Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTHE DISTRICT @ CAMPUS WEST - PDP - PDP120003 - CORRESPONDENCE - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARING (20)• Local observations of Swedish Columnar aspens growing along north facing walls were provided in the photographs. Again it is assumed they are growing significantly below photosynthetic maximum. • Species vary greatly in shoot growth response to light intensity. • In a study of 4 broadleaf species of trees (two birch and two maples) shoot growth was not adversely affected by reducing light intensity to 45% of maximum. However, further reduction in light intensity caused decreases in various aspects of shoot growth. One very shade tolerant species of maple had maximum height growth between 45%-13% of maximum. All Species had more height growth at 45% of maximum compared to 100% of maximum. • In another study light intensity had only limited effect on shoot elongation of American Linden seedlings, which is considered to be a shade tolerant species. • Local observations of broadleaf trees growing in shade to varying degrees are that they may be as tall, have thinner crowns and twigs and in some cases orient growth to a zone of higher light that makes them appear to lean toward the light. In very dense shade height growth can be slowed considerably and crowns are thin. • Trees use carbohydrates produced in photosynthesis for physiological processes of growth, reproduction, storage and defense. As less and less carbohydrates are produced the tree makes adjustments to the allocation within its genetic limits. Low light stress can be tolerated by shade tolerant species. At the extreme limit that a species can tolerate, growth may be very slow and energy reserves may not be adequate. This would be at or below the compensation point. The most shade tolerant trees have the best adaptability to grow and function in low light environment's • When trying to determine the degree of impact from long term exposure to lower light levels on different species in urban plantings, most often shade tolerance ratings and empirical observations are used to infer results. The best observations are those that most closely replicate the site being evaluated. The trees selected for planting have the primary tree selection characteristic identified for this site to varying degrees so do have potential to grow and function at this location. Performance is stated as potential because there are not locations to evaluate that replicate what is being proposed for 3 of the 4 species being used, and in the case of Swedish columnar aspen two sites were evaluated with different wall heights. With littleleaf linden one shade site with over topping trees was evaluated and one close planting to a east facing wall was identified. The lindens were a different cultivar of littleleaf linden than used on the project. Potential tree performance and function is inferred from species tolerance ratings, literature reports and a some field evaluations. There could be variance. This is a standard requirement that is typically addressed in a note of the plans. How will initially having no light (direct light) on trees at first affect photosynthesis and growth rate. I provide the following information taken from these and other sources and a few of my empirical observations. Physiology of trees by Kramer and Kozlowski, 1960 Growth and Development of Trees by Kozlowski Volume 1, 1971 • In the dark there is no photosynthesis • With added light increments a compensation point is reached at which photosynthesis and respiration are equal and there is no net carbon dioxide exchange. • With additional light above the compensation point, photosynthesis is proportional to light intensity until light saturation occurs, and the ascending part of a photosynthesis curve then becomes horizontal • Three broadleaf trees in one study achieved maximum photosynthesis at one-third or less of full light and any further increase in light intensity produced no further increase in photosynthesis. Other broadleaf trees reach maximum rates of photosynthesis at relatively low light intensities • Three species considered to be shade tolerant to varying degrees are shown to be at around 40% of observed maximum photosynthesis at 300 foot candles. One species was at 100% observed maximum photosynthesis at 1000 foot candles while two others were at around 70%-85% of observed maximum at this level of light. • Shade -tolerant trees make better use of light of low intensity than did trees described as sun trees. • In one accepted usage, of the term shade tolerance, it is defined as capacity to endure shade; a tree which reaches maximum photosynthesis at relatively low light intensity is tolerant while one whose rate of photosynthesis continues to increase with each added increment of light up to full sun is considered intolerant. • Shade is considered a stress just as drought is, and trees that have adaptations can better deal with it. • Shade tolerant trees can grow in light levels below photosynthetic maximum. Some shade tolerant trees can grow under a forest canopy. • The Delaware Plant partnership provides this information on Norway maple, "Today Norway maple is a frequent invader of the urban and suburban forests. Its extreme shade tolerance especially when young, has allowed it to penetrate beneath an intact forest canopy". • Local observations of Littleleaf Linden were made growing in a lot of shade from the over topping canopies of Siberian Elm and have been provided in photographs. It is assumed they are growing significantly below photosynthetic maximum for this species. In your professional opinion, what is the typical maximum radius for the four trees scheduled for planting on the north face of the building? Crimson Sentry Norway Maple Height: 30'-35' Width: 12'-15' Radius: 6'-7.5' Source: Fort Collins Wholesale Nursery Descriptive Guide Corinthian Littleleaf Linden Height: 45' Width: 15' Radius: 7.5' Source: Manual of Woody Landscape Plants by Michael A. Dirr The photo I provided of a putative Corinthian Littleleaf Linden appears to be close to these dimensions. Swedish Columnar Aspen Height: 30'-40' Width: 10'-15' Radius: 5'-7.5' Source: Fort Collins Wholesale Nursery Descriptive Guide My observations are that crown spread is most often narrower than than listed is the descriptive guide. Pyramidal Hornbeam Height 30'-35' Width: For the cultivar `Columnaris' Dr. Dirr states that it is spire -like but does not give a width dimension. He goes on to discuss that there is confusion in the nursery trade between the cultivar `Columnaris' and one called `Fastigiata'. "It is obvious that there is confusion among upright -growing cultivars or that more than on fastigiated clone is in the trade". The trees of pyramidal hornbeam that I provided in the photos appear to the narrow growing cultivar `Fastigiate that I would estimate could have an eventual crown spread between 10-15 feet. Source: Manual of Woody Landscape plants by Michael Dir and field observations of local specimens. Do you have photos that available that demonstrates successful growth and maturity of the Maple, Hornbeam, and Linden on the north face of a tall structure? I have no additional photos available demonstrating the other species. Previously included is a photo of a Littleleaf Linden growing in shade and another along an east facing wall. Given the high tree density and narrow space on the north side of the building, will an irrigation water delivery system be required to ensure tree survival? Crimson Spire Oak Pyramidal European Hornbeam Swedish Columnar Aspen I i j� t, ` � •J I }.T 1y t t! f jj rri�pp , i ri n e 4 Fyly North facing wall Swedish Columnar Aspen (North facing wall) 41 { Tq a.; { Tq a.; ��♦ •peg. "�y�'K .; f 1., T {+r. 4�t e {a� w` t dti f♦' IA R. a b s 4 ' , �W Ww L`« 4 , ti ■ : » L .\ � - :: - y«Z yg = \�\.� � \ ai a� {Y ,rJ AAA.J ..iq.. Page 1 of 1 Subj: FW: Trees at The District Date: 4/25/2012 11:49:45 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time From: TSHEPARDCa)fcoov.com To: Rvlooez(a)aol.com Hello Rich - I am forwarding this e-mail and attachment from our City Forester, Tim Buchanan to me dated April 20. 2012 regarding the trees to be planted on the north side of the proposed buildings. Linda Ripley referred to the information from the City Forester in her presentation as well as in her response to citizen input. The attachment includes pictures that were presented into the record by one of the citizens, perhaps Mr. Tim Erickson. Please let me know if you have any questions Thanks, Ted From: Tim Buchanan Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 2:39 PM To: Ted Shepard Cc: Ralph Zentz; 'timaerickson@gmail.com'; 'Linda Ripley' Subject: Trees at The District Hi Ted, As a result of some discussion at the hearing for The District on 4-6-12, Linda Ripley asked me to provide you some information about the Forestry review of the project, specifically trees shown to be planted along the north wall. This information is being provided to you, Linda and Tim Erickson. The north wall of The District has a narrow planting area in the shade. The applicant desires to screen the wall with trees. The primary criterion for tree selection at this site includes narrow crown form height to screen the wall and shade tolerance. Forestry staff reviewed and presented tree species to the project landscape architect, which have the characteristics of a narrower crown form and the height to screen the wall, with adaptability to shade. The trees selected for planting along the north wall have all these characteristics to varying degrees, so they do have potential to grow and function on this site. More than one species needs to be used in this area to meet the minimum species diversity standard of 15%. Photos are attached of the five species of trees shown to be used along the north wall. Two site meetings occurred with the project landscape architect and 8 comments were provided through round one and two. Comments and suggestions were acknowledged or incorporated. Forestry staff visited the site separately on two other occasions. A meeting occurred with Mr. Tim Erickson at his request to discuss the trees at The District. Part of this meeting involved making a site visit to the proposed project. Tim Buchanan City Forester 2216361 Wednesday, April 25, 2012 AOL: Rv lopez