Loading...
REVIEWED PLN BLD2024-0266+ARBORIST REPORT+2.28.2024_12.33.47_PM+4089110Greenforest Incorporated (�, _90 J_ consulting TO: Rick Cuevas REFERENCE: Arborist Report Arporist SITE ADDRESS: 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA DATE: August 11, 2021 REPORT REVISION: January 5, 2022 PREPARED BY: Favero Greenforest, ISA Certified Arborist # PN -0143A ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist® #379 You contacted me and contracted my services as a consulting arborist. My assignment is to inspect trees at the above referenced site. The purpose of this arborist report is to establish the condition of the significant trees to satisfy City of Edmonds submittal requirements (Edmonds Code §23.10.060.B.2.c). You provided me a topographic survey prepared by Pacific Coast Surveys, Inc., dated 5/29/2020. 1 visited the site 8/10/2021 and visually inspected the trees indicated on the survey, which are the subject of this report, and represent all regulated trees on the parcel. REVISED SUMMARY. all 3 onsite trees are proposed for removal. TREE INSPECTION I visually inspected each tree from the ground. I performed a Level 1 risk assessment.' This is the standard assessment for populations of trees near specified targets, conducted in order to identify obvious defects or specified conditions such as a pre -development inventory. This is a 1 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 9: Tree Shrub and Other woody Plant Management — Standard Practices, Tree Risk Assessment. 2011. ISA. 4547 South Lucile Street, Seattle, WA 98118 Tel. 206-723-0656 Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 2 of 11 limited visual assessment focuses on identifying trees with imminent and/or probable likelihood of failure, and/or other visible conditions that will affect tree retention. I recorded tree species and size (DBH). I estimated the average dripline of each tree. I rated the condition of each tree, both health and structure. A tree's structure is distinct from its health. This inspection identifies what is visible with both. High -risk trees can appear healthy in that they can have a dense, green canopy. This may occur when there is sufficient sapwood or adventitious roots present to maintain tree health, but inadequate strength for structural support. Conversely, trees in poor health may or may not be structurally stable. For example, tree decline due to root disease is likely to cause the tree to be structurally unstable, while decline due to drought or insect attack may not. One way that tree health and structure are linked is that healthy trees are more capable of compensating for structural defects. A healthy tree can develop adaptive growth that adds strength to parts weakened by decay, cracks, and wounds. This report identifies unhealthy trees based on existing health conditions and tree structure, and specifies which trees are most suitable for preservation .Z No invasive procedures were performed on any trees. The results of this inspection are based on what was visible at the time of the inspection. The attached inventory summarizes my inspection results and provides the following information for each tree: Proposed Action — Indicates if tree is to be removed or retained. Tree number as shown on attached exhibit. DBH stem diameter in inches measured 4.5 feet from the ground. Dripline average branch extension from the trunk as radius in feet. Health and Structure ratings '1' indicates good to excellent condition; no visible health - related problems or structural defects, 7 indicates fair condition; minor visible problems or defects that may require attention if the tree is retained, and 'T indicates poor condition; significant visible problems or defects and tree removal is recommended. Comments on Condition obvious structural defects or diseases visible at time of inspection. z Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Part 5: Tree Shrub and Other woody Plant Maintenance — Standard Practices, Managing Trees During Construction. 2008. ISA. Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 3 of 11 Viability - a determination by the arborist whether the tree is viable for retention, and complies with §23.10.080.B.1. SUBJECT TREES A moss cypress stands at the NE corner of the existing house. The tree is mature (over the hill, so to speak) and has outlived it useful life as a landscape amenity. If the existing foundation is removed, the tree will fall over as it relies on it for support. Four Leyland cypress trees stand in a hedgerow along the west lot boundary. Trees 2 & 3 are onsite, trees 4 & 5 on the abutting parcel to the west. Both onsite cypress trees lean SE. Though all four trees were planted in a hedgerow, the trees have never been maintained as a hedge. As a result, the 'inside' trees (#3) have very asymmetric and skinny structures because the end trees, in particular tree 2, has out competed tree 3 for light and space. The removal of tree 2 will leave tree 3 exposed, asymmetric and leaning. Tree 3 literally has no branches on the NE side of its trunk, or the SW side, as there are two other cypress trees opposite on the adjoining parcel. Below is the municipal definition of a hazard tree, and the exemption clause for removal of a hazard tree. 23.10.020.H. "Hazard tree" means a tree that is dead, dying, diseased, damaged, or structurally defective as determined by a qualified tree professional. 23.10.040 Exemptions. F. Trees that do not meet the exemptions in subsections (A) through (E) of this section may be removed with supporting documentation: 2. Hazard tree located outside a critical area with a tree risk assessment prepared by the applicant's qualified professional documenting how the tree meets the definition of a hazard tree. It is my opinion that tree #3 having developed inside a hedgerow of 4 trees now lacks the structural integrity to stand exposed as an edge tree when tree #2 is removed. I recommend the removal of both trees. The images on the next page show the 2 onsite cypress trees, their trunks, and their canopies relative to each other. Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist TREE 3, sow VIEW OF SUBJECT TREES LOOKING WEST FROM SUBJECT PARCEL % _,� , �' =,,� ,ice � yy�„ � ``, � • i SUBJECT Ott._ • • • • • I, PARCEL. ABUTTING y 7 PARCEL / �r rF VIEW OF TREE TRUNKS FROM ABUTTING PARCEL PL IS ILLUSTRATIVE, AND NOT TO SCALE Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 5 of 11 LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE Limits of Disturbance (LOD) are calculated for all the subject trees, regardless of viability or proposed action. They are listed below as radii in feet from the trunk for the side of the tree to be impacted by construction. They are determined using rootplate 3 and trunk diameter ,4'S and ISA Best Management Practices .6 These are the minimum distances from the trees for any soil disturbance on one side of the tree, and assume expanded protection on other sides: 1.5 x LOD on sides adjacent to encroachment, and no disturbance on the opposite side, or 2 x LOD. The following table lists the limits of disturbance of each tree. Proposed Action Tree No. DBH Species Dripline (R') LOD (R') Remove 1 13.5" Moss cypress 14' 7' Remove 2 22" Leyland cypress 25' 12' Remove 3 18" Leyland cypress 25' 10' Offsite 4 14" Leyland cypress 20' 8' Offsite 5 18" Leyland cypress 20' 10, To protect the two offsite trees, install tree protection fencing (TPF) along the east side of the stump of tree #3, parallel the property line for the distance of 8 feet to the north and the south. Tree protection is outlined in city code here: ECDC §23.10.070 Tree protection measures during development. Following are abbreviated points, but the full code should be reviewed and followed. Prior to development activity or initiating tree removal on the site, vegetated areas, individual trees and soil to be preserved in accordance with ECDC 23.10.060(B) shall be protected from potentially damaging activities pursuant to the following standards: A. Preconstruction Meeting Required. Prior to the commencement of any permitted clearing and grading activity, a preconstruction meeting shall be held on site with the permittee and appropriate city staff. The project site shall be marked in the field as follows: 1. The extent of clearing and grading to occur; 2. Delineation and protection of any critical areas and critical area buffers with clearing limit fencing; 3. Flagging of trees to be removed and tags on trees to be retained; and 4. Property lines. 3 Coder, Kim D. 2005. Tree Biomechanics Series. University of Georgia School of Forest Resources. 4 Smiley, E. Thomas, Ph. D. Assessing the Failure Potential of Tree Roots, Shade Tree Technical Report. Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories. 5 Fite, Kelby and E. Thomas Smiley. 2009. Managing Trees During construction; Part Two. Arborist News. ISA. 6 Companion publication to the ANSI A300 Series, Part 5: Managing Trees During Construction. 2008. ISA. Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 6 of 11 B. Placing Materials Near Trees. No person may conduct any activity within the protected area of any tree designated to remain, including, but not limited to, operating or parking equipment, placing solvents, storing building material or stockpiling any materials, or dumping concrete washout or other chemicals. During construction, no person shall attach any object to any tree designated for protection. C. Protective Barrier. Before development, land clearing, grading, filling or any land alteration, the applicant shall: 1. Erect and maintain readily visible temporary protective tree fencing along the limits of disturbance which completely surrounds the protected area of all retained trees, groups of trees, vegetation and native soil. Tree protective fencing shall be a minimum height of three feet, visible and of durable construction; orange polyethylene laminar fencing is acceptable. 2. Install highly visible signs spaced no further than 15 feet apart along the entirety of the protective tree fencing. Said sign must be approved by the director and shall state, at a minimum, "Tree and Soil Protection Area, Entrance Prohibited," and provide the city phone number for code enforcement to report violations. 3. Prohibit excavation or compaction of soil or other potentially damaging activities within the barriers; provided, that the director may allow such activities approved by a qualified professional and under the supervision of a qualified professional retained and paid for by the applicant. 4. Maintain the protective barriers in place for the duration of the project until the director authorizes their removal. 5. Ensure that any approved landscaping done in the protected zone subsequent to the removal of the barriers shall be accomplished with machinery from outside the protected zone or by hand. 6. Limit the time period that the critical root zone is covered by mulch, plywood, steel plates or similar materials, or by light soils, to protect the tree's critical root zone. 7. In addition to the above, the director may require the following: a. If equipment is authorized to operate within the protected zone, the soil and critical root zone of a tree must be covered with mulch to a depth of at least six inches or with plywood, steel plates or similar material in order to protect roots and soil from damage caused by heavy equipment. b. Minimize root damage by hand -excavating a two -foot -deep trench, at edge of critical root zone, to cleanly sever the roots of trees to be retained. Never rip or shred roots with heavy equipment. c. Corrective pruning performed on protected trees in order to avoid damage from machinery or building activity. d. Maintenance of trees throughout construction period by watering and fertilizing. D. Grade. 1. The grade shall not be elevated or reduced within the critical root zone of trees to be preserved without the director's authorization based on recommendations from a qualified professional. The director may allow coverage of up to one-half of the area of the tree's critical Greenforest ® Registered Consulting Arborist Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 7 of 11 root zone with light soils (no clay) to the minimum depth necessary to carry out grading or landscaping plans, if it will not imperil the survival of the tree. Aeration devices may be required to ensure the tree's survival. 2. If the grade adjacent to a preserved tree is raised such that it could slough or erode into the tree's critical root zone, it shall be permanently stabilized to prevent soil erosion and suffocation of the roots. 3. The applicant shall not install an impervious surface within the critical root zone of any tree to be retained without the authorization of the director. The director may require specific construction methods and/or use of aeration devices to ensure the tree's survival and to minimize the potential for root -induced damage to the impervious surface. 4. To the greatest extent practical, utility trenches shall be located outside of the critical root zone of trees to be retained. The director may require that utilities be tunneled under the roots of trees to be retained if the director determines that trenching would significantly reduce the chances of the tree's survival. 5. Trees and other vegetation to be retained shall be protected from erosion and sedimentation. Clearing operations shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. To control erosion, it is encouraged that shrubs, ground cover and stumps be maintained on the individual lots, where feasible. 6. The director may approve the use of alternative tree protection techniques if those techniques provide an equal or greater degree of protection than the techniques listed in this subsection. E. Directional Felling. Directional felling of trees shall be used to avoid damage to trees designated for retention. LIMITATIONS AND USE OF THIS REPORT This tree report establishes, via the most practical means available, the existing conditions of the trees on the subject property. Ratings for health and structure, as well as any recommendations are valid only through the development and construction process. This report is based solely on what is readily visible and observable, without any invasive means. There are several conditions that can affect a tree's condition that may be pre-existing and unable to be ascertained with a visual -only analysis. No attempt was made to determine the presence of hidden or concealed conditions which may contribute to the risk or failure potential of trees on the site. These conditions include root and stem (trunk) rot, internal cracks, structural defects or construction damage to roots, which may be hidden beneath the soil. Additionally, construction and post -construction circumstances can cause a relatively rapid deterioration of a tree's condition. ATTACHMENTS: Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 8 of 11 1. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 2. Certification of Performance 3. Tree Protection Detail 4. Significant Tree Inventory 5. Tree Retention Plan ATTACHMENT NO. 1 -ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. Afield examination of the site was made 8/10/2021. My observations and conclusions are as of that date. 2. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible; however, the consultant/arborist can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others. 3. 1 am not a qualified land surveyor. Reasonable care was used to match the trees indicated on the sheets with those growing in the field. 4. The consultant/appraiser shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made. Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 9 of 11 ATTACHMENT NO. 2 - CERTIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE I, Favero Greenforest, certify that: • 1 have personally inspected the trees and the property referred to in this report and have stated my findings accurately. • 1 have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. • The analysis, opinion, and conclusions stated herein are my own and are based on current scientific procedures and facts. • My analysis, opinion, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices. • No one provided significant professional assistance to me, except as indicated within the report. • My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client of any other party nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events. I further certify that I am a member in good standing of International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), and the ISA PNW Chapter, I am an ISA Certified Arborist (#PN-0143A) and am Tree Risk Assessment Qualified, and am a Registered Consulting Arborist® (#379) with American Society of Consulting Arborists. I have worked as an independent consulting arborist since 1989. Signed: IREENFOREST, In . By Favero Greenforest, M. S- Favero Greenforest Date: August 11, 2021 CERTIFIED11 ARBORIST 1� ISA. Digitally signed by Favero Greenforest DN: cn=Favero Greenforest, o, ou, email=greenforestinc@mindspring.co m,c=US Date: 2022.01.06 16:29:07-08'00' Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist TU OOALIFICATIONS TREE MSK ASSESUO r Rick Cuevas RE: Arborist Report for 648 Walnut Street, Edmonds WA August 11, 2021 Page 10 of 11 Condition ratings T good to excellent, '2' fair, '3' poor For offsite trees, driplines are reported as branch length overhanging the subject property as measured from an existing fence. DBH is estimated. ATTACHMENT NO. 3— SIGN IFICANTTREE INVENTORY (D W m z ° = �' Viable Species n Comment on Condition Tree Decline, old age/poor vitality, asymmetric 1 13.5" Moss cypress 14' 3 3 canopy, rootplate growth obstruction (existing No foundation) 2 22" Leyland cypress 25' 1 1 Both tree leans SE as part of an unmanaged Yes hedgerow. Cannot be retained as stand-alone 3 18" Leyland cypress 25' 1 1 trees. Yes 4* 14" Leyland cypress 20' 2 3 Tree leans SE, top dieback, tree is mostly dead No 5* 18" Leyland cypress 20' 2 3 Tree leans SE, top dieback, tree is mostly dead No *Offsite Trees Greenforest O Registered Consulting Arborist EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES VERTICAL DATUM LEGEND LEGAL DESCRIPTION METHOD OF SURVEY. SURVEY PERFORMED BY FIELD TRAVERSE INSTRUMENTATION: LEICA TS15 ROBOTIC ELECTRONIC TOTAL STATION PRECISION. MEETS OR EXCEEDS STATE STANDARDS WAC 332-130-090 BASIS OF BEARING: THE MONUMENTED SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M., AS THE BEARING OF N 88'4525" E. 00434209403700 I FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W/ FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W/ N 3-1/2" BRASS DISK & PUNCH. 3-1/2" BRASS DISK & PUNCH. DOWN 0.3'. VISITED 5-18-20. DOWN 0.3'. VISITED 5-18-20. - - ----SS____. SS----- N 88'4526" W 164.97(M) 165.00'(P) i r I I I 15' I I I a� �-I I o 0 :23 I I I WI I I I of I z1 � I I I I I I 15 I I I I I I 23 24 N 88'45'15" W 825.08' ----- I I 26 25 -_,L _ --�- - I FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W/ 3-112" BRASS DISK & PUNCH. DOWN 0.4'. VISITED 5-18-20. NOTES 1.) THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF PARTIES WHOSE NAMES APPEAR HEREON ONLY, AND DOES NOT EXTEND TO ANY UNNAMED THIRD PARTIES WITHOUT EXPRESS RECERTIFICATION BY THE LAND SURVEYOR. 2.) BOUNDARY LINES SHOWN AND CORNERS SET REPRESENT DEED LOCATIONS; OWNERSHIP LINES MAY VARY. NO GUARANTEE OF OWNERSHIP IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED. I IL -------------- I I I I I NAVD 88 FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W/ 3-112" BRASS DISK & X" WGS SURVEY DATA WAREHOUSE I.D.#17879 ELEV. = 79.22' SURVEY REFERENCES PLAT OF EDMONDS - VOL. 2, PG. 39 RECORD OF SURVEY - A.F.#200407295007 I I 00434209403500 I I I I I I I I I I I ------------------�- --------- SS= SSMH RIM=113.65 IE 8" RCP(N)=102.60 IE 8" RCP(E)=102.70 IE 6" RCP(W)=102.70 IE 6" RCP(SW)=102.70 --------------- LOT A LOT B 27032500202900 • SET 1/2" X 24" REBAR W/CAP STAMPED PCS 37536" O EXISTING REBAR W/CAP, AS NOTED X SET NAIL AND WASHER STAMPED "PCS 37536" X EXISTING NAIL AND WASHER AS NOTED OFOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT AS NOTED RIGHT OF WAY CENTERLINE O CATCH BASIN m WATER VALVE ® WATER METER 0 SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE o MAILBOX -0- UTILITY/POWER POLE CYPRESS TREE I I I I I I I I 00434209403300 00434209403100 I I I I I I I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------- CONCRETE CURB ffl 00434209402900 I I I I I I I ---1------------ I I I I I I I PARCEL A: LOTS 13 AND 14, BLOCK 93, CITY OF EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PAGE 39, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: LOTS 15 AND 16, BLOCK 93, CITY OF EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PAGE 39, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: BEGINNING AT A POINT 135.09 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M.; THENCE SOUTH 30 FEET; THENCE WEST 119.97 FEET; THENCE NORTH 30 FEET; THENCE EAST 119.97 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, WHICH LAND IS IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF TRACT B IN BLOCK 93, CITY OF EDMONDS, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 2 OF PLATS, PAGE 39, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 0043420940270E 00434209402400 I I I I , I I I , I I I , I I I , I I I I I I I I I 00434209402300 I 00434209402100 I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - j CB RIM=111.07 CONCRETE CURB IE 8" RCP(S)=109.82 12' 1� ro i i M - - - 'WALNUT ST. � / - - - - - - --SS- 224.87' SS SS / N 88'45 26" W - 494.72(M) 495.00'(P) CB RIM=111.89 0----5 - - - - - -- SS-y-----------------1 SSSS-_-_---- IE 8" RCP(N)=110.64 ; 269.85' �h'7�2 SSMH RIM=119.68 b IE 8" RCP(E)=104.33 , ; I CONCRETE CURB IE 8" RCP(W=104.23 , v"'i I IE 6" RCP(S)=104.33 I CONCRETE WALK '----- ---- SD SD WOOD FENCE COR. 1.0'(N) % - - - - - OF PROPERTY LINE �� / �i i CONCRETE CURB - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -�-----------� _ '� N 88'4526" W 119.90' I FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W/ 3-112" BRASS DISK & PUNCH. DOWN 0.3'. VISITED 5-18-20. 'I I I I I I I d-I rnlN I w I a 0 I o �1 z I FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W/ 3-1/2" BRASS DISK & PUNCH. DOWN 0.3'. VISITED 5-18-20. SSMH RIM=140.52 Ir---------------------------------------- CB RIM=112.62 i 14" IE 12" CPP(N)=109.12 i FOUND 112" IRON PIPE LL'z-uj C 14 C IE 10" CPP(S)=109.22 :z 12",, I 0.5'(W) & 0.3'(S) OF - i I I IE 8" CPP(W=109.22 o I ( cn I CORNER. END FENCE ,' o oz i W I # 1 12 �� - - IE 8" CPP E=109.22 I 0.5'(S) & 0.1 '(W) OF � �' 8 -' � i I v � � C CORNER ------ x - 11 �i �I xW 5.1' �- I 5.1 =►� �' i� A ; P I �� i 30' o I l i /TITT/ ?l7T//T TT7T/Tr7TT� - I I I I ^ I L I I jl o HOUSE i N ry �' ; 4 '�i 00434209301700 W J640 CARPORT i HOUSE /I o i i I 2 1 HOUSE �, i # I 634 s W I I # /� o � 00434209301100 z_ �� SNO. CO. LOT C ? U L r PARCEL A 5.5''I I i z --- SP S 95 180 i I--- 9, 00434209301300 A.F.#9604020521 __ 22 r �� II I c----------------------------------------------------------------� 4.8'I 10» r 120- - � / 11 . #2 7.7' i DEAD 14"1 % 1130� END WOOD FENCE 0.3'(W) 64 - _ _ #412 + ' OF PROPERTY LINE I C #3 8C c + ' PARCEL a #5 " C I END CHAIN LINK FENCE %� C DEAD i 00434209301500 ' '( 0.3W) OF PROPERTY LINE 8" I , W " C W I 126 i I I I 8 �i 1 '. I I 30' 224.66' i 8 C of ' I 00434209301701 i I II IE 8" RCP(W)_ 133.57 IE 8" RCP(E)=133.67 IE 8" RCP(S)=133.67 --------------------1- --- 148.34' 2.7'- 0t,(2 10" L1 I 1292.67' 24 �/r �- PARCEL C o N 88'4525" W 2612.01'(M) (BASIS OF BEARING) I� C rTl "' m x 27032500202600 0 - SHED / Imo," m i NE COR. OF THE I 25 NW 1 14 OF THE 12 i FOUND CASED CONC. MON. W 2" 12" �o N NW 1 4 SEC 25, 1 FOUND REBAR W/CAP STAMPED n C N CONCRETE `I I DOMED BRASS DISK & 'X': o 12" 14" 0.6' 12" , - C �' T27N, R3E, WM TRI COUNTY 14490" 0.2' N & `" I DOWN 0.3'. VISITED 5-13-20 --------L------------------ I 1.1 '(W) OF CORNER. FENCE)'- z C C x 14" C A 7 o T----------------------------------- 1.3'(W) AT CORNER--------- 1 ---------- ---------- -------------------- I r�---- --X x �__ ---126---'-5 N 88'45'25" W 120.00'-----128 , -------------------T----------------------------- WOOD FENCE - - i - / 130 - - I I---------- 132 i 27032500203100 - -140- - ! ! 27032500222300 ! 27032500222200 LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L 1 1.47' N 88'4525" W 12 1.27' N 88'4525" W 2 / 0 32 5 0 0 2 0 33 0 0 SCALE. 1 " = 20' MOM 0 20 40 4¢�1� J. R\ �F WA F� O 2:4 o 37536 \~� �G I S T Eg,4+ GNAL LhIp / w