Enmore Park Plan of Management - Land

More documents

Recommendations

Info

URBAN FORESTRY AUSTRALIA - TREE MANAGEMENT & CONSULTING ARBORICULTURISTSSCHEDULE OF ASSESSED TREESENMORE PARK, MARRICKVILLE, NSW. JANUARY 2009TreeNo.Botanic &Common Name92 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig*Hht(m)*Sp(m)*DBH(mm)6 12 850*ABAge *H *C Comments *SULE *LSR *RV *TPZOpt. &Min.LM -OMFair - In decline. Sparse canopy. Extensive epicormics throughout. Extensive decay pocketsthroughout. Concrete in base of stem. Four co-dominant, included stems from 1 metre AGL.Remove large diameter scaffold hanging over car park, with decay and splitting bark near stemjunction (remove at junction). Remove deadwood of 30mm or more over parking area.Aerial inspection of scaffold branches recommended. Routine monitoring.Mulch over roots (min. 4.5m radius). Short to medium term retention only.M 12.812.893 Lophostemon confertusBrush Box9 10 550 M Good Good Some small twig dieback. Minor epicormics shoots. Junctions appear sound. Very compactedsoils.Mulch root zone (min. 3m radius)2A M H 6.65.594 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig10 12 850ABLM -OMFair - Sparse canopy. Decay pockets in stem. Old damage to exposed roots. Epicormics throughout.Small twig dieback in upper canopy.Investigate with Resistograph® test to determine structural integrity of stem and extent of decay.Deadwood and monitor. Mulch over roots (min. 5m radius). Probable short term retention.M 12.812.895 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig13 15 1300ABLM Good - Large old wounds between buttress roots, with resulting reduction in girth. Internal cavities onnorth side of stem. Large canopy, with large diameter scaffolds.Aerial inspection required to assess integrity of included unions of scaffold branches, possibleremoval. Ideally reduce canopy loading to reduce stresses on stem, over time. Mulch over roots(min. 6.4m radius). Monitor tree condition.H 151596 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig5 12 850ABLM -OMFair Poor In decline. Sparse canopy. Small twig dieback. Extensive epicormics throughout scaffolds and onstem. Decay pockets in stem. Low vigour.Short term retention only. Would remove to allow for development of T146 (young Fig).3D M M 12.812.897 Ficus macrophyllaMoreton Bay Fig7 7 650ABOM Fair Poor In decline. Heavily topped in past. Decay pockets throughout. Poor stem and buttressdevelopment in relation to diameter (and weight) of scaffolds. Few scaffolds remaining.Monitor tree condition. Mulch root zone (min. 3.5m radius). Short term retention likely.3D L L 9.89.898 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig99 Lophostemon confertusBrush Box10 13 950 M Good - Minor epicormics. Cavity on north side at 1 metre AGL. Extent of decay not known.Investigate with Resistograph® test to determine structural integrity of stem and extent of decay.Aerial inspection. Remove scaffolds with poor attachment, included junctions, especially wherethey over hang car park.Remove deadwood > 30mm Ø. Mulch root zone (min. 5m radius). Monitor tree condition.12 11 670 M Good Good Previously topped at 3 metres AGL. Girdled roots. Minor epicormics.Remove deadwood and poorly attached, old, large diameter epicormics. Mulch root zone (min.3.5m radius). Monitor.H 11.49.52D H H 86.7Arboricultural Audit and Assessment– Enmore Park, Marrickville. January, 2008 14 of 42
URBAN FORESTRY AUSTRALIA - TREE MANAGEMENT & CONSULTING ARBORICULTURISTSTreeNo.Botanic & CommonName100 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig*Hht(m)*Sp(m)*DBH(mm)9 13 800ABAge *H *C Comments *SULE *LSR *RV *TPZOpt. &Min.M Good - Epicormics on stem and near base of stem, possible root crown damage. Possible old cavities inH 9.6base, could be buttress growth habit but difficult to determine. Highly compacted soil. Largediameter epicormics in canopy. Tree appears stressed, some decline, not obvious why (root8crown damage from stem cavities?).Investigate with Resistograph® test to determine structural integrity of rootcrown and extent ofdecay. Where appropriate, remove crossing, rubbing branches, as wounds are point of entry fordecay. Mulch root zone (min. 4m radius). Monitor.101 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig10 18 860ABM Fair - Topped at 3 metres AGL, with resultant congested, multi stems, some included junctions. Largedecay pocket at 1.5 m AGL, on east side, extent of decay not known. Epicormics throughout,average for age.Aerial inspection. Remove scaffold with decay at 3 metre AGL, and other scaffolds with similardamage. Resistograph® test to determine structural integrity of stem and extent of decay. Mulchroot zone (min. 4.5m radius). Monitor.H 10.38.6102 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig12 13 1050ABM Fair Poor Brick wall surrounding services meters embedded in base of buttress. Extensive epicormics on allscaffolds. Large cavity and decay on north side, poor trunk taper on north side, ‘hollo’ in stem.Signs of soil uplift on S side, leaning over car park.Removal recommended.4A H L 12.610.5103 Lophostemon confertusBrush Box104 Ficus macrophyllaMoreton Bay Fig13 10 780 M Good - Cavity and decay @ base, south side, extends possibly 50% of stem diameter. Topped at 4metre AGL. Leaning towards street. Vigorous.Resistograph test to determine structural integrity of stem and extent of decay. Mulch root zone(min. 4m radius). Monitor.8 6 570 OM Fair Poor Advanced decline- nearly dead. All scaffolds have been reduced to stubs except one.Remove and replace.H 9.47.84A M L 8.56.5105 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig8 12 920ABLM -OMPoor Poor Extensive small and large diameter epicormics. Extensive dieback. Most exposed tree in group,removal would not adversely impact other trees in group. Exposed roots damaged, decaypresent.Reduce branches to allow for development of adjacent trees, w/view to removal in short term.Mulch root zone (min. 4.5m radius). Monitor.3D M L 13.813.8106 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig9 9 x13600ABM Good Fair High landscape significance as group, medium as individual specimen. Exposed roots, mowerdamaged. Small and large diameter epicormics on scaffolds, possibly a result of root damageand stress due to compacted soils. Main scaffolds do not appear to be included at stem junctions.Reduce loading on scaffolds. Remove crossing branches. No more than 10 -15% removal offoliage recommended. Mulch root zone (min. 3m radius). Monitor.2D H/M H 7.26107 Ficus rubiginosaPort Jackson Fig8 8 x3730ABOM Poor Poor Advanced decline. Extensive sooty mould. Extensive epicormics. Warty stem growths. History ofbranch failures and removals. Suppressed, poor form. Dull foliage. Pollarded. Has had largediameter co-dominant stem removed. Remove.4A M L 1111Arboricultural Audit and Assessment– Enmore Park, Marrickville. January, 2008 15 of 42
Page 1:
Enmore Parkplan of management + mas
Page 6 and 7:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENTLis
Page 8 and 9:
Figure 1Study AreaApril 20100 20 40
Page 10 and 11:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENT1.5
Page 12 and 13:
Page 15:
Part APLAN OF MANAGEMENT13 Marrickv
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENTExi
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
10. 810 .810.810.810. 610.610 .610.
Page 38 and 39:
0 20 40 MApril 2010Figure 4.2Master
Page 40 and 41:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENT16.
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENTNo.
Page 46 and 47:
Page 49 and 50:
6.0 MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FRAMEWORK6.
Page 51 and 52:
6.0 MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FRAMEWORK6.
Page 53 and 54:
6.0 MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FRAMEWORKOb
Page 55 and 56:
6.0 MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FRAMEWORKOb
Page 57:
Part CBACKGROUND55 Marrickville Cou
Page 60 and 61:
Newington CollegeTo NewtownCommunit
Page 62 and 63:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENT193
Page 64 and 65:
10. 810 .810.810.810. 610.610 .610.
Page 66 and 67:
10. 810 .810.810.810. 610.610 .610.
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
14.8"NO S TOPP INGBUS Z ONE"S IGN"B
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENTPre
Page 78 and 79:
Page 81 and 82:
8.0 RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91:
9.0 APPENDIXABasis for ManagementSu
Page 94 and 95:
ENMORE PARK - PLAN OF MANAGEMENTThe
Page 97:
9.0 APPENDIXBHistorical Overview of
Page 100 and 101: Conservation Management StrategyEnm
Page 137 and 138: TREE MANAGEMENTCONSULTING ARBORICUL
Page 139 and 140: URBAN FORESTRY AUSTRALIA - TREE MAN
Page 149: URBAN FORESTRY AUSTRALIA - TREE MAN
Page 179: 9.0 APPENDIXCArboricultural Audit a
Page 200 and 201:
URBAN FORESTRY AUSTRALIA - TREE MAN
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 225 and 226:
Enmore Park Draft Plan of Managemen
Page 227 and 228:
Enmore Park Draft Plan of Managemen
Page 229:
9.0 APPENDIXELighting Appraisal103
Page 232 and 233:
ut the security requirement may be
Page 234 and 235:
High Mast FittingsThere are a numbe
Page 236 and 237:
Appendix A is an excerpt from AS/NZ
Page 238 and 239:
Power SuppliesOur recent experience
Page 240 and 241:
Appendix BLighting, Art + ScienceEn
Page 242:
9.0 APPENDIXFBibliographyBenson D.
show all

Enmore Park Plan of Management - Land

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?