HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR_Arborist_Report_240215_v1
1
Lonnson Arbor Care
2616 169th Street SE
Bothell, WA 98012
425-891-1741
lonnson@juno.com
December 14, 2023
Amin Gilani
5815 NE 8th St.
Renton, WA 98059
Re: Tree Survey Report for address above (Parcel #1123059068).
To Whom It May Concern,
The purpose of this report is to identify and locate significant trees and associated risks for the
development of the property mentioned above. The enclosed survey table documents the identification,
measurements, and condition of each significant tree. A site map of the tagged trees and City of Renton’s
Tree Retention Worksheet is included at the end of this report. This report has been revised to reflect
current plans.
On May 10, 2023, I provided a basic inspection of significant trees within and adjacent to the parcel
mentioned above. The trees were measured (with diameter tape) and existing tags were used for
identification. The tag numbers correspond with the data in the following tree inventory table. Tree
trunks are measured 4 ½ feet from the ground which is known as the Diameter at Standard Height (DSH).
The number within the brackets is the total DSH for multiple trunks derived from the square root of the
total diameter of all trunks; DSH = √[(DSH1)2 + (DSH2)2 + (DSH3)2 +…]. Trees that are considered
significant under Renton Code 4-11-200 are those 6 inches in diameter or greater (8 inches diameter for
Alders and Cottonwoods).
The total root zone known as the Limit of Disturbance (LOD) is the radius around the trunk that should
not be disturbed during grading and construction to preserve the root zone. The LOD is determined by
the species, branch length from trunk (dripline), slope, and surrounding conditions. Assessments of the
LODs in this report are determined by the species and their trunk sizes because driplines do not represent
the true critical root zone on this site.
All trees have some level of risk associated with tree defects, or hazards. Hazards are categorized into
four types of risk assessed for a five-year period: Improbable, possible, probable, and imminent.
Improbable risk means the tree is stable, void of defects, and unlikely to fail under normal, and may not in
extreme, weather conditions. Possible risk means that failure is unlikely to occur in normal weather
conditions but may be expected in extreme weather conditions. Probable risk means failure may be
expected under normal weather conditions. Trees with imminent risk are in the act of failing and should
be worked on as soon as possible.
The health of the trees is defined as good, fair, and poor. Fair health describes a tree as having vigor but
has defects such as disease, included bark, wood decay, weak structure, or root zone issues (i.e.,
impervious surfaces, compacted soil, etc.) that are not feasible for mitigation. Poor health describes a tree
that is dead, severely diseased, injured, or a hazard to surrounding property with no chance of recovery.
2
Tree Survey Table:
Tag # Species DSH Drip
-line
LOD Health Condition
301* Cottonwood
Populus
trichocarpa
30.0” 18.0’ 20.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
302 Cottonwood 26.5” 10.0’ 18.0’ Good Canopy dieback. Ganoderma conk 6’ up
trunk. Probable risk of tree failure.
303 Cottonwood 23.6” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
304 Cottonwood 20.8” 12.0’ 16.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
305 Cottonwood 20.7” 12.0’ 16.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the west. Low
vigor. No signs of decay or disease.
Possible risk of large part failure.
306 Buckthorn
Frangula
pershiana
7.4” 10.0’ 8.0’ Fair Open wound along the trunk (1’x6”).
Animal scratching. Possible risk of tree
failure.
307 Scouler Willow
Salix scouleriana 7.0” 6.0’ 6.0’ Poor Asymmetric canopy to the north. Severe
heartwood decay. Probable risk of tree
failure.
308 Oregon Ash
Fraxinus
latifolia
8.3” 10.0’ 8.0’ Poor Very low vigor, sparse. No signs of decay
or disease. Possible risk of tree failure.
309 Cottonwood 14.1” 15.0’ 14.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the east. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
310 Cottonwood 37.1” 20.0’ 25.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
311 Cottonwood 15.9” 10.0’ 14.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
312 Cottonwood 19.2” 10.0’ 16.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the west. Foliage is
sparse. No signs of decay or disease.
Possible risk of large part failure.
313 Bigleaf Maple
Acer
macrophyllum
11.9” 15.0’ 12.0’ Fair Peeling bark side of trunk. Sparse foliage.
Improbable risk of tree failure.
314 Red Cedar
Thuja plicata 49.0” 12.0’ 25.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
315 Bitter Cherry
Prunus
emarginata
13.7” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
316 Bitter Cherry 18.0” 12.0’ 12.0’ Poor Asymmetric canopy to the west. Foliage is
sparse. No signs of decay or disease.
Possible risk of tree failure.
317 Bigleaf Maple 29.0” 20.0’ 20.0’ Fair Few dead branches. Heavy with Ivy
vines. Possible risk of large part failure.
3
Tag # Species DSH Drip
-line
LOD Health Condition
318 Bigleaf Maple 43.0” 20.0’ 25.0’ Poor Severe heartwood decay with canopy
dieback. Probable risk of tree failure.
319 Red Cedar 17.5” 18.0’ 16.0’ Poor Dead top canopy. Exposed sapwood,
missing bark. Probable risk of large part
failure.
320 Bigleaf Maple 27.7”
8.5”
19.1”
[34.7”]
20.0’ 22.0’ Fair Few dead branches. Heavy with Ivy
vines. Possible risk of large part failure.
321* Bigleaf Maple 17.2” 18.0’ 16.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the west. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
322* Douglas Fir
Psuedotsuga
menziesii
26.8” 20.0’ 22.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
323 Bigleaf Maple 24.0” 18.0’ 20.0’ Poor Heartwood decay. Included bark. Foliage
is sparse. Probable risk of tree failure.
324 Bigleaf Maple 8.7” 8.0’ 8.0’ Poor Asymmetric canopy to the west with bark
cankers up the trunk. Probable risk of
large part failure.
325 Douglas Fir 10.9” 10.0’ 8.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
326 Bigleaf Maple 15.8”
16.5”
13.4”
[26.5”]
20.0’ 22.0’ Fair Included bark. No signs of decay or
disease. Heavy with Ivy vines. Possible
risk of large part failure.
327 Cottonwood 19.9” 10.0’ 16.0’ Fair Foliage is sparse. No signs of decay or
disease. Improbable risk of tree failure.
328 Cottonwood 23.7” 10.0’ 18.0’ Fair Tree has low vigor with a few dead
branches. No signs of decay or disease.
Possible risk of large part failure.
329 Cottonwood 16.2” 10.0’ 14.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
330 Cottonwood 22.5” 10.0’ 16.0’ Fair Heartwood decay. Foliage is sparse.
Possible risk of tree failure.
331 Cottonwood 11.7” 10.0’ 10.0’ Fair Trunk has abrupt bend 40’ up. No signs of
decay or disease. Possible risk of large
part failure.
332 Oregon Ash 7.8” 6.0’ 6.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
333 Scouler Willow 7.9” 6.0’ 6.0’ Poor Ganoderma conk at base of trunk.
Probable risk of tree failure.
334 Scouler Willow 5.0”
8.0”
[9.4”]
8.0’ 8.0’ Poor Smaller stem has decay. Broken canopy.
Probable risk of tree failure.
4
Tag # Species DSH Drip
-line
LOD Health Condition
335 Scouler Willow 7.3” 8.0’ 6.0’ Poor Heartwood decay. Probable risk of tree
failure.
336 Cottonwood 23.3” 18.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
337 Bigleaf Maple 8.3” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
338 Cottonwood 21.8” 15.0’ 16.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
339 Cottonwood 15.6” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
340 Bigleaf Maple 25.5” 20.0’ 20.0’ Fair Dead scaffold branches and several decay
pockets. Probable risk of large part
failure.
341 Cottonwood 19.3” 12.0’ 16.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
342 Bigleaf Maple 16.1” 18.0’ 16.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the south. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
343 Cottonwood 25.3” 18.0’ 20.0’ Good Dead scaffold branch. No signs of decay
or disease. Possible risk of large part
failure.
344 Cottonwood 14.3” 8.0’ 12.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
345 Scouler Willow 7.1”
4.8”
8.0”
[11.7”]
10.0’ 10.0’ Poor Heartwood decay. Tree previously fallen.
Possible risk of tree failure.
346 Cottonwood 16.3” 16.0’ 14.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the north. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
347 Cottonwood 27.6” 20.0’ 22.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
348 Cottonwood 39.7” 20.0’ 25.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
349* Buckthorn 5.7”
6.3”
5.0”
[9.9”]
10.0’ 10.0’ Good Asymmetric canopy to the west. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
350 Cottonwood 8.0” 10.0’ 10.0’ Good Asymmetric canopy to the west. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
351 Cherry
Prunus sp. 10.1” 15.0’ 12.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
5
Tag # Species DSH Drip
-line
LOD Health Condition
352 Red Alder
Alnus rubra
7.1”
9.9”
8.0”
[14.6”]
10.0’ 12.0’ Fair Included bark base of trunk. No signs of
decay or disease. Possible risk of large
part failure.
353 Red Alder 21.5” 20.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
356 Apple
Malus sp.
7.0”
6.2”
[9.4”]
10.0’ 10.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
357 Cottonwood 14.7” 10.0’ 12.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
358 Cottonwood 14.0” 10.0’ 12.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
359 Cottonwood 19.6” 10.0’ 16.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
360 Cottonwood 9.4” 8.0’ 8.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the west.
Asymmetric root system to the west. No
signs of decay or disease. Possible risk of
tree failure.
361 Cottonwood 12.9” 8.0’ 10.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
362 Cottonwood 18.6” 12.0’ 14.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the SW. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
363 Cottonwood 11.6” 8.0’ 8.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the west.
Asymmetric root system to the south. No
signs of decay or disease. Possible risk of
tree failure.
364 Cottonwood 8.3” 6.0’ 8.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
365 Cottonwood 21.1” 18.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
366 Cottonwood 12.7” 10.0’ 10.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the SW. Bark
cankers. No decay. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
367 Cottonwood 18.0” 15.0’ 16.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the SW. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
368 Cottonwood 22.4”
13.0”
[25.9”]
15.0’ 20.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
6
Tag # Species DSH Drip
-line
LOD Health Condition
369 Cottonwood 14.7” 12.0’ 12.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
370 Cottonwood 43.5” 20.0’ 25.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay or
disease. Broken scaffold branches.
Improbable risk of tree failure.
371 Cottonwood 23.2” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead. No canopy.
372 Cottonwood 30.4” 20.0’ 22.0’ Fair Dead side trunk with Ganoderma conk at
base. Possible risk of large part failure.
373 Scouler Willow 10.0’ 10.0’ 10.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
374 Hawthorn
Crataegus
monogyna
10.0’ 12.0’ 10.0’ Good Asymmetric canopy to the west. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
375 Scouler Willow 14.7” 12.0’ 12.0’ Poor Heartwood decay. Ganoderma conk.
Probable risk of tree failure.
376 Bigleaf Maple 15.8”
18.1”
30.0”
[38.4”]
20.0’ 25.0’ Fair A dead trunk and dead scaffold branches.
Probable risk of large part failure.
377 Bigleaf Maple 12.5” 15.0’ 12.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the west. Foliage is
sparse. Asymmetric root system to the
south. Possible risk of tree failure.
378 Cottonwood 16.5” 15.0’ 14.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
379 Cottonwood 13.2” 10.0’ 10.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
380 Cottonwood 24.5” 15.0’ 20.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
381 Cottonwood 22.0” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
382 Cottonwood 23.7” 20.0’ 20.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
383 Bigleaf Maple 32.7” 25.0’ 20.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
384 Cottonwood 17.3” 10.0’ 14.0’ Fair Broken top canopy. No signs of decay or
disease. Improbable risk of tree failure.
385 Cottonwood 20.6” 15.0’ 16.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
386 Scouler Willow 5.2”
5.3”
[7.4”]
6.0’ 6.0’ Poor Heartwood decay. Possible risk of tree
failure.
7
Tag # Species DSH Drip
-line
LOD Health Condition
387 Scouler Willow 10.3” 8.0’ 8.0’ Fair Heartwood decay. Possible risk of tree
failure.
388 Cottonwood 12.0” 10.0’ 10.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
389 Bigleaf Maple 8.3” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
390 Cottonwood 23.5” 8.0’ 18.0’ Poor Broken canopy. Tall snag.
391 Scouler Willow 8.9” 6.0’ 6.0’ Poor Heartwood decay. Possible risk of tree
failure.
392 Cottonwood 14.2” 10.0’ 10.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
393 Cottonwood 21.3” 15.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
394 Cottonwood 20.7” 10.0’ 16.0’ Poor Broken canopy. Tall snag.
395 Cottonwood 24.0” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
396 Cottonwood 22.0” 18.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
397 Cottonwood 22.5” 15.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
398 Cottonwood 16.5” 10.0’ 12.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
399 Scouler Willow 12.0”
4.0”
[12.6”]
10.0’ 10.0’ Poor Heartwood decay and a broken top
canopy. Possible risk of tree failure.
3100 Cottonwood 16.5” 15.0’ 14.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the east. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
3101 Cottonwood 17.7” 0’ 0’ Poor Dead.
3102 Cottonwood 10.3” 15.0’ 12.0’ Fair Asymmetric canopy to the east. No signs
of decay or disease. Improbable risk of
tree failure.
3103 Cottonwood 21.2” 15.0’ 18.0’ Good Sturdy tree with no signs of decay,
disease, or structural defects. Improbable
risk of tree failure.
* Trees off-site with overlying driplines.
General Requirements:
This property is zoned R-4, single family residence. It requires the retention of at least thirty
percent (30%) of the good to fair significant trees within the buildable area (Code 4-11-200).
There are 73 significant trees on the site with good to fair health. 22 trees must be retained or an
equivalent of new tree planting to meet the 30% retention requirements (73 trees x 30% = 21.9,
or 22 trees).
8
Tree Retention/Removal Table:
Tag # Retain Remove Not
Viable
Tag # Retain Remove Not
Viable
302* • 356 •
303* • • 357 •
304* • 358 •
305 • 359 •
306 • 360 •
307 • • 361 •
308 • • 362 •
309 • 363 •
310 • 364 •
311 • 365 •
312 • 366 •
313 • 367 •
314 • 368 •
315 • • 369 •
316 • • 370 •
317 • 371 • •
318 • • 372 •
319 • • 373 •
320 • 374 •
323 • • 375 • •
324 • • 376 •
325 • 377 •
326 • 378 •
327 • 379 •
328 • 380 •
329 • 381 • •
330 • 382 •
331 • 383 •
332 • 384 •
333* • • 385 •
334* • • 386 • •
335 • • 387 •
336 • 388 •
337 • • 389 • •
338 • 390 • •
339 • • 391 • •
340 • 392 •
341 • 393 •
342 • 394 • •
343 • 395 • •
344 • 396* •
345 • • 397* •
346 • 398* •
347 • 399 • •
348 • 3100* •
350 • 3101* • •
351 • 3102* •
352 • 3103* •
353 •
9
* Trees in the proposed Right-of-Way (8 healthy and 4 unhealthy).
The Table above shows the retention of 13 significant trees. One of the trees (#399) is in poor
health which does not count toward tree credit. Trees 331 and 332 may need to be removed for
Lot 1 and 2 driveways. Therefore, 13 significant trees with good to fair health are calculated for
retention. According to the Tree Retention and Credit Worksheet (Page 15) at least 64 new tree
plantings are required with different mature sizes. New tree plantings must be 2 inches in
diameter for deciduous trees and at least six feet tall for conifer (evergreen) trees.
Tree Protection Plan:
Protective fencing is required around the perimeters of the LOD for each retained or group of
trees during grading and construction. Temporary chain-link fencing is recommended to
preserve the trees from soil disturbance due to machines, foot traffic, and materials. Grading and
construction should not be allowed within the LOD of retained trees, unless described in this
report. Some of the trees have irregular root zones because of retention wall and impervious
surfaces. The map on the next page shows the placement of protection fencing.
The protection fencing may encroach part of the LOD of trees 314 and 348. The protection plan
for Cedar #314 does not exceed the threshold for outer root zone disturbance and protects the
inner (critical) root zone. The critical root zone for Cedar #314 is within its dripline. Under
normal conditions, no more than 30% of the outer root zone of a tree can be disturbed without
impacting health. This does not include the inner root zone. The protection plan for Cedar #314
would impact about 20% of the outer root zone. The same conditions are true for tree 348.
Trees off-site, #321 and #322, have overlying root zones and require protection fencing as shown
on the included map.
New Tree Recommendations:
The current plans do not meet minimum tree retention requirements and the mitigation of 76 new
tree plantings is needed. Larger, native evergreen trees include Douglas fir (Psuedotsuga
menziesii), Red cedar (Thuja plicata), Western hemlock (Tsuga heterphyllum), Grand fir (Abies
grandis), Shore pine (Pinus contorta), and Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis). Non-native evergreen
trees appropriate for landscape design that may count toward new tree plantings include
Excelsior cedar (Thuja plicata ‘Excelsior’), Mountain hemlock (Tsuga mertensiana), Alaskan
cedar (Callitropsis nootkatensis), Incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), Norway spruce (Picea
abies), Serbian spruce (Picea omorika), and Sawara cypress (Chamaecyparis pisifera).
There are not many native deciduous trees that work well in the residential setting except for
Serviceberry (Amelancheir alnifolia), Garry Oak (Quercus garriana), Vine Maple (Acer
circinatum), and Oregon Ash (Fraxinus latifolia). Non-native deciduous trees may include Red
maple (Acer rubrum), Linden (Tilia sp.), Ironwood (Parrotia persica), Katsura (Cercidiphyllum
japonicum), River birch (Betula nigra), Zelkova (Zelkova serrata), Japanese Hornbeam
(Carpinus japonicum), and Paperbark maple (Acer griseum).
10
New tree plantings are recommended to be placed around retained trees, along lot and “green”
tract borders, and the easement road. The new deciduous tree selection should be at least 25% of
the conifer selection.
Please reply if you have questions.
Thank you,
Lonnie Olson, Owner
ISA Certified Arborist (PN-5427A) exp. 12/31/2023
Qualified Tree Risk Assessor (#697) exp. 7/23/2024
11
12
13
14
15
16
Assumptions & Limiting Conditions
1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles and
ownerships to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is
assumed for matters legal in character. All property is appraised or evaluated as though
free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management.
2. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, I can neither guarantee nor be
responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.
3. I shall not be required to give testimony or attend court by reason of this report unless
subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee.
4. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
5. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for
any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior
expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant.
6. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed
by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, news, sales, or other
media, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of the consultant particularly
as to value conclusions, identity of the consultant, or any reference to any professional
society or institute or to any initialed designation conferred upon the consultant as stated in
my qualification.
7. This report and values expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and the
consultant’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a
stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be
reported.
8. Sketches, diagrams, 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.
9. Unless expressed otherwise: (1) information contained in this report covers only those
items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of
inspection; and (2) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items
without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee,
expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question
may not arise in the future.
17
Certification of Performance & Appraisal
I, Lonnie Olson, certify that all the statements of fact in this report are true, complete, and correct
to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that they are made in good faith.
❑ I have personally inspected the trees and the property referred to in this report and have
stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation or appraisal is stated in the
attached report and the terms of assignment.
❑ The analysis, opinions, and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current
scientific procedures and facts.
❑ 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 or 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 with the International Society of
Arboriculture. I have been involved in the field of arboriculture in a full-time capacity for more
than 26 years.
Signed: ________________________________