Full Text
2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Project No. TS - 4869 Arborist Report TO: Cosmos Development Properties, Oscar Del Moro SITE: 16135 NE 85th St, Redmond, WA 98052 RE: Tree Inventory & Assessment DATE: June 23, 2015 PREPARED BY: Chris Madison ISA Certified Arborist PN-7671A ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor REVIEWED BY: J. Casey Clapp ISA Certified Arborist PN-7475A ISA Qualified Tree Risk Assessor Summary Seventy-two (72) trees were assessed at the above addressed site. Thirty-six (36) of these trees are located within the property boundary, the additional thirty-six (36) trees are located adjacent to the site within the buffer survey area provided to us by the client. Seventy (70) trees meet the City of Redmond definition of a Significant tree; two Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) trees meet the requirements of a Landmark tree. The City of Redmond requires that 35 percent of site trees be retained during development. Of the thirty-four (34) Significant trees located within the property boundary, twelve (12) trees need to be retained to meet City requirements. The City also requires that all Landmark trees be retained (RZC 21.72). The City of Redmond requires an exception request be submitted and approved for the removal or impact of any Landmark tree, as well as for the removal of more than 35-percent of the Significant trees on site. All Landmark trees removed must be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. Significant trees removed are to be replaced at a 1:1 ratio, except for those that are removed beyond the 35-percent retention minimum, which shall be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. Obtain the necessary tree removal permission from the City of Redmond before beginning site development. Assignment & Scope of Report This report outlines the site inspection by Chris Madison and Katie Hogan of Tree Solutions, Inc. on June 15, 2015. We were asked to tag, identify, and visually inspect all Significant trees on site, with reference to a 2010 site survey. We were asked to review the Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) requirements as they pertain to the project. We were asked to produce an Arborist Report including the tag number or other identifier, species, size, condition, drip line and designation of each tree as it relates to City code. Oscar ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 2 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Del Moro, of Cosmos Development Properties, requested these services to acquire information for project planning purposes. This information is preliminary as we were not provided with a proposed site plan prior to the inventory. In this report, we provide general tree protection requirements for the City of Redmond. As proposed site plans become available, we can provide more specific tree protection and retention recommendations. Specifics for each tree can be found in the attached Table of Trees. A site map with tree locations can be found in the attached Site Map with Mark ups and Adjacent Site Aerial with Mark ups. An overview of the site we were asked to inventory can be found in Figure 1: Aerial Site Photo, which follows the report. Glossary and References follow the site maps. Limits of Assignment can be found in Appendix A. Methods can be found in Appendix B. Additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions can be found in Appendix C. Observations The Site This 99,883 square-foot property is located in Downtown Redmond and was previously used as a United State Postal Service office space. The old Post Office building still stands on the site. The site is zoned as Town Square Zone (TSQ). There are no critical areas on site and the topography is flat. The site appeared to have been left unmaintained for some time. The extent of the site can be seen on the included site plans. Besides the property surrounding the post office, we were asked to inventory additional areas surrounding the old post office site. These areas included the small planting strip running between the existing fire station and skate park, the small planting bed to the north of the transit center, and the side yard area just west of a small multi-family residential community. The Trees Thirty-six trees on site were tagged, measured, and assessed for health and structural condition. Two trees (trees 64 and 68) met the City definition of Landmark, having a diameter at standard height (DSH) equal to or greater than 30-inches. The remaining thirty-four trees meet the City definition of a healthy Significant tree. An additional thirty-six trees on property adjacent to the subject property were also tagged or marked with a red paint pen and assessed. All of these trees met the City definition of a healthy Significant tree. Ten Norway maple (Acer platanoides) trees are located on the north side of the property near the existing entrance (Trees 54-63). Several of these trees have multiple leaders attached from a single point and small sized dead wood present in the canopies. Overall, this cluster of maple trees is in fair to good health and structural condition and are strong candidates for retention. Trees 64 and 68 are Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) trees which we measured to be 30 inches DSH or greater. Due to their size, they both classify as Landmark trees within the City of Redmond. Both trees were found to be in good health and structural condition and are strong candidates for retention. If these trees are retained, the crowns should be cleaned to remove dead parts hanging in the canopy. ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 3 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Over extended branches should be reduced, and all invasive English ivy (Hedera helix) should be removed from the tree bases. Trees 65 and 66 are non-significant Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) trees in good health and structural condition. The trees are located near the Landmark Douglas-fir trees. Tree 66 lays on the western property line and may have shared ownership with the Redmond Fire Department to the west. This grouping of trees has a fairly high retention value, as they are all native species in good condition and located on the property edge. Trees A through J are located outside of the subject property—all of these trees were marked with red paint pen. The trees are all in fair to good health and structural condition. Some of the trees had obstruction from infrastructure and girdling roots. Trees 77 through 91 are located on the Redmond Fire Department property, tax parcel number 022505- 9159. These trees were planted between the fire station and skate park to the south. The row is comprised of native Douglas-fir and western redcedar (Thuja plicata) trees. All these trees are in fair to good health and structural condition. Tree 92 is a black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) located in the Edge Skate Park, tax parcel number [PHONE REDACTED]. This tree has a multiple stemmed form, and a single stem DSH equivalent of 26.6 inches. The tree has three large leaders greater than 20.0 inches DSH and is in good health and structural condition. This tree is adjacent to an open space near the skate park, and is a strong candidate for retention. Along the south edge of the property, there are over thirty recently planted incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens) trees. Only one of the incense cedar trees, Tree 93, is significant per City code (greater than 6 inches DSH). All of the other trees in this planting appeared to be in good health and structural condition and are strong candidates for retention. There are three black pine (Pinus nigra) trees located along the eastern property line (Trees 97-99). Irrigation heads are present at the base of each tree. Large surface roots exist from each tree and the soils are relatively shallow. The tree canopies hang over the subject property to the west and depending on site plans, may require crown reduction pruning. Trees 205 through 208 are cherry (Prunus sp.) trees that are located on the subject property. Tree 208 had poor structure; the other trees had no major issues other than dense invasive ivy coverage at the base. Trees 211-213 and 215-216 are silver maple (Acer saccharinum) trees located on-site along the eastern property line. English ivy covers the base of the trees. All of these maples are in good health and structural condition and are strong candidates for retention. Tree 214 is an 8.1 inch DSH Douglas-fir tree in good health and structure. ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 4 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Tree 217 is a multi-stem arborvitae (Thuja occidentalis) tree located through the back gate at the southeast corner of the existing building. There are two arborvitae trees in this location, only one of which is greater than 6 inches DSH. Trees 218, 220, 221, 222 are Norway maple trees located in the existing back parking lot. Trees 221 and 222 are growing in relatively small planting strips and have root obstruction caused by the parking lot infrastructure. There is visible tip dieback on both trees, and a visible girdling root on Tree 222. Overall, the Norway maple trees are mature and well-established and would be good retention trees for this site. Tree 219 is a flowering cherry tree located along the southern fence line; this tree had a large surface root running along the curb. There are a few other non-significant cherry trees located along this fence. Discussion Retained, Impacted, & Removed Trees The Redmond Zoning Code (RZC) states that the tree protection area shall be a minimum of the drip line plus five additional radial feet added to the furthest extent of the drip line. Trees that are proposed to be retained, removed, or that may be impacted, should be shown on a Tree Preservation Plan. The RZC states that a minimum of 35-percent of all significant trees on site shall be retained on any new development site, along with all Landmark trees, unless an exception has been applied for and granted. If the 35-percent retention level for significant trees is not achieved, each significant tree removed beyond 35-percent must be replaced at a 3:1 ratio. An exception request must be filed with the City of Redmond in order to dip below the minimum amount of trees retained. The city would also like an individual exception request submitted for each impacted tree onsite. These individual requests are to understand the extent of the impact that each tree will receive. Per Redmond City Code, a tree’s viability is based on proposed site plans, rather than health or structural condition. A tree is considered viable for a site until it is found to conflict with proposed development. Replacement Tree Requirements Landmark trees to be replaced at 3:1 Significant trees removed below the 65% maximum threshold to be replaced at 1:1 Significant trees removed beyond the 35% minimum threshold to be replaced at 3:1 Replacement Trees The Redmond Zoning Code states the following: Replacement trees are to be a minimum of: Two-and-one-half-inch caliper at breast height for deciduous trees Six feet in height for evergreen trees The Administrator may consider smaller-sized replacement trees if the applicant can demonstrate that smaller trees are more suited to the species, the site conditions, and the ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 5 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t purposes of this section, and that such trees will be planted in sufficient quantities to meet the intent of this section. Replacement trees shall be primarily native species in order to restore and enhance the site as nearly as practicable to its pre-development character. The condition of replacement trees shall meet or exceed current American Nursery and Landscape Association or equivalent organization’s standards for nursery stock. Installation of required replacement trees shall be in accordance with best management practices for landscaping which ensure the tree’s long-term health and survival. All required tree replacement and other required mitigation shall be bonded or completed prior to issuance of a building permit. Tree Protection Measures: To ensure long-term viability of trees and stands identified for protection, permit plans, and construction activities shall comply with the following minimum required tree protection: All minimum required tree protection measures shall be shown on the tree protection and replacement plan. All construction activities, including staging and traffic areas, shall be prohibited within five feet of the drip line of protected trees. Tree protection barriers shall be installed five feet beyond the drip line of significant trees to be protected prior to any land disturbance. Tree protection barriers shall be a minimum of four feet high, constructed of chain link, or polyethylene laminar safety fencing or similar material, subject to approval by the Administrator. On large or multiple-project sites, the Administrator may also require that signs requesting subcontractor cooperation and compliance with tree protection standards be posted at site entrances. Where tree protection areas are remote from areas of land disturbance, and where approved by the Administrator, alternative forms of tree protection may be used in lieu of tree protection barriers, provided that protected trees are completely surrounded with continuous rope or flagging and are accompanied by “Tree Save Area – Keep Out” signs. Preventative Measures: In addition to the above minimum tree protection measures, the applicant shall support tree protection efforts by employing, as appropriate, the following preventative measures, consistent with best management practices for maintaining the health of the tree: Pruning of visible deadwood on trees to be protected or relocated; Application of fertilizer to enhance the vigor of stressed trees; Use of soil amendments and soil aeration in tree protection and planting areas; Mulching over tree drip line areas; and Ensuring proper water availability during and immediately after construction. Alternative Methods: The Administrator may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if a protected tree will be protected to an equal or greater degree than through the techniques listed above. ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 6 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Aerial Site Photo Figure 1- Red line indicates rough area of inventory scope. We did not have any survey information of the surrounding areas or development plans. ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 7 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Glossary co-dominant stems: stems or branches of nearly equal diameter, often weakly attached (Matheny et al. 1998) crown/canopy: the aboveground portions of a tree (Lilly 2001) DSH: diameter at standard height; the diameter of the trunk measured 54 inches (4.5 feet) above grade (Matheny et al. 1998) ISA: International Society of Arboriculture included bark: bark that becomes embedded in a crotch between branch and trunk or between co- dominant stems and causes a weak structure (Lilly 2001) Landmark tree: A healthy tree with a DSH greater than 30-inches (RZC) significant size: A healthy tree measuring 6-inches DSH or greater (RZC) structural defects: flaws, decay, or other faults in the trunk, branches, or root collar of a tree, which may lead to failure (Lilly 2001) References ANSI A300 (Part 1) – 2008 American National Standards Institute. American National Standard for Tree Care Operations: Tree, Shrub, and Other Woody Plant Maintenance: Standard Practices (Pruning). New York: Tree Care Industry Association, 2008. Dunster & Associates Environmental Consultants Ltd. Assessing Trees in Urban Areas and the Urban- Rural Interface, US Release 1.0. Silverton: Pacific Northwest Chapter ISA, 2006. Lilly, Sharon. Arborists’ Certification Study Guide. Champaign, IL: The International Society of Arboriculture, 2001. Matheny, Nelda and James R. Clark. Trees and Development: A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture, 1998. Mattheck, Claus and Helge Breloer, The Body Language of Trees.: A Handbook for Failure Analysis. London: HMSO, 1994. Redmond Zoning Code. http://www.codepublishing.com/WA/redmond.html (Accessed November 13, 2013). ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 8 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Appendix A - Limits of Assignment Unless stated otherwise: 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, climbing, or coring unless explicitly specified. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the subject trees may not arise in the future. Tree Solutions did not review any reports or perform any tests related to the soil located on the subject property unless outlined in the scope of services. Tree Solutions staff are not and do not claim to be soils experts. An independent inventory and evaluation of the site’s soil should be obtained by a qualified professional if an additional understanding of the site’s characteristics is needed to make an informed decision. Appendix B - Methods We evaluated tree health and structure utilizing visual tree assessment (VTA) methods. The basis behind VTA is the identification of which the tree produces in reaction to a weak spot or area of mechanical stress. A tree reacts to mechanical and physiological stresses by growing more vigorously to re-enforce weak areas, while depriving less stressed parts (Mattheck & Breloer 1994). An understanding of the uniform stress allows me to make informed judgments about the condition of a tree. We used a laser rangefinder to determine distances and heights. We measured the diameter of each tree at 54 inches above grade, diameter at standard height (DSH). If a tree has multiple stems, I measured each stem individually at standard height and determined a single-stem equivalent diameter by taking the average of the stem diameters, per Redmond Zoning Code. ---PAGE BREAK--- Cosmos Development – 16135 NE 85th St – Arborist Report 06.23.2015 pg. 9 of 9 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone [PHONE REDACTED] w w w . t r e e s o l u t i o n s . n e t Appendix C - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions 1. Consultant assumes that any legal description provided to Consultant is correct and that title to property is good and marketable. Consultant assumes no responsibility for legal matters. Consultant assumes all property appraised or evaluated is free and clear, and is under responsible ownership and competent management. 2. Consultant assumes that the property and its use do not violate applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or regulations. 3. Although Consultant has taken care to obtain all information from reliable sources and to verify the data insofar as possible, Consultant does not guarantee and is not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 4. Client may not require Consultant to testify or attend court by reason of any report unless mutually satisfactory contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such Services as described in the Consulting Arborist Agreement. 5. Unless otherwise required by law, possession of this report does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any person other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior express written consent of the Consultant. 6. Unless otherwise required by law, no part of this report shall be conveyed by any person, including the Client, the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media without the Consultant‘s prior express written consent. 7. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of the Consultant, and the Consultant’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specific value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event or upon any finding to be reported. 8. All photographs included in this report were taken by Tree Solutions Inc. during the documented site visit, unless otherwise noted. 9. Sketches, drawings 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. The reproduction of any information generated by architects, engineers or other consultants and any sketches, drawings or photographs is for the express purpose of coordination and ease of reference only. Inclusion of such information on any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation by Consultant as to the sufficiency or accuracy of the information. 10. Unless otherwise agreed, information contained in this report covers only the items examined and reflects the condition of the those items at the time of inspection; and the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without dissection, excavation, probing, climbing, or coring. Consultant makes no warranty or guarantee, express or implied, that the problems or deficiencies of the plans or property in question may not arise in the future. 11. Loss or alteration of any part of this Agreement invalidates the entire report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Trees 16135 NE 85th St Redmond, WA 98025 Date of Inventory: 06/15/2015 Table Prepared: 06/16/2015 North East South West 54 Acer platanoides Norway maple 14.5 Good Good 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk 55 Acer platanoides Norway maple 13.1 Good Good 14 14 14 14 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, cement block at tree base 56 Acer platanoides Norway maple 11.7 Good Poor 17 17 17 17 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, co-dominant union with narrow angled attachment 57 Acer platanoides Norway maple 16.4 Good Fair 23 23 23 23 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, many leads growing from one attachment point 58 Acer platanoides Norway maple 10.4 Good Good 13.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk 59 Acer platanoides Norway maple 15.8 Good Good 20 20 20 20 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk 60 Acer platanoides Norway maple 14 Fair Fair 18 18 18 18 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, multiple dead leaders, small sized dead wood in canopy, tip dieback 61 Acer platanoides Norway maple 16.6 Good Fair 21 21 21 21 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, old pruning flush cuts from crown raising 62 Acer platanoides Norway maple 13.5 Good Fair 18 18 18 18 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, small sized dead wood in canopy, tip dieback 63 Acer platanoides Norway maple 13.9 Good Fair 18 18 18 18 Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, co-dominant union with narrow angled attachment 64 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 32 Good Good 19 19 19 19 Yes Invasive ivy at base and climbing trunk, branch hangers to the east and north, overextended limbs 65 Arbutus menziesii Pacific madrone 5* Good Good 16.5 8 3 13 *Multi-stemmed tree: 4.7, 5.2. Foliar fungus, phototropic lean to north, canopy grows into Tree 64 66 Arbutus menziesii Pacific madrone 5.4* Good Good 12.7 4.5 10 5 *Multi-stemmed tree:5, 5.4, 5.8. Foliar fungus, possible shared tree with property to west, natrassia canker on southern stem 67 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 7.2 Fair Fair 15.5 13.5 15.5 4 Heavy ivy coverage, multiple old pruning wounds, phototropic lean to east 68 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 32.5 Good Good 21 18.5 17.5 16 Yes Heavy ivy coverage, pruning cuts flush to tree trunk, moderate size dead wood in canopy, tree located mapped on survey 69 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 6.2* Fair Fair 11 18 2 6 *Multi-stemmed tree: 5.2, 7.2. Old pruning wounds DSH (inches) Notes Landmark Tree Drip line Radius (feet) Structural Condition Health Condition Common Name Scientific Name Tree ID Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Page 1 of 5 www.treesolutions.net [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Trees 16135 NE 85th St Redmond, WA 98025 Date of Inventory: 06/15/2015 Table Prepared: 06/16/2015 North East South West DSH (inches) Notes Landmark Tree Drip line Radius (feet) Structural Condition Health Condition Common Name Scientific Name Tree ID 70 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 7.3* Poor Fair 8.5 11 12 12.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 6.3, 8.3. Tip dieback, sparse canopy 71 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 8.3** Good Good 10 13.5 8 4 **DSH measured at narrowest point below union 72 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 6.8 Good Fair 12.5 10.5 15 11.5 Minimal tip dieback, old topping cut, phototropic lean to north 73 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 10.5** Good Good 10.5 11.5 15 14.5 **DSH measured at narrowest point below union 74 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 9.5** Good Fair 13.5 17 4 4 **DSH measured at narrowest point below union, phototropic lean to east, minimal tip dieback 75 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 5.0* Good Fair 16 11.5 3 18.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 4.2, 5.8. Minimal tip dieback 76 Prunus serrulata Flowering cherry 5.5* Good Good 17 16 20 12 *Multi-stemmed tree: 4.5, 5.9, 6.1. Minimal tip dieback 77 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 8.3* Good Fair 10 4.5 7.5 7.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 7.2, 9.4. Invasive ivy at base 78 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 10 Good Good 10 6 10 6 Invasive ivy at base 79 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 12.3 Good Good 14 7 14 7 Invasive ivy at base 80 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 7.8 Good Good 10 4.5 10 4.5 Invasive ivy at base, old pruning wounds at base 81 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 17.9 Good Good 19 19 10 19 Invasive ivy at base, structural root to south, bow form 82 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 13.6 Good Good 18 5 12.5 12.5 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 83 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 13.9 Good Good 18 7.5 7.5 7.5 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 84 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14.9 Good Good 13 13 13 13.5 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 85 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 17 Good Good 20 16 17.5 17.5 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 86 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 9.5* Good Good 9 2 10 9 *Multi-stemmed tree: 7.4, 11.6. Invasive ivy at base, crown raised, suppressed leader to south Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Page 2 of 5 www.treesolutions.net [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Trees 16135 NE 85th St Redmond, WA 98025 Date of Inventory: 06/15/2015 Table Prepared: 06/16/2015 North East South West DSH (inches) Notes Landmark Tree Drip line Radius (feet) Structural Condition Health Condition Common Name Scientific Name Tree ID 87 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 7.9* Good Fair 9 8 10 2 *Multi-stemmed tree: 4.5, 8.9, 10.4. Central leader - stem girdled by string, northern lead suppressed 88 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 17.5 Good Good 18 11 18 13 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 89 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 21.4 Good Good 18 15 17 12.5 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 90 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 15 Good Good 18 9 10 11 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 91 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16.1 Good Good 16 16 16 10.5 Invasive ivy at base, crown raised 92 Populus trichocarpa Black cottonwood 26.6* Good Good 35 41 35 33 *Multi-stemmed tree: 23.4, 25.7, 30.7. Old pruning wounds 93 Calocedrus decurrens Incense cedar 6.2 Good Good 4 4 4 4 94 Thuja plicata Western redcedar 15.3 Good Good 5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5 Clearance pruning on east side, shear pruning 95 Acer rubrum Red maple 16.3 Good Good 21 Possible girdling roots, limited growing space 96 Acer rubrum Red maple 13 Good Fair 18 Included bark, co-dominant union with narrow angled attachment 97 Pinus nigra Black pine 13.3 Good Good 18.5 Irrigation system near base, large surface roots 98 Pinus nigra Black pine 7.5* Good Fair 15.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 6.8, 8.2. Irrigation system near base, large surface roots, co-dominant union, suppressed canopy 99 Pinus nigra Black pine 10.4 Good Good 13 Irrigation system near base, large surface roots, ball and burlap material present 100 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 15.5 Good Good 18.5 Good structural roots on surface, pruning for building clearance 201 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14 Good Good 14.5 202 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14.8 Good Good 16.5 203 Acer palmatum Japanese maple 5.4* Good Good 12.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 5.3, 5.5. Asymmetrical canopy 204 Acer palmatum Japanese maple 5.9* Good Good 20.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 3.6, 8.2. Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Page 3 of 5 www.treesolutions.net [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Trees 16135 NE 85th St Redmond, WA 98025 Date of Inventory: 06/15/2015 Table Prepared: 06/16/2015 North East South West DSH (inches) Notes Landmark Tree Drip line Radius (feet) Structural Condition Health Condition Common Name Scientific Name Tree ID 205 Prunus sp. Flowering cherry 10.8 Good Good 18 6 20 14 Heavy ivy coverage 206 Prunus sp. Flowering cherry 6.0* Good Good 5 5 20 5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 6, 6.1. Heavy ivy coverage, co- dominant union 207 Prunus sp. Flowering cherry 7.6 Good Good 11 3 6 16.5 Heavy ivy coverage 208 Prunus sp. Flowering cherry 5.7* Good Poor 19.5 26 19.5 8 *Multi-stemmed tree: 3.5, 5, 5, 6, 7.5, 7.5. Heavy ivy coverage, co-dominant union 209 Acer saccharinum Silver maple 6.7 Good Good 6.5 Old pruning wound to west 210 Prunus sp. Flowering cherry 7.5* Fair Fair 11 10 17 11 *Multi-stemmed tree: 6.5, 8.5. Sparse crown 211 Acer saccharinum Silver maple 18.9 Good Good 16 16.5 17.5 Heavy ivy coverage 212 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 7.8 Good Good 8 8 8 8 Fastigiate form, heavy ivy coverage 213 Acer saccharinum Silver maple 14.2 Good Good 11.5 11.5 11.5 12.5 Heavy ivy coverage, overextended limbs 214 Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 8.1 Good Good 9.5 9.5 9.5 9.5 Fastigiate form, heavy ivy coverage 215 Acer saccharinum Silver maple 6.8 Good Good 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 Fastigiate form, heavy ivy coverage, tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen 216 Acer saccharinum Silver maple 8.4 Good Good 9 9 9 9 Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen, asymmetrical canopy 217 Thuja occidentalis Arborvitae 6.0* Good Good 4 4 4 4 *Multi-stemmed tree: 4.6, 7.5. Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen 218 Acer platanoides Norway maple 16.3 Good Good 23.5 20 20 23.5 Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen 219 Prunus sp. Flowering cherry 10.2* Good Fair 12 17 18 13.5 *Multi-stemmed tree: 9.1, 11.3. Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen, major surface roots, root obstruction to north 220 Acer platanoides Norway maple 16.4 Good Good 17 14.5 17 17 Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen, girdling root on north side 221 Acer platanoides Norway maple 19.2 Good Fair 20.5 20.5 20.5 20.5 Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen, limited growing space, possible root obstruction Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Page 4 of 5 www.treesolutions.net [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- Table of Trees 16135 NE 85th St Redmond, WA 98025 Date of Inventory: 06/15/2015 Table Prepared: 06/16/2015 North East South West DSH (inches) Notes Landmark Tree Drip line Radius (feet) Structural Condition Health Condition Common Name Scientific Name Tree ID 222 Acer platanoides Norway maple 14.7 Fair Fair 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 Tag number marked on trunk with red paint pen, girdling roots, root obstruction, sparse crown, top dieback on south side, bacterial flux at co-dominant union A Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 19 Good Good 17 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen B Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 14.4 Good Good 14.5 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen C Acer saccharinum Silver maple 14.2 Good Good 24.5 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen D Acer rubrum Red maple 11.3 Good Fair 11 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen, girdling root, infrastructure obstruction E Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 19.2 Good Good 14 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen, history of crown raising F Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore 14.5 Good Fair 20 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen G Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore maple 12.6 Good Good 18.5 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen H Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 20.5 Good Good 22 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen, history of crown raising I Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas-fir 16.3 Good Good 16.5 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen J Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore maple 15.2 Good Fair 16.5 Letter marked on trunk with red paint pen Additional notes: DSH (Diameter at Standard Height) is measured 4.5 feet above grade. Multi-stem trees are noted, and a single stem equivalent is calculated using the average of all of the stems as per Redmond City Code. Drip line is measured from the outermost portion of the trunk to the outermost extent of the canopy Non-Significant tree Landmark Tree Tree Solutions, Inc. 2940 Westlake Ave. N (Suite #200) Seattle, WA 98109 Page 5 of 5 www.treesolutions.net [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- 209 210 217 204 219 89 90 69 70 205 207 208 206 214 211 212 213 215 216 Hedge containing some signficant trees 54 55 203 201 202 100 96 98 99 97 95 91 94 218 Non-significant trees 93 220 221 222 G H I J F E 74 76 75 73 A B C 71 D 64 72 67 68 66 65 61 63 62 60 59 58 57 56 ---PAGE BREAK--- F E J G H I D 85 87 88 86 84 82 83 81 80 79 78 77 92 89 90 91