You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Wallangarra White Gum’ tag.

Wallangarra White Gum to be removed outside 1 Park Rd Marrickville

Marrickville Council has put up notification that they want to remove a Wallangarra White Gum (Eucalyptus scoparia) outside 1 Park Road, Marrickville (actually on Addison Road).

Reason for removal:

  • An independent arborist’s aerial assessment identified the subject tree as having an open cavity on its main stem at 4 metres above the ground.
  • Resistograph testing found that decay associated with the cavity accounts for 73% of the diameter of the stem at the point of testing & consequently the residual soundwood at this point constitutes 27% of the stem wall.
  • Stem failure potential has been established at starting in the range of 35-30% residual hardwood, with the frequency of failure increasing from 30% & lower. Therefore a stem with a residual soundwood shell of 27% presents a significant & unacceptable risk of stem failure.
  • Stem breakage would result in the tree falling onto Addison Rd, resulting in the possibility of serious injury or damage to persons or property.

It is great that Council is providing detailed information for the tree removal & that they are removing trees that are not healthy & for good reason.

It is obvious this tree is in decline & presents a significant risk of falling.  It’s a shame

Area of rot in the Gum at 1 Park Rd Marrickville

because it is a lovely tall tree & has a circumference of at least 3.5 metres.   It does have a considerable lean over Addison Road.

Council will replace this tree with a Spotted Gum (Corymbia maculata) though they don’t indicate when they will do this.

The deadline for submissions is 23 July 2010.  I will not be putting in a submission.  Thank you to Council for fixing up the link quickly.

We also went to have a look at the 2 Casuarinas that are to be removed so Sydney Water can repair a main water pipe.  They are nice mature trees & it’s a shame they have to go.  However, the Norfolk Island Pines (Araucaria heterophylia) that line the road to Tempe Reserve are close by & replacing these Casuarinas will be a better fit in the scheme of this area.

Almost gone, these 2 Casuarinas will be removed from Tempe Reserve

Wallangarra White Gum outside 19 Audley Street Petersham

Marrickville Council intends to remove a Eucalyptus scoparia (Wallangarra White Gum) outside 19 Audley Street Petersham.

They give the following reasons:

  • Extensive internal decay caused by Phellinus fungal decay pathogen. The presence of this pathogen is evidenced by numerous ‘bracket’ fruiting bodies along the trunk of the subject tree. There is no cure for this parasitic fungal pathogen & trees affected will eventually fail due to the reduction in strength of the heartwood caused by the spread of the pathogen.
  • Extensive basal decay which has predisposed the tree to predictable failure due to hollowing & reduction in strength of heartwood.
  • Extensive dieback of canopy & excessive epicormic shoot growth indicating extreme/ terminal levels of physiological stress.

They intend to replace it with an Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum), but don’t say when they plan to plant this tree.

I went to visit the tree today.  It has been poorly pruned in the past with many thick branches on one

The dark half-moon shape is a fungus. There are a number of these along the trunk

side removed & leans as a result.  The tree is quite tall, at least 10 metres & has a lot of foliage at the lower third of the trunk. The upper part of the tree has extensive die-off, which has been happening for a number of years.  The ‘bracket’ fruiting bodies are clearly visible on the trunk & start at an area that looks to me like a past major injury.  This tree is not in good condition & I agree with Council that it should be removed.  I hope they do not wait too long before they plant the replacement tree.

I am pleased to say that once again Council used sticky-tape to attach the notices of removal on the tree & both were still attached.  This looks to be a permanent change away from the practice of nailing the notices, so I thank Council for this. I also thank Council for giving detailed information explaining why the tree should be removed.  This is also a positive & inclusive change.

The deadline for submissions is 23rd June 2010. I will not be putting in a submission.

On 19th March, the following 3 street trees were put up on Marrickville Council’s web-site for removal.

1. Mature Corymbia citriodora (Lemon Scented Gum) outside 11 Union Street Dulwich Hill.  This tree was the first campaign for SoT in June last year.  At that time Council said the problem was ‘whole tree failure’ which I & other members of the community disputed.

showing the recent splits & the 'bleeding' from the nails which were hammered in last June 2009 - using a wide angle lens makes the tree appear taller than it is

The outcome was Council surveyed the tree & intended to monitor to see if the lean increased.  Their report says a lot has happened to this tree since then.

This time they say: Asymmetric root–plate development due to restrictive growth environment. (as does a huge percentage of mature trees in Marrickville LGA due to failure to remove cement from around their trunks), buttressing of the base of the tree over the adjacent kerb.  This predisposes the tree to wind-throw in extreme weather conditions.  There is also a risk of whole tree failure if the kerb collapses. Extensive structural root & crown decay in the plane of compressive stress.  This condition is compounded by the tree exhibiting a moderate lean in the plane of decay.  The decay has been caused by the presence of the naturally occurring fungal decay pathogen Armilaria leuteobubalina.  The tree is exposed to south-easterly winds in the direction of lean & in the plane of decay.  This is compounded by the tree exhibiting an asymmetric canopy, with the majority of the canopy being present in the direction of the lean of the tree (what does Council think of all the masses of asymmetric trees which have been made this way by Energy Australia?)  Severance of structural roots on the windward side of the tree as a result of excavations undertaken by Sydney Water.

I interpret the above as: this tree is likely to fall over if there is an extreme weather event, especially if the wind comes from a south-easterly direction or if the sandstone kerb collapses.  The tree has been placed at risk because Sydney Water severed its structural roots.  Finally, the tree has caught a fungal disease & this sews up the argument for removal.  As this fungus stays in the ground for a while, Council will not replace the tree for 2 years. Council does not say what species the replacement will be.

I went to have a look at this tree & its condition has really changed.  In my opinion it needs to go.  I can’t identify Armilaria leuteobubalina, but I can tell when a tree is deteriorating & this one is.  It has recently developed 2 large vertical splits in its trunk that regardless of the other things afflicting this tree, indicate its demise.

Its loss is going to have a dramatic affect on the streetscape as it cascades beautifully over Union Street & is clearly visible from the café on the corner.  The deadline for submissions is 2nd April 2010.

2. The second street tree is a Eucalyptus scoparia (Wallangarra White Gum) outside 70 Railway Street Petersham.  Council’s report says:  Extensive stem decay & is at risk of

showing the decay & damage by borers

breakage. No disagreement from me with this tree.  It looks like it has or had borers & they entered via a newly cut branch.

I am pleased to note that Council says they will replace it with a Lemon Scented Gum.  I do know a number of Petersham residents who are worried that Council will remove their Gums.  (I just realised how this reads like & will leave it for a bit of fun).  Put in a way that does not sound like dental work, residents fear that Council will remove the Eucalypts, so replacement with a tall growing Eucalypt will please many.  The deadline for submissions is 9th April 2010.

3.  The third tree required a certain amount of sleuthing on my part to locate because I failed to notice the word ‘adjacent.’  This is another Eucalyptus scoparia (Wallangarra

massive damage to this tree as well as termites

White Gum).  It sits in a lovely little space between 2 types of stairs (ordinary/normal stairs & thrill-seeker/kill off your granny stairs – see photo in this post) that connect Day Street with Hampden Avenue.  There are a number of mature trees in this little triangle of dirt.

Council’s report says: Extensive column decay in trunk. Termite activity evident. Again, both these were easy to see.  I also think the people who live in the house directly next to & below this particular tree may breath a sigh of relief when it goes.  They may have held their breath through a few storms, worried that it would crash on their house.  I know I would have.  Council will replace this tree with a Eucalyptus microcorys (Tallow Wood), which will be nice.  The deadline for submissions is 9th April 2010.

I was enormously pleased to see that Marrickville Council had used wide sticky tape to fasten the ‘notice of removal’ signs on all 3 trees.  Thank you for doing this.  This is a big

The ramp on the right is very steep - I assume it was used when the quarry across the road was active

change from previous practice of nailing in the signs & seems more effective because all 6 signs are still in place.

I was also very pleased to note the more detailed information provided with the ‘notification for removal.’  Although I recognise this takes more time for Council staff, it helps them in the long run because the community does not have to guess why the trees are up for removal.  All 3 notifications & especially the one in Union Street gave clear & descriptive reasons.  Coupled with the use of tape instead of nails, this is a great improvement & goes to generating goodwill.

Apparently the period for submissions for public trees is 14 days, not 21 as we have experienced throughout the latter half of 2009.  Council says they allow 21 days for submissions if the tree is significant in some way.  14 days doesn’t allow much time, but if we are organised, it can be done.  It also means that I cannot be slow in noticing new trees for removal on their web-site.

I am not going to put in a submission for any of the current trees as I believe they all should be removed.

click here to follow Saving Our Trees on Twitter

Archives

Categories

© Copyright

Using and copying text and photographs is not permitted without my permission.

Blog Stats

  • 302,670 hits
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 92 other followers

%d bloggers like this: