HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-08-03 Tree Removal and Replacement Communications (Parks Commission)Memo To : Barb Barry
VSSA
From: Katharine D Widin 8/3/99
Municipal Arborist
City of Oak Park Heights
Re: Tree Removal/Replacement Boutwell's Landing
As requested, I am providing an update for the status of the tree
removal /replacement for Boutwell's Landing in Oak Park Heights. A few things have
ha e
changed since the tree removal /replacement calculations were submitted in March.
L south end of west woods: the grading changed in this area and entended
previous plans. A retaining wall more
into the woods than
P p n all has now been proposed
for this area which will save a few trees. Trees removed were:
pin oak (I- I4 in.), (I - 20 in.)
Total Diameter Inches Removed = 34
(several other dead /declining oaks were removed at my request due to their failure
potential - replacement q
p p ment inches will not be required for these trees)
2, area between two western wetlands near nature reserve: to clear for
or
grading, more trees were removed from this location than estimated in the original
calculations:
pin oaks: (4 - 8 in.), (4-10 in.), (3-12 in.), (1-14 in.). (I - 20 in.)
bur oaks: (1-30 in.), (2 - 24 in.)
whit', oaks: (1-8 in.), (I -20 in.)
black cherr ■ : ( 1-8 in.), (1-12 in.)
aspen: (2-8 in.), (1-12 in,)
Total Inches Removed = 296 inches (original calculations estimated removal of 120
inches)
Total Additional Diameter Inches Removed = 176
3e evergreens by large wetland complex:
a. on west side approximately 75 significant trees were removed
(estimated average diameter = 5 inches)
these trees were not part of the original estimate of tree removal
b. on east side approximately 50 significant trees have been retained due to
grading changes around large wetland
3-10-1999 9:09PM
FROM BARRY AND ASSOC. 8223627 P.2
BOUTWELLS LANDING PHASE 1
TREE PRESERVATION CALCULATIONS
3/10/99
FILE COPY
Non-Crop Significant Trees
Total diameter inches of significant trees lost (A) 1,135.0
Total diameter inches of significant trees (B) 6,672.0
Replacement trees in caliper inches 256.7
Net replacement inches after credit for tree preservation 231.1
Crop Trees — includes trees over 10 ft. lost and moved
Condition Dias In. Wood. Factor CondJactor Replace. In.
Good 3,881.8 65% 8O% 2,018.5
Fair 1,410.8 65% 50% 458.5
Poor 2,359.2 65% 20% 306.7
Total 2,783.7
Caliper inches of significant trees to be moved on-site 966.0
(322 trees on plan, average 3")
Caliper inches of 2-4' pines to be moved on-site 750.0
(500 trees, not shown on plans, average 1.5")
Caliper inches of small trees already given away 750.0
(1,000 trees, 1.5" ave., at 50% because off-site)
Net replacement ca)iper inches needed — new trees 317.7
Total new tree caliper inches required (crop & non-crop) 548.8
Total new tree caliper inches in landscape plan 1,144.8
0 PLANT HEALTH a "
Memo To : Scott Richards
City of Oak Park Heights
From: Katharine D Widin
Municipal Arbor
Re: VSSA Submittals for Tree Preservation Flan and Landscaping
' Landing ro'e�t. is still incomplete. In order
The tree protection plan for the Boutwell's La � P .�
1. p � calculations, vY�.�, � will � � ��e�d the areas of evergreens
to be able to verify the tree replacement given separate summary
same plan as the deciduous trees. 1 have been
delineated on the F the hand-sketched maps that
which are useful; however, 1 am not able to decipher
sheets sheets. It is not. possible to Bell from the sketches
were sent to me with the summary shee in 'pa tion that will be
• the evergreen areas are located in relation to the construction i
exactly where r
� p which removed. According to the City's
occurring,
and which areas will be saved and wh . .
Tree
` Ordinance, a tree protection plan. is to be submitted by the
proposed tree Protection fir' �nanc a � or impervious surfaces
contains: "location of all buildings, structures, p
developer which cont� „ "delineation • 'all areas to be graded and the limits
to be built upon the land", delineation of q ,
contemplated � ' on of all existing ng s� gn�firr.ar� t trees . For this
of land disturbance", "size, species and location wed some
•� areas, both native and planted, we have ally
project, due to the extensive treed . individual listing
e if icant trees. We have not required g
estimation of the numbers of sign see where the groups of
eens so it i s particularly important to see e p
of all of the planted evergreens, p . least the location of all
ens are in relation to the construction. At the very . be
evergreens " h�n 30 feet of the grading limits needs to b
significant trees in the construction zone or wit
� impact the project will have on the significant trees
on the plan so that � ca��. determine what tnZp P � . the amount of
p count of trees affected by the construction, or
on site. If 1 cannot verify the a� � . trees which will need
• on the site, 1 cannot verify the number of replacement trees existing c�
t complete fan also serves a,s a useful tool in determining to he prove ded. A �.arnplete t�rec protection plan
where tree protection on i
measures will need to be .mpl emented.
• � requires that the developer ;show, as part of
tree protection ordinance also requires h • l •
�o The proposed t p 4L to be taken to protect significant trees". � would like
the tree protection plan, the "measures � 30 feet of the
th p p s will be used to protect trees w
to see what fencing and other measure within 3. � Autumn
are the trees in the woodland adjoining
grading limas. Of particular a �
g where the parkway bissects the oak g ro ve southeast of the large
Ridge and also the area p
wetland.
. t material specifications included. These
All of the landscape plans need to have lalan n� submitted for
3 p cation u.a.�[ titics and sizes. The d.esi gns
s cif �cat�on.s include plant. identification, � lex do not include this information.
the typical 4-p1 ex and du p i
. plantings b een eliminated. This was an
interesting, integral, and very attractive camp
anted that the parkway �nedran. plan � would like to
�� lam disappointed p component of the landscap����, plan. 1 wa
parkway and consequently
median will affect. the width of the pa a y q .,
see how the removal of this n� Will it be possible to save
southeast of the large wetland complex. p
the oak grove to the so for the retaining wall � n that area.
more of those oaks? 1 would also like to see the detail
P02
Lan
Ba 0
PLANT HEALTH Acr P02
Memo To : Kris Danielson, Community Devele Director
Scott Richards, ',la.nner
City of oak Park Heights
From: Katharine 1) Widin 4/8199
Municipal Arborist
Re: VSSA - Tree Preservation Plan, Landscaping
and Tree Replacement Calculatio t
1 have received a revised set of tree removal and replacement calculations for the
VSSA Boutwcll's Landing project from Barb Barry. Revised landscape plants were
included, as well as a drawing of tree protection fencing. 1 have finished reviewing the
submittals and have the following comments regarding tree replacement and the landscape
plans:
Tree Replace V L
concur with Ms. Barry's calculations regarding tree removal and replacement
amounts for the project. Their landscaping plans, tree moving, and efforts to
preserve wooded areas on the site, have resulted in a credit for tree
replacement of 319 inches. Assuming that there will be no further changes in
project design, grading limits, tree removal or proposed landscape
plantings, 1 recommend that this credit be applied to tree replacement amounts
which may be required in the next stages/phases of the project.
The plant list for the project looks quite good. A number of hardy trees and
shrubs, with good resistance to insect and disease problems and minimal
maintenance requirements, have been selected, For any future plans, 1 would
much prefer to have the plant schedule incorporated on the landscape plan
for easier reference. The plans show that the median has been removed from the
parkway, except for the entrance area. I understand that this median in the
entrance will now be 20 feet wide. 1 like that width much better than 10 feet,
as it should result in much better survival of the tre planted thcrem Overall
the landscape design is very attractive and should complement both the
buildings and the natural features of the site, 1 would like to commend the
p roject designers and city staff, council and commissions, for their efforts in
comin g up with a final plan which takes into account the natural features of the
site, p reserves or enhances natural areas, and makes good connections to other
parts of the city.
1 would still like to see detail of the retaining wall in the area where the parkway bissects
the oak g rove , how the wall is to be constructed, and how far it is from the ttuuks of
significant trees which are to be saved. Significant trees, which are within 30 feet of the
radio limits, and which the developer is ping to retain, need to be protected with
grading . � as shown in the tree
fencing, as outlined in the City's Tree Protection Standards and
p
P4tction detail drawing supplied by the project engineer, This fencing needs to he in
place, inspected and approved by the City, before grading commences.
March 29, 1999
Ms. Kris Danielson
Community Development Director
City of Oak Park Heights
14168 North 57 Street
P.O. Box 2007
Oak Park Heights, MN 55082-2007
Re: Boutwells Landing Hand Delivered
Tree Preservation Calculations
Dear Kris:
BARBARA P BARRY
& ASSOCIATES
FILE COPY
Enclosed are the revised tree preservation ordinance calculations and related back-up
information for your review. I have enclosed 2 copies with the exhibits so that you can
pass one along to Kathy Widin. The calculations for crop trees and for the woods are still
based upon samplings and review of the site plan, the grading plan, and the aerials of the
site. It was our understanding from the meeting with you, Kathy and others on January
21s that estimates would make sense in light of the expansive size of the site and
considering that the project was well along before this ordinance was ever considered.
Based upon our calculations, the Phase I Stagel plans for the project meet the new
ordinance. There will also be trees planted in the campus core (Phase 1 Stage 2), but
those new trees are not included in the attached numbers because we are not far enough
along for the landscape plan of that portion of Phase I yet. That said, it needs to be
recognized that when the Development Agreement was negotiated and even earlier when
the basic project design was proposed, we did not know of any ordinance that would
require tree preservation. We may not have designed a project that leaves the major open
space for a park if we had to consider tree replacement on a site that is an overgrown tree
farm. We think this design gives a great park to the City and we have agreed to many
other costs that benefit the City of Oak Park Heights. None of these commitments
contemplated our having any extra costs for tree replacement beyond what we can afford
to do and want to do as good stewards of the property. What we have shown you on the
current landscape plans and tree protection plans represents what we believe to be just
such a reasonable approach - leaving many acres untouched, moving many of the
evergreens that are in good condition, and providing an attractive landscape plan. We
hope you will concur.
A few specific things to note as you review the enclosed material: 1) It is likely that a
few less trees will be removed from the Parkway because of the narrowing due to
elimination of part of the median. 1 have not made any assumptions in these calculations
4631 Humboldt Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55409
(612) 822-4392
FAX (612) 822-3627
Letter to Kris Danielson
March 29, 1999
Page 2
about that because I do not have a clear indication from the Civil Engineer which specific
trees would be saved. The trees listed in Exhibit A are from sheet 2 -A Tree
Preservation Plan dated 1/21/99. 2) There are 500 2 -4' pines shown on the calculation
summary sheet that do not appear on the Landscape Plan. We would be glad to do an
"As- Built" Landscape Plan that shows where these trees were planted so that you can
confirm that we did in fact use 500 of these smaller trees on the site. 3) The townhouse
landscape plan — Sheet 5 — shows what will be provided for six units. in my totals, 1 have
extrapolated those quantities for 50 townhouse units.
1 have also enclosed one copy of the following sheets for Kathy's use in reviewing the
calculations and assumptions:
. Revised Landscape Plan -- 5 sheets and tabulations
Tree Preservation Plan — C2 -A dated 1/22/99
Grading Plan — C2 dated 2/23/99
Grading .plan — C2 dated 2/23/99 reduced to 1"=200' scale (same scale as aerial)
Aerial Section Map showing site dated 4/96 at 1 " =200' scale
These sheets with the exception of the reduced grading plan and the aerial were provided
to Scott Richards last week.
If you need anything further or would like to review any of the attached with me, please
do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
Barbara P. Barry
Development Consultant
Encl
Cc: Kathy Widin w/ enclosures
Scott Richards — w/ enclosures
Ed Reid — w/ enclosures
Greg Collatz - w/ enclosures
Skip Sorensen — w/ enclosures
.Dan Lindh -- w/ summary only
Curt Geissler — w/ summary only
Jeanie Hocking — w/ summary only
Al Black — w/ summary only
BOUTWELLS LANDING ® PHASE I STAGE 1
TREE PRESERVATION CALCULATIONS SUMMARY
3/29/99
Non-Crop Significant Trees
Total diameter inches of significant trees lost
Total diameter inches of significant trees
Replacement trees required in caliper inches
Less 10% credit for tree preservation
Net replacement inches required after credit
Crop Trees
Condition Dram. In. Wood. Factor Cond. Factor Replace. In.
Good 3,996 65% 80% 2,078 in.
Fair 1,993 65% 50% 648 in.
Poor 2,570 65% 20% 334 in.
Total significant crop tree diameter inches lost or moved 3,060 in. (3)
Caliper inches of significant trees to be moved on -site 764 in.
(191 trees on plan, average 4.0 ")
Caliper inches of 2 -4' pines to be moved on -site 750 in.
(500 trees, not shown on plans, average 1.5 ")
Caliper inches of small trees already given away 750 in.
(1,000 trees, 1.5" ave., at 50% because off-site)
Total crop tree diam. in. credit for trees to be moved 2,264 in.
Net crop tree replacement caliper in. needed --- new trees 796 in.
Total new tree caliper inches required (crop & non -crop) 1,079 in.
Total new tree caliper inches in landscape plan 1,398 in. (4)
Excess tree caliper inches provided 319 in.
Note: There will also be additional trees in Phase I Stage 2 around the core of the
campus that are not included here. The project should be viewed overall — any excess
provided in Phase I should count towards Phase II calculations.
(1) See Exhibit A.
(2) See Exhibits B, C, and D.
(3) See Exhibits E, F, and G.
(4) See Exhibit H.
1,255 in. (1)
6,672 in. (2)
314 in.
31 in.
283 in.
EXHIBIT A - BOUTWELLS LANDING DECIDUOUS TREES BEING REMOVED IN PHASE 1
3129199
Tree Type Tree No. Total Diam. Tree Type Tree No. Total Diam.
Bur Oak 106 52 Ash 753 16
Bur Oak 107 15 Cherry 759 15
Bur Oak 108 22 Pin Oak 762 22
Bur Oak 109 8 Pin Oak 763 22
Bur Oak 110 20 Pin Oak 770 14
Bur Oak 111 38 Pin Oak 771 18
Bur Oak 112 54 Pin Oak 772 36
Bur Oak 113 46 Cherry 773 10
Cherry 126 10 Pin Oak 774 15
Bur Oak 127 33 Pin Oak 775 19
Bur Oak 128 31 Pin Oak 776 15
Bur Oak 138 23 Pin Oak 784 16
Bur Oak 139 23 Pin Oak 785 19
Bur Oak 147 43 Pin Oak 786 15
Bur Oak 148 10 Subtotal 252
Pin Oak 149 13
Elm 158 10 See Ex, B - 113 of OO 120
Poplar 159 9
Pin Oak 700 12 TOTAL 1255 Diam. In.
Pin Oak 701 10
Bur Oak 702 32
Cherry 704 10
Cherry 705 12
Cherry 706 10
Bur Oak 707 16
Bur Oak 709 17
Hackberry 710 13
Elm 720 16
Elm 721 11
Elm 722 12
Elm 723 10
Elm 724 32
Bur Oak 726 18
Bur Oak 727 24
Elm 728 8
Elm 729 8
Bur Oak 730 25
Cherry 732 11
Elm 733 9
Bur Oak 737 17
Cherry 739 11
Cherry 741 9
Cherry 743 9
Cherry 746 11
Bur Oak 749 15
Cherry 750 11
Bur Oak 751 24
Subtotal 883
Oak woods adjacent to Autumn Ridge 4,120 diameter inches
Our surveyors measured 3 100'x100' areas in these woods and came up with an average
of 14 trees and 225 diameter inches of significant trees, primarily oak with a few cherry.
The area of that woodland is approximately 183,100 square feet as shown in Exhibit C, a
portion of the tree preservation plan with OA-OE located.
Trees listed on preservation plan not in woods 421 diameter inches
Trees numbered as 100- 105, 114, 115, 129, 133, 136, 139, 145, 146, 156, 812 --816 on the
tree preservation plan are not in the woods noted elsewhere on this page and are to be
preserved.
OF *— poplar grove at SE corner of pond 16 diameter inches
2 8 "trees, approximately 100 other trees 2-6 ".
OO* -- south area between the two ponds 240 diameter inches
20 oaks, white and red, average 18". Also about 1,000 understory 1 -3" oak and poplar.
Approximately 2/3 of this area will be preserved as is reflected in the diameter inches
above. The other 120 diameter inches lost to construction is reflected in Exhibit A.
OH* _ south end of west pond 440 diameter inches
8 oaks average 15 ". Also about 800 2 -8" understory oak and poplar (assume 5% of
understory is 8 ").
01* — SW end of west pond 180 diameter inches
12 trees, 15" average. Mix of oak, cherry and poplar.
TOTAL NON -CROP TREES PRESERVED 5,417 DIAMETER IN.
* Exhibit D shows the location of OF — 01.
EXHIBIT B
Boutwells Landing --- Phase 1 Stage 1
Non-Crop Trees Preserved
3/29/99
Note: Trees noted in OF -0I are estimated by Barb Barry and Ed Reid of Park
Nursery from their walk of the site in late February. This picks up areas in the south
of the site where a portion of the Phase 1 townhouses are being constructed. The
Tree Preservation Plan was prepared primarily to identify deciduous trees 8" or more
in diameter that are being lost to construction.
!,ot,tfwcHs Lmhdirl of-Tree.
702
32" Burr Oak
Good Condition
701
10' Pin Oa
Fair Condition
700
12" Pin Oa
Good Condition
705
12" Cherry
Fair Condition ' •
704
10" Cherry
Good Condition
701
19 Boxel
Fair Condi
- _22" Burr Oa
I Good Condition
721 /y I ~ ` ...
1" E
Fair CoAd 72R
c.
J Poor ion
f
24"
727 E rtirr -4a
Fair Cgpditio .434 ---
16" Burr Oa1--
735 Good Condition
16" 0a s swood------ ---- -_
Good- Coc dition
L, ,,736
9 Boxelder
'47 . ' For Condition, Leaning
8" Boxeld &r
• Condition j..eaning
748
fr 19" Pin Oak
Poor Condition, Leonln
▪ C13ar
or CQ( it Z n Leaning 742
15
750
I1" Char
1= oir C01 ion
755 7 55 _ — -' Good Condition
16'' Cherry
Cood %Condition 754 •
L 10" Burr Oo
77 Good Condition
8' Elm
_Good Condition 783
26 Red Oo
'6 Yin Oak
_..___
;(6d- Condition
Elm
'aod• Condition
-
'2 Cood Condition
20' in Oak
.3ood Condition
780
20" Pin Oak
:)oor Condition
78
28" Pin Ook
Good Condition
776
15" Pin . Oa
Good Condition
803
12" Box 1
_... --- Fair CZindition
13 Cherry
Good Condition
787
13 Pin Oak
Fair Condition
772
13 Cherry
Good Condition, Le
78?
H er
Fair Condo ion
19 Pin Oa
Good .r.orictitr5n
1 6 6 "in 00
802 Fin Oak Poor Condition. E
Fair Condition, Leaning g
. 11
• .804 .r-- - --- Cood Con
' Poor Condition
79
22 Pin • Oa
'Fair Condition,, easing
■
99 0 urr (5.4---1
good Condition' 8p
4. 1 • 22 urr Oa
° Good Condition, Leaning
g od Condit on
,`
t,'
r
97
5" White Oo
oar Condition
19 Burr Oa
807 Goo Condition, Leaning
10' Red Oak
Good Condit'
1
1 802
10 ' oplar
/ Goo Cornditio
XH
10 her
Poor C Condition
'an � Wil A - OE Showin
16 Burr Oak � eS KW4 IA1 004C5 •
V V •
V • • •
7a�
• r
•
• • •
• • ■
• • •
v•
• •
• •
•
• • • •
• • . . v
. .�
• W * . t/ V
• • . • $ • V 7 V O
q
. . oqr Cpndltio
7 T 1y �r r�
22 Kati 0a • • v •
Fait Condition" •
. • • • • • • •
• ► • • •
• . • • • •
• • r • •
• • V • •
V • • •
•
I ---- 1 e> 0 I
Efj
•
•
• •
ondi
7 16 9 n
Good Co
Ion,
775
9 Box . ider
Fair Co diti
8
Good C • diti • n
ning 73
10' Bo aide
Leaning 7
9" 3 E
P • r C ndiit
oTce!der
ition, Leaning 3
7"
r 1
it ondi
n, Leaning
1 Ch r ry
Fat . Co ditl
erg
tion, "Leaning .4,
Lion, Leaning
-�-� -- 22 Pin Oak
• ' Poor Co dition
�` . tai
� .,,..../8 I f Fail
.' �. L...._..v t 1 tit d Ua " - - . ..;,_
Fair Con • tion
815
11"
Fair
° - S' 3 Burr 0 k
For Condi on
817
- 114 Red Oak
Poor Condition
-- `� Go
dj t
tiort
\ 79
Goo
TREE LINE
f
43
614
Poo
42
ir
ed
r
But
k
yak
ditto
iti9
ed I+o1c
o tion
xet
75
24"
Fair on
72
.8 Bo eide
ir C• diti
i
Ion,
o k
itio
, Lea
ng
T '1
— fi r
/
f
~ I
D BoukW4k Lang FIVt-cs
5 / 24 / 6 19
p or w on o f TYa, Pre4e,nrodWo 11 P4C -tx1 511 -6 111 "6.
Ct,re.a.8 r1 oi
2:4
s cau 1" i 00'
1
Pre.se-eve6t
t
I I 1
r
Z
4
A. I
r
r /1 /
t
4 4
r
d' 4
0
4
k 4
4 4
4
,
o 0(0
N a
n
�o
Os
4
4
4 . 1 =❑
4 Otto 4
4 +��
4 74 0 4
4 4 0 �.+ 4 4 !
s o 4 a 4 k
4 V ' 4
a 4 n 4;t,� • 4 ► 4
4 , a4 k ..e 1R
: : - : -
1
� 4 4 •
4
it
.s�
w
ti
EXHIBIT E
Boutwells Landing -- Phase 1 Stage 1
Listing of Significant Crop Trees Lost
3/29/99
See Exhibit F for reap areas referenced in the list below.
M1!rtkQiI Densiti Number of Trees
L 1 scattered 18
L2 medium 55
L3 scattered 22
L4 scattered 34
L5 scattered 43
L6 scattered 20
L7 medium 57
L8 medium 62
L9 scattered 18
L10 medium 30
L11 dense (50)040) 84
L12 scattered 25
L13 scattered 31
L14 dense (50x260) 156
L15 scattered 17
L16 medium (200x80) 96
L17 scattered 16
L18 medium (200x60 plus 16 trees) 88
L19 scattered (340x200) 204
L20 dense (200x40) 96
L21 dense (220x40) 106
L22 dense (180x50) 108
L23 dense (20x480) 115
L24 scattered 12
L25 dense (60x220) and 158
medium (80x160) 77
TOTAL TREES 1,748
EXHIBIT G
BOUTWELLS LANDING — Phase I
Significant Crop Trees Lost or Moved
3/29/99
Scattered trees 460 trees (2,530 diameter inches)
Estimated at 30 trees / 10,000 sq. ft., 5.5" diameter average. Estimated total of 460
trees. Generally assume that 90% of the •scattered trees are in good condition (nice
shape on all sides, healthy condition) and that 10% are in fair condition (healthy
condition, only part of the tree is nicely shaped).
Medium density areas 465 trees (2,325 diameter inches)
Estimated at 60 trees /10,000 sq. ft., 5" diameter average. Estimated total of 465
trees. After a second walking of the site with Park Nursery, we generally
assume that 50% of trees are in good condition, 35% are in fair condition,
and 15% are in poor condition (either not healthy or has poor shape all over --- usually
the trees in the middle of a clump that have few spreading branches).
Dense areas 823 trees (3,704 diameter inches)
Our surveyors measured a 100'x100' area and did a tree count. In a very dense area, they
found 120 trees in that 10,000 sq. ft. A measured sample indicated an average tree
diameter of 4.5 ". There are an estimated 823 trees in the dense areas that will be
moved or destroyed. After a second walking of the site with Park Nursery, we estimate
that only .15% of the dense trees are in good condition, 25% are in fair condition, and
60% are poor because they are so densely planted and 1830 feet tall in most cases.
Total Significant Crop Trees Moved or Lost 1,748 trees (8,559 diameter inches)
EXHIBIT H Boutwells Landing Phase 1 Stage 1 Schedule of New Trees
3/28199
Quantity Total
Plant Schedule Symbol Sheet 1 Sheet 2 Sheet 3 Sheet 5 Caliper Cal. In.
American Linden A 9.00 5.00 - 8.00 2.00 44.00
American Linden AA 4.00 - 2.50 10.00
Redmond Linden B 6.00 - - 17.00 2.00 45.00
Redmond Linden BB 2.00 8.00 5.00 2.50 37.50
Elm C - - 2.00 2.00 4.00
Elm CC 3.00 4.00 m 2.50 1 7.50
Rubrum Maple D 18.00 3.00 - 2.00 42.00
Rubrum Maple DD 13.00 6.00 4.00 8.00 2.50 77.50
Sugar Maple E 3.00 - 4.00 2.00 14.00
Sugar Maple EE 3.00 5.00 4.00 - 2.50 30.00
Norway Maple F 9.00 - 5.00 - 2.00 28.00
Norway Maple FF 4.00 10.00 5.00 - 2.50 47.50
Ash G 4.00 2.00 - 2.00 12.00
Ash GG 25.00 4.00 2.00 .. 2.50 77.50
Ginko H 2.00 - 3.00 8.00 2.00 26.00
Ginko HH 1.00 - - .. 2.50 2.50
Ohio Buckeye 1 3.00 - 2.50 7.50
Oak J 19.00 2.00 - - 2.50 52.50
Aspen K 5.00 - - - 1.00 5.00
Tamarack L 5.00 - m m 3.00 15.00
Am. White Cedar M 9.00 5.00 12.00 m 3.00 78.00
Tartarian Maple N 10.00 13.00 - - 6.00 138.00
River Birch 0 9.00 - - 25.00 6.00 204.00
Jap. Tree Lilac P 23.00 6.00 9.00 8.00 6.00 276.00
Hawthorn a 5.00 5.00 5.00 - 5.00 75.00
Spruce & Pine Y -
Willow Z - 2.00 - 1.00 2.00
Flow. Crab ZZ 14.00 5.00 - m 1.50 28.50
Total 1 ,397.50
per 3/99 plans
TH plan X 8.33 for 50 units
Conifers not included here