revised draft - kenmore, washingtonkenmorewa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-02-09 arborist report...

2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone 206.528.4670 w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t

Project No. TS - 5275 Arborist Report

TO: Teresa Vanderburg, ESA

SITE: St. Edward Park Ballfield

RE: Tree Retention and Protection Report

DATE: May 6, 2016

UPDATED: January 22, 2018

PROJECT ARBORISTS: Katherine Taylor ISA Certified Arborist PN-8022A ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor

Scott Baker, Registered Consulting Arborist #414 ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-0670B ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor

ATTACHED: Table of Trees Marked Up Site Survey Tree Impacts Exhibit Tree Protection Specifications

Summary There are one-hundred and forty-seven (147) trees surrounding the perimeter of a proposed ballfield development site at St. Edward Park. All trees equal to six inches or greater were measured, assessed, and tagged per city of Kenmore Code Chapter 18.57 requirements. All of the trees from the southwest corner to the south and east sides of the ballfield are part of a continuous grove of trees.

The city of Kenmore requires that the net buildable area of a site contain thirty (30) tree units per acre. The net buildable area of St. Edward ballfield is equal to 2.1 acres which requires sixty-four (64) tree units. There are currently a total of one hundred and ninety-nine (199) tree units in the net buildable area which is equal to ninety-four (94) credits per acre. None of the trees in the net buildable area are recommended for removal. No additional trees are required for planting in the net buildable area.

Current plans indicate that one-hundred and seven (107) trees would be retained, twenty-nine (29) trees would be retained but impacted by site work, and eleven (11) trees would be removed. Four (4) of the impacted trees are recommended for pruning. Four (4) of the trees recommended for removal are growing in critical areas.

REVISED DRAFT

byb

Rectangle

St. Edward Park Ballfield Arborist Report UPDATED 1/22/2018 pg. 2 of 21


The trees recommended for removal are ten (10) black cottonwood trees and one (1) bigleaf maple that are growing near to proposed new infrastructure. The bigleaf maple has died since the initial inspection and was recommended for removal by the Washington State Parks. The black cottonwood trees have defects that pose risk to the new infrastructure and people using the new infrastructure onsite and qualify as hazard trees according to the definition in the city of Kenmore code. The city of Kenmore requires that hazard tree removals in critical areas be mitigated for in-kind and onsite. We recommend a minimum of one to one tree replacement for all tree removals (in and out of critical areas). We also recommend the use of native conifer species suited to the site conditions. The project team will work with Washington State Parks to determine an acceptable rate of replanting. The project team has made several alterations to the site design to better protect trees including eliminating a path inside the grove of trees near the parking area, changing pervious pavement paths to gravel paths near the parking area, redesigning the new parking space surfaces, moving the detention vault out from the critical root zones (CRZ), use of compost socks rather than silt fencing within CRZs, and eliminating hydro-seeding of grass in the beds where trees are growing. Construction methods to minimize impacts on trees are discussed and recommended in the following text. All excavation and root pruning within the CRZ of trees should be monitored by a qualified arborist. Assignment & Scope of Report This report outlines the site inspection by Casey Clapp and Katherine Taylor of Tree Solutions, Inc., on March 9, 2016 as well as subsequent site inspections by Katherine Taylor and Scott Baker on November 30 and December 22 of 2017. We were asked to review plans, visit the job site, inventory the trees, and provide a formal report including findings and a tree protection plan. Teresa Vanderburg, vice president of Environmental Science Associates, a contractor on the St. Edward Park Ballfield Development project, requested these services for project planning. The tree size, species, health and structural condition, and related notes and recommendations for each tree can be found in the attached Tree of Trees. A marked up Survey with tree locations and numbers, and a marked up Tree Impacts Exhibit are attached. Tree Protection Specifications are also attached. Photographs, Glossary, and References follow the report. Limits of assignment can be found in Appendix A. Methods can be found in Appendix B. Additional assumptions and limiting conditions can be found in Appendix C. Observations The Site and History The site is currently a ballfield with an adjacent parking and picnic area to the west, and a wetland and wooded area to the south and east of the field. The soils were saturated during our site visit especially in the area of the current ballfield. The lease area of the site is equal to 4.16 acres. The net buildable area of the site is equal to the lease area minus any critical areas. There are two critical areas within the lease area, the wetland buffer is equal to 1.64 acres and the wetland is equal to .41 acres. Therefore the net buildable area is equal to 2.11 acres.



Proposed plans show a renovated ballfield surface with two diamonds, lights, paths and bleachers surrounding the fields, and a renovated parking area. The Trees The trees are all native species including western redcedar (Thuja plicata), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), red alder (Alnus rubra), and Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii). The trees are around the perimeter of the existing ballfield on the west, south, and east sides. All 147 trees have connecting canopies and are therefore considered to be part of a grove. The trees are along the edge of a larger forest and have connecting canopies with many other adjacent trees outside the project area that were not measured or assessed. Trees 501 to 520 are large western redcedar and Douglas-fir trees in fair to good condition (Photo 1). They are part of a picnic area adjacent to the parking area along the west side of the ballfield. The soil in this area is heavily compacted, likely due to foot traffic and park use. Some surface roots of a few of the trees have wounds from lawn mowing activity. Trees 510, 511, and 517, which are all planned for retention, are Douglas-firs that have swollen bases or roots which could be an indicator of decay. Trees toward the south end of the existing ball field are mostly black cottonwood and are growing in a wetland buffer (Photo 2). Several of these trees are in a large mature form with breaks in their canopies, overextended branches, and in some cases low live crown ratios (LCR – length of live foliage to whole tree height). This species is typically shallow rooted, especially when growing in saturated or compacted soils. Compaction and saturated soils on site has led to surface rooting in many areas. A large portion of root systems are found in the top one to two feet of soil and can be negatively impacted by excavation, compaction, fill, and cutting or damaging of roots. Discussion On November 16th, 2017 the project team had a conference call with David Cass, Washington State Parks Agency Forester, to review project requirements regarding trees. The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission defines the critical root zone (CRZ) of a tree as having a radius of 1.25 feet for every inch of trunk diameter at standard height (DSH) measured from the center of the tree out. Up to 20 percent encroachment on the CRZ is allowed. Replacement of existing hard surfaces does not count as encroachment on the CRZ. Washington State Parks Tree protection specifications provided by David Cass were edited for this project and are attached. Construction for the ballfield and pervious paths would be within the critical root zones of the trees along the west and south edges of the proposed ballfield. Construction activities would remain outside the CRZs of trees along the east side of the field.



The following are anticipated construction activities:

• Installation of TESC details including compost socks.

• Ballfield: removal of existing turf; excavation of the top 8 to 10 inches of soil; application of a sand sub-grade and 6 inch plastic grating drainage system; and installation of a permeable artificial turf.

• Paths: installation of pervious pavement paths around the perimeter of the ballfield and leading from the parking area on the west side to the ballfield; installation of gravel paths within critical root zones of trees; conversion of an existing ditch along the west side of the field to permeable pavement.

• Parking lot: excavation and resurfacing of an existing parking area and lawn west of field with permeable asphalt and 6 to 9 inches of subgrade.

• Split rail fencing: installation of split rail fencing along the parking area.

• Stormwater detention: underground facility at the southwest corner of the field. BALLFIELD The impacts to trees from the ballfield installation are largely buffered by the installation of the path that surrounds the field. Surface preparation for the ballfield includes removal of the existing grass surface and top soil. There is a ditch surrounding the ballfield which may have limited regrowth of roots at the surface of the existing ballfield. PATHS Installation of pervious pavement with an underdrain is required to comply with Department of Ecology stormwater management regulations. The pervious surface would require 16 inches of sub-grade and a perforated pipe. In most areas, the path would be 0.5 to 1.5 feet above existing grade which would minimize the required excavation. Because the surface would be pervious, roots below the path surface should still have access to air and water. The path surface along the parking spaces has been changed on the proposed plans, as of January 2018, to be 3 inches of crushed gravel on grade instead of pervious pavement (Photo 3). This was done to prevent cutting of the surface roots of adjacent trees that would be required to accommodate the subgrade and drainage system for pervious pavement. In addition, a path running through the grove of trees in a previous proposal was removed to limit disturbance. In previous plans hydro-seeding of grass was shown at the edges of all new paths. The plans have been updated to show hydro-seeding only in areas where the soil against paths connects to existing or planned lawn areas. Soil within groves of trees shall be covered with 3 to 4 inches of woodchip mulch. PARKING LOT The existing parking lot is compacted gravel. Even though the parking lot is within the CRZ of several trees, due to compaction and previous surface manipulation there is likely a limited number of roots growing in this area. The proposed surface would be permeable asphalt with a subgrade of approximately 6 to 9 inches.



There are four new parking stalls proposed in an existing lawn area to meet Washington State Parks requirements for additional parking (Photo 4). In this area the project team has proposed limiting excavation depths and retaining all large structural roots within the subgrade. The permeable surface should allow for continued movement of water and air into the soil below. The greatest impact to the trees would be from a trench drain installed 16 inches below grade at the edge of the parking area. The trench drain could potentially result in large root cuts unless special construction methods are used. We recommend attempting to relocate the trench drain or use a surface gutter style drain instead. STORMWATER DETENTION The stormwater detention facility would be installed in the southwest corner of the field and would remain outside the CRZs of all trees. A drainage pipe would be installed from the detention facility into an existing ditch in the wetland buffer to slowly disperse water. According to the project civil engineer, hydrology studies showed that water would be dispersed in a manner that would not significantly increase or decrease the amount of water flowing to the wetland. The overflow pipe would be installed in the top foot of grade just below top soil. TREE IMPACTS AND RISK According to the attached analysis, the CRZ of several trees would be impacted greater than 20 percent. Based on the proposed plans and construction methods we believe that these trees can be retained and impacts will be limited for one or more of the following reasons: disturbance remains on one side of the CRZ; impacts would not necessarily result in root cuts; where there is raised grade it would consist of materials that would allow for air and water movement; and possible root cuts would remain at least nine feet from the trunks. Trees recommended for retention with impacts to over 20 percent of the CRZ include 501, 502, 503, 504, 505, 506, 507, 509, and 518. Tree 501 is a large Douglas-fir tree in good condition. Analysis shows that 44.9 percent of its CRZ would be impacted. The tree is growing toward the middle of the grove at the north end. Disturbance would occur approximately 18 to 21 feet to the north, east, and west of this tree. Based on our experience, the type of disturbance, and our knowledge of this species, we believe impacts to this tree from construction activities would be minimal. Trees 502, 503, and 504 would be impacted by four new required parking stalls. Excavation would occur in close proximity to the trees where there are surface roots (Photo 5). All roots should be retained to the extent possible. Trees 502, 503, 504, 508, 511, 512, 515, 516, and 517 would be impacted by a proposed trench drain along the west side of the parking area. We recommend relocating this drain or using a surface gutter style drain. If this is not possible we recommend threading the drain below uncovered roots to reduce impacts. Tree 505 is a western redcedar with a healthy canopy and codominant stems. One of the stems has wounds with reaction wood and a visible decay hollow. Trees 506 and 507 are both Douglas-fir trees in fair to good condition.



Impacts to these trees would occur approximately nine feet to the east. Grade in this area would be increased and permeable which would reduce the amount of necessary root cuts and allow for water and air exchange. Eventually tree 505 may require crown reduction to reduce load on the basal defect. Tree 509 has a thinning canopy and the top is beginning to dieback (Photo 6). This tree is growing very close to the existing ditch. Again, the path would largely be installed above grade limiting excavation and root cuts. Construction of the existing field and ditch likely damaged much of its root system. Additionally, heavily compacted soils and standing water in the ditch have likely caused stress to the tree. The new path could reduce saturated conditions at the base of this tree and potentially improve its condition. We recommend this tree for retention and monitoring following construction. Tree 518 is a healthy western redcedar, with no basal defects, growing at the southeast corner of the parking lot grove. A path is proposed to the south and east sides of this tree resulting in disturbance of 53 percent according to the tree impacts exhibit. Potential root cuts would occur approximately 18 to 24 feet from the trunk to the south and east (Photo 7) and sloped fill against the path would occur approximately 9 to 12 feet to the south and east. For the most part the path would be installed above grade or over the existing ditch likely resulting in minimal root pruning. The path surface and subgrade would be pervious allowing for exchange of air and water. We recommend retaining this tree. The soil in the grove next to the parking area is heavily compacted, likely from foot traffic and use (Photo 8). Soil in this area should be improved and protected by applying and maintaining a 3 to 4 inch layer of woodchip mulch. Woodchip mulch applied in the protection area should remain and be maintained after construction, especially if increased use of this area is anticipated. Woodchip mulch from tree removals should be used, bark mulch is not an appropriate mulch for this purpose. There are several large black cottonwood trees growing along the south portion of the ballfield. Several of the trees are in mature form with dominant crowns, large trunk diameters, codominant attachments, broken canopy parts, dead tops, over-extended branches, and / or low live crown ratios (LCR – live canopy to stem length) (Photo 9). These trees are growing at the edge of the wetland buffer in soils that are saturated for a portion of the year. Risk posed by this species increases as it matures. Black cottonwoods tend to shed large canopy parts and can be prone to windthrow at the roots, especially when growing in saturated conditions. It can be very difficult to predict whole tree failure as there is often no visible defects prior to failure. Impacts to the black cottonwood trees from construction would likely be minimal due to previous grading and installation of a ditch around the border of the field. However, several of these trees would be within striking distance of new infrastructure where people would be present. We recommend beginning to phase out some of the more dominant trees with defects (described above) and prune remaining trees to remove or reduce large parts over the ballfield. We recommend 10 black cottonwood trees for removal (534, 536 – 539, 541, 542, 566, 573, 583) and 4 black cottonwood trees for pruning (535, 556, 557, 572), including reducing some stems to wildlife habitat snags. Based on my experience and knowledge, the black cottonwood trees recommended for removal qualify as hazard trees according to definition in the city of Kenmore code. A bigleaf maple tagged 563 has died since the initial inspection and was recommended for removal by the Washington State Parks.



Trees 556 and 557 are both recommended for pruning. They both have large codominant stems. For both trees we recommend reducing or removing the stem that is leaning toward the field and pruning large scaffold branches over the field. See photos 10 and 11 for recommended pruning locations. Removal and reduction of trees would likely be more cost effective at the construction phase of the project as there would be no infrastructure below. Some of the wood from these trees could be placed as habitat logs or woody debris in the wetland buffer or other areas as determined by State Parks staff. The amount of woody debris that can be left on site would be evaluated at the time of removal. We recommend that some of the trees recommended for removal be cut to large wildlife habitat snags to supports birds and animals using this area, while new trees grow in place. Trees in critical areas should be prioritized for this treatment. Trees left as snags should be reduced to a height less that the distance to adjacent targets. Any remaining branches should be left or cut to stubs to allow places for birds to perch. A chainsaw could be used to create a jagged top cut for a more natural “break” appearance. Wildlife snags may sprout and require management over time. All of the remaining black cottonwood trees growing at the edge of the forest within striking distance of the field would also require pruning and removal over time. These trees should be assessed for management yearly. Trees 510, 511, and 517 are Douglas-firs that have swollen bases or roots that could be an indicator of decay. We recommend testing these trees to determine the presence/extent of decay. Testing could either be done using a micro-resistance drill or sonic tomography. Both tools measure the density and strength of the wood as an indicator of decay. TREE REPLACEMENT The city of Kenmore requires that the net buildable area contain 30 tree units per acre. If the site does not meet the required number of tree units, planting must occur to make up the required units. The net buildable area onsite is equal to 2.1 acres and would require 64 (rounded up from 63.3) tree units. Trees 501 to 518 and 520 are all growing in the net buildable area and total 199 (rounded up from 198.7) tree units which equals 94.2 tree units per acre. None of these trees are proposed for removal. No additional tree units are required for planting in the net buildable area. The city of Kenmore requires that hazard tree removals in critical areas be mitigated for in-kind and onsite. They also require that mitigation be sufficient to maintain the functions and values of the critical area, or to prevent risk from a hazard posed by a critical area. Four of the trees proposed for removal are growing in a critical area, three in the wetland buffer and one in the wetland. The remaining seven trees recommended for removal are growing just outside the lease area in the southwest corner of the site which is not designated as a critical area. We recommend a minimum of one to one tree replacement for all tree removals (in and out of critical areas). We also recommend the use of native conifer species suited to the site conditions. The project team will work with Washington State Parks to determine an acceptable rate of replanting.



Appropriate native coniferous and deciduous species for replanting include western redcedar (Thuja plicata), Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), shore pine (Pinus contorta v. contorta), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and cascara (Rhamnus purshiana). CONSTRUCTION METHODS Excavation and compaction within or adjacent to the CRZs should be limited to the extent possible. All excavation and root pruning within and at the edge of the CRZ should be done in the presence of a qualified arborist. The arborist shall help determine retention or removal of roots and assess the number and size of root cuts to determine if the tree remains viable. The tree protection fencing is shown inside the CRZ of several trees at the limits of disturbance. It must be communicated to the construction manager that work outside the fencing that is within the CRZ of trees shall be done in the manner described below and in the attached tree protection specifications. The following methods should be used within the CRZ of trees specific to certain areas:

• Paths around west grove of trees and new parking spaces: Use pneumatic air excavation within the CRZ of trees for paths and the four new parking stalls around the grove on the west side of the field. The brands Air Spade or Air Knife are preferable because they have been designed specifically for use around tree roots. All roots, especially those in the new parking stalls near trees 502, 503 and 504 should be retained, subgrade material should be placed around the roots. Fill material used to slope from the path edge down to the existing grade should be loose and well-draining. Compaction of this fill should be kept to a minimum. A layer of woodchip mulch should be applied over top of the fill where the path edge is against or within the grove of trees.

• Existing parking area and south ballfield: Use flat fronted buckets to perform excavation slowly. A qualified arborist should monitor the excavation to spot for roots. When roots are encountered, excavation should stop and the root should be assessed for retention or removal. This technique should also be used in the CRZ of trees at the south end of the ballfield.

• Trench drain along the parking lot: If relocation of the drain or use of an alternative style drain is not possible, use hydraulic excavation and a vacuum truck to dig the trench. All uncovered roots should be retained and the drain should be threaded under the roots.

• Stormwater facility drain pipe: perform excavation by hand or using pneumatic air excavation.

• Split rail fencing: dig pits by hand, adjust locations as necessary to avoid damaging roots. Limit root pruning to the extent possible, especially for roots that are 2 inches or greater in diameter. If roots are encountered during excavation, where possible, apply gravel under, around, and over the top of the roots instead of cutting them. Any necessary root cuts should be made cleanly with a sharp saw. Do not tear roots with an excavation bucket. Four inches of woodchip mulch should be applied over bare soil in all tree protection areas. Heavy equipment should not be used from within the CRZ of any trees unless the soils are protected from the load. Specifications for load protection can be found in the attached tree protection specifications. Access routes should remain toward the north end of the field outside the CRZ of any trees.



We recommend post construction monitoring and assessment for any retained trees with impacts within the CRZ. Impacts to trees from construction can take multiple years to become apparent. In addition to regular parks maintenance and monitoring, assessments should take place one and three years after construction. This assessment should be performed by a qualified arborist. Trees should be assessed for declining canopy condition, trunk defects, expansion of any decay areas, and shifting or heaving soils. Further information can be found in the attached Washington State Parks Tree Protection specifications which have been tailored for this project. Recommendations

• Obtain all permits necessary prior to commencement of project work.

• Install tree protection around all tree protection areas prior to the commencement of any site work. Apply four inches of wood chip mulch over bare soil in all tree protection areas. Have a qualified arborist inspect tree protection prior to the commencement of site work.

• Relocate the trench drain for the parking spaces in subsequent design updates, alternatively consider the use of a surface gutter style drain.

• Remove trees 534, 536 – 539, 541, 542, 563, 566, 573, and 583. Leave some of these trees as snags, especially those growing in critical areas.

• Prune trees 535, 556, 557, and 572.

• Follow construction methods described above and in the attached tree protection specifications.

• Have a qualified arborist monitor all work including root pruning and excavation done within the CRZ of trees.

• Consider additional testing for trees 510, 511, and 517 to determine the presence/extent of decay.



Photographs

Photo 1: Existing grove of trees to the west of the ballfield.

Photo 2: Grove of cottonwood trees at the south end of the ballfield.



Photo 3: Large surface roots in the area the pervious path has been changed to a gravel path in the proposed plans.

Photo 4: The yellow arrow indicates the location where four new parking stalls are proposed to meet Washington State parking lot requirements. Installation of these stalls would sever large surface structural roots from trees 502, 503, and 504.



Photo 5: One of the large surface roots adjacent to tree 502 that would need to be removed to accommodate new parking spaces.

Photo 6: Tree 509 with a thinning canopy and dead top.



Photo 7: A view of tree 518 looking north. Scott is standing approximately where the path would be installed.

Photo 8: Soils in the grove near the parking lot are heavily compacted.

Scott

Surface root



Photo 9: Typical form of black cottonwoods growing around the south perimeter of the ballfield.



Photo 10: A view of tree 556 with codominant stems. We recommend removing or shortening the east stem and pruning the large scaffold over the ballfield. The photo above shows approximate location of cuts. The qualified arborist performing the work should use their discretion in determining the final pruning cut locations.

Tree 556



Photo 11: A view of tree 557. We recommend shortening or removing the broken stem and reducing the canopy overhanging the ballfield. The qualified arborist performing the work should use their discretion in determining the final pruning cut locations.

Tree 557



Glossary advanced assessment: an assessment performed to provide detailed information about specific tree

parts, defects, targets, or site conditions. Specialized equipment, data collection and analysis, and/or expertise are usually required (ISA 2013)

ANSI A300: American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for tree care basic assessment: detailed visual inspection of a tree and surrounding site that may include the use of

simple tools. It requires that a tree risk assessor walk completely around the tree trunk looking at the site, aboveground roots, trunk, and branches (ISA 2013)

cracks: defects in trees that, if severe, may pose a risk of tree or branch failure (Lilly 2001) crown: the aboveground portions of a tree (Lilly 2001) crown cleaning: selective pruning to remove one or more of the following parts: dead, diseased, and/or

broken branches (ANSI A300) DBH or DSH: diameter at breast or standard height; the diameter of the trunk measured 54 inches (4.5

feet) above grade (Matheny et al. 1998) deciduous: tree or other plant that loses its leaves sometime during the year and stays leafless

generally during the cold season (Lilly 2001) epicormic: arising from latent or adventitious buds (Lilly 2001) evergreen: tree or plant that keeps its needles or leaves year round; this means for more than one

growing season (Lilly 2001) ISA: International Society of Arboriculture landscape function: the environmental, aesthetic, or architectural functions that a plant can have (Lilly

2001) limited visual assessment: a visual assessment from a specified perspective such as foot, vehicle, or

aerial (airborne) patrol of an individual tree or a population of trees near specified targets to identify specified conditions or obvious defects (ISA 2013)

mitigation: process of reducing damages or risk (Lilly 2001) monitoring: keeping a close watch; performing regular checks or inspections (Lilly 2001) owner/manager: the person or entity responsible for tree management or the controlling authority

that regulates tree management (ISA 2013) pathogen: causal agent of disease (Lilly 2001) micro-resistance drill: a drilling instrument used to determine the density of wood by measuring the

amount of resistance presented to the drilling needle as it is driven into the wood. The drilling resistance profiles show clearly where compression wood, annual rings, rot in various stages and other defects have been encountered by the drilling needle

retain and monitor: the recommendation to keep a tree and conduct follow-up assessments after a stated inspection interval (ISA 2013)

significant size: a tree measuring 6” DSH or greater soil structure: the arrangement of soil particles (Lilly 2001) structural defects: flaws, decay, or other faults in the trunk, branches, or root collar of a tree, which

may lead to failure (Lilly 2001) tomography: a technique for obtaining 2-D cross sections or 3-D pictures of the interior of an object by

passing sound waves through the object and measuring the travel times of the acoustic signals as the object absorbs or scatters them on ray paths between source and receiver.

Visual Tree Assessment (VTA): method of evaluating structural defects and stability in trees by noting the pattern of growth. Developed by Claus Mattheck (Harris, et al 1999)



References ANSI A300 (Part 1) – 2008 American National Standards Institute. American National Standard for Tree

Care Operations: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Maintenance: Standard Practices (Pruning). New York: Tree Care Industry Association, 2008.

Dunster & Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd. Assessing Trees in Urban Areas and the Urban-

Rural Interface, US Release 1.0. Silverton: Pacific Northwest Chapter ISA, 2006. Dunster, Julian A., E. Thomas Smiley, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly. Tree Risk Assessment Manual.

Champaign, Illinois: International Society of Arboriculture, 2013. E. Smiley, N. Matheny, S. Lilly. Best Management Practices: TREE RISK ASSESSMENT. ISA 2011. Lilly, Sharon. Arborists’ Certification Study Guide. Champaign, IL: The International Society of

Arboriculture, 2001. Matheny, Nelda and James R. Clark. Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees

During Land Development. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 1998. Mattheck, Claus and Helge Breloer, The Body Language of Trees.: A Handbook for Failure Analysis.

London: HMSO, 1994.



Appendix A - Limits of Assignment Unless stated otherwise: 1) information contained in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects the condition of those trees at the time of inspection; and 2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of the subject trees without dissection, excavation, probing, climbing, or coring unless explicitly specified. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the subject trees may not arise in the future. Tree Solutions did not review any reports or perform any tests related to the soil located on the subject property unless outlined in the scope of services. Tree Solutions staff are not and do not claim to be soils experts. An independent inventory and evaluation of the site’s soil should be obtained by a qualified professional if an additional understanding of the site’s characteristics is needed to make an informed decision. A Hazard Tree is defined as a tree that has been assessed and determined to have characteristics that make it an unacceptable risk for continued retention. A hazard tree, or a hazardous component, exist when the sum of the risk factors equals or exceeds a predetermined threshold of risk. The predetermined threshold for risk and the actions required to reduce the risk below that threshold is established by the risk manager. As a Qualified Tree Risk Assessor, my job is to provide the risk manager, in most cases the property owner, with technical information required to make informed decisions. The risk manager must make the decision about how to implement the actions required to reduce risk to acceptable levels.

Appendix B - Methods I evaluated tree health and structure utilizing visual tree assessment (VTA) methods. The basis behind VTA is the identification of symptoms, which the tree produces in reaction to a weak spot or area of mechanical stress. A tree reacts to mechanical and physiological stresses by growing more vigorously to reinforce weak areas, while depriving less stressed parts (Mattheck & Breloer 1994). An understanding of the uniform stress allows me to make informed judgments about the condition of a tree. I measured the diameter at standard height (DSH) of each tree, typically at 54 inches above grade. If a tree had multiple stems, I measured each stem individually at standard height and determined a single-stem equivalent diameter by taking the average of the stem diameters, as established by the RZC. I used a steel soil probe to test soil depths. I used binoculars to inspect the upper parts of the trees. Tree health considers crown indicators including foliar density, size, color, stem shoot extensions, decay, and damage. We have adapted our ratings based on the Purdue University Extension Formula Values for health condition. These values are a general representation used to assist in arborists in assigning ratings. Tree health needs to be evaluated on an individual basis and may not always fall entirely into a single category, however, I assigned a single condition rating for ease of clarity.



Excellent Perfect specimen with excellent form and vigor, well-balanced crown. Normal to exceeding shoot length on new growth. Leaf size and color normal. Trunk is sound and solid. Root zone undisturbed. No apparent pest problems. Long safe useful life expectancy for the species. Good Imperfect canopy density in few parts of the tree, up to 10 percent of the canopy. Normal to less than ¾ of

typical growth rate of shoots and minor deficiency in typical leaf development. Few pest issues or damage, and if they exist they are controllable or tree is reacting appropriately. Normal branch and stem development with healthy growth. Safe useful life expectancy typical for the species. Fair Crown decline and dieback up to 30 percent of the canopy. Leaf color is somewhat chlorotic/necrotic with smaller leaves and “off” coloration. Shoot extensions indicate some stunting and stressed growing conditions. Stress cone crop is clearly visible. Obvious signs of pest problems contributing to a lesser condition. Control might be possible. I found some decay areas in the main stem and branches. Below average safe useful life expectancy Poor Lacking full crown, more than 50 percent decline and dieback, especially affecting larger branches. Stunting of shoots is obvious with little evidence of growth on smaller stems. Leaf size and color reveals overall stress in the plant. Insect or disease infestation may be severe and uncontrollable. Extensive decay or hollows in branches and trunk. Short safe useful life expectancy. Tree health condition ratings have been adapted from the Purdue University Extension bulletin FNR-473-W - Tree Appraisal



Appendix C - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions

1. Consultant assumes that any legal description provided to Consultant is correct and that title to

property is good and marketable. Consultant assumes no responsibility for legal matters. Consultant assumes all property appraised or evaluated is free and clear, and is under responsible ownership and competent management.

2. Consultant assumes that the property and its use do not violate applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or regulations.

3. Although Consultant has taken care to obtain all information from reliable sources and to verify the data insofar as possible, Consultant does not guarantee and is not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.

4. Client may not require Consultant to testify or attend court by reason of any report unless mutually satisfactory contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such Services as described in the Consulting Arborist Agreement.

5. Unless otherwise required by law, possession of this report does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any person other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior express written consent of the Consultant.

6. Unless otherwise required by law, no part of this report shall be conveyed by any person, including the Client, the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media without the Consultant‘s prior express written consent.

7. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the Consultant, and the Consultant’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specific value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event or upon any finding to be reported.

8. All photographs included in this report were taken by Tree Solutions Inc. during the documented site visit, unless otherwise noted.

9. Sketches, drawings and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. The reproduction of any information generated by architects, engineers or other consultants and any sketches, drawings or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of such information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Consultant as to the sufficiency or accuracy of the information.

10. Unless otherwise agreed, (1) information contained in this report covers only the items examined and reflects the condition of the those items at the time of inspection; and (2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, climbing, or coring. Consultant makes no warranty or guarantee, express or implied, that the problems or deficiencies of the plans or property in question may not arise in the future.

11. Loss or alteration of any part of this Agreement invalidates the entire report.

DRAFT‐ Table of TreesSt Edward State Park, Kenmore, WA

Date of Inventory: 3‐9‐2016Table Prepared: 3‐15‐2016Table Updated: 01‐22‐2018

Tree ID Scientific Name Common NameDSH (inches)

Multi‐stem DSH (inches)

Health Condition

Structural Condition

Drip Line (feet)

Critical Root Zone Radius (feet)

Percent Impact on Critical Root Zone

Tree Units for Trees in Lease Area

Approximate distance of impacts within CRZ (feet) Condition Notes Recommended Action Management Recommendations. Post Construction Monitoring

501 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 43.8 Good Good 35 55 44.9% 14.5021 E, 21 W, 18 N

Damage to surface roots from mowers, shared canopy, nice tree. Proposed plan impacts: installation of a path to the north and east of this tree, resurface parking area to west. Impacts are 21' to E, 21 Retain ‐ impacted

Pneumatic air excavation, construction activities in CRZ shall be monitored by a qualified arborist.

Monitor once yearly for 3 years post construction.

502 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 30.2 Good Good 23 38 27.6% 8.20 3 W, 12 N

Damage to surface roots from mowers, shared canopy, small amount of bird activity in trunk. Proposed plan impacts: pervious pavement path in CRZ to north and gravel path to west, proposed parking area to west in an existing lawn area. Retain ‐ impacted

Gravel path and new parking planned for installation, pneumatic excavation


503 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 35.2 Good Good 25 44 17.3% 10.50 3 W, 24 N Shared canopy with 502, nice tree. Retain ‐ impacted



504 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 39.1 Good Good 21 49 21.9% 12.50

15 SW, 10 W, 36 E

Central decay column, shared canopy, good buttress root structure. Retain ‐ impacted



505 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 41.7 34.4, 23.5 Good Fair 25 52 36.5% 13.50 9 E, 33 W

Co‐dominant stems, wounds and visible decay on west stem, east stem appears stable, strong reaction wood. Retain ‐ impacted

Pneumatic air excavation, construction activities in CRZ shall be monitored by a qualified arborist. Monitor decay area and canopy condition, as decay advances subordination of west stem may be required.


506 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 31.8 Good Good 18 40 24.5% 8.60 12 EGood root flare, some girdling roots, some bird activity in trunk. Retain ‐ impacted



507 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 27.9 Fair Good 22 35 38.3% 7.00 9 E

Swept base, some dieback, thinning in canopy, shorter branchlet growth, less vigor. Retain ‐ impacted



508 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 42.7 Good Good 19 53 8.1% 14.00 10 W

Surface roots, near parking lot ‐ 14.5 feet to existing edge. Retain ‐ impacted



509 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 33.4 Fair Good 20 42 35.0% 9.50 9 E

Thinning canopy, moderate vigor, dead top, near drainage ditch. Retain ‐ impacted

Use pneumatic air excavation, limit root pruning, any root pruning should be done in the presence of a qualified arborist, apply 3 to 4 inches of wood chip mulch, monitor tree for canopy decline for 3 years post construction.


510 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 35.7 Good Good 28 45 18.6% 10.50 21 ESwelling on west side of base, surface root damage. Retain ‐ impacted

Consider advanced testing to assess internal structure


511 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 41.6 Good Good 33 52 3.0% 13.50 27W, 45E Surface roots, swelling at base/roots Retain ‐ impactedConsider advanced testing to assess internal structure


512 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 20.8 Good Good 15 26 0.0% 4.20 _ Surface roots. Retain

513 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 25.5 Good Good 19 32 0.0% 6.20 _ Surface roots. Retain

514 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 43.4 Good Good 32 54 15.9% 14.50 36 E, 36 W

Girdling root from adjacent western redcedar, flat side of trunk on south, strange tissue formation on east side possibly a canker. Retain ‐ impacted



515 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 39.2 Good Good 23 49 11.8% 12.50 21 NW, 15S Retain ‐ impacted



516 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 32.7 Good Fair 25 41 8.0% 9.00 6 N, 24 S

Lost top, two new leaders have regrown. Retain ‐ impacted



Tree Solutions, Inc.2940 Westlake Ave. N #200 Seattle, WA 98109 Page 1 of 6

www.treesolutions.net206‐528‐4670





Health Condition


Drip Line (feet)





517 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 34.1 Good Good 20 43 10.7% 10.00 12 S, 12 NSwept base, bulge at base. Consider testing to assess internal structure. Retain ‐ impacted

Pneumatic air excavation, construction activities in CRZ shall be monitored by a qualified arborist. Consider advanced testing.


518 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 36.3 Good Good 22 45 53.3% 11.00 9 E, 12 S Canopy is a bit thin. Retain ‐ impacted



519 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 43.7 Good Good 25 55 9.9% 18 N, 24 W Just outside lease area Retain ‐ impacted



520 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 32.0 Good Good 21 40 12.2% 9.00 9 N, 12 W Retain ‐ impacted



521 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 20.511, 10.6, 13.7 Good Fair 31 26 0.0%

_Three stems. Retain

522 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 15.1 Good Good 24 19 0.0% _ Retain

523 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 22.212.2, 7.9, 10.8, 12.8 Good Fair 17 28 0.0%

_Retain

524 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 41.8 Good Good 23 52 0.0%

_Slightly buried. Retain

525 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 12.0 Good Fair 13 15 0.0% _ Swept base, subdominant leader. Retain

526 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 27.2 Good Good 24 34 0.0%

_Retain

527 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 10.5 Fair Good 12 13 0.0%_

Retain

528 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 20.77.4, 11.8, 11.6, 9.9 Good Fair 36 26 0.0%

_Stilted roots, co‐dominant stems from base. Retain

529 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 36.0 Good Good 24 45 0.0%_

Stilted roots, growing in wetland. Retain

530 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 26.0 Good Fair 20 33 0.0%

_Directly adjacent to 531, swept base. Retain


_Directly adjacent to 531, swept base. Retain


_Swept base, decay column. Retain

533 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 19.9

10.5, 4.8, 4, 3.4, 11.6, 10 Fair Poor 19 25 0.0%

_

Decay at base, large dead parts in canopy, may break apart but due to distance from adjacent open areas it is low risk. Retain

534 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 28.2 Good Fair 31 35 0.0%

_Measured at narrowest point below union. Codominant leaders with included bark. Remove

535 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 14.6 Fair Fair 32 18 9.0% 18 N

Ivy on trunk, phototropic lean. PARKS: Dead limb over 4" diameter. Adjacent tree in similar condition. Retain ‐ impacted ‐

prune

Parks: Prune deadwood ‐ possibly already removed, two stumps in area

536 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 23.6 Good Good 27 30 20.9% 15 NE

Grafted at base to 537, dominant in group, approx. 120 ft. tall Remove

537 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 29.4 Good Good 27 37 29.5% 9 to 12 NE

Grafted at base to 536, dominant in group, approx. 120 ft. tall Remove

538 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 13.7 Fair Fair 7 17 2.7% 24 NE

Broken top, sprouts along stem ‐ living snag. Remove


_Broken top, dieback ‐ living snag Remove


_Canopy weighted to south, slight phototropic lean, stilted roots, suppressed growth. Retain

541 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 19.1 Good Fair 30 24 0.0% 27 NE

Lost top, phototropic lean, breaks in canopy. At edge of new ballfield. Remove

542 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 26.4 Good Fair 31 33 4.2% 18 NE

Lost top, reiterations, phototropic, breaks in canopy. At edge of new ballfield. Remove







Health Condition


Drip Line (feet)





543 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 25.9 Good Good 26 32 22.3% 12 N, 21 E

Grafted at base to tree 542, not a great union. Retain ‐ impacted

Excavation for pipe should be conducted by hand, excavation in field should be done with a flat front bucket with an arborist spotting for roots.



_Phototropic lean. Retain

545 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 41.9 Fair Fair 27 52 0.0%

_ Measured at narrowest point below union. Kretzschmaria and decay at base, very large wound ‐ tear‐out at base. Retain


_Retain


_Retain

548 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 20.410.3, 13, 11.8 Fair Poor 16 26 0.0%

_Kretzschmaria and decay visible on trunk, stilted roots. Retain

549 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 24.7 Poor Poor 12 31 18.7% 15 W, 21 N

Dead top, animal activity, lots of wounds. Retain ‐ impacted



550 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 22.412, 13.6, 13.1 Good Fair 30 28 26.9% 12 W, 15 N

Some dieback in canopy, narrowly attached stems. Proposed impacts: drainage pipe installation ~12 Retain ‐ impacted



551 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 36.1 Good Good 15 45 17.7% 27 N Two leaders. Retain ‐ impacted

Excavation in field should be done with a flat front bucket with an arborist spotting for roots.


552 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 15.4 Good Fair 20 19 0.0%_

Measured at narrowest point below union. Narrow attachment, included bark. Retain

553 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 13.8 7.9, 11.3 Fair Poor 21 17 0.0% _ Narrow attachment. Retain

554 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 25.8 Good Good 33 32 7.2% 24 N Retain ‐ impacted



555 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 33.0 21, 25.5 Good Fair 27 41 19.2% 21 N Co‐dominant stems with included bark. Retain ‐ impacted



556 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 47.1 35.8, 30.6 Good Fair 33 59 27.8% 24 N

Co‐dominant stems, a 6 and an 8 inch maple growing from base. In wetland buffer.

Retain ‐ impacted ‐ prune

Retain west stem and reduce large scaffold branch over field, shorten northeast stem to a snag. Excavation in field should be done with a flat front bucket with an arborist spotting for roots.


557 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 53.6

24.3, 32.5, 35 Good Fair 49 67 37.3% 15 N

Three co‐dominant stems one broken. PARKS: Dead limb over 4" diameter, already broken and hung up in canopy over ballfield. Tree next to tree 557. Large dead limb over ballfield. In wetland buffer.


Remove broken north stem, perform overall crown reduction toward veteran form, reduce large scaffold over field on west stem. Excavation in field should be done with a flat front bucket with an arborist spotting for roots.


558 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 12.4 Good Good 10 16 0.0% _ Retain


_At edge of streambed/wetland Retain

560 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 12.0 Good Fair 14 15 0.0%_ Co‐dominant leaders at approximately

12 feet, lean to north. Retain561 Alnus rubra Red alder 18.0 Good Fair 12 23 0.0% _ Dieback and breakage in canopy. Retain562 Alnus rubra Red alder 12.2 Good Fair 9 15 0.0% _ Lost top. Retain







Health Condition


Drip Line (feet)





563 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 17.4 Good Fair 13 22 0.0%

_Large wound, response growth around wound, breakage in canopy. PARKS: Standing dead. Listed for removal by parks. In wetland buffer. Remove

Parks: Recommended for removal


_Retain


_Small subdominant stem from base Retain


_Dominant tree, phototropic over field. Tree in wetland buffer Remove


_Growing directly adjacent to 568, suppressed and growing toward wetland Retain

568 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 13.9 8.5, 11 Good Fair 12 17 0.0%

_Two stems twisting. Retain


_Retain

570 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 29.1 Good Fair 25 36 0.0%_ Lean to north west, crack in trunk, high

bulging roots, schweinitzii at base. Retain


Retain

572 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 41.8 Good Fair 32 52 16.6% 27 N

Dominant tree, some breakage in canopy, co‐dominant leaders. Asymmetric canopy due to large breaks on south side. Tree in wetland buffer.


Reduce to live wildlife habitat snag. Monitor once yearly for 3 years post construction.


_Directly adjacent to 572. Suppressed form deadwood in canopy. Tree in wetland buffer. Remove

574 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 25.7 Good Good 12 32 5.4% 21 N Retain ‐ impacted



575 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 21.9 Fair Poor 12 27 0.0%

_Co‐dominant leaders ‐ one dead, bird activity in stems, living snags, short low risk. Retain

576 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 25.1 Fair Poor 13 31 0.0%

_Central decay, bird holes, kink in stem, co‐dominant leaders, living snag, short, low risk Retain


Phototropic lean to north east. Retain


Retain


_Swept base, lost top. Retain

580 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 13.7 Good Good 14 17 0.0% _ A little suppressed. Retain

581 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 13.2 10, 8.6 Poor Poor 16 17 0.0%_

Codominant stems, lost top, one stem nearly dead. Retain

582 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 13.9 12, 7.1 Good Fair 26 17 0.0% _ Retain

583 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 17.1 Good Fair 31 21 0.0% 33 NW

Tree is approximately 33 feet southeast of edge of ballfield, decay column visible between buttress roots at base, occluded crack on north side of stem, slightly phototropic toward field. Tree is growing in wetland.

Remove


_Lost top, regrown. Retain


_Retain


_Retain


_Retain







Health Condition


Drip Line (feet)





588 Populus trichocarpaBlack cottonwood 13.3 Good Poor 30 17 0.0%

_Retain


_Three leaders. Retain


_Retain


Retain


_Co‐dominant leaders twisting. Retain


_Retain


_Retain


_Retain

596 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 14.0 10.2, 9.6 Good Good 8 18 0.0%

_Co‐dominant stems from base ‐ good attachment. Retain


_Small subdominant stem from base Retain

598 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 12.5 Good Fair 12 16 0.0%_

Retain

599 Arbutus menziesii Pacific madrone 10.3 Good Good 35 13 0.0%_

Lean to west. Retain


_Co‐dominant leaders twisting at 10 feet. Retain


_Retain


Phototropic. Retain


_Retain

604 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 16.6 12.6, 10.8 Good Fair 12 21 0.0%

_Retain

605 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 18.5

12.5, 12.5, 5.5 Good Fair 16 23 0.0%

_Retain

606 Thuja plicataWestern redcedar 8.6 6.4, 5.7 Good Fair 11 11 0.0%

_Retain


_Retain


_Retain


Phototropic. Retain


_Retain


_Well attached codominant stems. Retain


_Slight kinks in stem. Retain


_Retain


_Retain


Retain


Retain


_Retain


Retain


_Measured at narrowest point below union of codominant stems. Retain







Health Condition


Drip Line (feet)






_Retain


_Retain


_Retain

623 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 33.412.2, 4.4, 30.4, 4.7 Good Good 31 42 0.0%

_Retain

624 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 10.2 Fair Fair 16 13 0.0%_

Suppressed, lost top, new leader has regrown. Retain


Retain


Retain627 Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple 31.2 31, 3.4 Good Good 21 39 0.0% _ Retain

628 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 24.1 18.1, 15.9 Good Fair 12 30 0.0%_

Retain


Lost top, a bit suppressed. Retain


Suppressed. Retain


Retain

632 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas‐fir 10.2 Fair Good 6 13 0.0%_

Retain


Retain


Somewhat phototropic. Retain


Retain


Retain


Small subdominant stem. Retain


Retain


Retain


Somewhat suppressed. Retain


Co‐dominant leaders at approximately 30 feet. Retain

Listed for monitoring by parks.


Retain


Retain


Retain


Broken reiteration. Retain


Retain


RetainAdditional notes:

DSH (Diameter at Standard Height) is measured 4.5 feet above grade. Multi‐stem trees are noted, and a single stem equivalent is calculated using the method defined in the Guide for Plant Appraisal 9th Ed.Drip line is measured from the center of the tree to the outermost extent of the canopyCritical root zone radius equals 1.25 feet per diameter inch Prune

Retain 107Retain ‐ Impacted 29 4

Remove 11Total Trees 147



tech

Callout

501

tech

Callout

502

tech

Callout

504

tech

Callout

503

tech

Callout

505

tech

Callout

506

tech

Callout

507

tech

Callout

509

tech

Callout

508

tech

Callout

511

tech

Callout

510

tech

Callout

512

tech

Callout

513

tech

Callout

514

tech

Callout

518

tech

Callout

515

tech

Callout

516

tech

Callout

517

tech

Callout

647

tech

Callout

627

tech

Callout

623

tech

Callout

626

tech

Callout

622

tech

Callout

620

tech

Callout

621

tech

Callout

616

tech

Callout

610

tech

Line

tech

Line

tech

Callout

633

tech

Callout

645

tech

Callout

644

tech

Callout

516

tech

Callout

517

tech

Callout

515

tech

Callout

514

tech

Callout

513

tech

Callout

512

tech

Callout

510

tech

Callout

511

tech

Callout

509

tech

Callout

508

tech

Callout

507

tech

Callout

518

tech

Callout

520

tech

Callout

519

tech

Callout

521

tech

Callout

524

tech

Callout

526

tech

Callout

528

tech

Callout

533

tech

Callout

529

tech

Callout

540

tech

Callout

539

tech

Callout

534

tech

Callout

535

tech

Callout

536

tech

Callout

537

tech

Callout

538

tech

Callout

541

tech

Callout

542

tech

Callout

543

tech

Callout

531

tech

Callout

530

tech

Callout

532

tech

Callout

548

tech

Callout

549

tech

Callout

550

tech

Callout

551

tech

Callout

556

tech

Callout

555

tech

Callout

557

tech

Callout

554

tech

Callout

553

tech

Callout

552

tech

Callout

546

tech

Callout

547

tech

Callout

558

tech

Callout

559

tech

Callout

560

tech

Callout

562

tech

Callout

566

tech

Callout

573

tech

Callout

568

tech

Callout

572

tech

Callout

567

tech

Callout

574

tech

Callout

575

tech

Callout

576

tech

Callout

577

tech

Callout

583

tech

Callout

584

tech

Callout

585

tech

Callout

586

tech

Callout

587

tech

Callout

588

tech

Callout

590

tech

Callout

589

tech

Callout

595

tech

Callout

610

tech

Callout

619

tech

Callout

620

tech

Callout

621

tech

Callout

623

tech

Callout

627

tech

Callout

626

tech

Callout

633

Katherine

Callout

Use pneumatic excavation in the CRZ for paths

Katherine

Line

Katherine

Line

Katherine

Callout

Use flat front excavation equipment with an arborist spotting for roots in CRZ along south edge of ball field

Katherine

Line

Katherine

Callout

Use hand digging for trench installation within wetland

Katherine

Callout

Use flat front excavation equipment with an arborist spotting for roots in existing parking lot

Katherine

Callout

Use pneumatic air excavation for new parking spots - retain all uncovered roots

Katherine

Callout

Relocate trench or use surface gutter drain as feasible. If not possible, use hydraulic excavation and vac truck to expose roots and thread drain below.

Katherine

Text Box

*All excavation and root pruning in the CRZ must be done under the supervision of a qualified arborist *Update plans to show that work in the CRZ outside the tree protection fencing must be done using the methods as shown on this plan *If tree tags are missing, confirm tree with arborist before removal or pruning

Katherine

Callout

534 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Text Box

remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Text Box

remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

538 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

539 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

541 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

542 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

563 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

566 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

573 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

X

Katherine

Callout

583 - remove

Katherine

Text Box

prune

Katherine

Text Box

prune

Katherine

Text Box

prune

Katherine

Callout

572 - prune

Katherine

Text Box

Tree Solutions Inc. Arborist: Katherine Taylor 206-528-4670 Marked Up Tree Impacts Exhibit January 5, 2017

Katherine

Callout

Dig pits for split rail fencing by hand. Adjust locations as needed to retain roots.

ST. EDWARD STATE PARK BALLFIELD RENOVATION

TEMPORARY TREE AND PLANT PROTECTION- 015639 - 1

SECTION 015639 - TEMPORARY TREE AND PLANT PROTECTION

PART 1 - GENERAL

1.1 SUMMARY

A. This Section includes the administrative and procedural requirements for the protection of trees, shrubs, and plant material not designated for removal. Leave such trees, shrubs, and plant materials in place and protected from damage or injury during construction using full and adequate methods of protection and trimming of existing trees and other vegetation that interfere with, or are affected by, execution of the work, whether temporary or permanent construction, in order to preserve the aesthetic character of the park.

1.2 REFERENCES

A. Definitions

1. Arborist Qualifications: An arborist approved of by the Project Representative or certified by ISA and licensed in the jurisdiction where project is located.

2. Critical Root Zone (CRZ): The portion of the root system nearest the stem that is critical for the stability and vitality of the tree. The minimum CRZ is a circular area having a radius of 1.25 feet for each one inch of trunk diameter defined by measuring the trunk diameter at 4.5 feet above ground level. For example, a tree that has a diameter of 20” would have a CRZ with a radius of 25’ from the base of the tree. This is a MINIMUM CRZ radius for healthy trees; the CRZ is usually beyond the dripline of the tree. If achievable, a ratio 2.5 feet radius for each 1 inch diameter is desirable.

3. Vegetation Protection Zone (VPZ): A defined area of any size within the project area where existing vegetation (trees, shrubs, or other plant material) is to be protected from construction impacts. The zone may be accomplished by physical barriers or other means (e.g., soil protection layers or treatments).

4. High Risk Tree: Any tree with a structural defect and/or disease that makes the tree highly prone to failure, and which has a target and may result in personal injury or property damage. A high risk tree is the same as an “Emergency Tree” as defined in WAC 352-28-010 (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=352-28-010).

B. Reference Standards

1. ANSI A300. Specifications for Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Management. 2. ANSI Z133-2012. Safety Requirements for Arboricultural Operations. 3. Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers. (2000). Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th ed.

International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, Illinois.

1.3 SUBMITTALS

A. Tree Removal and Pruning Schedule: Written schedule from arborist detailing scope and extent of tree removals and pruning of trees to remain that interfere with or are affected by construction.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=352-28-010



Pruning recommendations specific to each tree number are included in the table of trees attached to the arborist report.

B. Certification: From arborist, certifying that trees indicated to remain have been protected during construction according to recognized standards and that trees were promptly and properly treated and repaired when damaged.

C. Maintenance Recommendations: From arborist, for care and protection of trees affected by construction during and after completing the Work.

1.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE

A. Tree Pruning Standard: Comply with ANSI A300 (Part 1), "Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Maintenance--Standard Practices (Pruning)."

B. Construction Management Standard: Comply with ANSI A300 (Part 5): Management of Trees and Shrubs During Site Planning, Site Development, and Construction

C. Tree Planting: Comply with ANSI A300 (Part 6) Planting and Transplanting

D. Tree Root Protection and Management: Comply with ANSI A300 (Part 8) - 2013 Root Management Standard

PART 2 - PRODUCTS

2.1 CHAIN LINK FENCING WITH STEEL POSTS

A. Metallic-coated steel chain link fence fabric, 2-inch opening or smaller; 0.120-inch-diameter min. wire size; 6’ high; line posts, 1.9 inches in diameter min.; terminal and corner posts, 2-3/8 inches in diameter min.; top rail, 1-5/8 inches in diameter min.; bottom tension wire, 0.177 inch in diameter min.; with tie wires, hog ring ties, and other accessories for a complete fence system.

2.2 SOIL AND ROOT PROTECTION

A. Mulch: Woodchip mulch produced by sending raw tree material through an arborist chipper. Woodchips should be reasonably uniform in size and not contain long stringy twigs. Woodchip mulch should not contain diseased or deleterious materials. It can contain some bark in small amounts.

B. Landscape fabric: American Excelsior Stabilenka 140, Celanese Mirafi 140, Propex 45-45, or approved equivalent geotextile.

C. Filter Fabric: Manufacturer's standard, nonwoven, pervious, geotextile fabric of polypropylene, nylon, or polyester fibers.



D. Ground staples: 9” x 9” wire staples sufficient for holding landscape fabric or filter fabric in place for required time period.

E. Ground protection mats: Construction mats or timber mats, as a temporary road surface of sufficient weight rating for the equipment being operated in the work area.

2.3 TREE TRUNK PROTECTION

A. Common wood 2” x 4” lumber, 8’ long, without nails, other hardware, concrete residue, or other material that may be detrimental to plant health.

B. Strapping sufficient to hold 2 x 4’s in place.

PART 3 - PLANNING AND EXECUTION

3.1 PLANNING AND NOTIFICATION

A. Where existing trees and other vegetation are in the area of work, or where existing trees outside the area of work have a CRZ extending into the area of work, employ methods to minimize adverse impact to the existing trees (including limbs, stems, and roots), understory vegetation and their root systems, and soils. Where VPZ are designated by the Project Representative and/or in project plans, observe protection measures set forth herein. Notify the Project Representative of any construction work within the CRZ of trees at least two (2) working days before the scheduled activity.

3.2 PREPARATION

A. Prior to Construction: Erect tree and plant protection prior to beginning any site work. Protect trees to remain against cutting, breaking, skinning, or compaction of roots; skinning or bruising of bark; breaking of branches and foliage. Review locations, fencing, and other markings of any VPZ and CRZ for trees within the construction area with the Project Representative.

B. Tree Removal: Trees that are scheduled for removal as part of the project should be removed before construction to prevent hazards during construction.

C. Material Storage: Do not store construction materials, debris, or excavated material inside critical root zones or vegetation protection zones.

D. Vehicle and Foot Traffic: Designate access routes within construction area and limitations on equipment and vehicles. Designate parking on existing pavement or away from critical root zones of trees. Limit vehicle and foot traffic within CRZ to minimize soil compaction over root systems.

3.3 CRITICAL ROOT ZONE AND VEGETATION PROTECTION ZONE DESIGNATION

A. Temporary Fencing: Install temporary fencing around CRZ and VPZ as indicated by Project Representative. Maintain temporary fence and remove when construction is complete. Project arborist shall inspect tree protection fencing prior to the commencement of site work.



1. Line posts space at eight feet maximum. Set posts vertically to minimum 18” depth. Posts may be driven provided method of driving does not damage posts. Ensure that posts do not damage tree roots.

2. With Project Representative’s approval, sections of tree protection fencing may be removed temporarily to allow approved short-term construction activities. Stockpile removed fencing carefully for reinstallation. Reinstall fencing immediately when construction operations permit.

3. In areas where tree protection fencing is installed at the limits of disturbance, within the CRZ, construction shall be planned so that work done within the CRZ will occur prior to work done outside the CRZ. For example, pneumatic air excavation and/or root cuts in the CRZ will be done prior to any excavation done with a bucket outside the CRZ to prevent fracturing and damaging of roots.

B. Tree Trunk Protection: Where required tree trunks shall be protected by placing 2 x 4 lumber around the trunk, spaced so that strapping will not come in contact with the tree bark and lumber does not damage branches. Use strapping to hold lumber in place. Secure straps without nailing into or otherwise damaging tree bark.

3.4 SOIL COMPACTION, LOSS, AND DAMAGE WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE

A. Protection against soil compaction within the CRZ may include but will not be limited to the following methods:

1. Application of a 4-inch thick layer of mulch (wood chips salvaged from clearing and grubbing operations on or offsite) over bare soil within the CRZ. Replenish mulch as necessary to maintain a 4-inch depth. Do not place mulch within 6 inches of tree trunks. Mulch shall remain in place after construction, a layer of 4 inches should be maintained.

2. Ground protection mats, such as: timber or steel planking, construction mats, 1/2” thick CDX grade plywood, or brush for protection of surface roots and vegetation from equipment.

3. Where equipment operating within the CRZ exceeds 12,000 lbs use a 6-inch layer of mulch overlayed with ground protection mats described above.

B. Protection of soils against erosion and loss within the critical root zone of trees may require application of wood chip mulch, or landscape fabric at the request of the Project Representative.

C. Noxious Materials: Protect soils from damage caused by runoff or spillage of noxious materials while mixing, placing, or storing construction materials; washout of concrete mixing vessels and tools or other products that change the acidity of soils; and ponding, eroding, or excessive wetting caused by dewatering operations.

3.5 TRENCHING, DIGGING, TUNNELING, AND GRADING WITHIN THE CRITICAL ROOT ZONE:

A. Disturbance to soils and impacts to roots within the CRZ may require any of, and will not be limited to, the following methods, practices, and restrictions:

B. Maintain existing grade within CRZ of trees unless otherwise directed.



C. Lowering grades (cutting): Where existing grade is above new finish grade shown around trees, carefully excavate within CRZ to new grade. Excavation and root cutting within the CRZ shall be monitored by a qualified arborist.

1. Excavation for paths and new parking stalls within the CRZ of trees 501 to 520 shall be conducted using pneumatic air excavation tools. Operators of air excavation equipment should be experienced working near tree roots.

2. Excavation in the existing parking area and in the CRZ of trees at the south end of the ballfield shall be done with flat front buckets under the supervision of a qualified arborist. Excavation should be done slowly, and the arborist should be on the ground spotting for roots. When roots are encountered, excavation should stop and the root should be assessed for retention or cutting.

3. If the parking lot trench drain is not relocated outside the CRZ of trees, excavation shall be done using hydraulic excavation equipment and a vac truck to thread pipe below.

4. Excavation to accommodate the drainage pipe from the underground stormwater detention facility should be done by hand or pneumatic air excavation.

5. Dig split rail fence post holes by hand, relocate post to retain roots as necessary. 6. Cleanly cut roots exposed by excavation approximately 3-inches below soil surface of

new finish grade. Root cutting within the CRZ shall be performed under the supervision of a qualified arborist.

D. Raising grades (filling): Where existing grade is raised within the CRZ to greater than 4 inches above existing grade these roots shall be considered damaged by smothering. Methods to increase air exchange of tree roots within these areas may be required. Examples of such methods may include and will not be limited to:

1. Application of a 6 inch or thicker layer of large clean aggregate (2” by 4” or larger) covered with landscape fabric below fill material to maintain large pore space.

2. Installation of pervious pavement surface and subgrade per Department of Ecology specifications.

E. Only limited intrusions into tree CRZ zones will be allowed as shown on the plans and with the approval of the Project Representative. Where trenching for utilities or irrigation is required within CRZ’s of trees the following may be required:

1. No cutting of roots greater than two inches diameter. Tunnel under or around roots by drilling, auger boring, air excavation, or digging by hand.

2. Where necessary for installation, cut roots with sharp pruning instruments flush with the edge of the trench or tunnel; do not break or chop.

3. Avoid hitting roots with heavy equipment. Roots that are ripped by equipment should be excavated and cut cleanly at the closest point to the end of the damage.

4. Pile excavated soil outside of the CRZ of residual trees and return area to original grade upon completion of work.

5. Cover exposed roots with soil as soon as possible or at the end of each day; the soil compacted to the original firmness only; and, watered when conditions are dry.

6. Tree root pruning or other tree root treatments as directed by the Project Representative. 7. Root painting is not permitted.



3.6 STEM AND BRANCH PRUNING:

A. Any unnecessary cutting, breaking, skinning, or bruising of bark; breaking of branches and foliage; damage or clearing of vegetation in the work area will not be permitted. Where permitted, stem and branch pruning must follow ANSI A300 (Part 1).

B. Temporary tie-up of low limbs is permitted where designated by the project representative.

C. All final pruning cuts shall be made in branch tissue close to the trunk or parent limb, without cutting into the branch bark ridge or collar and without leaving a stub. Flush cuts to the tree trunk that remove the branch collar are unacceptable. Flush cuts result in a larger wound and expose trunk tissues to the possibility of decay.

D. All major tree pruning must have prior approval of Project Representative. An ISA certified arborist may be required, at the Contractors expense, for extensive or technically challenging pruning activities. Such requirements will be made explicit to the Contractor prior to the start of work.

E. Only proper branch pruning techniques will be accepted. Improperly pruned trees could be irreparably damaged and are subject to section 3.7 DAMAGE TO TREES AND TREE REPLACEMENT.

3.7 DAMAGE TO TREES AND TREE REPLACEMENT:

A. Should any tree or vegetation designated to remain be damaged in the course of construction immediately notify the Project Representative for inspection and direction for remedy.

B. Remedies for damage will, at the Owner’s discretion, require removal and disposal of the damaged tree(s) and be one of the following, at the discretion of the Project Representative.

1. Replace trees under 6” caliper measurement with new trees of 6” caliper measure, and the same species. Plant and maintain according to the requirements of ANSI A300 (Part 6) – Planting and Transplanting.

2. Replace trees over 6” caliper measurement with new trees 6” caliper measure. The new trees may or may not be the same species, at the discretion of the Project Representative. Select nursery stock, plant, and maintain as specified in Section 1.4 QUALITY ASSSURANCE. Compensate the Owner for the difference in value of the damaged tree and the replacement tree, calculated as the difference between the assessed values of the tree as calculated by an ISA certified arborist according to the latest edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal.

3. Compensate the Owner in cash or as a credit to the contract for the full value of the damaged tree, as appraised by an ISA certified arborist according to the latest edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal.

C. Notify Project Representative in any case where construction called for in the contract documents cannot be completed without damage to trees identified to remain. Approval of the Project Representative is required prior to beginning construction described in the contract documents that might damage a tree designated to remain. Any tree designated to remain which is damaged without Project Representative’s written approval, even if damage is necessary to complete the work, will subject the Contractor to remedies described in section 3.7 B above.



END OF SECTION

revised draft - kenmore, washingtonkenmorewa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-02-09 arborist report...

Documents