Upload
lenhi
View
215
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment
and Method Statement
For:
Barratt Homes (Bristol Division)
TKC Ref: 32.60a
February 2014
Company Registration No: 05934386
VAT No: 720 8066 54
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
2
Report Structure
This document combines the three elements which provide comprehensive
information to BS5837:2012 on:
• the quality and value of the trees on a development site.
• an assessment of how they may be affected, and
• how they will be protected during the development works.
The report is generally in accordance with British Standard BS 5837: 2012
Trees in relation to Construction; Recommendations.
Part A of this document is the Arboricultural Survey. The Arboricultural Survey provides the basic working data on the trees. The
preamble describes how the trees are measured, assessed and valued, and
the survey data will be found in Appendix 2 at the end of the document. The
appendix includes data relating to the root protection areas around each tree.
Part B is the Arboricultural Impact Assessment The Impact Assessment outlines the likely impact which the proposed
development may have on the trees.
Part C is the Arboricultural Method Statement The Method Statement proposes a methodology for tree protection during
the development works, and the Tree Protection Plan indicates the locations
of the various protection measures.
Tree surgery works and protected trees Works to maintain the trees in safe condition for up to two years are included
at Appendix 2. Other recommendations for the long-term management of
trees may also be included. If the trees are protected by a Tree Preservation
Order, or are within a Conservation Area, or are subject to any planning
condition, permission for any other works (including ground works within the
Root Protection Area) must be obtained from the Local Planning Authority.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
3
CONTENTS
Section Page No.
Part A Arboricultural Survey
A1. Site description 4
A2. Discussion and Arboricultural Constraints 4
A3. Tree survey criteria 7
A4. The Tree Constraints Plan 11
A5. General Considerations 12
Part B Arboricultural Impact Assessment 14
Part C Arboricultural Method Statement 16
C1. Tree surgery requirements 18
C2. Tree protection 18
C3. Materials storage and site offices 20
C4. Supervision of protective measures 20
C5. Sequence of construction and tree protection 21
APPENDIX 1: BS5837:2012
Tree quality assessment chart 22
APPENDIX 2: Tree Survey Data 24
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
4
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
A1. Introduction
1.1 Instructions were received from Barratt Homes (Bristol Division) to
report on the quality and condition of trees on land at The Hucclecote
Centre, Gloucester. Residential development of the land is proposed
and a survey of the trees to BS5837:20121 is required to inform the
design and the planning process.
1.2 I visited the site to survey the trees on 13th
February 2014. I am an
independent Arboricultural Consultant with more than 30 years
experience in the industry, I hold the Professional Diploma of
Arboriculture and I am a Fellow of the Arboricultural Association.
1.3 The accompanying Tree Constraints Plan (32.60.01) is based on the
following topographical survey:
� A.D. Horner Limited 2949-04FEB11-03
A2. Site Description and Discussion
2.1 The land lies to the east of Buscombe Gardens and immediately to the
west of the M5 motorway adjacent to junction 11A.
2.2 The existing buildings appear to date from the 1960s, and around them
were planted a variety of trees and shrubs, none of which are of
particular landscape significance. There is a single larger Yew tree
(Taxus baccata) which is of moderately good quality, a mature to over-
mature Weeping Willow in the adjacent property at the northwest
corner of the site, a Lime tree of some substance within the site on the
corner of Buscombe Gardens and Churchdown Lane, and two Birch
trees of reasonably good quality within the site to the east of the
buildings. Apart from these, the trees are small/young or of poor
quality.
1 Trees in relation to Demolition, Design and Construction: Recommendations
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
5
2.3 By contrast, the trees on that part of the motorway embankment which
borders the site to the east appear generally to be of good quality and
vitality. These appear to have the potential to become an area of good
quality trees, given appropriate and timely management. The trees
include Poplars, one of which (T40) is already 17.5m high, and all have
the potential to grow to 25m-30m high. This may have implications for
foundation design of new buildings on the site.
2.4 The 1:50,000 British Geological Survey map of the area suggests that
the subsoils are likely to be derived from the Lower Lias Clay. There are
also deposits of river gravel widely present within the Hucclecote area,
and soil conditions across the site may vary.
Chalara Dieback Disease of Ash
2.5 It is generally well known that Ash trees in many parts of the UK are
being affected by the fungal disease Chalara Dieback. Having originated
within Europe in Poland,2 the disease has progressed gradually across
Europe for 20 years and was spread nationwide in the UK as a result of
uncontrolled plant imports. It may also have spread to the UK
naturally, and some of the outbreaks in eastern England may have
arisen as a result of spores arriving on the wind from diseased trees on
the European mainland.
2.6 It is too early to know how the disease will progress, but the experience
on the European continent is that a very high proportion of Ash trees
have been killed within a few years. Given the widespread inoculation
across the UK, the disease is likely to progress steadily and affect most
trees within 10 years.
2.7 Ash is not a major component of the trees on the site. However, the
continuing growth of any existing Ash trees should not be relied upon
and other species should be preferred for planting. The native Oaks
(Quercus robur or Q. petrea) would grow well on this site, they are very
long lived, they are of high wildlife value and suit almost every British
landscape. None are present on the site and to include some within
any landscaping arrangements would be an advantage.
2 It is likely to have spread from immune populations of Asiatic Ash trees.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
6
A3. Arboricultural Constraints
3.1 The arboricultural constraints can be summarised as follows:
• the requirement to exclude all construction activities from the Root
Protection Areas of retained trees.
• the potential for light attenuation to windows and gardens where
existing trees cast shadows.
• the need to provide for the protection of the foundations of buildings
against root-related soil movement (subsidence) where trees are
retained or will be planted in proximity to buildings. Protection would
also be required against subsoil heave where trees are retained in
proximity to buildings, or if they are removed at, or shortly before, the
time of development.
3.2 Generally, the existing trees on the site present few constraints. The
principal constraint would be the need to exclude from the
development area the minimum rooting areas (Root Protection Areas)
of the retained trees.
3.3 To the east, the trees on the motorway embankment are likely to
become tall (>15m); the Poplars could become very tall (>20m) if they
are not removed in the course of good management to benefit the
growth of longer-lived and generally more desirable trees. The
potential growth of these trees, and more especially the Poplars, may
have implications for the design of the foundations of nearby buildings.
There is a potential for shadow constraints as they grow taller.
3.4 This arboricultural survey documents the locations of the trees present
on the site at February 2013 and I did not observe any indications of
trees having been removed recently. Were any trees to be felled
before development, consideration may need to be given to foundation
protection against subsoil heave if soil re-hydration3 is not complete at
the time of construction.
3 Of the soil moisture deficit which develops around trees and shrubs on shrinkable soils, usually
those with a high clay content.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
7
A4. Tree Survey criteria
The tree survey was carried out by Graham King MRAC, Dip.Arb.(RFS),
F.Arbor.A. Only those trees which are considered relevant to the
purposes of the survey have been included, and no consideration was
given to development proposals in the collection of the data. The
following data were collected and categories assigned:
4.1 Tree Number
The trees are identified by their Tree Numbers given in the appended
schedule (Appendix 2), and on the accompanying Tree Constraints
Plan.
4.2 Species
SPECIES is recorded giving the vernacular and scientific names.
4.3 Tree Height
TREE HEIGHT was estimated with a clinometer.
4.4 Stem Diameter
STEM DIAMETER is measured at 1.5m high and is rounded down, in
centimetres.
4.5 Branch spread
The BRANCH SPREAD was estimated on the four compass points and is
given in metres.
4.6 Lowest branches or Crown Height
The lowest branches or the CROWN HEIGHT, is assessed
approximately, in metres. Where the lowest significant branch occurs
on one side of the tree only, this is noted in the schedule in the
column “Side”. Where the orientation is specified as “All”, the lowest
branches are evenly arranged around the tree.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
8
4.7 Age code
i. Newly-planted (NP) Planted within the last 5 years
ii. Young (Y) Well established trees which might be moved or
easily replaced.
iii. Semi-mature (SM) Well established trees now growing strongly
but not yet mature.
iii. Early-mature (EM) Mature trees less than one third life
expectancy
iv. Mature (M) Trees between one third to two-thirds life
expectancy.
v. Over-mature (OM) Trees of greater than two-thirds of
anticipated life span on the site, or old trees in
decline.
vi. Dead, dying or dangerous: (D)
4.8 Physiological condition may be difficult to assess if trees are out of
leaf in winter or in early leaf in the spring. The condition of the foliage
in mid to late summer can be a good indicator of a tree’s physiological
condition, which is recorded as good, fair, poor or dead.
4.9 Structural condition is recorded as good, fair or poor.
4.10 Life expectancy
LIFE EXPECTANCY is recorded in years and is an approximate
judgement of the likely useful life of the trees. The Standard suggests
that 'A' class trees should have a minimum of 40 years safe useful life
expectancy, 'B' class trees a minimum of 20 years safe useful life
expectancy, and 'C' class trees a minimum of 10 years life.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
9
4.11 Tree Quality Assessment
4.11.1 The BS 5837:2012 tree quality assessement chart is included
at Appendix 1 below and should be considered together with
the following. The provisions of the chart may be summarised
as:
Class A: Exceptionally good trees or arboricultural features with
>40 years useful safe life.
Class B: Good trees with a minimum of 20 years useful safe life.
Class C: Unremarkable trees of limited merit. Minimum safe
life of 10 years.
Class U: Unsuitable for retention. Likely to have <10 years
useful safe life.
4.11.2 In addition to the provisions of the appended Chart
Intermediate classes may be used in this report as follows:
A/B: A good, or very good, tree. A-class trees are recognised as
having particular and possibly indefinable qualities which make
them special. These trees may or may not posses those
qualities.
B/C: A good tree which is tending towards the average, or a
good tree which might nonetheless be replaced within a
reasonable number of years by new planting.
C/U: a tree which probably will attain 10 years useful safe life
but one which is of such low value that it is barely worth
retention, or the retention of which might have a negative
landscape value.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
10
4.12 Preliminary management requirements
Recommendations for the management of the trees to
maintain them in safe condition for the period of construction
are included. More general management recommendations
may be included in some cases, and recommendations are valid
for two years.
4.13 Root Protection Area
4.13.1 The Root Protection Areas are an estimation of the minimum
area which a tree will require for continuing growth and is not a
representation of the total extent of their roots.
4.13.2 The Root Protection Areas of trees classified A-C (Appendix 1)
are given in the appended schedule (Appendix 2), and a circular
RPA is shown on the Tree Constraints Plan which encompasses
these areas.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
11
5. The Tree Constraints Plan
5.1 The British Standard BS 5837:2012 recommends that a plan
showing the constraints upon development which the trees
pose, are considered at the design stage. For this purpose, a
Tree Constraints Plan has been prepared to show:
• the position of the trees.
• the shape of the crown of the trees, accurately represented
and colour coded to show the category of the trees in
accordance with the Tree Quality Assessment chart.
• the recommended Root Protection Areas, drawn initially as a
circle, although subsequent variation of the shape of the area
may be appropriate.
• a representation of the shade which the trees may cast.
5.2 Tree Quality Assessment
Details on Tree Quality Assessment can be found in the extract
from BS5837: 2012 at Appendix 1.
5.3 Root Protection Areas
Details of the Root Protection Area are given at section 4.13
above. The radii and area of the Root Protection Areas drawn as
regular circles around the trees are given in the schedule of data
at Appendix 2.
5.4 Shadow Patterns
5.4.1 The shadows of the principal trees are included in this report.
The British Standard recommends that the shadow of a tree is
represented by shading equal to its present height drawn from
northwest to east, and future mature height if this is likely to be
substantially different. The shadows shown on the Tree
Constraints Plan are those of the trees at their existing heights
and are provided only for trees of height >10m. Amended
shadow patterns are shown for trees along the motorway
embankment.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
12
(5.4.1 Shadow Patterns cont.)
5.4.2 The shadows do not represent the fact that the shade does not
necessarily occur over the entire area all the time (ie. the sun
moves relative to the earth), nor that the length of the shadow
is shorter when the sun is higher during the middle of the day.
6. General Considerations
6.1 Trees and shrubs are living organisms whose health and condition can
change rapidly. The health condition and safety of trees should be
checked regularly by a suitably qualified person, preferably every year
and the conclusions and recommendations herein are valid for two
years.
6.2 Tree work should be carried out by skilled specialist contractors who
are adequately trained and who should be covered by at least £5
million of public liability insurance. Work should be carried out in
accordance with BS 3998 (2010): Recommendations for Tree Work.
When carrying out works, the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, the
Countryside & Rights of Way Act 2000 (as amended) and all other
legislation covering the protection of wildlife must be observed.
6.3 It is an offence to ‘intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat’ or ‘damage,
destroy or block access to the resting place of any bat’ (Countryside
and Rights of Way Act 2001 as amended). Where works are being
carried out and bats are present, or if the tree is a known roost,
consultation must be made with the Statutory Nature Conservancy
Organisation (Natural England 0845 600 3078
www.naturalengland.org.uk). A European Protected Species Habitat
Regulations Licence is required to handle or to undertake works which
are known to affect bats. To avoid disturbing breeding bats, work is
best undertaken between late August and early October, or during
March and April.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
13
6.4 Some of the trees may be covered by a Tree Preservation Order or the
site may be within a Conservation Area. In the first instance the
permission of the Local Planning Authority (LPA) must be obtained, or in
the case of a Conservation Area, six weeks notice must be given in
writing to the LPA for work to any trees of minimum 7.5cm diameter at
1.5m high. This includes ground works within the Root Protection Area
of any tree. It is advisable that enquiries are made of the LPA to
ascertain whether either of these controls exists before any works to
trees are undertaken.
6.5 Recommendations and conclusions relating to the condition and safety
of trees are valid for two years. This report is valid for five years.
6.6 Some of the trees included in the survey and about which management
recommendations are included, are outside the site boundary; the
permission of the tree owner would be required before works are
undertaken to them. Works may be carried out to those parts of any
branches which overhang the property boundary without the
permission of the owner of the tree. Branches may be cut back without
the owner’s permission only to the property boundary.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
14
Part B
Arboricultural Impact Assessment
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
15
Part B. Arboricultural Impact Assessment
B1. Most of the trees on the site are of low quality and are unsuitable for
retention. By contrast, the substantial bank of trees to the east which
are growing on the motorway embankment are potentially of high
quality and of long safe lives. These would require management to
maximise their potential.
B2. The following trees will be retained:
• T12 & T13 Silver Birches
• T21 Apple
• T32 Common Ash
• T34 Wild Cherry
• T36 Lime
• (T23 Weeping Willow – off site)
• G2 Various small trees and shrubs.
B3. The minimum rooting areas of the retained trees will be protected by
the erection of tree protection barriers before construction begins. If
the following Arboricultural Method Statement (Section C below) is
adhered to, it is likely that the retained trees and shrubs will remain in
good condition.
B4. Please refer to the landscaping plan for details of new planting of trees
and shrubs.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
16
Part C
Arboricultural Method Statement
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
17
Part C: Arboricultural Method Statement The Arboricultural Method Statement will be issued to the contractor as part
of the tender documents, and a copy will be available at all times on
the site.
Documentation received:
The accompanying Tree Protection Plan (32.60.02) is based on the following
Tetlow King plan:
� BARR121137 Drawing number: SL.01 Rev D. Title: Site Layout
Client:
Barratt Homes (Bristol Division)
Local Planning Authority:
Tewkesbury Borough Council
Project arboriculturist:
Tree King Consulting Ltd
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
18
Part C: Arboricultural Method Statement
The Arboricultural Method Statement will be issued to the contractor as part
of the tender documents, and a copy will be available at all times on the site.
Part C. Section 1: Tree surgery
C1.1 The following trees will be retained:
• T12 & T13 Silver Birches
• T21 Apple
• T32 Common Ash
• T34 Wild Cherry
• T36 Lime
• (T23 Weeping Willow – off site)
• G2 Various small trees and shrubs.
C1.2 All trees other than those listed above which are within the site
boundaries will be felled.
Part C. Section 2: Tree Protection
C2.1 Tree protection measures
C2.2 The principle tree protection measure will be the erection of a
protective barrier to avoid damage to roots within the minimum
rooting areas of the retained trees. It will also prevent soil
compaction which is a frequent cause of indirect damage to tree
roots. These areas will become Construction Exclusion Zones.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
19
C2.4 The protective barriers:
� Will be constructed prior to the commencement of all works.
� Will be of weldmesh panels of minimum 2.0m high, as shown on
the Tree Protection Plan, fixed securely to a scaffolding framework.
(Figure 1 below)
� Will be in accordance with the specifications outlined in Figure 1
below, without variation.
• Will be erected, and subsequently be subject to the inspection of
the Local Planning Authority at a pre-commencement meeting
between the tree officer and the project manager. The barriers
will be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, before
the commencement of demolition or construction works, including
the arrival on site of machinery or the delivery of materials.
� Will have all-weather notices affixed to each 10m run “Tree
Protection Fencing – Construction Exclusion Zone – No access”
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
20
Part C. Section 3: Materials storage, chemical contamination of
the soil, trenching for services etc.
C3.1 Stored materials and any site buildings or containers will be sited
outside the root protection area of any tree. In some circumstances
it may be possible to use temporary site offices as part of the tree
protection barriers.
C3.2 No concrete/cement washings or other chemicals potentially
harmful to tree roots will be discharged within 20m of any tree or in
such a way that liquids drain towards any of their root protection
areas. Any fires will located at least 30m from trees.
C3.3 No trenching for services, soakaways etc. will be undertaken within
the root protection areas of any tree without the prior written
agreement of the Local Planning Authority and determination of an
appropriate methodology to avoid damage to tree roots.
Part C. Section 4: Supervision of protective measures
The protective measures will be installed and be subject to
inspection and approval by the Local Planning Authority at a pre-
commencement meeting between the tree officer, the project
manager and the main contractor. No works will commence until
written agreement has been received from the Borough Council tree
officer that the protective measures are satisfactory. They will
remain in position for the duration of the project until written
permission is issued by the tree officer for their removal.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
21
Part C. Section 5: Sequence of construction and tree protection
� Tree surgery
� Installation of the protective barriers.
� Pre-commencement meeting between the tree officer and the
project manager to approve the tree protection barriers.
� Written notification received from the Local Planning Authority
that the protective measures are satisfactory and that
construction can commence.
� Demolition and Construction.
� Written confirmation that the protective barriers may be
removed .
Graham King MRAC, Dip.Arb.(RFS), F.Arbor.A
24th
February 2014
© TKC Ltd
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
22
APPENDIX 1
BS5837:2012 Tree Quality Assessment Chart
(extract from BS 5837:2012)
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
24
APPENDIX 2
Tree Survey Data
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
25
Appendix 2
Tree Survey Data: The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Abbreviations:
• # = estimated
� DBH = Stem diameter at 1.5m high
� RPA = Root Protection Area
� Ch = Crown height
� PC = Physiological condition
� SC = Structural condition
� Qual code = Tree quality code
� RPA rad. = radius of root protection area drawn as a regular circle
� (20-40) = tree surgery, which may have to be recurrent, will be likely to be required to
achieve this lifespan
Works Priorities:
1: Work required immediately, within 7 days.
2: Work to be carried out without undue delay, preferably within 6 weeks.
3: Work necessary but not urgent. Recommended to be completed within 3 months.
4: Works required to correct defects, but not urgent. Recommended timescale of 12
months.
5: Works required for reasons of long term tree safety.
6: Works not required for reasons of tree safety. Usually these works are to improve the
growth of individual trees, or of woodland.
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
26
Appendix 1: Schedule of tree data
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T1 Laburnum
(Laburnum anagyroides)
U na na
Description: In-grown forks at ground level. � Preliminary works: None
T2 Crab Apple
(Malus sp.)
U na na
Description: Basal decay. Poor condition generally. � Preliminary works: None
T3 Cotonesater U na na
Description: Large shrub. � Preliminary works: None
T4 Silver Birch
(Betula pendula)
U na na
Description: Basal fork is in-grown. Tendency for other forks
also to become in-grown.
� Preliminary works: None
T5 Bird Cherry
(Prunus padus)
U na na
Description: Tendency for forks also to become in-grown. � Preliminary works: None
T6 Sycamore
(Acer pseudoplatanus)
U na na
Description: Small tree. Tendency for other forks also to
become in-grown.
� Preliminary works: None
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
27
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T7 Hawthorn
(Crataegus monogyna)
5 110 3 3 3 3 1.7 all M F F 10-20 C2 1.5
m
7
sq.m
Description: Crown bias NE. Of little consequence. � Preliminary works: None
T8 Bird Cherry
(Prunus padus)
U na na
Description: Multi-stemmed. Basal forks in-grown. � Preliminary works: None
T9 Hybrid Cockspur Thorn
(Crataegus x lavallei)
7 170 3 3 3 3 1.7 all M F F 10-20 B2/C2 2.0
m
13
sq.m
Description: Crown bias NE. Pleasant small tree but of little
consequence.
� Preliminary works: None
T10 Crab Apple
(Malus sp.)
U na na
Description: Poor tree. � Preliminary works: None
T11 False Acacia
(Robinia pseudoacacia)
#9 #180 4 4 4 4 2 all M F F 20+ B2/C2 2.2
m
15
sq.m
Description: Concealed in dense evergreen shrubs. Appears
to be of reasonable quality and could be retained.
� Preliminary works: None
T12 Silver Birch
(Betula pendula var.
Tristis)
10 170 4 4 4 4 1.8 all EM
/M
G G 20-40 B2 2.0
m
13
sq.m
Description: In satisfactory condition. � Preliminary works: None
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
28
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T13 Silver Birch
(Betula pendula var.
Tristis)
8.5 180 4 4 4 4 1.8 all EM
/M
G G 20-40 B2 2.2
m
15
sq.m
Description: In satisfactory condition. � Preliminary works: None
T14 Flowering Cherry
(Prunus sp.)
9 250 4 4 4 2 1.8 all M G F 10-20 C2 3.0
m
28
sq.m
Description: Unremarkable tree. � Preliminary works: None
T15 Bird Cherry
(Prunus padus)
6.5 180 3 3 3 3 2 all EM
/M
G G 10-20 C2 2.2
m
15
sq.m
Description: Unremarkable tree. � Preliminary works: None
T16 Yew
(Taxus baccata)
7 #400 5 5 5 5 0 all EM
/M
G G 40+ B1 4.8
m
72
sq.m
Description: Wide-spreading crown, a large bush with the
potential to be long-lived and grow considerably larger.
� Preliminary works: None
T17 Sycamore
(Acer pseudoplatanus)
10 220 5 5 5 5 1.8 all EM G F 40+ B1/C1 2.6
m
22
sq.m
Description: Could be retained if formative pruning
undertaken
� Preliminary works: Formative prune to reduce dominance of secondary
stems of forks which are, or will become, in-grown.
� Works priority: 5
T18 Bay
(Laurus nobilis)
4 #200 3 3 3 3 0 all EM G F 40+ C2/U 2.4
m
18
sq.m
Description: Large multi-stemmed bush. Of little
consequence.
� Preliminary works: None
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
29
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T19 Common Ash
(Fraxinus excelsior)
8.5 150 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3 all EM G G ?20-
40
C2 1.8
m
10
sq.m
Description: Unimportant tree of low potential. � Preliminary works: None
T20 Apple
(Malus domestica)
6 200 1 3 3 2 2 all M F F 20-40 C2 2.4
m
18
sq.m
Description: Unimportant tree of low potential. � Preliminary works: None
T21 Apple
(Malus domestica)
6 #320 4 5 4 5 1.8 all M G F (40+) B2/C2 3.8
m
46
sq.m
Description: Dense ivy. Older tree with some wildlife value.
Could be retained usefully.
� Preliminary works: None
T22 Apple
(Malus domestica)
U na na
Description: Small tree of little consequence. � Preliminary works: None
T23 Weeping Willow
(Salix x chrysocoma)
#15 #500 9 9 9 9 6 over
site
M/
OM
G F 10-20 B1 6.0
m
113
sq.m
Description: In adjoining garden. Older Willows of this type have
tendency to lose branches as they age. Approaching old age.
Presumed to be the responsibility of another party.
� Preliminary works: na
T24 Sycamore
(Acer pseudoplatanus)
U na na
Description: Basal fork is in-grown. � Preliminary works: None
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
30
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T25 Cherry Plum (Prunus
cerasifera ‘Pissardii’)
7 310 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 1.3 all M G F/P (10-
20)
C2/U 3.7
m
43
sq.m
Description: Long branches tending to fail. Would require
crown reduction if retained.
� Preliminary works: Reduce the crown by 20% if retained.
T26 Elder
(Sambucus nigra)
U na na
Description: Of no consequence. � Preliminary works: None
T27 Hawthorn
(Crataegus monogyna)
5 #180 3 3 3 3 0 all G F F 20-40 C2 2.2
m
15
sq.m
Description: Small bush. � Preliminary works: None
T28 Almond
(Prunus dulcis)
4 160 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.8 all M F F 10-20 C1 1.9
m
12
sq.m
Description: Small tree of low vitality. Barely suitable for
retention.
� Preliminary works: None
T29 Common Holly
(Ilex aquifolium)
4 #150 3 3 3 3 0 all EM F/P F 20-40 C2 1.8
m
10
sq.m
Description: Of little consequence. � Preliminary works: None
T30 Elder
(Sambucus nigra)
U na na
Description: Of no consequence. � Preliminary works: None
T31 Cotoneaster U na na
Description: Large bush � Preliminary works: None
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
31
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T32 Common Ash
(Fraxinus excelsior)
8 320 5 5 5 5 1.8 all EM G F ?(20-
40)
B1/C1 3.8
m
46
sq.m
Description: Potential for good growth if it remains
unaffected by disease.
� Preliminary works: None
T33 Wild Cherry
(Prunus avium)
U na na
Description: Sucker growth. � Preliminary works: None
T34 Wild Cherry
(Prunus avium)
12 380 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 2 all M G G 20-40 B1 4.6
m
65
sq.m
Description: Good tree. � Preliminary works: None
T35 Lawson Cypress
(Chamaecyparis
lawsoniana)
14 #320 3 3 4 3 1.5 all M F F 10-20 C1 3.8
m
46
sq.m
Description: Unremarkable, drab tree. � Preliminary works: None
T36 Lime
(Tilix x euchlora)
11 410 6 6 6 6 1.8 ALL m g f (20-
40)
B1/C1 4.9
m
76
sq.m
Description: Of poor form. Main forks badly in-grown. Less likely to
constrain site use in this location. Could be retained with tree surgery.
� Preliminary works: Re-assess long-term requirements for
tree surgery if retained.
T37 Flowering Cherry
(Prunus sp.)
3 80 U na na
Description: Young tree of no importance. � Preliminary works: None
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
32
Branch radius (m) Low branch RPA No. Species Ht
(m)
DBH
(mm) N S E W (m) side
Age
PC: SC: Life:
(yrs)
Qual
Code rad. area
T38 Apple
(Malus domestica)
4 110 U na na
Description: Poor tree, unstable. � Preliminary works: None
T39 Cherry Plum (Prunus
cerasifera ‘Pissardii’)
6.5 130 3 3 3 3 1.4 all EM G G 10-20 C1 1.5
m
7
s.m
Description: Young tree of no importance. � Preliminary works: None
T40 Elder
(Sambucus nigra)
U na na
Description: Of no consequence. � Preliminary works: None
T41 Poplar
(Populus sp.)
17.
5
#400 7 7 7 7 na na M G ? 20-40 C1 4.8
m
72
sq.m
Description: Off site and presumed to be the responsibility of
another party. Potential to become very large tree.
� Preliminary works: na
The Hucclecote Centre, Gloucester
Arboricultural Survey, Impact Assessment & Method Statement
February 2014
33
Schedule of data of tree groups
Gp
No.
Species Avg.
height (m)
Avg. stem dia.
(mm)
RPA
(m)
Life Qual
code
Condition
Management recommendations (in bold type)
G1 Lawson Cypress
(C. lawsoniana)
12 250 3.0 10-20 C2 Line of dull drab trees. Somewhat lacking in vitality.
G2 Various to 7m bushes 3.0 20+ C2/U Privet, Rowan, Hazel. Vigorous bushes.
G3 Evergreen and
broadleaved
bushes and small
trees to 4.5m high
4.5 bushes na na U Vigorous bushy growth of shrubs, and shrubby trees.
G4 Lawson Cypress
(C. lawsoniana)
8.5 #200 3.0 20+ C2 Yellow variety of this common garden conifer. Low
value.
G5 Broadleaved forest
trees
11 #200 5.0 40+ B2 Growing on motorway embankment. Potential for
good growth if managed correctly. Of site and
presumed to be the responsibility of the Highways
Authority.
100 20 30 40 50m
T6Sycamore(U)
Evergreen bushesto 6.6m high
Evergreen bushesto 6.6m high
T19Common Ash(C2)
G2Various(C2/U)
G3Evergreen and broadleavedbushes and small trees to4.5m high(U)
G4Lawson Cypress(C2)
Scattered bushes1.5m high
Bushes to2.5m high
Bushes to1.5m high
Bushes to1.5m high
G1Lawson Cypress(C2)
CheltenhamEmail - [email protected]
Tel/Fax - 01242 522051
T3Birch(B2)
Key:
Category A
Category B
Category C
Category U
Category
RootProtectionArea
Tree Shadow
Tree NumberSpeciesCategory
Crown Spread
T3Birch(B2)
Tree not onTopo Survey
Projectedtree shadow
100 20 30 40 50m
T6Sycamore(U)
Evergreen bushesto 6.6m high
Evergreen bushesto 6.6m high
Scattered bushes1.5m high
G5Broadleaved forest trees(B2)
CheltenhamEmail - [email protected]
Tel/Fax - 01242 522051
T3Birch(B2)
Key:
Category A
Category B
Category C
Category U
Category
RootProtectionArea
Tree Shadow
Tree NumberSpeciesCategory
Crown Spread
T3Birch(B2)
Tree not onTopo Survey
Projectedtree shadow
3m
6.1m2.4m
6m2.2m
3.5m
4.5m 3.3m15
.8m
12.5
m
3.4m
5.7m
4.8m
2.1m
20m
6.8m
1.5m2.3m
1.9m2m
2.4m4.4m
4.9m
3.2m
4m
4.2m
3.3m
6.5m
5.9m6.1m
6.5m
Tree protecionfencing
Tree protecionfencing
Tree protecionfencing
Treeprotecion fencing
CheltenhamEmail - [email protected]
Tel/Fax - 01242 522051
Key:
Category A
Category B
Category C
Category U
Tree Protection Fencing
Ground Protection
T3Birch(B2)
Tree not onTopo Survey
Tree to be removed
T3Birch(B2)
Category
Root Protection Area
Tree NumberSpeciesCategory
Crown Spread
3.2m
4m
4.2m
3.3m
6.5m
5.9m6.1m
6.5m
CheltenhamEmail - [email protected]
Tel/Fax - 01242 522051
Key:
Category A
Category B
Category C
Category U
Tree Protection Fencing
Ground Protection
T3Birch(B2)
Tree not onTopo Survey
Tree to be removed
T3Birch(B2)
Category
Root Protection Area
Tree NumberSpeciesCategory
Crown Spread