View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
© Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
Trees and Construction
BS5837:2012 Tree Survey, Arboricultural
Implications Assessment & Method Statement
Site: Flaxyard Sumner Road, London SE15 5QS
Ref: 19450/A3
Client: Martin Arnold
(Mail) 2nd Floor | 1 Hunters Walk | Canal Street | Chester | CH1 4EB
0333 123 7080 | info@indigosurveys.co.uk
www.IndigoSurveys.co.uk
Arboricultural Consultant (Author):
Rod Benzies ND Arb BSc Forestry
- Jan 2020 -
PAGE | 2 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Title Page
1 Introduction 3
2 Site & Application Information 4
3 Findings & Recommendations 4 - 5
4 Scheme / Impact Assessment 5 - 8
5 Method Statement ‘Considerations‘ 8 - 13
Appendices
Caveat I
Terms and Definitions II
Tree data table, Tree Constraints Plan & Tree Protection Plan III
Revision Description Date
/ Based on Baseline survey 19450/A1 Sept 19
PAGE | 3 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Instruction: This advice has been prepared for Martin Arnold(hereafter; client) and
is in respect of the tree related planning considerations at the Land adjacent to
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS (hereafter; site).
As the proposal relates to development works at site, the advice herein is produced
in accordance with the British Standard 5837 : 2012 ‘Trees in Relation to Design,
Demolition and Construction - Recommendations’ (hereafter; BS5837).
1.2 BS5837: The scope of BS5837 is to provide guidance on how trees and other
vegetation can be integrated into construction and development design schemes.
The overall aim is to ensure the protection of amenity by trees which are
appropriate for retention.
1.3 Scope of this advice: This advice has been produced in accordance with BS5837 and
is intended to demonstrate the site’s realistic arboricultural constraints and assist
with the design process. The objective is to systematically assess and provide
suitable recommendations regarding the proposal’s potential impact on trees and
vice versa.
1.4 Following instruction the consultant surveyed the site on the 06th Sept 2019 where a
site walkover and BS5837 tree survey were carried out; all trees on site and around
the application boundary were surveyed from ground level and plotted as either an
individual or a tree group.
1.5 This advice is subject to caveat at Appendix I, outlines relevant terms and
definitions at Appendix II and constitutes the findings of the preliminary site
assessment and associated arboricultural recommendations.
1.6 The survey data and site observations use the supplied topographical survey to
illustrate the surveyed trees in plan format as a ‘Tree Constraints Plan’ (hereafter;
TCP); the TCP and the tree survey data table are at Appendix III.
PAGE | 4 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
2. SITE INFORMATION & TREE ASSESSMENT
2.1 The site is currently an area of open land currently open to the public which is
bordered by Sumner House a Primary school to the north and west also a leisure
centre to the east and the backs of a row of shops facing onto Peckham Road to the
south. The main section is dived up into roughly triangular shaped sections by
existing paths and roadways. There is an addition to the site facing onto Peckham
Road and to the south of the Peckham Pulse Leisure Centre
2.2 Proposal: I understand from the proposals available that it is intended to construct 3
new blocks within the site. 2 detached separate blocks and a further block that will
be an addition to the row of shops along Peckham Road. This has now been
confirmed and is included in the current plans provided by the client namely 3631-
LB-FY-00-DR-L-9000 and also landscape level plans 3631-LB-FY-00-DR-L-9014 and
3631-LB-FY-00-DR-L-9015
2.3 The site requires consideration from an arboricultural perspective due to the presence
of trees on and around the site; these trees are deemed to be within impacting
distance of the existing property and potential construction area.
2.4 The trees -
2.4.1 The tree survey and assessment resulted in the BS5837 quality/retention categories of
‘B’-Moderate, ‘C - low’ and ‘U – Unclassified’ being attributed to trees/tree groups; it
is also worth noting that the BS5837 circular RPAs are considered to halt at the extents
of existing property.
2.4.2 There are a few established features on site the most significant of these trees are
classified as ‘B’ class. These are concentrated particularly around Sumner House T1
to T10 and T11, T13, T14 and T15. The remaining trees are ‘C’ or ‘U’ class.
2.4.3 There are identified defects to the surveyed trees G3 and T20, this has resulted in the
recommendation for tree removal, i.e. the category ‘U’ trees.
2.4.4 No council search/contact has been requested and hence confirmation as to whether
any of the trees are protected by Tree Preservation Order was unavailable at the time
of writing this advice - please advise if this detail is at your disposal and/or confirm
whether a conservation area and TPO check is to be made on your behalf as part of
this advice.
PAGE | 5 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
3. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 The following information, as with the prior contents of this report, should be read
with the appended tree data table and tree constraints plan (19450/TCP/01/).
3.2 General Considerations for Tree Retention / Removal
3.2.1 Based on the boundary line location/neighbour’s site location of T1-T10, T14, T15
their retention and protection is to be assumed as part of the scheme.
3.2.2 The remaining trees are categorised as either ‘B’ or ‘C’, The ‘C’ category trees some
trees are of limited scale or remaining life expectancy in parts are mainly suitable for
retention whereas the greater level contribution of the ‘B’ trees are those to be
retained and protected also. Maintain clearance from ground level to lowest branches
retain and protect the existing soil levels and conditions for root growth.
3.2.3 Generally smaller scale, declining or limited contribution trees are categorised as low
quality ’C’ category trees. These may be suitable for retention for the most part but
should not present a significant constraint to the scheme as mitigation planting can
replicate and enhance their contribution.
3.2.4 ‘U’ class trees should be considered for removal for arboricultural reasons.
3.2.5 The removal of the above trees or vegetation may have an impact on the green cover
in the first instance, however, the scheme presents a significant enhancement
opportunity. Said removals would have no impact on the long term amenity of the
site and will allow for the selection of native species to enhance amenity and
biodiversity.
4. SCHEME / IMPLICATIONS ASSESSMENT
4.1 For this assessment, the proposed scheme has been considered (see; s.2.2 herein).
This includes consideration for arboricultural management / tree works for H&S tree
risk management, tree removal and pruning options, design solutions, tree
protection and sensitive measures to account for trees. As per s.1.6 and s.2.2 herein,
the TCP scheme overlay illustrates the proposed scheme.
PAGE | 6 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
4.2.1 Consideration for T11, T12, T18, T19 and T26 –
These trees are currently within the proposals footprint of blocks C and D and will be
required to be removed to accommodate the scheme. It is intended to mitigate the
loss within the landscaping scheme.
4.2.2 Consideration for T6, T7, T8, T9 and T10-
These trees are set withing the grounds of Sumner House and are separated from the
site by a brick-built boundary wall. It is also separated on site by an existing tarmacked
pedestrian walkway, also capable of taking light vehicles. The walkway is lit by street
lighting which was installed to the south of the walkway which required a service
trench to be excavated. Given the above the likelihood of significant roots from the
trees being within the RPA south of the walkway would be reduced.
The proposed footprint of Block B impinges on the unmodified RPA of T9 but given
the small percentage that is affected and the factors outlined above it is not likely to be
adversely affected by the scheme. It is not considered likely that significant roots will
be encountered where the proposed block is placed. The work to install the
foundations should be carried out by hand in the area indicated on the TPP. This
should be undertaken under Arboricultural supervision.
It is intended to protect the trees by a combination of retaining the existing hard surface
supplemented by tempory ground protection as outlined in the areas on the TPP.
Protective fencing is not considered necessary in this instance as the existing ground
conditions, tempory ground protection and existing wall are considered adequate
protection.
The ground level plan for the soft landscaping shows that that it is intended to retain
the existing ground levels in this area.
The trees are managed by pollarding on a regular basis and it is envisaged that this
practice will continue which eliminate any crown interference issues.
4.2.3 Consideration for T13-
Only proposed soft landscaping impinges on the RPA of T13. It is intended to
protect the tree by a combination of temporary ground protection and Heras fencing
as shown on the TPP. Only to be removed in the landscape phase
PAGE | 7 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
4.2.3 Consideration for T15-
Only proposed soft landscaping impinges on the RPA of T15. It is intended to
protect the tree as shown on the TPP by a combination of temporary ground
protection and the existing fencing in the locations shown. Protection to be removed
in the landscape phase.
4.3 Tree works -
4.3.1 Only those tree works previously mentioned as recommended H&S tree works are
proposed, as detailed within the tree works data table as ‘management’. No further
access enabling pruning work is anticipated
4.3.2 It is necessary for all tree works to be undertaken by a suitably qualified, experienced
and insured Tree Surgeon, prior to site works commencing, outside of nesting bird
season (or to have confirmation of no nesting birds by a qualified specialist).
NOTE: Further to the above scheme review as the AIA, working methods and design
solutions are then included within Arboricultural Method Statement ‘considerations’
(AMS) hereafter at s.5.
TREE WORK SUMMARY
NUMBER TREE REMOVALS / PRUNING WORKS
T11, T12, T18,
T19, T26 Remove
Remove in order to facilitate the scheme:
- to be replaced with new tree planting.
G1
Partially
prune/
remove
Remove constituent stems to accommodate Block D. the
majority will be retained and protected by avoidance
Retained trees
Protection by avoidance, placement of tempory ground
protection and existing hard surfaces with some fixed Heras
panels as shown on the TPP
NOTE: Further to the above scheme review, the tree works and tree protection measures
are outlined at s.5 as Arboricultural Method Statement ‘considerations’ (hereafter;
AMS) and correspond to the appended Tree Protection Plan (TPP).
PAGE | 8 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
5. METHOD STATEMENT ‘CONSIDERATIONS’
5.1 Arboricultural Construction Restrictions
5.1.1 The following restrictions are considered relevant for tree protection purposes
which are to be illustrated on a detailed Tree Protection Plan as part of planning
conditions:
a) Tree Works - are to be completed prior to any and all site works: no tree works not
specified within this AIA (or leaning against or attaching of objects to a tree) are
permitted unless agreed in writing by the council (subject to standard exemptions).
b) Tree Protection - Protective Barrier Fencing/ (Pedestrian Fencing) (PBF) is to be
installed in areas indicated within TPP (thick red lines) with works clearance, i.e.
1.5-2.0m around the hard landscape extents. Site compounds are to be away from
these areas unless on existing hard surface or where temporary ground protection is
used.
c) Construction Exclusion - the fenced off areas (indicated in red in the TPP are
Construction Exclusion Zones (CEZ). These areas should not be used for vehicular
access or storage as only manual work is to take place in these areas.
d) Site Restrictions - no chemicals/materials are to be transported/stored/used/mixed
within the CEZ, and no fires are to be lit and no machinery, plant or vehicles are to
be washed down within 10m of the tree’s canopy or in a CEZ
e) Lifting of existing Hardsurface- Phased lifting of the existing paved surface is to be
used in order to minimise the time that existing levels are exposed. Alternatively,
the existing paving could be lifted entirely and replaced with temporary ground
protection which could be removed/replaced depending on works required.
f) Ground Works/ Hard Landscape - During site works RPAs/CEZ there should not be
other none agreed works such as new surface works, new service installations
without the consultant’s prior advice and council consent, and no mechanical
digging or scraping is permitted within RPAs/CEZ; The new surface treatment is to
be installed by hand existing levels are to be retained.
g) Completion - only following construction and hard landscape completion can PBF
and stem protection be removed and remaining soft landscape works undertaken
within RPAs / CEZ (ground levels to be retained and works undertaken manually
with non-driven machinery).
PAGE | 9 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
5.1 Arboricultural Site Monitoring / Supervision
5.1.1 The council will typically request ‘a scheme of supervision for the arboricultural
protection measures’ to confirm tree protection and adherence to working methods
around trees.
5.1.2 The appointed site contractor and project manager will be provided with an
approved AMS and TPP and will need to be briefed as to prohibited works and tree
protection.
5.1.3 A record of each site visit will be kept, and a summary letter drafted for the client,
the site manager and the local authority (to be sent to the client for distribution),
thus -
• (1) Pre-commencement to confirm approved tree works, tree protection fence
line and construction restrictions for ground works;
• (2) Hand Digging Foundations The foundations for Block B in the area
indicated on the TPP will be hand dug
• (3) Half way through the programme to confirm maintained tree protection,
no tree damage and exclusion of RPA access;
• (4) After-construction to confirm excavations of existing hard surfaces, and
discuss tree protection requirements with the landscape team;
• (5) During soft landscape works for, retained soil levels and planting with
mulch layer;
• (6) Development completion after all hard landscape works and tree and
shrub planting is complete to sign off the site as having adhere to the AMS.
5.2 Ground Protection
5.2.1 In order to avoid the need for supplementary ground protection, phased construction
works are to be used in conjunction with the installation of the PBF; surface works
within retained trees’ RPAs are to be delayed until construction completion.
At the point of PBF being installed, the enclosed RPA sections become Construction
Exclusion Zones (hereafter; CEZ) to protect the trees’ rooting areas during
construction.
5.2.2 Where the retention of existing hard surfaces cannot be maintained within RPAs
during construction, temporary ground protection will be needed, i.e. for exposed
RPAs.
PAGE | 10 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
Specifically, the ground is to be protected from impact where it may be subject to
direct pedestrian/vehicular movements. The ground protection is to be appropriate
for the intensity of the pedestrian or vehicular movements thus -
a) For pedestrian movements within an exposed RPA, the ground protection is
to consist of “a single thickness of scaffold boards on top of a compressible layer laid
onto a geotextile, or supported by scaffold”; and
b) For wheeled or tracked movements within an exposed RPA, the ground
protection is to “be designed by an engineer to accommodate the likely loading”.
A specific proprietary ground protection system can be used as per the example
picture in the TPP
5.3 Underground utilities
5.3.1 Any new underground utilities are to utilise the construction area and hard surface
extents for new installations and avoid the need for works in proximity to trees.
Certainly, utility installations are to be:
• Located outside of RPAs and construction exclusion zones; and
• Installed only following the installation of the protective barrier fencing to
ensure the retained trees and their RPAs are protected.
5.4 Landscape Detail
5.4.1 The new tree planting illustrated on the current proposals will need supplementary
detail on species and nursery selection, planting method and maintenance.
5.5 Ground Works within RPAs
5.5.1 Any excavations within a RPA or designated CEZ (the area enclosed by PBF) must:
• Only be undertaken when the construction works are completed; and
• Use sensitive excavation techniques to protect the tree roots and their existing
growing conditions.
5.5.2 The excavation of existing surfaces are to be preventative and carefully avoid
damage to tree roots; i.e. individual 50mm layers of existing hard surfaces are to be
excavated at a time within an RPA/CEZ. This is to ensure that excavations do not
incur on the existing soil levels, i.e. no downward regrading of soil levels within
RPAs.
5.6 Report Handling
5.6.1 This report is released to the client and architect to be distributed at their discretion
and the consultant is available for queries relating to this report and/or trees.
PAGE | 11 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
5.6.2 The proposed scheme is reviewed in respect of the Arboricultural constraints and is
considered to be achievable in line with the BS5837 guidance.
5.6.3 This AMS and the TPP may be approved by the council in support of the
application.
5.6.2 This Arboricultural Report is produced to demonstrate consideration in reference to
BS5837 an may be approved by the council as a means of authorised tree protection
measures. This would be subject to an arboricultural review of the approved scheme
alongside details otherwise unavailable at the planning stages (construction site
layout, contractor’s site management plan etc.) whereby the AMS and TPP are to be
available on site and inspected as per s.5.2 for ‘Arboricultural Monitoring / Supervision’.
This concludes our advice.
PAGE | 12 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
Appendix I
Caveat
Any and all information supplied to Indigo Surveys Ltd by/on behalf of the client is assumed to
be accurate unless otherwise informed. | This advice is limited to the observations made on the
date of inspection as detailed herein and any deletion, editing or alteration will result in the advice
being null and void in its entirety. | This advice in its entirety may be deemed null and void if
remedial works are undertaken on any area of the site, on or after the date of the survey. | No
liability is assumed by the author or by Indigo Surveys Ltd for any misuse, misinterpretation or
misrepresentation of this advice. | This advice is not valid in adverse or unpredictable weather
conditions or for any failure due to ‘force majeure’ or unpredictable events. | No responsibility is
assumed either by the author of this advice or by Indigo Surveys Ltd for any legal matters that
may arise as a consequence. | Neither the author nor Indigo Surveys Ltd will be required to attend
court or give testimony as part of this agreement. | The responsibility for any works undertaken
on the basis of the recommendations of this advice does not form part of this agreement.
PAGE | 13 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
Appendix II
Terms and Definitions
“Arboriculturist” - person who has, through relevant education, training and experience,
gained expertise in the field of trees in relation to construction.
“Competent Person” - person who has training and experience relevant to the matter being
addressed and an understanding of the requirements of the particular task being
approached.
“Topographical survey” - an accurately measured land survey undertaken to show all relevant
existing site features. A method of carrying out topographical surveys is given in RICS specification
Surveys of land buildings and utility services at scales of 1:500 and larger.
“BS5837 Tree survey” - should be undertaken by an arboriculturist to record information
about the trees on or adjacent to a site. The results of the tree survey, including material
constraints arising from existing trees that merit retention, should be used (along with any
other relevant baseline data) to inform feasibility studies and design options. For this reason,
the tree survey should be completed and made available to designers prior to and/or
independently of any specific proposals for development.
“Tree categorisation method” - trees should be categorised in accordance with the BS5837
cascade chart by an arboriculturist. This is to identify the quality and value (in a non-fiscal
sense) of the existing tree stock, allowing informed decisions to be made concerning which
trees should be removed or retained in the event of development occurring.
“Root protection area (RPA)” - layout design tool indicating the minimum area around a tree
deemed to contain sufficient roots and rooting volume to maintain the tree’s viability, and
where the protection of the roots and soil structure is treated as a priority, shown as an
arboricultural constraint in m². The radius is calculated using the BS5837 calculation
method. An arboriculturist may change the shape of an RPA but not reduce its area.
“Arboricultural implications assessment” - a study, undertaken by an arboriculturist, to
identify, evaluate and possibly mitigate the extent of direct and indirect impacts on existing
trees that may arise as a result of the implementation of any site layout proposal.
“Arboricultural method statement” - methodology for the implementation of any aspect of
development that is within the root protection area, or has the potential to result in loss of or
damage to a tree to be retained.
“Tree protection plan” - a scale drawing, informed by descriptive text where necessary, based
upon the finalised proposals, showing trees for retention and illustrating the tree and
landscape protection measures.
PAGE | 14 of 14 © Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019
(Mail) 2nd Floor, 1 Hunters Walk, Canal Street, Chester, CH1 4EB
E: info@indigosurveys.co.uk | T: 0333 123 7080
Martin Arnold | CLIENT
Flaxyard Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS | SITE
19450/A3 | REF
07/01/20 | DATE
Appendix III
Data Table: As appended (BS5837 Tree Survey Key & Table)
Tree Constraints Plan: As appended (19450/TCP/01/)
‘Draft’ Tree Protection Plan: As appended (19450/TPP/01/)
Arboriculturist Northampton, Tree Survey, Tree Report, Tree Consultant, Arboricultural Survey, Arboricultural Report, Arboricultural Consultant, BS5837 Survey, BS5837 Report, Tree Survey Northampton, Tree Report
Northampton
CLIENT:
CONTACT:
TREE
REF. #SPECIES AGE
HEIGHT
(in m)
STEM
(in mm)
RPA
(in m)
CLEARANC
E
(in m)
1st
BRANCH
(in m)
VITALIT
Y
LIFE
EXPEC.NOTES MANAGEMENT
T1London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 16 4 5 5 4 690 8.3 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T2London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 16 3.5 4 4 3.5 700 8.4 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T3London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 16 5 4 6 4 550 6.6 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T4London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 15 3.5 3.5 6 4 490 5.9 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T5London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 15 5 7 7 7 560 6.7 3 to union Fair 20 - 40 B 2
T6London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 15 5 6 5 4 820 9.8 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T7London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 16 5 5 5 3 700 8.4 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T8Poplar; Populus,
SalicaceaeM 15 5 6 3 4 800 * 9.6 3 to union Fair 20 - 40 B 2
T9Poplar; Populus,
SalicaceaeM 15 6 7 5 3 920 11.0 3 to union Fair 20 - 40 B 2
T10London Plane; Platanus x
hispanica, PlatanaceaeM 14 5 5 3 5 610 7.3 3 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T11Sycamore; Acer,
AceraceaeM 16 7 5.5 6 6.5 610 7.3 2
3m - all
roundNormal 20 - 40 B 2
T12Sycamore; Acer,
AceraceaeM 16 7 7 6 6 712 8.5 3 3m + Fair 10 - 20 4x stems (320mm, 340mm, 380mm, 400mm), C 2
T13Tree of Heaven; Ailanthus,
Sapindales M 16 6 7 6 7 590 7.1 2 to union Normal 20 - 40 B 2
T14 Oak; Quercus, Fagaceae EM 10 6 5 6 5 370 4.4 14m - all
roundNormal 40 + B 2
T15 Lime; Tilia, Tiliaceae M 16 7 5 6 5 500 * 6.0 1.5 7m - East Fair 20 - 40 B 2
G1Norway Maple; Acer,
Aceraceae SM 8 - 10 see; TCP / 1.5 - 2.5 / Fair 10 - 20 C 2
T16 Birch; Betula, Betulaceae EM 14 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 180 2.2 16m - all
roundFair 10 - 20
In G4, previous co-dominant union at 3m, one
stem removed (future weak point).C
2
/
3T17 Laurel; Laurus, Lauraceae EM 8 3 3 3.5 2.5 170 2.0 2 to union Normal 40 + C 3
T18 Laurel; Laurus, Lauraceae SM 7.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 230 2.8 1.5 to union Normal 20 - 40 C 2
T19 Laurel; Laurus, Lauraceae EM 6 2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 140 1.7 1.5 to union Normal 20 - 40 C 2
T20 Rowan; Sorbus, Rosaceae M 6 2.5 2 2 2 150 1.8 1.5 2m + Poor < 10 U
3 - 5
CANOPY (in m)
N - S - E - W
BS
CAT.
PROJECT REF:
Andrew Turnbull FDSc MArborA
Martin Arnold
ARB CONSULTANT:
TREE SURVEY IN ACCORDANCE WITH BRITISH STANDARD 5837:2012 'TREES IN RELATION TO DESIGN, DEMOLITION & CONSTRUCTION - RECOMMENDATIONS'
/
SITE:
SURVEY DATE:
19450/A1 Flaxyard, Sumner Road, London, SE15 5QS
6 September 2019
© Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019Data Table Page 1 of 3
TREE
REF. #SPECIES AGE
HEIGHT
(in m)
STEM
(in mm)
RPA
(in m)
CLEARANC
E
(in m)
1st
BRANCH
(in m)
VITALIT
Y
LIFE
EXPEC.NOTES MANAGEMENT
CANOPY (in m)
N - S - E - W
BS
CAT.
T21 Laurel; Laurus, Lauraceae Y / EM 4.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 90 1.1 1.5 2m +Fair /
Poor10 - 20 C 3
T22 Laurel; Laurus, Lauraceae EM 7 2.5 2 2 2 140 1.7 1.5 2m + Normal 20 - 40 C 2
T23 Birch; Betula, Betulaceae EM 11 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 130 1.6 1.5 3m - South Fair 10 - 20 C 2
T24 Birch; Betula, Betulaceae EM 14 2 2.5 2 2 160 1.9 1 to union Normal 20 - 40 C 2
T25 Birch; Betula, Betulaceae EM 12 2 3 3 2 150 1.8 12.5m - all
roundNormal 20 - 40 C 2
G2 Laurel; Laurus, Lauraceae SM 5 - 7.5140 -
190/ 1.5 to union Normal 20 - 40 C 2
T26 Birch; Betula, Betulaceae EM 14 2.5 1 1 2.5 180 2.2 1 / Fair 10 - 20 C 3
G3 Planted border Y / EM 4 - 6 < 110 1.3 0.5 - 1.5 / Poor< 10 / 10 -
20U
T27 Birch; Betula, Betulaceae EM 14 3 2 3 3.5 190 2.3 13.5m - all
roundFair 10 - 20 C
2
/
3
G4Planted border (Hazel,
Birch, Castanea)Y - EM 5 - 8 / / / / / / 1 - 3 / Fair
< 10 / 10 -
20C
2
/
3
2.5 - 3.5
1 - 2
© Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019Data Table Page 2 of 3
TREE
REF. #SPECIES AGE
HEIGHT
(in m)
STEM
(in mm)
RPA
(in m)
CLEARANC
E
(in m)
1st
BRANCH
(in m)
VITALIT
Y
LIFE
EXPEC.NOTES MANAGEMENT
CANOPY (in m)
N - S - E - W
BS
CAT.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Approximate number of years a tree will continue to contribute without the need for oppressive arboricultural intervention, categorised in years as <10, 10-20, 20-40 and
>40; Structural and physiological condition observations;
Within the survey schedule denotes an estimate
Preliminary management recommendations (as appropriate);
BS5837 tree quality assessment category: resulting from structural/physiological condition and remaining contribution (approximate useful life expectancy);
Standard retention category U: in such a condition that any existing value would be lost within 10 years;
Standard retention category A: high quality and value, in such a condition as to be able to make substantial contribution of 40+ years;
Standard retention category B: moderate quality and value, in such a condition as to make a significant contribution of 20+ years;
Standard retention category C: low quality and value, currently in adequate condition to remain until new planting could be established 10+ years;
Standard retention sub-category, mainly due to: 1- Arboricultural values, 2- Landscape values, 3- Cultural values, including conservation;
VITALITY
IST BRANCH (in m)
On client request: presence of Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) / site location within a Conservation Area (CA) & date checked;
Tree reference number: tag or plan number (T - individual tree, G - group of trees/shrubs, H - hedge);
Genus, species and/or common name;
Age classification (NP - new planting, Y - young, EM - Early-Mature, SM - semi mature, M - mature, LM - late mature, OM - over mature);
Approximate height of tree in metres;
Approximate branch spread in metres of the four principal compass points;
Stem diameter in millimetres: measured in accordance with s.4.6 of BS5837;
Circle radius of the Root Protection Area: calculated using the stem diameter (single/multiple stem variant, as outlined within BS5837);
Crown clearance in metres above the adjacent ground level;
Clearance in metres to first significant branch and direction of growth (where relevant);
Physiological condition typically gauged from canopy cover and annual extension growth (good, fair, poor, dead);
' * '
MANAGEMENT
BS CAT.
NOTES
ESTIMATED REMAINING
CONTRIBUTION
HEIGHT (in m)
CANOPY (in m) N - S - E - W
STEM (in mm)
RPA (in m)
CLEARANCE (in m)
TPO/CA
TREE REF. #
SPECIES
AGE
TREE SURVEY ‘KEY’ - BRITISH STANDARD 5837:2012 'TREES IN RELATION TO DESIGN, DEMOLITION & CONSTRUCTION - RECOMMENDATIONS'
© Indigo Surveys Ltd 2019Data Table Page 3 of 3
2.13200
M
E
L
O
N
R
O
A
D
S
U
M
N
E
R
R
O
A
D
S
U
M
N
E
R
A
V
E
N
U
E
JO
CE
LY
N S
TR
EE
T
S
U
M
N
E
R
H
O
U
S
E
BLOCK B
BLOCK C
BLOCK D
SUMNER ROAD
RUIN GARDEN
S
U
M
N
E
R
H
O
U
S
E
W
A
L
L
(Mail) Second Floor, 1 Hunter's Walk, Canal Street, Chester. CH1 4EBTelephone: 0333 123 7080
TITLE
PROJECT
CLIENT
Drawing Number
REV.
www.indigosurveys.co.uk
2.13200
M
E
L
O
N
R
O
A
D
S
U
M
N
E
R
R
O
A
D
S
U
M
N
E
R
A
V
E
N
U
E
JO
CE
LY
N S
TR
EE
T
S
U
M
N
E
R
H
O
U
S
E
BLOCK B
BLOCK C
BLOCK D
SUMNER ROAD
RUIN GARDEN
S
U
M
N
E
R
H
O
U
S
E
W
A
L
L
(Mail) Second Floor, 1 Hunter's Walk, Canal Street, Chester. CH1 4EBTelephone: 0333 123 7080
TITLE
PROJECT
CLIENT
Drawing Number
REV.
www.indigosurveys.co.uk
Recommended