UWE_Tree Survey Report

Transcription

TREE SURVEY OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF ENGLAND
FRENCHAY CAMPUS (PART)
COLDHARBOUR LANE
BRISTOL
By Building Design Partnership
July 2004
Prepared by:
Building Design Partnership
16 Brewhouse Yard
Clerkenwell
London EC1V 4LJ
July 2004
TREE SURVEY REPORT
1.0
INTRODUCTION
Building Design Partnership (BDP) have been commissioned by The University of the West of
England to undertake a survey of the trees in the grounds of the Frenchay Campus,
Coldharbour Lane, Bristol. The survey as been requested to supplement the Planning
application to construct Phase 1 of the new Student Accommodation District, Sports Hall
facility and associated vehicle and pedestrian access routes and car parking areas, as
submitted to the South Gloucestershire Council in June 2004.
The survey has used the digital topographic survey prepared by M J Rees & Company Ltd
Surveyors as a base for the Tree Location Plan and to record the heights, canopies and girths
of the trees surveyed. The area of Phase 1 of the development is shown on drawing LP001
and on the attached LP005 Tree Location Plan and does not include trees to the eastern or
northern site boundaries. All trees have been surveyed in detail and reference is made to the
vegetation along the adjacent boundaries and hedgerows in the following text.
The tree survey was carried out on the 7th July 2004 and is based on tree survey guidelines
contained in BS5837: Trees in Relation to Construction. Information covering tree species,
height, spread, trunk, girth, age, condition and amenity value for each tree has been set out in
the enclosed Tree Schedule. In the schedule each tree is identified by a reference number
which corresponds to the Tree Location Plan and these are referred to in the following text.
2.0
SITE DESCRIPTION
The University of the West of England, Frenchay Campus is located on the urban fringe of
north Bristol and at the edge of South Gloucestershire’s green belt. It is surrounded on three
sides by a landscape that has been included in the Forest of Avon strategy. To the west, the
campus is flanked by a mixture of recreational open space, residential, business and retail
park developments. Agricultural pasture land with public rights of way is predominant on the
lower lying land to the north interspersed with recreational open space and commercial /
leisure developments to the east. A major transportation corridor in the form of the north
Bristol ring road cuts through the ridge on the northern boundary.
The University site was first developed as Bristol Polytechnic in the early 1970’s. There are a
number of fragments of old field boundaries from the pre-University landscape still present on
the site, with the remainder of tree planting being consistent in age with being planted at or
since the time of the Polytechnics development.
3.0
SUMMARY OF SURVEY FINDINGS
The trees on site can be broadly divided into three groups.
1 Fragments of the pre-University landscape.
Trees T18 to T25, Group 1, and trees T46 to T66. (29 trees in total)
Look at it form overall point of view
Trees T18 to T25 and Group 1 consist of mature ash trees with an understorey of hawthorn,
and are fragments of a field boundary that would have existed on the site prior its
development as a Polytechnic in the early 1970’s. They are currently divided into two
groupings (trees T18 to T23, and trees T24, T25 and G1) by an access route into the sports
field car park.
Typically the ash trees are regenerating coppices and have multiple trunks as a result. The
understorey of hawthorn has in the past been consistently maintained to a height of
approximately 2.0m. The trees are poorly managed which prevents them from achieving a
grade ‘A’ Amenity Value, but nonetheless they provide an important ecological corridor within
the University site, and are a valuable feature of the University landscape.
Trees T46 to T66, consisting of 10No sycamore, 4No ash, 3No horse chestnut, 3No field
maple and 1No hawthorn, are growing along a north-south line of a second field boundary
that would have existed on the site before its development as a Polytechnic in the early
1970’s. The trees are all semi-mature in age, consistent with planting at or around the time of
the development of the Polytechnic, and are all located to the west of a shallow drainage ditch
with a continuous hedgerow (H1) of regenerating elm, privet, ash, dogwood and field maple to
the eastern side of the ditch. Typically these trees are growing in groupings of 2 to 4 resulting
in slightly uneven canopies and form but are otherwise sound and healthy with minimal
defects. As a group they have are typically of grade ‘B’ Amenity Value and are a significant
feature of the University landscape.
Scheme results in the loss of 23 of the 29 individually surveyed trees (T24, T25 and T46 to
T66) plus all of Group 1.
2 Trees along access routes, boundaries and adjacent to the drainage swale.
Trees T1 to T17, trees T26 to T45, trees T67 to T73, trees T74 to T92, and trees T130 to
T155. (89 trees in total)
Trees T1 to T14 consisting of 2no silver birch and 12No Scots pine form a secondary buffer to
the west boundary of the site and are with the exception of young trees within the car park,
the only evergreen trees within the development boundary. The trees age is consistent with
being planted at the time of or subsequent to the site being developed as a Polytechnic in the
early 1970’s. Typically all have well balanced canopies when viewed as part of their
groupings with a small amount of maintenance required. Taking this into consideration, their
age and the impact on the Universities landscape they are of a grade ‘C’ Amenity Value.
They will perform an important screening function in the future.
Trees T26 to T39 consist of a line of poplars located on an earth bank dividing the existing
sports field car park and access road. As a group they are fairly consistent in height and
spread with the exception of T34 (dead) and T35 which are newly planted replacements
following the loss of one of the original line. All exhibit brown discolouration to the leaf
possibly due to a fungus or insect attack and are relatively densely branched from an
approximate height of 2.0m. These trees combined with G1 form an important piece of the
Universities landscape framework and have a grade ‘B’ Amenity Value. However it is likely
that in the long term these trees will need to be removed due to their location on sloping
ground causing them to become unstable.
Trees T40 to T45, all young nursery stock hawthorns, recently planted located to the roadside
of the line of poplars. They are very poor in form and are leaning as a result of broken tree
ties. Their proximity to the line of poplars severely limits their future potential, and as a result
they are of grade ‘D’ Amenity Value and it is recommended they be removed.
Trees T74 to T83 consist of a line of white poplars, set in from the Universities northern
boundary they form a barrier to views into the site. Two trees have been lost from this line
and replaced with young nursery stock poplars of a different variety. Typically the poplars are
of good, even form and are grade ‘B’ Amenity Value. These poplars are not a long term
solution and are planted for a quick impact. A number of very young nursery stock trees of a
variety of species are planted in the vicinity of the poplars with little regard to their
arrangement and proximity to the poplars.
Trees T130 to T155, a grouping of poplars which have been planted in the last 5 years,
located to the east of the car park on the bank leading down to the drainage stream. As a
group they have a reasonable landscape presence and are of good health and form. The
choice of poplars is again not a long term solution and their location on sloping ground may
lead to them becoming unstable in the future.
Scheme results in the loss of 58 of the 90 trees (T17, T26 to 45, T67, T71 to T73, T75 to 92,
T130, T134, T136, T137, T139, T140, T142, T144 to T150, and T53)
3 Trees within the existing car parks.
Trees T93 to T129, and trees T156 to T214 (96 trees in total)
Typically the trees within and adjacent to the existing car parks have a stem diameter of less
than 75mm which precludes them from needing to be surveyed according to the guidelines in
BS5837 Trees in Relation to Construction. However, because of their number they have
been surveyed to identify individual trees that may be suitable for transplantation and to
provide a record of trees currently on the site. The predominant species are pine, rowan,
whitebeam, silver birch and Crataegus. Again, many are young nursery stock and are poor in
form, providing little future benefit to the University landscape. The exceptions being two
cedars of excellent form and sound health, and a number of the pines are suitable for
relocation.
Scheme results in the loss of all of these trees. With the exception of trees T124 and T125,
where relocation to a suitable location of these cedars is recommended.
4.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
In this section the surveyed trees are assessed in relation to the development proposals
shown in drawing LP001. In assessing the impact of the proposals on the existing trees it is
assumed that guidelines contained in BS5837 Trees in Relation to Construction, are followed
before and during construction. The proposals show the retention of trees adjacent to the
west boundary including a portion of the field boundary remnant.
The new masterplan for the University recognises the need to retain existing trees and groups
of vegetation. However a fundamental masterplan concept is to order the new development
around an extended and reinforced campus grid. Unfortunately as many of the existing trees
have no relationship with the grid there is an inevitable clash.
The demanding brief for the student residences and the constraints associated with
complying with modern disabled access standards on a sloping site will necessitate a
complete remodelling of the hillside. With the exception of the peripheral areas, the existing
trees will not survive the resulting changes in ground level and water table.
A number of poplars of different species are lost as part of the development proposals and
although they are significant features of the University landscape they are typically planted on
sloping ground and are at risk of becoming unstable in the future, especially on such an
exposed site. They were planted for quick impact and have limited long term value for the
University.
The trees within the car park areas are all recommended for removal due to a combination of
their species, form, health and limited future potential. With the exception of two young
Cedars, which would benefit from being relocated to a position where they can realise their
full mature form, and a number of the pines which are also suitable for relocation.
The loss of a significant number of the trees on the site will be compensated for by the new
planting strategy. The new tree planting arrangement responds to and reinforces the campus
geometry. It will take the form of formal lines of trees on main pedestrian routes with random
groupings to soften the courtyard spaces. Around the perimeter, the trees will perform an
important function in breaking down the scale of the development when viewed from
surrounding countryside and urban fringe. Here the planting will be more naturalistic with a
high percentage of native species.
5.0
CONCLUSIONS
The main findings from this survey are as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
No trees on the site are of grade ‘A’ Amenity Value
Perimeter planting to the sites boundaries was not surveyed as part of the Tree
Survey Report as it is unaffected by the development proposals.
While the proposals result in the loss of 177 of the 214 existing trees on site, 54% of
these trees are recently planted or young car park trees with little amenity value.
All of one and part of a second old field boundary will be removed as part of the
proposals. Whilst these are important groups of vegetation, they are not of sufficient
amenity value to constrain the proposals.
The loss of existing trees will be offset by a greater number (267No.) of new trees, as
indicated on the drawing LP001. The new tree planting will have a strong relationship
with the campus geometry and be of a more suitable species and size for increased
long term landscape value.
A minimum of 59 new buffer/woodland trees are proposed to the north boundary to
offset the loss of existing trees in this vicinity and reinforce the screening effect of the
existing planting.
The two cedars within the car park areas will be relocated as part of the development
proposals to a more suitable location to enable them to achieve their full mature form.
The possibility of relocating the semi mature car park pine trees should be explored.
TREE SCHEDULE,
DATE CARRIED OUT: 8TH. JULY 2004
University of the West of England
Frenchay Campus
TREE
REF NO.
TREE SPECIES
HEIGHT
(M)
DIAMETER
SPREAD
APPROX
DIAMETER OF
TRUNK
AGE
CONDITION
CLASS
(CM)
AMENITY
VALUE
NOTES
(M)
T1
Betula pendula
7.0
4.0
20
M
2
B
Leaning slightly, slightly unbalanced
form.
T2
Betula pendula
6.0
3.0
15
Y
1
B
Base of trunk slightly crooked. Good
even form.
T3
Pinus sylvestris
7.0
6.0
35
M
1
B
Trees 3-10 form group. Even canopy
when viewed as part of group. Small
amount of dead wood. Ivy growing up
trunk requires clearing.
T4
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
3.0
25
M
1
B
T5
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
5.5
25
M
1
B
trunk requires clearing. Trunk slightly
crooked.
T6
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
5.0
35
M
1
B
trunk requires clearing. Trunk forks at
3.0m.
T7
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
6.5
35
M
1
B
T8
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
4.5
25
M
1
B
trunk required clearing.
T9
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
4.0
30
M
1
B
LN09275/landscape/UWE_Tree Survey Schedule.doc
T10
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
4.5
25
M
1
B
trunk requires clearing
T11
Pinus sylvestris
7.0
5.0
40
M
1
B
Even canopy. Small amount of dead
wood. Ivy growing up trunk requires
clearing.
T12
Pinus sylvestris
8.0
5.0
35 x2
M
2
B
Even canopy. Small amount of dead
wood. Ivy growing up trunk requires
clearing.
T13
Pinus sylvestris
7.0
4.0
30
M
1
B
Trees 13 and 14 form group. Forked
trunk. Uneven form as a result of
growing in close proximity to T14.
T14
Pinus sylvestris
7.0
4.0
30
M
1
B
Trees 13 and 14 form group. Even
canopy.
T15
Prunus sp.
6.5
4.5
30
M
1
C
Forked trunk at 1.2m. Even spreading
canopy.
T16
Salix sp.?
4.5
4.0
18
Y
1
C
Trunk not vertical. Some bark missing
from lower branches.
T17
Pinus sp.
2.0
1.0
10
N/Y
1
C
Young, recently planted pine.
T18
Fraxinus excelsior
8.5
4.0
35/20/15
M
3
C
Regenerating coppice from bole of
removed tree. Thin and leggy canopy.
Ivy growing up trunk, with dead wood
requiring maintenance. Lack of
management of tree and Crataegus
monogyna understorey.
T19
Fraxinus excelsior
8.5
4.0
25/15
M
3
B
removed tree. Ivy growing up trunk,
and some dead wood requiring
maintenance. Lack of management of
tree and Crataegus monogyna
understorey.
T20
Fraxinus excelsior
8.5
4.0
30/30
M
3
B
removed tree. Irregular form. Ivy
growing up trunk, and some dead wood
T21
Fraxinus excelsior
8.5
4.0
25
M
3
B
removed tree. Irregular form and
leaning. Ivy growing up trunk, and
some dead wood requiring
maintenance. Lack of management of
tree and Crataegus monogyna
understorey.
T22
Crataegus monogyna
3.5
2.5
10
Y
3
C
Growing as understory to Fraxinus
limiting form. Ivy growing through.
T23
Crataegus monogyna
3.5
2.5
10
Y
3
C
T24
Crataegus monogyna
3.5
2.5
10
Y
3
C
T25
Fraxinus excelsior
9
6
40 multiple
M
3
B
removed tree. Irregular form. Ivy
growing up trunk, and some dead wood
T26
Poplus nigra
7
3
22
M
2
B
Good even form. Significant amount of
brown discolouration to leaves possibly
caused by fungus/insects..
T27
Poplus nigra
8.5
4.0
30
M
2
B
caused by fungus/insects.
T28
Poplus nigra
7.5
3.0
22
M
2
B
T29
Poplus nigra
8.0
4.0
30
M
2
B
T30
Poplus nigra
8.0
4.0
30
M
2
B
T31
Poplus nigra
8.0
4.0
30
M
2
B
T32
Poplus nigra
7.5
4.0
30
M
2
B
T33
Poplus nigra
8.5
4.5
30
M
2
B
T34
Poplus nigra
3.0
0.6
3
N
D
Dead.
T35
Poplus nigra
3.0
0.6
3
N
2
C
Newly planted tree.
T36
Poplus nigra
8.0
4.0
30
M
2
B
T37
Poplus nigra
8.0
4.0
30
M
2
B
T38
Poplus nigra
8.0
3.5
30
M
2
B
T39
Poplus nigra
8.0
3.5
30
M
2
B
T40
Crataegus monogyna
3.0
1.0
10
Y
3
D
Poor uneven form. Tree ties broken,
tree leaning. Recently university
planting located beneath the canopy of
adjacent Fraxinus limiting future
potential.
T41
Crataegus monogyna
3.0
1.0
10
Y
2
D
Recently university planting located
beneath the canopy of adjacent
Fraxinus limiting future potential.
T42
Crataegus monogyna
3.0
1.0
10
Y
3
D
Poor uneven form and leaning. Tree
ties broken away from stake. Recent
university planting.
T43
Crataegus monogyna
3.0
1.0
10
Y
3
D
Poor uneven form and leaning through
double stake. Broken tree ties. Recent
university planting.
T44
Crataegus monogyna
3.0
1.0
10
Y
2
D
Recent university planting.
T45
Crataegus monogyna
3.0
1.0
10
Y
2
D
Recent university planting.
T46
Acer pseudoplatanus
7.0
5.0
25
M
1
B
Growing beneath canopy of T47
resulting in unbalanced form.
T47
Fraxinus excelsior
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Small amount of dead wood to be
removed. Slightly unbalanced form a
result of growing in close proximity to
T46.
T48
Acer pseudoplatanus
8.0
5.0
30
M
1
B
Good even balanced crown.
T49
Acer pseudoplatanus
8.0
5.0
25
M
1
B
Slightly unbalanced form.
T50
Aesculus
7.0
5.0
30
M
1
B
Canopy uneven as a result of growing in
hippocastanum
close proximity with T51. Would benefit
from having shoots at lower section of
trunk removed.
T51
Acer pseudoplatanus
8.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Canopy uneven as a result of growing in
close proximity with T50.
T52
Acer pseudoplatanus
6.5
3.0
20
Y/M
2
C
Unbalanced from. Pruning scars at
0.5m trunk height. Future potential
limited as a result of proximity to T53.
T53
Fraxinus excelsior
8.0
4.0
30
M
1
B
Good even form.
T54
Aesculus
hippocastanum
3.5
3.0
15
Y
2
C
Proximity to T53 and T55 limiting future
potential.
T55
Fraxinus excelsior
8.5
4.0
20
M
1
B
Some light pruning of dead wood
required. Good even canopy.
T56
Aesculus
hippocastanum
7.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Some light pruning required to balance
crown. Split in bark at 1.5m.
T57
Acer pseudoplatanus
8.0
3.5
22
M
2
B
Uneven form due to proximity to T56
and T58.
T58
Acer pseudoplatanus
7.0
3.5
25
M
2
B
Small amount of dead wood requiring
pruning. Ivy growing up trunk requires
removing.
T59
Crataegus monogyna
2.0
1.0
2x 6
Y
2
C
Self seeded tree with irregular form.
T60
Fraxinus excelsior
9.0
4.0
25
M
2
B
T61
Acer campestre
3.0
1.5
8
Y
2
C
Form restricted as a result of growing
beneath T60 and T62.
T62
Acer pseudoplatanus
6.0
3.0
20/15
M
1
B
Trunk forked at base.
T63
Acer campestre
3.5
2.0
12
Y
2
C
Unbalanced form. Bark scars.
T64
Acer pseudoplatanus
5.5
3.0
20
M
2
C
Tree leaning. Even canopy.
T65
Acer campestre
6.0
3.0
20
M
1
B
Uneven form as a result of growing
beneath T66.
T66
Acer pseudoplatanus
8.0
5.5
25/30
M
1
B
Trunk forked at 0.8m. Slightly
unbalanced form.
T67
Fagus sylvatica
4.5
2.5
18/18
Y
1
C
Trunk forked at base.
T68
Larix x eurolepis
5.5
4.0
15
M
1
B
Well balanced, even, spreading form.
T69
Fagus sylvatica
4.5
3.0
12 - 20
M
2
C
Poor specimen. Trunk forked into 4 at
base.
T70
Pinus sp.
4.0
2.5
25
M
1
C
Unbalanced form, restricted due to
proximity to T69.
T71
Acer campestre
2.5
1.0
4
N
1
C
Recent university planting. Staked low
at 0.5m.
T72
Acer campestre
2.5
1.0
4
N
1
C
at 0.5m.
T73
Acer campestre
2.5
1.0
4
N
1
C
at 0.5m.
T74
Poplus sp.
4.0
2.0
10
Y
1
C
Trunk bent.
T75
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Poor past pruning at 0.6m high.
Remove new shoots from site of old
pruning. Good even canopy.
T76
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
2
B
Leaning slightly. Good even canopy.
T77
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Well balanced tree.
T78
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Well balanced tree.
T79
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Well balanced tree.
T80
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Would benefit from light pruning to
balance canopy.
T81
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
2
C
Leaning. Would benefit from some
pruning to balance canopy.
T82
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Well balanced tree.
T83
Poplus alba
9.0
4.0
25
M
1
B
Leaning slightly. Good even canopy.
T84
Poplus sp.
3.0
1.5
8
Y
1
C
A recent replacement tree within line of
Poplus alba although not same species.
Crooked trunk.
T85
Poplus sp.
2.0
0.5
2
N
3
C
Recent university planting. Poor, small
specimen.
T86
Poplus sp.
2.0
0.5
2
N
3
C
specimen.
T87
Dead
1.0
0.5
2
D
Remove.
T88
Alnus glutinosa
4.0
2.0
10
Y
2
C
Recent university planting. Uneven
form. Poorly pruned.
T89
Alnus glutinosa
‘Imperialis’
2.5
0.8
4
N
1
C
specimen.
T90
Alnus glutinosa
‘Imperialis’
2.5
0.8
4
N
1
C
specimen.
T91
Dead
2.0
0.5
D
Remove.
T92
Alnus glutinosa
3.0
1.0
C
specimen. Trunk forked into 3 at base.
3x 6
Y
2
Some dead wood. Planted beneath the
canopy of adjacent poplars restricting
growth.
T93
Poplus sp.
4.0
0.5
5
N
3
D
Recent university planting. Very poor,
small specimen.
T94
Betula sp.
4.0
1.0
5
N
1
C
Recent university planting. Betula
variety. Even form.
T95
Betula sp.
4.0
1.0
5
N
1
C
Recent university planting. Betula
variety. Even form.
T96
Poplus sp.
2.5
1.0
6
Y
1
C
Even form.
T97
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
N
3
D
Recent university planting. Poor
specimen. Significant amount of dead
wood.
T98
Dead
2.0
0.5
D
Remove.
T99
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
N
3
D
Recent university planting. Poor
specimen. Significant amount of dead
wood.
T100
Fraxinus excelsior
5.0
3.5
15
M
1
B
Even, spreading form.
T101
Poplus sp.
2.5
1.0
6
Y
1
C
A recent replacement tree within line of
Poplus alba although not same species.
Even form.
T102
Alnus glutinosa
4.5
1.5
10
Y
2
C
Significant amount of dead wood
requiring pruning.
T103
Betula pendula
3.5
1.0
8
Y
1
C
Well balanced form.
T104
Salix alba
10.0
6.0
37
M
1
B
Well balanced form. Remove shoots at
lower trunk.
T105
Fraxinus ornus
3.5
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Ornamental ash. Even form.
T106
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Even form.
T107
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Purple variety. Mower damage to lower
trunk.
T108
Betula pendula
4.0
1.5
12
Y
1
C
Even form. Mower damage to lower
trunk.
T109
Fraxinus excelsior
4.0
2.0
15
Y
1
C
Even form. Mower damage to lower
trunk.
T110
Prunus sp.
4.0
2.0
15
Y
1
C
Well balanced form.
T111
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Purple variety. Well balanced form.
T112
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Slightly uneven form.
T113
Castanea sp.
2.5
1.0
8
Y
1
C
Well balanced form. Mower damage to
lower trunk.
T114
Salix sp.
6.0
4.0
20
M
1
C
Would benefit from light pruning.
T115
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T116
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T117
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T118
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T119
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T120
Betula sp.
3.0
1.0
5
N
4
D
Very poor specimen. Bark has
significant splits in two places.
T121
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T122
Dead.
3.5
2.0
10
D
Remove.
T123
Quercus sp.
5.0
1.5
10
Y
1
C
Columnar form.
T124
Cedrus atlantica
‘Glauca’
3.5
2.0
15
Y
1
B
T125
Cedrus atlantica
‘Glauca’
2.5
2.0
15
Y
1
B
Slightly uneven, spreading form.
T126
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
Leaning.
T127
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T128
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T129
Sorbus aria
3.5
2.5
10
Y
1
C
T130
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
1.5
8
N
1
C
Recent university planting. Even form.
T131
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
1.5
8
N
1
C
T132
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.5
1.5
8
N
1
C
T133
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form. Remove shoots from base
of trunk.
T134
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
of trunk.
T135
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T136
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T137
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T138
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T139
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T140
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Leaning slightly. Even form.
T141
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form. Remove shoots from lower
trunk.
T142
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T143
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T144
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T145
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T146
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T147
Poplus balsamifera
5.5
2.5
15
Y
1
C
Even form.
T148
Quercus robur
4.0
1.5
12
Y
1
C
Columnar form.
T149
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.0
2.5
8
Y
1
C
Purple form.
T150
Poplus alba
5.0
5.0
20
M
1
C
T151
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.0
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Even form.
T152
Acer campestre
4.0
3.0
12
Y
1
C
of trunk.
T153
Poplus alba
4.0
5.0
20
M
3
C
Leaning. Unbalanced form.
T154
Acer pseudoplatanus
3.0
1.5
10
Y
1
C
Purple form.
T155
Picea sp.
2.5
1.5
10
Y
1
C
Even, conical form.
T156
Quercus robur
3.0
1.0
10
Y
1
C
Columnar form.
T157
Pinus sp.
3.0
2.0
12
Y
1
C
Suitable for relocation.
T158
Quercus robur
2.5
0.6
10
N
2
C
Columnar form.
T159
Sorbus aucuparia
2.5
1.5
6
Y
1
C
Even form.
T160
Pinus sp.
2.0
2.0
10
Y
1
C
T161
Pinus sp.
2.5
2.5
12
Y
1
C
T162
Pinus sp.
2.5
2.5
12
Y
1
C
T163
Pinus sp.
2.5
2.5
12
Y
1
C
T164
Pinus sp.
2.5
2.5
12
Y
1
C
T165
Pinus sp.
2.5
2.5
12
Y
1
C
T166
Pinus sp.
2.0
2.0
12
Y
1
C
T167
Pinus sp.
3.0
0.6
8
Y
2
D
Poor specimen.
T168
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
Y
3
D
Poor specimen. Significant amount of
dead wood.
T169
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
Y
3
D
dead wood.
T170
Betula pendula
4.0
1.5
6
Y
1
C
Balanced form.
T171
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
Y
1
C
Balanced form.
T172
Acer campestre
2.5
1.0
5
Y
1
C
T173
Gleditsia triacanthos
2.5
1.0
5
Y
3
D
Poor specimen. Remove.
T174
Betula pendula
2.0
1.5
5
Y
2
C
Inappropriate species for situation.
T175
Sorbus aucuparia
2.0
1.5
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
T176
Pinus sp.
1.0
1.0
5
Y
1
C
T177
Pinus sp.
2.0
2.0
6
Y
1
C
T178
Sorbus aucuparia
2.5
1.5
5
Y
1
C
Even, balanced form.
T179
Sorbus aucuparia
3.0
1.5
5
Y
2
C
Thin branching structure.
T180
Betula pendula
2.0
1.5
6
Y
1
C
T181
Pinus sp.
2.5
1.5
8
Y
1
C
T182
Prunus sp.
2.0
2.0
8
Y
1
C
T183
Cedrus sp.
2.0
1.0
6
Y
1
C
T184
Pinus sp.
2.0
2.0
6
Y
1
C
T185
Sorbus aucuparia
2.5
2.0
5
Y
1
C
Staked too low, trunk leaning.
T186
Pinus sp.
2.5
2.0
8
Y
3
D
Leaning.
T187
Sorbus aucuparia
3.0
2.0
6
Y
1
C
Well balanced form.
T188
Quercus robur
2.5
1.0
6
N
1
C
Columnar form.
T189
Sorbus ‘Joseph Rock’
3.5
2.0
7
Y
3
C
Trunk bent.
T190
Sorbus ‘Joseph Rock’
3.0
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T191
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T192
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T193
Sorbus aucuparia
2.5
1.5
5
Y
1
C
T194
Sorbus aucuparia
2.5
1.5
5
Y
1
C
T195
Sorbus aucuparia
2.5
1.5
5
Y
1
C
T196
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T197
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T198
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T199
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T200
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T201
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T202
Sorbus aucuparia
3.5
2.0
7
Y
1
C
T203
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
Y
3
D
dead wood.
T204
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
T205
Betula pendula
3.0
1.0
5
Y
2
C
Uneven form.
T206
Crataegus prunifolia
2.5
2.0
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
T207
2.5
2.0
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
T208
2.5
2.0
5
Y
2
C
Leaning slightly. Remove shoots from
lower trunk.
T209
2.5
2.0
5
Y
2
C
Leaning slightly. Remove shoots from
lower trunk.
T210
2.5
2.0
5
Y
2
C
Remove shoots from lower trunk.
T211
2.5
2.0
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
T212
Carpinus betulus
3.5
1.0
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
T213
Crataegus monogyna
3.5
2.0
6
Y
1
C
Even form.
T214
Carpinus betulus
2.5
1.0
5
Y
1
C
Even form.
GROUP
REF NO.
SPECIES
HEIGHT
(M)
DIAMETER
SPREAD
APPROX
DIAMETER OF
TRUNK
AGE
CONDITION
CLASS
(CM)
AMENITY
VALUE
NOTES
(M)
G1
H1
10No. Fraxinus excelsior
10.0
16No. Crataegus
monogyna
3.5
Species include: elm,
privet, ash, dogwood, field
maple
3.0 – 5.0
varies
varies
20-40
O
2
12
M
2
varies
Y/M
2
GUIDANCE NOTES
Condition
Age
1. Sound and healthy
N - newly planted
2. Defective, but defects can be rectified and tree should reach maturity
Y - young
3. Defective, but defect cannot rectified, although the tree still has a limited useful life
M - mature
4. Defective to the point of being dangerous
O - old
Amenity Value
A
Tree of sufficient character and high quality that amenity loss will result if it is removed
B
Good tree, good quality, every effort should be made to retain tree but not of such good value
that its retention should necessarily override other vital factors
C
Tree of reasonable but not exceptional quality, worth retaining if it does not conflict with development
D
Tree of poor condition, appearance and value, which should be removed.
B
B
Typically the Fraxinus have multiple
trunks regenerating from cutting back to
nearly ground level in the past. All
contain some dead wood that requires
pruning. The understorey of Crataegus
has been consistently reduced to a
height of 2.0m in the past and is now
growing away from substantial trunks.
Ivy, brambles, nettle, grass and a
number of fallen limbs cover the ground
beneath. Requires maintenance.
Continuous hedgerow located to one
side of drainage ditch along old field
boundary.

UWE_Tree Survey Report

Transcription

Similar documents

Casas Rurales y Aptos. Turisticos

the baron in the trees il barone rampante

How to Paint Trees without foliage

Activity 22

OH Gardener Sept-Oct 2015

urban open and green spaces planting

Los combustibles fósiles liberan bióxido de carbono al quemarse e

How to Live with HLB

Residential Area Type: Knox Neighbourhood

Off - Esposito