Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR_Arborist_Report_180423_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: Jane Wang REFERENCE: Arborist Report SITE ADDRESS: 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 DATE: March 22, 2018 PREPARED BY: Favero Greenforest, ISA Certified Arborist # PN -0143A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #379 Introduction You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect the regulated 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. I received a topographic survey from Core Design. I visited the site 10/11/2017and visually inspected the trees indicated on the attached survey, 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. Total Significant Trees On Site 58 Landmark Trees On Site 0 Dangerous Trees On Site 21 (Proposed) ROW Trees 12 Offsite Trees 1 Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 2 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Data for 1 offsite tree (#8136) is also included in this report. The site is relatively flat. A single-family residence is located at the west of the parcel, near 116th Ave SE. A handful of native conifers and fruit trees surround the house. The remaining portion is covered in native growth deciduous trees, and a mix of invasive brambles and understory shrubs. Very few of these deciduous trees are healthy: most are in an obvious state of decline and failure. Additionally, though the site looks heavily forested, most trees are too small, and are not of a regulated size. 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 Each tree was marked with a 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 diameters (54” from grade) of each tree, and identified each tree by common name. REASON(S) FOR ANY TREE REMOVAL I rated the health and structure/form of each tree (see attached inventory and description below). Trees with significant visible problems or defects are indicated as Dangerous and are not viable for retention (dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or otherwise dangerous to persons or property). Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 3 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist 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. 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 tree inventory contains the following information on each tree. Proposed Action indicates if the tree is proposed for retention or removal. Retention Priority indicates if tree is Landmark, >60’ tall, part of a continuous canopy, >18” DBH, or is non-native. Tree Category as defined by municipal code. (TREE: A woody perennial usually 1 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 9: Tree Shrub and Other woody Plant Management – Standard Practices, Tree Risk Assessment. 2011. ISA. 2 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 5: Tree Shrub and Other woody Plant Maintenance – Standard Practices, Managing Trees During Construction. 2008. ISA. Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 4 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist having one dominant trunk, or, for certain species, a multi-stemmed trunk system, with a potential minimum height of ten feet (10') at maturity. Any trees listed on the Complete King County Weed List shall not qualify as a tree.) 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. (Multiple- stemmed trees are reported as the average using a 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"). Trees qualified as dangerous shall not be considered significant. Trees planted within the most recent ten (10) years shall qualify as significant trees, regardless of the actual caliper. Trees within the right-of-way (and proposed ROW) are not categorized. There are no landmark trees on the project site. Tree number as shown on the attached site exhibit. DBH Stem (trunk) diameter in inches 4.5 feet from grade. Tree Species Common name. Dripline Average branch extension in feet as radius from the trunk. Health & Structure Rating ‘1’ indicates good to excellent condition; no visible health- related problems or structural defects; ‘2’ indicates fair condition; minor visible problems or defects that may require attention or maintenance if the tree is retained, and/or the tree should only remain as a grove tree, and not stand alone; and ‘3’ indicates poor condition; significant visible problems or defects and tree removal is recommended. Visible Defects Obvious structural defects or diseases visible at time of inspection, including: Asymmetric canopy– the tree has an asymmetric canopy from space and light competition from adjacent trees. Branch dieback - mature branches in canopy are dying/dead. Crack – separation of wood fibers and predisposed to failure. Dead – tree is dead. Deadwood – large and/or multiple dead branches throughout canopy. Decay – process of wood degradation by microorganisms resulting in weak and defective structure. Diseased – foliage and trunk/stems are diseased. Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 5 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Dogleg in trunk – trunk with a bow or defective bend (90°) in trunk often half way of further up the trunk. Double leader – the tree has multiple stem attachments, which may require maintenance or monitoring over time. Included bark – an inclusion of bark at the attachment of multiple leaders and is preventing a wood-to-wood attachment Ivy - dense ivy prevents a thorough inspection, and other defects may be present. Multiple leaders - the tree has multiple stem attachments, which may lead to tree failure and require maintenance or monitoring over time. Previous failure – tree trunk previously broken and defective. Slender – tree lacks adequate trunk taper to stand lone. Sweep in trunk – characterized by a leaning lower trunk and a more upright top. Suppressed – tree crowded by larger adjacent trees; with defective structure and/or low vigor. Retain tree only as a grove tree, not stand-alone. Sweep – tree leans away from adjacent trees. Characterized by a leaning lower trunk and a top that is more upright. Topped – the tree is previously topped and has poor structure and/or stem decay. Type indicates if tree is Deciduous (D) or Evergreen (E). Viability - a determination by the arborist whether the tree is viable for retention. LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE Limits of Disturbance (LOD) are calculated for all the retained significant trees (and for trees on adjoining parcels with overhanging driplines). They are listed below 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 and ISA Best Management Practices.6 These are the minimum distances from the trees for any soil disturbance, and represent the area to be protected during construction. These LOD are malleable and may be adjusted during the design and construction process. The following table lists the limits of disturbance of each tree. 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 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Series, Part 5: Managing Trees During Construction. 2008. ISA. Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 6 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Limits of Disturbance in feet as radius from tree trunk. Limits of Disturbance Tree No. DBH Tree Species DL North East South West 8123 16” Western red-cedar 12’ 10’ 10’ 10’ PL 8124 13” Douglas-fir 14’ 8’ 8’ 8’ PL 8125 13” Western red-cedar 12’ 8’ 8’ 8’ PL 8197 18” Black cottonwood 18’ PL 10’ 10’ 10’ G 8” Black cottonwood 10’ 8’ 8’ 8’ 8’ H 10” Black cottonwood 11’ PL 8’ 8’ 8’ K 11” Bigleaf maple 14’ PL 8’ 8’ 8’ Y 29” Black cottonwood 20’ PL 16’ 16’ 16’ GG 10” Black cottonwood 12’ PL 8’ 8’ 8’ The attached Tree Retention Plan provides protection that exceeds these established LOD. Protective fencing is erected at the tree’s dripline, which is a greater distance for all retained trees. SUPPLEMENTAL TREES Supplemental trees are required and will include 32 three-inch caliper trees. Replacement Are shown on the attached Preliminary Landscape Plan. 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 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. Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 7 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist 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 5. Planting and Maintenance Specifications Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 8 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Attachment No. 1 - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions 1. A field examination of the site was made 10/112/217. 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. Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 9 of 16 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 22, 2018 Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 10 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Attachment No. 3 – Tree Inventory Proposed Action Category Tree No. DBH Species Dripline Health Structure Visible Defects Tree Type Viable Tree RETAIN SIGNIFICANT 8123 16” Western red-cedar 12’ 1 2 Double leader E YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT 8124 13” Douglas-fir 14’ 1 2 Double leader E YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT 8125 13” Western red-cedar 12’ 1 1 E YES Remove ROW 8135 26” White pine 17’ 1 2 Multiple leaders E YES Remove Dangerous 8137 8,10” Apple, fruiting 12’ 3 3 Diseased, decay, decline D NO Remove Dangerous 8138 24” Apple, fruiting 14’ 2 3 Diseased, decay, decline D NO Remove Dangerous 8172 22” Red alder 15’ 2 3 Decline, decay, asymmetric D NO Remove Dangerous 8173 10,10,18” Red alder 16’ 2 3 Decline, decay, failure D NO Remove Dangerous 8174 13” Black cottonwood 12’ 3 2 Decline, dead top D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT 8175 20” Black cottonwood 16’ 2 1 Thin canopy D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8176 17” Black cottonwood 15’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8177 16” Black cottonwood 15’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8178 22” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8179 14” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8180 24” Black cottonwood 20’ 1 2 Ivy D YES Remove ROW 8181 13,14” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Double leader D YES Remove ROW 8182 13,14” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Double leader D YES Remove ROW 8183 30” Black cottonwood 25’ 1 1 D YES Remove ROW 8184 15” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8187 19” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8190 16,18” Black cottonwood 16' 1 2 Double leader with included D YES Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 11 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Proposed Action Category Tree No. DBH Species Dripline Health Structure Visible Defects Tree Type Viable Tree bark Remove SIGNIFICANT 8191 29” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8192 19” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove Dangerous 8193 18” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 3 Decay D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT 8194 22” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8195 20” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT 8197 18” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8198 18” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove Dangerous 8199 14” Black cottonwood 16’ 2 3 Suppressed, asymmetric D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT 8200 20,12” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Double leader D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8201 28” Black cottonwood 20’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove Dangerous 8202 14” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 3 Crack D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT 8203 18” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8204 16” Black cottonwood 15’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8205 17” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8207 14” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8208 20” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8209 16” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8210 20” Black cottonwood 18’ 2 1 Thin canopy D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8211 22” Black cottonwood 20’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8212 26” Black cottonwood 20’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8213 18” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8214 17” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 12 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Proposed Action Category Tree No. DBH Species Dripline Health Structure Visible Defects Tree Type Viable Tree Remove SIGNIFICANT 8215 22” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove ROW 8216 14” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove ROW 8217 17” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove ROW 8218 16” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove ROW 8219 20” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES Remove ROW 8220 18” Black cottonwood 20’ 1 2 Dogleg D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8221 12” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 2 Previous top failure D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8222 15” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8223 22” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT 8224 20” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 1 D YES Remove Dangerous 8230 12” Red alder 16’ 2 3 Decline, top failure, double leader D NO Remove Dangerous 8231 22,22,24” Bigleaf maple 35’ 2 3 Diseased, decay, decline D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT A 9” Bigleaf maple 14’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT B 16” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT C 12” Black cottonwood 10’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT D 16” Black cottonwood 13’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT E 9” Black cottonwood 10’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT F 10” Black cottonwood 12’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT G 8” Black cottonwood 10’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT H 10” Black cottonwood 11’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT I 10” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT J 6” Cascara 10’ 1 1 D YES Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 13 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Proposed Action Category Tree No. DBH Species Dripline Health Structure Visible Defects Tree Type Viable Tree RETAIN SIGNIFICANT K 11” Bigleaf maple 14’ 1 2 Slender D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT L 9” Red alder 12’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT M 9” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove Dangerous N 12” Bigleaf maple 16’ 1 3 Topped, sweep D NO Remove Dangerous O 10” Bigleaf maple 10’ 1 3 Topped, sweep D NO Remove Dangerous P 28,26” Bigleaf maple 6’ 3 3 Nearly dead D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT Q 8” Cherry, bitter 12’ 1 1 D YES Remove ROW R 11” Scouler's willow 16’ 2 3 Decay, asymmetric, diseased D NO Remove ROW S 10,13” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Double leader D YES Remove Dangerous T 9” Black cottonwood 14’ 3 3 Diseased, decay, decline D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT U 10” Cherry, bitter 14’ 1 1 D YES Remove Dangerous V 11” Scouler's willow 14’ 3 2 Diseased, deadwood D NO Remove Dangerous W 7,8” Scouler's willow 10’ 3 2 Asymmetric, diseased D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT X 23” Black cottonwood 18’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT Y 29” Black cottonwood 20’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES Remove Dangerous Z 17” Black cottonwood 0’ 3 3 Dead D NO Remove Dangerous AA 18” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 3 Root failure D NO Remove Dangerous BB 6,6” Scouler's willow 14’ 3 2 Diseased, deadwood D NO Remove Dangerous CC 9” Red alder 14’ 2 3 Top failure, decay D NO Remove Dangerous DD 22,24” Red alder 18’ 2 3 Branch failure, double leader D NO Remove SIGNIFICANT EE 8, 10” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 2 Double leader, decay D YES Jane Wang RE: Arborist Report, 19016 116th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 March 22, 2018 Page 14 of 16 Greenforest Registered Consulting Arborist Proposed Action Category Tree No. DBH Species Dripline Health Structure Visible Defects Tree Type Viable Tree Remove SIGNIFICANT FF 10” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 2 Asymmetric D YES RETAIN SIGNIFICANT GG 10” Black cottonwood 12’ 1 2 Asymmetric, double leader D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT HH 11” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 1 D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT II 10” Black cottonwood 16’ 1 2 Failure, double leader D YES Remove SIGNIFICANT JJ 10” Black cottonwood 14’ 1 1 D YES OFFSITE TREE’ OFFSITE 8136 24” Douglas-fir 16’ 1 2 Over-pruned by adjoining neighbor X X X X X X X X X XXXXX X X X XX X X X X XX X X X X X XX XX XX X X X X X X XXX X XX X X X X X X X XX XX XX 4'%1//'0&'& (14#22418#. EXISTING TREE TO BE RETAINED (TYP.) 4'%1//'0&'& (14#22418#.