Arboricultural Assessment Northside Drive East Auckland ... · removal, chipping and stump grinding, generate high noise levels, usually on an intermittent rather than continuous

Arboricultural Assessment

Northside Drive East

Auckland Transport

23rd January 2012

Amended 15th November 2012

Amenity Tree Consultants Ltd

Northside Drive East – ATC 148 Page 2

Contents1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 3

2. REPORT AUTHOR.......................................................................................... 3

3. SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THE REPORT ......................................................... 3

4. REPORT DETAILS AND LIMITATIONS ........................................................... 3

5. SITE DETAILS AND DISTRICT PLAN ZONING................................................ 4

6. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION ............................................................. 5

7. PROPOSAL WORK......................................................................................... 6

8. WAITAKERE CITY - TREE PROTECTION RULES............................................ 6

8.2. STATUTORY ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................................... 7

9. ARBORICULTURAL ASSESSMENT OF EFFECTS............................................... 7

9.2. PERMANENT EFFECT FROM THE PROPOSED TREE REMOVAL........................................................................ 79.3. AMENITY VALUES AND NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER .............................................................................. 79.5. POTENTIAL FOR RELOCATION ..................................................................................................................... 89.7. ALTERNATIVE METHODS/LOCATION ........................................................................................................... 89.10. EFFECTS ON THE OVERALL RESILIENCE, BIO DIVERSITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE GREEN NETWORK.............. 89.13. EFFECTS OF GROUND STABILITY ................................................................................................................ 89.15. EFFECTS OF NOISE AND DISRUPTION GENERATED BY ARBORICULTURAL WORKS ........................................ 99.18. EFFECTS ON REMAINING OR SURROUNDING VEGETATION ........................................................................... 99.20. OVERALL SUMMARY OF THE ASSESSED EFFECTS ........................................................................................ 99.22. MITIGATION, RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT ....................................................................................... 9

10. CONCLUSION.............................................................................................. 10

APPENDIX 1 ......................................................................................................... 11

TREE REMOVAL SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................... 11

APPENDIX 2 ......................................................................................................... 19

APPENDIX 3 ......................................................................................................... 25

DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 25

Tables

5.1. TABLE 1 – SITE DETAILS .............................................................................. 4

5.2. TABLE 2 – RELEVANT DISTRICT PLAN ZONING............................................. 4

8.1. TABLE 3 – APPLICABLE TREE PROTECTION RULES ....................................... 6

Figures

5.3. FIGURE 1 – DISTRICT PLAN ZONING............................................................ 5

6.3. FIGURE 2 - SITE LOCATION – APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF WORKS (REDLINE)........................................................................................................ 5



1. Introduction

1.1. Amenity Tree Consultants Ltd (ATC) was commissioned by Auckland Council

16th December 2011 to survey trees between 64-82 Trig Road (Northside Drive

East) and then to provide an arboricultural report to accompany a Resource

Consent application to remove generally protected vegetation, as determined

by Auckland Council Waitakere Region District Plan (Operative) 2003.

2. Report Author

2.1. This report has been written by Stephen Bishop. I am the Director of ATC and

hold the following relevant qualification: Higher National Diploma in

Arboriculture. I have been a qualified and practicing arborist in local

government (United Kingdom and New Zealand) and private consultancy for

13-years. Furthermore, I am a fellow of the UK Arboricultural Association, a

member of the New Zealand Arboricultural Association and the International

Society of Arboriculture.

3. Scope and Purpose of the Report

3.1. ATC has been engaged to provide a report that addresses and identifies thefollowing:

Actual and potential effects of the proposed work to protected vegetation,

as determined by Waitakere City District Plan (Operative) 2003.

4. Report Details and Limitations

4.1. Unless otherwise stated:

All vegetation has been inspected from ground level only.

All vegetation measurements (heights, stem, girths, and canopy spreads)

are approximate.

No samples of vegetation or soil have been taken for analysis.

Amended or supplementary plans are not to scale.

The professional opinion expressed on the health status or structural

integrity of trees or other vegetation is valid at the time of inspection and

cannot be guaranteed beyond the date of the report, given the variability of

natural organisms and the influences of climatic events. It is always advisable

to reassess vegetation in high risk areas following storm events.

This report has been prepared for the particular project described to ATC

Ltd. No responsibility is accepted by ATC or its director for the accuracy of any

information provided by third parties and the use of this report or any part of it

for any purposes beyond the agreed scope.



4.2. The initial site assessment and report was carried out on 1st July 2010. Re

assessment of the trees following finalised plans was carried out on 23rd

January 2012 and 15th November 2012. The weather conditions were calm,

sunny and clear.

5. Site Details and District Plan Zoning

5.1. Table 1 – Site Details

Site Addresses

64 Trig Road66 Trig Road68 Trig Road70 Trig Road72 Trig Road74 Trig Road76 Trig Road78 Trig Road80 Trig Road82 Trig Road

Legal Descriptions

Lot 3 DP 159302Pt Lot 1 DP 154871

Lot 9 DP 64470Lot 8 DP 64470Lot 7 DP 64470Lot 6 DP 64470Lot 2 DP 87878Lot 4 DP 64470Lot 3 DP 64470Lot 2 DP 64470

Site Areas

1.2444Ha2.9948Ha4.2112Ha4.4034Ha4.3326Ha4.2820Ha2.4384Ha4.2694Ha4.2795Ha4.0468Ha

5.2. Table 2 – Relevant District Plan Zoning

Auckland District Plan, Waitakere Region - Zoning

Human Environment Countryside

Natural Environment General



5.3. Figure 1 – District Plan Zoning

Natural Area Map (General)

Human Environment Map (Special Area, Countryside)

6. Site Location and Description

6.1. This section of the proposed works runs along the existing access track/road

between 64 Trig and 74 Trig Road.

6.2. No notable trees exist within the site or area of works.

6.3. Figure 2 - Site Location – Approximate extent of works (red line)



7. Proposal Work

7.1. The location of the work area is shown in Figure 2. A more accurate site plan

showing the extent of works is provided with the consent application.

7.2. The detailed design and construction method for the new road layout and storm

water pond has been completed. And is not expected to change in any

significant detail. The following works to trees will be necessary to construct

the proposed road.

Removal

Fifty (50) individual trees

Twenty (20) Shelter belts or groups of trees

7.3. Please note that not all the trees surveyed/assessed and entered into the tree

removal schedule (appendix 2) are protected under the District Plan e.g.

Macrocarpa, Silver Dollar gum, Willow and some species of Poplar. However, in

this instance, it was decided to include all vegetation being removed to aid in

the overall assessment and extent of work.

7.4. The removal of the subject vegetation will have less than minor effects upon

the visual amenity of the area.

7.5. The location of the subject vegetation is detailed on the plan attached as

Appendix 1.

8. Waitakere City - Tree Protection Rules

8.1. Table 3 – Applicable Tree Protection Rules

General Natural Area Rules

Rule 2.1 – Permitted ActivitiesActivities meeting the following Performance Standards are Permitted Activities:(a) any vegetation alteration of:(i) native vegetation and exotic vegetation which is less than 6.0metres in height andless than 600mm in girth (as measured 1.4metres above the ground)(ii) vegetation listed in the Removable Vegetation Appendix and the EnvironmentallyDamaging Plants Appendix

Rule 2.2 Controlled Activity

(d) any vegetation alteration not meeting the standards in Rule 2.1 undertaken orrequired by a network utility operator necessary for the maintenance of that operator’sworks



8.2. Statutory Assessment

8.3. Section 95a of the Resource Management Act allows a consent authority to

publically notify an application for resource consent. However, a consent

authority cannot notify an application if a rule or national environmental

standard precludes public notification.

8.4. Waitakere Council’s District states that,

“In relation to Controlled and Limited Discretionary Activities applications for

consent need not to be notified and the written approvals of affected persons

will not be required, nor in terms of limited notification under the Act, will notice

to adversely effected persons need to be served”.

8.5. It is considered that there are no special circumstances under Section 95(4) of

the Resource Management Act (1991) that would justify notification of the

vegetation alteration aspects of the application (see Assessment of Effects

Section 9).

9. Arboricultural Assessment of Effects

9.1. This section provides an Assessment of Effects (AEE) for the proposed

vegetation works in accordance with section 88 (2b) of RMA:

“(2) An application must:

a) be made in the prescribed form and manner and

b) include, in accordance with the Schedule 4, an assessment of effects in

such detail as corresponds with the scale and significance of the effects that

the activity may have on the environment”

9.2. Permanent Effect From the Proposed Tree Removal

Brief details of the trees requiring removal have been listed in section 7. A full

description/schedule is attached as appendix 2.

9.3. Amenity Values and Neighbourhood Character

9.4. The access track/road between 64 and 74 Trig Road does not currently provide

any public through access. Therefore the numbers of general public using the

track is limited to the property owners and their visitors. The subject trees are

clearly visible when on the access track but not readily viewed by members of



the public. Therefore, it is considered that they do not provide a significant

visual amenity and any shot term effect will be minor in nature and confined to

a relatively small area. Replanting with native species along roadside bunds

will be taking place as part of the overall proposed works. This will in the

medium to long term greatly enhance the visual amenity and increase the

native flora in the area.

9.5. Potential for relocation

9.6. None of the trees assesed are suitable for relocation.

9.7. Alternative methods/Location

9.8. No significant trees or vegetation were observed that would warrant

extraordinary efforts to retain or relocate (if possible), or to seek alteration to

the proposed route of the SH16 link road.

9.9. The site is not known to be Historically, Culturally or Spiritually significant,

therefore there will be no adverse effects in this regard.

9.10. Effects on the Overall Resilience, Bio Diversity and Integrity of

the Green Network

9.11. Objective 2 of the District Plan acknowledges that the ecological integrity and

biodiversity of the Green Network is best served by maintaining the range of

native species and genetic stock within the City and that active enhancement,

such as weed and pest control and re-stocking with native plants may be

necessary. It is considered that the proposal will not cause any adverse effect

to the Green Network.

9.12. The majority of the trees/vegetation being removed is exotic species. Mass

replanting of the roadside bunds with native plants will increase the biodiversity

and green network of the City.

9.13. Effects of Ground Stability

9.14. The removal of vegetation has the potential to create, contribute or exacerbate

ground stability problems. In this instance the extent of works being carried out

to SH16 will mean that this is not an issue in this instance.



9.15. Effects of Noise and Disruption Generated by Arboricultural

Works

9.16. Power tools and machinery necessary to carry out arboricultural works such as

removal, chipping and stump grinding, generate high noise levels, usually on an

intermittent rather than continuous basis; that is likely to extend beyond the

working area. Some arboricultural operation will generate dust and wood chips

that may be carried by the wind into land adjacent to the working area.

9.17. Vehicles and machinery used in arboricultural works can be of medium goods

vehicle size (up to 12 tonnes). However, in this instance there is adequate on

site parking and maneuvering and as such the effects are considered to be no

more than minor and will be adequately mitigated by the proposals detailed in

Section 9.22.

9.18. Effects on Remaining or Surrounding Vegetation

9.19. The removal of vegetation can affect the health and vigour of surrounding

vegetation through edge effects. In this instance none of the subject trees

provide significant shelter to any other surrounding protected vegetation.

Linkages between habitats and other natural features will also remain

unaffected due to the small percentage of vegetation being removed from the

overall area and the extent of remaining vegetation within the immediate

vicinity. In view of these factors, the effects of the trees being removed are

considered to be no more than minor.

9.20. Overall Summary of the Assessed Effects

9.21. It is considered that the identified permanent and temporary environmental

effects of the required vegetation alteration, to facilitate the proposed works to

SH16, will be no more than minor and any effects will be adequately mitigated

by the proposals detailed in section 9.29. In addition, no persons are

considered to be adversely affected by the proposal.

9.22. Mitigation, Restoration and Enhancement

9.23. The removal of vegetation will be carried out by suitably qualified and

experienced persons. Care will be taken to ensure that adjacent protective

vegetation is not effected.



9.24. Noise management will be in accordance with the principles set out in

NZS6803P: 1984 “The measurement and Assessment of Noise from

Construction, Maintenance and Demolition Work”. Working hours for

arboricultural works will be restricted to the following:

Monday to Friday: 7.30am to 7.00pm

Saturday: 7.30am to 5.30pm

Sundays and Public Holidays: No work

All works will be carried out using machinery associated with modern

arboricultural practice.

All vehicles and machinery not able to be located within the working area

will be positioned to minimise disturbance to local traffic flow and available

parking spaces.

As far as is practicable dust and wood chips associated with the works will

be contained, cleared and disposed of at appropriate land fill or other

storage facilities.

9.25. No machinery or vehicles will be stored, parked or operated within any area

outside the proposed building footprint

9.26. It is anticipated that mass native planting continue to be carried out on

roadside bunds at various places along SH16. In effect all trees being removed

will be replaced at a minimum ration of 2-1. Details of all landscaping including

planting plans will be provided at a later date.

10. Conclusion

11.1 The proposed link road requires a “Controlled Activity Resource Consent” for

the removal of protected vegetation.

11.2 The assessment carried out in this report, in particular within Section 9, has

identified the actual and potential environmental effects of the proposed works

in accordance with Section 88 (2) of the RMA and concluded that no more than

minor effects to the environment or remaining vegetation will result.

Stephen BishopAmenity Tree Consultants Ltd15th November 2012

Tel: 09 974 4777Fax: 09 974 4888Email: [email protected]


Northside Drive Intersection SH16 – ATC 148 Page 11

Appendix 1

Tree Removal Schedule

RefNo Species Age

ClassHeight

(m)Girth(m)

CrownSpread(max in

m)

Vigour Comments

T1 PoplarPopulus spp Maturing 15+ >0.6 6 - 7 N Individual trees planted near/on boundary.

T2WillowSalix spp Maturing 13+ >0.6 8 N

Good specimen with a nice form, minordeadwood, no significant pest or diseasenoted.

Not Protected

T3MacrocarpaCuppressusmacrocarpa

Mature 25 >0.6 8 N

There are three separate stems but shouldbe considered as one tree. Old pruningwounds visible, minor deadwood. Goodshape and prominent within the landscape.

Not Protected.

T4 CedarCedrus spp Young 4 <0.6 1.5 L

Poor specimen, dieback in upper crown.

Not Protected

T5 PohutukawaMetrosideros excelsa Young 5 <0.6 1.5 L Major asymmetrical crown – poor form.



RefNo Species Age

ClassHeight

(m)Girth(m)

CrownSpread(max in

m)

Vigour Comments

T6,T7& T8

LemonwoodPittosporumeugeniodes Maturing 6 M/S 2 N Small insignificant trees.

T9 Corkscrew WillowSalix spp Maturing 9 >0.6 4 N Next to entrance to 68 Trig Road and

adjacent to power pole.

T10,11,& T12 Palm spp Maturing 9 >0.6 1.5 N A group of 3

T13She oakCasuarinacunninghamiana

Maturing 8 M/S 3 N Poor form – end of shelter belt.

T14 CedarCedrus spp Maturing 11 - 1.5 N Poor form.

T15SweetgumLiquidambarstyraciflua

Mature 11 T/S 6 N Good specimen.


Mature 11 >0.6 5 N Major asymmetrical crown.

T17PoplarPopulus spp Mature 25 >0.6 9 N Power lines under crown.

T18 OakQuercus spp Maturing 6 >0.6 5 N Major asymmetrical crown.

T19 MagnoliaMagnolia spp Maturing 7 >0.6 4 N Major asymmetrical crown.



RefNo Species Age

ClassHeight

(m)Girth(m)

CrownSpread(max in

m)

Vigour Comments

T20 Corkscrew willowSalix spp Maturing 8 >0.6 3 N Major asymmetrical crown, Decay observed

on main trunk.

T21 Cuppressus spp Mature 8 >0.6 3 N Near wooden fence.

T22She oakCasuarinacunninghamiana

Maturing 16 >0.6 4 N Poor form.

T23Brush boxLophostemonconferta

Mature 20 >0.6 4 N Few lower branches.

T24 PoplarPopulus spp Mature 20 >0.6 10 N Good specimen.

T25 Cuppressus spp Mature 20 >0.6 6 N Major asymmetry.


Mature 20 >0.6 6 N Good specimen.

T27 UnknownPossibly Willow Maturing 17 T/S 3 N Not easily distinguished.

T28 Silver DollarT Mature 15 >0.6 7 N Deadwood present in crown.

T29 MagnoliaMagnolia spp Maturing 10 >0.6 3 N Crown not yet fully formed.



RefNo Species Age

ClassHeight

(m)Girth(m)

CrownSpread(max in

m)

Vigour Comments

T30CamphorCinnamomumcamphora

Mature 12 M/S 6 N Good specimen.

T31 WillowSalix spp Mature 20 >0.6 10 N Good specimen.


Mature 15 >0.6 7 N Good specimen.


Maturing 5 M/S 7 N Poor condition.

T34 PoplarPopulus spp Maturing 15+ >0.6 6-7 N Planted around garage/building



T37 MagnoliaMagnolia spp Mature 8 >0.6 4 N

May be possible to retain but will not beknown until works commence – considerfor removal

T38Ash?No positiveidentification

Maturing 10 >0.6 4 N

Access not possible to correctly identify –may be possible to retain but decision tobe made when work commences aroundtree – consider for removal at this stage

T39 ElmUlmus glabra Maturing 7 M/S 3 N



RefNo Species Age

ClassHeight

(m)Girth(m)

CrownSpread(max in

m)

Vigour Comments

T40She OakCasuarinacunninghamiana

Young 7 >0.6 3 N Major asymmetric crown and lean towardsroad

T41 Pittosporumeugeniodes Young 3.5 M/S 2.5 N Small trees growing together



T44 Wattle Maturing 8 >0.6 2 N Extensively pruned back from adjacentpower lines

T45LemonwoodPittosporumeugeniodes

Maturing 8 >0.6 2 N As above

T46 MeliaMelia azedarach Mature 8 >0.6 3 N As above

T47 TitokiAlectryon excelsus Mature 8 >0.6 4 N Power lines running through crown


Young 4 >0.6 3 N Under Power lines

T49 Phoenix palm Mature 12 >0.6 4 N Adjacent to proposed access track forstorm water pond



RefNo Species Age

ClassHeight

(m)Girth(m)

CrownSpread(max in

m)

Vigour Comments

T50RedwoodSequoiasempervirens

Mature 22 >0.6 5 N Twin stem tree

G1WillowSalix spp Maturing 20+ >0.6 4 - 7 N Screen planting/Shelter belt, some minor

storm damage.

G2Mixed PoplarPopulus spp Maturing 20 >0.6 8 - 10 N

Screen planting/Shelter belt containingapproximately 19 trees. Telephone wiresrunning through the crown of two trees inthis group.

G3 Japanese cedarCryptomeria japonica Maturing 6 >0.6 3 N

Screen planting/Shelter belt containingapproximately 16 trees. All the lower limbshave been removed.

G4 Japanese cedarCryptomeria japonica Maturing 15 >0.6 3 N

Screen planting/Shelter belt containingapproximately 50 trees. Some of the treeshave been topped to accommodateoverhead power lines.

G5 AlderAlnus glutinosa Young 5 <0.6 2 N Approximately 7 trees in this group.

G6WillowSalix spp Maturing 10 >0.6 4 N Screen planting/Shelter belt containing

approximately 5 trees.

G7WillowSalix spp Maturing 10 >0.6 4 N Screen planting/Shelter belt containing




G8 AlderAlnus glutinosa Maturing 10 >0.6 4 N Approximately 6 trees in this group.

G9She oakCasuarinacunninghamiana

Maturing 8 Various 3 N Screen planting/Shelter belt containingapproximately 53 trees.


Mature 20 >0.6 8 N End of shelter belt.

G11 Japanese cedarCryptomeria japonica Maturing 6 >0.6 3 N Screen planting/Shelter belt containing


G12 Bamboo Hedge Mature 3-4 <0.6 2 N Shelter belt

G13 Bamboo Hedge Mature 3 <0.6 1.5 N Shelter belt behind Poplar trees

G14 Mixed hedge Maturing 2-3 <0.6 1.5 N

G15

WattlePittosporumDawn RedwoodCabbage treeAcmena

Maturing 4-7 >0.6 2 N

G16 Golden Wattle Young 3-4 M/S 2 N

G17She OakCasuarinacunninghamiana

Young 4 >0.6 2 N End of shelter belt may require partialremoval.

G18 WillowSalix spp Maturing 12 >0.6 2-4 L Poor specimens, remnant of shelter belt




Mature 20 >0.6 4-7 N Shelter belt

G20 Willow/poplarSalix spp Mature 8-15 >0.6 4-7 N Small group



Appendix 2Northside Drive Kedgley Road Link - Arboricultural Photographs

View west down access driveway/track T1 – Poplar T2 Willow

G1 Wilow G2 Poplar T3 Macrocarpa



T6,T7 and T8 Lemonwood T4 and T5 G3 – Japanese cedar shelterbelt

G4 – Japanese cedar shelterbelt T10, T11 and T12 – Palm G5 and G6 Alder and Willow shelter belt



T15 and T16 G9 She Oak T17 Poplar

T18, T19 and T20 T25, T26 and T27 G10 – She Oak



G11 Japanese cedar T29 Silver Dollar T32 Sweetgum

T41,42 and T43 Lemonwood G16 Golden Wattle T48 Camphor tree



G16 Dawn Redwood, Cabbage tree,Lemonwood, Acemena View towards T46 T44 Wattle and T45 Lemonwood

T46 Melia tree G14 Mixed hedge G20 Willow and Poplar



G19 She Oak G18 and T49 Willow and Phoenix palm T50 Redwood

DRAWNDATE A4SCALE

TITLE/DWG NO. Tree Location Plan Part 1Northside Drive Kedgley Road LinkAuckland

SB23/1/12Not to Scale

T1

T2

T3

G1

G2T34

T35 T36

G12

G13

DRAWNDATE A4SCALE

TITLE/DWG NO.

G18

G19

G20

T49

T50

Tree Location Plan Part 4Northside Drive Kedgley Road LinkAuckland

SBSB15/11/12Not to Scale

DRAWNDATE A4SCALE


SB23/1/12Not To Scale

T17

T21

T23

T25

T28T30

T31

T32

T18,T19, T20, T22,T24, T25, T26 and T27in this area

G9G10

G11 T48

G16

G17

DRAWNDATE A4SCALE


SB23/1/12Not to Scale

T4T5T6T7T8

T9

T10T11T12

T13T14

T15

T16 G3G4G5G6

G7G8

T37 T38

T39

T40

T41T42

T43T45

T44 T46

T47

G14

G15



Appendix 3

Definitions

Dimensions: All dimensions are estimated unless otherwise indicated. Measurementstaken with a tape or clinometer are indicated with a ‘*’. Less reliable estimateddimensions are indicated with a '?'.

Species: I based the species identification on my visual observations and have placed '?'after the name of a tree where I have some doubt over its identity.

Height: Height is estimated to the nearest meter.

Trunk diameter: Trunk diameter is estimated at 1.4m above ground level and recordedin meters. If appropriate, it has been measured with a diameter tape. Trees that havemultiple stems are indicated with ‘M’.

Maturity: Tree maturity has been assessed as mature (last one third of life expectancy),maturing (one third to two thirds life expectancy) and young (less than one third lifeexpectancy).

Vigour: This is an indication of the health of the tree. Trees have either been assessedas N = normal vigour or L = low vigour.

Comments: This column records any relevant features that may help clarify the retentioncategory allocation.

Documents

Arboricultural Assessment Northside Drive East Auckland ... · removal, chipping and stump grinding, generate high noise levels, usually on an intermittent rather than continuous