BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and ... · BS5837 Tree Survey and Tree Constraints Plan at the above address I am Jon Hartley, an Arboricultural Surveyor for Arbtech

BS5837:2012

Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction –

Recommendations

Tree Survey

Bancroft Gardens,

Bancroft,

Hertfordshire.

9 January 2014

Author: Jon Hartley Dip.Hort. (Arb.), Tech.Arbor.A.

Arbtech Consulting Ltd 5678552 GB903660148 Directors: R. M. Oates Unit 3 Well House Barn, Chester Road, Chester, CH4 0DH Also in Bedfordshire, Birmingham, Kent, Manchester, Lancashire, London, Surrey and Sussex Tel. 01244 661170 Web. www.arbtech.co.uk E-mail. [email protected] Bancroft Gardens – Arbtech TSR 01

Marion Clarke Building Design Partnership Ltd.

Bancroft Park, Bancroft, Hitchin, Hertfordshire

09/01/14

Tree Survey Report Bancroft Park, Bancroft, Hitchin, Hertfordshire

Marion Croft of BDP Ltd recently appointed Arbtech Consulting Ltd. to undertake a

BS5837 Tree Survey and Tree Constraints Plan at the above address

I am Jon Hartley, an Arboricultural Surveyor for Arbtech Consulting Ltd. I undertook

the tree survey on 3rd January 2014 and have subsequently produced this summary

of my findings.

I hold an Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) level 5 Diploma in arboriculture

which the UK NARIC consider comparable to a BTEC HNC. UK NARIC is the

National Agency responsible for providing information, advice and expert opinion on

qualifications worldwide. I have professional experience in contracting and in

Arboricultural Consultancy spanning fifteen years.

The advice below and appended is underwritten by our Professional Indemnity

Insurance for the business practice of Arboricultural Consultancy in the sum of one

million Pounds Sterling in each and every claim.

Tree Survey Executive Summary

A total of 51trees individual trees and 14 groups of trees were surveyed.

During the survey I categorised the group of trees using “Table 1 – Cascade chart for

tree quality assessment” of the BS5837:2012.

The proposed development for the site is unknown to the tree surveyor.

Of the trees and groups surveyed 48 were classified as C grade trees. The vast

majority of these C trees were classified thus due to advance maturity and

subsequent structural issues which make them poor candidates for retention on a

site being developed.

3 trees were found to be in such a condition that a classification of U was assigned.

These 3 were all individual trees with significant structural issues which should be

considered for management in the short term.


18 B grade trees were identified as being of significant quality and future potential

that they may prove an asset to any development of the site.

There are 2 trees on site which really stood out. Tree 35 a massive lime near the

centre of the site which has an impressive stature and is in excellent health and Tree

71 which while relatively young, is in excellent condition and has huge potential for

the future.

Individual notes on each tree’s structural and physiological condition are found in the

Notes section of the survey schedule.

This content is for educational and informative purposes; so parts of it are reproduced with the kind permission of BSI Global.


BS5837 Scope

This standard recognizes that there can be problems of development close to

existing trees which are to be retained, and of planting trees close to existing

structures. This standard sets out to assist those concerned with trees in relation to

construction to form balanced judgements. It does not set out to put arguments for or

against development, or for the removal or retention of trees. Where development,

including demolition, is to occur, the standard provides guidance on how to decide

which trees are appropriate for retention, on the means of protecting these trees

during development, including demolition and construction work, and on the means

of incorporating trees into the developed landscape.

Definitions

Arboriculturist

An arboriculturist (or arboricultural consultant) is a person who has, through relevant

education, training and experience, gained recognized qualifications and expertise in

the field of trees in relation to construction.

Tree Survey

A tree survey should be undertaken by an arboriculturist and should record

information about the trees on a site independently of and prior to any specific

design for development. As a subsequent task, and with reference to a design or

potential design, the results of the survey should be included in the preparation of a

tree constraints plan, which should be used to assist with site layout design.

Tree Constraints Plan

A TCP is plan, typically delivered as an AutoCAD drawing (.dwg file format),

prepared by an arboriculturist for the purposes of layout design showing the root

protection area and representing the effect that the mature height and spread of

retained trees will have on layouts through shade, dominance, etc.

Root Protection Area

An RPA is a layout design tool indicating the area surrounding a tree that contains

sufficient rooting volume to ensure the survival of the tree, shown in plan form in m².

Construction Exclusion Zone (also termed Tree Protection Zone)

A construction exclusion or tree protection zone is an area based on the RPA (in m²),

identified by an arboriculturist, to be protected during development, including

demolition and construction work, by the use of barriers and/or ground protection fit

for purpose to ensure the successful long-term retention of a tree.


Arboricultural Impact Assessment

This is a study, undertaken by an arboriculturist, to identify, evaluate and possibly

mitigate the extent of direct and indirect impacts on existing trees that may arise as a

result of the implementation of any site layout proposal.

Tree Protection Plan

A TPP is plan, typically delivered as an AutoCAD drawing (.dwg file format),

prepared by an arboriculturist showing the finalized layout proposals, tree retention

and tree and landscape protection measures detailed within the arboricultural

method statement, which can be shown graphically.

Arboricultural Method Statement

This is a methodology for the implementation of any aspect of development that has

the potential to result in loss of or damage to a tree. The AMS is likely to include

details of an on-site tree protection monitoring regime.

Methodology

The methodology used to assess the trees was the British Standard BS5837:2012-

Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction tree survey method. The aim

of the survey is to establish which trees are moderate and good quality; suitable for

retention and justifying protection. And, which trees are low or poor quality; either

undesirable or unsuitable to retain and protect.

The tree survey includes all trees included in the land survey red line boundary plan,

as well as any that may have been missed, and it should categorize trees or groups

of trees, including woodlands for their quality and value within the existing context, in

a transparent, understandable and systematic way. Where the arboriculturist has

deemed it appropriate, the trees have been tagged with small metal or plastic tags,

placed as high as is convenient on the stem of each tree.

Whilst master plan proposals for the development of the site might be available, the

trees have been surveyed without taking these into consideration. All detailed design

work on site layout should take into consideration the results of the tree survey (and

the TCP).

Trees forming groups and areas of woodland (including orchards, wood pasture and

historic parkland) are identified and considered as groups where the arboriculturist

has determined that this is appropriate, particularly where they contain a variety of

species and age classes that could aid long-term management. It is often expedient

to assess the quality and value of such groups of trees as a whole, rather than as

individuals. However, an assessment of individuals within any group has been

undertaken if they are open-grown or if there is a need to differentiate between them.


The quality and value of each tree or group of trees has been recorded by allocating

it to one of the four categories; A, B, C, or U (highest to lowest quality respectively).

The categories are differentiated on the tree survey plan by colour, or by suffixing the

category adjacent to the tree identification number on the TCP.

The survey schedule lists all the trees or groups of trees. The following information is

also provided:

I. reference number (to be recorded on the tree survey plan);

II. species (common or scientific names);

III. height in metres;

IV. stem diameter in millimetres at 1.5 m above adjacent ground level or

immediately above the root flare for multi-stemmed trees;

V. branch spread in metres taken at the four cardinal compass points;

VI. height in metres of crown clearance above adjacent ground level;

VII. age class (young, middle aged, mature, over-mature, veteran);

VIII. physiological condition (e.g. good, fair, poor, dead);

IX. structural condition, e.g. collapsing, the presence of any decay and physical

defect;

X. preliminary management recommendations, including further investigation of

suspected defects that require more detailed assessment and potential for

wildlife habitat; and

XI. Category grading to be recorded in plan on the tree survey plan.

Recommendations

With the benefit of making an assessment of your planning proposals, we make the

following recommendation to ensure that no conditions relating to arboriculture are

attached to any planning consent secured; obtain an arboricultural report to include:

a) An arboricultural impact assessment (AIA);

b) An arboricultural method statement (AMS); and

c) A tree protection plan drawing (TPP).


Limitations

Trees were inspected using visual observation from ground level only. Trees were

not climbed or inspected below ground level. Inaccessible trees will have best

estimates made about the location, physical dimensions and characteristics. Trees

have been grouped where BS5837 guides us that it is expedient to do so. Trees

have been excluded from the survey if they are found by us to be sufficiently far

away from the proposed developable area or if they are outside of the red line

boundary plan showing the expectations of our Client for the extent of the survey.

BS5837 does not draw any distinction between trees subject to statutory protection,

such as a Tree Preservation Order (“TPO”), and those trees without. This is

principally because a detailed planning consent overrides any TPO protection.

Consequently, we do not seek to offer any comparison between or infer any

difference in the quality or importance of TPO trees and other trees.

Appendices

The following documents were released to the Client as appendices to this report:

Survey Schedule (PDF)

Tree Constraints Plan drawing (PDF)

If you require clarification of information contained herein, please do not hesitate to

contact us via 08450 176950.

Yours Sincerely,

Jon Hartley

Arboricultural Surveyor

Arbtech Consulting Ltd 5678552 GB903660148 Directors: R. M. Oates Unit 3 Well House Barn, Chester Road, Chester, CH4 0DH Also in Bedfordshire, Birmingham, Kent, Manchester, Lancashire, London, Surrey and Sussex Tel. 01244 661170 Web. www.arbtech.co.uk E-mail. [email protected]

Appendix 1: Tree Survey Schedule

Arbtech Consulting Ltd 5678552 GB903660148 Directors: R. M. Oates Unit 3 Well House Barn, Chester Road, Chester, CH4 0DH Also in Bedfordshire, Birmingham, Kent, Manchester, Lancashire, London, Surrey and Sussex Tel. 01244 661170 Web. www.arbtech.co.uk E-mail. [email protected] Bancroft Park – Arbtech TS 01 A

Tree Survey Schedule Bancroft Park, Bancroft, Hitchin, Hertfordshire

Client: Marion Clarke

Survey Date 3rd

January 2014

Weather Conditions Stormy showers

Surveyor Jon Hartley

Key:

Tree Number A unique number or reference to identify trees or groups as shown on associated plans. The suffix G denotes a Group.

Species Common and or taxonomic names.

Height The height of the tree in meters (m).

Trunk Diameter The stem diameter in millimetres (mm) taken at 1.5m above ground level unless otherwise specified. The suffix # denotes an estimated

measurement where access has been restricted.

Canopy Spread The extent of the canopy taken in meters (m) to the principle points of the compass, North (N), East (E), South (S) and West (W). The suffix #

denotes an estimated measurement where access has been restricted.

Crown Clearance The height of canopy clearance above ground level to the lowest point of the canopy, taken in meters (m).

Age Class Age classification; Young (Y), Middle Aged (MA), Mature (M), Late Mature (LM), Veteran (V).

Physiological Condition The general physiological condition of the tree; Average, Below average, Low, Dead.

Structural Condition The general structural condition of the tree; Good, Moderate, Indifferent, Poor, Hazardous.

Comments Notes and general comments on the structural condition of the tree, its environment and it estimated remaining contribution.

Category The retention category referring to the quality and useful contribution in years; U = <10yrs; A = >40yrs; B = >20yrs; C = >10yrs.

The retention sub category referring to the type of amenity; 1 = Arboricultural; 2 = Landscape; 3 = Cultural including conservation.

http://www.arbtech.co.uk/

mailto:[email protected]


Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class

Physiological Condition

Structural Condition

Comments Category

G1 Various 5m 2m

300mm- 100mm

Up to 1m 2m Y Below average Poor

Species include: 29x lime and 16x holly have all been topped at 5m and 2m respectively. Of low quality and value.

C2,3

G2 Various 13m 80mm-120mm

Up to 2m 0.5m Y Average Poor Species include: False acacia, May & Elder; all individuals historically topped at 1m. Of low quality and value.

C2,3

3 Lawson cypress

10m 230mm

N 1.5m E 1.5m S 1.5m W 1.5m

1m Ma Average Moderate

The original main stem is missing. The current leader is an adapted secondary limb which has become dominant from near the base. There is an elbow at the base where the branch has turned upwards. Of fair quality but low value.

C1

4 Common lime 8m 500mm

@1m

N 1.5m E 2m S 2m W 2m

2m MA Average Moderate Historically topped at 4m. Of low quality and value.

C1


N 3m E 3m S 3m W 3m

2m Y Average Good

All unions are well constructed with no included bark. The lowest branch of the first limb has ripped free. The 300mm wound is 60% occluded. Of good quality and fair future value.

B2


N 3m E 4m S 5m

W 3.5m

3.5m MA Average Good No significant defects noted. B2

7 Lawson cypress

10m 260m

N 3m E 1m S 1m W 2m

3m Y Average Medium Split limb at 5m on northern aspect. Supressed by trees to the east. Of fair quality and low future value.

C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

G8 Various 14m 120mm- 950mm

Up to 5m 2m M Low Poor

Multiple significant defects which if remediated would negatively affect remaining trees. Although this is a generally mature stand of tree there are a multitude of defects noted in each individual. Of low quality and future value.

C1

9 Scotts pine 16m 540mm

N 4m E 2m S 5m W 5m

2m M Average Good significant defects noted.

B1

10 Maiden hair

tree 8m 400mm

N 2.5m E 3m S 3m W 2m

3m OM Low Poor

Twin stemmed with included bark at the main union. Basal growth present. Significant decay in the northern stem. Ganoderma bracket present.

U

11 Sycamore 16m 480mm

N 4.5m E 3m S 4m

W 4.5m

4.2m MA Average Moderate Bifurcates at 4m with included present. Squirrel damage evident on upside of low limbs.

B1

12 Sweet

chestnut 11m 530mm

N 2.5m E 5m S 6m

W 4.5m

3m MA Average Moderate No significant defect noted. B3

G13 Lawson cypress

10m 400mm-600mm

Up to 2m 0m MA Average Indifferent No significant defects noted. Although the trees are in good general condition they are of low value.

C1

14 Sweet

chestnut 11m 390mm

N 2.5m E 5m

S 4.5m W 4m

4m MA Average Good Crown break at 4.5m. Multi-stemmed from this point.

B3




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category


Up to 4m

1m MA Below average Indifferent

All trees infested with ivy from base to 70%. Base, stems and unions are not visible for inspection. Of low quality and future value.

C1

16 Ash 16m #750mm

N 8m E 7m S 9m W 9m

5m M Average Obscured

by ivy

Tree infested with ivy from base to 70%. Base, stems and unions are not visible for inspection. Tip extension appears good.

B1

17 Horse

chestnut 14m 550mm

N 6.5m E 5m S 6m W 6m

3m MA Average Moderate Multi-stemmed from 4m. Multiple unions of compressive nature.

B1

G18 Yew 12m 150mm- 500mm

N 6.5m E 4.5m S 5m

W 7.5m

2.5m M Average Good

Two trees. Truncated limbs to the east. Ivy from base to 50%. Base, stems and unions are not entirely visible for inspection.

B1

19 Birch 6m 240mm

N 3.5m E 2.5m S 3.5m W 3.5m

3m MA Average Moderate Supressed by G18 to the east. Of fair quality but future value.

C1


Up to 7.5m

3m M Average Poor

Species include: Beech & Field maple. Major structural faults in the dominant beech of the group. Ivy is covering the base, stems and major unions impairing detailed inspection of other individuals. Of low quality and future value.

C2,3




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

21 Ash 7m 216mm

N 4m E 4m S 4m W 4m

1m Y Average Moderate

3 stems from base, unions constructed well with no included bark. Currently in good condition but is a young, insignificant tree with poor structural form.

C1


Up to 4.5m

2m M Average Moderate

Species include: Field maple & Beech. Base, stems and unions are obscured by ivy. The shape of the unions suggests that they are likely to be well constructed.

B2

G23 Various 6m-12m

450mm-700mm

See plan for

canopy of group

2m OM Average Ivy Base, stems and unions are obscured by ivy to 80%. Of low quality and future aesthetic value.

C1

24 Ash 12m 600mm

N 5m E 7m S 6m W 7m

3.5m M Average Moderate Base, stems and unions are obscured by ivy to 90%. Growing in and supporting the river bank.

B2

25 Hazel 6.5m 6x120mm

N 3m E 3m S 1m W 2m

2m Y Average Moderate Growing in and supporting the river bank.

C1

26 Pear 7m 480mm

N 5m E 6m S 6m

W 1.5m

4m OM Low Poor Extensive decay detectable with the hammer to crown break.

U

G27 Flowering

cherry 6m

580mm-490mm

Up to 4m 2m OM Below average Poor Two trees. Poor unions with included bark, decay and Ganoderma present a the graft point at 3m

U




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

28 Foxglove tree 10m 280mm

N 4m E 4m S 4m W 4m

2m MA Average Moderate Mechanical wound at base. There is a swelling at the base to approximately double the stem diameter.

B1

29 Silver birch 15m 300mm

N 3.5m E 3.5m S 3.5m W 3.5m

2m MA Average Good No visible defects noted B1

30 Crab apple 7m 270mm

N 3m E 3m S 3m W 3m

2m M Average Indifferent

Repeated strimmer damage at base has resulted in poor development. No significant defects noted. Of low quality and future value.

C1

31 Norway maple 9m 420mm

N 4m E 4m S 4m W 6m

4m MA Average Moderate Minor wound on low northern limb. Some tight unions, no significant included bark at this time.

B1

32 Incense cedar 7m #180mm

N 1.5m E 1.5m S 1.5m W 1.5m

0m MA Average Low

no close companion trees. Of low quality and future value.

C1

33 Hawthorn 4m 250mm @1m

N 2.5m E 2.5m S 2.5m W 2.5m

1.5m M Average Moderate Previously topped at 3m. Of low quality and future value.

C1

G34 Various 2m-5m 120mm-300mm

Up to 3m 0m M Average Moderate A shrub bed with little value. C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category


N 9m E 8m S 7m W 5m

7m M Average Good

Crown structure is good with generally well-constructed unions and very little epicormic growth for the species. There is deadwood in excess of 50mm throughout the crown with 2 branches currently detached and hanging.

A1

36 Flowering

cherry 4m 180mm

N 0.5m E 2m S 2m W 2m

2m MA Below average Moderate Of low quality and value. C1

37 Horse

chestnut 9m 530mm

N 4.5m E 6m S 7m W 6m

2m M Below average Low

Bark legions throughout the lower stem and primary scaffold. Poor pruning wounds on stem all with decay associated. Of low quality and value.

C1

38 Cider gum 16m 470mm

N 5m E 4m S 5m W 4m

4m MA Average Good

Tree growing well with immediately significant defects noted. Of good quality and reasonable aesthetic value. Ivy covers lower 2m of stem.

B1

G39 Lawson cypress

7m-10m

#120mm-#300mm

Up to #2m

0m MA Average Moderate A hedge planted to screen the tennis courts. It has not been managed since planting. Of low quality and value.

C2

40 Flowering

cherry 4m 240mm

N 2m E 2m S 3m W 3m

2m MA Below average Low Decay present at the top of the stem at the graft. Of low quality and value.

C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

41 Horse

chestnut 10m 390mm

N 5m E 5m S 6m W 6m

2m MA Below average Moderate

Poor tip extension and bud density. Target canker at 3m on the northern side of the stem. Multiple pruning wounds on the stem with associated decay. Of low quality and value.

C1

42 Flowering

cherry 10m 270mm

N 1m E 4m S 4m W 4m

3m MA Average Moderate Congested stem union at 3m with included bark present. Of low quality and value.

C1


N 4m E 4m S 5m

W 3.5m

3m M Average Indifferent

Historically topped at approximately 5m and recently reduced to leave wounds of 50mm-100mm. Of medium quality.

C1

44 Thuja 12m 460mm

N 3m E 5m S 4m W 5m

0m MA Average Good Suppressed by 45. Of fair quality and low value.

C1

45 Honey locust 16m 870mm

N 9m E 6m S 5m W 7m

5m OM Below average Poor Deep stem fluting typical of species. All stem unions compressive in nature. Of low quality and value at his age.

C1

46 Thuja 9m 510mm

N 3m E 3m S 4m W 3m

0m MA Average Good

Low limbs regularly trimmed to manage footpath over hang. This has resulted in an individual of low quality and value.

C1


N 4m E 6m S 6m W 7m

4m OM Low poor

Stem unions of compressive nature with a rose growing from one major union. Recent major dead wood removed.

C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

48 Broadleaved

lime 22m 1430mm

N 11m E 10m S 8m W 9m

4m M average Moderate

5 co-dominant stems converge at approximately 5m. There is included bark at the unions but no reactive growth to suggest that these are particularly weak. Management may be required depending on target occupation. There is deadwood in excess of 50mm throughout the crown. Tree of good quality and high aesthetic value.

B1


N 7m E 7m S 5m W 7m

6m OM Low Hazardous

Un-identifiable fungal fruiting body at 1.5m on northern and southern side of main stem. Cavity at 2m on North. Of low quality and at this age, low long term value.

C1


N 7m E 4m

S 4.5m W 4m

4m OM Below average Moderate Hollow buttress on northern side. Of low quality and at this age, low long term value.

C1

51 Black

mulberry 8m 410mm

N 2m E 4m S 6m W 3m

3m OM Below average Poor

Stem union has included bark and several decaying pruning wounds in close proximity. Of low quality and long-term value

C1


N 5m E 6m S 8m W 7m

4m OM Low Indifferent Die back is present throughout the crown. Of low quality and at this age, low long term value.

C1


N 2m E 3.5 S 3m

W 1.5m

4m OM Low Poor

Fungal fruiting body at 3m on the R “ ” Of low quality and at this age, low long term value.

C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category


N 5m E 7m S 6m W 3m

5m OM Low Poor

Previously partially wind thrown to the east. Major deadwood (>50mm) in the crown. Of low quality and at this age, low long term value.

C1


N 3m E 5m S 7m W 4m

6m OM Low Poor

Recently reduced leaving 80mm-120mm pruning wounds. Fungal fruiting body at 2m on the northern side of the stem. Holly growing from stem union. Of low quality value.

C1


N 6m E 5m S 5m

W 5.5m

3m M Average Medium Historically topped at 4m. Of fair quality and some aesthetic value as a mature tree bordering the road.

C1

57 Plum 7m #380mm

N 2m E 4m S 4m W 2m


There is ivy obscuring the tree from the base to 60% coverage. Broken limbs are hanging in the crow and there is dead wood present. Of low quality and value.

C1

58 Plum 7m #400mm

N 3m E 3m S 3m W 4m


There is ivy obscuring the tree from the base to 60% coverage. Broken limbs are hanging in the crow and there is dead wood present. Of low quality and value.

C1

59 Hawthorn 6m 290mm

N 3m E 3m S 3m W 3m

2m M Average Good

Basal growth is developing suggesting some stress in the tree. Currently of good quality and good value for wildlife.

B1

60 Incense cedar 6m 180mm

N 2.5m E 2.5m S 2.5m W 2.5m

0m Y Average Good Of good quality for the species but low overall value.

C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

61 Atlantic cedar 9m 440mm

N 6m E 5.5m S 4m W 6m

0.4m MA Average Good Of good quality and high potential for amenity value.

B1

62 Gold leylandii 7m 260mm

N 2m E 2m S 2m W 2m

0m Y Average Good Of good quality but low long term value.

C1

63 Horse

chestnut 14m 850mm

N 2m E 7m S 5m W 7m

4m OM Low Poor

M g “ g” Coalescing columns of dysfunctional wood are likely. Of low quality and low long term value.

C1

64 May tree 5m 120mm

N 1m E 3m S 1m W 2m

1.5m M Average Good Asymmetrical crown as a result of suppression by 63. Fair quality with low long term value.

C1

65 Purple plum 8m #400mm

N 5m E 5m S 5m W 2m

2m OM Low Poor

Ivy obscures the base, stem and branch unions. Die back throughout crown. Of low quality and, at this age, low long term value.

C1

66 Weeping

beech 8m 330mm

N 6m E 5m

S 4.5m W 4m

0m MA Average Good

Regular works have been requited to manage the impact to road users. Of medium quality but low long term value.

C1

G67 Various 7m 120mm-210mm

Up to 3m 0m Y Average Moderate

Individuals which have been planted without the room to reach maturity. No particular defects are noted at this time. Of medium quality at present but low long term value.

C1




Tree No.

Species Height

(M)

Trunk Diameter

(MM)

Canopy Spread (M)

Crown Clearance

(M)

Age Class



Comments Category

G68 Various 7m #400mm Up to 4m 0m M Below average Moderate

Individuals which have been planted without the room to reach maturity. No particular defects are noted at this time. Of medium quality at present but low long term value.

C1

69 Purple plum 8m #400mm

N 4m E 4m S 4m W 5m

2m M Average Moderate

Ivy obscures the base, stem and branch unions. Die back throughout crown. Of low quality and, at this age, low long term value.

C1

70 Golden

incense cedar 7m 230mm

N 3m E 3m S 3m W 3m

0m MA Average Moderate Of good quality but low long term value.

C1

71 Giant sequoia 13m 780mm

N 3.5m E 3.5m S 3.5m W 3.5m

0m MA average Good

There are dead, low branches on the eastern side consistent with fire damage. Of good general quality and high potential for amenity value.

A1



Arbtech Consulting Ltd 5678552 GB903660148 Directors: R. M. Oates Unit 3 Well House Barn, Chester Road, Chester, CH4 0DH Also in Bedfordshire, Birmingham, Kent, Manchester, Lancashire, London, Surrey and Sussex Tel. 01244 661170 Web. www.arbtech.co.uk E-mail. [email protected]

Appendix 2: Tree Constraints Plan

LP

LP

LP

PT

MH

LP

LP

LP

LP

LP

SP

BIN

PT

MH

PT

IC

MH

PT

MH

BENCH

PT

PT

PT

PT

PT

DR

DR

DR

DR

DR

DR

IC

IC

IC

IC

BIN

IC

LP

BIN

BENCH

BIN

PT

PT

PT

PT

BENCH

NP

BENCH

BENCH

BIN

BENCH

PT

PT

IC

BOL

BOL

BOL

DR

DR

IC

IC

IC

DR

DR

IC

PT

PT

PT

PT

BOL

DR

DR

DR

PT

PT

PT

PT

PT

DR

DR

DR

DR

BIN

LP

PT

LP

IC

NP

WST

LP

DR

DR

RE

IC

PT

PT

BENCH

BENCH

BENCH

BENCH

BENCH

BENCHBENCH

PT

PT

FP

SP

BENCH

SP

BENCH

BENCH

BENCH

RE

RE

RE

LP

BENCH

RE

RE

PT

PT

BENCH

BENCH

BENCH

RE

RE

BENCH

IC

RE

RE

DR

DR

CB

IC

IC

DR

BOL

BOL

BOL

BOL

BOL

DR

DR

DR

DR

PT

PT

PT

PT

PT

PT

PT

PT

NP

BIN

BENCH

IC

BENCH

BIN

BENCH

BENCH

BENCH

BIN

DR

DR

DR

BIN

BIN

BIN

PT

IC

BENCH

BIN

BENCH

BIN

BENCH

BIN

BENCH

BIN

BIN

BENCH

BENCH

NP

BIN

BS

IC

IC

IC

LP

BOL

BOL

BENCH

IC

DR

DR

NP

NP

WST

MKR

LP

MKR

LP

LP

TCB

DR

BIN

IC

DR

BS

LP

CB

NP

SP

SP

BOL

BOL

BOL

TB

BIN

DR

BIN

LP

IC

DR

DR

DR

WST

WST

MH

MH

SP

BOL

LP

LP

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

G

MH

PT

PT

BENCH

G1

G1

G1

G1

G1

G1

3

4

5

6

7

G8

9

10 11

12

G13

G13

14

G15

16

17

G18

19

G20

21

G22

G23

24

25

26

G27

28

29

30

31

32

33

G34

35

36

37

38

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

G67

G68

69

70

71

G2

G2

G39

G39

G39

G39

G1

0m 1m 3m 5m 10m

RBTECHC o n s u l t i n g L i m i t e d

Tree Constraints Plan

13K146

Arbtech TCP 01

Jan 2013 1:400 @ A1 JCH

Tree

Nos.:

Tree

Canopies:

Trunks:

RPAs:

Category

'A' trees:

Category

'B' trees:

Category

'C' trees:

1

Category

'U' trees:

Trees are categorised in accordance with the cascade chart in Table 1

of the British Standard BS 5837:2005 'Trees in relation to construction -

Recommendations'

Category 'U' - Trees in such condition that they cannot realistically be

retained as living trees in context of the current land use

for longer than 10 years.

Category 'A' - Trees of high quality with an estimated remaining life

expectancy of at least 40 years.

Category 'B' - Trees of moderate quality with an estimated remaining

life expectancy of at least 20 years.

Category 'C' - Trees of low quality with an estimated remaining life

expectancy of at least 10 years, or young trees with a

stem diameter below 150mm.

Tree Categories

In order to avoid damage to the roots or rooting environment of

retained trees, the Root Protection Areas (RPAs) should be plotted

around each of the category A, B and C trees. This is a minimum area

in m² which should be left undisturbed around each retained tree.

The RPA is calculated using the British Standard BS 5837:2012 'Trees

in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations.

The calculated RPA is capped to 707m², which is the equivalent to a

circle with a radius of 15m. Where there appears to be restrictions to

root growth the root protection area is reshaped to more accurately

reflect the likely distribution of the roots.

Root Protection Area

All dimensions should be checked on site. No dimensions are to be scaled from this drawing.

Please notify us of any discrepancies found. Arbtech Consulting Ltd. cannot be held responsible for inaccuracies in

the base drawing in which this plan is based.

This drawing is designed to reflect the principles of the layout or design only, and relates only to the protection of

retained trees.

This drawing is not to be read as a definitive part of the engineering or construction designs or method statement.

An architect or structural engineer should be contacted over any matters of construction, detailing or specification

and for any standards or regulatory requirements relating to proposed structures, hard surfacing or underground

services.

This drawing was produced in colour - a monochrome copy should not be relied upon.

© Arbtech Consulting Ltd, 2012

Bancroft Park

Bancroft

Hitchin

Hertfordshire

Marion Clarke


Document Production Record

Document number

Editor Signature Position Issue

number Date

Arbtech TSR 01 Jon Hartley

Surveyor 1 09/01/2014

Limitations

Arbtech Consulting Ltd has prepared this Report for the sole use of the above

named Client/Agent in accordance with our terms of business, under which our

services were performed. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the

professional advice included in this Report or any other services provided by us. This

Report may not be relied upon by any other party without the prior and express

written agreement of Arbtech Consulting Ltd. The assessments made assume that

the sites and facilities will continue to be used for their current purpose without

significant change. The conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report

are based upon information provided by others and upon the assumption that all

relevant information has been provided by those parties from whom it has been

requested. Information obtained from third parties has not been independently

verified by Arbtech Consulting Ltd.

Copyright

© This Report is the copyright of Arbtech Consulting Ltd. Any unauthorised

reproduction or usage by any person other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.

www.arbtech.co.uk

Documents

BS5837:2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and ... · BS5837 Tree Survey and Tree Constraints Plan at the above address I am Jon Hartley, an Arboricultural Surveyor for Arbtech