3Agenda Item No:3.
City Commission Agenda Item Report
Meeting Date: July 3, 2018
Submitted by: Marcus Lightfoot
Submitting Department: Planning & Zoning Department
Item Type: Resolution
Agenda Section: RESOLUTION(S)
Subject:
A Resolution pursuant to Section 20-4.5 of the Land Development Code, designating a Heritage Tree on the
property located at 6471 Sunset Drive. 3/5
(City Manager-Planning Department)
Suggested Action:
Attachments:
6471 Sunset Drive Heritage Tree Staff Memo.docx
Resolution designating Tree at 6471 SunsetDrive as a HeritageTree#sCArev.docx
EXHIBIT A - Tree Resource Evaluation Jeff Shimonski.pdf
ZTR18-0294 - Tree Removal Permit Package.pdf
Lisa Hammer Arborist Report.pdf
1
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:The Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Commission
VIA:Steven Alexander, City Manager
FROM:Jane K. Tompkins, Planning and Zoning Director
Date:July 3, 2018
SUBJECT:
A Resolution pursuant to Section 20-4.5 of the Land Development Code, designating a
Heritage Tree on the property located at 6471 Sunset Drive.
BACKGROUND:
On February 21, 2018, the owner of the property located at 6471 Sunset Drive submitted tree
removal permit #ZTR18-0294, requesting approval to remove two (2) Strangler Fig trees on her
property. On March 20, 2018, Jeff Shimonski, the City’s contracted arborist, performed a tree
resource evaluation on the trees. Based on his evaluation, the two (2) trees had the following
dimensions:
Scientific
Name
Common
Name DBH H/Ct Canopy Condition
Tree #1 Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 25”25’35’Moderate
Tree #2 Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 52”90’65’Moderate
While Mr. Shimonski recommended the removal of Tree #1, he denied the removal of Tree #2
stating that it could be retained if dead and decaying wood and weakly attached branches in
the canopy were removed by a competent and qualified arborist. He also recommended that
the tree be annually monitored by a qualified ISA Certified Arborist to determine the health and
structural stability of tree and to prescribe further pruning if necessary. Based on the report
provided by Mr. Shimonski, it was determined that Tree #2 was a specimen sized tree. It was
also determined that Tree #2 could be a Heritage Tree.
ANALYSIS:
Pursuant to Section 20-4.5(B)(22) of the Land Development Code (LDC),
2
6471 Sunset Drive Heritage Tree Designation
July 3, 2018
Page 2of 3
MWL
C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@F005AF09\@BCL@F005AF09.docx
Heritage Tree:A designation given pursuant to an action by the City Commission.
The City Commission can grant Heritage Tree status in any of the following
categories:
a.Champion Size:Tree that is the largest of its species.
b.Significant Size:Tree worthy of recognitionfor size, but not the largest of its
species.
c.Historically/Culturally Significant:Trees specifically associated with historical
dates, events, people, and city landmarks
Additionally,the City Commission may approve the removal, relocation, or replacement of a
heritage or champion tree by resolution as indicated in both Section 20-4.5.1(A) and Section 20-
4.5.1(A)(2) of the LDC.
Over the course of the review of Tree Removal Permit #ZTR18-0294, two (2) additional arborist
reports(attached)were provided for review from the following Certified Arborists:
Richard A. Barocas
Lisa H. Hammer
Based on the review of the additional reportsby city staffin conjunction with the report
received from the Mr. Shimonski,all three (3) arborists agreed that that Tree #1 should be
removed. However, when Tree #2 was reviewed, both Mr. Shimonski and Ms. Hammer agreed
that the removal of Tree #2 be denied whereas Mr. Barocas recommended that it should be
removed. Based on the reports provided, all three (3) arborists agreedthat Tree #2 was
significantly large. This conclusion is realized from the following tree dimensions:
Scientific
Name
Common
Name DBH H/Ct Canopy Condition
Barocas Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 52”65’75’Good
Hammer Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 50”50’-60’
60’ (North
to South)
&
42’ (East to
West)
Good
Shimonski Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 52”90’65’Moderate
Based on the tree dimensions provided by the three (3) arborists, it is staff’s observation that
the Strangler Fig tree (Tree #2) be considered for Heritage Tree status by the City Commission.
3
6471 Sunset Drive Heritage Tree Designation
July 3, 2018
Page 3of 3
MWL
C:\Users\EASYPD~1\AppData\Local\Temp\BCL Technologies\easyPDF 8\@BCL@F005AF09\@BCL@F005AF09.docx
If the City Commission should decide to allow the removal of Tree #2, the Notice of Intent(NOI)
phase of the permit processmust be completedprior to the issuance of the permit. Pursuant to
Section 20-4.5.1(B)(4) of the LDC,
At the end of the next business day following the completion of the Preliminary
Approval review of an application fora tree permit, the Planning Department
shall notify the applicant of the Planning Department's intent to issue the
Preliminary Approval ("Notice of Intent"). The applicant shall post the Notice of
Intent, on or adjacent to the property, in a location visible to the general public
for at least ten (10) continuous calendar days prior to final permit issuance and
shall, in writing, notify the Planning Department that the Notice of Intent was
posted and include the date of the posting and photographic evidenceof the
same. The Notice of Intent must state the date of the issuance of the notice, the
date of the posting of the notice and shall advise the public that any objection
substantiated by a licensed arborist, certified under oath, that the trees to be
removed or relocated do not meet the requirements of this tree protection
ordinance ("Certificate of Non-compliance"), must be made by filing a notice of
appeal and the original Certificate of Non-compliance with the City Clerk within
ten (10) calendar days ofthe date of the posting of the notice. The appeal shall
be in accordance with Section 13-27 of the City Code, other than as to the time
for filing the appeal, which under these circumstances is ten (10) days.
If no appeals are filed within the prescribedten (10) calendar days, the tree removal permit can
be issued once the timehas concluded.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Commission approve the attached resolution.
Attachments:
Resolution
Exhibit “A”, Tree Resource Evaluation from Jeff Shimonski, dated March 23, 2018
Tree Removal Permit #ZTR18-0294, received on February 21, 2018
Arborist Report from Robert Barocas, dated December 11, 2017
Arborist Report from Lisa H. Hammer, dated February 12, 2018
4
RESOLUTION NO. ____________________1
2
A Resolution pursuant to Section 20-4.5 of the Land Development Code,3
designating a Heritage Tree on the property located at 6471 Sunset Drive.4
5
WHEREAS, the owner of the property located at 6471 Sunset Drive submitted tree 6
removal permit application #ZTR18-0294 for the removal of two (2) Strangler Fig trees on 7
February 21, 2018; and 8
9
WHEREAS, the City’s contracted arboristperformed a tree resource evaluation on the 10
two (2) Strangler Fig trees on March 20, 2018; and, 11
12
WHEREAS,based on the tree resource evaluation, the two (2) Strangler Fig trees had the 13
following dimensions:14
15
Scientific
Name
Common
Name DBH H/Ct Canopy Condition
Tree #1 Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 25”25’35’Moderate
Tree #2 Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 52”90’65’Moderate
16
WHEREAS, the City’s contracted arborist recommended approval for the removal of Tree 17
#1, and denial for the removal of Tree #2; and18
19
WHEREAS,based on its dimensions, it is the belief of City staffthat Tree #2 qualifies for 20
designation as a Heritage Tree; and 21
22
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of South Miami, as set forth in Section 20-4.5 (2) 23
of the City’s Land Development Code, “to protect and nurture trees, encourage the planting and 24
preservation of trees, and assure that the design and construction of all development activity is 25
executed in a manner consistent with the preservation of existing trees to the greatest extent26
possible; to ensure that the applicant takes all steps reasonably necessary to preserve or relocate 27
existing trees prior to receiving a permit”, and pursuant to 20-4.5 (2)(v), “toProvide for the 28
designation and additional protection of heritage and specimen trees; Promote efficient and cost-29
effective management of the urban forest through the development of a comprehensive long-range 30
urban forest master plan”; and31
32
WHEREAS, Section 20-4.5(B)(22) of the Land Development Code (LDC)defines a 33
Heritage Treesas:34
35
Heritage Tree:A designation given pursuant to an action by the City Commission. The 36
City Commission can grant Heritage Tree status in any of the following categories: 37
(a) Champion Size:Tree that is the largest of its species. 38
(b) Significant Size:Tree worthy of recognition for size, but not the largest of its species. 39
5
(c) Historically/Culturally Significant:Trees specifically associated with historical 1
dates, events, people, and city landmarks; and2
3
WHEREAS, the City Commission may approve theremoval, relocation, or replacement 4
of a heritage or champion tree by resolution as indicated in both Section 20-4.5.1(A) and Section 5
20-4.5.1(A)(2) of the LDC; and 6
7
WHEREAS,based on its size, theCity Commission desires to designate the Ficus aurea,8
located on the property at 6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida as a Heritage tree. 9
10
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY 11
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:12
13
Section 1. The recitals set forth above are found to be true and are adopted by reference as 14
if set forth in full herein. Pursuant to the Tree Resource Evaluation report dated March 23, 2018 15
from ISA Certified Arborist Jeff Shimonski which is attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit 16
“A”, the dimensionsof the Ficus aurea,(commonly known as a Strangler Fig tree) located on the 17
property at 6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Floridaare as follows:18
19
Scientific
Name
Common
Name DBH H/Ct Canopy Condition
Tree #2 Ficus aurea Strangler
Fig 52”90’65’Moderate
20
Section 2.The Ficus aurea,(asidentified in Section 1) is hereby designated as a Heritage 21
Tree and its removal, relocation, or replacementmay only be allowed by resolutionof the City 22
Commission. 23
24
Section 3. Severability. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this resolution is for 25
anyreason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall 26
not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.27
28
Section 4. Effective Date. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon 29
adoption by vote of the City Commission.30
31
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _______________ day of _________________, 2018.32
33
ATTEST:APPROVED:34
35
36
37
________________________________________38
CITY CLERK MAYOR39
40
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM,COMMISSION VOTE:41
LANGUAGE, LEGALITY AND Mayor Stoddard:42
6
EXECUTION THEREOF Vice-Mayor Harris:1
Commissioner Gil:2
____________________Commissioner Liebman:3
CITY ATTORNEY Commissioner Welsh:4
7
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 1
Tree Resource Evaluation for Two Strangler
Figs at 6471 SW Sunset Drive, South Miami
Prepared for:
The City of South Miami
Prepared by:
Jeff Shimonski
President, Tropical Designs of Florida
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
ISA Certified Arborist Municipal Specialist FL-1052AM
ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification
LIAF Florida Certified Landscape Inspector 2016-0175
305-773-9406
Jeff@TropicalArboriculture.com
March 23, 2018
8
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 2
Summary
I performed a tree resource evaluation for two strangler figs, Ficus aurea, along
the roadway in front of 6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami for the City of South
Miami on March 20, 2018.
Appendix A contains tree sizes and condition rating.
I rate trees and palms in accordance with ANSI A300 (Part 5) – 2005, Annex A,
Management Report Information. Trees and palms are rated Good, Moderate or
Poor, see Appendix B. I recommend the removal of trees or palms that I rate as
Poor.
Appendix C contains a section of the City of South Miami code that pertains to
the permitting of tree removal or relocation. Tree mitigation is also discussed.
Comments and Recommendations
I inspected the two strangler figs, and the issues that have occurred with these
trees were caused by improper pruning and other manmade causes.
I recommend the removal of tree 1, see photos below. I have rated its condition
as poor.
Tree 2 can be retained if dead and decaying wood, and weakly attached
branches in the canopy are removed by a competent and qualified arborist.
Many of the longer branches on this tree can be reduced in size thereby
accomplishing a reduction in the height and weight of the canopy.
I have rated the condition of this tree to be in moderate condition.
If this tree is to remain I recommend annual monitoring by a qualified ISA
Certified Arborist to determine the health and structural stability of this tree
and to prescribe further pruning if necessary.
9
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 3
I also recommend the reduction of the use of nitrogen fertilizer and any
herbicides in the lawn maintenance program. These chemicals have been shown
to be harmful to mature trees.
Photos below
The color and brightness on some photos has been adjusted to provide contrast
and clarity to the subject matter. This follows the Basic section on Enhancement
Techniques found in Section 11, Best Practices for Documenting Image
Enhancement in a document produced by SWGIT Scientific Working Group
Imaging Technology, www.SWGIT.org.
10
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 4
Photo 1 above is trees 1 & 2 viewed from the south. Note how close the
roadway is to the trunks of the trees.
11
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 5
Photo 2 above is the trunks of trees 1 & 2 viewed from the southeast.
12
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 6
Photo 3 above is the trunk of tree 1 viewed from the east. The arrow indicates
the 40-inch long steel spike that I used to insert into cavities. Any decay that I
saw was hard dead wood. I did not see any fungal conks or soft decayed wood
at the base of this tree.
This tree might have originally been an aerial root from adjacent tree 2. That
could explain the opening at the base of the trunk.
13
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 7
Photo 4 above shows via arrow where I was able to insert the steel spike about
25 inches into a hollow area beneath the trunk.
14
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 8
Photo 5 above shows the main branch/trunk with a very decayed area beneath
an old pruning cut that likely caused this decay. The pruning cut was a flush cut
that is not an acceptable practice for arboriculture.
15
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 9
Photo 6 above is a branch that extends to the south of the main branch. The
circled area indicates extensive decay with the bark falling-off. The branch is
hollow in this area. The arrows indicate a steel woven wire that was used to tie
the staghorn fern to the aerial root from this branch. The arrow to the left
shows where the wire is embedded into the aerial root.
This wire has caused permanent damage to this trunk and root.
Due to the extensive decay in this and the other main branch, I recommend the
removal of this tree.
16
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 10
Photo 7 above is tree 2 viewed from the north.
17
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 11
Photo 8 above is the trunk of tree 2 viewed from the west. I noted very little
decay when I inspected the trunk and root collar of this tree.
18
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 12
Photo 9 above is a canker on the east side of the tree about 20 feet above
grade. It appears the tree is responding successfully to this pathogen.
The arrow indicates an old flush pruning cut.
19
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 13
Photo 10 above is a branch with decay caused from an old flush pruning cut.
20
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 14
Photo 11 above is up in the canopy of tree 2. The circles indicate decay from old
pruning cuts.
Dead and decaying wood should be removed by a competent and qualified
arborist. Many of the longer branches on this tree can be reduced in size
thereby accomplishing a reduction in the height and weight of the canopy.
If this tree is to remain I recommend annual monitoring by a qualified ISA
Certified Arborist to determine the health and structural stability of this tree
and to prescribe further pruning if necessary.
21
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 15
Appendix – A
Scientific name Common name DBH H/Ct Canopy Condition
1 Ficus aurea Strangler fig 25” 25’ 35’ Moderate
2 Ficus aurea Strangler fig 52” 90’ 65’ Moderate
• DBH is rounded to the nearest inch.
• Height and canopy diameter is approximate.
• Canopy diameter was measured north to south.
Appendix – B
ANSI A300 (Part 5) - 2005, Annex A
Management report information
Examples of suitability ratings
Good: These are trees with good health and structural stability that have the potential for
longevity at the site.
Moderate: Trees in this category have fair health and/or structural defects that may be
abated with treatment. Trees in this category require more intense management and
monitoring, and may have shorter life-spans than those in the “good” category.
Poor: Trees in this category are in poor health or have significant defect s in structure that
cannot be abated with treatment. These trees can be expected to decline regardless of
management. The species or individual tree may possess either characteristics that are
undesirable in landscape settings or be unsuited for use areas.
22
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 16
Appendix – C – Sections of code that address tree mitigation
(1) Permit Required. A tree permit shall be required for the removal or
relocation of any tree within the City. The removal of trees that are
prohibited or exempted by Section 20-4.5.1(N) shall require a permit, in
advance of any such removal, but no fees shall be charged for said permit.
A tree permit shall also be required for the pruning or trimming of more
than one-third ( 1/3 ) of the canopy of a tree. No person, agent or
representative thereof, directly or indirectly, shall cut down, remove,
relocate, or effectively remove any tree on any property, without first
obtaining a tree permit as hereinafter provided. No building permit for any
work on the subject site, including new construction, additions, carports,
pools, decks, fences, driveways, parking lots, tennis courts, demolition, or
similar work, shall be issued by the Building Department unless the
Planning Department has determined that a valid tree removal, relocation
or trimming permit has been issued in accordance with this section.
Miami-Dade County retains authority for all applications for Mangroves
and natural forest communities work.
(3) Criteria for Tree Removal, Relocation, and Replacement. Replacement trees
are required to be planted to mitigate Specimen tree removal and $1,000 shall
be paid into the City's Tree Trust Fund in addition to any required mitigation.
(b) The requirements for mitigation of regulated trees approved for removal as
part of development plan or subdivision plat review are as follows:
23
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 17
(4) Tree Trust Fund. If the total number of trees required as mitigation cannot be
reasonably planted on the subject property, or at the City's direction, as an
alternative to the off-site Page 22 mitigation provided in the Tree removal
Section of this ordinance, the applicant shall contribute to the City's Tree Trust
Fund the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) per inch DBH required as
mitigation in accordance with the Tree removal Section of this ordinance.
H. Mitigation Methods.
(1) Unless otherwise specified in this tree protection ordinance, where
mitigation is required, it shall be allowed by two methods, mitigation trees (on
an inch-for-inch basis or as otherwise specified) and mitigation payment. The
amount of mitigation is as specified herein below.
24
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 18
Appendix – D – Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
Tropical Designs of Florida, Inc.
Arboricultural and Horticultural Consulting
Qualifications, Assumptions, and Limiting Conditions
Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Any titles or ownership of
properties are assumed to be good and marketable. All property is appraised or evaluated as though
free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management.
All property is presumed to be in conformance with applicable codes, ordinances, statutes, or other
regulations.
Care has been taken to obtain information from reliable sources. However, the consultant cannot be
responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.
The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend meetings, hearings, conferences,
mediations, arbitrations, or trials by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements
are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services.
This report and any appraisal value expressed herein represent the opinion of the consultant, and the
consultant’s fee is not contingent upon the reporting of a specified appraisal value, a stipulated result,
or the occurrence of a subsequent event.
Sketches, drawings, and photographs in this report are intended for use as visual aids, are not
necessarily to scale, and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. The
reproduction of information generated by architects, engineers, or other consultants on any sketches,
drawings, or photographs is only for coordination and ease of reference. Inclusion of said information
with any drawings or other documents does not constitute a representation Tropical Designs of Florida,
Inc. as to the sufficiency or accuracy of said information.
Unless otherwise expressed: a) this report covers only the examined items and their condition at the
time of inspection: and b) the inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible items without
dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that
structural problems or deficiencies of plants or property may not arise in the future.
25
6471 Sunset Drive, South Miami Tropical Designs of Florida Page 19
Appendix – E - Certification of Performance
Tropical Designs of Florida, Inc.
Arboricultural and Horticultural Consulting
I, Jeff Shimonski, certify:
• That I have personally inspected the trees and/or the property referred to in this report, and
have stated my findings accurately. The extent of the evaluation is stated in the attached report;
• That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the
subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved;
• That the analysis, opinions, and conclusions stated herein are my own;
• That my analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared
according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices;
• That no one provided significant professional assistance to the consultant, except as indicated
within the report;
• That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that
favors the cause of the client or any other party.
I further certify that I am a member of the American Society of Consulting Arborists and acknowledge,
accept, and adhere to the ASCA Standards of Professional Practice. I am an International Society of
Arboriculture Certified Municipal Arborist FL-1052AM, am ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualified and have
been involved in the practice of arboriculture and the study of trees for over forty-five years.
Signed:
Dated: March 23, 2018
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
1
February 12, 2018
Ms. Nancy Stroh
Orr’s Pond HOA
6471 Sunset Drive
South Miami, FL 33143
Dear Ms. Stroh:
On Wednesday, January 31, 2018, we met at your residence, above, where you requested that I
evaluate a large strangler fig tree (Ficus aurea) in front of your home.
BACKGROUND
You reported that you moved into this house about three years ago. On September 10, 2017,
Hurricane Irma struck South Florida and caused a large weeping fig tree (Ficus benjamina) to topple
and fall onto a house a few doors down from you. This caused you to question if the tree in front of
your house was safe and asked that I evaluate it in that regard.
OBSERVATIONS
At the time of my visit I noted the large strangler fig in front of your house, near the edge of the
street. The tree measures approximately 50 inches in trunk diameter, 50 to 60 feet in overall height,
with a crown spread of 60 feet from north-to-south and 42 feet from east-to-west. The west side of
the crown has been reduced back away from the house.
There is a second strangler fig tree adjacent to the bigger one above, on its south side. It measures 24
inches in trunk diameter, 25 feet in height, with a 20-foot crown in both directions. Its trunk is S-
shaped, growing toward and slightly over the street.
The trunks and locations of the two trees can be seen below:
39
2
The two trees can be seen below, as viewed from south looking north:
Tree #1
The larger tree is very healthy, with a dense crown of vigorous foliage. It shows signs of a long
history of proper maintenance, including pruning to thin and reduce its crown. I sounded the buttress
roots and basal trunk area with a mallet and heard no hollow sounds indicative of wood decay. I
probed with a yardstick a couple of depressions near the base of the tree and found no significant
decay. The roots are solid and free of any significant damage or decay. They were cut at the edge of
the road at the time of development in the 1980’s, but do not currently show any signs or symptoms
of decay or stress, as they have most likely re-established in surrounding areas.
As a species, strangler figs are native to South Florida and well-adapted to the soils and climate. They
have a tenacious root system and rarely uproot or topple unless they have root damage or disease.
This is contrary to the non-native weeping figs, such as the one up the street, which are shallowly-
rooted and frequently uproot and topple.
This tree has withstood Hurricanes Andrew, Katrina, Wilma, and now Irma without leaning, toppling,
or incurring any other damage except for some minor limb breakage. It is my professional opinion
that this tree is in a generally safe and healthy condition.* At this time, there are no needs for any
type of remedial treatment.
*Note that no tree is ever 100% safe or completely free of risk.
Tree #2
The smaller tree with the S-shaped trunk has significant wood decay associated with old wounds.
There is a large wound at the 90-degree bend in the trunk, where it appears a limb ripped off a long
time ago, possibly during Hurricane Andrew in 1992. There is a decay cavity from this wound down
the trunk, with an opening below; you can see all the way through the trunk at this point.
40
3
There is also an opening to a decay cavity further down on the trunk, and it is probably a continuation
of the decay cavity above.
The basal trunk area is hollowed-out inside, leaving the buttress roots above grade.
41
4
It is my professional opinion that this tree is prone to trunk breakage due to decay. The most likely
location of a break would be at the 90-degree bend in the trunk, in which case, the upper part of the
tree could fall into the street and/or front yard area. Whole tree toppling is also a possibility should
the basal trunk area break or the surface roots fail. In that case, the whole tree could topple into the
street and/or front yard area.
Although this tree has also withstood several hurricanes, the decay will not go away or get better; it
will only get worse. As it does, the risk of failure will increase. For these reasons, I recommend that
this tree be removed. It should be cut to a stump and the stump left intact to prevent damage to the
root system of the larger tree.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, I evaluated two strangler fig trees in front of your house and found that the larger tree
is healthy, structurally sound, and posing a very low risk. The smaller tree is prone to failure due to
wood decay. The most likely parts to fail are at the bend in the trunk and possibly the basal trunk
area. Should it fail, the tree or its parts could fall into the street and/or front yard areas and therefore,
I recommend removal of the smaller of the two trees.
Thank you for calling on me and please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or additional
needs for assistance.
Sincerely,
Lisa H. Hammer, RCA, TRAQ
Horticultural Consultant
.
42