Tree root zone vs excavator luke 23 : 34

[gink595]

It looks like a utility ditch to me, water, sewer or gas line??? Sometimes trees aren't in the plan. I hate it when they do that kind of work down city streets and take out all the big old trees, makes you sick. Glad I'm not he property owners sometimes

[derwoodii]

Many thanks your replies special to Glen. As summed up by Smc, I was very humbled. The fence is over the top brick work and steel. Why, dunno just is. The footing is high end of design needs. Why dunno?? Its loam sand here no reactive clays & we don't get perma frost in sunny ozzyland.
Outofmy the E nicholii (Willow Peppermint) over this side seem opposite to yours. Soft easy predictable fast growing short lived garden planting of the 1970-80ies. Ive soxed heaps wrong planted or end of life . They are kinda of a money tree for us here. Happy to further explore this.

[outofmytree]

Ahhh, now it becomes clear.

They installed the steel pickets to catch the trees that will fall over after they cut the roots to install the footing that supports the wall that includes the pickets.... I need another drink.

[outofmytree]

Originally Posted by derwoodii

E nicholii (Willow Peppermint) over this side seem opposite to yours. Soft easy predictable fast growing short lived garden planting of the 1970-80ies. Ive soxed heaps wrong planted or end of life . They are kinda of a money tree for us here. Happy to further explore this.

Interesting. Fast growing to what height for you guys?

We get maybe 20 metres but it takes 30 years or so to get there. Oldest stable tree I have personally worked on was 40 yo, lasered at 18 metres, dbh 1 metre. It reminded me of Agonis flexuosa (Weeping peppermint) in bark texture, leaf shape and of course the "minty" smell when crushed. This was the first I climbed so I was quite surprised at how the wood was both heavy and snapped off quickly before the top cut married up with the undercut.

What sort of annual rainfall do you get where you live?

[derwoodii]

Now your and my descriptions are starting to line up. I reckon we got the right species only difference was our perception of its handling. I was thrown by your view of it timber heavy not reliable foliage dense. I started thinking about Sugar gums. But once you added 20 metres 30 years Agonis flexuosa bark texture leaf shape and of course the "minty" smell I got on the same page.
Im in Mornington peninsula area we used to get 600 - 800mm now lucky if we see 400-500 things are getting very drought bad here 27% in city dams.

Been busy? News says get your saws sharp and fueled
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/tr...0909-fhhn.html

A tree has crushed a house south-east of Perth as a storm bears down on Perth - with the worst of the front expected to hit the city this evening. SES volunteers from Armadale have arrived at the Mann Place home to help clear the damage.

[outofmytree]

Curse those SES volunteers!

I was out in that stuff today. Forecast was for wind gusts to 120kph so we got into it fast. 7 Cocos palms and a modest Lawson cypress on the ground in 58 minutes. Between downpours it took another 4 hours to clean em up.

I dunno why but we get very little post storm damage to clean up... ah well. More palms tomorrow. Don't like em as trees but they pay the bills!

[derwoodii]

Some more pics that capture communication failure.
282 & 283 are behind a tree protection site fence specifically signed & labeled on plans as, no go zone. "Will this be a problem for the trees" asked the site Foreman??
309 was a great effort to protect some bitumen whilst killing a tree. The directional boring blokes were truly disappointed when I suggested that they kinda missed any objective of tree root protection.

[Ekka]

From August 2009 AS4970 has been out in Australia.

I suggest all Australians get a copy and LGA's conform to it unless deviation with evidence and supportive analysis from a suitably qualified and experienced arborist supports it.

There is a chart for SRZ's as well as CRZ's, in both cases shown here the SRZ's have been breached.

In the first case the tree appears to be council owned, i have worked on sites where this has happened and the council has been of the opinion that if the tree survives all good, if it dies and they remove so what, would have got removed anyway. Council then place the tree on the regular inspection schedule and check on it, perhaps prune it to mitigate hazard. I see in the first case what appears to be collar cuts for removing lower branches, likely to interfere with the fence. Seemed it was a considered event.

Sometimes the tree simply doesn't warrant the additional expenses of design and building, it's an economical stance that's taken, the wall presides, the tree stays or goes.

What may be overlooked is the long term uprooting. When in 10 years+ time the tree blows over and there's been a 100% staff turnover including the councillors so records and knowledge is lost.... but the evidence will remain.

[treeseer]

Originally Posted by derwoodii

Some more pics that capture communication failure.
282 & 283 are behind a tree protection site fence specifically signed & labeled on plans as, no go zone. "Will this be a problem for the trees" asked the site Foreman??

In one case a contractor took down a fence to trench, tree died, contractor was out $20,000+.

[outofmytree]

Originally Posted by derwoodii

Some more pics that capture communication failure.
282 & 283 are behind a tree protection site fence specifically signed & labeled on plans as, no go zone. "Will this be a problem for the trees" asked the site Foreman??
309 was a great effort to protect some bitumen whilst killing a tree. The directional boring blokes were truly disappointed when I suggested that they kinda missed any objective of tree root protection.

Sigh. It doesn't look good for those Eucs does it.

I was going to start a thread for these pics but I will piggy back yours instead Derwoodii.





I called the building company to ask if they had a copy of AS4970 or if indeed they even knew what it was and got a "don't call us we'll call you" push off.

This Corymbia citriodora is over 25m high and easily 35m in canopy width. There was paint, plaster, mortar and (at a guess) lime poured at the base of this tree. Short of drilling holes in the trunk and pouring in Round up I am not sure how much worse these people could have made the situation.

It is true that they came close to preserving the RPZ (9x1.5m=13.5m) but that is small consideration when you see all that garbage piled around it leeching directly into the soil.

I don't know who is responsible for this mess......




Oops. How did that photo get in there....

This may seem like small potatoes but we are losing major trees to development hand over fist in WA. This suburb (Peppermint Grove) is amongst the most expensive real estate here and it looks as though the owner of the building wanted this tree preserved. This block, (just the land) would be worth 1.5 to 2.5 million. The tree has many good cuts showing evidence of professional care for years even decades but all that may be undone because builders still see trees as a place to park the truck under while the unload bricks.

[treeseer]

if they are building it on spec the buyer better beware...

If they are building it on order then maybe the buyer can be found and oops get a mailing of info on tree care...

[derwoodii]

In my last post behind a tree pictured is bill board exulting the development looks featuring the trees that they had just mutilated as a sale piece.
That grand looking but mistreated Cor cit from Outofmy I would suggest will feature in plans and sales brochure eh..
AS4970 is a great doc, bit big n wordy so sadly seldom is seen in site sheds as it has no bikini girls on the cover.. Hey, that's an idea Tree Roots AS4970 pictures of girls then segue to show tradie build blokes the facts of tree roots zone, could only try could do nay harm.

[outofmytree]

Actually thats not a bad idea Guy. I could drop a letter in to the mail box in a few months time with photo's attached. At very least the new owners will be forewarned if not forearmed.

Derwoodii I share you cynicism of AS4970. Not of the document itself, but rather the likelyhood of anyone other than guys like us reading and following it. Maybe on large construction sites but on individual homes ... pffft.

Reminds me of a pruning job I did on an E.globulus about 6 months ago. I am in the canopy removing deadwood and a couple of poorly formed branches and next door are 3 or 4 carpenters with nail guns framing a house. No ear,eye,head or foot PPE. No nailgun signage, no clear fire zone behind the work area, no fall arrest harnesses and no railings around the roof. That, I am afraid, is the all too common standard on small building sites in WA at least.

[Ekka]

Originally Posted by outofmytree

It is true that they came close to preserving the RPZ (9x1.5m=13.5m) but that is small consideration when you see all that garbage piled around it leeching directly into the soil.

If you actually bought a copy rather than be a scab using the draft you'd know the standard mandates 12 X DBH not 9.

Originally Posted by outofmytree

This may seem like small potatoes but we are losing major trees to development hand over fist in WA. This suburb (Peppermint Grove) is amongst the most expensive real estate here and it looks as though the owner of the building wanted this tree preserved. This block, (just the land) would be worth 1.5 to 2.5 million. The tree has many good cuts showing evidence of professional care for years even decades but all that may be undone because builders still see trees as a place to park the truck under while the unload bricks.

Highly assumptive, the owner might or might not want the tree.

The tree may be protected or it may not be.

Fact is you don't know but you have tarred these people as if you do.

In many instances builders have to build a home but dont pay for or do the block clearing. Sometimes when a tree can be cleared the owner doesn't do it and if it's not in the builders way they wont clear it either.

I have been involved in disputes where a driveway to the street had a gum tree sitting smack bang in the middle, the builder cant put the driveway in and the owner refuses to pay the $1500 removal cost for the tree. The builder states again that they dont own the land and it has to be cleared at the clients cost for the driveway to go in, the scabby client in debt to his ears refuses to pay and says he bought the "package" and the builder should pay for the removal of the tree.

You have failed to establish context but draw conclusion easily.

There's 4 potential scenarios ....


1/ If the tree were protected and the council failed to provide the TMP in the DA approval then the builder would get off easily.

2/ The tree is protected and TMP's were provided and the builder ignored ... a fine coming.

3/ If the tree is not protected but the client does want to retain then it's a civil case for damages between the client and the builder, however without clear TMP's in place prior it would again be hard for the client.

4/ Tree will be removed later when client arranges, "just get the house built for now".

[outofmytree]

If you actually bought a copy rather than be a scab using the draft you'd know the standard mandates 12 X DBH not 9.

That will teach me to proofread!

Highly assumptive.

Correct, It is highly assumptive of you to draw conclusions from 3 photographs. But it's what I like about you Ekka. Always willing to open your mouth and put both feet in at the same time.

The tree may be protected or it may not be.

Fact is you don't know but you have tarred these people as if you do.

So either it is protected and they are breaching the standard, or it isnt protected and they are creating a hazard. Either way the photographs show poor conduct on what should a show piece site.

So do YOU think what was done here is right??

Or is it just that posting photo's of bad work is immoral? Better not use this link then.http://www.overclockers.com.au/wiki/...ke_photographs

Oh wait. You already did.