Loading...
DNS Arborist_Report+11.8.2022_2.07.58_PM+3209846AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT Arborist Report Prepared for Signature Homes by Village Life, LLC 10234 242nd PI SW Edmonds, WA August 26, 2022 11415 NE 1 281h St., Suite 110, Kirkland, WA 98034 1 Phone: 425.820.3420 I Fax: 425.820.3437 americanforestmanagement.com Page 1 Table of Contents 1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Description.......................................................................................................................................................2 3. Methodology................................................................................................................................................... 2 4. Observations................................................................................................................................................... 3 5. Discussion..........................................................................................................................................................4 6. Tree Protection Measures...................................................................................5 7. Limiting Conditions...........................................................................................................................................6 8. Site & Tree Photos...........................................................................................................................................7 Tree Summary Table - attached Tree Locator Map - attached Appendix AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Page 2 1. Introduction American Forest Management was contacted by Cher Anderson at Signature Homes by Village Life, LLC, Inc and asked to compile an arborist report for a parcel located within the City of Edmonds. The proposed development encompasses the property located at 10234 242nd PI SW Edmonds, WA (Snohomish County Parcel #0055500000-4902). Our assignment is to prepare a written report on present tree conditions which is to be filed with the preliminary permit application. This report covers all tree related regulations set forth under Chapter 23.10 of the Edmonds Community Development Code - ECDC). Date of Field Examination: ........ August 12, 2022 2. Description The proposed site plan shows a new 3,132 sq. ft. residence is planned to be built on the currently vacant lot. The lot is mostly clear with large trees around the perimeter. Thirteen trees with a caliper six inches or greater at 4.5 feet above grade (or diameter at breast height - DBH) were located and assessed on the property. One of these trees is in poor health and is not considered 'Significant' due to its non -viable condition. No neighboring trees were found to be potentially impacted by the proposed development. 3. Methodology Each tree in this report was closely observed and identified in the field with a numbered aluminum tag. These tag numbers correspond with the attached Tree Summary Table and Tree Map. Tree diameters and dripline measurements were measured with a logger's tape. Each tree was visually examined for defects and vigor. The tree assessment procedure involves the examination of several factors including: • The crown examined for current vigor. This is comprised of inspecting the foliage, buds and branches for color, density, form, and annual shoot growth, limb dieback and disease. The percentage of live crown (LCR) 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 viability is made. Trees considered 'non -viable' are trees that are in poor condition due to disease, extensive decay and/or cumulative structural defects which exacerbate failure potential. A 'viable' tree is a tree found to be in good health, in sound condition with minimal defects and suitable for its location. Viable trees will be wind firm under normal conditions if isolated or left as part of a grouping or grove of trees. The four condition categories are described below: AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Page 3 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, and is 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, and is suitable for its location. Fair — minor to moderate structural defects not expected to contribute to a failure in the 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, and is suitable for its location. Poor — major structural defects expected to cause fail in the 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, and/or not suitable for its location. The attached Tree Summary Table provides specific information on tree sizes and drip -line measurements. 4. Observations Most of the subject parcel is open and covered in grass with trees and shrubs around the perimeter. Some areas are covered in invasive Himalayan blackberry or English ivy which is climbing into the canopy of some of the trees included in this report. Eight of the 12 significant trees found here are Douglas -fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) all but one of which are in good condition. Trees #1096 and #1 106 are Douglas -fir, and tree #1097 is a variegated western red cedar. These trees are situated in the access easement to the northern edge of the property. These form a grove of contiguous canopy cover which includes bamboo and English laurel in their driplines. These trees are not able to be retained in the proposed site plan due to the necessary driveway construction. Trees #1 134, #1 1 35, and #1 1 36 are Leyland cypress along the northern fence line of the building pad. These trees are too close to the proposed structure to be retained in this plan and are planned to be removed. Tree #1 158 is a cherry in poor condition. Its canopy is badly wilted and decay is present in its trunk. English ivy covers most of its trunk. This tree is not viable and is not considered to be a 'Significant tree' due to its condition. Its retention is not recommended. Tree #1 1 10 is a Douglas -fir in good condition near the southeast corner of the parcel. It is in good condition and has a DBH of 28 inches. Some English ivy is growing at its base. This tree is located approximately 18 feet to the east of the proposed structure. Retention is possible if all tree protection measures outlined below are closely followed. Trees #1 19- #1 23 comprise a mature grove of good condition Douglas -fir in the southwest corner of the parcel. Ivy and Himalayan blackberry covers the ground in this area which slopes to the west. Tree #1 120 is the dominant tree on the northeast corner of this grove with a DBH of 36 inches. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Page 4 Tree #1 1 21 is suppressed by the larger adjacent trees and should not be isolated. Tree #1 1 23 is found at the northern edge of the grove and is the closest to the proposed development. The 'hammerhead' turn around in the driveway ends approximately 12 feet north of this tree at the edge of its drip line. All of the trees in this grove are likely able to be retained if all tree protection measures outlined below are closely followed. 5. Discussion & Tree Retention / Replacement Recommendations Edmonds Community Development Code Chapter 23.10.060 requires retention of 30% of all significant trees in the developable site on new single family projects. The proposed site plan shows the highest priority for retention trees found on the property will be retained. These trees are primarily mature Douglas -fir in good condition which form a grove of continuous canopy and are larger than 18 inches DBH. Of 12 significant trees found on the property, six are planned to be removed and six are planned to be retained for a retention rate of 50%. In addition to the tree retention requirements in 23.10.060 (C)(1 ), every significant tree that is removed must be replaced consistent with the requirements of ECDC 23.10.080. Each significant tree to be removed shall be replaced as follows: 1. For each significant tree between six inches and 10 inches DBH removed, one replacement tree is required. (Tree #1 134, one replacement tree required) 2. For each significant tree between 10.1 inches and 14 inches in DBH removed, two replacement trees are required. (Trees #1 135 & 1136, four replacement trees required) 3. For each significant tree greater than 14 inches and less the 24 inches in DBH removed, three replacement trees are required. (Trees #1096 & 1097, six replacement trees required) 4. For each significant tree greater than 24 inches in DBH removed, a fee based on an appraisal of the tree value by the city tree protection professional using trunk formula method in the current edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal shall be required. (Tree #1106) Eleven replacement trees are required per ECDC. Minimum sizes for replacement trees shall be one -and -one -half -inch caliper for deciduous trees or six feet in height for evergreen trees. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Page 5 6. Tree Protection Measures The extent of driplines (farthest reaching branches) for the subject trees to be retained can be found on the tree summary table at the back of this report. The recommended TPZ is shown on the attached Tree Locator Map and is generally at the dripline, but may vary based on species, age, condition, and prior improvements. These measurements are referenced when determining the feasibility of retention. The following general guidelines are recommended to ensure that the designated areas set aside for the preserved trees are protected and construction impacts are kept to a minimum. Tree protection should adhere to best management practices for tree and soil protection during development activity. 1. Tree protection fencing shall be erected around retained trees and positioned just beyond the drip line edge prior to moving any heavy equipment on site. Doing this will set clearing limits and avoid compaction of soils within root zones of retained trees. 2. Excavation limits should be laid out in paint on the ground to avoid over excavating. 3. 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. 4. 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. 6. Areas excavated within the drip -line of retained trees should be thoroughly irrigated daily during dry periods. 7. Preparations for final landscaping shall be accomplished by hand within the drip -lines of retained trees. Large equipment shall be kept outside of the tree protection zones at all times. Simply finish landscape within ten feet of retained trees with a 2- 4 inch layer of organic mulch. AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Page 6 7. Limiting Conditions There is no warranty suggested for any of the trees subject to this report. Weather, latent tree conditions, and future human -caused activities could cause physiologic changes and deteriorating tree condition. Over time deteriorating tree conditions may appear and there may be conditions not currently 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, Benjamin Mark ISA Certified Arborist #PN-6976A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. Page 7 8. Photos Looking north at the access easement. These trees and shrubs will need to be removed to construct the proposed driveway. #1097 AMERICAN FOREST MANAGEMENT, INC. 14 -b`�.� '� +,.s ,�. }� ,vim 4 • , a A�S,Ai � ,tF S �„trajp..c.�. S. �� ey�' �Y�' •� :V,'� ,,, s A ;F e� R � htPY •r n�.�J 4a -. - Tree Summary Table Signature Homes by Village Life, Inc 10234 242nd PI SW Edmonds, WA 98020 AMERICAN FOREST MAN A G E M E N T American Forest Management, Inc. Date: 8/12/2022 Inspector: Ben Mark 30% retention of all significant trees Tree replacement per 23.10.080 Siqnificant tree: 6"+ DBH DBH Tag # ID Genus species (Multi -stem Calculation) Drip -Line.... Limit of Disturbance (feet) Condition Proposal Comments N S E W 1096 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 20.5 20 19 20 20 Good REMOVE In easement 1097 Variegated western red cedar Thuja plicata Yebrina' 9, 7, 7 (23) 12 14 16 15 Good REMOVE In easement 1106 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 30.3 24 22 25 20 Good REMOVE In easement 1134 Leyland cypress Cupressus x leylandii 9.5 11 14 15 12 Good REMOVE Screening 1135 Leyland cypress Cupressus = leylandii 10.2 13 12 8 8 Good REMOVE Screening 1136 Leyland cypress Cupressus x leylandii 13.6 13 15 8 8 Good REMOVE Screening 1158 lCherry Prunus sp. 6,6 (12) 10 1 10 10 10 Poor REMOVE Canopy in decline. Covered in Ivy 1110 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 28 15 18 20 19 Good RETAIN Ivy at base 1120 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 36 27 20 28 18 Good RETAIN Ivy at base NE corner of grove 1121 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 11.5 10 15 10 10 Fair RETAIN Suppressed. Don't isolate 1119 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 23.5 12 18 6 12 Good RETAIN Don I isolate. West edge of grove. Un Ivy covered slope eas of retaining wall 1122 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 24 12 12 16 18 Good RETAIN Ivy, blackberry at base 1123 Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 32 13 16 19 15 Good RETAIN Root flare buried. On slope CIS TYPE I RIM=393. .64 12' DI E IE=382.21 12- CONC W IE=382.16 CB TYPE 1 04,))� wgSy RIM=386.68 64 q� FR 12' CPP E I.E==1365,018 40,4 1, 3, DI W E 5:. ----------- 6"PVC S IE=355.74 4. CONSTRUCTION - ENTRANCE FOUND REBAR 'LS 13374. OWN X 0.3' E IV WATER M 390.35' 1 10' APPROXIMATE SCALE UNKNOWN STUB #GOOD CONDITION TREES '0, ......... ... . ....... #FAIR CONDITION TREES #POOR CONDITION TREES TREE PROTECTION ZONE ......... RETAINED TREE DRIP LINE �.i No i 1VX15'SIDE SEWER EASEMENT AFN 200901230214 TO BENEFIT .. .. ........ ....... LOT ........... TREE TO BE REMOVED 1096 73 4'CMNLINK ....... ..... LOT 1 -.�: -1097. SHORT PLAT ............ AFN 200611025009 1106- QD 03, FOUND 1/2* REBAR NO CAP 0.7 SW . .... ........ F 2-NX ZE 1135 1134 Fy 3 3( 1 136 4' .4. .......... . . . . . . ...... 00, I .4v SILT FENCING TREES(11.) 04 FOUND REBAR & CAP 1123 'LS 37636' 02 W 1158 CO*b 00, 2. 40.?,t, 1122 TREE DRIP LINE 1119 1121 �00 1120 1110 FOU ND & CAP r-W SIDE B.S S 7536 0 o 0.2'W N 89*25'1 " 114.97'