How many offsite trees (within a woodland) to include in 5837

[Gary Prentice]

I'm in the process of writing a 5837. The site location plan I have been provided with doesn't include a small woodland to one side of the site (so it's part of the property but distant from the construction area.

 

When I did the assessment, I identified the significant trees - those whose canopies and RPAs extended significantly over the site boundary/line on the plan.

 

The trees that I've measured, being largely the biggest will provide the calculations for the TPP (so the smaller trees RPAs and canopies will be well inside the fencing)

 

I've explained my reasoning for not recording every off-site tree and I think it's reasonable to do it this way. Recording everything would have quadrupled the length of the report and cost, only to provide unnecessary information.

 

Now I'm wondering if I'm correct or not? Comments, good or bad, welcome

[Arborist]

That's the way I was taught to do the tech cert exam and that was with trees on the site. If on the edge take the larger trees that will encompass the smaller.

[Gary Prentice]

It seemed logical when I was on site, then I started reading the standard and started to concern myself:biggrin:

:thumbup1:

[sloth]

That's generally how I do it most of the time, use the largest trees for RPAs and indicate the overall canopy edge, then roughly extrapolate the RPAs across in line to join up. Or if there are no significantly larger trees I'll take a few measurements to work out a mean average, then whatever the radius of the RPA is will become the distance from the tree line I plot as the RPA. I've justify my reasons for either method in the AIA and haven't had a problem with this to date...

Of course the above only applies when construction is near a woodland /group of trees. If construction activities are to be within the trees you would I think need to be fussy and particular...

Edited May 28, 2017 by sloth

[Gary Prentice]

That's generally how I do it most of the time, use the largest trees for RPAs and indicate the overall canopy edge, then roughly extrapolate the RPAs across in line to join up. Or if there are no significantly larger trees I'll take a few measurements to work out a mean average, then whatever the radius of the RPA is will become the distance from the tree line I plot as the RPA. I've justify my reasons for either method in the AIA and haven't had a problem with this to date...

Of course the above only applies when construction is near a woodland /group of trees. If construction activities are to be within the trees you would I think need to be fussy and particular...

 

That would be a whole different ballgame entirely.

 

I think whoever drew the site location plan, showing the site boundaries had this in mind - just to justify the position of fencing to protect the woodland. I can't check now and have to get it delivered on tuesday morning.

 

Thank you both.

[Gary Prentice]

Rather than start a new thread.

 

What's the proper approach when titling drawings. I've got the topographic from the surveyer, frozen everything I don't want, plotted the trees, canopy spreads, RPAs and fencing.

 

I want to change the existing Title blocks/legends etc for information on the drawing (my additions) what do people do?

 

Leave all the surveyors details on -name & contact information, and add your own.

Or delete their theirs entirely?

 

What's the normal procedure or protocol, because I assume their are some copyright issues involved.

[sloth]

I use pear's mapper, so any dwg file has to be converted to dxf first which tends to feck with title bits etc. In any case I add all my own titles etc, but acknowledge the source of the base map (including original drawing name/revision etc if appropriate). If you are concerned about copyright just give the producer of the original a call. I normally need to anyway to ask for the file as a dxf, I tell them what for and have never been refused permission...

[Jon Heuch]

What's the normal procedure or protocol, because I assume their are some copyright issues involved.

 

 

You have to produce a plan that is clear and gets your "message" across - whatever item(s) your plan is designed to show. It's almost impossible to include ALL received information on your plan without mucking up your plan so turn off what you don't need and put your label on.

 

In terms of copyright there are a variety of issues which simply put are probably well beyond your paygrade:

 

1) the baseplan has probably come from OS; the OS copyright might be time limited; you may be given the OS licence number for reproduction or it might have disappeared in the design process.

 

2) the topographic survey company may have issued some copyright restriction to its client but it would be a stupid client who hadn't insisted on a licence agreement to use the survey for his site.....so it should be a matter for your client (whoever that is.....you may not know!)

 

3) other companies/people may have added layers/information and they may have added templates/information. I have never come across anyone worried about copyright in terms of use of the information for the immediate project. If you were to copy a design across to some other project it would be a different matter.

 

You can acknowledge other's inputs in your report but i don't think you need to specifically include them on the plan. My template has a box for "reliant on..." or similar but this is more for a version number rather than an acknowledgement of copyright.

 

Things become more complex when the developer changes and a new developer may have inheritied/"bought" reports from the previous developer. That is one reason why letters of reliance are required/requested and so the new developer does not have to start from scratch.

 

Jon

[Gary Prentice]

You have to produce a plan that is clear and gets your "message" across - whatever item(s) your plan is designed to show. It's almost impossible to include ALL received information on your plan without mucking up your plan so turn off what you don't need and put your label on.

 

In terms of copyright there are a variety of issues which simply put are probably well beyond your paygrade:

 

1) the baseplan has probably come from OS; the OS copyright might be time limited; you may be given the OS licence number for reproduction or it might have disappeared in the design process.

 

2) the topographic survey company may have issued some copyright restriction to its client but it would be a stupid client who hadn't insisted on a licence agreement to use the survey for his site.....so it should be a matter for your client (whoever that is.....you may not know!)

 

3) other companies/people may have added layers/information and they may have added templates/information. I have never come across anyone worried about copyright in terms of use of the information for the immediate project. If you were to copy a design across to some other project it would be a different matter.

 

You can acknowledge other's inputs in your report but i don't think you need to specifically include them on the plan. My template has a box for "reliant on..." or similar but this is more for a version number rather than an acknowledgement of copyright.

 

Things become more complex when the developer changes and a new developer may have inheritied/"bought" reports from the previous developer. That is one reason why letters of reliance are required/requested and so the new developer does not have to start from scratch.

 

Jon

 

 

 

I worry about everything Jon.

 

Thanks for your reply, one less thing to concern myself with.

 

Gary

[daltontrees]

In my fee proposals to clients I specify that it is conditional on being provided with a topo survey and right to use for the project. If I adapt or adopt drawings I say that on the plan or in the report. Seems to cover all eventualities.