Development Application Part 2 - Environmental & Stormwater Management Plans · OPW11/0335

    Matrix Projects f(LDt- I-.scree nl'l'crcian. David Lost Wav Flag !isn Reach (11.1) 457.i



                                                  Summary

    1. Samuel Cowie Arborislil lorticulturist and Principal of Leaf & Limb I lorticultural
    Consultancy, hate been enga`t ed by Matrix. I have been engaged fur the purpose of
    investigating and reporting on options related to the retention or removal. and protection of
    the existing trees located on the site being developed as The Essence of Peregian, and advise
    on any relevant on-going tree management that is required between trees and proposed
    developnent works. I inspected the site and trees on the I4`h of April 2010 and the 7rh of.lunc
    2010. The site inspection and this report were conducted as per SCRC's DA conditions.
    specifically conditions No 17, i8, and 49- The report also addressed issues with condition No
     16. This tiorms the brief of the report.

    Condition No 16
    ( liven the extensive nature of the hulk earthworks across the majority of the site. the overall
    ageipoxor health and structure of the Melaleucas on the site. retention of ant trees outside of
    the building tixotprinis isn't possible for a long tens health and structural arhoriculturtl
    perspective.

    Condition No 17
     he requirement to install sheet piling outside of the building located in the south-eastern
    comer of time site .% ill impact hcavily on Trees No I. 2, 3 and 4. Tree No I has a poor
    retention value due to the basal structural defect and poor useful Iilu expectancy. where as
     frees No 2. 3 and 4 will be severely impacted by the sheet piling. Combined with their
    overall small stature. therefore lacking significance when compared to larger trees, removal
    and replacement of all 4 trees is the bust option and will increase the future treescape of the
    nature strip and site.

    I licc No ; is neither in good health or structure, therefore removal and replacement with a
    superior specimen al the landscape phase is the best option-

     I rue No (► has a short useful lilu expectancy due to the loss ofa major lirsi order branch.
    including a major future structural issue- thcrctorc the retention value is lost and rcmo%at is
    rccrIII nnt•ncted


     I rues No 7. 8 and r) are also poor specimens for retention. I his is due to their advanced age
    and prevalence of the decay fungus Phellimut throughout their branch structure. The client
    requests and prcfcrs the retention of these trees, and given the driveway footprint, retention
    maybe possible under supervision ofa qualified sit arhorist and as per AS4970-2009.

    Condition No 49
    Assessment of the KI IMP by Jamey Warren and Associates found no trees specified i ►r
    retention clue to Koala activities, Ihercli ► re the requirements of this condition aren't
    applicable-

    Tree Protection (Western Reserve)
    Although not addressed under the conditions of DA consent- the trees and vegetation located
    on the western side of the gabion wall are retainable (no obvious impacts or future targets in
    their v icinity). Protection of the '. egelat ion and trees mavhc done h% installation of
    appropriate luncim_ and signage w ith the assumed erosion control measures placed on the
    western side of the gabion wall during construction.


    "Free Prolt'ction prior, during and after development v orks
    The tree management and protection plan recommended in this report (t'.3) should he
    ingolernentcd to preserve and retain trees numbered 7. 8 and 9 if requested by the client



    l .caf and Limb I torticultural Consultancy
    Prepared by Sanxsel ('o%%ie                                                         1 1:1, Of JIJIIC 2010




I