Original source · versioned page text
OPW15/0195 Supporting Information- Clearing Vegetation
I.K.Crow
Elandra Body Corporate
P.O.Box 1191.
Mooloolaba
Old 4557
7 oc:::r ~I~
Mr Conor Neville
Noosa Council Chambers
Tewantin Old
Elandra Covenant
Dear
As agreed the joint experts report has been finalised with number of
recommendations which the body corporate committee is actioning and will be
discussed with you once finalised
The most important recommendation(number 4) of the joint experts
report was in respect to safety and obtaining a a class 5 arborist which the
committee has done as the first priority and this has raised some major concerns
which need immediate action.
A copy of the joint experts report and the arborist report is attached.
The arborist made a number of visits to the site and discovered a 14
metre tree had fallen, fortuitously toward the river,in the arborist's words "had the
tree fallen towards rather than away from the building it is almost certain that there
would be some impact if not damage or injury"
The arborist makes a number of observations in respect to this tree and the
surrounding area which we need to action with you as priority to avoid any other
potential safety or damage issues.
In addition he raises a concern about tree roots which have entered the building
perimeter area and extend to the building retaining wall and recommends action to
stop any potential damage.
The arborist also makes a number of recommendations regarding other tree
management.This is a comprehensive report which the body corporate will keep
updated on an annual basis to ensure the integrity of the covenant area.
The body corporate seeks your approval to implement each of the
recommendations set out in the class 5 arborist report as recommended by the joint
experts report.
The body corporate would be happy for the class 5 arborist to
supervise any work to ensure it complies with his recommendations.
IBox; .".~.~~~" R: ,,/~d I
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
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of the other 14 pages
Page 2
•
I look forward to your early response, should you wish to visit the
property i am here till 22 October and can be contacted on 5447 2768 or at email
[email protected] Fox Rogers.(copy of letter only as a result of prior meeting)
Page 3
Joint Report - Bushfire Issues - Elandra Apartments 6 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads Prepared for Elandra Body Corporate Committee by Rob Friend and David Houghton JER RF2-1 DH2-1 24 July 2015
Page 4
Introduction
This report has been prepared on the request of the Elandra Body Corporate with regard to identifying issues
related to bushfire hazards and hazard management actions relevant to the covenanted area attached to the
Elandra Apartments and under the management responsibility of the Elandra Body Corporate.
The property is located at 6 Serenity Close, Noosa Heads and is described as Lot 0 on SP188261. The covenanted
area is described as Lot A on SP188261. The area of the covenanted area is approximately 3,026 square metres
(see figure 1).
Background
The background to the instigation of this report was provided by Mr Ian Crow, Chairperson of the Elandra Body
Corporate Committee.
1. November 2014. As required by the fire management plan, Elandra body corporate had 2 meetings with
the Queensland Fire and Emergency Services including a joint meeting with the Rural Fire Brigade to
assess the fuel load and obtain their recommendations on how it should be dealt with, together with any
other issues they thought relevanl. These meetings also included the lIuka body corporate.
2. On or about the 16th January 2015, the Iluka body corporate, under its Chairperson Mr Clive Brown,
lodged an Operational Works Application with Council for tree removal as a result of the meetings in point
1.
3. Elandra body corporate has not made any formal application to council as a result of these meetings.
4. Noosa Council engaged Mr Robert Friend to provide an independent advice with respect to the bushfire
issues within the Covenanted area attached to lIuka Apartments as well as the adjacent Apartments,
Elandra and Riverlighl. Mr Friend provided that advice on the 17th February 2015 after undertaking a
site inspection on the 30th January 2015.
5. Elandra Body Corporate engaged Mr David Houghton to undertake an evaluation of the fire risk in relation
to the Fire Management Plan (Mr Houghton was responsible for the preparation of the final FMP as
approved by Noosa Shire Council in 2005). Mr Houghton inspected the Elandra site on the 18th February
2015.
6. On the 26th February 2015. Council wrote to the body corporate for Elandra Settlers Cove CTS37351 C/-
Archers Body Corp as well as the body corporate and other bodies corporate within the Settlers Cove
development, subject to the covenant stating in paragraph 2: -
'Council commissioned Rob Friend and Associates Ply. Ltd. to undertake an assessment of the
vegetation within the covenanted area. These findings are attached and form an addendum to
the Fire Management Plan for the lot. Please ensure the management of the covenant area is
in accordance with the recommendations of the Rob Friend and Assoc. letter. Where there
exists a difference between the Rob Friend and Ass. letter and the existing Fire Management
Plan, the Rob Friend and Ass. Letter prevails to the extent of the difference.'
JER RF2-1 DH2-1 24 July 2015
Page 5
7. March 2015 Elandra body corporate seeks a meeting with Council to ascertain how the fire management
plan would now be implemented as a result of the letter from Council in February (point 6) and discussed
a number of issues it considered needed to be addressed. It was agreed to have a joint expert report.
The discussions at this meeting were documented in a letter from the Elandra Body Corporate Committee
to Council dated 25th March 2015.
8. In late March 2015 the Elandra Body Corporate Committee appoints joint experts, Mr Friend and Mr
Houghton, to prepare a Joint Expert Report regarding the bushfire issues within the Covenanted area
attached to the Elandra Apartments.
9. Mr Conor Neville from Noosa Council informed Mr Friend that Council did not accept nor would accept
that there would be any cost to Council resulting from Elandra Body Corporate instigating a Joint Expert
Report involving Mr Houghton or Mr Friend.
10. Mr Houghton and Mr Friend have undertaken independent s~e inspections and assessment of the factors
with regard to the bushfire hazards within the covenanted area.
Mr Friend and Mr Houghton have undertaken a discussion of the issues and presented their opinions regard this
matter to each other and the following areas of agreement and disagreement are the results of that discussion.
Areas of Agreement
1. Fuel loads within POSCWP area were well in excess of the designated action criterion of 10Uha at the
time of inspection as set out in the existing approved fire management plan.
2. Fire risk was identified as being low at the time of inspection by both authors.
3. Controlled buming is not being advocated by e~her party.
4. There is a need to avoid any adverse effects on the existing ecological values of the
covenanted/POSCWP area.
5. That planted less-flammable species are providing benefits in reducing the fire risk to the adjacent area
(the degree of benefit at this stage is a matter of debate however).
6. Both recognise the importance of having a useable and effective fire management strategy.
Areas of Disagreement
1. The status of the FMP Stage at present Le. whether it is Stage 2 or 3 (including the degree to which the
planted less-flammable species are contributing to this staged transition).
2. The need to manage existing and future fuel load, especially when significanijy in excess of 10Uha in
proximity to the development boundary. (Mr Houghton considered that assessment of fire risk is dynamic
and changes over time due to seasonal and vegetation conditions and, in the longer term, possible
climatic change effects. This dynamic nature needs to be recognised and the consequential management
requirements need to be provided for in the FMP). While Mr Friend agrees with this statement, it is not
practical or reasonable to manage an area on what mayor may not happen within a particular area at a
JER RF2-1 DH2-1 24 July 2015
Page 6
particular time. Mr Friend believes that one needs to look at all the issues which may contribute to the
bushfire hazard and risks associated with that hazard and respond accordingly.).
3. The need to consider other fire management risks in the future and to minimise risk as far as is practical.
4. Mr Friend believes the Elandra Body Corporate should consider preparing a new Fire Management Plan
to provide them with options to manage the covenanted area for the next 5 years. Mr Houghton believes
a Fire infonmationKit is a better way to deal with these bushfire issues within the covenanted area adjacent
to the Elandra development
Joint Recommendations
Based on Mr Houghton's and Mr Friend's opinions. we make the following recommendations for the Elandra
Apartments lot owners: •
1. The Elandra Body Corporate Committee on behalf of the Lot Owners. prepare a new Fire Management
document, either by a fire management plan or fire infonmationkit, based on the status of the vegetation
and associated bushfire hazard within the Covenanted area to address management needs that would
likely to be applicable over the next five years
2. The need for a revised plan or kit following this five year period would then be the subject of review at that
time
3. If the Body Corporate Committee has concerns with the status of the vegetation within the covenanted
area in the longer tenm, they could undertake additional plantings of less flammable plant species to
further assist the transition of the area to a less hazardous situation.
4. Should lot owners. tenants and/or Body Corporate Committee have a view that trees within the
Covenanted area are a safety risk. they should engage the services of a qualified and experienced
Arborist (Level 5 accreditation) to assess those trees and advise the Lot Owners through the Body
Corporate of the status of that tree or trees and provide recommendations as to itsItheir ongoing
management. Arborist recommendations should be taken into account by Council should any approval of
actions be required.
Robert Friend David Houghton
24 July 2015 24 July 2015
JER RF2.1 DH2.1 24 July 2015
Page 7
J"
B4 85 P"
153'05'10"613
"23'27",213 /
---
~
_., " "
"".'
~
:.:::L
.,... W7T"273
70810 "" 10
--
,m
~
"."".
o
o
~.w-
09
BUP13469 09
SP103385
FH
I~~ ~':;:'Om'
o ,.
SP103385
FH
Om'
08 08
11
SP195871
FH
FH
07
5826m'
.::.::"".;,----
••••
FH
<JIDID
8
...'"SP188270 SP195871
FH
1.217ha
6573m' 5436m'
1~.76ha
1 '58".127
o
STANDARD MAP NUMBER
I '" I "" I
''''I "'" I "" m I
SmartMap
9545.33142 SCALE 1 : 2SOO
An &tumaI PmWd 01
M,I,PWtNOOWPOSITON I
NEARESTl(X';ATO>l
Sm~ Worma1:oon
Serw:.es
SUBJECT PARCEL DESCRIPTION CUENT SERVICE STANDARDS e- ~ WI ertmlQr'lln.:m !he
+/ OCO,
DqlIII Cadastrlll Data fl&se
..
e
c.sPl95881
"""'m
Ar •••••••• ......,
,~ ""
"'ffHCU>
DCOO 2800112015
.....,
"""'Go~ I'O:)SA SHIRE
/< --
NOOSAHeAOS lMn oIltB rbmabon reoordad in It-. <loo;unenl (hi rRlnnQon) ~ IIIIIl16J1OR5lbky
.-d
rISk IIS!IOOlIIlI(Iwm IIlIl ••••• oIlhe Ht:m'Iallon a'ld IIto.Id ~ Indopeodenl proles&lONllld'\llc:e III
"""" W"' •• mWIon 10 d8alongs IM1hproporty
MARCH
"""'" 3Ol!62I197 ~
no Mpr~OI'
0e\)artnMn d Nau .• """",--
~1Il1lll8llOn
.-xlIolIl'll!S(DNRM)'s bo!it ll!lolls, DNIW m ••_
10Ih9 hlofmldlOr\ a-od,IoIhlJ eZl8"Ill*"'llI8dby •••••• Queensland
exc::UlIII 01 lmt l1li__ AlIl111ng10 ~. lIOCUlC'J'. n ••abitly, cornpleIEroal;J or
Government
QlITercy lind all ~abo!Ity Jor a"Y direct, Indu'lIclllOd ~ ClCiGt., Ios&es. dllmBgllll a-od
expenses ma.rred In .,y WilY (~ but no! _mI!l.Id 10 IhallW1Singlrom neghgence) In
0CIIlIlIIdlQn WI'tl BlTf I.e 01 or reIIIn::e on Ihol hlofmlllOn (e) The Stale 01 Queensland.
GDA (Department of Natural
Resources and Mines) 2015.
Page 8
[email protected]
Taylor Ecology W\\ ,,\',taylorecology.com
IJ.O. Bo:\ 212
Principal: Mark Taylnr (J.Sc.(F"r). Oip IInr1 (Arb) MOOLOOLAIIA Qld. 4557
forestry ciemist, Arborist. I-Jorticuhurisl I'h/F.x: (07) 5444 175H
MCl11her urthe In ••litulc of rnn."Slcts of AUl'tralia
Mohile: ~17 710 437
Mcmbc.'r of Arboricu1turc Australia AIIN: 85 75Q186 717
l.icenced Spotter. Calcher
ARBORIST REPORT
Version 3
September 2015
Elandra Settlers Cove
6 Serenity Close Noosa Heads
Bushfin: Ilal'..ard AssC'ssmcnls • Flora and Fauna Reports • Consuhant Arborisl
En\'iromllcnt;:11 Management Plans • Lil:cm:cd Spoiler. Catcher
Page 9
[email protected]
Taylor Ecology \\"\\ W.lay Il1ftX'ology.,:ol1l
P.O. Box 222
Principal: M"rk Ta)'lor B.Sc.(For). Dip 1I0rt (Arb) ~IOOLOOLAIIA Qld. 4557
rorestry cientist. Arborist. Horticulturist "hIF •• : (07) 5444 1758
!\kmhcr of the In~lilUie of roresll'~ of Aur.lmlia
Mohile: 04 I 7 71 () 437
Member of Arboricuhurc AlI~lrJlia All, :8575Q~86717
Licenced Sroucr - Catcher
28 September 2015
The Body Corporate Committee
Elandra Settlers Cove
6 Serenity Close
Noosa Heads [email protected]
Attention: Ian Crow
RE: 'ELANDRA' VEGETATIONMANAGEMENT
Introduction
A covenant area of some 3,026 sq. metres adjoins the northern side of the development at 6
Serenity Close Noosa Heads. It is understood that a condition of this Community Title development
at Settlers Cove is the retention and management of this area for ecological purposes.
This area is the subject of recent investigations by various authors into the most appropriate
methods of land management to meet the requirements of a mandated Bushfire Management
Plan.
The outcome of one of these investigations - a joint report by R. Friend and D. Haughton in July
2015 - recommended, among other things, that a levelS arborist be engaged to advise the Body
Corporate on potential safety issues presented by existing trees and to make recommendations for
their management.
To this end the site was visited on the 11,h September, 2015 in company with the Body Corporate
Committee Chairman Ian Crow with a view to providing a written report on the management of
vegetation with particular reference to safety. Follow up visits on the 15'h and 24'h of September
revealed a stark demonstration of the potential for poor safety outcomes - a large tree not far from
the fence between the Covenant area and the Building had fallen, apparently recently.
Note that Section 5.6 of the Covenant document allows for interference to vegetation if there is a
risk to human safety but that prior Council consent is required.
locations and dimensions in the following report are approximate.
DBH: Diameter at Breast Height (commonly measured at 1.4 m height)
/2
Uushfirc 1Ia.t.ard Assl:ssmcnts • Flora and Fauna Rerurts • Consultant Arborisl
l:n\'imnmcl1lal Management Plans • Liccnc,,-u Spulh:r - Catcher
Page 10
2 Australian Standards Two Australian Standards are relevant to this report - 1. AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites. This standard defines then extent of Tree Protection Zones and Structural Root Zones and makes recommendations for tree management. 2. AS4373-2009 Pruning of omenity trees. This standard makes recommendations for appropriate methods of foliage and root management. Background Although the scope of the following report is intended to cover trees and their safety risk, in this instance the term 'safety' has other connotations outside of the generally accepted issues of the potential effects of trees on building integrity and people's safety. The mere presence of trees has inextricable implications for bushfire safety and building amenity. Two reports by the author in 2014 for Elandra and the adjoining-but-one lIuka development investigated the issue of trees and bushfire risk in the Covenant area. More precise management recommendations for bushfire risk are contained in the aforementioned Friend and Houghton report (2015) and the following report is intended as an adjunct to their findings. Findings The location of specific trees worthy of attention is plotted on an extract of the site's Smart Map (Qld Govt) and is included in the following pages. The initial site inspection on the 11'h September was conducted solely from the building side of the Covenant fence. Conversely the 15th and 24th September inspections were conducted from the Covenant side of the fence and placed the safety issue in a dramatic context. DEAD TREE A large tree initially located approximately 5 metres from the Covenant fence was observed to have fallen in a - fortuitously - northerly direction away from the building. DBH was 32 cm and the height 14 metres. Some sparse dead foliage indicated that the species is a She Oak (likely to be A. littoralis). See photo on title page. There appeared to be a complete mechanical failure at the root crown junction. However there were no immediately obvious indications of wood decay such as fungal hyphae, oozing, spongy material or fruiting bodies. Any colour changes in the wood appeared to be nothing more than that normally associated with the differences between the outer sapwood and the heartwood. However it was very noticeable - and disturbing - that virtually none of the root ball was attached to the butt end. Taylor Ecology Arbori.t Report v3 - Sept 2015 Elandra, Noosa Head.
Page 11
3
An examination of the dry cambial layer under intact bark revealed that the tree likely died
some time ago. Additionally there was no green material within several branches which
were tested.
It could not be determined when the tree had fallen. Discussionswith the building manager
and the contract maintenance arborist revealed that neither had any knowledge of the tree
failure. Previous decline in the vitality of the tree such as dying foliage had not been noticed.
Following discussions with an extension officer of the Qld Department of Agriculture and
Fisheries and submission of photographic evidence it was agreed that little purpose would
be served by testing for pathogenic fungi. The cause of death could be many fold but it is
concerning that a small She Oak (Tree No.5) nearby has died. Equally concerning is that
many trees can remain standing for decades after dying but the author has no specific
knowledge of the processesthat are typical for She Oak decline.
Had the tree fallen towards rather than away from the building it is almost certain that
there would have been some impact, if not damage or injury.
Management Implications
1. Many pathogenic fungi thrive in wet conditions. Although no such fungi were
isolated in this instance it is known that adjacent lawn irrigation spreads into the
Conservation area. It would be advisable to ensure that such irrigation is directed
towards the lawn area only.
2. It is a known forestry principle that the faster a tree grows the lower its timber
strength. It is entirely logical that irrigation will contribute to increased tree growth
and that consequently its inherent stability is less than optimal. The detrimental
effect that irrigation may have on the stability of large eucalypts in close proximity
to the building cannot be overstated.
3. It was noted that a nearby rainforest tree (Tree No.3) had undergone a mechanical
failure part of the way along one of its lower limbs with no other apparent cause.
4. Observation of all trees within the Conservation area for signs of ill health such as
foliage which does not appear 'normal', thinning crown, dropped branches, leaning
trunk, cracked or mis-shapen trunk, insect attack or fungal 'mushrooms' should be
ongoing. Any concerns should be referred to a professional arborist immediately.
Taylor Ecology Arborist Report v3 - Sept 201S Elandra, Noosa Heads
Page 12
4
Fallen
Tree Tree
NO.2 Tree
Tree Tree No.5
NO.1 NO.4 o
SP10338
o
>f381
00000 o SP
SP188261
)195881
FH
o
- -- -- ••
C'n-t nr::aa-t
Figure 1- Approximate positions of relevant trees
The following discussion of individual trees partly concerns itself with the effect of shade on
grass growth. At the time of investigation the lawn area between the building and Covenant
area was fairly sparse - undoubtedly due to shade issues from adjoining vegetation. It is
critical to maintaining a fuel free zone around the building that a green lawn be encouraged.
A more shade tolerant grass species such as Buffalo may be useful but some direct sunlight
will always be necessary.
Taylor Ecology Arborlst Report v3 - Sept 2015 Elandra, Noosa Heads
Page 13
5 Tree NO.1 A Queensland Blue Gum (DBH 40 cm, height 14 m) situated only 25 cm from fence post. Issues - Shade, contribution to bushfire fuel both on ground and in gutters; expansion of trunk onto fence; physical conflict of canopy with building; root conflict with paving and retaining walls. Recommendations - reduce canopy by a maximum of 30% by pruning branches which overhang property back to major branches or back to the main trunk at the discretion of a minimum level 3 arborist while maintaining canopy balance. Monitor infrastructure for evidence of root or trunk encroachment. Tree Group Several Acronychia (Fraser Is Apple) specimens planted sporadically near the fence line and extend along most of the Covenant boundary. Issue - Shade. Recommendation - keep canopies pruned at an arborist's discretion so that shade does not become limiting to lawn growth. Tree NO.2 Casuarina (She Oak) Issue - Unbalanced crown; shade Recommendation - reduce canopy by a maximum of 30% by pruning branches which overhang property back to major branches or back to the main trunk at the discretion of a minimum level 3 arborist. Tree NO.3 Unidentified rainforest species. Situated about 4 metres from fence, DBH 30 cm. Issues - Four large surface roots - evidently emanating from this tree - are growing towards a garden retaining wall. Shade. Recommendation - These roots are beyond the Structural Root Zone and Tree Protection Zone as defined in AS4970 but clearly serve a feeding function. These roots may be severed at the fence line in a manner prescribed in AS4373 under the supervision of a minimum level 4 arborist. Unless a moisture proof barrier is installed at the points of severance the issue will likely re-occur. Keep height trimmed according to prevailing sun angle so that direct sunlight is not impeded. Taylor Ecology Arborist Report v3 - Sept 2015 Elandra, Noosa Heads
Page 14
6 Tree NO.4 Dual trunk Qld Blue Gum Issue - One co-dominant stem overhanging property; shade. Recommendation - The removal of this co-dominant stem back to the main trunk will not upset the canopy balance and should be undertaken by a minimum level 3 arborist. Tree NO.5 Dead Casuarina. Issue - Clearly too small (height 6 m, DBH 10 em) to be considered as faunal habitat but such material adds substantially to the bushfire hazard. Recommendation - Remove this tree and dispose of off-site. SUMMARY 1. It is not unreasonable that residents would expect to be able to reduce shade to grow lawn. 2. Reduction in tree canopies which overhang the property boundary helps to reduce the bushfire fuel source and helps maintain a fuel free zone Le. a green lawn. 3. Unfettered growth of tree canopies will inevitably encroach directly on to buildings as well as depositing fuel on to the roof and gutters. 4. Site investigations for this report did not reveal any obvious tree health issues apart from the recent failure of a large tree. This may have implications for the entire Covenant area. 5. Because the tree failure may be associated with pathogenic rot it is suggested that a close observance of surrounding trees for obvious signs of declining vitality be undertaken at least monthly, if not continuously. 6. Issues of encroachment, excess shade and bushfire hazard would be ongoing for the site managers but a professional review every 12 months may prevent small issues becoming unmanageable. 7. Redirection of irrigation away from the Covenant area will reduce the potential for fungal problems and will help contribute to tree stability. Taylor Ecology Arborist Report v3 - Sept 201S Elandra, Noosa Heads
Page 15
7 looking East looking West Taylor Ecology Arborist Report v3 - Sept 2015 Elandra, Noosa Heads [OCR of page images] Looking East Looking West Taylor Ecology Arborist Report v3 — Sept 2015 Elandra, Noosa Heads