HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 99-04; VILLAGES OF LA COSTA OAKS & RIDGE; OAK TREE CONDITION, LOCATION, PRESERVATION/REPLACEMENT; 2001-12-01I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OAK TREE CONDITION AND LOCATION
and
OAK TREE PRESERVATION/REPLACEMENT
LA COSTA OAKS SOUTH VILLAGES OF LA COSTA PROJECT REPORTS
For
MORROW DEVELOPMENT
December 2001
Prepared By:
RJM Design Group, Inc.
31591 Camino Capistrano
San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675
(949) 493-2600
■ II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Oak Tree Condition and Location Report ............................................................................. 1
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 2
Findings ......................................................................................................................... 2
Table I "Tree Condition" ................................................................................................ 3
Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 4
Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 4
Oak Tree Preservation/R.eplacement Rep0rt ......................................................................... 5
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 6
Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 7
Conservation ... , ............................................................................................................... 7
Table II Recommend~tions For Individual trees ................................................ 8
Table III Number of Trees .................................................................................. 8
Table IV Cumulative DBH ................................................................................. 8
Section I -Recommendations for Individual Trees ................................................................... 9
Section II -Oak Tree Conservation, Maintenance, and Management.. .................................... 10
Glussary .................................................................................................................................. 11
Appettdix A ·•••··························•··················· .................................................................................................................................................. 12
Photographs············································································································ 13-20
Appendix B ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Tree Location Map ........................................................................................ Map Pocket
I
I
I
I'
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OAK TREE CONDITION
AND
LOCATION REPORT
Page 1
I
I
I
I
I
,,
I
,,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
OAK TREE CONDITION AND LOCATION REPORT
LA COSTA OAKS SOUTH PROJECT
For
Morrow Development
December 2001
INTRODUCTION This report is in response to the City of Carlsbad Resolution 2001-318. The
first element includes a site visit, plotting of subject trees on a base map,
evaluation of the condition of the subject trees, and production of a written
report on the condition of the trees at the time of the site visit. The
following is that report. A second report, using the findings of this report,
will address recommendations for preservation or removal and replacement
of the subject trees at the site during construction.
FINDINGS
This report was prepared from information gathered and observations made
during an inspection of the subject trees on December 28, 2001. The
inspection was conducted by Bill Laymon, Landscape Architect, RJM
Design Group, Inc. License Number 2839 representing Morrow
Development. Opinions given in this report are those of Mr. Laymon and
are derived from current professional standards. No warranty regarding
errors of omission resulting from lack of communication of facts available
only to the client or their agents is expressed or implied. The following
opinions are offered for your consideration.
Nine (9) trees were included within the scope of this report due to their
location relative to the limits of the proposed grading, projected remedial
grading limits and storm drain facilities including the appurtenant energy
dissipation devices.
The evaluation concluded that of the nine (9) trees identified, five (5) trees
are within the limits of grading (Tree #229, 230, 243, 253, and 254), two (2)
trees will be impacted by remedial grading and storm drain facilities (Tree
#237 and 260), and two (2) trees will be unaffected by the implementation
of the project (Tree #204 and 214). All seven (7) of the trees impacted by
the project were rated as poor to very poor and will be replaced at a I : 1
ratio instead of being relocated.
The condition of each tree is recorded in Table I, "Tree Condition". Tree
photographs are found in Appendix A, "Photographs" and approximate
locations are plotted in Appendix B, "Tree Location Site Map".
Page2
I
II
I
I
I
,,
I
I
I
I
,,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE I -Tree Condition
Tree# Diameter Trunk Canopy Structure Pests =Total=
(DBH) Condition Condition Condition
204 18" 2 3 3 2 10
214 11" 3 3 2 2 10
229 60" 2 3 I 2 8
230 51" 2 2 2 2 8
237 14" 2 3 3 2 10
243 (a) 30" 2 2 I 2 7
12"
253 22" 2 2 2 2 8
254 (a) 26" 2 I 2 2 7
14"
260 20" 2 3 2 2 9
(a) Indicates trees with multiple trunks.
Condition Rating: The total number of points possible is 18. Excellent (17-18 points), Good (14-16 points)
Fair (11-13 points), Poor (9-10 points), or Very Poor (4-8 points).
Condition
Rating
Poor
Poor
Very Poor
Very Poor
Poor
Very Poor
Very Poor
Very Poor
Poor
Page 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,1
I
I
I
DISCUSSION Tree condition was determined by assigning a numerical rating of 1 -5 to
the condition of the trunk, canopy (leaf area), and structure of each tree.
The presence of insect or disease pests was evaluated and assigned a rating
of 1 -3. These ratings are recorded in Table I. Tree vitality was also rated
by comparing the shoot elongation of last year with shoot elongation this
year. Tree vitality was rated as growing, stable, or declining and was used
to modify the condition rating. These ratings are not given in Table I.
The size, rating of condition, and location of individual trees relative to the
proposed construction area was used to detennine the appropriateness of
removing or transplanting them to other locations. Trees with low vitality
are not recommended for relocation in Table II.
CONCLUSIONS The community of trees inspected comprises a grove of several individual
trees and associated plants. The environmental conditions, which favor the
survival of the community of trees, include the immediate topography, soil
conditions, and low use by humans. Currently the tree community and its
environment is being changed by people-produced stress (PPS) including
recreational use of the property by off-road motorcycles and mountain
biking and changes in topography by residential development on adjacent
land. The Harmony Grove fire, which occurred in the fall of 1998 was
very destructive to the health and aesthetics of these trees.
In relationship to current land use the Oak Tree community has become an
artifact within the changing environment. At one time the environmental
resource represented by the Oak Tree community was significant. The
Oaks provided a habitat for wildlife and stability within the native plant
community. This community has been fractured by the impact of changes
in land use. As a result, the environmental contribution of the Oak grove to
the plant and wildlife community, for the reduction of atmospheric carbon
dioxide through carbon sequestering and reduction of soil erosion, is being
superseded by the thousands of trees planted in residential developments on
adjacent land. Additional residential development and accompanying tree
plantings will continue to reduce the environmental importance of the oak
grove.
In general, young oaks adapt easily to changes in their environment.
Mature oak trees often suffer from even slight changes. The older the tree
the less adaptable it becomes to change. 1 Previous residential development
has already contributed to significant changes in the environment for the
oak trees as seen in the existing tree conditions (Table I) of poor and very
poor trees.
1 Care of Native Oaks; California Oak Foundation, Sacramento, California
Page4
I
I
I
I OAK TREE PRESERVATION/REPLACEMENT REPORT
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Page 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
OAK TREE PRESERVATION/REPLACEMENT REPORT
LA COSTA OAKS SOUTH PROJECT
For
Morrow Development
December 2001
INTRODUCTION In conjunction with the "Oak Tree Condition and Location Report" this
document provides guidelines for replacing the oak tree resource to a more
appropriate site location. Section I identifies the appropriate
recommendations for each tree. Section II gives procedures for
maintenance and management of replacement trees. Recommendations are
based on standards generally accepted by the tree care industry.
Recommendations for individual trees are given in Table II.
From the perspective of tree resource conservation the ecology of the tree
community at the site is currently degraded. The trees are all in poor or
very poor condition. The natural evolution of this tree community with
limited People-Produced Stress (PPS) is downward.
The intention to sustain the tree resourced represented by the oak trees in
this area may be better served by conservation (protecting the resource)
rather than preservation (maintaining individual trees intact or unchanged.)
If individual trees are preserved, they will become relics of the past,
existing within, but segregated from, the changing environment.
Conservation will provide the means for integrating the tree resource into
the changing environment and sustaining the specific tree species as an
example of indigenous plant life. With the approval of City staff, we
recommend giving conservation of the oak tree resource priority over
individual tree preservation.
All trees, regardless of their status, will require appropriate maintenance
during and after construction. In addition to recommendations for removal
and replacement, recommendations, for tree resource conservation,
management, and maintenance are included.
Page6
I
I
I
-I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DISCUSSION Tree location, size, and condition determine the type of conservation effort
recommended for individual trees. Trees within areas, which require
grading, are recommended for removal and replacement. Removal
replacement trees will be planted into the area designated as open space on
the site plan. For the purpose of this report, this area is Lot 178.
The mature trees now comprising the Oak Tree community at the site are
the least adaptable to changes in the environment. Changes in water runoff,
soil compaction, availability of nutrients and increased stress resulting
from the human use of the area will have the greatest negative effect on the
mature trees.
Each tree removed within the grading area shall be replaced with one (1)
36" commercially grown boxed tree. All replacement trees will be planted
on Lot 178 and will be field located by the project landscape architect.
This requirement is noted on Sheet 40 of City of Carlsbad drawing no. 397-
lL.
CONSERVATION To measure the success of the oak conservation effort over time it is
necessary to establish a baseline value of the resource. For the purpose of
this report a combination of the number of trees that will be replaced and
their sizes, relative to trunk diameter at breast height (DBH), are suggested.
As a working objective within the conservation goal a minimum acceptable
tree preservation value of seven (7) individual trees with a cumulative
DBH value of 17.5 inches, to be located within the boundary of Lot 178 is
suggested for approval by City staff These values are based on the number
of trees and their estimated cumulative DBH after replacement trees have
been planted following construction.
Page7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table II -Recommendations for Individual Trees
Tree# DBH Condition Recommendation
204 18" 2 Remain
214 11" 3 Remain
229 60" 2 Remove/Replace
230 51" 2 Remove/Replace
237 14" 2 Remove/Replace
243 (a) 30" 2 Remove/Replace
12"
253 22" 2 Remove/Replace
254 (a) 26" 2 Remove/Replace
14"
260 20" 2 Remove/Replace
(a): DBH given is cumulative for trees having more than one trunk.
Remove/Replace: Seven (7) trees to be removed will be replaced at a 1: 1 ratio. Each tree is
replaced with one (1) 36" box oak. All replacement trees shall be planted within Lot 178.
Table III-Number of Trees
Existing During Post After Five (5)
Construction Construction Years
Removed 7 0 0 0
Supplemented 0 0 0 0
Replaced 0 0 7 7
Total 7 0 7 7
Table IV -Cumulative DBH
Removed
Supplement
Replaced
Total
Existing During Post After Five (5)
Construction Construction Years
278 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 17.5 26.25
278 0 17.5 26.25
During construction the cumulative DBH value will be reduced 100%. The
seven (7) trees planted on Lot 178 following construction should have
average diameters of two and one half (2.5) inches, increasing the
cumulative DBH to an estimated 17.5 inches. Based on an annual trunk
growth rate of 15% for juvenile trees, the cumulative DBH is estimated to
increase by 50% within five (5) years.
Page 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REMOVE/
REPLACE
SECTION I
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL TREES
The mature oaks located within the area to be graded have a low relocation
survival probability because of their size, poor condition, or location. For
these reasons seven (7) trees are recommended for removal and
replacement. All trees which are removed will be replaced at I : I ratio with
one (I) 36" box Quercus agrifolia. All replacement trees will be planted
onto Lot 178 and will be field located by the project landscape architect.
This requirement is noted on Sheet 40 of City of Carlsbad drawing no. 397-
IL.
Page 9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0
SECTION II
OAK TREE CONSERVATION
MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT
All trees within Lot 178 will require pruning, and
the same general maintenance. fertilization. This
information will be
2.1 All tree pruning shall be used to adjust
restricted to the removal of treatments for the
dead, dying, or diseased conservation of the
branches. All pruning shall be oak tree resource.
in accordance with WC-ISA
pruning standards, 1989. 2.2 The conservation of the oak
trees within Lot 178 shall be
2.1.1 Replacement trees included in the developer's
should be pruned general tree management plan
within the first two under its own heading and this
(2) weeks to establish report shall be appended to that
good form and management plan. This
remove weak information shall be made
structural branches. available to the Homeowners
2.1.2 Irrigation for the oak
Association (HOA).
trees shall be 2.3 The minimum oak tree
segregated from other resource value will be analyzed
landscape plants. annually by the HOA upon
Irrigation for mature their assuming control of Lot
trees and replacement 178 and remedial planting of
trees (after two (2) oak trees shall continue to
years) shall not be assure the minimum resource
applied within ten value.
(10) feet of the trunk
of the tree. 2.4 Public access shall be restricted
to Lot 178 except for
2.1.3 Fertilizer shall only maintenance and monitoring.
be applied as a
treatment for soil
infertility as indicated
by soil analysis. Soil
samples from within
Lot 178 shall be made
and analyzed
quarterly.
2.1.4 Tree maintenance
records shall be kept
for all oak trees.
These records shall
include irrigation,
Page 10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
GLOSSARY
Arborist -A tree care professional certified
by the International Society of Arboriculture
or its equivalent.
Community of Trees -A group of trees
existing in proximity to one another, sharing
the same environment and codependent for
survival of the group.
Condition -Relative to tree health, the
combined health of the trunk, canopy (leaf
area), structure (branches), and the presence
of pests indicating the overall health of the
tree.
DBH -"Diameter at Breast Height," the
diameter of a tree trunk measure at 4.5 feet
above grade. Used for calculating tree size
relative to value.
Goal -A statement of intention, the
minimum acceptable performance level to
be achieved.
Management -A plan which establishes
goals, objectives, and procedures for
sustaining a tree resource.
Objective-A goal which can be quantified
relative to time.
Open space -Natural or open area ofland
use which is distinct from developed land
use areas.
PPS -"People-Produced Stress", changes in
the environment caused by land use by
people such as increased smog, water runoff,
soil compaction and vandalism which affect
tree survivability.
Procedure -The means for achieving an
objective.
Survivability -The speed at which a tree
can adapt to changes in its environment and
continue to live.
Tree Conservation -An attempt to keep
individual trees or their environment
unaltered or unchanged.
Value -A quantifiable dollar value for a
tree based upon its size, location, species,
and condition.
Page 11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
PHOTOGRAPHS
Pages 13-20
Photographs 1 -16
Photographs are color copies.
Originals are on digital file and available upon request.
Page 12
-------------------
...... w
Photograph #1
Tree #204: Viewed from northwest to southeast. Outside
grading area, this tree is in poor condition due to fire
damage .
Photograph #2
Tree #204: Viewed north to south with dose-up of trunk
fire damage.
--------------------...
Photograph #3
Tree #214: Viewed from southeast to northwest. Outside
grading area, this tree is in poor condition due to fire
damage and canopy recovery.
Photograph #4
Tree #214: Viewed east to west with close-up of fire
damage.
----------
-V,
Photograph #5
Tree #229: Viewed from northeast to southwest. Inside
grading area, this tree is in very poor condition with trunk
and structural fire damage.
---------
Photograph #6
Tree #229: Viewed northeast to southwest with close-up
of structural fire damage.
-------------------
.....
0\
Photograph #7
Tree #230: Viewed from northeast to southwest. Inside
grading area, this tree is in very poor condition with trunk
and canopy fire damage .
Photograph #8
Tree #230: Viewed from southwest to northeast,
indicating fire damage.
-------------------
...... -4
Photograph #9
Tree #23 7: Viewed from southwest to northeast. Inside
grading area, this tree is in poor condition with trunk and
canopy fire damage .
Photograph # 10
Tree #243: Viewed from northwest to southeast. Inside
grading area, this tree is in very poor condition with trunk,
canopy and structural fire damage.
-------------------
...... 00
Photograph #11
Tree #243: Viewed north to south. With close-up of trunk
and structural fire damage.
Photograph #12
Tree #253: Viewed southwest to northeast. Inside grading
area, this tree is in very poor condition with trunk, canopy
and structural fire damage .
-------------------
Photograph# 13
Tree #253: Viewed southeast to northwest inside grading
area. With close-up of canopy and structural fire damage.
Photograph #14
Tree #254: Viewed south to north. Inside grading area,
this tree is in very poor condition with trunk, canopy, and
structural fire damage.
-------------------
Photograph #15
Tree #260: Viewed west to east. Inside grading area, this
tree is in poor condition with canopy and structural fire
damage.
Photograph # 16
Tree #260: Viewed east to west with close-up of structural
damage.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIXB
TREE SITE LOCATION MAP
Map Pocket on Last Page
Map provided by:
Hunsaker Associates
San Diego, California
Page 21