Original source · versioned page text
arborist
A
h
Australian Tree Contractors
&
Arboricultural Consultants
www.australianconsultarborist.com.au
Managing Trees in The Urban
Environment
Norhart Developments
Jura
Cnr Eumundi Noosa Rd and Headland Drv
Noosaville
Consult Arborist : Kurt Brown DIP Arb ,
ISA TRAQ Certified
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.
Full text of the other 22 pages
Page 2
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Inspecting Arborist: Kurt Brown DIP Arb, ISA TRAQ Certified, Level 3 Arb Time Period: 12 Months Client: Norhart Developments Pty Ltd Site: Cnr Eumundi Noosa Rd and Headland Drv Noosaville QLD 4566 Date of Inspection: 13th September 2023 Table of Contents 1. Professional Disclaimer 2. Qualifications 3. Client Information 4. Scope Of Works 5. Method of Inspection 6. Site Map 7. Site Observations 8. Tree Details 9. Site Photos 10. Arborist Observations and Conclusion Statment
Page 3
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Professional Disclaimer: All trees are inspected on a basic level and ground based and should a higher level of inspection be required this will be identified and required to complete a mitigation response on individual trees. All trees are assessed on “normal weather conditions “and weather event outside this will be deemed an abnormal weather event and as this assessment results a higher level of risk than the initial assessment due to forces applied. After any weather event where there have been severe forces applied to the assessed trees, we strongly recommend a reinspection to keep your report current as this report prior to any event will be deemed defuncted until reinspected. Although Australian Tree Contractors & Arboricultural Consultants PTY Ltd (I 614 266 125) (ATCAC) use all due care and skill in providing you with the information made available in this Report, to the extent permitted by law ATCAC otherwise excludes all warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied. To the extent permitted by law, you agree that ATCAC is not liable to you or any other person or entity for any loss or damage caused or alleged to have been caused (including loss or damage resulting from negligence), either directly or indirectly, by your use of the information (including by way of example, Arboricultural advice) made available to you in this report. Without limiting this disclaimer, in no event will ATCAC be liable to you for any lost revenue or profits, or for special, indirect, consequential, or incidental damage (however caused and regardless of the theory of liability) arising out of or related to your use of that information, even if Tree Logic has been advised of the possibility of such loss or damage. This disclaimer is governed by the law in force in the State of Queensland, Australia. This Report is addressed to you and may not be distributed to, or used or relied on by, another person without the prior written consent of ATCAC. ATCAC accepts no liability to any other person, entity, or organisation with respect to the content of this Report unless that person, entity or organisation has first agreed in writing to the terms upon which this Report may be relied on by that other person, entity, or organisation. Report Assumptions The following qualifications and assumptions apply to the Report: • Any legal description provided to ATCAC is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownership of any property are assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matters outside of ATCAC’s control. • ATCAC assumes that any property or project is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or other local, state, or federal government regulations. • ATCAC shall take care to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data shall be verified as far as possible; however,
Page 4
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 ATCAC can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of the information provided by others not directly under ATCAC’s control. • No ATCAC employee or contractor shall be required to give testimony or to attend court because of the Report unless subpoenaed or subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services. • Loss of the report or alteration of any part of the report not undertaken by ATCAC invalidates the entire Report and shall not be relied upon by any party. • The Report and any values expressed therein represent the opinion of ATCAC’s consultant and ATCAC’s fee is in no way conditional upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported. • Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs used in the Report, is intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural drawings, reports, or surveys. • Unless expressed otherwise: I) The information contained in the Report will cover those items that were outlined in the project brief or that were examined during the assessment and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and ii) The inspection is limited to a visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation or probing unless otherwise stipulated. • There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied by ATCAC, that the problems or deficiencies of the plants or site in question may not arise in the future. • All instructions (verbal or written) that define the scope of the Report have been included in the Report and all documents and other materials that the ATCAC Consultant has been instructed to consider or to consider in preparing the Report have been included or listed within the Report. • The Report is limited to the matters stated in it and does not apply by implication to any other matters. • To the writer’s knowledge all facts, matter, and all assumptions upon which the Report proceeds have been stated within the body of the report and all opinion contained within the report will be fully researched and referenced and any such opinion not duly researched is based upon the writer’s experience and observations. General References • Australian Standards AS 4373 – 2007 Pruning of amenity trees. • AS 4970-2009 – Protection of trees on development sites • Wild Plants of Greater Brisbane – Queensland Museum • Fraser Coast website and Maps/overlays • Evaluating Tree Defects – A Field Guide by Ed Hayes, Second Edition • Body Language of Trees – Research for Amenity Trees, Claus Mattheck • Smiley E. Thomas, Nelda Matheny, and Sharon Lilly April 2012. Tree Risk Assessment: Levels of Assessment • Matheny Nelda and Jim Clark Feb 2009. Tree Risk Assessment: What we know (and What We Do Not Know)
Page 5
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
• The use of the TRAQ as trained by the International Society of Arboriculture
Qualifications:
Our Consulting Arborist is Kurt Brown, and he has over 30 years in field experience ranging the breadth of Australia and New Zealand, both as a consultant
and as a AQF Level 3 Climbing Arborist and as such brings a more rounded and unique perspective to his inspections. This is evident in the inspections and
data collection and how this is translated into the report format and recommendations.
Kurt also has attained the highest of the relevant qualifications for inspecting trees from all aspects relating to asset and people protection and tree health
and structure and much more.
Qualifications are as follows.
1. AQF Level 3 Arboriculture SCIT
2. AQF Level 5 Arboriculture TAFE East Coast
3. ISA TRAQ Certified Arborist
Other Relevant Information,
1. Queensland Arboricultural Association Qualified Member 2018 – Current
2. Arboriculture Australia Member
3. Queensland Arboricultural Association Executive Member 2012 to 2017
4. President Queensland Arboricultural Association 2014 to 2016
5. Past President Queensland Arboricultural Association 2017
6. Arboricultural Australia Member 2014 to current
7. International Society of Arboriculture Member 2014 to current
Scope Of Works
To inspect and assess all trees on site within the properties as per the site map for their position within the development and their suitability for retention as part of the long-
term DA and landscape plan.
Page 6
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Method of Inspection Kurt Brown employs a relevant section of multiple quantified modalities in his inspections, these are Matthecks VTA (Visual Tree Assessment) (Image 1) and ISA TRAQ Assessment. Kurt will also age profile the tree using the following classification in Appendix 2 and from this will give an approximate ULE (useful life expectancy) The following data was updated for the trees: • ID Number consistent with previous assessment or on a new site the initial numbering system • Image of tree • Botanic and common name • Tree dimensions (Height x Width) • Diameter at breast height (DBH) • Health • Structure • Useful life expectancy (ULE) • Age Class • Recommended works • Comments Appendix 1
Page 7
rNNIN ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP A
COAST NSW 22:
The Visual Tree Assessment (VTA) methods as described in ‘The Body Language of Trees. A Handbook
for Failure Analysis. Research for Amenity Trees’ by Mattheck and Breloer (Mattheck, et al., 1994) is
used in association with the International Society of Arboriculture’s guidelines in this report.
196 ‘THE BODY LANGUAGE OF TREES
© VITALITY REAKAGE
Bar
-bai
- twigs ‘DEFECT
‘SYMPTO! ° ol BUTTRESS
~ but @ SAIL AREA,
@ FUNGI ~ bulges : sotueesr
OLD BRANCHES WOUNDS °
: seam oRACKS
‘© BRANCHES. e
IN @ OTHER ABNOR-
spDNe MALTHINGS
WOUND
OCCLUSION
}@ KNOCKING WITH | |@ KNOCKING
HAMMER
l@ SOUND VELOCITY| | MEASUREMENT
MEASUREMENT | |@ REMOVE SOIL
}@ RESISTOGRAPH |}@ RESISTOGRAPH
Fig 120. The Visual Tree Assessment (VTA) procedure for assessing trees.
As the suspicion increases that defects are present, the examination becomes
more thorough and searching.
Tree Risk Management Specialist
Page 8
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Appendix 2 Age Profile Glossary of Terms DBH: Diameter at breast height ULE: Useful life expectancy Health Classification: • P = Poor • F = Fair • G = Good
Page 9
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
• D = Dead
Structure Classification:
• P Poor
• PF Poor Fair
• F Fair
• FG Fair Good
• G Good
Age Classification:
• J = Juvenile
• SM = Semi Mature
• M = Mature
• S = Sequencing
• D = Dead
Site Map
Page 10
ANN
EMT.V
~/SP298783 49
| SP298783
| BON
LEGEND:
4. Drawn to scale on an A3 sheet.
2. Contour Interval... 0.25m
3. All levels are in metres on the Australian Height
Datum referred to (PSM53205) - RL 13.595 AHD
Situated in EUMUNDI RD.
4. All Boundaries are vide tle and subject to
confirmation by survey.
5. The Location of Underaround services are in
with AS5488:2019, the
Scale 1:750
Site Observations
‘Standard for classification of Subsurface Utlity
Information (SUI). The exact nature anc location
of these services should be confirmed prior to
construction.
6. Area vide tile -3/S°208257 : 636m?
T. prea vide tile -77/RP71 151 : 1831m*
8 Area vide tile - 76/RP71 151 : 1927m?
9. Area vide tle -75/RP71 154 : 1925m?
10, Field Survey Completed on 18/05/2023
Level datum: AHD Derved ((PSIMSS205))
Moran: + 659'38" P7161
Tie
VERIFICATION PLOT
Lots 75-77 on RP71151, and Lot 3 on.
SP208257 - 79-83 Eumundi Noosa Road,
and 26 Headland Drive, Noosaville
Surveyed By: WA ‘Approved: GJ
Date Created: 1170923 Scale: 4.750
Page 11
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
The proposed development foot print has houses of varying ages and as such there impact on the current trees is evident , many of the larger species are
all forest form which indicates they were self-sown and already in place when these current dwellings we built . There are no significant species on site and
are all tytpical to the region
Tree Details
Tree Botanical Name Height Width DBH Age Health Structure ULE Risk Arborist Assessment
Number Common Name (CM) rating Risk Mitigation Works
1 Araucaria heterophylla 14 16 65 26.40457 M FG F 15 to Medium Arborist Assessment
153.05052 40 This tree was previously lopped and is evident in the trifurcation in the leaders and
Norfolk Pine conflicts with the Energex HV lines and are continually being managed only on onside.
which creates a weight bias and then coupling that with the weak epicormic growth?
these trees in such an exposed position are long term risk that is ever increasing, because.
of the attachment concerns
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
2 Araucaria heterophylla 19 10 78 -26.40477 M FG F 15 to Medium Arborist Assessment
153.05035 40 This tree was previously lopped and is evident in the trifurcation in the leaders and
Norfolk Pine conflicts with the Energex HV lines and are continually being managed only on onside.
which creates a weight bias and then coupling that with the weak epicormic growth?
these trees in such an exposed position are long term risk that is ever increasing, because.
of the attachment concerns
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
3 Araucaria heterophylla 15 5 67 -26.40456 M F F 15 to Medium Arborist Assessment
153.05060 40 This tree was previously lopped and is evident in the trifurcation in the leaders and
Norfolk Pine conflicts with the Energex HV lines and are continually being managed only on onside.
which creates a weight bias and then coupling that with the weak epicormic growth?
these trees in such an exposed position are long term risk that is ever increasing, because.
of the attachment concerns
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
4 Eugenia uniflora 4 5 22 -26.40475 M FG P 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05008 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
Brazilian Cherry forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Page 12
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
Complete removal
5 Peltophrin Ssp 8 6 44 -26.40453 SM / FG FG 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05076 M 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
6 Ficus Ssp 16 8 51 -26.40422 SM/M G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05151 This tree is tangled amongst a mature Paper bark and has open crouches in an exposed posi
Fig Tree and has compromised unions indicative of the species. As a wetland species they are
very explorative with their root systems and generally compromise plumbing.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
7 Melaleuca quinquinevia 18 15 112 -26.40459 M G G 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05121 40 This tree is tangled amongst a strangler fig and has open crouches in an exposed position.
Paper Bark and has compromised unions indicative of the species. As a wetland species they are
very explorative with their root systems and generally compromise plumbing.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
8 Mangifera indica 12 15 65 -26.40384 M FG FG 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05133 40 This is a mature fruit tree and will be in the middle of the development and with if come all.
Mango Tree the concerns with root incursion and fruit drop and vermin attractant properties which
again, in an urban environment are not ideal. Also, the concerns with bat issues when in
fruit also. Structurally the tree presents typically with signs of poor management practices.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
9 Eucalyptus grandis 21 12 112 -26.40446 M G G 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05108 40 Tree presents with typical forest form which again in indicative for the species and has a
Flooded Gum Spreading canopy and a bias to the west and due to its nature will be a management.
concern from a development and long tern position. A tree of this type needs to be in a
forest where it can benefit from collective protection not in a dense urban environment.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
10 Eucalyptus grandis 18 7 79 -2640448 M FG FG 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05128 40 Tree presents with typical forest form which again in indicative for the species and has a
Flooded Gum Spreading canopy and a bias to the west and due to its nature will be a management.
concern from a development and long tern position. A tree of this type needs to be in a
forest where it can benefit from collective protection not in a dense urban environment.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
11 Eucalyptus Grandis 25 3 28 -2640463 M G G 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05135 40 Tree presents with typical forest form which again in indicative for the species and has a
Flooded Gum Spreading canopy and a bias to the west and due to its nature will be a management.
concern from a development and long tern position. A tree of this type needs to be in a
Page 13
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
forest where it can benefit from collective protection not in a dense urban environment.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
12 Spathodea campanulata 9 9 139 -26.40446 SM G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05127 Weed species.
African Tulip Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
13 Glochidian ferdinandi 5 4 11 -26.40468 SM FG FG 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05136 Juvenile tree that presents typically for the species but are not a suitable tree in an urban
Cheese Tree environment and has typical include unions which will be potential failure points as the tree
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
14 Macadamia tetraphylla 6 5 31 -26.40472 SM / FG F 15 Low Arborist Assessment
153.05091 M TO This is a mature fruit tree and will be in the middle of the development and with if come all.
Queensland Nut 40 the concerns with root incursion and fruit drop and vermin attractant properties which
again, in an urban environment are not ideal. Also, the concerns with bat issues when in
fruit also. Structurally the tree presents typically with signs of poor management practices.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
15 Mangafera indica 12 18 195 -26.40480 M G G 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153 40 This is a mature fruit tree and will be in the middle of the development and with if come all.
Mango Tree the concerns with root incursion and fruit drop and vermin attractant properties which
again, in an urban environment are not ideal. Also, the concerns with bat issues when in
fruit also. Structurally the tree presents typically with signs of poor management practices.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
16 Tibouchina urvilleana 6 1 9 -26.40491 J FG FG 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05085 This is an ornamental shrub and serves no environmental native benefit.
Tibouchina Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
17 Ficus benjamina 20 4 31 -26.40500 SM/ FG FG 40+ Low Arborist Inspection
153.05090 M This tree is suggested is self seeded by bats from the local camp and has signs of root
Incursion into the current dwelling and this is the problematic issue for any new dwellings
Is the root plate and vermin concerns
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
18 Elaeocarpus obovatus 21 14 51 -26.40492 M G G 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05093 40 This is a native species that has had pressures of the urban environment such as site soil.
Hard Quongdong level change soil compaction poor soil hydrology and this is evident in the thinning up
in the trunk and poor taper evident. Unbalanced crown and growth habit.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
19 Lophostemon suaveolens 25 9 45 -26.40494 M F F 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05107 40 This is a native species that has had pressures of the urban environment such as site soil.
level change soil compaction poor soil hydrology and this is evident in the thinning up.
in the trunk and poor taper evident Forest form and long term the wrong species in an
Page 14
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
urban landscape environment
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
20 Lophostemon suaveolens 25 3 21 -26.40494 J/SM G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153..05090 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
21 Lophostemon suaveolens 25 5 31 -26.40494 SM G FG 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05102 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
22 Corymbia intermedia 28 12 55 -26.40492 SM/M F F 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05118 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
23 Delonix regia 2 2 6 -26.40454 J G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05091 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
24 Araucaria heterophylla 15 3 21 -26.40500 SM G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05119 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
25 Lophostemon suaveolens 15 9 32 -26.40498 SM F F 40 Low Arborist Assessment
153.05115 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
Page 15
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
26 Lophostemon suaveolens 15 9 32 -26.40497 SM F F 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05120 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
27 Lophostemon suaveolens 18 3 29 -26.40506 SM G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05112 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
28 Melaleuca quinquinervia 15 6 38 -2640503 SM/M F F 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05091 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
29 Lophostemon suaveolens 12 3 19 -26.40508 SM/M G G 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05113 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
30 Lophostemon suaveolens 16 4 23 -26.40514 SM/M FG F 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05108 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
Page 16
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
31 Lophostemon suaveolens 12 3 31 -26.40515 SM/M G FG 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
15305109 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
32 Melaleuca quinquinervia 14 4 34 -2640506 SM/M F FG 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05080 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
Paperbark forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
33 Ravenala 25 7 31 -26.40514 SM G FG 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
madaagascariensis 153.01505 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
Travellers Palm . This is a clumping palm variety that will expand in a clump as it matures.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
34 Lophostemon suaveolens 12 6 36 -26.40511 SM FG FG 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.0598 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
White Mahogany forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
35 Lophostemon confertus 16 9 41 -26.40508 SM FG F 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
153.05076 40 As this site is currently developed this tree is on a boundary and as such has all the urban
Brush Box forest pressures such as fences driveways soil compaction and limited or impeded root.
growth space as well as uninterrupted root plate exposure to rain from the structures.
And as such has an augmented growth because of this which is evident in its growth habit.
Also, this is an exposed site and as such long term no ideal conditions for a forest form tree.
Arborist Recommendations
Complete removal
36 Dupsysis lutencens x 3 4 6 112 -26.40485 M FG F 40+ Low Arborist Assessment
153.05061 These present typically for the species in their age range and location and are a low value.
Golden Cane Tree due to their continual sheading of fronds and seed drop which in an urban forest
developed environment is a hazard that must be continually managed from a trip/ slip.
point of view
Arborist Recommendation
Complete removal and development of a tree replacement plan as part of an offset with
better use of the green space within the proposed development
Page 17
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
37 Archontopheonix 8 3 .22 -26.40517 SM/M FG G 15 to Low Arborist Assessment
Alexandrea x 3 153.05023 40 These present typically for the species in their age range and location and are a low value.
Tree due to there continual sheading of fronds and seed drop which in an urban forest
Alexandra Palm developed environment is a hazard that must be continually managed from a trip/ slip.
point of view
Arborist Recommendation
Complete removal and development of a tree replacement plan as part of an offset with
better use of the green space within the proposed development
Arborist Site Observations
This site makes up multiple blocks and some have been previously developed and as such have normal shrub type vegetation that doesn’t raise a red flag
from a development perception and as such, we have assessed the trees that are either native or exotic and have some tree value in the DA process. The
other site has older style homes and the trees especially 26 Headland Drv have had human pressures on them for several years and are generally forest
form and to force these species to adapt further will more than likely exert more pressure than these trees can with stand even in their age profile.
They are on the one of the Eumundi Noosa Rd blocks 3 coastal species in the Araucaria s and as the report points out they conflict with Energex High
Voltage lines and were previously lopped and are all 3 or 4 stemmed instead of the traditional 1and the epicormic growth is a weakened structure and as
such an elevated risk that will only increase as the trees age.
So, our overall view there no significant or endangered species here and our suggestions is to clear all trees and devise a native landscape offset plan with
succession planting included and native connectivity for the local animal life.
Also, we have noted that outside the development site there are Noosa Councils trees on the verge that will require protections as per AS4970-2009 and
we propose to create a tree protection plan after consultation with Noosa Council depending on their master plan for the streetscape.
Special observation is the pink bubble on the site map that indicates the neighbouring trees on the eastern boundary are not within the site and as such
don’t fall under any tree management for the site but still have a minor consideration. The distance to any hard structure construction proposed appears
outside the SRZ and is greater than the distance currently in place for the neighbouring existing dwellings and the trees observed. This shows that Jura
Development is currently allowing more tree protection than the tree owners.
Page 18
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Site Photos Trees 1 , 2 and 3 Examples of landscape plants in current dwellings SP 208257 1 and 2
Page 19
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Noosa Council trees on the verge for review by Noosa Council
Page 20
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
Page 21
ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287
Page 22
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 ATCAC Tree Risk Management Specialist
Page 23
ANNUAL ARBORIST INSPECTION TREETOP ADVENTURES CENTRAL COAST NSW 2287 Arborist Conclusion Statement Kind regards Kurt Brown DIP Arb SCIT, ISA TRAQ Certified Australian Tree Contractors & Arboricultural Consultants Pty Ltd