HomeMy WebLinkAbout1281_001,,,M,,I,NUTES
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
JANUARY 10, 1995
L
xe]AAA,.3
Mayor Gerald, Farley called the meeting to order at 7,20 p.m. Present at the
orcoran
brig were. I
mee i Mayor Gerald Farley* Trustees George Clowes Timothy C
Richard Hendricks, Paul Hoefertl Vichaele Skowron and Irvana Wilks. Also
present at the meeting,were.& Village Manager Michael Janonis., Assistant to the
Village,Manager David Strahl, Finance.Director David Jepson, Polide Chief Ronald
Pavibck, lZb4ice Officer Kim Nagel, Deputy Chief Thomas Daley and Deputy Chief
THHWAJ_,
Acceptance of the Min'utes from December 13, 1994. Motion made by Trustee
Hoefert and. Seconded by Trustee Wilks. Trustee Wilks requested a revision to the
Minutes which. stated her opposition to the Recall Orainance as discussed and felt
the Ordinance 'Itself should be consioered unconstitutional. Trustee Wilks
requested-ber addition be made to the Minutes prior to the next meeting. Minutes
were approved With the change unanimously. Trustee Hendricks abstained.
None.
5 fs
ji
f
5
MAINTAIN
Mount Prospect Public Works Department
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TM CM USA
. ...............
TO: Village Manager
FROM: Forestry/Grounds Superintendent
DATE: January 13, 1995
SUBJ: Tree Risk Assessment Report
Accompanying this memo is a Tree Risk Assessment Report prepared
by Natural Path Forestry Consultants, Inc. This report is sched-
uled for discussion at the January 24, 1995, Committee of the
Whole meeting. The president of Natural Path, along with my-
self, will make a brief presentation at the meeting.
Using grant funds, last summer we hired Natural Path to assess
the structural integrity of 286 of our large parkway trees, and
to conduct a training session for Forestry Division staff,
Volume I of the report explains the procedures used and summariz-
es findings. Volume II (which is not being distributed at this
time but will be made available to any Board member upon re-
quest) includes the actual inspection notes and recommended
hazard mitigation measures for each tree.
In summary, Natural Path is recommending that we prune defective
limbs from 20 trees, add cables or inspect existing cables on 76
trees and remove 34 trees. In addition, they recommend that we
annually inspect 108 of the assessed trees to monitor defects
and/or integrity of cables. They also recommend that in future
years we continue a systematic program to assess the risks of
the other large diameter trees in our parkways.
Based on this report, we are planning to immediately begin the
recommended work. The cabling and the removal of defective
limbs will be done in-house by the Forestry Division crew as
soon as time allows. The remaining pruning will be done when
these trees are pruned next year on our five-year trimming cy-
cle. Of the 34 trees recommended for removal, we propose to
remove all, but three contractually (of the remaining three, one
will be removed by a developer and two in-house). Bids for a
tree removal contract were recently opened; the results will be
presented at the Village Board meeting on 2/7/95.
On 1/25/95 we plan to mail notification letters to property
owners adjacent to the trees scheduled for removal. A sample
letter is attached to this memo (Note - residents will not be
offered a replacement tree if there will not be a valid planting
site, as per our current standards, after the existing tree is
removed).
We are bringing this information to the Board at this time for
informational purposes. In some ways this risk assessment
project is no different than what the Forestry Division staff is
already doing. Nearly every day we assess the structural integ-
rity of trees and decide whether pruning, cabling or removal is
warranted. What is different about this project is the decision
making process. First, a thorough inspection is made using a
recognized procedure that should be defensible in court. Sec-
ond, potentially high-risk trees are routinely and systematical-
ly selected for assessment, as opposed to being overlooked until
a resident voices a concern.
Recent court rulings have made it clear that municipalities can
no longer rely on the "Act of God" defense when a tree failure
causes injury or property damage, if the failure is the result
of an identifiable defect. Recent arboricultural literature con-
tains references to court cases where the municipality states in
effect "we didn't know about the defect" and the court replies
"you should have known".
In my opinion the tree risk assessment program is an important
means of helping keep our streets safe for our residents, while
not unnecessarily removing trees that add greatly to the quality
of life in Mount Prospect. For these reasons, I recommend that
this program be continued in future years.
andlyv Clark
cc: Public Works Director
RISKASSE,SMT/FILES/FORESTRY '
Dkmctor
Herbert L Weeks
MAINTAIN
Water/Sewer Superintendent
Sean R Dorsey
Deputy Director
Street/BuRding Superintendent
Gen R Andler
Melvyn L. Both
Administrative Akio
FOres"/13"wrids Superintendent
Dawn L Wucki
Sandra M. Clark
Solid Waste Coordinator
M Lisa Angell
Vehicle/Equipment Superintendent
James
E, Guenther
Village Engineer
,Jeffrey A, Wulbecker
Mount
Prospect Public Works
Department
1700 W.
Central Road, Mount Prospect, Illinois 60056-2229
Phone 70B/B70-5640
Fax 700/253-9377
TDO 708/392-1235
I January 25, 1995
Dear Resident:
The Village recently hired an arboricultural consultant to take
a close look at some of our large parkway trees. A parkway tree
adjacent to your property was one of the trees the consultant
examined.
The purpose of this project was to assess the structural
strength of these trees, and to determine the relative risk of
failure (in other words, the likelihood that the entire tree or
parts of the tree would break or blow over, and the potential
for injury or property damage if they did). The consultant used
a state-of-the-art rating system developed by the International
Society of Arboriculture. After thoroughly examining each tree,
he gave each a numerical risk rating on a scale of 5 to 12. On
trees that received a relatively high rating he then determined
whether corrective measures such as pruning or cabling could be
used to lower the risk to an acceptable level.
Unfortunately there were some high-risk trees for which correc-
tive measures were not feasible. The tree adjacent to your
property was one of the trees that fell into the latter catego-
ry. Because of the defects identified in the examination, the
consultant has recommended removal of this tree as a responsible
action which should be taken.
Although the Village values our trees and recognizes that most
of our citizens share the same view, we do have a legal and
moral responsibility to try to assure the safety of all who use
our public rights-of-way. Therefore we intend to schedule the
removal of the tree in question (at no direct cost to you),
within the next few months. The stump will be removed in the
Spring and the area restored with topsoil and seed. Also in the
Spring we plan to plant a 1-1/2" diameter replacement tree at no
cost to you. If you would prefer not to receive this tree, or
would like to upgrade to a 2-1/211 tree at a $100.00 cost,, please
contact us by March 1, 19950
I am truly sorry to give you this news but I hope you will under-
stand why it is necessary. I invite you to contact me if you
would like to discuss this matter.
I
Sincerely,
Sandy Clark
Forestry Superintendent
Recycled Paper
1111,age af M.ount Pros!* ect
ree s
Ri k A,
Volu�m,e,l am Finai I Oepor
1111 t
Submitted by;
m
w
MarkDuntemann, President
NATURAL PATH FORESTRY CONSULTANTS INC.
PO Box 7723
Missoula,Montana 59807
-- (436) 721-3263
January 5, 1995
OF CONTENTS
Village of Mount Prospect,- Tree Risk Assessment Report
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
II., METHODOLOGY 5
111, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 27
IV. POLICY DEVELOPMENT 41
APPENDICES
Appendix I
Village of Mount Prospect Forestry Sections
Appendix 2
ISA's Hazard Tree Evaluation Form
Appendix 3
Trees Recommended for Removal
Appendix 4
Trees Recommended for Priority Mitigation
Appendix 5
Trees Recommended for Cyclic Maintenance
Appendix 6
Trees Requiring Additional Branch Removal
Appendix 7
Trees Requiring Cabling or Cable Inspection
Appendix 8
Comparison of Pre -Assessment and Final
Assessment Scores
Village of Mount Prospect,- Tree Risk Assessment Report
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Removal - This action was recommended for a trte that, in part, or in whole demonstrated
r
Priority Mitigation - This action was recommended for trees that demonstrated
reasonable health and had defects that should be mitigated through arboricultural practices
other then removal. These trees, however, do require an annual inspection to monitor
major defects that are present and to also assess the integrity of mitigating practices that
have occurred, such as cabling. One hundred and eight trees met this criteria.
Cyclic Maintenance - This action was recommended for trees that demonstrated a low
potential for failure. In some cases some mitigation through arboricultural practices are
4
required. These trees can be maintained and morutored as part of the Village's regular
cyclic pruning program. The remaining 144 trees met this criteria.
Excluding the Executive Summary, this report is divided into the following three sections:
ODOLOGYgives a brief description of the assessment procedures followed by
Natural Path') along with a summary description of the data collected.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Findings component displays the data
retrieved in graphic and narrative form. The narrative focuses on species, diameter, and
hazard rating distributions. The Recommendations component gives an overview of the
actions recommended by Natural Path based on the assessments made.
The final section, POLICY DEVELOPMENT, outlines a strategy for developing a long-
term risk reduction program. The objectives outlined in this section include:
• Increasing staff, elected officials, and the general public's knowledge of tree risk
management.
Identify and implement a series of risk reduction objectives including: reducing the
number of poor quality species, reducing specific defects, and implementing a cyclic
assessment program.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
4
W
_61 0 6 1 V to)
A "hazard tree" is any tree or tree part that demonstrates a high risk of failure or fracture
which would result in damage or injury to people or property. Usually, high-risk trees
demonstrate visible or otherwise detectable defects.
low
6, ore they occur.
One task of the urban vegetation manager is to antic!pate tree failures bef
There are no absolutes in determining hazards only sound judgment based on experienc.e
at recognizing structurally unsound trees, and following some standard guidelines.
This section briefly explains the methodology used to assess the trees identified. The trees
evaluated were selected by the Village of Mount Prospect based on either one of two
criteria.
The first criteria was to identify high risk trees that were located in the sections of the
xt fiscal year. [See
village that would be undergoing their cyclic pruning in the ne
Appendix I - Village of Mount Prospect Forestry Sections]. The sections were 3, the
south half of 5 151, and 16. By identifying high-risk trees and securing their timely
removal within these areas, fiscal and human resources will not be wasted on any pruning
actions for these trees. Within these four sections, the Village further narrowed the list of
trees to be assessed bocusing,
f on all trees with diameters of twenty-four inches and
y
greater and were one of seven high-risk species. These species were American Elm,
Siberian Elm, Silver Maple, Boxelder, Cottonwood, Willow, and White Poplar. A total of
259 trees met this first criteria.
The second criteria was a list of trees compiled from homeowner requests or village crew
°% inquiries. A total of 27 tree's met this second criteria for a total of 286 trees to be
assessed.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 5
On receiving the list of trees, Natural Path began the assessment using standards set by the
International Society of Arboriculture as outlined in their publication "Evaluation of
Hazard Trees in Urban Areas" 2nd Edition. The ISA established a two-page evaluation
form that Natural Path used for the Village of Mount Prospect project. [ See Appendix 2
- ISA's Tree Hazard Evaluation Form]. *0
The evaluation procedures focus on collecting data within nine broad categories. Each
int n* action, if a,n,y, to be
P of information plays, annt cate role in deterrmmrigine fin
taken. A total of h tree. The
,, 1-70 separate pieces of linformati,oncan, be: recorded for eac
nine as categories, with a brief description, and the complete list of data that
could be collected within each category are listed below.
..........
The tree location category defines, among other things, the location of the tree in question
by address, street and section. This category also defines who is responsible for the tree,
the date of inspection and who carried out the inspection. The six fields in this category
are:
1. Site/Address: Includes the street and address number where the tree is located.
2. Ma /Location: This field was used to record section and cell number within the lot.
3. Owner: Identifies, in general terms, who is responsible for the tree. The
four selections available are:
a. Public
b. Private
c. Unknown
d. Other
4. Date: The date the assessment is made.
5. Inspector: The name of the person conducting the assessment.
6. Date of Last
Inspection: The date the last assessment was made. As will be discussed in
more detail late ' r. it is important for municipalities to determine the
interval between inspections. The greater the lapse of time between
inspections, the greater the risk associated with the hazard
identified.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
6
TM,10- ARACTERISnC. .. S.
The tree characteristics category allows the assessor to record the species, a number of
size measurements, some descriptions of general form, any apparent past maintenance
history, and any special landscape features, such'as wildlife or historic tree. The twelve
fields in this category are. -
1. Tree#*.
M
The serial number unique to the tree being assessed is recorded at
this time. This number is used in the Village's computerized tree
i
inventory system to validate that updated information is being
associated with the right tree.
Z. Species:
Each tree is identified by it's common name. If discernible, the
cultivar is also noted.
3. DBH:
Using a diameter tape, the diameter of treesover eleven -inches in
di ter measured, at a point, conunonly tenned diameter breast,
height (dbh). DBH is the point of measurement on the trunk 4.5
feet ,from the round. I
4. # of trunks: This
field identifies the number of separate stems that occur at dbh.
Sr Height:
Using an instrument called a clinometer, the height of the tree is
recorded to the nearest foot.
6. Spread:
Using a I 00 -foot tape measure, the crown spread ism easured to
0,
the nearest, foot. Because of trregularly shaped crowns, two spread
measurements are taken, and the average of the two is recorded.
7. Form :
This field records the general symmetry'Of the tree being assessed
and any deviation from typical that may exist. The five selections
available are:
a. Generally symmetric
b. Minor asymmetry
C. Major asymmetry
d. Stump sprout
e. Stag -headed
8. Crown Class: This field records the general relation of the tree being assessed to
trees in it's vicinity. Dominant defines a tree that stands higher than
the surrounding trees. Codominant trees define the upper surface
of the canopy. The four selections available are:
------ -------
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 7
a. Dominant
b. Codominant
c. Intermediate
d. Suppressed
9. Live crown ratio: Is the ratio of the foliage canopy height to the total height of the
tree.
10. Age class: The relative point of chronological development in the life of the
tree being assessed is recorded. Age class is a species-specific
piece of information that is a function of age and vigor. The four
selections available are:
a. Young
b. Semi -mature
c. Matu re
d. Over -m atu re/serves cent
11. Pruning
History: Any known or identifiable past pruning event is recorded. The
eleven selections available are:
a. Crown cleaned (1)
b. Excessively thinned (2)
c. Topped (3)
d. Crown raised (4)
e. Pollarded (5)
E Crown reduced (6)
g. Flush cuts (7)
h. Cabled/braced (8)
i. None (9)
j. Multiple pruning events (10)
k. Approx. dates.
thor-s'Noteo. Hereafter in the narrative, the number in parenthesis that
follows some selections described is the numeric code corresponding to the selection
used by Natural Path in the computerized data submitted to the Village.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
8
12, Special Value: This field allows the assessor to record any unique cultural features
of the tree. The nine selections available are:
a.
Specimen (1)
b.
Heritage/Historic (2)
c,
Wildlife (3)
d.
Unusual (4)
e.,
Street tree (5)
f.
Screen (6)
g.
Shade (7)
h.
Indigenous (8)
i.
Protected by Government Agency (9)
C. TREE HEALTH
The tree health component categorized data about overall health characteristics. The
focus within this category concentrates on foliage, twig, and vigor appraisals. The vigor
rating is determined by the sum of the rating scores for roots, trunk, scaffold branches,
smaller branches/twigs, and foliage. The ten fields in this category are:
1. Foliage Color: This field allows the assessor to note general foliage color
conditions. A recording of normal means the color is typical for
that species. The three selections available are:
a. Normal
b. Chlorotic
c. Necrotic
A
2. Epicormics? Response: Yes/No. Epicornuc branchingare shoots created by,
adven'titiousbuds along branches and tru, nk T I*sfeature jis usually
an indicator of a tree in declining health. However, some species,
such as American Elm, are prone to epicormic branching. A yes
response to t,,h,,,,i,s query wasonly recorded when it was apparent that
epi,comuc- bra an. ching occurred,, because of declining health.,,
. ................ . .
Village of Mount prospect Tree Risk Assessment Report 9
3. Foliage Density: This field is an indicator of relative foliage density throughout the
crown. A sparse crown can be an indicator of declining health or
root problem. The two selections available are:
a. Normal
b. Sparse
4. Leaf Size: The average size of individual leaves are noted. A normal leaf size
is one that is typical for the species being assessed. The two
selections available are:
a. Normal
b. Small
5. Annual Shoot
Growth: An annual shoot growth of six -inches or greater is considered
_iJ
excellent. Three- to four -inches growth is considered average for
urban street trees. The three selections available are:
a. Excellent
b. Average
c. Poor MD
6. Twig Dieback? Response: Yes/No. An evaluation of small twig dieback is made.
If the number of dead twigs is greater than what is considered
typical for the species, a response of ",yes" is recorded.
7. Woundwood
Development: A woundwood development assessment 'is made of old pruning
wounds and trunk scars. The four selections available are:
a. Excellent
b. Average
c. Poor
d. None
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
10
8. Vigor Class: Vigor is an indicatorof (6 overall health. The ,or field, is
dete Mu"ned, by, evaluating, �,five features, of'the tree., These features
wigs, and
are! roots, trunk, scaffold branches, smiller branches/t�
foliage. The four selections available are:
a. Excellent
b. Average
c. Fair
d. Poor
9. Growth 0 physically impinge on the development of the
Obstructionse Any feature that may
tree is recorded. The seven selections available are:
a. Stakes (1)
b. Wire/ties (2)
c. Signs (3)
d. Cables (4)
e. Curb/pavement (5)
E Guards (6)
g, Other (7)
10. Major
Pests/Diseases: Amy discernible insect or disease problem is listed at this juncture.
Village of Mount Prospect =- Tree Risk Assessment Report
01
This category identified site features, either physical or climatic, that occur in the
i,n,g e
l a du te. Phystc0, i'd rmat-ionincludes land use type,
pronnty of the tree be va0
geographic anomalies,, and recent site and construct"lon,di'sturbances- Ctimatic inf nanation
jk H stru, ure, snow occurr, ences', etc. 'The thirteen
I "to'n's Sol
includes preval1ing, wind dkecti ct
fields in this category are:
1. Site Character: Site character ident'ifi, es the primary use of the site the tree is
located on. The seven selections available are:
a. Residence (1)
b. Commercial (2)
c. Industrial (3)
d. Park (4)
e. Open space (5)
E Natural (6)
g. Woodland/forest (7)
2. Landscape Type: Landscape type identifies the primary landscape feature the tree is
located on. The seven selections available are:
a. Parkway (1)
b. Raised bed (2)
c. Container (3)
d. Mound (4)
e. Lawn (5)
f. Shrub border (6)
g. Wind break (7)
3, Irrigation: This field denotes the presence or absence of an installed irrigation
system, and, if present, the effectiveness of the im"gation. The five
selections available are:
b. Adequate (2)
c. Inadequate (3)
d. Excessive (4)
e. Trunk wetted (5)
. .. .......
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
12
Nk
4. Recent Site
Disturbance:
es Y/No, fbilowed by a, choice, of disturbance type s. This
Res
field records recent sol"Idisturbante , that may have a fu tare, or
immediate impact on tree health and stability by damaging the tree's
root system. The five selections available are:
a. Construction (1)
b. Soil disturbance (2)
c. G rade, change (3)
d. Line clearing (4)
e. Site clearing (5)
5. Pavement
Lifted?
Response: Ye o. Any sign of sidewalk heaving greater than an
inch was recorded.
6. % Dripline
Paved:
The percentage of dripline paved is recorded. The five selections
available are:
a. 0%
b. 10-25%
c. 25-50%
do 50-75%
e. 75-100%
7. % Dripline with
Fill Soil.
Thepercentage of dripline covered in fill soil is recorded. The five
selections available are:
a. 0%
b, 10-25 %
c. 25-50%
do 50-75%
e. 75-100%
.............
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 13
. . ..........
% Dripline
Grade Lowered: The percentage of dripline grade lowered is recorded. The five
selections available are:
a. 0% d
b, 10-25%
c. 25-50%
d, 50-75%
e. 75-100%
9. Soil Problems: Any soil problems that are identified are recorded in this field. The
fourteen selections available are:
o
a. Drainage (1)
b. Shallow (2)
c. Compacted (3)
d. Drought (4)'
e. Saline (5)
L Alkaline (6)
g. Acidic (7)
h. Small volume (8)
16 Disease control (9)
j. History of fail (10)
k. Clay (11)
1. Expansive' (12)
m. Slope (13)
n. Aspect: (14)
WK
..........
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
14
10. Obstructions: Obstructions are physical features in the landscape that are
obstructed by the location of the tree being assessed. The nine
selections available are:
a. Lights (1)
b. Signage (2)
c. Line -of -sight (3)
d. View (4)
e. Overhead lines (5)
f. Underground utilities (6)
g. Traffic (7)
h. Adjacent vegetation (8)
L Other (9)
11. Exposure to
Wind: This field is another indicator of the trees location in association
with surr ounding trees. In, ttus instance, the field registers the
relation of the tree topotential wind exposure. The is selections
available are:
a. Single tree (1)
b. Below canopy (2)
c. Above canopy (3)
d. Recently exposed (4)
e. Windward, canopy edge (5)
f. Area prone to windthrow (6)
12, Prevailing Wind
Direction.
The most prevalent wind direction for the site is recorded as a
compass heading.
13. Occurrence of
Snow Storms,: The relative occurrences of snow and ice storms for the area is
recorded. The three selections available are:
a. Never
b. Seldom
c. Regularly
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 15
E. TARGET
Defined by the ISA, "the target component of a hazard rating is the people and property
that would be injured or damaged should a failure occur". The target category identifies
the use under the tree whether the target can be moved, and the level of occupancy. The
V I %"W
four fields in this category are:
1. Use Under Tree: This field identifies the most frequent use of the area under the tree
being assessed. The ten selections available are:
a. Building (1)
b. Parking (2)
c. Trafflic (3)
d. Pedestrian (4)
e. Recreation (5)
f. Landscape (6)
g. Hardscape (7)
h. Small features (8)
i. Utility lines (9)
j. School (10)
2. Can Target be
Moved? Response: Yes/No. In trying to mitigate a potentially hazardous
situation, a vegetation manager must consider that moving the
target, if possible, will reduce the hazard.
3. Can Use be
Restricted? Response: Yes/No. Like the previous field, a vegetation manager
must consider that restricting the use of the area, if possible, will
reduce the hazard.
4. Occupancy: The ISA has divided occupancy into the following four choices:
a. Occasional use: (e.g. jogging/cycling trai ' 1)
b, Intermittent use: (e.g. picnic area, day -use parking)
c. Frequent use: (e.g. seasonal camping area, storage facilities)
d. Constant use: (e.g. year-round use for a number, of hours each
day, residences)
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
16
A'uthors. e# Because all of the trees assessed,, except for, one, were located
I # s,*n,ct # , higho-vo!ume and, lowovolume
g, t a #std ten
ton betw
on municipal street
t
n, h upan. The, Village suggested, that
in dtlintatin,g occ ry
roads was, necesssarY
residential streets be identified as frequent use occupancy� and state, aud county
roads be identified as constant use occupancy.
The logic in having this distinction is well grounded. 'Because all, of the trees
0 11 , -tree w*th a, high
assessed were rated on the same, scale for risk potent*al, a 11
probability of failure would have a greater chance o,f'h 1*tting a turet on a h gh
volume, road as opposed to a to volume road.
The only time Natural Path modified the occupancy standard defined by I the Vinage
Wential street was, higher thantyptcal
was when we felt that occupancy on a resi
because the tree w or day -
as located near a school or park, or the street was used f
long parking*
The defects category allows the assessor to record, any apparent internal, or external
structural def�cts. An assessment is made by first observing any defects, associated with
*on of the
the roots. Of primary conc, inf f al decay. On compefigleti
root assessment'. observati,oris are made on the trunk and crown.
I I
The ten fields in this subcategory are:
1. Suspect Root whether root rot has been
Rot? Response: Yes/No. This field identifies
located or suspected.
2. Mushroom/Conk/
]Bracket Present 9W Response: Yes/No. If a physical fruiting body has been located, a
is
yee' response is recorded. If the species of the fungus,
4
k1. identifiable,, it is also recorded at this point.
'EDO
Village of mount Prospect
Tree Risk Assessment Report
17
3. Exposed Roots: A number of species are prone to exhibiting exposed surface roots.
The severity of the exposure is recorded here. The three selections
available are:
a. Severe
b. Moderate
c. Low
4. Undermined: If the stability of the tree's root system has been compromised by
erosion, the severity of the undermining is recorded here. The three
selections available are:
a. Severe
b. Moderate
c. Low
m.
5. Root Pruned: If any roots of the tree have been pruned recently, the distance of
the pruning from the trunk of the tree is recorded.
distance from trunk
6. Root Area T
Affected: The approximate root area affected by the root pruning referred to
in the previous question is entered in this field.
7. Buttress
Wounded? Response: Yes/No. If any part of the area known as the buttress is
damaged from scarring, record in this field. The buttress above-
ground, flared area of the trunk that forms the union of the root
system to the trunk.
S. When? If the date of the wounding is known, record it.
..... .....
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
18
9. Restricted Root This field is to record the relative severity of unavailable root area
Area: due to constructed hardscapes such as sidewalks, driveways,
P
avers, etc. The three selections available are:
a. Severe
b. Moderate
c. Low
1o. Potential for I
Root Failure: Based on the data collected within this category,, what is the relative
potential for the root system to fail on the tree being assessed. The
three selections available are:
a. Severe
b. Moderate
c. Low
TREE DEFECTS - LEAN
Continuing g in the defects category. The ten fields in this subcategory are:
11 Degree
from Vertical: If any lean occurs, record the degrees of line in this field.
2. Origin: The origin of the lean, if discernible, is recorded. The three
selections available are:
a. Natural
b. Unnatural
c. Self -corrected
'If any, soil surfaze around the tree, but
3. Soil Heaving? des p,onse: Yes/No.
especially on th�e opposng side of the lean, i's extu"biting mounding
i'
or heaving, record a "yes".
— — --------
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 19
4. Decay in Plane N.
of Lean?Response": 'Yest—No. A "Yee' responseis recorded if a decay column.
is ident"Ified on either the face of thetrunk the tree is leanIng toward
or on the face of the trunk on the opposing face of the lean.
5. Roots Broken? Response : YesNo- A "'Yee' response is recorded if roots show
breakage on the opposing side of the lean.
6. Soil Cracking? Response: Yes/No. A "yes' res, onse is recorded if soil shows
signs of cracking on the opposing slue of the lean.
7. Compounding recorded here.
Factors: Any factors that may compound the lean defect are
This can be anusually associated with roots,, that
y other defect,
have been identified.
8. Lean Severity:. This field records the relative severity of the lean, by synthesizi*ng
all of the information collected in the previous fields within this
category. The three selections available are:
a. Severe
b. Moderate
c. Low
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
20
TREE DEFECTS -CROWN DEFECTS
The last subcategory of the tree defects category is crown defects. Within this
subcategory, the assessor registers one of three ratings (s—severe, m=moderate, How) for
any of the defects listed below that apply.
The hazard rating category is where all of the data collected to this point is synthesized
into the PSA's twelve -point hazard rating. This category identifies the tree part most likely
to fail before the next inspection period. , As the time between inspections increase, the
greater potential exists for a larger part on the tree to fail. The six fields in this category
are,*
1. Tree Part Most
Likely to Fail:
This field identifies the tree part that is most likely to fail between
inspection periods. I
NO NOW ' 410000 011 i
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
W
0
2, Inspection s risk potential, an
Based onthe def�cts 'dentifiedand the treel M'C -1
I OF The three
Period49 d on is made at this t*'
einiod recommen at'
Inspection p ' la
selecti"O'nsavat ble are:
a. Annual
b. Biannual
c. Other
3. Failure , at 1" 6lihood that, the
the m fi kely failure and r esthel"k.
Potential: Identifies, yojst 1 11 result *nfallure witifinthe,
I W1
strUctural defects 'd,enfified su I As facto,r are:
# * �s � our ratings, availahleforthii
ection pertola. The f
insl) I
•r (e.g. dieback of twigs, small wounds
a, low: defects are nuno
od development) 1 -pant
with good woundwo Sty
Medium- defects are resent and obvious (e.g. cavl
b.
4, 1 o -*-?5,% of the circumfere nce,ofthe trunk,,
encompassing Z
codominant stems without included bark). 2 -points
rnificant defects present (e.g.
C* higho. numerous and/or Sig rcumference of the
cavit,y encompasslIng,30-501/o of the ci
M"ng wounds with decay along a branch).
trunk) muu'ltiple �pru,
3 -points
vete .. (egheartrot decay conks
do severe: defects are very semore than 50 % of
along,ma"In stem, Calvity encompassing
t, I he trunk). 45 - points
4, Size of Part: Rates • the size of the part most likely to fail. The four ratings
available for this factor are.
a. Most, likely Nilure less, t,han 6 inches in diameter. 1 -pant
1"kely ftilure 6-18 "Inches in diameter. 2 -points
bo, Most I is -30 in6hes, in diameter. 3 --points
Most lik 'lyf,
C* e dtlure *r than, 30 inches in diameter. 4-
o st, likely failure great e
points
Village of Molint prospect - Tree Risk A=ssment Report
22
5, Target Rating: Rates the use and occupancy of the area that would be struck by
the defectivepart. The four ratings available for this factor are:
a. Occasional use: (e.g. jogging/cycling, trail). 1 -point
be Intermittent use: (e.g. picnic area, day -use parking).
,2 -points
C, Frequent use: (e.g. seasonal camping area, storage
facilities). 3 -points
d, Constant use: (e.g. 'year-round use for a number of
hours each day, residences). 4 -points.
11
6. Hazard Rating: The twelve -point hazard rating is the sum of the three factors
detailed above: failure potential, size of part, and target.
It is easy to focus on whole tree failure as the hazard that ge s, assessed. In ftct,,, most
structural failures occur in the scaffold and upper branches., In this, categorY, the assessor
evaluates the defects identified and the hazard rating associated With the tree and tries, to
establish a reasonable abatement of the hazard. This abatement can include any
combinMtion of the following; remove the defective part, thin the crown', and cablelbrace
weak -forks: In extreme circumstances where arboricultural repairs will not sufficiently
abate the problem, removal of the tree is warranted. The eleven fields in this category are:
1. Prune: A number of arboricultural practices can be used to remedy some
high-risk situations. This field is used to record all pruning
abatement procedures. The eight selections available are:
a. Remove defective part (1)
b. Reduce end weight (2)
c. Crown clean (3)
d. Thin (4)
e. Raise canopy (5)
f. Crown reduce (6)
g. Restructure (7)
he Shape (8)
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
W
2. Cable/Brace: If a particular branch is identified as needing cabling, it is recorded
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
24
here. p.
3. Inspect Further:
If further inspections are required, the area needing inspection is
recorded. The four selections available are:
a. Root crown
b. Decay
c. Aerial
d. Monitor
4. Remove Tree?
Response,: Yes/No. If no' ti abate rnent procedures can be
recommended to reduce, thehazard, removaJ is recornmone d.
5. Replace?
Response: Yes/No. If enough room exists for a replacement tree to
be planted, it is noted in this field. "61 1
6. Move target.
Response: Ye o. If the target, such as a picnic table or bike
rack, can be moved, it is noted here.
7. Other:.
If an other recommendations can be made that are already not
covered, they are ,noted in this field.
8. Effect on
adjacent trees:
The affect of the recommended abatement procedures should be
assesses and recorded here and in the comments category. The two
selections available are:
a. None
b. Evaluate
9. Notification.
The agency responsible for enacting the abatement procedures
should be notified immediately. The three selections available are:
a. Owner
b. Manager
c. Governing agency
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
24
Q
10. Name: The name of the agency is recorded here.
11. Date: The date of notification is recorded here.
10 �..Mf N
,CQM
comments category is the last entry on the evaluation form. It is typically used to put
The g rY
,a narrative form the reasoning abatement procedures recommended. r m na g i
for the dddIts also � .
d
where an information on cares extracted from the tree is recorded and what, Y any,
y
photos were taken.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
25
�u
1131IMMI M& NEs"
This section synthesizes the information gathered during the field assessment. When the
data is presented in a graphic format, it is possible identify patterns that may assist the
Village in establishing a comprehensive risk reduction program. Once the findings have
been explained, a series of mitigation recommendations will be outlined.
L Snecies Distribution
A total of 286 trees were assessed encompassing twelve species. American Elm and
Silver Maple comprised 92% of the trees evaluated. Table I outlines the species
distribution of trees assessed by section. Table 2 outlines species distribution by number
and percent of total.
--
Table I -SDecies Distribution by Section
The project area encompassed the four sections that are scheduled for pruning next fisc
year (Section 3,5,15, and 16). The trees representedin the remaining six sections were
assessed because of homeowner service requests and do not imply that these are the on]
trees found in those sections with diameters of twenty-four inches and greater. I]
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
27
00o0000m�m
�oom000000�
Maple Silvero�m00000m�m
Elm. Siberian
. ...... . . ....... ..... I ....... . L�
�0000000000a
Poplar. White
�00000000000
rm�000000000�a
Hone
Linden Littleleatllloo=,""'=�=,=M=
��000m00000�o
h�0000000mo�a
Willow, Weepi!!�'ivoom00000�o
�o��00000���
The project area encompassed the four sections that are scheduled for pruning next fisc
year (Section 3,5,15, and 16). The trees representedin the remaining six sections were
assessed because of homeowner service requests and do not imply that these are the on]
trees found in those sections with diameters of twenty-four inches and greater. I]
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
27
•
Species
11
Num . ber % of Total
Elm, Amer•ican
168�
'93
59.0
33.0
Maple, Silver
4.0
Eln,j, Siberian
12
1.2
Cottonwood
4
0.7
poplar, to
2
0.3
Ash, Green
1
1
0.3
Ijackberry, Common
0.3
Haney locust, Thornless 1
0.3
Linden, Littlekaf
1
o.3
Maple, Boxelder
1
o.3
Mulberry
I
1
03
TOTAL
286
10010,
Table 2 Species Distribution of Trees Assessed
Village of Mount prospect _ Tree Risk Assessment Report
28
D s t r i" b u
Table 3 outlines in four -inch increments the diameter distribution of all trees assessed.
The 20" diameter class includes all trees between 17 and 20 inches in diameter.
Diameter
Class
Number
% of Total
2011)
1
0.5
24VII
1
0.5
28,91
30
18.0
3 22V
44
26.0
36"
33
20.0
40"
28
16.7
4491)
13
7.7
48tv
13
7.7
52,111
2
1.2
56"
1
0.5
60,111
0
0.0
64"
0
0.0
68,19
0
0.0
7291
0
0.0
7611)
1
0.5
8VTI
. .....
TOTAL
286
100,0
Table 3 - Diameter Distribution of all Trees Assessed
I
100 7 94
I
80 64
so 40
40 28 24
28
15 12
20,000 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 M
201* 24' 28" 32" W 400' 48" 62" 66- 60" 64' 68" 72= 760 80=
Diameter Classes
uo
Graph 1- Diameter Distribution of all Trees Assessed
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 29
..................
SARaza,rd R
Table 4 outlines the ISA Hazard Rating distribution for all trees assessed. Because the
target rating assigned to a street tree can never be below a rating or"3",and the lowest
rating that can be assigned to the remaining two factors is "I", the lowest possible total
Re ss0
score is
ISA Rating Number % of Total
1 0 0.0
2 0 0.0
3 0 0.0
4 0 0.0
5 1 0.3
6 53 17.3
7 90 29.4
8 64 21.0
9 55 18.0
10 38 12.4
11 5 1.6
0 O'o
TOTAL 286 100.0
Table 4 - ISA Hazard Rating Distribution for all Trees Assessed
As was explained earlier in the narrative, the rating assigned to each tree is on a relative
scale. There is no quantitative number to distinguish the differences in ratings, in other
words a rating of" 10" is not 'Y' times worse then a rating of "9". However for risk
management purposes, the hazard rating does place a tree on the scale in relation to other
trees. The higher the score the higher the potential for failure exists. With this in mind the
tree with a rating of "10" has a higher potential for structural failure or doing physical
damage then the tree with a rating of "9".
...................
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
30
r
N -011W
In developing a tree risk management program one must determine at what point
mitigation must occur. 'The obvious pno'nty, is to ntigate the trees with the highest,
ratings. This does not neces,safily mean the removal of a, tree. The determination of how
to gate the potential risk is a function of determining for each tree it's hazard rating,
the species 'Involved, the extent of multiple defects, the probability of faflure and the
idualt,Leeb ased
probability of striking a target. It- becqrnes a- ment-pLgn Indivi � ast . B
@ the 286 trees assessed were categorized into three action
on the above information,,
recommendations: Removal, Priority Monitoring., and Cyclic Maintenance.
11 Removal - This action was recommended�i for a tree that in part or in whole
demonstrated a high probability of failure. This recommendation was made when no other
our trees met
arboricultural alternative could be found to mitigate the problem. Thirty -f
this criteria. [See Appendix 3 for a list of all trees recommended for removal.] See
Volume H - Data, for an explanation of why the removal was recommended. Table 5 and
Graph 2 display the distribution of the 34 trees marked for removal in relation to the ISA
Hazard Rating assigned to them
Total Number of
ISA Rating Number Removal % of Total
1
0
0
0.0
2
0
0
0.0
3
0
0
0.0
4
0
0
0.0
5
1
0
0.0
6
53
0
0.0
7
90
0
0.0
8
64
0
0.0
9
55
8
14.5
10
38
21
55.3
11
5
5
100.0
1, 2
0
0
0
TOTAL
286
34
1119
Table 5 - Number of Trees Marked for Removal by ISA Rating Distribution
4
Village of Mount Prospect . Tree Risk Assessment Report 31
As may well be guessed, all of the trees with a score greater then "10" are recommended
to be removed. The percentage goes down as the rating goes down. Approximately 50%
of trees with a score of" 10" are recommended for removal. Just under 15% of trees with
a score of "9" are recommended for removal.
Note: One policy decision that may be formed from this point is that all trees,
regardless of species, with a hazard rating score of "11" or greater should be
recommended for removal.
25
20
15
10
6
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2
Graph 2 - Number of Trees Marked for Removal by ISA Rating Distribution
Thep ercentage of removals for the trees assessed (11.9%) is higher than typical for a
municipal forestry program. In the Chicago area, typical removal percentages hover
around 1.5%. A review of the Village's tree removal history shows that approximately
350 trees are removed each year. Thus is a removal percentage of 1.5% based on a total
population of 24,000 trees.
We believe the Village's removal percentage is higher then typical, in part, because of the
deta . iled focus on identifying structural defects on high risk species. Our expectation at the
beginning of the project was a removal percentage of 8%. The 'even even higher percentage
realized may imply that the Village should be removing a few more trees then is being
currently done.
Table 6 displays the species distribution for the 34 trees marked for removal. American
Elm comprises the largest number of removals. This, however, is not surprising in that
American Elm makes up 59% of the trees assessed.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
32
Marked for
- --- --------
Species
--- — - - - --------- - -
Species Removal
Total
Percent
Elm, American 20
168
13.4
Maple, Silver 8
93
8.8
Elm, Siberian 0
12
0.0
Cottonwood 1
4
25.0
Poplar, VVhite 0
2
0.0
Ash,, Green I
I
100.0
Hackberry, Common 0
1
0.0
Honevlocust, Thornless I
1
100.0
Linden, Littleleaf I
1
100.0
Maple, Boxelder 0
1
0.0
Mulberry
1
100.0
W ill'ow in 1
1 .. ........
100:.0
TOTAL 34
286
11,9
Table 6 - Species Distribution of Trees Marked for Removal
One way to determine if any removal trends exist within a species is by comparing the
number of removals to the total species population. Graph 3 and 4 depict the diameter
distribution for American Elm and Silver Maple respectively. The total height of each bar
represents the total number of trees within the diameter class for the species represented.
The lighter colored portion of each bar represents the total number of removals within
each diameter class for the species represented.
One trend we try to look for is a higher percentage of removals as the diameter classes
increase in size. If this trend does occur for a given species, the village may consider a
policy of automatic removal as trees of the species under consideration attain the diameter
size in which the potential for structural failure increases dramatically. In both cases
depicted below, neither species shows appreciable differences in removals as the size
increases. American Elm and Silver Maple are the only species shown because a large
enough sample size of the remaining ten species assessed did not exist.
46
40
35
30
26
20
is
10
6
0
200 240, 28" 32" 36" 40" 44" 48- 52- DIF DU 04 go #am a IV WOW
Diameter Classes
Graph 3 - Removal Distribution by Diameter for American Elm
Graph 4 - Removal Distribution by Diameter for Silver Maple
2. Prior•
ity Mitigation - This action was recommended for trees that demonstrated
reasonable health and had defects that should be mitigated through arboricultural practices
other than removal. These trees, however, do require an annual, ins pectionto Monitor
I mi i ting practices, that
major defect:s that, are presentand to alsoassess, the " *ntegfity of *t',ga
have occurred,such as cabling. One hundredand ei,ghttreesmetthis cIrttenia, [See
Appendix 4 for a list ofall trees recornmended for priority 'monitoring.) In some
instances, d,efective branches are recommended for removal. Thes�e activities should be
addressed during the regular pruning cycle. Comments on recommended actions for each
tree are listed in Volume II - Data for each tree in Appendix 4.
3. Cyclic Maintenance - This action was recommended for trees that demonstrated
a low potential for failure. A number of these trees also require mitigation through
arboricultural practices. These trees can be maintained and monitored as part of the
Village's regular cyclic pruning program. The remaining 144 trees met this criteria. [See
Appendix 5 for a list of all trees recommended for cyclic maintenance.] Comments on
recommended actions far each tree, if any, are listed for each tree in Volume II - Data.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
34
1:0 re recommended for a number of trees M" the, latter two
Specific, arboricultural practices, we #
gh,
maintenance, actions. A total of twenty trees had limbs that, were defect,ve enouto
41
warrant the removal of the limb. [See Appendix 6for a list of all, trees, req,luiri"ng some
branch removal other than what regular sanitation ' pruning would mitigate.] A total
of seventy-six trees required either existing cable's to be 'inspected, additional cables
installed, or cabling for the first time. [See Appendix 7 for a list of all trees requiring
cabling or cable inspections.]
During the course of this project, three major defects were identified. These defects made
up the bulk of the reasons for removing a tree or placing the tree on priority mitigation.
The defects are:
1. Trunk Cracks on American Elms, A large number of trees exhibited vertical cracks
from the base of the tree to the scaffold limb union. One crack usually occurs between
each set of scaffold limbs. lf a tree exting this defect i's selected to remain on the
ect is removed', it
street I it should be cabled extensively. When a tree with this type of def
4, #
important for the fbrestrystaff to, obs e how far the cracks exte nd laterally into the
w"ll assist, staff at future times in determining whether to save a
trunk. These, observatio, Ins 1,
tree or remove it.
2. Cavities at Branch Unions. A few trees exhibited this defect. Depending on how
extensive the decay is, cabling these limbs is not recommended because the integrity of the
branch union is questionable.
3. Basal Decay. A few trees exhibited this defect. The basal collar has been severely
undermined by decay processes. This type of defect is extremely hazardous because of the
hih potential for total tree fa
gilure.
The following list comprises some of the remag inindefects found durinthis project. VT
g`e
have included a brief description of the defect accompanied by some recommended
gation actions.
4. Crack. A fissure or cleft in the bark and wood, usually a longitudinal separation.
Cracks can occur in stems and branches and may extend up from the roots into the stem.
External cracks are initiated by the cambia wounds caused by fire, mechanical damage,
cankers branch stubs dead roots or internal cracks. Cracks form over a period of years
in building solid rings of wood over a wound. Inrolled wood
as a tree is unsuccesstui
forms over the wound site to create the crack. Cracks perpetuate themselves by adding
layers to the inrolled wood, worsening the situation.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 35
Assessment Criteria:
I'mr,nediate 'Removal when
- It is possible to see through the crack
- The stem has two cracks
- The stem has an open crack which is in contact with another defect
1HI L*g nh F all; r e Pole n Li ajI when
- The stem has one open crack with inrolled bark
- A four inch or larger branch has a crack
- A branch has an abrupt bend, twist or sharp angle
1 11 ium,F, I , when
Med, ailure Pote
. , �ti
- There are single, closed cracks on the stem
- There are single "frost" cracks
5. Weak Crotch. A crotch is either a fork in the stem, or the joint of two or more main
branches. A weak crotch has inrolled bark on the branch bark ridge. Often, stem tissues
will sink immediately below the branch of a weak crotch. Underneath the inrolled branch
bark ridge, bark forms between the branches but has no strength to hold the branches
together. As more bark is included inside the tree, the remaining woody connections
between branches will be unable to support the weight of the branch and the -weak crotch
will fail.
Assessment Criteria:
Immediate Removal when
- Crotch is cracked, cankered or decayed
a flure'Potentt,t,
l when
- Crotch has an inrolled branch bark ridge or bark inclusions
6.- Stem or Branch Decay. Wood that is structurally degraded or missing. Decay results
in a loss of structural strength and stability.
Decay is caused by fungi which infect fresh wounds in bark and wood. Over a period of
years, the fungi degrade and consume the wood's components causing the wood to be
structurally unsound.
The most dangerous decay -causing fungi are the canker -rot fungi. These infect and
degrade new growth rings as they form each year, so the entire volume of wood at the
canker location is structurally weakened. Trees are easily fractured at the canker -rot
infection site.
.... ....... . -
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
36
e Y, ess, problermfiz. only the wood, present at the
'Fungi that cause only decay arusuall I
aptible to decay ftomthatinf�ction. Subsequent, growth rings are
time of wounding, is susce ( '
free from decay so only an of the wood, at the In&ction, site is structurally
portio
weakened.
Assessment Criteria:
liate R al when,
resent in, the lower twelve feet ofthe main stem
Canker -Tot i P
Decay is present in a weak crotch
I when
?o
.r open crack occur together
vs the cum so
7. Cankers. Localized cambial tissue death. A canker wound destroambi
,
th• wood and bark cannot form over the canker location. Cag
nkers are caused by fun
at i,
insects, weather, or mecharfical damage.
................
Annual cankers are injuries or short-lived infections which " do not affect the tree orrn
structurally. Perenmal cankers, are long-te fb:ngus associations which, can alter tree f
and struCture and, increase; the 4kelihood ofstem fracture. Commonly� peremal cankers
have a "tar•get-like" appearance. Diffuse cankers are infections of large areas of the m
stem and kill trees rapidly.
Assessment Criteria:
1,mm ,e,,,,.d ,�e ,mova when
iat
Canker -rot infection is present in the lower twelve feet of the main stem
Cankers are located in the lower twelve feet of the main stem and on more than half of
the steas circumference
- Cankers are associated with other defects, especially cracks, decay or a weak crotch
ntia'l vihen
Failure P e
Cankers, affect,greater , than, half of the stem's circumference
Low -F t1lal when o other defects
Cankers affect, less than half of the stem's circumference and there are n
8, Death. A tree, branch or tree top is no longer living and, therefore, will be readily and
rapidly colonized by decay -causing fungi.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 37
Dead tops or branches may remain attached for several years or may fall off immediately,
depending on the tree species and the cause of death. While dead branches commonly
break off near the main stern, dead trees can fail anywhere: at the ground line, in the first
twelve feet of the main stern, or anywhere there is a defect. t
Assessment Criteria:
iota e opal of dead material when
- A tree is dead
- Dead branches or tops are lodged in a live tree
H,'FlRtn* awhen
enighut
Any branch is more than two thirds dead
A top is dead
9. Architectural Defect. Structure and form of a tree that is outside the range of
"normal" for that species. For example, the tree is leaning or a branch is grossly out of
balance with the rest of the crown.
Assessment Criteria:
toviv when
jafe mert
iate Removal wh
- A tree has a lean of greater than forty-five degrees
- A leaning tree with less than a forty-five degree angle also has an associated defect, such
as a crack, a canker or decay
Faiilure,P, 'Ptential when
- Branches have twists,, sharp angles or bends in them
- Branches are lopsided in respect to rest of the crown, especially if nearby trees have been
removed within the last ten years
10. Construction Injury. Various mechanical injuries to the stem or roots by equipment
or auto traffic, trenching, filling or lowering the grade, utility installation, black topping,
etc. Construction sites should be reevaluated after work is finished and watched carefully
for a period of years. M
A construction injury can change a minor defect to a major one. For example, a bump
with heavy equipment can enlarge a crack or fracture a portion of a decayed stem.
Assessment Criteria:
when
- Root severing affects more than half of the area inside a tree's dripline
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
38
11. Poor Condition. A tree which is expressing low vigor or impending death as
evidenced by: branch dieback or overall crown decline; abnormal leaf size; or early fall
coloration or production of new branches on the main stem.
Assessment Criteria:
otgniialwhen,
wn combined with development of
Therehas been recent, death of large limbs in the cro
new branches on the main stem
W, when
- Recent and prolonged pest outbreak results in dieback and low tree vigor
12. Storm Damage. Mechanical failure of roots, main stem or branches due to the stress
. a 0
of snow, icel rain'. strong winds, etc. The extent and type of damage cannot be
Int'llcipated. Sanitaion,'pruning, after a storm may, be requirea, and a storm was
particularly seve,re..' all. trees on a, site sh,ould, be reex ned to det new cracks,
windthrows, lodged trees or branches, etc. Malnydef�cts become more severe under the
increased weight load or other stresses caused by stonns.
Assessment Criteria:
Immediate,&Mpyg] of damaged material when
- Broken branches are lodged in the crown
- Trees have been windthrown, lodged or otherwise damaged
of 1, when
- Trees have been struck by lightening but are still alive
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 39
N. POLICY DEVELOPMENT
E I �Nl M g 1 1 g= 9109
ise resonable care to
In most states, the municipal government has a legal duty to exerc* a
protect the general public ftom foreseeable hazard,s*, 'To rmmMize the Iabi, ity associated,
h trees in high -use areas, such as urban, streets and, parks, landmanagers, must
Wit
demonstrate that they are exhibiting "reasonable care" 'in, mai'maird,ng, the trees on tho,s,e
sites.
Tree removals are an integral part of a good forest management program. Removals are
as necessary to the urban forest's life -cycle as are tree plantings and maintenance.
Removals do!, at times', stimulate a public reaction because people grow attached to the
trees in the vicinity of their homes. Nevertheless, a successful community forestry
program demands that a removal poltqy beadopted a ndappli,,,ed unifiormily throughout the
town. A clear, policy, provi I des coherent, guidelines, to enable town offmciials, and crews to
make informed removal -decisions. Furthermore, such a, policy can help allay, � blic
pu
concerns about tree removals. The village's potential losses from liability claims are also
greatly reduced, due to healthier and therefore less hazardous trees, as well as to the
aining
village's ability to demonstrate the degree of care exercised in maintits community
forest.
There are three important benefits of establishing a strong risk management policy. The
first is to maintain safe public areas by reducing potentially hazardous trees and the liability
associated with them. Secondly, the removal of dead and declining trees allows the
vegetation manager to make room for new diverse plantings which in turn increases the
overall health of the community forest. Thirdly, the allocation of limited fiscal resources
toward maintaining both young and mature, healthy trees is more efficient and fiscally
responsible than allocating funds toward maintaining decadent, senescing,, over -mature
trees,
The goal of a tree risk mangement program is to develop a comprehensive hazard
mitigation program that will increase the safety of the public right-of-way, guarantee the
accurate identification of high-risk trees, initiate the timely removal of potentially
hazardous trees, and to heighten staff awareness of hazard abatement procedures.
To enact the above goals, two main components of a comprehensive risk management
policy should be enacted. These components are: education and define risk reduction
objectives.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 41
Knowledge of tree risk management should not be exclusive information. The three main
groups affected by a risk reduction program -- staff, public officials, and the general public
Q..M must be kept informed on the topic.
A Staff -- The forestry, public works, and clerical staff are the people most directly
affected by day-to-day operations and policies. They require the expertise and information
to make informed decisions in the field. They are also required to mediate and resolve
conflicts that arise when a private individual objects to a certain policy being acted on. To
stay informed, staff training must be encouraged. Education for staff comprises the
following four components:
1. Attend tree risk management workshops regularly. (Even though a workshop was
recently held for staff, the Illinois Arborist Association is providing a one -day
workshop on appraisal methods this March. We encourage some staff to attend.)
2. Copy and distribute current risk management articles from trade and professional
journals to all staff.
3 Encourage staff to diagnose the cause of tree failures when they occur. What
defects were the primary reason for failure?
4. Use the computerized inventory to gain knowledge on species specific problems.
The inventory is one of the best tools available to the village to assess the current
log of trees. It should be used to identify high-risk species and high-risk defects.
Besides the seven high-risk species evaluated during the course of this project,
some additional trees to be concerned with are: Lombardy Poplar, Corkscrew
Willow, Red and White Mulberry, Tree of Heaven, and large diameter Green Ash.
Some key defects to monitor include trunk cavities, and basal decay.
The inventory should also be used to evaluate the history of tree failures in the
village and the maintenance history of specific species. In each case, failure and
high -maintenance patterns may be identified that will assist staff in identifying
and/or mitigating future hazards.
Be Public Officials -- Elected officials must approve policy that guarantees the safety
of the public right-of-way. A mandate that is, at times, difficult to enforce when dealing
With a topic as sensitive as tree removals. It is important that elected officials understand
the process involved with assessing a tree. In the end run, the goal of a municipal tree risk
reduction program is to minimize the potential hazards to the general public that use the
public right-of-way. Policy should reflect that goal.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
42
co General Public -- The private individual has the most emotional attachment to the
trees in front of his or her house. The decision by the municipality to remove a tree,
theref5re, has the,greatest, direct 'Impact on that person. We firmly believe that the more
,informed an indi'viduall's about a certain, policy, the better the opportunities to mediate any
difficulties.
Identifying clear risk -reduction ob ectives is the foundation of a long-term risk reduction
program. The following are two important risk -reduction objectives:
• Reduce the Number of Poor Quality Species
• Reduce Specific Defects
• Initiate a Cyclic Risk Assessment Program's
A. Reduce the Number of Poor Quality Species
A species may be considered of "Poor" quality for a variety of reasons. In the context of
this report, the pm,,aq, fbatures of'a poor qualityspecies are: consistent exhibh*oni of poo
trunk, stability or inordinate amounts of dieback, at maturity, The secondary features of
poor quality considered here are: poor form, forked trunk and susceptibility to decay. If
Roth primary and secondary features are present, the tree is considered a maintenance an
hazard liability. I
There are eleven species that the Village should take every opportunity to remove from
it's street tree inventory. They are'Boxelder', Red and White Mulberry, White Poplar,
Siberian Elm, Tree of Heaven, Willow, Cottonwood, Lombardy Poplar, Silver Maple, and
Corkscrew Willow.
All eleven species have a high-risk of structural failure associated with them as they get
more mature. A risk -reduction program is not just the removal of trees that are an
imminent threat of falling, but the removal of undesirable species before they become a
pr oblem. By removing these species, when the opportunity anses, the villa effectIvely
, nd n, m
millamiz,es the greater cost of removing the larger tree at a, latertime aia ore
hazardous structural state. The high cost of maintaina"rig the tree over 'its` s life is also,
removed.
B. Reduce Specific Defects
As mentioned in an earlier section, there are a number of defects the Village staff can
focus on reducing. The primary ones are basal decay, cavities at branch unions, and
American elms with numerous vertical cracks.
. . .............. ..........
rr
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 43
C. Implement A Cyclic Risk Assessment Program
Most literature concerning the development of a hazard tree management program
e ha '* e I regular monitoring schedule. An easy
mp s1z : the "mportance of maintaining a
0 ty,
stat emem, t,o, write,,, but a difficult policy to implement. The best way to reduce liabi i
however, is to carry out a regular program of monitoring. The most practical way to
0
implement a risk assessment program is to focus on the following three factors:
o On a village -wide basis, identify the number of each target species to assess.
Identify fiscal and human resources limits.
o Determine a feasible annual schedule based on the number of trees to assess and
resources available.
A eN
1. Identify the Number of Target bpecies
40
'S I of the high-.�ri,sk
BY revilew*ng, the ventory data on,a, eaon,by section basis ' fbr,each
Spec , leSid,eintified by the Vi1lag''e".1 wecan beg,'In to target certain areas of the M"llage that
W11
may'need more attention then others'-ident,"fy a as of the, I be more of a
]age that,
problem in years to come; and identify where few but problematic trees exist.
The following seventeen tables show the diameter distribution by forestry section for the
seven high-risk species identified by the Village. The information that should be extracted
from these tables involve answering the following questions:
Where are the diameter peaks for each species?,
Where are the large diameter trees located?
How many trees of each species are there?
Section I contains very few large diameter trees. One important feature is that the large
number of Silver Maples, while not an immediate problem, will place an increasing burden
on the village forestry department as the trees mature and obtain larger diameters.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
44
In Section 2 the sameproblem as was found in the previous Section occurs. In this
instance, howeverl there are a far greater number of trees in the twenty-four inch diameter
class.
In Section 3. again, the same problem is identified. The distribution of Silver Maples is
similar to Section 1.
In Section 4, two species dominate -- Silver Maple and Siberian Elm.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 45
Diameter rn for Six S )vves - Section 4
rr
mm
. .... ............... .
Ims
CM
Cononwood
7
..........
Me M
L "N
Willow, WeTmE
In Section 4, two species dominate -- Silver Maple and Siberian Elm.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 45
Section 5 contains a large number American Elm and Silver Maple. Only half of this
section was assessed as part of this project.
Section 8 is almost exclusively dominated by large -diameter American Elm. In
establishing a schedule of assessments, this section would be a priority.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
46
Diameter Distribution for Six edea, - Section 6
toter Classes;
. .... . .......... . . . .... ...... .. .. 7-12" 13-18" 19-24" 25-30" 31-36" 37"+ Total
.........................
Cottonwood
...... . ....... ..... ... -.-- Y
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ehn, Amencan
0 0 0 55 60 20 29 169
"Now-w�__
El Im S i bmi an
0 0 1 9 10 61,11,111,111, 2 29
Maple, Boxelder
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
--- --------
M le. Siler2
1 8 57 . . ..... 46 29 9 6 1581
Poplar, White
7 i 1 0 4
0 0 0 0
'E'
Willow. Weeping
0 (0) 0 o O 0 0 0 MMMMMM" NO will I
:' 1"
Se'ction 6like Section 5
contains a large number American Elm and Silver Maple. There
are a few large diameter Siberian Elm to be concerned about,.
Diameter Distribution for Six Species -'Section 7
S C ies
Diameter Classes
'pe
. .......... . .... . .
------ "_ ' 1
---------- - — ''
13 4_6" 7-12" 13-19" , 19-24" 25-30" 31-3,6" 37"+ Total
--------- --
Cottonwood
----
0 0 0 0 0 2
Elm., American American
0 0 3 1 3 0 0
Elm Siberian
. . ..... . ... ...
0 1 2 10 17 3 0 0 33 1
MaC. Boxel der
P1 ,
1 2 �3 0 0 0 0 0 6
-
Maple Silm
4 1 1 22 —7 263 373 33 1 0 697
ffiffi�
Poplar, White
0 0 0 0 0 3
Will ow"We in
0 0 0 I : 0 0 2 0 31 ::L L
Section 7 is dominated by Silver Maple. The diameter peak for this species, unlike the
previous sections reviewed, is in the twenty-four inch class. As this peak moves into the
next two diameter classes, this section will be of greater concern to the Village.
Diameter Distribution for Six S'Recless Section 8
Species Diameter Classes
S ed --mi INN — . . .....................
1-3" 4-6" 7-12" 13-18" 19-24" 25-30" 31-36" 37"+ Tot
1-3"
Ro 0
Cottonwood 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0
E Ekn, American ------ -------- - 0 0 1 8 33 194 116 32 384
0
Elm Siberian 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0
M 1, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0
M;Lpl, 2 4 10 0 0 39
!ple,, . ... . .... I .
Section 8 is almost exclusively dominated by large -diameter American Elm. In
establishing a schedule of assessments, this section would be a priority.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
46
Section 9 is also dominated by American Elm, but, unlike section 8, with far fewer trees in
the larger sizes.
In Section 10, the largest number within one species is Silver Maple. The total numbers
for Silver Maple though are relatively low.
Section 11 contains about 170 Silver Maples and American Elm. Within the large
diameter classes, their numbers relatively low compared to other sections. There is an
unusually high number of large diameter Siberian Elms in this section.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 47
Diametier Distribution for Six Species,
- Section 11
'�pedes
.......... —
[-Cotionwwd
...........
il
------
agn-wT
111
Inc
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Section 11 contains about 170 Silver Maples and American Elm. Within the large
diameter classes, their numbers relatively low compared to other sections. There is an
unusually high number of large diameter Siberian Elms in this section.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 47
Section 12 mimics sections I and 3 with the greatest number of trees being Silver Maple.
Again the trees are located in the medium-sized diameter classes.
Section 13 parallels Section 12 in Cistnoution.
ro ja
V" W KIILC t
0 0 0 0 0 0
Willow,
0-- tin
The data listed in these tables was retrieved from the 1.993 Urban Forestry Management
Plan. The data for Section 14 appears W duplicate Section 13. The data listed for one of
these two sections is erroneous.
Diameter Distribution for Six Species - Section 13
SFies
Species
-.1 OWN,
Diameter
.
..... ..... i
Diameter Glasses
. ......... .
1-3"
. ....... ..
13-18" 19-24" 1091 31-36"
4-699 7-12" 25-30
371"+
Total
------------
Cottonwood
0
1-3,n
4-6"
..... . . .. .........
7-12"
......... . . . ..... - -------------
13-18" 19-24"
.. ..........
25-30"
31-36"
OWHMMMM000"
37"+
NEWMONNOM"NO
Total
Elm. Siberian
Cott onwoW0
0 1 11 11 6 0
0
0
0 0
......... .
0
0
0
0
Map le, Sjjiv�Cr
Elm— American
. . ........... . .
0
. ...... .
0
..... . 0
0 0
0
0
0
0
Willow, We in
Elm Siberian
0
0
1
0 3
i 0
0
0 . . . . .
. . ............ 4
�!It, Boulder
0
0
2
1 0
- - ----- 0
0
0
3
14"APIC" Silver"2
8
15
56 27 ......... . . . .
0
0
0
108
Po' ilar, white
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
Willow, W = ing
O -T
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
Section 13 parallels Section 12 in Cistnoution.
ro ja
V" W KIILC t
0 0 0 0 0 0
Willow,
0-- tin
The data listed in these tables was retrieved from the 1.993 Urban Forestry Management
Plan. The data for Section 14 appears W duplicate Section 13. The data listed for one of
these two sections is erroneous.
Diameter Distribution for Six 'Species Section 15
.,.
SFies
-.1 OWN,
Diameter
. .......
. ......... .
1-3"
. ....... ..
13-18" 19-24" 1091 31-36"
4-699 7-12" 25-30
371"+
Total
------------
Cottonwood
0
1 0 0 1 0 0
7
0
2
Elin, American
0
3 3 3 2 2
3 ——
0
16
Elm. Siberian
0
0 1 11 11 6 0
0
29
Maple, Boulder
3
9 5 4-1 1 0 -0
0
22
Map le, Sjjiv�Cr
1
1 6 66 164 127 27 1
0
392
Po lar, White
0
0 0 I 0 1 1 0
1
3
Willow, We in
1110O
L 0 0 0 1 2
"
0
31
Village of Mount Prognct - Tree Risk Assessment Report
t"
48
& 0 -0 0
Section 15 parallels Section 12 in species and diameter distribution'. All of this section
was assessed as part of this project.
Section 16, like Section 5, contains a large number American Elm and Silver Maple. All
of this section was assessed as part of this project.
In Section"' 171, there are a relatively low number of large -diameter, high risk trees.
In reviewing the above distribution tables, the following points become clear:
• American Elm is clearly the species that should concern the Village the most. The
species contains the largest number of trees and the largest number of large -diameter
trees.
Silver Maple is the ' next most prevalent species, but it's numbers are relatively low in
the larger diameter classes. This species will become an increasing problem with time.
Sections 51, 61) 81) 9. and 11 are the sections with the highest priority for assessment
The remaining five species are sporadically cally represented, but a few large diameter
Op species in a number of sections should be of concern to the Village rt of a risk
A number of species, such as Boxelder, have small diameter trees that, as pa.
reduction plan could be targeted for removal. See Section 15 as an example.
. ............ . ..............
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report 49
B. Identify Fiscal and Human Resources Limits.
A tree risk reduction program is naturally limited by the fiscal and human resources
available to implement the program. The Village must have a clear understanding of what
is feasible within budgetary and personnel constraints. Courts in liability cases understand
these constraints. The process established for reducing risk is almost as 'important as
reducing the risk itself. Part of the process is understanding what limitations there are and
adapting a policy to address those limitations.
C. Determine a Feasible Annual Assessment Schedule
Based on the potential number of trees to assess and the resources available, is it possible
to establish a cyclic assessment program.
The following table shows the percentage of
trees assessed with this project.
PERCENTAGE OF SPECIES ASSESSED TO TOTAL NUMBER OF SPECIES
INVILLAGE WITH DIAMETERS OVER 24 INCHES IN DIAMETER
SPECIES ASSESSED
TOTAL PERCENTILE
"Wowwwwow Now"
Cottonwood 4
7 57%
Elm,, American 162
11077 15%
Elm, Siberian 8
120 7%
Ma Lel Boxelder i 1
8 13%
Ma le Silver 75
355 21%
Po lar, White 2
7 29%
Willow, Wee in 1
10 10%
Just under 20% of the high-risk trees in the village were evaluated. Are there enough
resources to assess 20% of the trees each year? If not, what is a realistic schedule to
implement? Only by assessing the first two parts outlined in this cyclic assessment
component will that question be answered.
In conclusion, the Village has taken a large step forward in developing a comprehensive omprehensive
tree risk reduction program. Staff knowledge and skills equal or exceed many of the
departments that we at Natural Path must work with. The information gathered from this
project should assist in focusing the program for the future.
Village of Mount Prospect - Tree Risk Assessment Report
50
fir .,,a ,,, ,,, ,,;,
r i ° , ,,, m ri, , 'i
✓iY,A� V ^ ✓ i i„� f� it
M 9I 11� r r11 f) fr G5 $1,1 �r I, 'rI. ,"r//
I,
r/1; a/J p � ,,. �, F 'w, '° ,i fr /, ,, , 11, I / bi l9,l k ear I,, ral yp^
:r/ % J of, �(J, r' JI, >'„ui m j J�,� ,Jff r I, yj ",(�
�' ", 1 � �.^w ; ,r i " GI ";,�r r ... ; 9f,,, `. ✓< mn , ,. ,z , , .IiM -�wi �'',J,o.. „'`�"` ra��/J :ry 1 r ),�E� / rr
`%r, fy dPf �' l% ,I ,', I Ift -„L , , k „ �1 'r % J' " ml tl�Jy� /llo; J'
III
fpr � a,If I ° o'� h, nm, I,I, r �1 �I���frl�
, , „ 11 i ra p1
/ rt11
!'s;�%/rflJ� J� , 11 I1111111111111111 ,
����JnJ r ll�r "qr", / , ��"Ill sr�l ,y'ir a°i�'h" J ",l! r fir'
ll
A'11)111,
"i m II9 zr, ,. :,n 11 ,s,,, W fr"nr ��,t I ' `7 a 9 � r , l`p�
Y
If I
' o 'J
M t,kf �r s ,/JG� 1' A / , % _ : ,�„ ���, '.� a Qfr, f fi I "' I 11 11 I," " l l �l
H ri 10 �v d
l v 0"� e
11 ,r I4r
, IfI' / J - r I, /.x IN,11 I Edi Jr>�� I
P
/ , + , ^ I Al
, oJ� SPI
W
1 NI
i r f '„ , ri IV I
a 11 Il V
Jv4 N ,` ✓i'� f rIII I
i
r r v ,., - - r p���p� rI tfr Nn. /,
, Q r, , � � 1a f ,
O
'r1 e r(�,, rm'� �
" / 1, ( ". ,. ;�^
/ F ",, �, '' fro l 1( """m , " Ill" 1I IJ
I If ,, , '9 Im f ,
I/,
/ t I0, 1, ,0 .
J /
If ,,
NF
m
�,r
�n ,
a ✓ r „ >I11 I P o
I I
r „y' .. '
N / r : d i. .. q « ^ 1
I
r Ivy, r
Ja fir 4 _ - , 1.1, I ray rrr r I
rIII id
I,r li r, r/ " c„ , I s m g t� � fH r#� � fI
,
d wy u' .� r
a ,�
')
IIIo, ' .. p
Ill r m l ,fir 1a rN1� r 11
1i I/rvr J r li m rn (I ro �IF �(J�o ,',
0 1y/ i�
I r. ,
r r r' r 0l �k r
/iii
��%r,iY� rW;,.�rJ1�r J� t�f„,fy° r 11 a ;,,rn ' �Fl� I,"',^11 ��'`"r/n�1r�,
1.
11
! nv r� U Gyi , iq
/r
, ;; ag
I, n
U „ni,r
11 i(
aw �(r �i rlr %I" nor'; % r 7 Ji
r ler+ i / r✓� p' ,� „ „
it J A'kr ,,
II
/ w, / 'ry1%a J , I IN i
14
/° o / K+ r O F l /
1� w� /, I r� ,. L x "ymo-11U1 , I r
����"ll 11,f�. e" it rry r�N @ip
II
Illo
,/ -, 4 r
ur 9ry /� fl f'
f1/1 �' ," ° ' `
11 �' 9, �!" .� it �� y a - �. � „ r fI 11 �
n s "I11I, „ 1!`" <. /. ti d X01 l,Y� /"�
)V
"
1 iy
lll� 41 iir r
yr l , � fl, I r �
Ifj�� ��i sir rr'/ J��>a `r�T ,-" x✓ fir.�1 )(�f I'll I m %�>',
, � 9
, ,,,, I
°, -f " ^'lr/ to11 " 6 P G;r J �,o N Appenda 1 „ , I : 11 Arlo , , I 6 III, t'll "'m' Ig
ri nip,,y�Jfr f a -r'6,,, ', ,;
JUr�� �Ny 11 Ii ail '��c �i y 1Wr r eI r/M �11,.
I ,. �� f
1111 I'll /
11 I
r� Jnr , r rI I I, I, 0 7
1, / r; a ,,, 11
�" G
I/ d i
. /, of w "Ifs a;0i�r �" I 11 "I � rJ r r d����I> ,
A
fi
III
J,,
I'll/"'
"Ily/fIll '11,111-1
r �.II 9,,if" n '�4k, ;, /N„ �VMLAGE 1 1. FORESTRY SECTIONS . r : it/a; i�r..
Ill
hJ fr
r
"ri
s ' r1 J J r /1�
9/ ;IfU rG Io�la Ali pr p� mW� p� l " / „a .r . r „✓ `� �r "I'll, n r r
I'll
.FIN/ ,J -n r l , r. �1a i ,a z11 ; , ' x�11-
°'" ,r f1, 1 hJ�i11�/t a �N I/r
r/
11,
I 10
ilig
M m� �7 d/s //r ii y fl " (7
d
It,
I', f q� 1 WI f,'
9°qrf frA/iffidr1
fr J l a1 raJ y" b / 3r
I, rr fJvri y
f
A, 9 /m a ✓�r 1 M n j ,`J" m,
III
Nf aQ1fr/T �I1 r pf)/51 /
N
�//fir rN / r,u(�f'�jfP err J"�ij`:
,' r yfr
f r/IJ/ PI / r�r�J U�r fri `Mrd Ye ui , ,,I'll /"� f% �a �f 1,, �fj/•���t��I
J��; i r i /��i r ii) J '�y / , A,` r 9 ;, ' ., r r 1 1 a1 f� 1� n� I 4 /
11
J�q elrf ^ frill/J ' " yr ° )I 11, ll 14 4yf)g,Klll h� �i �'fYy
11,
/fir I I `� I ,; 7 "�. 1"' �, yI�,Q /P JI" If�.lr �/ 4,Ip,
11
IN r /, .1r ,,
Ill ,
IIII
," a f 1..., N /.. ... yI Jf
;IJP ,fir % G 1IT 9 " r �/
{ l 1I , j 1.i r �' - „ i 4' Iv �'+ �l ij N v
((lrN �P` , u ' I` f % ' N , , a` " %`wi r fP i I % �"
f ;� / .%;"'' 7 J r , w J r, r ,rss /Il �k idl Jif>' % yf ilQ�
Ilfl,� ���C. Ff `J , J�� , / r „ n: „. 'i;,. ,,;n- �° f C `,, m ?7 ,r ,1 , r 6� ',
��
1"1 fr H� ''rr r y rr nji v
�lll'' if M" 11f G 9j ar r e'J 9nwl
� Nt1" Tlof I 11 I U/1 rrr y9 y i „. ,
P r o- III.env
" ii '4,11111 v / 37Nr� 1ajv r r ri ( " rf Ary �'��
w r ( 'v
1, / r rr r rr#Ig
�v R%ii"'If] fr�I 1m r"
r 7l / DJV f p ya IJ D J-✓ n r h 11
it 1r is I
" ��!Jr 1 1, r
�J r
J iff7,�' u
11 rr/ / r l' / R y « a�
9 J alai G n ll�JH f.,r i
r �a f ,`e � Ju nrf 1 " i i I
r y4 a!, IFr i, ri 9i � dv l� P . - J���
%%r a"ror r�i."� yr%M, r nIII ,�i%' f 9� , ;�m;r
//, ri9N V / t
;, m, ; i r v 4 w rl i
,�, u„ r l rtiay. �� % u,, .;,'r %tr/r r� m �Yl °a�J� y,
1
"a/l N '" r n rr/r�0 l !J a1 ri /
%rN"� Y� rN a A r GU "iI I'll � H'," „ ,��,,. - :�, "'i' '1 b;r ,�dl� aah� i � � r �'�U J
ar� 1 JrII J / Of F I W,,,
J / /r y allf ara ! rA III 1,1 r 11 11 f 'P, � wy i� D nv
r j w/ a f uifi( f
din%p�l'F// /// ` li I{'"1� fi<i rl HA r r" '+; r� H!ey�)�i�
,l // 1 2 USP rr ,, � , „ �,� „/ ;; rrl."'i/J 4,
r ffli frri, �``a l(/ 1 i l � 1 r?a f , +; ,. , « r /Oir
/d1/rU�ny �f / �i l � ,i "' a /J
r/ifr r I i� 1f r.,,/lir nrr
dP Ii ,rI 11 !
rah 4 r w a, are i6 / g l
," ",, , „ ,. : , %Dll i/o/„°irvy yriW
'�
Il rIfs' r 1J f rJ iIl
4,' r ,,, ,,, �F/r if N1 ��'ri{ //�
/ rG r i- l g r/� ;%" fufti l�, '�rii/1b"
W
/w„ v ' ar f r p r iC A i
V e
P r ✓ri�,U rf;yr,lf �i /r if n,n y r .. .� ,. io- / " f / U il" �i;' iff
II -"I" 11 I R 11 � , � ei��J� ri
u
l 11
l,, rl/ ^' I -" i 1 r;- „,; ` o f,., ' r»r „ e�J 1 Y r y flri at/N .
"'' l( %"9J n rr r rr
,� 1�u 2'1,,/ h >fi➢1 r /j J K/ s, r 9k*' a,
�rr1/ ii; as °, ; 'III`„ , " , ,„ �, ,. j`: , lJ' r' I" ✓''' /";i °I i f
9 / ,r ' ,f // ° �h9 °gq Mfr 1i ��1drf( �sWl/�rI
r ni li al� l it i
rt / d , yn ' ,�Y ` . , q� . �, R %r nen. 1�a a ' rl r r��,
I r r /1 i w di
1 r,, ,, - 't ",� , , ra m iti / '0 1 " Y Fal ;
'1�trOli �N °ufrr rrOl v a J� I
a, / rr ✓ 91a n n� r, ; �; ,. 11 z " , / a "„i 4 �%,
M11 I
�'i �% fjr u� "(a(>' / "; ..w /ri' ✓ /4 ; " 1 1 l� �'�NY' m r I
� ,,,,I iI s , � r r
IA( ,.- "' A, JI , -,-,. s p,ll M1 M t a rr R (or 1/ fv
N ' r r� r J
i��/ y"I llfr;�%4 �Jl T%;l %? r, n,. ' ' ro %' i; "' a /i f I ",lp r I1 /�
1 01 /� Fry�fll' jm " „ , ,�, � s, a,,, "�11 "I ' " a, � ..', , , -�,,;' r„ IJ9 i m
j,r , "IfIllen„„;, i ai r R 1 /✓ air r P r ,
l
r „ , / of I
rr, ,
1 ira irimJlY OyO/i - /, Y%A," 141 I r "rr / � , r1a
y'✓ �l rr / i 11 11,
,
A7P" ,II
„ , ,
fl�1�Y/ I� J1 "9/%� 0 1 r n fid �`�'1, 1 11,j''iJ c
rp r ffc"r/r,II , i r, 11 I 4'lJ (fyr��SNI"
,r , ..p a i
v r m/ rrfl
m111 r II, yr V
y l frr ( k j , 11;,, r , 0
„ ° ;'a `f r, , ; moi/ifr
., ," ti „r /; , ii roP , is y r rr
i a), ✓ r��, rryn; , '"' ;..... , ,{' ' I(, -1a 4, 0
it ( ,�%/ A, , ,;:.r !' +IN qNA, w,/ M O /uu,., M., .: ,� '. ,�
�°l,f4% ,. ,� a „ . . o;, , a, ,n �, ,, ,; ,:. ,,, "a -; i , f" „J r r
.N: ,;; i, ,�"r„- ., � ., ,f'.., ,r ; ��
7 , d
1/� _; ,
»» J " f
>ii nJ�ifp�fj m„n, r r 1 4 // f11 I �j n
II% " f dl r ' ,ni / r ur " 1'N f ", , .,�„ ,a =' ,, "� / / i"II( �J N"1 �, rI , r'1 I 11 f1i�914fy �r �i,
IT'llN U)V� +� » a I/ r
��, ° p 11„
R,lW '
J, r y �fr r a , y r r, u � N� I
2
1 i/w
y i r� III I 1 J�,rlrf'f
y / /I! r.II , lir, r 11 �a .�ll11 ��^7�` lro ��rr,
Ill I/a
, 11
I 11,
; ,II"I'S
J ,
,f r
q
SEMINOLE LN
C.►MP MCDONALD RD
a;
2
cr
W
a
EUCLID AV
„r,�".
m>! I,
�, al r o
s I, V � rlri h Il i
/ /9 r r, D / V�,, M
rtk: rrt � r „ , r „`'
ri 4 , ' i r1 �On ��, ? I F Grp � r, rr A' ^ r
")"I i r RN %I � 'M „�, � G k � r,1 �� rry Y mF,,,;�w.
✓" Pyo d(�i ^ ,r, a r " r4 »Vlr / ((VI r r nE am J✓I I
? "' rr a ,� Ir whir ,, ," i fl r 1f / d t ^ t pV� f �� f ,� ✓,f
rdU »
, fP I " JF II Ar r �,„ I, / , r +i r� rq ly l tlmr J ri rr ,'f 'Jj r '''Ml 11�
v
W /n � X01, r.. / , I / ,, , ;,,, b v „',,N , n �, ✓. ^ru,'JN r A (I % �9.N' 1J p r ' ,.. ^9 Ir / NI
nii( 1 IIA " X19 A rvrXr p Ilc�,, ,,.. -. ` �, J r,' i� P/%" p /i �,, ,� 7�/ Z i'" �
;� ISN n /r r 'oo //itt j/� �i
�, , / i rig 1rr�Mr'. !1 I P/ t, ,, , '�� ; r „r ,: (i,N,,,.., , !` r fl1' / ppri% c.. ; %7 " "' .,.I4 rr i
✓r �/ ( it ( sr gtAr a s �; err �, a !r a, /r N ✓ '.. r N
0/Irfr N ( fi
' ;' ».,,� „ I U i� ;ym t » , ,o, � ,rrVN' IM, -'r r, �W,- 1 I ^z, ,. r, 1 1 :: I A ( al ,✓ vi,,,;, •.,, ll ;w r,,
jll ,J rg .iK 1"�r'`� ^NN,'T, lI IV t,n r .. ",
,r, /r ✓,;, h',115�"h d ,Ill; 7,/awl ,,,pry',,, ^: ;_ y`;, r,�„ „°-�, ° P` yh/ wlr kflj i ,^ (�Y.r ,) nUt,1(/�^m1,1 .
r� I
)u 1 N u - r �rl g, ;`; N1 ilS^/i' e Iri1; l$'
y; / , 1 :, N Jryr /� `r A1r, I 11v u� I ;, ' 'I' ,N,?g'�'.' , 1;9 Pl 1 irr ' ,,F, ,.' „ ?, 1iY1, '1iN
�( ""V -, �,f 4 ,,I rr I °;;,, Ja ,,, ��)„ ll,c, rl,✓i",,, ,;,`.� Ir,r„ '/ �1,. ri, W rt��q
( r l lu ill A m 4V a J PJ s / / '/ r vi I d lv 9
a 1 11 w y,y;I P °". „" » a ' ;. 11 "I 1 t �rfr I�/f � � 1OZ/ re li;;
rt1G 9t iV' IIE ! r rr ,,, LN rrr ��� rrrn r,%%('i,., �,flhw'1
✓t1N, ,
P, d i, l ,eri a i tJ4 :"r; 11 1;, e^ / ('I i" /J l J
1..,, � I ✓ v, ✓� ,�r, N it `"�..; . ',, ,,,, J - ,,, ,' �r `�t ,,,. a. ;,. � �� ^� r /���'�.. at/ 19J j f BVI J l /� il,".. ; ,f, ,f/m!;'.
I „ r �, ,f f l „M-, ,v,
V I rV 1 r "
'I;. I✓i ; 1 / )A' r 6 '� I r rM ?w ` .,J �) tl'(1V rM / ill �i,> i o / 7t fµa`�j'
�V
W/r P"° 0 �� fill °E ; �i rw1/ ,� ,,,,n w , „�, / I rf J F r r N ri f Irt� /
�,�1 ftft� n , 1 / rl 9/ 91 / / I'
(7�r o ) `. d ✓r,VP ;, f , ; ,., ,, I p,,,, J v r^ �'� J ✓ 1. a i" Sir Pr m
i; 'r 'rf '9 1p If777m r,, frit ,i G ! v ` I/ // J;, wdJ11 I ,��+ m
�, J r I / r t '' r it r rf V V OI v ^uWI
wIa1, I 1 �, a r A( / r
� l) ,Jx rTt %'/r1 JP r r I Ir/ r G rto � 1�Jf /ror/ 191,,,J, q
J q 1l i l �] $ l tF J " +I !r /i rlf i(/ !1^ J/ " N )>r, �r a IV (
", �1��'�` �/� �/ �/ r ,5 I fir/ rt / ,r r
!/ fn o „r NI/r / >7 H �j //,a �'r 1%!li'!u ,,,, , ,,i/f`€ mi/�Nf �l �fK �Nj�,,,<. ' r f f I r r / /f / �t ✓ /r11n�r/i�l j 1 it a
��, r t/� rf "^ ",;' ,, rI� Ei rkr ' r ti,,,r! l�y�;, it �1 .
^Tf / Y!I m ✓rr ,N » 'r , /i'Ir1 / t f `, I✓ / I� ara' /' Ih / r ,r
�, rp t I �NIN., / r I rtmg,;, -,' r;. - Arorx✓o r rr! r �� 31 '/�'' ,/1 ,,�"Y
j (^Iy 1 i , ; ��"f
/ y/ ;
^ft,r„ a2, r >' - wrtN', ,,, nr, ✓„ I,,,!�, '„ /.,» a; Iph` / 1�rri yp{d q sIw < , , ui
o, r °' o; I(r '2i Jf r )I fd w%G,;1fJ ,% r"r,
/' pJVUE r! !F, /nil ,, °' / ° 'cv„' ,; �� „J"N.,,.., „ , ,.', /„ ,� D, , , " I, I 1 A , I
a ralUri A r f a A
':�J'y 'M i f Jh". m� .1 dr P r Ar l rIl / / )JW / }✓ ' �l IW '.
„:, „ r tsi / lr rot
rK» N I ry vier 9riviV ✓r, ' ; r,J,j ' ei „ , s ri 'II , ' �, 1W f gP�? ,r rl�faI 1, f�'�, ✓%Gf IpJ : A"} / ;
l�r;�pI; Ix�,sE r Jilix ",,r,>;!I / „ Hrir;,;
y1
rl'W W r i�g� rJ ))�p /� P r f ,y, ; '; , w r l r'� t
rP�W I 71. '^ro �,/i �,y / ,» a' M, r II I f , I �� ' ,t;,lA rIFmI �Al�,'I 'J' �JI �vI�J
r�/ir z P �0 r i � Jy r.�''r d/ ! I
AdI ,r � au �
!i/, r 9, r it /jIl"I „ 'r1", '� /r' f ,,,, F,, , � rllll� ne;, T / � � � r /� 1
111,, » Nr ,w 'l rI „ "" r ✓� - 1 Mir ;1!'I (�' ,'
:J. rtJlyd / r rri Ir rN,m..
'` , _�, ��).'� V! ,1 r t a y r^ ri✓'" p r�� ^ Pin
I �� alb , / ' %I NI r�^ '
' „Ji'I it r, Mir a „ r , //'17/ y '
„ / ,IJ r Jr "jJ
i ^ nJ .� r✓ yr fip r m)� � Td
q, .'r�
r I r ) / r�
r/ o � i yV , ✓ 1 ' "" A I ,, "9 P� ✓ mt rr��� r1� /a//J ,,, f
, I - 1 > , ( r =Ili J ° u $I , 4 y r r , �Irtr "/uf r
/ /ill', lilt ' , ,im1 01g „, , , „ r r ,,,, / y ✓r �fri l�� ail U pA 4
m. fir.. r l c/'N.� t"i / " . , r<w'» ,, Ir' b I,IN �l%� iat D �r 1 / wf 1r !/ 1rr1 mirlr ,v''�//
l,r x 91r m r �� rrr Ip
�' /; 1 l f,,,or i ,, ;vr/ r, ;I; '% ,,,, , "f'f ;✓ -, I,yi f s /, / Iii Ir/ r AI I yr rl Old
,h r�,16 11, ',r; " rr%'
,,I 1! ,,, ^P 4, rr , i , , I I �;I� I ;,.. - , .; ;
A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas -
T , ,A'
R
AZA D L U_ TION FOR,,M2nd Edition
Site/Address:,,,,_
Map/Location:
Owner public private unknown other
Date: Inspector:
Date of last inspection:
TREE CHARACTERISTICS
HAZARD RATING:
+ � +
Fa0ure + Size + 'Target Hazard
Potential of, part Rating Raung
Immediate action needed
't
Needs further inspection
Dead tree
.......... M ..........
Tree #: Species:
UK #of trunks: Height: Spread
Form: 0 generally symmetric 0 minor asymmetry CJ major asymmetry C3 stump sprout EJ stag -headed
Crown class: 11 dominant 0 co -dominant 0 intermediate C3 suppressed
Live crown ratio: % Age class: 0 young 0 semi -mature 0 mature C3 over-mature/senescent
Pruning history: 0 crown cleaned 0 excessively thinned 0 topped 0 crown raised 0 pollarded 0 crown reduced 0 flush cuts 0 cabled/braced
0 none 0 multiple pruning events Approx. dates:
Special Value: 0 specimen El herftagethistodc 0 wildlife El unusual El street tree 0 screen 0 shade E) indigenous 0 protected by gov. agency
TREE HEALTH
Foliage color. 0 normal 0 chlorotic 0 necrotic Epicormics? Y N Growth obstructions: MEMO""
Foliage densitir. 0 normal 0 sparse Leal size: 0 normal 0 small 0 stakes C3 wire/ties C1 signs C3 cables
Annual shoot growth: 0 excellent 0 average 0 poor Twig Dieback? Y N 0 curb/pavement 0 guards
Woundwood development: C3 excellent 0 average 0 pbor 0 none 0 other
Vigor class: 0 excellent 0 average 0 fair 0 poor
Major pests/diseases:
SITE CONDITIONS
Site Character: 0 residence 0 commercial C3 industrial 0 park 0 open space 0 natural 0 woodlandVorest
Landscape type: 0 parkway 0 raised bed 0 container 0 mound 0 lawn C3 shrub border 0 wind break
irrigation: C3 none 0 adequate 0 inadequate 0 excessive 0 trunk wettled
Recent site disturbance? Y N 0 construction 0 soil disturbance 0 grade change C3 line clearing 0 site clearing
% dripline paved: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100% Pavement lifted?
Y N
% dripline w/ till soil: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
% dripline grade lowered: 0% 10-25% 25-50% 50-75% 75-100%
Soil problems: 0 drainage 0 shallow 0 compacted 0 droughty 0 saline 0 alkaline El acidic 0 small volume 0 disease center 0 history of fail
0 clay 0 expansive 0 slope __ 0 aspect:
Obstructions: 0 lights 0 signage C3 line -of -sight C3 view 0 overhead lines C3 underground utilities 0 traffic 0 adjacent veg. 0
Exposure to wind: 0 single tree 0 below canopy 0 above canopy 0 recently exposed 0 windward, canopy edge C3 area prone to windthrow
Prevailing wind direction: Occurrence of snowfice storms Q never 0 seldom ID regularly
TARGET . .....
Use Under Tree: Elbuilding Oparking 0traffic Opedestrian Orecreation Olands,cape 0hardscape Osmall features Outilitylines
Can target be moved? Y N Can use be restricted? Y N
Occupancy: 0 occasional use 0 intermittent use 0 frequent use 0 constant -use
The International Society of Arboriculture assumes no responsibility for conclusions or recommendations derived from use of this form.
Specimen: TREE HAZARD EVALUATION FORM, Page I
TREE DEFECTS,-
ROO T DEFECTS:
Suspect
EFECTS.-
Suspect mot rot: Y N Mushroom/conk/bracket present: Y N In:
Exposed roots: 0 severe 0 moderate 0 low Undermined: ❑severe CJ moderate C1 low
Root pruned: distance from trunk Root area affected: % Buttress wounded: Y N When:
Restricted root area: Cl severe ❑ moderate (:1 low Potential for root failure: 0 severe 0 moderate ❑low
SEAN:deg. ❑
from vertical C3 natural 0 unnatural 11 self -corrected Soil heaving: Y N
Decay in plane of lean: Y N Roots broken Y N Soil cracking: Y N
compounding factors:
. ..... Lean severity: 0 severe IJ moderate CD low
CROWN DEFECTS: Indicate presence of individual dpfprtc anti rnta....46 . I
Tree part most likely to fail:
inspection period: annuM, Failure potential: I - low; 2 - medium; 3 - high; 4 - severe
Failure Potenfial + SizS 0,,f part + �Ralqng biaort"I other Size of part: I - <6- (15 cm); 2 - 6-18,1 (15-45 cm);
Haurd Rafing 3.18-3V (45-75 cm); 4 - A(r (75 cm)
+ + Target rating: 1 - occasional use; 2 intermittent use;
3 - frequent use; 4 - constant use
HAZARD ABATEMENT
Prune: El remove defective part C3 reduce end weight 0 crown Clean Cl thin 0 raise Canopy 0 crown reduce 0 restructure C1 shape
Cable/Brace:
Remove tree: Y N Replace? Y N Move I t I arget Y N OCher. . . ............ . . Inspect further.- C3 root crown 0 decay CJ aerial 0 monitor
Effect on adjacent Imes: C1 none 13 evaluate
Notification: IJ owner 0 manager 0 governing agency Date: . ..........
COMMENTS
. . .. ..... .
A AZZ nALAKIJ t; VALUATION FORM, Page 2
l f ,
1
µ
U
i
�� F,
n ,
m. /O ^
I
I` I / F M fir / A X11,
F'� / �,�1 ,,, .. ,, a _"
rn', p n,
III / D , an l -
ill I/ i..,,
(
- -
r;
fl GI N
r ,;- I l 9
l �%� �l I" , i f,"7
,
,� ,� -
d "� �e-
r
'�,
y .
Il II, m1 Mfr
Yl ar �(
..,�. ,. ., f �, vy I,
d
J! /J .., „1'' . q ,,rv;
� ,;;,A "'
rc JIj
SERIAL SECT
6839
4534
4572
18062
19823
,19378
19455
18280
18824
28995
8716
8583
8 584
7732
7747
7743
5597
5493
21979
0
9821
9630
9992
16194
16375
29!564
11244
17074
11233
11027
11041
11000
12633
12579
3
3
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
15
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES RECOMMENDED FOR REMOVAL
ADDRESS
1841 BOULDER DR
1909 IVY LN
901 SUMAC LN
201 FA I RV I :EW AV
1116 MEADOW
501 N • ELMHURST
608 N. MAIN ET
205 N. RUSSEL RD
719 N. WILLE ST
700 W. RAND RD
200 N. ELM
512 N. ELM
514 No :ELM
321 N. MAIN
407 N. MAIN
407 N. MAIN
JERRY
204 STRATTON
111 S. ELM
50 S• EMERSON
413 So EMERSON
319 S. MAIN ST
608 S . MAPLE
809 S. EDWARD
811 So SCHOOL
2002 W. LONNQUIST BLVD
104 HI LUS I AVE
11 'HI LUSI AVE
18 HI LUST AVE
110 Se ;ELMHURS T AVE
210 So ELMHURST AVE
214 S. PINE ST
10 WA PELLA► AVE
316 WA PELLA AVE
CELL SPECIES
16.1
MAPLE, SILVER
5.0
MAPLE, S I LVER
10.0
LINDEN, LITTLELEAF
4.0
ASH, GREEN
1.1
MAPLE, SILVER
10.0
MAPLE, SILVER
l . 0
ELM, AMERICAN
4.1
ELM, AMERICAN
2 4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
l . l
MAPLE, S I LVER
6.0
ELM, AMERICAN
4.4
ELM, AMERICAN
5.O
ELM, AMERICAN
4.0
MULBERRY
8.0
ELM, AMERICAN
13.0
ELM, AMERICAN
20.0
MAPLE, SILVER
l . 0
MAPLE, SILVER
7.0
ELM, AMERICAN
Q.0
HONEYLOCUST
3.0
ELM, AMERICAN
8.0
ELM, AMERICAN
390
ELM, AMERICAN
4.0
MAPLE, SILVER
4*0
ELM, AMERICAN
l.a
WILLOW, WEEPING
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
21.0
COTTONWOOD
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
3.a
ELM, AMERICAN
5.0
:ALM, AMERICAN
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
5.0
ELM, AMERICAN
DIAM RATE
30.0
25.2
11.0
41.2
30.0
31.2
26.2
38.9
24.9
50.0
26.5
51.0
34.7
23.6
45.2
28.6
22.9
23.9
35.5
23.7
44.8
38.2
27.5
32.8
17.9
31.4
39.0
27.9
38.5
43.5
40.0
40.8
42.0
31.7
10
9
10
10
10
11
10
11
9
10
9
10
10
10
9
9
10
10
10
10
9
14
10
14
14
10
9
11
10
9
10
10
k-1
,. "
v.
I
J for � v � " y
k
// r m I I,
11
Yr,,.,�p „A
Yo ,f a
"Il
m:, 11 I '"., .
'll
, 11
,sY , f "WH ,iVW< f r M '1 4lr,rr �,„�' '" w 1 « ° a v ✓ 11 j '4i;
rk /, ., !! u x ,r ; ,. . - ,,,, . (f„ y ,i' i4 pi fray/ v
w
11 ,,, 4V rf, x� �f 'olf, r "1�O,;y f r
fo r
I r .I r f� ry f j W ;. uG -, I - ,` lt r rrk11 I r 7 �f a U� v Fr..
r r „ ✓ f
f
p11 ' - F -
, , .. a,
r' ✓
I I.
III
�ri'r,, dA fwr Nf <' 1 - -vhf" �b rt -m I. r,w
, ri ; I m
/'
I-,,"" ,
If lm; i l
v e n „r
i o , II 1 "
I 1*
s rF
I If nc m - , . „ �, . - ' „ IIIit wr "��'�1 y V Nn iii (y �
III
rt - „ tl r %, r rim - ✓a` Af .. /��
, f
I 11
I, I'll
i
I
✓ A N i /% g 7r�1 9
I / 1 r� 2 y q e W >; / 9( e r
ry
, , , f: IR
v
f N"l s ",71' r /
ay' Vi ff Irr'�,. „" z ;" "Y lli - i 1 /ray f' mI of
"Il
w f� f �� - y rr ,,� w,M - F ftr y�lp,�,r"Al,C ,.
„"
, 11
11
lPY ,i / p, , ,wI " h, n.. ,h4, -�y ' r J11 fw ,I ,fY d n I ....
°✓�"I I
I Urr
i,Jlo�QziIII I
/ , ar d fJ r,:.. r1 r ��,,,,-' Y,,,," s I F 11
I'llit ; �r ff 'G f� a �I - ,. r e „7' rt r y�Y �N
e a dva
a
l- ° f nh ,- nl� y r V V
J
IIIiN
/III
11 I'll I I log"a,11 � OrG f r! r , , I , r' '� � rN �� "IS)", I,
"j it� W,
I
` y r % , fir,,, " lr"r
p
ll i 'z � G f d� fr',
olf 11
I'll
,
Ilit.
W r
w
, ii, ", '
d„11",
e of „ ,
r
I 11 1 " I,r
q
rc u , r /f�
ra r , " , _ - V' O I I, rp AA �k J �Jf
mf11",
' / 1 Ic
, �d V
/
rrf .d - V - - ,, r a Y' Ij 1f
0
' ,R,
ill
/ " tlU , 1 ' <'' , »r i Jr
f 11
I P ✓i � a
a 1
ecrrGl
nw1/1 /
gll I'll ' , , r, - f Ffa - e1s
rr'j 11 I J I -1,, n NfY r % f
V` ry iU l Y - .,, - -
11 /L W
/
"'III rI, rYl /
,gre 11 III 11
e r - , . _ -_ , , I 11, w ,�. i � �
f9, D N Irrvk r P f U
If,, Yf wfN fd „ ; , r f" a➢ra r
f o " „r, , , w ai N, " r n ry M",,a f ,"Iri1�tl
Ir' f f ,,,� r, , s, ., •: �;';, t A IC fill ,"0 ' a, , a JD
p�,Grr% r,' .- - I a,/G rG 9 N�V. ofi g
M / M '� - -11 - f ') I rrrjPr rw,rfp, V'if Jr
II
fiI f fi „ , Ig IIs. .,I 11 II I Ig
Tf If UJ,. ,r: .. `,' I .1 I - rp,a' Aro, / 1 f 'GY %� ^�i `,,'I
A N ' ', ,, K !6 wf M ,
If
f n 9 i,III '� 1 ,I f" `. u m " - / w 1 1,y mr�„t r p nA /,,
,, 11 . ,r ' r ,
r ,,
�r pAs' '� f N :a'11 ll /M iir wf - *. w7 A,,',Nyr mr t% xr;ld��yfv rJ lfii��
v f '� 1, ,N my r - - r r P f
a o/ "Vu 9 ` 1 a - ' If.. r -,. s ' ,m I X F r m '" r w%
" r 1 / r n -
It/ Mer Ji µ'ay T ,m 4 , - J f
°mr � � it n,/ m,,.,,,- , -,
9
u� r f.,. 't '.
d
f w�rr a r
a fi�
a r - e n i y, "ry Alp,* v f � �/ "4
I /11
D -`i iUr r r' w ' I " F 6' V , ,+.„;. r f t �NYA� ! %i�fy rV' %', r
I, I!!�.'%9Y ✓,rrvw� IN - m �' fi y y "V'7 rr"
�1r yy",rre "d / f r ry�
;m �, iI rd,1� 4 a I 01
n .r Ip' p 1„ i / ar
J , rm51 "
/I -1
I�dvY ur U r 0, ,'- ' V 4 .. 'v' I% r 1 r .. i �l' �9r
1 r ,. , f� ' ✓ ry,, la} � � v� r �r iN,f 4 J / o-
� ai17'1'+i'r ` ,,r''ww11
f ;� ' „ -, .. : y r, � , , , r ,y , � il, " a [' �(i ,�,
IpJo f, , .,; /
�f,,,,,, A % r� ., u" , w'' 'f; , O l� �K )� �Ury���iVr/r �Irr -
�I
<G�,,. wflrr�dr s/4f( /i a,,I, k r f r ;l 1'v .. ��y,, I
' w, I ' i/ pl, ,'„ Ih, ', �"71 I �ii 10,, 5 , fi 5i/ im�V,llff"'' mf'" l
l� p/ fl ° off`
v a / J r : it VV, r , ,�„ . ,,.. /V,,,,, ,y;� "' ',6i fr , / '� � f
/n "I N /r f �Ul ,.� N i� "/ vi y^ ' , , , 'x .. a L , / fYc -Vf w v „ ; f / « ?,r,.. a-< uN 3�'�//i� iv ,u, A�'I
xvV//14 rn fNwt f u . ,f ,,.r ,,, . I,I,/v A ra ��V rq
11
- I
p"I" ,
f le/ ,r w' If"' ), a r' , v r y rNr i/
11 V x, / 1 r , N „„ I� AT I.il�,�lYriiiM n P11 / mµ III,I r r,
f1r'Y w a /G ,$ f r.. 11 I v, ,: ,, 4 a v 6 v mV rhi
'If"
r
'"'
[",
If,
. .. ...
of e J� v n ""Jr v. �p �+ a r f f,
�� ,,, ,,,, , �� nr ., r 11 '0 , 'Al'.,, p f� ri fl ;afl� �r�'�All pnVur�rrrJV
/1 r� Jf( m B ;" a r
yrs m I,f�G,iff 1, , A 11 I � i rA rar /IN N
INNG"If ll, q ➢ DJm rf / ra»V @ ,
uy Ilr�f� �, �Nf /," °, No ,� Ir /r� ryfn/^�' Vw'yVivi ,W
I , ` "r I, ,< a a (' lA' w �';�$ (>/' Irr ,,pi,
'"� AHiP a�w .. ,. `' „. nIf I j7y`V rJfr7l',
I/r'f ., i iir ff jr, wl
IN " x -r - ,; : ,w , I, ' - , r r /fsw IC Vey ' '(Jq
I ,
!r iAY, ,r, ,,,ep m V 1 r 1 r
9fp,
k f✓�,ar�4p GU I,� � - I a IkV m r'If ryif -f"ky7f if
. ..
Pra � 1J ; % ,r I -11, 1,Mf r r P, / u I, ,,,,
f),
f
I ,,, --
I O
Y • b/ I ""Ia " , - OVA
i
R1
w
I ,I pl,
I I I , "
i
'�, I
q I % y f/ I� n r u wy r tdl'r
a
r,�1,I "I
I' I
,,
P ;� Nf fl f J ""I, I, ;; -a .,�, n m ri ,u i,1�41-1' fl , f. yl f ; "''°I
a„oa,
m11
u 1r /a rdu , / r , WA i
v
fIMF',l n
f
Yy k dd , �, fi ' nY
6
v'f x r, fl 9 c ",, . , k . r , KI V I Mr I"w �f gAf, c q�O", Sll NI
,
f an a 9S 4 i f /l of al
If f� it r l ma, 9>G %` fav f n �¢
,,, ,v ,A ff „ ;r, . J , rma,
ja v 9r W;% / « _ fl r
H a o, ' ' ,°i Ia J,r f r /Vr uwYl ow((
°yff, rf y r r r q,G O f r! Vf `r �f IVf
Vov �� QI of d N ,. y'yY f" , ' , ;(- ' „ ,,,, ,� ; r tri "P ��
11 i fid f I r'� "� Nf ""� - `� „r i yl (r u a ryi 'Ay ;f�11, (
�Vi '1�"�
fu f; "m' ,b *,r+r'f /or r " t ` . .. ' 'V ' iv a f �.,"'� ��„` y/r��' I N o�
rJ%J�N�v'nv� ✓.'aGII i I� fA A, ra yv�� „ r r irc ver '"� �'�iefP'OY f/`l,
YI/ I I'll 111I a, J
'mf �dv,- r Off ire r9a11
it / r f 9'0 r f; "v a a V 0/° r rp � /„„I,V r'„ Il
//Ij ( l r /'i >r f y u r r ,. r n �N ✓ rl'�y r"" 1'pr
11/f I�NY r nr ,""'off ,� n f - - - w,, ,V '� r r ffI�r r „n 1`JD A" � a ri ,"',�
I ����
f f r % WPIC
r rr QQ r
N, P/`/ IrYyQ ai-' r ° A - , � 01prY,fi " 'O� qfr f' Tula f 14"w" � ", �� I
Ill
wr fiu J I I, 11aI'l `11�iarw i y "I, �r
lD,I +
U ', T y N�
f
m
"V" , ,� n pr ff Hyl) ✓{('t� �rj »n
_ ➢ '" x �,/ , , ° r ,prof {"rr a
"r i f i f -
iG rY /J%l �' yr'111 w r V ',. w „ i fl;"I 11,11 11,r �,A ii/l2t.,.
,f' Al/ - e r
A9, v e a r 1r
Y fir», ri,1, iv lyfJ1 iry ry o rA
d ll" , i
/ � �; I 'nar'(r Y �� f „ � f "7 , r ,,r r.. - ra, ,, � x,. <. a.. �� .. 1 V �"« f rAr ,,,,' "f" °1""i iyrar"rJ,,(
i a
I "I I7
ui yyI2V f ifr a r r ,t "�J% rY �" r fl
A
"ti, �� � fl�f m l N'wJ"J f Ii rW'` ',rr ° m v � " , �,, r V' rA °,,�,; f11 f r, 1f „ .» 1 I,Nle "� I ' i'Il r,rfl V
n
9J ;rI f/ 4bw��fI0111
Via" �,,; y;-11,
" I , I ,"' -w�, �" f ,/rr r r'Vr "'rr
° ;, ,rff, I� " w
11
& %c
It
ryl �pf '' frf Oi I p�„ ,, C r/ir d
'f Vu ro d i� � rf yi� 'A - 2 fD
1 /r,�'�)VUJ uw{,wrmf f a, ;, a "i ,A,;�, " ,I ',
f , l I,e , ,'I I a' . .. ,, o'.. IIp, , O�, I/ it I)�
N ,�^ w
y/r oYL II�U p y u1 k M, p ;, r V ( l�" i
, ' „'t r r y f rr 1l/i A1" «i r `r�lIoll,,
rr, Jar sof f J," I � r „ 6, A � " � !rr; q„ ma, / wf/l , A `' N, , ,
�iurlH m 1 qrt✓;��k w4nr, lln, y .. - , „.' , , „ , ; °w.,w ,.r f.'fill n!f ��yf ,'�l , 11": 7r-�N�
r'r, ,�(J rr l� '� ,, ;, ,�, , „ „<, - ' ,, �,,,. `V"� f W,r pNI rI I I ( oiVif,4N %' ::! f�� li
f ,nw, 'a ", . ,.,A �0 ,,." „ p � i�(. ,� f" o f,V
m,% , ., ,. .. .. ,. " ,' ' f f/ K, , ;, / (y�dlN,Yny�lYl
11
rte„ V,lux' Ji', f V ,,,, - ,w, I J n yn��if` , r Nfr�'r
f It I
J
. �,, ":.. , ,o„ r "m i y'� IfIf m ,�6„`� %Ili Uf/H/ ,,, Ig, ''/nw),
f
rrif r ),,,, » , , % ,,,; , VI v r 1 io
, 11
II,
f -,, i. e .' w I,11" I " - r ,u, ur 7, r,,', 5„ `�YV 1 Ili i. -M1iJ,y",°
IW
a.1 lor
,,✓ µ ;; v, ,,: r ' ' ;; ,,,, *"'' r1 ✓ / /'•'1 °'i. (f, Ir ylli.
" fid,, �,r'" z = d "' a ✓ t �d/rx"A" "'IJ
�df l ,c fr�rrr a� f ; b. 1, ,11" " b. r ` ; f t U� /Anpryiav1'v/ �Nu ro{f y
p" Ata Illy%
I/,
f ,, r rr frrhl ➢11„-'. Vile •�>:."„ j. " ,✓�- .. .I , ,Yf„ f, r>p�irrr , (%� ��rrrtr �'mm� �f fi�u�w >
f <if 1 ufi rrf/ fi,yr,'% r , ,, ,i, , & r r 'x. .iV9I, 'r , ,� y r/ I f
Y' A 0 ,v;. ,,, m , ;;. ,e ,�' �N Oi irtrpk�y 11v�// r�
,aVu� uG f,�,fi(i ,t ,,`;. a av r V { r w Orn fii rl '�/ tI
n IV , �,r" Nf , ,r ! , ,. r, 0 w of f./- ,,,, 1 r,�mm "L ry �i .
v // i /,
r mrIf, i „ . iuI r-„ , u '„,;. ,, �„ t 11,1"w fV'f/fa,; IIIA(„/1'4„f,r-
l� V ; Nt �/ , „ f " u�� ,�If,, :, v '', .,,�. & w .. , o, ," r :f , ;A a, 'f k, Y r 1j '/ m Jr, T,1/41,1111 , ;,.. „r�r,
/ Af,r11"rl¢(J �� , (MI, , q -,v r, d m rbt y
, IIII 11
J ti f
,r, -, , ' , it t ,a f, ' J,; N,, a rev /2 lil� Il ,�If;. rc r+ f
11,
,"
,,,
„Y»11) 1 r
;� "
1r�. 11 r ,, ;. tl� r a.. f "'v4 ar
' / f� V ; ,, l ro V VO °'A , nv r ; "k /
"I Im Jf
If,i/,,, ; 11 (f 1 /°i� `off ,,,II I',,,, fllr / rl lgci
n „ „ a1 IQ rr NI,
I �, s,. �, ,, ,, "NI, , , ,k' h „' ' AY'F f ti 11 iy ,u f lo-,fy//
11]ah!; r fr „ iiia, ; r1 m ,r ', i;Ar1 i '
1(i, rlrJ ��of
fI I, » /nur::�>F j,', J�r / ,. ., ,." �,i�" �!!' ki 1 wr �f
n rrl; fr, " n /f )if 6fi "' Vy ° IW rB r N w ,�
M"f a/o yf f y ✓, f a 1 u , >L„ �y Vr /
11
,,,
�1 /i l( y r � r r f �,
a<m/ 1r f y,f fel f(. ,.. 1, "� ", r ���`
> rr� a „/A�r; „ r�r�n ,1r , „ , , ,,,, ' w rf r'�. /"' IJffi
� m /
r 1 ,l(p� ��i / r f Y / f mfi � r. t 'V I fi, it ifs
I'll
I / bll r.
F' If ,N �V h r n- - '!0�/� «IG ej"��v�y;�wym
hi Vf - , „ , - I of II ,qw Try a
f,
V,, a Arr 11 " watJ mi I'd,� 1
,, r r11 , a
r f �J
/ di , m P
ar„ 4J ll f�, �, m,m,
rm
II,
f �` f1 fa
i�
If, JY f ' r
I,w
I
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES RECOMMENDED FOR PRIORITY MITIGATION
SERIAL SECT ADDRESS
6836
3
1843
6835
3
1843
4540
3
1005
6940
3
1006
4764
3
1909
4625
3
1917
18590
5
5 21
18591
5
521
18529
5
701
25993
5
1004
19456
5
606
19453
5
610
19451
5
612
19451
5
61.4
19448
5
620
19448
1 5
620
17515
5
210
18807
5
613
,,--18812
5
621
18832
5
714
19431
5
® 521
1---19243
5
716
19245
5
718
8606
h
6
505
-5549
6
510
5556
7
200
5492
7
202
24601
8
316
10802
9
455
9626
9
315
9627
9
317
9990
9
608
9991
9
608
_16387
10
903
25365
15
701
30022
15
417a
1-25587
15
1721
25397
15
402
25844
15
1720
25516
15
1708
25355
15
1711
25356
15
1713
12679
16
319
11242
16
100
12498
16
101
BOULDER DR
BOULDER DR
BURNING BUSH LN
BURNING BUSH LN
CHOLO LN
KIOWA LN
FAIRVIEW AV
FAIRVIEW AV
FAIRVIEW AV
N • ;ELMHUR S T
N. MAIN ST
N. MAIN ST
N • MAIN ST
N. MAIN ST
N. MAIN ST
N' MAIN ST
N. WILLE
N. WILLS ST
N. WILLE ST
N. WILLS ST
PROSPECT MANOR AV
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
No E'L'M
No MAPLE
LE
STRATTON
STRATTON
MT PROSPECT RD
S • ELMHURST
S. MAIN ST
So MAIN` ST
•S . ;MAPLE
So MAPLE
S • SCHOOL
CRESTWOOD LN
DOUGLAS AVE
ESTATES DR
HATLEN AV
KIM AV
,MYRTLE DR
MYRTLE DR
MYRTLE DR
CAN DATA AVE
HI LUST AVE
HI LUSI AVE
CELL SPECIES
DIAM RATE
14.0 MAPLE, SILVER
31.0
8
16.0 MAPLE, S I LVER
26.0
8
4.a MAPLE, SILVER
30.7
8
9.0 COTTONWOOD
27.6
9
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
23,9
8
22.0 ELM, SIBERIAN
28.5
8
21.0.MAPLE; SILVER
30.6
8
22.0 MAPLE, SILVER
28.3
8
1.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24,6
8
1.0 COTTONWOOD
35.5
8
2.0 ELM, AMERICAN
29,8
8
6.0 ELM, AMERICAN
2 6 , 5
8
5.0 ELM, AMERICAN
26,1
8
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
25.5
9
3.0 ELM, AMERICAN
25.4
9
3.0 ELM, AMERICAN
25.4
9
5.0 ELM, AMERICAN
5 2 .0
9
4.0 MAPLE, SILVER
34.6
9
4.0 MAPLE, S I LVER
33,1
9
5.0 MAPLE, SILVER
26.8
9
22.0 MAPLE, SILVER
29,4
8
3.0 MAPLE, ,SILVER.
2 5.0
10
9.0 MAPLE, SILVER
27.3
8
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
73.6
8
5.0 ELM, AMERICAN
45.6
8
5.O MAPLE, SILVER.
20.7
9
5.0 MAPLE, SILVER
22.3
8
5.0 ELM, AMERICAN
38.4
9
9.0 MAPLE, S I LVER
31..7
8
6.0 ELM, AMERICAN
41.1
10
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
35.3
8
2090 ELM, AMERICAN
3795
9
23.0 ELM, AMERICAN
30.7
8
3.0 HACKBERRY
20e3
8
4.0 MAPLE, SILVER
22.2
8
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
23.9
9
4.0 MAPLE, SILVER
2 5.5
8
5 • 0 MAPLE, SILVER
3199
8
1.0 MAPLE, SILVER
23.5
8
7.0 ELM, SIBERIAN
25.0
8
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
28.1
9
3.0 MAPLE, SILVER
25.0
9
9.0 ELM, AMERICAN
35.5
9
4.a ELM, AMERICAN
25,3
9
6.0 ELM, AMERICAN
30.6
8
V-ILLAGE OF 'MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES RECOMMENDED FOR PRIORITY MITIGATION
SERIAL SECT ,ADDRESS CELL SPECIES
DIAM RATE
11246
16
108
HI LUST AVE
4.0 ELM,
AMERICAN
26.3
9
17076
16
11
HI LUSI AVE
23.0 COTTONWOOD
24.7
la
11247
16
110
HI LUST AVE
3.0 ELM,
AMERICAN
46.4
8
11248
16
112
HI LUSI AVE
3.0 ELM,
AMERICAN
34.7
8
12492
16
113
HI LUSI AVE
4.Q ELM,
AMERICAN
37.8
$
12491
16
115
HI LUSI AVE
4.Q
ELM,
AMERICAN
39.4
8
10982
16
122
HI LUSI AVE
4.0
ELM
AMERICAN
34.4
9
10983
16
122
HI LUSI AVE
23.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
30,7
to
12297
16
202
HI
LUSI AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
42.3
9
12505
16
21
HI
LUSI AVE
4 . a
ELM
AMERICAN
48.0
9
12475
16
211
HI
LUST AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
38.7
8
11137
16
100
I
OKA AVE
4.a
ELM,
AMERICAN
24.9
8
11136
16
100
1
OKA AVE
9.0
;ELM •
AMERICAN
38.9
8
11147
16
118
1
OKA AVE
4.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
28.0
8
11128
16
18
I
OKA AVE
4.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
54.5
la
11124
16
109
So
ELMHURST
AVE
4 . Q
ELM,
AMERICAN
43.8
10
11123
16
111
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
4.a
ELM #
AMERICAN
45.0
8
11073
16
217
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
6.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
33.0
9
%-.11071
16
221
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
4.0
ELM
AMERICAN
45.0
8
13750
16
300
S .
ELMHURST
AVE
2.0
ELM
AMERICAN
32.2
la
13743
16
300
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
7.0
ELM
AMERICAN
34.4
10
13744
16
300
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
31.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
30.2
10
13745
16
300
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
32.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
27.8
10
13747
16
300
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
51.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
41.6
10
11063
1.6
303
S .
ELMHURST
AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
45.2
8
11062
16
305
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
40.4
8
11061
16
307
S.
ELMHURST
AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
27o9
$
13486
16
216
So
MAIN ST
3. 0
ELM,
AMERICAN
2 3 . 9
8
13489
16
222
S•
MAIN ST
1.Q
ELM,
AMERICAN
28o6
$
11007
16
200
S.
PINE ST
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
44 .3
10
1100216
210
S.
PINE ST
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
38.1
9
10950
16
213
So
PINE ST
7 . a
ELM •
AMERICAN
35.3
8
)10951
16
21.5
S.
PINE ST
5.Q
ELM,
AMERICAN
32.5
8
'l.10953
16
217
S.
PINE ST
6.0
MAPLE, SILVER
47.2
8
10998
1.6
218
So
PINE ST
4.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
34.2
8
10968
16
311
S.
PINE ST
3.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
38.3
9
10973
16
318
S.
PINE ST
4.0
ELMAMERIC
�
29.9
8
10878
16
205
S.
WILLE ST
l.Q
ELM,
AMERICAN
242
8
10880
16
205
S.
WILLE ST
5.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
33.4
lq
.)",10936
16
210
S.
WILLE S T
5.0
ELM,
AMER I CAN
25.5
8
10883
16
211
S.
WILLE ST
2.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
34.6
10
10935
16
212
S•
WILLE ST
5.0
ELM
AMERICAN
31.7
$
10885
16
215
S.
WILLE ST
2.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
34.3
8
10930
16
220
S.
WILLE ST
5.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
26.9
$
10899
16
303
S.
WILLE ST
7.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
36.3
10
Page
2
30*1
8
29,4
8
VILLAGE OF
MOUNT PROSPECT
41*6
8
35,4
8
STREET TREE
RISK ASSESSMENT
29*8
8
27*8
8
TREES
RECOMMENDED FOR PRIORITY MITIGATION
SERIAL
SECT
26.5
ADDRESS
32,2
8
CELL
SPECIES
10905
16
315
So
WILLE
ST
5.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
10906
16
317
So
WILLE
ST
3,0
ELM,
AMERICAN
10907
16
317
So
WILLE
ST
7o0
ELM,
AMERICAN
10908
16
319
So
WILLE
ST
5*0
ELM,
AMERICAN
12520
16
502
We
BUSSE
AVE
2,0
ELM f
AMERICAN
'.%10927
16
100
We
MILBURN AVE
5o0
ELM,
AMERICAN
10928
16
100
We
MILBURN AVE
6o0
ELM,
AMERICAN
12621
16
100
WA
PELLA
AVE
9*0
ELM,
AMERICAN
w. 12622
16
100
WA
PELLA
AVE
lloO
ELM,
AMERICAN
12526
16
103
WA
PELLA
AVE
4*0
ELM,
AMERICAN
12612
16
116
WA
PELLA
AVE
5*0
ELM,
AMERICAN
12609
16
122
WA
PELLA
AVE
4*0
ELM,
AMERICAN
13514
16
13
WA
PELLA
AVE
4o0
:ELM,
AMERICAN
13515
16
15
WA
PELLA
AVE
4*0
ELM,
AMERICAN
12601
16
206
WA
PELLA
AVE
4o0
ELM,
AMERICAN
16
301
WA
PELLA
AVE
2090
ELM I
AMERICAN
12560
16
301
WA
PELLA
AVE
2290
ELM,
AMERICAN
I I 2584
16
306
WA
PELLA
AVE
590
ELM,
AMERICAN
30*1
8
29,4
8
29,2
8
41*6
8
35,4
8
30.6
8
29*8
8
27*8
8
46*3
8
30.0
8
26.5
8
32,2
8
35.9
10
42.5
9
4293
9
26*9
9
41*7
10
38*1
9
t �
"
r
�i U p�"riir� I Irl i M
I
J, f�%
m r
t�,✓� ,� �„�i / ..fir °���/� i r "1.
u,T i
�,; � � %G % r(l
� �
�✓/r''� � � ,ffb �r FN'h, 1�,�"r � �",� m ,,. �, - L ,,r ,;. � � / �y �� ,,, ���'� f'r rf ���'�.�Myr r iri° �. nr� ��rRf
,� '/ri
y,,,.
��'�” r r" �P 1' ✓ ,
,, ,,; ,,,, • � ' „' "' / „JAv, �R » JAI s✓ , �,- J„, Ary. .✓ � r'�
�
„
r nA�r
r i ,, , i9 ,i'�rnr �, ��ij?i 'fija��i �✓ r✓or ,��� %� „��!�i ;f r.N "`�f �,/fi/ frf»
r
YV4.�II '.. � � u >l,a, � ,ori ,�r�7A„P�-, f;a✓i i
erV..� �, N,. , ,,. ,+I ,� , a, „ r` 1,,, '. /, 5� /'nlgilM J ,o i•f� m e�1, ,; �nld ,.', � Y/ -
{el
r,r ., � „ ,. ,a ;. �;... .� , .r :,� ; r �, ,. �, �!( (. 7'li / r ',k.:...i ✓i �(;
rrr; /,
i
/ , ..: xy ,,r 1,F,.,. r� rr. IfrN,r %r/, ,,,/r./ ✓ ,.(1 I ✓ifi Ir
1 �f
te
l ✓, r ., a „� I�, � mfr 1 f� u r w, yr . �, _ /� /�' ` �,; , ;, <-. l fa<r ,. ,:�� �✓ IFr m �
, aY
l
,.; :, � :.; � ” t ",� ;- i ✓rye arm, ''.ui '� �' / ,�, � Ii /� �I � , , r sa„f I r, Vii, Y,re, V. �., %,. �, r,
u , , ” ✓or 7 J f w �j"i ,� )�l�u Yr / ,�y� f i rf d
�'fkr✓
r, r
� �^� � , „ N r „ ,r, ; , , l � , 1 ,. ,w w ;. Q pi �, .<, : � �,., rfii n'l„ ��%/ ^✓rym
/ % r
/./ ,yl rJ, ✓ ,�' 1 �',..n / --., � , ;��..
,.f rf
Yr., n
� - + ; ,yr , y
r � ,
A ,,,, '.t Ni A�,o M ,,r� , �, �}r ✓ � � , , P r �df i r(, ;�ONDi,' <.ir�I / F..,.
” , rrl , � � v , /r . ,. ✓) m /f l . / 1'µi l r
i i � ,✓ v , , ... N of I>Ua rf „ �, ,„rr ,f,, m ' ,,, w , ;.. ” ,,,... �f
-� . � r ' ;� � , �, .r, 0 1. r, ,;,fl ".. / ii f %' Y;: /T +, , i ,u✓ ��� D!� rtv...,fff 1m ,,(:,,� ,, ". ,_ d k,�" �,, ,�,,, ,. ,' i _n « ,.. -�,' ,.. i r �u1M�ii r r,;, �f ✓;,, ,,I't��
,,,ih,(F„�,.
tl b' ”
.�
r,
ll„ . .i ��.n/'f ➢� ryr,, , ,,,n a , i.. � k � r`�pPiii �iP� o��>�� �✓ j; / ,.,.
,..". ,,.. ,.. ,/R✓ ,,, r ,e...
,.I
ra m c 7 V/w>r 3G�^„ tt±,,; �nfr 9 �, 1�1, /r i4, pfl✓"f `, aJ ,, , ,. „ i.. ,i ;,6 f � ...
-.,
s
l�rMr�,
{ , , � ,: � ,,,: , � ; , , 1 ,,.. � -, ' -:w. . /��od� t , m i„Axh)V r ^ �", r dwl" s- �NeT � ✓' rl / ;l � , r” ,� ,,, ,i.7 r' r ,," ',,", ,�,, "� :.. �:. r ,' ,,rN,,, �:�ip r-„-, � 0 'y ;� �° � ,9 q J✓;, �r�� µ��iY
�9
/� e,. ,��I/Ix ��o "k r ✓ i�N qq,,��� r ( l��
".y, `,�i �,' ' <rrµ m✓ i�,
Yui �
y.,r / S � ✓ w / ski �,, N,,, .. ,. �� � / , m
�Ia
/... / ',;,,,..i�1h r' a, ir., rrl , -„ , ,,, r,� f � ,; 'v ,.. . ” ✓. _ R 9 idl� A ,/,,, �,- ;' 1 , � ,,, ,�UY%/ uY71/ � Qr„� Ir �' , '/p�, rr '�i �""' ®%y , ;;l ' � f,,. ,,,�� (�!i �, , ,, r
i ;, _ �,,,>n , /✓�'���� � f ,imyr(� s ";
,,r, ,-,;
r r BUD c! rl�., ���✓/ / � f "p' �, '>n 7 ��' a - r �1 rf ✓
III
nI�r ..", �, ,m rJ :m �ii ✓ „�, ✓ffl„'�,' - 'f/ miro�:ey i7 „ if
�
� � ,,/ ✓� �-�'
iii �.,, r 1 �ry rr r /
;
6 r �,
9 ,,, , olr, r�;, R , ,,, ' ;r ,, ,. A `✓ nr � ; � / ���, r” �^ � �`//r, ��yVi,, )W� /'>➢ � r,,fN.:.
� �„�,,,,. ;. ,.. -.t , , / 1 ✓ ;, � i y , w; �,
„ � fl r/r,N�a�riA G Gr r/ ✓ �/� 1; a1r�' � �fl /J, / f.. ,a ,: /„ ,,.;,' ” r µ r �� , ,.
� h
� ✓ r/
r„�� ,. /a„
-�”
„" ;. .. � ,,,,", itfy;,"; y , � ;, '•r f' %f iiV��l/ /%
I � ;,. � y- � / f ry r il,� i Y✓% � lr ^ i � /)"
�Y
� 1J�'✓ >r'��,,,, r�� ry A
a .,
IlJn��n �✓��/�� N��,�d� ryl�U„
'�
JrI / ,�
N- �� r ' a,,,, � ,., ;. „� � n, � �rvm f
�
„
y� k�d
➢ ✓ i - '� f„ �'� �,r� a '^ � , - gi m r � rrr
r
u iJ�iroa I� ' t r /, f�� � .� ,, ��fl � ,, � ,� r f ryµ ✓� i��%,p�,,."
U/
r
r
f
r o
v � i rJ/ m
i �
;` rl Q Tory willq�/F�J
I� 9 nii /r
1 0 � r
nirl I Irw
.;, Il Pn
I'i� ''„
.i.,uri"/
�� ; "^rro vl0i y :✓/ r �i,�Yp N �Mo r� �:,„' � � NU ter" �%I ,i , I, Jirµ/
IIII
rWN� ✓� r � IBJ luV N,s � ;, . � ,,, r r �J 1 ro
,'11',`,��go��,. l/ br`
il�'ra?r��rrrtl2i ✓1p/I�11 Y� �r;�r �u %� ; i;,; - i, "„; , a J�/r, ,ir n ' '"^ ✓; ✓ - u�NV+��rHar� f guy ,,r r
5 %,
��..e.
n -, it �N�
'%'Y/ i ".✓ , o,t, , ,,.. ,,,+- ,: �. ,,, ,".� ,. ,,,, ".� �o ,,.. ,
f„u Appendix, ,�. ,. "�r• i� �„, , � � ' "» ,.. , Jr Mi g
�n ful- � � a /r
m/V , ✓ � w ��('µa�� /� �iif4
f I�rt
.�,.
I
,v
�7(c >IIYS�Ad(VYOg'�Fmot ��'�� ry Alf �/ra�N��i� ✓ v�r r f � ; v � � � ” ,rz �
r,.'-, N �r � 1'n:n� ,,�,� a ry,,,,(, ,E�, ,��� ,, ,. , �� �� " �� � �
N n
IID II.
N OR
IC
.�7�iMr�f1�'III nrN r, a��a Ate. ry ,
NN
r.
c
ANCE
n,
9"0 � I ✓f4 vJ �� " � t
/
ry R,
r
� j1�' ✓ ., , „ r , m,/ � M �fi ✓"f 1 ' J /� J
�„ � ,' � ,o , s {. ,. � i �
, ,,,, �,� , � :. � "' "�
IIII J
J,��' d ,� ✓1 r /l ” ,a drrµr dm ,Y °J r
w
� a✓
u
Rf�/ � f�1 I �i l✓ 7 �" ;_ - — J ,J,s :�.�
/ r
f N, r f li
r
N
IIIIIIIIIIIiq
,
�,I:m
i
,
?�
V���rt
n,
t� o
� � 1 ,� � e " � -a � d� V Jfd�
��(ti` f�� /� ,1,, , p� r a ✓ hM1 ri f , , �- „ m � " , l � ,. ^mI,
ll�
f I r
✓ D
f
�
/n; ✓ " r
r
�u
sµrtrd 'k,l imI ��'�'� ur �° n t ,. � iR � I m f
m
y f✓mr.IP � rI �6 i � TI
m ry
s J %ird w
m7m� � .,; `��, ` - f� iii✓"� rti' " r
"
i
r od
r
I �
�l
r N bi
�J
�o / „,✓r�� � 0 �r � ",, ✓Alf
(�y
1
� lu� r a
t a,
✓ err
a
M J i
i,
�y �✓ �. rid° m�>ro� i
� lM,
i�n��G � J
1
r r
i 4,,.. a �� y i as � 9 1 d
fi� pry
I, � „ ; ' ,x �^ �
v' m i it a it Io�lri
w�i1 %yi�✓4 �fi, d � nd lyS^�iJv �!f
r �� ; r ✓N I � ��I � �, � ,. �
.l + f !�f �f
f✓�i ll� � � � n
m"
�y,l
-a " � : � ✓r � Yy � .�' 1 � ��' f %/ // +yrre� /�` �'✓ /��r /
1 � � ✓ ,v I as
f r r, J , 4 �, rf m, ",; or •f � i� � �J «t r��)�^�
z,;,+,µ c;o Y ry r� �''' �'✓ 1>< .r,. i�aµ� µ��,� ,� rJ�'`,a%'�w�ai
rr , , ,, � ,.. ,:. „ -»; J o' 1 " , �, ✓/ ' ,. ri � f� n� �r;,
+r„
,`, ",o, ,' ,,, i`� .. �, ,�;>„ 1 i �„ is , f /
,<,, h} �, " ;,,. .,, rr,,, (�`' �i ry i7;„ 1
/ ', r.� ::N ,� -.;' i ;, ', , a.w' „v,,. r,. Q , $7 �� , /I'01;
, , , � fl) /.'X / l „ i r
�� nbY� Y ,�. 7lit, -n?�/ rl� ,�a� �vff 1 i
l �r"i r lriirtu; _ +✓ I Wl N� i�
,„t^..;1,
I,4;,� ;"
I g %
Ib fr llr ger / o i � - .. ,✓ � i� r � i"� p i•+U /l
"
u
lA➢�.r�% � m „ ,��� , . ti 1� �� /e � -.,, �„ , Po .e ,� ; , � ,'. _ " .,, � YEA; >n� �!r.� m. M � ,
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES RECOMMENDED FOR CYCLIC MAINTENANCE
SERIAL SECT ADDRESS
CELL SPECIES
01/09/95
3509
2
1832
SITKA
7,0
ELM, SIBERIAN
20,2
7019
3
1802
AZALEA LN
5.0
MAPLE,
SILVER
27*0
7068
3
1807
AZALEA LN
5oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
24,0
7024
3
1812
AZALEA LN
6oO
ELM, SIBERIAN
24,0
7055
3
1823
AZALEA LN
590
MAPLE,
SILVER
24,0
6972
3
1800
BASSWOOD LN
390
MAPLE,
SILVER
24,5
6974
3
1802
BASSWOOD LN
3oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
32,2
6967
3
1805
BASSWOOD LN
690
MAPLEf
SILVER
24*2
6920
3
1808
BASSWOOD LN
5oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
24 5
6956
3
1821
BASSWOOD LN
loO
ELM, SIBERIAN
23,1
3955
3
1813
BOULDER DR
loO
MAPLE,
SILVER
25,3
5114
3
1831
BOULDER DR
17oO
ELME SIBERIAN
24oO
(4777
3
905
BURNING BUSH LN
OoO
ELM, SIBERIAN
25oO
4753
3
1919
CHOLO LN
7oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
26, 0
4 i 4065
3
1813
HOPI LN
590
MAPLEf
SILVER
26,3
,%--4063
3
1815
HOPI LN
4oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
25,8
4703
3
2001
HOPI LN
3e0
MAPLE,
SILVER
27,0
7083
3
2013
HOPI LN
6o0
MAPLE,
SILVER
24e7
7087
3
2015
HOPI LN
7oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
28*5
4855
3
1906
IVY LN
2oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
26o8
4847
3
1916
IVY LN
690
MAPLE,
SILVER
25o7
4837
3
2014
IVY LN
5*0
MAPLE,
SILVER
24, 6
4503
3
1,910
KIOWA LN
600
MAPLE,
SILVER
26,1
1 L 4243
3
927
QUINCE
5oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
27,0
t..'4688
3
902
SUMAC LN
3oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
24,0
4695
3
910
SUMAC LN
290
MAPLE,
SILVER
26ol
4610
3
927
SUMAC LN
7eO
ELMF SIBERIAN
28,7
18768
5
600
EASTWOOD AV
290
ELMf SIBERIAN
25,9
18776
5
600
EASTWOOD AV
20oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
31o1
18774
5
600
EASTWOOD AV
22o0
MAPLE,
SILVER
26,5
18666
5
521
FOREST AV
21o0
MAPLE,
SILVER
2791
18475
5
719
FOREST AV
2390
MAPLE,
SILVER
26,5
4536
5
1905
IVY LN
290
MAPLE,
SILVER
23,8
,�18897
5
608
No PINE ST
590
MAPLE,
SILVER
38,7
18883
5
609
No PINE ST
5o0
MAPLE,
SILVER
26.8
18880
5
613
No PINE ST
590
MAPLE,
SILVER
3296
'�18879
5
615
No PINE ST
590
MAPLE,
SILVER
31.7
18904
5
620
No PINE ST
490
MAPLE,
BOXELDER
27,96,
18914
5
712
No PINE ST
2o0
.ELM, SIBERIAN
33,9
18848
5
610
No WILLE ST
3o0
MAPLE,
SILVER
24.9
18808
5
615
No WILLE ST
6e0
MAPLE,
SILVER
25o9
18811
5
619
No WILLE ST
4oO
MAPLE,
SILVER
26o8
1 8840
5
702
No WILLE ST
3*0
MAPLE,
SILVER
28o2
18816
5
705
No WILLE ST
3,0
ELM, SIBERIAN
33,5
18819
5
711
No WILLE ST
3,0
MAPLEf
SILVER
24*9
Page
I
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES RECOMMENDED FOR CYCLIC MAINTENANCE
, SERIAL SECT ADDRESS
18833
18826
19430
18575
18574
18 713
19360
19228
19231
19230
19241
19250
9629
J 25835
25576
.,.,m 25554
25555
x
25552
----25549
25546
25547
4u. 26136
25616
2,618
` 2.619
25497
25330
-25331
2956,E
M
25518
2551.5
25881
12636
12637
12649
12990
12501
11243
1251.0
12509
12490
11.234
12296
12298
1231,1
r
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
9
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
16
16
16
15
16
16
16
16
16
16
714
719
521
600
600
601
520
618
620
620
712
715
319
703
1707
1714
1714
171,6
1724
1722
1722
417
1.715
1717
171.7
1705
17016
1706
747
1704
1708
1706
101
101
117
206
101
102
11
11
11.7
20
•200
204
300
N, WI,LLE ST
N. WI,LLE ST
PROSPECT MANOR AV
PROSPECT MANOR AV
PROSPECT MANOR AV
PROSPECT MANOR AV
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
S. MAIN ST
CRESTWOOD LN
ESTATES DR
ESTATES DR
ESTATES DR
ESTATES DR
ESTATES DR
ESTATES DR
ESTATES DR
HELENA AVE
KIM AV
KIM AV
KIM AV
MARTHA LN
MARTHA LN
,MARTHA LN
ME I ER RD
MYRTLE DR
MYRTLE DR
ROBBIE LN
CAN DOTA AVE
CAN DOTA AVE
CAN DOTA AVE
CAN DOTA AVE
.HI LUST AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUST AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUST AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUST AVE
CELE .SPECIES
01/09/95
DIAM RATE
2.0 MAPLE, SILVER
29.8
7
20.0 ;ELM , AMERICAN
26.4
6
2 0. 0 MAPLE, SILVER
22,9
7
21.0 MAPLE, SILVER
32,8
6
23.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24.8
6
9.0 MAPLE, SILVER
27.5
6
9.0 ELM, AMERICAN
35,9
7
390 MAPLE, SILVER
29,8
7
6.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24.0
6
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
25.0
6
6.0 MAPLE, SILVER
25,0
6
l o 0 MAPLE, SILVER
27.2
6
3.0 ELM, AMERICAN
34.5
7
6.0 MAPLE, SILVER
27.5
6
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
28o4
6
3.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24.5
6
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24,1
6
3.0 MAPLE, SILVER
27.5
6
7.O MAPLE, SILVER
31.0
6
3.0 MAPLE, SILVER
27.2
6
6.0 MAPLE, SILVER
26,8
6
5.0 MAPLE, SILVER
27,7
7
2.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24.9
6
390 POPLAR, WRITE
24,8
6
6.0 POPLAR, WHITE
128o4
6
4.0 MAPLE, SILVER
23.7
7
4.0 MAPLE, SILVER
2 3.8
7
6.0 MAPLE, SILVER
25.9
7
12.0 MAPLE, SILVER
31.6
7
4.0 MAPLE, SILVER.
25.0
6
4.0 ELM, SIBERIAN
25.3
7
7.0 MAPLE, SILVER
25.4
6
19.0 ELM, AMERICAN
30.7
7
2 2.01 ELM, AMERICAN
2 9.8
7
12.0 ELM, AMERICAN
28.5
7
9.0 ELM, AMERICAN
30.2
6
19.0 ELM, AMERICAN
28.3
7
5.0 ELM, AMERICAN
25.2
6
4.0 ,ELM, AMERICAN
27.7
7
6.0 ELM, AMERICAN
28.9
7
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
32.3
7
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
23.1
6
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
33.1
7
4.0 ELM, AMERICAN
33,5
7
12.0 .ELM, AMERICAN
28,8
7
V-ILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES RECOMMENDED FOR CYCLIC MAINTENANCE
SERIAL
SECT
ADDRESS
CELL SPECIES
DIAM
RATE
12329
16
319
HI LUST
AVE
11.0 ELM,
AMERICAN
32.9
7
10924
16
101
MILBURN
AVE
6.0 ELM,
AMERICAN
34.9
7
11072
16
219
So ELMHURST AVE
3.0 ELM •
AMERICAN
24.5
7
13490
16
224
S.
MAIN
ST
4.0 ELM •
AMERICAN
38.4
7
11001
16
212
So
PINE
ST
5.0 ELM
AMERICAN
35.8
7
10948
16
213
S.
PINE
ST
2.0 .ELM r
AMERICAN
CAN
34,2
7
10949
16
213
S.
PINE
ST
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
26.8
7
10952
16
217
So
PINE
ST
3.0
;ELMr
AMERICAN
7
w 10954
16
219
So
PINE
ST
3 . a
ELM
AMERICAN
.70.4
34.7
7
10955
16
221
S.
PINE
ST
3.0
EIM •
AMERICAN
30.9
6
10956
16
223
S.
PANE
ST
4.0
,ELM I
AMERICAN
38,3
7
10960
16
301
S.
PINE
ST
20.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
28.7
6
10961
15
301
S.
PINE
ST
21.0
:ELM �
AMERICAN
35.9
7
10975
16
312
So
PINE
ST
4. 0
ERIK •
AMERICAN
34.4
7
10969
_-_
1
313
So
PINE
ST
2.0
;ELM
'
AMERICAN
4 �.
7
10970
1
16
313
S.
PINE
ST
6.a
ELM,
AMERICAN
i5.
37.0
7
10974
16
316
S.
PINE
ST
490
ELM,AMERICAN
37,5
7
.10971
'
16
317
S.
PINE
ST
4.0
ELM,
.
AME RICAN
44.5
7
10972
16
319
So
PINE
ST
3 . a
ELM •
AMERICAN
36,8
7
10881
15
205
S .
WILLE
,ST
6 . a
ELM
AMERICAN O:AN
2 8.3
7
10882
16
205
S.
WILLE
ST
7.0
,ELM
AMERICAN
32.1
7
10939
16
206
S.
WILLE
ST
3.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
26.0
7
10938
16
208
S .
WILLE
ST
4.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
27.2
7
10937
16
210
S.
WILLE
ST
3.0
;ELM
AMERICAN
28.7
7
-10884
16
211.
So
WILLE
ST
7.0
;ALM •
AMERICAN
30.0
7
10934
16
214
So
WILLE
ST
3 . a
ELS f
AMERICAN
29.9
7
k 10933
16
214
So
WILLE
ST
7.0
ELM
AMERICAN
26.4
7
10886
16
215
So
WILLIE
ST
7. 0
ELM •
AMERICAN
29.4
7
10887
16
217
S.
WILLE
,ST
4.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
27.3
7
10931
16
218
So
WILLE
ST
3.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
37.1
7
. 10888
16
219
So
WILLE
ST
190
:ELM •
AMERICAN
32.6
7
10919
16
302
S.
WILLE
ST
4.0
;ELM,
AMERICAN
30.7
7
10918
16
304
S.
WILLE
ST
7.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
30,51
7
. 10 913
16
312
So
WILLE
ST
4. 0
ELM �
AMERICAN
26.3
7
12521
'"
16
502
W•
BUSSE
AVE
4 .0
ELM
AMERICAN
28.7
6
' 12 682
16
702
W.
BUSSE
AVE
5.0
;ELM •
AMERIC
29.3
7
,--""12487
16
402
W.
EVERGREEN .AVE
21.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
AN
32.9
7
10925
16
100
We
MILBURN AVE
2 . a
ELM
AMERICAN
28.8
7
10926
16
100
W.
MILBURN AVE
3.0
ELM #
AMERICAN
32.0
7
10921
16
101
W .
MI LBLTRN AVE
3.0
.ELM
AMERICAN AN
30.9
7
102
16
101
W.
MILBURN AVE
4.0
ELM
AMERICAN AN
2 5.9
7
10923
16
101
W.
MILBURN AVE
5.0
ELM
AMERICAN
29.2
7
'. 1254
16
101
WA
PELLA
AVE
5.0
,ELM,
AMERICAN
33,$
7
12525
16
101
WA
PELLA
AVE
23.O
Ems,
AMERICAN
2 4.2
7
1 614
16
112
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
ELM #
AMERICAN
26,5
7
Page
3
VILLAGE OF
MOUNT PROSPECT
a1/o9/95
STREET
TREE
RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES
RECOMMENDED FOR CYCLIC
MAINTENANCE
SERIAL
SECT
ADDRESS
CELL
SPECIES
DIAM
RATE
12613
16
114
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.a
ELM, AMERICAN
7.2
7
12611
16
118
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.O
ELM, AMERICAN
3p. 1
7
12628
16
20.
WA
PELLA
AVE
3.0
ELM, AMERICAN
24.3
7
12627
16
22
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
31.6
7
12626
16
22
WA
PELLA
AVE
23.a
ELM, AMERICAN
40,5
6
12593
16
222
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
;ELM, AMERICAN
29.?
7
12592
16
222
WA
PELLA
AVE
12.0
ELM, AMERICAN
33.2
7
12 555
16
223
WA
PELLA
AVE
10.0
ELM, AMERICAN
36,1
7
12557
.
r
16
223
WA
PELLA
AVE
12.0
ELM, AMERICAN
42,6
7
"ar , ,
#µ
do
f
f
II
v
rMIYAd � r W° d � ' rV�d+I r
l�y r fQ,U,I r r ', aJ ,j
r
r , rr l ma , ,
m r ^%,� 11 ss ✓l"r� rdiylr or r q, %� = r 7" r' J 4
�r, r d
pr `
rr ,d
k
ifrr fi r Nr,r v
)i 11
�pIA r,
r U,J
r i 1 %If 6y y la fi „. , w
�r 2 I rr y , '1� i/ r h1
f n
G4 a ,/ r ri r r r� �, r �r rt, ,� -� r. o 1, ry r �I �dJ'. I
rue J,r / ,. w
r/J') �,.`, 1� n ear rr
� %J ) „ ; r ,
7r
v ✓ r 0d6tr� ! /.Yn 1 r" ,u a, J i , , _ J
/ I t bar l i / 3, rr , /�
o u1rr, , oP w u
„r/ 1 /%r� r1If k r �, l My I Al
ilv il, i "' N,' I "I ) rf ) , , ,';;r ",��F �Y
rj i9 , Y� ; PO ��^ ') „ " ,� ,
d" "Ov i p,
i
y�fur f r fI , II „ai
Ju r f)f ax110, II Y i Ir;nr, »6 0 „�i,
m d DOr
ffnfi / 1fi r ,
J
r 1 R q x 90,rr r «r" dQ , r r, , ',
NN
tm N %A9 �4Y ,u 'Ru,W ,/ , ,: Y N I Jrr u, ,,:�, a ,�� „ r r 1
4 to y "Uu, , �,u t /
10 a err( rm� y'ni' r�yw I Y If nw :4 ; '" ,r- I I �F �y' ", (i t o J rf,
mG s % T
� �:yrJ in* 1j � I! (I r f�' /, �1 � / I �. r r X n, r m, ,r; o r,� �l ' e `„ � �/, ' , ,.
/ P r�' I Y Biu r i I I r' '
" d " �° IJ/, » jJp)) lJ d h, y, n 1r /r. O F ,
vnlrl, w i,hr'r rTMrr� �(�i r r!i, 9..,a fi 1
; dr r+n „w,,w �lr ^�,;'?�d , N �e,::l » t. ,ii : �� �r f ;',,,;;"'� d
/r
1� :a e� ��, a/.aVl�,�y ..' , � f?' „%�,, ,. �d'M ,7 I ao "
i,i�,,; Y:.,i,� lrrlr�i r �,.. (rp' „ ,%,, r.fir, oi,PD J ,;,:','.", f/. 9 A,,-;, ,�f ,a ,•"�r� y�
/i' '� 1�1Y'i� �i� ��i )r r�/ „, rf;a, «� ,' Sd(r�,.r r �ry� n a „%rrrr .w ✓ ")�,
JIi r// yr,ir r a m;4 is
q a,.;' �,�. ,y�>/y ,`..120r �' ?P% lir, ,r'�, ;ti r= m ; r, r�„ d ,�( !, rf
ir�l„('qAM 9 0; �1If,9 ,I "r ” i' ,,I� rfI"" ', ",; � n " rw / ,,, :..i `tti fI, ff,1 1 rill
J r r ,! � %,Y r l� f ei . ,1,,,. r r„ a `a /i`�� �N Y ri Idi;
/ " r
% i%Y i l
'lI �J / �i er F�,
d, i
lid/ Yii r / Pj r r lir 0v I di ii 1" I1 r r
it „"
i,�r�7i�r!,)r0u,rw �i)1a oJ'Jr, ar r?,r� �✓'� "; '€" ,^ �, " „.:... r f,,,r il�r ,mrurrMtv,-
��� T
/ " 'I n ��
k off r ,/ ✓rr// �.. kyr ea„ y /� „r, rfro ley' r w/ a` im/� e r
rn, b ,, Av,Oi u°JA I'll �y9 !1V aJr y, a �, ',s, m di ✓�R� W t a� !r
r ",� , ,. ,
Pik oMynpP ," rOf rX�d'rai �1�f l;/r f ri �� `ter y P� ,x �.�
r Jf rn, 1l �/ % ap n(�
pua ik 9 Y ,f , ° dir rn„ ^ r W r
,�'"^ rJns""�//rr,F ',-*,�l,rm ,v,RY ,11�� ;,� s,; '�, ,� ,i, ,,� „-, '� li,,,'.0 � /,�Ir i),1'
Nr,q`e i`YDu �(/�(r,;OArr 0 rgfii r rr I �, r „ ,,,r "<.. p
yr JM' q r✓ , y .w 6 . ;,. a r p
,,�,
, m 1 er A pJhwPr
/� /OM7 11 ui,p aY NIl ,rry' % % r '% y
rnf9 r/ ro r `l iji dry j j r ", I° N m'
„, c
91. "' r , Y
fir ;�/�jl ° Vli�/ / „ r� ,r„ ,�sr� v �d F
0 r ���
l di
y r, %iVry , IP rr r r� Nd
'
f y
° Jl ry , r / ��l I * Y 4), INI °Y d N ri ^'/v , i y fr I
m dir
q l ! fp r, , /„� r I ” d r „, /' ;,.�, , „ ,� �, -' �r e ,,, ..` a ',!./ , ,.. , - iri' rf " i� ll .,"r, r„,� i�lv>i„, a P';% I
r ;2; ,✓.. 1 d1 //"yl rp ry iulm;� nr ,� ,,, , .o; ,j, <: ,p,' >,v ,. ,r r ,,, ,, �, , ", n�i9➢,x,,11
i , r 1 ;1"., , „„ o ri, 1 / 0, ,.,,
„ WymnJr r (, (!!` ( /i% ' r A/'p:m 6 " „ r , , '' 9 , r , ” „ o / r ,w , , / pr no rr� , I b ,r
"l ,a w, , „ c 1A,' r `i, r” " ,,,, if .� " , , , n „' , , n r r; r rrt I r,, �,,, ((
��, ,,i,, ), ,� r 'FI'% i, Y u11�Yn�r, „' ' , l er ,, ` ,,, . ,, r . . , ,. ,,// r,Cii ; i� i �fi }f�, /i„ip� � 9�J ry��
�i , I y� ” l J'� J'O ,,H, t ' .. %, ,` , 'i,... „ ; ; n ,�. , ' ' _. ' I , ,i 1"l�yrrr ,l�w� „ �ra p � � r, � 9 ,"l
�^ , :,Y r
✓„�rr,�� /4 1 ,1q r«.., r",/ , r' , ', a” r ,,.n lrlr � � ,»
yal (i ,vhf 4 „Hl dln� J1
Yi; r c ,�„r/ Wr, ry rRp % „ r� r„ n ;�, y, re. a .. ' ,,. ' �, r. �. ,Q M � ,tri 1' 'u r �r
"fr r „ tl , - ,d� , >4 , , ; , ,,. ,:, ' ,� , ,.. ,q,.. „ A?�I e ,°` w f'. ` , 'I ” y1,,: ✓ r 11 j0 0r 9, r„�
l -,x r7 a � ,,vr
"r r. I % N rue "V . , , el , ,_�»; ., r, r .-,
rq sGl�.. w9,u`r°r'>� auG��i... r0 ,,.:;, al rw r,,,,.; v.; /- „ ,... I, r„ <„6;, �, i�, ry r�.d✓,/��/ir'%�>'�u�,;
,y IV„ 1 di �r f u' m e I , ,'; "9 /6'! ,/ro r41/ v 'i
„� uo,, ,,,”" r u „r ,r, y ✓ r r toi
(� , ? „,(� U.ar, Ar0J, n;, r ' I” , l,''' , ,,� r J�, "f 'm ° ; I' rfs r l o, n ,«dti7F� rp ,NI �r'j/
»,
,Yr >' ;Ny !i. ✓ i ;� 0 /� u, ,,, *„ m 1 al� e, 6 G`y ry;, I�N'm0'r , v'G
'.,�� Jn�YO, tiWi «ir 7 rrr rNr A k ,iii„ r '� / fl �s>' A Ii !.
;,
/,r r )I fii,i f)�✓ i�(f� Orr ii F" ; rN ' ,, - r '' s r ii, J rgJ,Y�� r Y r
ri 1q 119V is 1 ✓fal%r , n- » , c r
�JyYh✓ rr✓ „iiY ( u' f r/rik %rc T,"
y,I a� F r
p%/r"� ' 1, m b`r�`j1' p Grp/✓ i, 10r t, ff r ,. „ „ ° " u 6 ' r A
Ya ,fr6 g d ti �l i /el1�0 �r'I �N�f�"i r iv„ , ; ,`" ''r` t ,.. r ; r,„ (fi y,r r r
or: �✓ 11 F e /Igr
e) fNlff f(I
s
I Y
'PI'v, r� ,rmr rpl uip/r'r r�Jr�l y rj
tl �^ mVp ri,J 1 "' 1, If edG i� ^��/: rp;" ,r�ro - F - . "' it y % „ ° / , r<
�" y/'1 �hi H 'fin; '' M .,%
e wfi'a ,� d1 �) iii ' v'+ ° , a P " ,, r , I r:; 6'"
I", r,.
v"ro 9 / r
Err r, 'M,, ,�; Nr'f tri, , . , �, , ";ia r' �`;,
r -I
- ,. �� r �, q'n�� e�%f�'.: aryl
/ M f 1f � I� IM r «li `J � uk f) i, "I a
r i i i !H r"���Y1 %%.fl v on , ?, w �7 ,;i ,,,, =rra ,. ,
f1 !/ l %� ,f u
u
�"J , FD p i�'i 1rd f Illi;, r� � ✓i/i
t r' I w , 0i ;
r i1 i>in qi0 w rl 4; „',, J 1�1N e"r M a
, !f ip' bi{i,Pf rf I H "r f� it m "a , „ "p f+�JJ�i ' Or p rv'.
r r l r�, uv� 9f I m o r r, ' e'" , r
c f 1 Yi p 11 ' 1w 9 r' , r fpi a y i,
10 '. m r " , m P »� ""
U e fir'' ✓
F rdy �rrirr k ' r 0 " l iJ' di ;
r n �, m �N
i" r 0 s r w - def ,Y
7'
" a , Ja ",x� ,, ,I, r - f NFA r ! r ,
r
d "" 7n 1 r r ri „ a
Dp r' o) I rq / , f ur
j " , a r 1,r'% a. � Ar f �l J lir 6 y %2
1!w F
N� ., ..
�4 A QI r u Yy , pm P,
m
�,ry / J 1 M0 r ff r > „ �f
-r ` ,, r/ Jr dM✓ a
+ 0,61 "; r ,r
i;
a (� «r
7'' �j,ON � rr r ✓. r 9 r :� 1 .,, 1 j r / m r
"�Y1 r� �;, r M ,,?rA�'+ki r r! n li,:r r f ;u,. f rr r n r r - �' .. f p n , /r e6r
,d Im 6�pd iP Kr "°nfif 0
y' ,r lQ v r r �r ;rA srOd{, , ' ° f I I , r p' ", ,% ., .. 0 _ 7friP S rI
U , ,'.
u�j a IIF m ;, d• rc e
Y�Y �r iuLI �r r6 �fv sn
,D r r r ru aJiOr 0 rr f f� y
rj iPryq j/ "'r,� rr�r '� r r 6Y rr % " � ` a r'n)1I),
Y0. hr '� % Y / p t 'r¢ ' a r'' ,r re Il
r /'a aPr a ;r64 r %) r�) e j r d
ff �' r% �01 rrr m
k �. I, o Gtr ;�: ,r
/dJe Ir rA ^i » r' f i
r m O,. r ��, h0
�Ar rn�� %/r Jr 1 a�, �;i6� /r � of r / 0.. 0... ��r ,",. r ri .' ", „, - �.,. � r i !ar( r m
)uAu// d/�f id7" , r ,� d� , r'
ff,1'r y i✓✓ `'r Fr prrI"N'f &i ° "m tir„ r of rx�,r� „,.. „ ' <;,r Jrrtc//,le,6y° rl, '� rJ
drffY„p i r 0 rl r /'” _y rr �F
� a
��� )' ror 79 err e m / ;
r li ,„"'rtrul�l !r ,ilo fw r r I1f , , 1 ;., r ,, I'"; vh r,V`�p `rpr
' / r� "' ' � rl 1�J� f w ,I�f , 1 '^ a 9 r,",>i�P" , �,
y< � fi
r r it rri,,." "6 ,� I, p ,0 e; ,; I;hp k
A ,
r ✓ G ,
v
u
I,, ✓ r
l2ry iD 6p lQ I> ^� t lr �' a" A ' ' G
e u
rir
,ln M, Q r r r , r `� r ro" J N '� Y
,,�y ,i, r
r AP= r u40r1 , [r:0 rtoip.6M�r 1 *,p �" .. ,. a / ll! w 6 r
N r ..„, - r
"�, r;/ a ,pia }6 d q 'p 9
r r i 11V ru , '(, ii- r r , Oa,Fa M1 ! 6 N r';� pia ,
i
r✓1u d f oa'r d ry /,
e„m pfp u , „r<J sf ,' 1d, = u l ry r::�Yr r�
r "n0' 'hYf r ) uL, , , M1 d f
w
;rw' 60 >Yll 6 llf r l ,, t ✓ rR , �N• „ vs n� / vi
�„ y mM / 1/p rrev^ ', „ - 1 vw„ P p�iX)I d r
ry r ' a
iii r it r d /G sr a ar
,A „ O a
,-
J0 L 1, r, ,�' "� -.m' ar r�
a
IY , ✓r ry ° , d , ; 0i, , Nfi,� f✓ i
r Oi �Wp,i d r r,.” ,r„. - � 7 , "ru 6(lrrr f�i rrii 91�
0� f `Ir y �I ie y),/.,,, 'o' /iui;H rj� pr6
t^ Edi ° V iI0,, „
n
w GG �Ia / 1r u,.
r , u rWloui'll r ,vl r ? f � „ �� „ , n „ , r
r
/ % /s,
7u�uo'ap. ,,,q 2r//, r �,, ,p �!'° 'r A/ a ,'if, ` , ,.. ,,,-. Of, r r ,/'r��V `.�!y ,�„.
,! f roa l/' r 1 x.17 ,,i %,,;f, i,;.. %' r, if �k, ,eyj'„ ri Oa(” a4r;
',, ". ,,
r6 r�0 u, ,.) ",i , g, r,,, , .,0, r t �U ,a�, w `,:/ri ,anl�.
w a 7w'U' ,. , „�
� �JrtN, ," k ". 0 %� „rr r�,. /r ;,„ . (, 6 '� o r ' , ry l 0'`° " ,1 f , ,«df
m POjcl, „`,; R, / 'll ,I; V 1 6r �d °J' >, , , , M i „ ,r,ap r0 , r I ro
r
ti,'aru "" rj1H 'r ;' Hr ";, N"° ,1 x r p ., r „� ,, ` , , ' G 0 r ,,, ,k , 3.
�� iI�O(", ^` �m , U JJ",i 'p �„ "i /r' yy�� w,� .. ��� /` " �/ ,?, 4ipp��� yip
VNrq;,,` r „ ; Pr ,gip,, v f Pt r, ,, ,,, A, 0
1 u , „ ,, r.
If � , er, ' r
w,;
I ,iur
�ekr„. ,” y r
/, pr 0
,rr P , ,,
fry„✓ rUir 7) r, ;fi,., w�,.�- ''�� „�” tai -���/ f, ,r�,..
,G w, l r I lir ,6y: 04Y0 0l. ' ' I - ll /a" " : „ , " Hi J l `c M j
o� ,r ,' a
r, f u r a G U f, I 0
Yrf fl -rYlrk rl 0 N c N ,.
%, ,
��I , I „ �
�l ,,, M s ( r 'J,
/ra Y �,, it „ ,,, uwr P,...* ,Y,,, r ,, s, - r /4
,,o _�,
, �
N ,i: a �" i. 'JPA �,) N 1�
v
, i6 i ,�� I
I� n - % ,,fi
ryI l
. ,. W
Iu� n
" , G ..
n
� D r
, 1
% """
-ar, ,%t�r7
,,
/( /r
aY, r r r.
fe apo ,I
p ���
r„
M OI r ,H , 5,u,
f fYjf fly ��b�
Ph e/
ur A,'
f ,
G„ ,
"'°
wrr
/
!,r ,
A l DC ,
r2 a r r ,
.„ /r , f
ry dl /IaY rt /, f /o/ m ra
rf !" , ", I
aro fr
"
y rr%r rl-„
3i
Page 1
VILLAGE OF
MOUNT PROSPECT
01/09/95
STREET TREE
RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES REQUIRING ADDITIONAL BRANCH REMOVAL
SERIAL
SECT
ADDRESS
CELL
SPECIES
I3IAM
RATE
6836
3
1843
BOULDER DR
l4.O
MAPLE, SILVER
31,0
$
18529
1
5
701
FAIRVIEW AV
1.O
MAPLE, SILVER
24,6
$
17515
5
210
N. WILLE
5.0
ELM, AMERICAN
52.0
18812
5
621
N. WILLE ST
4.O
MAPLE, SILVER,
33.1
)18832
5
714
No WILLE ST
5.O
MAPLE, SILVER
26e8 $
9
19431
5
521
PROSPECT MANOR AV
22.0
MAPLE, SILVER
294
$
30022
15
417a
DOUGLAS AVE
7.0
MAPLE, SILVER
2399
25515
15
1708
MYRTLE DR
4.O
ELM, SIBERIAN
25.3
7
25516
15
1708
MYRTLE DR
7.O
ELM SIBERIAN
I
2590
11242
15
140
HI LVSI AVE
4.a
ELM AMERICAN
•
25.3
9
12509
16
11
HI LUSI AVE
6.0
ELM, AMERICAN
28.9
7
11248
16
112
HI LUS I AVE
3.0
ELM AMERICAN
34.7
8
11001
16
212
S.-PINE ST
5 . O
ELM, AMERICAN
35.8
?
10935
�
16
212
So WILLE ST
5. O
ELM, AMERICAN
31,7
8
10886
16
215
S. WILLE ST
7.O
ELM AMERICAN
29,4
7
10921
16
101
W . MI LBURN AVE
3.O
ELM, AMER I CAN
30.9
7
13514
16
13
WA. PELLA AVE
4.O
.ELM AMERICAN
36,9
10
' 135.5
16
15
WA PELLA AVE
4.4
ELM AMERICAN
�
42.5
�
1 601
16
206
WA PELLA AVE
4.0
ELMj AMERICAN4
2 2 w
12557
16
223
WA PELLA AVE
12.0
ELM AMERICAN •
42.6
7
Page 1
r � �
imf rtG a,
�J m
Ir, qp J11�I /r a
radf w7 m 9 3 v
�r a
r /,dl�n � r �" ✓
MM -"rvnry/ „,. ,r rrtr, /�/ „�,)0 � n, �mrv����ll' Ari✓�h' yat�Y/I���rVl6G fm Jr
r;�i r;.�,F f�'%
f �,V)
�i✓�9''lui';'�� a" .,'� I'!�, ✓Jf ' r s
rr
� �
J;
an
�uGi,,
�'�.��'.' ;✓��� � ,"wr, "'" r,-
nm r r �Ir GJfff''''''���Wwrrr r
' "Tf r
r� R
q11
.
mrn"",
1v ,"; , � k ✓ , Mir; rr . , „ ' u.,, i�ff r,r ,,," ,. ", J,
MM
!
�''�jr
yU ,I, ,m. �rv� ?�r ✓f4 „'rsr ; i:.
lr 'p � snv"
"a ,v
,ry„rY, i/r
r.. i, ,r, ,;: .,,a, i �mr�r Gr �
'4,J1T11. v ,f � & «Nf,rui , �' s ;.: ,.. ' `' ,+r,1 ,,,. ,!711f; ,;�"r�" ,r rx r"�/r ✓rt�l,lrv, �i%/�jl
,AOI%;� ,6 ��prr ✓v y /, � r„ a ,,,�1 ,,,„ ."✓' r ;'% �(F... 'r r ,; >M % "� .. e ...., _ „ V .,,,, fl a �„�, 1f J �w Gi r r y""llVx r,�.ri� rn j
�?�� u m r : ✓ 0"„ ,,,,, III ' r^ ». -, ,,, �, w. "'rJf 9 �f „
7�r�YJ,i � (NG ,,t � ✓ ,,;, i1^^, ,,,, of <; l i rf%; ((; W '� �i/ „I"I ,G( �T°i� a �.
y
r,�A'ti1f %;f AA✓„ fur�,fu yGf,�„'" , r ,;m; ✓;,;,,,,, r v '„ x;'� � ta',II aYl rrGNGidil �i� ��a^i
; II
'�1. ry � + Ah„ ,i , f x. ,. , fl, ".• ' „, W ,. ,, .. :". ', p :1 'am ki r / ,r^ a %1,
I, r r r �IA �;,.al 1 A , ,, ,a, _„ ,. � r/✓, ',krW ;I g � �... o +w✓r,/r ,a % m / /�/ y/F(�� ar� 1Jj.
ii
j � ""„i,." € ✓; „ �" ,' '¢ ro ,,; �,. I 1 /f , OfpV�" "0� vrx; ' x�v �iW /�/rrr a r
�,r,�,"�(;�,.,"r�. fa ". ��/✓r'�. 1i �,r, �, �dG'=: �" r , ,`N .,,, '" !m ;., ,�i N ,_ ,„"' r, ,` ;,,,e,,: .. =k„ �9i11 ,i�r r nr ,l4yp^r,rr r�i kyr lrf, ,d'd'' r��"/�� ,�y
Ar,%A,x ail"' r�xif/r/r er r%�M r ,,-,✓� ,x ,"
✓��a� /� � ryr,r��r r r n J�r./ rrt I x
" , „ � "� �" ru✓ _ , r I aur r rr7 a r /,�'>r
�r V
I a0 1r. y ?i ie " 0l n I
A�; , rryl� Ga lfYr ro,fd � .,v� � ?""' M..y � ,:. ,� ,. n; i ✓ ""�r✓�J �✓� �aAr
6n � /9
J r�yw/I w ry f✓✓/� �� w'
,� t
m, r /rt a JAi ✓ J 1Ja y
f,tf r y rdl r r
r ar' r rr�
i s 11 i
"i
y.. r ,�, r r y�i r� r fir' II ✓9k W�i �l'"J�pf
� r yl D ✓ " A x f("Tat /
a� " rrt/ Ti!U ��pr
G/ /
AI� �l�%iPr'Jnf lr✓sr�A
m H6 r
'+', r 0'
� "Y✓ � f d �"I�m�m /%k<;ry 'T,°.. a„ ' �;, ri I ,, � , `� m'l ; ',� "ry ;.., T, li`',,Jo it , r
i'
,,"
,
J
or,'r, �
V
hp7i"�f�`�, p �y�� y� IGS �a � m , •, ,. ,,; „
,j r kir"aI
! ���// I�rAJG"r �or �'r W�m� p ,., r, r ., ,• ,.. " �r ', � ,,,' "" ,`'e, �r1r „/'kWr� n" /;;I'
ry r r d
r� i,," 49
� ✓ ,,.` ,,., l✓ " f r % n
„�
e " r I �2 o(r, ,' �,' �n(rvy , lill(r /�%aLr � Nln'f✓nr��i x�
;; Ir..
r ,i ,'(n�// :,"/ �/•d�,rti�i"rod /r�V Al�v ail � : '�r �r''r4ll1" �p�,'�G'''onapd%(�P k� ,rV n1G II; Mf a; ' if„" w �, , , t; aV .: a ,o, ", „ ;, ,,' "a.' ",:
ef01r,1 �u✓%r ,a(✓;,, r /,Jyr fu h ,;. .,.., ",
, Qx r,, r J �lrV"�1,��,'k � r I " Y/�^���f G '",; ,, y, r r� Olrr �Iln �/ Iry✓� ,ly; ' ;,, ,: ," -; ' ,,, v' � �. .. ,. ,,, , „Aa � ,.%"r�/�AVr, »1d/k/ V ' '✓ �y rr , f rNry ryJ�(r I ,"! i"'� '��`%
,1J, i d ror �,� ar y, s,y 1m ", r " „ ,,;.,. ;rv, •.lk' , � , ,,, r ; - ,. ,, ,,,
19 1
,.
r ,, „ '„ a, fr° r„ nL/rt`N „ % •'� �i>i, ni ''Nl, ; r 4 Nl ?l ", fi i a � t " , !'mr'M„i
e ;�.. ,� „ , , i % ,m�:r� , ,,, f.. ,. -„�,, �, , a". q :.... ,. ✓, � ,a r � ,,
rr
�PI,�r,lr
k
,, ,,: � '( oG/�? �, s,r r r nl, f, ✓:;�" ,.,r ,(q .. n1,. ,rtv' r,, ,'^,'r/, `�u. , V ;`I' i a, r rvr, „�,ly� � / �l./ ^, i,7 � 'r
"
r k '�✓ " � V „ 'rP /G J! ?� r 9r �i � r L;11 �9 'r'�f yA� r� �' W f raafr �¢ ,.� /�, �„ � ✓ , 9., 'i Il
,r, 1.:
,. ;' ;i!J !.,n'"✓',d` �J� / �,,r'Ir( T ���s�il M1
r ,,�•,: ",,., .,, ,, ... ," ; ,,,: a,, ,,, yf r„ •,,, / r r�, ",. f0 y df� i�r, ,,r (`d ms �ixr!?'
�
I r V r / fro", 77ro„i�l/d W¢�rri9' calm 4R J/
✓,. ,x �� � er' r" .� i,r%'y r% , ',; � „ ,�,, „ ,, ,✓" v :" /
'-
f� 1
rlrJN
,« J� a/7�l
p'
r�
�; AW.r//•i � � �,: f -0 f fly �. 1 '
l»
� v
1,x
w'
"„ „ 1
, ;, r m ",,,, ,,, ; , "" ' ',, 1 �" m. '', , ,.. ,. ",+,:. "%" , I i, � r d' ✓ r r r:�;, "Nr�n�%/2l 1�. J;
`%'� /;; rFl V �i/ r a',,w k/ r ll. ,k, fl, + a,m, ✓ 'r' ,f ,;,,, ,,,, ,hr� dl; Gl ✓�➢✓',r {r
»,�,'r, ,a m`j�✓ i0
,,, m c,t1,, � r i A (' / r dG � ;r a ;'� � , tr '; •.,' " ! „�, " 9 ,i " � %
kr :.
✓ ,o ^ r< , ,,,r0 �,,; � ,,, ;1 air °ru, r , 7 , r y''J,n , /a ; ,,ar1 G Ja%N✓ Jr. r, r'->iD r; rr
y,
1k
!lJ G„ A1f9w r ,, ; r�,^ ✓ a fdl�-. i J W r, , ,,; a r Yy�.'il" r,; �'; l.i
"."
1",�I9„1"9I,,j 2(4/(ra,✓rr, 1,PrN,a(/N'%I'"jr11 ,"ag1} �J�m.trvyfm,AV�i J,';y1�f.9 M1�^r/r,�};iJ,i,x,,,,''vn.,"".f;...,.r., !r,,k,M1�y.r,,,.,r<r?raa,,,d",.,;r`i,,..^, ""P" kJ,P�/: k`,(Jy0�v,,„ia .� . �,i , yt 1, rI�o'�rl"r,r�,r,f, �� �:,r r�� fJ'D'�T,, ,,�rr;„�,�'?;/;"%;,rII � l ,,�:,^v,ri�. ,,7r,S%„laiAYGri,„,,+,C,,AW� )"J1/rm �V/It� T � Ir1 �.�� �r �frirr)r r�"f'�y'l/irt hrJr1)),'µri�"r�4,„Ir�rr h�k�,„r'inr}rdr,�,H,j..�(r..l�zr,G,r2rd,J�/,�V ;f/,ra, �i%r r l/r. r�r r�y",�l,;,4l� mV, 4��d"�;/.r�O/,ir�.,N".f4pr,%,:�G,.rmV,I,m,,,y,,,":,a /.„„'rYi,:w.,FPo"�fri,r..f�g�./':,�;'yI., .. , ., � , yrry r/k �r ��rrt(IIWT�h,"µ ',,l"'9W✓%A' ��rl,�,✓�r,>",n1r/lt�� kr�„�,Irl,',�"rl, ?,, r,,��,n,"��w/,"�„`�II,�� �.w,rr Y,�7e k� ;r, .f„,;rwfr",,,pµ , r.y,: e,9.�,:,, a p"i";r(,,„, �, �:',„'I,.+.AJ'"r�"�,r _,,.,.,'. l. ;Jrf ,P"I1 /Ir� ,Ir��vya�»;,r,u'n,�1m� , ra"m1, N�6",,,'"7, ry r,", , r/n»r�"„„�,yVr/I„r ,,`,1I, ;�' ,
.i a r,, ',;,a;'",N,''�'n,� <n,",,),'',,:? "''m,"a"l,"":e.aaha".,.0n,,r'.,„',"r' ,' ,ryf , ,rya,° !l",',a;,,V;,� ,,fG,„, ^'so",,�fd ,, i, /t!i„ „„,,'"am��r", r l„,"",,,,,„',',, , ,, , ,,I u"zA "a'r�,,,%'r ✓/'�ry:/r/:,,,r," . ';/,c, ,,,„/�,;`"" " ;°,;„,„;, "; „",,,,,i„,,;,i„ ri "r„- D,i:,,, ,,,�,,,ry.'i,,H r ,. , ,,,�„,„ y;, ", ,�„ %:'ap"'i�",A�/e;,»kr •i„ ,,;, , µ'. :'::.:,c,,,;,,�,.an„ „ ,,'rrr{ab'" %-r,"„ ,,,,» ,� r,',"•V,,rv„ f" ,r f,,,,,i,r r ,, ✓.., "... ",u.,,,. ;,';;,, ama,, ,; ,,,,:. : ,;:�o�,'- . .,;., ' 1n_,":. m' ; . ;. , ,,,...r�,r�,,.;.::;..:, ;.' ,,". _
s ;, .. ;�" , _ �' „,",". � ,,y rf:.:; ,r.a ,. ,. ,". ,"»,. �� '"',' „!r, a".mm,�Ir!r"�r ,t, r„;,",lf,I,,,,,mi,r'm,, t.��.",„o„'. ,✓,';r-,',:,,;rtii rt✓': .,. "e
,p`� ,,'.H.; .d..,' ,.tk"rt:�^/,,."i,..,'�Fr1 ar,�,,"��,,NN,.� %r,,,� yN,i �d.,i „P„ ,A, r �;" , g»,.,r" " '63 r,,�, ,,�,r�jfr'iryr„ ,,wy�r1�r„,a,l/,J1ara".a.ny �.",. �:,'f,pr.„W.r:,"l,,d 'rxr^rr �h elyr "if�;J,ra •� rA:ar"a7H/A �Nc,� f",; ,y,sqP�,i,rir^ y '7��1HN,,,1e,Jkar�a.rr J,l,, r��r,ry,,,;'� %"r,^,aVr',}," i'i"IvHrt�;n a; , -,",,,,; 'i";,.d/:p,:a �l`,r,,� .i?r1,'i,,p��nfa, '.^r�✓r,V,+,r-y,'
J/rWraGrm�rr;I ,,°r1,Vl'/ G �vN"k9 c1r..r,'y,rh:,rGi� a� a�rtfW ru Vrr,;;(�,9' rN�'ja ", ,�✓r,�j? r,1 {�'Nili/: „ l�!.( , ',%Uiry/%r"r,��;1r'�,(r��oAV� re.:', .,,i,Yr RF:x„,,
J'.,✓a.2v.W ^ 'rI'/ �4� Ii1rwg
ryrUri
f
,r,
F
,
,r
7 rrt pii
I
,"
e
o�, ;r /
e a.
!1tr r
r
YEHUNG,
, A, ;CABLE,INSPECTION,
r,aYa �� ,.
(
�
f.
l,j1`ira�
„
i,
..
..i"1
�
t((�� "�„�A �/ I»,a v P ✓ � ✓✓o, ^
0 mi �rm�n �..r ,rv/ G /,A �� d) t , J�, m ✓ �%,,, "/apo r V�rd '�
/
/ r . : rrt d' / i a y �ilM✓ d
p,:
Jv� ��'m'�"� sG i� �✓ k /1 W!(1��j 1f9� mm �,r
rdll f ,"'
1 , x/fir
f
n
• h ' s ,,, 1 1 S
l!m6�Aj,,l ,7 � m rrr tlV �
Y �y/" r fu a „ b r p w
r/121/" ri dlG AJ'IAArW 1�
, m ri /r l rm
i,
" 1 r f �i
�
0
r orq ,yor,l( ",,,,;�i1rv�
/i Gr rf11 �VI� r us
r1JJ'� r I�r ryi 1a�k °rt sKnr ur ItY /rI��
fir�aW a waw J' rd /a
r
I r. rMx»ry �/l�J,��ami'Ah
��I u7 a JJO �" r .,a, ,,, •, µaP
m�Na, 7r14 dry Jfrl w
� a k rJl � r
1,�� t! ��r 1� � r � � �✓ err 4 f �'
Y���I %,V7 jug r A✓ rV rTrrr / Gm /ii '" y ., ,,; as � 0 � r "rr 1.'paw�Wq�f
� m m % m fu i am 1 s
r V "x
a�r Ay!N rr ry ) 1a rr �
ro
I(p
�
Yd'm'ui tr, rd n I m r rl > n 4dA I r mw
mil A d +'w r
ri ?� i 6➢ yi " " N r rr
9j�119
l�ro � V, mr';
`, r a
rdr:
;ar ku
nli r 9" ra xp y
�
r r ry(
I /1 r i1r �rvri ✓11 F
fV✓xrii � „"� n ray � , ,oi r , A �,, r ,
� �
it rr � J a r( //W✓M y;
fa
�i� y, xfi; ria F X70'' r a/ � m✓ A f;` 1 a � o � G I rt m
r/if a,,,l, rip rtf6 ✓ °' � / Uix �)
arHAm�lWi'19
aMJ w
iI �Vf ''+,�dr�i�rr�Imµr `yTk �wm r r �I � I„°, y f /, y r r� Ol�ky
�ay.ur '�7� VR ^m , W'r,�,.� �ai�, �" ✓ "„ ma " f,, .. "",, „ II °n��mrnV ft � �y
i
G s'y�
r» » 7 rl � `' a R�I
x
� .J � „n „ ,.r ,,: ,. ,,.•,: ,,. ,. ///
r� �'• If w 7 4 w
y r
¢ Ar/ JGmJY r�
a s. dm' yr ✓ a ym m.„. , ',
r
�l y pr'r;� ✓r I"rv„ ,^"I �i' a� `, f,,,, v, IG,fA�1m�r a s, f srvJr 11 Till 'l�N,�^Ji i
4 nmG tl r Pon ',
'
W r I) J
�riA 11Ji m(t" W s r
„ ,,,, „ � � �� .., :," q ` �✓Fry I � rl y� " '
til �
r
a /
� lm rt a
rt
",,�
✓ ✓ry � / rr(fi m ip ylW r�rfrnm /
r" a & �ir V ml0 in rrW Aa
ai r r ^
,iIr
ry
�
, /iDa!f ,� ',m
m ,,yo,, r ,,, � "✓�, � ,! �.. " � ,,, % „ i n�„..y n' "� iii r 1f ,11 r � rr
rt'fa;, mlv; ' ,r , f, f• . ,n ,,," ,,. ,,;: �:, ,," i" ✓ a �r",,� ,, � , ,rr1;;. m ,r J '✓ r, r� , �1' � r," 'r A 1
J ° °u o» �' 're , ,1a.... "„ rt„ . ,: ,. ,.. ,,,, ,.'" ,,;,,;,, , ,,,, , :. ✓ aa,"`,,� r/ !r lYi f1"„r;;
11 Il1f w ,, IA (Ai ,, ., � "� „ ,✓ w,,, r .,Fc / a `, % fi ,,. r 'r ,/� /`' i r 6 , A
vy„�rM ,,.„,�''✓fi; ;yt f, ,W fi raM,,,7., , 92.:! ,�ij ' A��r», , //r �� if i✓a.
�'„ Yr
�x»,/i "U"sxr�ayN.. ✓ %a , +„" , , _ „ ; ,,, , , � ", mlry ,>. z0, ,,,, ' (;i' I r / l xjm✓Y , +l r/ ,�,rA
„„w'm "..
,� „ ,;:0(� r
�`'
r� AM/' r ^'�'�i/� WY � �%I1 y rt'�` eD (m mr"G 6 i �✓r, "
Jf
Ay r %r 9 r„ ,"✓
"
gµ, t" ,. `^�,^, ✓, � ,, r.. "i:.", ,. n;,, ,. , , ;;' "., F` ", „' '/fm � /r r fnrw e, wr; � ,w r%Y I a � �ir(`,a
;,,
f f ire Jm a/ r G)
'f'
,n �`�. as ,� INrrr"af 7%J! ;✓,,,,', rr ,�I ,("„ ✓ ,.. "
rm
W,."r „' ";... ,a. ,, s ,.. ,,, r, ,.. :, ,{. ";: ;,rt m„;; ,r, lml„ � a; ,✓ � n/ "(',1 e1 .n-m., �r ?f "Pl id Jl (iii,
c,T,m
✓� 'i ,;
� �",:'an i,.,r lk,. .vi ;. I � o m.. m, , ,. ,Y% ;, 1 " r, r,f Gil A� Gl ✓I" r ��r "1 y
^ m � tr � nr 9 i ,", �riar ,v� r r rf!✓ns,, ✓, ,rI��G� arf ra
V r ,,, �X✓J ; ' >art „ j.1<t a cr„ ,I •„ o; m ry
rf ,.
,,, ,,
�d°" " ,a _ "71�a, ,,;
n ^,
muif
a »" (II,, u�if yPl �r r a, ?, *�, r„ ,,,, i,;, » , .., ",,,✓ r. " ar �,rvo, y 1a„" r n »�", G � ao
rr
%�
g, n
m
r wA
m
»
w0
u r �;
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
STREET TREE RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES REQUIRING CABLING OR CABLE INSPECTION
SERIAL SECT ADDRESS
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
8
9
9
9
15
15
15
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16'
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
521
521
701
1004
606
610
612
608
615
210
613
615
521
520
718
505
316
315
317
608
402
417
1720
101
100
101
108
110
11.3
115
117
122
122
20
211
319
100
18
109
111
221
217
217
218
219
FAIRVIEW AV
FAIRVIEW AV
FAIRVIEW AV
N. ELMHURST
N. MAIN ST
N. MAIN ST
N. MAIN ST
N. PINE ST
N. PINE ST
N. WILLE
N. WILLE ST
N. WILLE ST
PROSPECT MANOR AV
RUSSEL ST
RUSSEL ST
N. ELM
MT PROSPECT RD
S. MAIN ST
S. MAIN ST
S. MAPLE
HATLEN AV
HELENA AVE
KIM AV
CAN ROTA AVE
HI LUST AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUST AVE
HI LUST AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
HI LUSI AVE
I OKA AVE
I OKA AVE
S• ELMHURST AVE
S. ELMHURST AVE
So EL<MHURST AVE
S. PINE ST
S. PINE ST
S. PINE ST
S. PINE ST
CELL SPECIES
DIAM RATE
21.0 MAPLE, SILVER
30,6
8
22.0 MAPLE, SILVER
28.3
8
1.0 MAPLE, SILVER
24,6
8
1.0 COTTONWOOD
35,5
8
2.0
ELM, AMERICAN
29.8
8
6.0
ELM, AMERICAN
26.5
8
5.0
ELM, AMERICAN
26.1
8
5.0
MAPLE, SILVER.
38,7
6
5.0
MAPLE, SILVER
31.7
7
5.0
ELM, AMERICAN
52*0
9
4.0
MAPLE, SILVER
34.6
9
6.0
MAPLE, SILVER
2 5 , 9
7
22.0
MAPLE, SILVER
29,4
8
9.0
ELM, AMERICAN
35.9
7
9.0
MAPLE, SILVER
27,3
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
73.6
8
5.0
ELM, AMERICAN
38.4
9
6.0
ELM, AMERICAN
41.1
14
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
35.3
8
23.0
ELM, AMERICAN
30.7
8
5.0
MAPLE, SILVER
31.9
8
5.0
MAPLE, SILVER
27.7
7
1.0
MAPLE, SILVER
23.5
8
19.0
ELM, AMERICAN
30.7
7
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
25.3
9
6.0
ELM, AMERICAN
30.6
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
26.3
9
3.0
ELM, AMERICAN
46.4
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
37.8
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
39.4
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
32.3
7
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
34.4
9
23.0
ELM, AMERICAN
30.7
10
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
23.1
6'
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
3897
8
11.0
ELM, AMERICAN
32,9
7
9.0
ELM, AMERICAN
38.9
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
54,5
10
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
43.8
1.0
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
45«0
8
440
ELM, AMERICAN
45,0
8
3.0
ELM, AMERICAN
30o4
7
6.0
MAPLE, SILVER
47.2
8
4.0
ELM, AMERICAN
34.2
8
3.0
ELM, AMERICAN
34,7
7
VILLAGE OF
MOUNT PROSPECT
ai/a9/95
STREET TREE
RISK ASSESSMENT
TREES REQUIRING CABLING OR CABLE
INSPECTION
SERIAL
SECT
ADDRESS
CELL
SPECIES
DIAM
RATE
10956
16
223
S.
PINE
ST
4.0
;ELM,
AMERICAN
38.3
7
10960
16
301
S.
PINE
ST
20.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
28.7
6
10968
16
311
S.
PINE
ST
3.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
38.3
9
10975
16
312
S.
PINE
ST
4.4
ELM,
AMERICAN
34.4
7
10969
16
313
So
PINE
ST
2.O
ELM,
AMERICAN
45.1
7
10970
16
313
So
PINEST
6.4
:ELM,
AMERICAN
37.0
7
10974
16
316
S.
PINE
ST
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
37.5
7
10972
16
319
S.
PINE
ST
3.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
36.8
7
10880
16
205
S.
WILLE
ST
5.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
33.4
10
10881
16
205
S.
WILLE
ST
6.0
.ELM,
AMERICAN
28.3
7
10882
16
205
S.
WILLS
ST
7.0
ELM ■
AMERICAN
3 2 . 1
7
u' 10939
16
246
S.
WILLE
ST
3.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
2 6 , 0
7
10936
16
210
S.
WILLE
ST
5.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
2 5 . 15
$
10883
16
211
So
WILLE
S T
2.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
34.6
10
10885
16
215
S.
WILLS
ST
2.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
34.3
$
` 10886
16
215
S •
WILLE
ST
7.0
:ELM •
AMERICAN
29.4
7
10931
16
218
S.
WILLE
ST
3.0
ELMr
AMERICAN
37.1
7
10899
16
303
S.
WILLS
ST
7.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
36.3
to
12621
16
100
WA
PELLA
AVE
9.0
:FLM,
AMERICAN
27.8
$
12622
16
140
WA
PELLA
AVE
11.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
46.3
8
12614
16
112
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.4
ELM,
AMERICAN
26.5
7
12613
16
.114
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
37.2
7
12612
16
116
WA
PELLA
AVE
5.0
ELM •
AMERICAN
26.5
8
13 514
16
13
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
36.9
10
- 13 515
16
15
WA
PELMA
AVE
4.0
EI,,.M,
AMERICAN
42.5
9
12601
16
206
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
ELM �
AMERICAN
42.3
9
12627
16
22
WA
PELLA
AVE
4.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
12592
16
222
WA
PELLA
AVE
12.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
33.2
7
12557
16
223
WA
PELLA
AVE
12.0
ELM,
AMERICAN
42.6
7
12560
16
301
WA
PELLA
AVE
22.0
:FLM,
AMERICAN
41.7
1p
_ 12584
16
306
WA
PELLA
AVE
5.0
.FLM,
AMERICAN
38.1
9
4
�„ r N t
.'`» i *11rylf o�uJ 'a""� too , I f y „� c,�'
v i � q,
r aj/ti r Ir II ,r'; , r' »,,,' uY i ,f, r r
,,
"
r e 1� 1U n (�^(I "y m �, f d I � o
((� Ilfi alN "(k M1'Aw f ' , . ryto J „ ' , � a, l r I`,`" , rr r r r W n J "�
Td d?v! In w ". F ,A ,r". „ " N J " a r ri /t � /l y y k� �' o/'� V r�if1�
a /r%1i,1 JN a a wl , '� fr 9 ry r f�� ;a�
a'�ja� ". aa, e �' 3 a"'`" ^ 6yvmii r Jl' �y� y
v r17 f r r ; l /y,„ :�, a ,� „ ' ,; ' , , , , m ; „ r r it , �'�I F�'"Y'r�'"' 1 mr hof �A9
�� l«
ri r
r l r r A ", 0(� 1/f/ ri r M rat1�� Jif/y � "Ply' �" � J'%/�
�' J ,'' ;, ,n qr i) 'w "i W1' it I 'I rN�� .: rhr�r% r fJ �r%r rr/i��,j
ri9,d,, '',i�„i, 1t'1>l"%li, lio,wA , " ,m " ` l ` ra,r,k l j ' 1 �'1 rfrrtl(»o/�° a stl r «r�lr��i J»`f
mo'r rt'°; gar, 4 "I ,i a y / i
hi H / ,Arrepl" rn, t r 9N / rl (/I
6aF( Gv w (;r'(' '° JJ ,, „1' o r,, - „ N r , n N y 0", L ff iir,,,
y�' if / e, ; (tJ 11"", IA''r//f1,f f -ar „a , m, ; ;¢, "a, . >a,,; D ;, '''� ��, r r /�y ,ra , r . rj5gbi ,:' '� ���M �r��r)'„
pb X11,,; J i t 9' % a r
Vr , rlv / ,,y�`,r �,/ly,✓r g„ "r ,1( r, „ ,,,, 'd „i , '"„ - <P »�I�1 �6 ;1� I:, lrrrS r d
a,4 .�,./� ilwd,, ,1(,,, � „ .>,9" „G a r,",, Ir 1 ,ark r / pin , l,�r ,M,w
. ,✓, 0 „ %?I� AI J re. / "i)' ,4 % , r, d 1 , ;. d �,.'� F / ; " ,f / LII:I� f ' le%Jf /;.
°91� �I /�yJt rr`1'ni; iJrr /in;;,, f, „ p 1 r 4 , , ,,.
1� D r ' %� r+= „'tsa, (,r, Mfi" ; r'�,i P li J/ rNi "rrrtl
Lr/,+ ), ,. � //�(1 " 111„'�i' ", h;�. n ' rr, v, ', +k ;, F �, ,,, "y ,�„ � i
r: ,Ji ijr; 'r!`,'; ���n r % ,.;, N, fir,.: f,. li o 1 r x„i r�MGs„,
r Q�li i'. 5,, ,,, r , p , i{r! n,,, >:, f° Di / ff ,. x, : A , , rr , " r. a ;a. y i » mi r,, (.,,; ,d.W
>! �� ;; ,rlr ,k IW„ ,4, ,r y. 9 . ,. ", „ ,,' ,{, �„ r,y ,.,,, ,l ..:", 1��"�IfN .1
a fil a P na G/ 0 „
yrs.! / r, ,,, � „ r, r /1, %1i % , ,
I. ",... 1 �,. !IID.,., ," nr , ,r" A" ,A ,, 1 ,,, in, r�. U, / >/ r �, /,..� ,,,,:. i�
,, In 1/, m H -e I "G, rr, 4,n io" <., . ,:� rA/ M,.o- ",j ,
'. , J'% a «r r ,� f�Y, ,., i 4,., J, 1 r,,, g4 r%i c«,ra;; ,r ," ,rr } n' '��'• �'J f am
1 ; ' riitlr va,4, n „ , r, Iw ,I „ " Jy, r „", ;t y
�.., I„ >IU „»'r,„ prn �„ ,e: ., . i, , (f ,AI-' '�i P� r nr%', r,d"�> "u
r - f a » ,i ,f ", 'l"i c, " Nay �mY, r ai
„ ,a d+
/ ' „ ( U,, i >bl "„ ; , ,, . "" 'r,,. 0 fila Y, ,,,.r r t ;; a: , 1�
,,f� „ ,,a" ,,,m�... „ , rll, 11 v<»r 1 n „ -,.. , „ , , rr , , ,r.;� 191, '
,,, �� ���:. J .,, ' ,P >^' / i„r . �6 r i. y (,r 'a ylrl n As i ''%`, «,,.. � i , }r, r
m I!ip r, ,. ..ri»�wn 7 �� ,<. pie a , v"a ,;1 r N ,
ff"
M y 'J 1' , ^tti .,. '%oemr" v., , ., . , " t„ r ,, : ,, �, of J , ,. r ,, ,i ,, r rJ i/ r, , ? ,,
/o,r 1 ,1 , 1i , .,1 I ar , t o ,
N, 1 h " »" .m, . „d �, f.,,,1N, wl', A , �„ ;, /ei r//
r J. „y„»,r J , ", n, , ,7 r. _, ( , m,f, „, , < ," ;",,; ;�. ,, „n% 1 ,,,,. l G„„" rr, f
,l%�/ may, , „
�� o,r , ;;Gry rFrytA ,r, ,, , , �ar „ e ' ..,:ai, r "" d .w,:, y�„ %, 6 ,.a, "'"(f it ,1rr� / .',�" 'il r
I , ' . , .4 7Y Il f ,,,,', I N ," A ,,
, n � r, ,f � r„/y v, :di q 'tri"�� m Ila �,l � (�I �,a r�f x I f�,,., �,
%,r . e a fi,„,
arr rir , x,,fJl i (', r
r ✓ 1 l r i., ,� , , , < � �, , „ o � , J a ,d lii ! �t/r f i- a r a�rt!J„ / Nwr/ � i
r, y,, Ar n o(, r r,
1, ''/,,,fl( ,,rr , ,p „v ,,r o ;m,
JJ / r
r r /, r �,
d
r ,� 9 r,1 r',, "
u ,1l _ .. vn r �9oM,,, , iI M1 ,,, ', " ✓rr� ,.. , , .u.. I r,", ;
/„ I , / A , , .,,
r. s ;... rs o r atw;pfr% ;� iF ,, a, " Ot rr ,, », ,,, rt , r,
r„ r ;z ,n" .a ,,. . . r t ? ;, ,,. , " ao,., , r y! ; :,,,, ! rl - tw. , Ad1 rfG r
'y, r1�, , ..;,i ,,,1, x ,,, , l , ,, ,, /i v , �r,%/ ,pl, ra'eia. "'.i ry
J , o, l,� , r/ r d mi,I , r f yr r I/i i, i ��+r3
f „r'...'; /,�W,rNVjr 'flei" ', ax1 »"v„ t?
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
y
Y
y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
r+0 -
VILLAGE
OF MOUNT
PROSPECT
COMPARISON OF PRE -ASSESSMENT AND
FINAL ASSESSMENT
SCORES
SERIAL
# SPECIES
DIAMETER PRE -SCORE ISA -SCORE
A SCORE
7483
MAPLE, SILVER
24.7
0
1.3490
ELM, AMERICAN
38.4
0
7
25993
COTTONWOOD
35.5
0
8
19823
MAPLE, SILVER
30.0
0
11
10802
MAPLE, SILVER
31.7
0
8
3509
ELM, SIBERIAN
2092
0
7
28995"
MAPLE, SILVER
50,0
0
11
18284
ELM, AMERICAN
38,9
0
11
16375
ELM, AMERICAN
17.9
0
10,
0
HONEYL,OCVST
23.7
a
10
25331
MAPLE, SILVER
25.9
6
7
25616
MAPLE, SILVER
24.9
6
6
18848
MAPLE, SILVER
24.9
6
7
18590
MAPLE, SILVER
30.6
6
8
25576
MAPLE, SILVER
28.4
7
6
18826
ELM, AMERICAN
26.4
7
6
18768
ElM, SIBERIAN
25.9
7
7
25835
MAPLE, SILVER
27.5
$
6
19241
MAPLE, SILVER
2 5.0
9
6
25518
MAPLE, SILVER
25.0
10
6
25355
MMAPLE , SILVER
28,1
10
9
25555
MAPLE , SILVER
24,1
10
6
25881
MAPLE, SILVER
25.4
10
6
10878
ELM, AMERICAN
24,2
10
8
10936
ELM, AMERICAN
25.5
10
8
18591
MAPLE, SILVER
28,3
10
25330
MAPLE, SILVER
23.8
11
7
25549
.MAPLE , SILVER
31.0
11
6
11234
ELM, AMERICAN
23.1
12
6
19231
MAPLE, SILVER
24,0
12
6
25619
POPLAR, WHITE
28.4
13
6
10887
ELM, AMERICAN
27.3
13
7
19250
MAPLE, SILVER
2 7.2
13
6
18666
MAPLE, SILVER
27.1
13
6
25546
MAPLE, SILVER
27.2
14
6
10 913
ELM, AMERICAN
2 6.3
14
7
25547
MAPLE, SILVER
26.8
15
6
25554
MAPLE , S I LVER
2 4.5
15
6
18883
MAPLE, SILVER
26,8
15
6
18713
MAPLE, SILVER
27.5
15
6
10926
ELM, AMERICAN
3 2.O
16
7
10938
ELM, AMERICAN
27.2
16
7
10886
ELM, AMERICAN
29.4
16,
7
19228
MAPLE, SILVER
29.8
16
7
19431
MAPLE, SILVER
29.4
16
18774
MAPLE, SILVER
2 6.5
16
7
19451
ELM, AMERICAN
26.1
16
8
N
N
N
Y
N
N
Y
y
Y
y
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
r+0 -
fl
f`
VILLAGE
4F MOUNT
PROSPECT
COMPARISON OF PRE -.ASSESSMENT AND
FINAL ASSESSMENT
SCORES
SERIAL
SPECIES
DIAMETER PRE -SCORE
ISA. -SCORE
REMOVE?
26136
MAPLE, SILVER.
27.7
17
7
N
25587
MAPLE, SILVER
25,5
17
8
N
10955
ELM, AMERICAN
30.9
17
6
N
10881
ELM, AMERICAN
25.3
17
7
N
10907
ELM, AMERICAN
29.2
17
8
N
18 819
MAPLE, SILVER.
24.9
17
6
N
18904
MAPLE, BOXELDER
27.6
17
7
N
25618
POPLAR, WRITE
24,8
18
6
N
13744
ELM, AMERICAN
30.2
18
10
N
10935
ELM, AMERICAN
31.7
18
8
N
10 919
ELM, AMERICAN
3 a . 7
18
7
N
18879
MAPLE, SILVER
31.7
18
7
N
19230
MAPLE, SILVER.
25,0
18
6
N
18475
MAPLE, SILVER
2 6.5
18
7
N
18776
MAPLE, SILVER
31.1
18
7
N
19453
ELM, AMERICAN
26,5
18
8
N
30022
MAPLE, SILVER
23.9
19
9
N
10922
ELM, AMERICAN
25.9
20
7
N
10934
ELM, AMERICAN
29.9
20
7
N
19430
MAPLE, SILVER
22.9
20
7
N
18529
MAPLE, S I LVER
24o6
21
8
N
10939
ELM, AMERICAN
26,0
22
7
N
10937
ELM, AMERICAN
28.7
22
?
N
19245
MAPLE, SILVER
27.o3
22
8
N
25515
..ELM, SIBERIAN
2 5.3
23
7
N
25356
MAPLE, SILVER
25*0
23
9
N
12509
ELM, AMERICAN
28.9
23
7
N
18833
MAPLE, S I LOVER
29o8
23
7
N
25497
MAPLE, SILVER
23.7
24
7
N
25516
ELM, SIBERIAN
25.0
24
8
N
10925
.ELM, AMERICAN
28.8
24
7
N
10924
,ELM, AMERICAN
34.9
24
7
N
10918
ELM, AMERICAN
30.5
24
7
N
29565
MAPLE , S I LVER
31..6
25
7
N
6972
MAPLE, SILVER
24,5
25
6
N
10961
ELM, AMERICAN
35.9
25
7
N
10928
ELM, AMERICAN
29.8
25
8
N
25397
MAPLE , SILVER
3199
26
8
N
10927
ELM , AMERICAN
30e6
26
g
N
10923
E;LM , AMERICAN
29-92
26
7
N
10888
ELM, AMERICAN
32.6
26
7
N
10906
ELM, AMERICAN
29.4
26
$
N
19360
ELM, AMERICAN
35,9
26
7
N
4540
MAPLE, SILVER.
30.7
27
g
N
4847
MAPLE, SILVER
25.7
27
6
N
11137
ELM, AMERICAN
24,9
27
g
N
11061
ELM, AMERICAN
2 7.9
27
g
rfi
Page. 2
VILLAGE
OF MOUNT
PROSPECT
COMPARISON OF PRE -ASSESSMENT ,AND
FINAL ASSESSMENT
SCORES
SERIAL
# SPECIES
DIAMETER PRE -SCORE IS -
ISA -SCORE
, 7
REMOVE?
10930
ELM, ,AMERICAN
26.9
27
8
N
18840
MAPLE, .SILVER
28,2
2 7
6
N
10949
ELM, AMERICAN
26.8
28
7
N
12649
:ELM, AMERICAN
28.5
28
7
N
12492
FLM, AMERICAN
37.8
28
$
N
13743
ELM, AMERICAN
34.4
28
10
N
6920
MAPLE, SILVER
2 4.5
29
6
N
12682
ELM, AMERICAN
2 9.3
29
7
N
10948
ELM, AMERICAN
34.2
30
7
N
17076
COTTONWOOD
24.7
30
10
N
11242
ELM, AMERICAN
25.3
30
9
N
11243
ELM, AMERICAN
25,2
30
6
N
12329
ELM, AMERICAN
329
30
7
18824
,ELM, AMERICAN
24. 9
30
10
M
Y
25552
MAPLE, SILVER
27.5
31
4688
MAPLE , SILVER
24,0
31
6
N
12525
ELM AMERICAN C
2492
31
7
N
18574
MAPLE SILVER R
24.8
31
6
N
18575
MAPLE, SILVER
32.8
31
6
N
13486
ELM, AMERICAN
2 3.9
32
$
N
12990
ELM, AMERICAN
30.2
32
6
N
17074
COTTONWOOD
27.9
32
10
y
11248
ELM, AMERICAN
34,7
32
8
N
10885
ELM, ,AMERICAN
34.3
32
8
N
7019
MAPLE, SILVER
27,0
33
6
N
12637
ELM, AMERICAN CAN
2 9.8
33
7
N
25365
MAP L,E , SILVER
22.2
34
8
N
12487
.ELM, AMERICAN
32.9
34
7
N
13750
ELM, AMERICAN
32.2
34
10
N
18880
MAPLE, SILVER
32o6
34
6
N
12627
ELM, AMERICAN
31.6
35
?
N
12510
ELM, AMERICAN
27.7
35
7
N
12501
ELM, AMERICAN
28o3
35
7
10933
ELM, AMERICAN
26o4
35
7
N
18811
MAPLE, SILVER
26.8
35
7
M
10954
ELM , AMERICAN
34o7
36
7
N
12626
ELM, AMERICAN
40o5
36
6
N
12 614
ELM, AMERICAN
26e5
36
7
N
7055
MAPLE, SILVER
24.0
37
6
N
4703
MAPLE, SILVER
27.0
37
7
N
10974
ELM, AMERICAN
3 7.5
37
7
N
6956
ELM, SIBERIAN
23.1
38
6
N
4837
MAPLE, SILVER
24.6
38
7
N
10953
MAPLE, SILVER
47.2
38
8
N
11071
FLM, AMERICAN
45.0
38
8
N
19448
ELM, AMERICAN
2,5.4
3 8
9
N
19448
ELM , AMERICAN
25.4
38
9
N
N
Page 4
VILLAGE
OF MOUNT
PROSPECT
COMPARISON OF PRE -ASSESSMENT AND
FINAL ASSESSMENT
SCORES
RES
SERIAL
# SPECIES
DIAMETER
PRE --SCORE
ISA SCORE
REMOVE?
12628
ELM, AMERICAN
24,3
3 9
7
12613
:ALM, AMERICAN
37.2
39
7
N
N
11072
ELM, AMERICAN
24..5
39
7
N
25844
MAPLE, SILVER
23.5
40
8
N
4777
ELM, SIBERIAN
25.0
40
N
12558
ELM, AMERICAN
26.9
41
9
N
10882
ELM, AMERICAN
32,1
41
7
N
9629
ELM, AMERICAN
34.5
42
7
N
10951
ELM, AMERICAN
32.5
42
$
N
10973
ELM, AMERICAN
29.9
42
8
r x.0983
ELM, AMERICAN
42
10
N30.7
N
11045
ELM, AMERICAN
40.0
42
la
y
18807
MAPLE, SILVER
34.6
42
9
18808
MAPLE, SILVER
25.9
42
7
N
19451
:ELM, AMERICAN
25.5
42
9
N
N
4503
MAPLE, SILVER
, 26.1
43
6
N
10971
ELM, AMERICAN
44.5
43
7
N
10884
ELM, AMERICAN
30.0
43
7
11001
ELM, AMERICAN
35.8
44
7
N
10960
ELM, AMER I CAN
28o7
44
N
10880
ELM, AMERICAN
3 3.4
44
10
10908
ELM, AMERICAN
41.6
44
8
N
4063
MAPLE, SILVER
25.8
45
6
N
N
10975
;ELM, AMERICAN
34,4
4 5
7
12298
:ELM, AMERICAN
33.5
45
7
N
12475
ELM, AMERICAN
38.7
45
8
N
10905
ELM, AMERICAN
30,1
45
8
N
4695
MAPLE , SILVER
26-o1
46
7
N
12296
ELM, AMERICAN
33,1
46
7
N
13 4 8 9
ELM, , AMERI CAN
28,6
47
$
N
10950
ELM, AMERICAN
35,3
48
$
N
10969
ELM, AMERICAN
45.1
48
7
IST
12521
:ELM, AMERICAN
28o7
48
6
N
13515
ELM, AMERICAN
42,5
4$
9
N
13745
ELM, AMERICAN
27.8
48
10
N
9626
ELM , AMERICAN
41.1
49
10
N
N
11062
ELM, AMERICAN
40.4
49
8
10956
ELM, AMERICAN
38.3
50
7
N
10921
ELM, AMERICAN
3099
50
7
N
12636
ELM, AMERICAN
30.s7
50
7
N
12490
:ELM, AMERICAN
32.3
50
7
N
10982
.ELM , AMERICAN
34,4
50
9
N
18832
MAPLE, SILVER.
26.8
50
9
N
19455
ELM, AMERICAN
2 6.2
50
10
N
9627
ELM, AMERICAN
35.3
51
8
y
10972
ELM, AMERICAN
36.8
51
7
N
18914
ELM, SIBERIAN
33.9
51
7
N
N
Page 4
Page 5
VILLAGE
OF MOUNT
PROSPECT
COMPARISON of PRE -ASSESSMENT AND
FINAL ASSESSMENT
SCORES
S
SERIAL
.
# SPECIES
DIAMETER
PRE -SCORE ISA -SCORE
R;EMCJVF?
4764
MAPLE, SILVER
23.9
52
8
N
4065
MAPLE, SILVER
2 6. 3
52
6
N
12297
,;ELM, AMERICAN
42.3
53
g
N
4855
MAPLE , SILVER
2�.8
54
7
N
12621
ELM, AMERICAN
27.8
54
8
N
12491
ELM, AMERICAN
39,4
54
8
N
6836
MAPLE , SILVER
31.0
55
8
N
4753
.MAPLE, SILVER
2690
55
E
N
10970
,ELM, AMERICAN
37.0
55
7
7024
ELM, :SIBERIAN
24,0
56
6
N
,. 12524
ELM AMERICAN
, AN
3 3.8
5 6
7
N
12592
ELM, AMERICAN
33.2
57
7
N
11136
ELM, AMERICAN
3 8.9
7
8
N
3955
MAPI,F � ILVER
2",5.3
,5
58
7
N
7087
MAPLE , :S I LVER
28.5
58
6
N
N
4536
MAPLE, SILVER
23,o8
5 8
6
4 610
FLM, SIBERIAN
2 8.7
58
N
11246
ELM, AMERICAN
26,3
5 8
9
10931
,ELN! , AMERICAN
3 7 . 1
58
7
N
N
29564
WILLOW, WEEPING
31.4
59
l 0
�
18812
MAPLE SILVER LV
• FR
33.1
59
9
N
7068
MAPLE, :SILVER
24.0
60
5
N
4625
ELM, SIBERIAN
28.5
60
8
N
5549
ELM, ;AMERICAN
45.6
60
8
N
11002
ELM, AMERICAN
38.1
61
19456
ELM, AMERICAN
2998
61
$
N
10998
ELM, AMERICAN
3 4.2
2
8
N
11247
ELM, AMERICAN
46.4
62
$
N
10899
HELM, AMERICAN
3 6.3
62
10
N
N
4243
MAPLE, SILVER
27,0
63
12498
ELM, AMERICAN
30,6
63
$
18897
MAPLE, SILVER'
38.7
63
6
N
5492
MAPLE, SILVER
22.3
64
8
N
18 816
ELM, SIBERIAN
3 3.5
64
7
N
5114
:ELM, SIBERIAN
24.0
65
7
N
12520
ELM, AMERICAN
35.4
65
8
N
12609
ELM, AMERICAN
32.2
66
8
N
11233
ELM, AMERICAN
38.5
66
9
N
10883
ELMO, AMERICAN
3 4.6
67
10
y
N
6974
MAPLE, ;S I LaV:ERR
32.o2
68
7
11124
ELM, AMERICAN
4 3, 8
68
10
N
11147
ELM, AMERICAN
28,0
69
8
N
12 311
ELM, AMERICAN
2898
70
?
N
5 4 9 3
MAPLE , SILVER LVER
2 3.9
71
g
N
11123
:ELM, AMERICAN
45.0
71
8
Y
5556
MAPLE , SILVER
2 0.7
72
9
N
10952
ELM, AMERICAN
30,4
73
N
N
Page 5
VT_LLAC E OF MOUNT PROSPECT
COMPARISON OF FRE -ASSESSMENT AND FINAL, ASSESSMENT SCORES
SERIAL # SPECIES DIAMETER FRE -SCORE ISA.-SCOREREMOVE. 7
6835
MAPLE, SILVER
26.0
75
$
N
11063
ELM, AMERICAN
45.2
75
8
N
12555
ELM, AMERICAN
36.1
76
7
N
13514
ELM, AMERICAN
36,9
77
10
N
12611
ELM, AMERICAN
30.1
77
7
N
24601
ELM, AMERICAN
38.4
77
N
6967
MAPLE , SILVER
24,2
80
6
N
11128
ELM, AMERICAN
54,'5
8 0
1
N
11000
ELM, AMERICAN
4 0 , 8
81
Y
8583
ELM, AMERICAN
51.0
82
10
Y
1.1.007
ELM, AMERICAN
44.3
82
10
N
12526
ELM, AMERICAN
30.0
82
$
N
12560
ELM, AMERICAN
41.7
82
10
N
11027
ELM, AMERICAN
43.5
83
11
Y
12593
ELM, AMERICAN
29,7
85
7
N
12557
ELM, AMERICAN
42.6
85
7
N
12679
ESM, AMERICAN
35.5
86
N
12505
,ELM, AMERICAN
48,0
86
N
12601
ELM, AMERICAN
42.3
87
N
13747
ELM, AMERICAN
41.6
87
10
N
9991
ELM, AMERICAN
30.7
87
$
N
19243
MAPLE, SILVER
25.0
88
10
N
12622
ELM, AMERICAN
4 6.3
89
8
N
21979
ELM, AMERICAN
35 , 5
89
10
Y
17 515
ELM, AMERICAN
52,0
89
g
N
19378
MAPLE, SILVER
31.2
90
11.
Y
12584
ELM, AMERICAN
38.1
93
N
9821
ELM, AMERICAN
44.8
94
10
Y
4534
MAPLE, SILVER
25.2
35
g
Y
4572
LINDEN, LITTLELEAF
11.0
96
10
Y
12 612
ELM, AMERICAN
26o5
98
g
N
12633
ELM, AMERICAN
42.O
99
10
Y
11073
ELM, AMERICAN
33.O
lag
N
8606
ELM , AMERICAN
7 3.6
103
$
N
5597
MAPLE, SILVER
22.9
103
Y
11244
ELM, AMERICAN
39.0
103
10
Y
10968
ELM, AMERICAN
38,3
105
9
N
871.6
ELM, AMERICAN
26.5
111
9
Y
18062
ASH, GREEN
41.2
111
10
Y
8584
EIM, ,AMERICAN
34 « 7
113
Y
6839
MAPLE, SILVER.
30.0
115
10
Y
16194
MAPLE, SILVER
3 2 , 8
115
10
Y
16387
HACNB;ERRY
20s3
117
8
N
6940
COTTONWOOD
27.6
120
9
N
9630
ELM, AMERICAN
38.2
120
10
Y
7747
ELM, AMERICAN
45.2
121
10
Y
9990
ELM, AMERICAN
37,5
126
9
N
Page: 6
REMOVE?
Y
Y
Y
Y
VILLAGE
OF MOUNT
PROSPECT
COMPARISON OF PRE—ASSESSMENT AND
FINAL ASSESSMENT SCORES
SERIAL #
SPECIES
DIAMETER
PRE—SCORE
ISA—SCORE
9992
ELM, AMERICAN
27.5
133
9
7743
ELM, AMERICAN
28o6
137
10
12579
;ELM, AMERICAN
31,7
143
10
7732
MULBERRY
23*6
169
10
REMOVE?
Y
Y
Y
Y
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Mount PrOpect, Illinois
TO: MICHAEL E. JANONIS, VILLAGE MANAGER
FROM: WILLIAM J. COONEY, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELO� EN',_
DATE, JANUARY 19, 1995
SUBJECT: CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND
FY'95 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT BUDGET
The Plan Commission held a public hearing on January 18th to review and discuss the Village's
Consolidated Plan which includes the FY'95 Community Development Block Grant (C.D.B.G.)
budget. The Plan Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Plan with minor
modifications to the C.D.B.G. budget. The Consolidated Plan replaces the Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy (CHAS) Plan that the Village has submitted to HUD over the past few years.
The Consolidated Plan is a policy document for the Village's housing and public service activities.
It includes a one year and five year plan for the Village.
The Plan Commission held a public hearing on December 7th to receive comments and proposals
for the C.D.B.G. fiscal year. A total of 14 requests for funds were received. Staff reviewed each
proposal, gathered additional information and forwarded their recommendation to the Plan
Commission. Attached is a summary of all proposals received. The total proposed budget for the
coming fiscal year is $410,493. It consists of the FY'95 Community Development Block Grant
allocation of $393,900 and $17,493 in program income received from the repayment of single family
housing rehabilitation loans. Listed below are the Plan Commission's funding recommendations for
the FY'95 C.D.B.G. Program.
1. Single Family Housing Rehabilitation activities ................ $2741993
2. Access to Care ......................... **1014*11 RM $113000
3. Resources for Community Living ... $600
4. Senior Shared Housing $11400
5. Boxwood Advocacy Program ......................... $135800
6.New Horizons .................................... $5)700
7. Transitional Living Program .......................... $6)000
8. Neighborhood Streets -Street Handicap Ramps $5030000
9. Administration ........................... S47-0, 0_00
TOTAL BUDGET I , 1, N, A k BIW 1. '. 0 1. yF # 1* W A W WLR N, " *1 W W M, + 4, M * . . 1 0 .1 01 $4.W1493
Please forward this memorandum and attachments to the Village Board for their review and
consideration at their January 24th Committee -of -the -Whole meeting. Staff will be present to
answer any questions regarding this matter.
SUMMARY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT REQUIESTS
To date, Community Development staff has received 13 requests for Community Development Block
Grant activities in fiscal year 1995. All of the requests were found to be Community Development
Block Grant eligible. The follo * is a summary of the eligible activities and staff s recommendation.
wing I
*j 41 W #
SmWe F =,d*, H sm'&.Reh ' citationActI "I WThis request is to continue the Village's 0%
V gu vit"i
interest Housing Rehabilitation and 50% Home Weath erization Subsidy Programs. Both
programs have been well received by the community and have seen an increased demand over
the past three years. Staff recommends that this activity be allocated $257,500 in new
C.D.B.G. funds for fiscal year 1995 and $17,493 in 1994 program income from the
repayment of loans for a total account appropriatel"on of $274,993.
2. Euclid School, ent/Childcation Pro Euclid School is proposing this program to
help parents make a difference in their children's school by enabling them to become
confident and resourceful supports within the education system. It would provide parents
with techniques and knowledge designed to help children learn at home, provide access to and
coordination of community services for children and their families and promote clear two-way
communication between the school and home as to school programs and children's progress.
Staff and the Plan Commission recommended that this not be funded with C.D.B.G.
funds but that the activity seek other school resources. The request was for $7,000,
3. A n'
�eSstQ_C_a_r_c - The Suburban P imary Health Care Council is requesting a grant of $18,000
to continue a program which enables low income, uninsured residents of Mount Prospect to
receive basic health care service, including office visits, prescription drugs, laboratory and
radiology services. Patients pay $5.00 per physician visit and no more than $10.00 for routine
lab and ex -ray services and prescription drugs. Physicians volunteer to participate in Access
to Care and choose the number of patients they will add to their practices. The proposal
seeks a $21,000 increase from what was approved last year. Staff and the Plan Commission
are recommending a grant of $11,000 which reflects an 8 month grant that would
normally be $16,000 over a full 12 month period.
4.Rg�ulesfi ,[C
_ - , or Commun4Ljft - This Agency proposes to provide affordable housing and
individualized support services for adults with developmental and physical disabilities. This
will be provided through a Shared Housing Program where individuals with disabilities are
matched with community residents to share housing and expenses. Individualized support
services are provided to help individuals with developmental disabilities to learn skills
necessary for living independently. The Agency is requesting a grant of $1,000. Staff and
so
the Plan Commission are recommending a $600 grant to cover the 8 month period of
the Village's 1995 fiscal year.
5. 5�e �or�Sha�redH�ousin, �- The Resource Center for the Elderly is seeking a $2,000 grant to
provide affordable housing. Through the program, elderly homeowners are given the
opportunity to generate income and remain in their own homes by renting to a low income
Summary of C.D.B.G. Requests
January 20, 1995
Page 2
home seeker. The low income renter normally pays a reduced rent and may perform certain
maintenance and cleaning work necessary to maintain the household. The Agency provides
senior citizens with the matck counselling and ongoing supportive services. Staff and the
Plan Commission are recommending that this activity be provided a $1,400 grant for the 8
month 1995 fiscal year.
6. Boxwood Advocapy PrognM - The Illinois Crossroads Girl Scouts Agency is seeking
$44,150 to continue to serve 150 children plus 140 family members in their two -phased
activity. The first phase is the Boxwood Odyssey activity in which Boxwood children,
between the ages of 5 and 17, meet twice a week after school, between September and May
at Euclid School. The program combines recreational and educational experiences and
activities. The second phase is the Summer Safari Program, which is a six week recreational
activity where children meet three days a week from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. for further
recreational and learning experiences. The programs focus is on academic support, inter-
personal skills and societal and community issues. The requested C.D.B.G. funds represent
a 192% increase from the current fiscal year and would fund 100% of the activities. If only
partially fanded with C.D.B.G. funds, the applicant will seek Urlited Way and other financial
support. We believe this program continues to be an essential activity in the Boxwood
neighborhood and would recommend that $13,800 be granted to support it in fiscal
year 1995.
7. This program is being proposed by the Campfire Boys and Girls of
MetropCCwgopor
activity which will emphasize personal goal setting, decision making, self-reliance, by creating
clubs that will conduct special events and camping for children in grades K through 12 in the
Cottonwood and Hawthorne Apartments areas. Program individual fees are $3.00 for youth
and $10.00 for adults. A part time program administrator, program aide and 18 volunteers
will be used to put on the program. It has no summer element. Staff would recommend a
funding level of $5,700 for this activity in riscal year 1995.
8. Rphgq Frost Extended, Day ,amu a ..... ..... . . m'' - The purpose of the extended day care program
at Robert Frost Elementary School is to provide identified students with a one on one or small
group tutorial to enrich or maintain academic and social skills as well as provide a positive
learning environment for students who do not have parental support for homework due to
differences
lanuage or work conflicts. The goal "is for the students to be better a
gble to
achieve academically at an average level within their grade and work cooperatively in a group
with peers. The dollar amount requested is $8,008. Staff and the Plan Commission
recommended that this item. not be funded and that the school look for available
educational funds through the school district.
Summary of C.D.B.G. Requests
January 20, 1995
LM
9.
� E' C DA .. ... ... ... . 09rt est ra W CERA Northwest Self -Help Center is seeking funding to
support the transitional living program. This program is centered around a six unit apartment
building in Arlington Heights, two apartments in Schaumburg and one rental apartment in Elk
Grove Village and Des Plaines. It provides temporary shelter to homeless families for a
maximum of four months. A case management system is used. Services may include
employment and training, budgeting and financial counselling, day care, food assistance,
medical assistance,, housing counselling and nutrition education. The Agency is seeking
financial assistance to support Mount Prospect residents who become homeless or the near
homeless. Staff and the Plan Commission are recommending a grant of $6,000 to
support Mount Prospect residents using the Transitional Living Program,
10. Childreds Sveci Financial AssiLtance
" all &I A — -This activity is proposed by the Village of
Mount Prospect Human Services Department and is designed to provide children from low
income families with productive summer activities. These may include open gym, swimming,
summer camp or Park District classes at the Mount Prospect Park District. The open gym
and swimming program costs are supported by a 1/3 payment from Salvation Army funds, 1/3
payment from the family and a 1/3 discount from the Park District. Park District Summer
Camp and classes are not discounted by the Mount Prospect Park District. The cost of these
is shared between the Salvation Army funds and the family. The Human Services Department
is seeking additional funds in the amount of $3,000 in order to expand the number of low
income children who can use these services. Staff and the Plan Commission are
recommending that this activity not be supported by Community Development Block
Grant funds.
11. &DIPE'.Cen'ter Paskin g.,Lot - This parking area is beginning to fail and was originally slated
for reconstruction last year. The project was placed on hold as a result of the Mount
Prospect Library proposed expansion that went to referendum. Although this work does need
to be completed, staff and the Plan Commission are recommending that it not be funded this
coming fiscal year since the parking lot is now being studied for redevelopment potential.
12. LgMe esurfac in This street is beginning to show signs of deterioration and will soon
need to be resurfaced. This street is on the western border of an eligible census tract block
group and is eligible for C.D.B.G. funding. Staff and the Plan Commission are recommending
that this project not be funded.
13 .NeiehborhLood.-S me iUca,',DRamp,,§ - Mount Prospect Americans with Disabilities Act
wez
self-evaluation plan has identified the need for further curb cuts and handicap ramps on public
street and alleys. The cost of completing this activity within the Village is estimated in access
Of $5001,000. Staff and the Plan Commission are recommending that $50,000 in
C.D.B.G. fiscal year 1995 funds be utilized in continuing our commitment to
completing our self-evaluation and complying with the American with Disabilities Act.
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT� ELLWO1
CONSOLEDATED PLAN
1995 1
For the planning period of May 1, 1995 thru December 31, 1999
and includes the
Village of pe
Community Development Block Grant Fiscal Year 1995 application
Prepared By: Michael Sims, Planner
Planning Department
Village of Mount Prospect
Tel: (708) 392-6000 Ext. 5313
VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT
CONSOLIDATED PLAN
This document contains the Village of Mount Prospect's housing affordability plan for the
next five years and Community Development Block Grant Fiscal Year 1995 application. The Plan
is divided into eight sections; Introduction, Summary of the Consolidated Plan, Community
Profile, Five Year Strategy, Annual Plan, Monitoring Plan, Community Development Block
Grant (C. D. B. G.) application and Appendix.
The Village's Consolidated Plan is a new planning document required by the Cranston -
Gonzales National Affordable Housing Act and replaces the Village's current -Comprehensive
Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), earlier. Housing Assistance Plans (HAP's) and C.D.B.G.
former applications. An approved Consolidated Plan is required of all states and units of local
government that receive funding under certain Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) programs, including Community Development Block Grants. The Plan will explain
Mount Prospect's housing market and inventory characteristics; estimate the housing assistance
needs of its very low income, low income and moderate income families, including the needs of
homeless individuals and families; assess the availability of housing resources for unassisted and
assisted housing; develop a strategy and identify resources for meeting housing assistance needs
over the five years and specify how federal resources will be utilized to provide affordable
housing for needy families and individuals. It also contains the Village's C.D.B.G. application
for federal Community Development Block Grant -Entitlement funds.
Mount Prospect's earliest housing plans took the form of zoning and comprehensive plan
ordinances. In 1978, the issue of providing for the housing needs of lower-income residents was
added to the Village's plans with HUD's approval of our first HAP. In 1991, Mount Prospect
received HUD approval of it's first five year CHAS.
Since 1978, Mount Prospect has benefitted from the HAP and CHAS process which has
led to with the construction of 412 subsidized senior housing units and the rehabilitation of 233
single family houses and 277 rental/multi-family residential homes. This document is intended to
provide a strategy for furthering the Village's efforts to provide lower income residents with
affordable housing options in the community.
The Village of Mount Prospect is hereby designating itself as the lead agency of this
Consolidated Plan.
In the process of preparing this plan, information was obtained from the 1980 and 1990
Census, studies and reports from State of Illinois agencies, the Northeastern Illinois Plan
Commission, and testimony and reports received as a result of the CHAS/Consolidated Plan
public hearing process conducted by the Village of Mount Prospect Plan Commission on July 6,
1
. ..... Residents and concerned individuals were invited to
.0pig
tl= part, , -�Qn xmi:
participate and express their concerns from the very beginning of the Consolidated Plan process
through to it's approval by the Village Board. A public notice was placed in the Mount Prospect
Journal on June 15, 1994 announcing a public hearing before the Mount Prospect Plan
Commission on July 6, 1994 at which time the Commission received public comments regarding
affordable housing issues and concerns. A second hearing was held on December 7, 1994 in
order to receive comments and proposals for the C.D.B.G. fiscal year 1995 program. That
hearing was advertised on November 9, 1995. The minutes of both hearings can be found in the
Summary of Citizen Comments section of this plan. During this process, Village staff mailed a
survey form to affordable housing related organizations in Mount Prospect and Cook County
which asked them to identify what, if any, federal housing assistance programs they would be
applying for during the 1995 federal fiscal year and over the next five years that would be located
in Mount Prospect. This information was also incorporated into the plan. A second public
hearing, advertised on the January 6, 1995 was held on January 18, 1995 before the Plan
Commission. The purpose of the hearing was to receive public comments and a Commission
recommendation for the final Consolidated Plan. The Village Board then gave final approval of
the document during their regular meeting on February 7, 1995. This process included the
approval of the Citizen Participation Plan, attached as Attachment A.
K
Back,zrou d,-=, d Tren, Mount Prospect's developmental history began in the early
1870's when E.C. Eggleston bought a tract of land from the farming families of Burke and
Rooney. In those days, the principal economic activity was farming; with onions, beets and
mushrooms being the principal crops. The Village of Mount Prospect area was formally
incorporated as a village in 1917, with a population of 100. Most of the Village's population and
economic growth occurred between 1950 and 1980, when the number of residentsgrew from
4,009 to 52,634. Today, Mount Prospect is primarily a suburban commuter town with a sound
business environment. Some of the Village's major employers are business' operating out of
Randhurst Shopping Center, Mull graphics, First Chicago Bank of Mount Prospect, Met Life and
Nutrasweet Company. We do not foresee any strong economic trends in the near future that will
affect or change housing affordability. Demographic trends are described in the following
section.
Demga,=-fda: The 1990 Census indicated that the Village's population is 53,170. This
represents a one percent increase from the 1980 Census figure of 52,634. Data from the 1980
Census incorporated in Mount Prospect's 1988 Three Year HAP notes that of the 1324 low
income renter households in Mount Prospect, 721 had very low incomes and 603 had low
incomes. By 1990, the number of low income renters had grown to 1233 and the number of very
low income renting residents increased to 2075. There were 6063 total renting households in the
Village in 1980. Of the 12,706 homeowner occupied units in 1980 in the Village, the Census
shows none of them were occupied by low income or very low income households. The 1990
Census indicates there were 4809 moderate income homeowners.
In the past ten years Mount Prospect has experienced a significant change in it's racial and
ethnic make-up. For instance, the number of Asian and Pacific Islander residents grew to 3,417,
up from -1,490 in 1980. The Black residential population grew from 331 to 606 during the same
ten year period. The increase in the Hispanic Origin population increased from 1,225 in 1980
to 3,411 in 1990. The American Indian population also rose over the same period from 52 to
73. These increases primarily occurred in Census Tract 8027.01, 8050.02, 8051.07, 8051.08 and
8051.11. The following is a summary of the minority and low and moderate percentages for the
residents in each of these Census Tracts:
Census Tract
% of Minority
% of Low/Moderate
Population
Income Residents
8027.01
23%
17%
8050.02
21%
33%
8051.07
34%
44%
8051.08
26%
37%
8051.11
29%
38%
See the attached maps for the census tract areas where there are concentrations of minorities and
low income residents.
K
11 qp�
8051908
. .........
8050-C
9051. 07
=f,
S
:)rity / Racial
)me Can centratic
Man
MountProspect is a mature communlry, w,ah appr ii,mately 97% of it's, buildable parcels
,developed. T us, 'the, Vill§,
age, expects, little, Population growth in the ne,ar fbluure. The largest
rema,ining undeveloped parcels are maini, 1 1, It *1 41
y zoned for *ndustrW an a ousimes,su.,ses.
ILVW ILIJ W'W
Staff s analysis of the housing market in Mount Prospect has concentrated on, cost, housing
conditions, overcrowding and availability. The b,i,'ggesthousing problem, and *Impediment tofa,ir
housing choice in Mount Prospect is cost. This will be discussed 'in the following, paragraphs.
In
general, most owner occupied housing units, are in,goodconditionand, should remain, so at. Ileasst,
inthx near fu tu
re ., Staff bel" 0 & 0,
,levesmost property owners will continueto maitntam heir properties
and protect this asset. The Village has implemented a Landlord/Tenant Ordinance, which requires
an annual inspection and the correction of code violations in all rental properties. The most
serious deteriorated housing is in the apartment complexes located in the south end of the Village
and in the Boxwood. neighborhood. We would note that overcrowding is a problem, primarily
in rental units. Rental units are readily available, as has been verified by information contained
in the preceding paragraph. Most of these units were built in the 1970's or earlier and are not
handicapped accessible. Many are small and would be difficult to make accessible.
The cost of owning a single family detached home in Mount Prospect poses a major
problem for low and very low income households. With very little buildable land remaining and
a low vacancy rate, there appears little chance that single family detached home prices will drop.
J
Condominium and townhome ownership se,ems more likely for low income and very low
income households. Staff estimates a smaIl number of units may start as low as $50,000 with
more being available in the $80,000 to $100,000 price range. Such housing represents a good
opportunity for first time homeowners to live in Mount Prospect. Condominium and townhomes
provide a good housing value and a way of accumulating equity for acquiring future housing or
rovi
meeting other financial objectives.
Homeownership and renting in Mount Prospect pose serious housing affordability concerns
and cost burdens for very low, low and moderate income households. The following Housing
Affordability Chart shows how housing costs financially effect these households.
W
HUD Defined
Extremely
Very Low
$69768
Monthly Rent $564
Household of 2,1:
Low Income
Income
Low Income
Moderate Income
Annual Income
$11.1430
$199050
$309450
$329950
Net Annual Income
$79534
$119430
$209097
$219744
Monthly Net Income
$628
$952
$1,674
$1,812
HOMEOWNERSHIP:
$764
$764
+Lq
housing COSLO
Purchase Price
$75,000
$759000
$759000
$759000
Mortgage
$71,250
$719250
$71.0250
$719250
Downpayment
5%
5%
5%
5%
Other Annual
Homeowner and renting housing costs include utility expenses.
It does not include property
housing costs*
$2,400
$2,400
$29400
$29400
Mortgage Interest Rate
9%
9%
9%
9%
Monthly mortgage costs
$575
$575
$575
$575
Other Monthly
housing costs*
$200
$200
$200
$200
Total Monthly
$775
$775
$775
$775
it housing costs
Housing cost % of
155%
81%
46%
42%
Net Income
Housing cost % of
81%
49%
31%
28%
Gross Income
Median Annual Rent: $69768
$69768
$69768
$69768
Monthly Rent $564
$564
$564
$564
Other Annual
housing costs* $19200
$1,200
$19200
$19200
Other Monthly
housing costs* $200
$200
$200
$200
Total Monthly $764
$764
$764
$764
+Lq
housing COSLO
Housing Costs % of 122%
80%
45%
42%
Net Income
Housing Costs % of 67%
48%
30%
28%
Gross Income
Homeowner and renting housing costs include utility expenses.
It does not include property
insurance, principal mortgage insurance, taxes, home repairs or property owner association fees,
downpayments or security deposits.
0
Mount Prospect's Three Year HAP in 1988 showed the greatest housing need was for new
elderly housing with rental subsidies. This need remains and was confirmed by testimony from
Centennial Apartments and Evangelical Health Systems during a CHAS public hearing on July
10, 1991 and the HUD Section 202 application process, including inquiries from Mount Prospect
senior citizens, in 1992. Other testimony from the Housing Authority of Cook County, Suburban
Area Agency on Aging and the Resource Center for the Elderly confirmed a need for senior
shared housing and rental assistance programs for very low income seniors.
Since most of Mount Pros,isbuildings were constructed before 1978, approximately
19,500, many may have lead based paint. Of these,, perhaps 2145 (11 %),are occup ie "by very
low income residents and 2535 (13 %) by low income citizens. The Village's Health Officer has
noted there have not been any lead poisoning cases reported in Mount Prospect and a recent water
survey indicates Mount Prospect's Water System had a lead level below 15parts per billion in 59
survey sites out of 60, an excellent rating.
ficQU
Nh-H 0 : Mount Prospect does not have any public housing projects that can be
I -
assisted under the Comprehensive Grants Progrwn. This grant is solely for the use of public
housing authorities. However, there are a number of federally assisted rental programs currently
operating. The Housing Authority of Cook County reports there are presently 67 families and
25 elderly, disabled, or handicapped residents benefiting from the Authority's Section 8 Existing
Housing Assistance Payments Program. Centennial Apartments and Huntington Aparm ents are
providing 412 units of senior subsidized housing. Centennial Apartments has 198 units, of which
192 are one bedroom units and 6 are two bedroom. Huntington Towers Apartments contains 214
units, of which 128 are studios, 75 are one bedroom and 11 are two bedroom. Both are currently
full with a normal waiting period of two to five years. federal Preference Rules allow for
individuals living in substandard housing, those involuntarily displaced, andpersons paying more
than 50% of their income for rent and utilities to receive priority in gaining access to subsidized
housing. Centennial Apartments is only receiving applications for the preference list. Mount
Prospect seniors on this list typically wait from 6 to 8 months.
,H, mglm, and Y&Isons, J Irea,,=, cd Ead-Litio, &EY,"m: The
With &mtloom
homeless population in Mount Prospect is estimated to be rather small. The 1990 Census counted
13 homeless individuals, all living in group quarters. A local volunteer shelter organization,
Public Action to Deliver Services (P.A. D.S.), which provides evening shelter and meals during
the colder months of the year for the northwest suburbs, has reported housing up to 80 individuals
a night this year. This number of guests is close to the maximum capacity of the P.A.D.S.
progrwn. This year, P.A.D.S. has seen an increase in the number of guests with a mental illness.
Northwest Suburban P.A. D.S. has a policy of not seeking governmental support.
The Human Services Department of the Village of Mount Prospect assists residents with
housing counseling, emergency financial assistance, food pantry and information on other
resources. They plan homeless and other programs and are the lead department in organizing
Mount Prospect Visions activities. Human Services does not operate any housing units.
7
services are provided by social service encies whose service
All other housing units and m.-
ag
centers are located outside the corporate limits of Mount Prospect. For instance, CEDA-
Northwest provides I I transitional units for fames in crisis in the northwest suburbs. These
consist of 7 two bedroom units, 3 one bedroom units and a home. In 1994 it opened the Wright
House, which provided an additional 11 unit transitional apartment building with affordable rent.
The agency also provides supportive services, including day care, group support and employment
counseling. CEDA-Northwest has requested that Mount Prospect include in this plan a priority
for the rehabtation or construction of additional transitional rental units in Mount Prospect.
Two years ago the Hope Center opened as a day shelter, providing the homeless with
medical assessments, mental health and legal services, job counseling and a location for the
homeless to receive mail and clothing. The Center is located in the Wheeling Township buildi*ni2
No federal I funds are being sought at this time.
K
A number of agencies and planning organizations identified a
pressing need for affordable housing to meet the needs of the "working poor" in Mount Prospect.
Glenkirk noted they employ 300 people, many of whom are entry level direct care workers,
cooks, housekeepers, food service and maintenance workers. In 1989, 40% of these employees
had to drive more than 15 miles to get to work use of the cost of housing in Mount Prospect.
Studies performed by the North Eastern Illinois Plan Commission have identified ajob/housing
imbalance in the northwest suburbs. This problem was also identified by NBD Bank.
Housing rehabilitation assistance is needed primarily for single parent households, the
elderly and homes with disabled members in both owner occupied and rental units. Our current
C.D.B.G. funded rehabilitation programs are adequately meeting the needs of home owners but
expanded funding will be needed to meet the growing demand for these programs.
Mount Prospect is almost entirely built-up and little population growth is anticipated.
There will not be significant changes in housing needs or inventory in the next five years. We do
not expect changes in employment patterns to change housing needs or characteristics..
Needs Asasment: The housing needs and ability of very low-income, low-income and
moderate -income households to obtain -Ing housing was clearly addressed in the sect -Ion of this
report under Market and Inventory Characteristics. Also discussed in that section were the issues
of cost burden, overcrowding,. and housing conditions. The main identified problem was the cost
of housing for all three income groups, in both the rental and homeownership market. Data from
the U.S. Census indicates the residents needing the most assistance are elderly homeowners, large
families and elderly renters. The Village has not been able to differentiate between the housing
needs of minority and non -minority residents as such data is not available.
The public housing authority (PHA.) that serves Mount Prospect is the Housing Authority
of Cook County. The PHA has reported they have about 5000 people on their Section 8 Existing
Housing Assistance Payments Program. Application were last opened in September, 1991 and
will be reopened in 1996. Applications for the handicapped, elderly and disabled were opened
in March of 1994. The estimated waiting time for those on the current list is two to three years.
At the present time, 96 percent of applicants seeking Section 8 housing meet federal priority
criteria, which are:
1. the applicant was displaced by a federally funded program, or
2. the applicant's household income is less than 50% of median income, or
3. the applicant currently lives in substandard housing.
As was mentioned earlier, Mount Prospect's most serious housing problem is affordability.
This includes the affordability of home purchasing. Since there appears to be no indication that
the price of housing will fall to where it will be affordable, the public sector solution to the
problem must involve assistance with downpayments, interest reduction, principal reduction
financing or federal tax credit assistance.
M
The City of Chicago Health Department is the main agency that coordinates and provide
funding for 12 agencies that address AIDS and related disease issues. The agency distribute
funds from the Ryan White Program as well as manages prevention, education and testing o
AIDS. The Ryan White Program uses federal funds for AIDS victims for health services
housing, food and respite care. Cook County also has a special AIDS patient program, which ha
hospital and meal services. Many AIDS patients also receive financial support from Pubic Aid
Since 1982 there have been 25 reported cases of AIDS in Mount Prospect. Seventeen of thes
are now deceased.
z