Original source · versioned page text
K - Preliminary Arborist Report (29.08.2019)
PRELIMINARY ARBORICULTURAL REPORT (PAR)
Noosa Market Place, Hofmann Drive,
Noosaville QLD (Lot 1 SP 222982 & Lot 4 SP 246584)
AUGUST 2019
PREPARATION FOR: Spotlight Property Group
PREPARED BY: Treescience Pty Ltd
Page1
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
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 39 pages
Page 2
PREPARED FOR
Spotlight Property Group
Contact: Ben Jones
PREPARED BY
Treescience Pty Ltd atf The Treescience Trust
Contact: Jason-jay Fletcher (Director/Principal Arboricultural Scientist) for Treescience
Postal Address: PO Box 6, Cabarita Beach NSW 2488
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 1300 731 859
Mobile: 0434 688 498
Page2
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 3
IMPORTANT NOTE
©Treescience Pty Ltd and its subsidiaries
The information contained in this document (produced by Treescience Pty Ltd and its subsidiaries), is exclusively for the use of the client (Spotlight
Property Group) and for the purpose for which it has been prepared. This report is strictly limited to the purpose and the facts and matters stated
in it and do not apply directly or indirectly and is not to be used for any other application, purpose, use or matter.
Copyright release
This document is covered by copyright and remains the property of Treescience Pty Ltd. The client has entered into a licence for usage for the
purposed described and therefore does not gain ownership in the document.
The licensee is authorised to make electronic copy of this document for filing purposes and may print and make full copies of this document for
internal use and for the purposes of public liaison provided this document is reproduced in its entirety.
Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, or review as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this
report, its attachments or appendices may be reproduced by any process without the written consent of Treescience Pty Ltd. All enquiries should
be directed to Treescience Pty Ltd.
If any part of this document is used, reproduced or stored contrary to the above approval it shall be taken as an acceptance of an agreement by
the user to pay a usage fee of $250.00 per page of this document or part thereof for each and every use. The usage fee is due within 14 days of
service subject to normal account terms and conditions.
Disclaimer
In preparing this report, certain assumptions have been made; it has been assumed that all information and documents provided to Treescience by
the Client or as a result of a specific request or enquiry were complete, accurate and up-to-date. Where Treescience have obtained information
from a government register or database, it is assumed that the information is accurate and are not aware of any reason why any of the
assumptions are incorrect. Where an assumption has been made, Treescience has not made any independent investigations with respect to the
matters which are the subject of that assumption.
Other than the Client, this report is presented without the assumption of a duty of care to any other person (“Third Party”). The report may not
contain sufficient information for the purposes of a Third Party or for other uses. Without the prior written consent of Treescience Pty Ltd:
This report may not be relied on by a Third Party; and Treescience Pty Ltd will not be liable to a Third Party for any loss, damage, liability or
claim arising out of or incidental to a Third-Party publishing, using or relying on the facts, content, opinions or subject matter contained in this
report.
If a Third Party uses or relies on the facts, content, opinions or subject matter contained in this report with or without the consent of Treescience
Pty Ltd, Treescience Pty Ltd disclaims all risk and the Third Party assumes all risk and releases and indemnifies and agrees to keep indemnified
Treescience Pty Ltd from any loss, damage, claim or liability arising directly or indirectly from the use of or reliance on this report.
In this note, a reference to loss and damage includes past and prospective economic loss, loss of profits, damage to property, injury to any person
(including death) costs and expenses incurred in taking measures to prevent, mitigate or rectify any harm, loss of opportunity, legal costs,
compensation, interest and any other direct, indirect, consequential or financial or other loss.
Limitation
This report is only concerned with the condition and management strategies required for the subject tree(s). Furthermore, it includes an
assessment based on the site visits and the advised information to Treescience from the Client.
This report does not take into account the possibility of extreme climatic events not normally expected in this locality. Such events could include,
but are not restricted to, severe windstorms, floods or drought. This report also does not take into account the possibility of future outbreaks of
pests or diseases.
Whilst all care is taken in the preparation of this report, no responsibility can be taken for the continued vitality of the trees mentioned or for any
damage that they may cause in the future.
Treescience Pty Ltd cannot be held responsible for the deterioration of trees or damages occurring as a result of a failure to implement the tree
management measures contained herein or from inadequate or inappropriate maintenance by the respected representatives and/or contracting
companies.
No decay detection equipment and/or soils and/or wood tissue samples have been sent for laboratory analysis.
Page3
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 4
DOCUMENT VERSION CONTROL
APPROVED
REV # DESCRIPTION AUTHOR REVIEWED BY DATE
BY
1 PAR JJ KK JJ 26/08/2019
2 PAR JJ JJ JJ 27/08/2019
DISTRIBUTION
COPIES RECIPIENT DATE
1 x PDF Spotlight Property Group
27/08/2019
1 x WORD Treescience Pty Ltd
27/08/2019
FILE REFERENCE PAR_Hofmann Dr, Noosaville_August 2019_Treescience Pty Ltd_V2
27/08/2019
Page4
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
From our assessment we believe the significant subject trees of critical interest can be
retained.
The retention of the subject trees and immediate forming vegetation will allow for the
integration of public open space with connection to the edge of the development site.
The retention of the subject trees’ and immediate forming vegetation will enhance the
landscape amenity, provide screenage, shade casting to the proposed car park and open
space. Generally, the foreseen vegetation relationship with the built space will reflect the
adjacent precinct density and landscape design outcomes to aligned with the elected sub-
tropical design as outlined with ‘Probable Solutions of the Landscaping Code’.
With consideration of the recommendation from the Planning and Environment Court
Judgement dated 15th July 2014 by His Honour Judge Rackermann, Noosa Council Planning
Polices and the guidelines within AS4970-2009, it would be my recommendation that an
Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) be commissioned prior to commencement of works
and as a conditional requirement of development consent.
Page5
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY page 5.
01 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND page 7.
02 METHOD & ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS page 8.
03 INDIVIDUAL TREE APPRAISAL page 9.
04 THE DESIGN & REPORTING STAGES page 22.
05 IMPACT ASSESSMENT & TREE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES page 23.
06 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES page 23.
07 ARBORICULTURAL WORK METHOD STATEMENT page 25.
08 IMPACT ASSESSMENT and TREE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES page 28.
09 WHEN TO CONSULT WITH THE SUPERVISING PROJECT ARBORIST page 33.
10 SYNOPSIS & CONCLUSIONS page 34.
11 RECOMMENDATIONS page 35.
Certification of Performance
Bibliography
Appendix ONE: Tree Significance
Appendix TWO: Tree Categorisation
Precedent Disclaimer for Consultancy
Page6
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 7
01 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
Treescience Pty Ltd was engaged by Spotlight Property Group (The Client) to prepare a
Preliminary Arboricultural Report (PAR) for the various trees based on the proposed
development layout. An Information Request sought by Noosa Council, application number
MCU19/0054, advises insufficient information had been provided concerning:
Landscaping Ecology
Issue-Landscaping & Ecology
Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that remaining vegetation depth
and density to Eenie Creek Road suitably buffers buildings and loading zones so the built
form does not encroach on the existing native vegetation along the road frontage.
The covenant areas and road reserves contain native vegetation which is required to be
retained during construction and the approved use of the site. Construction, supply of
services and the ongoing use of the site can impact on the retention of the vegetation.
Within the Information Request, Noosa Council have requested an Arborist report to
detail the following:
Item 36.
Provide an arborist report prepared by a qualified person which documents the methods to
retain and enhance the vegetation in the covenant area and in the road reserve during
construction, supply of services and the ongoing use of the site.
Item 37
1
For the purpose of preparing an Arborist Report, a qualified person is considered to be a
person with either:
a. ISA certification; or
b. a Diploma of Arboriculture in addition to a minimum of 3 years current experience in the
field of arboriculture.
Page7
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 8
02 METHOD & ASSESSMENT LIMITATIONS
The tree assessment summary presented in this report is based on a combined site
assessment with Gondwana Ecology Group on the 20th August 2019.
The historic site survey plan with noted significant trees (for purposes of Masters
development) within PDF file ‘2869-DA01_existing Masters Survey’ formed the foundation
of the Treescience assessment. Additionally, the drawing set by Buchan acknowledged the
covenant areas (Area A & B) which was also considered during our assessment from an
arboricultural perspective.
Prior to any onsite inspection(s) being carried out, a site survey plan and relevant drawings
were provided to Treescience in order to help identify and assess any potential impact of
the subject tree(s) within and adjacent to the proposed construction works. However, the
observations and recommendations within this report are, at this stage, speculative given a
detailed drawing of the site and proposed construction footprint is yet to be provided.
Since any part of a tree could fall, depending on the physical condition, it would be
clearly impracticable to undertake a detailed investigation of every part of every tree. The
subject tree(s) have been inspected visually while standing at ground level, using
binoculars as an aid where appropriate. Visual Tree Assessment (VTA) criteria was
employed to assess the mechanical integrity of the aerial parts of the subject tree as
proposed by Mattheck & Breloer (2002); with methods of hazard assessment as proposed by
Matheny & Clark (1994) and Lonsdale (1999).
By applying up-dated arboricultural principles and practices, the tree assessment consisted
of a comprehensive visual inspection of all parameters pertaining to the subject tree(s)
present and future health, and the influence of previous and future activities which may
have impacted the subject tree(s).
Soil characteristics and tree architecture were generally noted and/or analysed employing
standard industry tools such as optical laser equipment, measuring tapes, microscopes and
auger/coring devices etc.
The assessment did not involve a detailed examination of the below ground characteristics
or internal tree parts. The assessment was undertaken from the ground to determine tree
health, structure, form, and tree classification with measurements taken to establish trunk
and canopy dimensions.
Page8
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 9
03 INDIVIDUAL TREE APPRAISAL
In assessing the subject tree(s) the following factors have been considered:
o covenant Y (Ref: 714119228) – preserved native vegetation (753m2)
o covenant AA (Ref: 713330303) – preserved native vegetation (1172m2)
o covenant AB (Ref: 713330303) – preserved native vegetation (2000m2)
o future pressure for tree removal and pruning
o seasonal nuisance
o dimensions, established location and construction tolerance of each subject tree
o significance and value of each subject tree in terms of an arboricultural rating
which includes amenity value, function and health of each tree
o TPZ’s and requirements for tree preservation as outlined with AS4970-2009:
Protection of Trees on Development Sites (AS4970-2009)
o future tree management above and below ground
The following images depict the subject tree(s) growing environment, canopy morphology,
branching arrangements, site characteristics and/or critical area(s) of interest.
Drainage area – Area A
Page9
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 10
Tree #1 Tree #1 trunk region Development area adjacent trees #1 to #8
Tree #2 Area B Trees #3-#5
Tree #6 Tree #7 Tree #8
Page10
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 11
Area C Road Reserve area adjacent to Area C
Page11
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 12
3.1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Page12
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
[OCR of page images]
PAR: V2
eTreescience Pty Ltd —uncontrolled when printed
@creencience
smarter eco consulting
working with you
Page12
Page 13
3.2 TABLE ONE - INDIVIDUAL TREE ATTRIBUTES
TRE TREE SPECIES TREE AVERGAE RETAIN, NATIVE
DBH TREE TREE TREE TREE CONSTRUCTION NOTES, EXPLAINATIONS or
E (botanical & common TREE AGE HEIGHT CANOPY REMOVE or or
(mm) HEALTH STRUCTURE SIGNIFICANCE CATEGORISATION TOLERANCE DESCRIPTIONS
NO. name) (m) SPREAD (m) OTHER EXOTIC
The vegetation is largely
regrowth with mostly Melaleuca
quinquenervia. The trees of
interest are roadside of the drain
being further away from the
proposed development site. The
Area Various arising regrowth
Juvenile 150 7 4 Good Good Desirable C Fair to good Other Native topographical layout within area
A vegetation
A sequences as road, vegetation
then the drain. The broader
vegetation vales will be discussed
within the Gondwana Ecological
Report. The area is identified as
covenant Y and AA.
Within area A one (1) maturing
subject tree was located on the
roadside of the existing drain.
The subject tree is approximately
Eucalyptus robusta Early
1 250 15 6 Fair Good Desirable B Fair Retain Native 5 metres from the development
(Swamp mahogany) mature
area and with consideration of
the guidelines within AS4970-
2009, the subject tree will not be
impacted.
The subject tree was identified
based on its established location
to the proposed development.
Although there are other trees
growing behind the subject tree,
Eucalyptus robusta Early
2 350 15 8 Fair Fair Desirable B Fair Retain Native they will not be impacted based
(Swamp mahogany) mature
on their locations/dimensions.
The subject tree’s TPZ accounts
for the neighbouring trees and
Page13
therefore will be used as the
defining area of critical interest.
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 14
TRE TREE SPECIES TREE AVERGAE RETAIN, NATIVE
DBH TREE TREE TREE TREE CONSTRUCTION NOTES, EXPLAINATIONS or
E (botanical & common TREE AGE HEIGHT CANOPY REMOVE or or
(mm) HEALTH STRUCTURE SIGNIFICANCE CATEGORISATION TOLERANCE DESCRIPTIONS
NO. name) (m) SPREAD (m) OTHER EXOTIC
The area consists mostly of
Eucalyptus grandis, Corymbia
intermedia and Eucalyptus
robusta with a higher weed
incursion than other areas. The
subject trees are suitably
Area Early
Various tree species 150-250 7-10 4-6 Good Good Desirable C to B Fair to Fair-poor Retain Native positioned and will likely not be
B mature
impacted by the proposed
development. The broader
vegetation vales will be discussed
within the Gondwana Ecological
Report. The area is identified as
covenant AB.
The subject tree is growing on
the edge of the vegetated area
toward the proposed development
area. The future development
Eucalyptus grandis Early footprint will likely be within the
3 500 24 7 Fair Fair Desirable C to B Fair-poor Retain Native
(Flooded gum) mature subject tree’s TPZ. The provision
for adequate Arboricultural Work
Methods, design consideration
could allow for the retention of
the subject tree.
Two trees are arising as one and
are growing on the edge of the
vegetated area toward the
development area. The subject
trees are early emerging
specimens which could be
Eucalyptus robusta Early 100 &
4 12 7 Fair Fair Desirable C Fair Retain Native retained in the context of the
(Swamp mahogany) mature 150
proposed development.
Page14
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 15
TRE TREE SPECIES TREE AVERGAE RETAIN, NATIVE
DBH TREE TREE TREE TREE CONSTRUCTION NOTES, EXPLAINATIONS or
E (botanical & common TREE AGE HEIGHT CANOPY REMOVE or or
(mm) HEALTH STRUCTURE SIGNIFICANCE CATEGORISATION TOLERANCE DESCRIPTIONS
NO. name) (m) SPREAD (m) OTHER EXOTIC
The subject tree is growing on
the edge of the vegetated area
toward the development area. The
future development footprint
Eucalyptus grandis Early
5 400 24 7 Fair Fair Desirable C to B Fair-poor Retain Native could be within the subject tree’s
(Flooded gum) mature
TPZ. The provision for adequate
Arboricultural Work Methods,
design consideration could allow
for the retention of this tree.
The subject tree is a broad
spreading specimen and is set
back into the vegetated area by
approximately 6-8 metres. With
Eucalyptus grandis
6 Mature 600 22 14 Fair Fair Desirable B Fair-poor Retain Native consideration of the subject
(Flooded gum)
tree’s established location and
the guidelines within AS4970-
2009, the subject tree will not be
impacted.
The subject tree is an emerging
specimen with an understorey of
pioneer species Macaranga and
Acacia spp. With consideration of
Eucalyptus grandis Early
7 150 13 4 Good Good Desirable C Fair-poor Retain Native species, dimension’s and
(Flooded gum) mature
established location it is highly
unlikely the subject tree will be
impacted by the proposed
development footprint.
The subject tree is a mature
emerging specimen and is set
back into the vegetated area by
approximately 6-8 metres. With
Eucalyptus grandis
8 Mature 800 24 14 Fair Fair Significant B Fair-poor Retain Native consideration of the subject
(Flooded gum)
tree’s established location and
the guidelines within AS4970-
Page15
2009, the subject tree will not be
impacted.
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 16
TRE TREE SPECIES TREE AVERGAE RETAIN, NATIVE
DBH TREE TREE TREE TREE CONSTRUCTION NOTES, EXPLAINATIONS or
E (botanical & common TREE AGE HEIGHT CANOPY REMOVE or or
(mm) HEALTH STRUCTURE SIGNIFICANCE CATEGORISATION TOLERANCE DESCRIPTIONS
NO. name) (m) SPREAD (m) OTHER EXOTIC
The topographical layout within
the area sequences as road, drain
then vegetation. The area
consists mostly of regrowth of
Eucalyptus robusta, Acacia
species, Casuarina species and
Melaleuca quinquenervia that are
Area
Various tree species Juvenile 50-100 4-8 3-5 Good Fair Desirable C Fair-poor Retain Native emerging on the edge of the
C
development area. The broader
vegetation vales will be discussed
within the Gondwana Ecological
Report. The area is identified as
covenant AB and in parts
constitutes areas of the existing
road reserve.
Page16
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 17
03.3 TREE SURVEY
area C
area B
area A
T#8 T#7
T#6
T#5
T#4 T#3
T#2
T#1
Page17
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 18
03.4 SUMMARY OF TABLE ONE
A total of eight (8) isolated trees and three (3) areas distinct area of forming vegetation
were assessed.
From our assessment of the available drawings and performing a site assessment in the
absence of an individual tree survey, we believe the subject trees can be retained. Our
findings are preliminary but largely appear manageable based on our experience if adequate
tree protection measures are implemented in accordance with this conditional report, and a
commissioned Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) development of work method
statements and onsite supervision by an AQF Level 5 Arborist (Supervising Project
Arborist).
We are of the professional opinion that retention of the subject trees and immediate
forming vegetation will allow for the integration of public open space with connection to
the edge of the development site. Its should be noted that the edge effect of the
respective vegetation is fragmented which could be enriched with the implementation of
through a revegetation management plan and landscape plan.
The retention of the subject trees and immediate forming vegetation will enhance the
landscape amenity, provide screenage, shade casting to the proposed car park and open
space. Generally, the foreseen vegetation relationship with the built space will reflect the
adjacent precinct density and landscape design outcomes to aligned with the elected sub-
tropical design as outlined with ‘Probable Solutions of the Landscaping Code’.
Page18
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 19
03.5 TABLE TWO - TPZ ENCROACHMENT CONSIDERATIONS
TPZ TPZ SRZ DISTANCE TO
TREE DBH
TREE SPECIES RADIUS AREA RADIUS MEET THE 10%
NO. (mm)
(m) (Sq. m) (m) INCURSION (m)
Various arising regrowth 1.5 1.4
Area A 150 2.0 12.6
vegetation
Eucalyptus robusta
1.8 2.1
1 250 3.0 28.3
(Swamp mahogany)
Eucalyptus robusta
2.1 2.9
2 350 4.2 55.4
(Swamp mahogany)
1.5 1.4
Area B Various tree species 150 2.0 12.6
Eucalyptus grandis
2.5 4.1
3 500 6.0 113.1
(Flooded gum)
Eucalyptus robusta 100 & 1.7 1.7
4 2.4 18.1
(Swamp mahogany) 150
Eucalyptus grandis
2.3 3.3
5 400 4.8 72.4
(Flooded gum)
Eucalyptus grandis
2.7 5.0
6 600 7.2 162.9
(Flooded gum)
Eucalyptus grandis
1.5 1.4
7 150 2.0 12.6
(Flooded gum)
Eucalyptus grandis
3.0 6.6
8 800 9.6 289.5
(Flooded gum)
50- 1.5 1.4
Area C Various tree species 2.0 12.6
100
NOTE: The generally allowable 10% TPZ incursion distance is highlighted yellow above which can be applied assuming the
TPZ can be adequality off-set in accordance with AS4970-2009.
Page19
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 20
03.6 SUMMARY OF TABLE TWO
Table TWO provides in metres a radial measurement, unless otherwise stated, taken from the
centre of the tree trunk region for the individual trees applying the generic matrix within
AS4970-2009.
It should be noted that it is extremely difficult to speculate the volume and/or directional
growth of the subject tree(s) entire woody root system, particularly in the case of these early
mature to maturing specimen. Therefore, the expert view provided by Treescience is that the
type of disturbance is more important than the distance from the subject tree.
AS4970-2009, largely sets out the parameters for tree preservation, along with relevant
experience. With consideration of these guidelines, subject trees’ established location, trunk
dimensions and tree canopy morphology, we are of the professional opinion that the construction
footprint has somewhat considered the subject tree(s). The inclusion of car parking spaces and
landscape outcomes as opposed to buildings has ensured the foreseen TPZ incursions of the
built form can be suitably managed. As documented within the design and reporting stages (04
– page 19), a tree survey and development of an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA)
(Stage 3) will ensure the subjects trees not only survive but thrive for years to come.
The distances for protection have been established in accordance with AS4970-2009 and is
illustrated in table TWO. The foundations of AS4970-2009 was applied to aid with our
preliminary review and scaling objectives to help determine and anticipated construction
implications.
The AS4970-2009 states that the TPZ is “… the principle means of protecting a tree on
development sites. The TPZ is a combination of the root area and crown area requiring
protection. It is an area isolated from construction disturbances so that the tree remains
viable.”
The AS4970-2009 states that the SRZ “… is the area required for tree stability. A larger
area is required to maintain a viable tree. The SRZ only needs to be calculated when
major encroachment (greater than 10%) into a TPZ is proposed.”
It should be noted that the TPZ and SRZ calculations are to be taken from the center of
the tree trunk region.
Page20
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 21
Figure 1.0 - source AS4970-2009 page 14. TPZ and SRZ overview
The TPZ for individual trees is
calculated based on trunk (stem)
diameter (DBH), measured at 1.4
metres up from ground level.
The radius of the TPZ is
calculated by multiplying the
tree’s DBH by 12.
For example; a tree with 40cm
DBH requires a TPZ of 4.8
metres.
The method provides a TPZ that
addresses both tree stability
and growth requirements. TPZ
distances are measured as a
radius from the centre of the
trunk at ground level.
Page21
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 22
04 THE DESIGN AND REPORTING STAGES
The intention of the Preliminary Arboricultural Report is to assist those concerned with
layout design, by providing a balanced appraisal and considered advice on the value of
established existing subject tree(s). The report does not set out arguments for or against
the development or for the removal/retention of trees.
NOTE: It is assumed that a topographical survey, detail and feature survey and tree
survey has been provided.
STAGE ONE: Completion of the Preliminary Arboricultural Report at the pre-design stage
assesses the value and contribution of the tree(s) located on-site, independent of any
proposed layout design. This unbiased approach to evaluating trees will allow the highest
quality tree(s) to be retained, which will be capable of tolerating the pressures during the
development process. This represents the constraints imposed on-site by the existing
tree(s), indicating TPZ’s, tree dimensions, tree health and structure. This raw information
should be used as a design tool to inform the proposed layout.
STAGE TWO: In the post planning stage the Preliminary Arboricultural Report will help
inform the design team of the potential conflicts associated with the location of
established existing tree(s), help establish a satisfactory layout, which will allow a
harmonious juxtaposition of the established existing tree(s) with built structures and their
associated infrastructure.
STAGE THREE: As a part of the post planning approval stage an Arboricultural Impact
Assessment is to be commissioned. This report will determine that the final layout designs
have satisfactorily been mitigated in alliance with a construction methodology to ensure
the development can successfully be achieved based on the arboricultural constraints. The
Arboricultural Impact Assessment will review the impacts of the planning conditions, which
may include modifications to the Tree Protection Zones (TPZ’s) to meet the legislative
requirements for the various State/Local Government Planning Authorities and compliance
with AS4970-2009.
STAGE FOUR: The conclusion of the approval phase culminates with the implementation
of the approved Arboricultural Impact Assessment a level of on-site Arboricultural
supervision ‘Project Arborist’ for the following stages maybe required:
o pre-construction
o construction
o post construction
Page22
o final certification report
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 23
04.1 SUMMARY OF REPORTING STAGES
Treescience has only been involved in this project at stage ONE, therefore based on our
findings within this report, established location of the subject trees, this report initiates
Stages TWO and THREE along with a tree survey.
It is assumed by Treescience that the reviewed and issued design drawings are final.
05 IMPACT ASSESSMENT and TREE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES
The successful long-term retention of trees on construction sites requires understanding of
the ease with which trees may be damaged or killed. The following general principles
should be noted:
o older trees are generally at greater risk than younger trees and are less able to
tolerate changes to soil conditions or pruning
o most mature trees have roots that spread beyond the canopy dripline with tree
roots
o tree roots are typically found within the top 1000mm of soil
o raising soil levels around the trunk/root system of trees will normally result in tree
decline via root asphyxiation
o lowering soil levels close to trees will normally result in tree decline
o compaction of the soil profile, caused by vehicular traffic, destroys natural soil
structure/microbiology resulting in poor aeration and loss of water absorption
leading to root death
o spillage of chemicals, fuels or cement on the ground occupied by tree roots will
cause root death
06 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Largely, the construction objectives of critical interest are minor bulk earth works and
landscape works generally pertaining to car parking.
Generally, the existing soil grade within the subject tree’s TPZ shall not be significantly
lowered beyond 150mm without prior design outcomes documented and arboriculturally
Page23
certified by the appointed Supervising Project Arborist.
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 24
Additionally, the existing soil grade within the subject tree’s TPZ shall not be
significantly raised beyond 300mm without prior design outcomes documented and
arboriculturally certified by the appointed Supervising Project Arborist.
The engagement of a Treescience Supervising Project Arborist to perform a ‘watching
brief’ is probably the single most essential component to ensure successful tree
preservation, in correlation with the Arboricultural Work Method Statement (AWMS).
This will involve regular monitoring and providing of technical tree advice on a need by
basis.
06.1 TABLE THREE– KEY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONCEPT
DESIGN & OUR PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT
CONCEPT
TREE NO. TPZ KEY ISSUES & IMPACTS DESIGN & MITIGATION MEASURES
DESIGN
Prior to the commencement of any works, the appointed Arborist and relevant representatives are to
meet on site to assess and document the status of the tree and define the relevant work methods,
outline the communication pathway and the appointed Arborist is to identify the various key areas of
critical interest.
Issues:
Before excavation occurs for demolition and/or construction all documented approvals are required,
Damage to root system based on
relevant work methods adopted, alternative construction methods considered, along with Arborist
construction requirements
All trees supervision as noted within an AIA.
nominated Excavation and
It is possible tree roots are within the early topsoil environment/area and underside of the concrete
for construction
Impacts: footpath, edge of the existing retaining wall or grass environment. Therefore, do not excavate into
retention
the existing soil grade where woody tree roots and/or tree roots of high density have been identified
Minor reduction in tree health and
without direct consultation and approval from the Supervising Project Arborist.
possible onset of decay/fungal pathogens
to severed tree root/s Take all necessary steps to conform with AS4970-2009 and this report.
Trunk padding and/or TPZ fencing, Arborist Supervision (AQF level 5), Tree Surgery (pre-emptive
root pruning) and Arboricultural Work Method Statement.
Issues:
Direct contact with trees and cambium
Ensure the machinery is fit for purpose in relation and is not oversized given the confined
damage
environment.
All trees
nominated Machinery
Impacts: Machinery spotter is required during works within the TPZ’s
for movement
retention Minor reduction in tree health and
possible onset of decay/fungal pathogens Trunk padding and/or TPZ fencing, Arborist Supervision (AQF level 5), and Arboricultural Work
to from wound sites. Method Statements.
Page24
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 25
06.2 BULK EARTH WORKS WITHIN THE DEFINED TPZ
The Supervising Project Arborist will steer the site works and outline the action mitigation
measures as required.
In other defined areas of sensitivity for this project where excavation is required within a
defined TPZ, the Supervising Project Arborist will likely request a combination of a small
mud bucket and/or ripper arrangement on an excavator or similar machinery configuration
to help conduct comprehensive root investigation measures along the edge closest to the
subject tree(s) TPZ to help locate the presence of tree roots in an attempt to prevent
unforeseen tree root severance.
Tree roots which are deemed to be removed will be removed by the Supervising Project
Arborist or in combination with the machinery operator on a need by basis. Tree roots
which are defined for retention will be clearly marked with marker paint by the Supervising
Project Arborist to help guide/define the machinery operator work practices.
In determining tree root retention, the type of tree, tree canopy formation, tree structure,
tree health, soil structure/profile, number of tree roots etc., will be considered on a tree
root by tree root process with consideration of the constraints placed on the installation
methodology and tree preservation prerequisite.
06.3 LANDSCAPING DESIGN
All excavation with the TPZ for landscaping purposes i.e. planting shall be undertaken by
hand. Any trees roots discovered (25mm>) are to be left and shall not be cut or otherwise
damaged. Where possible, the soil structure within the TPZ shall be preserved.
No large trees are to be planted within the TPZ.
It should be noted that detailed design summaries and construction considerations will be
personalised on the commission of an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA).
07 ARBORICULTURAL WORK METHOD STATEMENT (preliminary)
The following Arboricultural Work Method Statement (AWMS) outlines the tree
protection measures for the general excavation construction works within defined TPZ’s.
This working document also informs the appropriate people undertaking the related work
tasks of their responsibilities as outlined in the following AWMS for works within a
defined TPZ:
Page25
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 26
o Arboricultural Work Method Statement - Activity: general excavation
The proposed Arboricultural Work Method Statements provide general guidance on the
physical protection and appropriate precautionary measures required in order to reduce any
detrimental impacts on tree health or compromise the structural integrity of trees which is
provided for your consideration.
The following Arboricultural Work Method Statements provides general guidance on the
physical protection and appropriate precautionary measures required in order to reduce any
detrimental impacts on tree health or compromise the structural integrity of trees which is
provided for your consideration. However, it is imperative that construction activities
should not transpire until the relevant requirements of this report have been implemented.
These guidelines are by no means fixed as trees are dynamic in nature and each site has
different considerations and variations that may alter or eradicate the need for certain
steps. Continued consultation with the Supervising Project Arborist throughout works is
necessary to ensure compliance and avoid unnecessary costs that may be incurred by
attempting to interpret these guidelines without the aid of an arboricultural specialist
assigned to the project.
07.1 ARBORICULTURE WORK METHOD STATEMENT – ACTIVITY: GENERAL
EXCAVATION
Tree roots which are deemed to be removed will be removed by the Supervising Project
Arborist or in combination with the machinery operator. Tree roots which are defined for
retention will be clearly marked with marker paint by the Supervising Project Arborist to
help guide and define the machinery operator work practices. In determining tree root
retention, the type of tree, tree canopy formation, tree structure, tree health, soil
structure/profile, number of tree roots etc., will be considered on a tree root by tree root
process with consideration of the constraints placed on the design requirements and tree
preservation prerequisite.
Page26
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 27
Arboricultural Work Method Statement (AWMS)
Activity: General Excavation
Description of Works
Excavation with the use of a mechanical device within the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of tree(s) nominated for retention.
The methodologies within this AWMS follow a logical sequence of events. Variation to the sequence could significantly reduce the efficiency
of the tree protection measures. This method statement should be read in conjunction with the relevant design drawing(s) and supporting
technical reports.
Work Method
1. All site works/plant operators are to receive tree protection site induction by the Site Manager and/or Supervising Project
Arborist if deemed necessary.
2. No vehicle or plant with upward pointing exhausts are to be operated under the subject tree canopy (to avoid heat damage to
the tree canopy) where possible.
3. No vehicle or plant is to be operated within the designated Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) unless authorisation has been obtained
by the Supervising Project Arborist.
4. No bulk or harmful materials such as concrete wash is to be placed in a defined TPZ.
5. Access into a defined TPZ or movement of the protection barriers/fencing will only be permitted in consultation with the
Supervising Project Arborist.
6. The excavator bucket is to be inverted so that it presses down into the soil, severing any roots that may have been missed
rather than lifting and tearing roots toward the lower trunk region when working near trees.
7. Ensure a spotter is available to confirm that any vehicles and machinery do not come into contact with any tree nominated for
preservation.
8. All tree roots that are uncovered when excavating which are greater than 25mm in diameter are to be cut cleanly and straight
by the Supervising Project Arborist.
9. Hand digging must occur if machinery is not capable of work in and around tree roots deemed worthy of retention without
causing damage as determined by the Supervising Project Arborist on a case by case basis.
10. Where air spades/water knife are to be used to aid identification of tree roots, the pressure must be reduced to mitigate the
potential of bark being stripped from the roots or the occurrence of root severance.
11. Water is not to be used for cutting purposes unless instructed by the Supervising Project Arborist and in consultation with the
relevant representatives.
12. If the area of excavation has an extensive network of tree roots or a tree root with a 75mm diameter or greater, the area of
excavation is to be backfilled within 12hrs of opening without causing damage to tree roots or covered using wet hessian, to
ensure the tree roots retain moisture and do not dry out. The hessian is to be comprised from 100% Jute which is a natural
fibre & will rot down over time.
13. When backfilling around tree roots, the subject soil is to be comprised of an indigenous topsoil and organic matter with a
neutral pH, free from weed growth and harmful materials. The backfilling of soil is to be carefully rammed & watered in and
around tree roots to eliminate air pockets.
14. All works within the defined exclusion zone as outlined within this report requires authorisation by the Supervising Project
Arborist.
Reporting of Incidents
All damage to protective barriers or accidental damage to trees (above or below ground) no matter how insignificant it may seem, must be
reported to the relevant representative and the Supervising Project Arborist immediately. A record of the damage is to be made by the Site
Manager and reported to the relevant representatives and the Supervising Project Arborist.
Name: Date: Signature: Name: Date:
Signature:
Page27
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 28
It should be noted that detailed AWMS will be personalised on the commission of an
Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA).
08 IMPACT ASSESSMENT and TREE-SPECIFIC MITIGATION MEASURES
This section outlines the identified impacts of the proposed operational works adjacent to
a tree, within and or adjacent to the project area in accordance with AS4970-2009.
It should be noted that detailed impacts assessment and tree specific mitigation measures
will be personalised on the commission of an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA).
AS4970-2009, highlights the requirements for tree protection where construction works will
transpire and is considered general information only. The exact tree specific mitigation
measures required for this project will be addressed at Operational Works by Treescience
and the relevant representatives and must be certificated prior to the commencement of
any proposed works.
08.1 ESTABLISHING THE TPZ
The TPZ helps protect tree roots from preventable incidents such as but not limited to
soil compaction damage, mechanical damage and chemical spills and are critical to ensure
the viability of the subject tree(s). Tree protection materials such as barriers and/or
ground protection are to be installed prior to the commencement of any construction
activity being undertaken on site including but not limited to:
o any materials or machinery brought onto site
o development or stripping of soil
Furthermore, no construction activities should take place until the relevant requirements
of this report have been implemented. The exact extent/design of the tree protection
fencing will be nominated by the Supervising Project Arborist and relevant representatives
in accordance with the development approval, site constraints and tree protection
requirements following the industry guidelines set out within AS4970-2009 and approved
reports/drawings.
Page28
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 29
08.2 PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES WITHIN A DEFINED TPZ
For the protection of tree(s), roots and natural soil condition from preventable incidents
such as but not limited to soil compaction, mechanical damage and chemical spills, no
construction activities are to be undertaken within the fenced TPZ which may have any
harmful effect on the protected tree(s).Machinery and other equipment must be kept away
from the tree(s), branches, trunks and roots, as well as any potentially harmful activities
outside of the TPZ that may impact the protected tree(s) such as but not limited to soil
erosion, radiant heat from machinery exhausts and polluting agents draining into the
protected area.
Page29
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 30
Activities generally excluded from the defined TPZ include the following but not limited
to:
a) re-positioning or removal of the tree protection materials at any time during the
construction work unless approval has been obtained by the Supervising Arborist.
The tree protection materials will only be removed once these works have been
fully completed;
b) any construction activities within the fenced TPZ which may have any harmful
effect on the protected tree;
c) compaction occurring within the TPZ;
d) harmful activities outside of the TPZ’s e.g. soil erosion, radiant heat from
machinery exhausts and polluting agents draining into the protected area;
e) machine excavation including trenching;
f) excavation for silt fencing;
g) cultivation;
h) storage;
i) preparation of chemicals, including preparation of cement products, including
outside of the TPZ where polluting agents may drain into the protected area;
j) parking of vehicles and plant;
k) refuelling;
l) dumping of waste, including outside of the TPZ where polluting agents may drain
into the protected area;
m) wash down and cleaning of equipment, including outside of the TPZ where polluting
agents may drain into the protected area;
n) placement of fill;
o) lighting of fires;
p) soil level changes;
q) soil compaction activities
r) temporary or permanent installation of utilities and signs;
s) physical damage to the tree
Note: The tree protection materials will not be re-positioned at any time during the construction work unless approval
has been obtained by the Treescience Supervising Project Arborist. Furthermore, the tree protection materials will only
be removed once these works have been fully completed. Entry into the fenced TPZ areas by persons, vehicles or
machinery is not permitted without consent from Treescience and in consultation with the relevant representatives.
Page30
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 31
08.3 TRUNK PROTECTION (PADDING)
Other tree protection measures are to be implemented along with the proposed tree
protection fencing design to protect the lower trunk region. The material and positioning
of the protection measures (padding/timber/tie wire) will be specified and correct
installation will be confirmed by the Supervising Project Arborist in consultation with the
relevant representatives.
NOTE: pre-start TPZ Trunk Protection Certification will be issued prior to the
commencement of any proposed works.
08.4 TREE PROTECTION FENCING DESIGN
The tree protection fence should be erected prior to the commencement of works and
correct installation confirmed by the Supervising Project Arborist. The tree protection
fencing should be installed at the edge of the defined TPZ and/or near the interface of
the earth works and/or in consultation with relevant representatives and Treescience.
The tree protection fencing shall be suitably robust and securely braced to provide
sufficient protection for the tree(s) nominated for retention and shall be maintained in
good order for the duration of the development/construction period. Inspection of the tree
protection fencing should be undertaken frequently by the Project Manager and/or
Treescience.
The performance requirements for the tree protection fencing will be determined by the
type of activity that will take place within the TPZ, topography, and length of the
construction period in consultation with the relevant representatives and Treescience.
Typically, the performance requirement for the tree protection fencing will be:
o tree protection fencing shall only be removed, altered, or relocated with the
authorisation from Treescience;
o installation, removal and, where required, replacement of tree protection fencing
will be supervised and signed off by the relevant representative and Treescience
and;
o the area between the tree protection fencing and the subject tree is deemed the
defined TPZ or exclusion zone
o the defined TPZ should be secured to restrict access in and around the tree(s)
nominated for retention
Page31
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 32
The tree protection fencing is to be of an agreed design/construction style in consultation
with the consenting authority, relevant representatives and Treescience with consideration
of the overall TPZ area, defined TPZ, topography, and length of the
development/construction period. It should be noted that existing perimeter fencing, and
other structures may be suitable as part of the overall protective fencing design.
Ideally, tree protection fencing shall consist of 1.8-metre-high temporary/relocatable
galvanised steel mesh panels in accordance with Australian Standards AS4687-2007:
Temporary fencing and hoardings.
The tree protection fence is to be supported by steel poles, concrete anchor blocks and
clamped at the top of each pair of panels. The tree protection fence must have a lockable
opening for access. The subject tree’s woody roots shall not be damaged during the
installation, modifying and dismantling of the tree protection fence.
Shade cloth material shall be attached to the outer surface of the tree protection fence
where deemed necessary in consultation with the relevant representatives and Treescience.
The purpose of the shade cloth is to reduce the transport of dust, other matter and
liquids into the protected area. The shade cloth material shall be transparent to provide
visibility into the defined TPZ where possible.
NOTE: pre-start TPZ Fencing Certification will be issued prior to the commencement of
any proposed works.
08.5 TPZ SIGNAGE
Tree protection signage should be attached to the tree protection fencing and be displayed
in prominent positions.
The TPZ sign shall be repeated at 15 metre intervals or closer where the TPZ fence
changes direction. The signage shall be installed prior to the commencement of works on-
site and shall be maintained in good condition for the duration of the development period.
NOTE: pre-start TPZ Signage Certification will be issued prior to the commencement of
any proposed works.
Page32
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 33
09 WHEN TO CONSULT WITH THE SUPERVISING PROJECT ARBORIST
The Project Manager is to consult with the appointed Treescience Supervising Project
Arborist when any of the following occurs:
o if there needs to be any deviation from the approved final plans regarding any of
the construction activities within defined TPZ’s;
o if access is required within the defined TPZ/fenced TPZ;
o if the nominated tree for protection foliage starts to wilt or changes colour;
o if any cracks or splits appear in the branches or trunks (especially if this
accompanied by the exudation of sap, liquids or discolouration of the bark) of the
tree nominated for protection;
o if any damage occurs to any part of the tree nominated for protection;
o the appearance of any infestation by insects, fungi or any other unusual displays
within/upon the tree nominated for protection; or
o there is a need to move or dismantle the trunk padding, tree protection fencing,
ground protection materials and any other associated materials that negates the
pre-start certification
Page33
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 34
10 SYNPOSIS & CONCLUSIONS
A level of preliminary development design considerations has been conducted by
Treescience which includes but not limited to, individual tree evaluations and a preliminary
assessment of potential arboricultural impacts. During the preliminary development design
stage, the condition of a tree, proximity of a tree to the proposed built form, engineering
requirements, and long-term tree management strategies were considered.
In addressing item 36 of Noosa Council Information Request we provide the following
response:
We conclude from our preliminary assessment that the associated tree protection
intricacies related to the associated earth works could be addressed onsite prior to the
commencement of the bulk earth works as will be identified within the commissioned AIA.
From our assessment of the available drawings and performing a site assessment in the
absence of an individual tree survey, we believe the subject trees can be retained. Our
findings are preliminary but largely appear manageable.
The retention of the subject trees and immediate forming vegetation will allow for the
integration of public open space with connection to the edge of the development site.
The retention of the subject trees’ and immediate forming vegetation will enhance the
landscape amenity, provide screenage, shade casting to the proposed car park and open
space. Generally, the foreseen vegetation relationship with the built space will reflect the
adjacent precinct density and landscape design outcomes to aligned with the elected sub-
tropical design as outlined with ‘Probable Solutions of the Landscaping Code’.
Therefore, we conclude the intricacies associated with the associated earth works could be
addressed at Operation Works by the relevant representatives and Treescience to ensure
suitable tree preservation measures are adopted as outlined within this report and a
commissioned Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA).
Treescience endorses the proposed design and construction requirements but conditional
constraints must be placed on all works within and/or directly adjacent to TPZ’s, to
ensure a level of compliance with in AS4970-2009, and as outlined within this report and a
commissioned Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA).
Page34
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 35
In addressing Item 37 we provide the following response.
The findings and any associated recommendations detailed within the report are of a
professional opinion of an experienced Arboriculturist (AQF Level 8) and are the view of
Treescience. This is based on the review of the information provided by The Client, the
brief and a survey of the site/tree(s).
My name is Jason-jay Fletcher and I am the Managing Director and Principal
Arboricultural Scientist for Treescience Pty Ltd, an arboricultural consultancy practice
based in northern New South Wales and south-east Queensland. I am tertiary educated in
the field of arboricultural science with twenty-four (24) years’ experience in urban
arboriculture, including nineteen (19) years in research and arboricultural consulting.
I have expertise in arboriculture. My qualifications and experience consist of the
management of trees in the urban landscape environment. Specifically, this has involved
tree hazard assessments, detailed assessments of tree condition on public and private land
with recommendations made on preservation strategies or risk remedial works and tree
related planning and development issues.
11 RECOMENDATIONS
With consideration of the recommendation from the Planning and Environment Court
Judgement dated 15th July 2014 by His Honour Judge Rackermann, Noosa Council Planning
Polices and the guidelines within AS4970-2009, it would be my recommendation that an
Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) be commissioned prior to commencement of works
and as a conditional requirement of development consent.
The recommendations made in this report are subject to approval by the consent authority.
Page35
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 36
Thank you for the opportunity to provide advice on this matter and if you have any
questions about this report please contact the author on 1300 731 859.
Yours Faithfully
Treescience Pty Ltd
Jason-jay Fletcher (Director/Principal Arboricultural Scientist) for Treescience Pty Ltd
Caveat
Unless states otherwise:
o This report cannot be used within a court of law or any legal situation without the prior consent of Treescience Pty Ltd
o Information contained in this report covers only the tree(s) that were examined and reflects the condition of the tree(s) at the time
of inspection, and
o There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, that problems and/or deficiencies of the subject tree may not arise in the
future.
CERTFICATION of PERFORMANCE
I Jason-jay Fletcher, certify I have formal qualifications that meet and exceed AQF level 8 in Arboriculture:
That I have personally inspected the tree(s), and/or the property referred to in this report and have stated my findings
accurately to the best of my ability. The extent of the evaluation and appraisal is stated in the report;
That I have no current or prospective interest in the vegetation or the property that is the subject of this report, and I
have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved;
That the analysis, opinions and conclusions stated herein are my own, and are based on current scientific procedures and
facts;
That my compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined conclusion that favours the cause of the
client or any other party, nor upon the results of the assessment, the attainment of stipulated results, or the occurrence
of any subsequent events;
That my analysis, opinions and conclusions were developed, and the report has been prepared according to commonly
accepted arboricultural practices.
I further certify that I am a registered active professional member of the ‘Institute of Australian Consulting
Arboriculturists’ (#372010), registered approved tree consultant for the ‘Queensland Arboricultural Association’ (#1481),
an active financial member of the world governing body ‘International Society of Arboriculture’ (#158995) were I have
Page36
been a practicing certified international Arborist since 2006 (AU – 0026) and therefore meet the minimum qualification
for writing arboricultural reports under the AQF (Australian Qualification Framework–Level 5).
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 37
BIBILOGRAPHY
Australian Standards (AS4970–2009: Protection of Trees on Development Sites)
Australian Standards (AS4373–2007: Pruning of Amenity Trees)
British Standard (BS5837-2012: Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction Recommendations)
Coder, K.D., (1998) Root growth control: Managing perceptions and realities. In The Landscape Below Ground II.
Proceedings of a Second International Workshop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils (D. Neely and G. Watson,
eds.), pp. 51–81. International Society of Arboriculture, Savoy, Ill, USA.
Dunster, J. (2009) Tree Risk Assessment in Urban Area and the Urban/Rural Interface, pp.68. International Society of
Arboricultural, Pacific Northwest Chapter.
Harris, R.W., Clark, J.R. & Matheny. N.P., (2004) Arboriculture. Integrated Management of Landscape Trees, Shrubs, and
Vines. Fourth edition. Prentice Hall.
Lonsdale, D., (1999) Principle of Tree Hazard Assessment and Management. The Stationary Office, London.
Matheny, N.P. & Clark, J.R., (1994) A Photographic Guide to the Evaluation of Hazard Trees in Urban Areas.
International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, USA.
Mattheck, C & Breloer. H., (2002) The Body Language of Trees. The Stationery Office, London.
Matheny, N.P. & Clark, J.R., (1998) Trees and development – A technical guide to preservation of trees during land
development. International Society of Arboriculture Books.
Page37
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 38
APPENDIX ONE: tree significance table
TREE CLASSIFICATION RATING BIODIVERSITY FUNCTION/SIGNIFICANCE/OTHER
Highly Significant Endangered and vulnerable o Heritage tree listed in the state heritage act or Local
species. Government Heritage Register;
o Historical/memorial tree e.g. war, ceremonial tree planted
Endangered regional by government or global leaders, or can be linked to the
ecosystems (remnant and city’s earlier botanical planter/community social group
disturbed), o High aesthetic value- tree has high significance in
size/colour and shade
Habitat trees o High cultural value- linked to indigenous culture, current or
earlier lifestyle.
Significant Near threatened species and o Aesthetic tree has a minor significance to size/colour and
native species of Council wide shade
significance as indicated on o Forms part of a recognised boulevard or landscape theme
Council’s Flora & Fauna o Healthy and sound tree(s) which play a significant functional
database role to the local community and/or contributes to the over
streetscape/landscape feature.
Vulnerable and of Concern
Regional Ecosystems (remnant
and disturbed) and Not of
Concern Regional Ecosystems
(remnant)
Poorly represented vegetation
community types (as defined
by Council’s Vegetation
Community Representation
Project)
Desirable Local native species or o Healthy and sound tree that contributes to the streetscape
introduced or parkland or landscape amenity
Not of Concern Regional
Ecosystems (disturbed)
Well represented in the local
area
Un-desirable Declared Pest Plan species, o Diseased or declining tree
poisonous or identified as o Undesirable species (weedy species)
Environmental Weeds species o Does not contribute to the overall streetscape or park
theme
o Presents additional conflict with the infrastructure or
safety that cannot be resolved through arboricultural
treatment
Page38
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 39
APPENDIX TWO: tree categorisation (BS5837-2012)
The purpose of the tree categorisation method is to identify the quality and value (in a non-fiscal sense) of an existing
tree, allowing informed decisions to be made concerning which trees should be removed or retained in the event of
development occurring.
Trees unsuitable for retention Category U: Those in such a condition that they cannot realistically be retained as living
trees in the context of the current land use for longer than 10 years
o trees that have a serious, irremediable, structural defect, such that their early loss is expected due to
collapse, including those that will become unviable after removal of other category U trees (e.g. where, for
whatever reason, the loss of companion shelter cannot be mitigated by pruning);
o trees that are dead or are showing signs of significant, immediate, and irreversible overall decline; and
o trees infected with pathogens of significance to the health and/or safety of other trees nearby, or very low-
quality trees suppressing adjacent trees of better quality
NOTE: Category U trees can have existing or potential conservation value which it might be desirable to preserve.
TREE TO BE MAINLY ARBORICILTURAL QUALITIES MAINLY LANDSCAPE QUALITIES MAINLY CULTURAL VALUES
CONSIDERED FOR INCLUDING CONSERVATION
RETENTION
Category A – Trees of Trees that are particularly good examples of Trees, groups or woodlands of particular Trees, groups or woodlands of significant
high quality with an their species, especially if rare or unusual; or visual importance as arboricultural and/or conservation, historical, commemorative or
estimated remaining life those that are essential components of groups or landscape features other value (e.g. veteran trees or wood-
expectancy of at least 40 formal or semi-formal arboricultural features pasture)
years (e.g. the dominant and/or principal trees within
an avenue)
Category B – Trees of Trees that might be included in category A, but Trees present in numbers, usually growing as Trees with material conservation or other
moderate quality with an are downgraded because of impaired condition groups or woodlands, such that they attract cultural value
estimated remaining life (e.g. presence of significant though remediable a higher collective rating than they might as
expectancy of at least 20 defects, including unsympathetic past individuals; or trees occurring as collectives
years management and storm damage), such that they but situated so as to make little visual
are unlikely to be suitable for retention for contribution to the wider locality
beyond 40 years; or trees lacking the special
quality necessary to merit the category A
designation
Category C -Trees of low Unremarkable trees of very limited merit or such Trees present in groups or woodlands, but Trees with no material conservation or
quality with an estimated impaired condition that they do not qualify in without this conferring on them significantly other culture values
remaining life expectancy higher categories greater collective landscape value; and/or
of at least 10 years, or trees offering low or only
young trees with a stem temporary/transient landscape benefits
diameter below 150mm
Page39
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed
Page 40
PRECENDENT DISCLAIMER for CONSULTANCY
Although Treescience uses all due care and skill in providing you the information made available within this report document, to the extent
permitted by law Treescience otherwise excludes all warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied.
To the extent permitted by law, you agree that Treescience 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
made (including by way of example, arboricultural advice) made available to you in this report document. Without limiting this disclaimer, in no
event will Treescience 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 Treescience has been advised of
the possibility of such loss or damage.
Clients may choose to accept and/or disregard the recommendation formulated within this report.
The devices and techniques used to develop this report have been selected to minimise the reporting costs, while ensuring that the reporting
information and the subsequent recommendation outlines within the report are suitable to the specific site.
This disclaimer is governed by the law in force in the state of Queensland, Australia.
Report assumptions:
• Any legal description provided of Treescience Pty Ltd. is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownerships to any property are
assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matter outside the consultant’s control.
• Treescience Pty Ltd. assumes that any property or project is not in violation of any application codes, ordinances, statutes or other
local, state or federal government regulations.
• Treescience Pty Ltd. shall take care to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data shall be verified insofar as possible;
however, Treescience can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of the information provided by others not directly
under Treescience control.
• No Treescience employee shall be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of the report document under unless
subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services.
• Loss of the report or alterations of any part of the report not undertaken by Treescience Pty Ltd. invalidates the entire report.
• Possession of the report or copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by anyone but the client or their
direct representatives, without the prior consent of the Treescience Pty Ltd.
• The report document and any values expressed therein represents the opinion of Treescience consultant’s and Treescience fee is in no
way conditional upon the reporting or a specified value, stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any findings
to be reported.
• Sketches, diagrams, graphs and photographs used in the report document, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale
and should not be construed as engineering or architectural drawings, report or surveys.
• Unless expressed: a) Information contained in the report will cover those items that were outlined in the brief or that were examined
during the assessment and reflect the condition of those items at the time of the inspection; and b) The inspection is limited to
visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation or probing unless otherwise stipulated within the report
document.
• There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied by Treescience Pty Ltd., 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 document have been included in the report document and all
documents and other materials that the Treescience consultant has been instructed or consider or to take into account in preparing
the report document have been included or list within the report document.
• To the authors knowledge all facts, matter and all assumptions upon which the report document proceeds have been stated within the
body of the report document and all opinion contained within the report document will be fully researched and referenced and any
such opinion not duly researched is based upon the authors experience and observations.
Page40
PAR: V2
©Treescience Pty Ltd –uncontrolled when printed