Loading...
Exhibit-J_UrbanForestryReport 971 .409.9354 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 €�—AJf OCIATFfLLc Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Urban Forestry Plan Supplemental Report April 5, 2017 Erika Court Subdivision 14259 SW 100th Avenue Tigard, Oregon 971 .409.93 54 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 — Af f 0C IATEfLLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Table of Contents — Purpose 1 General Description 1 Effective Tree Canopy Cover 1 Specifications 2 A.Tree Protection Specifications 2 B. Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement 3 C. Tree Planting Specifications 3 Signature of Approval 4 Enclosures — Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Attachment B: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Attachment D:Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Attachment E:Tree Canopy Site Plan Not Applicable — Existing Stand Inventory Data Planted Stand Inventory Stand Planting Specifications Tree Canopy Fee Calculation 971 .409.9354 Morgan Holen 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P 220 Lake Oswego,Oregon 97035 — —Af f OCIATrf c Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management morgan.holen@comcast.net Urban Forestry Plan - Supplemental Report Erika Court Subdivision, Tigard, OR April 5, 2017 M HA17016 Purpose This Urban Forestry Plan for the 10-lot subdivision project located in an R-3.5 zoning district at 14259 SW 100th Avenue (Tax Lots 600, 900 & 1100) in Tigard, Oregon, is provided pursuant to the City of Tigard Urban Forestry Manual.This report describes the existing trees located on the project site, provides arborist recommendations for tree removal, retention and protection, and describes the effective tree canopy cover needed to meet City requirements.This report is based on observations made by International Society of Arboriculture Board Certified Master Arborist and Qualified Tree Risk Assessor Morgan Nolen (PN-6145B) during a site visit conducted on March 8, 2017. General Description The site is primarily flat with one existing single family residence in the southeast portion of the site, which is planned to remain on proposed lot 5. Much of the site is open and undeveloped.The existing trees are scattered across the site, but primarily around the existing home and along property boundaries adjacent to the project site.The project proposes a 10-lot subdivision with a new street connecting SW 100th Avenue and SW 103rd Avenue, and a storm water tract in the northeast corner of the site. In all, 57 trees measuring six inches and larger in diameter were inventoried, including 15 different species and 30 trees located off-site within 25-feet of the project boundaries. A complete description of individual trees located on and adjacent to the project site is included in the enclosed existing tree inventory data (attachment A). Of the 27 on-site trees, 24 are planned for removal because of construction and/or poor condition and three are planned for retention on proposed lot 5 around the exiting home; these three trees can be adequately protected with tree protection fencing installed at the limits of proposed work with minor encroachments beneath the dripline area to be conducted under the on-site supervision of a Qualified Arborist. Of the 30 trees located off-site adjacent to project, adequate protection is possible for 28, but two are recommended for removal because of grading that is required for construction of the new street where it connects with SW 103rd Avenue on the west side of the site. Removal of these trees, #123 and #861, requires prior written consent of the neighboring property owner. Effective Tree Canopy Cover A summary of the effective tree canopy cover by lot and across the overall development site is included as attachment B.Attachment C,the planted tree inventory, describes 32 individual trees proposed for planting. The required number of street trees is based on the linear street frontage divided by 40.The total frontage is 1,240 linear feet.Therefore, 31 street trees are required, as is proposed.This includes 15 June Snow dogwoods (Cornus controversa 'June Snow') and 16 katsuras (Cercidiphyllum japonicum).The proposed street trees provide the closest and best spacing possible, and comply with the street tree planting standards in Section 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual and with the soil volume standards in Section 12. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Erika Court Subdivision,Tigard,Oregon Page 2 of 4 In addition, one Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) is proposed in the rear of lot 9 to satisfy canopy cover requirements for the overall development site.This species is native and provides 1.25 times the mature effective canopy cover credit, or 2,454 square feet.The 31 non-native street trees provide a total of 34,526 square feet of canopy credit, and preservation of three existing trees receiving condition and preservation ratings greater than one on lot 5 provides double canopy credit, or 9,948 square feet. The table below provides a summary of the effective tree canopy cover by lot/tract and demonstrates that the 15% minimum effective tree canopy cover per lot/tract requirement for the R-3.5 zoning district is satisfied. Lot Size Effective Tree Effective Canopy Lot Number (ft2) Canopy Area (ft2) Cover (%) Lot 1 10,492 2,218 21.1% Lot 2 9,076 2,218 24.4% Lot 3 8,512 2,218 26.1% Lot 4 9,301 3,474 37.4% Lot 5 17,695 15,346 86.7% Lot 6 9,520 3,474 36.5% Lot 7 9,369 3,474 37.1% Lot 8 10,043 2,218 22.1% Lot 9 11,639 5,634 48.4% Lot 10 12,670 2,218 17.5% Storm Tract 6,478 4,436 68.5% TOTAL 114,795 46,927 40.9% The overall development site is 114,795-square feet and has 46,927-square feet of effective tree canopy cover, or 40.9%.The minimum required effective tree canopy for the overall development site is 40%; therefore,the effective tree canopy cover requirement for the overall development site is also met. The Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan and Tree Canopy Site Plan are enclosed as attachments D and E as required by Section 10 of the Urban Forestry Manual,which illustrate how the Urban Forestry Plan requirements are met. Specifications A. Tree Protection Specifications 1. Tree Protection Zone.The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) shall be established at the dripline of protected trees as a minimum. If infrastructure must be installed closer to protected trees, the TPZ may be established within the dripline area if the project arborist determines that the trees will not be unduly damaged. The contractor is responsible for coordinating with the project arborist prior to working beneath protected tree driplines. 2. Protection Fencing. All trees to be retained shall be protected by 5-foot tall metal fencing unless otherwise approved by the city manager or designee. Protection fencing shall be secured to steel posts placed no further than 8-feet apart and shall be installed at the edge of the TPZ. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Erika Court Subdivision,Tigard,Oregon Page 3 of 4 3. Preconstruction Conference.The project arborist shall be on site to discuss methods of tree removal and tree protection prior to any construction. 4. Pruning.The project arborist can help identify if and where pruning is necessary once trees planned for removal have been removed and the site is staked and prepared for construction. Pruning shall be performed by a Qualified Tree Service. 5. Tree Protection Zone Maintenance.The protection fencing shall not be moved, removed, or entered by equipment except under direction of the project arborist. 6. Storage of Material or Equipment.The contractor shall not store materials or equipment within the TPZ. 7. Excavation. Excavation beneath protected tree driplines shall be avoided if alternatives are available. If excavation is unavoidable,the project arborist shall evaluate the proposed excavation to determine methods to minimize impacts to trees. All construction beneath the dripline of protected trees shall be under the on-site technical supervision of the project arborist. 8. Landscaping. Following construction and where landscaping is desired, apply approximately 3-inches of mulch beneath the dripline of protected trees, but not directly against tree trunks. Shrubs and ground covers may be planted within tree protection areas. If irrigation is used, use drip irrigation installed at native grade (no trenching) only beneath the driplines of protected trees. 9. Tree Protection Inspection.The project arborist shall inspect and verify the location of protection measures prior to construction, monitor tree protection measures regularly, and provide biweekly written reports to the City during periods of active construction. 10. Final Report.After the project has been completed,the project arborist shall provide a final report that describes the measures needed to maintain and protect the remaining trees. B. Soil Characteristics and Specifications for Improvement Native soils at the project site are moderately well drained Cornelius and Kinton silt loarns. Prior to the installation of new trees,the landscape contractor should excavate to a depth of 36-inches and mix amended topsoil into the native soil.Topsoil amendments should be determined by the landscape contractor. If soil compaction occurs during construction,the project arborist should provide additional recommendations as needed. C. Tree Planting Specifications New trees that are planted to meet the effective canopy requirements shall conform to the applicable standards in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual.They shall be planted in accordance with the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for tree planting (A300, Part 6) and additional standards adopted by the Oregon Landscape Contractors Board. Nursery stock shall meet the requirements of the American Association of Nurserymen for nursery stock(ANSI Z60.1)for Grade No.1 or better. Double stake trees if needed for stability. Urban Forest Plan—Supplemental Report Erika Court Subdivision,Tigard,Oregon Page 4 of 4 Signature of Approval We hereby attest that, to the best of our knowledge: ✓ The attached Tree Preservation and Removal site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 1 of the Urban Forestry Manual; ✓ The attached Tree Canopy site plan meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 2 of the Urban Forestry Manual; and ✓ This Supplemental Report meets all of the requirements in Section 10, Part 3 of the Urban Forestry Manual. The client may choose to accept or disregard the recommendations contained herein, or seek additional advice. Neither this author nor Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC, have assumed any responsibility for liability associated with the trees on or adjacent to this site. Thank you for choosing Morgan Holen &Associates, LLC,to provide consulting arborist services for the SW Hall Boulevard 11-lot subdivision project in Tigard. Please contact us if you have questions or need any additional information. Thank you, Morgan Holen Q&Associates, LLC: C Morga E. Holen, Owner/Member ISA Board Certified Master Arborist, PN-6145B ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified Forest Biologist Enclosures: Attachment A: Existing Tree Inventory Data Attachment B: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Attachment D: Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan Attachment E:Tree Canopy Site Plan Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Nolen MHA17006ErikaCourt-TreeData3-8-17.xlsx —8 —A/JOCIATLJ Page 1 of 3 No. Lot Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 O/S' HT5 Cond6 Pres' Comments Treatment 101 off-site cedar unknown 15 10 0 N 2 2 moderate structure protect 102 off-site cherry Prunus spp. n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 103 off-site western redcedar Thuja plicata n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 104 off-site cherry Prunus spp. n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 105 off-site cherry Prunus spp. n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 106 off-site western redcedar Thuja plicata n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 107 off-site cherry Prunus spp. n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 108 off-site cherry Prunus spp. n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 109 off-site western redcedar Thuja plicata n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 110 off-site cherry Prunus spp. n/a 14 0 N n/a n/a protect 114 9 beaked hazel Corylus cornuta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove 115 9 beaked hazel Corylus cornuta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove 116 9 beaked hazel Corylus cornuta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove 117 9 beaked hazel Corylus cornuta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove 118 8 beaked hazel Corylus cornuta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove 119 ROW English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna 10 12 0 N 1 1 nuisance species,poor structure remove 120 ROW English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna 4x6 14 0 N 1 1 nuisance species,poor structure remove 121 ROW English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna 4x6 16 0 N 1 1 nuisance species,poor structure remove 122 ROW English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna 4x6 14 0 N 1 1 nuisance species,poor structure remove 123 off-site Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii n/a 8 0 N n/a n remove off-site 855 off-site Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 52 36 0 N 3 3 forked leaders protect 861 off-site deciduous unknown 18 10 0 N 1 1 overgrown with ivy remove off-site 862 ROW maple Acer spp. 5x10 16 0 N 1 1 poor structure,extensive ivy remove 2x6, 4x10, 865 ROW maple Acer spp. 12 16 0 N 1 1 poor structure,extensive ivy remove 866 ROW maple Acer spp. 6 6 0 N 0 1 dead,overgrown with ivy,broken top remove 959 ROW black locust Robinia pseudoacacia 14 16 0 N 1 1 nuisance species,dense row remove 960 ROW black locust Robinia pseudoacacia 14 16 0 N 1 1 nuisance species,dense row remove 961 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 964 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 967 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 968 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect Morgan Nolen&Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data Morgan Molen MHA17006 Erika Court-Tree Data 3-8-17.xlsx —6•,—Ai}OCIATLJ Page 2 of 3 No. Lot Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 O/S° HT5 Cond6 Pres' Comments Treatment 969 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 970 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 971 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 975 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 976 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 977 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 978 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 979 off-site black locust Robinia pseudoacacia n/a 16 0 N n/a n/a nuisance species,dense row protect 2x6, 1195 5 saucer magnolia Magnolia x soulangeana 2x9 15 0 N 2 2 moderate structure remove 1222 5 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii 26 20 1,256 0 N 2 2 forked leaders retain 1276 5 Norway maple Acer platanoides 18 20 1,256 0 N 2 2 trunk damage on 2 side 0-6' retain codominant stems,seam with 1277 5 Norway maple Acer platanoides 2x14 28 2,462 0 N 2 2 included bark retain 1346 1 spruce Picea spp. 18 16 0 N 3 2 long live crown remove 1347 off-site spruce Picea spp. n/a 10 0 N 2 2 codominant leaders protect 1348 off-site maple Acer spp. n/a 22 0 N 2 2 moderate structure protect very poor structure,dead and broken 1353 10 deciduous unknown 2x8 10 0 N 1 1 branches,branch decay remove very poor structure,dead and broken 1354 10 deciduous unknown 10 10 0 N 1 1 branches,branch decay remove nuisance species,very poor structure, 1355 10 English hawthorn Crataegus monogyna 4x8 12 0 N 1 1 extensive ivy remove very poor structure,dead and broken 1356 9 deciduous unknown 10 8 0 N 1 1 branches,branch decay remove 1359 9 beaked hazel Corylus corn uta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove 1360 8 beaked hazel Corylus corn uta clump 15 0 N 1 1 shrub species,very poor condition remove nuisance species,dead and broken 1389 off-site sweet cherry Prunus avium n/a 18 0 N 2 1 branches,branch decay protect 1390 off-site Japanese maple Acer palmatum n/a 18 0 N 3 3 multi-stem ornamental protect 1391 off-site Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii n/a 8 0 N 3 3 young tree protect poor structure,decay,not well- 1404 ROW plum Prunus spp. 2x7 10 0 N 1 1 maintained remove Morgan Molen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Morgan Nolen Attachment A:Existing Tree Inventory Data MHA17006 Erika Court-Tree Data 3-8-17.xlsx -6.-A jOCIATF/'«< Page 3 of 3 No. Lot Common Name Species Name DBH1 C-Rad2 Canopy3 O/S' HT5 Cond6 Pres' Comments Treatment nuisance species,poor structure, 1405 ROW black locust Robinia pseudoacacia 19 24 0 N 1 1 crown decay remove 1DBH is tree diameter measured at 4.5-feet above the ground level in inches;trees with multiple trunks are measured separately and individual trunk measurements are separated by a comma,except multiple trunks of the same size are indicated as quantity x size. 2C-Rad is the average crown radius measured in feet. 3Canopy is the average tree canopy area(ft2)for on-site trees to be retained with Condition and Preservation ratings>2,calculated as:Canopy=(C-Rad)2 x n. 40/S identifies the trees as either Open Grown or Stand Grown. 5HT identifies whether or not the tree is a Heritage Tree(eitherY for yes or N for no). 6Cond is the numerical condition rating(0-3)for on-site trees as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING VIGOR CANOPY DENSITY DEADWOOD FAILURE HISTORY PESTS DECAY 0 dead to severe decline <30% major scaffold branches >1 scaffold Infested major conks and cavities 1 declining 30-60% twig and branch dieback scaffold branches Infested one to a few conks;small cavities 2 average 60-90% small twigs small branches Minor present only at pruning wounds 3 good to excellent 90-100% little or none none None absent to present only at pruning wounds 'Pres is the numerical suitability for preservation rating(0-3)for on-site trees as defined in the Tigard Urban Forestry Manual: RATING CONSIDERATIONS The tree is a"hazard tree"as defined in chapter 18.120 of the Tigard Development Code and"hazard tree abatement"as defined in Chapter 18.120 in the Tigard Development Code cannot be completed 0 in a manner that results in tree retention consistent with tree care industry standards. The tree is dead,in severe decline,or declining but may still be retained if desirable for wildlife or other benefits because it is not considered a"hazard tree"or"hazard tree abatement"could be 1 performed. 2 The tree has average health and/or structural stability that could be alleviated with treatment;the tree will be less resilient to development impacts and will require more frequent management and monitoring after development than a tree rated as a"3". 3 The tree has good to excellent health and structural stability;the tree will be more resilient to development impacts,and will require less frequent management and monitoring after development than a tree rated as a"2". NOTE: Diameter was not measured and Condition and Preservation Ratings were not assigned for off-site trees because complete visual assessment was not possible due to access limitations. Morgan Nolen&Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220,Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment B: Effective Tree Canopy Cover Summary Morgan Nolen MHA17006 Erika Court-Tree Data 3-8-17.xlsx -E -AJJOCIATEJ,c Page 1 of 1 2x Canopy Area (sq.ft.) 2x Canopy Area (sq.ft.) 1.25 x Mature Mature Canopy 1.25x Mature Effective% of Preserved Trees of Preserved Stands Canopy Area Area (sq.ft.)of Canopy Area Tree Canopy Canopy Lot Area (w/condition and (w/condition and (sq.ft.)of Native Non-Native (sq.ft.)of Area (sq.ft.) (Canopy Area Lot No. (sq.ft.) preservation rating>2) preservation rating>2) Planted Trees Planted Trees Planted Stands per Lot /Lot Area) Lot 1 10,492 0 0 0 2,218 0 2,218 21.1% Lot 2 9,076 0 0 0 2,218 0 2,218 24.4% Lot 3 8,512 0 0 0 2,218 0 2,218 26.1% Lot 4 9,301 0 0 0 3,474 0 3,474 37.4% Lot 5 17,695 9,948 0 0 5,398 0 15,346 86.7% Lot 6 9,520 0 0 0 3,474 0 3,474 36.5% Lot 7 9,369 0 0 0 3,474 0 3,474 37.1% Lot 8 10,043 0 0 0 2,218 0 2,218 22.1% Lot 9 11,639 0 0 2,454 3,180 0 5,634 48.4% Lot 10 12,670 0 0 0 2,218 0 2,218 17.5% Storm Tract 6,478 0 0 0 4,436 0 4,436 68.5% Total Development Site 114,795 9,948 0 2,454 34,526 0 46,927 40.9% Notes:Effective tree canopy cover is required to be calculated on a lot/tract by lot/tract basis only in the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for each lot or tract in the R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts shall be at least 15 percent. The standard percentage of effective tree canopy cover for the overall development site shall be at least: i.40%for R-1,R-2,R-3.5,R-4.5 and R-7 districts,except for schools(18.130.050(J)); ii.33%for R-12,R-25,R-40,C-N,C-C,C-G,C-P,MUE,MUE-1,MUE-2,MUC,MUR and I-P districts,except for schools(18.130.050(J));and iii.25%for MU-CBD,MUC-1,I-L and I-H districts,and for schools(18.130.050(J))in all districts. Morgan Holen & associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway, Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Morgan Nolen MHA17006 Erika Court-Tree Data 3-8-17.xlsx —«» AJJOCIATEJI�� Page 1 of 2 Mature Mature Available Structured Tree Caliper Canopy Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Soil Volume Lot No. Common Name/Species Name (in.) (ft.) (sq.ft.) (cu.ft.) (cu.ft.) Location No. 1 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street Storm Tract 2 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street Storm Tract 3 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street Storm Tract 4 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street Storm Tract 5 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 6 6 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 6 7 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 6 8 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 7 9 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 7 10 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 7 11 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 8 12 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 8 13 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 9 14 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 9 15 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 9 16 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 10 17 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 10 18 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 1 19 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 1 20 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 2 21 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 2 22 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 3 23 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 3 24 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 4 25 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 4 26 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 4 27 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 5 Continued... Morgan Nolen & associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment C: Planted Tree Inventory Morgan Nolen MHA17006 Erika Court-Tree Data 3-8-17.xlsx —&—AJJOCIATril, Page2of2 Mature Mature Available Structured Tree Caliper Canopy Spread Canopy Area Soil Volume Soil Volume Lot No. Common Name/Species Name (in.) (ft.) (sq.ft.) (cu.ft.) (cu.ft.) Location No. 28 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street 5 29 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 5 30 katsura/Cercidiphyllum japonicum 1.5 40 1,256 500+ n/a street _ 5 31 June Snow dogwood/Cornus controversa 'June Snow' 1.5 35 962 500+ n/a street 5 32 Oregon white oak/Quercus garryana 1.5 50 1,963 500+ n/a yard 9 Note:Thirty-one (31)street trees are required based on 1,240 linear feet of street frontage. One additional new tree is proposed in the rear yard at lot 9 to satisfy canopy cover requirements. Morgan Molen &Associates, LLC Consulting Arborists and Urban Forest Management 3 Monroe Parkway,Suite P220, Lake Oswego,OR 97035 morgan.holen@comcast.net 1971.409.9354 Attachment D: Tree Preservation and Removal Site Plan I LEGEND z 0 I.�I —--— PROPERTY LINE 2 8' 1 - - ROW LINE U. " ' EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN R II 30' 0 15 030' 60' � • x EXISTING EVERGREEN TREE TO REMAIN o 45 § SCALE: 1 INCH = 30 FEET l':' EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO BE REMOVED >' 4,5 > y -- I r � til 55 -� O �,� EXISTING EVERGREEN TREE TO BE REMOVED • U) ,6 Z LK EI_7>-', —I/— TREE PROTECTIVE FENCING .- •F ♦ cw,ia icv (AT DRIPLINE) E-id roan P6 F. E,oa 1-7W) 4 z �Z a 8 a CONSTRUCTION NOTES z 2�a ', f U 1=6 1 f © i 0 INSTALL TREE PROTECTION FENCING. MAINTAIN THROUGH LIFE OF PROJECT. W pd,.E'7 0 I 1 02 REMOVAL OF OFFSITE TREES(123 AND 861)REQUIRES PRIOR WRITTEN MO I CONSENT FROM PROPERTY OWNER. IF 03 COORDINATE WITH PROJECT ARBORIST PRIOR TO ADJUSTING PROTECTION FENCING FOR TRENCH EXCAVATION. ALSO SEE TREE PROTECTION NOTE 7. H _ .110� 109 . 1er8-� 10Tv ws-� 10 -1O 5. 103' 102TREE PROTECTION NOTES Ira -- - -- \ , 1 Jij Jy I . 3_ I _a" 1 4 I 1 I 1. TREE PROTECTION ZONE. THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL DESIGNATE THE TREE PROTECTION ZONE _ — — Li x x x x x (TPZ). ERE FEASIBLE THE TPZ SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT THE DRIPLINE OF PROTECTED TREES W / \ % � / \� / \� / QIJ AS A MINIMUM. THE LOCATION OF THE TPZ SHALL BE SHOWN ON CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS. IF !/—//—/h.f/—/j /—// //—//—//—y/=// /!—// -, 11 INFRASTRUCTURE MUST BE INSTALLED CLOSER TO THE TREES, THE TPZ MAY BE ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE DRIPLINE AREA IF THE PROJECT ARBORIST DETERMINES THAT THE TREES WILL NOT BE I s I I I mi.,O I �(1) 1-ib ARBOR ST PRIOR TO WORKIINGUNDULY DAMAGED. THE RBENEATH PROTECTED ACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TREE DRIPLINES COORDINATING WITH THE PROJECT Z vrib_ I I I I I I I I I-00 / IT 2. PROTECTION FENCING. ALL TREES TO BE RETAINED SHALL BE PROTECTED BY 5-FOOT TALL O d , I I I I CC i METAL FENCING UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE. PROTECTION Z Z , �979 1 1 I I I 6 G \�I' FENCING SHALL BE SECURED TO STEEL POSTS PLACED NO FURTHER THAN 8LFEET APART AND fin,,,.. 97$ 10 I 9 8 7 O L a 1; SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE OF THE TPZ. 1J W 0 Rey;• 977 12,670 S.F. 1 11,639 S.F. I 10,043 S.F. I I 9,639 S.F. 9,520 S.F. I yr LD I 3. PRECONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE. THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL BE ON SITE TO DISCUSS �/ Q 976 1391-� I I I I I I H co I, I 1 1..- METHODS OF TREE REMOVAL AND TREE PROTECTION PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION. 0 >e� pxQZ�oX1 ' I I I I I `-"I ' ® 4. PRUNING. THE PROJECT ARBORIST CAN HELP IDENTIFY IF AND WHERE PRUNING IS NECESSARY N HiPO 9'/1 I ONCE TREES PLANNED FOR REMOVAL HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND THE SITE IS STAKED AND CC L,J 968 41391) I I I — _ - 1f / I I PREPARED FOR CONSTRUCTION. PRUNING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A QUALIFIED TREE SERVICE. aX67. , ` I I I I I — — J I _ _ - I — — ,S 5. TREE PROTECTION ZONE MAINTENANCE. THE PROTECTION FENCING SHALL NOT BE MOVED, W Y x _ r X 1 J I ----- - -I/ --• REMOVED, OR ENTERED BY EQUIPMENT EXCEPT UNDER DIRECTION OF THE PROJECT ARBORIST. W 96 rC` ± y, % � Ge 1 4 115 1 1 1 ''• •• • 6. STORA E OF M TER AL 0 EQUIPMENT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STORE MATERIALS OR H f J 13: r60 ir� ' 4�'I'i1! / 1�� ii 11 �� EQUIPMENT WITHINATHE TPZ. R Fq 13 \ / f:411� 1/35 -i5; Yiix�l�3rVr��a elbr •� ' �� CO7. EXCAVATION. ALL — 9 y V 53Ill 'u J: EVALUATEALTERNATIVES TEHE PROPOSEDEXCAVATIONEXCAVAT10NBLE. IF AxTOnDETERMION IS NE MOETHODS TO IDABLE, THE MINIMIZE BE IMPACTST 1 TO ST TREES. Q'I'59�3,;:„ y L _ r- ���a r Al r- '7z4,,-;-, ALL CONSTRUCTION BENEATH THE DRIPLINE OF PROTECTED TREES SHALL BE UNDER THE ON-SITE . -- - TECHNICAL SUPERVISION OF THE PROJECT ARBORIST. / •�•_ •='L - - - ' S � �� �J ' A --------- 5 \ �' - x r© 8. LANDSCAPING. FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION AND WHERE LANDSCAPING IS DESIRED, APPLY E i _� - alliailln - ,-' xI�1 1 1 4 APPROXIMATELY 3oINCHES OF MULCH BENEATH THE DRIPLINE OF PROTECTED TREES, BUT NOT �'� / — �� — — — rV" 1 DIRECTLY AGAINST TREE TRUNKS. SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS MAY BE PLANTED WITHIN TREE O, -� \ -- PROTECTED I' / I PROTECTION AREAS. IF IRRIGATION IS USED, USE DRIP IRRIGATION ONLY BENEATH THE DRIPLINES OF TIF'. `1405. 1 ^ TYP) -- PROTECTED TREES. _ _15 i' - —tget'I -- — '19. TREE PROTECTION INSPECTION. THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL INSPECT AND VERIFY THE • fisc"� — — LOCATION OF PROTECTION MEASURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, MONITOR TREE PROTECTION �. ii _ MEASURES REGULARLY, AND PROVIDE BIWEEKLY WRITTEN REPORTS TO THE CITY DURING PERIODS OF I I II I 11 � s 10. FINAL REPORT. AFTER THE PROJECT HAS BEEN COMPLETED, THE PROJECT ARBORIST SHALL- I1PROVIDE A FINAL REPORT THAT DESCRIBES THE MEASURES NEEDED TO MAINTAIN AND PROTECT THE 03 I SF.— 1II2Ia A IA 10,492 S.F. III 9,076 S.F. i. 1118,512 S.F. 1 •9,301 S.F. ;, 12�r ,• TiESE DRAMS ARE THE �� I III III %�� INC IN A,Y 1 1 1 1 !� �� PERti�.oN Of ,~E MITTEN I I i u0 OF �� , 348 1� 1347 I III III © t _01��� L J -1 wm CLE 85• — I I 1 I I A 1 — - — I — IL 1 _ x x x .. Tx fix– x�� x —_ -- x 1 x Ts a --- - N S. W A 2 [ I, MORGAN HOLEN, ATTEST THAT THIS TREE PRESERVATION PLAN o MEETS THE REQUIRMENTSIN SECTION 10, PART 1, OF THE CITY OF a is TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL. o WulLx xx H N P'[I!dA, o 0 1- > CO W z D in J. FQ — MORGAN NOLEN SHEET w .!-', ISA BOARD CERTIFIED MASTER ARBORIST PN-6145B P600 1n � s.\ ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED P D E DATE:April 5,2017 JOB NO. I Z 2511-007 §J Attachment E: Tree Canopy Site Plan ,11 Df STREET TREE LEGEND z 0111 II j, E8 ( JUNE SNOW DOGWOOD /CORNUS CONTROVERSA'JUNE SNOW' RE. O KATSURA/CERCIDIPHYLLUM JAPONICUM 30' 0 15 30' 80' • 5. o • 1,2 •E: INCH = 30 FEET ��. OREGON WHITE OAK/QUERCUS GARRGANA z SC F ,, G = 60 p4` 3 ic,, �[3 F ,4o o 1 �a i9 lz gi p P.74() 4 R.q - TREE PLANTING NOTES 8 w Sl.o hx 1.NEW TREES THAT ARE PLANTED TO MEET THE EFFECTIVE U u�6 o P��1� •� CANOPY REQUIREMENTS SHALL CONFORM TO THE w a�F Ei� H APPLICABLE STANDARDS IN THE TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY 1. i 1 MANUAL.THEY SHALL BE PLANTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE Q7I AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS INSTITUTE(ANSI) f' STANDARDS FOR TREE PLANTING(A300,PART 6)AND �� c: ADDITIONAL STANDARDS ADOPTED BY THE OREGON L 8 " LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS BOARD.NURSERY STOCK SHALL cn MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION o' �0 — ,no-, X09 . jos 107 �� gas lbs x03 102 I N i i i i i i OF NURSERYMEN FOR NURSERY STOCK(ANSI Z60.1)FOR :111 �, / ay - I -�" 1 I I I � GRADE NO.1 OR BETTER.DOUBLE STAKE TREES IF NEEDED FOR D II �� ,' off IF—— L x _ x -— x 1 ".n ` �.` �7 ` ''4'73.41. I N STABILITY DURING THE ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD. ill r o 75.T ►�32 82' I s y\ \� I —/ _ 7 I F —I I F —1 I I ri1i1.�.,,, 2.ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE t, MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS WHEN A STREET TREE IS r i I / I I PLANTED WITHIN 5'OF ANY HARD SURFACE,PAVING,OR ibi ( w' / •I) I III UTILITY BOX. § 1 I I I I I I I �Do AMI'• , Ix O Q -,,,,,k_ '7�8 I 10 I I 9 I I I l 6 I E 'I 3.IF NEEDED,IRRIGATION TO BE DESIGN/BUILD BY THE Z )-EI 8L7 `O :r LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR. O a It 977 I III I 9,639 S.F. .2 9,520 S.F. co- I � 'I• W Imo, 976 1391- ( 12,670 S.F. 111,639 S.F. 110,043 S.F. I I N I I 4.ALLSTREETTREESSHALLBEAMINIMUMLS"CALIPERAT O9975 `, nI I I I _ TIME OF INSTALLATION o Z 968 f-v/ I III III J 1 I Li iLal I 1 - - I i iS 96fi i� ,It X it 1 �i �ra.:�r : r�:-as � �, .11389 I — o�� int 1� =terITatimaxtlii,- ,41111 \ , \� , ' /�� � - ,�. r, PC `M,m,• � f -1.- . - "11 141_- ----7-1..--,--6, ��i_ - — cil lbill 1 - 12111 _����a'L�11♦,411I �� �/ 10 , 51 . s r�- ��s"� tea: I —go 400,4441111111 WO , w—w—w—w—w—w—w—w-- — F — - 7�n 1- .,immows.H// 2' �... I I/ � I iil � s Ry — -- 137 / I I I L. V E----01-1 — —I I I 1 1 � S.F. OEl�M�NA 1 III 2 3 4 it_i P o die ( I I 11 __ I I 19,076 S.F. 8,512 S.F. I 9,301 S.F. i1 I 1 12r, o MANNER�� 10,492 S.F. I7 I `� CED IN ANY T I 1 1 L— PANN�ARE o� � a.�o alas ti� 13480I 347 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 � - 2/fo L @a__ adJ — — — — I ( 9 <m 'ioL!r3 oT 78 67Xir o - a L it MORGAN HOLEN, ATTEST THAT THIS TREE CANOPY SITE PLAN MEETS THE REQUIRMENTSIN SECTION 10, PART 2, OF THE CITY OF o TIGARD URBAN FORESTRY MANUAL. in in4L P, ,..., a I 'yy' +' l- 4 z 6 ¢ H o L 0 0 V 7) o 0 CO _ ar / Z to F,' o MORGAN HOLEN SHEET 1yl ISA BOARD CERTIFIED MASTER ARBORIST PN-61458 W P601 N iii :,� ISA TREE RISK ASSESSMENT QUALIFIED e o _ �9i.o / DATE:April 5,2017 P= JOB NO. i Z 2511-007 §J