The URL can be used to link to this page

03. Sam Lin CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: TR-2006-15 Agenda Date: September 26, 2006 Applicant: Sam Lin Property Owner: Chinese Church in Christ Property Location: 10455 Bandley Drive Environmental Review: Categorically Exempt Application Summary: Tree Removal, and replanting, of eight eucalyptus trees at an existing church (TR-2006-15) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Tree Removal (TR-2006-15) in accordance with the model resolution. BACKGROUND: The applicant, Sam Lin, representing Chinese Church in Christ, is requesting permission to remove eight (8) eucalyptus trees located in the landscaped islands of the rear parking lot of this existing church. In recent months, the Church has reported several tree limb breakages that have caused damage to tenant vehicles, and has subsequently filed for a tree removal permit (Exhibit A). DISCUSSION: The City Arborist, Barrie D. Coate and Associates, has examined the eight eucalyptuses, Pink Ironbark (Eucalyptus sideroxylon), measuring 17" to 27" in trunk diameter and prepared a report (Exhibit B). The City Arborist notes that in general the trees are healthy, but some have suffered limb breakage. According to the Arborist, the limb breakage is due to the topping of the eight trees 5-10 years ago. Topping results in new watersprout shoots that are poorly attached and, therefore, highly prone to failure. Topping also requires that the trees be pruned every 3-5 years for life if they are expected to be reasonably safe. The fact that the trees have not been pruned regularly is the primary cause of the broken branches. According to the arborist, regular pruning would be expensive for the applicant. If the trees are removed, the arborist recommends replacement based on their value. Six of the eucalyptuses have a value of $1,200 - $1,500 each, and the two larger diameter trees have a value of $2,500 each. Altogether, the replacement value is equivalent to three 48" box specimen trees. 3- J File No. TR-2006-15 2 September 26, 2006 Because of the sparseness of the existing landscaping, staff is recommending one for one replacement with smaller, 24" box trees. The applicant has suggested the deciduous Chinese Pistache, which is acceptable to staff for the interior tree replacements only, tree nos. 1,2,5,6 & 8. For the perimeter replacement trees, nos. 3, 4 & 7, staff recommends an evergreen tree, which will provide privacy screening between the abutting single-family residences and the church. Staff suggests 24" box Flaxleaf Paperbark, Canary Island Pine or another evergreen tree acceptable to the applicant and staff. Submitted by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developm~ Enclosures: Model Resolution Exhibit A: Tree Removal Request Letter and Justification Exhibit B: Arborist Report from Barrie D. Coate and Associates dated 6/19/06 Exhibit C: Tree Location Map G:planningj pdreportj pcTRreports j 2006 j TR-2006-15 3 ,OL; TR-2006-15 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF EIGHT EUCALYPTUS TREES AT AN EXISTING CHURCH AT 10455 BANDLEY DRIVE SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: TR-2006-15 Sam Un for Chinese Church in Christ 10455 Bandley Drive SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application to approve the removal of eight (8) eucalyptus trees; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application for Tree Removal is hereby approved and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application TR-2006-15, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of September 26, 2006 are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROV AL ACTION Approval is granted for the removal of eight eucalyptus trees, labeled 1 through 8 in the church parking lot as depicted in Exhibit C. 3--3 Resolution No. Page 2 TR-2006-15 September 26, 2006 2. TREE REPLACEMENT Five 24-inch box Chinese Pis tache trees shall be planted in the same locations where tree nos. 1,2,5,6 and 8 are removed. Three additional 24-inch box evergreen trees shall be planted in the same locations where tree nos. 3, 4 and 7 are removed. The latter shall be Flaxleaf Paperbark, Canary Island Pine or a similar tree acceptable to the applicant and Director of Community Development. Automatic irrigation shall be provided to all new trees, which shall be planted within 60 days of eucalyptus removal. 3.. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26h day of August 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABST AIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Ciddy Wordell City Planner Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission G:\Planning\PDREPORT\RES\2006\ TR-2006-15 res.doc 3-4 ~-'I ~\ '\ 1."- . ~1f~-t-~ Chinese Church in Christ www.ccic-cupertino.org 10455 BandleyDrive, Cupertino, CA 95014 Tel: (408) 996-2000 Fax: (408) 996-2008 August 29th, 2006 . Planning Commission City of Cupertino City Hall 10300 Torre Ave. Cupertino, Ca 95014 To the Honorable Chair and Members of Cupertino Planning Commission: The Chinese Church in Christ (CCIC) in Cupertino requests your approval for a permit to remove and replace 8 eucalyptus trees located at 10455 Bandley Drive, Cupertino. The attached site plan provides detailed locations of these trees. As you may have already known, the fact that eucalyptus trees pose significant safety/fire hazards in urbanized areas has long been established. We request that these trees located in the backyard of CCIC to be removed for the following reasons: . These trees routinely drop large limbs to damage vehicles parked in their vicinity. In the past two months; 2 incidents happened and caused damages to vehicles of our tenant's clients. There has no bodily injury incurred to any person at this point, but it is a serious threat to our safety. . The trees drop sap and shed larger amounts of debris to have become a nuisance. . Many articles from reputable authors indicate that even with regular monitoring and maintenance, it is extremely difficult to predict and control the performance of eucalyptus and monetary pines. They may drop limb or fail even under regular maintenance. . These trees are invasive and non-native. It will enhance the greater Cupertino environment if we replace them with Chinese Pistachio, which were approved in Cities such as San Jose and Sunnyvale. In summary, many neighborhood cities and towns in California, such as Oakland and Portola Valley, have taken proactive actions in the past years to list these invasive trees as unprotected, and have encouraged property owners to have them removed by not requiring permit for removal in some cases. There are also many tragic cases documented in the media that support the action to remove these trees from properties that are routinely used by people such as parks, campuses, and streets. The information presented in Attachments 1 - 6 will reveal but a glimpse of the problem. They are summarized below for your reference. Your decision to approve the permit will prevent potential tragedies from happening, will save lives, and will enhance the Cupertino environment. Members of the Chinese 3-5 Church in Christ in Cupertino sincerely appreciate your support and we thank you in advance for the permit to remove these problematic trees. Due to the storm season coming close, we would like to take immediate actions once as your favorable decision is granted. Sincerely, ( i Lian;~~-~~, -----T Elder, Chinese Church in Christ Summary of Attachments: Attachment 1 - Regular Planning Commission meeting minutes, Town of Port 01 a Valley, 02/04/04, Request for Eucalyptus Tree Removal- The Town planner presented the case of four non-native eucalyptus trees posing a potential safety hazard to Open Space Preserve visitors by routinely dropping very large limbs. The Commission concurred with removal of the eucalyptus trees as provided in the request. This case is similar in many ways to the present request. CCIC's members are exposed to the hazards presented by the eucalyptus on a regular basis. Attachment 2 - San Diego Reader article, 02/13/2003 - Quoting from the article: ".. . Limb and tree failures happen very, very often with eucalyptus trees, and has caused some of the most tragic accidents in San Diego history. . ." An interesting anecdote is that Australians nicknamed the eucalyptus tress 'widow makers. ' The article also established the fact that even with regular monitoring and maintenance, it is extremely difficult to predict and control eucalyptus performance. This situation prompted CCIC's decision to remove the eucalyptus trees and replace with native trees, rather than conducting periodic maintenance trimming. Attachment 3 - A letter appeared 04/0712000 on The Student Life, the Pomona College newspaper - Quoting from the article: "In 1997... 3 larg~ eucalyptus trees fell in a windstorm across a public access way..." and again a eucalyptus tree fell on February 23, 1998 and killed Pete Kurahashi. Attachment 4 - Green & Gold Plan, the University ofCalifomia, Irvine's campus landscape planning and implementation objectives - The first goal of the University landscape plan includes a measure to remove existing eucalyptus trees due to hazards or decline and replace with native and drought tolerant species. 3~Co This measure reflects the fact that eucalyptus trees will encroach into and overtake habitats of native species. Attachment 5 - Protected Trees Ordinance, City of Oakland - The City of Oakland's tree ordinance exclude eucalyptus trees from its protected-tree list, and does not require a permit for removal. This ordinance is similar to that of many other municipalities in California. Many cities do not protect eucalyptus trees because they are non-native and present significant safety and fire hazards. Attachment 6 - California Invasive Plant Council Invasive Plants List - The blue gum eucalyptus tree is identified as most invasive in coastal regions. Fire departments in Southern California recommend against using this tree for landscaping because they are extreme fire hazard. 3-7- ;~.,~ <' . REGIJl AR PI ANNIN~ COMMISSION MFETIN~ TOWN OF PORTOI A VAil EY, FAhru;'lry 4, 2004, TOWN CENTER, HISTORIC SCHOOl HOlJSF 76!) PORTOI A ROAn PORTOI A VAil FY, CA 94028 Vice Chairman Zaffaroni called the meeting to order at 8:08 p.m. Ms. Lambert called the roll: Present: Absent: Staff Present: Commissioners Elkind, Mcintosh, Wengert and Zaffaroni Chairman Breon Tom Vlasic, Dep. Town Planner Leslie Lambert, Planning Manager ORAl COMMIJNICATIONS: Bill Lane expressed his appreciation and thanks to Craig Breon for his years of service and to all commissioners for their dedication and hard work. RF~lJLAR AGFNDA (1) RAqlJAl';t for FIJe'.;:!lyphJI'; TrAA Remnvl'll Windy Hill OpAn Spl'lr.A PrAI';ArvA MidpAninl';lJIl'l Reginnl'll OpAn Spl'le'.P. njl';trict Mr. Via sic reviewed the staff report of 1/30/04 on the request from MROSD for removal of four large eucalyptus trees that currently stand adjacent to Sausal Pond vista point at the Windy Hill Open Space Preserve, near the western property boundary with The Sequoias. He reviewed the letter request from Ana Ruiz, Open Space Planner with MROSD, which describes the four non-native trees pose a potential safety hazard to preserve visitors by routinely dropping very large limbs in an area that receives high visitor use. In addition, the trees pose a potential fire hazard due to the high flammability of the trees and its leaf litter, a concern shared with The Sequoias. Mr. Vlasic noted that because Windy Hill Preserve is regulated by a conditional use permit issued by the Planning Commission, the request is presented to the Commissioners for information and comment prior to issuance of the tree removal permit. The request was referred to the Conservation Committee, and at their January 2ih meeting the committee unanimously recommended removal of the four trees and encouraged removal of the smaller eucalyptus trees on both sides of the pond. He noted that committee members raised some concerns over potential impact on raptors in the trees. Responding to Commissioners Zaffaroni and Elkind, Ms. Ruiz informed commission that the District's Resource Management specialist and biologist have made a preliminary evaluation of the trees and will visit the site prior to removal of the trees to confirm the lack of active nests. In response to questions over accessibility, Ms. Ruiz explained that the section of trail would be closed temporarily to visitors, who would be directed to use the Betsy Crower Trail to bypass the work area, signage will be posted at the parking lot, and at the site for notification to users. In response to concerns over thistle and broom, Ms. Ruiz indicated that they will have a specialist involved in restoration of the area. The Commission concurred with removal of the eucalyptus trees as provided with recommendation that MROSD submit a letter to the Town on the removal procedure and restoration plan for review by staff and Conservation Committee. . (2) PrAliminl'lry RAview Exr.Aptinn RAqlJAl';t fnr Detl'lr.hAd ~l'lrl'lgA 107 Tl'ln Ol'lk DrivA, Kil';tAr Mr. Via sic reviewed the staff report of 1/29/04 on the request for construction of a proposed attached, single story garage within 5' feet of the front parcel line, whereas a 20 foot setback is normally required on the .21 acre property located within Brookside Park subdivision. He referred to Municipal Code Section 18.52.090 of the zoning ordinance which allows the Planning Commission to grant an exception to permit a garage to be located within 5 feet of the front parcel line, but no closer than 15 feet of the centerline of the street, if two findings can be made as described in the staff report. He used site photos Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - 2/4/04 Page 1 3-0 and site plans to show the Commission the existing conditions of the site. Commissioner Elkind raised concern with the 15 foot height of the proposed garage and wondered about the potential visual impacts to views along Tan Oak Drive. Responding to Councilman Merk, Mr. Kister and his designer Mr. Leopold indicated that the garage is proposed to be 15' in height, with the pitch creating an attractive fa9ade and allows for some storage. Commissioner Wengert felt the project was reasonably thought out for the site and surrounding areas. Commissioner Mcintosh concurred th8t the request for exception was appropriate. but did request that the ASCC consider the matter of roof height and visual impact off site. Commissioner Zaffaroni further concurred that this request was an appropriate example for exception, and not unusual for this zoning district. r.OMMITTEF STAFF r.OMMITTEE RFPORTS ;:Inn RECOMMENI1ATIONS None APPROVAl OF MINUTES By motion of Commissioner Mcintosh, seconded by Commissioner Elkind, the minutes of the meeting of January 21, 2004 were approved as submitted by a vote of 4-0 (Breon, absent). AI1.JOlJRNM~NT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m~ Leah Zaffaroni, Vice Chairman Planning Commission Leslie Lambert Planning Manager Planning Commission Meeting Minutes - 2/4/04 Page 2 3-4 .reLJruary 1,), LVV.), rill1\.::, LUUUIC l'011Cl II \-\-:) I '-.-lLJ L'5'1L:) I VI' \'Y VI' .0U1 '- '-''-''_1.'- 1..-'1 jj '.':"~..L:ii_i:..i.t:"';;'"'-:;"";'/ .J. ......0"-' -'- "--'-'- - /::.If!~ 1~_~ 7/)' ,~. , '~:L:: ~l~,~e ~':.:,;,~ ~l~"'_-'-MJ,J ,.~ ;:"1 ~,-l~,~:~t;. iP,;~!l<: -- ,-.<""-. 10%di5rountlfp-toSi6ooffyourneA~"is1U '1 ~'/>o:~~~~" 'aI")) ;l(}O':'c, li Search I SanDiegoReader. COOl Home Classifieds Coupons Contests Job Giant Matches Page 9 Calendar Concerts Events Movies Music Restaurants Theater Articles Ask Saffron Back When Best Buys Blog World City Lights Cover Story Crasher Diary of a Diva Driven Extras It's a Crime Letters Like Wow! Matthew Alice Obermeyer Reading City Lights $engJbis stoaJQ ~Jri~I1~ Published on February 13, 2003 Parks Coddle Killer Trees By Ernie Grimm On January 6,2003, Suzee Vlk, a 49-year-old resident of Linda Vista, was walking her small dog around the plaza at Old Town San Diego State Historic Park. It would be her last walk. The 49-year-old was crushed by a 100- foot eucalyptus that fell in a Santa Ana wind. Four more eucalyptus trees are on the plaza. Old Town is the busiest state park in California, with over six million visitors a year. How likely is it that another person will be killed by a falling branch or a failing tree? Are the remaining trees accidents waiting to happen? I asked John Sevier, a certified arborist with 30 years of experience. "Yeah," he said, "accidents waiting to happen again." What drew him to trees was his interest in safety. He had been in the Air Force from 1966 to 1970, working in flight safety. "I was always intrigued by safety," he said, "and the more I worked on trees, the more I began to realize that trees are , nothing but a big series of levers, and if the weight out on the limbs ", surpasses the strength of the attachment point, you will have a limb failure. ) Limb and tree failures happen very, very often with eucalyptus trees, and ( has caused some of the most tragic accidents in San Diego history -- not J<" going back very far to the mid-1980s, when Frieda Williams was killed by a falling eucalyptus limb in the San Diego Zoo." Sevier was an expert witness in the trial that followed that accident. This part of his business started in 1979, when a lawyer in town contacted him. "A eucalyptus limb hit his client," Sevier said, "Put him in a wheelchair for life. The lawyer simply wanted to know if the accident was preventable. That was back in '79, and I would say from 1979 to 2003, I've probably 3-l0 08/22/2006 http://www.sdreader.com/php/ ci tyshow .php ?id=877 IIEntin Phi San 6 in stec San Fine coni in 5 hen tow prol ~ App or g info We con' to g tad, Cas Fill i Win Mar 6prr hen priz Wic tick, seal ~ ren $16 ma~ batt roar gar< was tenr ace. 436 170 Cal ,$30 , rete CLE Res incll entr rent 1 vUIUillJ 1-.1, f...VV...J, J. '-Ul"-0 '-..-VUU1"-' .1"-1.1.1\....'.1 J...J.V\.......J I '--J.LJ .J.....-/J.bJ.J.Lu 1 y", ".'-.-.......'-'...............'-'.......'--....~.. Remote Control Roam-O-Rama Seen On DVD Sheep and Goats Sporting Box T.G.I.F. Guides Baja Health & Beauty Legal Tickets Travel Wedding Online Ads Contact Us worked on over 160 tree-accident cases of one type or another." "What percentage of those were eucalyptus trees?" "Oh, the majority of either whole tree or limb failure were eucalyptus. The main player in big-tree accidents seems to be the eucalyptus." "Why?" "The trees dre from Australi(l. They're used to struggling and reaching out with their roots, under very adverse conditions, to explore the soil to find nutrients and moisture. And when the eucalyptus trees are transported here, to a place like San Diego, and put in places like city parks and state parks, then when the area is irrigated with sprinklers, like here in Old Town, you've got a compromise of the root system. The trees are used to struggling and reaching and surviving without being fed the moisture of the sprinkler system. "And so two things happen. One, the roots tend to get 'lazy'; they don't reach out and explore, they don't have to go very far to get their moisture. And the other problem with the lawn and irrigation system over eucalyptus is that the lawn acts like a kind of wetting agent, and it keeps the ground soppy around the roots. It never totally dries out. The strength of the roots can be compromised by rot. So you're maintaining a lawn and you're feeding a monster, which is an overwatered eucalyptus tree. What you have is really a very attractive atmosphere to come under and walk under and to be under that is, in fact, a death trap." Sevier and I were standing next to the tree that had fallen. I pointed to it and said, "So you're saying this tree had a shallow root structure and its roots had rotted?" "Y es. We can tell by looking at this root ball right here. It's a very, very limited amount of roots that were actually sound and strong and holding the tree, versus the compromised roots -- it just wasn't enough to hold the tree." "Had there been any warning signs with this tree?" "Well, certainly experts in the area of eucalyptus trees, which the state park system has -- some very highly qualified experts -- they know that sprinkler systems, lawns, massive root systems, very heavy foliage, and very heavy limbs is a recipe for disaster. What it amounts to is a gamble. It's not a matter of lfthere'll be a limb failure -- something's going to happen, either a tree failure or a limb failure. The concern I have now after this fatality is that after seeing the park headquarters building over here, if that other tree [he pointed to the nearest eucalyptus] were to fail, it would http://www.sdreader.com/php/cityshow . php ?id=877 mer inVE ava and 858 see PRe . OFF Mar pro' Gua : Live potl Hiril caul Imn plac Cali Can Adc. Sml wal CLE Mer foot top, or b 199 Con PUll Bale : 8.5- 661 .3~ I' 08/22/2006 1'CDrUary 15, LUU5; t'aJ.E~ LvLlLlle hlllel llc:e~ I LHj Ll~lH0 I IIv I'V VI' .::'U1LCLUU.LUlll 1- I....ts...... J 1...-'.1 _' cut the building in half. The people standing here would be severely injured or killed." "Do you think the remaining trees present a threat?" "The remaining trees are in danger either from a whole tree failure or a limb failure. These trees need hazard-reduction pruning, and until that work can be done, the area should be roped off, because people are walking under the remaining trees here, and what it's like is having a bus in your bus neet thaI has hald tires and hlows uut and causes a fritaJily, and then the rest of the buses in the fleet are still rolling down the road with bald tires! From looking around here, the rationale seems to be, 'Well, we had one blowout, so we're probably good for a while.' " Representatives from the park had a different view of the potential danger. I spoke with Stephen Bakken, a forester for the state park system. His job is to inspect trees and to train ecologists to recognize and mitigate hazardous ones. I began our conversation by saying, "I assume you pay particular attention to eucalyptus trees." "Well, no more so than any of the others. Each species has its own problems and attributes." "So you don't consider the eucalyptus more dangerous?" "As a general rule, no. Some species we are treating more aggressively now because of the summer branch-drop problems those species tend to have." Bakken said their usual policy is to examine trees every two years. Some parks do it every year, such as those hit hard by sudden oak death. The program of tree evaluation has been going on for over 35 years. I mentioned Sevier's contention that it was dangerous to surround eucalyptus trees with irrigated grass. I asked if Bakken agreed. "No," he said. "That's the case with some species of native oaks in California, but it's not necessarily an issue with eucalyptus. I mean, you can obviously overwater something." "Do the four remaining trees at the Old Town plaza cause any concern for you?" "Oh yeah, we inspect for root pathogens. That's what we do all the time, especially in a landscaped area." "Would the tree that blew over be a sign of potential problems with the four remaining trees on the plaza?" 3--,.2-) http://www.sdreader.com/php/ ci tyshow. php ?id=877 08/22/2006 1- \....U.lULUj' J.J, L.J\JVJ,..L \..-l..L..L'L,' .........'"-'..............L"-' .J."'-.,l..,l..,l......,l. ....,l.'-''-'U, -------"'J ~"W"'''''' . "Possibly. I had inspected the trees in December and didn't find any problems that gave me concern. And I looked at them again after the failure, and I came to the same conclusion." "When you looked at the one that failed, you didn't see any pathogens?" "Oh, there were some there. But I recognized that before when I looked at it. 1 had some concern ahout the tree, so my lTcCllllmcndation -- and T put it on the records -- was to have the crown worked on. And the tree had also been worked on earlier in the year. The crown had been reduced as well, last spring. We treat each tree on an individual basis and look at its structural integrity and its health. We know we are coming back in one to two years to look at it again." Again, I expressed Sevier's concern about the danger of eucalyptus trees in public places. "I take it you disagree with him?" "Well, we've had 30 years' experience. And what do we get? Seventy million visitors a year to our parks. We've had very few deaths, very few injuries. You know, a modest amount of claims. But I'd say, all in all, the program's working reasonably well. Each species has its own attributes, and some of them are compatible with a developed area, others are less compatible with a developed area. You basically have to take that into account if you are planting or replanting or whatever." "Are the trees in Old Town, then, more compatible?" "We didn't plant them." That point was also stressed by John Quirk, chief spokesman for Old Town San Diego State Historic Park. The trees were not originally on the plaza but were planted in the early 1920s, at the latest, by the city. They have been regularly inspected, Quirk said, and "There has never been anything indicated by our internal or external consultants that would predict the massive tree failure that happened in that windstorm. Now that we've had that type of failure, we are evaluating the future of those trees." Trees Australians have nicknamed "widow makers." Return to City Li&.hts main page. Send this storY to a friend Advertisement 3-13 http://www.sdreader.com/php/ city show . php ?id=877 08/22/2006 V'I V f I VV. 1. U111U11(..1. LV lJ1l.-lll1L 1.\....'1 /U L/l......l__Hll") Archive Copyright 2000 Pomona College, ASPC ~-- ([ f~\' ~ hI ~ \'n t u: if \' April 7. 2000 Ed/Let Pomona to Blame for '98 Deaths Editor: /" f I represented Clint and Hiromi Kurahashi, the parents of Yuta J.\ "Pete" Kurahashi who died as a the result of the Eucalyptus tree f falling on February 23, 1998. The facts of the case as learned \ " through depositions and written discovery demonstrated that the ) . Pomona College Grounds Department was negligent in its care of campus trees, particularly its aging Eucalyptus trees. Pomona College elected to plant these trees, mostly around the turn of the century, and it had a continuing obligation to monitor and maintain them in a sage and reasonable way. The tree in question was inspected by an arborist, on one occasion in April 1994 after it developed a significant lean over Fourth Street. The arborist, Paul Rogers, determined the tree was safe for the time being, yet no one from the Pomona College Grounds Department inspected the tree at - any time after April of 1994. Experts agree, however, that walking inspections of large trees set in urban areas should be conducted on -an annual basis. And this tree stood 80 feet, weighed 30 tons and was located at the corner of a busy campus intersection. The fact that this tree leaned over a public thoroughfare and posed a significant hazard was without question; it was inexcusable that Pomona College failed to conduct any follow up inspection of it. . '\ Moreover, there were warning signs that the large Eucalyptus trees ) on campus presented a significant hazard. In 1997, just one year ! before the incident, 3 large Eucalyptus trees fell in a windstorm j across a public access way and within 500 yards of this tree. Fortunately, no one was injured then. Yet, it was tragic that Pomona College still failed to take any precautionary measures for its remaining Eucalyptus trees. In fact, at the time of Peter Kurahashi's and Brian Cressner's deaths, Pomona College had never conducted a campus-wide inspection of Eucalyptus trees. In March of 1998, one month after the boys' deaths, Pomona College conducted its first ever campus-wide inspection of large Eucalyptus trees. -r ( During the litigation, the Kurahashi' s and the Cressner's retained James Clark, formerly a professor of Horticulture at the University of California, Davis, to evaluate Pomona College's care of this tree. Mr. Clark was the author of an arborist's manual entitled The Evaluation and Analysis of Hazardous Trees in Urban Settings. He was regarded as the most knowledgeable person in his field and he http://www.tsl.pomona.edu/archives/00/0407/eJ/OI.html 1. Ub\..... 1 "-..'1 .;..... 3~J4- 08/22/2006 V'll V ffVV. 1 UUIVlll...~ LV L.J1L1.11H.....- 1\..J1 /'.J L-'\...-U.ULJ considered Pomona College's care and maintenance of its Eucalyptus trees to be grossly inadequate. Sadly, Peter Kurahashi's and Brian Cressner's deaths were preventable. Had Pomona College taken better care of its trees, these young men would be alive today. In acknowledgement of that fact and the unimaginable loss suffered by the Kurahashi' s and the Cressner's, the case settled prior to trial for 1.6 million dollars. While no amount of money could compensate these families for the loss of their beautiful sons, the Kurahashi's felt the amount of the settlement at least reflected the magnitude of Pomona Col1ege's error. For Pomona College to state publicly that they did nothing wrong, and that the settlement resulted solely from the will of its insurance company, is disingenuous and wrong. During the litigation and settlement, the insurance company acted as an agent of Pomona College, and the facts of the case as learned through an exhaustive discovery process demonstrated Pomona College's negligence. The case settled for the amount it did because Pomona College failed its duty to adequately inspect and care for its own trees, and that failure caused the deaths of Peter Kurahashi and Brian Cressner. Sincerely, Michael J. Korda l:Iom~ I A &1' I Sports I Opinions I Ed/Let I Ope.!LEorum I Archive I Info http://www.tsl.pomona.edu/archives/OO/0407/eJ/Ol.html 3-15 08/22/2006 LJLl UICClJ dllU UUlU r I ell! 1. ub,L. .1 l..11 -.J iGREEN & GOLD ~l{[ll LANDSCAPE FEATURES can provide the most memorable visual image of a campus and represent a significant physical asset. Recognizing the importance of this resource to DCI, in 1995 former Chancellor Laurel Vv'ilkening directed a critical review of campu~ landscape planning, implementation, and management objectives. The resulting "Green and Gold Plan" identifies ways to better manage existing campus landscape assets and provides direction for future development of landscaping that is environmentally suitable, more sustainable given natural and financial resource constraints, and that better addresses campus planning and design objectives. Table of Contents: A. Background and General Planning Concepts B. The "Green and Gold Plan": Goals and Objectives C. Implementation Plan D. UCI "Green and Gold" Plant Material List (under construction) o Native Trees o Non-Native, Drought-Tolerant Trees o Native Shrubs o Non-Native Shrubs o Native Ground Covers and Vines o Non-Native Ground Covers and Vines o Seed Mix (Wildflowers) A Background and General Planning Concepts Initial Campus Development The original site designated for the campus on the Irvine Ranch was devoid of any significant trees and consisted of rolling hills covered in naturalized and native grasses with pockets of Coastal Sage Scrub. To achieve a campus presence and human scale in the early phases of development, while retaining the natural features and character of the site, DCI's initial landscape planning focused on establishing an urban forest. Some ofthe basic concepts in the landscape architectural supplement of DCI's 1963 Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) included the following: . The natural character and beauty of the rolling hills and the magnificent views should be maintained and selectively enhanced. . Existing canyons and drainage ways should be used to form greenbelts and windbreaks, and to tie the Central Campus to the outlying areas of the University community. 3- , Co http://www .ceplanning. uci.edu/ greengold.html 08/22/2006 . The landscape character of the academic quads should be more formal and urban, in contrast to the more informal areas between them (open space corridors, buffers and central park). . The campus should be landscaped as an "arboretum," utilizing an extensive plant palette that is developed to include a wide variety of species, both exotics and native, that are environmentally suitable to the site conditions. Most development over vcrs first 25 years focused on the Central Campus which has the character of a heavily forested park with well over 10,000 trees (estimated value over $12 million) in the central academic core. There are 15,000 to 20,000 trees over the entire campus. Today, the community's most memorable visual image of UeT is that of a forest of mature Eucalyptus Grandis trees. Well over 100 feet in height, they dominate the central academic core as well as views to the Central Campus. While some of the site's natural features have been retained, significant grading has occurred to provide for campus development and a large amount of exotic landscaping has been established with high water and maintenance demands. In addition, some open space corridors have been compromised to meet other development requirements. Current Plans The 1989 LRDP and LRDP EIR, as well as their implementing .documents (such as the Campus Design Framework and Guidelines), build on this original landscape theme and advocate additional concepts which include: . Emphasis on the use of native and drought tolerant species, particularly in outer campus areas. . Development of open space corridors as habitat linkages as well as open space amenities for the campus. . Continued use of landscape buffers at the campus perimeter and to physically separate land uses. . Theme planting palettes specific to each academic quad in order to achieve individual place identity. . A more comprehensive treatment of outdoor spaces including hardscape, street furnishings, and plant materials to achieve a unified urban design. Development since 1989 has involved increased implementation of drought tolerant and native landscaping and initial efforts to develop campus arroyos as native plant habitat corridors. During UCl's rapid development in the late 1980's, however, compromises and inconsistencies related to planning objectives occurred. Recent resource constraints have highlighted the need for landscaping with lower water and maintenance requirements. I The "Green and Gold Plan": Goals and Objectives It is important to re-focus the management of UCl's existing urban forest and to improve the planning and implementation process for future development more consistently with current campus values, 3-11- http://www . ceplanning. uci.edul greengold.html 08/22/2006 ULl Uleell i.:lllU UU1U rlall 1 d6L ..J Ul ..J objectives, and priorities. The first phases of UCI's landscape development are reaching maturity and will require a sound management strategy for the long-term viability of this significant campus and regional asset. The outer campus areas remain largely undeveloped and require careful planning to ensure proper development. These conditions provide an excellent opportunity for a young campus to consider new, innovative approaches to the development and management of campus landscaping. The results will affect the overall visual image of the DCI campus for many years to come. Future managers and developers of the campus landscape must ensure that optimum resource values and functional design objectives are achieved as part of the campus' investment in the management and implementation of open space and landscape resources. Four planning and management goals with supporting objectives have been established: Goall. Develop a landscape that is sustainable and provides for long term conservation of resources: energy, water, labor, and reduced production of green waste. . Water Conservation-Utilize plant materials, design and planting techniques, and irrigation systems that minimize water usage. . Plant Suitability-Use native and other environmentally suitable plant materials. ( ) I . Species and Age Diversity-Ensure both diversity of species and diversity of age in the urban forest. Trees of the same size and age tend to decline and die during the same period causing costly planning and maintenance problems and necessitating long periods of re-growth. . De-Intensification of Eucalyptus Trees-Remove existing eucalyptus trees due to hazards or j~) decline and replace with native and drought tolerant species which will introduce age diversity in the central campus. Goal 2. Develop campus landscaping and open space networks that maximize local and regional natural resource values. . Habitat Value-Utilize native plant materials that provide high wildlife foraging value. . Habitat and Open Space Linkages-Develop habitat corridors utilizing UCl's historic drainage ways, or arroyos, that connect the campus with regional open space areas such as the San Joaquin Hills and the wetland areas of the Upper Newport Bay, San Joaquin Freshwater Marsh, and San Diego Creek. Protect existing habitat resources. Restore, as networks of corridors and habitat sites, the isolated patches and discontinuous landscape corridors that were created under the original LRDP development. This will benefit the campus and also support regional habitat planning goals. . Preservation-Preserve natural features and environmentally significant areas. Retain the character of campus topography, ridge lines, view sheds, and vistas. Preserve historic landscape. Goal 3. Develop landscaping that provides the greatest functional value consistent with comprehensive campus planning and design objectives. . Maximize Functionality-Multiple functions, beyond aesthetic considerations, must be provided: define spaces, provide solar shading, define circulation elements, provide visual screening, reduce 3-l<O http://www .ceplanning. uci.edu/ greengold.html 08/22/2006 scale of monumental campus buildings, create public open spaces, and provide recreational amenities. . Design Consistency-Implement campus landscape that is consistent with, and supports, campus planning and design objectives to provide a unifying framework, place identity, and human scale to the campus. . Institutional Quality-Utilize plant materials, hardscape, and street furniture of institutional quality (i.e., long-lived, pest resistant, and durable). Goal 4. While selection of appropriate plant materials and proper planting and irrigation techniques arc crucial first steps in developing sustainable landscaping, it is equally important that adequate management programs are in place to preserve this asset. . Pruning-Prune to remove hazards and to improve vigor and aesthetics. . Fertilization-Environmentally responsible nutrient management to maintain plant health and reduce susceptibility to pests, diseases, and environmental stresses. . Inspection-Scheduled inspections for overall health, safety, and appearance. . Removal and Replacement-Even with good tree management, all trees will ultimately decline and require replacement. When removals are required, they are evaluated within these criteria: I) dead or dying trees; 2) trees that pose a hazard to people or may cause significant damage to buildings, property, or hardscape; and 3) trees growing in undesirable locations. . Protection-Control disease and pests through an integrated and environmentally responsible pest management program. Protect from physical hazards. . Green Waste-To minimize waste and meet solid waste regulatory requirements, all trimmings should be processed into mulch and used to control weeds, control erosion, retain soil moisture, and provide nutrients. . Habitat Areas-While habitat areas will generally require far less ongoing maintenance than more urban landscape areas, special management is required for protection of habitat value and for teaching and research activities in these areas. C Implementation Plan Throughout the campus, landscaping will be implemented in various ways. Since the availability of funding is limited and is likely to remain so, it is critical that all landscape development be closely managed. UCI must provide an advocacy role and take advantage of every opportunity to actively pursue tree grant programs, volunteer tree planting efforts, fund raising, and other support to implement the campus landscape program. Implementation opportunities include the following: Landscape elements of individual capital projects. These projects undergo review by campus staff for conformance with campus design guidelines and standards. Examples include: 3-,~ http://www .ceplanning. uci.edu/ greengold.html 08/22/2006 L- '-..-.1 '--.)i\....-\""'11 GUIU '--J\ '1\....<. 1. lL_Ul . Arroyo Vista Housing-native and drought tolerant planting . California Avenue-native and drought tolerant planting Mitigation measures and other conditions placed on campus related projects. Examples include: . West Campus Habitat Corridor . University Hills Riparian Corridor . East Campus Riparian Corridor Participation in regional open space and landscaping programs. Examples include: . Irvine Ranch Water District "Operation Outreach" native planting and irrigation retrofit projects, such as the California A venue Habitat Corridor Grant, gift and volunteer programs. Examples include: . State Urban Forestry Native Tree Grant Program . Berkeley Avenue Native Tree Planting . State Highway Landscape Grant Program . Small/Minority Business Landscape Grant Program . University Drive Slope Habitat Planting . University Hills Community Park Ongoing grounds maintenance operations. Examples include: . Ongoing tree management program: . Central campus eucalyptus tree removal and pruning program . Bridge Road tree removals . Campus Village eucalyptus tree removals (Note: All tree removals are reviewed by the Director of Campus & Environmental Planning, a licensed landscape architect, and are to be accompanied by replanting of appropriate trees to achieve replacement and age diversity.) , . Irrigation Water Management Program . Integrated Biological Pesticide Management Plan . Green Waste Recycling Program ReturnlQlJCI PlannillgPLQgr~m~ Last updated: 7/26/99. g..rnj!!~@ ucL~9JJ Copyright (Q 1999 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. 3'-00 http://www .ceplanning. uci.edu/ greengold.html 08/22/2006 ...&t >. <' -r'b "UIIUl" V.l.}ICI",;~ ....{.t;~(. ,. City of Oakland Public Works Agency www.oaklandpw.com PWA Call Center: (510) 615-5566 - pwacallcenter@oaklandnet.com Home About Us Departments Volunteer Key Services Tree Section 7101 Edgewater Drive, Building #4, Oakland, CA 94621 (510) 615-5850 WWw .Qgkl i3JlgpW. c;Ql1ljtI~~;> IrH Section Home . Hazardous Trees . Pending Tree Removals - Public Notice . Permit Application . Permit Fees . Protected Trees . Sidewalk Trees . Tree Ordinance Related Links from Public Works: . Arbor ~ . Creeks . Doin' the Green Thing . Environmental Services . Green Building . Incident Reports . Landscape > H-9JD11 > Q_eR9rtll)~nt~ > QJ2@rtm~nt of Infrg~tryctlJregm! QpE2rgtiQns > !nfI9~trIJQt!JI~_ Mgintemmge Qj'Li~jgn > Tree Secti.RO > Protected Trees Ordinance I Protected Trees Ordinance General Information ~. \ ( \.,', A permit must be applied for before removing a protected tree. A permit is also required if work might damage or destroy a protected tree. A protected tree is Coast Live Oak four inches or larger in diameter, measured four and a half feet above the ground, or any other species nine inches in diameter or larger, except Eucalyptus and Monterey Pine trees. Eucalyptus trees are not protected and no permit is required. Monterey Pines do not require a permit but the species must be verified by city staff prior to removal. There is no charge for Monterey Pine verification. "\ ( I; \ --.l If a tree is hazardous and presents an immediate threat to safety or property, the permit process may be waived b the city staff prior to removal. An inspector from the Tree Section will respond to your request for a hazardous tree inspection in twenty-tour hours or less. There is no charge for this service. You must be the tree owner to request a permit waiver. You cannot ask for a permit waiver to remove your neighbor's tree. Permit applications are taken at three locations. Development related applications are taken at the Zoning Desk, 250 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 2nd floor. Development is considered to be any activity regulated by the City of Oakland, and which requires design reviver or a zoning, building, grading or demolition permit. Non-development applications are taken at Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services: 1520 Lakeside Drive or 7101 Edgewater Drive. Non-development is typically a homeowner wishing to remove a tree growing in the front or back yard. City owned trees are also subject to the permit process unless they are immediate hazard. The minimum fee for a development related application is currently $147, and for non- development, $45. Up to ten trees may be listed on an application for the minimum fee. An extra $8 oer tree is charaed for the 11 th throuah 100th tree. 3-d' http://www.oaklandpw.comIPage551.aspx 08/22/2006 (i1)U It takes a minimum of five weeks to process a permit application. The request may be Lighting Assessment District (LLADl approved or denied based on the criteria listed in the Protected Trees Ordinance. The . Measure DD - Lake Merritttree(s) on the application are posted for twenty working days. Once a permit is Park Proiects approved or denied, the permit is held for a five working day appeal period. If there are · ~a~k tnd Building no appeals, the permit is issued. If a permit is appealed, the procedures and aln enance . Sewer Maintenance timeframes very depending on the type of permit application. . Street and Sidewalk Maintenance . Volunteer Opportunities . Winter S!QIJlJJ"reparation The information on this page is a summary of the Protected Trees Ordinance, ChaR!~r l.2~~Q of the Q1:!!sJangMuniQigal J;;Qde. For a copy of the Ordinance, contact the City Clerk, 1 City Hall Plaza, (510) 238-3611 or the Tree Section at 7101 Edgewater Drive, (510) 615-5850. Related Links from the City of Oakland: Please telephone the Tree Section at (510) 615-5850 for more information about the Protected Trees Ordinance. . Office of Parks and Recreation This page was last updated or reviewed on: Monday, December 19, 2005 Copyright@City of Oakland. All Rights Reserved. 3-d~ http://www.oaklandpw.comlPage551.aspx 08/22/2006 Don't Plant a Pest Cal-IPe> Responsible Landscaping> Don't Piant a Pest> State of California 1 About Us; Trees of the State of California region Choose another plant type for State of California lL1vasive Plants Definitions & Impacts Invasive Plant Inventory Invasive plants are listed in red boxes. Alternatives are listed I Invasive plants that are also a fire hazard are identified by this ~ Management Research INVASIVE! DO NOT PLANT! INVASI Mapping Responsible landscaping Policy Cal-IPC Symposia Field Courses Publications & Resources More/larger photos Related Sites Contact Us myoporum Myoporum laetum Invades along the coast from Sonoma Counl Forms dense stands with no other vegetatio large areas. Spread by birds. Leaves and fru wildlife and livestock. Burns easily. Doesn't f interior areas. Invasive! Do Not Plant! Invasive! Brazilian pepper, California pepper ( pepper Schinus terebinthifolius or Schinus molle Pepper trees are native to South America (d that Peruvian peppertree is sometimes calle, peppertree). Seeds are transported by birds into natural areas. The aggressive growth of them to displace native trees and form dens natural areas. They produce undesirable sue sprout unwanted seedlings. A serious proble California. Less of a problem in the San Frar and Central Valley, but care should be taker wildlands. Invasive! Do Not Plant! Invasive! blue gum eucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus 3-a'::, http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping/ dpp/plantpage. php ?re gion=state&type= Trees 08/22/2006 More/larger photos Found along the coast from Humboldt to Sal the Central Valley. Most invasive in coastal I, invades native plant communities, causing d plant and animal populations. Fire departme Southern California recommend against usin trees for landscaping because they are extrE ----;;,~~~~..-'o..- .-'---"" .....'"""_._...~~ ~...,.-"......~._,..,....~. _ ",,_~~",",l.-~L:':'1:l"~~->..o_C~''''~ "".. c.:. Invasive! Do Not Plant! Invasive! I~ ,. f ". '\, r\j, ~\ \, #/1' j 3.. :"~.' Z-."."lr ....~~~ ..~il;.-... '~.' ',~;.~~ ",- " , " L. 1 , More/larger photos Russian olive Elaeagnus angustifolia Found throughout California. Able to spread with the help of birds and mammals. Invade stream corridors, pushing out native willows cottonwoods. Reduces water levels. Provide! habitat. Serious invader in other western stc Invasive! Do Not Plant! Invasive! saltcedar Tamarix spp. A serious invader throughout California and states. Uses excessive amounts of water, sa changes water courses. Diminishes wildlife t increases fire hazzard. Not cdmmonly sold b occasionally available. More/larger photos Invasive! Do Not Plant! Invasive! ~'~"; r '~', ~ ",~ ',\- ~;. '~, ~\ ~ -".., "..r.... s '. .. ., it .. I'" '1'- . W h" ..,. '-~ ~,~ (: More/larger photos Chinese tallow tree Sapium sebiferum A huge problem in southern states, this spec been found in California wildlands. Grows ar rapidly, pushing out native plants. 3 ..~t 08/22/2006 http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping/ dpp/plantpage. php ?region=state&type= Trees \.-.L-U-1-1- \.-.. uLu.L....... Ul \.-.l.J.ll1-Vllllu.. 1-1"-,\ ... 1 ubL- .J \.-li I !nvas:iveE Do N~Jt PI2H'!;!! :E~wasive! scarlet wisteria Sesbania punicea New to California, spreading along the Amer central California. Also found in the Delta an California. A serious problem in South Africa Grows and spreads rapidly along river and s Pushing out native vegetation and wildlife. ~ by washing downstream. Invasive! Do Not Plant! Invasive! ~.JDr -". ~:~, '$I ~ More/larger photos single seed hawthorn Crataegus monogyna An established invader of the Pacific Northw spreading through northern California. Cap a dispersal by birds. Creates dense thickets, c structure of woodland understories. May hyt threaten native hawthorn species. Plant Care ~ Full ~un 0 Reg ula r water 16 Guide :(D Part shade 8 Medium water ,.-.=. o Full ~hade 0 Low water ~ More/larger photos TRY THESE PLANTS INSTEAD hybrid crape myrtle Lagerstromeia hybrids ~8 Stunning tree; great in a hot area. Showy Sl hot pink, white, lavender, and other colors t to brilliant fall foliage. Somewhat susceptibh the best choice for coastal locations. DecidU! Varies by hybrid. Height: 8-25 ft., varies by Chinese fringe tree Chionanthus retusus ~oe Blooms like clouds of the whitest, feathery f 3-0)5 http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping/ dpp/plantpage. php ?region=state&type= Trees 08/22/2006 More/larger photos More/larger photos More/larger photos ..."" - ~ -::-.--- -;. ",~' , rIfj,. \. lit; ~~, - ' ~ ~~..:: i(i~~' ~~,.,...', . .'w' "';l...-....~ - \......... -." ,,'," ---';~~-' ~"'" - "I)" ~,~ ." -L:_-~._., .,.,-;,.. i1 -< , ~ ~., More/larger photos -L- u-b\..- I Vi I Handsome bark provides winter interest. Wi central California environments. The olive-Iii litter problem. May produce a significant am Deciduous. Zones: 3-9, 14-24. Height: To 2 wide. bronze loquat Eriobotrya deflexa ~.~ 0 e Fast-growing and easily trained. New leaves copper before turning green. Bunches of ere flowers in spring. Easy to plant and care for, drained soil. Can be subject to fireblight. EVI 8-24. Height: 12-30 ft. Width: 15-30 ft. sweet michelia Michelia doltsopa ~1)O Prune to create a narrow, upright tree. Furr~ open to cream or white blossoms. Thin, leat leaves are red underneath. Evergreen. Zone To 25 ft. eastern redbud Cercis canadensis ~1,Doe Can be fast-growing. Rosy pink flowers bloo leaves appear and are followed by beanlike i well-drained soil. Cercis reniformis 'Oklahorr popular. Deciduous. Zones: 1-24. Height: 2! 25-35 ft. Japanese snowdrop tree Styrax japonicus ~J)O Slender, graceful trunk. Broad crown. Leave yellow in fall. Delicate, fragrant, white flowe leaves, creating a layered effect. Deciduous. 21. Height: 30 ft., narrow in youth, wide in I 3 - C>LP http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping! dpp/plantpage. php ?region=state&type= Trees 08/22/2006 \-,u-1.1 \-. 0lall- V1 \-.:1.111V1111.:1. 11l-' , More/larger photos 1 ubl- .J Vi / More/larger photos - .'. ~ ",' <~.~'. ...... " "-. -,',--,',, ,,- " "~,, !"-~, r" '".. ' - - , . . ~, - ~ '" ' " More/larger photos More/larger photos marina strawberry tree Arbutus 'Marina' ~eo Rosy pink, urn-shaped flowers, deep red bal strawberry like fruits in yellow and red, Eas~ care for. Can be susceptible to greenhouse t tolerate very alkaline or poorly-drained soil. reach tree size. Evergreen. Zones: 8,9, 14-, Width: To 40 ft. water gum Tristaniopsis laurina ~o Formal plant; can be trained as a single or r tree. Mahogany-colored bark peels, revealin white bark beneath. Yellow flowers produce Can be slow-growing. Damaged by very colc cultivar 'Elegant'. Evergreen. Zones: 15-24. Width: 5-30 ft. Nichol's willow-leafed peppermint Eucalyptus nicholii i;::r.J5 One of the cleanest, most graceful eucalyptl branches and not too much litter. Crushed IE like peppermint. Furrowed, rich, reddish-bra Damaged by very cold winters. Evergreen. L Height: 36-48 ft. Width: 15-36 ft. tupelo Nyssa sylvatica i;::r.~eJ5 Crooked branches and dark, red-tinged bar~ winter picture. Birds are attracted to the fru yellow, orange, and red before dropping in f shade tree. Poor in air pollution. Needs acidi '3 -6>1- http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping/dpp/plantpage. php ?region=state&type= Trees 08/22/2006 0C1.1-.1..1. 0. OL.dL....... Vi \....UlliVilllU 11\",-\",-2) More/larger photos J. 1.-\.0...... 'J '-,'- , salinity. Deciduous. Zones: 2-10, 14-21. He Width: 15-25 ft. -==~~~~--==,===--.-._,..-..-....-....~-=-=~=::;.~--.:::.:.=~-=--:.::::-~-;;:;~==..'-:::.. More/larger photos More/larger photos More/larger photos southern live oak Quercus virginiana ~o Relatively fast-growing and long-lived. Very interior climates. Easy to plant and care for. Zones: 4-24. Height: 40-80 ft. Width: 80-H bald cypress Taxodium distichum 1):.oeoXf Delicate, feathery foliage sprays turn reddisl dropping in the fall. Tolerates drought or vel and any but the most alkaline soil. Trunk ca at the base. No pests or diseases. Easy to pi Tolerates any amount of water. Deciduous. : 24. Height: 50-70 ft. Width: 20-30 ft. burr oak Quercus macrocarpa 1):. 0 e Rugged-looking tree with flaky grayish bark. lobed leaves are glossy green. Large, distinc covered in fringed cap. Tolerant of poor coni can be a trip hazard. Deciduous. Zones: 1-1 60-75 ft., equally wide when mature. tulip tree Liriodendron tulipifera 3-a-o http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping/ dpp/plantpage. php ?region=state&type= Trees 08/22/2006 La1-11L: 0LaLe UJ La111U1JJJd 110-- More/larger photos More/larger photos More/larger photos 1. u.t;L. I Ul I ~o Straight, columnar trunk with a tall, pyrami( lyre-shaped leaves. Foliage starts bright gre yellow in fall. Tulip-shaped flowers in late sp interesting but not showy. Beautiful large sh Likes slightly acidic, well-drained soil and pit Deciduous. Zones: 2-12, 14-24. Height: 60- 40 ft. dawn redwood Metasequoia glyptostroboides ~o Soft, pale green needles turn reddish-brown autumn, leaving a beautiful winter silhouettE when young. Older trees have fluted trunks. root fungus. Not suitable for very arid regior Deciduous. Zones: 3-10, 14-24. Height: To 20 ft. Japanese blueberry tree E1aeoca~pus decipiens ~O New leaves rusty and hairy, turning smooth Old leaves turn red before dropping. Blooms scented, white flowers in clusters followed b black, edible fruits. Likes rich, well-drained! pruning. Evergreen. Zones: 8-9, 14-24. Hei! Width: 20-30 ft. [ top of page] Bp Home I Join Us I Donate I Shop I Sitemap I Search: I ,Go .1 @ Copyright 2006 California Invasive Plant Council ~ Design & code by Fila Design 3-d1 http://www .cal- ipc.org/landscaping/dpp/plantpage. php ?region=state&type= Trees 08/22/2006 EVALUATION OF TREES AT THE CHINESE CHURCH IN CHRIST, 10455 BANDLEY DRIVE, CUPERTINO Assignment I was asked by Colin Jung, Planner, City of Cupertino, to inspect 8 trees located in the rear parking lot of the Chinese Church in Christ, 10455 Bandley Drive, Cupertino, California. Observations . I inspected the 8 trees of concern on June 22, 2006. All 8 trees are of the same species: Red Ironbark (Eucalyptus sideroxylon). For ease of discussion, I have numbered these trees as noted on the attached map. Trees # 1,2,5,6 and 8 are located in island planter beds in the center row of parking Trees # 3,4, and 7 are located in peninsula islands that are part of a fairly wide planter bed that extends for the full length of the property on the west side of the parking lot. The island planter beds, in which Trees # 1, 2, 5, and 6 exist, are not irrigated. In the planter bed, in which Tree # 8 exists, a bubbler has been recently activated to irrigate a young Chinese pistache (Pistacia chinensis). The wide planter bed on the west side of the site, in which Trees # 3,4, and 7 are a part, are irrigated. The canopies of Trees # 3, 4, and 7 are significantly denser than the canopies of Trees # 1,2, 5, 6, and 8. Generally all of the trees are healthy as exhibited by their dense canopies. Photos are provided in the attachments. The canopies are dense on all of the trees, but denser on Trees # 2, 4, and 7. On all of the trees, the branches are heavy with leaves and seed pods, causing the branch tips to bend downward sharply. On Tree # 1 only, I found half a dozen insects that appear to be a scale species (photo in the attachments). This does not represent an important aspect of the tree's health. On several of the trees, I observed a few leaves chewed along the margins. These scared leaves are consistent with damage caused by the Australian Tortoise Beetle (Trachymela sloahei). However, I consider the quantity to be insignificant damage. There is "bleeding" on the trunks of Trees # 1 and 5 (photo in attachments). This is called "Kino" a sap like liquid emitted from some trees when injured or during annual bark expansion. This bleeding is not believed to weaken these trees or to be a symptom of disease or insect infestation. Tree # 2 has suffered a broken branch (approximately 4 inches in diameter at the point of attachment) at about 25 feet above grade on the northwest side. This occurred recently, because the interior wood is creamy in color and fresh. . Tree # 8 has suffered a broken branch on the east side at about 20 feet above grade. The gray colored exposed interior wood, which is in the process of being covered by callus tissue, indicates that this break occurred a few years ago. 1 observed no other broken branches or limbs on these 8 trees. However, all 8 trees have been previously "topped" between 25-35 feet above grade. The length of the subsequent growth suggests that this was done a few years ago (I estimate 5-10 years ago). The inevitable result of "topping" is that the new watersprout shoots are poorly attached and, therefore, highly prone to failure. It is not surprising that Tree # 2 has a broken branch. 3~ 3>' Prepared by: Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist June 19th, 2006 EV ALUA TION OF TREES AT THE CH1NESE CHURCH IN CHRIST, 10455 BAND LEY DRIVE, CUPERTINO 2 Another result of "topping" requires that the trees be pruned every 3-5 years for life if they are expected to be reasonably safe. Of course, this becomes expensive. Conclusion These 8 trees have 2 insect species on only a few leaves, but this quantity does not constitute an infestation and, therefore, does not affect tree health. The fact that these trees have been topped but have not been pruned regularly is the primary cause of the broken branches. These trees could be mall1tained but the cost to prune them regularly and to keep them reasonably safe would be considerable. Recommendations I f these trees are removed, 1 recommend that they be replaced based on their val ue. I have calculated the value of each of these trees base on the ISA (International Society of Arboriculture) standards, 9th Edition, Trunk formula method. These calculations are accomplished using the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Trees # 1,2,4,5,7, and 8 each have a value of approximately $1,200-1,500, which is equivalent to one - 48 inch boxed specimen. Trees # 3 and 6, because of their larger trunk diameters, each have a value of approximately $2,500, which is equivalent to two - 48 inch boxed specimens. In the event that replacements would be made, I recommend that the replacement species be of a type that are highly valued in Cupertino, such as coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) or deodar cedar (cedrus deodara). However, whatever replacements are used, a permanent irrigation system must be installed not only for the establishment period of young trees but permanently. Established oak trees (and deodar cedars). in small planter beds such as seen at this site, require thorough irrigation monthly during the dry months of the year on a permanent basis. ~ M~:a~ Barrie D. Coate, Principal MLB/sh Enclosures: Assumpticms and Limiting Conditions Tree Charts Definition of Tree Charts Value Assessment Map Photos ~y 3 C;U Prepared by: Michael L Bench, Consulting Arborist June 19th, 2006 ; BARRIE D. COATE and ASSOCIATES (400) 353-1052 23535 Summil Road Los Galas, CA 95030 Tree # Plant Name 1 Pink lronbark --------- --------------------------------- Eucalvptus sideroxylon 2 Pink Ironbark 3 Pink lronbark 4 Pink lronbark 5 Pink lronbark 6 Pink Ironbark 7 Pink lronbark 8 Pink Iron bark ~ \ V\J V..J Measurements I 1 1 , I , I I I ~' w: W: u..: ~: T""' ";'::2 ~\:w 'l:lI1~ o:::(/) w:>- , ~ I(/) I LU :...!.. : "",,'~I <(""":....J: I ,::> I en (5::2! 0 I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 :~ :W W u.. N @ 0:: W ~ W I :2 en <( o is o W ~ <( :2 ~ CI) W ~ I <.9 W I Condition o W ~ <( :2 ~ CI) W o <( W 0:: 0... CI) I 1 I I I , I I , , I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 ~I 10 I T"" W 0:: ::> ~ o ::> n:: ~ CI) 17! : ! 40 35 ____~__-L___~____~____L___~___ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I 21: ! ! l : 55! 35 ----T---r---~----~---_r---r--- I I I I I I r I I , I I I I , I I I I I I I I I 27: : : : : 65: 35 ____~__~___~____~____L___L___ I I I I I I , I I I I I ~ I ~ I I I 20! ! ! ! ! 60! 35 ----T--~---~----~---~---r--- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I . I I I 23: : : : : 40: 35 ----t--~---~----i---_r---~--- I I I I I I 1 I : I I : I , I I I I 25: : : : : 65: 35 ----T--~---~----~---~---~--- I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I , 22: : : : : 60: 40 ----t--4r---~----t---~---~--- I I I I I I I I I ~ I : I I I I I I 20: : : : : 50: 35 ----+--~---~----.---~---~--- I I t I I f I I I I I I . I I I I I I , I , , , 1 ~I 0, ..-- 1 I 1 N' _, ~I 101 1 1 T"" 1 -' <.9 z f= <( 0:: Z o I- o Z o o I ~ ....J <( W I 1 3 ____L.___.J____ I 1 I I 1 I 1 1 I 1 i 3 i i ----r---'----~--- I , I , 1 I 1 1 I , , I 1 : 3: : ____L.___~____~___ I , I I I 1 I I 1 1 : 3: : ----r---'----~--- , 1 , , 1 I , 1 I , 1 I 1 : 3: : ----~---~----t--- I I , I ~ : I 1 I 1 : 3: : ----~---~----p--- I , , I I 1 I I , I 1 , 1 I 3 I I ----~---i----t--- I , I : : : 1 1 I 1 : 3: : ----~---~----~--- I I I I I 1 I 1 I f I I I I I I I I f I I t I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I ----t---~---~----1----~---~--- ----r---~----t--- , I I I 'I I I I : : : : :: ~ I : I , I I I 1 I I I ----~---~----.--- I , I I 1 I I I , Job Name: Chinese Church in Christ, 10455 Bandley Dr., Cupertino Job #: 06-06-131 Date: July 6th, 2006 I I I I I I If' I I I I I I I I I ~----r---r---1----i---_r---i--- I 1 I I I I I I I I I I Pruning/Cabling Needs N T"" , :!- <.9 z ~ <( 0:: o 0:: ~ <( I z o <.9 <.9 ~ z Z 0:: <.9 Z Z O,Z <( Z ~ CI) W CI)_ ....J I W <( o ~ 0:: 0:: ~ ~ ~ ~ o 0 0 0 n:: n:: 0:: n:: o 0 0 0 :t:t: o W o W W Z CI) W ....J en <( o ~ I <.9 ~ I o Z W W > o :2 W: 0::: I I , ___ ____~___~____L___J____ ___ I I I f I I I I , I I I ~ : : : ! I i i I i I I I I I I I I I I I t I I ---~----r---'----r---'----T--- I I f I I I I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I f I I I , I I I I I I I t I I ___~____L___~____L___~____~___ t I I I I I I , I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I ---~----r---1----r---~----T--- I . I I I I I I I I I I I , I I , f I , I I I I I I I I I I , I I , I I ---t----~---i----~---~----t--- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I f I I I I ---~----~---1----~---~----~--- I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I f I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I ---t----~---i----~---i----t--- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 , , I I , I I I I I I ---+----~---1----~---~---~--- I , I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I r ---t----~---i----t---i----t--- I I I I I I I I I I , I I t I I I I I I , I f I I I I I I I , I I I ---.----~---~----~---~----+--- I I I t I I I , I t I I , I I I I I Pest/Disease Problems , I I I , I I 1 :i:C) : ' I T"" ,- 1 , I ~I 10: I I T"" I - I , , I I ~I u:>: ::;..' W CI) <( W CI) o ~ o n:: o W W n:: ~ o IlJ 0::: IlJ > o o 0::: 5, -II 0: 0' I f-' 0: 0: 0:::: >- ~ 0:: o 0:: ll.. <.9 Z Z ::> 0:: ll.. ~I 10, I 1 T"" 1 _I 0' ..-- >- <( o W o ~ Z .::J n:: ~ Ii) I ....... _I I Cl)1 ~: 0: WI (f): Z: -, o o ~ o <( W o I I I I " , " -----~---- ---~---~------~---- I I . I I J I I I I I I I 1 I I I I t I I I 'I I I I I I I -----'----T---~---T------r---- I , . I I I I I I I I I I I f , f I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I _____~____~___~___~______L____ I I I I I I I J I I I f ~ I f I I I I I I I I! I I I I I I -----'----T---~---T------r---- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I _____J____L___~___l______L____ I I I I I I I 1 I , I I I 1 : f I I ( I I I 'I I I I I l I -----~----p---~---~------~---- , I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I " I -----i----t---~---t------t---- I I I I , I I : I : I , I I I I 1 I I I , I I I I -----~----.---~---~------~---- f I I. I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I , I 1 , I I I I I ---- - i----t- -- ~-- - t - -. - -- t---- I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I -----~----.---~---~------~---- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Recommend Status Ii? ..-- ~ , , , I I I I I I I , I I I , ......' U(: s' n:: W ~ ~ (/) o W W Z 0:: W ~ ....J ~ n:: W u.. CI) o W W Z ..J <( > o :E w 0::: C z w :!!: :E o () w 0::: IlJ (/) ~ (/) is 0::: 5 -I o o f- o o 0::: , ___ ____L.___~___ , I , 1 , I ~ I 1 ii, I , 1 I I 1 ---T----r---'---- , I , 1 I , I 1 I 1 1 , I 1 , , , , ___~____L.___J____ I I I I I , , I 1 c:;;- I ...... - ~ a: o a: Il. ..J <( > o :E w 0::: ('. W W 0:: ~ W <.9 <( t:: n:: W I ('. W w n:: ~ o W I- o W ~ o n:: 0... ----I....... ___J....... I I I' ' ---t----~---i---- ........f....... 1 I I I I I . 1 1 1 I 1 I I I I ---t----r---i---- I I I I , : I I I , , I I I 1 ---~---~---1---- , I 1 I , 1 I , 1 I I 1 I I I ---t----~---i---- I I , I 1 : I I I I I I I I I ---+----,..---...---- --- I 1 1 1 , 1 I 1 , I 1 I I I I ---t----~---i---- I , , : : : , I 1 1 I 1 , , 1 ---+----~---~--- I I , , I , , I I I I ---+..... I ___J...... I __J...... I I ----r....... I ----r....... I Best, 5 = Worst Page 1 of 1 Chinese Church in Christ 10455 Bandley Drive Cupertino Job # 06-06-131 Value Assessment I ,.,.-- trunk .1 I Adjusted I Tree Trunk Trunk Replace Price IN Installed BASIC Species I Unrounded Rounded # Species Type DBH 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Area Area IN Sq. IN Sq Sq. Tree Cost VALUE % Condition % Location % Value Value Eucalyptus 10%1 1 sideroxylon 2 17 226.865 226.865 2.24 77.04 345.46 $17,651 75% 80% $ 1,059 $1,060 Eucalyptus 10%1 2 sideroxylon 2 21 346.185 346.185 2.24 77.04 345.46 $26,843 75% 80% $ 1,611 $1,610 Eucalyptus 3 sideroxylon 2 27 572.265 572.265 2.24 77.04 345.46 $44,260 10% 75% 80% $ 2,656 $2,660 --t- Eucalyptus I I 10%1 4 sideroxylon 2 20 I 314 314 2.24 77.04 345.46 $24,363 75% 80% $ 1,462 $1,460 I --- --'---- 5 sideroxylon 2 23 I 415.265 415.265 2.24 77.04 345.46 $32,165 10% 75% 80% $ 1,930 $1,930 -t---- I .--- Eucalyptus I 6 sideroxylon 2 25 490.625 490.625 2.24 77.04 345.46 $37,971 10%1 75% 80% $ 2,278 $-~ Eucalyptus 7 sideroxylon 2 22 379.94 379.94 2.24 77.04 345.46 $29,443 10% 75% 80% $ 1,767 $~ Eucalyptus I i I I I 8 sideroxylon 2 20 314 314 2.24 7704 345.46 $24,363 10%1 75% 80% $ 1 ,462 $1,460 \.N \ ~ EVALUATION OF TREES Ai fHE CHINESE CHURCH IN CHRIST, 10455 BANDL Y 0N:VE, CUPERTINO Chinese Church in Christ Photos II Tree # 8 with sap called "kino" in trunk. This occurrence is fairly common and is not considered a debilitating problem for eucalyptus species. This tree has been "topped" which is why the branching structures are weak. Proper pruning an improve this condition, but topping permanently changes the structure that would have to be managed (pruned) regularly. These trees have not been pruned in several years. This broken branch is one of two broken branches that I could find on all 8 trees that have broken to this int e ~~.~~..., 'V". ".1" Prepared by: Michael L. Bench, Consulting Arborist June 19th, 2006 3'2>1- BARRIE D. COA- and ASSOCIA lES (408) 353-1052 23535 Summit Road Los Gatos, CA 95030 1 DBHl DEFINITION OF TERMS ON TREE EVALUATION CHARTS Diameter in inches at breast height, or 4 Yz feet. MULTI-STEM TREE DBH 2 and DBH 3 HEIGHT CANOPY DIAMETER HEALTH STRUCTURE HAZARD RATING CONDmON RATING CROWN CLEANING CROWN TIllNNlNG CROWN REDUCTION CROWN RESTORATION Check mark if the tree has more than one stem. Diameter at breast height for the multi-stem trunks, if any. As explained, listed by feet, approximately. Canopy diameter listed by feet, approximately. A judgment of relative health for the species in the subject area and soil. Number 1 signifies excellent health. A rating of number 5 represents specimens which are dead or actively dying. Judgement of relative structure: 1= perfect structure; 2= good to average structure; 3= potentially hazardous and repairable; 4= actively hazardous, but repairable; 5= actively hazardous and not repairable. A proportionate degree of hazard, based on 3 factors, failure potential, size of part which would fail, and a target rating potential 4-12. A composite of Health and Structure ratings. Crown cleaning is the removal of dead, dying, diseased, crowded, weakly attached, and low-vigor branches and watersprouts from a tree crown. Includes crown cleaning and the selective removal of branches to increase light penetration and air movement into the crown. Increased light and air stimulates and maintains interior foliage, which in turn improves branch taper and strength. Thinning reduces the wind-sail effect of the crown and the weight of heavy limbs. Thinning the crown can emph~~7e the structural beauty of trunk and branches as well as improve the growth of plants beneath the tree by increasing light penetration. When thinning the crown of mature trees, more than one-third of the live foliage should never be removed. Used to reduce the height and/or spread of a tree. Thinning cuts are most effective in maintaining the structural integrity and natural form of a tree and in delaying the time when it will need to be pruned again. The lateral to which a branch or trunk is cut should be at least one-half the diameter of the cut being made. Can improve the structure and appearance of trees that have been topped or severely pruned using heading cuts. One to three sprouts on main branch stubs should be selected to reform a more naturaI appearing crown. Selected vigorous sprouts may need to be thinned to a lateral, or even headed, to control length of growth in order to ensure adequate attachment for the size of the sprout. Restoration may require several prunings over a number of years, 3-~9 IDS 2 CROWN RAISING Removes the lower branches of a tree in order to provide clearance for buildings, vehicles, pedestrians, and vistas. It is important that a tree have at least one-half of its foliage on branches that originate in the lower two-thirds of its crown to ensure a well-formed, tapered structure and to uniformly distribute stress within a tree, When pruning for view, it is preferable to develop "windows" through the foliage of the tree, rather than to severely raise or reduce the crown. PRUNING PRIORITY The relative importance of the recommended pruning based on the danger created by the unpruned portions. REMOVE END-WEIGHT Defined as requiring the removal of the ends of major limbs or major branches in sufficient quantity to prevent the breakage of the limb in question. This is done by thinning, Different species will require different amounts of end-weight removal depending on the inherent structure of the tree. As an example, Elm trees must not be allowed to develop heavy end-weights, where the same amount of end- weight on Magnolia may not be dangerous. Possible entries in that column would be 1 through 5. Number 1 meaning no attention is needed, 5 meaning immediate attention is needed, CABLES NEEDED If support cables are needed, the quantity needed would be noted here. INSECTS This would define the proportion of insect presence and damage to a tree. A separate list might accompany this to show what insects might be found in each different species of tree. The potential numbers listed under this column would be 1 through 5 showing the proportionate severity of the infestation of insects. Number 1 being no presence visible at the time the survey was taken, 5 being a very severe case that should be treated immediately. TREE CROWN DISEASES Defined as the proportion of diseases present in the specimen at the time the survey was taken. Potential entries in this column would be 1 through 5. Number 1 . signifying very severe disease presence that should be treated. For this column a high rating may only serve to provide waming for the following year that treatment for the diseases in question should be planned in advance. Examples are Anthracnose disease on Modesto Ash. They would have to be sprayed before foliage is developed far enough for the disease to damage the foliage, usually in early March. DEAD WOOD Self-explanatory. Defines the proportion of dead wood that is in the crown of a tree. Entries possible in that column would be 1 through 5. Number 1 meaning none present, 5 meaning a significant quantity of dead parts present. This would usually be reflected in the health rating for this tree, but not always if the species typically accumulates dead twigs in the tree, as does Albizia julibrissin. TRUNK DECAY Trunk decay would signify the proportionate amount of decay in the trunk of the tree. This is usually a result of removal of large limbs or branches from which decay travels and is a far more serious problem in some species than in others. Significant amounts of trunk decay in Elms would be a very serious potential problem, where the same amount of trunk decay in a Magnolia might not be nearly so dangerous. Potential entries in that column would be 1 through 5, Number 1 signifying no decay,S signifying so much decay that the tree should be immediately removed. ROOT COLLAR COVERED When the root collar of many species is covered, Armillaria mellea, Phytophthora cactorum, or other diseases, may kill vascular tissue, implying that this condition must be corrected, 3-LlO ., BARRIE D. COAT~ and ASSOCIATES Ho rti cutural Consultants 23535 Summit Road Los Gatos, CA 95033 4081353-1052 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1, Any legal description provided to the appraiser/consultant is assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character nor is any opinion rendered as to the quality of any title. . 2, The appraiser/consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for accuracy of information provided by others. 3. The appraiser/consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this appraisal unless subsequent written arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for services, 4. Loss or removal of any part of this report invalidates the entire appraisal/evaluation. 5, Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person(s) to whom it is addressed without written consent of this appraiser/consultant. 6. This report and the values expressed herein represent the opinion of the appraiser/consultant, and the appraiser's/consultant's fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value nor upon any finding to be reported, 7. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, photos, etc., in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering reports or surveys. 8, This report has been made in conformity with acceptable appraisal/evaluation/diagnostic reporting techniques and procedures, as recommended by the International Society of Arboriculture.' 9. When applying any pesticide, fungicide, or herbicide, always follow label instructions. 1 a.No tree described in this report was climbed, unless otherwise stated. We cannot take responsibility for any defects which could only have been discovered by climbing. A full root collar inspection, consisting of excavating the soil around the tree to uncover the root collar and major buttress roots, was not performed, unless otherwise stated. We cannot take responsibility for any root defects which could only have been discovered by such an inspection, CONSUL liNG ARBORIST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Arborists are tree specialists who use their education, knowledge, training, and experience to examine tre~s, recommend measures to enhance the beauty and health of trees, and attempt to reduce risk of living near trees. Clients may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations of the arborist, or to seek additional advice, Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like medicine, cannot be guaranteed. . Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled, To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate all trees. dJ~~~ Ba rrie D, Coate ISA Certified Arborist Horticultural Consultant 3--'1 J t-~\\~\.j i+: C ':,l',_ r:" .... or"'..... . &1. ). '. ~~.t'~ ~l':.:;_. ~~.5~.#" F' ,,' .fit ,. :" .,~ ~i ~~ ",,--;..~!r..:..~ "~::;1# ;2 f'-, ,6, 8 E) PAR NG 5 '--' IE PARKIN! r- (N) STRIPING " ENmy IEXIT ;; (:)M~~'P'NG ~ ~C~~8LE SPACE I I I I I I OM I I I I I ,/ ," @ . ~ :~1. IF....SF nls ~r~ , (E)PR~i"G ~I IJlU: : I ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER 1',\ ---.., ", '" " '., ''\, ""-..,, " , .'~ .-_.~ ----------- " /' ~ .i (J /' ..... '"lJ} RESTI E, AOJU T 'C ~~~ S (9'>18" ECc" 'I (~ \'11 '..\ ~::.<~:,S c:\\\) VJ..:.t-\ h C'\'H~\s-r t