My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
815 SIEVERS-DUECY BLVD 2025-05-05
>
Address Records
>
SIEVERS-DUECY BLVD
>
815
>
815 SIEVERS-DUECY BLVD 2025-05-05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/5/2025 7:46:45 AM
Creation date
11/19/2024 11:57:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
SIEVERS-DUECY BLVD
Street Number
815
Imported From Microfiche
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
960
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
for those thatwill look better, and last longer. The narrative summarizes our proposed changes <br />which include: <br />• Incense Cedarfor Douglas Fir —The City preferred planting are native trees to the northwest. <br />In this case Doug Fir is native and the Incense Cedar is primarily California/Southern Oregon <br />species <br />• Blue PointJuniperfor Mountain Hemlock - Blue pointjuniper may struggle as this area may <br />be too cold. The Mountain Hemlock is native and should grow better. <br />• Chinese Fringe trees for Amelanchier-Chinese Fringe is indigenous to the east coast; however <br />is approved for growth in the Seattle area and noted for not interfering with overhead <br />powerlines. Amelanchier is native to western washington and does well here —So the <br />preferred tree is the Amelanchier. <br />• Natchez for Malus Tschonoskii —The Natchez is not native but can survive in this zone which is <br />8a &b this tree can survive 7-11. The Malus can also survive in this zone and is not native to <br />the region either. Is there a native alternative? <br />• Cavantine for Snowberry - Cavantine is not indigenous to the PNW however the snowberry is <br />native to all north America <br />It appears all the species originally offered and requesting to be replaced are native and would do <br />better than the proposed alternatives save the Natchez v Tschonoskii. Based on this, please adhere <br />to the original approved landscape plan —Thankyou <br />I believe each of these substitutions still fit within the interpretation of the code, and the idea <br />behind the landscaping requirements. Our group has successfully released landscaping bonds on all <br />previous properties within the City. <br />Shannon, anything to add? <br />Thanks, <br />Sean <br />From: Dennis Osborn <DOsborn(cDeverettwa.eov> <br />Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 10:20 AM <br />To: sean(cDug-dev.com <br />Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: Underwood Gartland 64- Landscape Inquiry <br />Hi Sean <br />I am Dennis Osborn and will be reviewing the proposed plant substitutions. My question is that in <br />the narrative provided, there are a lot of suggested changes. Is the idea to go with all of the <br />proposed changes in the narrative I received? <br />Dennis Osborn <br />Planner I Community, Planning and Economic Dev. <br />425-257-7176 1 2930 Wetmore, Suite 8A, Everett, WA 98201 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.