tree management consulting llp - cala homes/media/files/planning/barton-farm/... · selective...

Tree Management Consulting LLP 21 Burpham Lane Guildford Surrey GU4 7LN Tel: 01483 532786 Fax: 01483 534836 E-mail: [email protected]

Cala Homes (South) Ltd

Barton Farm

Andover Road Winchester Hampshire

ARBORICULTURAL REPORT

November 2009

Ref: 09060R

Arboricultural Report November 2009 Barton Farm, Andover Road, Winchester

Page: 2 Page: 2

Instructions

We are instructed to provide a qualitative assessment of the groups of trees at this site and

assess the impact of a proposed new road layout on existing trees. These proposals have

been prepared in accordance with the recommendations of BS5837:2005, other relevant

standards, codes of practice and government circular advice. Attached are my tree survey

schedules and plans, which have been colour-coded to indicate the condition of individual

and groups of trees. Client: Cala Homes (South) Ltd

Burgan House The Causeway Staines Middlesex TW18 3PR

Survey Date: August 2003 July 2004 14 October 2008 26 October 2009

Surveyed By: R D D Grainger DipArb(RFS) MICFor FArborA Our Ref: 09060R Contents

1 Tree Survey 2 Proposed New Road Layout 3 Conclusions

Attachments Group Tree Survey Schedule – 09060GS Group Tree Survey Plan – TMC-09060-GS Access Tree Survey Schedule – 09060S

New Road layout Plans – TMC-09060-L Areas A & B – Andover Road (south) & Stoney Lane Access Area C - Link Road from Andover Road Area D - Andover Road (north) Access

Area E - Beech Shelterbelt 1 Group Tree Survey 1.1 I re-surveyed all significant groups of trees at the site on 14 October 2008. This

survey was undertaken in accordance with the guidance of BS5837:2005 'British


Page: 3 Page: 3

Standard Guide for Trees in Relation to Construction'. The groups of trees were

graded using the categories prescribed in the Standard and reflect the general

condition of each group and its suitability for retention within residential development.

The group grading is not indicative of all the individual trees in each group, which may

contain trees of higher or lower grades. Furthermore, with the exception of the

proposed accesses, the condition and safety of individual trees within the groups has

not been assessed.

1.2 The group tree survey is attached (ref: 09060GS) together with a plan indicating tree

group locations (TMC-09060-GS). This plan has also been colour-coded in

accordance with the Standard.

1.3 Groups of trees in the high category (A – green) are the best groups on the site and

should be retained where possible. The moderate category groups (B - blue) are also

suitable for retention. Groups in the low category (C - grey) can be retained but the

Standard advises that trees in this category will only usually be retained where they

are not a significant constraint on development. Any groups in the remove category

(R - red) should be removed in any event. Trees in this category will normally be

exempt from a tree preservation order.

1.4 The trees are mostly located adjacent to the site boundaries and include trees on

highway and railway land and within the gardens of adjoining properties to the south.

In addition, there is a shelterbelt running from east to west across the middle of the

site

1.5 West Boundary

The trees along this boundary are mostly in the highway verge and include large

mature sycamore (G39) and several groups (G25, G26, G27 & G28) comprising

mainly sycamore, Norway maple, ash and field maple. The large mature sycamores

(G39) are mainly in the moderate category (Code B – blue) but, as highway trees they

are drawing towards the end of their safe life expectancy. A number have already


Page: 4 Page: 4

been removed and those remaining will need regular tree surgery to maintain them in

a safe condition.

1.5 Apart from the highway planting (G25, G26, G27 & G28), additional self-seeded trees

and other vegetation have grown around the planted trees to form a dense

impenetrable thicket. Selective thinning to allow more light and space for the better

quality trees to develop into more significant specimens would be beneficial.

1.6 North Boundary

With the exception of a group of beech trees (G32), the trees along the western part of

this boundary (G29, G31 & G33) are mainly small hedgerow species.

1.7 The group of 4 beech trees (G32) are well established young trees with the potential

to develop into significant specimens. Future management should include the

removal of one or two of the trees to allow those remaining to develop unrestricted.

1.8 Within the group at the eastern end of this boundary (G35) are some good quality

beech which, individually, would be graded in the high category (Code A). Again,

selective thinning around the better quality specimens would allow their proper

development. In addition, there is a group of young self-seeded ash (G36) on the

railway embankment leading up to the bridge.

1.9 East Boundary The trees along this boundary are all outside the site, on railway land (G18, G19, G20,

G37 & G38).

1.10 The groups comprise mostly very closely spaced self-seeded ash and sycamore with

some beech and a mixture of small hedgerow species. The central group (G20) is the

most significant and comprises large sycamore and ash with a dense understorey of

smaller species.


Page: 5 Page: 5

1.11 South Boundary

This comprises trees adjacent to the south boundary and within the gardens of

adjoining properties. Trees within the site are mainly ash, hawthorn and beech with

more ornamental species in the rear gardens of some of the adjoining properties. The

largest group (G10) is of mixed density with some gaps where the boundary planting

could be reinforced by new planting.

1.12 Central Shelterbelt

Across the middle of the site is a shelterbelt comprising, mainly, fully mature beech

(G21 & G22) and a line of fairly widely spaced copper beech (G23). I understand

these trees have recently been included in a tree preservation order (TPO).

1.13 Within the two groups of larger trees (G21 & G22) the trees are very closely spaced

and as a result those at the margins of the groups have developed with one-sided

crown spreads and leaning trunks. In addition, many trees within the groups have

been suppressed and have grown with tall narrow trunks and small crown spreads. A

number were found to be decayed and, indeed, some trees close to the railway line

have been cut down for safety reasons. Given the number of well-used footpaths,

both through and on either side of these groups, there is a not insignificant risk of

injury to users of these footpaths.

1.14 Although these two groups of trees (G21 & G22) are significant landscape features,

due to their condition and the lack of management their long-term future gives cause

for concern. Mature even-aged shelterbelts of this type are very difficult to sustain,

resulting from the lack of balance of tree age classes. As trees die or need to be

removed for reasons of safety, there are no younger established trees within the

group to take their place. The loss of larger trees then creates a break in the canopy

and exposes the tall suppressed trees within the groups to wind damage and wind-

throw. This results in larger breaks in the canopy, further damage and wind-throw and

the eventual loss of a significant landscape feature that will take many years to re-

establish.


Page: 6 Page: 6

1.15 To maintain this shelterbelt, progressive and continuous management will be

necessary. I would recommend some light and careful selective thinning to create

increased lighting within the groups to allow the planting and establishment of new

trees. Beech is a shade tolerant species and in my assessment this could be

successfully undertaken without creating major breaks in the shelterbelt, thereby

avoiding the associated problem of wind-throw. In addition, I would recommend

planting at the edges of both groups to provide sufficient new trees to establish a

balance of tree age classes. This would ensure the continuity of long-term tree cover

across the centre of the site.

1.15 Regarding the copper beech (G23), these are young established trees some of which

will develop into significant specimens prominent in the landscape of the local area.

However, the first nine trees from the west are below overhead power lines and have

been topped to provide the statutory clearance. Unfortunately, none of these trees will

develop a tall crown and, in the event of the power line being removed, would be

better replaced by new planting. The topped trees are shown on the tree survey plan

as being in the low category (Code C – brown).

2 Proposed New Road Layout 2.1 To assess the impact of these proposals on trees a detailed tree condition survey was

undertaken at each access point on 12 July 2004 and subsequently revised on 14

October 2008, with additional areas being added on 26 October 2009. This survey

was undertaken to the recommendations of BS5837:2005 and included all significant

trees. The tree survey schedule (09060S) and the included trees are numbered and

colour-coded on the group tree survey plan (ref: TMC-09060-L). Enlarged sections of

this plan show the trees that would be retained and removed:

Area A – Andover Road (South) Access

Area B – Andover Road/Stony Lane Access

Area C – Link Road for Andover Road Access

Area D – Andover Road (North) Access

Area E – Beech Shelterbelt


Page: 7 Page: 7

2.2 Area A - Andover Road (South) Access

Only one dead (code R – red) sycamore (tree 1) would need to be removed for

construction of the carriageway. Additionally three moderate category (code B –

blue) sycamores (trees 66, 67 & 69) would be within the vision splay and may also

need to be removed.

2.3 Area B – Andover Road/Sonly Lane Access

This would require the removal of two moderate category (code B – blue) sycamores

(trees 9 & 10). The remaining trees would be outside the engineering works for this

junction.

2.4 Area C – Link from Andover Road

Three trees would need to be removed; a young Norway maple (tree 52), and a very

closely spaced lime and Norway maple (tree 53) which share a common crown.

Additionally, the dense planting identified as G28 in the group tree survey, between

trees 51 and 54, would be removed.

2.5 Area D – Andover Road (North) Access

Two trees; a middle-aged and mature sycamore (trees 58 & 59) would need to be

removed to permit construction works. Two mature and one middle aged Norway

maple (trees 60, 61 & 62) located within the vision splay may also need to be

removed.

2.6 Area E – Beech Shelterbelt

I note a new road is proposed through an existing gap in the shelterbelt. However,

the exact location and extent of engineering works is not available at the present time.

The attached plan shows the condition of the various trees at this location and their

root protections areas as prescribed by the Standard.

2.7 In my assessment it should be possible to site the new road without causing a

significant adverse impact on this line of trees. However, some tree surgery works


Page: 8 Page: 8

would be necessary to provide sufficient clearance above the carriageway in

accordance with highway regulations.

3 Conclusions 3.1 A group tree survey was undertaken, to the recommendations of BS5837:2005, to

identify and assess the condition of all significant trees on and adjacent to the site.

3.2 The proposed access points have been identified following the tree survey and the

new road layout designed to retain the maximum number of better quality trees.



Group Tree Survey Schedule

Barton Farm Winchester Hampshire

November 2009

Ref: 09060GS

Group Tree Survey Schedule Barton Farm, Winchester, Hampshire November 2009

Page: 2 Page: 2

Instructions This tree survey has been undertaken to the recommendations of British Standard 5837:2005 ‘Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations’. Unless otherwise instructed the survey includes all significant individual and groups of trees and woodlands. Shrubs, bushes and other vegetation have not been included.

Site: Bartons Farm Winchester Hampshire Client: Cala Homes (South) Ltd


Survey Date: 14 July 2004

Revised 14 October 2008 Surveyed By: R D D Grainger DipArb(RFS) MICFor FArborA Our Ref: 09060GS Tree Survey Plan The tree survey plan indicates the tree number, crown size and shape and has been colour coded to indicate the condition of individual and groups of trees. Where trees are scheduled under a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) the TPO number may be shown on the plan. Additionally, the plan may indicate the root protection area (RPA) for the various trees as recommended in BS5837:2005 (TPC – tree constraints plan) Where the plan is provided in electronic format (CAD) the following layers are used: TMC-Tree No Tree number in survey TMC-Code A Category A trees TMC-Code B Category B trees TMC-Code C Category C trees TMC-Code R Category R trees TMC-TPO Tree preservation order number TMC-RPA Root protection area Tree Survey Codes NO Tree number on survey plan SPECIES Common/English name HEIGHT Height S Small - <6m M Medium – 7<12m L Large - >13m STEM Trunk diameter (centimetres) S Single stemmed trees measured at 1.5m above ground level M Multi stemmed trees measured immediately above the root flare


Page: 3 Page: 3

AGE Age class Y Young - Less than one third life expectancy MI Middle aged - One to two thirds life expectancy M Mature - More than two thirds life expectancy OM Over mature - Very limited safe life expectancy V Veteran tree EXP Estimated remaining safe life expectancy (years) Less than 10 10 – 20 20 – 40 more than 40 CAT Tree Categories and subcategories (1-2-3) Category A Green on plan

Trees of high quality and value: In such a condition as to be able to make a substantial contribution (a minimum of 40 years)

Trees in this category are the best trees on the site and should be retained where possible.

Subcategories 1 2 3

Trees that are particularly good examples of their species, especially if rare or unusual, or essential components of groups, or of formal or semi-formal arboricultural features (e.g. the dominant and/or principal trees within an avenue)

Trees, groups or woodlands which provide a definite screening or softening effect to the locality in relation to views into or out of the site, or those of particular visual importance (e.g. avenues or other arboricultural features assessed as groups)

Tree, groups or woodlands of significant conservation, historical, commemorative or other values (e.g. veteran trees or wood-pasture)

Category B Blue on plan Trees of moderate quality and value: In such a condition as to make a significant contribution (a minimum of 20 years) Trees in this category can be retained as individuals or as groups.

Subcategories 1 2 3

Trees that might be included in the high category, but are downgraded because of impaired condition (e.g. presence of remediable defects including unsympathetic past management and minor storm damage)

Trees present in numbers, usually as groups or woodlands, such that they form distinct landscape features, thereby attracting a higher collective rating than they might as individuals but which are not, individually, essential components of formal or semi-formal arboricultural features (e.g. trees of moderate quality within an avenue that includes better, A category specimens), or trees situated mainly internally to the site, therefore individually having little visual impact on the wider locality

Trees with clearly identifiable conservation or other cultural benefits


Page: 4 Page: 4

Category C Grey on plan Trees of low quality and value: Currently in adequate condition to remain until new planting could be established (minimum of 10

years), or young trees with a stem diameter below 150mm.

Trees in this category should not be retained in isolation but only as part of a group of, preferably, better quality (code A or B) trees. They will usually not be retained where they would pose a significant constraint on development.

Subcategories 1 2 3

Trees not qualifying in the higher categories

Trees present in groups or woodlands, but without this conferring on them significantly greater landscape value, and/or trees offering low or only temporary screening benefit

Trees with very limited conservation or other cultural benefits

NOTE: Whilst C category trees will usually not be retained where they would impose a significant constraint on development, young trees with a stem diameter of less than 150mm should be considered for relocation.

Category R Red on plan. Trees in such a condition that any existing value would be lost within 10 years and which should’,

in the current context, be removed for reasons of sound arboricultural management. Trees in this category should be felled in any event.

Criteria • 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 R category trees (i.e. where, for whatever reason, 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 (e.g. Dutch elm disease), or very low quality trees suppressing adjacent trees of better quality.

Note: Habitat reinstatement may be appropriate (e.g. R category trees used as a bat roost: installation of bat box in nearby tree)

COMMENTS General comments on the physiological and structural condition of the tree. In some cases a more

detailed inspection may be recommended to determine the tree’s safety and suitability for retention. Preliminary management may be recommended. Where trees have been included in a Tree Preservation Order the TPO number may be indicated.


Page: 5 Page: 5

Root Protection Area (RPA) To avoid damage to the roots or rooting environment of retained trees, the RPA should be plotted around the category A and B trees and, where they are not a significant constraint on development, the category C trees. This is the minimum area (m2) which should be left undisturbed and protected during development. Using the tree survey data (STEM) the RPA is calculated as an area equivalent to a circle (m2):

• for single stemmed trees (S) using a radius 12 times the stem diameter • for multi-stemmed trees (M) using a radius of 10 times the stem diameter.

The size of the RPA is capped at 707m2. The shape of the RPA is not mandatory but the area (m2) cannot be reduced and should take into account the morphology, likely distribution of the trees roots and other influencing factors. For individual open grown trees, the RPA around the tree may be offset by up to 20% on one side only. Where instructed, the RPA for appropriate trees is plotted on a tree constraints plan (TCP).


Page: 6 Page: 6

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m

STEM AGE EXP CAT COMMENTS / CONDITION

Top cm G1 Leyland cypress

L S 26 MI 20-40 C 2 Line of trees

G2 Sycamore Lime

M M

SS

24 54

Y Y

>40 B 2 Line of trees

G3 Lime M M 26 Y >40 B 2 Two trees

G4 Lime

M S 28 Y >40 B 2 Line of trees

G5 Lime M S 20 Y >40 B 2 Line of trees

G6 Leyland cypress M M 67 MI 20-40 C 2 Line of trees

7 Sycamore M S 16 Y C Single self-seeded tree, ivy covered

G8 Sycamore M M 44 Y 10-20 C 2 Line of self-seeded trees

G9 Ash Sycamore

S/M M

SM

13 22

Y Y

10-20 B 2 Line of self-seeded trees, ivy covered

G10 Sycamore Ash Horse chestnut Copper beech Hawthorn Beech

L L M L S M

MSM

SSS

60 30 20 35 15 30

M Y/M Y

Y M Y

>40 B 2 Mixed density with some breaks which would provide an opportunity for new planting

11 Blue atlas cedar M S 35 Y >40 B 2 Single tree sited on adjoining land

G12 Horse chestnut Hawthorn

M

S

S

M

30 12

Y

M

10-20 C 2

G14 Lime Corsican pine

L L

SS

52 45

M M

20-40 B 2 Three trees

15 Silver birch M S 18 MI 20-40 B 2 Single tree

G16 Hawthorn Sycamore Silver birch Ash

S L M L

M S S M

10 42 32 35

M M M M

20-40 B 2

G17 Hawthorn S M 12 M 10-20 C 2

G18 Silver birch M S 14 Y 20-40 B 2 Railway land


Page: 7 Page: 7

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m


Top cm G19 Hawthorn

Rowan Sycamore Goat willow

S S M S

MM M M

15 15 22 20

MI MI Y M

20-40 C 2 Railway land

G20 Hawthorn Sycamore Blackthorn Ash Cherry

S L S L M

MSMSM

20 35 12 40 20

M MI MI M M

20-40 B 2 Dense thicket on railway land

G21 Beech Wych elm Holly Ash Hawthorn Yew

L/M

S S S S S

S

SSSMS

107 15 10 12 17 30

OM/M/Y Y Y Y MI Y

20-40 B 2 Shelter belt, very closely spaced. Contains many over-mature trees with basal damage and wind blown trees

G22 Beech Wych elm Lime Yew

L

S M S

S

SSY

83 15 22 20

OM/M Y MI Y

20-40 B 2 Shelter belt. Contains over-mature and mature trees with basal decay

G23 Copper beech S/M S 36 Y >40 10-20

A C

2 2

Line of trees (9 trees at east end have been topped below power cables (C2)

G24 Beech Field maple

L S

SS

60 12

M MI

20-40 B 2

G25 Sycamore Ash Hawthorn Norway maple

L M S M

SSMS

34 15 12 28

MI Y M MI

20-40 B 2 Dense highway planting

G26 Norway maple Hawthorn Crab apple Goat willow Sycamore Field maple

S S S S M S

SMSMSM

14 20 26 15 45 10

Y M M M M Y


G27 Sycamore Field maple Hawthorn

M M S

SSM

30 35 10

MI MI MI



Page: 8 Page: 8

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m


Top cm G28 Hawthorn

Norway maple Sycamore Ash Silver birch Lime

S L L M L S

SS

SSSS

15 54 15 15 18 12

MI M/ MI Y Y MI Y

20-40 B 2 Very dense highway planting

G29 Hawthorn Service tree

S S

SS

10 8

MI MI

10-20 C 2 Hedgerow

G30 Hawthorn Ash Goat willow

S S S

SSM

8 15 18

MI Y MI

10-20 C 2 Hedgerow

G31 Hawthorn Sycamore

S S

SM

20 10

MI Y

10-20 C 2 Hedgerow

G32 Beech M S 30 Y >40 A 2 Four planted trees

G33 Hawthorn London plane Sloe

S S S

SMM

10 11 7

MI Y MI

10-20 C 2 Hedgerow

G34 Silver birch Hawthorn Norway maple

M S M

SMS

25 12 30

M MI Mi

20-40 B 2 Shelterbelt

G35 Field maple Hawthorn Beech

M S M

MMS

20 15 30

M M Y

>40 A 2 Fairly dense group sited on a raised bank at side of highway. Grade A beech tree within the group

G36 Ash Sloe

M S

SM

20 15

Y MI

C 2 Dense group on railway embankment leading to bridge

G37 Beech Ash Sycamore Hawthorn

L L M S

SSSM

45 35 20 14

M Y Y Y

20-40 B 2 Fairly dense group on railway embankment

G38 Hawthorn Sloe Blackthorn Sycamore

S S S M

MMMM

10 9 9 22

Y Y Y Y

20-40 C 2 Dense thicket

G39 Sycamore Beech Field maple

L L M

SSS

124 74 19

M M M

20-40 B 2 Highway trees



Tree Survey Schedule

Barton Farm Winchester Hampshire

November 2009

Ref: 09060S

Tree Survey Schedule Barton Farm, Winchester, Hampshire November 2009

Page: 2 Page: 2

Instructions This tree survey has been undertaken to the recommendations of British Standard 5837:2005 ‘Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations’. Unless otherwise instructed the survey includes all significant individual and groups of trees and woodlands. Shrubs, bushes and other vegetation have not been included.

Site: Bartons Farm Winchester Hampshire Client: Cala Homes (South) Ltd


Survey Date: 14 July 2004

Revised 14 October 2008, 26 October 2009 Surveyed By: R D D Grainger DipArb(RFS) MICFor FArborA Our Ref: 09060S Tree Survey Plan The tree survey plan indicates the tree number, crown size and shape and has been colour coded to indicate the condition of individual and groups of trees. Where trees are scheduled under a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) the TPO number may be shown on the plan. Additionally, the plan may indicate the root protection area (RPA) for the various trees as recommended in BS5837:2005 (TPC – tree constraints plan) Where the plan is provided in electronic format (CAD) the following layers are used: TMC-Tree No Tree number in survey TMC-Code A Category A trees TMC-Code B Category B trees TMC-Code C Category C trees TMC-Code R Category R trees TMC-TPO Tree preservation order number TMC-RPA Root protection area Tree Survey Codes NO Tree number on survey plan SPECIES Common/English name HEIGHT Height (metres) Top Height to top of tree Crn Mean clearance below crown spread RAD Crown spread radius (metres) STEM Trunk diameter (centimetres) S Single stemmed trees measured at 1.5m above ground level M Multi stemmed trees measured immediately above the root flare


Page: 3 Page: 3

AGE Age class Y Young - Less than one third life expectancy MI Middle aged - One to two thirds life expectancy M Mature - More than two thirds life expectancy OM Over mature - Very limited safe life expectancy V Veteran tree EXP Estimated remaining safe life expectancy (years) Less than 10 10 – 20 20 – 40 more than 40 CAT Tree Categories and subcategories (1-2-3) Category A Green on plan

Trees of high quality and value: In such a condition as to be able to make a substantial contribution (a minimum of 40 years)

Trees in this category are the best trees on the site and should be retained where possible.

Subcategories 1 2 3

Trees that are particularly good examples of their species, especially if rare or unusual, or essential components of groups, or of formal or semi-formal arboricultural features (e.g. the dominant and/or principal trees within an avenue)

Trees, groups or woodlands which provide a definite screening or softening effect to the locality in relation to views into or out of the site, or those of particular visual importance (e.g. avenues or other arboricultural features assessed as groups)

Tree, groups or woodlands of significant conservation, historical, commemorative or other values (e.g. veteran trees or wood-pasture)

Category B Blue on plan Trees of moderate quality and value: In such a condition as to make a significant contribution (a minimum of 20 years) Trees in this category can be retained as individuals or as groups.

Subcategories 1 2 3

Trees that might be included in the high category, but are downgraded because of impaired condition (e.g. presence of remediable defects including unsympathetic past management and minor storm damage)

Trees present in numbers, usually as groups or woodlands, such that they form distinct landscape features, thereby attracting a higher collective rating than they might as individuals but which are not, individually, essential components of formal or semi-formal arboricultural features (e.g. trees of moderate quality within an avenue that includes better, A category specimens), or trees situated mainly internally to the site, therefore individually having little visual impact on the wider locality

Trees with clearly identifiable conservation or other cultural benefits


Page: 4 Page: 4

Category C Grey on plan Trees of low quality and value: Currently in adequate condition to remain until new planting could be established (minimum of 10

years), or young trees with a stem diameter below 150mm.

Trees in this category should not be retained in isolation but only as part of a group of, preferably, better quality (code A or B) trees. They will usually not be retained where they would pose a significant constraint on development.

Subcategories 1 2 3

Trees not qualifying in the higher categories

Trees present in groups or woodlands, but without this conferring on them significantly greater landscape value, and/or trees offering low or only temporary screening benefit

Trees with very limited conservation or other cultural benefits

NOTE: Whilst C category trees will usually not be retained where they would impose a significant constraint on development, young trees with a stem diameter of less than 150mm should be considered for relocation.

Category R Red on plan. Trees in such a condition that any existing value would be lost within 10 years and which should’,

in the current context, be removed for reasons of sound arboricultural management. Trees in this category should be felled in any event.

Criteria • 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 R category trees (i.e. where, for whatever reason, 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 (e.g. Dutch elm disease), or very low quality trees suppressing adjacent trees of better quality.

Note: Habitat reinstatement may be appropriate (e.g. R category trees used as a bat roost: installation of bat box in nearby tree)

COMMENTS General comments on the physiological and structural condition of the tree. In some cases a more

detailed inspection may be recommended to determine the tree’s safety and suitability for retention. Preliminary management may be recommended. Where trees have been included in a Tree Preservation Order the TPO number may be indicated.


Page: 5 Page: 5

Root Protection Area (RPA) To avoid damage to the roots or rooting environment of retained trees, the RPA should be plotted around the category A and B trees and, where they are not a significant constraint on development, the category C trees. This is the minimum area (m2) which should be left undisturbed and protected during development. Using the tree survey data (STEM) the RPA is calculated as an area equivalent to a circle (m2):

• for single stemmed trees (S) using a radius 12 times the stem diameter • for multi-stemmed trees (M) using a radius of 10 times the stem diameter.

The size of the RPA is capped at 707m2. The shape of the RPA is not mandatory but the area (m2) cannot be reduced and should take into account the morphology, likely distribution of the trees roots and other influencing factors. For individual open grown trees, the RPA around the tree may be offset by up to 20% on one side only. Where instructed, the RPA for appropriate trees is plotted on a tree constraints plan (TCP).


Page: 6 Page: 6

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m RAD STEM AGE EXP CAT COMMENTS / CONDITION Top Crn m cm

1 Sycamore

16 5.5 8 S 66 M 10-20 R - Tag 17. Dead

2 Sycamore Felled – stump only

3 Sycamore 19 2 7 S 70 M 20-40 B 1 One-sided crown, ivy covered – detailed inspection and tree surgery required

4 Sycamore 20 6 8 S 102 M 10-20 C 1 Tag 21. Forked trunk, compression formation, possible decay – detailed inspection required

5 Sycamore 19 6 8 S 98 M <10 R - Tag 22. Forked trunk, compression formation, possible decay.

6 Sycamore 17 5 8 S 80 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 23. Decayed pruning wounds, over-extended lateral limbs, detailed inspection and tree surgery required

7 Sycamore 17 5 6 S 67 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 24. Forked trunk

8 Sycamore 18 2 8 S 124 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 25. Basal and trunk decay, compression fork.

9 Sycamore 12 2 7 S 54 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 26.

10 Sycamore 12 3 6 S 44 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 27.

11 Sycamore 12 3 7 S 48 M 10-20 C 1 Root damage and suspected basal decay, ivy covered – detailed inspection required

12 Sycamore 16 4 7 S 51 M <10 R - Tag 29. Decayed forked trunk

13 Sycamore 14 3 7 S 33 M 10-20 C 1 Tag 30. Suppressed, one-sided crown, trunk and crown decay

14 Sycamore 19 3 7 S 71 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 31. Ivy covered – detailed inspection required

15 Sycamore 14 3 5 S 34 M 20-40 C 1 Tag 32. Suppressed crown.

16 Sycamore 14 4 6 S 55 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 33.

17 Sycamore 12 4 4 S 36 M 10-20 C 1 Tag 34. Some crown die-back

18 Sycamore 16 3 8 S 62 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 35. One-sided crown


Page: 7 Page: 7

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m RAD STEM AGE EXP CAT COMMENTS / CONDITION Top Crn m cm 19 Sycamore 15 4 5 S 46 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 36. Suppressed crown

20 Sycamore 16 4 8 S 60 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 37.

21 Sycamore 17 6 8 S 63 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 38. Leaning trunk

22 Sycamore 17 7 8 S 67 M <10 R - Tag 39. Dying – overall crown

die-back

23 Sycamore 14 4 8 S 56 M 10-20 C 1 Damaged crown, ivy covered – tree surgery required

24 Sycamore 17 3 8 S 60 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 41. Forked trunk

25 Hawthorn 8 0 4 M 38 M 10-20 C 1 Ivy covered

26 Hawthorn 8 0 4 M 36 M 10-20 C 1 Ivy covered

27 Crab apple 8 0 4 M 37 M 10-20 C 1 Ivy covered

28 Hawthorn 5 0 4 M 17 M 10-20 C 1

29 Norway maple 8 3 4 M 23 Y 10-20 C 1 One-sided crown

30 Norway maple 12 4 4 S <19 Y 10-20 C 1 Tag 80. Group of stems

31 Norway maple 12 3 4 M 20 Y 20-40 B 1

32 Sycamore 13 2 4 S 24 Y 20-40 B 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown

33 Sycamore 15 0 3 M 40 Y 20-40 B 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown

34 Sycamore 13 3 6 S 40 M 20-40 B 1 Tag 86.

35 Field maple 6 3 4 M <21 MI 10-20 C 1

36 Sycamore 14 4 4 S 20 Y 10-20 C 1 Group of self-seeded stems with one-sided crowns

37 Sycamore 14 6 2.5 S 28 Y 10-20 C 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown

38 Norway maple 13 5 5 S 40 M <10 R - Tag 1192. Crown die-back

39 Field maple 7 3 3 M 19 MI 10-20 C 1 Tag 1195. Suppressed

40 Norway maple 12 3 3 S 19 Y 10-20 C 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown – tree surgery required

41 Norway maple 14 2 6 S 33 MI 20-40 B 1 One-sided crown, ivy covered – tree surgery required


Page: 8 Page: 8

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m RAD STEM AGE EXP CAT COMMENTS / CONDITION Top Crn m cm 42 Norway maple 15 4 5 S 35 MI 20-40 B 1 Ivy covered – tree surgery

required

43 Norway maple 14 2 6 S 36 MI 20-40 B 1 Tree surgery required

44 Norway maple 13 3 7 M 46 MI <10 R - Crown die-back

45 Field maple 12 2 4 M 48 M 10-20 C 1

46 Field maple 10 2 3 M 40 M 10-20 C 1 Tag 1210.

47 Norway maple 10 3 5 S 29 MI <10 R - Crown die-back

48 Norway maple 10 2 6 S 28 MI 10-20 C 1 Crown die-back

49 Norway maple 12 2 6 S 33 MI 20-40 B 1 Ivy covered, tree surgery required

50 Norway maple 12 2 4 S 25 Y 20-40 B 1

51 Lime 12 1 4 S 24 Y 20-40 B 1

52 Norway maple 12 2 4 S 27 Y 20-40 B 1

53 Lime & Norway maple

11 2 4 M 33 Y 20-40 B 1 Common crown

54 Ash 11 3 3 M 28 Y 20-40 B 1 Forked trunk

55 Norway maple 14 0 6 S 38 M 20-40 B 1 Damaged crown, structural defects – tree surgery required

56 Ash 13 6 5 S 25 MI 20-40 B 1

57 Norway maple 10 0 9 M 67 M 20-40 B 1

58 Sycamore 10 3 4 S 25 MI 10-20 C 1 Suppressed one-sided crown

59 Sycamore 14 0 7 M 80 M 20-40 B 1 Regrown coppice

60 Norway maple 11 1 5 S 24 M 10-20 C 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown, ivy covered

61 Norway maple 13 1 5 S 29 MI 10-20 C 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown, ivy covered

62 Norway maple 13 1 6 S 44 M 20-40 B 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown, ivy covered

63 Norway maple 16 1 7 S 52 M 20-40 B 1 Ivy covered


Page: 9 Page: 9

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m RAD STEM AGE EXP CAT COMMENTS / CONDITION Top Crn m cm 64 Norway maple 14 1 6 S 35 MI 20-40 B 1 Suppressed, one-sided crown,

ivy covered

65 Norway maple 16 1 7 S 46 M 20-40 B 1

66 Sycamore 18 5 8 S 74 OM 20-40 B 1 One-sided crown

67 Sycamore 18 5 7 S 78 OM 20-40 B 1 Suppressed crown

68 Sycamore 19 5 7 S 72 OM 20-40 B 1 Suppressed crown

69 Sycamore 16 5 5 S 43 M 20-40 B 1 Suppressed crown

70 Sycamore 15 6 5 S 44 M 20-40 B 1

71 Sycamore 15 4 6 M 45 MI 10-20 C 1 Forked trunk, growing from bank, leaning, ivy covered

72 Sycamore 18 5 5 S 46 M 20-40 B 1 Two stems, common crown

73 Beech 20 5 9 S 60 M 20-40 B 1

74 Beech 20 7 7 S 44 M 20-40 B 1 Suppressed crown

75 Beech 20 5 10 S 56 M 20-40 B 1

76 Elm 11 2 9 M 36 Y <10 R - Two stems, leaning, suppressed

77 Beech 20 7 9 S 63 M 20-40 B 1

78 Beech 20 5 9 S 70 M 20-40 B 1

79 Beech 17 7 7 S 41 M 20-40 B 1

80 Beech 20 5 8 S 85 M 20-40 B 1

81 Beech 15 5 11 S 84 M 20-40 B 1 Structural defects

82 Ash 11 3 5 M 28 Y 20-40 C 1 Forked trunk, ivy covered

83 Yew 7 0 4 M 45 Y 10-20 C 1 Basal decay

84 Beech 21 3 14 S 92 M 20-40 B 1 Trunk damage

85 Ash 16 3 11 S 33 MI 10-20 C 1 Leaning, one-sided crown, ivy covered

86 Beech 19 5 11 S 65 M 20-40 B 1

87 Beech 18 6 12 S 47 MI <10 R - Trunk decay


Page: 10 Page: 10

NO SPECIES HEIGHT m RAD STEM AGE EXP CAT COMMENTS / CONDITION Top Crn m cm 88 Beech 19 5 14 S 85 M 20-40 B 1 One-sided crown, some crown

die-back

89 Beech 15 8 10 S 35 MI 20-40 B 1

90 Beech 17 8 4 S 39 MI <10 R - Trunk decay

91 Beech 21 3 4 S 34 MI 20-40 B 1 Suppressed crown

92 Beech 20 9 5 S 39 MI 20-40 B 1

93 Beech 19 12 3 S 62 M 20-40 B 1

94 Beech 19 6 7 S 33 MI 20-40 B 1 Suppressed crown

95 Beech 19 6 7 S 51 M 20-40

96 Beech 21 6 10 S 54 M 20-40 B 1

97 Beech 20 5 12 S 76 M 20-40 B 1

tree management consulting llp - cala homes/media/files/planning/barton-farm/... · selective...

Documents