Evaluation 3 Evaluation Date: 30 May, 2012. Evaluators: Claudia Green. Committee Summary: As previously noted there is considerable variation in growth between the trees growing along the edge of the multistory car-park and those growing in the street cutouts. The car-park trees are nearly twice the size of those growing in the cutouts suggesting that there is a significant difference in the growing conditions of these two locations although it is unclear what factors are the cause of this difference. The car park trees have achieved considerable growth and are contributing significantly to the shading and screening of the car park area and the overall appearance of this street. All trees have been heavily mulched but the soil beneath is very dry. Without adequate water, mulch can actually create hydrophobic conditions which makes it very difficult for water to penetrate the soil. The car-park tree evaluated was the second to the right of the statue, the cutout tree was directly opposite. Management Inputs: All trees mulched heavily with woodchips. Maintenance Requirements: Address hydrophobic soil with soil wetters and conditioners, consider irrigation to re-wet soil, address mottled leaves by checking nutrient levels in soil and addressing any deficiencies/toxicities. Consider additional care for trees in cutouts.

Evaluation 2 Evaluation Date: 2 May, 2007. Evaluators: Ian Rogers, Nick Archer, Ian Brown. Committee Summary: There is two plantings of this species on this site. One is in the large cut out opposite the church and the other in the borders along the car park wall. This has produced a contrasting result. Container Size: 45 litre. Planting Date: Winter 2001 & 02.

Evaluation 1 Evaluation Date: 10 Nov, 2003. Evaluators: Nick Archer, Stewart Campbell, Mick Dalton, Meg Jones. Committee Summary: These Olives are showing good establishment rates and reasonable extension growth in an environment with a lot of reflected heat, however a second season of irrigation may have improved this further. Weed control will an issue at this site. Container Size: 45 Litre. Planting Date: Winter 2001 & Winter 2002. Management Inputs: Irrigated for 1 year. Maintenance Requirements: Mulch would be beneficial. Formative pruning in future years.

Evaluation 3 Evaluation Date: 25 May, 2012. Evaluators: Claudia Green. Committee Summary: These trees show good, dense growth but have been pruned hard below powerlines which has affected their overall shape. Trees are producing lots of upright growth which will have to be pruned regularly to maintain size. Management Inputs: Pruned hard below powerlines. Maintenance Requirements: Continue to prune below powerlines but manage for more aesthetic shape.

Evaluation 2 Evaluation Date: 9 Jan, 2009. Evaluators: Gary Smith and Leanne Gillies. Committee Summary: Overall a successful planting. The trees are well established and have plenty of new growth. Some of the trees are beginning to produce fruit. Management Inputs: Canopy raising has been completed.

Evaluation 1 Evaluation Date: 23 Feb, 2005. Evaluators: Stewart Campbell, Sarah Nunn, Tim Hart and David Grant. Committee Summary: This is the second evaluation of Oleas on the AUSTEP web site, these plantings are now relatively common in areas like Hume with their southern European population. This evaluation however is Olea europea 'Tolleys Upright', apparently a low fruiting variety. Container Size: 30 cm. Planting Date: 2003. Maintenance Requirements: Like all plantings at Hume, these trees received regular watering every fourteen days during the summer months. However it was noted, that additional watering of the Oleas may overcome the slight foliage discolouration.

IMPORTANT NOTE:
Information contained herein is presented for information purposes only with the sole intention of providing a forum for general information sharing relating to the urban street tree evaluation undertaken and observed by a number of participants and interested third parties. All information is believed to be correct and is the result of private enquiries and experiences and is given in good faith and, as such, the accuracy of this information is not warranted in any way. The information on this site is current at the date of publication but may be subject to change without notice. AUSTEP® and every person / party associated with the production of or contribution to this website disclaims all liability for loss suffered as a result of reliance on the matters set out in this document. Any user of this information should seek their own independent advice. Please refer to the 'Terms of Use' on this website (http://www.austep.net.au/terms_of_use.asp).