HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR_Hardy Short Plat_Arborist Report_210324_v1 Greenforest Incorporated
C o n s u l t i n g A r b o r i s t
4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656
TO: Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
REFERENCE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report
SITE ADDRESS: 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
DATE: March 24, 2021
PREPARED BY: Favero Greenforest, ISA Certified Arborist # PN -0143A
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #379
INTRODUCTION
You contacted me 3/4/2021 and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My
assignment is to tag and inspect trees at the above referenced site. The purpose of this
report is to establish the condition of the significant trees to satisfy City of Renton permit
submittal requirements.
You provided me a topographic survey prepared by 4Site Surveying & Consulting, dated
12/02/20. I visited the site 3/5/2021 and visually inspected the trees, which are the subject
of this report.
SUMMARY
The following table summarizes the tree quantities and categories inventoried in this report.
Significant, Landmark and Dangerous categories are defined by municipal code. Dead trees
are excluded from this report.
Significant Trees on Site 9
Landmark Trees on Site 0
Dangerous Trees on Site 0
Total Subject Trees 9
All onsite tree are viable for retention. Attributes for them, and for one offsite tree, are
summarized in attachment 3.
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 2 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
LIMITATIONS AND USE OF THIS REPORT
This tree report establishes, via the most practical means available, the existing conditions
of the trees on the subject property. Ratings for health and structure, as well as any
recommendations are valid only through the development and construction process. This
report is based solely on what is readily visible and observable, without any invasive means.
There are several conditions that can affect a tree’s condition that may be pre-existing and
unable to be ascertained with a visual-only analysis. No attempt was made to determine the
presence of hidden or concealed conditions which may contribute to the risk or failure
potential of trees on the site. These conditions include root and stem (trunk) rot, internal
cracks, structural defects or construction damage to roots, which may be hidden beneath
the soil. Additionally, construction and post-construction circumstances can cause a
relatively rapid deterioration of a tree’s condition.
IDENTIFICATION SCHEME
I marked each onsite tree with 1” x 3.5” aluminum tag indicating tree number as listed on
the attached inventory, and as shown on the attached exhibit.
SPECIES AND SIZE OF EACH TREE
I measured the trunk diameter (54” from grade) of each tree, and identified each tree by
common name.
TREE INSPECTION METHOD – TREE HEALTH, CONDITION AND VIABILITY
I visually inspected each tree from the ground. I performed a Level 1 risk assessment.1 This
is the standard assessment for populations of trees near specified targets, conducted in
order to identify obvious defects or specified conditions such as a pre-development
inventory. This is a limited visual assessment focuses on identifying trees with imminent
and/or probable likelihood of failure, and/or other visible conditions that will affect tree
retention.
I recorded tree species and size (DBH). I estimated the average dripline of each tree. I rated
the condition of each tree, both health and structure. A tree’s structure is distinct from its
health. This inspection identifies what is visible with both.
1 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 9: Tree Shrub and Other woody Plant Management – Standard
Practices, Tree Risk Assessment. 2011. ISA.
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 3 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
High-risk trees can appear healthy in that they can have a dense, green canopy. This may
occur when there is sufficient sapwood or adventitious roots present to maintain tree
health, but inadequate strength for structural support.
Conversely, trees in poor health may or may not be structurally stable. For example, tree
decline due to root disease is likely to cause the tree to be structurally unstable, while
decline due to drought or insect attack may not.
One way that tree health and structure are linked is that healthy trees are more capable of
compensating for structural defects. A healthy tree can develop adaptive growth that adds
strength to parts weakened by decay, cracks, and wounds.
This report identifies unhealthy trees based on existing health conditions and tree structure,
and specifies which trees are most suitable for preservation.2
No invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are
based on what was visible at the time of the inspection.
The attached inventory summarizes my inspection results and provides the following
information for each tree:
Proposed Action – Indicates if tree is to be removed or retained.
Tree Category as defined by municipal code.
Dangerous: Any tree that has been certified, in a written report, as dead,
terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property
by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist.
Landmark: A tree with a caliper of thirty inches (30") or greater. (Average
multiple stems and report single integer)
Significant: A tree with a caliper of at least six inches (6"), or an alder or
cottonwood tree with a caliper of at least eight inches (8").
Tree number as shown on tag in the field, and on attached exhibit.
DBH Stem diameter in inches measured 4.5 feet from the ground.
Tree Species Common name.
Dripline Average branch extension from the trunk as radius in feet.
Health and Structure ratings ‘1’ indicates no visible health-related problems or
structural defects, ‘2’ indicates minor visible problems or defects that may
2 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 5: Tree Shrub and Other woody Plant Maintenance – Standard
Practices, Managing Trees During Construction. 2008. ISA.
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 4 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
require attention if the tree is retained, and ‘3’ indicates significant visible
problems or defects and tree removal is recommended.
Comments on Condition Obvious structural defects or diseases visible at time of
inspection.
Viability - a determination by the arborist whether the tree is viable for retention.
Type indicates if tree is Deciduous (D), Evergreen (E), broadleaf (B) and coniferous
(C).
SUBJECT TREES
The site currently has a single-family residence. The subject trees include conifers, broadleaf
evergreens and deciduous trees: also native, ornamental and fruiting species.
The subject trees are listed with their proposed action in the following table, and their
attributes are summarized in attachment 3.
REASON(S) FOR ANY TREE REMOVAL
Six trees are proposed for removal because of conflicts with proposed site improvements as
indicated in the following table.
Proposed
Action
Tree
No. DBH Species Retention Priority
One Two Three
Retain 1 10,12,12 Purpleleaf plum iii Retain 2 14 Western red-cedar ii Remove - building pad 3 19 Deodar cedar ii, v Retain 4 6 English laurel ii
Remove – Storm drain 5 6 English laurel ii 6 6 English laurel ii
Remove - building pad 7 6 Apple ii ii 8 10 Apple ii ii Remove –
Access/Utilities TRACT 9 3,4,4,6 Vine maple ii
Protect 10* 25 Douglas-fir Boldtype – retained tree
*Offsite tree
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 5 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
IMPACT OF NECESSARY TREE REMOVAL
Most trees to be removed are either small, or are stand-alone. Their absence will have no to
minimal impact on the retained trees. The exception is tree 3, the Deodar cedar. This tree is
the largest and it stands very close to and provides wind buffering for tree 2, the second
largest tree, and a native red-cedar.
The retained trees include a flowering plum, an English laurel, and the native red-cedar. The
plum is currently a stand-alone tree and the laurel has a very low and wide canopy. The
native cedar (next to the Deodar) as a very high live crown ratio, and excellent trunk taper.
Because of these features, none of these three retained trees will be negatively impacted by
the necessary tree removal.
Trees stand near the shared parcel boundary to the west. These trees are native firs, they
are tall and have canopies above that of the Deodar cedar, and it is they who buffer the it
and the red-cedar from winds. The offsite trees will not be impacted by the necessary tree
removal.
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
Limits of Disturbance (LOD) are calculated for all the retained significant trees (and for one
tree on the adjoining parcel to the west). They are listed in attachment 3 as radii in feet
from the trunk for the side of the tree to be impacted by construction. They are determined
using rootplate 3 and trunk diameter,4,5,6 and ISA Best Management Practices.7 These are the
minimum distances from the trees for any soil disturbance, and represent the area to be
protected during construction. The following table lists the limits of disturbance of each tree.
TREE RETENTION AND LAND CLEARING REGULATIONS
4.4.130 §H.9. Protection Measures During Construction: Protection measures in this
subsection shall apply for all trees that are to be retained. All of the following tree protection
measures shall apply:
a. Construction Storage Prohibited: The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any
equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install
impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the
3 Coder, Kim D. 2005. Tree Biomechanics Series. University of Georgia School of Forest Resources.
4 Smiley, E. Thomas, Ph. D. Assessing the Failure Potential of Tree Roots, Shade Tree Technical Report. Bartlett
Tree Research Laboratories.
5 Fite, Kelby and E. Thomas Smiley. 2009. Managing Trees During construction; Part Two. Arborist News. ISA.
6 Andrew R. Benson, Andrew Koeser, Justin Morgenroth. Responses Of Mature Roadside Trees To Root
Severance Treatments. 2019. Journal of Urban Forestry & Urban Greening.
7 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Series, Part 5: Managing Trees During Construction. 2008. ISA.
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 6 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
drip line of any tree to be retained.
b. Fenced Protection Area Required: Prior to development activities, the applicant shall erect
and maintain six-foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the
drip lines of all retained trees or at a distance surrounding the tree equal to one and
one-quarter feet (1.25') for every one inch (1") of trunk caliper, whichever is greater,
or along the perimeter of a tree protection tract. Placards shall be placed on fencing
every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, “NO TRESPASSING – Protected Trees,” or on
each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected
trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on
four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever
equipment or trucks are moving near trees.
c. Protection from Grade Changes: If the grade level adjoining to a tree to be retained is to
be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree.
The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree’s drip line.
d. Impervious Surfaces Prohibited within the Drip Line: The applicant may not install
impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be
retained.
e. Restrictions on Grading within the Drip Lines of Retained Trees: The grade level around
any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas:
(i) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (ii) an area around the tree equal to
one and one-half feet (1-1/2') in diameter for each one inch (1") of tree caliper. A
larger tree protection zone based on tree size, species, soil, or other conditions may
be required. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012)
f. Mulch Layer Required: All areas within the required fencing shall be covered completely
and evenly with a minimum of three inches (3") of bark mulch prior to installation of
the protective fencing. Exceptions may be approved if the mulch will adversely affect
protected ground cover plants. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012)
g. Monitoring Required during Construction: The applicant shall retain a certified arborist or
licensed landscape architect to ensure trees are protected from development
activities and/or to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for
any trees and ground cover that are to be retained.
h. Alternative Protection: Alternative safeguards may be used if determined to provide equal
or greater tree protection. (Ord. 5676, 12-3-2012)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
2. Certification of Performance
3. Significant Tree Inventory
4. Tree Retention Plan
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 7 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
Attachment No. 1 - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions
1. A field examination of the site was made 3/5/2021. My observations and
conclusions are as of that date.
2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has
been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/arborist can neither
guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.
3. I am not a qualified land surveyor. Reasonable care was used to match the trees
indicated on the sheets with those growing in the field.
4. Construction activities can significantly affect the condition of retained trees. All
retained trees should be inspected after construction is completed, and then
inspected regularly as part of routine maintenance.
5. Unless stated other wise: 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, or coring. There is no warranty or
guarantee, expressed or implied that problems or deficiencies of the subject tree
may not arise in the future.
6. All trees possess the risk of failure. Trees can fail at any time, with or without
obvious defects, and with or without applied stress. A complete evaluation of the
potential for this (a) tree to fail requires excavation and examination of the base of
the subject tree. Permission of the current property owner must be obtained before
this work can be undertaken and the hazard evaluation completed.
7. The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court
by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made.
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 8 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
Attachment No. 2 - Certification of Performance
I, Favero Greenforest, certify that:
• I have personally inspected the trees and the property referred to in this report and
have stated my findings accurately.
• I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the
subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties
involved.
• The analysis, opinion, and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on
current scientific procedures and facts.
• My analysis, opinion, and conclusions were developed and this report has been
prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices.
• No one provided significant professional assistance to me, except as indicated within
the report.
• My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined
conclusion that favors the cause of the client of any other party nor upon the results
of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any
subsequent events.
I further certify that I am a member in good standing of International Society of
Arboriculture (ISA), and the ISA PNW Chapter, I am an ISA Certified Arborist (#PN-0143A) and
am Tree Risk Assessment Qualified, and am a Registered Consulting Arborist® (#379) with
American Society of Consulting Arborists. I have worked as an independent consulting
arborist since 1989.
Signed:
GREENFOREST, Inc.
By Favero Greenforest, M. S.
Date: March 24, 2021
Favero
Greenforest
Digitally signed by Favero Greenforest
DN: cn=Favero Greenforest, o, ou,
email=greenforestinc@mindspring.co
m, c=US
Date: 2021.03.31 09:02:26 -07'00'
Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction
RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA
March 24, 2021
Page 9 of 10
Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist
Attachment No. 3 – Regulated Tree Inventory
Dripline & limit of disturbance (LOD) are radii from center of tree.
Condition ratings ‘1’ good to excellent, ‘2’ fair, ‘3’ poor. Tree type indicates if tree is Deciduous (D), Evergreen (E), broadleaf (B) and coniferous (C).
For offsite tree, dripline is reported as branch length overhanging the subject property as measured from an existing fence. DBH is estimated.
Type indicates if tree is Deciduous (D), Evergreen (E), broadleaf (B) and coniferous (C). Proposed Action Reason for Removal Tree
No. DBH Species Dripline (R') LOD (R') Health Structure Comments on Condition Viable Tree? Tree Type Retain 1 10,12,12” Purpleleaf plum 17’ 10’ 2 2 Diseased, multiple stems Yes BD
Retain 2 14” Western red-cedar 14’ 8’ 1 2 Asymmetric canopy Yes CE
Building pad 3 19” Deodar cedar 24’ 12’ 1 2 Asymmetric canopy Yes CE
Retain 4 6” English laurel 16’ 6’ 1 2 Suppressed Yes BE
Storm drain 5 6” English laurel 12’ 6’ 1 2 Suppressed Yes BE
Storm drain 6 6” English laurel 12’ 6’ 1 2 Suppressed Yes BE
Building pad 7 6” Apple 10’ 6’ 2 2 Diseased, over-pruned Yes BD
Building pad 8 10” Apple 15’ 6’ 2 2 Diseased, over-pruned Yes BD
Access/Utilities 9 3,4,4,6” Vine maple 11’ 8’ 1 2 Multiple leaders Yes BD
Protect 10 25” Douglas-fir 18’ 15’ Offsite Tree CE
9 Significant Trees
0 Dangerous
0 Landmark
9 Total Onsite Trees
6 Remove
3 Retain
12ROWTRACT A12365410978XXXXXXXXHARDY SHORT PLAT
IN COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF RENTON STANDARDSPR20-XXXXXXC20-XXXXXXDESIGN12100 NE 195th St, Suite 300 Bothell, Washington 98011 425.885.7877CIVIL ENGINEERINGLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTUREPLANNINGSURVEYINGPROJECT NO. 21019LUA-20-XXXXXXTREE RETENTION TABLEPER R.M.C. 04.04.130.H.1.A.I.TREE RETENTION CALCULATIONSTREE REMOVAL TO BE SUPERVISEDBY ARBORIST TO INSUREPROTECTION OF LIMITS OFDISTURBANCE FOR TREES TOREMAIN (TYP.)SIGNIFICANT TREE TO REMOVE (TYP.)LEGENDSIGNIFICANT TREE TO BE REMOVEDLANDMARK TREE TO BE REMOVEDSIGNIFICANT TREE TO BE RETAINEDLANDMARK TREE TO BE RETAINEDTREE PROTECTION FENCING6' HT TREE PROTECTION FENCING (TYP.)SEE NOTATION HEREONTOTAL ONSITE SIGNIFICANT TREES:REQUIRED RETAINED SIGNIFICANT TREES:PROVIDED RETAINED SIGNIFICANT TREES:TOTAL REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED:9 SIGNIFICANT TREES3 (30 %) = 9 SIGNIFICANT TREES X .303 SIGNIFICANT TREES0 TREESPER R.M.C. 04.04.130.H.9.B.NOTEPROTECTION FENCING SHALL BE CHAIN LINK TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FENCINGAROUND THE DRIP LINES OF ALL RETAINED TREES OR AT A DISTANCE SURROUNDINGTHE TREE EQUAL TO ONE AND ONE-QUARTER FEET (1-1/4') FOR EVERY ONE INCH (1") OFTRUNK CALIPER, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. PLACARDS SHALL BE PLACED ON FENCINGEVERY FIFTY FEET (50') INDICATING THE WORDS, “NO TRESPASSING – PROTECTEDTREES,” OR ON EACH SIDE OF THE FENCING. SITE ACCESS TO INDIVIDUALLY PROTECTEDTREES OR GROUPS OF TREES SHALL BE FENCED AND SIGNED. INDIVIDUAL TREES SHALLBE FENCED ON FOUR (4) SIDES. IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDESUPERVISION WHENEVER EQUIPMENT OR TRUCKS ARE MOVING NEAR TREES.PER R.M.C. 04.04.130.C.9.DTREE DENSITY CALCULATIONSREQUIRED SIGNIFICANT TREES LOT 1:REQUIRED SIGNIFICANT TREES LOT 2:PROVIDED RETAINED SIGNIFICANT TREES LOT 1:PROVIDED RETAINED SIGNIFICANT TREES LOT 2:TOTAL REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED:2 TREES REQUIRED (7,565 SQ.FT. / 5,000 SQ.FT. - 1.51 TREES)0 TREES REQUIRED (4,816 SQ.FT. / 5,000 SQ.FT. = 0.96 TREES)2 SIGNIFICANT TREES0 TREES0 TREETREE TO REMAIN (TYP.)LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE (TYP.)OFFSITE TREE (TYP.)Bob Wenzl, Tuscany Construction RE: Hardy Short Plat Arborist Report, 857 Field Ave NE, Renton WA March 24, 2021 Page 10 of 10 Attachment No. 4 – Tree Retention Plan