Start with the drawing note: confirm that each plant to be moved is shown at its original and its new location, under one tag that matches the transplant list, and that the demolition plan does not mark the same plant for removal. Then check that the root pruning lead time, the transplanting seasons, the protection barriers, the soil and percolation tests at both sites, the pit and setting details, the staking and guying details, the guarantee, and the restoration of the removal site kept in the issued Section 32 96 00 agree with the drawings, the schedule, and Sections 32 05 33, 32 93 00, and 32 92 23.
Assemble the review package
Gather the existing conditions and tree survey with tags, species, caliper, height, and canopy spread, the demolition plan, the tree protection and staging plans with access routes and any holding area, the planting plan and plant schedule showing the new locations, the transplant pit, setting, mulch, and staking and guying details, the grading plans at both sites, the underground and overhead utility plans at the removal site, the new site, and along the moving route, the irrigation plan or the note on how moved plants will be watered, the soil and geotechnical reports, the construction schedule and phasing plan, and the issued Section 32 96 00 with Sections 02 41 00, 31 00 00, 32 05 33, 32 93 00, the turf sections, and the irrigation section the project issues. Follow the largest tree from its tag on the survey to its new pit and its staking detail before assuming the others match.
WBDG publishes UFGS 32 96 00: Transplanting Exterior Plants as a public guide-specification reference (accessed November 10, 2026). Use your project’s issued specification and amendments for the actual comparison; the guide specification does not automatically govern your project. The checklist below is an original suggested review workflow, not a reproduction of the UFGS requirements.
Eight checks to run against the issued set
Use one record per location or system. The CSV contains the same eight prompts plus fields for source revisions, observed evidence, the review owner, the decision, and closure references.
| Check | Sources to compare | Question to resolve |
|---|---|---|
| Original and new locations on the drawings | Opening drawing note (original and new locations delineated for each plant) + Plant Material Identification (tagged and/or shown on drawings) + Layout (relocate as shown; adjustment only with Contracting Officer approval) + Transplanting Plan shop drawing (existing and proposed locations; common and botanical names, classification, caliper, height) + Obstructions Above or Below Ground + demolition, survey, and planting plans | Is each plant to be moved shown at both its original and its new location under one tag, as the drawing note requires, rather than left to tagging in the field, does the transplant list on the drawings give the names, caliper, and height the Transplanting Plan repeats, does the demolition plan avoid marking the same plants for removal, and since the obstruction adjustment shop drawings are not in the Submittals list, has the specifier added them? |
| Candidate size, method, equipment, and root pruning | Plant Material Preparation bracket (wire balled and burlapped, boxed, bare rooted, or spaded) + Root Pruning (lead time; root ball size to ANSI/ANLA Z60.1) + Time and Conditions note (root pruning lead time for specimen trees) + Palms + Equipment product data + Photographs + license and tree relocation references + Permits (overhead lines) + tree survey and access routes | Is a method kept for the large canopy and specimen plants that the sizes on the survey and the access routes can support, are overhead lines, gates, and turning radii along the moving route checked for the root ball and the equipment, and since the article’s default root pruning lead time is shorter than the lead time the note recommends for specimen trees, does the construction schedule start root pruning early enough for the trees the drawings call specimens? |
| Seasons, same-day moves, and holding | Deciduous and Evergreen Plant Material Time blanks + Time and Conditions note (local agricultural office) + Transplanting Conditions (stop work in drought, wet, or frozen conditions; new site excavated before removal; proposed times submitted for a variance) + Time Limitation (dig to install the same day; boxing or heeling in) + Protection of Plant Material During Transplanting + phasing plan and schedule | Are the deciduous and evergreen windows filled from local advice and matched by the schedule, does the phasing plan have the new site graded and its pit dug before each plant is removed, so the same-day move the section requires is possible, is a holding area for boxed or heeled-in plants shown on the staging plan where phasing prevents same-day moves, and since proposed transplanting times have no submittal item, has one been added? |
| Protection before and during construction | Protection of Plant Material to be Transplanted (tagging, metal pole and netting barrier set as a diameter from the outside of the trunk, drip line exception, watering until irrigation service) + Site Preparation Protection (fence no closer to trees than the drip line; access confined to areas indicated) + Protecting Existing Vegetation (barricades at the removal and installing sites; damage assessed by a state certified arborist under the National Arborist Association’s tree valuation guideline) + tree protection and staging plans | Is the protection barrier drawn around each plant to be moved and each plant to be preserved, and since one article sets it as a diameter measured from the outside of the trunk with a drip line exception and the other at no closer than the drip line, which rule governs, are the equipment and vehicle access areas indicated, as Site Preparation requires, and since the tree valuation guideline is not in the References article, has the specifier named the edition and the guide that governs damage assessment? |
| Utilities, soil and percolation tests, and topsoil matching | Underground Utilities (verified and marked at both sites) + Soil Test (both growing areas; location map; sodium adsorption ratio printed as “Sodium Absorption Ratio”) + Percolation Test (determination of a drainage system or soil penetrant) + Topsoil note and article (new site topsoil matched to the original site) + Soil Conditioners and Lime (hydrated or burnt lime bracket with the limestone default) + Finish Grade and Topsoil (Section 31 00 00) + utility and grading plans | Are the underground utilities at both sites and along the route shown and clear of the new pits, does the drawing set or the specification provide a subsoil drain detail or soil penetrant for the case where the percolation test fails, is topsoil matching at the new site possible with the source the topsoil bracket keeps, and has the Lime article been edited so its calcium carbonate equivalent matches the lime type kept, since the default is the note’s value for limestone? |
| Pits, setting, watering, and mulch | Plant Pits (depth equal to the root ball; sloped sides; no cylindrical pits) + Setting Plant Material (set at the grade it was grown; root flare visible; metal, wood, and synthetic material removed; burlap folded back; earth berm) + Plant Material Preparation (north side marked and kept) + Mycorrhizal Fungi Inoculum brackets + Watering + Placing Mulch + Finishing edging + transplant pit and mulch details + grading plans | Does the drawing set use a transplant pit detail that matches the article, with sloped sides and the depth set by the root ball, rather than the new-plant pit detail from Section 32 93 00, does the new finished grade let each plant be set at the grade it was grown with the root flare visible, does the detail remove wire baskets and other materials the article requires removed, and are the edging shape and the mulch extent drawn, since the Finishing article asks for the planted area to be edged as indicated? |
| Staking, guying, anchors, and flags | Staking and Guying note and article (only when unstable or exposed to high wind) + One, Two, and Three Bracing or Ground Stakes bands + Deadmen or Earth Anchors + Flags (visible to pedestrians) + Staking and Guying Material articles (Guying Wire to ASTM A580/A580M, which the References article titles Stainless Steel Wire; cable, chafing guards, turnbuckles, deadmen, metal anchors) + staking details + mowing areas + Section 32 05 33 Tree Supports and removal certificate | Do the staking details follow the size bands the article sets, with deadmen or earth anchors for the largest calipers, are ground stakes kept out of areas to be mowed, as the article requires, are the guy flags placed where walks and play areas pass, has the guying wire been specified to a standard that matches galvanized steel wire, and are product data added for the guying, turnbuckles, anchors, and deadmen that the Submittals article does not list? |
| Guarantee, establishment, restoration, and clean up | Guarantee (period bracket; replacement by the share of dead branches; replacement season blanks) + Plant Establishment Period (same as newly planted exterior plants under Section 32 05 33) + Section 32 05 33 Removal of Dying or Dead Plants + Section 32 93 00 Guarantee brackets (“Transplanted plants require no guarantee”) + Restoration (rutted or dead turf sodded) + Backfill Removal Site Plant Pits (percent compaction with no test method; turf replaced with sod under Section 32 92 23) + Related Requirements (32 92 23 bracketed) + Clean Up | Where Section 32 96 00 is issued, has the “Transplanted plants require no guarantee” option in Section 32 93 00 been deleted, which of the two dead plant tests in this section and Section 32 05 33 governs replacement, is Section 32 92 23 issued, since the restoration articles require sod under it without a bracket, are the removal site pits shown on the demolition or grading plan with a backfill compaction test method named, since the article gives a percent without one, and do the replacement planting season blanks agree with the transplanting windows? |
Worked example: oaks drawn only at their new home, a short root pruning window, and a guarantee waived elsewhere
Illustrative example: a headquarters courtyard renovation relocates six mature oaks and a row of palms to new islands in an expanded parking lot. The planting plan shows the new locations with tags, but the demolition plan marks the same oaks “remove” and the survey tags differ from the planting plan tags. The construction schedule starts root pruning a few weeks before the move, shorter than the lead time the issued Section 32 96 00 keeps and much shorter than its note advises for specimen trees. The transplant pit detail is the new-plant pit from Section 32 93 00, the staking detail shows ground stakes in a mowed lawn island, the electrical plan routes a lighting conduit through one new pit, Section 32 93 00 keeps the bracket “Transplanted plants require no guarantee”, and the removal pits are to be sodded under Section 32 92 23, which the project does not issue.
Ask the landscape architect to show each oak and palm at both locations under one tag, to correct the demolition plan, to issue a transplant pit detail that follows the Plant Pits and Setting articles, and to replace the ground stakes in the mowed island with bracing stakes or below-grade anchors. Ask the electrical engineer to reroute the conduit clear of the new pit, and ask the contractor and the landscape architect to resequence the schedule so root pruning starts with the lead time the specimen trees need. Ask the specifier to delete the no-guarantee option from Section 32 93 00, to settle one dead plant test with Section 32 05 33, to issue Section 32 92 23 or change the restoration to the turf section the project uses, and to name the compaction test for the removal pits.
Avoid a false conflict
Section 32 96 00 covers moving existing plants on the site; new plants follow Section 32 93 00 and the planting guide, establishment and dead plant replacement after the move follow Section 32 05 33 and the landscape establishment guide, turf restoration follows Sections 32 92 19, 32 92 23, and 32 92 26 and the turf guide, plants removed rather than moved follow Section 02 41 00, and topsoil placement and compaction follow Section 31 00 00, so check those before calling a requirement missing. The section has no anti-desiccant article although its Transplanting Plan names one, no submittal for obstruction shop drawings, proposed transplanting times, the percolation determination, the arborist’s qualifications, or most staking and guying materials, and no test method for its removal pit compaction. Its guying wire cites a stainless steel wire standard for galvanized wire, its Lime article pairs lime types with the limestone default, and its tree valuation guideline is not in its References article. Sizes, seasons, and methods are judgments the notes leave to the design professional, the local agricultural office, and the tree mover, and tree health and valuation belong to a certified arborist. The current guide section cites ANSI/ANLA Z60.1, ASTM A580/A580M, C602, D4427, D4972, D5539, and D6155, TCIA A300P1 and Z133, and the USDA Kellogg Soil Survey Laboratory Methods Manual; confirm the editions your project invokes.
When requirements disagree, follow the project’s document-control and clarification process. Do not assume that drawings always override specifications, or the reverse. Identify the exact sources and request an authorized decision.
Close the issue across the affected documents
Record the location or tag, drawing and specification references, issue dates, observed difference, and the decision needed. Assign an owner and keep the item open until the response identifies the governing requirement. Check the revised drawings and specification references together; a response email alone may leave the issued package inconsistent.
For the overall process, use the guide to drawing and specification conflicts. Mark an inapplicable checklist row with a reason, and distinguish a verified correction from a question that still needs design information.
Where Groundbook fits
Groundbook’s drawing and specification review helps investigate potential disagreements in the documents you supply. Include the relevant specification sections and drawing references, then verify the cited evidence with the responsible reviewers before acting on a finding.