Loading...
HazardTreeRemoval_20160610.pdf From:Bob Schroff To:Lien, Kernen Subject:Tree removal requests Date:Friday, May 27, 2016 12:44:20 PM Attachments:Brookacres Risk Assessment Trees 758-760, 776, 975.pdf Hi Kernen, Brookacres completed a full assessment of our area trees by Tree Solution in early 2016. Based upon their input, we have identified 5 trees for which we seek permission for removal. The completed ISA tree risk assessment forms indicating that each of these five trees is considered a high risk are attached. Trees 758, 759, 760 and 975 are all within the stream buffer, and as such we will be required to complete the 2 for 1 replacement of these trees as mitigation. Tree 776 is not in a sensitive area due to slope or stream proximity. In the past year we have completed the removal of two trees within the stream buffer that required mitigation. Trees 762 and 964. The 2 for 1 replacements have been completed in the form of one vine maple, one western red cedar, and two Pacific dogwoods, all of suitable height and trunk diameter to meet requirements. Please let me know if you approve removal of the five trees identified above at your earliest convenience. Thanks, Bob Bob Schroff 16616 76th Avenue W Edmonds, WA 98026 T: 206-235-7306 rschroff@comcast.net Client _______________________________________________________________Date___________________Time_________________ BrookacresHOA01.14.201611:30AM 1660076thAveW-eastoflot175812 Tree species _________________________________________dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Pinusjeffreyi,Jeffreypine38inches<80feet20feet Assessor(s)__________________________________________ Time frame_____________Toolsused______________________________ ScottBaker-PN-0670B,KatieHogan-PN-8078A2yearsVTA,hypsometer Target Assessment move target? number Target Occupancy Target rate ЊΑƩğƩĻ Ћ Α ƚĭĭğƭźƚƓğƌ Ќ Α ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓƷ Ѝ Α ĭƚƓƭƷğƓƷ 1 No No Carsalong76thAveW3 2 Powerlinesalong76thAveW4NoNo 3 4 Site Factors 3otherJeffreypinefailuresjustwest _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None Grade change Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________Recentfailuresandnewexposure Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ S/SW ______ Strong winds Ice Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Vigor Low Normal High None (seasonal) None (dead) Pests_____________________________________________________ Dendroctonusvalensinvicinity________________________________________________________ Nn oe ____________________________________________________________________ Branches Trunk Roots Describe Load Factors Fromwater Wind exposure Protected Full Wind funneling ________________________ Small Medium Large Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense _____________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Mantreesremovedeastoftreesalonowerlinesthreelareinefailureswest ygp;gp Ð Crown and Branches Ð 65 Unbalanced crown LCR ______% Cracks ___________________________________Lightning damage Dead twigs/branches ____% overall Max. dia. ______ Codominant __________________________________Included bark Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ______ ___________________Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Over-extended branches Previous branch failures _______________ Similar branches present Pruning history Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay Crown cleanedThinned Raised Conks Heartwood decay ________________________ Reduced Topped Lion-tailed Flush cuts Other Response growth Failureoflareco-dominantartsintoowerlines/road gpp Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable Possible Probable Imminent Ð Trunk Ð Ð Roots and Root Collar Ð Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling Codominant stems Included bark Cracks Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze Ooze Cavity _____% circ. Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______ Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper Soil weakness _____ ________________________________ Lean° Corrected? Response growth Response growth Failureofco-dominanttrunkduetohighNoconcernsatthistime Main concern(s) Main concern(s) exposure Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable PossibleProbableImminentImprobable PossibleProbableImminent Page 1 of 2 Target number Consequences Impact (from Matrix 1) Imminent Medium Severe Minor of part Target High (from of concern Tree part Matrix 2) <80' <38"1 NoLow TrunkFailure/breakageof co-dominanttrunks <80'2 <38" NoHigh ormaintrunk <80' <15"1 NoLow CanopyFailure/breakageof 2 Partsweaklyattached <80'2 <15"NoLow partsfromrecent exposure 3 4 Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. MediumHigh Imminent UnlikelySomewhat likelyLikelyVery likely UnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likelyLikely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. MinorSevere LowModerateHighExtreme LowModerateHighHigh North LowLowModerateModerate LowLowLowLow Treeisnowveryexposeddueto adjacenttreefailuresandremovalsbyPUD.Duetotherecentfailures ofadjacentJeffreypinetrees,thelikelihoodofthistreefailinghas greatlyincreased. _____________________________________________________________________ ________ Removeorshortentowildlifesnagtoheightoutofrangeoftargets(lessthan20feet)Low ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ Low Moderate High Extreme 1 2 3 4 __________________ Low Moderate High Extreme Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason________________________________________________ None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Page 2 of 2 ProjectNo.TS1933 tŷƚƷƚŭƩğƦŷƭΑƩĻĻАЎБ Photo1:Lookingwesttowardtree758Αnotecodominantjunctionwithlargeseamofincludedbark(seered arrow). 2940WestlakeAveN(Suite200)Seattle,WA98109Phone206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net ProjectNo.TS1933 tŷƚƷƚŭƩğƦŷƭΑƩĻĻАЎВ Tree 759 Tree 758 Photo1:Lookingwesttowardtree759. 2940WestlakeAveN(Suite200)Seattle,WA98109Phone206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net Client _______________________________________________________________Date___________________Time_________________ BrookacresHOA01.14.201611:30AM 1660076thAveW-eastoflot175912 Tree species _________________________________________dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Pinusjeffreyi,Jeffreypine26.5inches<80feet16feet Assessor(s)__________________________________________ Time frame_____________Toolsused______________________________ ScottBaker-PN-0670B,KatieHogan-PN-8078A2yearsVTA,hypsometer Target Assessment move target? number Target Occupancy Target rate ЊΑƩğƩĻ Ћ Α ƚĭĭğƭźƚƓğƌ Ќ Α ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓƷ Ѝ Α ĭƚƓƭƷğƓƷ 1 No No Carsalong76thAveW3 2 Powerlinesalong76thAveW4NoNo 3 4 Site Factors 3otherJeffreypinefailuresjustwest _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None Grade change Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________Recentfailuresandnewexposure Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ S/SW ______ Strong winds Ice Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Vigor Low Normal High None (seasonal) None (dead) Pests_____________________________________________________ Dendroctonusvalensinvicinity________________________________________________________ Nn oe ____________________________________________________________________ Branches Trunk Roots Describe Load Factors Fromwater Wind exposure Protected Full Wind funneling ________________________ Small Medium Large Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense _____________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Mantreesremovedeastoftreesalonowerlinesthreelareinefailureswest ygp;gp Ð Crown and Branches Ð 40 Unbalanced crown LCR ______% Cracks ___________________________________Lightning damage Dead twigs/branches ____% overall Max. dia. ______ 5 Codominant __________________________________Included bark Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ______ ___________________Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Over-extended branches Previous branch failures _______________ Similar branches present Pruning history Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay Crown cleanedThinned Raised Conks Heartwood decay ________________________ Reduced Topped Lion-tailed Flush cuts Other Response growth Failureofbranchesintoowerlines/road p Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable Possible Probable Imminent Ð Trunk Ð Ð Roots and Root Collar Ð Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling Codominant stems Included bark Cracks Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze Ooze Cavity _____% circ. Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______ Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper Soil weakness _____ ________________________________ Lean° Corrected? Response growth Response growth FailureoftrunkduetohighexposureNoconcernsatthistime Main concern(s) Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable PossibleProbableImminentImprobable PossibleProbableImminent Page 1 of 2 Target number Consequences Impact (from Matrix 1) Imminent Medium Severe Minor of part Target High (from of concern Tree part Matrix 2) <80' <27"1 NoLow TrunkFailure/breakageof co-dominanttrunks <80'2 <27" NoHigh ormaintrunk <80' <15"1 NoLow CanopyFailure/breakageof 2 Partsweaklyattached <80'2 <15"NoLow partsfromrecent exposure 3 4 Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. MediumHigh Imminent UnlikelySomewhat likelyLikelyVery likely UnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likelyLikely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. MinorSevere LowModerateHighExtreme LowModerateHighHigh North LowLowModerateModerate LowLowLowLow Treeisnowveryexposeddueto adjacenttreefailuresandremovalsbyPUD.Duetotherecentfailures ofadjacentJeffreypinetrees,thelikelihoodofthistreefailinghas greatlyincreased. _____________________________________________________________________ ________ Removeorshortentowildlifesnagtoheightoutofrangeoftargets(lessthan20feet)Low ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ Low Moderate High Extreme 1 2 3 4 __________________ Low Moderate High Extreme Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason________________________________________________ None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Page 2 of 2 ProjectNo.TS1933 tŷƚƷƚŭƩğƦŷƭΑƩĻĻАЎВ Tree 759 Tree 758 Photo1:Lookingwesttowardtree759. 2940WestlakeAveN(Suite200)Seattle,WA98109Phone206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net Client _______________________________________________________________Date___________________Time_________________ BrookacresHOA01.14.201611:30AM 1660076thAveW-eastoflot176012 Tree species _________________________________________dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Pinusjeffreyi,Jeffreypine47.5inches<100feet25feet Assessor(s)__________________________________________ Time frame_____________Toolsused______________________________ ScottBaker-PN-0670B,KatieHogan-PN-8078A3yearsVTA,hypsometer Target Assessment move target? number Target Occupancy Target rate ЊΑƩğƩĻ Ћ Α ƚĭĭğƭźƚƓğƌ Ќ Α ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓƷ Ѝ Α ĭƚƓƭƷğƓƷ 1 No No Carsalong76thAveW3 2 Powerlinesalong76thAveW4NoNo 3 No No HOABridge/Landscaping4 4 Site Factors MultipleJeffreypinetreesinsamearea _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None Grade change Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________Recentfailuresandnewexposure Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ S/SW ______ Strong winds Ice Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ Vigor Low Normal High None (seasonal) None (dead) Pests_____________________________________________________ Dendroctonusvalensatbase________________________________________________________ Nn oe ____________________________________________________________________ Branches Trunk Roots Describe Load Factors Fromwater Wind exposure Protected Full Wind funneling ________________________ Small Medium Large Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense _____________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Co-dominanttrunkfailureandtreetoedforsafeturoses ppypp Ð Crown and Branches Ð 15 Unbalanced crown LCR ______% Cracks ___________________________________Lightning damage 4in Dead twigs/branches ____% overall Max. dia. ______ 30 Codominant __________________________________Included bark Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ______ Attoppingpoint ___________________Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Over-extended branches Previous branch failures _______________ Similar branches present Pruning history Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay Crown cleanedThinned Raised Conks Heartwood decay ________________________ Reduced Topped Lion-tailed Flush cuts Other Response growth Failureofbranchesunlikeltostriketarets yg Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable Possible Probable Imminent Ð Trunk Ð Ð Roots and Root Collar Ð Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling Codominant stems Included bark Cracks Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze Ooze Cavity _____% circ. Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______ Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper Soil weakness _____ ________________________________ Lean° Corrected? Poor Response growth Response growth FailureofremainingtrunkduetoweakNoconcernsatthistime Main concern(s) Main concern(s) attachmentpointandbeetledamage Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable PossibleProbableImminentImprobable PossibleProbableImminent Page 1 of 2 Target number Consequences Impact (from Matrix 1) Imminent Medium Severe Minor of part Target High (from of concern Tree part Matrix 2) <100 <47"1 NoMod TrunkFailure/breakageof trunkatco-dom <1002 <47" NoHigh tearoutpoint <100 <47"3 Mod No 2 3 4 Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. MediumHigh Imminent UnlikelySomewhat likelyLikelyVery likely UnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likelyLikely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. MinorSevere LowModerateHighExtreme LowModerateHighHigh North LowLowModerateModerate LowLowLowLow 50%oftreetoreoutatco-dominant union.Severaldominanttreesadjacenttothistreehaverecentlyfailed orbeenremoved.Treeisnowveryexposedandhaslargedefectat atbase.Windsfromthenortharecommoninthisareaandwould likelypushthistreetowardthepowerlinesintheeventoffailure. _____________________________________________________________________ ________ RemoveorshortentowildlifesnagtoheightoutofrangeoftargetsLow ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ Low Moderate High Extreme 1 2 3 4 __________________ Low Moderate High Extreme Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason________________________________________________ None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Page 2 of 2 Project No. TS - 1933 tŷƚƷƚŭƩğƦŷƭ ƩĻĻ АЏЉ Tree 760 Photo 1: Looking east toward tree 760. 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net Risk Assessment Tree 760 05.23.2016 pg. 2 of 2 Photo 2: Co-dominant tear out at base. Arrow points to example of frass from 5ĻƓķƩƚĭƷƚƓǒƭ ǝğƌĻƓƭ beetle, red turpentine beetle. Heavy infestations can lead to decreased wood strength. Beetle activity appeared to be high. 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net Client _______________________________________________________________Date___________________Time_________________ BrookacresHOA01.14.201611:00AM 1660076thAveW-eastoflot177612 Tree species _________________________________________dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Tsugaheterophylla,westernhemlock16.8inches>80feet20feet Assessor(s)__________________________________________ Time frame_____________Toolsused______________________________ ScottBaker-PN-0670B,KatieHogan-PN-8078A2yearsVTA Target Assessment move target? number Target Occupancy Target rate ЊΑƩğƩĻ Ћ Α ƚĭĭğƭźƚƓğƌ Ќ Α ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓƷ Ѝ Α ĭƚƓƭƷğƓƷ 1 No No Lot1-Parcel006931000001004 2 3 4 Site Factors Failuresandremovalstothesouthandeast _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None Grade change Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________Recentadjacenttreefailure/removals Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ S/SW ______ Strong winds Ice Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ 100 Vigor Low Normal High None (seasonal) None (dead) Pests_____________________________________________________ None________________________________________________________ Nn oe ____________________________________________________________________ Branches Trunk Roots Describe Load Factors Wind exposure Protected Full Wind funneling ________________________ Small Medium Large Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense _____________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Severaladacenttreeremovals-tree975nowverexosed jyp Ð Crown and Branches Ð 50 Unbalanced crown LCR ______% Cracks ___________________________________Lightning damage Dead twigs/branches ____% overall Max. dia. ______ Codominant __________________________________Included bark Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ______ ___________________Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Over-extended branches Previous branch failures _______________ Similar branches present Pruning history Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay Crown cleanedThinned Raised Conks Heartwood decay ________________________ Reduced Topped Lion-tailed Flush cuts Other Response growth Naturalbranchsheddinisossiblebutwillnotresentrisktosurroundintarets gppgg Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable Possible Probable Imminent Ð Trunk Ð Ð Roots and Root Collar Ð Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling Codominant stems Included bark Cracks Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze Ooze Cavity _____% circ. Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______ Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper Soil weakness _____ ________________________________ Lean° Corrected? Response growth Response growth PossibletrunkfailureduetohighexposureGrowingonnursestump-failurelikely Main concern(s) Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable PossibleProbableImminentImprobable PossibleProbableImminent Page 1 of 2 Target number Consequences Impact (from Matrix 1) Imminent Medium Severe Minor of part Target High (from of concern Tree part Matrix 2) <90' <17"1 NoHigh RootsFailureduetoweak rooting <80' <17"1 NoMod TrunkFailureduetohigh 2 exposure 3 4 Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. MediumHigh Imminent UnlikelySomewhat likelyLikelyVery likely UnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likelyLikely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. MinorSevere LowModerateHighExtreme LowModerateHighHigh North LowLowModerateModerate LowLowLowLow Hemlockisrecentlyexposedfrom failureandremovalofadjacenttrees.Treeisgrowingonnursestump andhasweakrootingasaresult.Therearenoidealwaystomitigate risk. _____________________________________________________________________ ________ ReducetosnagLow ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ Low Moderate High Extreme 1 2 3 4 __________________ Low Moderate High Extreme Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason________________________________________________ None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Page 2 of 2 Project No. TS - 1933 tŷƚƷƚŭƩğƦŷƭ ƩĻĻ ААЏ Tree 776 Photo 1: Looking east toward tree 776. 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net Risk Assessment Tree 760 05.23.2016 pg. 2 of 2 Photo 2: Base of tree 776 growing on nurse stump. 2940 Westlake Ave N (Suite 200) · Seattle, WA 98109 · Phone 206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net Client _______________________________________________________________Date___________________Time_________________ BrookacresHOA01.14.201612:00PM 1674076thAveW-westoflot10and1197512 Tree species _________________________________________dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Tsugaheterophylla,westernhemlock34inches>80feet30feet Assessor(s)__________________________________________ Time frame_____________Toolsused______________________________ ScottBaker-PN-0670B,KatieHogan-PN-8078A2yearsVTA Target Assessment move target? number Target Occupancy Target rate ЊΑƩğƩĻ Ћ Α ƚĭĭğƭźƚƓğƌ Ќ Α ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓƷ Ѝ Α ĭƚƓƭƷğƓƷ 1 No No Lot10-Parcel006931000010004 2 Lot11-Parcel006931000011004NoNo 3 4 Site Factors Failuresintocreek _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% Aspect _____ Site changes None Grade change Site clearing Changed soil hydrology Root cuts Describe _____________________________________Recentadjacenttreefailure Limited volume Saturated Shallow Compacted Pavement over roots ______% Describe __________________________ S/SW ______ Strong winds Ice Snow Heavy rain Describe______________________________ 100 Vigor Low Normal High None (seasonal) None (dead) Pests_____________________________________________________ None________________________________________________________ Nn oe ____________________________________________________________________ Branches Trunk Roots Describe Load Factors Fromcreek Wind exposure Protected Full Wind funneling ________________________ Small Medium Large Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense _____________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________ Dominantcedartreerecentlfailed-tree975isnowverexosed yyp Ð Crown and Branches Ð 60 Unbalanced crown LCR ______% Cracks ___________________________________Lightning damage Dead twigs/branches ____% overall Max. dia. ______ Codominant __________________________________Included bark Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ______ ___________________Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ. Over-extended branches Previous branch failures _______________ Similar branches present Pruning history Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay Crown cleanedThinned Raised Conks Heartwood decay ________________________ Reduced Topped Lion-tailed Flush cuts Other Response growth Naturalbranchsheddinisossiblebutwillnotresentrisktosurroundintarets gppgg Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable Possible Probable Imminent Ð Trunk Ð Ð Roots and Root Collar Ð Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling Codominant stems Included bark Cracks Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze Ooze Cavity _____% circ. Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______ Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper Soil weakness 5Partially _____ ________________________________ Lean° Corrected? None Fair Response growth Response growth FailureatbaseduetodecayFailureduetodecay,stiltedrootsandsoil Main concern(s) Main concern(s) weakness Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Improbable PossibleProbableImminentImprobable PossibleProbableImminent Page 1 of 2 Target number Consequences Impact (from Matrix 1) Imminent Medium Severe Minor of part Target High (from of concern Tree part Matrix 2) <90' <34"1 NoHigh RootsFailureduetosoil weakness/decay <90'2 <34" NoHigh <90' <34"1 NoMod TrunkFailureduetotrunk 2 decay <90'2 <34"NoMod 3 4 Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix. MediumHigh Imminent UnlikelySomewhat likelyLikelyVery likely UnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likelyLikely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelySomewhat likely UnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikelyUnlikely Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. MinorSevere LowModerateHighExtreme LowModerateHighHigh North LowLowModerateModerate LowLowLowLow Hemlockisrecentlyexposedfrom failureofdominantcedartreejustwest.Therearesignsofadvanced decayatthebaseandactivesoilerosion.Thetreetargetstwohouses. Removalassoonaspossibleisrecommended. _____________________________________________________________________ ________ ReducetosnagLow ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ________ Low Moderate High Extreme 1 2 3 4 __________________ Low Moderate High Extreme Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason________________________________________________ None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________ Page 2 of 2 ProjectNo.TS1933 tŷƚƷƚŭƩğƦŷƭΑƩĻĻВАЎ Photo1:Lookingnorthwesttowardhighrisktree975.Treetargetstwohouses. 2940WestlakeAveN(Suite200)Seattle,WA98109Phone206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net RiskAssessmentΑTree975 05.23.2016pg.2of2 Photo2:Lookingwesttowardtree975Αnoteleanandseamalongcompressionside. 2940WestlakeAveN(Suite200)Seattle,WA98109Phone206.528.4670 www.treesolutions.net