arboricultural assessment & report · rose of sharon . s . 0-92-w . ttii . ei*aga8 . 11river...

ARBORICULTURAL ASSESSMENT & REPORT

1-9 Allan Street, Oakleigh GLENN WATERS I ARBORICULTURE

PO Box 94 I Oakleigh South I Victoria I 3167 Kol I 0439 273 771

E I [email protected]

D18-946395

Arboricultural Assessment & Report

1-9 Allan Street, Oakleigh

Introduction Glenn Waters has been engaged to undertake an inspection and report for the trees and property at 1-9 Allan Street, Oakleigh.

This report will provide comment on the individual site, neighbouring property and street trees in question and provide advice regarding the species, condition and suitability for retention of the

existing site trees and also provide advice regarding the future management of the trees.

Objectives • To inspect the site and existing trees located within site at 1-9 Allan Street, Oakleigh

including any nearby neighbouring property or street trees that may be impacted by the

proposed development of the subject site.

• To collect data on the individual site and neighbouring property trees and provide a tree number plan that correspond to the report tree data.

• To provide an arboricultural report that provides advice and solutions for the future

management of the site, neighbouring property and street trees (as required).

Observations The site was up until recently, part of the OC Connections group of properties and is now currently unused. The existing trees are scattered around the existing buildings and given the lack of

maintenance in the past there are a number of urban woody weed trees. The site inspection and assessment captured data on forty-five (45) individual trees including six (6) street trees.

There are no high value trees on the site and in fact only two of the subject site trees were rated as having 'Moderate' arboricultural/retention value. There were four (4) tow-Moderate' rated trees with the remaining site trees rated as having 'Low' or 'No' arboricultural/retention value. A number of these trees are urban woody weed species such as Desert Ash, Box Elder and Sweet

Pittosporum.

The 'Moderate', neighbouring property and street trees have been apportioned Tree Protection

Zone (TPZ) distances as per the Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites which defines a TPZ as being the trunk diameter of the tree multiplied by a factor of 12. (eg: a 30cm dbh X 12 = 3.6m radius TPZ).

D18-946395

Discussion

General Tree Retention Discussion:

The Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites has been used

to calculate the TPZ for the subject site and neighbouring property trees.

The TPZ is calculated based on trunk (stem) diameter (DBH), measured at approximately 1.4

metres up from ground level. The radius of the TPZ is calculated by multiplying the trees DBH by 12. The method provides a TPZ that addresses both the stability and growing requirements of a tree. TPZ distances are measured as a radius from the centre of the trunk at (or near) ground level.

Encroachment into the TPZ is permissible under certain circumstances though is dependent on both site conditions and tree characteristics. Minor encroachment, up to 10% of the TPZ, is generally permissible provided encroachment is compensated for by recruitment of an equal area contiguous with the TPZ.

With a site such as this, it is important to understand that tree root growth is opportunistic and

occurs where the essentials to life (primarily air and water) are present. Heterogeneous soil

conditions, existing barriers, hard paved surfaces, roads and buildings may have inhibited the development of a symmetrically radiating root system and this may impact on the size and shape of a TPZ. Existing infrastructure around some trees may be within the TPZ or root plate radius and this may affect how roots are located and it is likely that the roots of individual trees may have

grown in response to the site conditions and therefore 'normal' tree protection zone calculations

may need to be modified to allow for such anomalies.

Appendix 1 lists the standard tree protection works that should be considered as part of the

management of trees to be retained during development and these works should be seen as a minimum standard to apply.

Glenn Waters GLENN WATERS I ARBORICULTURE

D18-946395

Appendix 1: Tree Protection During Development

The following are guidelines that must be implemented to minimise the impact of the proposed

construction works on the retained trees.

• The Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) is fenced and clearly marked at all times. This fence should deter the placement of building materials, entry of heavy equipment and vehicles and also the entry of workers and/or the public into the TPZ. Australian Standard AS 4687 - 2007 Temporary fencing and hoardings, specifies appropriate fencing requirements. Existing perimeter fencing can be incorporated into the protective fencing. Shade cloth should be attached to reduce the movement of dust and other particulates into the TPZ. Signs identifying the TPZ are to be placed on the fencing.

• If the area within the TPZ is to be accessed during the construction phase then the area will need ground protection. Measures may include a permeable membrane, such as a geotextile, to cover the TPZ area beneath a 100 mm layer of crushed rock below rumble boards.

• Contractors and site workers should receive written and verbal instruction as to the importance of tree protection and preservation within the site. Successful tree preservation occurs when there is a commitment from all relevant parties involved in designing, constructing and managing a development project. Members of the project team need to interact with each other to minimise the impacts to the trees, either through design decisions or construction practices.

• The consultant arborist is on-site to supervise excavation works around the existing trees where the TPZ will be encroached.

• There is no immediate requirement for mulching within the TPZ. There is benefit to maintaining existing site conditions within the TPZ and is more analogous to proposed completion conditions. Monitoring of the trees in-line with prevailing weather conditions will indicate if mulching will be required. The same approach is to used in providing supplemental irrigation.

• No persons, vehicles or machinery to enter the TPZ without the consent of the consulting arborist or site manager.

• Any underground service installations within the allocated TPZ should be bored and utility authorities should common trench where possible.

• No fuel, oil dumps or chemicals shall be allowed in or stored on the TPZ and the servicing and refuelling of equipment and vehicles should be carried out away from the root zones.

• No storage of material, equipment or temporary building should take place over the root zone of the tree.

• Nothing whatsoever should be attached to the tree including temporary services wires, nails, screws or any other fixing device.

• Any pruning that is required must be carried out by trained and competent arborist who has a thorough knowledge of tree physiology and pruning methods and carry out pruning to the Australian Standard — AS 4373 — 2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees.

• All root excavation should be carried out by hand digging or with the use of 'Air-Excavation' techniques, and roots should be severed by saw cutting or with a sharp axe and not with a Backhoe or any machinery or blunt instrument.

D18-946395

Comments

urban

weed

tree neig_hbouring

reserve

tree

some

decline self-sown

weed x 2

leaning

misshapen

specimen

bifurcation at

ground

13

trees misshapen

due to

wire

clearance

pruning

street

tree

street

tree

street

tree

street

tree

street

tree self-sown

weed

misshapen

due to

wires

sell-sown

weed neighbouring

reserve

tree

neighbouring

reserve

tree

neighbouring

reserve

tree 111

ii

fg n

H

neighbouring

reserve

tree

neighbouring

reserve

tree

Origin Exotic

Deciduous

Aust.

Native

I

Exotic

Deciduous

Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Vic.

Native

Exotic

Conifer

lExotic

Deciduous I

'Exotic

Evergereen

1-4.k z- .1

1g 'Aust.

Native

1Vie.

Native

Vic.

Native

'Exotic

Deciduous

'Vic.

Native

,Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Exotic

Evergereen i

illT.

zwz%

Mg Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Exotic

Deciduous

Exotic

Deciduous

Exotic

Deciduous

Exotic

Deciduous

Exotic

Deciduous

Exotic

Deciduous

Aust.

Native

Vic.

Native

Aust.

Native

Exotic

Deciduous

Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Aust.

Native

Exotic

Deciduous

Vic.

Native .2

gg Vic. Native

Vic.

Native .2

gg

7:5 .1 E ULU f

E Vg:(F.M

Art

Value Moderate

Low

Low-Moderate]

Low Low None None g

z

Moderate

Low None

,low-Moderatd Low-Moderate

None Low

Low-Moderate

Low None None Low 0 g z3

Low-Moderate] Low-Moderate Low-Moderate Low-Moderate Low-Moderate

Low None None None Low Low None None Low

Low-Moderate Low-Moderate

g 23 Low No

Value

High

Low-Moderate Low-Moderate Low-Moderate

g '41

ma21222> 112d212212i2122222g0.11

MIT.61A ligk§ ‘222211g2.2>a21>21221c2

pg-686.61.16—ot14`'stae,grE0.4b0Ai`L,,L pgml §:WI we_ 2

6 To 8 122a2C-22

P

„ ... § a t A. t ,-,

8 4! :: 26°,2,222-2L'q22(2,T>22,172,26."2_,T2212e.e.:222>egg

g

a .0 , 88 42

..- 4 •-....

6-tg 24a 4 8

ao- 8 A

0;

e, ,

g M

.4 .- . .

68 22

. ...1 8 aa2

'5 ,L-

ro

L .,-

gg MM

8 L A ,- gn888bA4 cLo.mke.e.

4,21.4; ..1. 12,21,2

e.Rm

"PI3J122011"gliOjiMOiSge5WIA az aaa aa 2

;

4

>>

1E

Common

Name

English

Oak

Norfolk

Island

Hibiscus

Desert

Ash

11

=g, gg

2 j L‘.

Bracelet

Honey

Myrtle

Western

Red

Cedar

Desert

Ash

Rose of

Sharon S 0-92-W

ttii ei*AgA8 11River

Red

Gum 1Queensland

Brush

Box

Norfolk

Island

Hibiscus

Common

Lemon

Queensland

Brush

Box

Kohuhu Gungurru

Sweet

Pdtosporum

Queensland

Brush

Box ,

Queensland

Brush

Box

Queensland

Brush

Box

Queensland

Brush

Box g 1 m 0 11"tVg§

aliiiLU

a a

t . i! -8

Gossamer

Wattle

Lilly

Pity

Box

Elder Queensland

Brush

Box

Lilly

Pity Silky

Oak

t

-9. g§E

Llal

m202

t -9.

River

Red

Gum

River

Red

Gum

Swamp

Gum Blackwood

Species Ckiercus

robur

wl g:E5..2-at gt,g1,1

Wttl Fraxinus

anqustifolie

Hibiscus

syriacuc 7...a.-,;.

.Acacia

elate

Acacia

ineemsii

Cotymbia

maculate

Fraxinus

engustifolia

il

0 0 1§

'R

Leotineria

patersonia

Citrus

limon

s; It;

Eucalypotus

caesie

Pittosporum

undulatum 41 II

-E:El.

Lophostemon

confortus

Lophostemon

contertus snueleidopnescl

reoe

snueproo

uousinsoydol

Acer

palmatum

Prunus

armeniaca FilaS

Kai. caa-

1 E a

Acacia

floribunda

Syzycaum

smithil

Acer

neouno'o Lophostemon

confertus

E e a, 0 Acer

neoundo lEucalyptus

cephalocarpa

Eucalyptus 7

ovate

,Eucalyptus

cephalocarpa

Eucalyptus

camaldulensis

,Eucalyptus

camaldulensis

Eucalyptus 7

ovate

Acacia

melanoxylon

Mx0x.-00.-N.-sty- X,x,„XxxxXXX,.X,XXXXgxxxXXgKXKI(gXXPKXXXXXZP W,,x0xxx0W,,,,T

00000'000WM.MY.20.2r-0,N“.''W

As 22 50 A

';,,,-sF,gAgs-,4'4.,

i

I

ti,

R.A

1

til

z2 .c2

28 40 V

FI:ii 25/20

multi-stemmed L'-

g. SC173

Q-' .”3,9RER4

10/10/10 15/120

,52 '44i14'A' gi W

R

38 ,20

multi-stemmed

40 15 20 RARRAA 1.-"""'"'".2:--V.TRRALAAWARRggSAAAt;ARq;V44A4

D18-946395

tz:223

BOUNDARIES SHOWN HEREIN ARE PROVISIONAL ONLY.

PS 807221 HAD NOT BEEN REGISTERED AT THE TIME OF

1I41C CI I D I / r TI.41C DI AM IC TO

BOUNDARIES SHOWN HEREIN ARE PROVISIONAL ONLY.

PS 80722IL HAD NOT BEEN REGISTERED AT THE TIME OF

THIS SURVEY. THIS PL AN IS TO BE REVISED / CONFIRMED UPON REGISTRATION OF THAT PLAN.

D18-946395

GLENN WATERS I ARBORICULTURE

Tree Descriptors - Version 8 (February 2018)

The typical assessment of tree evaluates the factors of health and structure. The descriptors of health and structure attributed to a tree evaluate the individual specimen as compared to what could be considered typical for that species growing in its location. The two factors are completely separate and it is possible to have a tree in good health with very poor structure or, conversely, a tree in very poor health with good structure. These two factors should be used a guide to the overall picture of the tree condition at the time of inspection.

Tree No:

A unique identifier, normally a number and often associated with a plan or map reference and used to identify an individual tree or tree group.

Species:

Provides botanical name, (genus, species, variety and cultivar) according to accepted international codes of taxonomic classification.

Common Name:

Provide the most well-known non-scientific name by which the tree is generally known.

DBH (trunk diameter, measured at 1.4m from ground):

Indicates the trunk diameter (expressed in centimetres) of an individual tree measured at 1.4m above the existing ground level. Plants with a multi-stemmed habit may be measured below the 1.4m or at the tree base. DBH measurements are usually undertaken with foresters diameter tape or builders tape.

Dbhs in the tree data followed by an * are where the dbh has been estimated due to not having access to the tree (usually neighbouring properties).

Basal Diameter (bdbh) is measured to calculate the Structural Root Zone (SRZ) as required in AS-4970.

H x W (Height x Width or Canopy Spread):

Indicates the height and width of the individual tree; dimensions are expressed in metres. Height is measured with a clinometer/heightmeter where possible. Tree heights may be estimated in line with previous clinometer readings in conjunction with author's experience. Crown widths are generally paced (estimated) at the widest axis or averaged.

D18-946395


Tree Type:

Describes the general geographic origin o f the species and its type (e.g. deciduous o r evergreen).

Category Description

Indigenous Occurs naturally in the area or region of the subject site

Victorian native Occurs naturally within some part of the State of Victoria (not exclusively) but is not indigenous

Australian native Occurs naturally within Australia but is not a Victorian native or indigenous

Exotic deciduous Occurs outside of Australia and typically sheds its leaves during winter

Exotic evergreen Occurs outside of Australia and typically holds its leaves all year round

Exotic conifer Occurs outside of Australia and is classified as a gymnosperm

Native conifer Occurs naturally within Australia and is classified as a gymnosperm

Palm Woody monocotyledon

Age:

Relates t o the physiological stage o f the tree's life cycle.


Young Sapling tree and/or recently planted

Semi-mature Tree rapidly increasing in size and yet to achieve expected size in situation

Maturing Specimen approaching expected size in situation, with reduced incremental growth

Senescent Tree is over-mature and in decline

Dead Tree is dead

Health:

Assesses a range o f attributes t o describe the overall health o f the tree.

Category Growth Indicators Decline symptoms/ Deadwood

Foliage density, colour, size, intactness

Pests and/or disease

Good Above typical None or minimal Better than typical None or minimal

Fair Typical Typical or expected Typical Typical, within damage

thresholds Fair to Poor Below typical More than typical Exhibiting deficiencies

Exceeds damage thresholds

Poor Minimal Excessive and large

amount/size Exhibiting severe

deficiencies Extreme and

contributing to decline Dead N/A N/A N/A N/A

D18-946395


Structure:

Assesses principal components of tree structure. Root plate & Primary branch Outer crown and Lean from Descriptor Trunk lower stem support roots vertical No damage,

disease Well formed, No damage, disease, No damage, disease Good or decay; obvious attached, spaced decay or structural Low or none

or decay; well tapered basal flare / stable and tapered defect in ground

Fair Minor damage or decay

Minor damage or decay

Typically formed, attached, spaced

and tapered

Minor damage, disease or decay; minor branch end-

weight or over- extension

Minor / natural

Weak, decayed or Moderate damage, Moderate damage Moderate damage or with acute branch disease or decay;

Poor or decay; minimal decay; approaching attachments; moderate branch end- Moderate basal flare recognised thresholds previous branch weight or over-

failure evidence extension

Very Poor

Decayed, cavities or has acute Major damage,

Major damage, Major damage, branch disease or decay; disease or decay;

disease or decay; attachments with fungal fruiting bodies exceeds recognised f I f included bark; present; major branch thresholds; fungal

bodies present excessive end-weight or over- fruiting bodies present compression extension flaring; failure likely

Acute

Excessive Decayed, cavities Excessive damage, Excessive - root damage, disease Excessive damage, or branch disease or decay; plate failure or Hazardous or decay; unstable disease or decay; attachments with excessive branch end-

stem failure / loose in ground; cavities active split; failure weight or over- probable

failure probable imminent extension

The lowest or worst descriptor assigned to the tree in any column is generally the overall rating assigned to the tree. The assessment for structure is limited to observations of external and above ground tree parts. It does not include any exploratory assessment of underground or internal tree parts unless this is requested as part of the investigation.

Trees are assessed and the given a rating for a point in time. Generally, trees with a poor or very poor structure are beyond the benefit of practical arboricultural treatments. The management of trees in the urban environment requires appropriate arboricultural input and consideration of risk.

D18-946395


Arboricul tural / Retent ion Value Rating:

Relates t o the combination of previous tree rating factors, including health, structure and form (arboricultural merit), and also conveys an amenity value. This rating relates to the trees biological, functional and aesthetic characteristics within an urban landscape context.


Tree of better than high quality and will be an outstanding example of the species due to factors such as age, size, outstanding example, rare in cultivation, etc. Significant Retention of these trees should be a priority for the site.

Tree of high quality in good to fair condition. Generally a prominent arboricultural feature. Tree is capable of tolerating changes in its environment.

High These trees have the potential to be a medium to long-term component of the landscape if managed appropriately. Retention of these trees is highly desirable.

Tree of moderate quality, in fair or better condition. Generally contributes to the landscape. Tree may have a condition, and or structural problem that will respond to arboricultural

M oderate treatment. Tree is capable of tolerating changes in its environment. These trees have the potential to be a medium to long-term component of the landscape if managed appropriately. Retention of these trees is generally desirable.

Low

Tree of low quality and/or little amenity value. Tree in poor health and/or with poor structure. Tree unlikely to respond positively to changes in its environment and does not warrant design modification to preserve it. Tree may be beyond the benefit of practical arboricultural treatments.

Tree is not significant for its size and/or young. These trees are easily replaceable. Tree (species) is functionally inappropriate to specific location and would be expected to be problematic if retained.

Retention of such trees may be considered if not requiring a disproportionate expenditure of resources for a tree in its condition and location.

Tree has a severe structural defect and/or health problem that cannot be sustained with practical arboricultural techniques and the loss of tree would be expected in the short term. Tree whose retention would be impractical after the removal of adjacent trees (includes trees that have developed in close spaced groups and would not be expected to

None acclimatise to severe alterations to surrounding environment — removal of adjacent shelter trees) Tree has a detrimental effect on the environment, for example, the tree is a woody weed. These trees should be removed on the basis of sound arboricultural management.

D18-946395


Useful Life Expectancy

Assessment of useful life expectancy provides an indication of health and tree appropriateness and involves an estimate of how long a tree is likely to remain in the landscape based on species, stage of life (cycle), health, amenity, environmental services contribution, conflicts with adjacent infrastructure and risk to the community.

The assessment is based on the site conditions not being significantly altered and that any pre- scribed maintenance works are carried out (site conditions are presumed to remain relatively con- stant and the tree would be maintained under scheduled maintenance programs).

ULE Rating Description

Tree may be dead or mostly dead. Tree may exhibit major structural faults. Tree may be an < 1 year imminent failure hazard. Excessive infrastructure damage with high risk potential that cannot

be remedied. Tree is exhibiting severe chronic decline. Crown is likely to be less than 50% typical density.

1 5 Crown may be mostly epicormic growth. Dieback of large limbs is common (large

- years deadwood may have been pruned out). Over-mature and senescing. Infrastructure conflicts with heightened risk potential. Tree has outgrown site constraints. Tree is exhibiting chronic decline. Crown density will be less than typical and epicormic growth is likely to present. The crown may still be mostly entire, but some dieback is likely

6 - 10 years to be evident. Dieback may include large limbs. Over-mature and senescing or early decline symptoms in short-lived species. Early infrastructure conflicts with potential to increase regardless of management inputs. Trees displaying normal growth characteristics. Tree may be growing in restricted environment (e.g. streetscapes) or may be in late maturity.

10-25 years Tree may be growing in restricted environment (e.g. streetscapes) or may be in late maturity.

Generally juvenile and semi-mature trees exhibiting normal growth characteristics in parks 25+ years or open space. Could also be maturing, long-lived trees. Tree well suited to the site with

negligible potential for infrastructure conflicts.

Bibliography:

Coder, K D. (1996) Construction damage assessments: trees and sites, University of Georgia, USA

Hitchmough, J.D. (1994) Urban landscape management, lnkata Press, Australia

Gooding, R.F., Ingram, J.B., Urban, J.R., Bloch, L.B., Steigerwaldt, W.M, Harris, R.W. and Allen, E.N. (2000) Guide for plant appraisal, 9th edition, International society of Arboriculture, USA

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

D18-946395

GLENN WATERS I ARBORICULTURE P.O. Box 94, Oakleigh South, VIC. 3167.

Arboriculture! Consultancy: Precedent disclaimer and copyright

Copyright notice: © Glenn Waters 2018. All rights reserved, except as expressly provided otherwise in this publication.

Disclaimer: Glenn Waters uses all due experience, care and skill in providing you the information contained in the above report and to the extent permitted by law, Glenn Waters otherwise excludes all warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied.

To the extent permitted by law, you agree that Glenn Waters is not liable to you or any other person or entity for any loss or damage caused or alleged to have been caused (including loss or damage resulting from negligence), either directly or indirectly, by your use of the information (including by way of example, arboricultural advice) made available to you in the above report.

Without limiting this disclaimer, in no event will Glenn Waters be liable to you for any lost revenue or profits, or for special, indirect, consequential or incidental damage (however caused and regardless of the theory of liability) arising out of or related to your use of the information contained in the above report, even if Glenn Waters has been advised of the possibility of such loss or damage.

This disclaimer is governed by the law in force in the State of Victoria, Australia.

The provision of the above report and the information contained herein represent the opinion of Glenn Waters and any fee is in no way conditional upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

Sketches, diagrams, graphs and photographs in the above report are intended as visual aids and are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural drawings, reports or surveys.

Unless expressed otherwise; the information contained in this report covers only those items that were covered in the project brief or that were examined during the assessment and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and the inspection undertaken as part of the preparation for the above report was limited to visual examination of accessible components of any tree without climbing the tree or removal of any parts of the tree or any dissection, excavation or probing unless otherwise stipulated.

D18-946395

ARBORICULTURAL

ASSESSMENT REPORT

777 - 781 WARRIGAL ROAD, OAKLEIGH

REPORT PREPARED FOR: STELLER

REPORT PREPARED BY: DAMIEN BURGESS CONSULTING ARBORIST - DB HORTICULTURE PTY LTD.

23/07/2018

horticulture ,cl a r b o r l c u l t u r a l consultants

www. dbhor t i c u l t u r e . corn

20 Glen Avenue, Croydon Vic 3136 1 phone: 0422 999 754 1 email: damienOdbhorticulture.com

D18-946395

Contents

1. Brief 3

2. Overview 3

3. Methodology 3

4. Tree Protection Zones (TPZ's) 3

5. Site Plan 4

6. Tree Assessment Table 5

7. Photos 6

8. Discussion / Recommendations 10

9. Tree Descriptors 11

10. References 12

DB Horticulture Pty Ltd. 777-781 Warrigal Road, Oakleigh Page 2 of 12

D18-946395

1. Brief

The client, M r Andrew Bromley of Steller, has requested an Arboricultural Assessment Report containing details o f species, age, size, health, suitability, amenity value and Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) for specified trees within and near t o the property at 777-781 Warrigal Road, Oakleigh.

2. Overview

The site contains three single-storey dwellings. A residential housing development is proposed across the three sites, as well as the adjoining property to the rear; 1 —9 Allen Street.

3. Methodology

A visual site inspection o f the trees took place on Friday July 20th, 2018. The trees were not climbed nor was any soil excavation o r diagnosis of the internal or below ground components of the trees undertaken.

The trees were photographed on site using an iphone 8. Height and Spread o f trees was recorded via visual estimation. Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) was taken at 1.4 metres above ground level using a diameter tape.

A Retention Value for each tree has been determined using tree condition factors and values as listed on Page 11 of this report.

4. Tree Protection Zones (TPZ's)

Where appropriate, Tree Protection Zones and Structural Root Zones have been applied as per AS4970-2009, 'Protection o f Trees on Development Sites'.

Tree Protection Zones are determined by multiplying the Trunk Diameter @ Breast Height (DBH) x 12. TPZ's are measured from the centre o f the trunk.

Structural Root Zones are the area required for tree stability and are only necessary where major encroachment into the TPZ is t o occur. The SRZ radius = (Diameter x 50) 0.42 x 0.64.

DB Horticulture Pty Ltd. 777-781 Warriga I Road, Oakleigh Page 3 of 12

D18-946395

5. site Plan

0

DB Horticulture Pt' Ltd.

*yr.*.

777-7n warrigal Road, Oakleigh

111.•

Page 401 12

D18-946395

6. T r e e Assessment Table

I i 3 g

g 1

z i ..... E g•

I x

'5' 1 ... I'

i

I

TPZ

(m)

I 0. A I

< :

I 3

, - i a a

1 Plotanus orientolis Plane Tree E 8 7 28 3.4 39 2.3 M F G F F M Street tree - Warrigal Rd

2 Platanus orientalis Plane Tree E 8 8 31 3.7 37 2.2 M F G F F H Street tree - Warrigal Rd

3 Lophostemon confertus Brush Box N 7 5 16/13 2.5 26 1.9 M F G F F H Street tree - Allen St

4 Lophostemon confertus Brush Box N 7 5 21 2.5 25 1.9 SMGF GGM Street tree - Allen st

5 Lophostemon confertus Brush Box N 6 3 11 2.0 16 1.5 Y GGGF M Street tree -Al len St

6 For tune° obovata Kumquat E 5 2 8/8/8 2.0 16 1.5 SM G F F P L

7 Callistemon viminalis Weeping Bottlebrush N 6 4 21 2.5 27 1.9 SMGF F PL

8 Prunus sp. Flowering Cherry E 5 3 24/17 3.5 34 2.1 MF F F PL

9 Acer negundo Box Elder E 9 8 24/21/20 4.6 51 2.5 SM G P F P L

10 Betula pendulo Silver Birch E 8 3 22 2.6 29 2.0 MPPPPL

11 Cupressus macrocorpo Monterey Cypress E 10 3 24 2.9 26 1.9 SMF GF PL

12 Cotoneoster gloucophyllus Cotoneaster E 6 7 18/15 2.8 43 2.3 MGF F PL

13 Syagrus romanzoffiona Queen Palm E 6 3 2.5 SMG G GP L

14 Citrus x limon Lemon E 3 5 8/8/8 2.0 15 1.5 SM G G G P L

15 Archontophoenix cunninghomiano Bangalow Palm N 12 4 3.0 M GGGP L

16 Archontophoenix cunninghamiona Bangalow Palm N 12 4 3.0 M G G GP L

17 Archontophoenix cunninghomiano Bangalow Palm N 10 4 3.0 M GGGP L Group

18 Syagrus romonzoffiono Queen Palm E 10 5 3.5 M GGGP L six trees surveyed as a group

19 Syagrus romanzoffiono Queen Palm E 10 4 3.0 M GGGP L

20 Syagrus romanzoffiano Queen Palm E 10 5 3.5 M GE GP L

'Trees listed in red are considered appropriate for removal

DB Horticulture Pty Ltd. 777-781 Warrigal goad, Oakleigh Page 5 of 12

D18-946395

7. Photos

Trees 3 - 5

Tree 2

Tree 6

D18-946395

Trees 7 & 8

Tree 11

DB Horticulture Pty Ltd.

Trees 9 & 10

Trees 12 — 14

777-781 Warrigal Road, Oakleigh Page 7 of 12

D18-946395

Trees 15- 17

Group 18


D18-946395

Trees 19 & 20

Pty Ltd 777-781 Warrigal Road, Oakleigh Page 9 of 12

D18-946395

8. Discussion / Recommendations

Street Trees

Trees 1 & 2 are both Plane Trees on Warrigal Road. Trees 3 —5 are Brush Box on Allen Street. Any proposed changes to the existing driveway crossing configuration will need to consider the TPZ's of these trees.

Trees within Subject Properties

Trees 6 to 20 are located within the three subject properties. Tree types include Kumquat, Brush Box, Prunus, Cotoneaster (weed species), Queen Palms, Bangalow Palms, Lemon, Cypress, Silver Birch and Box Elder. Most of the trees surveyed are Palms. None of the trees surveyed are of any significance in regard to their species or size. All are rated as Low Retention Value and considered suitable for removal to accommodate the development proposal where required.

Damien Burgess Consulting Arborist/Director DB Horticulture Pty Ltd.

Grad. Cert. Arboriculture Cert. Horticulture ISA TRAQ

July 23, 2018.

Retention value should be considered in the context of a tree being worthy o f being a material constraint on the site. Low retention value trees are by definition not worthy of being a material constraint, however, Low Retention value trees should not necessarily always be removed in all cases. Trees o f Moderate Retention Value should be considered for retention where they are not a material constraint on the site. Where they conflict with plans for the site, either retention or removal are considered as appropriate options. High Retention Value trees should be retained and designed around.


D18-946395

9. Tree Descriptors Age

Y Young Tree is juvenile or recently planted SM Semi-mature Tree is established and actively growing M Mature Tree has reached expected maximum size OM Over Mature Tree is over mature and in decline

Condition

G Good Full crown, free of disease, good colour, good extension growth of twigs, no dieback

F Fair Tree shows one or more of the following: <25% deadwood, dieback, unbalanced canopy, minor pathogens

P Poor Tree shows one or more of the following: >25% deadwood, major pathogen presence, structural faults

D Dead Tree is dead

Structure

G Good Good branch attachments and no structural defects present, no co-dominant stems, good branch and trunk taper, good buttressing at base of trunk

F Fair Some minor structural defects or cavities may be present P Poor Major defects to trunk, branches or roots, poor

attachment points, missing bark, likely points of failure H Hazardous Tree poses immediate danger and should be removed

Form

G Good Full and balanced canopy F Fair Minor asymmetry in canopy shape P Poor Major asymmetry, unbalanced appearance

Amenity Value

G Good Attractive tree which contributes significantly to the surrounding landscape and public realm, may provide good screening and shade qualities

F Fair Tree contributes to its immediate surroundings, may be one of a group of trees and/or provide moderate screening and shading qualities

P Poor Tree does not make a positive contribution to the landscape and could be considered for removal

Retention Value LMH Low, Moderate or

High An assessment which incorporates the above criteria and the Safe Useful Life Expectancy of the tree


D18-946395

10. References

• Clark, J.R. & Matheny N.P. (1998), Trees and Development: A Technical guide to preservation o f trees during land development, ISA Publishing

• Standards Australia (2009), A54970-2009 Protection o f Trees on Development Sites, Standards Australia

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are those o f the author only. All due care and skill has been used to provide this information to the extent permitted by law that you agree that DB Horticulture is not liable for any loss or liability; or alleged loss or liability caused either directly or indirectly by any person(s) using this information.

Unless expressed otherwise; the information contained in this report covers only those items that were covered in the project brief or that were examined during the assessment and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and the inspection undertaken as part of the preparation of this report was limited to visual examination of accessible components o f any tree without climbing the tree or removal o f any part of the tree or any dissection, excavation or probing unless otherwise stipulated.

Copyright C) DB Horticulture Pty Ltd. 2018.

DB Hort icu l ture Pty Ltd. 777-781 Warr igal Road, Oakleigh Page 12 o f 12

D18-946395

arboricultural assessment & report · rose of sharon . s . 0-92-w . ttii . ei*aga8 . 11river...

Documents