The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR_TRAQ_Penta_Flattened — 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 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 Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant 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 Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A  Minor Moderate  Significant  Client _______________________________________________________________ Date___________________ Time_________________ Address/Tree location _________________________________________________________ Tree no.____________ Sheet _____ of _____ Tree species _________________________________________ dbh_____________ Height ___________ Crown spread dia. ____________ Assessor(s) __________________________________________ Time frame_____________ Tools used______________________________ Target Assessment Ta r g e t nu m b e r Target description 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 ? 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_____________________________________________________ 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 planned change in load factors ________________________________________________________________________________________ _ Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure Occupancy rate 1–rare 2 – occasional 3 – frequent 4 – constant Likelihood of failureLikelihood of failure Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form Page 1 of 2 Site Factors Target zone T a r g e t w i t h i n dr i p l i n e T a r g e t wi t h i n 1 x H t . T a r g e t w i t h i n 1. 5 x H t . Main concern(s) Load on defect N/A  Minor  Moderate  Significant  Likelihood of failure Improbable  Possible  Probable  Imminent  Improbable Possible  Probable  Imminent Improbable Possible  Probable  Imminent  Penta Commercial LLC Nov 25 10 AM 1222 Bronson Way N • Renton, WA 98057 1 1 2 Douglas Fir 23"75'35' Eric Ledford PN-9290A 2 Year Camera, Rangefinder, Probe, Mallet Stem Girdling Vandalism, suspected chemical poisoning 90 10 Puget Sound pavement over roots No No ■ ✔ ✔ ✔ ■ ■ Pedestrians 3 Parked Vehicles 3 First hair and nail 4 None observed ■ SSW ■■■ ■■0 None Present ■■■ ■■None Observed ■ None Documented No No 10■12" ■ No No ■■ Dead branches falling from tree ■ ■ ■ ■ None Observed None Observed Suspected chemical exposure in root zone ■ ■■ 1 2 3 4 Matrix 1. 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 Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Somewhat likely Improbable Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Unlikely Co n d i t i o n n u m b e r Pa r t s i z e Fa l l d i s t a n c e Target protection Conditions of concern 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 Risk rating of part (from Matrix 2)Tree part 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 Mitigation options _____________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________ Overall tree risk rating Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Work priority 1  2  3  4  Overall residual risk Low  Moderate  High  Extreme  Recommended inspection interval __________________ is datasheet was produced by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) and is intended for use by Tree Risk Assessment Quali ed (TRAQ) arborists – 2013 North Page 2 of 2 Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix. Risk Categorization Ta r g e t nu m b e r 60'2 None ModeratCrown and Branches 75' 75'75'2 75'75'3 1 50' 50'1 None 50' 60' 60'3 None Falling and impacting person, parked vehicle Roots and Collar- chemical exposure could weaken roots cause whole tree 75'None None None High Moderat Low Low Low Symptoms are consistent with chemical injury or soil-applied herbicide. Poisoning is suspected based on scorch patterns, sudden decline, and proximity to known vandalized tree. Adjacent trees (Tree #1, 2) show synchronized canopy decline. Root zone overlap suggests environmental poisoning affecting multiple specimens. NoneRemove tree due to high likelihood of progressive structural decline. Suspected root zone poisoning has compromised tree health, with no realistic mitigation to restore function. Removal eliminates risk to pedestrians and vehicles in high-use area. Stump Grind and rake grinding s flat. ■■ ■ ■NA