The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutD_Monsrud Tree Removal_final_20260407DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT D_Monsrud Tree Removal_final PLANNING DIVISION ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT EVALUATION FORM & DECISION DATE OF DECISION: April 8, 2026 PROJECT NUMBER: LUA26-000104, RVMP PROJECT NAME: Monsrud Tree Removal PROJECT MANAGER: Ian Harris, Associate Planner APPLICANT/OWNER: Mark and Esmeralda Monsrud 12109 SE 164th St, Renton, WA 98058 CONTACT: Mark Monsrud 12109 SE 164th St, Renton, WA 98058 PROJECT LOCATION: 12109 SE 164th St (APN 1423900010) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant and property owners, Mark and Esmeralda Monsrud, are requesting a Routine Vegetation Management Permit (RVMP) to remove one (1) landmark tree located on the property at 12109 SE 164th St. The subject property contains a single-family residence and is in the Benson Community Planning Area. The lot is 0.19 acres in size and is zoned Residenial-6 (R-6). According to City of Renton (COR) Maps, no critical areas are mapped on the site. According to the Arborist Report prepared by ISA Certified Arborist David Bigelow and dated March 6, 2026 (Attachment A), one Western red cedar (Thuja plicata) tree is proposed for removal. The subject tree is considered a “landmark tree” as it has a diameter-at-breast-height (DBH) of approximately 34-inches (34”). The tree is equivalent to 12 tree credits. The property also contains two additional trees classified as significant trees, both of which are proposed to be retained. Based on the submitted ISA Tree Risk Assessment form (Attachment B), the subject tree has been classified as high-risk by the arborist. CRITICAL AREAS: None GENERAL REVIEW CRITERIA 4-9-195D.4: YES 1. The lot shall comply with minimum tree credit requirements pursuant to RMC 4-4- 130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Routine Vegetation Management Permit Monsrud Tree Removal LUA26-000104, RVMP Permit Date: April 8, 2026 Page 2 of 4 D_Monsrud Tree Removal_final Staff Comments: In accordance with RMC 4-4-130H, compliance with tree credit requirements necessitates a minimum of 30 tree credits per net acre. The subject property totals 0.19 acres, and would be required to maintain six (6) tree credits (0.19 x 30 = 6). According to the submitted Tree Credit and Retention worksheet for this project (Attachment B), the subject property contains approximately two (2) significant trees and one (1) landmark tree. The applicant is proposing to remove the sole landmark tree, as it is a high-risk tree causing damage to the property. The tree proposed to be removed constitutes 12 tree credits. The remaining two (2) significant trees equal 13 tree credits, as calculated by the applicant, which exceeds the minimum tree credit requirement of six (6) credits. N/A 2. The land clearing and tree removal shall be consistent with restrictions for critical areas, pursuant to RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations, and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. Staff Comments: Not applicable. The subject property contains no critical areas or associated buffers. YES, IF CONDITION OF APPROVAL IS MET 3. Removal of a landmark tree shall meet the applicable review criteria pursuant to RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. Staff Comments: The subject tree has a DBH of approximately 34-inches (34”) and is thus classified as a “landmark tree,” subject to the applicable criteria for removal found in RMC 4-4-130F.2.c. Removal of a landmark tree may be granted in instances where the tree is determined to be “high-risk.” According to the ISA Tree Risk Assessment form (Attachment C), the subject tree’s roots and leaders (primary trunks) have an imminent and probable likelihood of failure, respectively. Both are categorized as having a high likelihood of impact. Photographs within the arborist report document significant recent tree limbing that was unpermitted. During the limbing, in anticipation of the tree being removed, the applicant was issued a code citation and applied for this RVMP application in order to come into compliance with code. While the limbing that was completed prior to work stoppage likely contributes to the instability of the subject tree, the tree exhibited other concerns prior to this. The Arborist Report and submitted Tree Inventory Plan (Attachment D) both document the negative impact that portions of the tree have already had on the property, including the home foundation, patio, roof, and water/sewer pipe. The tree has also outgrown its location, making it an inappropriate fit and risk to further damage to people and property. This places the tree within the “high-risk” category, which is grounds for removal. In order to mitigate the concern the tree poses and retain landscaping, the applicant shall confer with the arborist to select appropriate replacement trees for replanting and plant the replacement trees within six (6) months of the date of decision. Once installed, the applicant shall notify the Planning Project Manager to complete a landscape inspection. N/A 4. Street frontage and parking lot trees and landscaping shall be preserved unless Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Routine Vegetation Management Permit Monsrud Tree Removal LUA26-000104, RVMP Permit Date: April 8, 2026 Page 3 of 4 D_Monsrud Tree Removal_final otherwise approved by the Administrator. Staff Comments: Not applicable. The subject tree is not a street frontage or parking lot tree. N/A 5. The land clearing and tree removal shall not remove any landscaping or protected trees required as part of a land development permit. Staff Comments: Not applicable. The subject tree is not a protected tree required as part of a land development permit. Additionally, the property is well-landscaped, containing numerous small shrubs, and two additional “significant” trees, as previously described. Nothing is proposed for removal except the subject Western red cedar tree. N/A 6. The land clearing and tree removal shall maintain visual screening and buffering between land uses of differing intensity, consistent with applicable landscaping and setback provisions. Staff Comments: Not applicable. The subject tree does not provide visual screening and buffering between land uses of differing intensity, as the adjoining properties are all single-family uses within the R-6 zone. Additionally, the subject tree is located further from the property line than other trees proposed to remain, meaning its removal is not anticipated to heavily impact screening. Also, based on satellite imagery viewed via COR Maps, the rear yard of the subject property and adjoining properties are all relatively heavily landscaped with mature tree foliage. YES 7. The land clearing and tree removal shall not create or contribute to a hazardous condition, such as increased potential for blowdown, pest infestation, disease, or other problems that may result from selectively removing trees and other vegetation from a lot. Staff Comments: The documentation provided did not indicate that the removal of the subject tree would create or contribute to a hazardous condition. N/A 8. The land clearing and tree removal shall be consistent with the requirement of the Shoreline Master Program, pursuant to RMC 4-3-090F.1, Vegetation Conservation and RMC 4-4-130, Tree Retention and Land Clearing Regulations. Staff Comments: Not applicable. The property is not located within shoreline jurisdiction. DECISION: The Monsrud Tree Removal, LUA26-000104, RVMP is Approved with Conditions* . *CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The applicant shall confer with the arborist to select appropriate replacement trees for replanting and plant the replacement trees within six (6) months of the date of decision. Once installed, the applicant shall notify the Planning Project Manager to complete a landscape inspection. Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Routine Vegetation Management Permit Monsrud Tree Removal LUA26-000104, RVMP Permit Date: April 8, 2026 Page 4 of 4 D_Monsrud Tree Removal_final SIGNATURE & DATE OF DECISION: ________________________________________ ____________________________________ Matthew Herrera, Planning Director Date RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that the decision be reopened by the approval body. The approval body may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the approval body finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14-day appeal time frame. APPEALS: Appeals of permit issuance must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 22, 2026. An appeal of the decision must be filed within the 14-day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197- 11-680). Appeals must be submitted electronically to the City Clerk at cityclerk@rentonwa.gov or delivered to City Hall 1st floor Lobby Hub Monday through Friday. The appeal fee, normally due at the time an appeal is submitted, will be collected at a future date if your appeal is submitted electronically. The appeal submitted in person may be paid on the first floor in our Finance Department. Appeals to the Hearing Examiner are governed by RMC 4-8-110 and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office, cityclerk@rentonwa.gov. EXPIRATION: The Routine Vegetation Management Permit shall be valid for one year from the date of issuance. An extension may be granted by the Administrator for a period of one year upon application by the property owner or manager. Application for such an extension must be made at least thirty (30) days in advance of the expiration of the original permit and shall include a statement of justification for the extension. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Arborist Report, prepared by David Bigelow, dated March 6, 2026 Attachment B: Tree Retention and Tree Credit Worksheet Attachment C: ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment Forms, dated March 6, 2026 Attachment D: Tree Inventory Plan, dated December 8, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A 4/8/2026 | 8:46 AM PDT March 6th, 2026 Prepared by: David Bigelow ISA Certified Arborist Tree Risk Assessment Qualified PN-9725A Property Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton, WA 98058 (Parcel #142390-0010) Client: Mark Monsrud (206) 992-4247 | monsy2002@msn.com Date / Time: 3/6/2026 – 12:45 PM Tree ID: Tree No. 1 (Tree 10 on site map) Assessor: David Bigelow, ISA Certified Arborist & Tree Risk Assessor PN9725A Tools Used: Visual inspection Assessment Time Frame: Imminent Arborist’s Report The tree described below was evaluated to determine its current condition and the potential for risk to adjacent targets. Trees are living organisms and their health, vigor, and structural condition can change over time. This report reflects conditions at the time of assessment and the information recorded on the attached ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form. 1. Scope of Work A basic tree risk assessment was performed for one Western red cedar located at 12109 SE 164th St., Renton. The purpose of this assessment was to document observed defects and site constraints, identify targets, and rate risk using the ISA matrices, with particular emphasis on documented conflict between roots and on-site infrastructure. 2. Summary Tree: Western red cedar (Thuja plicata) • DBH: 33.8 in • Height: ~75 ft • Crown spread: 38 ft Attachment A Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A • Live Crown Ratio (LCR): 45% Target: “12109 infrastructure (underground and foundational)” with occupancy constant • Roots: continued/ongoing damage associated with infrastructure conflict; likelihood noted as imminent for the root/infrastructure condition. • Crown/Trunk: multiple codominant leaders (four tops originating around ~25 ft), included bark, weak attachments, poor taper, and lean (3–4°) across multiple stems; likelihood recorded as probable for codominant stem failure. Risk ratings: • Target 1 – Roots / “Continued damage” → High • Target 1 – Codominant leaders / “Failure at union (x4)” → High Overall tree risk rating: High Mitigation option: Remove / replace Residual risk: None 3. Methodology This assessment follows the ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment approach, evaluating: • Observed defects in crown, trunk, and roots/root collar • Site factors and load factors • Target presence and occupancy • Likelihood of failure, likelihood of impact, consequences, and resulting risk rating This assessment was performed via visual inspection as listed on the form. 4. Site Conditions and Load Factors Topography: Flat Site changes: Root cuts noted; described as mitigation of a large root impacting water/sewer pipe. Soil conditions: Limited volume; pavement over roots; 65–70 percent coverage. Prevailing wind direction: NE Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Load factors recorded: • Wind exposure: Full • Relative crown size: Medium • Crown density: Sparse; Interior branches: Few • Recent/expected change in load factors: removal operations paused; continuation of removal/replacement recommended. 5. Tree Health and Condition Vigor: Low Foliage: Normal 92.5%; Necrotic 7.5% 6. Defects and Conditions Affecting Likelihood of Failure Crown and Branches • Unbalanced crown; LCR 45% • Dead twigs/branches 5% overall • Removal operations paused; limited south-facing foliage • Codominant structure: several tops (4) originating at ~25 ft • Included bark; weak attachments • Crown condition of concern: codominant stems with limited mass dampening; weighted toward home • Crown load on defect: Significant; likelihood of failure: Probable; fall distance: 25 ft Trunk • Codominant stems; included bark; poor taper • Lean: 3–4°, noted as multiple stems, uncorrected due to competition • Response growth: Fair • Trunk condition of concern: codominant stem failure; part size 40–45 ft x 16–20 in diameter; fall distance 25 ft • Trunk load on defect: Significant; likelihood of failure: Probable Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Roots and Root Collar Recorded root conditions include: • Cut/damaged roots noted; distance from trunk 12 ft • Root condition of concern: root damage to infrastructure; part size 5 in diameter • Root load on defect: Significant; likelihood of failure: Imminent (for the infrastructure- damage scenario) • Roots causing upheaval and cracks in the patio. Subsequent water drainage towards house. 7. Risk Categorization (ISA Matrices) 1. Roots – “Continued damage” – High 2. Codominant leaders – “Failure at union (x4)” – High Overall tree risk rating: High 8. Recommendations Remove / replace • Tree assessed after removal operations were paused. • Root pruning or root block installation not feasible due to limited area; tree has outgrown its location. 9. Limits of Assessment This is a preliminary ISA basic assessment with no stated inspection limitations on the form. The evaluation is based on visible conditions and the information recorded at the time of assessment. Trees are dynamic; conditions may change with weather, site disturbance, and time. 10. Conclusion The Western red cedar at 12109 SE 164th St., Renton presents a High risk condition driven by (1) ongoing root-related infrastructure damage and (2) multiple codominant leaders with union failure concern (x4), in a constant-occupancy target setting. The recorded mitigation is remove/replace, with residual risk recorded as none following mitigation. Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A This report does not address the safe working distances for energized conductors. Contractors should ensure compliance with all relevant safety regulations. 1 person at work in the US dies from electrocution an average of once every day. Limits of the Report Unless otherwise stated: 1. The information in this report covers only the items examined and reflects their condition at the time of inspection. 2. The inspection was limited to a visual examination of accessible items without further dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. Any loss or alteration of part of this report invalidates the entire document. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that the trees in question may not develop problems or deficiencies in the future. Respectfully submitted, David Bigelow 528 13th Street Snohomish, WA 98290 (206) 504-0355 dvdbigelow@gmail.com ISA Certified Arborist #PN9725A Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Site map for illustration purposes only NORTH Tree 10 (from inventory). Western red cedar proposed for removal Tree 10 (from inventory). Western red cedar proposed for removal Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Photo 1 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Photo 2 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Photo 3 Photo taken in crawlspace of 12109 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Photo 4 Photo taken in crawlspace of 12109 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Photo 5 24in scale used. Distance = 27.5in to patio. Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A rentonwa.gov/permitservices | planningcustomerservice@rentonwa.gov | 425-430-7294 12/01/2025 Page 1 of 3 CITY OF RENTON Ι PERMIT SERVICES TREE RETENTION AND CREDIT WORKSHEET TREE RETENTION REQUIREMENTS A minimum retention of thirty percent (30%) of all significant trees (as defined in RMC 4-11-200) is required on site. Please complete the form below to verify compliance with minimum tree retention requirements. • Identify total number of trees 6-inch caliper or greater (or alder or cottonwood trees 8-inch caliper or greater) on site: Trees Trees Trees Trees Trees Trees Required Trees Proposed •Deductions – Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: o Trees that are high-risk, as defined in RMC 4-11-200: o Trees within existing and proposed public right-of-way: o Trees within wetlands, streams, very high landslide hazards, protected slopes, and associated buffers: •Total remaining trees after deductions: •Required tree retention (30%): •Identify number of trees proposed for retention: •Identify number of trees requested for replacement in lieu of retention (skip page 3 if no tree replacement is requested):Trees TREE CREDIT REQUIREMENTS Tree credit requirements apply at a minimum rate of thirty (30) credits per net acre. Complete the form below to determine minimum tree credit requirements. •Gross area of property in square feet: Square Feet •Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from tree credit calculation: o Existing and proposed public right-of-way: Square Feet o Wetlands, streams, very high landslide hazards, protected slopes, and associated buffers: Square Feet •Total excluded area:Square Feet •Net land area (after deductions) in square feet:Square Feet •Net land area (after deductions) in acres:Acres •Required tree credits:Tree Credits Required Attachment B RECEIVED 12/11/2025 jcisneros PLANNING DIVISION 3 1 2 0.6 11 0 8170 0 8170 0.19 6 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A rentonwa.gov/permitservices | planningcustomerservice@rentonwa.gov | 425-430-7294 12/01/2025 Page 2 of 3 TREE RETENTION AND CREDIT WORKSHEET PROPOSED TREE CREDITS Please complete the table below to calculate the total tree credits proposed for your project. Identify the quantity of trees for each tree category, after deducting trees within excluded areas, as shown in the previous section. TREE SIZE TREE CREDITS TREE QUANTITY TOTAL TREE CREDITS RETAINED TREES Preserved tree 6 – 9” caliper 4 Preserved tree 10 – 12” caliper 5 Preserved tree 13 – 15” caliper 6 Preserved tree 16 – 18” caliper 7 Preserved tree 19 – 21” caliper 8 Preserved tree 22 – 24” caliper 9 Preserved tree 25 – 28” caliper 10 Preserved tree 29 – 32” caliper 11 Preserved tree 33 – 36” caliper 12 Preserved tree 37” caliper and greater 13 NEW TREES New small species tree (30' or less at maturity) 0.25 New medium species tree (30' to 50' at maturity) 1 New large species tree (50' or more at maturity) 2 TREE CREDITS PROPOSED: RECEIVED 12/11/2025 jcisneros PLANNING DIVISION 1 1 13 0 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A rentonwa.gov/permitservices | planningcustomerservice@rentonwa.gov | 425-430-7294 12/01/2025 Page 3 of 3 TREE RETENTION AND CREDIT WORKSHEET TREE REPLACEMENT JUSTIFICATION Replacement may be authorized as an alternative to 30% retention provided the removal is the minimum necessary to accomplish the desired purpose and provided the proposal meets one of the following options: a.There are special circumstances related to the size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the subject property; or b.The strict application of the code would prevent reasonable use of property; or c.The strict application of the code would prevent compliance with minimum density requirements of the zone; or d.The project is a short plat with four (4) or fewer lots. Please attach a written justification demonstrating compliance with the requirements and criteria as descripted above. TREE REPLACEMENT QUANTITY Tree replacement quantity is determined based on the credit value of the trees proposed for removal. Larger, higher priority trees shall be used for calculation of tree replacement. Identify the quantity of each tree requested to be removed in lieu of 30% retention, based on tree size. List the identification number of each tree, as indicated in the arborist report. TREE SIZE TREE CREDITS TREE QUANTITY TREE INDENTIFICATION # TOTAL TREE CREDITS Tree 37” caliper + 13 Tree 33 – 36” caliper 12 Tree 29 – 32” caliper 11 Tree 25 – 28” caliper 10 Tree 22 – 24” caliper 9 Tree 19 – 21” caliper 8 Tree 16 – 18” caliper 7 Tree 13 – 15” caliper 6 Tree 10 – 12” caliper 5 Tree 6 – 9” caliper 4 REPLACEMENT CREDITS REQUIRED: TREE REPLACEMENT PLANTING Identify the quantity of proposed new replacement trees (minimum size of 2-inch caliper). The total replacement credits proposed should be equal to or greater than the replacement credits required, as shown in the previous section. TREE SIZE TREE CREDITS TREE QUANTITY TOTAL TREE CREDITS New small species tree (30' or less at maturity) 0.25 New medium species tree (30' to 50' at maturity) 1 New large species tree (50' or more at maturity) 2 REPLACEMENT CREDITS PROPOSED: RECEIVED 12/11/2025 jcisneros PLANNING DIVISION 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A — Trunk — — Crown and Branches — — Roots and Root Collar — Unbalanced crown  LCR ______% Dead twigs/branches  ______% overall Max. dia. ________ Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________ Over-extended branches  Pruning history Crown cleaned  Reduced  Flush cuts  Thinned  Topped  Other Raised  Lion-tailed  Cracks  ________________________________ Lightning damage  Codominant ______________________________ Included bark  Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present  Dead/Missing bark  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sapwood damage/decay  Conks  Heartwood decay  ______________________ Response growth Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time _________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no. ____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) ____ ____________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________ Target Assessment T a r g e t nu m b e r Target description Target protection P r a c t i c a l t o m o v e t a r g e t ? R e s t r i c t i o n p r a c t i c a l ? Ta r g e t w i t h i n dr i p l i n e T a r g e t w i t h i n 1 x H t . Ta r g e t w i t h i n 1. 5 x H t . 1 2 3 4 History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None  Grade change  Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________ Soil conditions Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ Prevailing wind direction______ Common weather Strong winds  Ice Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Tree Health and Species Profile Vigor Low  Normal  High  Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____% Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________ Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________ Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss  _____________________ Recent or expected change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Dead/Missing bark  Abnormal bark texture/color  Codominant stems  Included bark  Cracks  Sapwood damage/decay  Cankers/Galls/Burls  Sap ooze  Lightning damage  Heartwood decay  Conks/Mushrooms  Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper  Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________ Response growth Condition(s) of concern Part Size Fall Distance 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 Condition(s) of concern Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Part Size Fall Distance Part Size Fall Distance Attachment C Mark Monsrud (206) 992-4247 monsy2002@msn.com 3/6/2026 12:45pm 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Parcel Number 142390-0010 1 (tree 10 on site map)1 1 Western red cedar, Thuja plicata 33.8 75ft approx.38ft David Bigelow ISA certified arborist and tree risk assessor PN9725A visual inspection imminent 12109 infrastructure (underground and foundational)none 4 4 n n Root disruption to infrastructure noted n Mitigation of large root impacting water/sewer pipe 65-70 NE All in moderation 92.5 7.5 Co dominate stems known to fail. Aggressive root growth in close quarters. n Tree removal operations paused. Continuation of removal/replacement recommended. 45 5 1in Removal operations paused. Limited south facing foliage. Several tops (4) originating at approx 25ft.n Co dominant stems with limited mass dampening. Weighted towards home. See "Trunk" below 25ft 25ft n n n 3-4 Lean angle is for multiple stems. Uncorrected due to competition. Fair Co dominant stem failure 40-45ft x 16-20in diameter 25ft 12ft Root damage to infrastructure 5in diameter N/A Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Target (Target number or description)Tree part Condition(s) of concern Risk rating (from Matrix 2) Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. Likelihood of Failure Likelihood of Impact 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 Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Failure Impact Failure & Impact (from Matrix 1) Likelihood Im p r o b a b l e Im m i n e n t Po s s i b l e Ve r y l o w Un l i k e l y Ne g l i g i b l e Me d i u m Li k e l y Si g n i f i c a n t Pr o b a b l e Lo w So m e w h a t Mi n o r Hi g h Ve r y l i k e l y Se v e r e Consequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure Ne g l i g i b l e 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 Data Final  Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________ Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Notes, explanations, descriptions 1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ 4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Overall residual risk None  Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval __________________ This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Mitigation options 1 Roots Continued damage l l l l High 1 Co dominant leaders Failure at union(x4) l l l l High Tree was assessed after removal operations were paused. Root pruning or root block installation not feasible due to limited area. Tree has outgrown it's location. Remove/replace None everyday by homeowner Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A T1 T2 LEGEND a: The property boundaries are drawn to scale as shown. b: N/A not applicable. There are no areas to be cleared. c: Tree slated for removal. T10-Tree#10, red cedar 70 ft tall, caliper diameter 34”. Condition of the cedar is healthy with extensive root structure spreading out under the house foundation, patio, and yard. The base of the red cedar is 2 ft from patio, 5 ft from the roof rain gutter, 7 ft from house foundation, and 12 ft from main sewer line. This red cedar tree was de-limbed from the base grade level to a height of 50 feet on November 12, 2025 and has high potential of blowdown with risk of severely damaging the subject property (case code No. CODE25-000713). This cedar must be removed due to causing damage to the house foundation, damage to the patio, root damage to the main sewer line, and shedding damage to the roof. Excessive cedar shedding requires roof cleaning weekly by retired home owner. The roof is 15 years old and exhibits signs of wear from cedar foliage debris which caused shingle deterioration and accelerated moss accumulation. The red cedar tree roots are also pinching off the center rain gutter down spout drain field pipe which increases the potential of water intrusion into the house crawl space. See photo on Tree Retention Plan page 5 for center rain gutter down spout proximity to the red cedar tree. See site pictures of existing property damage on pages 4 and 5. NOTE1: Caliper diameters are measured at 4.5 ft (54 inches) above grade. T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 bush bush driveway concrete patio SE 164th St 8’x10’ shed 8’x8’ shed boulevard sidewalk 110 ft 74.27 ft front yard N sewer line 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 house area 1350 ft^2 back yard Tree retention plan Page 1 of 8 Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft) 12 ft Attachment D RECEIVED 12/11/2025 jcisneros PLANNING DIVISIONDocusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A T1 T2 d: Trees to be retained. T1-Tree#1, located on boulevard, skinny genes oak 12 ft tall, caliper diameter 2”. Healthy tree planted by city of Renton in summer 2025. T2-Tree#2, located on boulevard, skinny genes oak 12 ft tall, caliper diameter 2”. Healthy tree planted by city of Renton in summer 2025. T3-Tree#3, located in front yard, rose bush 8 ft tall, caliper diameter 2”. Healthy tree/bush planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T4-Tree#4, located in front yard, rhododendron 8 ft tall, caliper diameter 2”. Healthy tree/bush planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T5-Tree#5, located in front yard, maple 8 ft tall, caliper diameter 3”. Healthy tree planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T6-Tree#6, located in back yard, maple 24 ft tall, caliper diameter 5”. Healthy tree planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T7=Tree#7, located in back yard, spire cedar 20 ft tall, caliper diameter 4”. Healthy tree planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T8=Tree#8, located in back yard, holly 16 ft tall, caliper diameter 3”. Healthy tree planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T9-Tree#9, located in back yard, rhododendron 8 ft tall, caliper diameter 2”. Healthy tree/bush planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T11-Tree#11, located in back yard, blue spruce 40 ft tall, caliper diameter 13”. Healthy tree planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. T12-Tree#12, located in back yard, blue spruce 50 ft tall, caliper diameter 18”. Healthy tree planted prior to 1997 by previous owner. e: Limits of disturbance: Trees T1-T9, T11 & T12 are not in critical root zone and will not be disturbed by removal of the red cedar T10. NOTE1: Caliper diameters are measured at 4.5 ft (54 inches) above grade. T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 bush bush driveway concrete patio SE 164th St 8’x10’ shed 8’x8’ shed boulevard sidewalk 110 ft 74.27 ft front yard Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft) N sewer line 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 house area 1350 ft^2 back yard Tree retention plan Page 2 of 8 LEGEND N N N N Y Y Y N N Y Y Y = counts as tree N = does not count Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A T1 T2 f: Tree protection tract (N/A) not applicable. g: Trees not viable for retention T10-Tree#10, This red cedar tree was de-limbed from the base grade level to a height of 50 feet on November 12, 2025 and has high potential of blowdown with risk of severely damaging the subject property (case code No. CODE25-000713). This cedar must be removed due to causing damage to the house foundation, damage to the patio, root damage to the main sewer line, and shedding damage to the roof. Excessive cedar shedding requires roof cleaning weekly by retired home owner. The roof is 15 years old and exhibits signs of wear from cedar foliage debris which caused shingle deterioration and accelerated moss accumulation. See site pictures of existing property damage on pages 4 and 5. h: impact to remaining trees Trees T1-T9, T11 & T12 will not be impacted, nor disturbed by removal of the red cedar T10. i: Protection measures during construction. N/A not applicable. There is no construction associated with this tree removal project. j: Supplemental trees. N/A not applicable. No additional trees are slated to be planted with this tree removal project. k: Tree overlap of construction lines. N/A not applicable. There is no construction associated with this tree removal project. l: Rights-of-way. There is no construction associated with this tree removal project. Utilities and infrastructure in place will not be disturbed. m-n: Construction activities. N/A not applicable. There is no construction associated with this tree removal project. o-r: Protected critical areas/trees. N/A not applicable. There are no protected critical areas on the subject property. A replacement tree is not planned at this time, as the lot has adequate trees per the tree retention and credit worksheet. T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10 T11 T12 bush bush driveway concrete patio SE 164th St 8’x10’ shed 8’x8’ shed boulevard sidewalk 110 ft 74.27 ft front yard Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Scale: 1 inch = 20 feet Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft) N sewer line 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 house area 1350 ft^2 back yard Tree retention plan Page 3 of 8 LEGEND 12 ft Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft)Tree retention plan Page 4 of 8 existing damage pictures Crawl space. Cedar root coming thru house foundation around the main sewer pipe. Cedar root Cedar root Patio cracks from cedar root structure Cedar tree Photo taken November 12, 2025 Photo taken November 12, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft)Tree retention plan Page 5 of 8 existing damage pictures Patio cracks from cedar root structure Cedar tree Patio cracks from cedar root structure Cedar tree 2 ft 7 ft The red cedar tree is too close to the house foundation and is causing damage to the property. Photo taken November 12, 2025 Photo taken November 12, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft) Tree retention plan Page 6 of 8Front yard view of house picture T2 T1 T3T4 T5 T10 T11 T1-Tree#1, retained, skinny genes oak. T2-Tree#2, retained, skinny genes oak. T3-Tree#3, retained, rose bush. T4-Tree#4, retained, rhododendron. T5-Tree#5, retained, maple T10-Tree#10, to be removed, red cedar T11-Tree#11, retained, blue spruce Photo taken November 12, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft) Tree retention plan Page 7 of 8back yard view of house picture T6 T6-Tree#6, retained, maple. T7-Tree#7, retained, spire cedar. T8-Tree#8, retained, holly. T9-Tree#9, retained, rhododendron. T10-Tree#10, to be removed, red cedar T7 T8 T9 T10 Photo taken November 12, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A Project Name: Remove One Cedar Tree December 8, 2025 Address: 12109 SE 164th St., Renton WA 98058 Lot size: 8170 ft^2 (110 ft x 74.27 ft) Tree retention plan Page 8 of 8back yard view of house picture T11 T11-Tree#11, retained, blue spruce T12-Tree#12, retained, blue spruce T12 T10-Tree#10, to be removed, red cedar T10 Photo taken November 12, 2025 Photo taken November 12, 2025 Docusign Envelope ID: 16A139CF-2909-4726-9BDD-F3E7B4250C5A