Arboriat. eport. Severance of 6 Circie St, NOTL. Report prepared by Robyn Pollard, ISA ON 1352A 1ISA CTRA1587

Transcription

1 Arboriat eport Severance of 6 Circie St, NOTL Report prepared by Robyn Pollard, ISA ON 1352A 1ISA CTRA1587 January 11,2018

2 Limits Certificate Summary Assignment Observations Tree inventory Part 2 Tree inventory Part 1 Site Plan Appendix A Appendix B of Assignment/Investigation 1 of Performance 11

3 Summary This report was requested by Susan Wheler on behalf of the property owner of 6 Circle St, NOTL for the purposes of applying to sever the property into two residential lots. This report was prepared by Robyn Pollard of Arborwood Tree Service Inc. The town has requested an inventory of the trees within the two lots to be severed to aid in the approval process. This report is intended to be used by the property owner(s) to help them plan for proper maintenance of their trees as well as for the review of town staff to allow for an overview of the trees within the property lines. it may also be reviewed by contractors involved in future tree care. Part 2 of 6 Circle St, NOTL as indicated on the site plan currently has a single storey home that will remain. Part las shown on the site plan will have a new home constructed with attached parking that will allow for parking for both Lot 1 and Lot 2. This report deals with all live trees greater than 10cm in diameter at breast height that are within 6 Circle St NOTL. All trees were inventoried and assessed. No endangered or threatened tree species were observed. Assignment ~ Prepare a tree inventory including all existing trees greater than 10cm in DBH that are located within the proposed severance area of 6 Circle St (Lot 1 and Lot 2). -- Prepare recommendations for future tree care of all inventoried trees. Observations Please refer to the detailed tree inventory for all field observations about all subject trees. Please note that all field observations were made by Robyn Pollard on December 15, 2017.

4 P (cornmonl T T ~ Prior Prior ree Inventory art 2 Tree Owner Tree Species DBH Drip Tree ID (cm) - Line Health botanical) (m) 1 Town Norway Spruce/ G Picea abies 2 Town White Pine / Pinus 20 4 G glauca 3 Private Sugar Maple, Acer 85 l0 P saccharinum Notes large deadwood throughout the crown, low vigour small cavities throughout the crown and main limbs, decay visible in the main trunk TreePreservation Recommendations Preserve Tree to construction install a tree protection zone (hoarding) 2 metres from the trunk to protect the below and above ground features of the tree during construction Preserve Tree - no special needed since this tree is not within the scope of proposed construction and will not be affected Preserve Tree to construction tree should be pruned to remove all deadwood and then install a tree protection zone (hoarding) 5 metres from the trunk to protect the below and above ground features of the tree during construction

5 no no no no a Tree Owner Tree Species DBH Drip Tree Notes Tree Preservation ID (common/ (cm) Line Health Recommendations botanical) (mi 4 Private White Spruce / l7 4 F Preserve Tree Picea glauca special needed since this tree is not within the scope of proposed construction and will not be affected 5 Private Colorado Spruce / 28 6 F Preserve Tree Picea pungens special needed since this tree is not within the scope of proposed construction and will not be affected 6 Private Colorado Spruce / 34 7 F Preserve Tree Picea pungens special needed since this tree is not within the scope of proposed construction and will not be affected 7 Private White Spruce / 34 7 F Preserve Tree Picea glauca special needed since this tree is not within the scope of proposed construction and will not be affected

6 (common/p P prior prior Tree Inventory Part 1 P Tree Owner Tree Species DBH Drip Tree Notes Tree Preservation "3 (cm) Line Health Recommendations botanical) (m) 8 Private White Spruce / 36 5 P tree is in Remove Tree Picea glauca decline, within to construction the footprint of remove the tree due the proposed to the proposed new home home's footprint 9 Town Sugar Maple / Acer 61 7 F large Preserve Tree saccharinum deadwood Prior to construction - throughout the tree should be pruned crown, low to remove all vigour small deadwood cavities and then install a tree throughout the protection zone crown and main (hoarding) 4 metres limbs, decay from the trunk to visible in the protect the below and main trunk above ground features of the tree during construction 10 Private Hedgerow of Cedars and Remove Trees Evergreens Spruces to construction planted as a remove the trees due hedge row; to the proposed trees have been home's footprint poorly (please note you maintained and could keep some of do not add the Cedars closest to much aesthetic Part 2 if you'd like to, value I'd suggest hoarding them for protection)

7 s (cm) L e P P Ifdriveway Prior Tree Owner Tree Species DBH Drip Tree Notes Tree Preservation ld a (common/ Line Health Recommendations botanical) (m) ~ 11 Town Sugar Maple, Acer 62 8 P large Remove Tree (with saccharinum deadwood permission from the throughout the town) crown, low vigour small OR cavities throughout the Preserve Tree crown and main to construction limbs, decay tree should be pruned visible in the to remove all main trunk deadwood and then install a tree *Good protection zone candidate for (hoarding) 4 metres tree removal from the trunkto due to overall protect the below and poor condition. above ground However for the features of the tree purpose of the during construction. project it could is left as is be preserved then no further so I've included recommendatio needed however if it ns for its is proposed for preservation. resurfacing, or replacement then further needed.

8 Prior Tree i ID Owner Tree Species LDLBHDrip Tree (common/. (cm) Line Health botanical) (m) Notes Tree Preservation Recommendations 12 Town White Birch / 9,9, 4 G Betula pa pyrifera 9,13 Preserve Tree to construction tree should be pruned to remove all deadwood and then install a tree protection zone (hoarding) 1.5 metres from the trunk to protect the below and above ground features of the tree during construction

9 """""" "--~~~--~j " KERRYT. " " * Setback TOP GRADE TOWN OF ~ NIAGAR/\ ONTHE~LAKE LOT GRADINGPLAN L.E E_NQ METRIC NOTE LWAT ONS SHOWN ON " DVEWQED"9 ms PLAN AREINMETRESAND CAN BE PARTOFLOTG.T.P. PLAN148A(BEINGPART1, PLAN30R~ W_) -«Measurement CONVERTED TO FEET sv DIVIDINGBY Street No. 6 BMW * * CIRCLESTREET s E :::? : ELEVATRON NOTE Buiider or Owner? MARKAND CAROLINEPoLé; Aa'iA 1500 ExisiingGround Elevation Euzv/mo~sARE OF GEODETICORLGIN (CGVD~1928:?8).DERIVEDFROMGNSS Subd n Grade Cnntrol Plan No, Proposed Gmund E sva_? " (120 0) OBSERVATIONSANDNRC/\N SGEOID Fmishs.-dGmund Elevauon MODELHT2.0. -r, Traffic Sign NOTE GRADINGDURWG ANDAFTER CONS?RUCTiON TC!NOT ADVERSELY IMFACT UN ABUTT1-NCLANDS. NOTE ALL nowuspoms smear ro BE"u-ngcreo TO ( '5 O _ PART 1 PART 2 my 9 LOT AREA=348.3sq.m. LOT ARL-iA=49'7sq.m. (:3 ea 6 $1 NOTE >475. LOT COVER/\GE=29. I% LOT COVER/\GE=13.7% 5 Um O 9 3C \ ' 3E 70 "5 6? Tim \ swam 5* C 5 {E 5 N1MCTRES 1 we G V Dwg attached ḊRAWN DH CHECKED AC ZONE ER2 REF. 17~1B-7D2~O{) SCALE PROPOSEDELEVATIONS(PART 1) PVOPOSSG Grading C F?Ca i0 1 As Constructed Grading Certificanon TOP OF FOUNDAHON I Hereby Candy ( V31lhe oxoposeo grauzngswvwnis \:om;mt<l\4ewi( \ a». UW! I hereby C?mfyha) 5f1E\'9k5.!(BX \ the hnisnad grades shown. and MEL 97%gramn-3 "; 5**~ ohms Icmnes nansugm-.1 adversary an.:mng<anas. 9 4] _ HMSHED FLOOR M_O.LS Date._? iy10_ _2M913 _ Dale mm by City We»---0 L3 MATTHEWS CAMERON, «HEYWOOD HOWE s u av i H v r. L I Mx7 2 n Awmw mmm suhsinfiarycl] 9 sum Lmuxed Nxagtit.-\FA'LL'\' I905}ix?" m M OF FOOTING 89:81.75~ GRADE (FRONT) (REAR) GI bsv6g0o0«g2-q \6D0d8\dwg\!?-1S'I{)2~D(E~PLCT-F LAdwgPu 2 iarimet11x17jul :42pm Awuntw manna:

10 Appendix A - Limits of Assignment/lnvestigation The investigation included a visual assessment of the above ground features of the trees on December 15, 2017; no climbing inspections were performed or deemed necessary. The recommendations have been put forth on the basis of root flare, trunk, stem, and scaffold branch assessment and their interdependent nature. To ensure that the client knows what is technically and professionally realistic in preserving trees, I have included this clause regarding limitations. The trees presented in this report were assessed using conventional arboricultural techniques. This includes a visual examination of all the above ground parts of the tree. In this visual examination arborists look for scars, defects, external indications of decay (i.e. Fungal fruiting bodies), evidence of attack by insects, discoloured foliage, the conditions of any visible root structures, the degree and direction of lean (if applicable), the general condition of the tree and surrounding area and the nearness of property and people. Unless otherwise stated the trees have not been cored, probed, climbed and there was no detailed inspection completed of the root crowns. Trees are livingorganisms that are susceptible to changes in health and vitality at any time. They are not immune to the changes in site condition or seasonal variations in weather conditions. Trees will always pose some risk to surrounding property or persons. Only complete removal of all trees would eliminate all risk, as such the arborist cannot be liable for any damages caused in whole or in part by tree failure. Most trees have the potential for failure in extreme weather and that risk can only be eliminated if the tree is removed. Sensible efforts have been made to ensure that the trees listed as priority two and three are healthy from a visual stand point. implementation of the report is the responsibility of the client and Arborwood Tree Service Inc. does not hold any responsibility to ensure that the recommendations provided herein are followed. Consultant Signature: Robyn Pollard Date: January l 1,

11 A pendix -Certificate fperform ce I, Robyn Pollard, certify that: ~ have personally inspected each of the tree(s) and/or the property referred to in this report, and have stated my findings accurately. The extent in this report and the Limits of Assessment. of any evaluation or appraisal is stated ~ l have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation of the property that is the subject of this report, and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. ~The analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own, and are based on current scientific procedures and facts. ~ My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favours the cause of the client or any other party, or upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence of any subsequent events. ~ My analysis, opinions and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices. i further certify that i am a Certified Arborist & Tree RiskAssessor through the international Society of Arboriculture and l have been involved in the fields of Arboriculture and Horticulture in a fulltimecapacity for more than 12 years. Signed: Robyn Pollard Date: January 1 1, 2018 ii