Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16834-R-Tree Protection Plan-Washington Forestry Cons Inic-2014-04-23FORESTRY AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT SPECIALISTS WFCI 3601943-1 723 FAX 3601943-4 1 28 1919 Yelm Hwy SE, Suite C Olympia, WA 98501 URBANIRURAL FORESTRY TREE APPRAISAL HAZARD TREE ANALYSIS RIGHT-OF-WAYS VEGETATION MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES CONTRACT FORESTERS Member of International Society of Arboriculture and Society of American Foresters - Tree Protection Plan- Copperwood Project SE 2nd Place Renton, WA Prepared for: Wayne Potter Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. Prepared by: Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Date: April 18, 2014 Introduction Quadrant Homes is planning to construct a new 47 lot subdivision on approximately 13.11 acres at SE 2nd Place in Renton, WA. The proponent has retained WFCI to: • Evaluate the health and long-term survival potential for trees 6 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) and larger within the buildable area of the site and make recommendations for retention, protection, and necessary cultural care. • Prepare a list of all trees with their corresponding size, condition and potential for retention, along with their minimum root protection zone required if they are to be saved. • Complete required tree retention calculations as per the City of Renton ordinance Section 4-4-130. • Evaluate soils with respect to impacts on tree growth and stability. Observations Methodology WFCI has evaluated trees 6 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) and larger in the proposed project area, and assessed their potential to be incorporated into the new project. The tree evaluation phase used methodology developed by Nelda Matheny and Dr. James Clark in their 1998 publication Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 2 Site Description The project site includes 8 parcels with residences that have large, mostly open, yards and/or patches of forest. The parcels include: 1523059043, 1523059221, 1523059170, 1523059093, 1523059100, 1523059066, 1523059201, and 1523059067. Four long driveways run south from SE 2nd Place towards the structures. Planted and native trees exist adjacent to the homes. The easterly portion of the project site is composed of a forested area with a stream running north to south. Soil Depth and Productivity According to the Natural Resource Conservation Service Soil Survey, the Alderwood gravelly sandy loam is the predominant soil type found within the project area. This is a moderately deep, moderately well drained soil found on glacial till plains. It is formed in ablation till overlying basal till. A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of 20 to 40 inches. Permeability is moderately rapid above the hardpan and very slow in the pan. Available water capacity is low and the effective rooting depth for trees is 20-40 inches. A perched seasonal high water table is at a depth of 18-36 inches from November to March. The potential for windthrow of trees is 'moderate' under normal conditions. New trees require irrigation for establishment. Tree Evaluation Each tree within the project site was evaluated. A complete listing of trees within the project site is provided in Attachment 3. For the purposes of description, we will divide the project site into three sections: the stream buffer zone, the storm pond area, and the residential home area where development will occur. Residential Home Area Approximately 9.1 acres of the proposed project area was comprised of residential homes and yards at the time of our field inspection. Many of the parcels contained native tree species as well as planted ornamental specimens. The species found in this area included Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), grand fir (Abies grandis), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana), red alder (Alnus rubra), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), cherry species (Prunus spp.), cypress species (Cupressus spp.), vine maple (Acer circinatum), Katsura tree (Cercidiphyllum japonicum), Hinoki cypress (Chamaecyparis obtusa), European white birch (Betula pendula), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), flowering plum (Prunus cerasifera), western white pine (Pinus monticola), Colorado blue spruce (Picea pungens), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), apple (Malus spp.), honey locust (Gleditsia triacanthos) and western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). A total of 171 trees were found within the residential home area, ranging in diameter from 6 to 42 inches DBH. Twenty-two additional trees are undesirable species (Populus, Alnus, Salix, and Platanus spp.) as per the Renton tree ordinance. One hundred and twenty-seven (127) of these 171 trees were classified as healthy. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 3 Tree condition ranged from very poor to very good, with the majority falling into the fair category. A summary of trees found within the residential home area is shown below: Table 1. Trees located within the residential home area after exclusion of undesirable species. Species DBH Range (in) Total Trees Healthy Trees Douglas-fir 6-42 62 52 Bigleaf maple 6-28 56 40 Cherry spp. 6-12 16 11 Western red cedar 6-21 15 8 All others 6-19 22 16 Total 6-42 171 127 Stream Buffer Zone Trees within the stream buffer zone were inventoried by species, size, and condition. A total of 83 trees were found, with 64 trees in fair or better condition. Again, red alder, cottonwood, willow and London plane was excluded from the inventory and assessment. A summary of trees found within the stream buffer zone is shown below: Table 2. Trees located within the stream buffer zone after exclusion of undesirable species. Species DBH Range Total # of Trees Healthy Trees Bigleaf Maple 6-22+ 49 33 Douglas-fir 6-22+ 25 24 Western red cedar 6-14 5 5 Cherry spp 6-8 3 1 Colorado Blue Spruce 8 1 1 Total 6-22+ 83 64 Storm Pond Area Trees within the storm pond area were inventoried by species, size, and condition. A total of 35 trees were found, with 19 trees in fair or better condition. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 4 A summary of trees found within the storm pond area is shown below: Table 3. Trees located within the storm pond area after exclusion of undesirable species. Species DBH Range Total # of Trees Healthy Trees Bigleaf maple 6-22+ 11 3 Douglas-fir 6-22+ 24 16 Total 6+22 35 19 Off-Site Impacts Removal of trees within the project site should not affect off-site trees. Discussion Potential for Tree Retention The following table provides a summary of all potential areas on the site and whether the trees can be saved or removed in the project. These are illustrated on the proposed site plan in Appendix II. A detailed summary of trees by, species, condition, and DBH class is provided in Appendix III. Table 4. Summary of tree inventory by location. Area Total #Trees # Healthy Trees # of Trees to be Removed # Trees Retained Residential Home 171 127 135 36 Stream Buffer Zone 83 64 19 64 Storm Pond 35 19 35 0 Total 289 210 189 100 A total of 100 trees will be retained on site. Sixty four trees can be saved within the stream buffer zone and 36 trees can be retained around the residential homes. All trees will be retained south of lots 37 and 46. Per an arrangement made between Quadrant Homes, and home owner Berquist, these trees will not count towards the tree retention requirement. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 5 Tree Density Calculations Title 4-4-130 of the Renton Municipal Code requires that a minimum of 30% of all healthy significant trees in buildable areas be retained on the project. Dead, diseased, or dangerous trees within proposed public streets or private access easements were only included once in the trees excluded from retention. The following is a summary of the required and planned tree retention: Total Number of Significant Trees on Site 289 trees Trees Excluded from Retention Calculation: Trees that are Dead Diseased or Dangerous 77 trees Trees in Proposed Public Streets 22 trees Trees in Private Access easements 7 trees Trees in Critical Areas and Buffers 64 trees Number of Healthy, Significant Trees in Buildable Area: 119 trees Required Tree Retention: 30% of healthy significant trees in buildable area: 36 trees Planned Tree Retention 36 trees There are 119 healthy significant trees in the buildable area of the site. At least 36 of these trees need to be retained to meet the City of Renton Code. The proposed plan retains 36 trees outside of the critical areas and buffers. Recommendations Tree Protection Measures Trees to be saved must be protected during construction by a six foot high chain link fencing (Appendix IX), located at the edge of the critical root zone (CRZ). The CRZ shall be the dripline of the stand of trees, or the limits of construction of the tree tract. Placards shall be placed on the fencing every 50 feet indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING - Protected Trees". The individual tree CRZ is the dripline (6 feet minimum), unless otherwise delineated by WFCI (see Appendix III). Tree protection fences should be placed around the edge of the critical root zone (CRZ). The fence should be erected after logging but prior to the start of clearing. The fences should be maintained until the start of the landscape installation. There should be no equipment activity (including rototilling) within the critical root zone. No irrigation lines, trenches, or other utilities should be installed within the CRZ. Cuts or fills should impact no more than 20% of a tree’s root system. If topsoil is added to the root zone of a Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 6 protected tree, the depth should not exceed 2 inches of a sandy loam or loamy fine sand topsoil and should not cover more than 20% of the root system. If roots are encountered outside the CRZ during construction, they should be cut cleanly with a saw and covered immediately with moist soil. Noxious vegetation within the critical root zone should be removed by hand. If a proposed save tree must be impacting by grading or fills, then the tree should be re-evaluated by WFCI to determine if the tree can be saved with mitigating measures, or if the tree should be removed. Pruning and Thinning All individual trees to be saved near or within developed areas should have their crowns raised to provide a minimum of 8 feet of ground clearance over sidewalks and landscape areas, 15 feet over parking lots or streets, and at least 10 feet of building clearance. All pruning should be done according to the ANSI A300 standards for proper pruning, and be completed by an International Society of Arboriculture Certified Arborist®, or be supervised by a Certified Arborist®. Hazard Tree Inspection During the time of our field inspection, there were many large black cottonwood trees growing within the stream buffer zone in the north-east corner of the project site. These trees have reached a mature size. Some are dead, other defective and some have already failed. Many of these trees can reach targets outside of the stream buffer. Cottonwoods are also susceptible to storm damage and limb failure which makes them unsuitable trees for new developments. It is recommended that these trees be individually evaluated to determine their risk to surrounding targets. This should be done and mitigation of the hazard trees done during the land clearing phase of the project. WFCI should be contacted to inspect all 'save trees' after initial clearing to mark any additional trees for removal that are deemed to be high risk trees to targets within and outside of the save tree areas. A second inspection of the save trees should occur after the completion of grading to determine if any trees were damaged during grading activity. Conclusions and Timeline for Activity 1. Tree risk assessment should be done for the cottonwoods in the stream buffer. Necessary removals can then be approved and work can be done during land clearing. 2. Forty trees are proposed to be retained in the buildable area of the project. 3. The final, approved tree protection plan map should be included in the construction drawings for bid and construction of the project and should be labeled as such. 4. Stake and heavily flag the clearing limits. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 7 5. Contact WFCI to attend pre-job conference and discuss tree protection issues with contractors. WFCI can verify all trees to be saved and/or removed are adequately marked for retention. 6. Complete all necessary pruning on save trees or stand edges to provide at least 8’ of ground clearance near sidewalks and trails, and 15’ above all driveways or access roads. 7. Complete logging. Complete necessary hazard tree removals and invasive plant removals from the tree protection areas. No equipment should enter the tree protection areas during logging. 8. Install tree protection fences along the 'limits of construction'. The fences should be located at the limits of construction or at the dripline of the save tree or as otherwise specified by WFCI. Maintain fences throughout construction. 9. Contact WFCI to inspect the tree protection areas after initial clearing. 10. Do not excavate stumps within 10’ of trees to be saved. These should be individually evaluated by WFCI to determine the method of removal. 11. Re-inventory the retained trees for final save tree counts. 12. Complete grading and construction of the project. 13. Contact WFCI to final inspect the tree protection areas after grading. 14. All save trees within reach of targets should be inspected annually for 2 years by a qualified professional forester retained by the homeowners association, and bi-annually thereafter. The purpose of these inspections is to identify trees that develop problems due to changing micro-site conditions and to prescribe cultural care or removal. Summary The City of Renton Municipal Code requires 36 of the 119 healthy significant trees (30 %) be retained on the buildable area of the site. This plan retains 36 trees. No tree replacement plan is necessary. Please give me a call if you have further questions. Respectfully submitted, Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. Galen M. Wright, ASCA, ACF ISA Board Certified Master Arborist PN-0129 BU Certified Forester No. 44 attachment: attachments Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 8 Appendix I Figure 1. Aerial Photo of the Copperwood Project Site in Renton, WA (King County iMAP 2009) Approximate Site Boundary NORTH No Scale Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 9 Appendix II Figure 2. Copperwood Project Site and Grading Plan Project Boundary Stream Buffer Zone Storm Pond Area Tree Protection Fence Locations Tract E Tract F NORTH No Scale Tract B Stream Buffer Residential Area Storm Pond Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 10 Figure 3. Copperwood Project Site Tree Locations (North West) Retained Tree Removal Tree Tree Protection Fence Location 1 2 3 6 7 8 9 11 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 31 32 33 34 36 37 38 75 52 53 54 55 56 57 76 77 78 79 4 5 # # 28 Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 11 Figure 4. Copperwood Project Site Tree Locations (South West) Retained Tree Removal Tree Tree Protection Fence Location 34 35 43 44 45 46 49 51 59 61 62 66 68 69 33 37 38 41 42 47 48 50 58 60 63 64 67 71 70 72 73 74 39 40 65 # # Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 12 Figure 5. Copperwood Project Site Tree Locations (North Central) Retained Tree Removal Tree Tree Protection Fence Location 126 127 153 119 118 122 123 167 128 121 133 120 129 130 131 132 125 124 154 155 156 157 171 172 168 160 159 158 # # Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 13 Figure 6. Copperwood Project Site Tree Locations (South Central) Retained Tree Removal Tree Tree Protection Fence Location 87 80 81 83 82 60 85 86 95 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 116 134 135 138 136 117 121 118 119 120 113 # # 114 Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 14 Figure 7. Copperwood Project Site Tree Locations (North East) 193 174 172 173 168 169 170 161 162 163 164 165 166 159 160 171 192 64 Healthy Trees Retained in Stream Buffer Zone Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 15 Figure 8. Copperwood Project Site Tree Locations (South East) Retained Tree Removal Tree Tree Protection Fence Location 175 177 180 181 182 184 183 186 187 188 190 147 148 149 151 150 146 142 143 145 137, 140-141 19 Healthy Trees Removed From Storm Pond Area 139 # # 152 178 179 185 189 191 176 144 Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 16 Appendix III Table 5. Copperwood Project Residential Area Tree List # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 1 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Fair 10 Save 2 Douglas-fir 8 Suppressed Poor 7 Remove low vigor 3 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Fair 10 Save 4 Douglas-fir 17 Co-dominant Fair 11 Save 5 Douglas-fir 23 Co-dominant Fair 12 Save 6 Grand fir 18 Co-dominant Very Good 12 Remove 7 Douglas-fir 22 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 8 Douglas-fir 23 Co-dominant Fair 13 Remove 9 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove 10 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Poor 9 Remove poor health 11 Douglas-fir 15 Co-dominant Fair 9 Remove 12 Douglas-fir 12 Co-dominant Poor 9 Remove poor health, broken top 13 Bigleaf maple 26 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 14 Douglas-fir 16 Intermediate Good 10 Save 15 Bigleaf maple 8,10 Intermediate Fair 8 Save not marked (black berries) 16 Bigleaf maple 8,13 Intermediate Poor 9 Remove broken top 17 Douglas-fir 42 Dominant Fair 15 Remove 18 Douglas-fir 28 Co-dominant Fair 13 Remove 19 Scouler's willow 6 Suppressed Fair 6 Remove not marked (black berries) 20 Douglas-fir 36 Dominant Fair 15 Remove 21 Red alder 12 Intermediate Fair 9 Remove 22 Douglas-fir 17 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 23 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove 24 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 25 Bigleaf maple 12 Intermediate Fair 8 Remove 26 Bigleaf maple 18 Intermediate Good 12 Save 27 Douglas-fir 7 Intermediate Poor 6 Remove branch dieback 28 Bigleaf maple 28 Co-dominant Fair 13 Save 29 Bigleaf maple 20 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove 30 Western red cedar 18 Co-dominant Poor 11 Remove multi-topped Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 17 # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 31 Western red cedar 19 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove multi-topped 32 Western red cedar 18 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove multi-topped 33 Western red cedar 18 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove multi-topped 34 Western red cedar 18 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove multi-topped 35 Western red cedar 22 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove multi-topped 36 Scouler's willow 6 Suppressed Fair 6 Remove 37 Bigleaf maple 14 Intermediate Fair 10 Save 38 Red alder 14 Intermediate Very Poor 10 Remove Hazard Tree, dead top, decay 39 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 11 Save 40 Douglas-fir 12 Intermediate Fair 10 Save 41 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 13 Save 42 Bigleaf maple 10 Intermediate Fair 9 Save 43 Douglas-fir 17 Co-dominant Fair 11 Save 44 Cherry spp 8 Suppressed Poor 6 Remove poor health, upper stem decay 45 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 46 Grand fir 11 Intermediate Good 10 Remove 47 Pacific madrone 6 Suppressed Poor 6 Remove leaf and twig blight 48 Pacific madrone 5-9 Intermediate Poor 10 Remove 3 stems, leaf and twig blight 49 Bigleaf maple 7-10 Intermediate Fair 10 Remove 3 stems 50 Cherry spp 12 Intermediate Fair 10 Remove 51 Cherry spp 12 Intermediate Fair 10 Remove 52 Cypress spp 6 Co-dominant Good 6 Remove located in Drive A 53 Cherry spp 6 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 54 Katsura 3-6 Co-dominant Good 6 Remove 3 stems 55 Vine maple 4,7 Co-dominant Good 6 Remove 56 Hinoki cypress 7 Co-dominant Good 6 Remove 57 Cypress spp 4,6 Co-dominant Good 6 Remove 58 Cherry spp 7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 59 Cherry spp 6 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 60 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Poor 10 Remove poor health, branch dieback Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 18 # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 61 Scouler's willow 4-8 Co-dominant Poor 10 Remove 4 stems, not suitable for development 62 Scouler's willow 4-12 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove 10 stems, not suitable for development 63 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Good 10 Save 64 Scouler's willow 4-8 Co-dominant Poor 10 Remove not suitable for development 65 Douglas-fir 16 Co-dominant Fair 10 Save 66 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Poor 10 Remove low vigor 67 Bigleaf maple 9 Co-dominant Good 9 Save 68 European white birch 11 Co-dominant Fair 8 Remove 69 Cherry spp 7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in access tract 70 Western red cedar 4-7 Co-dominant Good 8 Save 4 stems 71 Western white pine 7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Save 72 Flowering plum 6,6 Co-dominant Poor 8 Remove broken top 73 Flowering plum 5,5 Co-dominant Poor 6 Remove previous branch failure 74 Flowering plum 5,9 Co-dominant Poor 6 Remove previous branch failure 75 Western red cedar 12 Co-dominant Fair 8 Remove located in Drive A 76 Lombardi cottonwood 13 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove not suitable for development 77 Lombardi cottonwood 14 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove not suitable for development 78 Lombardi cottonwood 10 Co-dominant Fair 8 Remove not suitable for development 79 Lombardi cottonwood 19 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove not suitable for development 80 Bigleaf maple 6,7 Suppressed Fair 8 Save 81 Cherry spp 10 Intermediate Fair 8 Save 82 Douglas-fir 15,18 Co-dominant Fair 15 Remove 83 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 84 Bigleaf maple 8-20 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove 4 stems, co-dominant stems 85 Bigleaf maple 22 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove poor structure, not suitable for development Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 19 # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 86 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove 87 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 88 Bigleaf maple 8-16 Co-dominant Poor 13 Remove poor branch structure 89 Bigleaf maple 11 Co-dominant Poor 9 Remove poor branch structure 90 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 91 Douglas-fir 11 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 92 Douglas-fir 16 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 93 Bigleaf maple 17,18 Co-dominant Fair 15 Remove minor branch dieback, prune dead branches 94 Western red cedar 7-15 Intermediate Poor 11 Save 3 stems, not counted towards retained trees 95 Douglas-fir 16 Co-dominant Poor 10 Remove lean 96 Douglas-fir 12 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 97 Douglas-fir 7 Intermediate Poor 6 Remove poor health, broken top 98 Douglas-fir 16 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 99 Bigleaf maple 6,17 Co-dominant Poor 12 Remove branch dieback 100 Bigleaf maple 6 Suppressed Poor 6 Remove poor health 101 Bigleaf maple 10 Intermediate Poor 7 Remove poor health 102 Red alder 14 Intermediate Poor 10 Remove poor health, stem decay 103 Douglas-fir 17 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove located in Drive A 104 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove located in Drive A 105 Red alder 9 Intermediate Poor 8 Remove poor health, poor structure 106 Cherry spp 6 Intermediate Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 107 Bigleaf maple 8 Intermediate Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 108 Douglas-fir 30 Co-dominant Fair 14 Remove 109 Redwood 10,12 Suppressed Poor 10 Remove dead top, located in Drive A 110 Bigleaf maple 28 Co-dominant Poor 13 Save poor branch structure, not counted towards retained trees 111 Bigleaf maple 7 Intermediate Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 112 Bigleaf maple 14 Intermediate Fair 10 Remove located in Drive A 113 Bigleaf maple 6,14 Intermediate Fair 10 Save not counted towards retained trees Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 20 # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 114 Scouler's willow 14 Intermediate Poor 10 Save 115 Red alder 10 Intermediate Poor 10 Save 116 Cherry spp 4-6 Intermediate Poor 10 Save 3 stems, low vigor, not counted towards retained trees 117 Bigleaf maple 8,20 Co-dominant Poor 13 Remove dead stem 118 Western red cedar 18 Intermediate Fair 13 Remove located in Drive A 119 Western red cedar 6 Suppressed Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 120 Western red cedar 20 Co-dominant Fair 13 Remove located in Drive A 121 Western red cedar 21 Co-dominant Very Good 14 Remove 122 Douglas-fir 28 Dominant Fair 15 Remove 123 Bigleaf maple 10-12 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 3 stems 124 Cherry spp 6 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove 125 Cherry spp 6 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove 126 Douglas-fir 32 Dominant Fair 15 Remove 127 Apple spp 9 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 128 Apple spp 7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 129 Apple spp 5,6 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 130 Apple spp 5-7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove 3 stems, located in Drive A 131 Apple spp 7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Remove located in Drive A 132 Bigleaf maple 9,10 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove located in Drive A 133 Honey locust 8 Dominant Good 8 Remove located in Drive A 134 Red alder 7 Co-dominant Fair 8 Save not marked (black berries) 135 Bigleaf maple 7 Intermediate Fair 7 Save not marked (black berries), not counted towards retained trees 136 Bigleaf maple 9 Intermediate Fair 7 Save not marked (black berries), not counted towards retained trees 137 Scouler's willow 6,10 Intermediate Poor 9 Save 138 Bigleaf maple 4 Intermediate Fair 6 Save not counted towards retained trees Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 21 # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 139 Bigleaf maple 8 Intermediate Fair 7 Save not counted towards retained trees 140 Red alder 8 Intermediate Poor 7 Save lean 141 Red alder 8 Intermediate Poor 7 Save dead top 142 Cherry spp 7 Intermediate Poor 6 Save poor health, not counted towards retained trees 143 Red alder 13 Intermediate Poor 8 Save poor branch structure 144 Bigleaf maple 5,6 Intermediate Poor 7 Save poor branch structure, not counted towards retained trees 145 Douglas-fir 14 Co-dominant Poor 10 Save Low vigor, not counted towards retained trees 146 Cherry spp 8 Intermediate Poor 8 Save poor branch structure, not counted towards retained trees 147 Red alder 6 Intermediate Poor 6 Save poor branch structure 148 Douglas-fir 17 Co-dominant Fair 10 Save not counted towards retained trees 149 Cherry spp 7 Intermediate Poor 7 Save poor branch structure, not counted towards retained trees 150 Bigleaf maple 22 Co-dominant Fair 12 Save not counted towards retained trees 151 Bigleaf maple 16 Co-dominant Poor 10 Remove branch dieback, poor structure 152 Bigleaf maple 17 Co-dominant Poor 10 Save branch dieback, poor structure, not counted towards retained trees 153 Bigleaf maple 5-13 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 3 stems 154 Bigleaf maple 27 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 155 Bigleaf maple 4,8 Suppressed Poor 7 Remove low vigor 156 Douglas-fir 6 Suppressed Poor 6 Remove low vigor 157 Scouler's willow 10 Intermediate Poor 7 Remove not suitable for development 158 Douglas-fir 6 Intermediate Fair 6 Remove 159 Douglas-fir 16 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove 160 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 161 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 22 # Species DBH (in) Crown Position Condition Root Protection Zone (ft) Project Plan Save or Remove Notes 162 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 163 Douglas-fir 20 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 164 Douglas-fir 6 Suppressed Fair 6 Remove 165 Douglas-fir 7 Suppressed Fair 6 Remove 166 Douglas-fir 22 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove 167 Western red cedar 14 Intermediate Fair 10 Remove 168 Douglas-fir 22 Co-dominant Fair 12 Remove ivy 169 Douglas-fir 18 Co-dominant Fair 11 Remove ivy 170 Douglas-fir 15 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove ivy 171 Bigleaf maple 5-18 Co-dominant Poor 15 Remove 5 stems, poor structure 172 Bigleaf maple 10- 15 Co-dominant Poor 15 Remove 4 stems, poor structure 173 Douglas-fir 15 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 174 Western hemlock 13 Intermediate Good 10 Remove 175 Western red cedar 18 Co-dominant Fair 10 Save 176 Douglas-fir 13 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 177 Douglas-fir 13 Co-dominant Fair 10 Remove 178 Bigleaf maple 7 Co-dominant Fair 7 Save 179 Bigleaf maple 7 Co-dominant Fair 7 Save 180 Bigleaf maple 22 Dominant Fair 14 Save 181 Bigleaf maple 11 Co-dominant Fair 9 Remove 182 Bigleaf maple 6 Intermediate Fair 6 Save 183 Bigleaf maple 10 Co-dominant Fair 9 Save 184 Bigleaf maple 4-7 Co-dominant Fair 10 Save 185 Bigleaf maple 9 Co-dominant Fair 9 Save 186 Bigleaf maple 9 Co-dominant Fair 9 Save 187 Bigleaf maple 7 Co-dominant Fair 6 Save 188 Bigleaf maple 6 Co-dominant Fair 6 Save 189 Bigleaf maple 8 Co-dominant Fair 8 Save 190 Bigleaf maple 8 Co-dominant Fair 8 Save 191 Bigleaf maple 30 Dominant Fair 18 Save 192 Cherry spp 7 Co-dominant Fair 7 Save 193 Bigleaf maple 9 Co-dominant Fair 8 Remove Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 23 Appendix IV Table 6. Copperwood Project Storm Pond Area Tree Condition by Diameter Class and Species. Poor Health Diameter Class (in) Species 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22+ Bigleaf Maple 1 3 2 1 1 Douglas-fir 1 4 2 1 Fair Health Diameter Class (in) Species 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22+ Bigleaf Maple 1 1 1 Douglas-fir 1 5 1 2 1 6 Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 24 Table 7. Copperwood Project Stream Buffer Zone Tree Condition by Diameter Class and Species. Poor Health Diameter Class (in) Species 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22+ Bigleaf Maple 1 3 1 2 2 1 2 4 Douglas-fir 1 0 0 Cherry spp. 1 1 Fair Health Diameter Class (in) Species 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22+ Bigleaf Maple 6 4 1 4 3 2 1 3 3 Douglas-fir 1 3 1 5 0 0 1 5 Western Red Cedar 1 Cherry spp. 1 Good Health Diameter Class (in) Species 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22+ Bigleaf Maple 3 3 Douglas-fir 6 1 1 Western Red Cedar 1 2 1 Blue spruce 1 Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 25 Appendix V WFCI Photo Log (4/14/2014) Photo A. Trees to # 3-4 to be retained. All trees evaluated within the residential area have blue numbers painted at the base. Photo B. View looking south along the western boundary of the project area. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 26 Photo C. View from the northern project boundary looking south-east towards the stream and forested area. Photo D. Large black cottonwood trees in the northwest corner of the project site. Trees are over mature and prone failure. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 27 Appendix VI Individual Tree Rating Key for Tree Condition RATING SYMBOL DEFINITION Very Good VG • Balanced crown that is characteristic of the species • Normal lateral and terminal branch growth rates for the species and soil type • Stem sound, normal bark vigor • No root problems • No insect or disease problems • Long-term, attractive tree Good G • Crown lacking symmetry but nearly balanced • Normal lateral and terminal branch growth rates for the species and soil type • Minor twig dieback O.K. • Stem sound, normal bark vigor • No root problems • No or minor insect or disease problems – insignificant • Long-term tree Fair F • Crown lacking symmetry due to branch loss • Slow lateral and terminal branch growth rates for the species and soil type • Minor and major twig dieback – starting to decline • Stem partly unsound, slow diameter growth and low bark vigor • Minor root problems • Minor insect or disease problems • Short-term tree 10-30 years Poor P • Major branch loss – unsymmetrical crown • Greatly reduced growth • Several structurally import dead or branch scaffold branches • Stem has bark loss and significant decay with poor bark vigor • Root damage • Insect or disease problems – remedy required • Short-term tree 1-10 years Very Poor VP • Lacking adequate live crown for survival and growth • Severe decline • Minor and major twig dieback • Stem unsound, bark sloughing, previous stem or large branch failures, very poor bark vigor • Severe root problems or disease • No or minor insect or disease problems • Mortality expected within the next few years Dead DEAD • Dead Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 28 Cultural Care Needs: ABBRV. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION CC Crown Cleaning Pruning of dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or defective branches over 1/2 inch in diameter –includes removal of dead tops CT Crown Thinning Pruning of branches described in crown cleaning, plus thinning of up to 20% of the live branches over ½ inch diameter. Branch should be 1/3 to ½ the diameter of the lateral branch. Thinning should be well distributed throughout crown of tree, and should release healthy, long-term branches. RC Crown Reduction Reduction of the crown of a tree by pruning to lateral branches. Generally used to remove declining branches or to lighten end weight on long branches. CR Crown Raising Pruning of lower branches to remove deadwood or to provide ground or building clearances. RMV Remove Remove tree due to decline or hazardous conditions that cannot be mitigated by pruning. RS Remove Sprouts Remove basal sprouts from stem of tree. Rep Replace Tree is small – is in decline or dead. Replace with suitable tree species. HT Hazard Tree Tree is hazardous and cannot be mitigated by pruning. Recommendation is to remove tree. None No Work No work necessary at this time. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 29 Appendix VII Description of Tree Evaluation Methodology The evaluation of the tree condition on this site included the visual assessment of: 1. Live-crown ratio, 2. Lateral and terminal branch growth rates, 3. Presence of dieback in minor and major scaffold branches and twigs, 4. Foliage color, 5. Stem soundness and other structural defects, 6. Visual root collar examination, 7. Presence of insect or disease problems. 8. Windfirmness if tree removal will expose this tree to failure. In cases where signs of internal defect or disease were suspected, a core sample was taken to look for stain, decay, and diameter growth rates. Also, root collars were exposed to look for the presence of root disease. In all cases, the overall appearance of the tree was considered relative to its ability to add value to either an individual lot or the entire subdivision. Also, the scale of the tree and its proximity to both proposed and existing houses was considered. Lastly, the potential for incorporation into the project design is evaluated, as well as potential site plan modifications that may allow otherwise removed tree(s) to be both saved and protected in the development. Trees that are preserved in a development must be carefully selected to make sure that they can survive construction impacts, adapt to a new environment, and perform well in the landscape. Healthy, vigorous trees are better able to tolerate impacts such as root injury, changes in soils moisture regimes, and soil compaction than are low vigor trees. Structural characteristics are also important in assessing suitability. Trees with significant decay and other structural defects that cannot be treated are likely to fail. Such trees should not be preserved in areas where damage to people or property could occur. Trees that have developed in a forest stand are adapted to the close, dense conditions found in such stands. When surrounding trees are removed during clearing and grading, the remaining trees are exposed to extremes in wind, temperature, solar radiation, which causes sunscald, and other influences. Young, vigorous trees with well-developed crowns are best able to adapt to these changing site conditions. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 30 Appendix VIII Glossary of Forestry and Arboricultural Terminology DBH: Diameter at Breast Height (measured 4.5 ft. above the ground line on the high side of the tree). Caliper: In Issaquah - Caliper is referring to diameter measurement at DBH. Live Crown Ratio: Ratio of live foliage on the stem of the tree. Example: A 100’ tall tree with 40 feet of live crown would have a 40% live crown ratio. Conifers with less than 30% live crown ratio are generally not considered to be long-term trees in forestry. Crown: Portion of a trees stem covered by live foliage. Crown Position: Position of the crown with respect to other trees in the stand. Dominant Crown Position: Receives light from above and from the sides. Codominant Crown Position: Receives light from above and some from the sides. Intermediate Crown Position: Receives little light from above and none from the sides. Trees tend to be slender with poor live crown ratios. Suppressed Crown Position: Receives no light from above and none from the sides. Trees tend to be slender with poor live crown ratios. Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 31 Appendix IX Tree Protection Fence Detail 6 ft. Temporary Chain Link Fence on Driven Posts NO TRESPASSING - Protected Trees Copperwood Project Tree Protection Plan Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc Page 32 Appendix X Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 1) Any legal description provided to the Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership's to any property are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management. 2) It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other governmental regulations, unless otherwise stated. 3) Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information. 4) Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. 5) Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidated the entire report. 6) 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 Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. 7) Neither all or any part of the contents of this report, nor copy thereof, shall be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without the prior expressed written or verbal consent of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. -- particularly as to value conclusions, identity of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc., or any reference to any professional society or to any initialed designation conferred upon Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc. as stated in its qualifications. 8) This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of Washington Forestry Consultants, Inc., and the fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence neither of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding in to reported. 9) Sketches, diagrams, graphs, 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. 10) 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 tree or other plant or property in question may not arise in the future. Note: Even healthy trees can fail under normal or storm conditions. The only way to eliminate all risk is to remove all trees within reach of all targets. Annual monitoring by an ISA Certified Arborist or Certified Forester will reduce the potential of tree failures. It is impossible to predict with certainty that a tree will stand or fail, or the timing of the failure. It is considered an ‘Act of God’ when a tree fails, unless it is directly felled or pushed over by man’s actions.