arboricultural impact assessment/method statement land off

Tree Solutions Ltd Registration in England & Wales Company No 04548951

Arboricultural Impact Assessment/Method Statement

Land off Maes Gwern, Mold, CH7 1XN

Prepared for: WATES C/o Atmos Consulting Our Ref: 17/AIA/FLINTS/13 17 March 2017 Tree Solutions Ltd T: 01244 389114 E: [email protected] W: www.tree-solutions.co.uk

mailto:[email protected]

Contents:

1.0 Instruction 2.0 Statutory Controls & Planning Policy 3.0 The Site 4.0 Development Proposal 5.0 General Constraints Data – Construction Exclusion Zones 6.0 Survey Methodology 7.0 Juxtaposition of Trees & Structures 8.0 Demolition/Development Impact to Trees 9.0 Proposed Revisions 10.0 Conclusions 11.0 Limiting Conditions Appendix 1 Tree Survey Schedule Appendix 2 Preliminary Tree Constraints Plan Appendix 3 Arboricultural Impact Plan Appendix 4 Tree Protection Plan Appendix 5 Tree Protection Measures/Method Statement Appendix 6 No Dig Footpath Cross Section 'Example'

www.tree-solutions.co.uk

Arboricultural Impact Assessment – Land off Maes Gwern, Mold (17/03/2017) © Tree Solutions Ltd (2017)

2

1.0 INSTRUCTION

1.1 We have been instructed by Atmos Consulting to carry out an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) in order to assess the development proposal in relation to trees in accordance with the principles of British Standard 5837 ‘Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition & Construction - Recommendations’ 2012.

1.2 We are instructed to prepare a report in order to provide information to assist all parties involved

in the planning process to make balanced judgements with regard to arboricultural features in relation to the proposed residential development on land off Maes Gwern, Mold, CH7 1XN. As such, all significant trees within influencing distance to the development proposal both on and adjoining the site have been surveyed and are listed within a Tree Survey Schedule (Appendix 1) and plotted on all accompanying plans.

1.3 The phase 1 tree survey was carried out on 10 January 2017 by Alistair Henderson, Principal

Consultant to Tree Solutions Ltd. Our appraisal of the mechanical integrity of trees on the site is sufficient only to inform the current project. The assessment of trees is carried out from ground level without invasive investigation and the disclosure of hidden defects cannot therefore be expected. Whilst the survey is not specifically commissioned to report on matters of tree safety, we report obvious defects that are significant in relation to the existing and proposed land use. We do not carry out detailed safety inspections unless specifically instructed to do so in writing and have not carried out such inspections of trees on the proposal site.

1.4 Twenty two individual trees (T1–T22), twenty groups (G1-G20), four woodland (W1-W4) and one

hedgerow (H1) were surveyed and mapped on a Preliminary Tree Constraints Plan and Impact Assessment Plan Ref: 17/AIA/FLINTS/33 Drawing No. 1&2 at Appendix 2/3. All arboricultural information recorded during the survey is presented within a schedule at Appendix 1.

1.5 The Arboricultural Impact Assessment is based on proposed site layout plan Ref: 671.06 001MG

(Rev L) provided by Halliday Clark Architects. 2.0 STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 On 24 February 2017, Flintshire Council confirmed that trees located on and adjoining the west

and northern boundary are subject to a Tree Preservation Order. Individual trees to the west are protected by TPO No 310 (2014) and woodland areas to the NE are protected by TPO No. 57 (2003). The exact trees have not been identified.

Plate 1 - Email from FCC confirming location of protected trees



3

2.2 Protected Species 2.2.1 Mature trees often contain cavities, crevices and hollows that offer potential habitat for species

such as bats and barn owls. Both are afforded protection under the Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Bats are also protected under The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended).

2.3 Wildlife Habitats

2.3.1 Trees and hedgerows of most species provide valuable nesting sites for a wide range of birds

and it is likely that nesting birds will be present on the site during the period March to September. 3.0 THE SITE 3.1 The site is vacant agricultural land with residential dwellings to the north, business park to the

south and school playing fields to the east. There are woodlands outside the north and southern boundary and individual trees of merit to the west.

4.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 4.1 Residential development with associated vehicular access and parking. 5.0 GENERAL CONSTRAINTS DATA - CONSTRUCTION EXCLUSION ZONES (CEZ’s) 5.1 GENERAL

5.1.1 The three phases of an AIA were outlined in Section 1. In addition, during the development

process for retention trees, there may be three and even four constraints to consider: Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ’s):

• CEZ 1: Root Protection Area (see 5.2) • CEZ 2: Tree Crown Protection (see 5.3) • CEZ 3: Tree Dominance (see 5.4) • CEZ 4: New Tree Planting Zone (see 5.5)

CEZ’s are explained below: 5.2 CEZ 1: ROOT PROTECTION AREA (RPA) 5.2.1 The RPA, calculated in m2, should be protected before and during any demolition/construction

works. This ensures the effective retention of trees by safeguarding a reliable quantum of functioning tree roots. The RPA is based on a radial measure from the centre of the tree stem, which is calculated by multiplying the stem diameter by a factor of twelve or by the (mean stem diameter²) x number of stems for multi-stemmed trees. With the AIA 1, the RPA is only shown

indicatively on the preliminary TCP, as its shape may be subject to amendment as the design progresses.

5.2.2 During the AIA 2, the derived radial measure is converted by the arboriculturalist into the actual

area to be protected, having due regard to prevailing site conditions and how these may have affected the tree(s), particularly in relation to factors affecting their likely rooting disposition. The RPA for each tree should initially be plotted as a circle centred on the base of the stem. Where pre-existing site conditions or other factors indicate that rooting has occurred asymmetrically, a

polygon of equivalent area should be produced. Modifications to the shape of the RPA should reflect a soundly based arboricultural assessment of likely root distribution.

5.2.3 The means of protecting the RPA will include the installation of tree protective fencing prior to the

start of any demolition or construction work on site. The prohibition of various activities within the RPA must be adhered to (e.g. mechanical excavation, soil stripping, fire lighting, material storage, lowering levels and creating excessive sealed surfacing) and may include the use of temporary ground protection and/or special engineering solutions where construction is proposed near to retention trees or within the RPA.



4

5.3 CEZ 2: TREE CROWN PROTECTION ZONE

5.3.1 This is the area above ground occupied by the crown (branches) of the tree, along with

allowances for working space (safe working area) and if appropriate, for future growth. The extent of CEZ 2 is determined by considering the existing and future crown spread of the tree(s), bearing in mind the possibility of this being modified by an acceptable quantum of pruning.

5.4 CEZ 3: TREE DOMINANCE ZONE 5.4.1 This is the area above ground dominated by the tree in relation to issues of shading, seasonal

debris and safety apprehension. This area is calculated by considering the height and spread of the tree relative to the proposed buildings, cross referenced with intended end use. As such, what is assessed is the likely psychological effect of the tree on the end user.

5.4.2 The purpose of identifying CEZ 3 is to protect trees from post development pressure (resentment)

by the site’s end users, who may, if resentful of the trees, seek to procure excessive pruning treatments or even to have them removed. This is a common Planning Service concern, which has led on many occasions both to refusals of consent and to dismissed Appeals against those refusals

5.4.3 The means of protecting CEZ 3 is likely to include optimising the site layout and room type

(especially in relation to new residential dwellings), such that any adverse psychological impacts of the trees are reduced to an acceptable minimum. Key principles include ensuring adequate separation distances between trees and new buildings, in the context of the buildings’ end use relative to the location of the tree(s) and avoiding excessive obstruction by trees of critical solar access.

5.5 CEZ 4: NEW PLANTING ZONE 5.5.1 In some cases, it may be appropriate to identify and protect areas intended for new landscape

planting, which can fail to establish if the soil has been heavily compacted or contaminated during the demolition/construction process. The means of protecting CEZ 4 will either be by fencing it off prior to the start of works on site, or by soil remediation once construction has finished (and prior to the start of planting). Topsoil protection in areas destined for new planting is frequently an economy measure, saving on plant replacement and soil structure remediation.

6.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

6.1 The method used in the preparation of this report is based on the principles of BS 5837: 2012.

1. Tree heights were surveyed to the nearest 1m. 2. Trunk diameters were measured by use of forestry girth tape 3. The category assessment (Table 1) on which the trees is based include current and long-term

arboricultural, landscape, cultural and conservation values (BS5837: 2012). This table can be found at Appendix 1

4. For clarity, the grading system is summarised from Table 2 of the BS as follows:

U grade – trees for removal, effective for less than 10 years A grade – trees of high quality and value, effective for more than 40 years B grade – trees of moderate quality and value, effective for more than 20 years C grade – trees of low quality and value, effective for 10 years Note: We have indicated colour coding on the drawing and therefore a monochrome copy should not be relied on.

6.2 SOIL ASSESSMENT

6.2.1 A soil assessment should be undertaken by a competent person to inform decisions relating to:

• the root protection area (RPA) • tree protection • new planting design; and • foundation design to take account of retained, removed and new trees (potential soil

subsidence/heave) Tree Solutions do not undertake soil assessments and the client is advised to seek specialist advice in this respect.



5

7.0 JUXTAPOSITION OF TREES AND STRUCTURES 7.1 Below ground constraints 7.1.1 The below ground constraints are generally summarised as the root protection area (RPA). The

shape of the RPA and its exact location will depend upon arboricultural considerations including likely tolerance of the tree to root disturbance; morphology and disposition of the roots when known influenced by past or existing site conditions; soil type and structure; and topography and drainage.

7.1.2 The purpose of the RPA is to prevent physical damage to tree roots and to prevent damage to

the soil structure. Tree roots are damaged by soil compaction, changes in soil levels or soil contamination which could reduce tree health and/or stability.

7.1.3 Root patterns are affected by topography and characteristics of the soil or substrate. Where trees

are located within close proximity to existing hard standing or underground physical barriers they are unlikely to have an even distribution of lateral roots due to restrictions in root growth created by compacted sub-grades beneath. All RPA's have been plotted unmodified as there were no significant underground barriers present to prevent good radial root spread.

7.2 Underground Services 7.2.1 We have considered the broad implications of the provision of underground services but the

locations of existing and proposed were not identified on the plans supplied by the Project Architect and in this regard, our advice is of a general nature.

7.2.2 Drainage and service runs may need to be constructed within the rooting areas of retained trees.

If this is a requirement of the development it will be necessary to retain significant roots and methods of excavation, such as thrust boring or hand digging, may need to be adopted to ensure that these impacts are acceptable.

7.2.3 As with foundation design, low impact construction methods for services installation are now well

established. For more information regarding underground services, reference should be made to the National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Publication No. 10. Volume 4 ‘Guidelines for the Planning, Installation and Maintenance of Utility Services in Proximity to Trees’ 2007

8.0 DEVELOPMENT IMPACT TO TREES

8.1 Tree Solutions carried out a stage one preliminary tree survey and provided the project architect with a report in which all existing trees/hedgerows and their respective Root Protection Areas (RPA) were identified and plotted on a tree constraints and impact assessment plan. The architect has incorporated the design and layout advice contained within the stage 1 survey and the layout has been amended a number of times following consolation with Tree Solutions in order to ensure the best quality trees can be retained with no adverse construction impacts. We are therefore satisfied that the proposal has taken the long-term future of the most important trees and into account and the layout is therefore in accordance with Flintshire Council Planning Policies and recommendations contained with BS5837: 2012.

8.2 In order to accommodate the proposed development it will be necessary to remove tree number

17 and groups 9, 11,18 and H1. Tree number 17 is a Larch on the edge of an established woodland area. It is not visually prominent and as such its removal will have no adverse impact on the landscape character and setting of the locale. Group 9 is a linier group of unmanaged Hazel coppice and occasional Holly of no merit. Group 11 are all Elm trees within the boundary hedge. Many are dead with the remaining appearing stressed & in decline. Group 18 are crack Willow stems on the edge of the woodland area. We have advised that they be removed due to their close proximity to plot 120 as these trees by nature of their brittle branch structure are prone to failure during excessive loading or inclement weather conditions. It should however be noted that the development area is outside the RPA of these trees so they could be retained if requested. H1 is an unmanaged hedge that can be coppiced to ground level and allowed to re-establish to form a better quality well managed green boundary treatment. All other trees are to be retained.



6

8.3 Development impacts on retained trees are listed below:

1. The turning head of the internal spine road encroaches within the RPA of tree number 4. Whilst we are confident that no significant tree roots will be encountered within this area, as a precautionary measure it will be hand excavated under supervision from the project arboricultural consultant. Any tree roots encountered will be cleanly pruned back to a suitable inner node by the arboricultural consultant in order to ensure minimal adverse impact to the existing and future health and vigour of this tree.

2. Plot number 3 encroaches within the RPA of tree number 12. This incursion is minor,

approximately 3m on the outer extremities of the RPA. As with the turning head, we are confident from site investigations that no significant tree roots will be present around the outside edge of the RPA and as such, we are satisfied that excavating standard strip foundations will have no adverse impact on this tree. As a precautionary measure, the excavation of the foundations will be overseen and supervised by the project arboricultural consultant with any tree roots cleanly pruned if required.

3. There is a potential footpath in the NW corner of the site that links into Stewart Milne. Whilst

details of the exact alignment and construction methodology were not available, if installed it will need to be constructed to a no-dig design specification in order to comply with recommendations contained within para. 7.2 of BS5837: 2012. This will involve the use of a three dimensional cellular confinement system such as ‘Infraweb’. This is possible due to the area being level and containing no undulations. The footpath section within the site can be installed with a 75mm layer of plastic cells laid above the existing ground level and back filled with a free draining washed stone that contains no fines in order to help maintain adequate gaseous diffusion for tree roots below. The top dressing will be a porous asphalt or similar to be agreed by the client and the LPA. An example of the design can be found within Infragreen cross section drawing Ref: IG-SD-IW-PA-75 at Appendix 6.

4. Tree numbers 18 & 19 were not included in the topographical site survey, as such their

positions are plotted indicatively and the impact of development cannot be substantiated. Both trees appear to be on the site boundary and if crown reduced by approximately 30% could form attractive mature back drop to plot numbers 51-54.

5. The woodland outside the southern boundary (W4) is predominantly naturally colonised scrub

trees that have in many areas been coppiced in the past leaving multiple small diameter stems from the coppice stool. Assuming this management will continue into the future we can see no direct conflict with the adjacent dwellings.

6. The woodland to the north (W2, G3-G5) forms an attractive mature back drop to the plot

numbers 6-21 and screens the site well from residential dwellings located to the north. These trees are a real asset to the site providing a mature landscape feature that future occupiers will cherish. As they are north of the dwellings they are unlikely to cast significant shade to the rear gardens and the plots are set back far enough to ensure both trees and dwellings can coexist with no future pressure to fell of prune.



7

Photo 1 - Tree numbers 4-9 in NW corner of site

Photo 2 - Tree numbers 10-13

Photo 3 - Woodland along northern boundary



8

Photo 4 - Group 4 linier belt of Eucalyptus along boundary fence line

Photo 5 - Group 5, mature Large offering attractive backdrop to dwellings

Photo 6 - Woodland outside northern boundary viewed from east (Plot 16)



9

Photo 7 - Woodland outside southern boundary, predominantly small diameter scrub on boundary with larger trees sett well back within centre

Photo 8 - Small diameter multi-stemmed past coppice on edge of wooded copse that runs along southern boundary in front of plots 96-107

9.0 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE SCHEME

9.1 We advise that all proposed revisions having implications for trees should be referred to us for

review. 10.0 CONCLUSIONS

10.1 BS 5837: 2012 contains clear and current recommendations for a best practice approach to the

assessment, retention and protection of trees on development sites. The proposed development has followed this guidance by:

Seeking arboricultural advice and undertaking a phase 1 preliminary tree survey in order to inform the layout and design of the proposed development

Respecting the constraints posed to development of the site by high or moderate quality trees

Acting upon arboricultural advice throughout the design process in order to obtain the best development proposal whilst considering the current and future tree requirements

10.2 The protection of retained trees will be in accordance with recommendation contained within the

BS and as detailed on the Tree Protection Plan at Appendix 4.



10

11.0 LIMITING CONDITIONS

Unless stated otherwise: Information contained in this report covers only those trees that were examined and reflects the condition of those trees at the time of the inspection. The inspection is limited to visual examination of the subject trees from ground level only and without dissection, excavation, probing or coring. There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems or deficiencies of the subject trees may not arise in the future. This report has been prepared for the sole use and benefit of the client. Any liability of Tree Solutions shall not be extended to any third party. No part of this report can be reproduced without the authorisation of Tree Solutions Ltd.



11

Appendix One

Tree Survey Schedule

TREE SURVEY SCHEDULE (BS5837: 2012) SITE: LAND OFF MAES GWERN, MOLD, CH71XN SURVEYOR: A. HENDERSON

CLIENT: WATES C/O ATMOS CONSULTING ASSESSMENT DATE: 10 JANUARY 2017 PAGE 1 OF 7

BRIEF: ARBORICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT VIEWING CONDITIONS: GOOD

JOB REFERENCE: 17/AIA/FLINTS/33

TREE NO.

T - Tree G - Group H- Hedge

SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE

HEIGHT (m) + CROWN CLEARANCE/DIRECTION OF GROWTH (N.S.E.W)

RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY

& SUB-CATEGORY GRADING BS 5837

BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

T1

Oak

M

17

1S

4

5.5

5

1

650

G

Crown bias east due to close proximity to T2 (forms closed canopy)

E.R.C. 40

Remove dead wood

A2 7.8

191m²

T2

Sycamore

M 17

2N

4.5 4.5 5 5 830 M

Tip dieback in crown

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 10

312m²

T3

Sycamore

EM

16

3W

2

3

4

5

400

M

Self set tree with poor structural form

Tree of no value outside site boundary

E.R.C. 10

N/A

C2 4.8

72m²

T4

Oak

M

20

3E

6

8

10

8

1250

G

Dead wood in crown

Crown bias east

E.R.C. 40

Crown lift to allow easement for construction plant

A2 15

707m²

T5

Oak

M 20

4E

6 4 5 4 860 G

Dead wood in crown

E.R.C. 40

N/A

A2 10.3

335m²

T6

Oak

MD

In decline

Significant stems decay

E.R.C. 0

3rd party tree

U N/A

HEADINGS & ABBREVIATIONS TREE NO. REFERENCE NUMBER. REFER TO PLAN OR NUMBERED TAGS WHERE APPLICABLE (T = TREE, G = GROUP, H = HEDGE) SPECIES: COMMON NAME (LATIN NAMES AVAILABLE ON REQUEST) AGE RANGE/LIFE STAGE: Y = YOUNG, SM = SEMI MATURE, EM = EARLY MATURE, M = MATURE, PM = POST MATURE HEIGHT: ESTIMATED AND RECORDED IN METRES. APPROXIMATELY 1 IN 10 TREES ARE MEASURED USING A CLINOMETER AND THE REMAINDER ESTIMATED AGAINST THE MEASURED TREES CROWN SPREAD: MAXIMUM CROWN RADIUS MEASURED TO THE FOUR CARDINAL COMPASS POINTS FOR SINGLE SPECIMENS ONLY (MEASUREMENT FOR TREE GROUPS - MAXIMUM RADIUS OF THE GROUP) CROWN CLEARANCE & DIRECTION OF GROWTH: STEM DIA/MULTI-STEM DIA:

HEIGHT IN METERS OF CROWN CLEARANCE ABOVE ADJACENT GROUND LEVEL (TO INFORM ON GROUND CLEARANCE, CROWN/STEM RATIO AND SHADING) STEM DIAMETER - MEASURED AT APPROXIMATELY 1.5 METRES ABOVE GROUND LEVEL OR A COMBINATION OF STEMS FOR MULTI-STEMMED TREES

VITALITY: E.R.C. = ESTIMATED REMAINING CONTRIBUTION: BS 5837CATEGORY & SUB-CATEGORY GRADING: BS 5837 RADIUS & BS 5837 RPA:

A MEASURE OF PHYSIOLOGICAL CONDITION. D = DEAD, MD = MORIBUND, P = POOR, M = MODERATE, G = GOOD RELATIVE USEFUL LIFE EXPECTANCY (YEARS) A = HIGH QUALITY AND VALUE, B = MODERATE QUALITY AND VALUE, C = LOW QUALITY AND VALUE, U = UNSUITABLE FOR RETENTION (SUB-CATEGORY REFERS TO ARBORICULTURAL., LANDSCAPE AND CULTURAL/CONSERVATION VALUES) PROTECTIVE DISTANCE - RADIUS FROM THE CENTRE OF THE STEM TO THE LINE OF TREE PROTECTION (CONSTRUCTION EXCLUSION ZONE - CEZ) AND PROTECTIVE BARRIER ROOT PROTECTION AREA - BS 5837 (2012) ANNEX D (THE RECOMMENDATIONS STATE THAT THE RPA SHOULD BE CAPPED AT 707 M2) NOTE – ALL CALCULATIONS ROUNDED TO NEAREST DECIMAL





TREE NO.


SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE


RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY


BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

T7

Sycamore

M

17

4S

1.5

5.5

5

4

600

G

Minor dead wood in crown

E.R.C. 20+

N/A B2 7.2

163m²

T8

Sycamore M

17

3N

5

2

5

4

540

G

No significant defects

E.R.C. 20+

N/A B2 6.5

132m²

T9

Oak

FM

17

1.5S

6

6.5

6

7

1000

G

Snapped and hanging hazard beam to west (lowest limb)

Large diameter dead wood in crown

E.R.C. 40

Crown clean to removal all dead/dying/ hazardous limbs

A2 12

452m²

T10

Alder

M

16

2S

4

4

3

2

360

G

Cavity on stem to north

E.R.C. 20

3rd party tree - N/A

C1 4.3

59m²

T11

Horse Chestnut

EM

13

0N

6

4

4

5

460 450

(644)

P

Poor quality topped out tree of no value

E.R.C. 0


C2 7.7

188m²

T12

Oak

M

19

1S

7

8

8

10

1150

G

Stem to north failed leaving large tear out wound

large cavity on stem to NE at 2m & Se at 5m

E.R.C. 40

Crown reduce over site by 3m back to inner sub-lateral growth

A2 13.8

598m²

T13

Sycamore

EM

15

1S

2

4

2

3

370

G


E.R.C. 20


B2 4.4

62m²





TREE NO.


SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE


RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY


BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

T14

Larch

M

18

5S

9

6

6

3

560

G

No defects

E.R.C. 20


B2 6.7

142m²

T15

Pine

M

18

5S

2.5

5

5

5

610 G

Browsing damage at base

E.R.C. 20

N/A B2 7.3

168m²

T16

Larch

M 18

1.5S

4 7 6.5 2.5 670 G Stem & crown bias SE

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 8

203m²

T17

Larch

M 17

1S

2 3 4.5 2 440 M/G Browsing damage at base

Insignificant tree due to extensive woodland beyond

E.R.C. 20

Fell for development

B2 5.3

88m²

T18

Ash

M 18

1N

5 5 5 9 700 G Edge tree to woodland

Not visually prominent from any location outside boundary - no loss in amenity if removed

E.R.C. 20

Remove if within site ownership

B2 8.4

222m²

T19

Ash

M 19

1N

7 7 9 7 900 G Large tree with no significant defects

E.R.C. 40

N/A

A2 10.8

366m²

T20

Oak

M 17

0N

6 5 6 5 600 G Location plotted indicatively

Good quality tree

E.R.C. 40

N/A

A2 7.2

163m²





TREE NO.


SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE


RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY


BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

T21

Willow

(Crack)

PM P Partial root plate failure, evidence of lifting to west

Multiple crown failures - tree is hazardous

E.R.C. 0

Fell & grind out stump to prevent re-growth

U N/A

T22

Willow

(Crack)

FM 21

1N

6 8 7 6 900 M Ivy clad stem impeding inspection

Unsuitable species of tree to retain within close proximity to targets i.e. within residential development due to likelihood of extensive scaffold limb failures

Tree is reaching the end of its safe & useful life expectancy

E.R.C. 20

Recommend removing & grinding out stump to prevent re-growth

B2 10.8

366m²

G1

Alder

M

≤15

1N

4.5

4

4

4

≤670 G

Mature trees at top of slope

All Ivy clad impeding inspection

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 8

203m²

G2

Willow

(Goat)

M

≤15

0

200x2

100x3

(332)

M

Area of low grade scrub with multiple crown/stem failures

E.R.C. 10

Requires coppicing

C2 3.9

50m²

G3

Larch

M

≤18

1.5S

4

4.5

4.5

4

≤500 G

No visual defects

E.R.C. 20+

N/A

B2 6

113m²

G4

Eucalyptus

M

≤18

0.5S

4

4.5

3

3

≤450 G

Linier group planted along the boundary fence line

Attractive back drop to site

E.R.C. 20

N/A

A2 5.4

92m²





TREE NO.


SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE


RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY


BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

G5

Larch

M

≤18

1S

4

4.5

3

3

≤450 G

Linier group planted along the boundary fence line

Attractive back drop to site

E.R.C. 20+

N/A

A2 5.4

92m²

G6

Oak Alder

EM

≤13

0

2 2 2 2 ≤250 G

Small diameter trees located outside site boundary

No defects

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 3

28m²

G7

Pine Spruce

EM/M

≤15

3

3

3

4

≤400 G

Small copse on downward slope outside boundary

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 4.8

72m²

G8

Ash 80% Oak

Spruce Hawthorn

SM

≤12

0

≤200 G

Linear group planted of upward slope from playing fields

No management since planting

E.R.C. 20+

3rd party trees

B2 2.4

18m²

G9

Hazel (Coppice) Holly

M

≤7

0

2

2

2

2

50x 20

(224)

G

Past coppice

E.R.C. 10

Remove for development

C2 2.7

23m²

G10

Oak

EM

≤8

1S

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

≤300 G

Two small trees outside boundary fence

Well established & have future potential

E.R.C. 20+

N/A

C2 3.6

41m²

G11

Elm

EM

11

1W

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.5

≤300 M

Row of trees within boundary hedge

Many showing evidence of Dutch Elm Disease

E.R.C. 0

Remove as part of boundary hedge restoration

C2 3.6

41m²





TREE NO.


SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE


RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY


BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

G12

Sycamore Ash

Alder Poplar

M

≤20

4

4

4

4

≤400 M/G

Wooded copse on upward sloping embankment outside site boundary

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 4.8

72m²

G13

Elm

EM

MD/D

Dead/dying Elm scrub

Remove

U N/A

G14

Ash Oak Lime

Maple

EM

≤15

1W

4 4 3 4 ≤300 G

Linear group of unmanaged trees forming a close canopy

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 3.6

41m²

G15

Pine Alder

M

≤18

1W

4

4

4

4

≤550 G

Trees located outside eastern boundary

No access to survey

E.R.C. 20+

N/A

B2 6.6

137m²

G16

Holly Elm

M

12

2

2

2

2

≤200 G

Overgrown hedge

E.R.C. 10

N/A

C2 2.4

18m²

G17

Alder

EM

16

3

2

2

2

150x7

(397)

G

Small copse of multi-stemmed trees from past coppice

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 4.7

71m²

G18

Willow

(Crack)

EM

≤16

1N

7

5

7

6

≤350 G

Insignificant trees on edge of woodland

E.R.C. 10

Coppice

C2 4.2

55m²

G19

Alder

M

≤15

0

5

5

4

4

≤450 G

Boundary trees

Trees to east dead & needs to be removed

E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 5.4

92m²





TREE NO.


SPECIES

(COMMON NAME)

AGE


RADIAL CROWN SPREAD

(m)

N S E W

ST

EM

/

MU

LT

I-ST

EM

* D

IA.(m

m)

VITALITY

COMMENTS

MANAGEMENT

CATEGORY


BS 5837 RADIUS

(m)

RPA (m2)

G20

Alder Willow

EM

≤15

≤300 M/G


E.R.C. 20

N/A

B2 3.6

41m²

W1

Ash Willow Birch Hazel

Hawthorn

EM

≤15

1W

≤220 G

Linier woodland located along southern boundary

Predominantly small diameter Ash poles

No signs of any management

E.R.C. 20+

Requires thinning out to leave best stems to establish to maturity

B2 2.6

22m²

W2

Willow Alder Pine

Mountain Ash Larch

Sycamore Birch

EM/

M

≤17

1W

≤300 G

Sothern edge trees to established woodland located outside northern boundary

E.R.C. 40

N/A

A2 3.6

41m²

W3

Willow Alder Ash

Maple

M

≤18

≤500 M

Unmanaged woodland and scrub

E.R.C. 20+

Needs appropriate management

B2 6

113m²

W4

Hazel Ash

Mountain Ash Alder

EM

≤16

≤250 G

Unmanaged woodland of small diameter stems at 0.5-1m centres

E.R.C. 10

As W3

B2 3

28m²

H1

Holly Blackthorn Hawthorn

M

≤4 ≤100 P

Unmanaged hedgerows

E.R.C. 10

Coppice

C2 1.2

5m²

Table 1 Cascade chart for tree quality assessment

Category and definition Criteria (including subcategories where appropriate) Identificationon plan

Trees unsuitable for retention (see Note)Category U

Those in such a conditionthat they cannot realisticallybe retained as living trees inthe context of the currentland use for longer than10 years

• Trees that have a serious, irremediable, structural defect, such that their early loss is expected due to collapse,including those that will become unviable after removal of other category U trees (e.g. where, for whateverreason, the loss of companion shelter cannot be mitigated by pruning)

• Trees that are dead or are showing signs of significant, immediate, and irreversible overall decline

• Trees infected with pathogens of significance to the health and/or safety of other trees nearby, or very lowquality trees suppressing adjacent trees of better quality

NOTE Category U trees can have existing or potential conservation value which it might be desirable to preserve;see 4.5.7.

See Table 2

1 Mainly arboricultural qualities 2 Mainly landscape qualities 3 Mainly cultural values,including conservation

Trees to be considered for retentionCategory A

Trees of high quality with anestimated remaining lifeexpectancy of at least40 years

Trees that are particularly goodexamples of their species, especially ifrare or unusual; or those that areessential components of groups orformal or semi-formal arboriculturalfeatures (e.g. the dominant and/orprincipal trees within an avenue)

Trees, groups or woodlands of particularvisual importance as arboricultural and/orlandscape features

Trees, groups or woodlandsof significant conservation,historical, commemorative orother value (e.g. veterantrees or wood-pasture)

See Table 2

Category B

Trees of moderate qualitywith an estimated remaininglife expectancy of at least20 years

Trees that might be included incategory A, but are downgradedbecause of impaired condition (e.g.presence of significant thoughremediable defects, includingunsympathetic past management andstorm damage), such that they areunlikely to be suitable for retention forbeyond 40 years; or trees lacking thespecial quality necessary to merit thecategory A designation

Trees present in numbers, usually growingas groups or woodlands, such that theyattract a higher collective rating than theymight as individuals; or trees occurring ascollectives but situated so as to make littlevisual contribution to the wider locality

Trees with materialconservation or othercultural value

See Table 2

Category C

Trees of low quality with anestimated remaining lifeexpectancy of at least10 years, or young trees witha stem diameter below150 mm

Unremarkable trees of very limitedmerit or such impaired condition thatthey do not qualify in higher categories

Trees present in groups or woodlands, butwithout this conferring on themsignificantly greater collective landscapevalue; and/or trees offering low or onlytemporary/transient landscape benefits

Trees with no materialconservation or othercultural value

See Table 2

BR

ITISHSTA

ND

AR

DB

S5837:2012

©Th

eB

ritishStan

dard

sIn

stitutio

n2012

•9

Alistair

Highlight

Alistair

Highlight

Alistair

Highlight

Alistair

Highlight



12

Appendix Two

Preliminary Tree Constraints Plan

SEP2

SEP3

SEP4

SEP5

DF1

DF2

DF3

DF4

DF5

DF5A

DF6

DF7

DF8

SEP4A

ML1

ML2

SEP1

SEP5

DF2

DF3

DF4

DF5

DF5A

DF6

DF7

DF8

D1

D1A

D2

D1B

D3

D4

D5

D6

D6A

D7 D8

D7A

D7B

D9 D9A

D9C

D9D

D9E

D9G

D50

D51D52

D53

D54

D55

D56

D60

D59

D60A

D57

D58

D61

D62

D63

D3

RE2

RE1

ML1

ML1A

ML2

ML3

ML4

E323169.613N362938.645

E323225.541

E323223.128

E323289.005

N362908.967

N362955.304

N362923.266

N362989.753E323336.016

N362982.742E323396.449

N362941.192E323433.043

N362956.056E323190.003

N362920.823E323189.696

N362898.483E323330.734

N362843.625E323352.521

N362881.643E323399.060

N362836.803E323434.636

DEAD ALDER

STUMP

STUMP

1

2

3

4Stump

Stump

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Sm Sycamore

14

15

16

17

Poor quality Willow scrub

21

G1*

G2*

G3

G4

G5

G6*

G7*

Sm Hawthorn (H3, D150mm)

Sm Oak (H8, D100mm)

G18*

Dead Alder

G19*

G20

W1*

W2*

W4*

22

23

20*

5m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m

Crown

Spread

Tree

Number

Category

Root

Protection

Area

13

Category A

(High Quality)

Category B

(Moderate Quality)

Do not scale from this drawing all dimensions to be

checked on site.

The copyright of this document resides with Tree

Solutions unless assigned in writing by the company

Job Ref:

Drawn By:

Scale: Date:

Revision:

LI

1:500 @ A1 January 2017

-

Title:

Tree Constraints Plan

Project:

Maes Gwern, Mold, CH7 1XN

Client:

Wates C/o Atmos Consulting

Root Protection Area

Modified to Account for

Site Features

Legend

17/AIA/FLINTS/33 01

Drawing No:

E: [email protected]

W: www.tree-solutions.co.uk

T: 01244 389114

M: 07766 774508

Category C

(Low Quality)

Category U

(Dead/Dying/In Decline)

N

W E

S

NOTE: Trees marked with # have approximate

measurements as outside site boundary with no

access

NOTE: Tree/group numbers marked

with an * have approximate locations

Drawing sheets

S01

S02

SEP5

SEP6

SEP7

SEP8

SEP9

SEP8

DF8

SEP5

SEP6

SEP8SEP8

DF8

D9 D9A

D10

D9C

D9B

D11

D12D12A

D12B

D13

D60

D59

D60A

D61

D62

D63

D64D65

D66

D67

ML4

N362989.753E323336.016

N362982.742E323396.449

N362941.192E323433.043

N362910.130E323457.278

N362879.990E323547.344

N362898.483E323330.734

N362843.625E323352.521

N362881.643E323399.060

N362836.803E323434.636

N362857.119E323491.868

N362865.569E323543.967

N362890.240E323602.541

17

18

19

G5

G6*

G7*


Sm Oak (H8, D100mm)

G8*

G9* Dead Ash

G10

G11*

G12*

G13*

G14*

G15*#

G16*

G17*

W3*

W4*

H1*

20*

5m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m

Crown

Spread

Tree

Number

Category

Root

Protection

Area

13

Category A

(High Quality)

Category B

(Moderate Quality)


checked on site.



Job Ref:

Drawn By:

Scale: Date:

Revision:

LI

1:500 @ A1 January 2017

-

Title:

Tree Constraints Plan

Project:


Client:




Site Features

Legend

17/AIA/FLINTS/33 01

Drawing No:



T: 01244 389114

M: 07766 774508

Category C

(Low Quality)

Category U


N

W E

S



access



Drawing sheets

S01

S02



13

Appendix Three

Impact Assessment Plan



14

Appendix Four

Tree Protection Plan

A

B

B

A

9

1

6

1

0

2

S

A

N

D

Y

G

R

O

V

E

T

R

A

D

I

T

I

O

N

A

L

E

S

T

A

T

E

R

O

A

D

2m WIDE PRIVATE FOORPATH ABUTING PUBLIC

OPEN SPACE AND EXISTING WATERCOURSE TO

SOUTHERN BOUNDARY

V

I

E

W

V

I

E

W

VIE

W

3

5

6

T

2

T

2

T

R

A

D

I

T

I

O

N

A

L

E

S

T

A

T

E

R

O

A

D

T

ra

d

itio

n

a

l E

s

ta

te

R

o

a

d

8

T2

M

E

W

S

C

O

U

R

T

V

I

S

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

V

I

S

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

T

2

26

2

5

2

4

58

59

60

61

68

69

70

STEWART MILNE

DEVELOPMENT

E

X

IS

T

IN

G

G

R

A

V

E

L

F

O

O

T

P

A

T

H

O

U

T

F

A

L

L

P

O

S

I

T

I

O

N

T

O

B

E

L

O

O

K

E

D

A

T

B

Y

S

T

R

U

C

T

U

R

A

L

E

N

G

I

N

E

E

R

T

1

2

2

2

3

T

1

T

1

T1

T

3

T

4

T

3

T

9

T

9

T4

T4

T

7

T

4

T4

9

28

27

7

57

T4

21

T

4

T

3

T

2

T

6

T

2

T

2

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

134

T2

T2

133

132

131

T

6

T

6

T

6

5

6

TU

RN

IN

G H

EA

D

125

123

124

T6

122

T6

T6

T6

P

R

IV

A

T

E

D

R

IV

E

B

i

n

s

t

o

r

e

T10

114-119

T10

107

B

i

n

s

t

o

r

e

108-113

T10

Bin

sto

re

Bin

sto

re

17

1

8

T

7

T

7

T

8

T

8

T

9

15

1

9

T

7

2

0

T

7

1

0

T7

1

1

T

2

12

T

7

T

2

T

7

T7

62

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

3

T

3

T

3

7

7

7

8

81

80

82

79

T

9

16

75

76

T

2

T

1

T

7

T

7

T

8

T

8

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

8

T8

T8

T7

V

I

S

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

T

7

T

7

T8

T8

Private Drive

T6 T6

T6

T6

T

6

T

6

T

6

T

6

1

3

1

4

63

64

65

66

67

71

72

73

74

87

88

89

90

91

92

95

94

120

121

126

127

129

128

130

106

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

V

I

E

W

S

1

2

T

5

T

3

T

9

AREA TO BE LANDSCAPED

POTENTIAL FOOTPATH LINK THROUGH

TO STEWART MILNE - FURTHER

CONSULTATION REQUIRED

P

r

o

p

o

s

e

d

S

u

b

s

t

a

t

i

o

n

4

T

1

0

T

1

0

9

6

-

1

0

1

T10

159

160

1

5

2

1

5

7

158

Private Drive

Bin

sto

re

T11

T11

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

T

9

T

U

R

N

I

N

G

H

E

A

D

102

103

104

105

135

136137

138

139

140 - 1

45

146

147

148

149

151

T

8

T

8

T

8

T

8

Pond

ESTIMATED POSITION OF FAULT LINE

FFORDD HENGOED

Car

park

ing for

Apart

ments

Car p

arkin

g fo

r A

partm

ents

C

a

r

p

a

r

k

i

n

g

f

o

r

A

p

a

r

t

m

e

n

t

s

T2

T1

1

5

5

1

5

6

T

4

154

T

3

1

5

3

T

2

T2

93

T2

T2

P

riv

a

te

D

riv

e

P

riv

a

te

D

riv

e

150

F

F

L

1

3

5

.

5

0

0

m

F

F

L

1

3

5

.

3

0

0

m

F

F

L

1

3

5

.

3

0

0

m

F

F

L

1

3

5

.

3

0

0

m

F

F

L

1

3

5

.

3

0

0

m

FFL134.500m

FFL134.500m

FFL134.500m

FF

L134.8

50m

F

F

L

1

3

4

.7

5

0

m

FFL134.250m

FFL134.200m

FFL133.900m

F

F

L134.100m

FF

L134.100m

FFL134. 100m

F

F

L

1

3

4

.2

5

0

m

F

F

L

1

3

3

.5

0

0

m

FFL133.500m

FF

L133.5

00m

FFL134.200m

FFL134.200m

FFL133.900mFFL134.200m

FFL134.650m

FFL134.650m

FFL134.800m

FFL134.800m

FFL134.450m

FFL134.185m

FFL134.200m

FFL134.200m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.800m

FFL133.300m

FFL133.300m

FFL133.100m

FFL133.100m

FFL134.850m

FFL134. 550m

FFL134. 550m

FFL134. 300m

FFL134. 300m

FFL134.000m

FFL133.600m

FFL133.400m

FFL133.400m

FFL133.100m

FFL133.100m

FFL132.750m

FFL132.750m

FFL129.750m

FFL129.750m

FFL132.000m

FFL131.250m

FFL130.900m

FFL131.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.700m

F

F

L133.700m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL135.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.000m

FFL133.500m

FFL134.000m

F

F

L134.500m

FFL134.000m

T

5

F

F

L

1

3

5

.

5

0

0

m

FFL133.500m

T

6

T

6

T

6

T

8

POTENTIAL COMMUNITY

ORCHARD / GROWING

AREA

84

85

86

T9

FFL132.700m

T12

T12

FFL132.000m

T

6

F

F

L

1

3

3

.5

0

0

m

T

6

T

6

F

F

L

1

3

3

.5

0

0

m

T

4

T

4

F

F

L

1

3

3

.

8

0

0

m

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

1

2

3

4Stump

Stump

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

Sm Sycamore

14

15

16

Poor quality Willow scrub

G1*

G2*

G3

G4

G5

G6*

G7*


Sm Oak (H8, D100mm)

G19*

G20

W1*

W2*

W4*

20*

22

5m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m

Crown

Spread

Tree

Number

Category

Root

Protection

Area

13

Category A

(High Quality)

Category B

(Moderate Quality)


checked on site.



Job Ref:

Drawn By:

Scale: Date:

Revision:

1:500 @ A1

Title:


Project:


Client:




Site Features

Legend

17/AIA/FLINTS/33 03

Drawing No:



T: 01244 389114

M: 07766 774508

Category C

(Low Quality)

Category U


N

W E

S



access



Drawing sheets

S01

S02

Tree Protection Fencing

LI & AM

March 2017

A

Ground Protection

No-Dig Surface Installation Areas -

see Method Statement

B

B

M

AE

S G

W

ER

N

El Sub Sta

Pond

V

I

E

W

VIE

W

V

I

E

W

V

I

S

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

Playing Field

PROPOSED FOOTPATH TO

ACCESS PLAYING FIELD.

THIS COULD ALSO BE

USED TO REDUCE TRAVEL

TO THE LOCAL SCHOOl.

T

2

T

2

T

R

A

D

I

T

I

O

N

A

L

E

S

T

A

T

E

R

O

A

D

V

I

S

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

T

2

26

2

5

2

4

58

59

60

61

68

69

70

T

1

2

2

2

3

T

1

T

1

T

3

T

9

T

9

T

7

T

4

T4

T

6

T

6

T

6

T

6

40

33

32

31

28

27

57

T4

21

P

U

B

L

I

C

O

P

E

N

S

P

A

C

E

0

.

1

8

H

A

-

0

.

4

4

A

C

R

E

S

5

5

5

6

TU

RN

IN

G H

EA

D

P

R

IV

A

T

E

D

R

IV

E

B

i

n

s

t

o

r

e

T10

114-119

T10

107

B

i

n

s

t

o

r

e

108-113

T10

Bin

sto

re

Bin

sto

re

T

7

1

9

2

0

T

7

T7

T

2

T

7

T7

62

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

3

T

3

T

3

7

7

7

8

81

80

82

7

9

75

76

T

U

R

N

I

N

G

H

E

A

D

T

2

T

7

T

7

T

8

T

8

T

7

T

8

T

8

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

2

T

7

T

7

T

8

T

8

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

7

T

7

V

I

S

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

T

7

T

7

38

39

29

30

34

35

36

37

63

64

65

66

67

71

73

74

83

87

88

89

90

91

92

95

94

106

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

P

r

o

p

o

s

e

d

S

u

b

s

t

a

t

i

o

n

T

1

0

T

1

0

9

6

-

1

0

1

T10

T

9

T

U

R

N

I

N

G

H

E

A

D

102

103

104

105

T

8

T

8

Pond / Bog



Existing building

M

e

w

s

C

o

u

r

t

Car

parkin

g for

Apart

ments

C

a

r

p

a

r

k

i

n

g

f

o

r

A

p

a

r

t

m

e

n

t

s

T

9

P

r

i

v

a

t

e

D

r

i

v

e

T2

93

FFL134.185m

FFL134.200m

FFL134.200m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.800m

FFL133.300m

FFL133.300m

FFL133.100m

FFL133.100m

FFL134. 300m

FFL134. 300m

FFL134.000m

FFL133.600m

FFL133.400m

FFL133.400m

FFL133.100m

FFL133.100m

FFL132.750m

FFL132.750m

FFL131.700m

FFL132.450m

FFL132.450m

FFL131.000m

FFL130.500m

FFL129.000m

FFL129.500m

FFL129.750m

FFL129.750m

FFL132.000m

FFL131.250m

FFL130.900m

FFL131.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.700m

F

F

L133.700m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL135.500m

FFL133.500m

FFL134.000m

FFL134.000m

T

6

T

6

T

6

T

8

84

85

86

T9

FFL132.700m

T12

T12

FFL132.000m

T

6

F

F

L

1

3

3

.5

0

0

m

T

6

T

6

F

F

L

1

3

3

.5

0

0

m

T

4

T

9

T

9

T

1

T

1

T

1

T

5

T

1

T

4

T

4

T

1

T

1

T

5

T

4

45

43

44

47

48

51

42

52

46

53

FFL128.100m

FFL127.500m

FFL128.000m

FFL127.800m

FFL127.500m

FFL127.000m

FFL127.000m

FFL127.000m

FFL127.000m

FFL127.000m

FFL127.000m

49

FFL127.000m

50

54

FFL127.000m

Gateway

Feature

T

4

F

F

L

1

3

3

.

8

0

0

m

T

1

F

F

L

1

2

8

.

1

0

0

m

41

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

V

IS

T

A

T

O

W

A

R

D

S

P

R

O

P

E

R

T

Y

F

R

O

N

T

A

G

E

G5

G6*

G7*


Sm Oak (H8, D100mm)

G8*

G10

G12*

G13*

G14*

G15*#

G16*

G17*

W3*

W4*

20*

19*

18*

5m 10m 20m 30m 40m 50m

N

W E

S

Drawing sheets

S01

S02


checked on site.



Job Ref:

Drawn By:

Scale: Date:

Revision:

LI & AM

1:500 @ A1

March 2017

A

Title:


Project:


Client:


17/AIA/FLINTS/33 03

Drawing No:



T: 01244 389114

M: 07766 774508

Crown

Spread

Tree

Number

Category

Root

Protection

Area

13

Category A

(High Quality)

Category B

(Moderate Quality)



Site Features

Legend

Category C

(Low Quality)

Category U




access



Tree Protection Fencing

Ground Protection

No-Dig Surface Installation Areas -

see Method Statement



15

Appendix Five

Tree Protective Measures/Method Statement



16

SEQUENCE OF OPERATIONS

From commencement of the above development, the following methodology shall be implemented in the manner and sequence described:

1. Tree Surgery Works 2. Erect temporary protective fencing 3. Install ground protection boards 4. Main construction phase 5. Excavation of turning head within RPA of T4 6. Installation of no-dig footpath 7. Removal of temporary fencing 8. Landscaping within RPA’s 9. Arboricultural site supervision

1. Tree Surgery Works

1. Before the erection of the temporary protective fencing, all tree removal shall be implemented in accordance with the Tree Survey Schedule at Appendix 1

2. All possible efforts must be made to prevent damage to retained trees including potential root incursion or compaction caused by vehicle access.

3. All arboricultural works shall conform to the recommendations of BS 3998 (2010) ‘Recommendations for Tree Work’

4. All operatives shall be equipped with and use personal protective equipment (PPE) in accordance with current Health & Safety Executive current directives and industry codes of practice.

5. Performance of all arboricultural operations and use of equipment shall be in accordance with current Health & Safety Executive current directives and industry codes of practice

2. Erect Temporary Tree Protective Fencing

1. Prior to commencement of any construction, preparation, excavation or material deliveries the

main contractor shall erect the temporary protective fencing as detailed in the ‘Tree Protection Specification’ and in the location indicated on the Tree Protection Plan.

2. Tree Solutions are to be given 5 days written notice as soon as all protective fencing has been

erected in order to inspect the specification and location. An inspection report will be completed and returned to the LPA Tree Officer for approval. Any damage occurring to protective fencing during the demolition or construction phase shall be made good by the main contractor

3. Install ground protection within RPA of tree number 12, 18 & 19

1. The ground protection measures must be capable of supporting the expected loads and evenly distribute the carried weight over the track width of any vehicles that will use the access route in order to avoiding rutting, compaction and damage to the soil.

2. The method of protecting the ground for tracked construction traffic movements within the RPA will involve the use of a high density polyethylene track boards or bog mats laid across the RPA that extends beyond the protective fencing location butted together to form a continuous line as indicated on the Tree Protection Plan. The boards will be fixed in place by construction tie-rods to avoid any displacement details of which are to be approved for use by Tree Solutions and the LPA before installation commences.

3. Temporary ground protection materials shall be delivered and moved by low impact tracked machinery and installed by hand.

4. The ground beneath any protection boarding will be left undisturbed and will be protected with a porous geotextile fabric and side butting scaffold boards on a 100mm compressible layer such of sharp sand

5. Boards will remain in-situ until the construction of the building has been completed



17

Plate 1 protective boards & scaffolding to be installed

4. Main Construction Phase

1. Tree protective fencing to be erected prior to any construction plant or materials entering the site 2. Tree protective barriers in accordance with BS 5837: 2012 will be erected to prevent damage to

the tree stems and any movement of plant with the RPA 3. There shall be no storage of construction material, site parking, site accommodation or

equipment in any area designated as the Root Protection Area (RPA) and Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ) and enclosed by Temporary Protective Fencing

4. No materials that are likely to have an adverse effect on tree health such as oil, bitumen or cement will be stored or discharged within 10 metres of the trunk of a tree that is to be retained. No fires will be lit

5. The site agent shall supervise deliveries by self-loading crane, with vehicles positioned in such a manner that retained trees are not at risk of damage

Cement Mixing

The cement mixer will be laid on top of plywood boards in a position outside the RPA of any trees. The mixer will be kept in this position throughout all development work. Avoiding Damage to Stems and Branches

Care shall be taken when planning site operations in proximity to trees to ensure that wide or tall loads or plant with booms, jibs and counterweights can operate without coming into contact with retained trees. Such contact can result in serious injury resulting in safe retention impossible

On Site Storage of Spoil and Building Materials

Prior to and during all site construction works no spoil will be stored and no cement mixing will take place within the Root Protection Area of any tree on or adjacent to the site even if proposed site work is to be within the crown spread. Any encroachment within this protected area will only be with the prior agreement of the LPA Arboricultural Officer



18

5. Excavation of Turning Head within RPA of T4

The section of road that encroaches within the RPA of tree number 4 will be excavated by hand digging or by use of an ‘Airspade’ under the direct supervision of the project arboricultural consultant. The use of mechanical excavation plant is prohibited. The following steps will be adhered to in order to minimise damage:

1. After careful removal of the turf surface digging must proceed with hand tools. Clumps of roots less than 25mm in diameter (including fibrous roots) should be retained in situ without damage. Throughout the excavation works great care should be taken to protect the bark around the roots.

2. All roots greater than 25mm diameter should be preserved and worked around. These roots must not be severed without first consulting the owner of the tree or the local authority tree officer. If after consultation severance is unavoidable, roots must be cut back using a sharp tool to leave the smallest wound.

3. Fine roots are vulnerable to desiccation once they are exposed to the air. Larger roots have a bark layer which provides some protection against desiccation and temperature change. The greatest risk to these roots occurs when there are rapid fluctuations in air temperature around them e.g. frost and extremes of heat. It is therefore important to protect exposed roots where a trench is to be left open overnight where there is a risk of frost. Roots, whist exposed, shall be wrapped in dry (winter) or wet (summer), clean Hessian sacking to prevent desiccation and to protect from rapid temperature changes prior to backfilling. Exposed roots shall be pruned back to a side branch, by use of a sharp saw or secateurs by the project arboricultural consultant and not construction personnel.

Backfilling trench

1. Without prejudice to the requirements relating to the specification of materials and the standards

of workmanship, backfilling should be carefully carried out to avoid direct damage to roots and excessive compaction of the soil around them.

2. The backfill should, where possible, include the placement of an inert granular material mixed with top soil or sharp sand (not builder’s sand) around the roots. This should allow the soil to be compacted for resurfacing without damage to the roots securing a local aerated zone enabling the root to survive in the longer term. Backfilling should be carried out using the excavated soil. This should not be compacted but lightly “tamped” and left slightly proud of the surrounding surface to allow natural settlement. Other materials should not be incorporated into the backfill

6. Installation of ‘No-Dig’ Footpath

1. Upon completion of all development work and removal of associated plant and material from site, the proposed new pedestrian footpath within the RPA of tree number 4 & 5 and as indicated with a blue cross hatch on the tree protection plan shall be constructed using a no-dig three dimensional cellular confinement system in accordance with the engineers and manufacturers recommendations see drawing at Appendix 6.

2. Construction shall ideally be undertaken in dry weather when ground is driest and least prone to compaction

3. Ground vegetation should be killed using a translocated herbicide such as glyphosate. To prevent severe oxygen depletion in the soil during the process of decomposition, all dead organic material shall be removed

4. All major protrusions such as rocks and demolition material shall be removed minimizing ground disturbance. All hollows will be filled with sharp sand

5. Permeable matting will then be laid and the cellular confinement system laid on top and pegged in place.

6. The cellular confinement system will then be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s guidelines using no-fines aggregate. Fill the cells working from the area furthest from the tree first. Further filling should be carried out using the filled Cellweb/Infraweb as a platform

7. Edging will be constructed with tantalised boards attached to pegs driven into the ground. Pegs should be long enough to give adequate support during construction

8. Install a permeable wearing course, e.g. resin bonded gravel placed on the aggregate. 9. Tree Solutions will be responsible for monitoring all excavation works and issuing a certificate of

practical completion 10. Under no circumstances is limestone aggregate to be used



19

7. Remove all Temporary Tree Protective Fencing

1. Tree Protective fencing will only be removed upon completion of all construction work and once all machinery associated with the works has left site.

2. The tree protection fencing shall not be removed until written confirmation has been received from the Local Planning Authority that it is acceptable to do so.

8. Landscaping within RPA of Trees

1. There shall be no rotovation of ground within any area designated as a Root Protection Area

(RPA) and Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ) and enclosed by Temporary Protective Fencing. 2. No hard landscaping works or excavation for cables or any other service should be installed

within the Root Protection Area (RPA) and Construction Exclusion Zone (CEZ) without the written consent of the LPA

9. ARBORICULTURAL SITE SUPERVISION

1 The erection of all tree protection measures outlined in this AMS and as indicated on the Tree

Protection Plan will be inspected by the contract Arboricultural Consultant immediately after erection. Photographic evidence of the location and specification of all protective fencing will be forwarded to the LPA Tree Officer upon completion.

2 All proposed work within any designated RPA will be overseen by contract Arboricultural Consultant with photographic records taken and signed inspection report emailed direct to the LPA for approval

3 The contract Arboricultural Consultant to make visits to site to inspect all tree protection measures during all key development work within close proximity to retained trees

Useful Contacts

Arboricultural Consultant LPA Consultant Forestry Officer Name: Alistair Henderson (Tree Solutions Ltd) Name: Stuart Body Tel: 01244 389114 Tel: 01352 703264

Mobile: 07766 774508 Email: [email protected]

TREE PROTECTIVE FENCING

1 Before the commencement of any site excavations and subsequent construction works (other than those set out in the schedule of tree works contained in this document), protective fencing will be erected as detailed on the Tree Protection Plan and as specified below. The LPA Tree Officer will be given 5 days notice upon completion of the fencing in order to inspect and approve prior to the commencement of any site works.

2 The fencing will consist of a scaffold framework in accordance with Figure 2 of BS 5837 – 2012 (illustration below) comprising a metal framework, both vertical and horizontal, well braced to resist impacts. Vertical tubes will be spaced at a maximum interval of 3m. Onto this, weldmesh panels shall be securely fixed with wire or scaffold clamps. Weldmesh panels on rubber or concrete feet are not considered resistant to impact and for this reason will not be used. The site manager or other suitably qualified appointed person will be responsible for inspecting the protective fencing on a daily basis; any damage to the fencing or breaches of the fenced area will

be rectified immediately. 3 Clearly legible weatherproof signage, stating “Protected Trees – Exclusion Zone” shall be

attached to the fencing 1.5m from the ground, facing out of the Tree Protection Zone located at regular intervals along the fence line

4 The fencing will remain in place until completion of all site works and then only removed when all site traffic is removed from site

5 Other than works detailed within this method statement or approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA), no works including storage or dumping of materials shall take place within the exclusion zones defined by the protective fencing.

[email protected]



20

Protective Fencing Detail

1. Magenta - Trees



21

Appendix Six

Proposed 'No-Dig' Footpath Infragreen example cross section drawings

Ref: IG-SD-IW-PA-75

arboricultural impact assessment/method statement land off

Documents