ARBORIST REPORT. FOR 1250 McCRANEY STREET EAST OAKVILLE, ONTARIO. Prepared For:

Transcription

1 FOR 1250 McCRANEY STREET EAST OAKVILLE, ONTARIO repared For: Mr. James Greer Trinity United Church 1250 McCraney Street east Oakville, ON L6H 3K3 repared By: Goran Olbina ISA Certified Arborist #ON-1249A ArborFront Consulting 7212 Danton romenade Mississauga, ON L5N 5C4 (905) roject No: Website:

2 age ii TABLE OF CONTENTS age No. 1.0 Introduction Field Observations Methodology Tree Inventory and Assessment Recommendations Tree reservation and rotection Measures Conclusion..13 Figure 1. Figure 2. Key lan...15 hotographs...15 Figure 3. Tree Appraisal For Trees on Town roperty Figure 4. Tree rotection Barriers Figure 5. Detail T

3 1.0 INTRODUCTION ArborFront Consulting has been retained by Mr. James Greer of the Trinity United Church to prepare an Arborist Report and Tree rotection lan for the existing trees that will be involved with the proposed development on the subject property located at 1250 McCraney Street East. We have been advised by the planning consultant (Weston Consulting) that a portion of the site is proposed to be subdivided into 3 new residential properties fronting on Sewell Drive. The trees involved with this project are regulated under the Town Tree rotection By-law , and rivate Tree rotection By-law The purpose of this report is to inventory and assess the condition of the trees involved with this project for individual private trees 10cm DBH and greater on or within 6m of the subject property and any size Town boulevard trees on Sewell Drive adjacent to or within 6m of the lot line. Involved private trees that are in groupings will be assessed generally as a group and note species and general size ranges. Involved By-law regulated private trees 20cm DBH and greater within a tree grouping will be inventoried and assessed individually. The report will determine if the trees will be suitable for protection, and recommend protection methods to preserve the trees where applicable. 2.0 FIELD OBSERVATIONS The subject property is located south west of the intersection of McCraney Street East and Sewell Drive. It is bounded by existing residential lots along the western property line. See Figure 1, Key lan. The site and field observations were made on October 2 nd, 2015 and November 26 th, 2015 by I.S.A. Certified Arborist, Goran Olbina of ArborFront Consulting. There was no construction activity on the site during our tree inspections. The subject property has two building structures, a paved U shaped asphalt driveway from McCraney Street east, and a paved asphalt driveway and parking lot accessed from Sewell Drive. There are eleven (11) Town of Oakville trees located in the boulevard of Sewell Drive adjacent to the subject site, forty-nine (49) individual private trees, and a portion of a large private tree grouping in the north-west corner of the site that will be involved with the proposed project. It is important to note that seventeen (17) of the individual private trees that will be involved with the proposed project are less than 20cm DBH in size and are not By-law regulated. There are numerous other individual private trees on the north half of the site that will not be involved with the proposed project and are not part of this report. The Town boulevard trees species encountered were Honey Locust (Gleditsia triacanthos var. enermis), Tulip Tree (Liriodendron tulipifera), Freeman Maple (Acer x freemanii var.), Little Leaf Linden (Tilia cordata), and Kentucky Coffee Tree (Gymnocladus dioica). These were all recently planted estimated within the last year or so and were all in general good age 1

4 condition, however certain trees exhibited stress in the form of epicormics along their main stems. The private tree species encountered individually or within the large tree grouping consisted of the following: Norway Maple (Acer platanoides), White Spruce (icea glauca), Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum), Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), Colorado Blue Spruce (icea pungens glauca ), European Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), Eastern White ine (inus strobus), Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum), Austrian ine (inus nigra), aper Birch (Betula papyrifera), White Mulberry (Morus alba), Red ine (inus resinosa), White Oak (Quercus alba), Red Oak (Quercus rubra), Scots ine (inus sylvestris), Hop-hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana), Red Maple (Acer rubrum), Shagbark Hickory (Carya ovata), Cedar (Thuja spp.), and American Elm (Ulmus americana). Most of these trees were generally in fair condition with the exception of the Ash which were all in varying degrees of decline due to EAB (Emerald Ash Borer). There is a small Cedar hedge row located on both sides of the driveway entrance from Sewell Drive along with mostly smaller caliper trees (less than 10cm DBH) and shrub groupings north of this entrance. The existing landscape is in fair condition. There were no tree species encountered on site that were listed under the Canadian Species At Risk Act, 2002 or the Ontario Endangered Species Act, S.O METHODOLOGY A total of sixty (60) individual trees and one (1) tree grouping were inventoried for this report. Eleven (11) of these are Town-owned trees. None of the trees inventoried in this report were physically tagged in the field. The trees that were inventoried for this report have been fully assessed documenting tree number, species, ownership, condition (structure & health), and size using standard arboriculture procedures approved by the International Society of Arboriculture (I.S.A.). The caliper (diameter) of each tree was measured at 1.37 metres above existing grade using a caliper tape and recorded in centimetres (cm) as Diameter at Breast Height (DBH). The other information gathered from field observations to aid in assessing the tree condition, tree protection and/or tree preservation measures may have included any of the following, but not restricted to: tree height, crown spread, age, predicted longevity, health, form, proximity to construction activity, elevation of tree base, lowest elevation of crown branches, crown structure if trees are closely spaced, and overall landscape value. Additional information was included for the inventoried trees that were classified under the category of municipal trees, and were detailed as follows: age 2

5 1. For each tree identified by a Tree rotection Zone (TZ) as being preserved, a valuation was completed to summarize the monetary value of trees located on Town roperty, following ISA s Guide for lant Appraisal, 9 th Edition, as revised from time to time.(see Figure 3). Note that a structural hazard rating for trees greater than 10cm in DBH, following the methodology of ISA s Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas, Second Edition, as revised from time to time, including a photographic record of each tree was not conducted as all Town trees were less than 10cm in DBH. 4.0 TREE INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT The tree inventory and assessment is provided in chart form below. Valuations for municipal trees are described in this section. Site photographs of the trees and site are illustrated in Figure 2. Refer to the Tree rotection lan accompanying this report for specific tree locations and canopy distribution. A brief explanation of the assessment categories follows: Tree Number: This number refers to the identification number assigned to the tree and corresponding number on the Tree rotection lan indicating location of the tree. Owner: The inventoried trees were placed into one the following categories: N SN M M1 SM rivate client owned tree Neighbour (private) owned tree Shared ownership with neighbour (private) Municipal tree on boulevard Municipal / ublic tree in park, open space, or naturalized area Shared ownership with Municipality / ublic Agency Botanical Name: The Latin name or botanical name is provided for each tree. Snag is indicated if the tree is unidentifiable due to its dead condition. Common Name: The common name is provided for each tree. Snag is indicated if the tree is unidentifiable due to its dead condition. DBH: This refers to the Diameter at Breast Height of the tree (in centimetres) and is measured at 1.37 meters above the ground for each tree. For multi-stemmed trees, the total of the diameter of the three largest stems measured at 1.37 meters above the existing grade of the ground adjoining its base. Canopy Diameter: This is an estimated diameter of the tree canopy measured in metres. Structure: This component of condition is an assessment of the roots (visual above ground), trunk, scaffold branches, and canopy of the tree for any defects or age 3

6 Tree No. Owner DBH (cm) Canopy Diameter (m) Min.TZ Radius (m) Structure Health Recommendation ArborFront Consulting weaknesses. The presence of any fruiting bodies is also considered in this category. This is measured on a scale of dead (D), poor (), fair (F), good (G). Health: This component of condition is an assessment of the canopy vigour, and assesses the amount of deadwood and live growth in the crown as compared to a 100% healthy tree. Other considerations in this category are the size, colour, amount of foliage, insects, disease and any pathological concerns. This is measured on a scale of dead (D), poor (), fair (F), good (G). TZ: Tree rotection Zone These are the minimum distances required to protect a tree to be preserved. TZ distances (in metres) are to be measured from the outer edge of the tree base towards the drip line and may be limited by an existing paved surface, provided that surface remains intact throughout the site alteration. Comments: These are specific and relevant comments related to the structure or health of the tree and related field observations. Recommendation: This is the recommendation whether to rotect (), rotect with minor injury (I), Remove (R), or Remove dead, dying, or hazard tree (RX) based on all assessment categories and proposed development information provided. Individual Tree Inventory Condition Common Name Botanical Name Comments M Honey Locust M Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthos var. enermis Gleditsia triacanthos var. enermis G G G G M Tulip Tree Liriodendron tulipifera G G M Freeman Maple Acer x freemanii var G G M Freeman Maple Acer x freemanii var G G M Little Leaf Linden Tilia cordata G G M Little Leaf Linden Tilia cordata G G M Kentucky Coffee Tree Gymnocladus dioica G G M Kentucky Coffee Tree Gymnocladus dioica G G M Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthos var. enermis G G boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. boulevard tree in street R.O.W. street tree in R.O.W., stakes dislodged street tree in R.O.W., epicormics on trunk R R age 4

7 M Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthos var. enermis G G street tree in R.O.W., epicormics on trunk 1 N aper Birch Betula papyrifera F F 2 N aper Birch Betula papyrifera F F 3 N aper Birch Betula papyrifera F F 4 N Austrian ine inus nigra ~ F F tip blight 5 White Spruce icea glauca F F 6 White Spruce icea glauca F F a few broken branches in canopy R 7 White Spruce icea glauca F F R 8 White Spruce icea glauca F F- 35% deadwood R 9 Cedar Thuja spp F F R 10 Cedar Thuja spp F F 3-stem clump R 11 Common Buckthorn Rhamnus cathartica F F multi-stem R 12 White Oak Quercus alba F F 15% deadwood R 13 Shagbark Hickory Carya ovata F F R 14 Eastern White ine inus strobus G G R 15 Scots ine inus sylvestris F R 16 Green Ash Fraxinus Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), D D pennsylvanica 100% dead RX 17 White Oak Quercus alba F F I 18 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 2-stem codominant 0.4m I 19 Scots ine inus sylvestris ~ F F- R 20 Colorado Blue Spruce icea pungens 'glauca' F F cytospora canker R 21 Norway Maple Acer platanoides F large opening/wound w/decay in trunk R 22 Cedar Thuja spp F F 2-stem codominant grade 23 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 2-stem included bark 0.9m 24 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 25 N Silver Maple Acer saccharinum ~ F F 26 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F within tree grouping 'A' 27 Norway Maple Acer platanoides F F 2-stem 0.25m 28 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 3-stems, interference with tree no.29 I 29 Silver Maple Acer saccharinum F F I 30 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F I 31 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F I 32 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F I 33 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F I 34 Colorado Blue Spruce icea pungens 'glauca' F F 35 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 2-stem included bark 1.3m 36 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 37 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 2-stem included bark 1.1m I 38 Norway Maple Acer platanoides F G 39 Norway Maple Acer platanoides F F roots exposed above grade 40 Norway Maple Acer platanoides F G roots exposed above grade 41 Norway Maple Acer platanoides F G 42 Red Oak Quercus rubra F- F one-sided canopy, 10 lean 43 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 44 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 10 lean 45 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F age 5

8 46 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 10 lean 47 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 2-stem included bark 1.0m 48 Red Oak Quercus rubra F G 49 Red Oak Quercus rubra F F 2-stem included bark 1.0m ~ denotes tree size is estimated due to inaccessibility General Tree Grouping Inventory Tree Grouping Dominant Species Size range DBH (cm) of trees within Group General Condition of Group Comments A Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) European Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica) Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) White Oak (Quercus alba) Red Oak (Quercus rubra) Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum) American Elm (Ulmus americana) Red Maple (Acer rubrum) Eastern White ine (inus strobus) Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) White Mulberry (Morus alba) Red ine (inus resinosa) Hop-hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana) 1-65 F The Ash trees are infected with varying degrees of Emerald Ash Borer disease (EAB) and are either dead, dying, or in a state of declining health. Tar spot was identified on the Norway Maple. Some trees are dead or in decline which is normal for most tree groupings as there is competition for available sunlight and nutrients. 4.1 Valuation for Municipal Trees Being reserved A valuation of each tree using the replacement cost method was conducted as per Town of Oakville requirements. For a detailed breakdown refer to Figure 3 - Tree Appraisal The final appraised value of the trees is as follows: Tree # Honey Locust is $320 Tree # Honey Locust is $320 (recommended for removal) Tree # Tulip Tree is $400 Tree # Freeman Maple is $320 (recommended for removal) Tree # Freeman Maple is $320 Tree # Little Leaf Linden is $340 Tree # Little Leaf Linden is $330 age 6

9 Tree # Kentucky Coffee Tree is $360 Tree # Kentucky Coffee Tree is $360 Tree # Honey Locust is $320 Tree # Honey Locust is $ RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations in this section were determined after review of the condition of the trees, analysis of the existing site conditions, and review of the proposed development. 5.1 Trees to be reserved There are forty-four (44) individual trees and all trees in grouping 'A' inventoried in this report that are recommended for protection. All trees to be preserved (except for trees #38 and 39) are to be protected by hoarding per Town of Oakville standards and as shown on an Urban Forestry approved Tree rotection lan to ensure successful preservation. Trees #38 and 39 are both less than 20cm DBH in size are not By-law regulated, and their minimum TZ distances are well away from the proposed asphalt resurfacing work that is proposed. Trees #38 and #39 are part of a series of landscape planting beds which will remain intact and do not require any tree protection fencing as long as no construction materials or equipment is temporarily stored in the area, and the area cannot be used for construction access. The following thirty-five (35) individual trees will retain 100% of their minimum TZ distances, with minimum TZ distances limited for the Town-owned boulevard trees due to the existing concrete sidewalk and curb which will remain intact. The trees in this category are #515417, , , , 1 5, 22 27, 34 36, and Trees #17-18, 28-33, and 37 These nine (9) trees are recommended for protection, but the placement of the tree protection fencing is limited to facilitate the proposed construction works. As such these trees will have an encroachment to their minimum required TZ and may receive minor to moderate injury to part of their root systems. The following additional recommendations broken down below for these nine (9) aforementioned trees are to be implemented to mitigate or lessen the impacts of construction: age 7

10 For Trees #17, 18, 28, and 29 Ensure tree hoarding is installed just behind and parallel to the edge of the existing asphalt parking lot surface where shown on the Tree rotection lan. Removal of the existing asphalt surface for the areas within the minimum TZ s of the trees is to be carefully done by hand or hand-held machinery leaving the existing subgrade granular material intact. While in the presence of a Certified Arborist on site conduct an exploratory dig (30-40cm deep by 15-25cm wide) either by hand digging carefully or using low water pressure hydro vac method along the outer edge of the tree protection zones prior to commencing with open face cuts to prevent any unnecessary tearing or pulling of roots. All exposed roots encountered within the exploratory dug trench outside the established TZ hoarding are to be pruned cleanly with sharp hand tools, by a Certified Arborist or Qualified Tree Care Specialist. All root pruning shall be cut using any of the following tools: large or small loppers; hand pruners; small hand saws; or wood scribers. No wound dressings or pruning paint shall be used to cover the ends of each cut. Avoid long exposure to tree roots during construction. Keep exposed roots moist and dampened with mulching materials, irrigation or wrap in burlap if exposed for longer than 4 hours. Backfill with native material to prevent roots from drying out. After root pruning has been performed the subgrade material within the minimum TZ s of the trees can be removed as required. Add topsoil/planting soil and landscaping to finished grades as per engineering and landscape plans. For Trees #30, 31, 32, 33, and 37 Ensure tree hoarding is installed where shown on the Tree rotection lan. The area of existing asphalt parking lot that is scheduled for re-surfacing only is to be left intact and can be used as the construction access and temporary staging area until the very last part of construction for the site. The existing asphalt surface may be removed / scarified within the minimum TZ s of the trees carefully by hand or hand held machinery leaving the existing granular sub-grade material intact and undisturbed during construction. Any exposed roots encountered outside the established tree hoarding during removals of asphalt surface that have been severed or damaged up to 5 cm in diameter shall be pruned using acceptable arboricultural practices. Any roots encountered larger than 5 cm in diameter should be left intact and undamaged, especially any supporting buttress roots. age 8

11 All pruned roots shall be cut cleanly with sharp hand tools, by a Certified Arborist or Qualified Tree Care Specialist. No wound dressings or pruning paint shall be used to cover the ends of each cut. All root pruning shall be cut using any of the following tools: large or small loppers; hand pruners; small hand saws; or wood scribers. Avoid long exposure to tree roots during construction. Keep exposed roots moist and dampened with mulching materials, irrigation or wrap in burlap if exposed for longer than 4 hours. No compaction of the subgrade material within the minimum TZ areas of the trees. New asphalt surface is to be applied over the existing granular sub-grade material. This will minimize damage to the root system of the tree and prevent further compaction. The following are additional tree protection recommendations for all trees: Where any temporary access must be gained within the TZ s of trees to facilitate construction works apply a temporary 200mm (8 ) continuous layer of mulch prior to any work. This will prevent compaction of the soil within the TZ s of trees. All mulch to be removed after the completion of construction. rune branches in tree canopies for construction clearance and pedestrian clearance (2.4m ht.) as needed to prevent branch injury or damage using acceptable arboricultural practices. No wound dressings or pruning paint shall be used to cover the ends of each cut. 5.2 Trees to be Removed There are sixteen (16) total trees recommended for removal consisting of two (2) Town-owned trees # and , and fourteen (14) private trees #6 16 and Town trees # and These two trees will be in direct conflict with the proposed driveway alignments through the boulevard for the new residential lots. Tree # will also be in conflict with proposed underground services. These trees are recommended for removal; however, the Town may wish to transplant these two trees to other Town-owned land if they choose prior to construction works on site. Trees #6 15 and These thirteen trees will be in direct conflict with the proposed residential building structures and/or associated grading and are all recommended for removal. age 9

12 Tree #16 This tree is 100% dead from what appears to be EAB (Emerald Ash Borer) and is recommended for removal. 6.0 TREE RESERVATION AND ROTECTION MEASURES The following tree preservation and protection measures will be undertaken and are shown on the accompanying Tree rotection lan. All tree protection measures cited for retained trees must comply with the Town of Oakville EN-TRE-001 Tree rotection olicy and Tree rotection During Construction specifications noted under procedure number EN-TRE Any variation from the standard tree protection must be approved by Development Services, Urban Forestry Coordinator. 6.1 re-construction hase For the trees that were recommended for crown pruning that are within the TZ limits, these activities are to be performed by a qualified Arborist prior to the installation of the tree protection zone barriers and prior to the commencement of any construction activities. Install the tree protection zone barrier as per municipal standards at the limits shown on the Tree rotection lan after any tree removal and crown pruning activities are completed. rior to construction, the trees to be preserved shall be protected with a tree protection barrier. (See Figure 4 Tree rotection Barriers). The barrier shall consist of a 3/8 thick, 8 x4 (1.2m or 4 ft. high) plywood hoarding. Within a Town road allowance when visibility is a consideration, the barrier shall consist of a 1.2 meter (4 ft.) high orange plastic snow fence on 2 x 4 frame. Attach a filter cloth 600mm high to the construction side of the hoarding to act as sediment control. Sediment control fencing per OSD , and installed to the satisfaction of Urban Forestry. All supports and bracing used to safely secure the barrier should be located outside the Tree rotection Zone (TZ). All supports and bracing should minimize damage to roots. The fence is to be installed along the edge of the tree protection zones. This hoarding is to remain in place and remain in good condition throughout the entire duration of the project. Dismantling the tree protection barrier prior to approval by the Town of Oakville, Urban Forestry staff may constitute a contravention to the Town of Oakville bylaw or permit issue. The applicant shall notify the Town of Oakville and the Consulting Arborist to confirm that the tree protection barriers are in place. age 10

13 A TREE ROTECTION ZONE sign must be mounted on one side of the tree protection barrier for the duration of site construction. The sign should be a minimum of 40cm x 60cm and made of white gator board or equivalent material. The sign must contain the same notes and be similar to the illustration shown below. TREE ROTECTION ZONE (TZ) No grade change, storage of materials or equipment is permitted within this area. Tree protection barrier must not be removed without the written authorization of the Town of Oakville. Report any contraventions to Contact Name Tel. No. Unauthorized removal of the tree protection barrier or other contraventions may result in prosecution. Where some fill or excavated material must be temporarily located near a TZ, a wooden barrier must be used to ensure no material enters the TZ. Remove any garbage and foreign debris from the tree protection zones. All contractors should be informed of the tree preservation and protection measures at a pre-construction meeting. 6.2 During Construction hase All areas within the protective hoarding shall remain undisturbed for the duration of construction. There will be no grade changes, dumping, and storage of any materials, structures or equipment within these areas. The tree protection barrier must not be removed without written authorization of the Town of Oakville. Minor grading works will be permitted at the edge of the preservation zone as required to correct localized depressions adjacent to the new development. This work to be undertaken under the direct supervision of a Certified Arborist. A qualified Arborist will undertake proper root pruning in accordance with acceptable arboriculture practices when and if roots of retained trees are to be exposed, damaged, or severed by construction work. The exposed roots will be backfilled with appropriate material as soon as possible to prevent desiccation. Root pruning prior to excavation will help prevent unnecessary damage to tree roots. The use of low-water pressure Hydrovac technology to expose roots is recommended. The Town of Oakville and the Consulting Arborist must be notified for all work that impacts the tree preservation zones or for temporary removal of a section age 11

14 of hoarding to gain access for fine grading or other works. All works to be supervised by the Town of Oakville and/or Consulting Arborist. No cables, wire or ropes of any kind shall be wrapped around or installed in trees to be preserved. No contaminants will be dumped or flushed in the TZ areas or where feeder roots of trees exist (generally beyond the TZ areas). Irrigate tree protection zones during drought conditions, June to September to reduce drought stress. Inspect the site daily to ensure hoarding is in place and in good condition. Inspect trees to monitor condition. 6.3 ost Construction hase Following the completion of all site works, and after review by the Consulting Arborist and approval by the Town of Oakville Urban Forestry staff, the protective hoarding may be removed. After removal of the protective hoarding, the tree preservation areas shall be inspected by the Certified Arborist and Town of Oakville Urban Forestry staff. Any remaining dead, diseased, or hazardous limbs or trees are to be removed by a qualified Arborist as directed by the Consulting Arborist. Inspect trees two times per year, May and September to monitor condition for a minimum of two years. 6.4 lanting / Landscaping Any planting or landscaping completed within the tree protection zones, after construction is completed and hoarding has been removed, must not cause damage to any of the trees or their roots. The trees must be protected for the same reasons listed above but without the use of hoarding. No grade changes are permitted which include adding and/or removing soil. No excavation is permitted within the Tree rotection Zone (TZ). Only individual holes carefully hand dug for new planting of trees and shrubs will be permitted. No heavy equipment can be used within the TZ so as to prevent soil compaction. age 12

15 6.5 Implementation To ensure the Tree reservation and rotection Measures are implemented, the Consulting Arborist should be present at the following stages of construction: Upon layout of protective hoarding; eriodically during construction (especially during any excavations near trees) to ensure the hoarding remains in place and no damage occurs to trees being preserved; and Upon completion of construction activities. 7.0 CONCLUSION There are sixty (60) individual trees and one tree grouping inventoried for this report. Two (2) Town of Oakville boulevard trees and fourteen (14) private trees are recommended for removal due to conflicts with the proposed development and associated grading and servicing. Of these fourteen private trees recommended for removal, only seven (7) of them are By-law regulated due to their diameter size (DBH). Trees #515418, , 6 16, and are scheduled for removal. Forty-four (44) individual trees and trees in grouping A are recommended for preservation during the development of the subject property. Nine (9) of these individual trees scheduled for protection (private trees #17-18, 28-33, and 37) may receive minor to moderate injury to part of their root systems to facilitate the proposed construction works. The following are approximate percentages of their respective minimum required TZ areas that will be affected: tree #17 (not By-law regulated) 24%; tree #18 23%; tree #28 16%; tree #29 12%; tree #30 16%; tree #31 13%; tree #32 - <1%; tree #33 - <1%; and tree #37 3%. The remaining thirty-five (35) individual trees scheduled for preservation #515417, , , , 1-5, 22-27, 34 36, and all trees in tree grouping A should not be impacted by the proposed construction as 100% of the TZ will be protected. Note that it may be necessary to allow minor grading by hand in a couple of localized areas within the established TZ s under the direct supervision of Town Forestry staff or Certified Arborist on site to allow for positive drainage for proposed swales as per engineering grading plans. With the above in mind, it is my opinion, that if the above recommendations for tree protection measures are implemented, any affected trees should recover their injuries and the proposed construction should not adversely affect the long-term health, safety and condition of the trees scheduled for protection. The inspection of the trees was made using accepted arboriculture practices and is limited to visual examination. There was no climbing, probing, coring, dissection and detailed root examination involving excavation. While reasonable efforts have been made to assess trees in this report, there is no guarantee offered, or implied that these trees or any of their parts may have problems or deficiencies that may arise in the future. age 13

16 Trees are living organisms and their health and vigour change over time and are subject to changes in site and weather conditions. As such trees should be re-assessed periodically. The assessments made in this report are valid at the time of inspection. The determination of ownership of any subject tree(s) is the responsibility of the landowner(s). Any civil or common-law issues, which may exist between property owners with respect to trees, must be resolved by the owner(s). Any recommendation to perform work on any parts of a tree, remove or retain trees does not grant permission to encroach in any manner onto adjacent private properties. repared by: ARBORFRONT CONSULTING Goran Olbina, OALA, ISA, BHA ISA Certified Arborist #ON-1249A Butternut Health Assessor age 14

17 Figure 1: Key lan North direction is straight up, and the key plan is not to scale. The location of the site is shown as a red dashed line. (Source: Google Maps) Figure 2: hotographs Trees # Trees # & age 15

18 Trees #1-4 Trees #5-9 Trees #12-13 Trees #10-11, 22, & Tree Grouping A Tree #19 Trees #14-15 Trees #16-18 Tree #20 age 16

19 Tree #21 Tree #23 Tree #24 Trees #26-30 Trees #31-33 Trees #24-25 Tree #34 Tree # age 17

20 Trees #35-37 Tree #38 and shrubs north of parking lot entrance Tree #39 and shrubs north of parking lot entrance Trees #40-41 Trees #42-49 Tree Grouping A age 18

21 Figure 3: Tree Appraisal TREE ARAISAL (RELACEMENT COST METHOD) FOR TREES TRANSLANTABLE (U TO 9cm DBH FOR DECIDUOUS AND 300cm HT. FOR CONIFEROUS) ITEM DESCRITION UNIT 1 Species (Common Name): Honey locust Honey locust Tulip Tree Freeman Key # Condition % Trunk Diameter (cm) DBH Calculation for Location: Site Maple Freeman Maple Littleleaf Linden Littleleaf Linden Kentucky Coffee Kentucky Coffee Honey locust % % % Contribution lacement 4 Location (Average Factor) % Removal and Cleanup Costs (for appraised plant/replaced tree each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Species Rating % Replacement Tree Size (diameter) cm Replacement Tree Cost (avg. cost from 3 regional nurseries) each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Installation Cost each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Installed Tree Cost (#8+#9) each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Adjusted Installed Tree Cost (#10x#6x#2x#4) each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Add Removal and Cleanup Costs (#5) - if appraised tree is replaced each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Appraised Value is either #11 or #12 each $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Final Appraised Value (if #13 is $5000 or more, it is rounded 14 each $320 $320 $400 $320 $320 $340 $330 $360 $360 $320 $320 to the nearest $100; if it is less, it is rounded to the nearest $10) Honey locust age 19

22 Figure 4: Tree rotection Barriers age 20

23 Figure 5: age 21