
Bow,sweep { , COI_ ,
AL
COdommar lslorks t- . L.
Multiple attachments I
LIncluded bark Lc ! l-
Exmissiveend 1waaht L !:Crackslsplds fli IMHangers _. 1_-,.....M__.._ I M.Guvkr�r �. L1LDecay _ ._� _.__..__M_ : _ . 'AlCa�nh[ 4...L�:Conkvmuahroomsrbracket I L r Gtreectinglsap Vow j
it ._.__.-1
Loose/cracked bark
Nesting holeibee hive L : /,.
Deadwood/stubS _.. M -..i L _
Rerer°.✓termitesjants 1 1 t- .__ _1„..... ...__.__. __...,_.
CodtkerskaayfOofis ....- _ ___ - L.
Previous failure 1 } t.• iL.
HAZARD RATING `Y t
Tree part meet eecel to law ... _ %y-oLJw r '" v, f 'm;toe poia-r it t Ow? e'=urn o rign 4 severe
Inspection period. .._.._ _ annual.._ .__biannual-_ _ utter S;ze of part 1-<li i 15 rntl,1•0"t8 1 tS d5 crnr:
Failure Potential«Size of Part«Target Rating a Haiard Rating r 3 1B cos30"oral j5 c nix d ;mitt nt(7 emt
Target rating 1-oar:m oral use:2 intermittent use.
t +. _.`` - 3-frequent use:4-constant use
HAZARD ABATEMENT
Pmi,c: K rend c fectwe part :reduce end weight I i crown c esn :drier i-mesa caevrnY .,crmwr renra a rarrtriuc ure i shave
Cable/Brace: Inspect further. :_root crown Li decay ...aerial .i monitor
Remove lee: ® N Replace? Y a Move target: Y ® Other
**fort
n
E1fad ort adjacent trees: Ti none 7 evaluate
Notification: owner z manager L governing agency Date: 10%3/ao/'7 _
COMMENTS
A. Dead branch on madrona, possible rot source
r i i
ki
di.
•« a t �j�j Lr !.
�> •' 4 '
- w . ' ?
iiik
w ` '
ftw Ee 4 i` y�� w�ll�
VP
f i a a5
nst" 'S s t 1 d f'
s
II
spy .4 ayra�: 'L.` . y'
� l `)v g
u0. t 1 * it,
.,...44 0.,-
444
.0;. III
j .. . Ili ;it
A
IMG 7659 J PG Page 1 of 1
.. -
4..,
...
' \• ,
. ..
0..... .. 4 ' ,. .
. ,
,..
' 'S.
,- , .4, ''''' . .
* ..„.,-,,_, 41.
1,14, . * * 4,t,y 4, ' , "..
I-
I1 'S., ' • - ' - . .
•- ''."---'1,,'41' 44'' ." Y-
s ..9,4''' '4 j *. ' ,.',.s'.,;,,", .,, ,*i. :-..-4+._ •
Il „,
o ••
, .
..," ,. q *
---,-.,
1
0,4k,
, 1
,..
41
1 ....t
•
41d 7..
\&% •
--....
. .., .„,
"--*,'
, ir , ..„-,...1:-.7,,..- - ,
, - Z •• 3 44
- ' •' . ...4.,.• '.s"•1 ' ?-'''..- : ... '
..-ii. . 1 'I‘ •x'• ' -.•- -. •
, ,...... • \,,,,1„,.......,:,.. . ,.)- . ts"Vq-ileitr-
-.
- ,.."-• Ai
: •:.-- ,.,
••:!„.. --: .."
: • ,;....' 6. .- .;r..,'‘. . • -4 4
,--3/
K z
1
- ,,
Pt, •t.
t
https://mail.google.com/ /scs/mail-static/ /j s/k=gmail.main.en.khUFNOKniXg.0/m=pds,p... 10/9/2017
B. Die back in certain branches
,t. . {� r •!/�1, i.. . .,,, .,.,._1!.::„.„.. � 3i,;gat
, ; .. , g , : 1
. . , ,. t. ,..., , i : .,,t,...,...,,,,..„.,.....
�~I Y 1 {r k
( > ,tj�`! • . •, ., .,,,. , Syr
ft
t � r'4' ?' - P. 11
e it t i :_
•
•_, t - 'f F' r <f4•,Y£ is,
4
i� 4
..
r w : It it
,, ,
t. ,•... "1.tr i
Hof � / ..A•• y C. r 1
s r~.'
C. Fork with one side healthier than other. Bark strained.
p F N'i
, k.: .41 f,-4, 1 ,
3• _`lit
t, e- k, ' r-, rI<•
I.
y
,f * Aki • .,
tld.
yt
} t
3
D. Unhealthy fork with dead unrepaired branch on healthier fork
4
Vt.
:Pit A • •
I $�. M �`
,y ♦~
1*,
4.0
0
•
E. Full view of tree with bark inconsistencies of left vs right fork.
i
,: i f
,{' '''i ,•
• r :-
f�(,,., '. '
I • s
y •1•lt
Opt' $ .., , ''
I
� e r z "iF
d a.
4, ye t _ { sy
, a"i rays#s y. ' rY,�>� 5 �) � 1„)��,1, f'
':''.4'.4'''''''' '4. '..V °''' 1 - ' '.•,'.,,,,.44.10N,k),;: !le:100:9\- k,$)‘te.'\,,,,.,*- '
J Ji, '�ti, 4
l��r.: 111-1 x
`
F. Multiple areas of dieback
i` '
1441.
A tillSk 4° 4. , ••*:)$). '!" . .
' , ' i f .r. y._ itX , ' r
< "t
•
Nilij
43111
141
• r t S 4404 •.., .it
r I
G. Vertical shot of tree with die back, bark inconsistencies and dead stub
0 4 1:
V.
r
t
$ ie-
•
,..
it j
y ,� V4'
1 fy
Iwt
I +; ,
i
,,
r-
, 4,,41 ''''. 4:`,• 1,
1 tJ
, ills
t r
H. Tree in relation to target
01.
• yy
rf
V K
,' 4
ti y
y�q
W
tr„ •
�t s
I. Tree with target, dead portions,and die back.
f.
} ', u
§g
4 ..;I, N' `..sow„,,_---„,—...,
N. G,p T t r. ' K
c I .4.tt. a 4` t'' w it N.: r--'-. •. 0.
1
\ �,�_ .�
C
A'
`.s
fr.,•...I
I
s ti � rV.
J. Bark or tree vertical
tik.
tiiv
4'it 'sp, t' cam;
y x
a, r 1
• 1 N' r 1 !
. ram - - . '•i 4f
• 1 Y
j{j}{ 1
IY 16
#
1
J. 1 1.