Loading...
20150522084353341.pdf36LC i"dl.W 1. History of failures_ 9 I ia`3 Topography Flag SlopelE] % Aspect Site changes None Verade change D Site clearing 0 Changed soil hydrology D Root cuts O Describe Soilconditions Unaited volume U Saturated 0 Shallow[] Compacted �l�avementover roots l Y. Describe Prevailing wind direction � "annman weather Strong winds l lce11 Snowy Heavy rain Describe Free Health and Species Profile Vigor Low C] Norrnaf Ge Nigh Q Foliage None (seasonal) Q None { ead) D Normal[�C� % chlorotic Necrotic %5 If 4 Pests Abiotic 0 @ •�.AAU Speciesfailureprafile Branc es Trunk RoatsQ describe `. Load Factors Wndexposure ProtectedO Partiallik FuilD WindfunnefingO Relative crown size Smallf] Medium targeQ Crown density Spa rse El Normal W' Dense D interior branches Few❑ Normalvbensell Vines/Mistietue/Moss ll Recent or planned change in load factors Treo Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — Unbalanced crown LCR If Cracks ❑ j6L ab = ,r+ _ Lightning damage Q Dead twigs/branches l2l` %overall Max. dia. Cudominant ® included bark 11 Broken/Hangers Number�tp� Max,dia. Weakattachrnents❑ Cavity/Nest hole %clr�c, fiver -extended branches l i'' Previous branch failures 5milar branches present Pruning history Crown cleaned © Thinned 0 Raised W111, Dead/Missing-bark 0 Cankers/Galls/Earls Q Sapwood damage/decay Reduced © Topped O Lion tailed ❑ conks © Heartwood decay ❑ Flush cuts Q other ijesponw growth r •, Jow Main c neern(s) r i a1.0 Load on defect N/A L] Minor IJ Moderate D Significant❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable C] Imminent ❑ --Trunk — Roots and moot Collar — Dead/Missing bark 0 Abnormal bark texture/color ❑ Collar hurled/Not visible Q Depth Stem girdling ❑ coclorninant stems 0 Included bark ❑ Cracks 19/ Dead C] Decay D Conks/Mushrooms 0 ,Sapwood damage/decay lot Cankers/Galls/8urlsil Sap ooze ❑ Daze C.7 Cavity %circ. Lightning damage ® Heartwood decay W."Conks/Mushrooms C l Cracks ❑ Cut[Damaged roots Q Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole jjD % circ. Dept., Poortaper Q Root plate lifting 13 WI weakness ❑ T Lean ° Corrected? Response growth a Response growth Main cor?corn ) Main concern(s) Loadonciefect 4ALl MinorD Mcderate[A Significantly Loadondefect�N/A❑ Minor❑ Moderate® Significant -0 Likelihood of failure Ukelihood of failure �ImprobableU Possible Ll Probabl imniinentO Irnprobablell PossibleD Probable imminent ........... Page 1 01, 2. Target zon e Otrupasiq v _°�i Target CtlsSCai j=ii4r1 C k 2—.3ocesiana! 3 1,J AQ 36LC i"dl.W 1. History of failures_ 9 I ia`3 Topography Flag SlopelE] % Aspect Site changes None Verade change D Site clearing 0 Changed soil hydrology D Root cuts O Describe Soilconditions Unaited volume U Saturated 0 Shallow[] Compacted �l�avementover roots l Y. Describe Prevailing wind direction � "annman weather Strong winds l lce11 Snowy Heavy rain Describe Free Health and Species Profile Vigor Low C] Norrnaf Ge Nigh Q Foliage None (seasonal) Q None { ead) D Normal[�C� % chlorotic Necrotic %5 If 4 Pests Abiotic 0 @ •�.AAU Speciesfailureprafile Branc es Trunk RoatsQ describe `. Load Factors Wndexposure ProtectedO Partiallik FuilD WindfunnefingO Relative crown size Smallf] Medium targeQ Crown density Spa rse El Normal W' Dense D interior branches Few❑ Normalvbensell Vines/Mistietue/Moss ll Recent or planned change in load factors Treo Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure — Crown and Branches — Unbalanced crown LCR If Cracks ❑ j6L ab = ,r+ _ Lightning damage Q Dead twigs/branches l2l` %overall Max. dia. Cudominant ® included bark 11 Broken/Hangers Number�tp� Max,dia. Weakattachrnents❑ Cavity/Nest hole %clr�c, fiver -extended branches l i'' Previous branch failures 5milar branches present Pruning history Crown cleaned © Thinned 0 Raised W111, Dead/Missing-bark 0 Cankers/Galls/Earls Q Sapwood damage/decay Reduced © Topped O Lion tailed ❑ conks © Heartwood decay ❑ Flush cuts Q other ijesponw growth r •, Jow Main c neern(s) r i a1.0 Load on defect N/A L] Minor IJ Moderate D Significant❑ Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable C] Imminent ❑ --Trunk — Roots and moot Collar — Dead/Missing bark 0 Abnormal bark texture/color ❑ Collar hurled/Not visible Q Depth Stem girdling ❑ coclorninant stems 0 Included bark ❑ Cracks 19/ Dead C] Decay D Conks/Mushrooms 0 ,Sapwood damage/decay lot Cankers/Galls/8urlsil Sap ooze ❑ Daze C.7 Cavity %circ. Lightning damage ® Heartwood decay W."Conks/Mushrooms C l Cracks ❑ Cut[Damaged roots Q Distance from trunk Cavity/Nest hole jjD % circ. Dept., Poortaper Q Root plate lifting 13 WI weakness ❑ T Lean ° Corrected? Response growth a Response growth Main cor?corn ) Main concern(s) Loadonciefect 4ALl MinorD Mcderate[A Significantly Loadondefect�N/A❑ Minor❑ Moderate® Significant -0 Likelihood of failure Ukelihood of failure �ImprobableU Possible Ll Probabl imniinentO Irnprobablell PossibleD Probable imminent ........... Page 1 01, 2. Risk Categorization m Negligible Likelihood of;mpacting Target Severe of Failure Very IW Low Medium Ukellhood Imminent Unlikely C- Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely 0)Faitute sr Samewbat likely Failure Impact & Impact Consequences Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improhahle Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikaly Risk Cnndittctr�s ns 's Target w •� w o c rating of part W 'Free part of Concern€ projecdo"o° rap ° E Ln iv �7 167D j c c w rn {frnrn Matnx2j a d 2 3 MQrrix 1. l kelihood matrix- Likelihood atrix Likelihood Negligible Likelihood of;mpacting Target Severe of Failure Very IW Low Medium High Imminent Unlikely Somewhatlikely Likely Very likely Probable Unlikely Unlikely Samewbat likely Likely Possflale Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improhahle Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikaly A4au0. Risk ratinji matrix, likelihood of Failure a Impact Negligible Consequences of Failure Minor Slgniiicant Severe Very likely Low Moderate High Extreme likely t.aw Moderate High High Somewhat likely Low row Moderate Moderate k#r�likeiy Low Low Law Low hoc tis Notes, explanations, des iptions AI / -%I AA— e✓i ; A� Mitigation options ,dna [tesidua] risk _ --•— Residual risk A y Residual risk. " Residual risk JCFen) 011/ Overall tree risk rating Low Q Moderate D High e Extreme D Work priority 1 CJ 29"30 4 n Overall residual risk Lorry I Moderare El High Ci extreme ❑ Recommended inspection interna{ Data ll�Final lm] preliminary Advanced assessment needed (No E]Yes--fype/Reason Insperdna-fllrnitatfnns VIONone ElVisibflity DAccess UVines DRootcollar burled Describe ibis Ldashcct r grai3u«iE'�j ilioIns6 rarrnirlSocrc(gvLVborrCW(%at (1SA)and"Jrvcndcd for rue6y'rrceHfskAsa�ssmentQuuli€ick crRAO)arhuru(Ls-2012 Page 2 of 2