Arborist's Report
June 18, 2022
Tree Preservation Plan
For Edison Park, City of Huntington Beach
Prepared for: Ms. Tamara McGlory
RJM Design Group
31591 Camino Capistrano
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92691
Prepared by: Greg Applegate, ASCA, ASLA
Arborgate Consulting, Inc
1131 Lucinda Way
Tustin, CA 92780
714/ 731-6240
Tree Preservation Plan ©Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Table of Contents Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 BACKGROUND AND ASSIGNMENT .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 FINDINGS........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 OVERALL MATRIX OF FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 21 Turf grass impacts and effects on tree health ....................................................................................................................................................................... 22 Life expectancy and longevity .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 22 Pest and diseases observed .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 23 Visible Decay or Structural Defects ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Current Maintenance ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Soil Compaction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 61 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 62 MATRIX OF RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 64 CLEARANCES FOR TREES DURING CONSTRUCTION....................................................................................................................................................................... 76 PRESERVATION OF TREES TO REMAIN .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 76 Pest Management ................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 78 Tree Health Management ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 78 LONG TERM MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................... 79 Tree Preservation Plan ©Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Table of Contents TREE PRESERVATION SPECIFICATIONS - ............................................................................................................................................................................ 80 CONTINGENT AND LIMITED CONDITIONS ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 81 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 82 PRESERVATION ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 82 PLANTING .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 83 DISCLAIMER .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 84 CERTIFICATION............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 85 APPENDIX ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 86 A. Resume: ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 87 B. Botanical Name / Common Name Cross-reference ........................................................................................................................................................ 88 C. Glossary .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 90 D. Area Map ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 94 E . Eucalyptus Hazard Charts .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 95 F. Transplanting Specifications........................................................................................................................................................................................... 98 Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Introduction 3 Introduction
Background and Assignment
Edison Park is a forty-acre municipal facility in Huntington Beach, California, across the street from Edison High School. Edison Park contains a wide variety of trees, large areas of fairly level turf, and a few buildings, including a fire station and community building. Designed and installed in about 1960, it is arranged in a common southern California format – turf with randomly placed trees and groups of trees, flat hardscape for paths, sports use and picnics, restrooms, and playgrounds. The park is primarily used by nearby residents and Edison High School students. This park is in a generally attractive and clean middle-class neighborhood and has paved paths winding through the grassy open fields, which are used for biking, dog walking and jogging. Many active recreational elements are existing, and more are planned. Edison Park has a children’s play area, tennis and handball courts and fields for various sports activities.
This report is to update a previous inventory and report prepared in 2009 for NUVIS Landscape Architecture & Planning. Since that time a large number of trees have died or been removed. Comparison of the two reports will Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Introduction 4 provide useful information on the success and durability of various tree species. It will also provide suggestions for changes in maintenance that should add to the success and durability to new trees.
The City of Huntington Beach transformed the site of a former landfill into what is now Edison Park. In January 2001, a passive gas control system was installed at Edison Park by GeoScience Analytical Inc. to control the methane gas being produced by the old Cannery Street Disposal Station. The system consists of five wells located at two sites in the park, three wells along the west, southwest border and two wells along the north border of the park at Stillwell Drive.
According to the City’s web site, very little gas remains.
The City of Huntington Beach has hired the landscape architectural firm, RJM Design Group, to study and design overall improvements to the park. RJM contracted with this consultant to provide arboricultural consulting services as a part of their design development work. In the 2009 study several hundred (320) mature trees were growing throughout the park, many of which were in decline. In this study 228 trees remain, and many of them are in decline.
The primary focus is the trees in and around planned improvements.
Ms. Tamara McGlory has asked that I inspect these trees, individually, list their botanic name, common name, analyze their health and structure as it affects their suitability for use in the new plan, recommend which trees are suitable and of sufficient value to justify transplanting and reuse, and describe general protection measures to preserve the other suitable trees during future construction.
It was agreed that each tree 4” caliper or larger will be tagged, measured, and evaluated. Arboricultural evaluation of the trees' health and condition relative to transplanting or preservation related to planned park improvements and professional opinions would be provided, and reported as appropriate. Arborgate will determine which trees are suitable for transplanting and the minimum clearance radius needed to protect each in place. Recommendations and specifications for replacements, transplanting and protection in place will be included. If requested, I may be on-call for arboricultural consulting questions during design development.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 5 Findings
Background Documents
As background for this report, this consultant was supplied seven pdf’s of the planting plans for Edison Park, a “Planting Details, Notes and List”, a Tree Exhibit” plan, and an inventory of the park trees performed about 7 years ago or more. The current plans have not been finalized, certified or approved by the City as of the date of this report.
Observations
Many mature specimens of several Eucalyptus species, Liquidambars, sycamores, London planes, pines, evergreen pears, and Shamel ash provide shade and beauty in this large park. Several new species have been planted since the last inventory, some successful, some not. A previous inventory done about 2004 included 386 trees. Including the fire station and its
surrounding trees and palms, there were about 319 trees in 2009, distributed among 53 species, that were observed during my inspection. The current inventory includes 234 trees over 4” caliper, in 46 species. Their health has been weakened by soil compaction, soil quality, drought, infrequent or poor pruning practices, pest outbreaks, and lawn mower injuries. Now Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 6 that the park is over 60 years old, a number of trees have structural defects, as older public trees often exhibit, such as overly long limbs, decay, included bark, damaged surface roots, and crowded scaffold limbs.
No risk assessment was performed, but the main factors affecting the risk level of these trees are the poor structural conditions, plus their relative age lack of initial training, turf related root problems, the genetic characteristics of the species, and proximity to areas of human use and traffic.
Being written by a consultant usually hired to detect weaknesses and solve tree problems, this report will have a somewhat critical tone. Most of the trees in Edison Park are in moderate health and in adequate condition for the climate, use, and ordinary municipal budgeted maintenance level they have received over the years. A few of the trees are large and stately, but contain flaws which raise concern. I recommend that 59 trees be removed due to their safety, poor health or condition.
The myoporums were in decline in the last report and now there are few left. They were in serious decline due to the recent thrip infestation, Klambothrips myopori, plus poor soil conditions and poor structure with included bark had caused several to split apart. The sweetgums frequently had codominant trunks or scaffold limbs, with narrow crotches and included bark which will make them prone to splitting. Pierce’s disease, Xylella fastidiosa, appears to be causing further decline, but no testing has been done to confirm this. Their scaffold limbs were also too long and end heavy. Cajeput trees are normally considered a bullet-proof species for areas like this. Most are healthy here, but it is surprising that a few are not healthy.
Carrotwood trees are normally a reliable and vigorous species, almost weed-like in normal healthy soil. However, the soil here has affected most of them adversely. Chlorosis, dieback and stunting is common. Alders are short-lived, and there are none left worth saving.
Some London planes were in weak health due to inadequate root space, and others due to poor tolerance of the coastal environment. California sycamores have grown much better than the London plane trees. All other things being equal, California sycamores grow much faster. However, they are also more prone to invasive shot hole borers. The recent planting of Chitalpas was not very successful. This is a useful tree in desert areas, but not so much in this coastal zone.
Aleppo pines are also a tree that favors hot dry climates. They grow well in coastal areas, but the climate negatively affects their structure, making them more erratic in form. Desert grown Aleppo pines are more excurrent and straight. Coastal ones are more decurrent, sometimes even growing horizontally. Italian stone pines can also grow well in this area, but they need to be subordinated in pruning to keep a single central leader. Several species of eucalypts are grown here, and most appear to have grown better than average. The only one worth calling out, is the red ironbark. The red ironbarks are generally healthy, but the structure is weak. They commonly have dogleg limbs or trunks, included bark, old breaks and overly long Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 7 limbs. Evergreen pears are prone to fire-blight which caused some dieback and cankers. They also had poor structure, often with included bark or overly long limbs. A number of Shamel ash appear to be in decline and have dead limbs.
Testing will need to be performed to identify to cause. Shamel ash also had narrow crotches with included bark and crowded scaffold limbs, which is common for the species. Southern magnolias are fussier about soil and need more water than most of the successful species here. They are less fussy than other magnolia species. Half the magnolias are in poor health. Tipu trees have grown well. The one that is not under high tension lines looks great, but all the others are severely topped for line clearance. Their structure, health and beauty has been permanently destroyed.
Later in this report there will be more discussion of species found only in a few representatives. Some of these less-common trees have grown well. They were few in number in the last inventory, so it does not show that they failed, but rather they could be tested on a wider basis.
It is likely that soils used to fill in the old land fill are a significant part of the difficulty here for growing healthy trees. True topsoil, suited for growing common trees and shrubs is hard to find. Such soils would lack organic matter and beneficial biotic life, and have toxic levels of metals or salts. Considering that areas where the turf is thin show many exposed sea shells, it would not be surprising that soil from dredging Huntington Harbor was used. Consider that even Bermuda grass is having a hard time growing in some areas. Geosyntec Consultants is studying the soils with a structural focus. Another study may be useful for the benefit of the trees, namely an agronomic analysis. The combination of salts, turf focused irrigation and soil compaction has caused the death of many trees, and caused many trees to be shallow rooted, which then leads to damage by lawn maintenance equipment. Very little mulching was observed.
I considered the health, structure and species tolerances in my recommendations for transplanting. Transplanting, storage and replanting is an expensive process and adds a level of risk for toppling or dying in the years following transplanting.
Older trees and unhealthy trees are less likely to transplant successfully.
The first chart below (Overall Matrix of Findings) shows the subject trees arranged first by tag number with all criteria shown in a A to F rating system – A being best. Empty cells are for trees removed after the last inventory.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 8 Overall Matrix of Findings
Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
1 Tipuana tipu Tipu tree 32 33 A B
Lt 2long
2 Callistemon citrinus Lemon bottlebrush 4,6,7,5,4,4 12 B C- - - Cod inc Xing 3 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 18 18 B C - - Cod inc 2long Sh MB 4 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 11 15 C- C- - - CrS cod 2long Sh MB 5 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 14 18 D C- - - Db cod Sh MB 6 Removed
7 Alnus rhombifolia White alder 18 13 D- D - - Db Sh MB 8 Removed
9 Morus alba White mulberry 21 25 A C- - - Cod 2long Xing S-seam, Sh MB 10 Alnus rhombifolia White alder 17 16 D D- - - 1s Dk Brk NEST 11 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 14 16 D D - - Db cod Sh MB 12 Removed
13 Morus alba White mulberry 16 18 B C- - - mDk cod DL Xing Sh MB 14 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 23 24 A C- - - 60⁰ lean cod-kiss Sh MB 15 Removed
16 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 24 22 A C - - DLT DLS Xing cod Sh MB 17 Spathodea campanulata African tulip tree 6+4.5 9 B C - - 1s Binj Sh MB 18 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 15 14 C C- - - Db FB Dk Brk DL Sh MB 19 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 6.2 5 D D- - - TO Dk Db cod 20 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 8 4 D D- - - TDk SDk epi Binj 21 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 6 7 - 1s D D- - - 1s 45⁰ lean TDk BDk 22 Spathodea campanulata African tulip tree 5 @ 3' 5 C C - - Cod LB Sh MB 23 Spathodea campanulata African tulip tree 7 6 C C - - Cod mDb Sh half-gird 24 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 8 18 D C- - - WWinj CrS Db 2long 25 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 10 13 C- D - - WW BDk Db 2long 26 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 8+8 14 C C - - Cod inc Db FB Sh MB Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 9 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
27 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 17 20 B A - - mCod Sh MB 28 Removed
- -
29 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 15 @ 1' 18 C- C- - - LB 2long mDb Sh MB 30 Alnus rhombifolia White alder 27"b 16 D D - - Cod inc Db 31 Alnus rhombifolia White alder 21 @ 3' 16 D D - - Cod T-seam Db Sh MB 32 Lagerstroemia X cv Hybrid crape myrtle 12 11 B C - - CrS Sh MB 33 Juniperus chin.
'Torulosa'
Hollywood juniper 16 10 B C - - Cod inc OL
34 Juniperus chin.
'Torulosa'
Hollywood juniper 9+10 11 B C - - Cod inc OL
35 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 5 7 C- C- end island Sp 36 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 5 6 C- C- end island Sp lean 37 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 5 6 C- C- end island Sp 38 Removed
- -
39 Afrocarpus falcatus Fern pine 18 18 B C - - Cod Xing Sh 40 Corymbia citriodora Lemon-scented gum 22 25 C C - - Cod Sp 41 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 5+8 10 D D - - Cod Sp chlor Sh MB
42 Afrocarpus falcatus Fern pine 20 25 B B - - Sh 2long 43 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 4 6 C- D - - Cod inc Xing TO Sh MB
44 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 8+9 12 B C - - Cod inc Xing Sh MB
45 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 4+5 6 C- D - - Cod Xing-kiss Sp Sh MB
46 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 5 6 C- C - - Cod Xing leans 60⁰ NoRF 47 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 5 8 C- C- - - Cod TO Xing Sp 48 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 6.5 6 C- C- - - 60⁰ lean Tinj cod Sp FC 49 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 7 9 B B - - mLean mSp 50 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 20 25 D D - - Cod inc SDk Sh MB 51 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 12 17 C B - - Sh Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 10 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
52 Removed
- -
53 Removed
- -
54 Removed
- -
55 Removed
- -
56 Removed
- -
57 Removed
- -
58 Removed
- -
59 Removed
- -
60 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 40 20 B C- - - Cod inc Hd SW-lift Sh MB 61 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 16 18 C C- - - Db FB Lt TO Sh MB 62 Quercus ilex Holly oak 18 16 C C - - Cod TD mSp Sh MB 63 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 14 15 B C- - - LB cod CrS Sh MB 64 Quercus ilex Holly oak 12 16 C B - - mSp MB
65 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 5.5 7 D C- - - Sp Brk Db 66 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
Willow pittosporum 7 7 F F - - Dead NoRF
67 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
Willow pittosporum 13 18 B C- - - Cod Xing-kiss
68 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
Willow pittosporum 15 16 C C - - Cod inc Sh MB
69 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
Willow pittosporum 12 16 C C- - - Cod incTO gaffed Sh MB 70 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
Willow pittosporum 14 14 C D - - 1sRF cod inc gaffed CrS 71 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 23 22 C C - - Hd Sp cod mDb Sh MB
72 Removed
- -
73 Schinus terebinthifolius Brazil pepper 26 18 C- C- - - 1sRF mSp cod MB 74 Removed
75 Pinus thunbergiana Japanese black pine 8 6 C C - - Cod Binj Sp 76 Schinus terebinthifolius Brazil pepper 20 17 C- C- - - Cod inc Lt Sp Db FC Sh Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 11 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
77 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 21 30 C C - - Cod inc CrS Xing Sh MB 78 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine 14 16 - 1s B D - - 1s WWinj Sh MB 79 Lagunaria patersonii Primrose tree 11 9 A C - - Cod inc CrS epi, burrow 80 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 26 20 - 1s D D - - 1s cod inc T-horiz Sp Db R- exposed
81 Schinus molle California pepper 8+9 12 B C - - Cod inc FC 1T-cut 82 Tipuana tipu Tipu tree 23 18 C D - - Topd Hd epi OH-wires, Sh MB 83 Tipuana tipu Tipu tree 22 22 C D - - Topd Hd epi OH-wires, Sh MB 84 Tipuana tipu Tipu tree 21 15 C D - - Topd Hd epi OH-wires, Sh MB 85 Removed
- -
86 Removed
- -
87 Removed
- -
88 Removed
- -
89 Schinus terebinthifolius Brazil pepper 30 28 B C - - 1s cod FC mGird Sh 90 Removed
- -
91 Removed
- -
92 Removed
- -
93 Metrosideros excelsus New Zealand Christmas
tree
8,8,8,8,8 13 B C - - Cod Xing TO Sh MB
94 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 39 36 C C - - 2long cod mSp S-crk
95 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine 7 10 - 1s B C- - - 60⁰ lean Binj 96 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine 14 16 C C- - - DLT Brk 2long 97 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 26 28 C C - - Cod 2long mSp Sh MB
98 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine 13 12 C- B - - Cr#97 1s Db 99 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine 17 13 B C - - Cod 2long R-galls 100 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 26 25 C- C - - Cod 2long Db Sp Sh MB
101 Removed
- -
102 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 3+4 3 C D - - 3"T broke
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 12 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
103 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 8+10+7+4 15 C D - - Root sprung 104 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 3+4+6 7 C D - - 2Ts-Dk, Sp 105 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 3,3,3,3,3 8 C C - - Clump 106 Removed
- -
107 Removed
- -
108 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 3,2,2,2,2,2 6 C C- - - Clump, old Hd 109 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 7+3+2 8 C C- - - 1s, old Hd 110 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 6,6,7,7,7 9 C C- - - Db Tinjs mGird 111 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 3+3+2+2 6 C C- - - Hd DL, a bush, fill on-RC, burrow 112 Removed
- -
113 Removed
- -
114 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 10,7,7,5,5,
5 15 C C- - - Lt cod mDb Sp Sh
115 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 6 12 - 1s C C- - - 45⁰ lean, 1s mDb S-crk 116 Myoporum laetum Ngaio 5+2 12 - 1s D D - - 1s dead, other Sp 117 Removed
- -
118 Removed
- -
119 Removed
- -
120 Removed
- -
121 Removed
- -
122 Removed
- -
123 Removed
- -
124 Feijoa sellowiana Pineapple guava 5, 5, 5, 7,4 8 C C- - - Cod Xing Lt Sh MB 125 Feijoa sellowiana Pineapple guava 10"b 4 D D - - Cod Lt Sh MB 126 Metrosideros excelsus New Zealand Christmas
tree
9,7,6,6,5,5 15 B C - - Cod Xing Lt Sh MB
127 Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine 14 12 B C - - Cod Sh, R-galls, HANAGER 128 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 42 36 B C - - Cod FC 2long Sh MB
129 Removed
- -
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 13 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
130 Removed
- -
131 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 20 18 - 1s B C- - - Root sprung, 30⁰ lean 132 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 22 @ 2' 13 B C - - Cod inc Sh MB 133 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
Silver dollar gum 14 20 C C - - Cod 2long leans, Sh MB 134 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 20 22 - 1s F F - - DEAD 135 Removed
- -
136 Removed
- -
137 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 44 36 A B - - Cod 2long 138 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 34 @ 2' 30 A C - - 1sRF cod 2long Rinj 139 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
Silver dollar gum 14 14 C D - - Brks DLT cod
140 Removed
- -
141 Removed
- -
142 Removed
- -
143 Removed
- -
144 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 23 16 C C - - Cod Sp Db 2long
145 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 20 30 C- C- - - Cod inc 2long lrg S-cut Db Sh MB 146 Celtis laevigata Sugar hackberry 12 16 B C - - Chlor cod DL 2long 147 Removed
- -
148 Removed
- -
149 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
Silver dollar gum 15 16 B B - - Sh MB
150 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 23 20 C C - - Cod DLS 2long Sh MB 151 Eucalyptus sp. Eucalypt 19 18 C C - - Cod CrS Xing 152 Removed
- -
153 Removed
- -
154 Removed
- -
155 Agonis flexuosa Peppermint tree 29, 16, 17 20 B C - - Cod T-crk Xing Sh MB 156 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 25 20 B C - - Cod DLS 2long Sh MB, NEST Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 14 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
157 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 23 20 B C - - Cod DLS 2long Sh MB 158 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 18 18 C C - - Cod DLT FC brk Sh MB 159 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 22 20 C C- - - Cod DLS Xing Sh MB 160 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 20 18 C C - - Cod DLS Xing Sh MB 161 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 20 16 - 1s C C - - 1s DLS L:t Cod Sh MB 162 Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark 19 16 C C - - Cod Hd DL brk Xing Sh MB 163 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
Silver dollar gum 24 25 C C - - 1sRF Cod OL Lt Sh MB 164 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 34 28 B C - - Cod CrS mDb 2long Sh MB 165 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 24 20 C- C- - - 1sSp Db CrS Sh MB 166 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 17 14 C- C - - CrS Db Sp Sh MB 167 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 24 25 D C - - CrS cod Sp Db Sh MB 168 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 14 16 B C - - CrS cod Xing Sh MB
169 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 10 9 B C - - Cod Tinj Sh MB 170 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 14 15 B C - - 45⁰ lean, half gird 171 Removed
- -
172 Removed
- -
173 Removed
- -
174 Removed
- -
175 Removed
- -
176 Removed
- -
177 Sophora japonica Chinese scholar tree 5.5 8 C C- - - Cod Xing Sh MB 178 Sophora japonica Chinese scholar tree 5 7 C C- - - Cod CrS Xing Binj 179 Sophora japonica Chinese scholar tree 7 9 C C- - - Cod CrS Xing mDb Sh MB 180 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 27 22 B C - - Cod CrS Sh MB 181 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 29 30 B C- - - Cod inc Xing, R-galls Sh MB 182 Sophora japonica Chinese scholar tree 5 5 C C- - - Cod CrS Xing NoRF 183 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 19 12 C C - - Cod 2long 1sSp Sh MB 184 Brachychiton discolor Pink flame tree 14 7 D D - - Dead top and tips, Sh MB Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 15 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
185 Brachychiton discolor Pink flame tree 8 6 C- C- - - Weak top 186 Brachychiton discolor Pink flame tree 19 10 C C- - - Cod CrS Sh MB 187 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 8+10 12 C- C- - - Cod inc Sp Sh MB 188 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 20 15 C C
NoRF cod inc Sp
189 Brachychiton discolor Pink flame tree 18 8 C- C- - - CrS Sp Sh MB 190 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 16 12 B C- - - Cod Sh MB 191 Pinus thunbergiana Japanese black pine 14 18 B C - - Cod Sh MB Cr#190 & 192 192 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 13 12 C C - - Cod Sh MB Cr#191 193 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 9 6 B C - - Cod CrS 194 Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree 4.3 3 C C- - - Cod Xing 195 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 22 18 B C- - - Cod inc Lt Sh MB
196 Eucalyptus rudis Desert gum 16 16 B C - - Cod leans, root sprung, Sh MB 197 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
Silver dollar gum 32 27 C C - - SW lift cod Xing-kiss 198 Eucalyptus cladocalyx Sugar gum 24 25 C C - - Hd DL cod Sh MB 199 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
Silver dollar gum 18 18-1s B C- - - 45⁰ lean, root-sprung, Xing-kiss Sh MB
200 Removed
- -
201 Eucalyptus cladocalyx Sugar gum 40 27 C C - - Sp-top cod Sh MB, HANGER 202 Removed
203 Pinus eldarica Afghan pine 16 12 C C
Sp 2long, no mulch
204 Eucalyptus cladocalyx Sugar gum 35 25 B C
Cod Hd TD
205 Eucalyptus cladocalyx Sugar gum 32 25 B B
Hd TD Sp-top Sh MB
206 Eucalyptus cladocalyx Sugar gum 46 30 C C
R-inj cod Xing-kiss DLS Sp-top
207 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 20 25 B C
R-inj cod galls 2long Sh MB
208 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 20 25 B C
FC inc cod galls DLS Sh MB
209 Pinus pinea Italian stone pine 26"b 25 C- C-
Cod inc R-galls Lt OP Sp Sh MB
210 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 26 @ 2' 15 B C-
Cod inc CrR TO OL
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 16 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
211 Olmediella betschlerana Guatemalan holly 9 10 B C-
60⁰ lean CrS FC Sh MB
212 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 10 10 B C
Cod mSp Sh MB
213 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 12 15 B C
Cod DLS mDb mSp Sh MB
214 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 21 22 A B
mBow 2long Sh MB
215 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 15 15 C- C-
DL cid Db Sh MB
216 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 17 18 C C
Cod 2long Sh MB
217 Schinus molle California pepper 7.3 7 B B
Cod Sh MB
218 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 18 14 C C-
FC 1-cod cut, TD R-galls Sh MB
219 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 18 20 B C-
Cod CrS Xing R-galls, Sh MB
220 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 13 11 B D
Cod Xing, tangle of limbs, Sh MB
221 Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear 18 10 B C-
FC 60⁰ lean Tinj DLT DLS Sh MB
222 Removed
223 Removed
224 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 10 16 C- C- sml cutout Cod Db Sp bleeding trunk 225 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 8 12 D D sml cutout Leans Db Sp T-Db 226 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 7.5 12 D D sml cutout Cod Db Sp 227 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 7.5 14 -1s D D sml cutout Cod brk leans Db Sp 228 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 7.7 9 C- C- sml cutout Cod DLS Db Sp 229 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 11 16 C- C- sml cutout Cod DLS Db Sp 230 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 8.5 10 C- D sml cutout Cid CrS DLS Db Sp 231 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 8 12 C- C- sml cutout Cod brks DLS Db Sp 232 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 4 2 F F sml cutout Dk Db Sp, near dead 233 Removed
234 Removed
235 Removed
236 Removed
237 Removed
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 17 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
238 Ficus rubiginosa Rusty leaf fig 5 4 B C sml plantr FC, stump sprout 239 Removed
240 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 6 8 C C- turn round Tinj 1sRF Sp cod, aphids 241 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 5.5 7 C- D turn round Leans 60⁰, Tinj 1sRF Sp cod, aphids
242 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 7 8 C C- Fire station Vines in canopy, rests on wall, cod Sp
243 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 6 7 C C- Fire station Vines in canopy, CrR cod Sp 244 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 7 10 C C- Fire station Vines in canopy, CrR cod Sp 245 x Chitalpa Chilopsis x Catalpa 7 8 C C- Fire station Vines in canopy, CrR leans cod Sp 246 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 6.3 10 B C Fire station
Cod CrS Tinj
247 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 10+11+12 12 C- C Fire
station
Cod Xing OL Sh MB
248 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 12+10+10 16 C C Fire
station
Cod OL Sh MB
249 Melaleuca nesophylla Pink melaleuca 13 20 - 1s C C- Fire station
OP T-horiz
250 Melaleuca nesophylla Pink melaleuca 12+12 20 - 1s C C- Fire station
OP T-horiz DkT
251 Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia 6 9 C- C mid Sp Db S-brk 252 Eucalyptus ficifolia Red flowering gum 20 16 C C
mLean cod mBleeding
253 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 15 14 B D
60⁰ lean cod inc Xing, tangled Sh
MB
254 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 15 12 B D
1sRF cod inc CrS Sh MB
255 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 16 12 B C-
CrS cod inc Db Sh MB
256 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 14 12 C D
Xing tangledSp Db Sh MB
257 Melaleuca
quinquenervia
Cajeput tree 22 15 B C-
Cod inc half-gird CrS
258 Removed
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 18 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
259 Removed
260 Corymbia citriodora Lemon-scented gum 14 16 - 1s C- C-
1s cod Sp Lt Sh MB
261 Removed
262 Removed
263 Removed
264 Removed
265 Removed
266 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
Red gum 20 16 - 1s C C-
1s Xing OL Sh MB
267 Removed
268 Removed
269 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 8+9 15 - 1s C- D
1s cod DkTs epis
270 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 11 10 D- C-
Cod NC Db Sh MB
271 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 20 25 B C-
Cod Xing-kiss Sh MB
272 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 18"b 18 C- C-
Cod inc 2long Db Sh MB
273 Removed
274 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 16 20 C- D
FC Dk Hd DL Sh MB
275 Removed
276 Olea europaea Olive 22 15 D D
Epis FC brk Db Xylella? Sh MB
277 Removed
278 Metrosideros excelsus New Zealand Christmas
tree
21 @ 2' 18 B C
Root sprung, Lt Sh
279 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 18 20 C- C
OP Sp mDb Sh MB
280 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 20 20 B B
Lt 2long Sh MB
281 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 23 26 C C-
Cod Xing-kiss Db, gravel mulch
282 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 18 18 C C
Cod mDb Sh MB
283 Removed
284 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 16 18 C D
1s TO topd Sh MB
285 Removed
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 19 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
286 Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash 21 20 C C
Cod mTop-Db Sh MB
287 Removed
288 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 11 12 C- C-
Cod Db brk Sh MB
289 Removed
290 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 20 16 C- C
ShMB Db DLs Sp
291 Lophostemon confertus Brisbane box 8 8 C- D
Sp Db galls stunted
292 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 17 20 B C
Cod brks mDb Sh MB
293 Removed
294 Removed
295 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 17 16 C- C
Db Sp Sh MB
296 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 40 30 C C-
Cod inc CrS Sp
297 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 32 30 B C-
Cod inc EH Lt
298 Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine 18 20 A D
DkB
299 Eucalyptus citriodora Lemon-scented gum 25 25 B C
Cid brk 2long Sh MB
300 Eucalyptus citriodora Lemon-scented gum 17 16 D- D
Binj cod brk Sh MB
301 Platanus racemosa California sycamore 34 25 B B
DLs 2long Sh MB
302 Removed
303 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 12 14 D D
Cod Hd Db 2long Sh MB
304 Removed
305 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 5+6+6 12 C C-
FC cod chlor mDb Sh MB
306 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 4.2 5 D D
WWinj chlor Db lean
307 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
Carrotwood 5 6 D D
WWinj chlor Db Sh MB
308 Ficus rubignosa Rusty leaf fig 11 14 B C
Lt CrR
309 Removed
310 Syagrus
romanzoffianum
Queen palm 20'th 12 C C Fire station Penciled
311 Syagrus
romanzoffianum
Queen palm 17'th 10 C C Fire station Penciled
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 20 Tag
# Botanic Name Common Name Caliper –
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Health Conditio
n Location Comments
312 Syagrus
romanzoffianum
Queen palm 16'th 10 C C Fire station Penciled
313 Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum 12 16 C- D Fire station Topd TD Db 2long Sh MB 314 Howea forsteriana Kentia palm 4+6' 9 B B Fire station 4'T stunted 315 Corymbia citriodora Lemon-scented gum 18 20 C C- Fire station |OP Lt Sp 316 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 8.5 12 B C Fire station FC OL Sh MB 317 Platanus x acerifolia London plane 9 12 B C Fire station FC OL cod 318 Syagrus
romanzoffianum
Queen palm 16+18 10 B C Fire station 8'T is thin and sparse 319 Schinus terebinthifolius Brazil pepper 9+10 10 B C- Fire station Cod inc stubs DLT DLS * Calipers with “b” indicated basal measurements below first scaffold limbs. ** All tree tags from the 2009 inspection are gone. They probably were removed, because not even small stunted trees had tags.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 21 Abbreviations in the Matrix
Arboricultural terms are defined in the glossary. Common abbreviations used in the following matrix include:
1s = one sided,
1sRF = 1 sided root flare
2long = too long
B = base e.g.
Binj = basal injury
Brk = break
Chlor = chlorotic
CO = cut out
Cod = codominant branching
Crk = crack
Cr = crowded
CrR = crowded roots
CrS = crowded scaffold limbs
CrT = crowded trunks
Db = dieback
Dk = decay
DL = dog-leg, DLS = dog-leg scaffold
DLT = dog-leg trunk
EH = end heavy
epi = epicormic shoots
FC = flush cut
Gird = girdled
Hd = headed back
Inc = included bark
Inj = injured
Lt = lion tailed
MB = mower blight
OL = over-lifted (canopy)
OP = over-pruned
R = root e.g. Rinj = root injury
RC=root crown
RDk = root decay
Sh = shallow roots
Sp = sparse
S = scaffold limb
Sml=small
S-brk = scaffold broke
SW = sidewalk
T = trunk
T-bow = bowed trunk
TDk = trunk decay
th = trunk height
Tinj = trunk injury
TO = tear out
Topd = topped
WWinj = weed whip injury
Xing = crossing, rubbing limbs
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 22 Discussion
Turf grass impacts and effects on tree health
The custom of planting trees within the lawns creates a maintenance conflict and an irrigation conflict between turf care and tree care. As a result, most of Edison Park’s trees are shallow rooted and make poor candidates for transplanting. Trees in turf suffer from several common problems. Generally, their wood is weaker, due to heavier use of nitrogen fertilizer. Also, excurrent trees in turf tend to lose their primary or central leaders, and they have shallow root systems that are frequently injured by lawn mowers.
Trunks and root crowns are also injured by turf maintenance equipment. In addition, soil compaction is higher in turf areas due to frequent foot and lawn mower traffic over wet or moist soil. The high number of leaning trees is also related to being shallow rooted due to turf grass culture and not able to resist strong winds.
During this inspection and the last, pickup trunks and heavier vehicles were being driven over the turf, over tree root zones. Most of these trees are either directly planted in turf or have root systems that have grown into adjoining turf. In recent history the lawn areas have been kept fairly dry, it appears that at least during the period when their primary root structure was developing turf conditions were moister.
Life expectancy and longevity
Trees in parks often have shorter life spans than in nature, because of “people pressures”, soil compaction, competition with turf, damage from turf equipment, and in this case, perhaps vandalism from high school students. The trees in Edison Park have a few signs of vandalism, such as trunk carving, but many more lawn mower injuries. They also show the other impacts of soil compaction to various degrees. A number of leaning trees are probably due to having shallow roots.
Most trees in older parks needs to be replaced or upgraded periodically to reflect the success or failure of species, pest or disease outbreaks, and challenging locations. Due to Edison Park’s history as a land fill, this is a challenging location. Life spans for some species of trees in Edison Park have already been reached in several cases. Though in nature some superior specimens may live for hundreds of years, genetically inferior trees and trees less ideally situated live much shorter lives. In most cases trees with the longest life span are in nature, untouched by man. Some trees in Edison Park appear to be about 60 years old. With the “people pressures” found here, few of these trees will last another 50 years. Based on the analysis to follow, the less successful species should be avoided in future planting and in some cases removed.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 23
Pest and diseases observed
Some trees in this park are declining prematurely due to pest or disease problems, such as the red gum eucalyptus. Since 2009 about a third of the redgums and flooded gums at Edison Park have been removed for one reason or another. Redgum lerp psyllid, Glycaspis brimblecombei, (RLP) is the primary pest affecting the red gums and flooded gums on site. The 2009 inventory found only half as many of these two species as when the previous inventory was done. The state release of a predatory wasp has brought this pest under control. Only minor infestations of psyllids were observed at this time, but even in Australia, with full natural controls, flare ups do occur.
Redgum lerp psyllids are small insects that suck sap from leaves. Adults are about the size of a gnat. Even with natural biological controls in place, psyllid densities can become so high that partial or total defoliation of trees occasionally results, tree appearance becomes unsightly, and tree vigor is reduced. Psyllids also produce a sticky substance called honeydew, which drops to the ground on cars and sidewalks. The honeydew will often be fed on by black sooty mold and ants. < Immature lerp psyllid
<“Lerps” are caps made of crystallized sap, under which immature psyllids feed. RLP forms a lerp, which is a structure produced by the nymphs as a protective cover resembling a scale.
Over the past twenty years or so, eight to ten eucalyptus pests have arrived in California. The redgum lerp psyllid, one of the more deadly pests on California's eucalyptus trees, was discovered in 1998 in Los Angeles County. Fortunately, the biological control program run by the state has finally become effective as the wasps spread and parasitized the psyllid eggs.
Another relatively new eucalyptus pest is the fern leaf psyllid, Eucalyptolyma maidenii. This psyllid feeds on lemon gum and spotted gum. This pest will definitely stress these trees and trees already stressed by other causes may be eventually killed. Almost no damage was found on the six lemon gum specimens in Edison Park. There were seven lemon gums in the last inventory, so one has died or been removed.
There is also some minor damage from the Australian tortoise beetle, Trachymela sloanei. The red gums, flooded gums, and sugar gums are also fed upon by this beetle. While being attacked by psyllids, additional foliage loss from tortoise beetles can be serious.
There is no control and I know of no biological control programs underway.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 24 The white alders have either been removed for structural problems, or over half have died from borers or other issues. This is a fairly short-lived species, and all of the remaining ones on site are in poor health and have structural weaknesses.
Myoporums are currently in serious decline due to a recent outbreak of thrips, Klambothrips myopori. I have yet to see a successful spray program for this pest and many of the myoporums on site are too far declined to recover.
It may be only a seasonal problem, but the Chitalpas are sparse and heavily infested by aphids. Aphids can infest many different species when they have soft new leaves in spring. However, this is the only species noted with a significant aphid infestation.
Evergreen pears have always had spells of fire blight damage. When properly treated and not spread by pruning tools, it is only serious in wetter years. In 2009 there were eight fewer pears than at the previous inventory. There are still eight remaining.
Several other species have disappeared totally from the park for unknown reasons. The silver maple, Indian laurels, white birch, coral trees, Wilson holly, yew pine, and Xylosma have been removed since the first inventory for one reason or another.
Visible Decay or Structural Defects
The most common defects are related to turf maintenance around trees. Many of the large, exposed primary roots have been shaved down by lawn mowers. Basal injuries and decay are also common, either due to lawn mower impacts or string trimmer damage, Lawn mowers or string trimmers have damaged the root flares of many trees to the extent that decay has resulted to various degrees.
Some of the trees are so damaged that they are leaning, some from lack of root support. Others may have leaned due to strong winds before they were adequately rooted in.
Over the years the trees in Edison Park have formed their current structures without the benefit of skillful training and pruning. The budget to bring in expert crews to perform the type of pruning that yields stronger, longer lived trees was not available. Most of the older specimens now have overly long, end-heavy branches, dogleg limbs, and crowded scaffold limbs, with narrow crotches, included bark and other defects that can ultimately be hazardous. Poorly formed trees eventually shed branches or may topple unexpectedly. The requirements of turf maintenance in the root zones of trees introduces many small injuries over time to the trunks, root crowns, and surface roots.
This inspection was not intended to be exhaustive, no internal decay testing was done, nor were loss of strength calculations done to determine if decay was critical. With the high incidence of lawn mower injuries to roots and trunks, more decay might be found with Resistograph or sonic tomography testing, but the degree of root decay would be nearly impossible to quantify.
The alders and liquidambars, though typically excurrent, have poor codominant structure due to lack of training, poor maintenance pruning, and loss of a central leader due to wind damage, topping and/or excessive nitrogen fertilizer. Xylella is a likely cause of some of the liquidambars dieback. Their overall health and growth rate has declined and these specimens are not especially large Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 25 yet. When secondary leaders are growing too large they may be reduced proportionately by drop-crotch style pruning or subordination. This will stunt the growth of the competing leaders while allowing the main leader to increase proportionately.
Aleppo pines are another species that is typically excurrent in its native desert climate. In coastal climates they tend to lose their natural form, and even more so when they have excess water and nitrogen fertilizer, i.e. lawn conditions. The resulting codominant structure is also due to lack of training.
Italian stone pines may also be affected by this climate. Anyone who has been to Italy is probably familiar with their tall mushroom-like form in maturity. It is very common on the Italian skyline. The low bushy form found here is prone to splitting in their later years.
Single-trunk carrotwoods are commonly topped at an early age by the growers, which causes a brush of dense and closely spaced scaffold limbs. These crowded limbs tend to pinch each other out over time. Good early training can reduce or eliminate this problem. Carrotwood multi-trunked trees tend to have included bark between trunks and later in life one or more trunks split out.
Many of the carrotwoods here are in weak health and may never grow large. Comparing photographs from 2009 with this year’s trees, many seem to be virtually the same size. As common as this is, soil chemistry is the likely cause.
As red gums, sugar gums and other trees get older their chance of dropping limbs increases significantly and the size of those limbs also increase. I observed several large breaks in old eucalypts. These may be caused by storm damage or just excessive end weight.
Defects and decay are not as much the cause, as age and overly long and end-heavy limbs. Keeping foot traffic and activities out from under these trees is the best remedy, short of good pruning or removal. The reader will note in the Appendix charts that document the hazard profile of red gums, ironbarks and 2 other eucalyptus species.
Current Maintenance
Current maintenance practice is impacting the health of the trees in the areas of pruning, turf maintenance and soils/water management.
Substandard pruning practices include poor or lack of early training, such as allowing codominant leaders to form or crowded scaffolds with included bark; making flush cuts, leaving stubs, and lion-tailing. Codominant or equal size leaders often split out; they are inherently weak since they do not form good branch collars. When scaffold limbs are not properly spaced at an early age they often grow together, and sometimes fuse together where they cross. Codominant limbs are inherently weak.
The branch collar cannot form uniformly around the base of the limb and they often fail. Flush cuts cut through the branch Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 26 collar into trunk or limb tissue and lead to decay. Flush cuts are also larger cuts. Lion-tailing leaves all the foliage and weight at the branch ends. This concentrates the weight at the end rather than evenly distributing it along the limb and it also eliminates the ability to drop-crotch limbs when they get old, long, and end-heavy.
Shallow roots are common for trees in turf, since the compaction of the soil and the frequent irrigation of the turf keeps the roots near the surface. However, as these roots expand to the point where the lawn mower nick them on every pass, it is time to move the turf back and install a larger mulch basin below the tree. When roots are exposed near the base it is not acceptable to just mow off the tops. Each such injury to the trunk or root crown is one more wound that the tree must expend stored carbohydrates to compartmentalize. Each such injury is a possible point of infection and decay.
Few trees in Edison Park have had the turf pulled back from around the trunk. For larger trees on this site, this leads to more mower damage to the exposed roots. Keeping the turf back from trees allows for mulching, and also reduces the competition for water and nutrients. Mulching helps young trees to have a deeper distribution of roots. Mulch can be made from the chips the tree service makes from the pruning debris. This improves the soil, improves root health and reduces organic debris going to the landfill. One study of young trees found that keeping the turf back eighteen inches allowed 50 % faster growth than allowing the turf to grow up to the trunk. This was even without the damage to roots and trunks.
Turf aeration can reduce compaction to surface layers and will be helpful to trees as well, but it must be kept away from the larger exposed primary roots. Mulching and application of gypsum will improve water penetration, reduce soil compaction near trees, improve biotic life in the soil and reduce injury to exposed roots.
The early history of this site may be an important factor in the chemistry and condition of the soil on site. Good soil management should start with good sampling, mapping the soils, and testing of soils on site. Soil that can’t support turf grass, probably can’t support tree growth.
Periodic leaching of salts is probably necessary, being so close to the ocean. If reclaimed irrigation water is used, it will require even more frequent leaching.
To reduce soil compaction, lawn mowing should be scheduled for periods when the soil is at its driest, just before irrigation.
The irrigation cycles should also be governed by the times the sports fields are in use and activities scheduled for periods when the soil is drier.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 27 Soil Compaction
One of the major effects of heavy foot traffic and vehicle traffic is soil compaction. To the experienced eye, the effect of compacted soil on trees is obvious. Other plants that happen to be rooted in compacted soil, shrubs, annuals, perennials, even turf, will suffer from compaction as well. Bare soils in heavily used parks where grass cannot grow back are common. The places at Edison Park where City vehicles leave the paved roads and walkways are also devoid of turf and tree roots suffer as well. During the time I was on site I noticed several vehicles parking under trees. In a coastal climate like this, the shade of trees is simply not that important compared to the damage it does to the soil and roots. Root systems are very demanding and simply will not grow in compacted soil.
Here are several signs of soil compaction:
• Roots of plants, especially trees, close to or exposed on the surface. • Yellowing of foliage, especially in early spring during leaf-out and prior to leaf maturity, coupled with diminished development of leaves throughout the growing season. Do not confuse this with several nutrient deficiency symptoms. Cross- checking with foliar and soil analyses may be required. • Incidence of various plant diseases that are related to poor drainage and lack of oxygen. • Resistance to penetration of the soil by shovel, pick, or penetrometer.
Several of these symptoms may be present on a heavily used site. It is unlikely that one symptom alone - except resistance to penetration - indicates compaction, and that varies with soil moisture. Moreover, individual features may occur on uncompacted soils; shallow-rooted tree species such as ficus, fruitless mulberry and Shamel ash, for example, exhibit roots near the surface even on uncompacted soils.
Significant effects of soil compaction as they affect management of this site include:
• Crusting. Crusting occurs when the soil aggregates are pulverized and the fines fill the smaller pores. Foot and vehicle traffic compacts the surface more than lower soil depths. The crust can then repel even light rainfall and irrigation. • Decreased infiltration. The crust formation coupled with the reduced pore space and its smaller average-pore size reduces the infiltration capacity of the compacted soil under heavy rainfall, creating runoff and soil erosion. • Increased density. As soil fragments fill voids in compressed soil, the total pore space is reduced and the larger air-filled pores are destroyed or at least reduced in size.
• Decreased water-holding capacity. Since water is held in the pore space, any pore space decrease will generally decrease water-holding capacity.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 28 • Decreased soil aeration. Diffusion of gases, such as oxygen and carbon dioxide, into and out of the soil can be greatly reduced. Macro-pores become discontinuous and the smaller pores that are water-filled act as a barrier to diffusion of gases.
Even if the surface soil is the only portion compacted, infiltration and diffusion are determined by the least permeable layer of the soil profile; so the entire profile may suffer from reduced diffusion. • Root impedance. Roots penetrate only pores as large or larger in diameter than their root tip; the root will penetrate a smaller pore only if the soil is loose. If the soil is firm, the root simply cannot penetrate the smaller pore. • Poor leaching of salts. The compaction and crusting reduce water penetration, but leaves behind a thin layer of salts near the surface. The salts prevent good soil structure and reduce tree health in less tolerant species.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 29 Photographic Documentation
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 30
Note the golden carpet below tipu tree # 1
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 31
#19 London plane – note limb torn out Decay probably started with a basal injury by a lawn mower.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 32
Alders in decline The Liquidambar behind make the alder look fuller.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 33
Gophers or ground squirrels abound. Note a recently fallen branch.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 34
Most of the larger eucalypts need corrective pruning to reduce risk.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 35
Locals know these trees have dropped limbs, but everyone wanted to make sure they were not removed.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 36
#206 Sugar gum is one-sided and has crossing limbs that fused. See above Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 37
Cajeput or paperbark trees should be a good species for this soil and climate. Some are declining though.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 38
Cajeput or paperbark trees should be a good species for this soil and climate. The most common deterrent to good health are root injuries.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 39
Note the planed down surface roots common around their basess.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 40
Note the planed down surface roots common around their bases. This one is also girdled Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 41
Many myoporums are root sprung.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 42
The south edge used to have many more myoporums.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 43
Magnolias are usually a good lawn tree, but need better soil. Note the unhealthy turf surrounding these trees.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 44
Note the unhealthy turf surrounding these trees. This healthy magnolia has more green grass around it; is it water or soil? Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 45
A root sprung pink melaleuca. #67 Willow pittosporum with a braided trunk.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 46
A root-sprung, decayed and headed pink melaleuca, but not dead.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 47
A root-sprung, decayed and headed pink melaleuca, but interesting.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 48
Chitalpa are a recently planted desert loving hybrid. They are sparse, have poor structure and lots of aphids.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 49
Tag #145, Liquidambar styraciflua with crowded codominant limbs #71 Eucalyptus camaldulensis – note headed lower limb wraps around Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 50
The whole group of London planes in the plaza are in tiny cut-outs and in poor health.> Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 51
Healthy London planes in front of the fire station. London planes just to the north are in poor health. Soil or water? Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 52
Flush cuts on trunk resulted in velvet stem (Flammulina velutipes) decay. #145, Liquidambar with included bark, codominant, broken limbs Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 53
Tag #145, Liquidambar with codominant limbs and included bark. #50 Liquidambar with much dieback; Xylella? Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 54
Tag #218, Cupaniopsis anacardioides with crowded scaffold limbs and included bark. Also note minor chlorosis.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 55
This carrotwood has barely grown at all since 2009. Note the root crown. This carrotwood is also stunted. Note the root crown.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 56
Tag #266, Fraxinus uhdei –This damages roots and compacts soil. This picture is from 2009, conditions have deteriorated since then.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 57
#269 Fraxinus uhdei – wind swept? Fraxinus uhdei – note roots shaved by mowers.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 58
181, Pinus pinea with very crowded codominant trunks that are likely to split out. This pine has declined significantly since 2009.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 59
More stunted carrotwoods surround the community building. #42 Afrocarpus falcatus below the community building is very healthy.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Findings 60 New Tristaniopsis laurina, a coastal species, are doing well.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Analysis 61 Analysis
The main purpose of this report is to identify trees that are of sufficient health, condition and value to justify the cost of boxing, storing and replanting on site, as well as to identify trees that should be removed just due to very poor health or instability. Any other use of this report should consider the lack of detailed testing and reporting of internal decay and underground root defects.
Trees that were clearly close to death and unrecoverable and those that were clearly unstable are recommended for removal. All the trees that are in the path of new improvements cannot remain in their present location, but nearby trees can be preserved if their roots and canopies are protected at a sufficient distance from their trunk.
In the recommendations matrix to follow I list those trees that should be removed solely due to their health or structural condition; those that would be reasonable to transplant considering their species, health, structure and value; I list the average radius of their driplines; a recommended clearance and protective fencing radius. Generally conifers and deciduous trees move best in winter, broadleaf evergreens move best in spring just before new growth, and sub-tropicals move best in late spring or early summer.
Eucalyptus, eucalyptus relatives and certain other related trees do not transplant well in any season. Some species like Magnolia grandiflora transplant adequately when they are young but become increasingly difficult to move successfully as they age. Overall, successful transplanting requires healthy trees, the proper season, suitable species, the right size box for the tree, and an experienced and knowledgeable transplant contractor.
Since long term guarantees are rare or expensive from tree movers, and since construction schedules do not often consider tree needs, I advise to err on the side of removal and replacement. Since tree moving contractors usually only offer one year or no guarantee and when they do replace a tree, it is from their stock, they tend to err on the side of transplanting almost anything. In my opinion an independent expert with no financial interest provides the most reliable guidance.
Transplanting specifications are found in the appendix of this report.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 62 Recommendations
Since the construction plans are not finalized, but hopefully are flexible to some degree, the recommendations below are general and intended most to aid the landscape architects’ design development work. The clearance radii in the matrix below are approximate, and should be adjusted to accommodate leaning trees or trees with damaged or one-sided root systems. The clearance radii on the side opposite the lean should be increased proportionately to the degree of lean.
Trees in good health, that can be preserved, will need to be protected during roto-tilling, soil treatments, grading, and irrigation trenching, as well as other construction. Fencing and clear marking of those to be preserved will be needed. When grading near trees to remain, preliminary trenching at the limits of the protection zone will prevent backhoes and graders from tearing roots back into the protection zone.
At the time Edison Park was designed and installed, it was more common to place “shade trees” in turf. The redesign of the park can be improved by placing a significant percentage of new trees in areas adjacent to, but separate from the broad lawns.
In this way irrigation needs of trees and turf, which are so different, can each be optimized. Soil preparation for and maintenance of a mulch bed below a tree grove can made more efficient and effective.
New and replacement tree species must be carefully selected to be tolerant of soil and environmental conditions, and need little maintenance. And of course, we would not want to repeat planting more of the tree species that have previously failed at Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 63 Edison Park. If reclaimed water is used, a narrower list of potential trees for replacement should be researched. The current need for water restrictions may also limit the amount of turf and the species of turf that can be maintained. Less turf and more trees would improve water efficiency.
The use of a well-diversified pallet of trees is the safest approach to selection when there is a combination of various difficult soil conditions and turf. Planting amendments and soil preparation should be determined by a soil laboratory report. However, the lab report should also contain recommendations that deal with mitigation of compaction outside the root zones of trees.
General planting strategies are needed to protect new trees and enhance their growing environments. New trees should stay clear of existing trees and have over-sized planting pits to deal with compaction and other soil conditions. The planting pits should be over-size in width, not depth. Maintenance recommendations will deal with protection of soil and root zones as well as proper training and pruning.
For preservation in place suitable surrounding trees should be surveyed, since in my experience GPS can occasionally be inaccurate even when done with expensive surveying equipment.
Only trees that should clearly be removed were marked as such below. Other trees that have low condition ratings, below C, should be considered for removal or intensive care. Older trees that are in poor condition do not improve quickly. It may take years for noticeable recovery. This determination is a matter for more consideration and discussion.
Construction is hard on trees, even landscape construction. Following good tree preservation procedures will lessen the impact, but not eliminate it. Dust alone can have serious impacts on trees. Even with fencing there will still be some root loss and damage. Many trees on site have serious stress levels already, due to compaction and physical injuries. The additional stresses related to construction must be kept to a minimum to end up with worthwhile trees at the end.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 64 Matrix of Recommendations
Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
1 Tipuana tipu 32 33 A B No No 33 Lt 2long
2 Callistemon citrinus 4,6,7,5,4,4 12 B C- No No 12 Cod inc Xing 3 Liquidambar styraciflua 18 18 B C No No 18 Cod inc 2long Sh MB 4 Liquidambar styraciflua 11 15 C- C- No ? 15 CrS cod 2long Sh MB 5 Platanus x acerifolia 14 18 D C- No Yes N/A Db cod Sh MB 6 Removed
7 Alnus rhombifolia 18 13 D- D No Yes N/A Db Sh MB
8 Removed
9 Morus alba 21 25 A C- No ? 25 Cod 2long Xing S-seam, Sh MB 10 Alnus rhombifolia 17 16 D D- No Yes N/A 1s Dk Brk NEST 11 Platanus x acerifolia 14 16 D D No Yes N/A Db cod Sh MB 12 Removed
13 Morus alba 16 18 B C- No No 18 mDk cod DL Xing Sh MB 14 Platanus racemosa 23 24 A C- No Yes N/A 60⁰ lean cod-kiss Sh MB 15 Removed
16 Platanus racemosa 24 22 A C No No 22 DLT DLS Xing cod Sh MB 17 Spathodea campanulata 6+4.5 9 B C No No 9 1s Binj Sh MB 18 Pyrus kawakamii 15 14 C C- No Yes N/A Db FB Dk Brk DL Sh MB 19 Platanus x acerifolia 6.2 5 D D- No Yes N/A TO Dk Db cod 20 Platanus x acerifolia 8 4 D D- No Yes N/A TDk SDk epi Binj 21 Platanus x acerifolia 6 7 - 1s D D- No Yes N/A 1s 45⁰ lean TDk BDk 22 Spathodea campanulata 5 @ 3' 5 C C No No 5 Cod LB Sh MB 23 Spathodea campanulata 7 6 C C No No 7 Cod mDb Sh half-gird 24 Platanus x acerifolia 8 18 D C- No No 20 WWinj CrS Db 2long 25 Platanus x acerifolia 10 13 C- D No Yes N/A WW BDk Db 2long 26 Pyrus kawakamii 8+8 14 C C No No 14 Cod inc Db FB Sh MB Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 65 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
27 Magnolia grandiflora 17 20 B A No No 20 mCod Sh MB
28 Removed
29 Liquidambar styraciflua 15 @ 1' 18 C- C- No Yes N/A LB 2long mDb Sh MB 30 Alnus rhombifolia 27"b 16 D D No Yes N/A Cod inc Db
31 Alnus rhombifolia 21 @ 3' 16 D D No Yes N/A Cod T-seam Db Sh MB 32 Lagerstroemia X cv 12 11 B C No No 11 CrS Sh MB
33 Juniperus chin.
'Torulosa'
16 10 B C No No 10 Cod inc OL
34 Juniperus chin.
'Torulosa'
9+10 11 B C No No 11 Cod inc OL
35 x Chitalpa 5 7 C- C- No Yes N/A Sp
36 x Chitalpa 5 6 C- C- No Yes N/A Sp lean
37 x Chitalpa 5 6 C- C- No Yes N/A Sp
38 Removed
39 Afrocarpus falcatus 18 18 B C No No 18 Cod Xing Sh
40 Corymbia citriodora 22 25 C C No No 25 Cod Sp
41 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
5+8 10 D D No Yes N/A Cod Sp chlor Sh MB
42 Afrocarpus falcatus 20 25 B B No No 25 Sh 2long
43 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
4 6 C- D No Yes N/A Cod inc Xing TO Sh MB
44 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
8+9 12 B C No No 12 Cod inc Xing Sh MB
45 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
4+5 6 C- D No Yes N/A Cod Xing-kiss Sp Sh MB
46 x Chitalpa 5 6 C- C No Yes N/A Cod Xing leans 60⁰ NoRF 47 x Chitalpa 5 8 C- C- No No 8 Cod TO Xing Sp
48 x Chitalpa 6.5 6 C- C- No Yes N/A 60⁰ lean Tinj cod Sp FC 49 x Chitalpa 7 9 B B No No 9 mLean mSp
50 Liquidambar styraciflua 20 25 D D No Yes N/A Cod inc SDk Sh MB 51 Platanus x acerifolia 12 17 C B No No 17 Sh
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 66 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
52 Removed
53 Removed
54 Removed
55 Removed
56 Removed
57 Removed
58 Removed
59 Removed
60 Melaleuca quinquenervia 40 20 B C- No No 20 Cod inc Hd SW-lift Sh MB 61 Pyrus kawakamii 16 18 C C- No No 18 Db FB Lt TO Sh MB 62 Quercus ilex 18 16 C C Yes No 18 Cod TD mSp Sh MB
63 Liquidambar styraciflua 14 15 B C- No No 15 LB cod CrS Sh MB 64 Quercus ilex 12 16 C B Yes No 16 mSp MB
65 Magnolia grandiflora 5.5 7 D C- No Yes N/A Sp Brk Db 66 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
7 7 F F No Yes n/A Dead NoRF
67 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
13 18 B C- No No 18 Cod Xing-kiss
68 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
15 16 C C No No 16 Cod inc Sh MB
69 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
12 16 C C- No No 16 Cod incTO gaffed Sh MB
70 Pittosporum
phillyraeoides
14 14 C D No No 14 1sRF cod inc gaffed CrS
71 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
23 22 C C No No 23 Hd Sp cod mDb Sh MB
72 Removed
73 Schinus terebinthifolius 26 18 C- C- No No 30 1sRF mSp cod MB 74 Removed
75 Pinus thunbergiana 8 6 C C No No 8 Cod Binj Sp
76 Schinus terebinthifolius 20 17 C- C- No No 24 Cod inc Lt Sp Db FC Sh Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 67 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
77 Fraxinus uhdei 21 30 C C No No 21 Cod inc CrS Xing Sh MB 78 Pinus canariensis 14 16 - 1s B D No Yes 16 - 1s 1s WWinj Sh MB 79 Lagunaria patersonii 11 9 A C No No 9 Cod inc CrS epi, burrow 80 Myoporum laetum 26 20 - 1s D D No Yes N/A 1s cod inc T-horiz Sp Db R- exposed
81 Schinus molle 8+9 12 B C No No 12 Cod inc FC 1T-cut
82 Tipuana tipu 23 18 C D No Yes N/A Topd Hd epi OH-wires, Sh MB 83 Tipuana tipu 22 22 C D No Yes N/A Topd Hd epi OH-wires, Sh MB 84 Tipuana tipu 21 15 C D No Yes N/A Topd Hd epi OH-wires, Sh MB 85 Removed
86 Removed
87 Removed
88 Removed
89 Schinus terebinthifolius 30 28 B C No No 28 1s cod FC mGird Sh 90 Removed
91 Removed
92 Removed
93 Metrosideros excelsus 8,8,8,8,8 13 B C No No 13 Cod Xing TO Sh MB 94 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
39 36 C C No No 39 2long cod mSp S-crk
95 Pinus canariensis 7 10 - 1s B C- No No 10 - 1s 60⁰ lean Binj 96 Pinus canariensis 14 16 C C- No No 16 DLT Brk 2long
97 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
26 28 C C No No 26 Cod 2long mSp Sh MB
98 Pinus canariensis 13 12 C- B No No 15 Cr#97 1s Db
99 Pinus canariensis 17 13 B C No No 13 Cod 2long R-galls 100 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
26 25 C- C No No 30 Cod 2long Db Sp Sh MB
101 Removed
102 Myoporum laetum 3+4 3 C D No Yes N/A 3"T broke
103 Myoporum laetum 8+10+7+4 15 C D No Yes N/A Root sprung Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 68 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
104 Myoporum laetum 3+4+6 7 C D No Yes N/A 2Ts-Dk, Sp
105 Myoporum laetum 3,3,3,3,3 8 C C No No 8 Clump
106 Removed
107 Removed
108 Myoporum laetum 3,2,2,2,2,2 6 C C- No Yes N/A Clump, old Hd 109 Myoporum laetum 7+3+2 8 C C- No No 8 1s, old Hd
110 Myoporum laetum 6,6,7,7,7 9 C C- No No 9 Db Tinjs mGird 111 Myoporum laetum 3+3+2+2 6 C C- No No 6 Hd DL, a bush, fill on-RC, burrow 112 Removed
113 Removed
114 Myoporum laetum 10,7,7,5,5,
5 15 C C- No No 15 Lt cod mDb Sp Sh
115 Myoporum laetum 6 12 - 1s C C- No No 12 45⁰ lean, 1s mDb S-crk 116 Myoporum laetum 5+2 12 - 1s D D No Yes N/A 1s dead, other Sp 117 Removed
118 Removed
119 Removed
120 Removed
121 Removed
122 Removed
123 Removed
124 Feijoa sellowiana 5, 5, 5, 7,4 8 C C- No No 8 Cod Xing Lt Sh MB 125 Feijoa sellowiana 10"b 4 D D No No 12 Cod Lt Sh MB
126 Metrosideros excelsus 9,7,6,6,5,5 15 B C No No 15 Cod Xing Lt Sh MB 127 Pinus canariensis 14 12 B C No No 12 Cod Sh, R-galls, HANAGER 128 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
42 36 B C No No 36 Cod FC 2long Sh MB
129 Removed
130 Removed
131 Pinus pinea 20 18 - 1s B C- No No 18 - 1s Root sprung, 30⁰ lean Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 69 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
132 Pinus pinea 22 @ 2' 13 B C No No 13 Cod inc Sh MB
133 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
14 20 C C No No 20 Cod 2long leans, Sh MB
134 Pinus halepensis 20 22 - 1s F F No Yes n/A DEAD
135 Removed
136 Removed
137 Pinus halepensis 44 36 A B No No 36 Cod 2long
138 Pinus halepensis 34 @ 2' 30 A C No No 30 1sRF cod 2long Rinj 139 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
14 14 C D No Yes N/A Brks DLT cod
140 Removed
141 Removed
142 Removed
143 Removed
144 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
23 16 C C No No 23 Cod Sp Db 2long
145 Liquidambar styraciflua 20 30 C- C- No No 30 Cod inc 2long lrg S-cut Db Sh MB 146 Celtis laevigata 12 16 B C No No 16 Chlor cod DL 2long 147 Removed
148 Removed
149 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
15 16 B B No No 16 Sh MB
150 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 23 20 C C No No 23 Cod DLS 2long Sh MB 151 Eucalyptus sp. 19 18 C C No No 19 Cod CrS Xing
152 Removed
153 Removed
154 Removed
155 Agonis flexuosa 29, 16, 17 20 B C No No 20 Cod T-crk Xing Sh MB 156 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 25 20 B C No No 20 Cod DLS 2long Sh MB, NEST 157 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 23 20 B C No No 20 Cod DLS 2long Sh MB 158 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 18 18 C C No No 18 Cod DLT FC brk Sh MB Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 70 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
159 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 22 20 C C- No No 22 Cod DLS Xing Sh MB 160 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 20 18 C C No No 20 Cod DLS Xing Sh MB 161 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 20 16 - 1s C C No No 20 1s DLS L:t Cod Sh MB 162 Eucalyptus sideroxylon 19 16 C C No No 19 Cod Hd DL brk Xing Sh MB 163 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
24 25 C C No No 25 1sRF Cod OL Lt Sh MB
164 Fraxinus uhdei 34 28 B C No No 28 Cod CrS mDb 2long Sh MB 165 Fraxinus uhdei 24 20 C- C- No No 24 1sSp Db CrS Sh MB 166 Fraxinus uhdei 17 14 C- C No No 17 CrS Db Sp Sh MB
167 Fraxinus uhdei 24 25 D C No No 27 CrS cod Sp Db Sh MB 168 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
14 16 B C No No 16 CrS cod Xing Sh MB
169 Pyrus kawakamii 10 9 B C No No 9 Cod Tinj Sh MB
170 Pinus halepensis 14 15 B C No No 15 45⁰ lean, half gird 171 Removed
172 Removed
173 Removed
174 Removed
175 Removed
176 Removed
177 Sophora japonica 5.5 8 C C- No No 8 Cod Xing Sh MB
178 Sophora japonica 5 7 C C- No No 7 Cod CrS Xing Binj 179 Sophora japonica 7 9 C C- No No 9 Cod CrS Xing mDb Sh MB 180 Pinus pinea 27 22 B C No No 22 Cod CrS Sh MB
181 Pinus pinea 29 30 B C- No No 30 Cod inc Xing, R-galls Sh MB 182 Sophora japonica 5 5 C C- No No 5 Cod CrS Xing NoRF 183 Brachychiton populneus 19 12 C C No No 19 Cod 2long 1sSp Sh MB 184 Brachychiton discolor 14 7 D D No Yes N/A Dead top and tips, Sh MB 185 Brachychiton discolor 8 6 C- C- No No 8 Weak top
186 Brachychiton discolor 19 10 C C- No No 19 Cod CrS Sh MB Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 71 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
187 Brachychiton populneus 8+10 12 C- C- No No 12 Cod inc Sp Sh MB 188 Brachychiton populneus 20 15 C C No No 20 NoRF cod inc Sp 189 Brachychiton discolor 18 8 C- C- No No 18 CrS Sp Sh MB 190 Brachychiton populneus 16 12 B C- No No 12 Cod Sh MB 191 Pinus thunbergiana 14 18 B C No No 18 Cod Sh MB Cr#190 & 192 192 Brachychiton populneus 13 12 C C No No 13 Cod Sh MB Cr#191 193 Brachychiton populneus 9 6 B C No No 7 Cod CrS
194 Brachychiton populneus 4.3 3 C C- No No 4.5 Cod Xing 195 Melaleuca quinquenervia 22 18 B C- No ? 18 Cod inc Lt Sh MB 196 Eucalyptus rudis 16 16 B C No No 16 Cod leans, root sprung, Sh MB 197 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
32 27 C C No No 32 SW lift cod Xing-kiss
198 Eucalyptus cladocalyx 24 25 C C No No 25 Hd DL cod Sh MB 199 Eucalyptus
polyanthemos
18 18-1s B C- No No 18 45⁰ lean, root-sprung, Xing-kiss Sh MB
200 Removed
201 Eucalyptus cladocalyx 40 27 C C No No 40 Sp-top cod Sh MB, HANGER 202 Removed
203 Pinus eldarica 16 12 C C No No 16 Sp 2long, no mulch 204 Eucalyptus cladocalyx 35 25 B C No No 27 Cod Hd TD
205 Eucalyptus cladocalyx 32 25 B B No No 25 Hd TD Sp-top Sh MB 206 Eucalyptus cladocalyx 46 30 C C No No 46 R-inj cod Xing-kiss DLS Sp-top 207 Pinus pinea 20 25 B C No No 25 R-inj cod galls 2long Sh MB 208 Pinus pinea 20 25 B C No No 25 FC inc cod galls DLS Sh MB 209 Pinus pinea 26"b 25 C- C- No No 30 Cod inc R-galls Lt OP Sp Sh MB 210 Melaleuca quinquenervia 26 @ 2' 15 B C- No No 15 Cod inc CrR TO OL 211 Olmediella betschlerana 9 10 B C- No No 10 60⁰ lean CrS FC Sh MB 212 Pyrus kawakamii 10 10 B C No No 10 Cod mSp Sh MB
213 Pyrus kawakamii 12 15 B C No No 15 Cod DLS mDb mSp Sh MB 214 Platanus racemosa 21 22 A B No No 22 mBow 2long Sh MB Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 72 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
215 Liquidambar styraciflua 15 15 C- C- No No 15 DL cid Db Sh MB 216 Liquidambar styraciflua 17 18 C C No No 18 Cod 2long Sh MB 217 Schinus molle 7.3 7 B B No No 7 Cod Sh MB
218 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
18 14 C C- No No 18 FC 1-cod cut, TD R-galls Sh MB
219 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
18 20 B C- No No 20 Cod CrS Xing R-galls, Sh MB
220 Pyrus kawakamii 13 11 B D No No 11 Cod Xing, tangle of limbs, Sh MB 221 Pyrus kawakamii 18 10 B C- No No 10 FC 60⁰ lean Tinj DLT DLS Sh MB 222 Removed
223 Removed
224 Platanus x acerifolia 10 16 C- C- No Yes N/A Cod Db Sp bleeding trunk 225 Platanus x acerifolia 8 12 D D No Yes n/A Leans Db Sp T-Db 226 Platanus x acerifolia 7.5 12 D D No Yes n/A Cod Db Sp 227 Platanus x acerifolia 7.5 14 -1s D D No Yes n/A Cod brk leans Db Sp 228 Platanus x acerifolia 7.7 9 C- C- No Yes N/A Cod DLS Db Sp 229 Platanus x acerifolia 11 16 C- C- No Yes N/A Cod DLS Db Sp 230 Platanus x acerifolia 8.5 10 C- D No Yes N/A Cid CrS DLS Db Sp 231 Platanus x acerifolia 8 12 C- C- No Yes N/A Cod brks DLS Db Sp 232 Platanus x acerifolia 4 2 F F No Yes n/A Dk Db Sp, near dead 233 Removed
234 Removed
235 Removed
236 Removed
237 Removed
238 Ficus rubignosa 5 4 B C No Yes N/A FC, stump sprout 239 Removed
240 x Chitalpa 6 8 C C- No No 8 Tinj 1sRF Sp cod, aphids 241 x Chitalpa 5.5 7 C- D No Yes N/A Leans 60⁰, Tinj 1sRF Sp cod, aphids
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 73 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
242 x Chitalpa 7 8 C C- No No 8 Vines in canopy, rests on wall, cod Sp
243 x Chitalpa 6 7 C C- No No 7 Vines in canopy, CrR cod Sp 244 x Chitalpa 7 10 C C- No No 10 Vines in canopy, CrR cod Sp 245 x Chitalpa 7 8 C C- No No 8 Vines in canopy, CrR leans cod Sp 246 Magnolia grandiflora 6.3 10 B C No No 10 Cod CrS Tinj 247 Melaleuca quinquenervia 10+11+12 12 C- C No No 15 Cod Xing OL Sh MB 248 Melaleuca quinquenervia 12+10+10 16 C C No No 16 Cod OL Sh MB 249 Melaleuca nesophylla 13 20 - 1s C C- No No 15 OP T-horiz 250 Melaleuca nesophylla 12+12 20 - 1s C C- No No 20 OP T-horiz DkT 251 Magnolia grandiflora 6 9 C- C No No 10 Sp Db S-brk
252 Eucalyptus ficifolia 20 16 C C No No 20 mLean cod mBleeding 253 Melaleuca quinquenervia 15 14 B D No ? 14 60⁰ lean cod inc Xing, tangled Sh MB
254 Melaleuca quinquenervia 15 12 B D No ? 12 1sRF cod inc CrS Sh MB 255 Melaleuca quinquenervia 16 12 B C- No No 12 CrS cod inc Db Sh MB 256 Melaleuca quinquenervia 14 12 C D No ? 14 Xing tangledSp Db Sh MB 257 Melaleuca quinquenervia 22 15 B C- No No 15 Cod inc half-gird CrS 258 Removed
259 Removed
260 Corymbia citriodora 14 16 - 1s C- C- No No 2 1s cod Sp Lt Sh MB 261 Removed
262 Removed
263 Removed
264 Removed
265 Removed
266 Eucalyptus
camaldulensis
20 16 - 1s C C- No No 20 1s Xing OL Sh MB
267 Removed
268 Removed
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 74 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
269 Fraxinus uhdei 8+9 15 - 1s C- D No Yes N/A 1s cod DkTs epis 270 Fraxinus uhdei 11 10 D- C- No Yes n/A Cod NC Db Sh MB 271 Fraxinus uhdei 20 25 B C- No No 25 Cod Xing-kiss Sh MB 272 Liquidambar styraciflua 18"b 18 C- C- No No 20 Cod inc 2long Db Sh MB 273 Removed
274 Liquidambar styraciflua 16 20 C- D No Yes N/A FC Dk Hd DL Sh MB 275 Removed
276 Olea europaea 22 15 D D No Yes N/A Epis FC brk Db Xylella? Sh MB 277 Removed
278 Metrosideros excelsus 21 @ 2' 18 B C No No 18 Root sprung, Lt Sh 279 Platanus racemosa 18 20 C- C No No 24 OP Sp mDb Sh MB 280 Platanus racemosa 20 20 B B Yes No 20 Lt 2long Sh MB 281 Platanus x acerifolia 23 26 C C- No No 26 Cod Xing-kiss Db, gravel mulch 282 Fraxinus uhdei 18 18 C C No No 18 Cod mDb Sh MB
283 Removed
284 Fraxinus uhdei 16 18 C D No Yes N/A 1s TO topd Sh MB 285 Removed
286 Fraxinus uhdei 21 20 C C No No 21 Cod mTop-Db Sh MB 287 Removed
288 Liquidambar styraciflua 11 12 C- C- No ? 12 Cod Db brk Sh MB 289 Removed
290 Platanus racemosa 20 16 C- C No No 24 ShMB Db DLs Sp 291 Lophostemon confertus 8 8 C- D No Yes N/A Sp Db galls stunted 292 Liquidambar styraciflua 17 20 B C No No 20 Cod brks mDb Sh MB 293 Removed
294 Removed
295 Platanus x acerifolia 17 16 C- C No No 20 Db Sp Sh MB 296 Pinus halepensis 40 30 C C- No No 40 Cod inc CrS Sp 297 Pinus halepensis 32 30 B C- No No 30 Cod inc EH Lt
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 75 Tag
# Botanic Name Caliper
DBH*
Driplin
e
radius
Healt
h
Conditio
n
Transplan
t
Remov
e
Clearanc
e Comments
298 Pinus halepensis 18 20 A D No Yes N/A DkB
299 Eucalyptus citriodora 25 25 B C No No 25 Cid brk 2long Sh MB 300 Eucalyptus citriodora 17 16 D- D No Yes n/A Binj cod brk Sh MB 301 Platanus racemosa 34 25 B B No No 25 DLs 2long Sh MB 302 Removed
303 Liquidambar styraciflua 12 14 D D No Yes N/A Cod Hd Db 2long Sh MB 304 Removed
305 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
5+6+6 12 C C- No No 12 FC cod chlor mDb Sh MB
306 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
4.2 5 D D No Yes N/A WWinj chlor Db lean
307 Cupaniopsis
anacardioides
5 6 D D No Yes N/A WWinj chlor Db Sh MB
308 Ficus rubignosa 11 14 B C No No 14 Lt CrR
309 Removed
310 Syagrus romanzoffianum 20'th 12 C C Okay No 5 Penciled 311 Syagrus romanzoffianum 17'th 10 C C Okay No 5 Penciled 312 Syagrus romanzoffianum 16'th 10 C C Okay No 5 Penciled 313 Liquidambar styraciflua 12 16 C- D No Yes N/A Topd TD Db 2long Sh MB 314 Howea forsteriana 4+6' 9 B B Okay No 9 4'T stunted
315 Corymbia citriodora 18 20 C C- No No 20 |OP Lt Sp
316 Platanus x acerifolia 8.5 12 B C No No 12 FC OL Sh MB 317 Platanus x acerifolia 9 12 B C No No 12 FC OL cod
318 Syagrus romanzoffianum 16+18 10 B C Okay No 10 8'T is thin and sparse 319 Schinus terebinthifolius 9+10 10 B C- No No 10 Cod inc stubs DLT DLS *Trunk diameters with “b” indicated basal measurements below first scaffold limbs.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 76 Clearances for Trees during Construction
Recommended clearance radii for trenching, paving or other activities that may weaken or kill trees are listed in the Matrix of Recommendations above. There are several methods of determining the space needed for tree protection. Drip line is most often used but you must be aware of the tree's lean or any other physical factors that force roots into a certain direction. The most important roots are opposite the lean of a tree. Following dripline alone would be just the wrong thing to do for leaning trees.
Dripline based recommendations also do not consider larger trees with narrow or upright habits. There are also significant species tolerance differences that should be considered. Drip line is not effective in these cases.
The authors of Trees & Development, use a diameter method that allows six inches of radius for every inch of trunk diameter for trees up to 20 inches DBH. For trees that are over 20 inches allow nine inches for every inch of trunk diameter. Over mature trees will need a full foot for every diameter - inch. If the tree is known to be only moderately tolerant to damage, add 3 inches per diameter inch to these distances. If the tree has a poor tolerance, add 6 inches. If you take this to the maximum, you would allow
1.5 feet of radius for every inch of trunk diameter to be on the safe side. Using such a formula is my preferred method of forming a protection zone. See Trees and Development, ISA, by Matheny and Clark, page 74 and appendix.
I recommend 6-foot-high chain link protective fencing around the protection zone. Before the fence goes up any weeds should be removed and any bare soil mulched to four inches deep with coarse tree chips. Existing turf in the protection zone can be sprayed with herbicide before mulching.
Preservation of Trees to Remain
During tree removal operations it will be evident that some trees may have less than attractive, formerly shaded, sides exposed.
If properly chosen and placed, new plantings should soon help fill in and improve this appearance. Temporary irrigation will probably be necessary during construction to maintain the health of existing trees (due to the shallow roots). A drip or mini- spray type system and domestic water would be best, considering the root spread and dictates of a construction site. Water trucks rarely provide sufficiently deep watering. Other species added to existing groupings should have similar watering requirements as the existing trees. However, for the first few years they will require more frequent irrigation within the watering basin, while they root in. Trees planted from smaller containers need shorter establishment periods.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 77 Deep cross-ripping (subsoiling) and amending of large areas where trees will be planted is essential. Recommendations for soil amendments and fertilization should come from an independent laboratory, after thorough testing. • Install 6’ high secure fencing around trees to be preserved. Equipment and even foot traffic must be kept out from under all trees being preserved.
• To avoid tearing roots back into the protection zones, during deep ripping or grading in the vicinity of trees to remain, a trencher should cut around the perimeter outside the clearance radius. Roots over 1 inch in diameter should then be cut cleanly using loppers or a fine bladed saw. Do not apply a sealant. Considering the shallow rooting of trees at Edison Park, keep in mind that almost any amount of root loss may increase the risk of toppling in the wind. • When other excavations are dug, first use a trencher and re-cut the roots over one inch with loppers or a fine bladed saw.
Equipment such as backhoes may tear roots excessively between the trench and trunk. Roots that are not cut cleanly will be more open to infection and will not resprout as well.
• No vehicles, equipment, materials, fuels, soil, excess concrete or other debris, liquid or solid, may be dumped or stored under or near the trees.
• Do not change the soil level or grade within the drip-line of any tree. If necessary, some accommodations can be made if approached on a tree-by-tree basis. Specific recommendations should be obtained from a registered consulting arborist. • To reduce soil compaction below trees to remain, four radial trenches should be placed between the main lateral roots, as much as their position can be determined. Trenches should begin at four feet or more from the trunk and radiate out to the edge of the root zone. The soil in each trench should be amended as recommended by a soil lab. • When larger roots are exposed in excavations, cover the ends with baggies and a rubber band or plastic sheeting and keep moist. Remember to remove the baggies when the roots are recovered. • Strong dust control measures should be observed and dusty foliage rinsed every Friday or as often as necessary. • The soil surface under each tree to remain should be maintained in a moist condition to a minimum depth of 18 inches. • After turf and ground cover are removed under trees, a layer of wood chips or coarse mulch should be maintained to a depth of four inches. The existing leaf and organic layer should be left in place as much as possible. • If equipment access is necessary within the protection zone, steel plates on a layer of wood chips 8 inches deep should be installed on the surface under trees to reduce compaction.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 78 Pest Management
Monitor trees to remain during construction and consult a licensed pest control advisor for recommendations to control pests encountered.
Tree Health Management
Tree health management should consider both the part you see and the equally important part underground. The below ground portions will involve soil chemical, biological and physical properties. Minimum levels of fertility are recommended to discourage excessive new growth, which is preferred by many pests. Recommendations dealing with the physical properties are as follows:
1. Trees that cannot be made safe by pruning or moving the “target” should be removed.
2. Trees protection zones should be mulched. Adding surface mulching to tree planting areas will reduce water evaporation from the soil surface, improve soil biotic life, improve water penetration, protect surface roots, and reduce the accumulation of salts in the soil surface. Try to use good quality, fully composted organic material from a reputable source (e.g. Aguinaga “Forest Floor ½ - 2”) However, if constrained by budgets, even fresh tree chips from a tree service are better than no mulch.
3. Aerate lawn areas, vertical mulch or use radial trenching as described above.
The larger eucalypts, red gums and sugar gums surrounding improvements should receive the following care:
1. Do no pruning (root pruning or top pruning) except as needed for public safety.
2. Pruning needs to focus on correcting or minimizing the defects listed in the comments column of the matrix.
3. Do not climb any tree, other than those being removed, using climbing gaffs.
4. Do not cultivate the soil under construction affected trees, except lightly as needed to apply gypsum or other recommended amendments. Under no circumstances should a roto-tiller be used under affected trees.
5. Do not trench, dig, or install new plantings under or near trees to remain. Radial trenching between primary roots to reduce compaction may be used under the guidance of a registered consulting arborist.
6. Irrigation in the area of affected trees should be adjusted to less frequent, but longer cycles, according to the reduced needs of the trees once the turf is removed.
7. The new irrigation system should have separate valves for tree masses. New irrigation lines among tree masses should be run outside the clearance radii, but when necessary can be run radial to trunks or surface mounted flex tubing below mulch.
8. Do not plant any new eucalypts from containers larger than 5-gallon size, and minimize staking.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 79 Long Term Maintenance Recommendations
1. To the degree possible, trees to remain should have turf removed within the dripline and replaced with mulch beds and occasional sparse plantings of drought tolerant shrubs or ground covers. New trees should have no turf within three feet of their trunks. The irrigation for the trees should be separated from the turf and scheduled according to their specific needs.
2. All future pruning should be guided by ANSI A-300 standards – there must be no topping, no lion-tailing, no flush cuts, no over-lifting and no over thinning. All pruning should be supervised by an ISA certified arborist. Pruning specifications should guide outside contract tree service work.
3. Staking of new trees should be carefully monitored to avoid stake rub and tree tie girdling. Trees shall be tied only as high as necessary to keep the tree vertical. All excess stake length above the highest tie shall be cut and removed. Stakes should be removed as soon as trees can stand without them.
4. Trees that are over picnic areas, walkways, and other public use areas must be kept to high standards of soundness and safety. Large codominant specimens, trees with large end-heavy scaffolds, trees with extensive decay, trees that have large limbs with included bark, and other trees that have uncorrectable defects should be removed or the uses below them should be removed.
5. Establish and enforce policies to keep all vehicles in the park, including city maintenance vehicles, on paved surfaces and away from trees.
6. After construction the trees should be inspected again for hazardous conditions that may have come about during this time or perhaps caused by construction.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 80 Tree Preservation Suggestions
1. Protection Barrier: A protection barrier is recommended to be installed around the trees to be preserved. The barrier shall be constructed of chain-link fencing at least six feet high. The barrier shall be placed as far from the base of the tree(s) as possible, preferably at the drip-line to protect lower limbs. The fencing shall be maintained in good repair throughout the duration of the project, and shall not be removed, relocated, or encroached upon.
2. Storage of Materials: There shall be NO storage of materials or supplies of any kind within the area of the protection barriers. Concrete and cement materials, block, stone, sand and soil shall not be placed within the drip-line of the tree.
3. Fuel Storage: Fuel storage is not recommended within 150 feet of any tree to be preserved. Refueling, servicing and maintenance of equipment and machinery shall NOT be permitted within 150 feet of protected trees.
4. Debris and Waste Materials: Debris and waste from construction or other activities is NOT be permitted within protected areas. Wash down of concrete or cement handling equipment, in particular, is not recommended within 150 feet of protected trees.
5. Grade Changes: Grade changes can be particularly damaging to trees. Even as little as two inches of fill can cause the death of a tree. Lowering the grade can destroy major portions of a root system. Any grade changes proposed should be approved by a Registered Consulting Arborist prior to construction, and precautions taken to mitigate potential injuries.
6. Damages: Severed roots shall be pruned cleanly to healthy tissue, using proper pruning tools. Broken branches or limbs shall be pruned according to International Society of Arboriculture Pruning Guidelines and ANSI A-300 Pruning Standards.
7. Preventive Measures: Before construction begins, fertilization of the affected trees intended to remain is recommended to improve tree vigor and health. Follow a soil laboratory’s recommendations for fertilization with the appropriate fertilizer products. Pruning of the tree canopies and branches should be done at the direction of the project arborist to remove any dead or broken branches, and to provide the necessary clearances for the construction equipment when necessary.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 81 Contingent and Limited Conditions
In comparison, the 2009 inventory shows continuing tree loss in two main areas, short-lived species and large trees planted in small spaces.
Proper planting and maintenance will be essential to good growth and performance of any future planting and the maintenance of the existing trees.
Transplanting is unlikely to be of use in this park due to shallow roots, poor tree health and long recovery periods.
Transplanting of larger mature trees always involves increased risk of tree death and/or toppling.
The soil conditions of this site do not appear to be uniform, and conditions may be encountered that are still unknown.
A detailed hazard analysis was not requested. No testing was done for internal decay or below ground conditions.
No guarantee of tree safety or stability is made by this report. Existing stability may be compromised by the future work of others.
Small numbers of trees do not yield reliable conclusions as to their site suitability.
Tree dripline radii were estimated for an approximate average radius around each tree.
Measurements were taken according to ANSI Z-60, using a Biltmore stick, or calipers for smaller trees.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 82
Conclusion
Preservation
I recommend that 59 trees be removed due to their safety, poor health or condition. In the 2009 report most of these removals were myoporums dying due to the thrip infestation. Now, over a decade later, only six myoporums are recommended for removal, but that is half the remaining twelve myoporums. The species with the largest number of recommended removals is the London plane tree, and that due mostly to the group planted in the skateboard area declining from lack of root space. The London plane cultivar planted in front of the fire station have grown well. Trees of other species were recommended for removal for a variety of reasons, e.g. decay at the base started by lawn mower injuries, trunk defects such as seriously included bark between codominant leaders, poor health, and other untreatable defects or conditions. This is the best time to clean out weak and unstable trees.
For the trees that will remain, some serious protection measures are needed and justified. Large trees, like the eucalypts near the office, are a great asset to a park. However, they have dropped limbs and need professional corrective pruning.
If this study is followed by new construction, consider that many unplanned things can happen on construction sites. Good fencing is the best insurance that desirable trees will remain so. Monitoring of work around trees is essential.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Recommendations 83 Planting
What makes choosing good species difficult at Edison Park is the variety of soil conditions. What may be a good choice for one part of the park, may not be good elsewhere. There are some species that tolerate tough soil conditions, but do not do well under lawn conditions. Then there are other considerations than soil and lawn tolerance. Some will need to be smaller trees for small areas. But the bottom line is, if the tree won’t grow well in these conditions, it doesn’t matter if it’s a good tree for lawn areas or small areas.
This consultant occasionally deals with soils that will not support woody plants of any species. There are grass species that can tolerate some such difficult soils that woody plants will not. Testing, mapping, and knowing the soil conditions around the park will help avoid more plant failures.
If the park is watered with reclaimed water, having that water tested, or getting the suppliers test results can also help avoid future plant failures. West Basin Water District still does not meet State standards for their reclaimed water, and there are other districts that have high salinity or high boron. Excess elements in the water can build up in the soil to the point where very few plants will grow.
Diversity is good insurance against serious future pest outbreaks. Edison Park has fairly good diversity, but has too many of certain species that have not grown well. Do not plant more than ten percent of even the most successful species. The introduction of new pests that can kill trees is nothing new. Consider the Dutch elm disease.
The root environment is just as important as the above ground environment. Many of the trees recommended for removal became injured or unstable because the root environment was not protected and shallow roots resulted, the shallow roots were then injured by lawn mowers and in some decay resulted. This is an opportunity to improve that environment. Less turf, thoughtful selection, more mulch, and good soil testing and monitoring can help new trees last longer.
Transplanting
Transplanting is not necessarily a valid means of preserving trees. There are few truly qualified contractors, it is expensive and risky, it can take decades for transplanted trees to fully recover, landscape maintenance people do not typically know how to care for transplanted trees, and there are almost no trees at Edison Park that should be transplanted.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Disclaimer 84 Disclaimer
Good, current information on tree preservation has been applied. However, even when every tree is inspected, inspection involves sampling, therefore some areas of decay or weakness may be missed. A complete tree hazard evaluation was not requested or performed. Weather, winds and the magnitude and direction of storms are not predictable and some failures may still occur despite the best application of high professional standards. Future tree maintenance will also affect the trees health and stability and is not under the supervision or scrutiny of this consultant. Continuing construction activity such as trenching will also affect the health and safety, but are unknown and unsupervised by this consultant. Trees are living, dynamic organisms and their future status cannot be predicted with complete certainty by any expert. This consultant does not assume liability for any tree failures involved with this property.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Certification 85 Certification
I, Gregory W. Applegate, certify to the best of my knowledge and belief:
That the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. That the report analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal unbiased professional analysis, opinions and conclusions.
That I have no present or prospective interest in the vegetation that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
That my compensation is not contingent upon a reporting the attainment of stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event.
That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the standards of arboricultural practice.
That I have made a personal inspection of the plants that are the subject of this report. No one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report.
Arborgate Consulting, Inc
Gregory W. Applegate, ASCA, ASLA emeritus ___________________________ Date _6/18/2022_____ Registered Consulting Arborist #365
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 86 Appendix
A. Resume
B. Botanical Name / Common Name Cross-reference
C. Glossary
D. Area map
E. Eucalyptus Hazard Charts
F. Transplanting Specifications
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 87 RESUME: GREGORY W. APPLEGATE, ASCA, ASLA emeritus
PROFESSIONAL
REGISTRATIONS: American Society of Consulting Arborists RCA #365 American Society of Consulting Arborists, Tree & Plant Appraisal Qualified International Society of Arboriculture, Certified Arborist Number WE-180a International Society of Arboriculture, Tree Risk Assessment Qualified EXPERIENCE: Mr. Applegate is an independent consulting arborist, CEO of Arborgate Consulting, Inc. He has been in the horticulture industry since 1963, providing professional arboricultural consulting since 1984 within both private and public sectors. His expertise includes appraisal, tree preserv ation, diagnosis of tree and palm problems, construction impact mitigation, environmental assessment, forensic consulting and testimony, hazard evaluation, pruning programs, species selection and tree health monitoring.
Mr. Applegate has consulted for insurance companies, major developers, theme parks, homeowners, homeowners' associations, landscape architects, landscape contractors, property managers, attorneys and governmental bodies.
Notable projects on which he has consulted are: Disneyland, Disneyland Hotel, DisneySeas -Tokyo, Disney’s Wild Animal Kingdom, the New Tomorrowland, Disney’s California Adventure, Disney Hong Kong project, Universal Studios, Knott’s Berry Farm, J. Paul Getty Museum, Dreamworks, Newport Coast, Crystal Court, Newport Fashion Isl and Palms, Bixby Ranch Country Club, Playa Vista, MTA Purple and Expo Lines, MWD -California Lakes, Loyola- Marymount campus, Cal Tech, Cal State Long Beach, Arcadia High School, Pierce College, The Irvine Concourse, UCI, USC, UCLA, LA City College, LA Trade Tech, Riverside City College, Crafton Hills College, and the State of California review of the Landscape Architecture License exam (re: plant materials).
EDUCATION: Bachelor of Science in Landscape Architecture, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona 1973 Arboricultural Consulting Academy (by ASCA), Arbor-Day Farm, Kansas City 1995 Continuing Education Courses in Arboriculture, required to maintain Certified Arborist status and for ASCA membership
PROFESSIONAL
AFFILIATIONS: American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA), Emeritus Member American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA), Registered Member International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), Certified Member California Tree Failure Report Program, UC Davis, Participant Street Tree Seminar (STS), Member
COMMUNITY
AFFILIATIONS: Landscape Architecture License Exam, Reviewer, Cal Poly Pomona (1986-90) American Institute of Landscape Architects (L.A.) Board of Directors (1980-82) ASCA 2011 Nominations Committee and A3G appraisal update committee ASCA, Industry definitions committee 2009-2010
ASCA web site, west coast tree question responder (2007 -2018) California Landscape Architect Student Scholarship Fund - Chairman (1985) International Society of Arboriculture - Examiner-tree worker certification (1990) Guest lecturer at UCLA, Cal Poly, Saddleback College, & Palomar Junior College Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 88 B. Botanical Name / Common Name Cross-reference
Botanic name Common name
Afrocarpus falcatus Fern pine
Agonis flexuosa Peppermint tree
Alnus rhombifolia White alder
Brachychiton discolor Pink flame tree
Brachychiton populneus Bottle tree
Callistemon citrinus Bottle brush tree
Celtis laevigata Sugar hackberry
Corymbia citriodora Lemon gum
Cupaniopsis anacardioides Carrotwood tree
Eucalyptus camaldulensis Red gum
Eucalyptus cladocalyx Sugar gum
Eucalyptus ficifolia Red flowering gum
Eucalyptus polyanthemos Silver dollar gum
Eucalyptus rudis Flooded gum
Eucalyptus sideroxylon Red ironbark
Feijoa sellowiana Pineapple guava
Ficus rubignosa Rusty leaf fig
Fraxinus uhdei Shamel ash
Howea forsteriana Kentia palm
Juniperus chinensis 'Torulosa' Hollywood juniper
Lagerstroemia X cv Hybrid crape myrtle cultivar
Lagunaria patersonii Primrose tree
Liquidambar styraciflua American sweet gum
Lophostemon confertus Brisbane box
Magnolia grandiflora Southern magnolia
Melaleuca quinquenervia Cajeput tree
Metrosideros excelsus New Zealand Christmas tree
Morus alba White mulberry
Myoporum laetum Ngaio
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 89 Botanic name Common name
Olea europaea Olive
Olmediella betschlerana Guatemalan holly
Pinus canariensis Canary Island pine
Pinus eldarica Afghan pine
Pinus halepensis Aleppo pine
Pinus pinea Italian stone pine
Pinus thunbergiana Japanese black pine
Platanus racemosa California sycamore
Platanus x acerifolia London plane
Pyrus kawakamii Evergreen pear
Quercus ilex Holly oak
Schinus molle California pepper
Schinus terebinthifolius Brazil pepper
Sophora japonica Chinese scholar tree
Spathodea campanulata African tulip tree
Syagrus romanzoffianum Queen palm
Tipuana tipu Tipu tree
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 90 Glossary
Apical dominance Relative strength of the central leader compared to lateral branches.
Arboricultural Pertaining to the awareness, care, evaluation, identification, growing, maintenance, management, planting, selection, treatment, understanding, valuation and so forth of trees and other woody plants and their growing environments, particularly in shade and ornamental (non-crop/commodity) settings.
Arborist A person possessing the technical competence through experience and related training to provide for or supervise the management of trees or other woody plants in a landscape setting.
Bark Tissue on the outside of the vascular cambium. Bark is usually divided into inner bark - active phloem and aging and dead crushed phloem - and outer bark.
Biltmore stick The Biltmore stick or cruiser stick can determine tree diameter and height along with volumes of wood on standing trees and logs.
Biotic Pertaining to living organisms.
Branch collar Trunk tissue that forms around the base of a branch between the main stem and the branch, or between a main branch and a lateral branch. As a branch decreases in vigor or begins to die, the collar usually becomes more pronounced an more completely encircles the branch.
Calcareous soil A soil containing calcium carbonate (lime), or a soil alkaline in reaction because of the presence of calcium carbonate.
Caliper A measurement of the trunk diameter for nursery-grown or small size trees; taken at 6 inches above ground level for trees less than 6 inches diameter, and at 12 inches above ground level for trees 6 inches to 12 inches diameter. Trees larger than 12 inches diameter are measured at 54 inches (4.5 feet) above the ground level.
Canopy The live, foliage-bearing part of a tree.
Cavity An open and exposed area of wood, where the bark is missing and internal wood has been decayed and dissolved.
Central leader The main stem of the tree.
Chlorotic Also Chlorosis. A condition of the plant marked by yellowing of normally green foliage, often indicating nutrient deficiency or plant dysfunction.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 91 Codominant Leaders equal in size and relative importance, developed from 2 apical buds at the top of a stem. Each codominant stem is an extension of the stem below it. There are no branch collars or trunk collars at the bases of codominant stems.
Compaction (Soil Compaction) The compression of soil, causing a reduction of pore space and an increase in the bulk density of the soil. Tree roots cannot grow in compacted soil.
Compartmentalize To seal off decay. The ability of the tree to restrict the spread of invasive organisms, such as decay fungi, by means of internal changes in cell structure and chemistry.
Crotch The union of two or more branches; the axillary zone between branches.
Crown The upper portions of a tree or shrub, including the main limbs, branches, and twigs.
Cultivar A cultivated variety. Maybe a field selection or a horticultural variety that has originated and persisted under cultivation. Usually enclosed in single quotes after the genus and species names.
Decay Progressive deterioration of organic tissues, usually caused by fungal or bacterial organisms, resulting in loss of cell structure, strength, and function. In wood, the loss of structural strength.
Decline Progressive reduction of health or vigor of a plant.
Decurrent Referring to crowns which are made up of a system of codominant scaffold branches. Lacking a central leader.
Dieback Progressive death of buds, twigs and branch tissues, on individual limbs, or throughout the canopy.
Dripline A projected line on the ground that corresponds to the spread of branches in the canopy; the farthest spread of branches.
Evergreen retains its leaves throughout the year.
Excurrent Referring to crowns having a strong central leader Fertilization The process of adding nutrients to a tree or plant; usually done by incorporating the nutrients into the soil, but sometimes by foliar application or injection directly into living tissues.
Flush cut Pruning technique in which both branch and stem tissue are removed, generally considered poor practice Foliage The live leaves or needles of the tree; the plant part primarily responsible for photosynthesis.
Gall An abnormal or disorganized growth of plant tissues, caused by parasitic or infectious organisms such as insects, fungi, bacteria, or viruses.
Grading Also Regrading. Intentional altering of topography and soil levels, using machinery.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 92 Ground cover Plants, usually herbaceous, used to spread, stay low and cover ground. They are usually not suited for foot traffic and do not usually need to be mowed and as such are distinguished from lawns Included bark Bark or cortex tissue that is included or trapped between close-growing branches. Usually found in narrow or tight crotches.
Leader A main stem or branch of a tree that is (usually) codominant with other main stems.
Lifted A shrub or a tree that has had lower branches and foliage removed, often to reveal the lower trunks or branch-work or for improved visibility as in many street trees.
Limb A large lateral branch growing from the main trunk.
Lion-tailing Pruning technique where internal foliage and branches are removed, leaving the latter concentrated at branch ends.
Penciled abrupt tapering of the upper trunk of a palm, indicating diminishing health over time.
Resistograph An instrument used to detect and measure the extent of decay in trees and wood. The Resistograph drills a 3 mm hole into the trunk and produces a graph of the resistance encountered.
Root crown Area at the base of a tree where the roots and stem merge (synonym - root collar) Root system The portion of the tree containing the root organs, including buttress roots, transport roots, and fine absorbing roots; all underground parts of the tree.
Root zone The area and volume of soil around the tree in which roots are normally found. May extend to three or more times the branch spread of the tree, or several times the height of the tree.
Scaffold limb Primary structural branch of the crown.
Shrub A relatively low woody plant with several stems arising near the ground.
Soil profile The characteristics of a soil as regards to relative depth; the changes in soil texture and composition that occur with depth.
Sprout Also water sprout or epicormic shoot. A shoot or stem that grows from the bark of a tree; adventitious or secondary growth.
Systemic Affecting the whole plant or organism. A systemic compound is carried throughout the entire plant to all parts.
Taper Relative change I diameter with length - reflects ability of stem or branch to evenly distribute stress.
Target Any person or object within reach of a falling tree or part of a tree that may be injured or damaged.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 93 Topping The practice of cutting large limbs back severely, without regard to form or habit of the tree. Cuts are usually made between lateral branch nodes. This practice is extremely injurious to trees, and promotes decay in the canopy.
Trees An arborescent woody plant, with a single or few trunks near the base.
Vertical mulching Ventilation of soil by auguring holes in a regular pattern. Usually the holes are backfilled with amended soil, but small holes may be left open.
Vigor Active, healthy growth of plants: ability to respond to stress factors.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 94 D. Area Map
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 95 E .Eucalyptus Hazard Charts
The following charts are taken from a recent presentation of information of the California Tree Failure Database. Information is submitted by arborist participants throughout California.
camald = Eucalyptus camaldulensis Red gum
golb = Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum
siderox = Eucalyptus sideroxylon Ironbark
vim = Eucalyptus viminalis Manna gum
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 96
Decay is involved in limb drop to a species-specific degree. While high winds are often a cause of limb failure, ten percent or more failures are on near still days.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 97
Even 4 inch diameter limbs can be deadly, but these figures represent means not the range of size.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 98 F. Transplanting Specifications
1.00 Introduction - The specifications are presented as working guidelines, recognizing that trees are individually unique and that their transplanting may not always fit strict rules. Successful transplanting of trees is a skill obtained by practice in the field. Only contractors who can present evidence of successful similar projects are invited to bid.
1.01 Overview of Specifications - Any tree transplanting performed on a tree under this contract must be done according these specifications.
1.10 General Requirements - The following requirements are for use only during any contracted transplanting of trees at Edison Park, and may not be used for other projects by the City or others.
a. Transplanting trees, including boxing and cleating, to maximize tree health and survival. Transplant trees, as indicated by the City, as specified herein, and provide all materials and labor necessary for a complete and proper installation. Provide other materials, not specifically described but required for a complete and proper installation, as selected by the Contractor, subject to approval by the designated City representative.
a. Transport boxed trees to designated holding area on site.
c. Build watering basins within the box using clean washed sand free from noxious weeds and/or seeds, stones or other foreign matter.
d. Watering, using water that is suitable for irrigation and free from ingredients harmful to plant life. Water may be available via quick-coupler near some transplanted trees. Contractor is responsible to supply water as needed.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 99 Prior to starting, the Contractor must schedule and attend a pre -contract meeting at Edison Park, 22301 Magnolia Blvd., Huntington Beach, California. At this meeting, schedules, procedures, and any other questions pertaining to the project, as specified in the tree work, shall be discussed and any clarifications addressed by City’s representative. Contractor will be responsible to contact Underground Service Alert (800-422-4133) prior to commencing work.
1.11 Consulting Arborist - Shall be notified one week prior to the start of work to set up site meeting. Greg Applegate may be reached at 714-731-6240.
1.12 Transplanting Specifications - Box sizes recommended by the Consulting Arborist shall be listed on the bid sheet and/or plans.
Trees shall be transplanted from various locations on site and transported to a designated location for stabilizing before planting:
a. 36 inch box trees - minimum two and one half inch (2 ½” ) caliper to three and one half inch (3 ½ ” ) measured at six inches (6”) above ground level. Tree height shall be comparable with what is commonly available in the nursery trade, as solely determined by the Consulting Arborist.
b. 48 inch box trees - minimum three and one half inch (3 ½” ) caliper to four and one half inch (4 ½” ) measured at six inches (6”) above ground level. Tree height shall be comparable with what is commonly available in the nursery trade, as solely determined by the Consulting Arborist.
c. 60 inch box trees – minimum four and one half inch (4. ½” ) caliper to six and one half inch (6 ½” ) measured at six inches (6”) above ground level. Tree height shall be comparable with what is commonly available in the nursery trade, as solely determined by the Consulting Arborist
d. Trees larger than 6 ½” caliper will be individually sized by the Consulting Arborist and labeled in the field.
1.13 Procedure - All trees to be transplanted shall be located and watered to moisten the soil to a depth of thr ee and a half feet two days before boxing. The root ball of each tree must be kept moist and held intact during transplanting. The initial trenching of the rootball may be performed using a trencher. However the final fitting of the rootball to the box shall be performed using sharpened spades. All root ends must be cut cleanly. After rough cutting the rootball shape, two opposite sides of the box should be staked in place and used as a template to form the remaining rootball. After obtaining a tight fit, nail and band the box sides in place. Padded 2 Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 100 x 4’s, 2 x 6’s or 2 x 8’s (depending on box size) shall be nailed in place as cleats around the trunk before installing bottom. If the soil has sufficient clay content to hold together, the bottom may be installed by pulling over the box, by the box and shaving the bottom flush, then nailing on the bottom. If the soil at the bottom is concave, nail one or two boards on at a time and pack the soil behind them as the bottom is formed. The bottom shall be nailed in place and banded over the cleats before moving. Trees shall not be moved or pulled over by their trunks. Cables, straps or chains may only contact or be attached to the tree box. The trees shall be moved to a holding area where a sand waterin g basin will be formed at the box edge. Water the tree immediately after forming the basin. A final inspection of all boxed trees will be performed at the designated holding area.
1.14 Transplanting Materials - Boxing materials shall be approved by the Consulting Arborist prior to transplanting the trees .
Materials to be approved are:
a. Sand - Clean washed sand, suitable for horticultural use, free from noxious weeds and/or seeds, stones or other foreign matter.
b. Tree Boxes - The tree boxes shall be delivered as new disassembled sides, complete with bottoms, and cleats in the sizes specified.
c. Bands - Bands shall be new steel, one inch bands and clamps, with appropriate crimping device.
d. Topsoil, where necessary to backfill holes created by transplanting trees, composed of pulverized top soil free from subsoil, noxious weeds and/or seeds, stones or other foreign matter.
Transplanting materials shall be inspected by the Consulting Arborist prior to boxing. Payment for boxes, bands, sand, and other supplies needed for complete and proper transplanting shall be included in the bid. Contractor shall pay for any returns necessary.
1.15 Tree Location - The location of all trees to be transplanted will be marked in the field by the City representative and/or Consulting Arborist. Marking is usually done with a ribbon and Sharpie. No work shall be done if there is a discrepancy, until approval has been given by City.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 101
1.20 Specific Transplanting Specifications
All trees to be transplanted shall be located and watered to moisten the soil to a depth of three to three and a half feet, two days before boxing.
a. The root ball of each tree must be kept moist and held intact during transplanting.
b. The initial trenching of the rootball may be performed using a trencher. However the final fitting of the rootball to the box shall be performed using sharpened spades.
c. All root ends must be cut cleanly.
d. After rough cutting the rootball shape, two opposite sides of the box should be staked in place and used as a template to form the rootball.
e. After obtaining a tight fit, nail and band the box sides in place.
f. Soil at natural grade must fill box to within two to three inches of the top. Soil may not be placed on top to achieve level.
g. Padded 2 x 4’s, 2 x 6’s or 2 x 8’s shall be nailed in place as cleats around the trunk , and the side bands before installing bottom.
h. Bottom shall be nailed in place and banded over the cleats before moving.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 102 i. The trees shall be transplanted to a holding area on site where a sand watering basin will be formed at the box edge. Avoid windy areas and exposed asphalt areas. Water should be readily available. Trees may need guying to prevent toppling in the wind.
j. Water immediately and thoroughly after forming the basin. The basin should hold at least two inches of water and should be filled twice at this time.
k. A final inspection by a City representative of all boxed trees will be performed at the designated holding area.
l. Trees shall not be transplanted if the soil is dry or in a muddy condition.
m. All trees shall be kept in a moist condition until final acceptance. Several light irrigatio ns per day may be needed during hot, dry or Santa Ana conditions.
1.21 Tree Pruning - Only broken or dead limbs , and approved as such, shall be pruned. All pruning cuts should be made per ANSI A- 300. Lower limbs in the way of cleats may be removed. All other limbs in the way of boxing shall be tied up rather than removed.
Any trees improperly pruned will be subject to removal by the Contractor and replaced by the Contractor at no additional cost to the City.
1.22 Tree guarantee and replacement - All transplanted trees shall be guaranteed to be properly transplanted for at least one (1) month after transplanting or until one month after the final acceptance, whichever occurs later. Trees that die or are damaged as a result of vandalism or lack of care by the City are exempt from this condition. All replacement trees shall likewise be guaranteed to be in excellent health and condition until at least one (1) month after receipt.
1.23 Tree Watering - Trees shall be watered by Contractor during boxing operations and thereafter, until acceptance of the work.
Immediately after boxing and building a water basin, apply water to each tree by means of a hose or drip/trickle system. Apply water in a moderate stream in the basin until the soil is completely and evenly saturated to the bottom of the box.
Tree Preservation Plan © Arborgate Consulting, Inc. 6-18-22 Appendix 103 The watering shall be in sufficient quantities and as often as seasonal conditions require to keep the soil moist, but not waterlogged, at all times.
1.24 Tree Establishment and Acceptance - The establishment period is hereby defined as starting with completion of transplanting operations and acceptance by City, and continuing for 30 calendar days thereafter. Acceptance by City must be in writing in order for the establishment period to begin. At completion of the establishment period, trees shall not show evidence of tip die -back, wilt, or bark cracking. Where landscape dies or shows evidence of decline, weakness or damage due to neglect or transplanting using a n unapproved method, the Contractor shall promptly replace with new, vigorous and healthy pines at no additional cost to the City.
When the Contractor believes he has completed the tree establishment period and all the trees are ready for acceptance, he shall request inspection. A City representative will inspect the trees for acceptance in a timely manner. Acceptance shall occur only upon written acceptance of the project by the City.
During the contract period the Contractor will maintain water basins in good condition and provide all watering and weeding necessary to keep the trees in a healthy growing condition. The Contractor shall conduct all operations in such a manner as to minimize inconvenience to the City and the general public. The Contractor shall provide a level of maintenance which presents a pleasing and desirable appearance at all times. Final payment to the Contractor will not be made until the end of the establ ishment period by the City, and upon final acceptance by City and completion of the Notice of Completion process. All pest control chemicals or other materials used by the Contractor in carrying out work related to this project must be approved by the City prior to its use.
Where trees die or show evidence of decline, weakness or damage due to neglect or transplanting in an unapproved method, the Contractor shall promptly replace with new, vigorous and healthy selections at no additional cost to the City. At the end of the establishment period all pines shall be in a healthy condition as determined by the City. The Contractor shall obtain written approval and release from the City before ending maintenance obligations.