Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park · Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park 31 October 2019. Witness Declaration. I have made all the inquiries that I believe are

ARBORICULTURAL STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE VCAT YR2018/358 PANEL

Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park

GLENN WATERS | ARBORICULTUREPO Box 94 | Oakleigh South | Victoria | 3167

M | 0439 273 771

Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park 31 October 2019

Arboricultural Statement of Evidence VCAT P461/2016 Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park

1. Key Objectives:

• To review the documentation reaction to the planning scheme amendment application application for the site at Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park.

• To inspect the property and trees in question sited within the subdivision area at Lot 3, PS403716J - Holloway Road, Wonga Park.

• To provide information with regard to the ‘Significant’ trees on the subdivision site.

2. Facts, Matters & Assumptions:

I have inspected the site and the trees in question on 23 October 2019 for the preparation of this report.

3. Qualifications, Experience and Area of Expertise:

The qualifications and experience I have to carry out the arboricultural assessment are as follows:

• I am a Consulting Arborist of thirty years of industry experience, with both local government and private practice.

• I have several qualifications in Arboriculture including a Certificate of Tree Surgery (Holmesglen TAFE), an Advanced Certificate of Arboriculture [Dux] (VCAH Burnley) and a Bachelor of Applied Science Degree (Environmental Horticulture) from University of Melbourne - Burnley Campus.

• I have been the Past President of the Arboricultural Association of Australia (AAA), past Vice President of the Arboricultural Association of Australia (AAA) and I am a member of the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), member of the National Arborists Association (USA), a founding member of the Melbourne Arborist Discussion Group and a member/sponsor of the Victorian Timber Industry Organisation.

Glenn Waters | Arboriculture 1


4. Reviewed Documents:

• Planning & Property Partners - Briefing Letter (17/10/2019)

• Brett Lane & Associates - Flora & Fauna Assessment (May 2018)

• Landsite - Landscape Plan #9001 / MP01 \ Issue 1: (8/11/2018)

• Reeds Consulting - Proposed Subdivision Plan #20493 \ Revision W (31/10/2018)

• Reeds Consulting - Proposed Subdivision Plan #20493 \ Revision X (31/10/2019)

5. Expertise to Prepare this Report:

• I have prepared numerous tree preservation and protections plans for new developments and have acted as a supervising arborist on such sites on many occasions.

• I have considerable experience at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal as an expert witness on arboricultural matters.

• I have presented many papers to various conferences and have taught Arboricultural Consultancy at Melbourne University - Burnley College and also several subjects for the National Certificate (Diploma Level 5).

• I spent 10 years as the in-house Landscape Assessment Officer for the City of Glen Eira and have significant experience with the requirements of the planning system including planning permits and tree retention.

6. Identity of the Person/s who prepared this Report:

The author of this report (Glenn Waters) visited the subject site (23/10/2019) and prepared this report relating to the site.

7. Briefing Instructions

• Review the material supplied to you in relation to the Amendment;

• Conduct a survey of all significant trees on the Site that are located within, or near to, the area designated for the proposed subdivision (see Plan of Subdivision version W at tab 14) and associated works to determine:

i. The location, size and condition of such trees; ii. The tree protection zones (‘TPZ’) of such trees; iii. Whether the TPZs may be affected by any proposed excavation or building envelope; iv. Reconcile the tree numbering to align with the tree numbering on the proposed Plan

of Subdivision and the Landscape plan prepared by Landsite dated 8 November



2018 (tab 13), noting that these documents differ from the tree numbering in the Flora and Fauna Assessment prepared by Brett Lane & Associates dated 1 May 2018 (tab 16).

• Consider and formulate your own opinions, within the limits of your expertise, with respect to the appropriateness of the Amendment and Planning Permit Application in respect of relevant arboricultural considerations; and

• Prepare a report which sets out the conclusions you have reached, and clearly states the basis upon which you have arrived at those conclusions, including any facts you have relied upon or assumptions which you have made which form part of the reasoning by which you reach your conclusions.

5. Observations:

Given that no actual site survey can be found for the subdivision area, I believe that the clearest plan that showed the trees sited within the subdivision area was the submitted Landsite landscape plan.

I have therefore used the section of the landscape plan showing the subdivision which also shows the trees numbered 2 - 96. I added tree #1 sited near Meadowbank Avenue.

Given also that no actual definition was available that describes a ‘Significant’ tree, I have taken the species lists and large tree sizes stated in the EVC Benchmarks for the site area.

EVC 47 Valley Grassy Forest states that a large tree for the site is “Eucalyptus spp. 70cm” EVC 83 Swampy Riparian Woodland states that a large tree for the site is “Eucalyptus spp. 60cm” EVC 164 Creekline Herb-rich Woodland states that a large tree for the site is “Eucalyptus spp. 70cm”

As a general starting point, I decided that I would assess trees having a trunk diameter (dbh) greater than 50cm. Of the 96 trees inspected, 29 had diameters larger than 50cm and have been considered to be ‘Significant’ trees for the purposes of this assessment and report.

Five (5) different species were found with the majority (23) being Swamp Gum (Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata), two (2) Candlebarks (Eucalyptus rubida subsp. rubida), one (1) River Red Gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis), one (1) Manna Gum (Eucalyptus viminalis subsp. viminalis), one (1) fallen Gum (Eucalyptus spp.) and one (1) Blackwood (Acacia melanoxylon).

Of the 29 trees assessed, all but two are Local Native tree species with the River Red Gum and the Manna Gum being Victorian Native species.

6. Discussion:

General Tree Retention Discussion:

The Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites has been used to calculate the TPZ for the significant trees.



The TPZ is calculated based on trunk (stem) diameter (DBH), measured at approximately 1.4 metres up from ground level. The radius of the TPZ is calculated by multiplying the trees DBH by 12. The method provides a TPZ that addresses both the stability and growing requirements of a tree. TPZ distances are measured as a radius from the centre of the trunk at (or near) ground level. Encroachment into the TPZ is permissible under certain circumstances though is dependent on both site conditions and tree characteristics. Minor encroachment, up to 10% of the TPZ, is generally permissible provided encroachment is compensated for by recruitment of an equal area contiguous with the TPZ.

The TPZs for the individual trees are contained within the attached tree data spreadsheet.

Appendix 1 lists the standard tree protection works that should be considered as part of the management of trees to be retained during development and these works should be seen as a minimum standard to apply.

Discussion Regarding the Subdivision Plan:

I originally commented on the exhibited Subdivision Plan (#20493 \ Revision W :31/10/2018) which showed 48 lots in total. My issue with this plan were that a number of the significant trees assessed would make some of the lots almost unusable (Lots #13, #26, #27 and #34).

I also noted that several lots would have reduced building envelopes given individual significant tree locations. These lots were #23, #28, #35, #36 & #41.

I have subsequently been briefed with a revised subdivision plan (#20493 \ Revision X: 31/10/2019) as attached at Appendix 4. This plan reduces the lot number to 45 lots and creates a Conservation Reserve at the Meadowbank Avenue entrance to the subdivision.

The roadway construction will require the removal of trees #40, #41, #42 & #76.

I am satisfied that this revised plan (Revision X) appropriately addresses the issue of the significant tree retention. Many of the individual trees are now typically located in areas away from potential building sites and their individual tree protection zones (TPZs) should be able to be accommodated without major encroachment.

7. Conclusions & Recommendations:

The retention of the significant trees is clearly possible and the new proposed subdivision layout is a major improvement in terms of tree retention. While several lots now have reduced building envelopes, it is my belief that this will allow for the retention of the individual significant trees.

I see no arboricultural reason preventing the approval of the application for the Planning Amendment with this new proposed subdivision plan (Revision x) given that almost all of the significant trees can be retained on the site.



Witness Declaration.

I have made all the inquiries that I believe are desirable and appropriate and no matters of significance which I regard as relevant have to my knowledge been withheld from the Panel.

Glenn Waters Glenn Waters | Arboriculture



Appendix 1: Tree Protection During Development

The following are guidelines that must be implemented to minimise the impact of the proposed construction works on the existing site trees.

• Tree protection fencing must conform to the Australian Standard (AS 4970-2009) and must remain in place and in good condition at all times. Shade cloth or similar should be attached to reduce the transport of dust, other particulate matter and liquids into the protected area. Appropriate signage must be displayed on any tree protection fencing prohibiting access excavation, changes in soil levels or any storage in accordance with AS4970-200 and be visible from all sides.

• Where fencing cannot adequately protect the TPZ, and access is required for construction purposes, ground protection using a permeable membrane beneath a layer of mulch or crushed rock below rumble boards, must be laid down within the TPZ of retained trees. Rumble boards (or similar) should be of a suitable thickness to prevent soil compaction and root damage. Ground protection must only be removed once all buildings and works have been completed.

• The Project Arborist must supervise any excavation works within the tree protection zones on the subject land and any instance where trees on adjoining properties may be impacted.

• No filling, trenching or excavation is to occur within Tree Protection Zones except for buildings and footings as approved by the applicable Planning Permit from the Responsible Authority.

• No persons, vehicles or machinery are to enter the Tree Protection Zone without the consent of the Project Arborist or Site Manager.

• No underground service installations are to be sited within any Tree Protection Zone.

• No fuel, oil dumps or chemicals will be allowed in or stored on the Tree Protection Zone and the servicing and re-fuelling of equipment and vehicles must be carried out away from the root zones.

• No storage of material, equipment or temporary building will take place over the Tree Protection Zone.

• Nothing whatsoever must be attached to the tree including temporary services wires, nails, screws or any other fixing device.

• No residual herbicides are to be used within the Tree Protection Zones.

• Supplementary watering must be provided for the fenced Tree Protection Zone through any dry periods during and after the construction process.

• Any pruning of the canopies required for building or vehicle clearance, or other reasons, is to be done by a qualified arborist to Australian Standards for pruning of Amenity Trees 4373 – 2007.

• The tree protection zone must be mulched (where advises by the Project Arborist) with a 100mm layer of coarse (30mm dia) organic woodchip mulch.

• All excavation within the Tree Protection Zone must be carried out by hand digging or with the use of ‘NDD-Excavation’ techniques or with small machinery and only when supervised by the Project Arborist. Roots must be severed by saw cutting or with a sharp axe and not with a Backhoe or any machinery or blunt instrument.



GLENN WATERS | ARBORICULTURE

P.O. Box 94,Oakleigh South, VIC. 3167.

Arboricultural Consultancy: Precedent disclaimer and copyright

Copyright notice: © Glenn Waters | Arboriculture 2019. All rights reserved, except as expressly provided otherwise in this publication. Disclaimer: Although Glenn Waters | Arboriculture uses all due care and skill in providing you the information made available in this report, to the extent permitted by law Glenn Waters | Arboriculture otherwise excludes all warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied. To the extent permitted by law, you agree the Glenn Waters | Arboriculture is not liable to you or any other person or entity for any loss or damage caused or alleged to have been caused (including loss or damage resulting from negligence), either directly or indirectly, by your use of the information (including by way of example, arboricultural advice) made available to you in this report. Without limiting this disclaimer, in no event will Glenn Waters | Arboriculture be liable to you for any lost revenue or profits, or for special, indirect, consequential or incidental damage (however caused and regardless of the theory of liability) arising out of or related to your use of that information, even if Glenn Waters | Arboriculture has been advised of the possibility of such loss or damage. This disclaimer is governed by the law in force in the State of Victoria, Australia.

Report Assumptions:

• Any legal description provided to Glenn Waters | Arboriculture is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matters outside the consultant’s control.

• Glenn Waters | Arboriculture assumes that any property or project is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or other local, state or federal government regulations.

• Glenn Waters | Arboriculture shall take care to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data shall be verified insofar as possible; however Glenn Waters | Arboriculture can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of the information provided by others not directly under Glenn Waters | Arboriculture’s control.

• No Glenn Waters | Arboriculture employee shall be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of the report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services.

• Loss of the report or alteration of any part of the report not undertaken by Glenn Waters | Arboriculture invalidates the entire report.

• Possession of the report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by anyone but the client or their directed representatives, without the prior consent of the Glenn Waters | Arboriculture.

• The report and any values expressed therein represent the opinion of Glenn Waters | Arboriculture and Glenn Waters | Arboriculture’s fee is in no way conditional upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

• Sketches, diagrams, graphs and photographs used in the report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural drawings, reports or surveys.

• Unless expressed otherwise: i) Information contained in the report will cover those items that were outlined in the project brief or that were examined during the assessment and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and ii) The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation or probing unless otherwise stipulated.

• There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied by Glenn Waters | Arboriculture, that the problems or deficiencies of the plants or site in question may not arise in the future.

• All instructions (verbal or written) that define the scope of the report have been included in the report and all documents and other materials that Glenn Waters | Arboriculture has been instructed to consider or to take into account in preparing the report have been included or listed within the report.

To the writer’s knowledge all facts, matter and all assumptions upon which the report proceeds have been stated within the body of the report and all opinion contained within the report will be fully researched and referenced and any such opinion not duly researched is based upon the writers experience and observations.


LAN

DSI

TE P

TY L

TDAB

N: 4

8 10

8 25

7 97

1

PO B

OX

1175

BYR

ON

BAY

, NSW

248

1

T: (0

2) 6

680

8997

E:

info

@la

ndsi

te.n

et.a

u

LAN

DSC

APE

ARC

HIT

ECTU

RE

I U

RBA

N D

ESIG

N I

EN

VIR

ON

MEN

TAL

PRO

JEC

T M

ANAG

EMEN

T

Dat

e: 8

/11/

18 I

Pro

ject

No:

900

1 I

MP0

IS

SUE

[I]

1:10

00 a

t A1

1:20

00 a

t A3

1Pr

opos

ed R

esid

entia

l Est

ate,

Won

ga P

ark

Land

scap

e C

once

pt /

Fram

ewor

k Pl

an

2

16

8

2

213

57

9

68

10

11

11

4

7

7

76

2

2

1

1

3

4

3

4

1

5

5

10

10

6

9

drill

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Oval

glennwaters1

Typewritten Text

1

No Dbh H x S Species Common Name Age Health Structure Arb Value Origin TPZs Comments1 65 20 x 16 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Poor No Value Local Native 7.8m6 80 22 x 22 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair-Poor High Local Native 9.6m7 70 22 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Very Poor Low-Moderate Local Native 8.4m9 75 22 x 20 Eucalyptus camaldulensis River Red Gum Mature Fair-Poor Fair-Poor High Vic Native 9.0m15 55 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair Moderate Local Native 6.6m17 60 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair Moderate Local Native 7.2m18 65 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair Moderate Local Native 7.8m18a 60 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair Moderate Local Native 7.2m30 90 24 x 22 Eucalyptus rubida subsp. rubida Candlebark Mature Fair-Poor Fair High Local Native 10.8m31 80 Eucalyptus spp. Gum No Value No Value No Value No Value Local Native fallen32 100 18 x 20 Eucalyptus rubida subsp. rubida Candlebark Mature Fair-Poor Fair-Poor High Local Native 12.0m35 50 15x 16 Acacia melanoxylon Blackwood Mature Fair-Poor Poor Moderate Local Native 6.0m36 100 18 x 20 Eucalyptus viminalis subsp. viminalis Manna Gum Mature Fair-Poor Fair High Vic Native 12.0m39 75 20 x 20 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Mature Poor Fair-Poor Moderate Local Native 9.0m41 60/55 20 x 22 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Mature Fair-Poor Poor Moderate-High Local Native 9.7m42 65 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair Moderate Local Native 7.8m44 65 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair-Poor Moderate Local Native 7.8m45 90 22 x 2 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Fair Moderate Local Native 10.8m46 50/45 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Poor Very Poor Low-Moderate Local Native 8.0m47 40/40 18 x 20 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Very Poor Very Poor Low-Moderate Local Native 6.8m49 80 20 x 22 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Mature Fair-Poor Fair-Poor Moderate-High Local Native 9.6m50 100 22 x 16 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Mature Poor Fair-Poor Moderate Local Native 12.0m52 65 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Poor Moderate Local Native 7.8m53 65 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Poor Moderate Local Native 7.8m54 60 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Poor Moderate Local Native 7.2m55 65 20 x 18 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Fair-Poor Poor Moderate Local Native 7.8m59 55 18 x 16 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Poor Fair-Poor Moderate Local Native 6.6m70 100 24 x 20 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Mature Poor Fair-Poor High Local Native 12.0m76 65 18 x 16 Eucalyptus ovata var. ovata Swamp Gum Maturing Poor Poor Low-Moderate Local Native 7.8m

LANDSCAPE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS PLANTREES TO BE RETAINED BASED ON

(03) 8660 3000

WWW.REEDSCONSULTING.COM.AU

MELBOURNE VIC 3000

440 ELIZABETH STREET

LEVEL 6

[email protected]

SHEET A3SCALE 1: 1500

20 10 0 20 40 60

20493REF

VERSION(LOT 3 ON PS 403716J)

HOLLOWAY ROAD, WONGA PARK

G:\20493\Dgn(V8i)\V8i_1pp1X.dgnX

PLAN

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION

DATE 31/10/2019

BR

US

HY

CR

EE

K

3

2

1

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1213

400.40

100.5

8

26.19

319.55

179.85

143.8

2

125.6

3

35.2

5

14

151617

18

19

20

21

2223 24

2526

27 28 2930

31

3233

34353637

38394041

42434445

MEADOWBANK

RISE

REGENCY

GLEN

PARK D

RIVE

GLE

NH

ELE

N P

LA

CE

GLE

N IN

NES C

LO

SE

AMLEY COURT

HOLLOWAY ROAD

AVENUE

35

(16)

35

(15)

(14)

35

12.90

35

(14)

(14)

(15)

(14)

(16)

16

12.5

012.5

0

12.5

0

12.5

0

12.50

12.50

35

12.50

12.5012.50

15

16

14

37.7

6

16

19

33.6

6

37.3

0

19.35

12.50

33.88

20.4521.34

1416.84

15

11

18.76

24.83

20.1120.39

For Cross Section Details, refer to Typical Cross Section Plan.

derived from the Title and not survey dimensions.PS 403716J. (Vol.10386, Fol.482). Dimension shown have beenThe Subject Site is comprised of one Certificate of Title, being Lot 3 on

plan for detailed design or for any financial dealings involving the land.to change. No reliance should be placed on the information on thisdriveway crossovers and nature strips are indicative only and subjectcouncil and all other relevant authorities. Landscaping, footpaths,title and easement verification, engineering design, approval fromconsent of Reeds Consulting PTY LTD. The plan is subject to survey,should not be used for any other purpose without the writtenThis plan has been prepared for review and comment only and

DR

AFT

146

127126

132133

87

19

18 178

3 4

2122 20

35 34 33

100111

113112

114 116

115

117119120 123

122

121

124

118110109108

107106105

104

103102

10197

98

145

138

139

136

137

141

142

143

144

140

135 134

131

130128

125

149

9

3036

99

102

102

44

50

49 4746

52

53

54

55

59

70

76

6

7

1518a

32

907m²490m²

438m²451m²451m²

472m²716m²

747m²

442m²

438m²

400

m²

621m²

634

m²

769

m² 425m²

576m²

7.030 ha

434m²

427m²

445m²

507m²

424m²

305m²

302m²

438m²

438m²

438m²

437m²

423m²

378m²

525m²438m²438m²

438m²438m²

438m²

454

m²

702

m²

681

m²

454

m²

508

m²

480m²

756

m²

469

m²

524

m²

467

m²

EXTEN

T

OF

RESER

VE

TO BE

DETERMINED

FROM TREE

35m BUFFER

FROM TREE

35m BUFFER

PATH

2.5m SHARED

RESERVE

WETLANDSPROPOSED

COMPENSATIONFLOOD

PROPOSED

20m WIDE MAINTENANCE BUFFER

20

m WID

E M

AIN

TE

NA

NC

E B

UFFE

R

556m²

Reserve

Conservation

AVERAGE LOT AREA: 502m²

NUMBER OF LOTS: 45

AREA FOR ALLOTMENTS : 2.257 ha

CONSERVATION RESERVE: 556m²

AREA OF ROADS : 8726m²

RESERVE AREA: 7.030 ha

DEVELOPABLE AREA: 3.186 ha

SITE AREA: 10.22 ha

LANDSCAPE INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS PLANTREES TO BE RETAINED BASED ON

RESERVE

(03) 8660 3000

WWW.REEDSCONSULTING.COM.AU

MELBOURNE VIC 3000

440 ELIZABETH STREET

LEVEL 6

[email protected]

SHEET A3SCALE 1: 1500

20 10 0 20 40 60

20493REF

VERSION(LOT 3 ON PS 403716J)

HOLLOWAY ROAD, WONGA PARK

G:\20493\Dgn(V8i)\V8i_1pp1W.dgnW

WETLANDSPROPOSED

COMPENSATIONFLOOD

PROPOSED

PLAN

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION

C

C A

A

B

B

DATE 31/10/18

BR

US

HY

CR

EE

K

3

2

1

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11121314

15

161718

19

20

21

2223

25 2627 28 29 30 31

32

33

34

35

3637

38

3940

414243

44454647

48

24

400.40

100.5

8

26.19

319.55

179.85

143.8

2

125.6

3

35.2

5

MEADOWBANK

RISE

REGENCY

GLEN

PARK D

RIVE

GLE

NH

ELE

N P

LA

CE

GLE

N IN

NES C

LO

SE

AMLEY COURT

HOLLOWAY ROAD

AVENUE

20m WIDE MAINTENANCE BUFFER

20

m WID

E M

AIN

TE

NA

NC

E B

UFFE

R

AVERAGE LOT AREA: 481m²

NUMBER OF LOTS: 48

AREA FOR ALLOTMENTS : 2.313 ha

AREA OF ROADS : 8726m²

RESERVE AREA: 7.030 ha

DEVELOPABLE AREA: 3.186 ha

SITE AREA: 10.22 ha

35

(16)

35

(15)

(14)

35

14.41

12.90

35

16

(14)

(14)

(15)

(14)

(16)

16

12.5

012.5

0

12.5

0

12.5

0

12.50

12.50

12.50

35

12.50

12.5012.50

12.50

15

16

1414

14

37.7

6

16

19

33.6

6

37.3

0

1412.50

1412.50

33.88

For Cross Section Details, refer to Typical Cross Section Plan.

derived from the Title and not survey dimensions.PS 403716J. (Vol.10386, Fol.482). Dimension shown have beenThe Subject Site is comprised of one Certificate of Title, being Lot 3 on

plan for detailed design or for any financial dealings involving the land.to change. No reliance should be placed on the information on thisdriveway crossovers and nature strips are indicative only and subjectcouncil and all other relevant authorities. Landscaping, footpaths,title and easement verification, engineering design, approval fromconsent of Reeds Consulting PTY LTD. The plan is subject to survey,should not be used for any other purpose without the writtenThis plan has been prepared for review and comment only and

146

127126

132133

87

19

18 178

3 4

2122 20

35 34 33

100111

113112

114 116

115

117119120 123

122

121

124

118110109108

107106105

104

103102

10197

98

145

138

139

136

137

141

142

143

144

140

135 134

131

130128

125

149

9

30

46

36

99

102

102

980m²505m²

438m²451m²451m²

472m²716m²

677m²

626m² 442m²

438m²

450

m²

483m²

634

m²

528

m² 425m²

576m²

7.030 ha

434m²

427m²

445m²

507m²

424m²

305m²

302m²

438m²

438m²

438m²

437m²

423m²

378m²

438m²438m²

438m²438m²

438m²438m²

454

m²

508

m²

454

m²

508

m²

454

m²

508

m²

480m²

471

m²

526

m²

469

m²

524

m²

467

m²

EXTEN

T

OF

RESER

VE

TO BE

DETERMINED

FROM TREE

35m BUFFER

FROM TREE

35m BUFFER

PATH

2.5m SHARED

DD


Tree Descriptors - Version 9 (April 2018)

The typical assessment of a tree evaluates the factors of health and structure. The descriptors of health and structure attributed to a tree evaluate the individual specimen as compared to what could be considered typical for that species growing in its location. The two factors are completely separate and it is possible to have a tree in good health with very poor structure or, conversely, a tree in very poor health with good structure. These two factors should be used a guide to the overall tree condition at the time of inspection.

Tree No:A unique identifier, normally a number and often associated with a plan or map reference and used to identify an individual tree or tree group.

Species:

Provides botanical name, (genus, species, variety and cultivar) according to accepted international codes of taxonomic classification.

Common Name:

Provide the most well-known non-scientific name by which the tree is generally known.

DBH (trunk diameter, measured at 1.4m from ground):

Indicates the trunk diameter (expressed in centimetres) of an individual tree measured at 1.4m above the existing ground level. Plants with a multi-stemmed habit may be measured below the 1.4m or at the tree base. DBH measurements are usually undertaken with foresters diameter tape or builders tape.

DBH in the tree data followed by an * are where the dbh has been estimated due to not having access to the tree (usually neighbouring properties).

Basal Trunk Diameter:

This is the trunk diameter measured as the base of the trunk immediately above the root buttress or trunk flare. It us used to calculate the Structural Root Zone (SRZ) as outlined in the Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

H x W (Height x Width or Canopy Spread):

Indicates the height and width of the individual tree; dimensions are expressed in metres. Height is measured with a clinometer/heightmeter where possible. Tree heights may be estimated in line with previous clinometer readings in conjunction with author’s experience. Crown widths are generally paced (estimated) at the widest axis or averaged.


Tree Type:Describes the general geographic origin of the species and its type (e.g. deciduous or evergreen).

Age:

Relates to the physiological stage of the tree’s life cycle.

Health:

Assesses a range of attributes to describe the overall health of the tree.

Category Description

Indigenous Occurs naturally in the area or region of the subject site

Victorian native Occurs naturally within some part of the State of Victoria (not exclusively) but is not indigenous

Australian native Occurs naturally within Australia but is not a Victorian native or indigenous

Exotic deciduous Occurs outside of Australia and typically sheds its leaves during winter

Exotic evergreen Occurs outside of Australia and typically holds its leaves all year round

Exotic conifer Occurs outside of Australia and is classified as a gymnosperm

Native conifer Occurs naturally within Australia and is classified as a gymnosperm

Palm Woody monocotyledon


Young Sapling tree and/or recently planted

Semi-mature Tree rapidly increasing in size and yet to achieve expected size in situation

Maturing Specimen approaching expected size in situation, with reduced incremental growth

Senescent Tree is over-mature and in decline

Dead Tree is dead

Category Growth Indicators Decline symptoms/Deadwood

Foliage density, colour, size, intact-

nessPests and/or disease

Good Above typical None or minimal Better than typical None or minimal

Fair Typical Typical or expected Typical Typical, within damage thresholds

Fair to Poor Below typical More than typical Exhibiting deficiencies Exceeds damage

thresholds

Poor Minimal Excessive and large amount/size

Exhibiting severe defi-ciencies

Extreme and contribut-ing to decline

Dead N/A N/A N/A N/A


Structure:

Assesses principal components of tree structure.

The lowest or worst descriptor assigned to the tree in any column is generally the overall rating assigned to the tree. The assessment for structure is limited to observations of external and above ground tree parts. It does not include any exploratory assessment of underground or internal tree parts unless this is requested as part of the investigation. Trees are assessed and the given a rating for a point in time. Generally, trees with a poor or very poor structure are beyond the benefit of practical arboricultural treatments. The management of trees in the urban environment requires appropriate arboricultural input and consideration of risk.

Descriptor Root plate & lower stem Trunk Primary branch

supportOuter crown and

rootsLean from verti-

cal

Good

No damage, dis-ease

or decay; obvious basal flare / stable

in ground

No damage, disease or decay; well tapered

Well formed, at-tached, spaced

and tapered

No damage, disease, decay or structural

defectLow or none

Fair Minor damage or decay

Minor damage or decay

Typically formed, attached, spaced

and tapered

Minor damage, dis-ease or decay; minor branch end-weight or

over-extension

Minor / natural

PoorModerate damage or decay; minimal

basal flare

Moderate damage or decay; approaching

recognised thresholds

Weak, decayed or with acute branch attachments; previ-ous branch failure

evidence

Moderate damage, disease or decay;

moderate branch end-weight or over-exten-

sion

Moderate

Very Poor

Major damage, disease or decay;

fungal fruiting bodies present

Major damage, dis-ease or decay; ex-ceeds recognised thresholds; fungal

fruiting bodies present

Decayed, cavities or has acute

branch attach-ments with includ-ed bark; excessive compression flar-ing; failure likely

Major damage, dis-ease or decay; fungal

fruiting bodies present; major branch end-

weight or over-exten-sion

Acute

Hazardous

Excessive dam-age, disease or

decay; unstable / loose in ground; failure probable

Excessive damage, disease or decay;

cavities

Decayed, cavities or branch attach-ments with active split; failure immi-

nent

Excessive damage, disease or decay;

excessive branch end-weight or over-exten-

sion

Excessive – root plate failure or

stem failure prob-able

GLENN WATERS | ARBORICULTURE Arboricultural / Retention Value Rating:

Relates to the combination of previous tree rating factors, including health, structure and form (ar-boricultural merit), and also conveys an amenity value. This rating relates to the trees biological, functional and aesthetic characteristics within an urban landscape context.


SignificantTree of better than high quality and will be an outstanding example of the species due to factors such as age, size, outstanding example, rare in cultivation, etc. Retention of these trees should be a priority for the site.

High

Tree of high quality in good to fair condition. Generally a prominent arboricultural feature. Tree is capable of tolerating changes in its environment. These trees have the potential to be a medium to long-term component of the landscape if managed appropriately. Retention of these trees is highly desirable.

Moderate

Tree of moderate quality, in fair or better condition. Generally contributes to the landscape. Tree may have a condition, and or structural problem that will respond to arboricultural treatment. Tree is capable of tolerating changes in its environment. These trees have the potential to be a medium to long-term component of the landscape if managed appropriately. Retention of these trees is generally desirable.

Low

Tree of low quality and/or little amenity value. Tree in poor health and/or with poor structure. Tree unlikely to respond positively to changes in its environment and does not warrant de-sign modification to preserve it. Tree may be beyond the benefit of practical arboricultural treatments.

Tree is not significant for its size and/or young. These trees are easily replaceable. Tree (species) is functionally inappropriate to specific location and would be expected to be problematic if retained.

Retention of such trees may be considered if not requiring a disproportionate expenditure of resources for a tree in its condition and location.

None

Tree has a severe structural defect and/or health problem that cannot be sustained with practical arboricultural techniques and the loss of tree would be expected in the short term. Tree whose retention would be impractical after the removal of adjacent trees (includes trees that have developed in close spaced groups and would not be expected to acclima-tise to severe alterations to surrounding environment – removal of adjacent shelter trees) Tree has a detrimental effect on the environment, for example, the tree is a woody weed. These trees should be removed on the basis of sound arboricultural management.

GLENN WATERS | ARBORICULTURE Useful Life Expectancy

Assessment of useful life expectancy provides an indication of health and tree appropriateness and involves an estimate of how long a tree is likely to remain in the landscape based on species, stage of life (cycle), health, amenity, environmental services contribution, conflicts with adjacent in-frastructure and risk to the community.

The assessment is based on the site conditions not being significantly altered and that any pre-scribed maintenance works are carried out (site conditions are presumed to remain relatively con-stant and the tree would be maintained under scheduled maintenance programs).

ULE Rating Description

< 1 yearTree may be dead or mostly dead. Tree may exhibit major structural faults. Tree may be an imminent failure hazard. Excessive infrastructure damage with high risk potential that cannot be remedied.

1 - 5 years

Tree is exhibiting severe chronic decline. Crown is likely to be less than 50% typical density. Crown may be mostly epicormic growth. Dieback of large limbs is common (large dead-wood may have been pruned out). Over-mature and senescing. Infrastructure conflicts with heightened risk potential. Tree has outgrown site constraints.

6 - 10 years

Tree is exhibiting chronic decline. Crown density will be less than typical and epicormic growth is likely to present. The crown may still be mostly entire, but some dieback is likely to be evident. Dieback may include large limbs. Over-mature and senescing or early decline symptoms in short-lived species. Early infrastructure conflicts with potential to increase regardless of management inputs.

10-25 years

Trees displaying normal growth characteristics. Tree may be growing in restricted environ-ment (e.g. streetscapes) or may be in late maturity.

Tree may be growing in restricted environment (e.g. streetscapes) or may be in late maturity.

25+ yearsGenerally juvenile and semi-mature trees exhibiting normal growth characteristics in parks or open space. Could also be maturing, long-lived trees. Tree well suited to the site with negligible potential for infrastructure conflicts.


Tree Risk Assessment

A primary goal of tree risk assessment is to provide information about the level of risk posed by a tree over a specific time period. This is accomplished in qualitative tree risk assessment by first determining the categories for likelihood and consequences of tree failure. These factors are de-termined by:

1. Evaluating the structural conditions that may lead to failure; the potential loads on the tree; and the trees’ adaptations to weaknesses—to determine the likelihood of failure.

2. Evaluating the likelihood that a tree or branch could strike people or property or disrupt ac-tivities.

3. Assessing the injury, damage or disruption—to estimate the consequences of failure.

A matrix-based, qualitative approach to tree risk assessment is used define the level of risk. The factors collected during the tree assessment, particularly with regard to the trees structure are used in this determination.

The risk category is then compared to the level of risk that is acceptable to the client, controlling authority, or societal standards. If the risk category defined for the tree risk exceeds the level of acceptable risk, mitigation is recommended.

Risk Assessment Matrix

Bibliography:

Coder, K D. (1996) Construction damage assessments: trees and sites, University of Georgia, USA

Hitchmough, J.D. (1994) Urban landscape management, Inkata Press, Australia

Gooding, R.F., Ingram, J.B., Urban, J.R., Bloch, L.B., Steigerwaldt, W.M, Harris, R.W. and Allen, E.N. (2000) Guide for plant appraisal, 9th edition, International society of Arboriculture, USA

Standards Australia (2009) Australian Standard AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

Likelihood of Failure

Likelihood of Failure (Target/Consequence)

Unlikely Somewhat Likely Likely Very Likely

Imminent (Very Poor Structure)

Low Moderate High Extreme

Probable (Poor Structure)

Low Moderate High High

Possible (Fair-Poor Structure)

Low Low Moderate Moderate

Improbable (Fair Structure)

Low Low Low Low



P.O. Box 94,Oakleigh South, VIC. 3167.

Arboricultural Consultancy: Precedent disclaimer and copyright

Copyright notice: © Glenn Waters | Arboriculture 2019. All rights reserved, except as expressly provided otherwise in this publication. Disclaimer: Although Glenn Waters | Arboriculture uses all due care and skill in providing you the information made available in this report, to the extent permitted by law Glenn Waters | Arboriculture otherwise excludes all warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied. To the extent permitted by law, you agree the Glenn Waters | Arboriculture is not liable to you or any other person or entity for any loss or damage caused or alleged to have been caused (including loss or damage resulting from negligence), either directly or indirectly, by your use of the information (including by way of example, arboricultural advice) made available to you in this report. Without limiting this disclaimer, in no event will Glenn Waters | Arboriculture be liable to you for any lost revenue or profits, or for special, indirect, consequential or incidental damage (however caused and regardless of the theory of liability) arising out of or related to your use of that information, even if Glenn Waters | Arboriculture has been advised of the possibility of such loss or damage. This disclaimer is governed by the law in force in the State of Victoria, Australia.

Report Assumptions:

• Any legal description provided to Glenn Waters | Arboriculture is assumed to be correct. Any titles and ownerships to any property are assumed to be correct. No responsibility is assumed for matters outside the consultant’s control.

• Glenn Waters | Arboriculture assumes that any property or project is not in violation of any applicable codes, ordinances, statutes or other local, state or federal government regulations.

• Glenn Waters | Arboriculture shall take care to obtain all information from reliable sources. All data shall be verified insofar as possible; however Glenn Waters | Arboriculture can neither guarantee nor be responsible for the accuracy of the information provided by others not directly under Glenn Waters | Arboriculture’s control.

• No Glenn Waters | Arboriculture employee shall be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of the report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services.

• Loss of the report or alteration of any part of the report not undertaken by Glenn Waters | Arboriculture invalidates the entire report.

• Possession of the report or a copy thereof does not imply right of publication or use for any purpose by anyone but the client or their directed representatives, without the prior consent of the Glenn Waters | Arboriculture.

• The report and any values expressed therein represent the opinion of Glenn Waters | Arboriculture and Glenn Waters | Arboriculture’s fee is in no way conditional upon the reporting of a specified value, a stipulated result, the occurrence of a subsequent event, nor upon any finding to be reported.

• Sketches, diagrams, graphs and photographs used in the report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural drawings, reports or surveys.

• Unless expressed otherwise: i) Information contained in the report will cover those items that were outlined in the project brief or that were examined during the assessment and reflect the condition of those items at the time of inspection; and ii) The inspection is limited to visual examination of accessible components without dissection, excavation or probing unless otherwise stipulated.

• There is no warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied by Glenn Waters | Arboriculture, that the problems or deficiencies of the plants or site in question may not arise in the future.

• All instructions (verbal or written) that define the scope of the report have been included in the report and all documents and other materials that Glenn Waters | Arboriculture has been instructed to consider or to take into account in preparing the report have been included or listed within the report.

To the writer’s knowledge all facts, matter and all assumptions upon which the report proceeds have been stated within the body of the report and all opinion contained within the report will be fully researched and referenced and any such opinion not duly researched is based upon the writers experience and observations.
