HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-374127W NE
F- M O
TREE RETENTION MATRIX _ a
v wry
m
Q m
W CD m
a m
U m 3
to f 3 1
Z
Q
J <
® N
m
U W
Z
a
m 3
m
a m
2
Z � m
N m op N
STATE OF
WASHINGTON
REGISIEREO
tANOSGPE AROH Cf C9
R i
I/ NSE N0. 29-14
ON RESENFP €�14
1
Z Z a
UPI
J-�I
N
ZYI
Q z CC =
�G
Q Z Y_ U W a- < ?�
Z U)
O W Z
q
w WWI
(7 = Q O
Q �o
E- o a a
z > of
I
DRAMNGkSSUE
DESIGN DEV. 11106113
COORDINATION 01/15114
BID SET 031311141
LAND USE REVISION #1 06105/14
ADDENDUM #1 06117/14
- Bigiest ri Ad. Low - Branch a ho... in . ties vie grew ly Up ADDENDUM #4 071021141
UTILITY SET 07/16114
PERMIT REVISIONIMYLAR 08/191141
NO REV DATE
1 vERrrRevarox 4soxu
verlrRREVgpN ".1au
• RR14910WWl.AR 4110.11
DRAWING TITLE
TREE
RETENTION
SCHEDULE
�� AS INDICATED
PLOT DATE: 08119114
PRINCIPAL: AW
PROJ. MGR: AW
DRAFTER AM, HB, CS, AW
SHEETNV.
L0.3
SUBJECT TO
PERMIT APPROVAL
i
Tree I dbh ' CRZ Drip. Risk of Presery Removal Maintenance Significant Tag [Species I, line Vigor Structure Comments /Defects anon Reason for Removal
# �
(in.) (ft) (ftl Failure value Planned Recommendations Tree
1 Flow ailing cherry, II I Branches have failed are lodged in the crown III I
Prunus serrolata of this tree. Twigs at the end of branches x I, NO Conflicts with proposed utilities to
6 71 Fair - Goad Fair Law appear to be infected w Rh a disease. Moderate i,
2 iBack cottonwood Moderate- I, Conflicts with proposed grading, moderate to high risk of
Populus Mchocarpa 19.3 201 Good Fah high Low % ' YES failure
3 IBapkcononwood, ns, I, i Moderate- This tree has poor trunk structure, w nh included Conflicts with parking layout, moderate to high risk of
Populus Mchocarpa 11.71, i5,i Good Poor - Fair Filth bark This isaweak structure. Low % I NO
failure
4 jBack cottonwood, ! Moderate - The trunk and canopy of this tree bows over a i Conflicts with parking layout, moderate to high risk Of
IPopulus MChocapa 107 12j Good Poor - Fair Filth residential building to the north. Low % NO failure
' Bai r�i;oltbnw ra - Thetrank- arldca tlhisYreabows -o1/ -
5 x � NO Conflicts with parking layout, moderate to high disk of
Populus MChocarpa 85 10i Good Poor - Fair Filth area to the south. Low fall Ure
6 Black cottonw ootl. '. Moderate - The trunk and canopy of this tree bows over an COnflICIS Wlfh parking layout, moderate t0 high risk Of
Populus MChocarpa 62 ! ]� Good Poor - Fa'v Filth area to the north. Low % NO failure
7 Black cottonwood, j Moderate- ! Conflicts with parking layout, moderate to high risk of
Populus MChocarpa 9.9 � 11! Good Poor Filth Thereaa crook in the trunk of this tree. Low ! % NO failure
8 Back cottonw add, ! ! MPtlarate - Tha Vee a suppressed, and the trunk bows � Conflicts with parking layout, moderate to high risk of
Populus MChocarpa 7.3 ! 81 Good Poor Filth tow and the south. Low % NO failure
9 (Black cottonw ood j Moderate - Tha Vee has a small trunk cavity that contains X Conflicts with parking layout, moderate to high dsk of
Populus fdchxarpa 11.8! 13j Good Fail Filth decay. Low NO failure
(Back cottonw ood, Conflicts with ro sect moderate to high dsk of
70 j Abderata -Tha tree has a history of large tree failure near X NO P � grading, g
Populus tnchocerpa 203 � 21 Good Far Filth toareskantal bulking located to the north. Low i failure
1t (Back eononw ood ee I to) Fair Poor - Fair Moderate The tree is suppressed Low i % �: NO Conflicts with proposed grading, moderate risk of failure
12 (Back cottonw ood, I I ' NO Conflicts with ro osed moderate risk of failure
(Populus Mchocapa 9.8 11 ii Fair Fa'v Moderate This tree is sightly suppressed. Low % P p grading,
' 13.1, ! This tree has 3 cotlorrinant trunks, w Rh each !
!Black cottonw bad, Conflicts with ro osed moderate to high risk f
13 11, ! I Matlerale - trunk bowing outwards fromthe centre. This is X P P grading, Ig n 0
IPopulus MChocarpa 10.1 j 161, Fair - Good Fa'v Filth aweak structure. Low NO failure
14 Bleek cottonw ood ! I. crate -This tree is suppressed, and the trunk is X Conflicts with proposed grading, moderate t0 high risk Of
;Populus MChocarpa 7.9 i 91 Fair Poor - Fair high bowed. Low NO failure
15 !
Bigleaf maple. Acer '.
imacrophNlum 6.2 I 811 Fail Fail Low This tree is suppressed. Low % NO Conflicts with proposed grading
i6 iBgeeaf neple, Acer '. I
;macrophNlum 7.g j 9, Fair Fair Low Moderate % NO Conflicts with proposed grading
17 (Bgleaf rtaple, Acer 1
macrophylmm 6 Bj Good Good Low Moderate % NO Conflicts with proposed grading
18 -' ks.thac.corrvrise•tna -t
x NO Conflicts with radio
'macrophyllum 75 i, Low- regrownfromastunp. Thecanopy of this tree proposed 9 9
65 5 151 Fair -Good Fail Moderate contains dead branches. Moderate
19 II Bigleaf rmpk, Acer i j Low -
macrophyllum 71 g'1 Fair Fail Law Moderate % NO COnflICIS Wlfh proposed grading
20 liegleaf rmpk, Acer '1 I I x NO Conflicts with radio
macrophyllum 14 151 .Fav Pair Low This tree is slightly suppressetl. Moderate' proposed g 9
21 Bgleaf maple, Acer j Low -
ImacrophNlum 63 g Fair Fah Low The crown of this tree contains dead branches. Moderate X NO Conflicts with proposed grading
� I Bgkat rmpk, Acer ! This tree w suppressed, and Me crow n '
(macro h tom zt g Poor- x j NO Conflicts with radio
PN j Fair Poor Fair Law contains tleatl branches. Moderate proposed 9 9
23 "I Bgleaf rrapk, Acer
imacrophNlum 87 10j Fair - Gootl Fair Low Notleratel % NO COnFlICIS with proposed grading
24 I&gbaf maple, Acer ; x NO Conflicts with ro sect grading macrophNlum 78 9j 11:, Fair Fair Low Low P Po 9 9
25 j a na .Acer - -_ - -__
!macrophNlum 69 ! gI Poor- Fair Poor- Fair Moderate Tha tree a suppressed. Moderate � % NO Conflicts with proposed grading, moderate risk of failure
26 !Bgleaf nePk, Acer I Lev -
jmacrophNlum 12.9 14 Good Fair Moderate The crown of this tree contains tleatl branches. Moderate % NO Conflicts with proposed grading
27 !Bgleaf nePk, Acer Low - � i.
!macrophNlum 8.1 9 Good Fa "v Moderate Moderate j X II NO Conflicts with proposed grading
28 Bg @af neple, Acer I Low
.= Acer I 8 Fail For Low This tree is suppressed. Motlerale I % � NO COnflICIS With proposed grading
29 Bg @af nepk, Acer
macrophNlum 7.5 g Fair Fair Low Moderate % I NO Conflicts with proposed grading
� Bigleaf maple, Acer
macrophNlum 7.8 9 Fair Fair Low Moderate % NO COOflICIS with proposed grading
31 Bigleaf maple, Acer Low -
macrophyllum ] 4 g Fail Fail Low This tree a slightly suppressed. Moderate % NO Conflicts with proposed grading CD
' leaf rm b Acer 11, Low -
macrophNlum 11.2 12 Good Fail Moderate There are dead branches in the crown. Moderate NO Conflicts with proposed grading
33 Bigleaf rraPla, Acer Low - Low - NO
macrophNlum 7.8 9 11 Fair Fail Moderate This tee is suppressed. Moderate Install tree protection.
� Bigleaf maple, Acer I Low - NO
(macrophNlum 8.1 g! 11 Fair Fail Moderate Moderate install tree protection.
35
Bigleaf rrepk, Acer I Low - !
macrophNlum 6.6 ej Fair Fail Moderate Moderate % I NO Conflicts with proposed grading
� iBigleaf neP!e. Acer ! Low - !
macrophNlum 9.1 � 10, Fair Fail Moderate Moderate NO
! Rune to clean the tree of
I The trunk of this time has a cavity, that contains significant dead branches, and
Bigleaf rreple, Acer I
37 tlecay. The crown of this tree contains (prune to reduce the crow ns YES
(macrophNlum Moderate - sgnJkant dead branches, measuring up te4 ,height and width. DO not thin the
� 55.9 ( 56 Fair Poor -Feu Filth inches diameter. Filth !crown.
�' - am - _- _��Rtmelo- ckarbranche NO
macrophNlum 8.2 j 10 Fair. Fat Moderate abuiking to the north. Hgh building to the north.
I
I
3o Bigleaf rtaple, Acer 8, 10, i NO
macrophNlum 7.5, 6, The rruRipa trunks that comprise this tree have
9.5, 5, regrow n from a stung. The canopy of this time j Rune to clean the tree of dead
9, 7.5 i5 Fair Fair Moderate contains dead branches. Moderate branches.
4C 65wat ��� Acer
macrophNlum 7.4 I 8 Fah Fail Low Moderate 1 NO
a1 Bgleaf rrePle. Acer NO
macrophNlum 71.8 141 Fau - Good Fa'v Moderate The crown of this tree contains tleatl branches. Moderate
a2 Bigleaf rrepk, Acer Low -
macrophNlum 8 ! 10 Fail Fail Nbtlerate Moderate NO
Si maple, Acer I � Low -
3 macrophNlum 8.3 70 Fair Fail Moderate Moderate
� Bigleaf maple, Acer Low -
macrophNlum 8.7 1 70 Fail Fah Moderate Moderate NO
45 Bigleaf maple, Acer Low, -
macrophNlum 8.9 10 Fair Fail Moderate Moderate NO
�
Bigleaf rmpk, Acer Law -
macrophyilum ].6 li 9 (Fair Fair Moderate Moderate NO
47 Bgleaf rrePk, Acer Low -
macrophNlum 8.8 10� Fa'4 Fail AkMerate Moderate NO
� Bigleaf rreple, Acer
Imecrophyllum Z3 I 9i Poor - Fair Poor - Fair Moderate This treea suppressed. Low NO
49 j Bigleaf rreple, Acer �
macrophNlum 6.8 g Fair Fail Low Moderate NO
50 Bigleaf maple, Acer
I ! NO
51 !Bgleaf rreple, Acer NO
Imecrophyllum Z9 9 Fair Fair Loa Moderate
Moderate- NO
52 Red alder, Alnus cobra ] 2 ! g Poor Poor - Fail Filth This tree is in decline w Rh a dead top. Low
I Tha foliage in this tree is thinning in tlensity,
5 I Red alder, Alnus more ] 2 j gj Poor- Fair Fatr Moderate intlkiating the tree may be in decline. Low NO
! I The trunko this tree is bow ed and the tap has
54 Red alder, Alnus cobra i I .failed previously, and there are dead branches NO
8.8 i 10! 11 Poor - Fair Poor - Fa'v Moderate in iheuow n. Low Install tree protection.
I The foliage in this tree is thinning in density and
55 Rod alder, Alnus more ( ! Modarale -the Vee has a dead top, indkiating d is in NO
j ZB 9I 10 Poor -Fa'v Poor - Fa'v Filth decline. Low Install tree protection.
56 !Bigleat rrePle, Acer Low -
I macrophNlum 6.6 g Fair Poor -Fair Low The Gunk of this Gee is scarred with injuries. Moderate % NO Conflicts with proposed grading Tree Drip- Preserv!
dbh CRZ Risk of Removal Maintenance Significant
Tag Species line Vigor Structure Comments /Defects -ation
* (in.) (ft.) (R) Failure value Planned Recommendations Tree Reason for Removal
I
The foliage In this tree is thinning in density, and
57 Red alder, Alnus rubs � the crown contains dead branches indicating x NO Conflicts with proposed grading
6.4 8 Poor- Fair Fair Low the tree nay be in decline. Low '.
58 Red alder Alnus rubs 6 'I 8 Dead Dead Filth Dead. Hazard i Rertove NO Dead
59 Red alder, Anus ru6ro 6.3 g Deatl Dead Filth Dead. Hazard I Remove NO Dead
Bigleaf maple, Acer Low - I
6a macrophNlum 7] 9 Good Fair Low Nbderate' % NO Conflicts with proposed grading
61 Bigleaf rrePk, Acer I x
m.i Low tvvbderate NO Conflicts with proposed grading
I
The foliage in This tree is thinning in tlensit and
62 Red alder, Alnus rubs Moderate the tree has a dead tap, and the crown includes % NO Conflicts with proposed grading, moderate to high risk of
6.8 g Poor Poor Filth dead branches intliciating d is in decline. Low '. failure
83 Red alder, Alnus rubs 7.6 , g Deatl Dead
high Dead. jHazard Remove NO Dead
64 Red alder, Alnus rubro 6.1 ( g' Deatl Dead Low Dead. jLOw Remove NO Dead
65 Bigleaf rrapk, Acer '
macrophNlum 6 8 8!Fair Fair Law Moderate 'Install tree protection. NO
� Bigleaf nape, Acar
macrophNlum 7.6 i 8j 10 Fair Low Moderate 'Install tree protection. NO
i The foliage in this tree is thinning in density,
67 Red alder, Alnus cobra � indicating the tree may be in tlecline. The top NO
9.7 1 t Poor- Fair Fair Low has failed previously, and has regrown. Low '.
I
I The folage in this tree is thinning in density and
68 Red alder, Alnus rubs I� X
the tree has a dead tap, and the crow n includes NO Conflicts with proposed grading, moderate risk of failure
6.3 8 Poor - Fair Fiber Fair Moderate dead branches indiciating it is in decline. Low '.
4.7, 'i The trunk of this tree has a cavity, that contains I
69 Red alder, Alnus rubs 6.2, decay, and at the base of the trunk I observed a NO
6.9 9 Fair Poor Filth crack Low
Moderate The low er trunk of this tree has cavity, that
70 Red alder, Alnus rubre 7 7 1 8 Fair Poor high contains decay. Low NO
71 Black cottonw cod. I Moderate- A codomnant portion of this trees crown has I '.
Populus hichocarpa 17.31 78 Fair -000tl Poor - Fair Filth failed previously, leavingalarge trunk injury. Low I, Remove NO Moderate to high risk Of failure.
Back cottonwood I
72 17.5 18 Goad Fair Moderate Low j NO
Populus frichocarpa '
73 Red Nor, Alnus rubre 6.1 ' 8 Goad Fair Moderate This tree is in decline w hh a dead top. Low ' NO
' The trunk of this tree contains decay, and leans '.
I, r-Fair r- a!r -- NO Moderate risk of failure.
I I Thefoliege in this tree is thinning in densky,
Back cottonwood,
75 I Low - intliciating the tree nay be in decline. The top NO
Populus Mchocarps 172 1 19 Fair Poor Moderate has failetl previously, and has regrown. Low I
Back cottonwood. ! I I
76 8.4 ! 10j Fair Fair Nbderate Low NO
Populus Mchocarpa ,
I! I The foliage in this tree is thinning in density and
77 Red alder, Alnus rubre the tree has a dead top, and the crow n contains NO
7.4 9 Poor Poor- Fair Moderate tleatl branches intliciating d a in decline. Low
78 Red aker, Alnus cobra 6 I 8' 8 Poor Poor- Fair Low This tree is suppressed. - Low Install tree protection. NO
This tree is slightly suppressed. A cavity in the
79 Red alder, Alnus rubre NO
62 8 eFair Poor high bwer trunk contains decay. Low hstall NO protection.
80 Red alder, Alnus rubre This tree is slightly suppressed. A cavity in the :.
r tr ,nk coolaiosllecay NO
81 Potl alder, Alnus rubre 7.3 I 9 9.5 Fair Fair Low Low �1. Install tree protection NO
82 Bigleaf neple, Acer The top of this tree has failed previously and I
macrophNlum 7.8 9 10 Fair Poor - Fair Low has regrow n. This tree is suppressed. Low Install tree protection. NO
83 Back cottonw Oct. NO
Populus hichocarpa 15.7 16 20 Fair Fair Moderate Low '. hstall tree protection.
� Bigleaf nePle, Acer X I.
macrophNlum 6.4 8 Fair Poor- Fair Low This tree is suppressed. Low NO COnflICTS Wlfh pTOpOSBd grading
Poor trunkstrudure,wdh included bark 'I
Black Corp. ood, X NO Moderate risk of failure.
85 Populus hichocarpa 122' between trunks. This isaweak structure. This
13.1 14 Fair Fair Moderate tree is also suppressed. Low I
� Back cottonw ood, I ",
Populus frichocarpa 8.5 10 11 Fair Fair Moderate This tree is suppressetl. Law i Install tree protection. NO
g7 Bigleaf rmpk, Acer NO
macrophNlum 6.7 8 Fair Fair Low Low
� Bgleaf maple, Acer
macrophyllum 9 1 11 Fair Fair Law Moderate NO
69 Black cottonwood,
Populus MChocarpa 14.5 16 Fair Fair Moderate Moderate - NO
so Backcottonwood NO
Populus Mchocarpa 7.7 ' 10 Fair Poor- Fair Motlarele This tree is suppressetl. Low I
91 Back cottonwood i
Populus Mchocarpa 75 j i6 Fair Fair Moderate NO
92 Back cottonw odd. '
Populus Mchocarpa 11.1 i 13 14 Fair Fair Moderate Low ':Install tree protection. NO
s3
Black eononw and, NO
Populus frichocarpa 70.3 1 12 13 Fair Fair Low This tree is suppressed. Low Install tree protection.
94 Red alder, Alnus rubre 9.6 ; i t 12.5 Fair Fair Moderate This tree is suppressetl. Low Install tree protection. NO
95 Bigleaf naple, Acer ' NO
9.1 it 12 Good! Gootl Moderate There are dead branches in the crown Mh Install tree protection.
� Black cottonw act, Low - !
Populus frichocarpa 8.5 10 Good Fair Filth There are dead branches in the crown. Nbderate I NO
The foliage in this tree a thinning in density and �I
the tree has a dead top, and the crow n contains
97 Red skier, Alnus rubre dead branches intlicia[in His in decline. This %
11.5, g NO High risk of failure
10.3, tree has a poor trunk structure, w ith included
6 14 Poor - Fair Poor Filth bark betty Ben trunks. This is aweak structure. Low '
' The foliage in this tree is thinning in density,
98 Potl aker, Alnus rubre indicating a tlecline in condition. The trunk of I NO
10.1 12 Poor - Fair Poor Filth this tree has a cavity, that contains decay. Hazartl 11 Remove
99 Red alder, Alnus rubre 6.5 8 8.5 Fair Fair Low Low hstall tree protection. NO
100 Black eononw nod, I NO
Populus hichocarpa 6.4 8 8.5 Fair Fair Moderate Low I. Install tree protection.
Thrs Gee Fos- pdb�runkTC�re�M1 a ow -
101 Red alder, Alnus ru6ra 10.3 72 Fair Fair Moderate significant bow and lean to the east Moderate NO
102 Red alder, Alnus rubre This tree has poor trunk structure. w dh a Low - I
9.6 11 Fair Fair Moderate significant bow and lean to the east Moderate NO
Black cottonwood The trunk of this tree is poorly tapered w hich is 1.
103 Populus frichocarpa 9.1 11 Fair Fair Low aweak structure. Moderate � NO
104 Black cottonwood, The trunk of this tree is poorly tapered w hich is I
Populus frichocarpa 8.5 10 Fair Fair Low aweak structure. Moderate NO
11.5,
105 Red alder, Alnus rubre 10.3, Moderate - Tha tree has a trunk cavity that contains decay. NO
6 14 Fair Poor - Fair Filth There are dead branches in the crow n. Law
10fi Red alder, Alnus ruble 10.1 12 Fair Fair Moderate Low NO
The trunk of this tree is Poorly tapered w hich is j
107 Ratl alder, Alnus rubre 65 ( 8 Poor - Fair Poor - Fair Moderate aweak structure. This tree is suppressed. Low NO
TheVUnkoi- ihistreeispoory tapered whkh is - -- ----- - - - - --
108 Red alder, Alnus rubre 6.4 j 8 Poor - Fair Poor - Fair Moderate aweak structure. This tree is suppressed. Low ! NO
I This tree is grow ing in w et soils. I observed -
109 Potl aker, Alnus rubre I Moderate -trunk injuries, a cavity w hich contained decay, NO
6.1 � 10 Fair Poor - Fair Filth and dead branches in the crow n. Low
The trunk of this tree is poorly taperetl and is
110 Retl aker, Alnus rubre bow ed which isaweak structure. This tree is Low - NO
fi.2 8 Fair Fair Moderate grow ing in wet soils. Moderate '
! The Gunk of Uis tree is poory tapered and k i
111 Red aker, Alnus rubre I bow etl whkh isaweak structure. This tree is NO
6 8 Fair Fair Moderate grow ing in wet soils. Low '
j The trunk of Uis tree is poorly tapered and a '
r1l Potlaker, Alnus ruble bow ed whkhisaweak structure. This tree
also leans to the w est. This
tree ¢grow ing in
NO
Fair
Fair
Moderate
wet soils.
Low