Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-5-2026 - Request for Administrative Reconsideration – LUA25‑000432 (RVMP)CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Renton. Do not click links, reply or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. From:CityClerk To:Cynthia Moya Subject:FW: Request for Administrative Reconsideration – LUA25‑000432 (RVMP) Date:Monday, January 5, 2026 3:10:36 PM FYI JASON A. SETH, MMC, CPRO | City Clerk/Public Records Officer City of Renton // City Clerk Division cell 206-635-6100 // office 425-430-6502 NOTICE OF PUBLIC DISCLOSURE: This message complies with Washington State’s Public Records Act – RCW 42.56. Book time to meet with me From: Kahlil Khan <khanallurahoa@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 5, 2026 2:34 PM To: Matthew Herrera <MHerrera@Rentonwa.gov>; CityClerk <CityClerk@Rentonwa.gov> Subject: Request for Administrative Reconsideration – LUA25‑000432 (RVMP) Mr. Herrera, I am submitting this email to request an administrative reconsideration for Project Number LUA25‑000432 (RVMP). My reasons are outlined below: 1. The proposed removal or snagging of the landmark Douglas Fir may not meet the criteria in RMC 4‑4‑130.F.2.c. a. Tree is not high‑risk. The arborist identified the tree’s overall risk rating as “likely moderate.” Attachment B (ISA Basic Tree Assessment Form) characterizes the likelihood of trunk failure as “improbable.” Attachment A (Arborist Report) states that the “resident has requested removal for their peace of mind,” indicating the recommendation was driven by homeowner preference rather than objective hazard criteria. b. No obvious physical damage. The minor roof damage cited in the determination has not been verified as being caused by the subject tree. The incident occurred during the 2024 bomb cyclone—an extreme and infrequent event—and the debris could have come from any nearby Douglas Fir. c. Less aggressive alternatives exist. There are feasible options to improve tree health without removal or snagging, such as widening the fence perimeter to increase airflow and promote root growth, and providing targeted treatment. As a landmark tree within a designated tree protection area, proactive measures to support its health may be warranted. 2. The removal or snagging may introduce risks not reflected in the arborist report. Section 7 of the Planning Division Routine Vegetation Management Permit and Certificate of Exemption Evaluation Form does not appear to consider the following hazards: a. Increased flooding risk. Homes adjacent to the tree sit lower than the surrounding trail, with crawlspaces and yards vulnerable to water intrusion. Removing a mature tree eliminates a significant source of water absorption and may increase stormwater runoff, potentially affecting multiple homes during heavy rainfall. b. Potential harm to adjacent Douglas Firs. The subject tree may provide wind buffering and root‑system interdependence for nearby Douglas Firs. Removal could destabilize these trees by: • Reducing wind protection from the existing canopy • Disrupting intertwined or mutually supportive root structures 3. Concerns regarding tree credit calculations (Attachment C). The tree credit calculation appears to be based on a single tract, even though the HOA controls multiple tracts that include the subject tree. This may understate the cumulative impact of removals. Additionally, multiple removals and snagging activities over the past five years may exceed the RMC 4‑4‑130.C.9 limit of five significant trees within a five‑year period. This cumulative impact does not appear to have been evaluated. 4. Community impacts were not addressed. Although the tree is rated as moderate risk, the justification for removal is primarily the homeowner’s desire for “peace of mind.” The broader community value of the tree has not been considered, including: • Noise mitigation from Highway 169 • Dust and particulate buffering from the transmission line right‑of‑way • Aesthetic and ecological value of a mature landmark tree These benefits are significant and should be weighed against a removal request based on unverified damage and subjective comfort. If you have availability, I would be happy to discuss my concerns by phone or in person. I was recently elected Vice President of the Allura at Tiffany Park HOA, and I want to ensure that our community continues to thrive. Thank you for your time and consideration. Kahlil Khan