Arboricultural report - City of · PDF fileArboricultural report for 850 Maroondah Hwy, Box...

3 Black Hill Road, Menzies Creek, Victoria 3159 m. 0419 349 268 f.(03)5968 2316

e. [email protected] www.treetec.net.au Treetec ABN 58 096 262 494

Arboricultural report

for

850 Maroondah Hwy, Box Hill

Tree inspection for planning application

Site

850 Maroondah Hwy

Box Hill, VIC

Prepared for

Jeff Porter- Architect

Asian Pacific Group

03 9863 7091

0412 994 734 [email protected]

Treetec reference

whit0514cw

Site assessment

16th

May 2014

Submission date

30th

May 2014

Consultants

Chris White

BSc. Sci. (Env)

[email protected]

0401 483 141

Mark Cashmore

Diploma of Horticulture (Arb)

[email protected]

0419 349 268

whit0514cw www.treetec.net.au 2 of 27

Contents

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3

2 Key objectives ......................................................................................................... 3

3 Methodology ............................................................................................................ 3

3.1 Site inspection .................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Tree Identification ............................................................................................... 3

3.3 Trees not listed ................................................................................................... 3

3.4 Inspection method .............................................................................................. 4

4 Tree assessments ................................................................................................... 4

4.1 Defects ............................................................................................................... 4

4.2 Condition of roots ............................................................................................... 4

4.3 Impact assessment ............................................................................................. 4

4.4 Data .................................................................................................................... 5

4.5 Plants not listed .................................................................................................19

4.6 Site plan ............................................................................................................20

5 Observations / discussions .................................................................................. 21

5.1 Site summary ....................................................................................................21

5.2 Site details .........................................................................................................22

5.3 General comments ............................................................................................23

5.3.1 Soil compaction ...........................................................................................23

5.3.2 Maintaining Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) ...................................................23

6 Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 24

6.1 Report summary ................................................................................................24

7 References ............................................................................................................. 25

8 Assumptions and limiting conditions.................................................................. 25

Appendix 1. Glossary .................................................................................................. 26


1 Introduction

Treetec has been engaged by Jeff Porter of Asian Pacific Services to provide an arboricultural assessment of any trees on site, or within close proximity on neighbouring properties adjacent to the subject site at 850 Whitehorse Road, Box Hill. The purpose of the assessment is to inform the City of Whitehorse City Council as they consider a planning application for the site. The findings provided in this report are consistent with the Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 (Protection of Trees on Development Sites). A condition and impact assessment has been provided for 29 trees (including three tree groups) that are within proximity to the proposed works. Four of these trees are growing as street trees on Whitehorse Road. The remainder are all located within the boundaries of the subject site. Their size, age, amenity value and recommended Tree Protection Zones (TPZ’s) are discussed within this report. There are no other significant trees that have the potential to be impacted by the proposed development.

2 Key objectives

1- Provide relevant details on the subject trees including their amenity value, health, structure, fauna habitat value and conservation significance

2- Determine the likely impact the proposed development will have on the subject trees

3- Comment on tree treatments, design options and/or construction methods that are likely to be required to enable the ongoing retention of the subject trees given the current proposal (if applicable).

3 Methodology

3.1 Site inspection

The arboricultural assessment of 850 Whitehorse Road, Box Hill was undertaken by Chris White in the morning of Saturday 24th May 2014. Data collected is set out in section 4- Tree Assessments (below) and relevant definitions are found in Appendix 1.

3.2 Tree Identification

Treetec has identified these trees to species level using available diagnostic material (buds, fruit leaves, bark etc). No flowering material was present on the trees. Flowering material can be critical for accurate identification, particularly with some Eucalypt species.

3.3 Trees not listed

Weed species and juvenile exotic trees of low amenity value or shrubs of little

significance have not been listed individually. Dead trees have not been listed.


3.4 Inspection method

• All observations were taken at ground level, using the Visual Tree Assessment (VTA) method (Mattheck and Breloer 1994)

• Excavation at the site was not undertaken

• Aerial examination (climbing) of the tree structures was not required

• Heights and canopy widths have been estimated.

• Those trees located on the subject site have been numbered and tagged

4 Tree assessments

4.1 Defects

Where a tree exhibits minor or no defects or where a proposed structure is unlikely to significantly impact a tree or group of trees no comment will be made. It is therefore the opinion of the author that further action relating to that tree is not required other than the level of protection afforded by applying, to the tree and/or site, the information contained within General Comments - Section 5.3

4.2 Condition of roots

Excavations were not undertaken for this report therefore root condition has not been included unless above ground signs, such as soil heaving or cracking were observed.

4.3 Impact assessment

This report relates to the subject trees, their condition and significance, and the likely impact on those trees of the proposed works at the site. This judgment is based on the site inspection and information supplied to Treetec for the purposes of conducting an arboricultural assessment (drawings, plans etc.) and is current at the time of the submission of the report. This report does not make judgement on the proposal or its appropriateness for the location or landscape.


4.4 Data

Tree # 1

Species Callistemon salignus

Common name Willow Bottlebrush

DBH (cm) 23

Height (m) 7

Spread (m) 6

Structure Fair

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.8

Notes Multi-stemmed from 1.3m- union with included bark. Large wound with significant decay at base of tree. Trunk appears to be at least partially hollow. Whole tree failure is likely in the medium term. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.

Impact Assessment High

Tree # 2

Species Eucalyptus viminalis

Common name Manna Gum

DBH (cm) 55

Height (m) 18

Spread (m) 11

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value High

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 6.6

Notes Some small deadwood in canopy. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 3

Species Eucalyptus viridis

Common name Green Mallee

DBH (cm) 31

Height (m) 12

Spread (m) 10

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low-medium

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.7

Notes Some small to moderate sized deadwood. Uneven form due to proximity to tree 2. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 4

Species Allocasuarina torulosa

Common name Forest Oak

DBH (cm) 15

Height (m) 6

Spread (m) 3

Structure Good

Health Fair-good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 5-15

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.0

Notes Some dieback in upper canopy and branch tips. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 5

Species Eucalyptus rubida

Common name Candlebark

DBH (cm) 44

Height (m) 18

Spread (m) 11

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value High

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 5.3

Notes Numerous small scars on lower trunk, possibly the result of insect attack. Past failure of a number of small branches. Small sections of deadwood in canopy. A small number of branch unions have included bark. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 6



DBH (cm) 50

Height (m) 18

Spread (m) 13

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value High

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 6.0

Notes Some small deadwood throughout canopy. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 7

Species Acacia cognata

Common name Narrow-leaf Bower Wattle

DBH (cm) 12

Height (m) 5

Spread (m) 5

Structure Fair-poor

Health Fair

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 5-15

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.0

Notes Group of two trees. Both trees with dieback in upper canopy and both trees are multi-stemmed from ground level. Unions have included bark. Trees proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 8



DBH (cm) 30

Height (m) 12

Spread (m) 10

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Medium

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.6

Notes Some small deadwood in lower canopy. Poor form due to crowding from tree 6. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 9



DBH (cm) 19

Height (m) 11

Spread (m) 7

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Semi-mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.3

Notes Smaller size may be due to competition with other trees. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 10



DBH (cm) 37

Height (m) 14

Spread (m) 7

Structure Good

Health Good



ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 4.4

Notes Co-dominant from 8m- union appears sound. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 11

Species Eucalyptus sargentii

Common name Salt River Gum

DBH (cm) 50

Height (m) 15

Spread (m) 10

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Medium-high

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 6.0

Notes Poor form due to proximity to building. Lowest branches obstruct footpath. Small wound in lower trunk- good callousing. Small hanger in lower canopy. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 12

Species Eucalyptus viridis

Common name Green Mallee

DBH (cm) 15

Height (m) 9

Spread (m) 7

Structure Fair

Health Fair


Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 5-15

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.0

Notes Poor form due to proximity to tree 11. Mechanical damage to main leader @7m due to contact with tree 11. Thin canopy. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 13

Species Melaleuca linariifolia

Common name Snow-in-Summer

DBH (cm) 31

Height (m) 6

Spread (m) 5

Structure Fair

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) ~3.0

TPZ (m) 3.7

Notes Planted as a street tree on Whitehorse Road. Multi-stemmed from 2m- union with included bark. Development may encroach up to 5% into the TPZ.

Impact Assessment Low

Tree # 14



DBH (cm) 27

Height (m) 15

Spread (m) 7

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature


ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.2

Notes Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 15

Species Eucalyptus melliodora

Common name Yellow Box

DBH (cm) 33

Height (m) 15

Spread (m) 8

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature


ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 4.0

Notes Slight thinning of lower canopy. Some epicormic shoots- may indicate stress. Some small deadwood. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 16



DBH (cm) 37

Height (m) 7

Spread (m) 6

Structure Fair-good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) ~3.5

TPZ (m) 4.4

Notes Growing as a street tree in Whitehorse Road. Multi-stemmed from 2.0m-union with included bark. Past lopping of lower branches for road clearance. Development may encroach up to 5% into the TPZ.



Tree # 17

Species Acacia melanoxylon

Common name Blackwood

DBH (cm) 31

Height (m) 11

Spread (m) 6

Structure Fair

Health Fair-good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Medium-low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.7

Notes Multi-stemmed from ground level- union with included rock from the landscaping. Some dieback in largest leader. Past lopping of lower branches for footpath clearance. Tree may fail at union in the medium term. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 18



DBH (cm) 39

Height (m) 6

Spread (m) 6

Structure Fair-good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) ~3.5

TPZ (m) 4.7

Notes Growing as a street tree in Whitehorse Road. Co-dominant from near-ground- union with included bark. Development may encroach up to 7.4% into the TPZ.



Tree # 19


Common name Snow-in-summer

DBH (cm) 26

Height (m) 6

Spread (m) 5

Structure Fair-good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) ~3.5

TPZ (m) 3.1

Notes Growing as a street tree in Whitehorse Road. Multi-stemmed from ground level- union with included bark. Some lopping of lower branches for road and footpath clearance. All works are outside the TPZ of this tree.


Tree # 20

Species Pittosporum undulatum

Common name Sweet Pittosporum

DBH (cm) 25

Height (m) 8

Spread (m) 4

Structure Fair-good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.0

Notes Co-dominant from near-ground- union with included bark. Second leader removed from near union. Past lopping of lower branches for footpath clearance. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 21

Species Eucalyptus leucoxylon ‘rosea’

Common name Red-Flowering yellow Gum

DBH (cm) 21

Height (m) 13

Spread (m) 7

Structure Good

Health Good


Amenity value Low-medium

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.5

Notes Some small deadwood. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 22

Species Corymbia maculata

Common name Spotted Gum

DBH (cm) 44

Height (m) 18

Spread (m) 13

Structure Fair-good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value High

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 5.3

Notes Co-dominant from 6m- rear of union with slight rib formation- may indicate structural stress. Smaller leader with much terminal weight. Small deadwood in canopy. Lerp on leaves. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 23



DBH (cm) 29

Height (m) 19

Spread (m) 10

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Medium-high

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.5

Notes Small amount of deadwood. Lerp on leaves. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.


Tree # 24


Common name 3 x Spotted Gum

DBH (cm) ~15

Height (m) B/n 8 and 10

Spread (m) ~7

Structure Good

Health Good


Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.0

Notes Group of three trees- likely to have self-seeded from nearby mature specimens. All with significant lerp damage on leaves. Trees proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 25


Common name Spotted Gum

DBH (cm) 51

Height (m) 19

Spread (m) 10

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value High

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 6.1



Tree # 26

Species Acacia mearnsii

Common name Black Wattle

DBH (cm) 25

Height (m) 11

Spread (m) 7

Structure Fair-poor

Health Poor

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 5-15

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.0

Notes Tree appears close to senescent. Much dieback and deadwood. Borer infestation in deceased limbs. Tree proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 27

Species Acacia mearnsii

Common name Black Wattle

DBH (cm) 38

Height (m) 12

Spread (m) 7

Structure Fair-poor

Health Poor

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 4.6

Notes Tree appears close to senescent. Dieback in 60% of foliage. Much deadwood. Borer infestation in trunk and branches. Proposed to be removed for the development. Tree should be considered for removal.


Tree # 28



DBH (cm) ~21

Height (m) 7

Spread (m) 4

Structure Good

Health Good


Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 2.5

Notes Group of two trees. Both proposed to be removed for the development.



Tree # 29



DBH (cm) 28

Height (m) 9

Spread (m) 5

Structure Good

Health Good

Age category Mature

Amenity value Low

ULE (yrs) 15+

DTW (m) 0.0

TPZ (m) 3.4



4.5 Plants not listed

There are a range of shrubs on the subject site that are within proximity to the proposed works, but are generally less than 3 metres in height. The proposed development may impact some of these plants, however they are insignificant in size, and/or amenity value.


4.6 Site plan

Not to scale, for indicative purposes only

3

26

4 1 2

5

9 10 11 12

13

14 15

16

17

18 19

20 21 22

23

24

25 27

28 29

6 7

8 No Tree


5 Observations / discussions

5.1 Site summary

850 Whitehorse Road, Box Hill is a lightly vegetated parcel of land of 3301 sqm. The site occupies approximately 120 metres of road frontage along Whitehorse Road (the main thoroughfare of Box Hill) some 17km east of the Melbourne CBD. Current land use at the site is commercial, and the site currently supports a three-storey office block with undercover car park. The infrastructure on site occupies approximately 75% of the total site area. The property is zoned ‘Commercial 1 Zone’ (B2Z) under the City of Whitehorse City Council Planning Scheme. The 25% of the site that has not been developed is comprised predominately of landscaped garden beds. The large Eucalypts are a significant feature of the site, and where they are planted in close proximity to one another, significantly reduce the visual impact of the building on the streetscape of Whitehorse Road. These trees are made up of both indigenous and non-indigenous species including Manna Gum, Spotted Gum and Candlebark. The shrub layer at the site is sparse, but is typically dominated by native species such Wattle, Crimson Bottlebrush, Goosefoot, Tea-tree and Grevillia. Growing beneath these species are native and exotic grasses and broad-leaf weed species such as Agapanthus, Iris, Pennisetum, and Flax-lily. Amongst the native understorey species are common weed species such as Panic Veldt Grass, Black Nightshade, Flax-leaf Broom, Wild Cabbage and Sow Thistle.

Plate 1- Photograph showing the typical landscaping lining Whitehorse Road at the site


Plate 2- Photograph of the landscaping at the eastern end of the building.

5.2 Site details

Number of trees inspected 29 (including three tree groups) Location of trees See site map - Section 4.4 (above) Slope 0°

Aspect N/A

Soil moisture Low Soil compaction High Target exposure High Water course within 30m No

Site habitat significance The faunal habitat significance of most trees assessed is considered to be medium. The flowering Eucalypts assessed are likely to provide valuable feeding habitat for a range of common native bird species. Scratches on the trunk of some of the smooth barked Eucalypts suggests that possums may be utilising the trees. No hollows were observed in any trees. Ecological / taxonomic significance None of the trees assessed is considered significant under the Federal Governments Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) 1999, or Victoria’s Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act, 1988.


5.3 General comments

5.3.1 Soil compaction

Soil compaction reduces the number and size of soil pores, subsequently reducing the available water and oxygen to a tree, this then impedes a trees ability to respire (consume reserved energy supplies) and increases stress. Subsequent symptoms may include thinning or dying crown, reduced or no seasonal extension growth, limb shed or death of the tree. Insect infestation may increase as a trees natural ability to withstand pests is diminished.

5.3.2 Maintaining Tree Protection Zones (TPZ)

Where it is determined that a TPZ is to be established, the area should be fenced prior to commencement of demolition/construction work, this area must be protected; no materials, equipment, waste, chemicals or vehicles are to be stored or parked within this area. The soil profile and level within the TPZ should not be disturbed or altered. If at any time the TPZ may need to be infringed upon for works such as excavation for the installation of pipes or drainage or the movement of equipment or any other interference that may cause a change in the availability of water or oxygen to the tree, a suitably qualified arborist should be consulted to supervise the works. It may be possible to work within a TPZ without significantly impacting a tree however the size and number of roots in the area would need to be determined prior to commencement and design and construction methods may need alteration to minimize tree impact.

Extract from AS 4970-2009

Variations to the TPZ General It may be possible to encroach into or make variations to the standard TPZ. Encroachment includes excavation, compacted fill and machine trenching. Minor encroachment If the proposed encroachment is less than 10% of the area of the TPZ and is outside the SRZ detailed root investigations should not be required. The area lost to this encroachment should be compensated for elsewhere and contiguous with the TPZ. Variations must be made by the project arborist considering relevant factors listed in (see standard).... Major encroachment If the proposed encroachment is greater than 10% of the TPZ or inside the SRZ, the project arborist must demonstrate that the tree(s) would remain viable. The area lost to this encroachment should be compensated for elsewhere and contiguous with the TPZ. This may require root investigation by non-destructive methods and consideration of relevant factors listed in (see standard)


6 Conclusions

6.1 Report summary

This report was commissioned to provide a condition assessment for any trees on site and within proximity on neighbouring properties that have the potential to be impacted by the proposed development at 850 Whitehorse Road, Box Hill. Twenty-nine trees were assessed, including three tree groups. Four trees are located within the road reserve of Whitehorse Road, with the remaining 25 trees located within the property boundaries. Twelve trees (41%) were considered to be indigenous native species, and seventeen trees (59%) were considered to be non-indigenous native species. Trees ranged in age from semi-mature to mature, and were assessed from low to high for amenity value. The proposed development will utilise much of the available land, and to facilitate the construction all trees within the property boundaries will need to be removed, 25 in total (including 3 small groupings) of which 11 are low amenity, 9 medium amenity and 5 high amenity. Those four trees within the road reserve of Whitehorse road may be able to be retained despite the development, although they will be at risk from development related activity. There are no other significant trees on the property, or within close proximity on neighbouring properties that are likely to be affected by the proposed development.


7 References

Brooker, M.I.H and Kleinig, D.A (2001). Field guide to Eucalypts- Volume 2 south-western and southern Australia. Bloomings Books, Melbourne Australia.

Costerman, L (200). Native trees and shrubs of south-eastern Australia. Landsdowne Publishing, Sydney.

Mattheck, C., Breloer, H (1994). The body language of trees. A handbook for failure

analysis. Research for Amenity trees No.4, The Stationary Shop.

Nicholle, D (2006). Eucalypts of Victoria and Tasmania. Bloomings Book, Melbourne, Australia

Richardson, F.J, Richardson, R.G and Shepherd, R.C.H (2006). Weeds of the south-east- An identification guide for Australia. R.G and F.J Richardson, Meredith, Victoria.

Standards Australia. (2009), AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites

Standards Australia, (2007), AS 4373-2007 Pruning of amenity trees

8 Assumptions and limiting conditions

1. Treetec does not assume responsibility for legal matters, and assumes that legal descriptions,

titles and ownerships are correct and good. 2. Treetec assumes that any property or project is not in violation of any applicable codes,

ordinances, statutes or other government regulations. 3. Treetec takes all reasonable care to ensure all referenced material is accurate and quoted in

correct context but does not take responsibility for information quoted or supplied. 4. Treetec shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless

subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including the payment of an additional fee for such services.

5. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report. 6. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not imply right of publication or use for any

purpose by anyone but the person to whom it is addressed, without the prior written consent of Treetec.

7. All, or any part of the contents of this report, or any copy thereof, shall not be used for any purpose by anyone but the person to whom it is addressed, without the written consent of Treetec.

8. This report shall not be conveyed by anyone, including the client, to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales or other media, without the written consent of Treetec.

9. This report and any values expressed herein represent the opinion of Treetec and Treetec’s fee is in no way contingent upon the reporting of a specified value, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

10. Site plans, diagrams, graphs and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys.

11. Information in this report covers only those items that were examined in accordance with the Terms of Reference, and reflects the condition of those items that were examined at the time of the inspection.

12 The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible components unless otherwise stated in the “Method of Inspection”.

13 There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that the problems or deficiencies of the plants or property in question may not arise in the future.


Appendix 1. Glossary

AGE CATEGORY The age of the tree is represented as Juvenile, Semi-mature, Mature or Senescent.

Juvenile: A young tree, given normal environmental conditions for that tree it will not yet flower or fruit.

Semi-mature: Able to reproduce but not yet nearly the size of a mature specimen in that location.

Mature: Has reached or nearly reached full size and spread for that species in the given location.

Senescent: Old age: health and / or structure is being adversely impacted by the ageing process, these processes will eventually lead to death

AMENITY VALUE

A judgment of amenity and/or utility the tree provides based on factors such as species, size, age, health and local environment. Amenity may be based on ecological or landscape value or both. Documented as Low, Medium or High. Amenity value does not consider the degree of risk associated with a tree

CANOPY SPREAD Overall size of the canopy as looking from a plan view. Recorded at the widest point.

CO-DOMINANT STEMS Two stems of approximately the same thickness and height originating from the same position in the tree.

COMMON NAME A non-scientific name commonly used for that tree.

DBH The diameter of the trunk measured at or near 1.4m above ground level. Where there is more than 1 stem originating below 1.4m the measurement recorded is calculated as described in AS 4970-2009.

DEAD (AS DEAD) Cessation of all metabolic processes (or very soon to be)

DISTANCE TO WORKS (DTW)

The distance (in metres) from the proposed works to the outside of the trunk at the base of the tree.

FORM Reference to the symmetry of the crown as observed from all angles and in accordance with the morphology of that species, and documented as Poor, Fair or Good.

HEALTH A trees vigour as exhibited by the crown density, leaf colour, seasonal extension growth, presence of stress indicators, ability to withstand diseases and pests, and the degree of dieback. Where a deciduous tree is inspected without foliage and health is undetermined a ‘?’ will be noted.

Dead: Cessation or near cessation of all metabolic processes

Poor: Indicating symptoms of extreme stress such as minimal foliage, or extensively damaged leaves from pests and diseases. Death probable if condition of tree deteriorates.

Fair: Not nearly of ‘Good’ condition (see below)

Good: Usual for that species given normal environmental conditions – full canopy with only minor deadwood, normal leaf size and extension growth, minimal pest or disease damage

Excellent: Better than usual for that species under normal conditions

HEIGHT The distance in metres from the ground to the highest point in the crown, calculated in the vertical plane. This measurement unless otherwise specified is an estimation only.

INCLUDED BARK A union within a tree that has included bark (bark pressing on bark), these


UNION unions are usually poorly attached and more likely to fail as the included bark is equivalent to a split. Often characterized by an acute angle and sometimes forming ribs or flaring immediately below the union where the tree reacts to the weakness by placing secondary growth. Though these unions are weaker than a ‘good ‘ union, the risk of failure cannot be calculated.

STRUCTURAL ROOT ZONE (SRZ)

The area around the base of a tree required for the tree’s stability in the ground. The woody root growth and soil cohesion in this area are necessary to hold the tree upright. The SRZ is nominally circular with the trunk at its centre and is expressed by its radius in metres. This zone considers a tree’s structural stability only, this is different from the root zone required for a tree’s vigour and long-term viability, which will usually be a much larger area.

STRUCTURE Reference to the structural integrity of the tree with consideration of the crown, trunk and roots. Determined using the Visual Tree Assessment (VTA) method (Matheck and Breloer 1994) . The failure of small (<60mm calliper) live or dead limbs is normal and not considered here.

Very poor:

Clear indications that a significant failure is likely in the near future

Poor: Signs of structural weakness obvious and failure likely, one might expect a significant failure event within the next 5 years, possibly tomorrow

Fair: Signs of weakness present though not obviously significant, likely to become worse over time

Good: No obvious signs of structural weakness

TREE NUMBER Identifying number allocated to individual trees or groups of trees, may be used to locate trees using site plans or tags on trees.

TREE PROTECTION ZONE (TPZ)

An exclusion area that allows for protection of canopy and roots; both the structural roots that give the tree stability and the smaller absorption roots. The radius of the TPZ is normally calculated for each tree by multiplying the DBH × 12. The minimum distance will be 2m and maximum 15 as stipulated in the Australian Standard 4970-2009 – Protection of trees on development sites.

TREETEC REFERENCE Unique identifier assigned to an individual report by Treetec

ULE Useful Life Expectancy is an estimation of how many years a tree can be retained in the landscape provided growing conditions do not worsen and any recommended works are completed. It takes into consideration factors such as species, age, health, defects / hazards and site conditions.

UNION The point where a branch or stem is attached to another branch or stem.

Arboricultural report - City of · PDF fileArboricultural report for 850 Maroondah Hwy, Box...

Documents

Transcript of Arboricultural report - City of · PDF fileArboricultural report for 850 Maroondah Hwy, Box...