 |
| Topped Cottonwoods - "roadside attraction" on NE 90th Street |
The problem is they girdled and topped these Cottonwoods growing in a stormwater facility further down the road. Wildlife habitat is abundant here. I just about gag everytime I have to pass them. Anyone driving to Comcast, the Eastside Gym, Vertical Club, or any number of office buildings has to look at it.
The City is setting a painful example to citizenry and students of what NOT to do with trees. Comments?
By Bob Yoder
Photo by Yoder
Cottonwood trees are very prone to disease and dropping of limbs in high winds. I know because I used to have one.
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing the reason they topped them instead of cutting all the way down was because it was less expensive to deal with them this way for now.
Good points, JanS. Alders are considered garbage tree by the city, too. However, in a forest Alders will often snap off at the top making excellent habitat for Piliated Woodpeckers. But, in the urban areas falling branches can be a pain, huh?
ReplyDeleteThey were diseased and would eventually fall. I assume the stumps were left because they will be excellent for birds and insects as the they decay.But yeah, they're ugly. Maybe someone should knit them some sweaters.
ReplyDeleteTree City USA. What more is there to say?
ReplyDeleteI don't know for sure, Bob but it looks like they were left as snags for habitat. We want to encourage that when anyone takes down a tree.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a kid, we had a cottonwood just feet from the backdoor that suffered in a storm and had to come down. When the cotton came, it blanketed the whole neighborhood. My dad used to rake it into the street and set a match to it. That's when we could burn leaves in a dense urban neighborhood too. Times have changed for the better for air quality.
Thanks for your comment, Kim. Yes, I remember the days when I was a pre-teen in St. Paul, MN and we had "bon-fires" in the street (and we'd have to stop playing & go to bed when the street lights turned on). I'll never forget that smokey, autumn smell and sparks from the burning leaves. Those were neighborhood nights my daughter never will never experience.
ReplyDeleteSturdy Oak trees were common in the mid-west. Alders and thirsty Cottonwoods rare.
I understand the value of logs and snags to wildlife and their food source. In fact the Wa. State Dept. of Fish & Wildlife classifies wood debris as "Priority Habitat".
Believe me, I've looked as closely to the snags contribution of habitat to the excessive topping by Public Works.
My conclusion: the topping is excessive and therefore abusive, ugly and a poor example to our community. The city is: 1) indeed augmenting Habitat and 2)perhaps trying to bring attention and chatter about their advanced stormwater practices, and 3) educate the public.
Normally the city does in right, but in this case they're ass-backwards.
1) Peer over the bridge and you'll see abundant logs and wood debris from fallen trees.
2) Why weren't these trees topped rather than the ones next to the road? Education?
3) Look at the snags closely. No woodpecker foraging, no brown creepers, nuthatches, sapsuckers, woodpeckers, climbing the snags. No hawk, eagle or Pileated nesting.
You'll may find a few holes, but not as many as you'd expect from snags this old
4) MOST IMPORTANTLY: The city's construction of Artifical Habitat is excessive, if not abusive. Creating one urban snag is a wonderful contribution to our urban environment (and to use an over-used word "sustainability").
Ask any wildlife biologist (esp. one that consults for a developer) and you'd know ONE snag is all that's useful. The rest (4?) are literally over-kill.
If you need another example of this excessive topping, look at the forest clear-cuts as you drive I-90. You might see 4 our so snaged tree on the ridges of hectors of forest. Yet, Redmond needs to 4-5 topped trees in a storm pond adjacent an arteriole and trail.
5) If the city feels an obligation to protect us from wind and limbs by topping these trees then cut them to the stump - and create your snag further into the pond where it's "safer."
I hate to get off-topic, beyond the over-use of 'sustainabilty', but this Artificial Light (Tree Sock Art) thing concerns me and LOTS of others. In Anderson Park it's excessive, and so less impactful, balanced and pleasing. I hear it's migrating to buildings now. Fewer yarned trees can do the job this art is intended (besides making life less dreary) I really do like it. But, how much do we need to "connect the cultures" and bring in tourists and the American college based tech workers. A dressed tree here and there through the city would be awesome, my opinion....but not a forest park. But this is another story and the kind of chatter I'm sure the city wants to stimulate.
If other comment hear and leave their name I may post it on a separate page, along with Councilmember Kim Allen's comment. Thanks, Readers!
My impressions from the picture and description are that these trees were behind a fence in a "stormwater facility." If my assumptions are true, this negates two of the City’s arguments to make snags of them; they’re too far away from sidewalks to create issues, and the risk of falling limbs is already mitigated by limited access. And I, for one, love the flying “cotton” seeds.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, tree roots may cause issues with stormwater infrastructure, but they are also a vital component of natural stormwater mitigation. And though it’s true that “hardwood” trees like cottonwood are more susceptible to wind/ice damage than conifer trees, the dangers can easily be overstated.
If these trees were indeed already dying, topping may extend the “life” of the snag by limiting wind pressure, though aesthetically they take some getting used to. Either way, the City will need a better tree management/communication strategy going forward because deciduous trees like these are faster growing than conifers and will likely be the first native trees to colonize disturbed sites. In other words, as we lose long-lived conifers over time, we’re going to have more deciduous trees as their replacements.
Bob, In May of 2010, the Natural Resource Division submitted a Tree Removal Application to remove hazardous cottonwood trees within the stormwater pond adjacent to 90th Street.
ReplyDeleteCity staff discovered the root systems of the large cottonwoods were being compromised by the saturated soils, and extensive beaver activity, thus causing several of the trees to fall over the past few years.
City staff also noticed some of the cottonwoods leaning over the roadway and sidewalk along 90th Street, and an arborist report recommended removal of the hazard trees.
Given the traffic volumes on 90th street, the City viewed removing the trees as a high priority for public safety.
Furthermore, the City makes an effort to retain habitat snags when it is appropriate, as the snags provide habitat value.
Lastly, the pond is proposed to be redesigned and rebuilt in the next few years. Therefore, the City will be making the site more attractive with additional plantings at that time.
With regard to your comment about designating cottonwoods as urban “garbage trees”, the Tree Preservation Code does not exclude cottonwoods from the tree preservation requirements. Cottonwoods can be included as trees to be saved as well as counted towards the retained ratio and replacement tree count.
I hope this provides clarification and if you have any additional questions please do not hesitate to contact me via phone or email.
Sincerely,
Kelsey Johnson, Assistant Planner City of Redmond
Dear Mr. Campbell, Dir. of Public Works, City of Redmond:
ReplyDeleteI reported to our city Ombudsman 5-topped significant trees (Cottonwoods) in the stormwater pond adjacent the 90th Street Bridge. My complaint was re-directed to an Assist. Planner Kelsey Johnson in Planning and Development when the Dept. of Natural Resources under Public Works did the job and design and should answer. Will you? I recommend all but one topped-tree be cut to stump for the following reasons:
1) Topping 5 large urban Cottonwoods to create 'snag' habitat is over-kill for a project this small -- copius logs and woody debris already exists. Any land-use wildlife consultant would probably be happy with just one snag in this pond. Is the city setting a land-use precedent?
2)five topped significant trees next to a busy roadway demonstrates everyday to passersby the city is disrespectful of these trees and educates citizens and youth that topping trees on their property is an okay thing to do.
3) Mr. Myers alluded to them as being ugly. My readers agree, though most citizens have no voice on the matter or don't know how or to whom to send feedback to the city.
4) I've been observing this pond habitat since 2009. Little wildlife activity on the trees was observed before and after the topping. Do you inventory wildlife species on your renovated stormwater ponds?
5) "Snag" wildlife activity: I can't count the insects, but it's obvious there's no nesting of buteos, waders or P. Woodpeckers. Foraging of woodpeckers, sapsuckers, nuthatches, brown creepers are rarely if ever observed. Evidence of foraging is modest for the amount of top-tree habitat.
Planner Kelsey says planting new shrubs is planned over in two years. Mr. Myers says enhancements will begin in the summer. I respectfully request you remove four 'snags' to stump, in the process creating log habitat. Log decay may be more rapid in the water, providing shelter, food and protection for the known waterfowl, amphibians, and reptiles living in your pond.
Hopefully, input from other citizens and the Mayor will further encourage you to take action. Please let me know if you'd like additional information.
Thank you.
I think the city cut the tallest topped tree to the same level s the others. It looks better, more uniform.
ReplyDelete