the hucclecote centre, gloucester arboricultural survey...

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


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.



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



February 2014

4


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



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.



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.



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.



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.



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.



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.



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.



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.



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.



February 2014

14

Part B

Arboricultural Impact Assessment



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.



February 2014

16

Part C

Arboricultural 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



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.



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”



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.



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



February 2014

22

APPENDIX 1

BS5837:2012 Tree Quality Assessment Chart

(extract from BS 5837:2012)



February 2014

24

APPENDIX 2

Tree Survey Data



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.



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.




February 2014

27


(m)

DBH


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.


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.


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



February 2014

28


(m)

DBH


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.


T17 Sycamore


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.




February 2014

29


(m)

DBH


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.


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


U na na

Description: Basal fork is in-grown. � Preliminary works: None



February 2014

30


(m)

DBH


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.


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


T31 Cotoneaster U na na

Description: Large bush � Preliminary works: None



February 2014

31


(m)

DBH


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.


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



February 2014

32


(m)

DBH


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


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



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


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)



Scattered bushes1.5m high

G5Broadleaved forest trees(B2)


Tel/Fax - 01242 522051

T3Birch(B2)

Key:

Category A

Category B

Category C

Category U

Category

RootProtectionArea

Tree Shadow


Crown Spread

T3Birch(B2)


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



Treeprotecion fencing


Tel/Fax - 01242 522051

Key:

Category A

Category B

Category C

Category U

Tree Protection Fencing

Ground Protection

T3Birch(B2)


Tree to be removed

T3Birch(B2)

Category

Root Protection Area


Crown Spread

3.2m

4m

4.2m

3.3m

6.5m

5.9m6.1m

6.5m


Tel/Fax - 01242 522051

Key:

Category A

Category B

Category C

Category U

Tree Protection Fencing

Ground Protection

T3Birch(B2)


Tree to be removed

T3Birch(B2)

Category

Root Protection Area


Crown Spread

the hucclecote centre, gloucester arboricultural survey...

Documents