Full Text
LEGEND SIGNIFICANT CONIFER TREE SIGNIFICANT DECIDUOUS TREE TREE TO REMAIN TREE TO BE REMOVED SIZE OF TREE AT DBH VIABLE TREE NON-VIABLE TREE NON-SIGNIFICANT TREE LIMIT OF WORK TREE PROTECTION FENCING DRIP LINE. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED 5' BEYOND DRIPLINE OF TREES TO BE RETAINED WHERE APPLICABLE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE #16007 #12215 NOTES NS X 1. REDMOND ZONING CODE 21.72.080 REQUIRES: 1:1 REPLACEMENT FOR SIGNIFICANT TREE (6"-30" DIA.), 3:1 REPLACEMENT FOR LANDMARK TREES (>30" DIA.) 2. MINIMUM SIZES FOR REPLACEMENT TREES SHALL BE: 6' HEIGHT FOR EVERGREEN TREES, 212" CALIPER FOR DECIDUOUS TREES 3. THE ADMINISTRATION MAY CONSIDER SMALLER SIZED REPLACEMENT TREES IF THE APPLICANT CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT SMALLER TREES ARE MORE SUITED TO THE SPECIES, SITE CONDITIONS AND PURPOSE, AND THAT SUCH TREES WILL BE PLANTED IN SUFFICIENT QUANTITIES TO MEET THE INTENT. 4. 84 SIGNIFICANT TREES ARE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A MIX OF CONIFER AND DECIDUOUS TREES ON SITE AS PART OF THE BUILDING'S LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS. 5. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED 5' BEYOND DRIPLINE OF TREES TO BE RETAINED. 6. REFER TO SHEET TP2 FOR THE TREE SUMMARY TABLE 7. TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY TABLE ACCOUNTS FOR TREES ON ENTIRE SITE. 8. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN FOR REPLACEMENT TREES & PLANT SCHEDULE TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY TABLE Proposed Action and Description TREE TYPE Landmark (>30" dbh) Significant Totals Replacement Trees REMOVAL 0 0% 84 11% 84 11% 84 IMPACTED 0 0% 26 4% 26 3% RETAINED 9 100% 640 85% 649 86% TOTAL 9 100% 750 100% 759 100% TREE PROTECTION DETAIL EQ. EQ. ZONE A DIA. = 2X ZONE B DIA. = X ZONE C DIA. = .5X DRIPLINE = X Project Number LLA0049.16 275 5th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 (360) 377-8773 FAX 792-1385 [EMAIL REDACTED] 10901 176TH CIRCLE NE REDMOND, WA 98052 REVISION SCHEDULE ISSUED: Lyon Landscape Architects SHEET: Tree Preservation Plan Tree Summary Table Arborist Report Prepared by: American Forest Management 11415 NE 128th St, Suite 110 Kirkland, WA 98034 [PHONE REDACTED] Inspector: Kelly Wilkinson September 15, 2016 Updated: April 5, 2018 Assisted Living Building Area AL.TP1 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- LEGEND SIGNIFICANT CONIFER TREE SIGNIFICANT DECIDUOUS TREE TREE TO REMAIN TREE TO BE REMOVED SIZE OF TREE AT DBH VIABLE TREE NON-VIABLE TREE NON-SIGNIFICANT TREE LIMIT OF WORK TREE PROTECTION FENCING DRIP LINE. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED 5' BEYOND DRIPLINE OF TREES TO BE RETAINED WHERE APPLICABLE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE #16007 #12215 NS X Project Number LLA0049.16 275 5th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 (360) 377-8773 FAX 792-1385 [EMAIL REDACTED] 10901 176TH CIRCLE NE REDMOND, WA 98052 REVISION SCHEDULE ISSUED: Lyon Landscape Architects SHEET: Tree Preservation Plan Frontage Improvements Arborist Report Prepared by: American Forest Management 11415 NE 128th St, Suite 110 Kirkland, WA 98034 [PHONE REDACTED] Inspector: Kelly Wilkinson September 15, 2016 Updated: April 5, 2018 Street Frontage Sidewalk Improvement Area - South of Entrance AL.TP2 Street Frontage Sidewalk Improvement Area - North of Proposed Building ---PAGE BREAK--- Tree Preservation Plan Project Number LLA0049.16 275 5th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 (360) 377-8773 FAX 792-1385 [EMAIL REDACTED] 10901 176TH CIRCLE NE REDMOND, WA 98052 REVISION SCHEDULE ISSUED: Lyon Landscape Architects SHEET: Arborist Report Prepared by: American Forest Management 11415 NE 128th St, Suite 110 Kirkland, WA 98034 [PHONE REDACTED] Inspector: Kelly Wilkinson September 15, 2016 Updated: April 5, 2018 Tree Summary Table - Assisted Living Building, Emerald Heights Tree Summary Table AL.TP3 retain retain retain retain retain retain retain retain ---PAGE BREAK--- Arborist Report For Emerald Heights - AL Redmond, WA September 15th, 2016 Updated 4-5-2018 ---PAGE BREAK--- American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Description 1 3. Methodology 1 4. Observations/Discussion 1 5. Tree Retention and Removal 3 6. Tree Retention Calculation 3 7. Tree Replacement 4 8. Tree Protection Measures 4 Appendix Site/Tree Photos – pages 5 - 7 Tree Summary Tables - attached Tree Survey Map – attached Tree Protection Plan - attached ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 1 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 1. Introduction American Forest Management was contacted by Moghan Lyon with Lyon Landscape Architects and was asked to compile an ‘Arborist Report’ for a new assisted living building located at Emerald Heights in Redmond. The proposed new construction is at 10901 176th Cir NE, also known as Emerald Heights. Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions, and to provide appropriate recommendations for the protection of retained trees during construction. This report encompasses all the criteria set forth under the City of Redmond’s tree regulations. Date of Field Examination: August 17th and 18th, 2016 September 15th, 2016 2. Description The topography of the subject property is flat. Only trees that will be removed or potentially impacted by construction were included in this report. 126 significant trees were included in this report. None of the trees in the subject area are landmark trees. 13 of these trees are in poor condition and are non-viable. All of the significant trees in the subject area have been identified in the field with a numbered aluminum tag attached to the lower trunk. Tree tag numbers correspond with tree numbers on the attached tree summary table and copy of the site plan. No trees on neighboring properties with drip-lines extending on to the subject area were identified. The subject area borders 176th Ave NE. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape at DBH (diameter at 4 ½’ above ground). The tree heights were measured using a Spiegel Relaskop. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay, which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and/or damage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. Based on these factors a determination of condition and viability is made. A ‘viable’ tree, is “A significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is wind firm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, and is a species that is suitable for its location.” Trees considered ‘non-viable’ are trees that are in poor condition due to disease and/or pests, age related decline, have significant decay issues and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 2 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 The four condition categories are described below: Excellent – free of structural defects, no disease or pest problems, no root issues, excellent structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor, it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good – free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns, minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Fair – minor to moderate structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in near future, no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density, will be wind firm if left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor – major structural defects expected to cause fail in near future, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, not suitable for its location The attached tree map indicates the ‘condition’ of the subject trees found at the site. The attached Tree Summary Table provides specific information on tree sizes and drip-line measurements. 4. Observations The most common species concerns are discussed below. For information on specific trees, see the attached tree table. Red Alder The red alder trees in the subject area are generally semi-mature and in incipient stages of decline. There are multiple dead red alder trees in the subject area. Common defects include leaf dieback and lower trunk decay. Forked trunks and leaning trees were also frequently noted. The red alder trees in the subject area range from fair to poor condition. Viability varies and none of the red alders are considered high value for retention. Big leaf maple The big leaf maple trees in the subject area vary in age and condition. The most common notable defects were co-dominant stems with included bark, abnormally small leaves and leaning trunks. Large limb failures and trunk decay were also observed. The big leaf maple trees range from good to poor condition. Douglas-fir The Douglas-fir trees in the subject area typically have DBH’s around 20”. Some structural issues were observed such as leaning trunks, forked tops and crooks in the trunk. The Douglas-fir trees range from fair to excellent condition. Trunk bleeding, possible caused by cambial ruptures was observed. All are considered viable. Western red cedar The western red cedar trees vary in condition. There are a variety of notable defects. Dead tops, poor form, decay and trunk wounds were observed. The western red cedar trees range from good to poor condition. Most are viable. Western hemlock There are two western hemlock trees in the subject area. One has extensive lower trunk decay. The other has very few live branches. Both trees are in poor condition and are non-viable. ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 3 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 Bitter cherry The bitter cherry trees in the subject area are generally semi-mature to mature and in decline. Leaf dieback and poor taper were issues observed in many trees. The bitter cherry trees in the subject area range from fair to poor condition. Cascara There are three significant cascara trees in the subject area. One has a self-corrected lean. Another has a forked trunk. The cascara trees range from fair to good condition. All three are viable. Velvet ash Velvet ash trees are planted between the parking areas. These trees are all between 6” and 9” DBH. All of the velvet ash trees are in good condition and are viable. 5. Discussion The extent of drip-lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees can be found on the tree summary table at the back of this report. These have also been delineated on a copy of the site survey for trees with a potentially reasonable chance of retention. The information plotted on the attached survey plan may need to be transferred to a final tree retention/protection plan to meet City submittal requirements. The trees that are to be removed shall be shown “X’d” out on the final plan. The Limits of Disturbance (LOD) measurements can also be found on the tree summary table and are shown on the attached Tree Protection Map. These have been delineated on a copy of the site plan. The LOD measurements are based on species, age, condition, drip-line, prior improvements, proposed impacts and the anticipated cumulative impacts to the entire root zone. Tree Protection fencing shall be located beyond the drip-line edge of retained trees per the attached plan, and only moved back to the LOD when work is authorized. There are no major conflicts concerning neighboring trees. Cascara, bitter cherry and red alder are all native hardwood species. All of these species are short lived with average productive lifespans of less than 100 years. These species should be the lowest priority for retention. Crown dieback and abnormally small leaves were observed in some of the big leaf maple trees. The dieback may be associated with Xylella fastidiosa, which is a bacterial disease that is adversely affecting big leaf maple in our region. There are many trees on the property that are in stressed conditions, possibly caused by the unusually hot and dry summers. Using mulch and regularly watering trees may alleviate some of this stress. Water deeply, slowly, and thoroughly in the evening or early in the morning. Watering needs will vary depending on the time of year. Proper use of mulch can reduce water use by 25 to 35% under many conditions. Finished landscaping work within the drip-lines of retained trees shall maintain existing grades and not disturb fine root mass at the ground surface. Finish landscape with beauty bark or new lawn on top of existing grade. Add no more than 2” to 4” of mulch/beauty bark or 2” of composted soil to establish new lawn. Raising the grade more than a few inches will have adverse impacts on fine roots by cutting off oxygen. Remove ivy from all retained trees. At a minimum, tree protection fencing should be place 5’ from the dripline of the retained trees. The attached tree map shows suggestions for placement of the tree protection fencing, see the below section on tree protection measures for more specific guidelines. 6. Tree Retention A small percentage of the significant trees at Emerald Heights are located in the subject area. A total of 126 significant trees were assessed in the subject area. 13 of the significant trees are in poor condition. These 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 4 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 non-viable trees were not included in the tree calculation. 93 healthy, significant trees will be removed the subject area. 7. Tree Replacement Replacements trees may be required. Consult your city planner for tree replacement requirements. All replacement trees are to be planted on site. Replacement trees shall be at a minimum – 2 ½ inch caliper for deciduous species and 6 feet in height for coniferous species. 8. Tree Protection Measures The following guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated space set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. See the Redmond Zoning Code RZC 21.72.070 Tree Protection Measures. • Tree protection barriers shall be initially erected at 5’ outside of the drip-line prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. • Tree protection fencing shall only be moved where necessary to install improvements, but only as close as the Limits of Disturbance, as indicated on the attached plan. • Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. • Excavations within the drip-lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed up to the “Limits of Disturbance”. • To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip-line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. • Areas excavated within the drip-line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated weekly during dry periods. • Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip-lines of retained trees. Plantings within the drip lines shall be limited. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man-caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Kelly Wilkinson [EMAIL REDACTED] ISA Certified Arborist #PN-7673A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 5 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 Photos Tree #16004 – over mature red alder with lower trunk decay West side of subject property ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 6 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 Tree #11174 – western hemlock with severe lower trunk decay Tree #12200 – big leaf maple with lower trunk decay ---PAGE BREAK--- Emerald Heights AL - Arborist Report Page 7 American Forest Management, Inc. 9/15/2016 Updated 4-5-18 Tree #12204 – big leaf maple with lower trunk decay and poor form Tree #16021 – Indian bean tree in planter ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 Tree Summary Table American Forest Management, Inc For: Emerald Heights - AL Date: 9/15/2016, Udpated 4-5-18 Redmond, WA Inspector Wilkinson Native/ Tree/ Planted/ DBH Height Tag # Species Volunteer (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W 9638 black cottonwood native 17 99 10 / 10 15 / 10 fair viable retain 9639 Douglas-fir native 13 60 13 / 6 14 / 6 10 / 6 good viable retain 9640 Douglas-fir native 13 66 10 / 6 good viable retain 9641 Douglas-fir native 14 59 good viable retain 9655 Douglas-fir native 14 61 11 / 8 12 / 8 15 / 8 good viable retain 9656 Douglas-fir native 19 66 17 / 10 12 / 10 13 / 5 good viable retain 11174 western hemlock native 17 47 poor non-viable lower trunk decay remove 11953 big leaf maple native 9 61 6 / 5 12 / 5 3 / 5 fair viable retain 11958 Douglas-fir native 26 105 10 / 12 12 / 12 8 / 12 good viable some trunk bleeding retain 11960 big leaf maple native 12 65 12 / 6 5 / 6 18 / 6 fair viable co-dominant stems fork at excessive, included bark retain 11963 bitter cherry native 8, 7 58 6 11 12 poor non-viable dieback remove 11967 Douglas-fir native 23 95 12 / 10 11 / 10 9 / 10 good viable retain 11976 cascara native 11 48 19 13 4 7 good viable remove 11999 western hemlock native 14 53 poor non-viable very few live branches, near dead remove 12000 bitter cherry native 7 42 fair viable dieback remove 12001 bitter cherry native 6 50 poor non-viable some dieback, adjacent to trail remove 12002 Douglas-fir native 23 90 14 13 8 good viable remove 12003 red alder native 9 64 fair viable leans West remove 12004 red alder native 8 68 fair viable remove 12005 big leaf maple native 6 56 fair viable remove 12006 red alder native 5 38 fair viable remove 12007 Douglas-fir native 24 83 10 12 good viable large epicormic branches remove 12008 bitter cherry native 6 53 fair viable remove 12018 big leaf maple native 16 79 good viable remove 12019 Douglas-fir native 20 95 excellent viable remove Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 Tree Summary Table American Forest Management, Inc For: Emerald Heights - AL Date: 9/15/2016, Udpated 4-5-18 Redmond, WA Inspector Wilkinson Native/ Tree/ Planted/ DBH Height Tag # Species Volunteer (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) 12020 Douglas-fir native 28 124 excellent viable remove 12021 Douglas-fir native 22 108 excellent viable remove 12024 red alder native 8 16 11 4 13 fair viable Some limb dieback, trunk is sound remove 12029 big leaf maple native 7, 10, 17 83 10 12 19 good viable remove 12030 Douglas-fir native 23 95 21 10 18 14 fair viable Trunk bleeding on south side remove 12031 Douglas-fir native 21 90 10 11 9 good viable remove 12032 bitter cherry native 7 57 fair viable remove 12033 big leaf maple native 7, 11 67 good viable remove 12034 bitter cherry native 7 35 poor non-viable dieback remove 12036 Douglas-fir native 24 85 10 17 14 12 good viable Forked top, u shaped attachment remove 12037 big leaf maple native 5, 6, 6, 2 55 13 7 7 4 fair viable remove 12038 Douglas-fir native 20 91 12 10 16 15 good viable Lean west, some soil plate lifting, two crooks in trunk remove 12039 big leaf maple native 14, 9 58 13 3 6 16 fair viable g some included bark remove 12040 Douglas-fir native 23 87 10 8 12 7 good viable remove 12047 western red cedar native 7, 4, 4 34 9 13 12 12 good viable remove 12087 western red cedar native 19 49 10 / 10 11 / 10 10 / 10 fair viable forked trunk retain 12175 Port Orford cedar native 19 68 11 12 10 9 good viable remove 12176 big leaf maple native 6, 6, 7 89 12 9 11 8 fair viable remove 12177 big leaf maple native 7 65 4 14 11 3 fair viable Adjacent to trail, self corrected lean remove 12178 cascara native 6, 3, 2, 2 32 8 6 9 5 fair viable self corrected lean remove 12190 big leaf maple native 7 52 6 5 20 fair viable remove 12191 red alder native 7 56 fair viable remove 12192 bitter cherry native 7 50 fair viable remove 12193 bitter cherry native 6 50 fair viable remove 12194 big leaf maple native 6 45 poor non-viable abnormally small leaves remove 12196 big leaf maple native 10, 4 55 fair viable remove ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 Tree Summary Table American Forest Management, Inc For: Emerald Heights - AL Date: 9/15/2016, Udpated 4-5-18 Redmond, WA Inspector Wilkinson Native/ Tree/ Planted/ DBH Height Tag # Species Volunteer (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) 12198 big leaf maple native 8, 6 52 fair viable forks at base, small leaves remove 12199 big leaf maple native 6 50 fair viable remove 12200 big leaf maple native 3, 9, 10, 6 55 fair viable lower trunk decay remove 12201 big leaf maple native 6 50 fair viable abnormally small leaves remove 12202 big leaf maple native 9, 9 70 fair viable remove 12204 big leaf maple native 12, 7, 7 65 fair viable lower trunk decay remove 12205 big leaf maple native 6 51 fair viable remove 12212 big leaf maple native 3, 2 65 fair viable poor taper remove 12213 big leaf maple native 7 68 fair viable poor taper remove 12214 Douglas-fir native 22 85 10 8 6 good viable self-corrected lean E, dead top remove 12215 bitter cherry native 6 50 poor non-viable poor taper, suppressed by #12214 remove 12218 big leaf maple native 7, 4, 4 51 fair viable remove 12220 bitter cherry native 8 58 4 5 7 5 fair viable remove 12221 big leaf maple native 6 56 5 5 8 4 fair viable remove 12222 big leaf maple native 7 60 3 8 4 11 fair viable Abnormally small leaves remove 12223 bitter cherry native 8 62 4 6 3 6 fair viable Some dieback remove 12224 unknown deciduous 6 non-viable Dead remove 12225 Douglas-fir native 20 83 14 10 15 6 good viable Crook in lower trunk remove 12226 western red cedar native 14 50 13 11 9 12 good viable remove 12227 Douglas-fir native 24 91 6 15 8 12 good viable remove 12232 big leaf maple native 10 54 12 9 9 11 good viable remove 12233 big leaf maple native 26 98 14 16 16 good viable remove 12234 big leaf maple native 8, 4 68 fair viable remove 12238 Douglas-fir native 15 68 11 13 7 10 fair viable Poor form, s shaped trunk remove 12241 western red cedar native 7 36 4 12 6 13 fair viable Wound on N side of trunk remove 12243 western red cedar native 19 49 6 11 13 12 fair viable Minor decay remove 12245 western red cedar native 12 46 6 9 12 8 fair viable Some dieback remove 12247 western red cedar native 11 44 13 9 12 5 fair viable remove 12250 western red cedar native 16 49 16 7 16 6 fair viable Poor form remove 12252 western red cedar native 11 42 9 10 3 14 fair viable remove ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Tree Summary Table American Forest Management, Inc For: Emerald Heights - AL Date: 9/15/2016, Udpated 4-5-18 Redmond, WA Inspector Wilkinson Native/ Tree/ Planted/ DBH Height Tag # Species Volunteer (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) 12254 big leaf maple native 9 51 13 10 6 13 good viable Trunk forks 7' from ground remove 12256 Douglas-fir native 7 51 7 6 5 6 good viable remove 12257 Douglas-fir native 19 72 15 12 16 12 good viable Crook in trunk remove 12259 big leaf maple native 8 57 fair viable remove 12260 western red cedar native 15, 14 48 8 11 13 12 good viable Forks at base remove 12261 big leaf maple native 9 65 fair viable remove 12268 Douglas-fir native 8 55 4 8 7 7 good viable remove 12269 big leaf maple native 7 55 fair viable remove 12270 western red cedar native 11 47 13 8 12 15 good viable remove 12271 big leaf maple native 7 56 fair viable remove 12279 western red cedar native 15 45 10 12 10 8 good viable remove 12281 red alder native 7 53 16 8 5 9 fair viable ok form remove 12283 red alder native 6 55 5 9 6 4 fair viable ok form remove 12293 red alder native 9 53 6 4 3 8 poor non-viable dieback, leans SW remove 12295 Douglas-fir native 12 64 12 5 6 7 fair viable leans NE, towards trail remove 12297 red alder native 8 dead remove 12300 red alder native 6 poor non-viable some dieback remove 12301 red alder native 8 dead remove 12305 big leaf maple native 6, 5 51 5 4 11 fair viable remove 12308 big leaf maple native 8, 6, 6, 8 45 5 12 fair viable dead stems remove 12309 western red cedar native 13 43 poor non-viable top 80% is dead, possibly drought remove 12311 big leaf maple native 7 38 fair viable leans NW, forks 6' from the ground, leans remove 12313 western red cedar native 7 30 11 10 6 fair viable top 10% is dead remove 12318 western red cedar native 8 34 9 / 5 7 / 5 8 / 5 good viable retain 12348 velvet ash planted 8 39 9 16 13 8 good viable remove 12382 velvet ash native 9 41 14 11 3 12 good viable remove 16001 big leaf maple native 7 51 10 7 3 15 good viable Slight lean W remove 16002 big leaf maple native 4, 8 54 5 8 7 14 good viable failure, good decay compartmentalization remove ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 Tree Summary Table American Forest Management, Inc For: Emerald Heights - AL Date: 9/15/2016, Udpated 4-5-18 Redmond, WA Inspector Wilkinson Native/ Tree/ Planted/ DBH Height Tag # Species Volunteer (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line/Limits of Disturbance (feet) 16003 velvet ash planted 6 34 8 4 6 6 good viable remove 16004 red alder native 9 61 poor non-viable decay, overmature remove 16005 red alder native 12, 8 64 10 11 7 17 fair viable Forks at base remove 16006 big leaf maple native 11 52 8 8 10 12 good viable Good form remove 16007 velvet ash planted 7 38 12 9 6 7 good viable remove 16008 velvet ash planted 6 34 9 6 7 7 good viable remove 16009 cascara native 5, 6 34 7 11 3 8 fair viable Forks 2' from ground remove 16010 velvet ash planted 6 38 7 / 4 10 / 4 14 / 4 good viable retain 16011 western red cedar native 7 33 11 / 5 10 / 5 12 / 5 good viable retain 16012 velvet ash planted 6 52 poor non-viable dieback remove 16013 big leaf maple native 6 50 fair viable remove 16014 bitter cherry native 7 50 fair viable remove 16015 Douglas-fir native 6 33 fair viable remove 16016 Douglas-fir native 8 58 10 / 4 7 / 4 11 / 4 good viable retain 16017 black cottonwood native 18 98 18 / 10 10 / 10 good viable retain 16018 velvet ash planted 7 29 5 / 3 6 / 3 good viable retain 16019 velvet ash planted 9 48 12 / 6 14 / 6 9 / 4 13 / 6 good viable retain 16020 velvet ash native 10 48 20 / 5 19 / 5 15 / 5 good viable retain 16021 Indian bean tree planted 12 41 15 / 5 13 / 5 12 / 5 15 / 5 good viable retain ---PAGE BREAK--- LEGEND SIGNIFICANT CONIFER TREE SIGNIFICANT / LANDMARK DECIDUOUS TREE TREE TO REMAIN TREE TO BE REMOVED SIZE OF TREE AT DBH VIABLE TREE NON-VIABLE TREE NON-SIGNIFICANT TREE LIMIT OF WORK TREE PROTECTION FENCING DRIP LINE. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED 5' BEYOND DRIPLINE OF TREES TO BE RETAINED WHERE APPLICABLE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE #16007 #12215 NS X TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY TABLE Proposed Action and Description TREE TYPE Landmark (>30" dbh) Significant Totals Replacement Trees Req'd REMOVAL 1 11% 95 13% 96 13% 98 IMPACTED 0 0% 10 1% 10 1% RETAINED 8 89% 645 86% 653 86% TOTAL 9 100% 750 100% 759 100% THE TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY TABLE ABOVE DIFFERS FROM THE SEPA TREE SUMMARY TABLE 4.C ON PAGE 11 OF THE SEPA CHECKLIST FORM. THE CITY OF REDMOND SEPARATES IMPACTED TREES FROM RETAINED TREES AS SHOWN ABOVE, WHEREAS THE SEPA TREE SUMMARY TABLE INCLUDES IMPACTED TREES WITH THE NUMBER OF RETAINED TREES. THIS IS WHY THERE IS A DISCREPANCY IN THE TREE COUNT NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF THE TWO TABLES. * THE TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY TABLE ONLY INCLUDES VIABLE TREES. 67 REPLACEMENT TREES BEING PROPOSED TOWARDS CITY OF REDMOND CODE RZC 21.72.080. REMAINING 31 REPLACEMENT TREES WILL BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE FEE-IN-LIEU OF PROGRAM OR SIMILAR. TREE PROTECTION DETAIL EQ. EQ. ZONE A DIA. = 2X ZONE B DIA. = X ZONE C DIA. = .5X DRIPLINE = X NOTES 1. REDMOND ZONING CODE 21.72.080 REQUIRES: 1:1 REPLACEMENT FOR SIGNIFICANT TREE (6"-30" DIA.), 3:1 REPLACEMENT FOR LANDMARK TREES (>30" DIA.) 2. MINIMUM SIZES FOR REPLACEMENT TREES SHALL BE: 6' HEIGHT FOR EVERGREEN TREES, 212" CALIPER FOR DECIDUOUS TREES 3. THE ADMINISTRATION MAY CONSIDER SMALLER SIZED REPLACEMENT TREES IF THE APPLICANT CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT SMALLER TREES ARE MORE SUITED TO THE SPECIES, SITE CONDITIONS AND PURPOSE, AND THAT SUCH TREES WILL BE PLANTED IN SUFFICIENT QUANTITIES TO MEET THE INTENT. 4. 95 SIGNIFICANT TREES AND 1 LANDMARK TREE ARE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A MIX OF CONIFER AND DECIDUOUS TREES ON SITE AS PART OF THE BUILDING'S LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS. 5. TREE PROTECTION MEASURES TO BE MAINTAINED 5' BEYOND DRIPLINE OF TREES TO BE RETAINED. 6. REFER TO SHEET TP2 FOR THE TREE SUMMARY TABLE 7. TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY TABLE ACCOUNTS FOR TREES ON ENTIRE SITE. 8. REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN FOR REPLACEMENT TREES & PLANT SCHEDULE Project Number LLA0049.16 275 5th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 (360) 377-8773 FAX 792-1385 [EMAIL REDACTED] 10901 176TH CIRCLE NE REDMOND, WA 98052 REVISION SCHEDULE ISSUED: Lyon Landscape Architects SHEET: Tree Preservation Plan Arborist Report Prepared by: American Forest Management 11415 NE 128th St, Suite 110 Kirkland, WA 98034 [PHONE REDACTED] Inspector: Kelly Wilkinson June 13, 2017 Updated Report: January 3, 2018 Courtyard - Independent Living Building IL.TP1 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Tree Preservation Plan Project Number LLA0049.16 275 5th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 (360) 377-8773 FAX 792-1385 [EMAIL REDACTED] 10901 176TH CIRCLE NE REDMOND, WA 98052 REVISION SCHEDULE ISSUED: Lyon Landscape Architects SHEET: Arborist Report Prepared by: American Forest Management 11415 NE 128th St, Suite 110 Kirkland, WA 98034 [PHONE REDACTED] Inspector: Kelly Wilkinson Report: June 13, 2017 Updated Report: January 3, 2018 Tree Summary Table - Courtyard - Independent Living Building, Emerald Heights Tree Summary Table IL.TP2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 11415 NE 128th St., Suite 110, Kirkland, WA 98034 I Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] I Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] americanforestmanagement.com Emerald Heights - IL Redmond, WA Arborist Report June 26th, 2017 Revised January 3nd, 2018 ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 1 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Description 2 3. Methodology 2 4. Observations 3 5. Discussion 4 6. Tree Protection Measures 5 7. Tree Retention 6 8. Tree Replacement 6 Appendix Site/Tree Photos – pages 7 - 9 Tree Summary Table - attached Tree Condition Map - attached ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 2 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. 1. Introduction American Forest Management was contacted by Moghan Lyon with Lyon Landscape Architects and was asked to compile an ‘Arborist Report’ for a new independent living building located at Emerald Heights in Redmond Our assignment is to prepare a written report on the current condition of significant trees on the subject parcels and any right-of-way or neighboring trees that may be impacted by future re-development of the property. Date of Field Examination: June 6th and 13th, 2017 2. Description The topography of the subject property is flat. Only trees that will be removed or potentially impacted by construction were included in this report. 126 significant trees (trees with a diameter at breast height, 4 ½’ above ground > were included in this report. Three of the trees in the subject area are landmark trees. 11 of these trees are in poor condition and are non-viable. All of the significant trees in the subject area have been identified in the field with a numbered aluminum tag attached to the lower trunk. Tree tag numbers correspond with tree numbers on the attached tree summary table and copy of the site plan. No trees on neighboring properties with drip-lines extending on to the subject area were identified. The subject area borders 176th Ave NE. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was visited. Tree diameters were measured by tape. The tree heights were measured using a Spiegel Relaskop. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of many factors: • The crown of the tree is examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the crown (foliage, buds and branches) for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown is estimated for coniferous species only and scored appropriately. • The bole or main stem of the tree is inspected for decay, which includes cavities, wounds, fruiting bodies of decay (conks or mushrooms), seams, insects, bleeding, callus development, broken or dead tops, structural defects and unnatural leans. Structural defects include crooks, forks with V-shaped crotches, multiple attachments, and excessive sweep. • The root collar and roots are inspected for the presence of decay, insects and/or damage, as well as if they have been injured, undermined or exposed, or original grade has been altered. ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 3 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Based on these factors a determination of condition is made. The four condition categories are described below based on the species traits assessed: Excellent – free of structural defects, no disease or pest problems, no root issues, excellent structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, above average vigor, it will be wind firm if isolated, suitable for its location Good – free of significant structural defects, no disease concerns, minor pest issues, no significant root issues, good structure/form with uniform crown or canopy, foliage of normal color and density, average or normal vigor, will be wind firm if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, suitable for its location Fair – minor structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in near future, no disease concerns, moderate pest issues, no significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, average or normal vigor, foliage of normal color, moderate foliage density, will be wind firm if left as part of a grouping or grove of trees, cannot be isolated, suitable for its location Poor – major structural defects expected to fail in near future, disease or significant pest concerns, decline due to old age, significant root issues, asymmetric or unbalanced crown or canopy, sparse or abnormally small foliage, poor vigor, not suitable for its location A ‘viable’ tree is a significant tree that a qualified professional has determined to be in good health, with a low risk of failure due to structural defects, is wind firm if isolated or remains as part of a grove, and is a species that is suitable for its location. Trees considered ‘non-viable’ are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, age related decline, have significant decay issues and/or cumulative structural defects, which exacerbate failure potential. The attached tree map indicates the ‘condition’ of the subject trees found at the site. 4. Observations General species observations are below. For information on specific trees, see the attached tree table. Douglas fir Douglas fir trees range in age and condition. The largest Douglas fir in the study area has a DBH of 32". The most common defects were structural. Leaning trunks and forked tops were observed in multiple trees. The Douglas fir trees range from fair to good condition. All are viable. Western red cedar The Western red cedars range in age and viability. Dead tops and visible trunk decay were common. There are dead Western red cedar trees on the property. Co-dominant stems with included bark at the point of attachment were observed. The Western red cedar trees range in condition from poor to good. ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 4 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Big leaf maple Big leaf maple trees are dispersed throughout the subject area. Many have forked trunks and widespread crowns both attributes are typical of the species. Some have large dead stems in the crown. The big leaf maple trees in the subject area range in condition from fair to good and are all viable. Red alder The red alder trees in the subject area are generally semi-mature and in incipient stages of decline. Common defects include leaf dieback and lower trunk decay. Many have leaning trunks and poor trunk taper. The red alder trees in the subject area range from fair to poor condition. Viability varies and none of the red alders are considered high value for retention. River birch The river birch trees are located near the parking structure and vary in viability. Thin crowns and dead tops were commonly observed. The birch trees range in condition from fair to poor. Bitter cherry The bitter cherry trees in the subject area are generally semi-mature to mature and in decline. Leaf dieback and poor taper were issues observed in many trees. The bitter cherry trees in the subject area range from fair to poor condition. 5. Discussion The extent of drip-lines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees can be found on the tree summary table at the back of this report. These have also been delineated on the final tree retention/protection plan. The Limits of Disturbance (LOD) measurements can also be found on the tree summary table and are shown on the final tree retention/protection plan. The LOD measurements are based on species, age, condition, drip-line, prior improvements, proposed impacts and the anticipated cumulative impacts to the entire root zone. No high-risk tree conditions were observed at the site. No conditions were identified that warrant any remedial actions to reduce risks at this time. All subject trees would be rated as low to moderate risks under an ISA Level II Basic Assessment. The highest priority trees for retention are the native big leaf maple, western red cedar and Douglas fir trees on the south side of the property. These trees are healthy and typically far from the proposed building. Douglas fir, Western red cedar and big leaf maple are a long lived, native species. If adequately protected these trees could have productive lifespans that positively benefit the site for another hundred years or more. Cascara, bitter cherry and red alder are all native hardwood species. All of these species are short lived with average productive lifespans of less than 100 years. These species should be the lowest priority for retention. ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 5 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. The Western red cedar trees have the most concerning issues. There are multiple dead and declining Western red cedar trees in the subject area. Water stress, caused by the unusually hot and dry summers is suspected to be one of the causes. Western red cedars need sufficient water. The Western red cedars that have died were young and likely suppressed as well. Finished landscaping work within the drip-lines of retained trees shall maintain existing grades and not disturb fine root mass at the ground surface. Finish landscape with beauty bark or new lawn on top of existing grade. Add no more than 2” to 4” of mulch/beauty bark or 2” of composted soil to establish new lawn. Raising the grade more than a few inches will have adverse impacts on fine roots by cutting off oxygen. 6. Tree Protection Measures The following guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated space set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. See the Redmond Zoning Code RZC 21.72.070 Tree Protection Measures. Tree protection barriers shall be initially erected at 5’ outside of the drip-line prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. Tree protection fencing shall only be moved where necessary to install improvements, but only as close as the Limits of Disturbance, as indicated on the attached plan. Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. Excavations within the drip-lines shall be monitored by a qualified tree professional so necessary precautions can be taken to decrease impacts to tree parts. A qualified tree professional shall monitor excavations when work is required and allowed up to the “Limits of Disturbance”. To establish sub grade for foundations, curbs and pavement sections near the trees, soil should be removed parallel to the roots and not at 90 degree angles to avoid breaking and tearing roots that lead back to the trunk within the drip-line. Any roots damaged during these excavations should be exposed to sound tissue and cut cleanly with a saw. Cutting tools should be sterilized with alcohol. Areas excavated within the drip-line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated weekly during dry periods. Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip-lines of retained trees. Plantings within the drip lines shall be limited. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones. 7. Tree Retention A small percentage of the significant trees at Emerald Heights are located in the subject area. A total of 126 significant trees were assessed in the subject area. 11 of the significant trees are in poor condition. These 11 non-viable trees were not included in the tree calculation. 105 healthy, significant trees will be removed the subject area. One of these significant trees is a landmark tree. ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 6 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. 8. Tree Replacement Replacements trees may be required. Consult your city planner for tree replacement requirements. All replacement trees are to be planted on site. Replacement trees shall be at a minimum – 2 ½ inch caliper for deciduous species and 6 feet in height for coniferous species. There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future man-caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time, deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions, which are not now visible which, could cause tree failure. This report or the verbal comments made at the site in no way warrant the structural stability or long term condition of any tree, but represent my opinion based on the observations made. Nearly all trees in any condition standing within reach of improvements or human use areas represent hazards that could lead to damage or injury. Please call if you have any questions or if we can be of further assistance. Sincerely, Kelly Wilkinson [EMAIL REDACTED] ISA Certified Arborist #PN-7673A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 7 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Photos Tree #60 – bitter cherry with a forked trunk attachment. This tree has severe dieback and is in poor condition Tree #11698 – Western red cedar tree with a severe self-corrected lean ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 8 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Tree #11725 – lodgepole pine with a severe self-corrected lean. This tree has very few live branches, only 20% of the crown is alive Tree #7336 – Western red cedar with visible trunk decay ---PAGE BREAK--- January 3rd, 2018 Emerald Heights IL Building - Redmond Page 9 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Tree #11748 – Western red cedar with a forked trunk and included bark at the point of attachment ---PAGE BREAK--- For: Date: 1/3/2018 Inspector: Wilkinson Tree/ DBH Height Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W 59 Western red cedar 6 33 14 / 8 3 / 8 11 / 8 8 / 8 fair viable Asymmetrical crown remove 60 bitter cherry 5, 6 43 poor non-viable Forks at decay at attachment, severe dieback remove 61 Douglas fir 19 66 9 16 14 9 good viable remove 62 Western red cedar 8 31 12 / 9 10 / 9 10 / 9 11 / 9 good viable remove 63 Western red cedar 7 28 6 / 8 8 / 8 8 / 8 7 / 8 good viable remove 64 red alder 6 29 17 8 8 7 fair viable Leans North remove 65 Douglas fir 6 36 4 / 7 9 / 7 8 / 7 8 / 7 good viable remove 66 red alder 6 36 18 / 7 3 / 7 7 / 7 11 / 7 fair viable Thin crown remove 67 red alder 12, 4, 3 34 poor non-viable Severe decay remove 68 Douglas fir 6 36 7 10 9 9 good viable remove 69 Douglas fir 10 51 18 3 12 15 fair viable remove 70 big leaf maple 8 46 1 / 7 16 / 7 10 / 7 14 / 7 good viable remove 71 red alder 6 47 16 0 8 10 fair viable leans north remove 72 Oregon ash 6 42 14 5 0 16 fair viable remove 73 Oregon ash 6 38 17 3 12 8 fair viable remove 75 Western red cedar 10 35 12 20 16 17 good viable remove 76 Western red cedar 6 32 5 2 6 6 fair viable remove 77 Western red cedar 7 30 5 2 3 14 fair viable remove 78 big leaf maple 12 48 8 / 8 9 / 8 19 / 8 0 / 8 fair viable impacted 7094 Douglas fir 16 65 18 12 17 17 good viable remove 7096 Douglas fir 13 67 20 8 13 7 good viable remove 7100 Douglas fir 14 41 19 10 16 17 good viable remove 7332 big leaf maple 56 108 26 20 18 29 fair viable Five codominant stems, large dead branches, landmark tree remove 7333 Douglas fir 28 129 12 12 7 10 good viable remove 7334 Douglas fir 21 122 8 9 8 7 good viable remove 7335 big leaf maple 19 73 17 24 18 18 good viable Dead stems, largest has a DBH 6" remove 7336 Western red cedar 16 50 16 14 14 15 fair viable Decay pockets, full crown remove Drip-Line / Limits of Disturbance (feet) American Forest Management, Inc Tree Summary Table City of Redmond Emerald Heights Building IL 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- For: Date: 1/3/2018 Inspector: Wilkinson Tree/ DBH Height Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line / Limits of Disturbance (feet) American Forest Management, Inc Tree Summary Table City of Redmond Emerald Heights Building IL 7337 Western red cedar 15 44 poor non-viable Visible pockets of decay in lower trunk, dead top remove 7338 Douglas fir 28 15 17 14 12 good viable remove 7339 big leaf maple 13 74 14 / 8 18 / 8 8 / 8 16 / 8 good viable remove 7340 big leaf maple 13 59 22 / 8 20 / 8 18 / 8 3 / 8 good viable remove 7341 Douglas fir 18 94 15 13 8 15 fair viable Flat bark remove 7537 river birch 9 53 poor non-viable 20% live crown ratio remove 7552 big leaf maple 13 57 15 13 13 16 good viable remove 7553 Douglas fir 25 111 17 12 14 12 fair viable Large wound on south side remove 7563 Douglas fir 13 80 16 9 12 11 good viable remove 7564 Douglas fir 13 64 9 12 14 16 good viable remove 7565 Douglas fir 18 79 13 11 13 14 good viable remove 7570 bitter cherry 10 53 15 3 12 12 fair viable Self corrected lean remove 7571 Western red cedar 9 33 11 6 8 9 good viable remove 7581 London plane 7 29 15 8 13 12 good viable remove 7587 Western red cedar 17 55 13 3 14 8 fair viable Codominant stems, significant included bark, trunks twist remove 7596 London plane 7 33 8 12 17 10 good viable remove 7607 London plane 8 39 12 10 8 11 good viable remove 7620 river birch 8 52 16 6 12 3 fair viable top dieback remove 7622 Western red cedar 11 55 19 5 7 10 good viable remove 7623 Douglas fir 17 77 11 16 13 12 good viable remove 7626 red alder 10, 8 35 12 8 7 8 fair viable forks at base remove 7628 red alder 8 51 2 10 6 2 fair viable remove 7629 river birch 8 65 12 6 5 5 fair viable remove 7629 river birch 9 65 poor non-viable top 20% is dead, in decline remove 7630 red alder 8 70 3 6 7 7 fair viable remove 7633 red alder 8 55 10 15 12 9 fair viable remove 7634 red alder 13 52 poor non-viable Severe decay, 10% LCR remove 7638 Douglas fir 10 45 14 11 15 12 good viable remove 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- For: Date: 1/3/2018 Inspector: Wilkinson Tree/ DBH Height Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line / Limits of Disturbance (feet) American Forest Management, Inc Tree Summary Table City of Redmond Emerald Heights Building IL 7650 Douglas fir 28 98 10 10 11 9 good viable remove 7653 Western red cedar 13 45 9 / 9 8 / 9 10 / 9 12 / 9 good viable remove 11196 Western red cedar 25 65 18 15 15 12 good viable remove 11603 Douglas fir 13 40 20 11 15 18 good viable remove 11604 Western red cedar 8, 9 35 poor non-viable Decay, leans S remove 11605 Western red cedar 22 85 19 17 10 14 good viable remove 11606 Douglas fir 22 123 10 14 10 12 good viable remove 11607 Western red cedar 12 39 2 16 19 8 fair viable remove 11608 Western red cedar 10 12 4 2 11 fair viable Thin crown remove 11609 Western red cedar 10 41 2 14 6 10 fair viable remove 11610 Western red cedar 15 45 8 7 6 15 fair viable remove 11614 Western red cedar 10 53 7 8 5 12 fair viable remove 11615 Western red cedar 13 68 4 11 6 8 fair viable remove 11616 Western red cedar 14 32 poor non-viable In severe decline, dead top remove 11617 Western red cedar 12 50 6 10 13 4 fair viable Thin crown remove 11618 Western red cedar 18 65 12 16 15 4 good viable remove 11619 Douglas fir 19 108 10 / 10 14 / 10 14 / 10 16 / 10 good viable remove 11620 big leaf maple 9 75 9 / 7 17 / 7 15 / 7 6 / 7 fair viable remove 11621 Douglas fir 19 18 15 12 16 fair viable Self corrected lean S remove 11621 Douglas fir 20 85 7 19 11 14 fair viable Self corrected lean S remove 11653 London plane 12 36 12 16 15 7 fair viable remove 11698 Western red cedar 16 54 9 / 9 8 / 9 10 / 9 13 / 9 good viable Self corrected lean remove 11699 Western red cedar 16 59 7 / 9 16 / 9 7 / 9 12 / 9 good viable Self corrected lean remove 11700 Western red cedar 7 43 10 / 6 6 / 6 9 / 6 9 / 6 good viable remove 11701 Western red cedar 17 70 3 / 10 16 / 10 4 / 10 6 / 10 good viable remove 11702 Western red cedar 11 61 3 / 7 16 / 7 3 / 7 8 / 7 good viable remove 11703 Western red cedar 7 57 5 / 6 7 / 6 7 / 6 3 / 6 good viable remove 11704 Western red cedar 15 65 15 5 8 8 good viable remove 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- For: Date: 1/3/2018 Inspector: Wilkinson Tree/ DBH Height Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line / Limits of Disturbance (feet) American Forest Management, Inc Tree Summary Table City of Redmond Emerald Heights Building IL 11705 Western red cedar 22 78 13 / 10 9 / 14 12 / 14 8 / 14 good viable remove 11706 Western red cedar 23 71 4 / 15 19 / 15 7 / 15 8 / 15 good viable remove 11707 bitter cherry 7,4 60 4 / 6 9 / 6 0 / 6 7 / 6 fair viable Smaller stem is dead remove 11709 bitter cherry 10 68 3 / 7 9 / 7 5 / 7 7 / 7 fair viable remove 11710 Douglas fir 14 76 12 9 13 11 good viable remove 11711 red alder 7 55 14 / 6 6 / 6 8 / 6 9 / 6 fair viable remove 11712 bitter cherry 12 60 4 / 7 15 / 7 11 / 7 5 / 7 fair viable remove 11714 bitter cherry 10 62 16 / 6 8 / 6 8 / 6 12 / 6 fair viable remove 11716 Douglas fir 14 66 10 / 8 15 / 8 14 / 8 12 / 8 good viable remove 11717 red alder 17 55 poor non-viable Severe decay, growing around fence remove 11719 Douglas fir 26 120 10 / 13 13 / 13 12 / 13 8 / 13 good viable remove 11725 Lodgepole pine 8 28 poor non-viable Severe self corrected lean, 20% LCR remove 11726 Douglas fir 9 52 13 8 12 6 good viable remove 11727 red alder 10 66 18 12 10 7 fair viable remove 11736 river birch 8 70 10 0 13 7 fair viable forked trunk, top dieback remove 11737 big leaf maple 18, 8, 3 81 15 / 15 20 / 15 17 / 15 21 / 15 good viable Large root cut for trail, full crown, good vigor remove 11738 Douglas fir 27 115 8 / 12 16 / 15 6 / 15 14 / 15 fair viable Leans N remove 11739 Western red cedar 17 64 10 12 12 15 good viable remove 11741 Western red cedar 11 30 3 17 7 14 fair viable Keep as grouping with 11742, crooked top remove 11742 Western red cedar 13 38 15 8 8 14 fair viable Forks at 15' remove 11743 big leaf maple 26 96 13 / 15 14 / 15 13 / 15 17 / 15 good viable Forked trunk, full crown, good structure remove 11746 Western red cedar 21 85 17 / 12 15 / 12 12 / 12 19 / 12 good viable impacted 11747 Douglas fir 32 130 12 / 15 12 / 15 8 / 15 12 / 15 good viable impacted 11748 Western red cedar 28 90 15 / 14 16 / 14 15 / 14 18 / 14 fair viable Trunk forks at 10' impacted 11750 Douglas fir 22 100 12 / 11 8 / 11 12 / 11 11 / 11 good viable remove 11751 Western red cedar 7 36 7 / 6 7 / 6 10 / 6 6 / 6 good viable remove 11752 Western red cedar 18 70 12 / 8 8 / 10 15 / 10 13 / 10 good viable remove 11753 red alder 7 55 16 0 7 4 fair viable Leans north remove 11754 red alder 6, 2 45 15 0 7 3 fair viable Leans north remove 11771 Lodgepole pine 8 27 6 / 6 8 / 6 7 / 6 5 / 6 fair viable Leans N remove 11772 Douglas fir 29 98 7 / 16 19 / 16 14 / 16 15 / 16 good viable remove 11776 Western red cedar 6 22 9 / 6 9 / 6 8 / 6 10 / 6 good viable remove 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- For: Date: 1/3/2018 Inspector: Wilkinson Tree/ DBH Height Tag # Species (inches) (feet) Condition Viability Comments Proposal N S E W Drip-Line / Limits of Disturbance (feet) American Forest Management, Inc Tree Summary Table City of Redmond Emerald Heights Building IL 11777 Cascara 8 42 4 / 7 12 / 7 9 / 7 7 / 7 fair viable impacted 11781 Western red cedar 8 24 9 / 7 12 / 7 12 / 7 10 / 7 good viable remove 11783 Western red cedar 8 21 10 / 7 11 / 7 11 / 7 8 / 7 good viable remove 11832 Douglas fir 13 85 poor non-viable Leans north, crooked trunk remove 11833 Western red cedar 30 110 10 / 20 24 / 15 15 / 20 8 / 20 good viable impacted 11834 Western red cedar 14 85 10 / 8 19 / 8 5 / 8 20 / 8 good viable impacted 11835 red alder 7, 7, 6 45 12 / 8 8 / 8 18 / 8 4 / 8 fair viable Forks at base remove 11836 Western red cedar 18, 2 50 10 / 12 16 / 12 16 / 12 14 / 12 good viable impacted 11837 big leaf maple 11 70 6 / 6 8 / 6 19 / 6 5 / 6 fair viable impacted 11838 big leaf maple 12 65 20 / 7 0 / 7 16 / 7 6 / 7 fair viable impacted 11930 Douglas fir 25 115 16 / 16 8 / 16 5 / 16 9 / 16 good viable remove 5