The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR_Arborist_Report_SapphireOnTalbot_181101_v1.pdf 11415 NE 128th St., Suite 110, Kirkland, WA 98034 | Phone: 425.820.3420 | Fax: 425.820.3437 americanforestmanagement.com ARBORIST REPORT for Sapphire Homes Inc. 4827 Talbot RD S Renton, WA July 9, 2018 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 2. Description ............................................................................................................... 1 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................ 1 4. Observations ........................................................................................................... 2 5. Discussion ............................................................................................................... 2 6. Tree Protection Measures ........................................................................................ 3 7. Tree Replacement ................................................................................................... 3 Appendix Site/Tree Photos – pages 5 – 8 Tree Summary Table – attached Tree Conditions Map - attached General Tree Protection Fencing Detail - attached Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 1 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 1. Introduction American Forest Management, Inc. was contacted by Troy Schmeil of Sapphire Homes Inc., and was asked to compile an ‘Arborist Report’ for a property located within the City of Renton. The proposed townhome project encompasses property located at 4827 Talbot Rd S. Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions, which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report encompasses all of the criteria set forth under City of Renton code section 4-8-120. The tree retention requirement is 30% of significant trees. Date of Field Examination: July 3rd, 2018 2. Description 71 significant trees were identified and assessed on the property. These are comprised of a mix of native species and planted ornamental species. A numbered aluminum tag was placed on the lower trunks of the subject trees located in the southeast corner of the site, within the proposed tree retention/open space tract. Significant trees outside of this area were identified with a numbered piece of flagging attached the lower trunk. These tree numbers correspond with the numbers on the Tree Summary Tables and attached maps. There are only a few potential issues with neighboring or off-site trees. Three neighboring trees were identified, assessed and included in this report. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. The tree heights were measured using a Spiegel Relaskop. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay, which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and/or damage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. Based on these factors a determination of viability is made. Trees considered ‘non-viable’ are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, extensive decay and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. A ‘viable’ tree is a tree found to be in good health, in a sound condition with minimal defects and is suitable for its location. Also, it will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees. A ‘borderline’ viable tree is a tree where its viability is in question. These are trees that are beginning to display symptoms of decline due to age and or species related problems. Borderline trees are not expected to positively contribute to the landscape for the long-term and are not recommended for retention. The attached Tree Conditions Map indicates the viability of the subject trees. Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 2 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 4. Observations The subject trees are comprised of a mix of native and planted species. Native species are comprised of Oregon Ash, Pacific Willow, Western Red Cedar, Big Leaf Maple, Douglas-fir and Black Cottonwood. Planted species include Black Pine, Lombardi Poplar, Leyland Cypress, Fruit Trees, European Paper Birch, Lawson Cypress, Elm, and Windmill Palms. 6 of the 71 assessed trees on the subject property are in poor condition and considered non-viable. These are described as follows: Tree #33 is a Pacific Willow (Salix lasiandra). It has a broken leader and is suppressed by nearby Cottonwoods. Tree #35 is a Pacific Willow dominated by nearby trees with a severe lean reaching for light. Tree #36 is another Pacific Willow dominated by nearby trees with a severe lean and broken leader. Tree #50 is an overly mature Apple (Malus spp.) shaded by taller trees with a history of large heading cuts resulting in an abundance of regrowth and dead and decaying wood. (See photo #1) Tree #69 is a European White Elm (Ulmus laevis). It is severely damaged by Elm Leafminer (Fenusa ulmi), and its form is poor. Tree #70 is another overly mature Apple with a history of growing in the shade and harsh pruning resulting in a large amount of dead wood in the canopy. There are several native neighboring trees on the west perimeter. These are primarily comprised of black cottonwood trees. These are mostly young to semi-mature specimens. 5. Discussion There are several trees in the southeast corner of the site where retention may be feasible. Trees #1-20, 24, 25 roughly fall within the proposed tree retention tract on the site plan. The number of trees that can be retained will depend on the storm water retention design. In order to properly protect retained trees, existing grades shall be maintained around them to the fullest extent possible. After review of the proposed design, the subject trees selected for retention can be successfully preserved in good condition, so long as the proper tree protection measures are taken. The drip-lines (farthest reaching branches) for the trees within the proposed tree retention tract can be found on the tree summary table. These have also been delineated on a copy of the development plan for trees proposed for retention. The information plotted on the attached plan may need to be transferred to a final tree retention/protection plan to meet City submittal requirements. The trees that are to be removed shall be shown “X’d” out on the final plan. The Limits of Disturbance (LOD) measurements can also be found on the tree summary table. This is the recommended distance of the closest impact (soil excavation or fill) to the trunk face. These should be referenced when determining tree retention feasibility. The LOD measurements are based on species, age, condition, drip-line, prior improvements, proposed impacts and the anticipated cumulative impacts to the entire root zone. Tree Protection fencing shall be initially located a few feet beyond the drip-line edge of retained trees per the attached plan, and only moved back to the LOD when work is authorized and ready to commence. Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 3 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 Neighboring Tree Issues: Tree #201 is a Black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) in fair condition just over the west fence line. This tree is likely to develop into a hazard tree as it matures. Removal now to avoid future problems would be prudent. Tree # 202 is an Oregon Ash (Fraxinus latifolia) in fair condition just over the north fence line. This tree will likely be significantly impacted by the development. Removal and replacement would be prudent. Tree # 203 is a Big Leaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum) in poor condition near the south east corner of the property near Talbot Road S. This tree is under utility lines and has been topped many times over the years resulting in multiple leader regrowth. (See photo #3) Removal is recommended. Finished landscaping work within the drip-lines of retained trees shall maintain existing grades and not disturb fine root mass at the ground surface. Finish landscape with mulch or new lawn on top of existing grade. Add no more than 2” to 4” of mulch or 2” of composted soil to establish new lawn. Raising the grade more than a few inches will have adverse impacts on fine roots by cutting off oxygen causing suffocation. 6. Tree Protection Measures The following general guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated space set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. 1. Tree protection fencing should be erected around retained trees and positioned just beyond the drip-line edge prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. Doing this will set clearing limits and avoid compaction of soils within root zones of retained trees. 2. Any existing infrastructure to be removed within the drip-line or tree protection zone shall be removed by hand or utilizing a tracked mini-excavator. 3. Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. 4. Excavations within the drip-lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed within the “limits of disturbance”. 5. To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip-line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. 6. Areas excavated within the drip-line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated weekly during dry periods. 7. Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip-lines of retained trees. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones at all times. Simply finish landscape within 10’ of retained trees with a 2” to 4” layer of organic mulch. 7. Tree Replacement Supplemental trees will likely be necessary to meet the retention requirement, given the low potential for successful tree retention. The tree retention calculation is based on 65, healthy significant trees, not including poor condition or non-viable trees. The retention requirement for the site is 30%, therefore, a total of 20 trees are required for retention per code. Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 4 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 The following replacement requirements are necessary when retained/protected trees do not meet the minimum requirement per RMC 4-4-130 H. Performance Standards for Land Development/Building Permits: e. Replacement Requirements: As an alternative to retaining trees, the Administrator may authorize the planting of replacement trees on the site if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator’s satisfaction that an insufficient number of trees can be retained. i. Replacement Ratio: When the required number of protected trees cannot be retained, replacement trees, with at least a two-inch (2") caliper or an evergreen at least six feet (6') tall, shall be planted at a rate of twelve (12) caliper inches of new trees to replace each protected tree removed. Up to fifty percent (50%) of trees required pursuant to RMC 4-4-070, Landscaping, may contribute to replacement trees. The City may require a surety or bond to ensure the survival of replacement trees. New or supplemental trees will likely need to be planted to meet the municipal code. New tree plantings shall be given the appropriate space for the species and their growing characteristics. Confer with the City’s Urban Forester for appropriate replacement species. Consult with your City planner to determine the number of replacement trees required once the tree retention plan has been finalized. For planting and maintenance specifications, refer to municipal code 4-4-070 Landscaping. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man-caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Bob Layton ISA Certified Arborist #PN-2714A Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (TRAQ) Ben Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (TRAQ) Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 5 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 Photo #1, Tree #50 – Non-viable Photo #2, Trees #8,9 – Good condition Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 6 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 Photo #3, Neighboring tree #203, Poor condition Photo #4 Trees along west side Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 7 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 Photo #5, Trees #53,54 Photo #6, Looking south Talbot Road S Arborist Report Page 8 American Forest Management 7/9/2018 Photo #7, Looking west 1 Sapphire Homes TREE SUMMARY TABLE Ben Mark, Bob Layton 4827 Talbot Road South Renton, WA Jul 3, 2018 Tree #Species DBH (in)Height (ft)North South East West Condition Comments Proposal 1 Black Pine 16 47 13 12 13 10 Good Typical TBD 2 Pear 11 36 14 10 12 16 Fair Shade, dead wood TBD 3 Apple *20 caliper 36 12 16 12 20 Fair History of poor pruning TBD 4 Lombardi poplar 23 110 14 14 14 12 Good Typical TBD 5 Lombardi poplar 17 85 12 12 10 10 Good Typical TBD 6 Oregon Ash 18, 20 85 14 18 16 16 Fair Forked, crown dieback TBD 7 Black Cottonwood 21 94 20 20 20 20 Good Typical TBD 8 Black Pine 12 43 8 12 12 10 Good Suppressed TBD 9 Black Pine 14 53 10 8 12 8 Good Forked top TBD 10 Pacific Willow 11, 7 50 10 12 8 20 Good Natural lean TBD 11 Pacific Willow 10 50 10 20 8 10 Good Natural lean TBD 12 Plum 7 22 Fair Volunteer TBD 13 Plum 7 20 Fair Volunteer TBD 14 Pacific Willow 14, 10, 7 60 16 12 14 25 Fair Multi, broken TBD 15 Douglas Fir 7 32 10 8 8 8 Good Suppressed TBD 16 Leyland Cypress 7 30 8 8 10 8 Good Suppressed TBD 17 Black pine 15 40 12 12 8 12 Fair Shade TBD 18 Black pine 11 40 6 8 8 10 Good Forked top TBD 19 Black pine 13 50 10 8 12 12 Good Forked top TBD 20 Plum 11 36 8 12 10 12 Fair Mature TBD 21 Plum 6, 5, 5 Good Typical REMOVE 22 Plum 6, 5, 3, 4 Good Typical REMOVE 23 Lombardi poplar 28 Good Typical REMOVE 24 Leyland cypress 6 Good Typical TBD 25 Pacific Willow 10, 6, 8 Fair Split REMOVE 26 Pacific Willow 8 Fair Natural lean REMOVE 27 Black Cottonwood 9, 7 Fair Suppressed REMOVE 28 Pacific willow 12 Fair Suppressed REMOVE 29 Pacific willow 11 Fair Suppressed REMOVE 30 Black Cottonwood 17 Fair Typical REMOVE 31 Black Cottonwood 8 Fair Typical REMOVE 32 Black Cottonwood 8 Fair Typical REMOVE 33 Pacific Willow 10, 9 Poor Broken leader REMOVE 34 Pacific Willow 10, 12 Fair Broken Leader REMOVE 35 Pacific Willow 13 Poor Lean REMOVE 36 Pacific Willow 11 Poor Broken Leader, severe lean REMOVE 37 Western red cedar 7 fair Typical REMOVE 38 Western red cedar 8 Good Typical REMOVE 39 Western red cedar 5,5,5,Good Multi REMOVE 2 Sapphire Homes TREE SUMMARY TABLE Ben Mark, Bob Layton 4827 Talbot Road South Renton, WA Jul 3, 2018 Tree #Species DBH (in)Height (ft)North South East West Condition Comments Proposal 40 Oregon Ash 9, 8, 7, 6, 5 Fair Multi REMOVE 41 Black Cottonwood 16 Good Typical REMOVE 42 Oregon Ash 16, 7 Fair Forked, multi REMOVE 43 Douglas Fir 10 Good Typical REMOVE 44 Oregon Ash 15, 13, 12 70 Good Forked, included bark REMOVE 45 Windmill Palm 10 Good Typical REMOVE 46 Windmill Palm 10 Good Typical REMOVE 47 Leyland Cypress 22 Good Typical REMOVE 48 European Paper Birch 28 Good Mature REMOVE 49 Lawson Cypress 18 Good Typical REMOVE 50 Apple 7 Poor Shade, poor pruning REMOVE 51 Cherry 9, 9, 8, 8, 6 Good Typical REMOVE 52 Zelkova 7, 7, 6, 6 Fair Multi, broken tops REMOVE 53 Lombardi poplar 28 Fair Sending shoots through pavement REMOVE 54 Leyland Cypress 28 Good Typical REMOVE 55 Douglas Fir 12 Fair Suppressed REMOVE 56 Douglas Fir 12 Good Typical REMOVE 57 Douglas Fir 7 Good Typical REMOVE 58 Douglas Fir 14 Good Typical REMOVE 59 Douglas Fir 12 Good Ivy REMOVE 60 Black Pine 11 Good Typical REMOVE 61 Black Pine 12 Fair Forked leader REMOVE 62 Black Pine 13 Fair Forked leader REMOVE 63 Black Pine 12 Fair Broken leader, suppressed REMOVE 64 Western red cedar 22 Good Typical REMOVE 65 Douglas Fir 12 Good Young REMOVE 66 Douglas Fir 12 Good Young REMOVE 67 Leyland Cypress 20 Good Vigorous REMOVE 68 Leyland Cypress 18 Good Typical REMOVE 69 Elm 10 Poor Leaf miner REMOVE 70 Apple 14 Poor Shade, pruning REMOVE 71 European Paper Birch 11 Fair Significant lean REMOVE Neighboring Trees 201 Black Cottonwood 16 85 18,18 16, 10 Lod Fair Forked, broken branches REMOVE 202 Oregon Ash 16, 14 80 24, 14 Lod 18 18 Fair Typical REMOVE 203 BLM 8 Poor Forked leader, under utility lines REMOVE