 |
| A Bobcat's "last stand" in Sigmund and Werner's backyard / credit Sigmund |
In 2007, I made two trips to Sigmund and Werner's house to commiserate with them about their severe loss of a forest bordering their property. Losing a neighborhood forest and it's wildlife is close to losing and mourning the loss of a dear friend. It hurts and it takes time. I know this from the Education Hill Perrigo Heights clear-cut. Sigmonde showed their pictures and I listened. She took me on hurried walk through the forest before the clear-cut. It was all over in just a few days.The photograph of this urban Bobcat was taken by Werner & Sigmund. Their home borders on a North Redmond 18-acre forest. Over 300 mature trees were cleared for 76 single-family homes with lot sizes ***4000 - 22,000 SF, according city documents. The project (178th Ct. NE & NE 116th St.) is known as "Pearce PRD" and is one of many environmentally sensitive projects in Redmond developed by Eric Campbell's Camwest Development, Inc. of Kirkland, WA.
According to a "Wildlife Study Report" filed by wetland , wildlife, and forest consultant Chad Armour, LLC on January 20, 2007 "the site may have the potential to support as many as 68 different species of wildlife". Sigmund has also observed coyotes and deer in her backyard and there have been neighborhood reports of *black bear. Where will they go?
Camwest paid an arborist for a tree preservation plan required by city permit. The arborist reported that 294 significant trees were clear-cut. That's 54% of the 489 significant trees on the project. 39 Landmark trees were presumed removed. Landmark trees are supposed to get special protections. (see Councilwoman Kim Allen's statement, below).
Chad Armour made two brief site visits. Among Mr. Armour's qualifications, he is a "certified wetland delineator" and has a certificate in commercial real estate. He was hired by Camwest to write environmental reports for the city land use permit.
Mr. Armour reported: nine wetlands and 20 State Priority habitat tree snags, ideal for Pileated Woodpecker nesting. He identified a foraging P. Woodpecker, and a Great Blue Heron "in the vicinity". The Great Blue Heron is valued by the State and Redmond as a Priority Species of Local Importance. Nesting P. Woodpeckers are potentially endangered and have protections when nests are present. I was told by a resident Armour spent only several hours during each of his two visits to the site.
Mr. Armour stated a heron rookery is located about one mile SE of the site. City planner Cathy Beam indicated months ago these eastern rookery nests were vacated. Mr. Armour also noted a stream map indicating coho salmon migrate to within a few hundred feet of the project site. A tributary to Bear Creek and two ponds are present.
Obviously, significant and devastating deforestation of "urban open space" has occurred. Habitat destruction was far more extensive than Camwest's Tyler's Creek and Perrigo Heights developments. Fortunately, Camwest does a good job restoring and enhancing their streams, wetlands, and forest buffers. However, according to the neighbors, the development will be setback only 20 feet from their properties and exposed neighborhood trees will be endangered by resultant high winds.
Councilwoman Kim Allen is to be commended for speaking up for the neighborhood during Werner's Landmark Tree Exception appeal. Councilman Richard Cole appeared insensitive during reconsideration of the Landmark Tree appeal stating Werner was slowing down the project. Ms. Allen is a qualified lawyer and is a strong council advocate for "green" protections and standards. ** Ms. Allen's statement urging amendments to city tree preservation standards are below. The city is holding a Community Meeting on Thursday, 7/28 to ask for ideas on how to improve Residential Development permitting. Contact Jeff Churchill for more information by emailing: jchurchill@redmond.gov.
*** The City Neighborhood Map and Notice of Application quote different lot size ranges.
**'Councilmember Allen read a written request to the staff as follows, 'Tree retention is an expressed value of the citizens of Redmond articulated in the Comprehensive Plan, Neighborhood Plans, and community meetings. Redmond’s tree retention law reflects that a detailed and thoughtful analysis by the Administrator of what should be a detailed and written account of extraordinary circumstances is required to justify the felling of any landmark tree or drastically reducing our declining canopy. In this case there is no record of that detailed analysis by staff which does both the staff and the citizens a disservice. Our Code Administrators should begin to provide a written and detailed analysis of their reasoning on all of these exceptions to our Tree Retention Ordinance and that the code should be amended to provide notice to adjacent property owners when such a request is made.' - contributed by Werner
###
QUESTIONS: Was off-site mitigation required? It not, how where were they replaced? PRD' appeals are Quasi-Judicial. Was there adequate notice? Tom Hinman, a respected planning commissioner, influenced the city years later to map significant and landmark trees on the Notice of Application. Why did it take so long? In 2022, Tree Regulations were updated to protect/preserve Redmond's remaining trees on private properties. It's 2024 and the updated tree regulations still haven't been implemented owing to legal issues Kirkland is facing. No comment.
Opinion and report by Bob Yoder, ~ 2007, updated 1/29/2024
Additional "land use" articles are found using the blog search engine.
.jpg)
.jpg)
