The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR_Barten_TRAQ_Rev2_231116 — 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 Target numberTarget description Target protection Practical to move target? Restriction practical?Target within drip line Target within 1x Ht.Target within 1.5x Ht.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 rate1–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 Chris Barten 11/16/23 2:17 12733 SE 163 Street, Renton, WA 98058 1 1 2 Douglas ﬁr 40”160’30 Terry Flatley Diameter tape, camera 1 year Driveway ✔✔✔4 No Sidewalk ✔✔4 No Driveway approach ✔✔4 No Turf areas ✔✔✔4 No Some small branches falling into yard and driveway ■10 North ■ ■■■45 Asphalt driveway West ■■9 months out of 12 months ■■100 None Mechanical damage to structural roots in driveway ■■End loaded branches fail when overloaded with cone crop, heavy rain or snow, strong winds and icey conditions ■■■ ■■■Vine Root cutting to replace heaved driveway, sidewalk and drive approach will increase risk to stability. 40”25 feet ■ ■ ■10 feet ■ Heaving driveway, sidewalk, approach, turf areas 12” plus N/A ■ ■ 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 ImprobableImminentPossibleVery lowUnlikelyNegligibleMediumLikelySignificantProbableLowSomewhatMinorHighVery likelySevereConsequences Likelihood of Failure & Impact Consequences of Failure Ne g l i g i b l e 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 __________________ This 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 This assessment is based on the assumed condition of having to sever multiple structural roots on the East side of the tree to effectuate driveway repairs using the owner’s preferred construction techniques to replace like with like.” Driveway Structural roots Roots are heaving asphalt driveway ●●●●Extreme Sidewalk Structural roots Roots heaving sidewalk ●●●●Extreme Driveway approach Structural roots Roots heaving approach and creating tripping hazard ●●●●Extreme Turf areas Structural roots Roots heaving turf creating trip hazard and reducing lawn maintenance ●●●●Extreme Tree roots have surfaced onto driveway and grown large severely damaging the asphalt surfacing creating trip hazards and making access difﬁcult if not impossible. Tree roots have heaved the public sidewalk and created tripping hazards in three locations. Tree roots have heaved the driveway approach tilting it towards the street and creating a 1-inch lift, a tripping hazard. Tree roots have heaved turf areas and surfaced in several locations creating tripping hazards and make lawn maintenance impossible in several locations. Remove roots and tree 0 ■ ■ ■■ ■