The URL can be used to link to this page

cupertino, stevens creek blvd., PO, PINE TREE EVAL. 8-27-18-signed_3.pdfARBOR/ST REPORT - Tree Assessment & Recommendations for Eleven Monterey Pine Trees at: UNITED STATES POST OFFICE 21701 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino August 27, 2018 Prepared for: Mr. Manny S. Jhutty - Postmaster 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino, CA. 95014 Prepared by: Kurt Fouts SA Certified Arborist WE0681A Kurt Fouts CnnaIII Ganr. 826 Monlerey Avenue Capitola, CA 95010 831-359-5807 k u rl I o uls1 (Mou I I uok. cu rn Table of Contents SUMMARY................................................................................................................................ 1 Background.................................................................................................................. 1 Assignment.................................................................................................................. 1 Limitsof the Assignment.............................................................................................. 2 Purpose and use of the report...................................................................................... 2 Resources.................................................................................................................... 2 OBSERVATIONS...................................................................................................................... 3 DISCUSSION............................................................................................................................. 4 Tree Evaluation and Recording Methods..................................................................... 4 SpeciesList.................................................................................................................4 ConditionRating.........................................................................................................4 Suitability for Preservation.......................................................................................... 5 Tree Condition, Failure Pattern & Suitability for Preservation.................................5 Risk Reduction Mitigation Options........................................................................11 ReplacementTrees.............................................................................................11 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................12 RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................13 Attachments: Appendix A -H Appendix A — Tree Assessment Chart Appendix B — Criteria for Tree Assessment Chart Appendix C - Tree Location Site Plan Sheet Appendix D - Bibliography Appendix E — Tree Inventory Aerial Image Appendix F - Tree Work Standards & Qualifications Appendix G — City of Cupertino Protected Tree Appendix H - Assumptions & Limiting Conditions Tree Assessment & Recommendations 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Eleven Monterey Pine Page 1 SUMMARY ■ Eleven "protected" trees in declining condition were inventoried and their condition evaluated. ■ The tree site is an unimproved plot of land, within U.S Postal Service property. ■ Five of the trees are dead. ■ Three trees are in poor condition and are in significant decline. ■ Two are in fair condition and in moderate decline. ■ One is in fair condition with some decline. ■ The five dead trees and three in significant decline, eight total, are recommended for removal. ■ The two trees in fair condition with moderate decline are recommended for retention. ■ One tree in fair condition with minor decline is recommended for retention. ■ The eight trees recommended for removal meet City of Cupertino Municipal Code criteria for removal. ■ If tree removals are permitted by approval authority, replacement trees will be required. Background A tree removal permit will be submitted to the City of Cupertino Planning Department, to remove eight (8) trees on property owned by the U.S. Post Office, located at 21701 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino. Mr. Manny Jhutty, postmaster at the Cupertino Post Office, has requested my services, to assess the condition of eleven "protected" trees on the property, and any risk they may pose. Further, to provide a report with my findings and recommendations to meet City of Cupertino Municipal Code requirements. Assignment Provide an arborist report that includes an assessment of trees within the property area. The assessment is to include the species, size (trunk diameter, height and canopy spread), condition (health and structure), and suitability for preservation ratings. To complete this assignment, the following services were performed: ■ Tree Resource Evaluation: Tag trees with embossed metal tags, inventory, evaluate and assign suitability for preservation ratings for subject trees. ■ Mapping: Plot trees and replacement trees, onto a site plan of the property. ■ Aerial Image: Inventory trees on aerial image. Tree Assessment & Recommendations Eleven Monterey Pine Limits of the Assignment 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Page 2 The information contained in this report covers only those items that were examined and reflects the condition of those items at the time of inspection on August 21, 2018. The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without climbing, dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the trees in questions may not arise in the future. Purpose and use of the report The report is intended to identify all the trees within the property area that were requested for evaluation. The report is to be used by the client, their agents, and the City of Cupertino as a reference for existing tree conditions and to help satisfy the City of Cupertino planning requirements. Resources All information within this report is based on site plans as of the date of this report. Resources are as follows: Site Visit, Tree Inventory & Condition Evaluation at, 21701 Stevens Creek Boulevard, on August 21, 2018. ■ City of Cupertino Municipal Code — Chapter 14.18: Protected Trees. Tree Assessment & Recommendations 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Eleven Monterey Pine Page 3 OBSERVATIONS The property is located at 21701 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino. The property is owned by the U.S. Post Office and includes the post office building, surrounding loading and parking areas and a unimproved area at the northern end of the property. The unimproved area is flat and consists of two rows of mature to over -mature Monterey pine (Pinus radiafa),along the east and west perimeters of the property. A few coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), are growing at the southern end of the unimproved area. The subject trees include eleven Monterey pines. Five trees are dead, three are in significant decline, two are in moderate decline and one is in fair condition with some decline. The remainder of the Monterey pines in the unimproved area were not inventoried in this report Their condition varies, with all showing symptoms of drought stress. Image #1 — Post office boundaries. Inventoried trees are flagged and numbered. t 1� Tree Assessment & Recommendations Eleven Monterey Pine DISCUSSION Tree Evaluation and Recording Methods 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Page 4 Site evaluations were made on 8/21//2018. The inventory included eleven trees in the unimproved area of the property. The trees were tagged with metal tags. The health and structural condition of each tree was assessed and recorded. Based on the trees health and structural condition, each trees suitability for preservation was rated and recorded. The recorded data is included in the Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A, of this report. Tree numbers were plotted on the attached Tree Protection Plan sheets. To correlate the data in the Tree Assessment Chart to the tree's location on the site, refer to the Tree Protection Site Plan sheet - Appendix C. Species List TOTAL SUBJECT TREES: 11 Trees Protected: 11 11 Monterey Pine (Pinus radiata) Condition Rating A trees condition is determined by an assessing both the health and structure, then combining the two factors to reach a condition rating. Tree condition is rated as poor, fair or good. The quantity of trees assigned for each category (good, fair or poor), is indicated below: Tree Condition Rating ■ Good - 0 ■ Fair - 3 ■ Poor - 8 Tree Assessment & Recommendations Eleven Monterey Pine Suitability for Preservation 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Page 5 A trees suitability for preservation is determined based on its health, structure, age, species characteristics and longevity using a scale of good, fair or poor. The quantity of trees assigned to each category (good, fair or poor), is listed below. Suitability Rating ■ Good - 0 ■ Fair - 3 ■ Poor- 8 Tree Condition, Failure Pattern & Suitability for Preservation As they mature, Monterey Pines planted away from the coast (out of their native range), if not supplied with supplemental irrigation, have a failure pattern that is repeated often in inland areas of the S.F. Bay Area. The trees first become drought stressed, then are attacked by two species of bark beetles common to this area. Often, the lower trunk area is infested first by red turpentine beetle (Dendroctonus valens), which weakens and further stresses the tree. The second infestation by the engraver beetle (Ip spp.) is usually a more significant infestation and is often the pest that effects the most significant decline, and eventual death of the tree. The eleven subject trees evaluated are following the failure pattern described above and are either dead or are in significant to moderate stages of decline. Once bark beetle infestation has caused a significant decline, reversal and recovery for a tree does not occur. Therefore, Monterey pine trees T3,T6 & T8, which are in significant decline, are recommended for removal. Since all of the Monterey pines on this plot are in close proximity to the failing trees and are also exposed to an active population of bark beetle species that specifically target this tree species, it is likely a matter of time that the three trees not recommended for removal, will reach a poor condition and require removal. Chemical control of the engraver beetle as a mitigation option, has proved unsuccessful in similar situations.The following are images and descriptions of tree condition: siAt! %fv7 4: -?AV, OA- -. �r qMW ��+1� y w�° � a�'� ��• � � � FLAY °�?k __ .�� .� �ss�i ��s� � • �- � °"- fit+"" d V t at�....' e y v -sem R .y ti S•', ! �- ^: ,,tWw ,4 R. V-x fit f.r 1 . —s'r�r •s3 .d. � i .r �. .',_eK`i: .�% � '�li`e. �'�,�•� � - �' ';..,� •�-fi. `�1 iT ♦spm.; , q ,. 4,,, , • i� S V� ,i r •'b�I,P '�` "�c�' •> . eftAM 0. 9 A _ '.wYc h y if, AP TSF � Tree Assessment & Recommendations Eleven Monterey Pine 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Page 9 Image #8 — Tree T7 — Thinning canopy and dieback. Has new needle bundle growth over most of canopy indicating moderate vigor. Retention is recommended. Image #9 — Tree T8 — More than half of canopy is dead. Dieback pattern consistent with bark beetle activity. Removal is recommended. Tw �& iN AM fLi i��aI t,F.. b t S 14�41IL £'- wt - 40 M t jrr�Ea 9�7(Ip7CPi 1pY4E1lQ;� faB;!!}Ws3 Tree Assessment & Recommendations Eleven Monterey Pine 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Page 11 Tree Condition, Failure Pattern & Suitability for Preservation (cont.) In addition to their poor health, several of the trees are growing in close proximity to adjacent residential properties and structures. The risk these trees represent is an additional element to consider when evaluating retention or removal including: Tree T3 has an 8" diameter limb growing out over an adjacent structure (garage?). Tree T4 has several 5-8" diameter limbs that grow out over an adjacent structure (garage?). Trees T3 — T11 have canopies overhanging into adjacent yards. The five trees that are dead contain significant sources of fuel and should be considered a fire hazard. These trees should be prioritized and removed as soon as possible. Risk Reduction Management Options The primary causes of decline of these trees is, 1) no supplemental irrigation and 2) infestation by bark beetle insects. Adding irrigation to the trees not inventoried that are in better condition is a management option that should be considered. Otherwise, it is only a matter of time when the remainder of this tree group will fail. Even so, with a population of insect pests adjacent o these trees, it is likely that many of them are already infested. Introducing irrigation to the trees inventoried would not be effective at this advanced stage in their decline. Further, application of insecticides to control the identified species of bark beetle, on this species of tree, at this stage of their development, is not recommended, would not be cost effective, and has usually proven to be an ineffective method to restore trees to a good condition. If any of the trees recommended for removal are retained, risk reduction pruning is recommended, including removal or end weight reduction of large (> 4" in diameter), limbs that grow out over the adjacent properties. Replacement Trees The removal of trees can be offset by replacement planting. The number and species of replacement trees shall be determined by the City of Cupertino approval authority. They should be placed in areas where ample light for establishment can be found and where they do not present safety concerns. Assuming a one to one replacement ratio, replacement locations are plotted on the attached Tree Location Map. Recommended replacement tree species for this location is Coast Live Oak, (Quercus agrifolia). Tree Assessment & Recommendations 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Eleven Monterey Pine Page 12 CONCLUSION ■ Eleven "protected" trees in declining condition were inventoried and their condition evaluated. ■ The tree site is an unimproved plot within U.S Postal Service property. ■ Five of the trees are dead. ■ Two trees are poor condition and in significant decline. ■ Three are in fair condition and in moderate decline. ■ One is in fair condition with some decline. ■ The five dead trees and two in significant decline are recommended for removal. ■ The three trees in fair condition with moderate are recommended for retention. ■ One tree in fair condition with minor decline is recommended for removal. ■ The trees evaluated are following a failure pattern typical of other mature Monterey pines growing in inland areas of the SF Bay Area. ■ The three trees that are in poor condition and are declining significantly, will most likely not recover from their decline and are recommended for removal. ■ The eight trees recommended for removal meet City of Cupertino Municipal Code criteria for removal. ■ If tree removals are permitted by approval authority, replacement trees will be required. ■ Mitigation measures to improve the condition of these trees so that they can be retained, would not be effective for this situation. ■ If any of the trees recommended for removal are retained, risk reduction pruning is recommended, including removal or end weight reduction of large (> 4" in diameter), limbs that grow out over the adjacent properties. ■ The remaining Monterey pines not recommended for removal should be monitored on an annual basis by an arborist. ■ All "protected" size trees as designated by the City of Cupertino Municipal Code require a permit for removal or approval by the Director of Community Development. Tree Assessment & Recommendations Eleven Monterey Pine RECOMMENDATIONS 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. Page 13 1. Obtain all necessary permits prior to removing or significantly altering any trees on site. 2. Remove trees recommended for removal. 3. If any trees recommend for removal are not approved for removal, risk reduction pruning should be done on large (>4" in diameter) branches, including end weight reduction or limb removal depending on the individual tree. 4. Perform risk reduction pruning on the three trees not recommended for removal. 5. If feasible, consider providing supplemental irrigation to the remaining Monterey pines in this plot that were not inventoried. 6. Plant replacement trees for trees removed. Coast Live Oak is an appropriate species for this location. 7. Monitor the remaining Monterey pines in this plot on an annual basis. Monitoring should be done by an experienced arborist. Respectfully submitted, kw-Fods Kurt Fouts ISA Certified Arborist WE0681A Ikrhr3a� {3413811t[RnT. Kurt Fouts 826 Manlerey Avenue Capitola, CA 95010 831-359-3607 k u rl I o utsl 0ou I I uok. eu rn 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino Tree Assessment Chart - Appendix A Suitability for Preservation Ratings: Good: Trees in good health and structural condition with potential for longevity on the site Retention or Removal Code: RT: Retain Tree RI: Remove Due to Construction Impacts Fair: Trees in fair health and/or with structural defects that may I.M. Impacts Can Be Mitigated With Pre -Construction Treatments be reduced with treatment procedures R.C. Remove Due to Condition Poor: Trees in poor health and/or with poor structure that cannot be effectively abated with treatment Trunk Suitability for Retention Crown Diameter @ Protected Health Structural Preservation or Tree # Species Height & Insects or Disease Comments 54 inches Tree Rating Rating (Based Upon Removal Spread a.g. Condition) Code Numerous entry holes in trunk basal area and Monterey pine T1 50" Yes 50'X35' Poor Poor Poor RC frass indicate bark beetle Dead. No live canopy. Located adjacent to parking lot. (Pinus radiata ) activity. Active fungal decay. Evidence of past bark Dead. No live canopy. Broken terminal (tip of trunk). Located T2 Monterey pine 31" Yes 50'X35' Poor Poor Poor RC beetle activity. adjacent to parking lot. Kurt Foute +Sr11!n Couaultmut Page 1 of 4 8/25/2018 826 Monlarey Avenue Capitala, CA 95010 831-359-3607 sc ha rbo rg r nu n d s(Myahu u.c om 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino Tree Assessment Chart - Appendix A Trunk Suitability for Diameter @ Protected Crown Health Structural Preservation Retention Tree # Species Height & or Removal Insects or Disease Comments 54 inches Tree Rating Rating (Based Upon Spread Code p a.g. Condition) Dieback pattern in upper canopy consistent with Overmature > 80% of useful life, appears in moderate to engraver beetle (Ips spp.) significant decline. Upper canopy is thinning and needle color activity. Numerous entry is off (pale green vs. bright green. Thinning and needle color Monterey pine (Pinus holes in trunk basal area, consistant with engraver bark beetle (Ips pp .),activity. Co - T3 40" Yes 68'X45' Fair Poor Poor RC radiata) pitch tubes and frass dominant trunks at 5' above grade. Smaller trunk has 20 indicate red turpentine degree lean. Included bark & steep angles of trunk bark beetle , attachment. If retained, cable for two trunks is recommended. (Dendroctonus valens), Several 3-5" diameter branches in upper canopy have died. activity. Appears in moderate decline. Thinning canopy. Co -dominant at 40' above grade. On trunk leans 15 degrees. Many stubs of T4 Monterey pine 34" Yes 68'X45' Fair Fair Fair RT None observed. failed 3-4" diameter limbs. Several 5-8" diameter limbs grow out over adjacent structure (garage?). Appears in moderate decline. Significantly thinning canopy. TS Monterey pine 44" Yes 60'X50' Fair Fair Fair RT None observed. Monitor yearly. Kurt FoutB i•horiei Conau2La.nt Page 2 of 4 8/25/2018 $26 Munlerey Avenue Capitola, CA 95010 831-359-3607 sc ha rbo rg r ou n d s4?yati u o.c um 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino Tree Assessment Chart - Appendix A Suitability for Retention Trunk Crown protected Health Structural Preservation or Tree # Species Diameter Height & Insects or Disease Comments Tree Rating Rating (Based Upon Removal @ 4.5' Spread p Condition) Code Overmature tree (>80% of useful life), appears in significant Monterey pine (Pinus decline. Minimal amount of new needle growth, < 10% of T6 24" Yes 65'X25' Poor Poor Poor RC None observed. radiata) canopy. Live crown ratio is < 20%. Uniform dieback extends over 80% of remaining live canopy. Active red terpentine New needle bundle growth of 8-12" at ends of branches over T7 Monterey pine 25" Yes 45'X30' Fair Fair Fair RT (Dendroctonus valens ) most of canopy indicates moderate vigor. bark beetle activity. Extensive bark beetle activity over entire Appears in significant decline. One side, (50% of canopy), is circumference of tree in T8 Monterey pine 46" Yes 65'X45' Poor Poor Poor RC trunk basal area. Dieback dead. One side of canopy is green. Live side of canopy shows tip dieback and needle browning over 100% of canopy pattern in upper canopy circumference. consistent with engraver beetle (Ips spp. ) activity. F`outBtoll� Conaulba nt Page 3 of 4 8/25/2018 826 Monterey Avenue Capitala, CA 95010 831-559-3607 sc ha rho ria r ou n d s(FR?yaho o.c orn 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino Tree Assessment Chart - Appendix A Suitability for Trunk Crown Retention protected Health Structural Preservation Tree # Species Diameter Height & or Removal Insects or Disease Comments Tree Rating Rating (Based Upon @ 4.5' Spread p Code Condition) Evidence of past beetle Monterey pine (Pinus bark activity. Wood decay T9 25" Yes 46'X35' Poor Poor Poor RC Dead. No live canopy. Some dead needles still intact. radiata) fungal organisms present in upper trunk. Evidence of past bark T10 Monterey pine 25" Yes 50'X30' Poor Poor Poor RC Dead. No live canopy. Some dead needles still intact. beetle activity. Dead. No live canopy. No dead needles. Only branches remain. Evidence of past bark This was likely the first of three tree T9,T10 & T11 to fail. T11 Monterey pine 25" Yes 50'x40' Poor Poor Poor RC beetle activity. Progression of failure pattern indicates tree to left of tree T9 will be next to fail. Kurt Fout$ ArL oriat Oonauitent Page 4 of 4 8/25/2018 $26 Monterey Avenue Capitola, CA 95410 831-359-3607 sc ha rbo rg lou n d s(iPyaho o.c om r_IJ1: I►111K4:Wil: k9;10MAN to] ;AIaaW-11KI"1•I a01k94:r_T:i1 Following is an explanation of the data used in the tree evaluations. The data is incorporated in the Tree Assessment Chart, Appendix A. Trunk Diameter and Number of Trunks: Trunk diameter as measured at 4.5 feet above grade. The number of trunks refers to a single or multiple trunked tree. Multiple trunks are measured at 4.5 feet above grade. Health Ratings. Good: A healthy, vigorous tree, reasonably free of signs and symptoms of disease Fair: Moderate vigor, moderate twig and small branch dieback, crown may be thinning and leaf color may be poor Poor: Tree in severe decline, dieback of scaffold branches and/or trunk, most of foliage from epicormics Structure Ratings: Good: No significant structural defects. Growth habit and form typical of the species Fair: Moderate structural defects that might be mitigated with regular care Poor: Extensive structural defects that cannot be abated. Suitabilitv for Preservation Rati Rating factors: Tree Health: Healthy vigorous trees are more tolerant of construction impacts such as root loss, grading and soil compaction, then are less vigorous specimens. Structural integrity: Preserved trees should be structurally sound and absent of defects or have defects that can be effectively reduced, especially near structures or high use areas. Tree Age: Over mature trees have a reduced ability to tolerate construction impacts, generate new tissue and adjust to an altered environment. Young to maturing specimens are better able to respond to change. Species response: There is a wide variation in the tolerance of individual tree species to construction impacts. Rating Scale: Good: Trees in good health and structural condition with potential for longevity on the site Fair: Trees in fair health and/or with structural defects that may be reduced with treatment procedures. Poor: Trees in poor health and/or with poor structure that cannot be effectively abated with treatment. Trees can be expected to decline or fail regardless of construction impacts or management . The species or individual may possess characteristics that are incompatible or undesirable in landscape settings or unsuited for the intended use of the site. Construction Impacts: Rating Scale: High: Development elements proposed that are located within the Tree Protection Zone that would severely impact the health and /or stability of the tree. The tree impacts cannot be mitigated without design changes. The tree may be located within the building footprint. Moderate: Development elements proposed that are located within the Tree Protection Zone that will impact the health and/or stability of the tree and can be mitigated with tree protection treatments. Low: Development elements proposed that are located within or near the Tree Protection Zone that will have a minor impact on the health of the tree and can be mitigated with tree protection treatments. None: Development elements will have no impact on the health and stability of the Tree. Tree Protection Zone (TPZ): Defined area within which certain activities are prohibited or restricted to prevent or minimize potential injury to designated trees, particularly during construction or development. Site Map - 21701 Stevens Creek Blvd. X T8 -46"D T7 -25"D X T6 -24"D T5 -44"D T4 -34"D X T3 -40"D XT2-31"D XT1-50"D Inventoried Monterey Pines Existing Pines Not Inventoried Remove Tree Replant Tree - All trees to be 36" box, Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia), ave. DBH = 34" Canopy Extents Stevens Creek Blvd. BIBLIOGRAPHY Matheny, N. and Clark, J. Trees & Development — A Technical Guide to Preservation of Trees During Land Development. Champaign, IL: International Society of Arboriculture c. 1998 Costello, L.R., Watson, G., Smiley E.T. Root Management — Best Management Practices, Champaign, ILL: International Society of Arboriculture c. 2017 Harris, R.W., Clark, J.R. and Matheny, N.P. Arboriculture: Integrated management of landscape tree, shrubs, and vines. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice -Hall, Inc. c.2004 Matheny, N. and Clark, J. Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas. Champaign, IL: Wadley Graphix Corp. c.1994 Smiley, E.T., Matheny, N., Lilly, S. Tree Risk Assessment — Best Management Practices, Champaign, ILL: International Society of Arboriculture c. 2011 Costello, L., Perry, E., & Matheny,N, Abiotic Disorders of Landscape Plants: A Diagnostic Guide Oakland, CA:UC/ANR Publications (Publication 3420) c.2003. \ t.� sa✓� 4 <` c� / r',L `' � i '�' N y ". r . "'^` \��"r-i �., ° s-ts.'•t. � I •` �a t. `@„ �,. '\ a� .mak *' & r,� \\ �`��h �• V'' � 4 �1' :-/1�/•e'Y �t^ �; id �� `'�Z,� X-.�}`�,. / i��o�, �\ � ��,,r �_J.�"•� 4;. .: aFr,'. f 'k„ � ''V �C'- v06,{9109 ' U.S. Post Office r��1 VL AL OF F, �, :- t � � „ ,,,_ is � •- yAy�j, ' � a _ 4 1 11 F�� I �� .`•,� '�.: ', �-- �, .;i"• � _ g • r 'rte � { ' UES �� ` •.� Q� ,:8 i - + ,r1 `� r.: .. ' � 1\ tz t 77 CT IA �iw 17 17- _ � r r �. --- :I -u. i;C' ��,'=r, .R�',.:•!Y:'_�::�►:'�;t•ra #,� ,. r'I :� /�.�i�.1---.1��e, d Appendix F- Tree Work Standards and Qualifications All tree work, removal, pruning, planting, shall be performed using industry standards of workmanship as established in the Best Management Practices of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and the American National Standards Institute series, Safety Requirements in Arboriculture Operations ANSI Z133-2017. Contractor licensing and insurance coverage shall be verified. Trees to be removed shall be cut into smaller manageable pieces consistent with safe arboricultural practices, and carefully removed so as not to damage any surrounding trees or structures. The trees shall be cut down as close to grade as possible. Tree removal is to be performed by a qualified contractor with valid City Business/ State Licenses and General Liability and Workman's Compensation insurance. City of Cupertino Protected Trees Qrotected Trees Heritage Trees designated forspecial aesthetic, cultural or historical value or significance Specimen Trees of the species listed below with either a minimum single trunk diameter of 12 inches (38 inch circumference) or a minimum multi -trunk diameter of 24 inches (75 inch circumference) measured 4.5 feet above ground level Scientific Name Common Name Aescuius caiifornico California Buckeye Acer macrophyfium Big Leaf Maple �edrus atiantica 'Giauca' Blue Atlas Cedar �edrus deodara Deodar Cedar °fatanus racemosa Western Sycamore quercus Native Oak trees, including the following: Quercus ogrifoiio Coast Live Oak Quercus dougiasii Blue Oak Quercus keifoggii California Black Oak Quercus iobato Valley Oak Quercus wisiizenii Interior Live Oak Jmbeifuiaria cafifornica California Bay Laurel Required Trees - any tree required to be planted or retained as part of an approved development application, building permit, tree removal permit or code enforcement action Privacy Protection Trees - landscaping any tree required to be planted or retained as part of privacy protection ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. Any legal description provided by the appraiser/consultant is assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character nor is any opinion rendered as 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/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. 10. 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 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. CONSULTING ARBORIST DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Arborists are tree specialists who use their education. Knowledge, training, and experience to examine trees, 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. Kurt F uwIMMO a ILA 826 Menlerey AveRue DapRol a, CA 95x10 831-359-3$07 k u rl I outs -11 Cou I I aok. co rn TM