Arboricultural Hazard Survey Millom without Parish Council

The Hill

Millom

April 2017

______________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

1.0Introduction

1.1Lowther Forestry Group Ltd has been commissioned by Millom without Parish Council to carry out an arboricultural hazard survey of trees within their ownership at The Hill, Millom.

2.0The Brief

2.1Carry out a visual inspection of all trees within the survey area identified by the Parish Council on site.

2.2Assess the trees using Quantified Tree Risk Assessment (QTRA) to produce a risk of harm to persons or damage to property.

2.3Make recommendations regarding future management of the trees and what works are required to reduce the risk of harm to an acceptable level.

3.0Reasons for Survey

3.1The survey has been requested by Millom without Parish Council as part of their on- going tree management program.

3.2The survey is to identify defective trees and to recommend future works that will benefit the woodland and its wildlife whilst providing a safe environment.

4.0Scope and Report Limitations

4.1This is a tree safety survey and evaluates trees with regard to their likelihood to cause death or bodily injury to any person or damage to property. Any clear and identifiable hazards are highlighted with recommendations. There may however be hidden defects or defects which are not identified due to weather conditions or foliage for which Lowther Forestry Group Ltd cannot be held responsible. The survey produces a picture of those trees surveyed as on the date when the survey was undertaken. It is quite possible for hazards and defects to develop after that time.

4.2This report confines itself to the arboricultural and silvicultural aspects of the site, any engineering or ecological implications are not covered and specialist advice may be sought.

5.0Documents Provided

5.1The survey area was identified by Millom without Parish Council and marked on a paper plan.

5.2A digital plan of the site was purchased in SHP format to enable to plotting of tree locations.

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

6.0Survey Methodology

6.1The procedure for the assessment of individual trees is to:

Assess the site for Targets (person or object damaged by the falling part or whole tree). The detail of this assessment will be led by the general nature of both the site and trees.

Assess the tree in relation to the Target.

Identify, calculate and record any significant risk.

6.2Table 1:- Target Ranges for Structures, Pedestrians and Vehicles. Categorised by their occupation, pedestrian frequency or monetary value, road speed and traffic volume. (Vs5)

6.3The data regarding all surveyed trees can be seen in the Tree Data Table in Appendix 1.

6.4Trees with risk scores greater than 1:10,000 require works to be carried out as this is an unacceptable level of risk. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) state that

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

1:10,000 is the risk a person will take when going about their daily routine and that this is an acceptable level of risk.

6.5Trees with a risk score of less than 1:10,000 may have works recommended. These are to prolong the safe useful life expectancy of the tree and as part of ongoing management.

6.6Trees with a risk score of less than 1:100,000 are not required to be recorded as part of this assessment. Trees that are recorded with a risk score of less than 1:100,000 are at the discretion of the surveyor and to aid the long term management of the site.

6.7Trees that are within the survey area that are not recorded in the report are considered to have an acceptable risk of harm at the time of survey.

6.8The QTRA risk score is calculated by the assessment of the three primary components of tree failure risk. The input values for these components are set out in broad ranges of Target, Size and Probability of Failure. The QTRA user estimates the values for the three components and inputs them on either the QTRA manual calculator or software application to calculate the Risk of Harm.

6.9The QTRA risk score is divided into 4 categories Immediate, High, Medium and Low. This in turn informs the priority given to the individual tree. Table 2 below details the tree risk priority.

6.9.1 Table 2, Tree Risk Priority.

Tree Risk Priority

6.10Data recorded during the survey includes: Tree Location, Species, Age Class, Condition, Risk Score, Defects, Recommendations and Proposed Future Inspection Frequency.

7.0Site and Legal Restrictions

7.1The site is The Hill, Millom, LA18 5HE.

7.2The survey area includes the old quarry, surrounding roads, footpaths and trees near services.

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

7.3This is the second formal inspection of trees on this site by Lowther Forestry Group

Ltd.

7.4Lowther Forestry Group Ltd have consulted with Copeland Borough Council and they have confirmed that the site is not protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) and the site is not within a Conservation Area.

7.5Substantial penalties and/or prison sentences can be incurred for contravention of legislation relating to protected species.

7.6Further legal restrictions can be seen in Appendix 4.

8.0The Survey

8.1The survey identified and recorded 6 trees. The trees have been divided into the following four categories ranging from Immediate to Low risk of harm. Table 3, below details the trees and their categories.

8.1.1 Table 3.

Tree Priority

8.1.2The site is not showing signs of recent management and for the size of site a large number of trees have been recorded.

8.1.3Works have been recommended to all 6 trees. A summary of the tree works is shown below in Table 4, Tree Work Recommendations.

8.1.4Table 4, Tree Work Recommendations.

Tree Work Recommendations

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

8.2No trees have been recorded as Immediate, High or Medium priority on this site.

8.3There are six trees recorded as Low priority.

8.3.1The six trees recorded are split into two groups. Trees that requiring felling and trees that are requiring arboricultural works.

8.3.2The three trees requiring arboricultural works are trees 2485, 2486, 2487. Tree

2485 has sign of decay at the base of a large lateral limb which is expected to reduce its safe useful life expectancy. This tree also has ivy present in the upper crown. Tree 2486 has a large crossing branch at 5m which will have an increased risk of failure as its growth is distorted. Tree 2487 is a large Cherry tree with a cavity at the base of a large limb. The cavity is historic with good reaction wood indicating some structural strength. The cavity has internal decay and predicting when the limb will fail is very difficult. It is recommended that the limb is reduced to 1.5m from the stem to prevent the limb from failing and to retain the cavity for wildlife.

8.3.3Trees 2481, 2482 and 2483 have been recommended to be coppiced. These trees are all stored pollards that are showing signs of decay either in their base or at the point of pollard. All of these trees are located on steep slopes and are likely to reach the road or the telephone line should they fail. Honey Fungus, Armillaria mellea was noted at the base of tree 2481 and therefore basal decay is expected and re-pollarding is no longer an option.

8.4 Details of works can be found in Appendix 1 Tree Data Table.

9.0Discussion and Recommendations

9.1The majority of defects found on this site affect the Sycamore. Sycamore is an invasive species that will out compete the other species. When coppicing Sycamore on this site it is advisable to kill a percentage of the trees to maintain species diversity and to allow other species to develop. It is advised to kill trees that are located in awkward positions that cannot be cut without the assistance of tree surgeons.

9.1.1The Sycamore trees that have been pollarded are now at a stage where they can be either re-pollarded or coppiced. It is recommended that the trees are coppiced as this will be easier to maintain in the long term and will not require the assistance of tree surgeons.

9.1.2The size of site means it can be easily split into three or four areas that can be coppiced on a 5 to 10 year cycle. If the total volume of timber cut per calendar quarter is less than 5m³ then the works would not require a felling licence. This would include the phased removal of large Sycamore and the protection of native low grown trees that will benefit the local wildlife.

9.2Many of the trees on site are covered by ivy. Ivy will eventually smother a tree blocking light to the leaves restricting the trees ability to grow. The ivy will also increase

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

wind loading on the stem and branches increasing the risk of wind-blow or wind-snap. It is recommended that where the ivy has reached the middle or upper crown that it is severed. Where the ivy is not interfering with the crown it can remain as it provides many wildlife benefits.

9.3There is a tree marked on the plan as 01. This is a healthy Sycamore and its ownership has not been confirmed. The tree would be recommended for coppicing if it is within the Parish Council property. The tree would be recorded as low priority at this time however its removal will only increase in cost as the tree develops.

9.4All works listed in the tree data table are recommended to be carried out during 2017.

9.5Contractors are to consider nesting birds and other European Protected Species prior to any felling and arboricultural works.

9.6Tree locations can be seen in Appendix 5, Tree Location & Survey Area Plan.

9.7Details of hazard works can be found in Appendix 1, Tree Data Table.

10.0Summary

10.1Lowther Forestry Group Ltd has been commissioned by Millom without Parish Council Ltd to carry out an arboricultural hazard survey of trees within their property at The Hill.

10.2Carry out a visual inspection of all trees within falling distance of the survey area identified by Millom without Parish Council.

10.3The survey identified and recorded 6 trees. The trees have been divided into the following four categories.

Immediate Priority - 0

High Priority – 0

Medium Priority – 0

Low Priority – 6

10.4Works have been recommended to all 6 trees.

10.5The site is recommended to be re-inspected in 1.5 years or 3 years if all works recommended in the report are carried out.

10.6Tree work recommendations can be seen on page 5, Table 3.

10.7The tree locations can be seen in Appendix 5, Tree Location & Survey Area Plan.

10.8Information regarding individual trees can be seen in Appendix 1 Tree Data Table.

________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 1 – Tree Data Table

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 2 – Glossary of Arboricultural Terms

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 3 – Surveyor Qualifications

LOWTHER FORESTRY GROUP LTD

PROFESSIONAL CURRICULUM VITAE

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 4 – Legal Restriction

4.1Trees in any location may be protected by legislation. Where development is proposed, additional legal protection may be appropriate and can be enforced by the local authority. Attention is drawn to legal controls and liabilities under common law for consideration at the earliest stages of potential site development.

4.2The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires that, except in certain circumstances, “no work shall be carried out which will affect trees over a certain size which are situated in Conservation Areas”. Six weeks’ notice of intent has to be given to the local authority before the work is carried out. This provides an opportunity for the local authority to make a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) under this Act to protect the trees.

4.3Tree Preservation Orders allow for trees to be protected either as individuals, groups, areas or woodlands. The orders have the effect of preventing the cutting down, topping, lopping, uprooting, wilful damage or wilful destruction of trees, except in certain circumstances, other than with consent of the local authority.

4.4Even when no specific legal protection exists, it may be necessary to obtain a felling licence. These apply if the volume of timber exceeds specified amounts; site clearance, even of small areas, before detailed planning permission has been granted could exceed the felling licence quota. The Forestry Commission, under the Forestry Act 1967, administers felling licences.

4.5Before carrying out any arboricultural or forestry operations, consideration should be given to the following legislation for protected species of flora and fauna: The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended), and the Countryside Rights of Way Act 2000 protected species of flora and fauna. This will prevent any harm or damage to protected species.

4.6Substantial penalties and or prison sentences can be incurred for contravention of legislation relating to protected species.

4.7Lowther Forestry Group has not been requested to make any checks for protected species on this site.

______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________

Appendix 5 – Tree Location Plan & Survey Area

______________________________________________________________________________________