APPROVED PLN Tree Removal PLN2024-0049'llc. 10j
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 51" Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: July 2, 2024
TO: David Burger
FROM: Rose Haas, Planner
rose.haas@edmondswa.gov
(425) 771-0220 ext. 1239
RE: Hazard Tree Removal- PLN2024-0049
315 8t" Ave N
The removal of 1 hazard tree has been approved per ECDC 23.40.220.C.8(b)ii and
as recommended by your arborist. The hazard tree is within and adjacent to
mapped Critical Areas at 315 81" Ave N.
The permit is approved with the condition that you meet the arborist's
recommendations on page 3 of 13 of the attached arborist report. Due to the
presence of critical areas, 2 replacement trees are required per ECDC
23.40.220.C.8(b)i and iv within one year of the removals. Once the replacement
trees have been planted, please notify me or the Planning Division to schedule an
inspection verifying the removal conditions have been met.
Disclaimer: Only the one tree indicated in this application can be removed from
the property. All other tree removals may be subject to the Critical Area
regulations per Chapter 23.40 and will require necessary permits. Please call
the City directly if you have any questions regarding this removal or future
removals at this site.
R VED
0024 MyBuildingPermitxom
Y NDS
PLANW IEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Jurisdiction: Edmonds
Project Name: Big Leaf Maple tree removal
Application ID: 1499500
Supplemental Name: Applicant Certification - Planning
The applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify,
defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any
action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant,
his/her/its agents or employees. The property affected by the application is in the exclusive ownership of the applicant or that the
application has been submitted with the consent of all owners of the affected property.
I certify, under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington, that the information and exhibits herewith submitted
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on behalf of the owner of the subject
property.
I do so certify.
RECEIVED
June 11 Z024 /
CITY OF S CITY OF EDMONDS MyBuildinBPermit.com
PLANNING & PMENT
DEPAR
Clearing and Grading Application #1499500 - Big Leaf Maple tree removal
Applicant
First Name Last Name Company Name
David Burger
Number Street Apartment or Suite Number E-mail Address
315 8th Ave N burgx68@outlook.com
City State Zip Phone Number Extension
Edmonds WA 98020 (512) 638-3441
Contractor
Company Name
Contractor Unknown
Number Street Apartment or Suite Number
City State Zip Phone Number Extension
State License Number License Expiration Date uBl # E-mail Address
Project Location
Number Street Floor Number Suite or Room Number
315 8TH AVE N
City Zip Code County Parcel Number
EDMONDS 98020 00434208501600
Associated Building Permit Number Tenant Name
Additional Information (i.e. equipment location or special instructions).
Work Location
Property Owner
First Name Last Name or Company Name
David G & Lisa M Burger
Number Street Apartment or Suite Number
315 8TH AVE N
City State Zip
EDMONDS WA 98020
Certification Statement - The applicant states:
I certify that I am the owner of this property or the owner's authorized agent. If acting as an authorized agent, I further certify that I have full power and
authority to file this application and to perform, on behalf of the owner, all acts required to enable the jurisdiction to process and review such application. I
have furnished true and correct information. I will comply with all provisions of law and ordinance governing this type of application. If the scope of work
requires a licensed contractor to perform the work, the information will be provided prior to permit issuance.
Date Submitted: 6/10/2024 Submitted By: David Burger
Page 1 of 2
RECEIVED
June 11„Z024 /
CITY OFs MyBuildingPermit.com
PLANNING P.ENT CITY OF EDMONDS
DEPAR
Clearing and Grading Application #1499500 - Big Leaf Maple tree removal
Project Contact
Company Name:
Name:
Address:
David Burger
315 8th Ave N
Edmonds WA 98020
Project Type
Single Family Residential
Email: burgx68@outlook.com
Phone #: (512) 638-3441
Activity Type Scope of Work
Hazard Tree Removal Tree Removal
Project Name: Big Leaf Maple tree removal
Description of Work: Removal of one Big Leaf Maple tree that is diseased.
Project Details
Primary Use
Other
Tree Information
Total number of trees to be removed
Description (species, diameter)
Location (front yard, back yard, etc.)
1
Acer macrophyllum, big leaf maple 16 inches at breast
height
Side backyard
Page 2 of 2
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
June 5, 2024
315 8" Ave N
Edmonds, WA 98020
To the City of Edmonds,
It is my desire to have a tree cut down to a stump. The specified tree has multiple dead
branches and other issues as delineated by the arborists report submitted with this
application. The tree is a Big Leaf Oak, Acer macrophyllum. It is surrounded by similar
trees that are reasonably healthy as determined by an arborist.
We recently bought this property last Fall. The landscaping had been neglected for some
time and it is our intention to get it back to good shape and do everything we can to provide
hill stability and beauty. Of course, we want to feel safe that no trees will fall on our
beloved home.
Pending city approval, I intend to hire a professional tree service to remove the tree. Per my
arborist's recommendation I plan to get bids from EcoTree NW or Giving Tree Arbor Care.
I intend to plant 3 Western cedars and 1-2 flowering trees in the immediate vicinity of this
tree. It is my intention to give primacy to evergreen conifers for this particular area of the
property.
I hope this cover letter suffices to introduce my intentions. If you have any questions or if I
am missing required information, please email me at burgx68@outlook.com or call me at
512-638-3441.
Respectfully,
David Burger
RECEIVED
June 11,20 Ae plan
CITYOFEDMoN315 8" Ave N, Edmonds, WA 98020
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENTree removal / replacement plan
Red circle is the approximate location of the tree to be removed
Blue donuts are the approximate location for tree replacements
RECEIVED Reviewed by
June 11,2024 �
City of Edmonds
CITY OFEDMONDS Planning Division
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�
Katy Bigelow
206.351.1375
arboristkaty@gmail.com
June 4, 2024
David Burger
315 8th Ave. N
Edmonds, WA 98026
Dear Mr. Burger:
Thank you for asking me to provide a risk assessment and work recommendations for one tree
growing on your property in Edmonds, WA. This memo can be used to submit to the City of
Edmonds for a hazard tree removal permit. To evaluate the tree addressed in this memo I
combined my field experience and education with current accepted practices as defined by the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the International Society of Arboriculture
(ISA).
The tools I used to make this assessment were limited to a digging tool, diameter tape,
binoculars and hand mallet. A visual tree assessment and other methods are only conclusive
for the day of inspection and do not guarantee that conditions will remain the same in the
future.
On May 31, 2024 1 completed a Level 2 tree assessment of several trees on the Burger property
and recommended one be worked on now to reduce risk to on and off property targets. All
levels of tree assessment are explained in an attachment to this report. Map 1 shows the
location of the tree on the Burgers property.
Tree 2: Bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) — 16" DBH (Diameter at Breast Height).
This younger maple stands on the north side of the Burger property north of their
home (Photo 1). It grows on a short slope from the home heading downhill to Sprague
St. (Photo 2).
The lower trunk where it touches the ground to approximately 3 feet up from the
ground is entirely rotten with at least two visible fungal diseases known to affect the
integrity of this trees' wood strength (Photo 3).
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDTree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
The tree has a very sparse upper canopy that is partially dead - this corresponds with
the extent of the rot in its lower trunk which presumably extends underground
affecting the tree roots (Photos 4). Leaves are sparse and smaller than average.
Overall this tree is in poor architectural condition and is very stressed.
Tree risk assessment is a qualification that can be obtained through the ISA (International
Society of Arboriculture). The TRAQ (Tree Risk Assessment Qualification) methodology has
improved risk assessment by teaching assessors to follow a consistent format when examining
a tree.
Additionally, the TRAQ protocol includes defined terms for tree risk. The four terms under the
risk category Likelihood of Failure are Imminent, Probable, Possible and Improbable. Imminent
as defined in the TRAQ manual is an infrequent observance that would involve immediate risk
mitigation to prevent damage to a nearby target. The majority of trees I and other tree risk
assessors observe usually fall into the middle categories of Possible or Probable Likelihood of
Failure. Very rarely is a tree rated "Imminent" observed.
To assist in visualizing how a tree risk assessor determines risk, the following matrix used as
part of the protocols can be referred to below:
Matrix I. Likelihood matrix.
Likelihood
of Failure
Likelihood of Impact
Very low
Low
Medium
High
Imminent
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Very likely
Probable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Possible
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Improbable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Likelihood of
Failure & Impact
Consequences of Failure
Negligible
Minor
Significant
Severe
Very likely
Low
Moderate
High
Extreme
Likely
Low
Moderate
High
High
Somewhat likely
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Unlikely
Low
Low
Low
Low
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 2 of 13
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONOFree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
Keeping this risk rating system in mind during my assessment:
Tree 2: Failure of the entire tree onto either the home, fence or Sprague St. is
probable with a high likelihood of impact. The consequences of a total tree failure
would be significant making this tree a high risk to off property targets. None of the
targets can be moved or reasonably blocked from occupation. Based on the likelihood
of a total tree failure, the work priority is high.
• I recommend that this tree be cut down within three months. The homeowner
may choose to leave a short portion of the tree trunk as a "snag" but I do not
recommend it be left more than ten feet tall.
• If a snag is left, the final trunk cut should be left jagged in appearance.
• If a stump rather than a snag is left, it shall remain untouched (not pulled out).
It can be ground out or left to rot in place.
• Logs can be left on site but logs shall not be left piled on top of each other. Each
log shall be touching the ground. If logs can not avoid being stacked they shall
be removed from the site.
• All limb and foliage debris should be chipped up and removed from the site.
Wood chips can be used on the property if desired.
• Please share this portion of the report with your working arborist.
This tree stands in a Critical Area (see Critical Area Map). According to Edmonds Municipal
Code, If a certified arborist determines that a tree is hazardous, poses a threat to public safety,
or is an imminent risk of damage to private property, a permit for removal is not required but
documentation such as this report is needed. In this case this maple is considered a high risk /
hazard tree.
Title 23 Natural Resources
Ch. 23.40.220.C.b Environmentally critical areas general provisions
i. The applicant submits a report from an ISA- or ASCA-certified arborist or registered
landscape architect that documents the hazard and provides a replanting
schedule for the replacement trees; (This report documents that the maple is
considered a hazard tree. Replanting is discussed below in this report.)
ii. Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown thinning, unless otherwise justified
by a qualified professional. Where pruning or crown thinning is not sufficient to
address the hazard, trees should be removed or converted to wildlife snags;
(Pruning or thinning is not sufficient to address any of the risks posed by this
maple tree. See above for tree work recommendations for tree
removal/snagging.)
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 3 of 13
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONOFree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
iii. All vegetation cut (tree stems, branches, etc.) shall be left within the critical area or
buffer unless removal is warranted due to the potential for disease or pest
transmittal to other healthy vegetation or unless removal is warranted to
improve slope stability; (See above for recommendations for dealing with the
removed tree parts.)
iv. The land owner shall replace any trees that are removed with new trees at a ratio of
two replacement trees for each tree removed (2:1) within one year in
accordance with an approved restoration plan. Replacement trees may be
planted at a different, nearby location if it can be determined that planting in
the same location would create a new hazard or potentially damage the critical
area. Replacement trees shall be species that are native and indigenous to the
site and a minimum of one to two inches in diameter at breast height (dbh) for
deciduous trees and a minimum of six feet in height for evergreen trees as
measured from the top of the root ball; ... in this case, two trees shall be
replanted to replace the functions of the maple recommended for removal.
Western red cedar (Thuja plicata- small cultivars only), vine maple (Acer circinatum),
Pacific dogwood (Cornus nuttallii) or weeping Alaska cedar (Chamaecyparis
nootkatensis'Pendula') would be good choices of native trees to replant on this
site. Many other ornamental tree species can also be used in lieu of native tree
species to provide diversity.
The location of new plantings can occur in many areas of the property including on the
slope close to where Tree 2 stands, on the south side of the property or other
areas as the homeowner chooses.
Planting in the fall months and providing supplemental water for plants for up to one
year will help new trees establish.
How to submit for a permit: Use the My Building Permit website (do not email application
materials to staff). The correct form is found under "Clearing and Grading"/ "Single Family"/
"Hazard Tree Removal". You will submit this report and 2 pages of TRAQ forms attached to this
report.
If you haven't used MBP before or need assistance with material submission, Development
Services/Planning can assist you (425) 771-0220. Once materials are submitted to mbo.com,
the request will show up in the queue for review.
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 4 of 13
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDTree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
Thank you very much for calling me for your arboricultural concerns.
Katy Bigelow
Board Master Certified Arborist
PNW ISA member # PN-6039B
Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Registered Consulting Arborist° #490
Definitions
"Shall" denotes a requirement that is mandatory whenever the criterion for
conformance with the specification requires that there be no deviation. This word
implies obligation.
"Should" denotes a guideline or recommendation whenever noncompliance with the
specification is permissible.
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 5 of 13
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDTree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
Levels of Tree Assessment
LEVEL 1: The Level 1 assessment is a visual assessment from a specified perspective of an
individual tree or a population of trees near specified targets to identify obvious defects or
specified conditions. A limited visual assessment typically focuses on identifying trees with an
imminent and/or probable likelihood of failure.
Limited visual assessments are the fastest but least thorough means of assessment and are
intended primarily for large populations of trees.
LEVEL 2: This is a basic assessment completing a detailed visual inspection of a tree and
surrounding site, and a synthesis of the information collected. This assessment requires that a
tree risk assessor walk completely around the tree —looking at the site, buttress roots, trunk,
and branches.
A basic assessment may include the use of simple tools to gain additional information about
the tree or defects. Basic is the standard assessment that is performed by arborists in
response to a client's request for tree risk assessment. Simple tools may be used for measuring
the tree and acquiring more information about the tree or defects. However, the use of these
tools is not mandatory unless specified in the Scope of Work.
LEVEL 3: Advanced assessments are performed to provide detailed information about specific
tree parts, defects, targets, or site conditions. They are usually conducted in conjunction with
or after a basic assessment if the tree risk assessor needs additional information and the client
approves the additional service. Specialized equipment, data collection and analysis, and/or
expertise are usually required for advanced assessments. These assessments are therefore
generally more time intensive and more expensive.
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 6 of 13
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDTree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 gth Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
Map 1
0 15 3Utt
The tree is approximately located by the red circle.
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 7 of 13
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDFree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
O
Critical Area Map
■
—j
Approximate location of the maple shown by the red circle.
All colors on this map represent different types of Critical Areas.
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 8 of 13
..........
-rs 7, -F
IN �} M y '� v*, « t s !9 riP DIY {^ .Y� rAp � 'ry ✓ .: 6
a MTa k rat 1 L I
k� i7
jw-
♦� � 1 '!'^ 'a- $Yea, '�' � - as '� � � �) ���±' ..'9r'^.�
` �� + �'�''�<T aa. ar+�::A 1.,.., � .,fir. , a• � � ,-;,r,.�C eve ' i+,
+ 4 N� dra + w X ya p A a ✓� r Y G 1 IAlp
ell
ti
♦ . � � �, �' ie. max+,. BI;�, ��ii 7.r
F�n' r7L.� �' • „L
it
y -w
l
,-.,
2k
tlIK
7i f)#
w
Ok
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDTree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
Photo 3: Rotting lower tree trunk.
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 11 of 13
r. p x i a1 4
i� n 2 i\.v��;k�'��� s�; +ram �, r� � ':( .L !f��°y., .. �.� ♦� �I
i
�(�. 'Y ` a.. I��dy�•: "i A 6'�'b \ h't�l �FY�• w:+�1� _
Ty
�0.
vi,
�; J 4 Jt1 r• t-..c., '„�'A,;
NOW I VT
� ! • >�- fit � •'�K, � �•"�y§ ;��,a .� �.
'gill '�� � x .Y �„� '� Ji;''. �.�'. ♦ qtl;�',`. �xc.'#''fix' R
i km 44 �aiii
�03
c1
f `y ..♦� " . .?; i'yyyJy �+'4� •�'A f"`• $� fir; ,,,may,;
�N,i �yy/xrw . • i4 k 4. �"'�.` J'V%as is x y�� Y 102• tis�J�
F 7
NMI
^.�. • \ k,� !F�- j",
i!G ;ti�.Y,.s a •'c. �y '. ,,s.��' P'•,$ Y '"�I . '' ,y xR,p'q ;'cep+",.,. a, k �a�3,_aY
�,�m3°� ..4•:y cry :.� iS� t.+.
��,y, �/yr�,�7r �;T��✓�^�'��� t;. �1. � d, �s,�s ,r diHr•dE.,��lJ,d ,r�� �S" -�z1�
S. • .t is �G' . �d '" h ,Y�j,'`fsa 2 7Y � 4
�'..5 � +Y•. � wy � k }a <'� W�pA' .y�,y �',�e �y' y y a`i'-� „id � s�!.- i �?.'� a�.
�♦ii "'N Ji'" +�,� yam. ^�
L 9` v � ♦G J f � t ,��1 , \
RECEIVED
June 11,2024
CITY OF EDMONDTree risk assessment - Burger
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT 315 8th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA
6-4-2024
Assumptions, Limiting Conditions and General Waiver
I, Katy Bigelow, certify that:
I have personally inspected the tree(s) and or the property referred to in this report;
I have no current or prospective financial or other interest in the vegetation or the property
which is the subject of this report and have no personal interest or bias in favor of or against
any of the involved parties or their respective position(s), if any;
The analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are the product of my independent
professional judgment and based on current scientific procedures and facts, and the foregoing
report was prepared according to commercially reasonable and generally accepted
arboricultural standards and practices for the Pacific Northwest and Puget Sound areas;
The information included in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects
the condition of the trees as of the time and date of inspection;
This report and the opinions expressed herein are not intended, nor should they be construed,
as any type of warranty or guarantee regarding the condition of the subject trees in the future;
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions ("CC&Rs") may restrict the number, type and height of
vegetation on the subject property, and I have made no investigation regarding whether the
property is subject to such CC&Rs; and
To the best of my knowledge and belief, all statements and information in this report are true
and correct and information provided by others is assumed to be true and correct.
I am not an attorney or engineer. This report does not cover these areas of expertise and
represents advice only of arboricultural nature. Without limiting the generality of the
preceding sentence, it is specifically understood that nothing contained in this report is
intended as legal advice, or advice or opinions regarding soil stability or zoning laws, and this
report should not be relied upon to take the place of such advice.
Katy Bigelow
Board Master Certified Arborist
PNW ISA member # PN-6039B
Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Registered Consulting Arborist° #490
Prepared by Katy Bigelow Page 13 of 13
RECEIVED S Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Date L L 'Lz' Time I' f"lI
PLANYftrrPP�11liication ,''C_ �c'ri^,� Tree no. Z Sheet of 7
Tree species rlk }111 s1,,J ✓) dbh f5Height w �' Crowns read dia. 2S
Assessor(s) i/ . ) 1 Time frame Wit; , Tools used 0 i% )q!,Yt
Target. Assess er t _ _ _ _ _ _ -
ll Reviewed y
Target zone
v
City of Edmonds
Oc
m
s
s
;
Planning Division ;
3 =�
.3 2
ratency
1—rare
$
c
Target description
fl.
9 J
x
z-occasionalle
`.L
•
a
F— :L
3
m
3—frequent
4-constant
2 0
a E
F
a
3
4
Site Factors
History of failures iA ry^ L1c Topography Flat❑ Slope.9 % Aspect
Site changes None Grade change ❑ Site clearing ❑ Changed soil hydrology ❑ Root cuts ❑ Describe
Soil conditions Limited volume ❑ Saturated ❑ Shallow ❑ Compacted ❑ Pavement over roots ❑ % Describe
Prevailing wind direction Common weather Strong winds ❑ Ice ❑ Snow Heavy rain ❑ Describe
Tree Health and Species Profile
Vigor Low E� Normal ❑ High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal) ❑ None (dead) ❑ Normal % Chlorotic % Necrotic %
Pests Abiotic
Species failure profile Branches® Trunk® Roots ❑ Describe
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected ❑ Partial M Full ❑ Wind funneling❑ Relative crown size Small ❑ Medium ❑ Large❑
Crown density Sparse Ifl Normal ❑ Dense ❑ Interior branches Few M Normal ❑ Dense [I Vines/Mistletoe/Moss ❑
Recent or planned change in load factors
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
— Crown and Branches —
Unbalanced crown ❑ LCR % Cracks ❑ Lightning damage ❑
Dead -twigs/txa�ches Lt9 %overall Max. dia. Codominant ❑ Included bark ❑
B oken/Hinged Number------------ Max. dia.
Weak attachments ❑ Cavity/Nest hole /o circ.
Over -extended branches ❑
Previous branch failures ❑ Similar branches present ❑
Pruning history
Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑ Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑
Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑ Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑
Flush cuts ❑ Other ��y�4 Response growth
Main concern(s) 6�'�'r� �.�. 01
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor El Moderate '® Significant ❑
Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable ® Imminent ❑
—Trunk — — Roots and oot Collar
Dead/Missing bark a Abnormal bark texture/color ❑ Collar buried/Not visible ❑ Dep 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 ❑ Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness ❑
Lean____' Corrected?_______ _-___
Response growth Response growth
Main concern(s) _,�� z` '1� ��" �'- 1"1�'� �i Main concern(s)
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant ❑ Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant ❑
Likelihood of failure Likelihoo�[]Possible
re
Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable ❑ Imminent ❑ Improbab❑ Probable ❑ Imminent ❑
Page I of 2
RECEIV t
June 11,2024
CITY OF E_DMO_ NDS
PLANNIN am ELOPMENT
D WN
Risk Categorization
Risk
111111WA-11611"
I Conditions
rating
C��CCCC;Crn
•❑CCC•
C
CCCCCC�WE
OC
�
En
•
•
now,
•
•
MC
�
mmm�.MWIM
•GMC101RUMC70
MWM
=
cco•
=
����`CC❑•
OCC•
CWC
=
����
ooc�cccc��•
noon
•
•
■�
M
NEW
oocc
=i
����
•
•
•
cccc��o��ME
m
mm�
cco���ccc��a�
coo•
�'�
Matrix I. Likelihood matrix.
Likelihood
of Failure
Likelihood of Impacting Target
Very low
Low
Medium
High
Imminent
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Very likely
Probable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Likely
Possible
I Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Improbable
I Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Matrix2. Risk rating matrix.
Likelihood of
Failure & Impact
Consequences of Failure
Negligible
Minor
Significant
Severe
Very likely
Low
Moderate
High
Extreme
Likely
Low
Moderate
High
High
Somewhat likely
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Unlikely
Low
Low
Low
Low
Notes, explanations, descriptions
Mitigation options
North
Residual risk VVCVk.C�
Residual risk
Residual risk
Residual risk
Overall tree risk rating Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High Eb Extreme ❑ Work priority 10E] 2 ❑ 3 ❑ 4 ❑
Overall residual risk Low P Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme ❑ Recommended inspection interval _-
Data Final ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed fgNo ❑Yes-Type/Reason
Inspection limitations {None ❑Visibility ❑Access Mines ❑Root collar buried Describe
This datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and is intended for use by Tree Risk A.wssnient Qualified (TRAQ) arborist, 2013
Page 2 of 2