2337 Ocean Forest Drive West Arborist LetterISA. Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form
Client Troy E. Andrade Date 5/31/2023
Address/Tree location 2337 Ocean Forest Dr. W — North of house ,among azaleas/ligustrum Tree no. 1
Tree species Water Oak dbh 5.5' Height 65'
Assessor(s) Tallon Trammell NE7477A Tools used Phone , Probe
Target Assessment
Time 0800
Sheet 1 of 1
Crown spread dia. 60'
Time frame 1+ years
site Factors
History of failures No - Large cavitiy has been decaying for years Topography Flatf 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 SE Common weather Strong winds 8 Ice ❑ Snow ❑ Heavy rain 8 Describe Coastal Flordia
Tree Health and Species Profile
Vigor Low ❑ Normal B High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal)❑ None (dead)❑ Normal 90 % Chlorotic % Necrotic %
Pests/BlotiC Decay prone, fungal , boring insects Ablotic
Species failure profile Branches B Trunk 8 Roots 8 Describe Water oaks are prone to decay weakening intgrity of tree
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected ❑ Partial® Full ❑ Wind funneling ❑
Target zone
Crown density Sparse ❑ Normal Dense ❑ Interior branches Fewli
Normal ❑ Dense ❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss ❑
Recent or expected change in load factors continued decay at base of tree
s
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
Occupancy
Unbalanced crown ❑ LCR %
Cracks ❑ Lightning damage ❑
c 5 c
c Target description
Target protection
s s
3
rate
1 -rare
° m
n.
u V
Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑
Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑
r x x
pq'.CD �p eti m N
2 -occasional
3- frequent
Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑
Flush cuts ❑ Other
Response growth
NA Condition (s)
H im
4 -constant
o
a E
tY C
1 HomeOwner/People
no
✓ ✓ ✓
3
no
no
2 House
no
✓ ✓ ✓
4
no
no
3
Cavity/Nest hole 2' % circ. Depth 2.5" Poor taper ❑
Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness ❑
Lean 25 ° Corrected? NO
NA
CODIT is present however wont correct missing heart wood
Response growth
4
Condition (s) of concern Large cavity at base cause by natural decay
Part Size 65 Fall Distance 65
Part Size 65 Fall Distance 65'
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant®
site Factors
History of failures No - Large cavitiy has been decaying for years Topography Flatf 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 SE Common weather Strong winds 8 Ice ❑ Snow ❑ Heavy rain 8 Describe Coastal Flordia
Tree Health and Species Profile
Vigor Low ❑ Normal B High ❑ Foliage None (seasonal)❑ None (dead)❑ Normal 90 % Chlorotic % Necrotic %
Pests/BlotiC Decay prone, fungal , boring insects Ablotic
Species failure profile Branches B Trunk 8 Roots 8 Describe Water oaks are prone to decay weakening intgrity of tree
Load Factors
Wind exposure Protected ❑ Partial® Full ❑ Wind funneling ❑
Relative crown size Small ❑ Medium [F! Large ❑
Crown density Sparse ❑ Normal Dense ❑ Interior branches Fewli
Normal ❑ Dense ❑ Vines/Mistletoe/Moss ❑
Recent or expected change in load factors continued decay at base of tree
Tree Defects and Conditions Affecting the Likelihood of Failure
— Crown and Branches —
Unbalanced crown ❑ LCR %
Cracks ❑ Lightning damage ❑
Dead twigs/branches 8 10 %overall Max. dia. 2"
Codominant ❑ Included bark ❑
Broken/Hangers Number o Max. dia.
Weak attachments ❑ Cavity/Nest hole%circ.
Over-extended branches ❑
Previous branch failures ❑ Similar branches present ❑
Pruning history
Dead/Missing bark ❑ Cankers/Galls/Burls ❑ Sapwood damage/decay ❑
Crown cleaned ❑ Thinned ❑ Raised ❑
Reduced ❑ Topped ❑ Lion -tailed ❑
Conks ❑ Heartwood decay ❑
Flush cuts ❑ Other
Response growth
NA Condition (s)
of concern NA
Part Size Fall Distance
Part Size Fall Distance
Load on defect N/A 8 Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant ❑
Load on defect N/A ® Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant-]
Likelihood of failure Improbable® Possible Probable ❑ Imminent ❑
Likelihood of failure ImprobableB Possible Probable ❑ Imminent ❑
—Trunk —
— Roots and Root Collar —
Dead/Missing bark ❑ Abnormal bark texture/color ❑
Collar buried/Not visible ❑ Depth 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 ff] Conks/Mushrooms ❑
Cracks ❑ Cut/Damaged roots ❑ Distance from trunk
Cavity/Nest hole 2' % circ. Depth 2.5" Poor taper ❑
Root plate lifting ❑ Soil weakness ❑
Lean 25 ° Corrected? NO
NA
CODIT is present however wont correct missing heart wood
Response growth
Response growth
Condition (s) of concern Large cavity at base of trunk extending up 6'
Condition (s) of concern Large cavity at base cause by natural decay
Part Size 65 Fall Distance 65
Part Size 65 Fall Distance 65'
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant®
Load on defect N/A ❑ Minor ❑ Moderate ❑ Significant 8
Likelihood of failure Improbable ❑ Possible ❑ Probable 0 Imminent 8
Likelihood of failure Improbable❑ Possible ❑ Probable 0 Imminent
Risk Categorization
Tar et
g
(Target number
or description)
Tree part
Likelihood
Failure & Impact Consequences
Failure Impact {from Matrix 1)
Condition(s) d
of concern 3 T t a
to Crating
o o E 3 m '_ Y �_
a aE 02 ZI vii 2 Z in to
Risk
(from
Matrix 2)
Homeowner/People
Whole Tree
Whole Tree
Cavity at base failin
Cavity at base failinc
Unlikely
W
Likely
Very likely
*
/
Unlikely
extreme
extreme
Somewhat likely
House
Possible
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Somewhat likely
Improbable
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Unlikely
Ulm
1H
Matrix/. Likelihood matrix.
Likelihood
of Failure
Negligible
Likelihood of Impact
Severe
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
Negligible
Consequences of Failure
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
Large cavity at base, Hollow inside base of trunk extending 6' up, old tree that had grown in space allowed
so canopy is unbalanced ,presence of decay continuing up the center of tree,
possibly cause by old lighting damage , possibly open wound led to furthr decay down the trunk
No pruning or cabling will midigate the risk to an acceptable level
Hazard tree - recommend immediate removal
Mitigation options
, Removal
2.
3.
Residual risk 0
Residual risk
Residual risk
Residual risk
Overall tree risk rating Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme IN
Overall residual risk None @ Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme ❑ Recommended inspection interval after every big storm
Data @ Final ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ❑No ❑Yes-Type/Reason
Inspection limitations @None ❑Visibility ❑Access ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe
r,,:.- a,....,. k. --,.,...,_„a... A r.,. A— r..F.,...... :... ,..i c .,r a trc s t —11 Pao 1 .,f ?
Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part
People 1whole tree
House
Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.
le tree
Risk Categorization
Likelihood
Condition(s)
of concern
Failure at base
allure at Base
Likelihood
Negligible
Likelihood of Impact
Severe
of Failure
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
MEMOMEMO
NEED
MENU
mommoommmsommommi
WONDERED
.E.mm.mmmmm
NONSENSE
MONOMER.
MEN
nommossommosommol
ME■■t1■t■t■■■t■NI
ROME
MEMO
MEMO
ONE
No
NONNI
0
MA.NNMNMI
NONNIonmommoommommommi
NMI
01
Likelihood
Negligible
Likelihood of Impact
Severe
of Failure
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
Negligible
Consequences of Failure
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
The large hollow at the base as several holes on the northside
all the weight is on the southside so the addtional forces on the load
will cause failure. Remove before the tree becomes even more hazardous
in the removal process
Mitigation options
2. Removal
i
NFLt��i 1
�k
Residual risk 0
Residual risk _
3' Residual risk
a' -- Residual risk
Overall tree risk rating Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme B
Overall residual risk None ® Low ❑ Moderate ❑ High ❑ Extreme ❑ Recommended inspection interval every big storm
Data IN Final ❑ Preliminary Advanced assessment needed ❑No ❑Yes-Type/Reason
Inspection limitations ❑None ❑Visibility ❑Access ❑Vines ❑Root collar buried Describe
Risk
rating
6from
MotnX 2j
axtreme
axtreme
this datusheet was nrudu,ed b-,. the International Sodety of .lrburi,ulture 1,1SA) — 2017 Page 2 of 2
j
The Water Oak has attempted to CODIT however since water oaks are susceptible rot the lower heart
wood of the trunk is no longer there. In the I" picture you can see day light through the tree. The load
bearing structure of the tree is compromised
The middle tree is the oak for this report. Majority of the
weight is heading south ( right in pic) adding additional
stresses to the defect
SUMMORY — Due to the extreme decay of the heart wood located at the base of the trunk immediate
removal is recommended