LTC 596-2017 REmoval of Two Australian Pines on Pine Tree Drive/\A I A f\/\ I
City of Miami Beach , 1700 Convention Center Drive , Miami Beach , Florid a 33139, www.miamibeachfl .g ov
Jimmy L. M o ra les , C ity Manager
Tel : 305-673-70 l 0 , Fax : 305-673-7782
f)96-2017
NO. LTC#
TO: Mayor Dan Gelber and Members oft
FROM : Jimmy L. Morales , City Manager
DATE : December 14 , 2017
LETIER TO COMMISSION
SUBJECT : Removal of Two Australian Pines on Pine Tree Drive
This Letter to Commission (L TC) is a follow-up to an L TC dated October 23, 2017, which
summarized the results of a tree risk assessment conducted along Pine Tree Drive (attached).
On September 24, 2017, two master arborists certified by the International Society of
Arboriculture completed a tree risk assessment of the 271 Australian pines located in the
median and right-of-way along Pine Tree Drive between 30 1h Street and 46 1h Street. Per the
results of the assessment, there are two Australian pines located on Pine Tree Drive, one on the
4200 block and one on the 4400 block , that pose an imminent hazard and must be removed.
Pine Tree Drive is a county road . Therefore, following the city 's tree assessment Miami-Dade
County was notified of the two high -risk trees and the city requested emergency action for their
removal.
The work is scheduled to begin on Tuesday, December 19 and is anticipated to take
approximately one day, with the potential of up to two additional work days as warranted by the
on-site and weather conditions . Temporary closure of one lane may be required on northbound
and southbound Pine Tree Drive. However, no lane closures or work will occur during rush
hours (before 1 O a .m. or after 3:30 p.m.). Residents will be notified via e-mail and on social
media . Additionally, a copy of this L TC will be hand delivered to homeowners in the immediate
vicinity of the two trees to be removed.
Should you have any questions , please contact Omar Leon , Urban Forester, at 305-673-7722 .
Attachments:
A -Letter to the Commission -Pine Tree Drive Tree Assessment -October 23 , 2017
ATTACHMENT A
MIA
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139, www .mia rm ilieachA.gov
Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
Tel: 305-673-7010 , Fax : 305-673-7782
NO. LTC# 509-2017
TO : Mayor Philip Levine and Members of
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager
DATE : October 23, 2017
SUBJECT: Hurricane Irma Tree Assessment and
TIER T•O COMMISSION
The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to update the Mayor and City Commission on the
tree assessments completed after Hurricane Irma, including an asse :s sment of the Australian
pines along Pine Tree Drive between 30th Street and 45th Street, and <:i n the city's short-term
and long-term plans to recover the urban forest from the losses experiEm ced during the storm .
,.
Last month Hurricane Irma damaged many trees throughout the city .. Urban Forestry staff, in
coordination with Greenspace Management staff and Parks and Recreation staff, assessed all
the trees impacted within the public right-of-way and in public parks to dete rmine which could be
saved and which had to be removed . Viable trees are being re-staked ,, pruned and watered, as
appropriate, to improve their chances pf survival. Through these inter·de partmental efforts, the
city has saved many trees. However, several trees were deemed im min ent hazards or were
severely damaged and are being removed . A final count will be provi ded by the end of January
when all of the hurricane debris has been cleared.
Pine Tree Drive Tree Assessment
On September 24, 2017, two master arborists certified by the !I nternational Society of
Arboriculture completed a tree risk assessment of the 271 Austra lia n pines located in the
median and right-of-way along Pine Tree Drive between 30th Street and 46th Street (Attachment
A). The trees along this corridor are approximately 100 years old and have exceeded the
average lifespan of Australian pines in Florida, which ranges from 40 t(l 50 years. As such, the
city conducts a risk assessment every three years to determine their co ndition and what, if any,
maintenance work is needed to lower their risk for failure (toppling Ol ve r or losing a branch).
Based on the results of these assessments, the city works with Miam i-Dade County, since this
is a county road, to ensure high-risk trees are properly maintained or re 1mo v ed .
The assessment completed last month was scheduled as an update to th e prior assessment
completed in January 2014. Its goal was to confirm whether weight reductio n pruning conducted
in January 2017 was effective in increasing tree stability and reducing risk . However, since the
new assessment was completed after Hurricane Irma , it also captures, any impacts caused by
the storm .
Per the arborists' report, the Australian pines along the corridor have significant structural
problems, resulting primarily from decay at their base. Of the 271 Australian pines evaluated,
one toppled over during Hurricane Irma and two trees were deemed imminent hazards to be
removed immediately. Additionally, 254 trees must be substantially pruned to make them less
top-heavy and better able to support the weight of their canopy, particularly during periods of
heavy winds. The city has notified the County of the need to conduct this work and has
requested the two emergency tree removals be scheduled as soon as possible. The
maintenance pruning of the 254 trees is anticipated to cost $200,000.00 and is currently
unfunded.
Photo 1 -Decay and Crack on Imminent Hazard Photo 2 -Properly Pruned Australian Pine
The maintenance pruning will build off of the weight reduction pruning conducted earlier this
year, which was deemed insufficient. The goal is to reduce the potential of the trees to fall
during a storm before the start of next hurricane season. It is anticipated that the pruning can
extend the useful life of these 254 trees for up to 10 years. Even after the pruning is completed,
the city will need to continue evaluating the risk of the Australian pines on an on-going basis to
determine how each tree responds to the weight reduction pruning, as well as how the decay in
each tree progresses. Future assessments may determine that additional removals and/or
pruning will be necessary depending on the risk factor of each tree's condition.
It is recommended that the city begin developing a long-term plan for this corridor as these trees
reach the end of their life. This plan should take into account that Australian pines are
categorized as a Class I invasive species that cannot be replanted or sold in Miar.ni-Dade
County. Additionally, Australian pines change the chemistry of their surrounding soil to prevent
competition from other species. The replanting plan will need to include restoration of the soil,
as well as a minimum buffer between existing Australian pines and new plantings to ensure they
survive.
Recovery Reforestation
Once the removal of damaged trees and vegetative debris is completed , Urban Forestry staff
will be conducting a before and after comparison using satellite imagery to determine the
percentage of canopy loss from Hurricane Irma throughout the city. They will also be reviewing
pre-and post-storm inspection photos and conducting field inspections to ground truth their
analysis. In addition to quantifying loss , these efforts will identify locations in the right-of-way
and city parks that need to be replanted.
Based on initial observations , there has been a substantial loss of trees, which will take several
years to fully replace. This fiscal year the City Commiss ion approved $75,000 for citywide
reforestation. The city also was awarded Neat Streets grant funding to plant 44 high-quality
trees in pre-selected locations within the city's right-of-way. The availability of reforestation
funds allows the city to begin recovery reforestation quickly and, when combined with funding
from Greenspace, Parks and FEMA, speeds up the rate at which our urban canopy can recover.
This fiscal year the City Commission also approved $25,000 for the development of the city's
first ever Street Tree Master Plan. The Plan will create a vision for prioritizing trees in our
neighborhoods and for meeting present needs while considering the needs and challenges of
the future, such as sea level rise . In its development, Urban Forestry staff will work with
community stakeholders to define tree species diversity street-by-street, creating cohesive
neighborhoods with the right tree planted in the right place . Once completed, the Plan will guide
reforestation efforts moving forward .
Should you have any questions, please contact Omar Leon, Urban Forester, at 305-673-7722. r ... .
Attachments :
A -Pine Tree Drive Risk Assessment Report
Cc: City of Miami Beach Historic P(es ervation Board
~ Ju1111l SMTt~OJL
•
ATIACHMENT A
Pine Tree Drive
Tree Risk Assessment Report
by
Daniel Lippi
ISA Board Certified Master Arborist #FL6145B
ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualification (TRAQ)
and
Chuck Lippi
' +
. ,.,
I SA Board Certified Master Arborist #FLoso1 s
ASCA Registered Consulting Arborist #443
ISA Tree Risk Assessor Qualification (TRAQ)
September 24, 2017
Page 2 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
lntroduction ........................................................................................ 3
Summary ................................................................................................................ 3
Background ............................................................................................................ 3
Limits of the Assignment ........................................................................................ 4
Purpose and Use of the Report ............................................................................. 5
Testing and Analysis ............................................................................................. 5
Data Collection ....................................................................................................... 7
Risk Assessment Rating System ........................................................................... 9
Pruning and Maintenance Categories .................................................................. 1 O
Observations .................................................................................... 11
General Tree Species Characteristics ................................................................. 11
The Trees ............................................................................................................. 11
Site ....................................................................................................................... 14
Problems and Defects Observed ........................................................................ 14
.lo.
Basal Decay and Gall Deday ............................................................................... 14 • Mallet Test ............................................................................................................ 16
Health and Structural Condition ..................... ; ..................................................... 17
Size of Part Likely to Fail and General Decay Condition of the Tree ................... 17
Likelihood of Failure ....... : .. ~ ... :. ............................................................................. 18
Maintenance Recommended ............................................................................... 20
Risk Rating Distribution ........................................................................................ 21
Disc::ussi<>n ....................................................................................... 21
Conflict Between Arborist Recommendation and Tree Ordinance ....................... 23
Conclusions ..................................................................................... 25
Appendix A Definitions ............................................................................... 26
Certification of Performance ....................................................................... 27
References .................................................................................................... 28
Tree Inventory Data
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 3 of 29
Introduction
Summary
September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Overall the Australian pine population on Pine Tree Drive is healthy but has some
significant structural problems mostly basal decay, which is difficult to measure,
columns of internal trunk decay and long sprawling lateral branches that create
increased leverage force on the decayed trunk areas of the trees. The first
significant pruning done since we started the tree risk assessment of the
Australian pines in 2010 was in January 2017, seven years after the original
request. Unfortunately, the pruning done in January 2017 was insufficient in
scope to achieve the desired effect of significant crown reduction. Recent
revisions to the ANSI A300 Pruning Standards which are integral guidelines to
the Miami-Dade County Tree Ordinance permit increased amount of pruning that
we recommend. The old ANSI A300 Pruning Standards did not. The Australian
pine trees growing in the wide median north of 41 st Street have more root space
and are generally in better structural condition than the trees growing south of
41 st Street mostly in the narrow 9-foot wide median where roots are restricted by
pavement and curbing. LQDking forward, we need to seriously consider
aggressive canopy reduction as a realistic option for many of the trees and in
some cases tree removal.
Background . ;. /
Previous tree risk assessments were done in 2010-2011 by Chuck Lippi and
2014 by both Chuck and Daniel Lippi. Each report called for the removal of a few
trees and severe crown reduction on remaining trees to reduce lever forces of
wind of the sprawling branches and on the compromised trunks that have been
weakened by decay over the years. After the 2014 tree assessment and report,
we gave a short presentation to the Miami Beach Historic Preservation Board
indicating that crown reduction was imperative to avoid continued tree failures.
That crown reduction pruning was finally done, we understand, in January 2017.
Unfortunately, the crown reduction done in January was insufficient providing
less than 15 or 20 percent crown reduction instead of the 40 to 50 percent crown
reduction we recommend. Because there has been no significant mechanical
change to the structure of the trees, their level of risk has not been reduced and
in effect the pruning was not successful.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rm:irrl r.ArtifiArl M::i~tAr Arhnri~t~ J:I -~1.4&:\R i:inrl J:I -n&:\n1 R
Page 4 of 29
Assignment
September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
In August, 2017, Advanced Tree Care was given the assignment by the City of
Miami Beach to perform a Tree Survey and Risk Assessment, our third on this
street since 2010, for approximately 271 historic Australian pines ( Casuarina
equisetifolia) on Pine Tree Drive.
Our assignment was to:
1 . Assess the current condition of the trees.
2. Make recommendations to reduce risk
3. Make recommendations to maintain healthy trees and mitigate structural
problems and risk as much as possible.
Because of the timing of Hurricane Irma, we were able to re-evaluate the
structural condition of 145 Australian pines which were evaluated before the
hurricane hit and again shortly following the hurricane to have a sense of the
Australian pine reaction to a very stressful wind event. One Australian pine tree
failed during Hurricane Irma (tree #33806) and another tree (#33384) cracked
horizontally at the base ami is in line for removal as soon as possible . .-. •
Important Note: The terminology used in this report to describe tree defects
observed, maintenance recommended and risk score rating is designed for
the use of /SA Certified Arborists who are trained in Risk Assessment
protocol and ANSI A-3dO ,PtUning Standards. Property owners and
residents concerned about the health and structural condition of the trees
near their property or public right of way may find the arboriculture
terminology used confusing. Likewise, tree service workers who are not
trained in Risk Assessment protocol and ANSI A-300 Pruning Standards
may also find the terminology confusing, in which case they should not be
hired to perform the maintenance work recommended.
Limits of the Assignment
We visually inspected each tree for the inventory and risk assessment. We did
not survey any other trees on or near the site. Tree evaluations and data
gathering was done on September 5, 2017 just prior to Hurricane Irma and .
September 18, 2017 following Hurricane Irma. Our observations and conclusions
are as of those days.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 5 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
The first half of the Australian pine trees evaluated on September 5 were re-
evaluated on September 17 following the hurricane to determine damage and
effects of the hurricane. A severe storm or other environmental factors can
change the observations and maintenance recommendations
Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural
failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not always
fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees, below ground or not
clearly visible from the vantage point on the ground. Arborists cannot guarantee
that a tree will be healthy, safe or adequately protected under all circumstances
or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial, protective and mitigating
treatments and recommendations cannot be guaranteed.
Purpose and Use of the Report
This report is prepared for the City of Miami Beach. The main purpose of the tree
inventory is risk assessment, which identifies apparent tree problems and
provides valuable information for a long-term management plan, allowing for
effective use of tree funds.and more accurate budget projections. This tree
inventory and assessment provides information on the condition of the Australian
pine trees on Pine Tree Drive between West 46th Street •and West 30th Street.
An additional benefit is that the City of Miami Beach is on record as having risk
assessment procedures in place and an on-going risk assessment program . . ; -~
Testing and Analysis
The Risk Assessment was done in accordance with ANSI A300 Standards on
Tree Risk Assessment and the companion publication Best Management
Practices, Tree Risk Assessment.1 ,2 Tree health recommendations follow
procedures and techniques of two of the country's leading arboricultural
researchers: Dr. Ed Gilman, professor emeritus (retired) of environmental
horticulture at the University of Florida and Dr. Kim Coder, professor at the
University of Georgia. Health evaluation techniques were adapted from Dr. Jerry
Bond.3 Pruning recommendations follow the 2017 updated ANSI A300 Pruning
Standards,4 which contain some important changes from the previous 2008
version, and these changes will affect our recommendations. Pruning •
recommendations also follow the authoritative pruning guide by Dr. Gilman, An
Illustrated Pruning Guide.s
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rn~rrl r,P.rtifiP.rl M~stP.r Arhnrists Fl -R14FiR ::inrl Fl -0Fi01 R
Page 6 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
On each tree evaluated we performed a Level 2 Basic Assessment, which is a
detailed visual inspection of a tree and its surrounding site. The Level 2
Assessment includes a 360-degree visual inspection from ground level on each
tree and sound testing of the lower trunk and root flares with a rubber mallet to
listen for tonal variations that may indicate dead bark or internal hollows. When
there is sufficient evidence gathered under a Level 2 Assessment for additional
evaluation of a tree found to have significant structural defects such as visible
cavities, decay or indications of possible decay from a sounding test, we
sometimes recommend a Level 3 Advanced Assessment with a resistance drill
test to determine the extent of internal decay and strength loss. A resistance drill
is a drilling device that measures and graphs decay as the narrow %-inch drill bit
passes through the different layers of solid and decayed wood. Level 3 Advanced
Assessment was part of the scope of this assignment but in our opinion the
resistance drill was not needed based upon our current observations, past
experience and the advice of wood decay expert Francis W.M.R. Schwarze.B
According to Dr. Schwarze, the Resistograph cannot distinguish differences
between solid wood and wood decayed with Kretzschmaria deusta, which is the
one of the main suspected basal decay organisms infecting the Pine Tree Drive
Australian pine trees. r
;lo. .
ID Tags -During the first tree risk assessment-done in 2010, ea9h tree was given
a uniquely numbered black-nylon tag secured to the trunk with a stainless steel
nail. Approximately 15 of 'he ags had
come off since 201 O but the tree
identification numbers were
discernible by checking the numbers
of adjacent trees. On the next risk
assessment of the Pine Tree Drive
trees, new tags should be used to
replace missing tags. Although the
numbers will no longer be sequential,
the trees missing tags will then be
more easily identified by work crews
when maintenance work has been
assigned to a specific tree. New tags
can be installed before the next
assessment If desired by the City of
Miami Beach.
Figure 1 lnonotus dryadeus conks are regularly
seen on the lower trunks and decaying galls on
Pinetree Drive. It is a butt rot or basal rot fungi.
Identification is easy because of the amber
droplets that form on a fresh conk (arrows).
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 7 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Fungal Conks -During the previous
assessment and the current assessment of the ,
trees, two decay organisms were identified in
the field. The first is lnonotus dryadeus
commonly called "weeping conk" for the amber
droplets that form on the surface of fresh conks
(Figure 1 ). It is a root and butt rot fungi and is
considered a white rot but shows symptoms of
soft rot by preferentially degrading cellulose
first making the tree brittle. According to
F.W.M.R. Schwarze, et. al., lnonotus dryadeus
infected trees do not exhibit any symptoms in
the crown for a long time "and apparently
healthy trees can be suddenly blown down by
the wind because their roots are destroyed ."7
The second fungus found at the site is
Kretzschmaria deusta, commonly called
"brittle cinder" for the burnt appearance
(Figure 2) and the characteristic of making
infected wood brittle. Krett schmaria deusta is
a soft rot that preferentially degrades
cellulose before degrading lign in making the
butt area brittle much like a ceramic . Our • visual diagnosis is guided by e photographs
and description provided by Sinclair's
authoritative textbook.a
Data Collection
/'
Figure 2 Pieces of black crusty
psuedosclerotial plates of what I
believe t be the pathogen
Kretzschmaria deusta litter the
ground below a basal cavity. These
black crusty plates are found near the
base of many of the Australian pines
on Pinetree Drive.
Both empirical data as well as subjective data were gathered on each tree. Data
was collected on HanDBase, a data collection database application used on our
handheld smartphones and downloaded to a MS Excel spreadsheet.
Empirical data included:
1 . tree tag number
The Subjective data included:
1. Basal condition (none apparent, suspected cavity but not visible, visible
cavity -large, visible cavity -moderate, and visible cavity -smal~ Basal decay
is one of most difficult areas of decay to identify because the damaged area is
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rn!:lrri rortifion l\A!:actor Arhnrictc l=I -~1..:1.i:\R !:Inn l=I .()i:\()1 R
Page 8 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
often well hidden beneath the trunk and some of the main pathogens do not
register with some of the Level 3 diagnostic equipment. We visually measured
the amount of decay at the base of the tree and also used a 4-foot fiberglass
probe to see if the probe could be
inserted beneath the base of the trunk.
2. Gall condition (No galls present, solid
galls, some decay, and extensive
decay). Galls, also known as burls, are
large growths usually on the trunk. They
normally do not affect tree structure
unless the galls are heavily decayed. For
more information on the cause and
effects of galls, go to page 1 O of this
report under DBH Measurements.
3. Mallet test (negative, positive or
inconclusive) pro ides results by hitting
the trunk at various locations and
heights with a rubber mallet to measure
tonal variations. A posit.We mallet test
indicates a decayed area or hollow area
in the trunk.
. 4. Tree health -An evaluation of tree
health provides anothef perspective for
determining a Risk Score. ree health
was divided into three separate
categories :
• Tree opacity is the percentage of light
visibly blocked by branches, foliage
and reproductive structures of the
actual upper live crown. Opacity
Figure 3 The crown tc:i trunk ratio is the
ratio of the height of the tree's crown (red
vertical line) compared to the overall
height of the tree trunk (yellow vertical
line) Photo from Dr. Jerry Bond , Urban
Tree Health: A Practical and Precise
Estimation Method, Urban Forest
Analytics LLC , 2012 .
provides an estimate of the actual photosynthetic tissue within the crown of
the tree. A higher percentage is most desirable .
• Tree vitality-is the percentage of the upper crown that is free from recent
mortality on branches with fine twigs, beginning at the terminal portion of a
branch in proceeding toward the trunk. This is exemplified by dead
branches in the mid and upper crown. A higher percentage (few or no pead
branches) is most desirable .
• Crown to trunk ratio -is the ratio of the live crown height to the total live
tree height, expressed as a percentage. Again, a higher percentage is most
desirable (Figure 3).
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 9 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
5. Structural problems (a list of defects including: sprawling branches,
extensive decay, moderate decay, nominal decay, hangers, dead branches,
fungal conks, cracks)
6. Work Recommended (None recommended, Priority 1 remove, Priority 2
remove, Priority 3 remove, End Weight Reduction, Priority 1 prune, Priority 2
prune) A description of the maintenance activities recommended is found on
page 20 of this report (Figures 17 and 18, page 20).
7. Observations (other notations on tree defects and conditions including:
column of decay; fungal conks including lnonotus dryaedus, Kretzschmaria
deusta; missing tag, old lightning strike, bee colony, strangler fig)
8. Likelihood of Failure (improbable -1, possible -2, probable -3 and
imminent -4)
9. Size of part the size of the tree part likely to fail ( 1 -small, 2-medium, 3 -
large)
10. Decay ( 1 -small, 2-medium, 3 -large)
11. Health Condition (good -1, fair-2, and poor-3)
12.Structural Condition (good -1, fair-2, and poor-3)
Risk Assessment Rating.,System ... •
The risk rating score in the last column of the data sheets is used to provide a
relative measure of tree health and structural condition of the tree population
utilizing the items 8 through 12 above. We scored each tree according to a risk
assessment rating system <:Je~eloped by the ANSI A-300 risk assessment
standards and adapted by us to better assess the special conditions of the Pine
Drive trees.
Trees were rated in each category and the sum of the five categories represents
the Risk Score. The higher score means a higher risk for that category. The
highest risk tree could attain a hazard rating of 16. The lowest risk tree could
have a hazard rating of 5. The risk ratings for all the trees are shown in Figure 19
on page 21 of this report.
According to Clark and Matheny,9 "Thus hazard ratings cannot strictly define a
numerical line for action between either removal and retention or treatment and
no treatment. This must be an administrative decision, one made by owner and .
manager. In municipal situations, where an agency might manage a very large
number of trees, there may be practical limits to the amount of work that can be
undertaken and only the most severe and significant hazards may be addressed.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 10 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Some level of risk will always be present when people live among trees. The
decision of how much risk is tolerable
remains with the owner and manager."
Tree Health and Structural
Condition -Each tree was also
evaluated as to its overall health and
structure. It is important to understand
that health and structure are two
separate and independent
considerations. A tree can be healthy
yet have poor and hazardous
structure . Live trees with lots of green
foliage can fail and sometimes do. Figure 4 Large galls are prevalent on most of
Structurally sound trees sometimes the Australian pine trees on Pine Tree Drive.
decline and die from poor health.
DBH Measurements -A tree measurement normally taken during tree
evaluations, DBH, was not aken because the trees are heavily infested with
large trunk galls or tumorS, which we believe are caused by the bacterium
Agrobacterium tumefaciens. The galls are technically cal ed crown galls or crown
.. gall tumors, but for simplicity we will refer to them as galls in this report. The large
galls are often located on the trunk where the DBH measurement should be
taken and the presence of th galls makes accurate DBH measurements difficult
if not impossible. A majority of the trees (93 percent) had medium to very large
galls on their trunks. Only seven percent of the trees were free of galls. Galls are
not pathogenic and usually do not negatively affect the structure and strength of
a tree as long as the galls are solid. However, if the gall begins to decay, as is the
case with many of the galls on trees on Pine Tree Drive, we have observed the
decaying galls can provide an entry point for a decay organism to enter the tree
trunk and degrade the trunk tissue.
Pruning and Maintenance Categories
Trees that were marked for some form of maintenance received one of the
following descriptive classifications in item 6 on page 8 above. All work sho1,1ld
follow ANSI A300 Pruning Standards:
· Priority 1 Removal Trees designated for removal have defects that cannot be
cost-effectively or practically treated. The majority of the trees in this category
have a large percentage of dead crown , decay and/or pose an elevated level or
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lipp i
Advanced Tree Care , Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists Fl -R14!=\R ::inrl Fl .ni::;n1 R
Page 11 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
risk for failure . Any hazards that could be seen as potential dangers to persons
or property and seen as potential liabilities to the client would be in this
category. Large dead and dying trees that are high liability risks are included in
this category. These trees are the first ones that should be removed.
· Priority 2 Removal Trees that should be removed but do not pose a liability as
great as the first priority will be identified here. This category would need
attention as soon as "Priority 1" trees are removed and Priority 1 Prune is done.
• Priority 3 Removal Trees that should be removed, but pose minimal liability to
persons or property, will be identified in this category.
• Priority 1 Prune Trees that require priority one pruning are recommended for
trimming to remove hazardous deadwood, hangers, or broken branches. These
trees have broken or hanging limbs, hazardous deadwood, and dead, dying, or
diseased limbs on leaders greater than four inches in diameter.
• Priority 2 Prune These trees have dead, dying, diseased, or weakened
branches between two and four inches in diameter and are potential safety
hazards.
· End Weight Reduction Pruning These trees require routine horticultural
pruning to correct structural problems, reduce crown size, remove dead
branches, strangler fig plants or vines, or correct growth patterns which would
eventually obstruct traffi c or interfere with utility wires or buildings. Large Tree
Routine Pruning is often used to describe this process. But in this case the
authors wanted to emphasize end weight reduction to reduce crown size as the
primary goal. . ; ·""
Observations
General Tree Species Characteristics
In our initial report dated November 7, 201 O and our subsequent report in 2014,
we provided some basic background information on the history of the trees,
information about the species and information about the site. Some of this
background information has been repeated in this report under Observations
"The Trees" and "The Site" for the benefit of those who have not seen the first
report.
The Trees
The Australian pines growing along Pine Tree Drive in Miami Beach are a
dichotomy. On the one hand, the 271 trees examined are all Casuarina
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rn~rrl r.~rtifi~rl M~c:t~r Arhnric:tc: l=I -~1.d.~R ~nrl l=I -n~n1 R
Page 12 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
equisetifolia, which is a Category I invasive exotic plant. Category I invasive
exotic plants are those that are altering native plant communities based on the
documented ecological damage. On the other hand the same trees were also
designated as historic trees and the street, Pine Tree Drive, a historic site by the
Miami Beach City Commission in June, 2001.10 According to early records11 , ·
John Collins, was one of the first settlers in what was to become Miami Beach.
In 1910, Collins planted Australian pines as a windbreak to protect his young
avocado and mango groves. The same pines planted in 191 O now stand along
what has become Pine Tree Drive in the City of Miami Beach.
According to Dr. Ed Gilman, University of Florida Professor of Urban Trees &
Landscape Plants in the Environmental Horticulture Department and one of the
country's leading arboricultural researchers, "Long-favored for use in erosion
control along beaches, the Australian pine tree is now outlawed in many parts of
Florida due to its invasive nature, rapid growth rate, and non-native status. It is
not a true pine tree and is not related to the pines. A straight, upright tree capable
of reaching 70 to 90 feet in height and possessing rough, fissured, dark-gray
bark, Australian pine has what appear to be long, soft, gray/green needles but
these 'needles' are actually .. multi-jointed branchlets, the true leaves being rather
inconspicuous." 12 :-
The trees along Pine Tree Drive range in diameter from approximately 16 inches
to an estimated 42 inches with a predominance of the smaller diameter trees
growing in the narrow medranto the south of 41 st Street. We presume from the
historical records provided to me in 201 O by Dr. Chris Latt (now deceased) that
all the trees are approximately the same age. The large range in trunk diameter
may be readily explained by the difference in root space by the relatively narrow
9-foot wide median south of 41 st Street and the more root friendly 30-foot wide
median north of 41 st Street. Or possibly some of the trees especially on the
south end may have been planted at a later date.
According to the records used to designate the trees as historic, the trees are
approximately 100 years old. Some experts13 say the average life span of
Australian pines in Florida is around 40 to 50 years with some specimens
reportedly living "hundreds of years in parts of their native range."14 The
Australian pines appear to be well over their average age and should be tre,ated
as veteran trees, in our opinion.
According to the Smithsonian Marine Station at Ft. Pierce, "Early on, Australian
pine was also utilized in Florida as a a lumber species and in ditch and canal
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-n14~R ;:inrl Fl -0~01 R
Page 13 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
stabilization. It ultimately proved to be poorly suited to this latter use, again due
to its shallow root system and its tendency to be blown down. More troubling than
its poor utility as a purpose-cultivated species, C. equisetifolia revealed itself to
be a highly invasive species in Florida. The species' ability to colonize disturbed
and nutrient-poor sites, its high fecundity, protracted reproductive season,
broadcast seed dispersal, and tendency to form monospecific stands are traits
that make it a highly competent invader." And the article continues, "Australian
pine is generally the dominant species in competitive interactions with native
Florida vegetation. Dense thickets of Australian pine can outcompete and
displace mangroves and other native coastal vegetation in Florida. There is
evidence that the fallen branchlets are allelopathic in nature, containing chemical
compounds that inhibit growth, survival, or recolonization by native plant
species."15
Predominant Failure The type of tree failures that have been reported along
Pine Tree Drive have been entire trees falling over due to root or basal decay.
According to verbal accounts, five Australian pine trees fell during the hurricanes
of 2004 and 2005. Then a large Australian pine fell on September 15, 201 O
across Pine Tree Drive at 34th Avenue. The cause of this failure on a calm day
also appears to have beeM basal rot. Some small lateral branch failures have
occurred from time to time but these are not documented and appear to be
without incident and minor in nature. Apparently there has been another tree
failure on Pine Tree Drive sometime after the previous 2010-2011 assessment.
However, that incident occurred before the City's previous Urban Forester Mark
Williams was hired so there is no historical information available on the exact
cause of the failure. One more tree failed during Hurricane Irma earlier this
month with some property damage. It is tree #33806 located on the west swale.
Another tree #33384 had a large horizontal crack in the base, a sign of imminent
failure. That tree crack was noticed during our reevaluation of the north section of
trees following Hurricane Irma. The crack did not exist during our pre-hurricane
evaluation of the north section of Pine Tree Drive. Tree #33384 was marked for a
Priority 1 removal.
On Sept. 18, 2017 after the hurricane we were able to observe tree #33806 that
had been partially removed and cut into pieces. Because the basal portion of the
tree and stump had been pulled out of the ground by the time we reached t,he
tree, we could not tell if the entire tree had failed by falling over or if the trunk had
snapped at a weakened area caused by decay higher on the trunk. We did
observe that there was significant basal decay as well as a column of decay
which extended well up into the upper canopy. According to the homeowner who
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arhorist~ FL-R14f>B ~nrl FL-Ofi01 R
Page 14 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
spoke to us, the tree broke at a decayed area about 20 feet above the ground.
Before it was removed the tree was very near the street and we observed few
roots had grown into the street below the asphalt. Although roots growing into the
street below the asphalt cause infrastructure damage and make an uneven
surface, those lateral roots help make the tree more stable. So a more stable tree
will have more lateral roots that will conflict with nearby infrastructure.
Site
There are now 271 trees growing in the right-of-way with trees growing in a
double row in a 30-foot wide median between 41 st Street and 46th Street, and
trees are growing in a single row in an approximately 9-foot wide median
between 41 st Street and 30th Street. There are also approximately 20 Australian
pine trees growing on the west side of the street in the right-of-way between 30th
Street and 34th Street. The narrow median has a curb at the edge of the street
on the east side and no curb on the west side of the median. On the west side of
the street tree roots are lifting the asphalt pavement in some places. On the east
side of the median there is little evidence of root damage to the pavement which
raises the probability that a1 one time the tree roots had been cut for the
installation of the curb. The north end of the double row Qf trees just south of 46th
Street is approximately 4 feet higher than the street grade. This berm gradually
lowers to street grade approaching 41 st Street.
Problems and Defects Observed
Basal Decay and Gall Decay
Basal decay and the somewhat related gall decay provide an indication of the
structural condition of the tree. The condition of the base of the trunk and the
condition of the galls coincides (Figures 5 and 6). Basal decay is difficult to
measure because a small opening at the base of the trunk may be the only
indication that a large decayed area exists. A probe is still the best tool for
locating basal decay. Because so many of the Australian pine trees on Pine Tree
Drive have galls (97 percent of the trees), monitoring decay on the galls is useful.
We have observed that often gall decay is a precursor of trunk decay. Figures 7
and 8 show how basal decay colonizes the lower trunk and Figure 8 shows why
diagnosing basal decay is so difficult. ·
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-OS01 B
Page 15 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Basal Decay
Oecav ureA'Alt •••••••• 29lmi
D«ay-moderate ••••••••••• 41005
D«av-smaiil ••••• 16.lP!'
~ne Aoi-rent •••• 12.-
>u~ected I 1.50%
Figure 5
Figure 7 Basal decay also called root and
butt rot caused by Kretchmaria deusta
appears on the lower part of the trunk and
upper roots . Drawing from Schwarze,
Engels and Mattheck, Fungal Stategies of
Wood Decay in Trees.
Gall Condition
l9.SO!'
SoHd pis -11.4C*
No plls I 3Ull"
Figure 6
Figure 8 Basal decay also called root rot
caused by lnonotus dryadeus appears on
the lower part of the trunk and underside of
roots. Drawing from Schwarze, Engels and
Mattheck, Fungal Stategies of Wood
Decay in Trees.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
o,...,...~..1 1"',.....+;.i;,.....1 11.A,.,,..+"r A ~h"ric-+... C'I _&::1 A i::R <>nrl J:"I _ni:;n1 R
Page 16 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Mallet Test
The simple rubber mallet test is still a useful tool is locating decay on the trunk .
Sixty four percent of the trees had a positive mallet test result on some portion of
the trunk (Figure 9). Sometimes the decay or hollow area was in one section and
one side of the trunk and other times the mallet test showed that there was a
column of decay extending from low in the trunk upward. A column of decay is
usually of greater concern than a localized hollow area or area of decay on the
trunk because it indicates a lack of vertical compartmentalization.
Figure 10
Mallet Test Results
·~-
Figure 9
Health Condition Structural Condition
Figure 11
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arbori~t~ Fl -R14~R ;rnrl Fl -0~01 R
Page 17 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Health and Structural Condition
The health condition (Figure 10) of a
very high percentage, 96 percent, of the
Australian pine trees is good with only 6 0.00,
four percent evaluated as fair. Structural 50.000.
Structural Condition
North and South Sections
52.10"
42.10'1'
condition, however, is not so good 40.00""
because of the widespread decay found 30.00""
on the trunks, basal areas and galls.
Only eight percent of the trees are in
good structural condition while 45
percent are fair and 47 percent are poor
o.ro" I i
(Figure 11 ). Breaking down the data
between the north section and south
section (Figure 12), more trees are in
Figure 12
poor structural condition on the south section.
Good Faor
a North • Scu,,th
Size of Part Likely to Fail.and General Decay Condition of the Tree ... •
Poor
Because of the location of most of the decay in the trunk or basal area, the part
of the tree most likely to fail is the entire trunk or a large branch. Seventy-eight
percent of the tree parts likely to fail are large (Figure 13). . _,,
Breaking down the decayed trees into those that have a column of decay and
further breaking the data down into trees in the north section (with the wide
median) and trees in the south section (with the narrow median), 26.1 percent of
the north trees have a column of decay while 44.7 percent of the trees south of
41 st Street had a column of decay (Figure 14).
Size of Part Likely to Fail
71 .2111'
Prevalence in % of Trees with
Column of Decay
Medium -20.lO!ll
SmoR I 1 smi:
Figure 13 Figure 14
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-O!i01 B
Page 18 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Likelihood of Failure
Likelihood of Failure
Imminent
-I'" 1% •
Improbable
"'
--------------------
Figure 15
60.00"
sa.oo"
40.00"
30.00"
20.00"
10.00"
Q_(X)"
. ; ,,.,
8.40!I
.0.70ll
Improbable
Failure Probability
North and South Sections
Pa&.sbte ProbotN
• No rt~ •South
Figure 16
Daniel Lippi and. Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
1.70"'iJ.OOll
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 19 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
The likelihood of failure of the tree or part of the tree is another measurement of
risk. Figure 15 shows that Probable Risk of Failure and Possible Risk of Failure
are nearly the same. However when looking at the Failure Probability based
upon the north section and the south section (Figure 16), the south section has
52.6 percent "Probable" compared to 37.8 percent "Probable" in the north
section. Again our data is showing increased risk in the south section.
r ... .
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rn~rrl r.ArtifiArl M~dAr Arhnri~tc: !=I -~1 A.i:\R ~nrl !=I .()i:\()1 R
Page 20 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Maintenance Recommended
100.00J(,
93.73"
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
S0.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
to.00%
End Weig tt fnority l
Reductiai ' Rem011e
-1f-theseirees· are not
going to be aggressively
reduced, then most should
be removed.
-------
3.32% 2.21% ----0.37"
Pnority 2 None Pnority 1
Rem011e rea>mmended Prune
0.00%
Prionty 2
Prune
-------------. ---~~-----
·Figure 17 -
Maintenance Recommende~
When examining the
maintenance or work
recommended for all the trees,
only 3.69 percent of the trees (1 O
trees) were recommended for
removal (Figure 17). And 93.73
percent of the trees were
recommended for aggressive,
significant end weight branch
reduction pruning. The caveat
here is there must be significant
branch end weight reduction in
the realm of 50 percent of the
5 .00"
5 001'
4 .001'
3.001'
2.001'
UD1'
0.00'1
Removal and Pruning Recommendation
Not including End Weight Reduction Pruning
• .I_
Pnorttv l Pnortty2 Pnontv 1 Prune PrlOrlt\l l Ptune
Rem we nta>mmonded
• North •South
Figure 18
crown. If this aggressive pruning cannot be done soon, then we recommend that
most of the trees, especially those with a high risk score and/or a column of
decay be removed. Figure 18 is an enlargement of the different maintenance
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists Fl -n14FlR ;:mrl Fl -OF\01 R
Page 21 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
recommendations after the End Weight Reduction Pruning is removed from the
graph. Most of the removals are on the south section . The high number of Priority
1 Prune are to remove hangers in the north section following the hurricane . No
dead branches were observed during the current evaluation while previous
assessments found dead branches over the street to be a significant problem .
Risk Rating Distribution
The distribution of the risk scores in Figure 19 shows that the relatively high
rating of 13 included the largest number of trees of any single rating. These
scores alone do not always warrant removal or other maintenance treatment. But
the ranking is another way of viewing the cumulative scores of several individual
defects.
Discussion
-----------.---------------
Jo.
· Risk Rating Distribution
... ~:I : I
~ 14 r-2.2tl"
t 13 --------------------· 35.10%
-§, 12 ·---· 7.~ i: 11 u
~ 10
~ 9
~ 8
-§,
i: 7
6
------• 11.l 15.10%
·----... -----~9.20% 2 .2~
1 4.80%
I 2.2Q%
s • 0.70%
0 .00%
Figure 19
10.00" 15.00% 20.00% 25.00" 30.00% 35.00" 40.00 % J
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care , Inc
Board Certifier! Master Arbori~t~ F L-n14SB anrl F L -OS01 A
Page 22 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
The Australian pines along Pine Tree Drive in Miami Beach have survived many
years and are in healthy condition, but it is important to remember that all trees
have a lifespan. Most of these trees will not fail from declining health. Rather
structural failures will be the demise of these historic trees. The Australian pine
trees will eventually break apart or tip over. This structural failure is from large
crowns on compromised trunks and trunk bases. This falling-apart process can
be delayed significantly with proper crown management. According to what we
have been observing over the past seven years, the Australian pines are too big,
too heavy, too sprawling for the deteriorating trunks and trunk bases and the
restricted root space south of 41 st Street. To avoid breaking apart or falling over,
these Australian pines should not be 50 to 60 feet tall but rather maintained at a
height closer to 30 feet tall if their trunks are going to support the crowns.
Aggressive crown reduction is not an unusual pruning treatment for healthy
veteran trees. Ideally it would be best for the trees for crews to perform the crown
reduction annually at the rate of approximately 20 to 25 percent. However, we
have lost seven years waiting for the initial significant crown reduction pruning
that was requested in our 2010/2011 report. When the pruning was performed, it
was inadequate and did not solve any of the structural problems we described.
Based upon this experience, it is very unlikely that annual pruning could be a
viable option over a period of years.
The maintenance recommended has a very high percentage of trees that we
recommend aggressive end >deight reduction pruning on all lateral and vertical
branches. Reduction should be approximately 50 to 60 percent. The trees are
healthy and can very likely tolerate that much crown removal. These trees are
gradually collapsing and failing at a relatively high rate when considering
catastrophic consequences on this very busy street. If the reductions will not be
50 to 60 percent as we recommend, then in our opinion the trees should be
removed. After two previous reports in which crown reduction has been strongly
recommended, one light crown reduction has been done and that was only
recently. This is our third report and our advice is unequivocal to aggressively
reduce the crowns or remove the trees.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 23 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Conflict Between Arborist Recommendation and Tree Ordinance
It is very likely the tree crews contracted to prune the Australian pines on Pine
Tree Drive in January, 2017 were cautious not to prune too much because the
Miami-Dade County Tree Ordinance specifically follows the latest version ANSI
A300 Pruning Standards, the version in effect at the time of pruning.
The old ANSI A300 Standards -The ANSI A300 Pruning Standards in effect
since 2008 specifically limited pruning to not more than 25 percent:
5.5.3 Not more than 25 percent of the foliage should be removed within an
annual growing season. The percentage and distribution of foliage to be
removed shall be adjusted according to the plant's species, age, health,
and site.
5.5.4 Not more than 25 percent of the foliage of a branch or limb should
be removed when it is cut back to a lateral. That lateral should be large
enough to assume apical dominance.
r
Even though "the percentage and distribution of foliage to be removed shall be
adjusted according to the plant's species, age, health and site," the "not more
than 25 percent of foliage" was interpreted to be the maximum allowed under any
circumstances. . , ""
New ANSI A300 Standards -Fortunately, the new ANSI A300 Pruning
Standards released this year (2017) clarify and remove the "25 percent" rule.
According to the new revised Pruning Standards, "These were both advisory
'should' statements with the understanding that 25 percent may be too much or
too little, depending upon the tree and the objectives." The new standards go on
to say, "Though not the intent, 25 percent was often considered to be the
maximum allowable amount regardless of other factors."16
The new Standards continue, "The 2017 revision removes the 25 percent
guideline, and provides the arborist with the flexibility to exercise professional
judgement in determining pruning amount based upon 'species, size, age,
condition and site.'". The pruning amount can be expressed as an estimat~d
percentage of foliage to be removed from certain locations, number of pruning
cuts of certain sizes or types or by other means."17
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rni:irrl r.i:>rtifii:>rl Mi:ic::ti:>r Arhnric::k i::1 -~1.d.i:;R i:inrl i::1 _ni:;n1 R
Page 24 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Reduction Pruning The trees along Pine Tree Drive must be managed as the
aging veteran trees that they are. Dr. Kim Coder, arboriculture professor at the
University of Georgia, writes articles and speaks regularly to Florida arborists
about maintenance of aging veteran trees. In addition to structural problems
caused by sprawling branches and decay, Dr. Coder says
veteran trees also have:1a
• reduced photosynthesis
• vascular problems
• increased sapwood respiration
Coder goes on to describe how branch end weight reduction and crown size
reduction achieve the goals of reducing risk of structural failure and improving
vascular pathways. He adds that
branch reductions "should be timed
so that a
number of years occur between
treatments."19 In other words
reducing the crown size and spread of
aging trees will reduce riskrof failure
and reduce vascular probl ms caused
by damage to long vascular .
pathways. But crown reduction must
be done carefully. Pruning -that
removes too many leaves, which
produce carbohydrates, and
branches, where carbohydrates are
stored, can weaken a tree.
Our preferred method of mitigation
was in 2010/2011, 2014 and now is
crown reduction which can reduce
the forces placed on the trunk and
base of the tree by wind events,
excessive lean or long, sprawling
lateral branches. Crown reduction
can be even more useful where
more of the trees exhibit higher
probability of failure and root space
is limited for the trees such as in the
Figure 20 This Australian pine at 41 st Street had
it trunk broken years previously likely in a wind
event. It is now about the size we recommend for
Pine Tree Drive. Veteran trees tend to become
smaller and more wind resistant through random
limb failures . We can assist this natural process
through crown reduction pruning.
9 foot wide median south of 41 st Street.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists Fl -n14flR ::inrl Fl -Of\01 R
Page 25 of 29
Conclusions
September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Aggressive crown reduction pruning is still the primary maintenance tool for
prolonging the life of this slowly decaying tree population. End weight reduction
pruning will reduce the stress of excessively large crowns on the lower trunk.
Even trees that have some signs of basal decay will benefit from end weight
reduction pruning to increase their stability.
Of course there is a balance between not enough pruning and too much. Not
removing enough branch end weight will not significantly reduce the risk as is the
current situation. Removing too much end weight from the trunks and branches
can impact the health of the trees by removing leaves where carbohydrates are
produced and young branches where the carbohydrates are stored for future use
by the tree. The more aggressive end weight reduction pruning we call for should
be carefully supervised and monitored by us or a qualified arborist who is a
Board Certified Master Arborist to assure the correct dose of pruning is done. If
left unmonitored, many tree pruning crews will not remove sufficient branch end
weight as is the current sitUation or they may remove lower branches not end
weight. And when pruned incorrectly, this lions tailing or ewer-lifting type pruning
can actually make the trees more prone to failure.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rn::irrl r.ArtifiArl M::i~tAr Arhnri~t~ Fl -R14!=\R :::mrl Fl -0!=\01 R
Page 26 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Appendix A Definitions
Basal Decay --(also called Butt Rot or Butt Decay) decay caused by fungi that
invade the lower trunk from below and root crown area of a tree.
Codominant Leaders -a tree with multiple trunks often beginning as a single
leader and dividing .into two or more leaders of similar size higher up on the
trunk. Codominant leaders are considered a structural defect because they can
be prone to failure (splitting)
Compartmentalization -the ability of a tree to isolate (wall off) damage and
decay and continue to grow around the damaged area. Trees that are good
compartmentalizers are better able to withstand damage from injuries such as
pruning cuts, gashes, lightning strikes, etc.
Condition -an evaluation of a tree's structure and health
Critical Root Zone -this an area around a tree where roots must be protected
and is another term for Tree Protection Zone
DBH -diameter at breast height, a measurement of a tree's diameter usually
measured approximately four and one half feet above the ground
Dripline -the outer edge of a tree canopy
End Weight Reduction Pruning -A recommended pruning method that
reduces (subordinates) cddominant leaders and large side branches by reducing
their size from the outside in. Reduction pruning is often he preferred method of
taking weight off the ends of branches versus the commonly utilized but
undesirable method known as "lion tailing" which removes interior branches and
keeps only the branches ·out at the end creating instability and increasing risk of
branch or trunk failure.
Epicormic sprouts -Excessive sprouting. Short twigs and small leaves growing
along the upper surface of one or more main branches. The presence of
epicormic sprouts is an indication of poor tree health, over-pruning, and/or a
weakened tree.
Reduction Pruning -see End Weight Reduction Pruning
Resistance drill -a diagnostic tool that utilizes a 1 /8-inch diameter drill bit to
measure decay inside a tree trunk or branch by measuring and graphing the
resistance of the drill bit as it moves through the wood.
Root Flare -also called Root Crown --the area at the base of the tree trunk
that becomes wider (flares out) where roots grow horizontally in the soil. The
individual root flares are where the roots are connected to the base of the tcee
trunk.
Root Plate -a circular area with an outer boundary that is usually considered to
be a distance from the tree trunk that is three times the diameter of the tree.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B
Page 27 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
Certification of Performance
We, Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi, certify that:
Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the
structural failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do
not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below
ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy, safe or
adequately protected under all circumstances or for a specified period of time.
Likewise, remedial, protective and mitigating treatments and
recommendations cannot be guaranteed.
We 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 party or parties involved.
We certify that all the statements made in this report are true, complete and
correct to the best of our knowledge and belief and are made in good faith.
The analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are our own and are
based on current scientific procedures and facts.
Our analysis, opinions and conclusions were developed and this report has
been prepared according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices.
Our compensation is not contingent upon the reportin•g of a predetermined
conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party nor upon the
results of the assessrpent,:.-the attainment of stipulated results or the
occurrence of any subsequent events.
There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or
deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future.
We reserve the right to change our reports/opinions on the basis of new or
different evidence.
Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
We further certify that we are members in good standing of the International
Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and the Florida Urban Forestry Council and are ISA
Board Certified Master Arborists FL-61458 and FL-0501 B and Chuck is an ASCA
Registered Consulting Arborist #443.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Rn~rrl r.ArtifiArl M~~tAr Arhnri~t~ Fl -~1 <!1.i;R ~nrl Fl .ni;n1 R
Page 28 of 29 September 24, 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
References
1 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 Risk Assessment Part 9 Tree, Shrub, and
Other Woody Plant Management Standard Practices (Tree Risk Assessment a. Tree Structure
Assessment), 2011.
2 Thomas Smiley, Nelda Matheny and Sharon Lilly, Best Management Practices Tree Risk
Assessment, International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, Illinois, 2011.
3 Jerry Bond, Urban Tree Health: A Practical and Precise Estimation Method, Urban Forest
Analytics, LLC, 2012.
4 American National Standards Institute (ANSI} A300 Pruning, American National Standard for
Tree Care Operations Tree, Shrub and Other Woody Plant Maintenance, Standard Practices
(Pruning) Part I,
2017
5 Dr. Ed Gilman, An Illustrated Guide to Pruning, 3rd Edition, Delmar Cengage Learning, 2012
6 Francis W.M.R. Schwarze, Diagnosis and Prognosis of the Development of Wood Decay in
Urban Trees, En Spec Environment and Risk, Australia, 2008. p. 196.
7 F.W.M.R. Schwarze, J. Engels, and C. Mattcheck, Fungal Strategies of Wood Decay in Trees,
Springer, Germany, 2000, pp. 133-137.
8 Dr. Wayne Sinclair and Dr. Hmyard-Lyon, Diseases of Trees and Shrubs, Second Edition,
Cornell University Press, Ithaca pp. 206-207.
9 Dr. James R. Clark and Dr. Nelda P. Matheny, A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of
Hazard Trees in Urban Areas, 2nd edition, International Society of Arboriculture, 1994, pp. 37 -
57.
10 Pinetree Drive History Roadway, Miami Beach Historic Site Designation Report, Prepared
by City of Miami Beach Planning Department, Design, Preservation & Neighborhood Planning
Division, February 28, 2001, Adopted June 6, 2001 (Ordinance No. 2001-3310)
11 Ibid. p. 19.
12 Dr. Ed Gilman and Dr. Dennis Watson, Casuarina spp.: Australian Pine, University of Florida
publication ENH288, 2007.
13 Elfers S.C. 1988. Element Stewardship Abstract for Casuarina equisetifolia. The Nature
Conservancy. Unpublished report prepared for The Nature Conservancy on Australian pine.
Winter Park, FL. from the website downloaded Oct. 30, 2010.
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care, Inc
Bnard Certified Master Arhnrists Fl -R14~R ~nrl Fl -n~n1 R
Page 29 of 29 September 24 , 2017
Pine Tree Drive Tree Risk Assessment
Tree Risk Assessment Report
14 Linda Conway Dueve r from the Floridata website http://www florjdata com/ref/c/casu eQu.cfm
downloaded Oct. 30, 2010. Linda is a conservation ecologist with nearly 30 years experience in
resource inventory/evaluation and natural area management.
15 Smithsonian Marine Station at Ft. Pierce http:Uwww.sms.si.edu/irlspec/
casuarjna eQuisetifolia.htm Website downloaded Oct. 30, 201 O
16 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 Pruning , American National Standard for
Tree Care Operations Tree, Shrub and Othe r Woody Plant Maintenance , Standard Practices
(Pruning) Part I, 2017 , p. 29 .
17 Ibid., p. 29
18 Dr. Kim Coder, University of Georgia, School of Forest Resources , Athens , GA , Manag ing
Tree Aging , Arborist News , June , 2005, pp . 36 -40.
19 Ibid., p . 40.
r .... .
Daniel Lippi and Chuck Lippi
Advanced Tree Care , Inc
Brnmi CertifiArl M~stAr Arhorists F L -n14f18 ~nrl F L -Of101 B