Land off Tatenhill Lane Branston Burton Upon Trent...1.0 INTRODUCTION . 1.1 Brief 1.1.1 Marlow Consulting Ltd has been instructed by Central & Country Developments Ltd to update a

Land off Tatenhill Lane Branston

Burton Upon Trent

Proposed Housing Development

Arboricultural Report

Prepared for: Central & Country Developments Ltd

Prepared by:

Marlow Consulting Ltd

Arboricultural Consultants & Landscape Architects

27 Roden Avenue Kidderminster Worcestershire

DY10 2RF T: 01562 820907

e: [email protected]

11th July 2013

lisa.roberts

Text Box

P/2013/01160 Received 30/09/13

Tatenhill Lane Marlow Consulting Ltd 11th July 2013

Page 1 of 14

Contents

1.0 Introduction........................................................................................................3

2.0 Tree Survey………………………………………………………………………….6

3.0 Tree Constraints Plan………………………………………………………………7

4.0 Arboricultural Impact Assessment…….……………….......................................8

5.0 Arboricultural Method Statement……………………………………………….…9

6.0 Tree Protection Plan………………………………………………………………14


Page 2 of 14

Appendices

1……………………………………………………………..Tree Survey Schedule

2……………………………………………………………………Tree Survey Plan

3…………………………………………………...Notes on Tree Survey Schedule

4…………………………………………………….Common and Botanical names

5……………………………BS5837 Tree Survey Assessment – Cascade Chart

6……………………………………………………………….Tree Constraints Plan

7………………………………………………………………...Tree Protection Plan

8…………………………………………………………….Protective fencing detail


Page 3 of 14

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Brief

1.1.1 Marlow Consulting Ltd has been instructed by Central & Country

Developments Ltd to update a previous Arboricultural Report produced in

respect of a proposed housing development on land off Tatenhill Lane,

Branston, Burton Upon Trent.

1.1.2 The original Marlow Consulting Ltd report was produced in April 2010.

1.2 Information provided

1.2.1 Marlow Consulting Ltd has been supplied with the following information in

electronic format;

• Proposed Layout (Project No. BA445) produced by Base Architecture.

1.3 Scope of the report

1.3.1 The report follows the methodology set out in accordance with British

Standard 5837: 2012, Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and

Construction – Recommendations, (BS 5837).

1.3.2 All observations were made from ground level and from within the site.

1.3.3 Marlow Consulting Ltd has no information in respect of proposed changes in

levels or routeing of services.


Page 4 of 14

1.4 Limitations

1.4.1 Validity, accuracy and findings of the report will directly relate to the accuracy

of information provided at the time of the survey.

1.4.2 All observations were made from within the boundaries of the property, or

from public land unless otherwise stated.

1.4.3 The findings of this tree report and tree survey are valid for one year.

1.4.4 The report does not comment on possible effects of trees on neighbouring

properties, including in relation to subsidence or heave, or with regard to

possible hazards presented.

1.4.5 This report does not deal with issues relating to subsidence or heave to any

built structures and surrounding vegetation. However, it may be prudent to

consider the effects of heave on any property if trees are removed. Similarly

direct tree root damage is not considered within this report.

1.4.6 The tree works recommended do not consider general or required

management of the trees.

1.5 Status of the trees

1.5.1 Marlow Consulting Ltd has no information in respect of the status of trees

within or adjacent to the site.

1.5.2 Before carrying out any works to the trees please obtain the necessary

consents from the Local Authority in writing.


Page 5 of 14

1.6 Site visit

1.6.1 Jeff Marlow of Marlow Consulting Ltd visited site on the 9th July 2013.

1.7 Location of the site

1.7.1 The site is located close to the southern edge of Burton Upon Trent. Tatenhill

Lane is accessed from Branston Road, close to it’s the junction with the A38.

1.7.2 The site is bordered by Branston Water Park to the south and east, Tatenhill

Lane to the north and the Trent and Mersey Canal to the west. There is a

‘farm type’, vehicular access into the site between houses on the southern

side of Tatenhill Lane.

1.8 Description of the site

1.8.1 The site is currently a grassed agricultural field. The site is bordered by

fences and hedges of the rear gardens along Tatenhill Lane to the north, a

dense group of mature Crack Willows to the south east, a hedgerow parallel

with the access road to Branston Water Park to the south and a hedgerow

along the Trent and Mersey Canal to the west.

1.9 Description of the Proposed Development 1.9.1 The development entails the construction of 55 houses and associated

infrastructure.


Page 6 of 14

2.0 TREE SURVEY

2.1 Please find as Appendix 1 a Tree Survey Schedule in the form of two sheets

with our assessment of the ten trees and two hedges surveyed and our

assessment of their suitability for retention.

2.2 Please find as Appendix 2 a Tree Survey Plan with the trees numbered and

coloured according to our assessment of their suitability for retention.

2.3 Please find as Appendix 3 notes on the Tree Survey Schedule and

Appendix 4 a list of the common and botanical names of tree species.

2.4 Please find as Appendix 5 a cascade chart for tree quality assessment, Table

1 of BS5837:2012, which defines the four tree quality categories and the

criteria by which trees fit into the categories.

2.5 Please find below as Table 1 a summary of the suitability for retention of the

individual trees and hedges surveyed.

Tree Suitability For Retention

No.

High (A)

0

Moderate (B)

3

Low (C)

9

Fell (U)

0

Table 1 Suitability for retention of the surveyed trees


Page 7 of 14

3.0 TREE CONSTRAINTS PLAN

3.1 Root Protection Areas

3.1.1 BS5837 recommends an area equivalent to a circle with a radius 12 times the

trunk diameter(s) at 1.5m is left free from disturbance by construction. The

area occupied by the circle is known as the Root Protection Area (RPA).

3.1.2 Please find as Appendix 6 a Tree Constraints Plan with the RPAs plotted as

red circles.

3.2 Tree Shadow Plots

3.2.1 BS5837 recommends a tree shadow plot is indicated as a segment with a

radius from the centre of the stem equal to the height of the tree, drawn from

due north west to due east, indicating the shadow pattern through the main

part of the day.

3.2.2 Please find as Appendix 6 a Tree Constraints Plan with the tree shadow plots

shown for those trees adjacent to the proposed houses indicated by a green

segment.


Page 8 of 14

4.0 ARBORICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1 Tree removal

4.1.1 The proposed development doesn’t require the removal of any of the

surveyed trees.

4.2 Root Protection Areas

4.2.1 The proposed development does not impinge into the RPAs of any of the

surveyed trees, except for a young Oak, tree 359, where the proposed road

clips the east side of its RPA. Given the age of the tree, in our opinion this is

unlikely to be detrimental to the trees health.

4.3 Tree Shading

4.3.1 Trees 351-358 will cast shade across the rear gardens of the plots to the

north.

4.3.2 We have recommended that the majority of these trees are either coppiced to

ground level or pollarded at 2m, which will significantly reduce any shading.

4.3.3. The large Crack Willows to the east side of the site may cast shade across

the rear gardens of plots on their west side in the mornings, but by

approximately mid-day any shade will largely clear the gardens.

4.3.4 The hedge on the south west boundary will cast a small amount of shade

across the rear gardens of plots 31-39.


Page 9 of 14

5.0 ARBORICULTURAL METHOD STATEMENT

5.1 Tree Works

5.1.1 We would recommend the tree works recommended in the Tree Survey

Schedule are carried out prior to development commencing on site.

5.1.2 The Tree Surgeon should be able to demonstrate proof of experience and

hold the relevant insurance cover. All pruning works will be carried out in line

with best practice and current industry standards.

5.1.3 The statutory protection afforded by the Wildlife and Countryside Act and

Countryside and Rights of Way Act will be adhered to. If further advice is

required, particularly if bats are discovered during tree work, it will be obtained

from Natural England, or other competent persons and recommendations

adhered to.

5.1.4 All work shall be undertaken at the appropriate time and with the consent of

the Local Authority.

5.2 Arboricultural Supervision

5.2.1 Arboricultural Supervision involves a site visit and subsequent brief report on

tree related issues on site, a copy being sent to the client, contractor and

Local Authority Tree Officer.

5.2.2 The purpose of the Arboricultural Supervision is to ensure that the Tree

Protection measures are being adhered to, no damage has occurred to

retained trees and if any conflicts have arisen, they are promptly and

effectively dealt with.

5.2.3 The following phases of Arboricultural Supervision are suggested;


Page 10 of 14

Phase 1 Pre-development stage.

• A pre-commencement meeting will be held with the Client (or his

representative), the Builder and the Project Arboriculturalist.

• The purpose of the meeting will be to develop a relationship between

the Arboriculturalist and the Builder and to discuss tree protection

measures, including the position and type of protective fencing. The

fencing is to be erected prior to any works on site commencing.

• Contact details of all parties will be exchanged to ensure effective

communication.

Phase 2 Development Stage

• During the development stage, initially, regular site visits will be carried

out by the Project Arboricultural Consultant. The first two site visits will

be weekly.

• Once compliance with the tree protection measures is established site

visits can be reduced in frequency and any concerns/issues raised on

site dealt with by means of phone call or email.

Phase 3 Post-development Stage

• Once all construction related works have been completed the

protective fencing will be removed.

• Any landscape operatives employed in respect of hard or soft

landscaping will be briefed by the Project Arboriculturalist.


Page 11 of 14

5.3 Construction Exclusion Zones

5.3.1 The line of protective fencing is defined by the extent of the Root Protection

Area (RPA) of those trees to be retained within the site. The final extent of

the construction zone will be determined by the proposed driveway and

garage.

5.3.2 The fenced off area is known as the Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ).

Within the CEZ, the following will apply;

• No mechanical excavation.

• No excavation by any means without arboricultural site supervision.

• No lowering or raising of levels (except removal of grass sward/surface

layer, using hand tools).

• No storage of plant or materials.

• No storage or handling of any chemicals, including cement washings,

vehicle oils or fuels.

• No vehicular access.

• No fire lighting.

5.4 Tree Protective Fencing

5.4.1 All protective fencing shall be installed prior to any of the following taking

place:

• Plant and material delivery.

• Demolition.

• Soil stripping.

• Construction works.

• Utility installation.


Page 12 of 14

• Landscaping

5.4.2 Once erected, all tree protective fencing will remain in place and will not be

altered or moved without consultation and the agreement of the Project

Arboriculturalist and the Local Authority.

5.4.3 Once the Construction Exclusion Zones have been protected construction

works can commence.

5.5 Avoiding damage to stems and branches

5.5.1 Care shall be taken when planning site operations in proximity to retained

trees to ensure that wide or tall loads, or plant with booms, jibs and

counterweights can operate without coming into contact with retained trees.

Such contact can result in serious damage and might make their safe

retention impossible.

5.6 Installation of underground services within the Root Protection Area

(RPA)

5.6.1 All services should be directed outside the RPAs of adjacent trees.

5.7 Soft landscaping within the Root Protection Area (RPA)

5.7.1 Ground preparation will be carried out sensitively to ensure root damage is

mitigated as much as practical. At no time is any heavy plant to be used

within the RPA. Removal of existing vegetation will be carried out by hand.

Turf may be removed using a mechanical turf stripper or by hand.


Page 13 of 14

5.7.2 At no time shall a rotovator be used within any RPA to prepare the soil. Any

levelling will be done by hand with the use of hand tools.

5.7.3 Should the soil be compacted or have a poor structure which may hinder the

development of any new planting, soil decompaction techniques may be used

upon consultation with the Project Arboriculturalist.

5.7.4 New plants will be planted individually to minimise root disturbance (e.g. no

‘trench’ planting).

5.7.5 No works will be carried out within any RPAs if the soil moisture is of a level

likely to allow compaction to occur.

5.8 Hard landscaping within the Root Protection Area (RPA)

5.8.1 Removal of existing vegetation will be carried out by hand. Turf may be

removed using a mechanical turf stripper or by hand.

5.8.2 Any hard surfacing used within the Root Protection Area (RPA) should be

permeable and gas porous. Paving slabs and block paviours are available

with built in infiltration spaces between the slabs or blocks. These are ideal,

though they should be laid dry-jointed on a sharp sand foundation to allow air

and moisture to penetrate to the rooting area.

5.8.3 Bitumen paving can consist of porous or impermeable material. As the pores

in tarmac paving will become blocked, the use of the material will be limited in

extent to no more than 20% of the RPA.


Page 14 of 14

6.0 TREE PROTECTION PLAN

6.1 Please find as Appendix 7 a Tree Protection Plan with the line of protective

fencing indicated by a dashed magenta line.

6.2 We would recommend the use of Herras fencing braced on a framework of

scaffold poles, as per figure 2 of BS5837 (see Appendix 8).

Jeff Marlow

MSc., Dip. Arb. (R.F.S.), F. Arbor. A., M. Biol., C. Biol.

Arboricultural Association Registered Consultant

Director, Marlow Consulting Ltd

11th July 2013

Site: Land at Tatenhill Lane, Burton Upon Trent

Date of Survey: 6th April 2010 (updated 09.07.13)

Tree Survey Schedule

1

Marlow Consulting Ltd T: 01562 820907

Tree Species Height Trunk Branch Crown Age Physiol. Structural Preliminary Est. Category Sub Root Root

Tag diam. Spread Clear. Class Condition Condition Work Contrib. Grading Cat Protection Protection

No. at 1.5 m N S E W Required (years) Radius Area (m2)

350 Silver 6 175 4 4 0 4 0 Young Good Trunk leans and crown biased to No work required. 10+ C 1/2 2.10 14

Birch the south west. Crown healthy.

- -

351 Crack 3 461 1 1 0 1 1 Middle Fair Trunk twin stemmed. Pollarded at No work required. 10+ C 1/2 5.54 96

Willow Aged approx. 2m. Large wounds.

Healthy regrowth. - -

- -

352 Crack 15 650 8 5 10 9.4 2 Mature Good Base surrounded by brambles. Pollard at 2m. 10+ C 1/2 7.80 191

Willow # Trunk forks at approx. 1.4m. Northern

secton split out.

353 Crack 10 1200 9 2 0 9.8 2 Mature Poor Tree collapsed. Coppice to ground 10+ C 1/2 14.40 652

Willow # level.

354 Crack 16 900 8.2 4 13 8.5 1 Mature Fair Twin stemmed from ground level. Coppice to ground 10+ C 1/2 10.80 366

Willow # Eastern stem growing at 45 degrees. level.

High risk of failure. - -

- -

355 Crack 16 446 1 7 9 8.4 1 Mature Fair Large branch failed on the west Pollard at 2m. 10+ C 1/2 5.35 90

Willow side at approx. 3m. Serious risk

of crown failing. - -

- -

356 Crack 6 1000 4.0 4 4 4 6 Mature Fair A group of three main stems. No work required. 10+ C 1/2 12.00 452

Willow # Decay in the central stem. Recently

pollarded at approx. 6m. No regrowth. - -

357 Crack 14 1100 10.0 2 3 11 0 Mature Fair Dense ivy into the crown. South Pollard at 2m. 10+ C 1/2 13.20 547

Willow # side of the tree pollarded at approx.

3m. North side at serious risk of - -

failure. - -

Site: Land at Tatenhill Lane, Burton Upon Trent

Date of Survey: 6th April 2010 (updated 09.07.13)

Tree Survey Schedule

2

Marlow Consulting Ltd T: 01562 820907

Tree Species Height Trunk Branch Crown Age Physiol. Structural Preliminary Est. Category Sub Root Root

Tag diam. Spread Clear. Class Condition Condition Work Contrib. Grading Cat Protection Protection

No. at 1.5 m N S E W Required (years) Radius Area (m2)

358 Crack 14 286 3 4 3 4 5 Middle Good No significant visible defects in the Pollard at 2m. 10+ C 1/2 3.44 37

Willow Aged base and trunk. Crown healthy.

At risk of failure.

359 English 9 652 7 7 7.0 7 1 Middle Good Dead ivy to the trunk. Deadwood. No work required. 20+ B 1/2 7.82 192

Oak Aged Crown healthy.

H1 Mixed 6 250 3 3 3 3 0 Middle Good Overall in good condition. No work required. 20+ B 1/2 3.00 28

species # Aged

field

boundary

H2 Hawthorn, 3 250 3 3 3 3 0 Middle Good Uneven in height. Sections trimmed. No work required. 20+ B 1/2 3.00 28

Elderberry, # Aged Overall in good condition.

Blackthorn

BS 5837:2012

Tree Survey - Notes

1. All dimensions are in metres, except trunk diameter, which is in mm.

2. Species - Common names are given.

3. Height describes the approximate height of the tree from ground level.

4. Trunk diameter is measured as per annexe C of BS5837:2012.

5. The Branch Spread refers to the crown radius in metres from the centre of the trunk

at the four cardinal points, which is estimated.

6. Crown Clearance is the approximate height in metres of crown clearance above adjacent ground level.

7. Age Class, Physiological Condition, Structural Condition and Preliminary Work Required are self explanatory.

8. Estimated contribution in years is the trees estimated remaining contribution in years.

9. B.S. Cat refers to BS 5837:2012, Table 1 and refers to tree/group quality and value

'A' - High - (Green); 'B' - Moderate - (Blue); 'C' - Low - (Grey)

'U' - Fell (Red).

10. Sub Cat refers to the retention criteria values where 1 is Arboricultural, 2 is

landscape and 3 is cultural including conservation, historic and commemorative.

11. Root Protection Radius is a radial distance measured from the trunk centre.

12. Root Protection Area is the minimum area in m2 which should remain undisturbed.

13. Dimensions marked with a # are estimated.

TreeCommon and Botanical Names

Common Name Botanical Name Common Name Botanical Name

Alder, Common Alnus glutinosa Elm, English Ulmus proceraAlder, Grey Alnus incana Elm, Wych Ulmus glabraAlder, Italian Alnus cordata False Acacia Robinia pseudoacaciaApple, Crab Malus sylvestris Fir, Common Silver Abies albaAsh, Common Fraxinus excelsior Fir, Douglas Pseudotsuga menziesiiAsh, Caucasian Fraxinus oxycarpa Fir, Grand Abies grandisAspen Populus tremula Gum, Sweet Liquidamaber styracifluaBeech, Antartic Nothofagus antarctica Gum, Cider Eucalyptus gunniiBeech, Common Fagus sylvatica Hawthorn Crataegus monogynaBeech, Copper Fagus sylvatica 'Purpurea' Hazel Corylus avellanaBeech, Cut Leaf Fagus sylvatica 'Heterophylla' Hazel, Turkish Corylus colurnaBirch, Ornamental Betula sp. Hemlock, Western Tsuga heterophyllaBirch, Silver Betula Pendula Holly, Common Ilex acquifoliumBirch, River Betula nigra Honey Locust Gleditsia triacanthosBox Elder Acer negundo Hornbeam Carpinus betulusCedar, Atlas Cedrus atlantica Hornbeam, Fastigiate Carpinus betulus 'Fastigiata'Cedar, Doedar Cedrus deodora Indian Bean TreeCedar, Lebanon Cedrus libani Juniper, Common Juniperus communisCedar, Western Red Thuja plicata Juniper, Chinese Juniperus chinensisCedar, Japanese Red Cryptomeria japonica Laburnum Laburnum anagyroidesCherry, Bird Prunus padus Larch, European Larix deciduaCherry, Ornamental Prunus sp. Lime, Common Tilia x europaeaCherry, Wild Prunus avium Maple, Norway Acer platanoidesChestnut, Sweet Castanea sativa Maple, Cappadocian Acer cappadocicumChestnut, Horse Aesculus hippocastanum Maple, Field Acer campestreChestnut, Red Horse Aesculus x carnea Maple, Paper-Bark Acer grisseumCypress, Swamp Taxodium distichum Maple, Silver Acer saccharinumCypress, Lawson Chamaecyparis lawsoniana Monkey Puzzle Araucaria araucanaCypress, Leylandii X Cupressocyparis leylandii Mulberry, Common Morus nigraCypress, Nootka Chamaecyparis nootkansensis Oak, English Quercus roburCypress, Monterey Cupressus macrocarpa Oak, Fastigiate English Quercus robur 'Fastigiata'

TreeCommon and Botanical Names

Common Name Botanical Name Common Name Botanical Name

Oak, Holm Quercus ilex Whitebeam, Swedish Sorbus intermediaOak, Red Quercus rubra Willow, Crack Salix fragilisOak, Scarlet Quercus coccinea Willow, Goat Salix capreaOak, Sessile Quercus petraea Willow, White Salix albaOak, Turkey Quercus cerris Yew, Common Taxus baccataPear Pyrus sp. Yew, Irish Taxus baccata 'Fastigiata'

Pear, Willow leafed Pyrus salicifoliaPine, Scots Pinus sylvestrisPine, Corsican Pinus nigra var. maritimaPlane, London Platanus x hispanicaPlane, Oriental Platanus orientalisPlum Prunus sp.Poplar, Black Populus nigraPoplar, Grey Populus canescensPoplar, Hybrid Black Populus x euramericanaPoplar, Lombardy Populus nigra var. 'Italica'Poplar, Western Balsam Populus trichocarpaPoplar, White Populus albaRedwood, Coast Sequoia sempervironsRedwod, Dawn Metasequoia glyptostroiboidesRowan Sorbus aucupariaSnowy Mespil Amelanchier lamarckiiSpruce, Norway Picea abiesSpruce, Sitka Picea sitchensisSycamore Acer pseudoplatanusTree of Heaven Ailanthus altissimaThorn, Cockspur Crategus crus-galliTulip Tree Liriodendron tulipiferaWalnut, Common Juglans regiaWellingtonia Sequoiadendron giganteumWhitebeam Sorbus aria

Documents

Land off Tatenhill Lane Branston Burton Upon Trent...1.0 INTRODUCTION . 1.1 Brief 1.1.1 Marlow Consulting Ltd has been instructed by Central & Country Developments Ltd to update a