THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS
BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS
BS5837 TREE SURVEY, ARBORICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND METHOD STATEMENT
Elizabeth Greenwood CMLI FArborA [email protected] June 2015
Reference 556.15 1 THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Contents
1.0 Introduction...... page 3 1.1. Contacts 1.2. Instruction 1.3 Background
2.0 Tree survey...... page 4 2.1 Tree Survey Criteria 2.2 British Standards: 5837:2012 2.3 Synopsis of Tree Survey
3.0 Arboricultural Impact...... page 8 3.1 Issues considered 3.2 Arboricultural Assessment Impact
4.0 Arboricultural Method of operations- Pre construction page 11 4.1 Setting Out 4.2. Tree Works 4.3 Protective Barriers/fencing 4.4 Ground Protection 4.5 Demolition
5.0 Method of construction for the development………… page 14 5.1 Hand dig 5.2 Foundation details 5.3 Surfacing within the Root Protection Area 5.4 Location of Underground Services 5.5. Contingency Plans 5.6 Site Supervision
6.0 Post construction landscaping near trees. …………… page 15 6.1 Removal of Ground Protection and Fencing 6.2 Permanent Surfacing within the Root Protection Areas 6.3 Remedial Works 6.4 Landscape Proposals
Appendices A Photographs ……………………….……………….. page 17 B Tree Survey Sheets………………………………….. page 21 C Cascade Chart for Tree Quality Assessment…… page 27 D Protective barrier...... page 29 E Indicative details for new surfacing...... page 32 F Arboricultural Supervision………………………… page 34 G Plan 556.15.1 Tree Constraints Plan .…………… page 36 H Plan 556.15.2 Tree Removal Plan ………………... page 38 I Plan 556.15.3 Tree Protection Plan ……………... page 40
Reference 556.15 2
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
1.0 Introduction 1.1. Contacts Client - Mr & Mrs C.Yardley, John Barleycorn PH. Threshers Bush, Harlow Essex CM17 0NS
Planning consultant - Mr. Malcolm Horswill, [email protected] Designer- SJK Planning and Design Services Arboriculturalist and Landscape Architect- Elizabeth Greenwood Council.- Epping Forest Council
1.2. Instruction Instruction was received from Mr. M. Horswill to provide an arboricultural method statement to facilitate construction of new bedroom accommodation in the vicinity of mature trees.
It is intended to be a working document to be used by the contractor and local authority to ensure the retention of the trees and provide a means of construction for the implementation of this proposed development.
The trees were surveyed on 27 May 2015. Plans showing the details as outlined in this method statement are included in the appendix to this report (Appendices G, H and I)
In the case of building within the vicinity of mature trees the owners must be made aware of their responsibility to maintain these trees in a safe condition. Their insurers should be made aware of the implications of the presence of these trees.
The survey is to take the form of a visual assessment of trees recording their measurement, describing their age, amenity, condition and recommending work. Trees have been plotted on plan and full details of survey work are included in the appendices.
Limitations of this tree survey would include the lack of visibility of every tree owing to dense undergrowth and the presence of climbing plants such as ivy. There may be restrictions to the access within the site or from neighbouring land, and, in the case of trees growing on the boundary of the site only one side of the tree may be visible.
1.3 Background 1.3.1 The rectangular site with car parking and a pub garden is within a rural area, with arable fields on the north and east of the property. A bank with hedgerow type trees on the northern boundary with trees and shrubbery separating the garden from a residential dwelling on the western side.
1.3.2. The public house is set centrally facing the road on the southern side of the
Reference 556.15 3
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
plot; the rectangular garden is situated on the western side and the car park on the eastern side. The proposed site for the bedroom accommodation is at the north western side of the rear garden.
1.3.3 According to the British Geological Survey the underlying geological formation is of London Clay Formation - of clays, silts and sands. Superficial deposits have been recorded as Lowestoft Formation - glacial till deposits. Underlying clay soils would be susceptible to compaction exacerbated by overrun of heavy vehicles or construction works
1.3.4. A topographical survey has not been commissioned; the site appears relatively level with a bank along part of the north boundary; this is of recent origin from spoil excavated when the car park was constructed. A pond is present along the garden boundary with the road.
1.3.5 The garden is laid to lawn with a rose trellis separating it from the car park; a walnut also marks this boundary. Other trees, including oak and field maples, lie on the western and northern boundary. The oak and the larger field maples are old trees and in excess of 100 years in age,
1.3.6 The trees are currently not protected by a Tree Preservation Order; they are not growing within a Conservation Area, and are not protected by any other Planning Legislation. This situation may change and the client is advised to make further inquiries prior to any tree work.
2.1 Tree Survey Criteria 2.1.1 Photographs of many of the trees and full details of this tree survey are included on tree survey sheets. (Appendices A and B) Information recorded complies with BS5837:2012, and is outlined as follows:-
The species (English names), size and position of the trees within the site.
The majority of large shrubs or trees with stem diameter of less than 150 mm have not been surveyed. According to the British Standard Recommendations these trees can be transplanted or replaced.
The dimensions of the trees are the height, and the girth measured at 1.5 metre above ground level. The spread is measured at the four points of the compass, and this is represented on plan. The lowest branch on the trunk is measured from ground level and the crown height is measured from the lowest point of the foliage.
The maturity is recorded and details of this classification are included on the tree survey sheets.
A description of the trees’ condition includes any visual defects at the time of the survey. As this survey is conducted from ground level not all defects may
Reference 556.15 4
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
be visible, and pathogens may not be apparent because of the season of inspection.
General recommendations for each tree are outlined, which may need to be reviewed once development proposals are finalized.
Estimated remaining contribution in years in view of the existing site conditions is classified as (less than 10 years; 10 to 20 years, 20 to 40 years or more than 40 years).
2.1.2 A copy of an ordnance survey layout plan has been provided showing the site boundaries; measurements taken on site have been plotted on this plan, using tape measures and laser measure. Tree survey information has been added to this plan and details amended for the purpose of this report. (Appendices G, H and I)
2.1.3 It is important to note that the trees are surveyed and their condition evaluated in the current site conditions. If there is a change in the site conditions and within the root protection area the trees may need to be re-surveyed and their potential longevity re-evaluated. In the event of adverse weather conditions the survey should be repeated. Regardless of the development proposals there should be regular inspection and monitoring of trees at a frequency dependent on their condition and age: as such this tree survey is only valid for a 3 year period.
2.2. BRITISH STANDARDS: Tree In relation to design, demolition and Construction- recommendations. 5837:2012
2.2.1 Assessment of the trees’ amenity values The British Standard Recommendations provide an assessment of trees on development sites and outlines four categories in which trees should be placed for assessment purposes. These assessment categories are reproduced in Appendix C, Table 1, “Cascade Chart for Tree Quality Assessment”, and simplified as:- A Trees of high quality with an estimated remaining life expectancy of at least 40 years B Trees of moderate quality with an estimated remaining life expectancy of at least 20 years C Trees of low quality, with an estimated remaining life expectancy of at least 10 years, or young trees with a stem diameter of below 150mm U Trees which have limited prognosis. Those in such a conditions that they cannot realistically be retained as living trees in the context of the current land use for longer than 10 years.
2.2.2 These categories are subdivided into three sub groups:- 1. Trees of arboricultural value, good examples of their species or unusual specimens 2. Mainly trees of landscape value, trees which are primarily of
Reference 556.15 5
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
visual amenity 3. Trees with mainly conservational value for example veteran trees
2.2.3 Tree root protection - British Standard Recommendations 5837:2012 provide a formula for calculating the Root Protection Area (RPA) required to be protected for existing trees that are to be retained. The area of the root protection area is calculated by multiplying the girth measured at 1.5 metre by 12. In the case of multi-stem trees the girth of the trunks is measured at 1.5 metres and a formula is outlined in BS5837:2012 (The square root of the combined squares of the girth gives the mean dimension of the girth- with a tree with 5 or more stems the mean girth of all stems is then calculated. The results of both equations are then multiplied by 12 to give the radius). Root protection areas are indicated as a radius on plan. In the event of root restrictions for example deep foundations or a retaining wall, topography, drainage, soil type or soil structure, or soil disturbance the approximate area is represented by a polygon, as dictated by this British Standard. In this site an assumption would be that the trees may be able to root under car park surface and footpath construction, but that a road would provide a barrier to root formation.
2.2.4 Within development sites the British Standard recommends that trees are fenced off to ensure the root protection area is not damaged by construction works. In compliance with the British Standards, protective fencing should be erected at the edge of the root protection area. If access is required within this area, then the ground should be protected. Construction techniques using geo- web and geo-textile, in accordance with BS recommendations might be used to minimize damage to trees and enable working space for demolition or construction within the root protection area of trees.
2.2.5 Drainage and service runs need to be identified at this stage to ensure that if new service runs are to be excavated they should be located outside the root protection zone of existing trees.
2.2.6 Building foundations can be specifically designed to reduce the impact of a building if there is a minor incursion into the root protection area of a tree.
2.2.7 Other considerations- In addition, the British Standard takes into account future growth of the crown of the tree, the spatial implications and its effects on light.
2.2.8 Existing levels within the root protection areas of trees should be retained.
2.2.9 Some tree work might be required to ensure that the crowns of trees are cut back from working space and to provide access for construction vehicles. 2.2.10 There are adequate areas within the site to ensure that handling and storage of materials can be accommodated well outside the root protection areas.
Reference 556.15 6
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
2.3 Tree Survey 2.3.1 Within the edge of the car park and enclosed in a 7 x 5 metre planting bed, the twin stemmed walnut (T1) shows signs of decline with peripheral dieback of the branches. The tree has surface roots and multiple pruning wounds, with indication of fungal pathogens present in some of these cavities. Fungal brackets are also visible on several of the peripheral branches. A tree with limited prognosis, although of amenity value, it has be classified as a'C2' quality tree. 2.3.2 On the north and western boundary there are six field maples. The group of four field maples have grown as a group (T2, T3, T4 and T5), with the dominant central tree (T4) of good quality with an 8 metre radius root protection area. The three leaning trees growing under its canopy have suppressed crown formation. These trees of hedgerow origin are important visually in defining the edge of the property and integrating it into the surrounding rural area, 2.3.4 The twin stemmed tree on the eastern side (T2) has ivy ascending its crown and some fire damage to its trunk. Of the two trees growing close together (T3 and T4), the leaning trunk of the southern tree (T3) has damage to the stem indicative of fire damage; with over 50% of the bark removed. Its retention should be reviewed. On the western side the tree (T5) overhangs the shed. 2.3.5 One of the oldest trees within the property, on the western side of the garden is a 16 metre high large twin stemmed field maple (T7), with a tight fork between the two stems. There is deadwood within the canopy, and the tree has a 9 metre root protection area. There is a further field maple (T9) with a girth of 580mm with a 7 metre root protection area which is growing along this western boundary 2.3.6 Of most prominence is the oak (T10) which has incurred storm damage, and has recently been subject to tree surgery to address health and safety; with defective branch structure its condition should be monitored and it should be re- inspected annually 2.3.1 Three sycamores have been surveyed; a sapling tree (T8) growing between and under the canopies of the field maples (T7 and T9); a semi mature specimen growing within the boundary shrubbery on the western side of the garden and lastly, of more visual significance, the mature specimen (T12) on the northern side of the car park, 12 metres high with a root protection area of 4.25 metres in radius. 2.3.8 Two hawthorns have been surveyed both probably of hedgerow origin, one tree situated to the rear of the shed, is a twin stemmed hawthorn (T6), the other a multi-stem hawthorn(T13) growing on the north boundary between the field maple (T2) and sycamore (T13).
Reference 556.15 7
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Category Number of No Species trees A 0 B 10 T2 , T4, T5, T7, T9; Field maples, T6, T13 ; T10; T11 hawthorn, oak and and T12 sycamores. C 3 T1, T8 Walnut, Sycamore, U 0 T3 Field maple,
3.0 Arboricultural Method Statement 3.1 Issues Considered This method statement includes details on the following Pre construction works and site clearance Tree protection Tree surgery Protective fencing Methods of ground protection construction during works Demolition
Construction works Hand dig, Foundation design Hard surfacing within the root protection area Location of underground services Contingency plans Site supervision
Post- Construction works Removal of protective barrier etc. New surfacing Remedial works
Reference 556.15 8
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Landscape works 3.2 Arboricultural Impact Assessment 3.2.1 The approved site layout has been provided by S J K Planning, drawing number 3312/02. The impact of these proposals is summarized in the following table:-
Protect Tree Tree MITIGATION Ground Foundati num SPECIES EFFECT ive Construction Hand surgery protectio on barrier for surfacing dig ber n design Impaired condition- Too T1 Walnut close to building REMOVE to enable retention RPA within footprint building Field Tree T2 and working X X X X X maple surgery space for construction Impaired condition- Too Field T3 close to building REMOVE maple to enable retention RPA within T4, footprint building Field Tree T7, and working X X X X X maples surgery T9 space for construction RPA within Field Tree T5 working space X X X X X maple surgery for construction T6 RPA within Tree and Hawthorn working space X X X X X surgery T13 for construction RPA within footprint building Tree T10 Oak and working X X X X X surgery space for construction RPA within footprint building Tree T12 Sycamore and working X X X X X surgery space for construction
3.2.2 Incursion of the development into the root protection area of trees within the development footprint are summarized by the following table:-
Reference 556.15 9
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Root incursion % of Tree no Species protection Impact into RPA incursion area
7.2 24% Within footprint of building T2 Field maple 29.5 Working space for construction 17 58% (2 metres wide)
32 16% Within footprint of building T4 Field maple 197 Working space for construction 29 15% (2 metres wide)
Working space for construction T5 Field maple 46 9 20% (2 metres wide)
Working space for construction T6 Hawthorn 34 11 32% (2 metres wide)
37 14% Within footprint of building T7 Field maple 260 Working space for construction 34 13% (2 metres wide)
7 5% Within footprint of building T9 Field maple 152 Working space for construction 21 16% (2 metres wide) 4 1.5% Within footprint of building T10 Oak 290 Working space for construction 20 7% (2 metres wide)
1 0.5% Within footprint of building T12 Sycamore 57 Working space for construction 22 39% (2 metres wide)
Working space for construction T13 Hawthorn 12.5 3.6 29% (2 metres wide)
3.2.3 The maximum incursion into these trees root protection area will be working
Reference 556.15 10
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
space for construction, with the field maple at 58% and the sycamore (T12) at 39%, of which some of this area is already hard surfaced. The building footprint intrudes over 20% of the root protection areas of the three field maples (T2, T4 and T5). All these trees are boundary trees are significant visually as they provide screen planting along the edge of this rural area.
3.2.4 Mitigation and details to address the incursion into these trees’ root protection areas are outlined as follows:-.
Protective barrier/ fencing Ground protection within the area of proposed working space will partly address the impact of the development Foundation design. Hand digging for foundation of paths and hard surfacing New hard surfacing
4.0 Method of Operations- Pre Construction
4.1 Setting out 4.1.1 The site can be set out by the contractor in accordance with the Tree Protection Plan from measurements as outlined on the plan. Placing of any site accommodation and storage of materials will be set out with agreement by the arboriculturalist outside the root protection zone of any of the trees. There will not be any bonfires within the vicinity of the trees.
4.1.2 Storage of contaminants and mixing of concrete must be carried out outside the root protection areas of all trees. An indicative area for this usage is marked on the plan (See appendix I). The ground should be protected with heavy duty plastic sheeting, e.g. 1200 gauge DPM, with edges secured and raised to prevent spillage and with a raised lip along the access point.
4.2. Tree Works 4.2.1 As part of the application for planning permission the following tree surgery is outlined. All works will be carried out by a fully insured and competent tree surgeon in accordance with BS3889:2010 “Tree Work”. The timing of tree surgery should also be carried out in accordance with the Wildlife and Countryside Act and in view of the nesting season of birds within the sites.
Category
Tag Tree Recommendations
T1 Walnut C2 REMOVE
Reference 556.15 11
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Face back lower foliage along boundary of the T2 Field Maple B1 garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
Category
Tag Tree Recommendations
T3 Field Maple U REMOVE Cut ivy at base -Face back lower foliage along boundary of the garden and Crown lift canopy T4 Field Maple B1 to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
Face back lower foliage along boundary of the T5 Field Maple B/C garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
Face back lower foliage along boundary of the T6 Hawthorn B1 garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
Face back lower foliage along boundary of the garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 T7 Field Maple B1 metre clearance from the proposed building clean deadwood T8 Sycamore C2 review/ remove Cut ivy at base and remove deadwood overhanging the garden. Face back lower T9 Field Maple B1 foliage along boundary of the garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
Monitor- clean deadwood and consider further T10 Oak B1 reduction if required to address storm damage.
T11 Sycamore B2 Retain
Retain Face back lower foliage along boundary T12 Sycamore B2 of the garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building Retain Face back lower foliage along boundary T13 Hawthorn C2 of the garden and Crown lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
4.2.2 The total number of 2 trees to be removed as a result of this application, one of C2 quality, the walnut (T1) and the poor quality leaning field maple (T3) of 'U'
Reference 556.15 12
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
quality.
4.3 Protective Fencing/Protective Barrier Details of the fencing are shown in the appendices to this report and comply with British Standard recommendations. (See appendix D). All weather notices are to be affixed to this fencing with signage “CONSTRUCTION EXCLUSION ZONE – NO ACCESS”.
4.4 Ground Protection In the vicinity of the temporary unit working space will mainly be confined to existing hard surfacing. Where additional working space is required for construction within the root protection areas of retained trees, the British Standard specifies the following type of ground protection. a) For pedestrian movements only, a single thickness of scaffold boards placed either on top of a driven scaffold frame, so as to form a suspended walkway, or on top of a compression-resistant layer (e.g. 100 mm depth of woodchip), laid onto a geo-textile membrane; b) For pedestrian-operated plant up to a gross weight of 2 t, proprietary, inter-linked ground protection boards placed on top of a compression-resistant layer (e.g. 150 mm depth of woodchip), laid onto a geo-textile membrane; c) For wheeled or tracked construction traffic exceeding 2 t gross weight, an alternative system (e.g. proprietary systems or pre-cast reinforced concrete slabs) to an engineering specification designed in conjunction with arboricultural advice, to accommodate the likely loading to which it will be subjected.
4.5 Demolition
a) Prior to demolition the trees and hedges to be retained should be fenced off and ground protection installed within their root protection areas. b) For the trees along the edge of the development site the crown should be faced back to ensure there is clearance under the canopy to remove building materials c) All heavy machinery and demolition vehicles should be positioned within the footprint of the building. d) No material should be stored under the tree canopies e) All hard surfacing to be removed by hand with care so as not to damage tree roots, and stored outside the tree root protection areas. f) If temporary surfacing is required this should be in accordance with ground protection outlined above.
Reference 556.15 13
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
5.0 Methods of Construction for the Development
5.1.1 Hand dig Hand digging will also be required for all works within root protection areas of trees, including removal of surfacing, trenches, excavation for foundations, hard surfacing, fence post and for cultivation for soft landscape areas. All hand digging within the root protection areas of trees should be supervised by a competent arboriculturalist. 5.1.2 Within root protection areas all excavation should be hand dug. A trench should be hand dug near the trees to ascertain whether roots are present. If roots over 50mm are found these should, where possible, be bridged, and surrounded by sand- roots under this dimension should be cut to a clean cut and surrounded by sand. No roots are to be left exposed but covered with damp sand or hessian. The surface level of the path may need to be adjusted to retain these roots.
5.1.3 If on investigation of the hand dug trench there are no roots present mechanical excavation may be possible if a banksman is supervising the excavation to ensure that if roots are unearthed they can be protected and clean cut and surrounded by sand. Hand digging may need to be resumed to complete the excavation
5.1.4 This would include exploratory excavation by hand for the foundations of the paths and new hard surfacing within the root protection area of the trees.
5.2 Foundation design 5.2.1 Methods to mitigate foundations can be designed with virtually non invasive techniques using a mini pile and above ground beam and raft construction; specialist companies can construct these foundations and are experienced at ensuring tree protection techniques are deployed. By inserting gravel filter medium above ground and below the raft foundation some surface water ground filtration can provide moisture to the underlying tree roots.
5.2.2 Hand dig in area where indicated close to trees to minimize damage to tree roots. This is to ensure that large diameter structural roots are not damaged. 5.2.3 All pile rigs in vicinity of trees are to be positioned within the footprint of the building thus avoiding any damage to nearby trees
5.3 Surfacing within the Root Protection Area Hand digging will also be required for any work within the root protection areas of the trees. Indicative construction drawings are included in Appendix E. a) Minimizing excavation within the root protection area by removing surfacing herbage and laying a geo-textile to stabilize the ground. b) Infill any irregularities with 50mm sharp sand
Reference 556.15 14
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
c) On this lay a geo web, depth to be specified by the supplier to accommodate the proposed weight load. d) This will be filled with no fines gravel / stone 20-40mm e) Lay final wearing surface on top of this base- for example permeable paving or porous tarmac. f) Use timber edging to avoid excessive excavation to facilitate haunching of edging.
5.4 Location of Underground Services All drainage and below ground services will be designed to avoid tree protection zones. If there is no alternative but to site these within the root protection area of trees, then trenches excavation should be hand dug and comply with 'Hand dug ' as outlined in section 5.1 or the NJUG regulations.
5.5. Contingency Plans If vehicular access is necessary within the root protection zone of any of the trees, in response to chemical spillage, collision or emergency access, the ground will be protected by geo-textile or boarding as outlined in the British Standard. Spillage and ground contamination will be prevented and preparation of material carried out outside the root protection areas of tree.
5.6 Site Supervision There will be full supervision on site from the site foreman and tree protection methods will be strictly adhered to. An arboricultural supervision schedule, if required by the local authority, is included in the appendices to this report. (See Appendix F)
6.0 Post Construction and Landscaping near Trees.
6.1 Removal of fencing and ground protection On completion of works, protective fencing and the ground protection for temporary working space will be removed.
6.2 Remedial works and soil improvement 6.2.1 Exposed soils are easily compacted resulting in loss of water and gaseous exchange and leading to root deaths. To relieve ground compaction, which may have resulted from the overrun of vehicles or by storage of materials, the clay soils should be broken up to allow air to penetrate and for the soil structure to be restored. There are various methods to achieve this which are outlined in the appendices to this report. Auguring the soil by hand combined with soil improvements
Reference 556.15 15
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Pneumatic excavation for example air spade and soil improvements
6.2.2 Within the tree root protection area improve the soil structure by incorporating a compost or mulch within the topsoil, of 75-100mm in depth. This can be spread over the surface and gently forked into the soil. If bark chip is used as a mulch NPK fertilizer should be added to counteract the nitrogen depletion of the soil. There are options for additives of microrryhizal fungal which may also improve root function. Ground compaction will be addressed by either lightly forking over the area or by other techniques; for example use of tree spade soil aeration.
6.3 New surfacing Within the root protection areas the surface overlying the root protection areas of trees will be laid as outlined in section 5.2, on either the existing geo web base or on a new geo web base, with no excavation within these root protection areas.
6.4 New planting and soft landscape New planting within the root protection areas of trees should be carried out to avoid mechanical cultivation and for plants to be notch planted. Shrub beds are to be mulched, which, in addition to reducing weed growth, will enhance soil conditions round trees. Within grass areas, the height of mower blades are to be set above the level of surface tree roots to avoid damage and soil level raised above surface roots with a sandy composition of topsoil
Elizabeth Greenwood CMLI FArborA June 2015
References British Standards 5837: 2012 Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction. British Standards 3998: 2010 Tree work Tree Preservation Orders - A Guide to Good Practice Diagnosis of ill health in trees - R G Sprouts and T G Winter - Forestry Commission Publication ISBN 0-11-753545-1 Principles of tree hazard management - David Lonsdale - Forestry Commission Publication ISBN 0-11-753355-6 The body language of trees - Claus Mattheck and Helge Breloer - Forestry Commission Publication ISBN 0-11-753067-0 Arboriculture research and Information note 12 ‘Tree Root Systems’. Tree Roots and in the Built Environment John Roberts, Nick Jackson and Mark Smith. DCLG ISBN 13-978-0-11-753620-3 Manual of Wood Decay Fungi- K. Weber and C. Mattheck - -The Arboricultural Association, ISBN 0- 900978 Volume 4: NJUG Guidelines For The Planning, Installation And Maintenance Of Utility Apparatus In Proximity To Trees (Issue 2) – Operatives Handbook
Reference 556.15 16
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Appendix A
Photographs of the site and trees
Reference 556.15 17
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Above, below and bottom left- the walnut (T1) with peripheral dieback of its branches and surface roots- a tree of limited prognosis. Bottom right- the group of four field maples grown as group, with the dominant centre tree (T4) and three leaning trees goring under is canopy.
Reference 556.15 18
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Above left - the twin stemmed tree on the eastern side (T2). Above right- the leaning damaged stem of the field maple (T3). Below - field maples (T7) growing close to the shed Below right and bottom left- the field maple (T9). Bottom right - the large storm damaged oak (T10)
Reference 556.15 19
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Above left- the car park with boundary field maples (T2,T3, and t4) and the sycamore (T12) Above right- the sycamore (T12). Below- the north east corner of the car park with hawthorn (T13)
Reference 556.15 20
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Appendix B
Tree Survey
Reference 556.15 21
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
lowercrown
Diameter Category life
Lowest
branch
Height
South
North
Stem Stem
West
RPA
East Age exp cond Tag Tree Recommendations ect
ition
anc
y
enclosed in a 7 x 5 metre planting bed, the twin stemmed walnut (T1) shows signs of decline with peripheral dieback of the branches. The tree has surface roots and multiple Walnut 10 440, pruning wounds T1 Juglans M 2 13 3 2 C2 6 5.7 4.6 6.8 Fair REMOVE to 8 520 throughout the tree, with regia 20 indication of fungal pathogens present in some of these cavities. Fungal brackets are also visible on several of the peripheral branches. A tree with limited prognosis, although of amenity value, it has be classified as a'C2' quality tree.
Reference 556.15 22
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
lowercrown
Diameter Category life
Lowest
branch
Height
South
North
Stem Stem
West
RPA
East Age exp cond Tag Tree Recommendations ect
ition
anc
y Face back lower one of four, suppressed foliage along Field and leaning trunk on made boundary of the 20 Maple 210, 11.7 up bank; fire damage to garden and Crown T2 M 2 1 1 B1 3 6.2 6 5.6 Fair to 5 Acer 330 5 trunk- of visual lift canopy to 40 campestre significance along rear provide 1.5 metre boundary clearance from the proposed building Field leaning stem to south with Maple extensive fire damage less T3 M 310 1 9.5 2 1.5 U 0 6.1 4 7 Fair REMOVE Acer (over 50% trunk) 10 campestre suppressed and leaning Field Face back lower Maple foliage along Acer boundary of the 20 campestre Goo Dominant tree of group- garden and Crown T4 M 660 1 15 1.5 1.5 B1 6.8 4.7 8.7 5.5 to 8 d ivy ascending to 7 metre lift canopy to 40 provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building Field Face back lower Maple foliage along Acer boundary of the 20 campestre leaning and suppressed garden and Crown T5 M 320 1 11 1 1 B/C 5.7 0 0 5.5 Fair to 4 tree, overhanging the shed lift canopy to 40 provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
Reference 556.15 23
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
StemDiameter
Lowestbranch
lowercrown
Category life
Height
South
North
Stem
West
RPA
East Age exp cond Tag Tree Recommendations ect
ition
anc
y
Face back lower foliage along boundary of the Hawthorn 20 240, Goo garden and Crown T6 Crataegus EM 2 8.75 2.25 2 B1 3.1 4 2 2.5 Hedgerow type tree to 3 130 d lift canopy to monogyna 40 provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building
One of the oldest trees Face back lower within the property, on foliage along boundary of the Field the western side of the garden and Crown 20 Maple 570, Goo garden is a 16 metre T7 M 2 16 4 2 B1 6.6 7.7 6.8 5.7 lift canopy to to 9 Acer 500 d high large twin stemmed provide 1.5 metre 40 campestre field maple (T7), with a clearance from the tight fork between the proposed building - two stems. There is clean deadwood deadwood within the canopy. Sycamore Immature tree with no Acer potential in this location T8 Y 120 1 7.2 1.5 1 C2 2.8 2.4 3.3 2 Fair review/ remove 2 pseudoplat under canopy of Field anus maples
Reference 556.15 24
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
lowercrown
Diameter Category life
Lowest
branch
Height
South
North
Stem Stem
West
RPA
East Age exp cond Tag Tree Recommendations ect
ition
anc
y Cut ivy at base and remove deadwood overhanging the garden- . Face back Field Large pruning wounds, ivy lower foliage along Maple 16.7 ascending the crown and T9 M 580 1 3 3 B1 7 6.2 8.2 7 Fair boundary of the 7 Acer 5 deadwood within the garden and Crown campestre canopy lift canopy to provide 1.5 metre clearance from the proposed building extensive storm damage within drown, mal formed Monitor- clean branches, recently tree deadwood and Oak surgery to address storm 20 consider further T10 Quercus M 800 1 17 4 2.5 B1 3.5 5.2 7 8 Fair damage- Large pruning to 9.75 reduction if required robur wounds - Large diameter 40 to address storm deadwood within the damage. canopy- visible splits within lateral branches Sycamore On western boundary, ivy 20 Acer T11 EM 170 1 9.4 1.5 1.5 B2 3.7 3 4.3 4 fair on stem, suppressed by Retain to 2 pseudoplat field maple 40 anus Sycamore 20 Acer Goo On bank, well formed, T12 M 355 1 12 1.5 1 B2 3.5 4 6.5 4.1 Retain to 4.3 pseudoplat d significance re amenity 40 anus
Reference 556.15 25
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
lowercrown
Diameter Category life
Lowest
branch
Height
South
North
Stem Stem
West
RPA
East Age exp cond Tag Tree Recommendations ect
ition
anc
y 70, Hawthorn 75, 20 multi-stemmed hedgerow T13 Crataegus M 60, 5 6 0 0 C2 2.7 1.6 1.7 2 Fair Retain to 2 tree monogyna 65, 40 50
Reference 556.15 26
Appendix C
Copy of BS5837:2012 Table 1 “Cascade Chart for Tree Quality Assessment”
Reference 556.15 27
TABLE 1 Cascade Chart for Tree Quality Assessment- BS5837:2012 ( copies of table1 and 2)
Identification on plan ( RAB subject to Category Criteria legiliblity of the plan) Category U Those in such a conditions Trees that have a serious, irremediable, structural defect, such a that their early loss is expected due to collapse including those that will that they cannot realistically be become unviable after removal of other category U trees ( e.g. Where for whatever reason, the loss of companion shelter cannot be retained as living trees in the mitigated by pruning.) Trees that are dead or are showing signs of Dark red context of the current land use significant, immediate and irreversible overall decline. ( RAB 127-000-000) for longer than 10 years Trees infected with pathogens of significance to the health and/or so safety p 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 might be desirable to preserve Trees to consider for retention 1. Mainly arboricultural qualities 2. Mainly landscape qualities 3. Mainly Conservation qualities Category A Trees of high quality with an Trees that are particularly good Trees, groups or woodlands or particular Trees, group or woodlands of estimated remaining life examples of their species, especially if rare visual importance as arboricultural and /or significant conservation, expectancy of at least 40 or unusual; those that are essential landscape features commemorative or other value (/e.g. years components of groups or formal or semi Veteran trees or wood pasture) Light Green (RAB 000- formal arboricultural features ( e.g. The 255-000) dominant and/or principal trees within an e avenue Category B Trees of moderate quality Trees that might be included in category A, Tree present in numbers, usually growing in Trees with materials conservation or other with an estimated remaining but downgraded because of impaired cons groups or woodlands, such that they attract a cultural c value life expectancy of at least 20 conditions ( e.g. Presence of significant higher collective rating than they might as years though remediable defects, including individuals; or trees occurring as collections but unsympathetic past management and storm situated a so as to make little visual contribution damage) such as that they are unlikely to to the wider locality Mid blue (RAB -000- be suitable for retention beyond 40 years; or 000-255) trees lacking the special quality necessary to merit category A designation
Category C Trees of low quality, with an Unremarkable trees of limited merit such or Trees present in groups or woodlands but Trees with no materials conservation or estimated remaining life such impaired condition that they do not without this conferring on them significantly other cultural value expectancy of at least 10 qualify in higher categories. great collective landscape value; and/or tree Grey (Rab 091-091- years, or young trees with a offering low or only temporary/transient 091) stem diameter of below landscape benefits 150mm
Appendix D Protective Barrier/ Fencing
Reference 556.15 29
Appendix E
Indicative Details for New Surfacing
Reference 556.15 32
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Appendix F
Indicative Arboricultural Supervision
Reference 556.15 34
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Indicative Arboricultural Supervision
*Site Estimated Date of item supervision timing visit visit number Meet site foremen and discuss works and program. Prior to site Setting out site and protective clearance Visit 1 fencing, ground protection- site and organization, and demolition demolition
Setting out building, foundation Prior to Visit 2 excavation, trenches construction Excavations/ changes of soil levels— and foundation and During Visit 3 positioning of pile drivers construction details- inspect On completion- removal of tree Post protection, planting and Visit 4 completion remedial works- removal
Reference 556.15 35
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Appendix G
Plan 556.15.1 Tree Constraints Plan
Reference 556.15 36
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Appendix H
Plan 556.15.2 Tree Removal Plan
Reference 556.15 38
THE JOHN BARLEYCORN PUBLIC HOUSE, THRESHERS BUSH, HARLOW CM17 0NS Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement
Appendix I
Plan 556.15.3 Tree Protection Plan
Reference 556.15 40