Grove Park School AIA - East Sussex · Grove Park School Church Road Crowborough TN6 1BN 16th...

Arboricultural Impact Assessment Grove Park School Church Road Crowborough TN6 1BN 16th August 2016

PJC ref: 4111/16-01

T: 01323 400311 E: [email protected]

Chapter House, Priesthawes Farm Hailsham Road, Polegate,

East Sussex BN26 6QU

This report has been prepared by

PJC Consultancy Ltd

on behalf of BLB Surveyors

Prepared by

Peter Davies FdSc Arboriculture M.Arbor.A Peter has a Foundation Degree in Arboriculture and is a professional

member of the Arboricultural Association. He has ten years experience in the arboricultural industry, originally working as a groundsman and feller, and progressing into consultancy. He is a Lantra accredited professional

tree inspector.

Checked by

Adam Earl BSc(Hons) MCIEEM Adam has received a BSc(Hons) in Applied biology and is a full member of the Chartered Institute for Ecology and Environmental Management. He has over five years experience in the ecology and arboriculture industry and is a Lantra

accredited professional tree inspector.

Approved by

Nick Betts HND For M.Arbor.A Nick has attained an HND in forestry management and is a professional member of both the Arboricultural Association and the Consulting Arborists Society. He has worked in the arboricultural and forestry industries for 14 years. He started his career as a forestry worker before qualifying as a tree surgeon, working in both the private and commercial sectors. He has been a practising consultant

since 2004. He is a Lantra accredited professional tree inspector.

PJC Ref No: PJC/4111/16-01 Rev1 Date: 16/08/16

CONTENTS 1 Executive summary 2 Introduction 3 Initial tree survey summary 4 Arboricultural impact assessment 5 Conclusions

Appendices:

1. Tree Constraints Plan and Tree Retention Plan 2. Tree Survey Schedule 3. Photographs


1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 This report should be read in conjunction with arboricultural survey ref. PJC/3969/16-01 and arboricultural method statement ref. PJC/4111/16-02. 1.2 Site location: The site is situated adjacent to the junction between Church Road and A26 Beacon Road, more broadly to the west of Crowborough town centre. It has a central OS grid reference of TQ511304. The surrounding land use is comprised of residential properties to the north south and west, and a commercial vehicle mechanic workshop to the east. The location of the site within its environs is shown in figure 1.

Figure 1: Location of Site and Environs

1.3 Proposal: A proposal has been outlined to improve the parking capacity at the school by extending the existing car park into an area of woodland and constructing new parking bays adjacent to the site entrance/exit. 1.4 Tree removals: Trees T7, T8, T10, T11, T17-T20, T24 and T26 (6x category B and 4x category C trees) along with a section of woodland W3 (category B) will require removal to facilitate the proposed construction works. 1.5 Works within root protection areas: The new parking area will encroach the root protection areas of trees T9, T22, T25 and group G28. Sympathetic construction methodologies will need to be employed to minimise the impact on these trees.


2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Instruction: PJC Consultancy has been instructed by BLB Surveyors to provide an arboricultural impact assessment for proposed construction works at Grove Park School in Crowborough. The proposal is to increase parking capacity at the school. 2.2 Brief: PJC Consultancy has been commissioned to compile an arboricultural impact assessment written in accordance with guidelines set out in BS5837: 2012 ‘Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations’. 2.3 Scope of this report: This report is concerned with all significant trees located within the site boundary and those located around the curtilage of the site with the potential to impact or be impacted by the proposed construction works. 2.4 Contents of report: This report includes the following:

• A schedule of trees to be retained/removed. • A schedule of access facilitation pruning required for development. • An assessment of the impact construction works will have on retained trees and

mitigation measures to be implemented. • Tree Constraints Plan and Tree Retention Plan.

2.5 Documents and information provided: The following documents were provided by the client to produce this report:

• Drawing ref. 14135-04 – Site Location Plan • Drawing ref. 14135-019 – Site Layout-Existing Plan-Upper Area • Drawing ref. 16050-051-B – Site Layout Proposed Plan


3 INITIAL TREE SURVEY SUMMARY 3.1 Site visit: Site visits were carried out on 7th and 24th March and 3rd August 2016. The weather conditions at the time of all visits were fine and dry with no wind. The visibility was adequate for visual tree inspection from ground level. The initial survey assessed the trees in the context of the existing land use, not in consideration of development proposals. 3.2 Survey methodology: Explanations for the measurements and information collected for each tree are described in arboricultural report ref. PJC/3969/16-01. 3.3 Site layout: The survey area comprises an existing parking area with a semi-mature woodland block (W3) to the east and a number of individual mature specimens located on the western edge of the woodland and in a small plant bed located between a garage building and the main school buildings. Trees located around the curtilage of the site entrance and exit have also been included in this survey. Details of each tree can be found in the Tree Survey Schedule in Appendix 2. 3.4 Tree categorisation summary: A total of thirty-four trees, four tree groups and one woodland block were surveyed and recorded in the Tree Survey Schedule. Table 1: Tree categorisation summary

Categorisation Individual tree Tree group Woodland A 3 1 0 B 20 1 1 C 11 2 0

Total 34 4 1 3.5 Statutory tree protection: Wealden District Council Planning Department was contacted by e-mail on 10th March 2016 to establish restrictions to tree works at the site. No Tree Preservation Order (TPO) protects the trees specifically surveyed for this report on the date of this report and the site is not located within a Conservation Area. However, any persons proposing to undertake tree works must check the status of these trees with the local authority, and gain necessary consent before works are undertaken. 3.6 Financial penalties and/or criminal proceedings can result if tree works are carried out on a protected tree without consent. The entirety of the tree is protected, both above and below ground.


4 ARBORICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4.1 Tree removals: Trees to be removed for the proposed development are shown on the Tree Retention Plan in Appendix 1. They are shaded to indicate their BS5837 tree category. These comprise T7, T8, T10, T11, T17-T20, T24 and T26 (6x category B and 4x category C trees) along with a section of woodland W3 (category B). 4.2 The proposed tree removals have been selected to avoid any major landscape impact externally of the site (by retaining groups G28 and G29 on the northern boundary and a large section of W3 on the eastern boundary). There shall be a limited loss of screening between Grove Park Cottage and the parking area, but replanting can mitigate this. 4.3 Due the heavily wooded nature of the site, there will not be significant scope for mitigation tree planting. The 3.5m buffer surrounding the new parking area should be left free of trees to avoid future pressures from parked cars. There will be scope for under-storey planting in this area such as holly, hawthorn or hazel. These low level species will also aid screening between the parking area and Grove Park Cottage without over-shading the third party property. 4.4 Access facilitation pruning: Based on the information currently available, no access facilitation pruning beyond the initial tree clearance works will be required to facilitate the proposed development. Any requirements for access facilitation pruning that cannot be predicted at this stage in the design process (e.g. for contractor compound or movement of large plant) should be discussed at the pre-commencement meeting with the project arboriculturalist and agreed with the local authority arboricultural officer. All pruning works would need to be carried out in accordance with BS3998: 2010. 4.5 Works within root protection areas: New permanent surfacing will be constructed within the root protection areas of trees T9, T22, T25 and group G28. The greatest encroachment shall be into the root protection area of T9. The car park surface located within this trees root protection area shall comprise grasscrete. This will provide a permeable and load baring surface to protect the rooting medium beneath. The grasscrete surface shall be installed above the existing ground level as wide spread soil stripping within the root protection area would result in significant harm to the tree. It shall also be constructed on a geotextile membrane to help filter pollutants from cars from leeching into the soil. This surface will need to meet the level of the existing car parking area, therefore a completely no-dig surface will not be achievable. The area requiring soil stripping must be kept to an absolute minimum by ramping up to the level for the no dig surface. The detailed specification for the grasscrete parking area including levels is not available on the date of this report. 4.6 In addition to the grasscrete surface, a formal footpath servicing the car park will also encroach the root protection area of T9. This surface must be of a permeable design (e.g. resin-bound gravel on a permeable sub-base) and be constructed above the existing ground level. It will be necessary to construct a step at the end of this path so the level of the footpath can meet the level of the existing car park surface without the requirement for extensive root pruning close to the stem of T9.


4.7 The new parking bays located adjacent to the site entrance and exits will encroach the root protection areas of T22, T25 and G28. The level of encroachment into group G28 is minimal and is not expected to have a notable impact on the trees. 4.8 The encroachment into the existing unsurfaced portions of the root protection areas of T22 and T25 is slightly greater (T22-13.2% and T25-20.0%). T22 is a goat willow noted as being of good physiological condition. As a species, willow is generally considered more tolerant to ground disturbance when compared to other species such as beech. The area of encroachment into the root protection area of T22 can easily be mitigated contiguous with the root protection area to the east of the tree. The encroachment into the root protection area of T25 is greater but again the tree is of good physiological condition and the level of encroachment (which cannot be minimised if additional parking is required) should not warrant removal of the tree. 4.9 As the new parking bays located adjacent to the site entrance/exit will be an extension of the existing tarmac surface, it will not be achievable to implement a no-dig design and a level of root pruning will be unavoidable. The extent of root pruning shall be minimised by avoiding any over dig past the edge of the new parking bays and by using the shallowest surface specification available. Use of a three dimensional load baring sub-base such as CellWeb should be explored to minimise the depth of excavation. The new parking bays shall be porous (permeable macadam) and installed above a geotextile membrane to filter pollutants from vehicles entering the soil. 4.10 Services: No information is currently available regarding drainage for the new parking areas. New underground surface water drainage pipes or gullies should be located outside the root protection areas of retained trees. If this is not feasible, then further input from the project arboriculturalist will be required to determine how the pipes can be installed within the guidelines outlined in NJUG10 ‘Guidelines for the planning, installation and maintenance of utilities in proximity to trees’ and BS5837: 2012. 4.11 An excess surface water from the new parking areas should be directed away from the trees. This will be important to avoid contamination of the rooting medium from car pollutants and potential salt in periods of snow or frost.


5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 Trees requiring removal to facilitate the proposed development comprise T7, T8, T10, T11, T17-T20, T24 and T26 (6x category B and 4x category C trees) along with a section of woodland W3 (category B). New native shrub planting (detailed specification to be confirmed) will occur around the main car park extension to improve the ecological value of the site as well as maintain vegetative screening between the car park and Grove Park Cottage. 5.2 The proposed site layout involves construction of new permanent surfacing within the root protection areas of trees T9, T22, T25 and group G28. Sympathetic construction methodologies will need to be employed to minimise the impact on these trees, therefore allowing their retention and continued contribution to the site. 5.3 Based on the above assessment, trees recommended for retention in this report can be protected during the proposed construction works and successfully integrated into the site post development.


6 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 Trees should be checked for protected species before works are undertaken. It is against the law to disturb bats or their roosts under the Conservation of Habitat and Species Regulations. Nesting birds are protected by the Wildlife and Countryside Act. If protected species are discovered, Natural England should be contacted for advice. 6.2 The tree works contractors should carry out all tree works to BS3998: 2010 ‘Tree works – recommendations’, as modified by research that is more recent. They should also carry relevant, adequate and up to date insurance. 6.3 It is also recommended that all tree works be carried out by an Arboricultural Association approved contractor. Approved contractors are expected to work to industry best standards, and the Arboricultural Association website contains contact details and information on engaging a suitable contractor. 6.4 The trees at this site were assessed for their condition and safety in relation to the average range of weather conditions that the region experiences. Any weather events that exceed the average norm cannot be predicted, and so their effects are not considered within this report. 6.5 The views and opinions contained within this report are entirely those of the author.


Contact details PJC Consultancy Ltd Chapter House Priesthawes Farm Hailsham Road Polegate East Sussex BN26 6QU Tel: 01323 400311 E-mail: [email protected] Author: Peter Davies Date: 16th August 2016


APPENDIX 1 Tree Constraints Plan and Tree Retention Plan


APPENDIX 2 Tree Survey Schedule

Tree Survey Schedule

Sheet 1

Tree ref. no. Species Height

(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class

Physiological condition

Structural condition Comments Management

recommendationCategory grading

Root Protection Area (m2)

Root Protection Radius (m)

N: 6 Crown:E: 7 4 westS: 6 Branch:W: 6 4 westN: 3 Crown:E: 2 2 averageS: 2 2 averageW: 3

N: 4 Crown:E: 6 3 northS: 9 Branch:W: 4 4 westN: 1 Crown:E: 2 9 southS: 6 Branch:W: 5 5 southN: 5 Crown:E: 4 2 northS: 4 Branch:W: 5 2 north

147.0 6.8

452.4 12.0

91.6 5.4

10.2 average

1.8 average

374.6

334.6 10.3

Third party tree only viewed from site.

Compression fork from 4-5m and historic

branch failure on south

Third party tree only viewed from site. Typical

habit for species.

A1 10.9

B2

Slight south lean. Minor deadwood. Squirrel damage. Drawn up

habit typical of woodland specimen.

Remove all trees within 3.5m of proposed

parking area (refer to Tree Retention Plan).

07/03/2016

No action required on date of survey, or for

development.

BLB Surveyors

Good

Mature

Fair

Good

Good

Survey date:Surveyor:

Good13

Mature

T: Individual tree or shrub

Grove Park School, Crowborough G: Group of 2 or more trees

Branch spread

(m)

Client:Site:

Peter Davies W: Woodland blockH: Hedgerow

W3

T4

Beech (Fagus sylvatica) 16 1000 estT1

T2Leyland cypress (Cupressocyparis

leylandii)450 est

Sycamore & birch dominant, oak,

yew, cherry, holly, cherry laurel,

poplar

Up to 13

average

Up to 150

average

Mature GoodBeech (Fagus sylvatica) 25 910

FairSemi mature Good2

average0-6

average

B1GoodGood

Semi mature trees with narrow upright habits typical of woodland

trees. Sporadic under-storey only.


development.B1/2


development.B1/2


development.A1

Ivy clad. Previously reduced. No major

visible defects.Mature

Good Good

Large deadwood (low frequency of use within target). 1 sided crown

due to suppression from T4.

Sever ivy and remove basal epicormic growth

to facilitate comprehensive future

inspection.

T5 Pine (Pinus nigra) 28 860 Mature

T6 Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) 12 570


Sheet 2


(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class






N: 1 Crown:E: 4 11 southS: 4 Branch:W: 1 9 southN: 4 Crown:E: 2 4 westS: 5 Branch:W: 5 4 westN: 6 Crown:E: 5 3 southS: 5 Branch:W: 5 3 eastN: 4 Crown:E: 3 4 westS: 3 Branch:W: 3 5 southN: 5 Crown:E: 3 2 southS: 4 Branch:W: 5 3 averageN: 3 Crown:E: 4 2 eastS: 5 Branch:W: 3 2 average


development.B1

Fair

Minor deadwood due to suppression. Ivy clad.

Possible squirrel damage.

Remove to facilitate development. B1

68.8 4.7T12 Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) 11 390 Early

mature Good FairGrows beneath larch.

Minor deadwood due to suppression.

113.1 6.0T11 Beech (Fagus sylvatica) 16 500 Mature Good

Good

Co-dominant stems from base with

reasonable union. Minor deadwood due to

suppression. Drawn up

Remove to facilitate development. B1/2 240.2 8.8T10 Sycamore (Acer

pseudoplatanus) 23 500, 530 Mature Good

Good

Previously crown lifted over car park. Building rubble piled within RPA and against buttress.

Sympathetic construction

methodology to be employed within RPA.

A1 179.6 7.6T9 Beech (Fagus sylvatica) 17 630 Mature Good

Fair 1 sided crown due to suppression from T7.

Remove to facilitate development. B1 83.6 5.2T8 English oak

(Quercus robur) 13 430 Early mature Good

FairIvy clad stem. Stem

leader previously pollarded at 8m.

Remove to facilitate development. B1 173.9 7.4

Surveyor: Peter Davies W: Woodland block

Branch spread

(m)

T7 Pine (Pinus nigra) 14 620 Mature Good

Client: BLB Surveyors T: Individual tree or shrub

Site: Grove Park School, Crowborough G: Group of 2 or more trees

Survey date: 07/03/2016 H: Hedgerow


Sheet 3


(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class






N: 4 Crown:E: 5 7 southS: 6 Branch:W: 3 8 southN: 3 Crown:E: 2 4 northS: 3 Branch:W: 2 4 northN: 5 Crown:E: 3 3 northS: 4 Branch:W: 6 4 westN: 4 Crown:E: 2 2 averageS: 3 Branch:W: 5 2 westN: 4 Crown:E: 4 2 southS: 3 Branch:W: 1 1.5 averageN: 3 Crown:E: 4 2 northS: 3 Branch:W: 3 1.5 average





Branch spread

(m)

T13 Larch (Larix decidua) 18 590 Early

mature Good GoodMinor deadwood in

crown. No major visible defects.


development.B1 157.5 7.1

T14 Pine (Pinus sylvestris) 17 460 Mature Good Good

Stem encroaches crown of T15. Small

deadwood. No major visible defects.

Remove deadwood over 30mmØ. No action

required for development.

B1 95.7 5.5

T15 Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) 12 470, 550 Mature Good Good

Co-dominant stems from base with

compression fork.



T16 Pine (Pinus sylvestris) 15 530 Mature Good Good

Typical habit for species with no major visible

defects.



T17 Cherry (Prunus avium) 4 250 at

1mEarly

mature Good FairPreviously crown lifted over driveway. Stem

graft at 1.5m.

Remove to facilitate development. C1 28.3 3.0


1mEarly

mature Good FairPreviously crown lifted over driveway. Stem

graft at 1.5m.



Sheet 4


(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class






N: 2 Crown:E: 4 1 southS: 4 Branch:W: 3 1.5 averageN: 3 Crown:E: 4 2 northS: 4 Branch:W: 2 1.5 averageN: 1 Crown:E: 3 0 southS: 5 Branch:W: 3 2 northN: 1 Crown:E: 3 0 southS: 4 Branch:W: 3 2 south

N: 4 Crown:E: 3 3 westS: 4 Branch:W: 4 4 average

Good Previously crown lifted. No major visible defects.

Remove to facilitate development. B1 49.3 4.0T24 Sweet chestnut

(Castanea sativa) 13 330 Early mature Good

Fair

Clump of holly including multi-stemmed trees.

Drawn up growth habits.


development.C1 10.2

average1.8

averageG23 Holly (Ilex aquifolium)

Up to 8 average

Up to 150

average

Early mature Good2

average 0 average

Fair Previously pollarded at 4m.


development.C1 65.3 4.6T22 Goat willow (Salix

caprea) 13 380 Early mature Good

Fair

Drawn up growth habit and one sided crown due to suppression. Defoliation from leaf

miner moth.


development.B1 30.6 3.1T21

Horse chestnut (Aesculus

hippocastanum)11 260 Early

mature Good

FairPreviously crown lifted over driveway. Stem

graft at 1.5m.

Remove to facilitate development. C1 49.3 4.0T20 Cherry (Prunus

avium) 5 330 Early mature Good

FairPreviously crown lifted over driveway. Stem

graft at 1.5m.



Branch spread

(m)


1mEarly

mature Good





Sheet 5


(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class






N: 4 Crown:E: 2 1 averageS: 3 Branch:W: 3 2 northN: 2 Crown:E: 0 3 westS: 2 Branch:W: 4 3 averageN: 3 Crown:E: 2 5 southS: 2 Branch:W: 4 4 west

N: 2 Crown:E: 3 4 eastS: 2 Branch:W: 2 5 average

FairNarrow upright growth habit. Suppressed by

cherry laurel.


development.C1 38.0 3.5T30 Lime (Tilia

cordata) 12 290 Early mature Good

Good

Mature trees on road frontage with cherry

laurel, willow and holly under-storey.


development.A2 162.9

average7.2

averageG29Beech,

sycamore, willow, holly, cherry laurel

Up to 15

average

Up to 600

average

Semi mature-mature

Good1-5 average

0-5 average

Good

2x large trees north of boundary fence.

Compression fork in stem union on south

tree.


development.B2 246.6

average8.9

averageG28 2x beech (Fagus sylvatica)

20 average

650, 350 largest

treeMature Good4

average 0 average

Fair

Drawn up growth habit. Lower crown

suppressed by cherry laurel.


development.B1 20.0 2.5T27 Silver birch

(Betula pendula) 15 210 Early mature Good

FairOne sided crown and

minor deadwood due to suppression.

Remove to facilitate development. B1 18.1 2.4T26 English oak

(Quercus robur) 8 200 Semi mature Good

Fair Stem pollarded to 10m.

Reassess pollard knuckle in dormant

season and carry out climbing assessment if

deemed necessary.

C1 234.5 8.6


Branch spread

(m)

T25 Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) 14 720 Mature Good





Sheet 6


(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class






N: 4 Crown:E: 4 3 eastS: 4 Branch:W: 3 3 averageN: 2 Crown:E: 2 6 southS: 3 Branch:W: 1 5 southN: 4 Crown:E: 4 3 averageS: 4 Branch:W: 3 4 averageN: 3 Crown:E: 1 2 westS: 2 Branch:W: 3 2 northN: 2 Crown:E: 2 1 southS: 5 Branch:W: 3 1.5 average

Fair 2x multi-stemmed holly clumps.


development.C1 18.1

average2.4

averageG36 2x holly (Ilex aquifolium)

7 average

200 average

estMature Good2

average 0 average

FairIvy clad. Stem graft. Heavily reduced from

driveway.


development.C1 79.8 5.0T35 Flowering cherry

(Prunus spp.) 5 420 Mature Good

PoorIvy clad.2x stems with long bark inclusion in

union.


development.C1 14.7 2.2T34 Sycamore (Acer

pseudoplatanus) 9 150, 100 est

Semi mature Fair

FairPreviously pollarded to 6m. Squirrel damage in

stem.


development.B1 79.8 5.0T33 Goat willow (Salix

caprea) 13 420 Mature Good

Fair

Dense under-storey inhibits inspection.

Narrow upright growth habit and one sided

crown.


development.B1 40.7 3.6T32 Ash (Fraxinus

excelsior) 14 300 est Early mature Good

Fair Dense under-storey inhibits inspection.




Branch spread

(m)

T31 Beech (Fagus sylvatica) 12 400 est Early

mature Good





Sheet 7


(m)

Stem diameter

(mm)

Crown clearance

(m)

Age class






N: 3 Crown:E: 2 1 southS: 5 Branch:W: 3 1.5 averageN: 4 Crown:E: 4 1 southS: 5 Branch:W: 3 2 southN: 0 Crown:E: 0 1 westS: 2 Branch:W: 4 2 west

FairRelatively sparse, one

sided crown. Tree suppressed by T30.


development.C1 26.1 2.9T39 Scots pine (Pinus

sylvestris) 7 240 Semi mature Fair

Fair 4x stems from base, all with compression forks.


development.B1 279.4 9.4T38

Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus

'leopoldii')17

410, 290,

470, 380Mature Good

Fair Suppressed by holly. Ivy clad. Stem graft


development.C1 46.3 3.8


Branch spread

(m)

T37 Flowering cherry (Prunus spp.) 5 320 at

1mEarly

mature Fair





APPENDIX 3 Photographs

Photograph 1 – Tree T9

Photograph 2 – Edge of woodland adjacent to Grove Park Cottage


Photograph 3 – Woodland W3

Photograph 4 – Trees T7 and T8


Photograph 5 – Trees T12-T15



Photograph 7 – Trees T17-G28


Date post:	26-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times