HomeMy WebLinkAboutArborist Report - Cascade Park (1)Arborist Report For:
Cascade Park
Trestle Community Management
Prepared on:12/02/2025
Prepared by:
866-815-2525
www.aplustree.com
780 Azuar Ave. Vallejo, CA
Background Information
This report was prepared on behalf of Cascade Park concerning three (3) trees located at 17419
119th Pl SE, Renton, WA 98058.
The purpose of this report is to document the current condition of the subject trees and provide
professional recommendations regarding their health, structure, and potential impacts on adjacent
structures.
The assessment was performed on October 31st, 2025 by Daniel Potts, ISA Certified arborist #WE-
11534AT. The inspection consisted of a visual ground-level assessment with photographic
documentation. No aerial inspection, internal decay detection, or root crown excavation was
performed.
Jessy Jacquinot
ISA Certified Arborist #WE-13500A
1
aplustree.com A Plus Tree, LLC 6412 S900 E, Suite 201, Murray, UT
84121
Arborist Disclaimer
Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Trees
are living organisms that may fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within
trees and below ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe, or fail for that
matter, under all circumstances, or for a given period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like any
medicine, cannot be guaranteed.
Treatments, pruning and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist’s
services such as property boundaries, property ownership, sight lines, disputes between neighbors,
landlord- tenant matters, etc. Arborists cannot take such issues into account unless complete and accurate
information is given to the arborist. The person hiring the arborist accepts full responsibility for
authorizing the recommended treatment or remedial measures.
Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near a tree is to accept some degree of risk.
The only way to eliminate all risks is to eliminate all trees.
This consultant does not verify the safety or health of any tree for any period of time. Construction
activities are hazardous to trees and cause many short and long-term injuries, which can cause trees to die
or topple.
Even when every tree is inspected, inspection involves sampling; therefore, some areas of decay or
weakness may be missed. Weather, winds and the magnitude and direction of storms are not predictable,
and some failures may still occur despite the best application of high professional standards.
I hereby declare that the above observations, discussion and recommendation are true to the best of my
knowledge, belief and professional opinion. In addition, A Plus Tree is held harmless of any of these
opinions from future tree failures.
Sincerely,
Jessy Jacquinot
Jessy Jacquinot
ISA Certified Arborist WE-13500A
2
Observations
At the time of the assessment, the following was observed:
Tree #Species DBH
(in)
Height
(ft)
Canopy
Spread (ft)Notes
17
Pinus nigra
(Austrian pine)18 65 20 Dead. Bark fissures,
discoloration, borer
holes and frass
32 Betula jacquemontii
(Himalayan birch)8.7 40 10
Dead. Within 1x tree
height of building. Cavity
at 8'. Inclusion at union.
51 Populus trichocarpa
(Black cottonwood)
18,
19 100 55
Previous failure at base,
decay present. Weak
union between two
remaining stems.
Extensive internal decay
on western stem.
3
4
Site Map
4
Observations, Discussion, and Recommendations
Tree 17, an 18" DBH Austrian pine situated within a continuous row of the same species,
was found to be completely dead at the time of inspection. Resin in bark fissures,
discoloration of the bark, and borer holes with associated frass were observed, all of which
indicate active or recent wood-boring insect activity. Because this tree is part of a
monoculture planting, its condition increases the likelihood that existing borers may spread
to adjacent, still-living pines. The presence of these insects, combined with the inherent
structural instability of a dead conifer, makes the tree a source of both pest pressure and
structural risk. For these reasons, removal of tree 17 is recommended to help limit the
spread of infestation and to eliminate the hazards associated with a dead standing pine.
Tree 32, an 8.7" DBH Himalayan birch, is also dead and stands within one tree-length of a
building and adjacent patio area. The tree has a cavity at approximately 8 feet above grade,
as well as a major inclusion at a nearby union that compromises structural integrity at that
junction. The tree has a 5 degree lean away from the nearby building. It is located on the
bank of a creek. Given the combination of mortality and structural defects, removal is
recommended.
Tree 51 is a multi-stemmed black cottonwood consisting of two remaining stems,
measuring 18" and 19" DBH. A third stem previously failed, indicating a history of structural
weakness within this tree. The two remaining stems are connected by a weak union and
exhibit decay at the base, with sounding revealing extensive internal decay in the western
stem and decay on the tension side of the eastern stem. Both stems lean toward
Petrovitsky Road, increasing the risk to vehicular traffic should failure occur. The cumulative
impacts of past failure, compromised unions, and significant decay throughout both stems
greatly diminish the structural reliability of the tree. Due to the high likelihood of future
failure in a high-target area, removal of Tree 51 is advised.
Based on a completed tree inventory, a total of 317 trees measuring 6" DBH or greater are
located on the property. Of these, 95 are located within the stream or stream buffer,
including trees 32 and 51 discussed above. The required tree retention for the site is 66.6
trees, and 221 of the 222 identified after deduction of the trees in the stream and stream
buffer area are proposed for retention.
After deducting the stream and stream buffer areas, the net land area of the property is
314, 345 square feet, or 7.22 acres. The required tree credits for the site are 216.6 credits.
Excluding trees located within the stream and stream buffer, the property contains an
estimated 1,369 tree credits, greatly surpassing the required credit amount. Given this
substantial surplus, it is not expected that replacement trees will be required for this
project.
5
6
Figure 1. Taken 10/31/2025
Full view of Austrian pine, tree 17
Figure 2. Taken 10/31/2025
Borer holes, bark fissures, sap
7
Figure 3. Taken 10/31/2025
Full view of Himalayan birch, tree 32
Figure 4. Taken 10/31/2025
Cavity and inclusion
8
Figure 5. Taken 10/31/2025
Full view of black cottonwood, tree 51
8
Figure 6. Taken 10/31/2025
Base of two remaining stems