Laserfiche WebLink
I���,�.s����C�.or� �»'��¢,au ��:. I:.� � ��-����m����u�F:�r����.��r,���� <br /> li�r�;a::1�+�+���a�� ��:i����, �";��IuV.��,i�.i,�.ri� <br /> The valley oak, tree 54, on the west side of the property is an example of a dramatic <br /> phototropic iean. (See phota 9) Walnuts growing to the south of the oak ha�e shaded it <br /> resulting in a severe curvature of the trunk. TF�is oak is a challenging tree to preserve due <br /> to its poor architecture. lt represents an on-going burder� for a future property owner. <br /> A feld of very mature and neglected English walnuts,trees 55 through 64, populates the <br /> southwest portion of the site. {See photas 10 through 17) The trees are in various states of <br /> disrepair all display evidence of decay in the trunk, limbs and branches. Evidence af <br /> past and curre�t limb fail�res was als� observed. (See p�otos 20 through 24) <br /> The English walnu�is not tolerant of soil disturbances. (MatF�eny, Clark 1998) When <br /> assessir�g the current condition of these trees ROC does not believe remediation, with the <br /> best af intentions wil! not be enough ta extend the�r safe and useful life. <br /> To the east of the walnuts are two rather young {-30 years) coast live oaks,trees 65 and <br /> fi6. (See photos 1 S and 19} Bath exhibit phototropic trunk�eans and act as lattice for the <br /> aggressive ivy ar�d other garden vines seeking the sun. Another challenge yes but <br /> resources should be more wisely alfocated. <br /> Conclusions <br /> Of the 26 assessed trees, 2 coast line oaks, 1 sauther� magnolia and 8 evergreen pears <br /> were determined to be rr�oderately 5uitable for preservatian. As stated in Table 3 <br /> regarding maderately suitable trees: <br /> MODERATE: Trees which confrib�te to the site but provide less than significant <br /> contrib�tions forreasons of health, structural condition or appearance. On-going <br /> s�itability wif!require properiy implemented maintenance practices. Desig�revisions to <br /> preserve these trees may not be warranted. <br /> In the prafessional opinion of ROC, immediate mitigation costs, on-going maintenance <br /> costs and the risk af failure associated with preserving the existing trees are the <br /> consequencES that should be considered by the design team. <br /> co en 'ons <br /> The following recommendations are provided if one or more exi�ting trees are to be <br /> preserved: <br /> �. Prior to the cammencement of construction acti�ities a site meeting with contractors <br /> and their foremen or leads,John Milfer Architects and the Project Arborist should be <br /> held ta ensure an understanding of the Tree Preservation Plan. <br /> +"�;�a�r��;�,��� G�:��� oo�P�a,�„ a aMO��tr�µ'`���'�d,�. �"���G.� Q .�� <br />