Loading...
Arborist Report Community Development Department FE-21Planning Division—Cupertino CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-2021-001, ( ) Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date 07/01/21 Signature Erick Serrano Case Manager Updated Arborist Report 10200 South De Anza Blvd. Cupertino, CA 95014 PREPARED FOR Rubicon Point Partners 55 2nd Street, Suite 1900 San Francisco, CA 94105 PREPARED BY: HortScience I Bartlett Consulting 325 Ray Street Pleasanton, CA 94566 March 4, 2021 HORT SCIENCE BARTLETT CONSULTING A)vis o i rI I'ie-.A.Illrr..lel...he.x xperl Lo,.. , Community Development Department FE-21Planning Division—Cupertino CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-2021-001, Updated Arborist Report A O Approval Body: Admin Hearing 10200 South De Anza Blvd. Approval Date 07/01/21 Cupertino, CA 95014 Signature Erick Serrano Case Manager Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 1 Introduction and Overview 2 Tree Assessment Methods 2 Description of Trees 3 Suitability for Preservation 5 Tree Preservation Guidelines 6 List of Tables Table 1. Condition ratings and frequency of occurrence of trees 3 Table 2. Tree suitability for preservation 6 Exhibits Tree Assessment Map Tree Assessment Data Table Community Development Department FE-21Planning Division—Cupertino CUPERTINO APPROVED Updated Arborist Report Case# ASA-2 41 10211, a ( � 10200 South De Anza Blvd. Approval Body: Admin Hearing Cupertino, CA 95014 Approval Date 07/ 1/21 QFFMrn Signature aty �, �,rr�+�� �+, ;� ;„,, ,� ,v Ived in the redevelopment of the subject property in Cupertino, CA. Theasiteacurrently consists of a commercial building with associated parking, landscaping, and a storage yard. Development plans depict landscaping changes and retention of the existing underground parking lot and building. Tree locations were included on the plans. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting, a division of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company, was asked to survey the trees within and immediately adjacent to the proposed work area in Cupertino. Sixty-five (65)trees (at least 5" in trunk diameter)were evaluated. Seventeen (17)trees were growing offsite with crowns extending over the property, including 14 street trees along South De Anza Blvd and Cali Ave. Seven species comprised the 65 trees assessed. Species composition was typical of commercial properties in Cupertino. None of the species assessed were native to the Cupertino area. In total, tree conditions ranged from poor(17 trees)to poor(12 trees)with 36 trees in fair condition (Table 1). Furthermore, six trees were highly suitable for preservation, 26 were moderately suitable, and 33 were poorly suited (Table 2). Cupertino's Tree Ordinance Section 14.18.035 classifies the following trees as Protected: • Street trees • Heritage trees • Certain California native species 10" in trunk diameter and larger • Approved privacy protection planting in R-1 zoning districts • Any tree required to be planted or retained as part of an approved development application, building permit, tree removal permit or code enforcement action in all zoning districts. Based on the designations above, all 65 of the assessed trees met the City of Cupertino's criteria for Protected status. Protected trees may not be removed without a permit. Protected trees are identified in the Tree Assessment Data Tables (see Exhibits). Based on my evaluation of the plans: • Eighteen (18)on-site trees will be removed due to a combination of their proximity to proposed impactful work and low suitability for preservation. o All are considered Protected. • Forty-seven (47)trees are located outside the work area and can be preserved with no to moderate impacts. o All trees are Protected. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company 325 Ray St. Pleasanton, CA 925.484.0211 • www.hortscience.com FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6h+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 2 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-2221-Q01, arro-overview Rubicon Point Partners is involved in the redevelopment of the subject property in Cupertino, CA. Approval Body: Ac LD r ently consists of a commercial building with associated parking, landscaping, and a Approval Date / .1 fans depict landscaping changes and retention of the existing a Signature AHgBgr ina lot nd building. Case Manager HortScience I Bartlett Consulting, a division of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company, was asked to survey the trees within and immediately adjacent to the proposed work area in Cupertino. Sixty-five (65)trees (at least 5" in trunk diameter)were evaluated. Seventeen (17)trees were growing offsite with crowns extending over the property, including 14 street trees along South De Anza Blvd and Cali Ave. Seven species comprised the 65 trees assessed. Species composition was typical of commercial properties in Cupertino. None of the species assessed were native to the Cupertino area. This report provides the following information: 1. Assessment of the health, structural condition, and suitability for preservation of the trees located within and with crown overhanging the proposed project area based on a visual inspection from the ground. 2. An evaluation of anticipated impacts to trees from construction and recommendations for removal and preservation. 3. Tree preservation guidelines during the design, construction, and maintenance phases of construction. 4. A tree assessment map with approximate tree locations. Tree Assessment Methods Trees were assessed on November 23, 2020. The assessment included trees within and with canopy overhanging the proposed work area. The assessment procedure consisted of the following steps: 1. Identifying the tree species; 2. Tagging each tree with a numerically coded metal tag and recording its location on a map. Off-site and inaccessible trees with canopy overhanging the work area were not tagged and were assessed from the subject property; 3. Measuring the trunk diameter of each tree 5" in trunk diameter and larger at a point 54" above grade; 4. Evaluating health and structure based on a visual inspection from the ground: Good(4-5) A healthy tree that may have a slight decline in vigor, small amount of twig dieback, and minor structural defects that could be corrected. Fair(3) Tree with moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback, thinning of crown, poor leaf color, and moderate structural defects that might be mitigated with regular care. Poor(1-2) Tree in decline, epicormic growth, extensive dieback of medium to large branches, and significant structural defects that cannot be abated. 5. Rating the suitability for preservation as "high", "moderate", or"low". Suitability for preservation considers the health, age and structural condition of the tree, and its potential to remain an asset to the site for years to come. High Trees with good health and structural stability that have the potential for longevity at the site. Moderate Trees with somewhat declining health and/or structural defects that can be abated with treatment. The tree will require more intense HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6hv+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 3 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-2021-001, A management and monitoring, and may have shorter life span than those in 'high' category. Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date 07/01/2, Low Tree in poor health or with significant structural defects that cannot Signature Erick Serrano a mitigated. Tree is expected to continue to decline, regardless of Case Manager `reatment. The species or individual may have characteristics that are undesirable for landscapes and generally are unsuited for use areas. Description of Trees Sixty-five (65)trees were assessed. (Table 1). Descriptions of each tree are found in the Tree Assessment Data Tables and approximate locations are plotted on the Tree Assessment Map (see Exhibits). In total, tree conditions ranged from poor(17 trees)to good (12 trees)with 36 trees in fair condition (Table 1). Seventeen (17)trees were growing offsite with crowns extending over the property, including 14 street trees along South De Anza Blvd and Cali Ave. Seven species comprised the 65 trees assessed. Species composition was typical of developed properties in Cupertino. None of the species assessed were native to the Cupertino area. Table 1. Condition ratings and frequency of occurrence of trees 10200 South De Anza Blvd. Cupertino, CA 95014 Common Name Scientific Name Condition Total Poor Fair Good (1-2) (3) (4-5) Red maple Acer rubrum 1 - 4 5 Mediterranean fan palm Chamaerops humilis _ 1 - 1 Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia indica _ _ 1 1 Japanese black pine Pinus thunbergiana _ _ 1 1 Purpleleaf plum Prunus cerasifera 6 10 - 16 Evergreen pear Pyrus kawakamii 9 23 5 37 Chinese elm Ulmus parvifolia 1 2 1 4 Total 17 36 12 65 26% 55% 18% Evergreen pear was the most frequently occurring species. A total of 37 pears (57% of the inventory)were assessed. Twelve (12) evergreen pears grew in a landscaped area east of the existing building (Photo 1). Twenty-two (22)grew along South De Anza Blvd; nine of these were protected street trees. Tree conditions ranged from poor(nine trees)to good (five trees)with 23 trees in fair condition. Trunk diameters ranged from 7"to 20". All of the pears exhibited signs of fire blight bacterial disease, to varying degrees of severity. Fire blight causes dieback and gradual decline in overall condition. It is difficult to effectively manage. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6hv+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 4 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-20�1 00.1, t plums were also assessed. Tree conditions Approval Body: AgMgbIJ4rt5M poor(six trees)to fair Approval Date (10 trE !(Rdlividual trunk diameters Signature rid ftmaVbto 9". Six of the plums were5ltagtemmed. Many of the plums also exhibited signs of internal decay, which can compromise health and structural integrity(Photo 2). Five red maple street trees were assessed. Tree conditions ranged V from poor(one tree)to good (four , rwrw� trees). Individual trunk diameters varied little from 7"to 9". The trees were growing in a narrow planter between the existing building and - Cali Avenue. They also had a Photo 1 —Twelve (12) evergreen pears grew in a fastigiate (compact and upright)form. landscaped area east of the existing building Red maple#257 was in poor condition with signs of wounding and decay in its trunk. Four offsite Chinese elms were assessed. Tree conditions ranged from poor(one tree) r�r.. to good (one tree)with two trees in fair r 1 condition. Individual trunk diameters ranged from 5"to 12". The elms had spreading crowns with varying degrees of dieback. Chinese elm #221 was in poor condition with a canker on its trunk, likely caused by anthracnose fungal disease. ,. The remaining three species comprised 4.6% of the trees assessed. The most noteworthy of these included: _ Japanese black pine#265 was in good w condition with typical pyramidal form and structure. Despite its bowed trunk, it had a dense, vigorous crown. The semi-mature 10" tree was growing along the eastern property line. • Mediterranean fan palm #213 was in fair condition with browning live frond tips, an indicator of stress. The 21" palm was growing adjacent to the existing building. Photo 2— Many of the purpleleaf plums exhibited signs of internal decay, which can compromise health and structural integrity. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6h+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 5 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# 8SA-20217 W1, A -- Section 14.18.035 classifies the following trees as Protected: • Street trees Approval Body: Admin� ea t e trees Approval Date 07/A�/ g '" :a native species 10" in trunk diameter and larger Signature Erick Serrano , r •�p} oaey--p,=otection planting in R-1 zoning districts Case Mani ge7rTo • Any tree required to be planted or retained as part of an approved development application, building permit, tree removal permit or code enforcement action in all zoning districts. Based on the designations above, all of the assessed trees met the City of Cupertino's criteria for Protected status. Protected trees may not be removed without a permit. Protected trees are identified in the Tree Assessment Data Tables(see Exhibits). Suitability for Preservation Before evaluating the impacts that will occur during development, it is important to consider the quality of the tree resource itself, and the potential for individual trees to function well over an extended length of time. Trees that are preserved on development sites must be carefully selected to make sure that they may survive development impacts, adapt to a new environment and perform well in the landscape. Our goal is to identify trees that have the potential for long-term health, structural stability and longevity. For trees growing in open fields, away from areas where people and property are present, structural defects and/or poor health presents a low risk of damage or injury if they fail. However, we must be concerned about safety in use areas. Therefore, where development encroaches into existing plantings, we must consider their structural stability as well as their potential to grow and thrive in a new environment. Where development will not occur, the normal life cycles of decline, structural failure and death should be allowed to continue. Evaluation of suitability for preservation considers several factors: • Tree health Healthy, vigorous trees are better able to tolerate impacts such as root injury, demolition of existing structures, changes in soil grade and moisture, and soil compaction than are non-vigorous trees. For example, the evergreen pear trees infected with the harmful and difficult to treat fire blight bacterial disease had lower suitability. • Structural integrity Trees with significant amounts of wood decay and other structural defects that cannot be corrected are likely to fail. Such trees should not be preserved in areas where damage to people or property is likely. • Species response There is a wide variation in the response of individual species to construction impacts and changes in the environment. • Tree age and longevity Old trees, while having significant emotional and aesthetic appeal, have limited physiological capacity to adjust to an altered environment. • Species invasiveness Species that spread across a site and displace desired vegetation are not always appropriate for retention. This is particularly true when indigenous species are displaced. The California Invasive Plant Inventory Database http://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/ HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plannrngr6h+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 6 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# � ASA-20 1-001, .- ---- - A t:f: d as being invasive. Cupertino is part of the Central West Floristic Province. None of the trees assessed were classified as invasive. Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date Each ROVAI rated for suitability for preservation based upon its age, health, structural condition Signature a15diabititgui3efely coexist within a development environment (see Tree Assessment exhibit). Weceensmder trees with high suitability for preservation to be the best candidates for preservation. We do not recommend retention of trees with low suitability for preservation in areas where people or property will be present. Retention of trees with moderate suitability for preservation depends upon the intensity of proposed site changes. Table 2. Tree suitability for preservation 10200 South De Anza Blvd. Cupertino, CA 95014 High These are trees with good health and structural stability that have the potential for longevity at the site. Six trees were considered highly suitable for preservation. Moderate Trees in this category have fair health and/or structural defects that may be abated with treatment. These trees require more intense management and monitoring, and may have shorter life-spans than those in the "high" category. Twenty-six (26)trees were considered moderately suitable for preservation. Low Trees in this category are in poor health or have significant defects in structure that cannot be abated with treatment. These trees can be expected to decline regardless of management. The species or individual tree may possess either characteristics that are undesirable in landscape settings or be unsuited for use areas. Thirty-three (33)trees were considered poor candidates for preservation. Evaluation of Impacts and Recommendations To assess impacts to trees, I reviewed the 10200 De Anza—Planning Submittal_0112 Plans dated January 12 2020 and created by SWA. Surveyed trunk locations were plotted on the plans. I identified trees that would likely be removed and preserved based on the locations of the trees relative to proposed work on the plans and my field notes. Landscape plans entail replacing existing landscaping with new trees and understory plants, removing existing walls and curbs, and adding new hardscape. Based on plans, I recommend the removal of 16 trees due to their proximity to proposed impactful work and poor condition. Offsite trees, property-line trees, and trees located onsite outside the work area would be less impacted by proposed work and have greater potential for successful transplant. Based on my evaluation of the plans: • Eighteen (18) on-site trees will be removed due to a combination of their proximity to proposed impactful work and low suitability for preservation. An example of such a tree is Japanese black pine#265 (Photo 3). o All are considered Protected. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6hv+4si 2 0 pe-rune Page 7 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-2021-001, s are located A outside the work area and can be Approval Body: Admin Heap' F6%erved with no to moderate " Approval Date 07 PQ� Signature Erick Serr ano A;,'zreesi„�Protected. f �r Case Manager t 0 Eight trees were growing offsite on adjacent , properties. t o Crown pruning may be necessary for work I clearance. S o Roots may be impacted $: during excavation for new landscaping installation. ` 0 1 anticipate these impacts will be within the trees' thresholds of tolerance, but I recommend adequately ' protecting these trees and coordinating any necessary — pruning work with adjacent property owners and the Project Arborist. . Impacts to trees to be preserved can be Photo 3—Japanese black pine#265 had minimized by following the Tree limited growing space, browning needles, and Preservation Guidelines. was located where new landscaping is planned. Tree Preservation Guidelines The following recommendations will help reduce impacts to trees from development as well as maintain and improve their health and vitality through the clearing, grading and construction phases. The key elements of a tree preservation would include: 1. Retaining select trees with high or moderate suitability for preservation. 2. Establishing TREE PROTECTION ZONE for each tree to be preserved. TREE PROTECTION ZONE should be identified by the Consulting Arborist based on species tolerances, tree condition, trunk diameters, and the nature and proximity of the proposed disturbance. • Street trees should have tree protection zone fencing installed around the edges of their planter strips or wood plank trunk protection (Photo 4) installed around their trunks. • The remaining offsite trees should have tree protection zone fencing installed between their trunks and the edge of the proposed work area or access path. Such work should be coordinated with the respective adjacent property owners. • Trees onsite to be preserved should have tree protection zone fencing installed to encompass the extents of their driplines. 3. Providing supplemental irrigation prior to and during the demolition and construction phases. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6 20 pe-rt-Fno Page 8 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA_2021_001, t:___ Approval Body: Admin kea 4 changes to the plans affecting the Approval Date 07A21should be reviewed by the _ with regard to tree Signature Erick _ T[___ include, but are not Case Mana er limited to, site plans, improvement plans, utility and drainage plans, grading plans, landscape and irrigation plans, and demolition plans. 2. Plan for tree preservation by designing ;K adequate space around trees to be preserved. This Is the TREE PROTECTION ZONE: No grading, excavation, construction or storage of materials should occur within that zone. Route underground services including utilities, sub-drains, water or sewer around the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 3. Irrigation systems must be designed so _ :; ., that no trenching severs roots larger than 1" in diameter will occur within the / [- TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 4. Tree Preservation Guidelines prepared by the Consulting Arborist, Photo 4—An example of wood plank trunk which include specifications for tree protection is pictured above. protection during demolition and construction, should be included on all plans. 5. Any herbicides placed under paving materials must be safe for use around trees and labeled for that use. 6. Do not lime the subsoil within 50' of any tree identified for preservation. Lime is toxic to tree roots. 7. As trees withdraw water from the soil, expansive soils may shrink within the root area. Therefore, foundations, footings and pavements on expansive soils near trees should be designed to withstand differential displacement. 8. Ensure adequate but not excessive water is supplied to trees; in most cases occasional irrigation will be required. Avoid directing runoff toward trees. Pre-demolition and pre-construction treatments and recommendations 1. The demolition and construction superintendents shall meet with the Consulting Arborist before beginning work to review all work procedures, access routes, storage areas, and tree protection measures. 2. Fence all trees to be retained to completely enclose the TREE PROTECTION ZONE prior to demolition, grubbing or grading. Fences shall be 6' tall chain link. Fences are to remain until all grading and construction is completed. 3. Apply and maintain 4-6"wood chip mulch within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Keep the mulch 2'from the base of tree trunks. 4. Fences are to remain until all grading and construction is completed. Where demolition must occur close to trees, such as removing curb and pavement, install trunk protection devices such as winding silt sock wattling around trunks or stacking hay bales around tree trunks. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6 20 pe-rt-Fno Page 9 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASl-20g1-001 A _ L ___ ._ ._--served to clean the crown of dead branches 1" and larger in diameter, raise canopies as needed for construction activities. Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date 071011A. All pruning shall be done by a State of California Licensed Tree Contractor Signature Erick SerranoCo • II pruning shall be done by Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Case Manager In accordance with the Best Management Practices for Pruning (International Society of Arboriculture, 2002) and adhere to the most recent editions of the American National Standard for Tree Care Operations (Z133.1) and Pruning (A300). b. The Consulting Arborist will provide pruning specifications prior to site demolition. c. Branches extending into the work area that can remain following demolition shall be tied back and protected from damage. d. While in the tree the arborist shall perform an aerial inspection to identify any defects, weak branch and trunk attachments and decay not visible from the ground. Any additional work needed to mitigate defects shall be reported to the property owner. 6. Tree(s)to be removed that have branches extending into the canopy of tree(s)or located within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE of tree(s)to remain shall be removed by a Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker and not by the demolition contractor. The Certified Arborist or Certified Tree Worker shall remove the trees in a manner that causes no damage to the tree(s)and understory to remain. Stumps shall be ground below grade. 7. Trees to be removed shall be felled so as to fall away from TREE PROTECTION ZONE and avoid pulling and breaking of roots of trees to remain. If roots are entwined, the Consulting Arborist may require first severing the major woody root mass before extracting the trees, or grinding the stump below ground. 8. All down brush and trees shall be removed from the TREE PROTECTION ZONE either by hand, or with equipment sitting outside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Extraction shall occur by lifting the material out, not by skidding across the ground. Brush shall be chipped and spread beneath the trees within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE 9. Structures and underground features to be removed within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE shall use equipment that will minimize damage to trees above and below ground, and operate from outside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Tie back branches and wrap trunks with protective materials to protect from injury as directed by the Project Arborist. The Project Arborist shall be on-site during all operations within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE to monitor demolition activity. 10. All tree work shall comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act as well as California Fish and Wildlife code 3503-3513 to not disturb nesting birds. To the extent feasible tree pruning and removal should be scheduled outside of the breeding season. Breeding bird surveys should be conducted prior to tree work. Qualified biologists should be involved in establishing work buffers for active nests. Recommendations for tree protection during construction 1. Any approved grading, construction, demolition or other work within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE should be monitored by the Consulting Arborist. 2. All contractors shall conduct operations in a manner that will prevent damage to trees to be preserved. 3. Tree protection devices are to remain until all site work has been completed within the work area. Fences or other protection devices may not be relocated or removed without permission of the Consulting Arborist. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6h+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 10 CUPERTINO APPROVED ASA-20 1-0 1 case# --q -•:-- -, traffic and storage areas must remain outside TREE PROTECTION A ZONE at all times. Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date 507/bMrpot pruning required for construction purposes shall receive the prior approval of Signature Erick 9ervised y the Project Arborist. Roots should be cut with a saw to provide a Case Manage�- s„r-vm cut. Removal of roots larger than 2" in diameter should be avoided. 6. If roots 2" and greater in diameter are encountered during site work and must be cut to complete the construction, the Project Arborist must be consulted to evaluate effects on the health and stability of the tree and recommend treatment. 7. Prior to grading or trenching, trees may require root pruning outside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Any root pruning required for construction purposes shall receive the prior approval of, and be supervised by, the Project Arborist. 8. Spoil from trench, footing, utility or other excavation shall not be placed within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE, neither temporarily nor permanently. 9. All grading within the dripline of trees shall be done using the smallest equipment possible. The equipment shall operate perpendicular to the tree and operate from outside the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. Any modifications must be approved and monitored by the Consulting Arborist. 10. All trees shall be irrigated on a schedule to be determined by the Consulting Arborist (every 3 to 6 weeks is typical). Each irrigation shall wet the soil within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE to a depth of 30". 11. If injury should occur to any tree during construction, it should be evaluated as soon as possible by the Consulting Arborist so that appropriate treatments can be applied. 12. No excess soil, chemicals, debris, equipment or other materials shall be dumped or stored within the TREE PROTECTION ZONE. 13. Any additional tree pruning needed for clearance during construction must be performed by a Certified Arborist and not by construction personnel. 14. Trees that accumulate a sufficient quantity of dust on their leaves, limbs and trunk as judged by the Consulting Arborist shall be spray-washed at the direction of the Project Arborist. Maintenance of impacted trees Our procedures included assessing trees for observable defects in structure. This is not to say that trees without significant defects will not fail. Failure of apparently defect-free trees does occur, especially during storm events. Wind forces, for example, can exceed the strength of defect-free wood causing branches and trunks to break. Wind forces coupled with rain can saturate soils, reducing their ability to hold roots, and blow over defect-free trees. Although we cannot predict all failures, identifying those trees with observable defects is a critical component of enhancing public safety. Furthermore, trees change over time. Our inspections represent the condition of the tree at the time of inspection. As trees age, the likelihood of failure of branches or entire trees increases. Annual tree inspections are recommended to identify changes to tree health and structure. In addition, trees should be inspected after storms of unusual severity to evaluate damage and structural changes. Initiating these inspections is the responsibility of the client and/or tree owner. Preserved trees will experience a physical environment different from that pre-development. As a result, tree health and structural stability should be monitored. Occasional pruning, fertilization, mulch, pest management, replanting and irrigation may be required. In addition, provisions for monitoring both tree health and structural stability following construction must be made a priority. HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company FE-21Communit Kavlegg s� p� l�bicon Point Partners HortScience Bartlett Consulting Plann+ngr6v+4si 2 0 pe-rt-Fno Page 11 CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# SA- 0 ,W11y , A _ s about my observations or recommendations, please contact me. Approval Body: Aftrtlt nce I Bartlett Consulting Approval Date 7/01/21 Signature Ei :o Ca a Manager Jillian Keller, Consulting Arborist and Urban Forester Certified Arborist and Utility Specialist#WE-12057A Tree Risk Assessment Qualified (TRAQ) Wildlife Trained Arborist HortScience I Bartlett Consulting • Divisions of The F.A. Bartlett Tree Expert Company 44mwl�� Community Development Department FE-21Planning Division—Cupertino CUPERTINO APPROVED Case# ASA-2021-001, ( ) Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date 07/01/21 Signature Erick Serrano i Case Manager Exhibits Tree Assessment Map Tree Assessment Data Table Tree Disposition Table a Community Development De101 ~ • Tree Assessment Map Planning Division—Cuper , CUPERTINO APPROVED - _ :� •'�. " Case# ASA-2021 001, - _ 10200 S. De Anza Blvd. Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval Date 07/01/21 Cupertino, CA Signature Erick Serrano Case Manager 1 • Prepared for: Rubicon Point Partners San Francisco, CA z November 2020 No Scale - Notes • • Base map provided by: Google Earth I 1 • Numbered tree locations are approximate. i �•� AVQM s 1 ��• 1 � � HORT SCIENCE y = `r + TBARTLETT CONSULTING 1 • D'ivisi ons of The FA-Bartlett Tree Expert Company 325 b• �� 1� - r �� Ray Street Pleasanton, 1 Pleasanton,California 94566 •I •� — Phone 925.484.0211 .�� ,• —� 1 *• �� Fax 925.484.0596 71 .., �� • Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard CUPERTINO Cupertino, CA �ffftXORT SCIENCE Case# ree _ _ fnent March 2020 a11R11ET, oN111 TM� a Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval ffp@ No. SpE001/21 Trunk Protected Condition Suitability for Comments Signature Erick Serrano Diameter Tree? 1=poor Preservation Case Manager in.) 5=excellent 201 Evergreen pear 12 Yes 4 Moderate Fire blight; codominant at 10'; vigorous spreading crown; surface roots present; crown raised. 202 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 3 Moderate Fire blight; codominant at 12'; thin crown with minor dieback; surface roots present; crown raised. 203 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Moderate Fire blight; codominant at 12'; thin crown with minor dieback; surface roots present; crown raised. 204 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 3 Moderate Fire blight; codominant at 12'; thin crown with minor dieback; surface roots present; central leader bows north; crown raised. 205 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 3 Low Fire blight; codominant at 18'; thin crown with minor dieback; lower trunk wet from irrigation; poor structure; crown raised. 206 Evergreen pear 9 Yes 3 Low Fire blight; codominant at 12'; thin crown with minor dieback; lower trunk wet from irrigation; poor structure; crown raised. 207 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Low Fire blight; codominant at 10'; thin crown with minor dieback; lower trunk wet from irrigation; poor structure; crown raised. 208 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 2 Low Fire blight; codominant at 10'; thin crown with minor dieback; lower trunk wet from irrigation; poor structure; crown raised. 209 Evergreen pear 9 Yes 2 Low Fire blight; codominant at 10'; thin crown with minor dieback; lower trunk wet from irrigation; poor structure; crown raised; one sided to the east. 210 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Moderate Fire blight; codominant at 10'; spreading crown with minor dieback; lower trunk wet from irrigation; crown raised. 211 Evergreen pear 7 Yes 3 Low Fire blight; codominant at 10'; thin crown with minor dieback; crown raised; poor structure. 212 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Moderate Fire blight; codominant at 10'; thin crown with minor dieback; crown raised; trunk bows west. 213 Mediterranean fan 21 Yes 3 Moderate 30' of bare trunk; live frond tips are browning; dried fronds still palm attached. 214 Crape myrtle 4, 3, 3, 3, Yes 5 High Good vigorous tree; multiple stems arise at 1'; shrubby form. 3, 3, 2, 2, 2 Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard CUPERTINO Cupertino, CA �ffftXORT SCIENCE Case# ree _ _ fnent March 2020 a11R11ET, oN111 TM� a Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval ffp@ No. SpE001/21 Trunk Protected Condition Suitability for Comments Signature Erick Serrano Diameter Tree? 1=poor Preservation Case Manager in.) 5=excellent 215 Purpleleaf plum 3, 3, 2, 2, Yes 3 Low Multiple attachments arise at 2.5'; thin crown with moderate 2 dieback; crown raised; signs of shot hole borer. 216 Purpleleaf plum 3, 3, 3, 3, Yes 3 Low Multiple attachments arise at 2.5'; thin crown with moderate 3, 3 dieback; crown raised; signs of shot hole borer and internal decay. 217 Purpleleaf plum 3, 3, 3, 2, Yes 2 Low Multiple attachments arise at 25; thin crown with moderate 2, 2 dieback; crown raised; signs of shot hole borer; internal decay visible in trunk. 218 Purpleleaf plum 2, 2, 2, 2, Yes 3 Low Multiple attachments arise at 2.5'; thin crown with moderate 2, 2, 1, 1 dieback; spreading crown raised. 219 Purpleleaf plum 3, 2, 2, 1 Yes 3 Low Multiple attachments arise at 2.5'; thin crown with moderate dieback; crown raised. 220 Purpleleaf plum 4, 3, 2, 2 Yes 2 Low Multiple attachments arise at 2.5'; thin crown with moderate dieback; spreading crown raised; signs of internal decay. 221 Chinese elm 12 Yes 2 Low Offsite; canker present on southern side of trunk; thin spreading crown with moderate dieback. 222 Chinese elm 11 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite; codominant at 7'; thin spreading crown with moderate dieback. 223 Chinese elm 10 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite; codominant at 8'; thin spreading crown with moderate dieback. 224 Chinese elm 6 Yes 4 Moderate Offsite; good form and structure with minor dieback. 225 Purpleleaf plum 5 Yes 3 Low Crown raised; signs of internal decay; adjacent to light pole; minor dieback. 226 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 2 Low Crown raised; signs of severe internal decay in trunk; surface roots present; minor dieback. 227 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 2 Low Crown raised; signs of severe internal decay in trunk; surface; minor dieback; root flare covered. 228 Purpleleaf plum 8 Yes 3 Low Crown raised; signs of internal decay in trunk; surface; dense crown; surface roots present; codominant at 6'. Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard CUPERTINO Cupertino, CA �ffftXORT SCIENCE Case# ree _ _ fnent March 2020 a11R11ET, oN111 TM� a Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval ffp@ No. SpE001/21 Trunk Protected Condition Suitability for Comments Signature Erick Serrano Diameter Tree? 1=poor Preservation Case Manager in.) 5=excellent 229 Purpleleaf plum 8 Yes 3 Low Crown raised; signs of internal decay in trunk; surface; dense crown with minor dieback; surface roots present; codominant at 6'; trunk in hedge row. 230 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 2 Low Crown raised; signs of severe internal decay in trunk; surface; thin crown with dieback; surface roots present; codominant at 6'. 231 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 3 Low Crown raised; surface; dense crown with minor dieback; surface roots present; codominant at 5.5'. 232 Purpleleaf plum 5 Yes 2 Low Crown raised; surface;thin crown with minor dieback; surface roots present; codominant at 7'; signs of internal decay. 233 Purpleleaf plum 9 Yes 3 Low Crown raised; dense crown with minor dieback; codominant at 6'; signs of internal decay; trunk in hedge row; surface roots present. 234 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 4 Moderate Large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant at 8'with included park; at edge of property. 235 Evergreen pear 16 Yes 3 Moderate Large spreading crown with minor fire blight; multiple attachments arise at 8'with included park; at edge of property; surface roots present; minor dieback. 236 Evergreen pear 16 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; multiple attachments arise at 8'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback. 237 Evergreen pear 16 Yes 3 Moderate At edge of property; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; multiple attachments arise at 6'; surface roots present; minor dieback. 238 Evergreen pear 15 Yes 3 Moderate Large spreading crown with minor fire blight; multiple attachments arise at 6'with included bark; at edge of property; surface roots present; minor dieback. 239 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 8'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback. Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard CUPERTINO Cupertino, CA �ffftXORT SCIENCE Case# ree _ _ fnent March 2020 a11R11ET, oN111 TM� a Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval ffp@ No. SpE001/21 Trunk Protected Condition Suitability for Comments Signature Erick Serrano Diameter Tree? 1=poor Preservation Case Manager in.) 5=excellent 240 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Moderate At edge of property, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 8'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback. 241 Evergreen pear 15 Yes 3 Moderate At edge of property, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 8'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback. 242 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite street tree, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 10'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; adjacent to street light. 243 Evergreen pear 13 Yes 3 Low At edge of property, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; multiple attachments arise at 8' with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; one sided to the west. 244 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Low At edge of property, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 8'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; decay in base. 245 Evergreen pear 17 Yes 3 Low Offsite street tree, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 10'with included bark; surface roots present; moderate dieback; past branch failures. 246 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 2 Low At edge of property, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 7'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; past branch failures; thin crown. 247 Evergreen pear 10 Yes 2 Low At edge of property, large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 6'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; decay in base; thin crown; epicormic growth. 248 Evergreen pear 19 Yes 4 Moderate Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 10'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; dense crown. Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard CUPERTINO Cupertino, CA �ffftXORT SCIENCE Case# ree _ _ fnent March 2020 a11R11ET, oN111 TM� a Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval ffp@ No. SpE001/21 Trunk Protected Condition Suitability for Comments Signature Erick Serrano Diameter Tree? 1=poor Preservation Case Manager in.) 5=excellent 249 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Moderate At edge of property; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 7'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; slightly thin crown. 250 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 2 Low Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 10'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; decay in trunk. 251 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 2 Low At edge of property; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 7'with included bark; surface roots present; minor dieback; signs of decay in crown; poor structure. 252 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 2 Low Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 12'with included bark; surface roots present; moderate dieback; signs of decay in crown; poor structure. 253 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 2 Low At edge of property; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 7'with included bark; surface roots present; moderate dieback; signs of decay in crown; poor structure; one sided to east. 254 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 2 Low Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 10'with included bark; surface roots present; moderate dieback; signs of decay in crown; poor structure; past failures. 255 Evergreen pear 20 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite street tree; large spreading crown with minor fire blight; codominant attachments arise at 10'with included bark; large surface roots present; moderate dieback; dense crown; past failures. 256 Red maple 8 Yes 4 High Compact upright form; multiple attachments arise at 6.5'; surface roots present; in between building and road in narrow planter. Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard CUPERTINO Cupertino, CA �ffftXORT SCIENCE Case# ree _ _ fnent March 2020 a11R11ET, oN111 TM� a Approval Body: Admin Hearing Approval ffp@ No. SpE001/21 Trunk Protected Condition Suitability for Comments Signature Erick Serrano Diameter Tree? 1=poor Preservation Case Manager in.) 5=excellent 257 Red maple 8 Yes 2 Low Compact upright form; surface roots present; in between building and road in narrow planter; signs of internal decay in trunk. 258 Red maple 8 Yes 4 High Compact upright form; good structure; surface roots present; in between building and road in narrow planter. 259 Red maple 7 Yes 4 High Compact upright form; good structure; surface roots present; in between building and road in narrow planter. 260 Red maple 9 Yes 4 High Compact upright form; good structure; surface roots present; in between building and road in narrow planter. 261 Evergreen pear 10 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite overhanging property: dense spreading crown with fire blight; leans away from adjacent building. 262 Evergreen pear 12 Yes 4 Moderate Offsite overhanging property: dense spreading crown with fire blight; leans away from adjacent building. 263 Purpleleaf plum 6 Yes 3 Moderate Offsite overhanging property: dense crown; leans away from adjacent building. 264 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 4 Moderate Offsite overhanging property: dense spreading crown with fire blight; leans away from adjacent building. 265 Japanese black pine 10 Yes 4 High Typical form and structured; trunk is bowed west; dense crown; on- site; base crowded by landscaping; in concrete planter. Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard �i<UPERTINO TreeD �P� IOn Cupertino, CA NORCIENCE Case# HS �iTlf , March 2021 BIRTlETl CoNsu�TiN13 Approval Body•,�d In Hgaring Tree No. Spe")b Trunk Protected Condition Disposition Comments Approval date eter Tree? 1=poor Signature Erick Serrano n.) 5=excellent Case Manager 201 Evergreen pear 12 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 202 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping is to be removed and where outdoor room installation is planned. 203 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Preserve Adjacent to where landscaping and hardscaping will be removed; use caution when working near tree, install protection. 204 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be replaced with paving and patio furniture. 205 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be removed. 206 Evergreen pear 9 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be removed. 207 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be removed. 208 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 2 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be removed. 209 Evergreen pear 9 Yes 2 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be removed. 210 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping and nearby hardscaping are to be removed. 211 Evergreen pear 7 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping will be replaced. 212 Evergreen pear 8 Yes 3 Remove Diseased with fire blight; located in area where landscaping will be replaced. 213 Mediterranean fan palm 21 Yes 3 Remove Conflicts with proposed landscaping-located in area where landscaping will be replaced with bamboo; some potential to work around and preserve. 214 Crape myrtle 4, 3, 3, 3, Yes 5 Preserve Existing planter will be retained around tree. 3, 3,2, 2, 2 215 Purpleleaf plum 3, 3,2, 2, Yes 3 Remove Has dieback and decay; located where bar table installation is planned. 2 Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard �i<UPERTINO TreeD �P� IOn Cupertino, CA NORCIENCE Case# HS �iTlf , March 2021 BIRTlETl CoNsu�TiN13 Approval Body•,�d In Hgaring Tree No. Spe")b Trunk Protected Condition Disposition Comments Approval date eter Tree? 1=poor Signature Erick Serrano n.) 5=excellent Case Manager 216 Purpleleaf plum 3, 3, 3, 3, Yes 3 Remove Has dieback and decay; located where bar table installation is planned. 3, 3 217 Purpleleaf plum 3, 3, 3, 2, Yes 2 Remove Has dieback and decay; conflicts with proposed landscaping -located in area 2, 2 where landscaping will be replaced with bamboo and rush; some potential to work around and preserve. 218 Purpleleaf plum 2, 2, 2, 2, Yes 3 Remove Has dieback and decay; located where bar table installation is planned. 2, 2, 1, 1 219 Purpleleaf plum 3,2,2, 1 Yes 3 Remove Has dieback and decay; located where bar table installation is planned. 220 Purpleleaf plum 4, 3, 2, 2 Yes 2 Remove Has dieback and decay; conflicts with proposed landscaping -located in area where landscaping will be replaced with bamboo and rush; some potential to work around and preserve. 221 Chinese elm 12 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 222 Chinese elm 11 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 223 Chinese elm 10 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 224 Chinese elm 6 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 225 Purpleleaf plum 5 Yes 3 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped; consider removal due to poor condition. 226 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 2 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped; consider removal due to poor condition. 227 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 2 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped; consider removal due to poor condition. 228 Purpleleaf plum 8 Yes 3 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped. 229 Purpleleaf plum 8 Yes 3 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped. 230 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 2 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped; consider removal due to poor condition. 231 Purpleleaf plum 7 Yes 3 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped. 232 Purpleleaf plum 5 Yes 2 Preserve Located outside circular concrete walls to be retained; located in area to be landscaped; consider removal due to poor condition. Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard �i<UPERTINO TreeD �P� IOn Cupertino, CA NORCIENCE Case# HS �iTlf , March 2021 BIRTlETl CoNsu�TiN13 Approval Body•,�d In Hgaring Tree No. Spe")b Trunk Protected Condition Disposition Comments Approval date eter Tree? 1=poor Signature Erick Serrano n.) 5=excellent Case Manager 233 Purpleleaf plum 9 Yes 3 Preserve Too close to proposed landscaping work 234 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 235 Evergreen pear 16 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 236 Evergreen pear 16 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 237 Evergreen pear 16 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 238 Evergreen pear 15 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 239 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 240 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 241 Evergreen pear 15 Yes 3 Preserve Part of dripline within area to be re-landscaped; hand dig area within dripline and avoid root damage. 242 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 243 Evergreen pear 13 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 244 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Preserve Part of dripline within area to be re-landscaped; hand dig area within dripline and avoid root damage. 245 Evergreen pear 17 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 246 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 247 Evergreen pear 10 Yes 2 Preserve Part of dripline within area to be re-landscaped; hand dig area within dripline and avoid root damage. 248 Evergreen pear 19 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 249 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 250 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 251 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 252 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 253 Evergreen pear 14 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 254 Evergreen pear 18 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 255 Evergreen pear 20 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 256 Red maple 8 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 257 Red maple 8 Yes 2 Preserve Outside work area 258 Red maple 8 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area Community Development Department 11-21 Planning Division—Cupertino 10200 South De Anza Boulevard �i<UPERTINO TreeD �P� IOn Cupertino, CA NORCIENCE Case# HS �iTlf , March 2021 BIRTlETl CoNsu�TiN13 Approval Body•,�d In Hgaring Tree No. Spe")b Trunk Protected Condition Disposition Comments Approval date eter Tree? 1=poor Signature Erick Serrano n.) 5=excellent Case Manager 259 Red maple 7 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 260 Red maple 9 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 261 Evergreen pear 10 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 262 Evergreen pear 12 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 263 Purpleleaf plum 6 Yes 3 Preserve Outside work area 264 Evergreen pear 11 Yes 4 Preserve Outside work area 265 Japanese black pine 10 Yes 4 Remove Potential safety concern with leaning trunk; limited growing space in current landcaping; conflicts with proposed landscaping -located in area where landscaping will be replaced with bamboo; some potential to work around and preserve.