HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR_ISA_Tree_Risk_Assessment_Form — Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
10’
Tree is more of nuisance trees
Driveway
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
X 4
X
David Wells
2
Property damage
3
22109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
N
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
Branch failure
Sw
N N
15”
15”
100
N
N
5-14-24
60’
N
1
Nusiance tree-
Typical PNW weather
80
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
N
House primary
50
60’
Visual, diameter tape
X
N
1 week
Underground utilies
1223
Nusiance tree-
1
Yes
1
N
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Root prune and crown clean tree
X
XDriveway
Underground utilies
Moderate
Removal
X
Roots
Low
X
X
X
Roots nuisance tree XX
X
Low
X High
High
Nusiance tree-
House primary X
X
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
1
N
NX NN
Branch failure
N
Tree is more of nuisance trees
Property damage
8
2
2
60’
Visual, diameter tape
X
N
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
2109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
4
100
1
5-14-24
60’
8”
Underground utilies
100
Yes3
10’
1 week
Nusiance tree-
N
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
Driveway
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
X
Sw
N
David Wells
N
3
House primary
50
Typical PNW weather
Nusiance tree-
80
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Underground utilies
Root prune and crown clean tree
X
Removal
Nusiance tree-
Moderate
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
X
Roots
X XHouse primary
XDrivewayRoots nuisance tree
Low
Low
X
X
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
2
N
60’
6
1 week
10’
N
NDriveway NX
Yes
1
N X
12”
Nusiance tree-
Tree is more of nuisance trees Branch failure
60’
100
3
50
Underground utilies
2109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
5-14-24
2
Typical PNW weather
David Wells
N
Visual, diameter tape
1
Property damage
Sw
80
N
12”
X
House primary
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
N
4
Nusiance tree-
155
N
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Underground utilies
Low
Roots
High
High
ModerateRoot prune and crown clean tree
X
X Low
X
X
Nusiance tree-
XX
XX
Removal
XX
Roots nuisance tree
X
Driveway
XHouse primary
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
Underground utilies
N
50
2
N
N
1 week
X
5
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
X
David Wells
9”
Tree is more of nuisance trees
N
Yes
N
Property damage
3
N
2
N
Nusiance tree-
House primary N4
12109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
Nusiance tree-
Typical PNW weather
100
1
10’
135
Branch failure
60’
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
N
9”
Sw
5-14-24
80
X
Visual, diameter tape
60’
Driveway
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
X
X
Roots
Root prune and crown clean tree
X
High
High
Underground utilies X
Low
X
Moderate
House primary
Driveway
X
Removal
X
Roots nuisance tree XX
Nusiance tree-
X
X
LowX
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
N2
Sw
N
10’
N
Driveway
2
Branch failure
X
1245
X
10”
House primary
N
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
4
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
Typical PNW weather
N
Underground utilies
Visual, diameter tape
1
1 week
3
10”
N
Yes
X
Tree is more of nuisance trees
N
5-14-24
50
60’
Nusiance tree-
2
100
60’
N
80
Nusiance tree-
Property damage
1
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
N
David Wells
2109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
X
Low
X
XHouse primary
Removal
Driveway
X
X X
Moderate
XX
Underground utilies
Low
X
Roots nuisance tree
Nusiance tree-
XRoots
X High
High
Root prune and crown clean tree
X
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
7
Branch failure
Underground utilies
Typical PNW weather
Visual, diameter tape
N
50
5-14-24
1 week
10
80
X
Sw
1
100
2
David Wells
N
3
2
60’
60’
N
4 N
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
Tree is more of nuisance trees
N
2109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
Nusiance tree-
10”
X
N
210
N
X
10’
N
House primary
1
Yes
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
NDriveway
Nusiance tree-
Property damage
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Driveway
Low
X
X
Roots nuisance tree
X
X
Underground utilies X
House primary
X
X
Nusiance tree-
X
Roots
X
Removal
Root prune and crown clean tree
High
HighX
XX
Moderate
Low
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
Driveway
2109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
X
1X
Typical PNW weather
245
50
60’
Nusiance tree-
N
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A Visual, diameter tape
N
4
Sw
Nusiance tree-
Yes
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
House primary
1 week
N
Tree is more of nuisance trees Branch failure
3
X
N
15”
2
100
2
N
N
N N
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
5-14-24
10’
David Wells
80
15”
Property damage
9
N
1
60’
Underground utilies
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
X
Underground utilies
Removal
X
X
XHouse primary
X
X
Low
X
Low
Roots nuisance tree
X
Nusiance tree-
XDrivewayRoots
High
High
XX
X
Root prune and crown clean tree Moderate
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
Sw
Property damage
5-14-24
60’
N
N
N
Tree is more of nuisance trees
Nusiance tree-
Nusiance tree-
100
2109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
Branch failure
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A 1 week
80
N
N
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
N
3
2
10’
House primary
2
Driveway
4
14”
N
120pm
X
Visual, diameter tape
60’
XUnderground utilies
50
1
4
14”
Yes
David Wells
1
Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
N
Typical PNW weather
X
N
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Moderate
X
Driveway
X
X
LowX
Nusiance tree-
Low
X
Removal
Roots
House primary
Root prune and crown clean tree
X
High
HighRoots nuisance tree X X
Underground utilies
X
XX
X
— Trunk —
— Crown and Branches —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Unbalanced crown LCR ______%
Dead twigs/branches ______% overall Max. dia. ________
Broken/Hangers Number __________ Max. dia. ________
Over-extended branches
Pruning history
Crown cleaned
Reduced
Flush cuts
Thinned
Topped
Other
Raised
Lion-tailed
Cracks ________________________________ Lightning damage
Codominant ______________________________ Included bark
Weak attachments _________________ Cavity/Nest hole ____% circ.
Previous branch failures _____________ Similar branches present
Dead/Missing bark Cankers/Galls/Burls Sapwood damage/decay
Conks Heartwood decay ______________________
Response growth
Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________
Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____
Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________
Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Tools used______________________________ Time frame_____________
Target Assessment
T
a
r
g
e
t
nu
m
b
e
r
Target description Target protection
P
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
t
o
m
o
v
e
t
a
r
g
e
t
?
R
e
s
t
r
i
c
t
i
o
n
p
r
a
c
t
i
c
a
l
?
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
dr
i
p
l
i
n
e
T
a
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1x
H
t
.
Ta
r
g
e
t
w
i
t
h
i
n
1.
5
x
H
t
.
1
2
3
4
History of failures _____________________________________________________________ Topography Flat Slope _________% 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 Normal High Foliage None (seasonal) None (dead) Normal _____% Chlorotic _____% Necrotic _____%
Pests/Biotic_________________________________________________ Abiotic _______________________________________________________
Species failure profile Branches Trunk Roots Describe ____________________________________________________________________
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected Partial Full Wind funneling ________________________ Relative crown size Small Medium Large
Crown density Sparse Normal Dense Interior branches Few Normal Dense Vines/Mistletoe/Moss _____________________
Recent or expected change in load factors _______________________________________________________________________________________ _
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Page 1 of 2
Site Factors
Target zone
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Dead/Missing bark Abnormal bark texture/color
Codominant stems Included bark Cracks
Sapwood damage/decay Cankers/Galls/Burls Sap ooze
Lightning damage Heartwood decay Conks/Mushrooms
Cavity/Nest hole _____ % circ. Depth _______ Poor taper
Lean _____° Corrected? __________________________________
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Part Size Fall Distance
Collar buried/Not visible Depth________ Stem girdling
Dead Decay Conks/Mushrooms
Ooze Cavity _____% circ.
Cracks Cut/Damaged roots Distance from trunk _______
Root plate lifting Soil weakness
Response growth
Condition(s) of concern
Load on defect N/A Minor Moderate Significant
Likelihood of failure Improbable Possible Probable Imminent
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
230
Nuisance tree roots lifting driveway and underground
utilities
100
Nusiance tree-
N
82109 Harrington Place Northeast Renton, WA. 98056
Sw
Tree is more of nuisance trees
N
N
Branch failure
NX
15”
4House primary
Property damage
80
1
David Wells
1
Driveway
X
N
3
1 week
N
N
5-14-24
15”Leyland Cypress (Cupressus x leylandii)
X
2
2
Underground utilies
Visual, diameter tape
Typical PNW weather
Nusiance tree-
N
Yes
60’10’
60’
50
N
Matthew Hicks PN-9596A
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)
Matrix 1. 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
Failure Impact Failure & Impact
(from Matrix 1)
Likelihood
Im
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
Im
m
i
n
e
n
t
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
Ve
r
y
l
o
w
Un
l
i
k
e
l
y
Ne
g
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
Me
d
i
u
m
Li
k
e
l
y
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Pr
o
b
a
b
l
e
Lo
w
So
m
e
w
h
a
t
Mi
n
o
r
Hi
g
h
Ve
r
y
l
i
k
e
l
y
Se
v
e
r
e
Consequences
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
Data Final Preliminary Advanced assessment needed No Yes-Type/Reason ________________________________________________
Inspection limitations None Visibility Access Vines Root collar buried Describe ___________________________________________
Notes, explanations, descriptions
1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
4.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________
Overall tree risk rating Low Moderate High Extreme
Overall residual risk None Low Moderate High Extreme Recommended inspection interval __________________
is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) — 2017
North
Page 2 of 2
Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.
Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
X
Roots
Moderate
Nusiance tree-
Driveway
Low
X
X
Underground utilies X High
HighX
Root prune and crown clean tree
Removal
X
X X
House primary
X
Low
Roots nuisance tree
X
X X