Sealed Judgement

4 V ISUAL R EVIEW S COPE
As part of the JER process, reviews of the Health and Structure of trees were untaken by
Consult Arborist, with Dr Watson present to assess the site from an ecological perspective in
August 2024. During the 2024 assessment, 204 trees were reviewed; the Melaleuca wetland
trees in the north west corner were deemed to be beyond the scope of influence of bushfire
protection, the bioretention basin, the project design, and the spread of the Frangipani Vine at
that time. A key aspect of the review was to determine the effects that the invasive Frangipani
Vine is having on the main site area and the trees within the proposed cabin footprint.

A further health and condition review was undertaken by Matthew Duncan on 24 March 2025,
following the meeting on 18 March 2025, to evaluate the impact of the matters agreed at the
Mediation. A basic visual assessment was undertaken from ground level, with reasonable
access available to most areas of the site and trees.

Of the 242 native trees recorded within the RACV site boundary, 181 trees were reviewed in
March 2025 based on their location within the Urban Footprint and the Bushfire 10m Buffer
Zone or directly adjacent to the project design and/or the spread of the Frangipani Vine. The
trees within the northwest are in the Environmental Zone and are not affected by the project
design and were not overly impacted by the Frangipani Vine at the time of the assessments.

A key aspect of this review was to determine the effects that the invasive Frangipani Vine is
having on the main site area and the trees within the new Mediation proposed cabin footprint.

The review recorded provides an overview of any changes to the status of each tree and
confirms whether the tree remains ‘Suitable’ for retention based on its condition and the effect
of Frangipani Vine on the tree. In some trees, this was difficult to determine due to the dense
growth of the vine obstructing a clear visual of the tree structure. In these situations, the tree
was awarded a ‘Questionable’ retention status. These ‘Questionable’ trees are likely to be
overpowered by the vine, resulting in further decline in their health and structural integrity
without intervention in the near future. It is predicted that if a reassessment is undertaken in
12 months, there will be an increase in the number of trees declared ‘Redundant’ or dead.

To date, due to the aggressive nature of the vine, some trees have already been declared
‘Redundant’ as they no longer provide function as a viable tree; these trees were found to be
dead and/or dysfunctional with multiple failing branches and compromised structural integrity.

In the 2022 design, eleven trees were allocated a TBC status (To Be Confirmed), as it was
not possible to positively determine whether or not the trees could be retained due to potential
conflicts with the design. As a consequence of the amended design and further refinements,
we have been able to more precisely determine the trees that are able to be retained and
those which are not able to be retained. We are now confident that those labelled Retain can
be kept.




25_05_28_AR_RACV_RACV v NSC_Tree Retention Review_V10                                 Page 7 of 32




                                                                                                     54