Attachment A: Minerva Ave Cypress Report — Pacifica City Council, March 11, 2024

Pacifica, CA 94044
RE: Cypress Trees on Minerva Ave.

Date: 4/26/23

ARBORIST REPORT
Assignment
• Provide inspections and tree risk assessments for 16 mature Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) street trees located on Minerva Avenue. • Conduct inspections using ground level analysis, city-provided aerial lift system and a drone.
• Provide an Arborist Report of findings and recommendations.

Background
Following several waves of storms that hit Pacifica this winter, city staff and residents were concerned about the condition of the Monterey cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) trees along Minerva Avenue.

Several of the trees partially failed or lost large branches in the course of the storms. While on site crews were cleaning up dead, broken, and hanging branches.

Observations
We inspected the trees on March 31 and April 4, 2023.

On March 31 we used a city provided lift to inspect defects in the tree aloft. The same day we captured imagery using a small drone to inspect areas inaccessible from the lift.

We returned on April 4 to complete the inspections and our risk assessments.

A separate ISA Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form was completed for each tree and is attached to this report.

All trees were found to be either High or Extreme Risk.

ATTACHMENT "A"
Tree Management Experts
Consulting Arborists
3109 Sacramento Street
San Francisco, CA 94115
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
Certified Arborists, Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Contractor’s License #885953 www.treemanagementexperts.blogspot.com Page 2 of 6 Discussion
These trees are large and overmature specimens that have reached the end of their useful life, they have numerous defects and have been severely compromised by recent storms.

Some of the trees could likely be mitigated through pruning. The removal of the more severely compromised trees will be necessary, and consideration of any remaining trees newly exposed to new wind stresses will require additional pruning. These trees have grown as a grove and because of their close association, are not adapted to the new wind forces that will be present.

Conclusions & Recommendations
Based on the attached tree risk assessments, it is recommended that the trees be removed.

1. Any legal description provided to the consultant is assumed to be correct. Title and ownership of all property considered are assumed to be good and marketable. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character. Any and all property is appraised or evaluated as though free and clear, under responsible ownership and competent management.

2. It is assumed that any property is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or other governmental regulations.

3. Care has been taken to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data has been verified insofar as possible. The consultant can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.

4. Various diagrams, sketches and photographs in this report are intended as visual aids and are not to scale, unless specifically stated as such on the drawing. These communication tools in no way substitute for nor should be construed as surveys, architectural or engineering drawings.

5. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.

6. Possession of this report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by any other than the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior written or verbal consent of the consultant.

7. This report is confidential and to be distributed only to the individual or entity to whom it is addressed.

Any or all of the contents of this report may be conveyed to another party only with the express prior written or verbal consent of the consultant. Such limitations apply to the original report, a copy, facsimile, scanned image or digital version thereof.

8. This report represents the opinion of the consultant. In no way is the consultant’s fee contingent upon a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

9. The consultant shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule, an agreement or a contract.

10. Information contained in this report reflects observations made only to those items described and only reflects the condition of those items at the time of the site visit. Furthermore, the inspection is limited to visual examination of items and elements at the site, unless expressly stated otherwise. There is no expressed or implied warranty or guarantee that problems or deficiencies of the plants or property inspected may not arise in the future.

Arborists cannot detect every condition that could possibly lead to the structural failure of a tree. Trees are living organisms that fail in ways we do not fully understand. Conditions are often hidden within trees and below ground. Arborists cannot guarantee that a tree will be healthy or safe under all circumstances, or for a specified period of time. Likewise, remedial treatments, like any medicine, cannot be guaranteed.

Treatment, pruning, and removal of trees may involve considerations beyond the scope of the arborist’s services such as property boundaries, property ownership, site lines, disputes between neighbors, and other issues. An arborist cannot take such considerations into account unless complete and accurate information is disclosed to the arborist. An arborist should then be expected to reasonably rely upon the completeness and accuracy of the information provided.

Trees can be managed, but they cannot be controlled. To live near trees is to accept some degree of risk. The only way to eliminate all risk associated with trees is to eliminate the trees.

Tree risk assessment is not tree risk management. The arborist typically has the distinct and separate role of being the tree risk assessor. The tree risk manager is typically the property owner or the agent thereof. Tree risk management should consider tree risk management and may consider other factors related to property management decision making.

Tree Management Experts
Consulting Arborists
3109 Sacramento Street
San Francisco, CA 94115
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
Certified Arborists, Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Contractor’s License #885953 www.treemanagementexperts.blogspot.com Page 5 of 6 Certification of Performance
I, Roy C. Leggitt, III, Certify:
• That we have inspected the trees and/or property evaluated in this report. We have stated findings accurately, insofar as the limitations of the Assignment and within the extent and context identified by this report;
• That we have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or any real estate that is the subject of this report, and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; • That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are original and are based on current scientific procedures and facts and according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices; • That no significant professional assistance was provided, except as indicated by the inclusion of another professional report within this report;
• That compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party.

I am a member in good standing of the American Society of Consulting Arborists and a member and Certified Arborist with the International Society of Arboriculture.

I have attained professional training in all areas of knowledge asserted through this report by completion of a Bachelor of Science degree in Plant Science, by routinely attending pertinent professional conferences and by reading current research from professional journals, books and other media.

I have rendered professional services in a full-time capacity in the field of horticulture and arboriculture for more than 34 years.

Signed:

Certified Arborist WE-0564A
Date: 4/26/2023
[email protected]
Cell (415) 606-3610
Tree Management Experts
Consulting Arborists
3109 Sacramento Street
San Francisco, CA 94115
Member, American Society of Consulting Arborists
Certified Arborists, Tree Risk Assessment Qualified
Contractor’s License #885953 www.treemanagementexperts.blogspot.com Page 6 of 6 Certification of Performance
I, Aaron Wang, Certify:
• That we have inspected the trees and/or property evaluated in this report. We have stated findings accurately, insofar as the limitations of the Assignment and within the extent and context identified by this report;
• That we have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or any real estate that is the subject of this report, and have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; • That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are original and are based on current scientific procedures and facts and according to commonly accepted arboricultural practices; • That no significant professional assistance was provided, except as indicated by the inclusion of another professional report within this report;
• That compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favors the cause of the client or any other party.

I am a member and Certified Arborist with the International Society of Arboriculture.

I have attained professional training in all areas of knowledge asserted through this report by completion of a Bachelor of Science degree in Forestry and Natural Resources, by routinely attending pertinent professional conferences and by reading current research from professional journals, books and other media.

I have rendered professional services in a full-time capacity in the field of horticulture and arboriculture for more than 10 years.

Signed:

Certified Arborist MW-5597A
Date: 4/26/2023
[email protected]
Cell (847) 630-3599
— 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 number
Target description Target protection
Target within
Practical to move target? Restriction practical?
drip line
Target within
1x Ht.

Target within

1.5 x 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
rate
1–rare
2 – occasional
3 – frequent
4 – constant
Basic Tree Risk Assessment Form

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 583 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 59.0" 80ft 80ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
70 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 50
X
1 6"
5 2"
X
X X
X X
X 50
X X
X X
X
Good
Scaffold Tearout
18" 50ft
X
X
X X
X X
X X
X
5 8" X
8 No
Poor
None
X
X
X 4"
X X
X 12"
X
Poor
Uprooting
59" 80ft
X
X

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
ImprobablePossible
Probable
ImminentVery lowLowMediumHighUnlikelySomewhatLikelyVery likelyNegligibleMinorSignificantSevere 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 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
None
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Low
Low
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Multiple recent failures, tree is falling apart, extensive decay on top of 2 lower Remove Tree (recommended) None
End-Weight Reduction, drastic pruning High
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
scaffolds
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 584 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 30.8" 80ft 40ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
60 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 15
X
X X
X
X
X X
Good
Scaffold Tearout
6" 70ft
X
X
X
X
X
X
8 No
Poor
Mid-stem Failure
X
X
X 4"
X 12"
X
Poor
Uprooting

30.8" 80ft
X
X
24" 80ft

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Mid-stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Tree is partially uprooted, sapsucker damage indicates internal decay, low LCR Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
Moderate
no taper
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 585 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 35.2" 100ft 50ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
50 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 15
X
X X
X
X
X X
Good
Scaffold Tearout
6" 70ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
8 No
Poor
Mid-Stem Failure
X
X
X 4"
X X
X 6"
Poor
Uprooting

35.2" 100ft
X
X
24" 100ft

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Mid-Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Extreme
Extreme
High
Moderate
High
High
low LCR, no taper, no buttresses
Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 586 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 34.0" 80ft 40ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
50 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 30
X
X X
X
X
X X
Good
Scaffold Tearout
6" 70ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
12 No
Poor
Mid-Stem Failure
X
X
X 4"
X X
X 8"
Poor
Uprooting

34.0" 80ft
X
X
24" 80ft

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Mid-Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
High
High
low LCR, one-sided
Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 587 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 58.5" 110ft 80ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
50 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
30 X
X X
X
X
X X
Good
Scaffold Tearout
12" 50ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
5 No
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 4"
X X
X 24"
Poor
Uprooting

58.5" 110ft
X
X
30" 100ft
X
X X
50 24"
X
X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Extreme
Extreme
High
Low
Moderate
Moderate
co-dominant stems with 30' long seam, upper 10' with split, stems separating Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
deacyed, dead bark, raccoon in residence
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 588 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 55.0" 80ft 60ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, drone, probes one year
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
70 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 30
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
8" 50ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
5 No
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 4"
X 6"
Poor
Uprooting

55.0" 80ft
X
X
38" 80ft
6 6"
X
X X
10 12"
X
X 5
X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
most of top broke out in recent storms
Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 589 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 55.9" 80ft 60ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
50 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 25
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
8" 60ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 4"
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

55.9" 80ft
X
X
30" 80ft
X
X X
10 30"
X
X X
X
X X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
vertical cavity between codominant stems, 30" deep using tile probe Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 590 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 49.6" 100ft 60ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
70 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 15
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
14" 50ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

49.6" 100ft
X
X
24" 100ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
15 No

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Low
High
Extreme
Extreme
one-sided, decayed scaffold top
Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 591 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 100.9" 120ft 80ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
80 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 30
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
12" 70ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting
100.9" 120ft
X
X
36" 120ft
X
X
X X
X
X
8 No
5 2"
X
10 12"
X 4"
X
X
X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
High
Extreme
Extreme
many codominant stems with cavities and bark inclusions Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
High
High
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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 592 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 55.0" 80ft 80ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
70 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 40
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
18" 60ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

55.0" 80ft
X
X
24" 80ft
X
X X
X
X
5 No
X
25 12"
X 4"
X
X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Extensive cubical brown rot, cavities on North side @ 15'-25' Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
High
High
Moderate
large helical fracture @ 30'-40', decayed branch over property — 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 593 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 53.1" 90ft 70ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
30 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 40
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
12" 50ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

53.1" 90ft
X
X
24" 90ft
X
5 No
X
X 4"
X X
X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
crack between codominant stems, active separation with 2" gap Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
Extreme
Extreme
High
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 594 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 63.5" 90ft 70ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
60 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 60
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
12" 60ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Poor
Codominant Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

63.5" 90ft
X
X
24" 90ft
X
10 No
X
X 4"
X X
X
X X
50 6" X
X 5

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
crack, decay on south side, one-sided, codominant attachments Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
Extreme
Extreme
High
— 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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 595 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 35.0" 90ft 50ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
80 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 35
X
X X
X
X
X X
Poor
Scaffold Tearout
8" 50ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Poor
Mid-Stem Failure
X
X
X 6"
Poor
Uprooting

35.0" 90ft
X
X
14" 90ft
8 No
X
X 4"
X X
50 6" X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
no taper, no buttress or root flare
Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
High
High
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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 596 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 27.0" 100ft 20ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
80 X 100
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 30
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
6" 50ft
X
X
X X
X
X
X
Poor
Mid-Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

27.0" 100ft
X
X
12" 100ft
8 No
X
X 4"
50 6" X

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Risk Categorization
Mitigation options
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
Branch
Trunk
Roots
Scaffold
Tearout
Codominant
Stem
Failure
Uprooting
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
High
High
Moderate
Low
Moderate
Moderate
Remove Tree (recommended) None
X
X N/A
X X
X
Already Conducted
High
High
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.

Target within

1.5 x Ht.
1 2
3 4

Page 1 of 2 ends

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
City of Pacifica 3/31/2023 Daylight
Minerva Avenue, Pacifica 598 1 1
Monterey Cypress (Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) 41.4" 110ft 40ft Roy Leggitt, Aaron Wang d-tape, aerial lift, drone, probes one year Structures
Vehicles
Pedestrians
none
none
none
X
X
X
4 4
3 No
No
No
No
No
No
Tearouts, limb drop X
X X X X Paving and construction
X
West X X Heavy seasonal storms with extreme winds
80 X 80
Cypress Canker, Brown Cubical Rot
X X X brittle wood failures in overextended branches, uprooting/stem failures in heavy storms X
X
X
X
X 60
X
X X
X
X
X X
Fair
Scaffold Tearout
6" 30ft
X
X
X X
X
X
Poor
Mid-Stem Failure
X
X
X 0"
Poor
Uprooting

41.4" 110ft
X
X
18" 110ft
X
X 4"
X
X X
20 X
50 6"

Target
(Target number
or description)
Tree part Condition(s)
of concern Risk
rating
(from
Matrix 2)

Matrix 1. Likelihood matrix.

1.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

2.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

3.__________________________________________________________________________________ Residual risk ________

Page 2 of 2 ends

Matrix 2. Risk rating matrix.

Pacifica City CouncilMarch 11, 2024

Pacifica City Council
March 11, 2024