TPO Requests - January 26 RevA - FINAL
Renfrewshire Council · 20 January 2026
Back to Planning and Climate Change Policy Board — 20 January 2026 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
PUBLIC ___________________________________________________________________ To: Planning and Climate Change Policy Board On: 20 January 2026 ___________________________________________________________________ Report by: Chief Executive ___________________________________________________________________ Heading: Tree Preservation Order Requests ___________________________________________________________________ 1. Summary 1.1 This report seeks to provide an update to the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) requests which were considered at previous meetings of the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board. 1.2 In addition, this report also seeks to respond to requests to apply a TPO designation to various sites throughout Renfrewshire. 1.3 The requests submitted are considered in line with the relevant legislation, namely, Section 160 of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006, and within the procedures set out in the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation Order and Trees in Conservation Areas) (Scotland) Regulations 2011. ___________________________________________________________________ 2. Recommendations 2.1 It is recommended that the Board: (i) Note that the TPO designation agreed at the meeting of the Planning and Climate Change Board in August 2025 in respect of the site at Braids Road, Paisley is currently subject to a period of public consultation. The TPO designation as it applies to the site will be returned to a future meeting of the Planning and Climate Change Policy board for confirmation or otherwise of the order.
Page 2
PUBLIC (ii) Approve the need for a tree preservation order in respect of trees at Hollybush and agree that officers proceed to prepare the order, serve it on relevant parties and make the order available to the public and seek representations. (iii) Note that an assessment was undertaken of a tree at 35 Haining Road, Renfrew and that the tree in question was found not to meet the criteria for a tree preservation order. (iv) Note that an assessment was undertaken of trees at a site at Inchinnan Business Park and that the trees in question were found not to meet the criteria for a tree preservation order. (v) Approve the need for a tree preservation order in respect of a tree at Paisley Grammar and agree that officers proceed to prepare the order, serve it on relevant parties and make the order available to the public and seek representations. (vi) Note that an assessment was undertaken of trees at a site at Ladyacres Way, Inchinnan and that the trees in question were found not to meet the criteria for a tree preservation order. _________________________________________________________ 3. Tree at Braids Road, Paisley 3.1 At the meeting of the Planning and Climate Change Policy board in August 2025 it was agreed that a TPO designation would be placed on a tree at Braids Road, Paisley. 3.2 In respect of the site in question and in line with the Renfrewshire Planning and Development Tree Policy 2022, and the relevant legislation relating to Tree Preservation Orders, Officers have undertaken the following: ▪ Prepared the relevant orders and made them available online for review; ▪ Served the orders on relevant parties including landowners; ▪ Published public notices in the local press advising of the orders; and ▪ Provided an opportunity for comments to be made by any interested party in relation to either of the orders. 3.3 The 28 day consultation period has not yet concluded and as such interested parties are still able to make comment on the orders. 3.4 Following the conclusion of the consultation period any comments received will be considered and a further report brought back to a future meeting of the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board to confirm or otherwise the tree preservation orders. ___________________________________________________________________
Page 3
PUBLIC 4. TPO Requests Trees at Hollybush 4.1 A request for a tree preservation order has been received in respect of a group of trees at a site known as Hollybush, located to the south west of Dykebar Hospital. 4.2 A TEMPO assessment of the woodland has been undertaken in respect of the site by an independent arboriculturist. 4.3 The assessment notes the principal tree species on site include oak, beech, ash and sycamore with the dominant tree species being oak which reproduces freely at the site. In addition, the reports notes that all age ranges are present which ensures a good supply of successor trees. 4.4 The majority of the sycamores and beeches present on site are found to be veteran trees which appear to be of planted origin and not freely reproducing although some young, self-sown sycamores are identified. 4.5 The report notes that one mature beech tree was found to be extensively decayed while another has an advanced infection by decay fungus. In addition most of the ash trees on site were found to be suffering to a greater or lesser extent from the fungal infection known as ash dieback. 4.6 Notwithstanding the above, the report notes that otherwise the overall quality of the tree cover is fair to good, with abundant new growth arising where conditions allow. 4.7 The site achieved a TEMPO score of 33 indicating that it definitely merits the making of a woodland Tree Preservation Order. The report also notes that any future order should be made to include ‘mixed hardwoods consisting mainly of Pedunculate oak’. 4.8 A copy of the assessment undertaken is detailed as Background Paper 1 as attached to this report. 4.9 In light of the above it is recommended that a TPO designation is progressed in relation to the woodland in question. Tree at 35 Haining Road, Renfrew 4.10 A request for a tree preservation order has been received in respect of a tree at 35 Haining Road, Renfrew. 4.11 A TEMPO assessment of the tree has been undertaken in respect of the site by an independent arboriculturist. 4.12 The tree is found to be a semi mature Copper Beech tree which is growing within the rear garden of 35 Haining Road, Renfrew towards the rear boundary.
Page 4
PUBLIC The tree is of a spreading form with a multi-stemmed crown developing above a single stem. 4.13 The report notes that the crown vigour appears to be normal and overall the tree appears to be in satisfactory health and good structural condition with no obvious defects. 4.14 The tree achieved a TEMPO score of 13 indicating that should there be a threat to the tree a Tree Preservation Order would be defensible. 4.15 Notwithstanding the above, the independent arboriculturist report notes that when making a TPO consideration should also be given to the necessity and expediency of making the tree subject of an order. It is understood from the TPO request (by the property owner) that the perceived threat to the tree in question is not from felling but from actions taken by third parties to cut back branches and entering the property to carry out such work without the owners permission. 4.16 In light of the above, the independent reports also notes the following: Under Common Law (i.e. without a TPO in place), neighbours have a right to prune back any tree branches or roots crossing the boundary line (although they may not enter the property to do so). This right does not apply where a tree is subject to a TPO or in a Conservation Area, where such works normally require the formal consent of the Local Planning Authority. However under Section 160(6) (b) of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006, felling or lopping of trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order is exempt from the need for formal consent if the work is necessary for the prevention or abatement of a nuisance. Whether or not the encroachment of branches constitutes nuisance in the legal sense is a matter for a solicitor, not an arboriculturist. Mere encroachment is not, in itself, considered to be an actionable nuisance in the legal sense. However if a tree is having an unreasonably detrimental effect on the living conditions of neighbours and restricts their full use and enjoyment of their properties, that could be regarded as being a nuisance and the neighbours could proceed without the need for formal consent. That would make a TPO pointless if it's purpose was solely to prevent such action. It would also be inappropriate use of the legislation and be bad practice on the part of the Council. Even if the neighbours were to make a formal application to the Council and have the consent refused, they would almost certainly win on appeal to the Scottish Ministers. Unauthorised entry into the property to carry out pruning without the owners permission would be a criminal act, regardless of whether or not a TPO is in force. The correct course of action in such a case would be to call the police, not the Council. 4.17 In all regards, the TEMPO scoring is noted and it would be appropriate to make the tree subject of a TPO if it was under threat of being felled. Given that there
Page 5
PUBLIC is no such threat it is recommended that it would not be expedient for the Council to make an order. 4.18 A copy of the assessment undertaken is detailed as Background Paper 2 as attached to this report. 4.19 In light of the above it is recommended that a TPO designation is not progressed in relation to the tree in question. Inchinnan Business Park 4.20 Trees at a site at Inchinnan Business Park were considered at the August 2025 meeting of the Planning and Climate Change Policy Board. It was agreed to continue the request to enable clarification to be sought in respect of the TEMPO assessment in respect of the management of the site. 4.21 The independent arboriculturist who undertook the assessment has confirmed that they consider the site to be managed on behalf of Scottish Enterprise (the landowners) and therefore the site is not unmanaged. 4.22 In light of the above, a further independent assessment was undertaken by a different arboriculturist. 4.23 The TEMPO assessment was undertaken of the woodland in question. 4.24 The woodland is found to comprise a species mix of predominantly broadleaf including alder, ash, birch, hazel, oak, poplar, sycamore and willow. In addition, a handful of conifers are also noted. 4.25 The report notes that the woodland was originally planted as a shelterbelt and appears to have had minimum intervention in recent years with substantial natural regeneration throughout the woodland. 4.26 The site achieved a TEMPO score of 6 indicating that imposing a Tree Preservation Order on the woodland would be indefensible. 4.27 A copy of the assessment undertaken is detailed as Background Paper 3 as attached to this report. 4.28 In light of the above it is recommended that a TPO designation is not progressed in relation to the woodland in question. Tree at Paisley Grammar School 4.29 A request for a Tree Preservation Order has been received in respect of a tree within the grounds of Paisley Grammar. 4.30 A TEMPO assessment of the tree has been undertaken in respect of the site by an independent arboriculturist.
Page 6
PUBLIC 4.31 The tree is found to be a Turkey Oak located within the playground of Paisley Grammar School close to the eastern boundary and overhanging Crossflat Crescent. 4.32 The tree is estimated to be of a height around 23 metres with an average crown radius of 12 metres and a trunk diameter of around 1 metre. 4.33 The overall health and vitality of the tree is found to be good for its age and maturity. The tree has a predicted safe future life expectancy of over 40 years. 4.34 The tree achieved a TEMPO score of 22 indicating that it definitely merits a Tree Preservation Order. 4.35 A copy of the assessment undertaken is detailed as Background Paper 4 as attached to this report. 4.36 In light of the above it is recommended that a TPO designation is progressed in relation to the tree in question. Woodland at Ladyacres Way, Inchinnan 4.37 A request for a Tree Preservation Order has been received in respect of a woodland located adjacent to Ladyacres Way, Inchinnan. 4.38 A TEMPO assessment of the tree has been undertaken in respect of the site by an independent arboriculturist. 4.39 The woodland is found to consist of a relatively young shelterbelt of mostly native broadleaved species panted to screen the residential development at Ladyacres Way. The woodland consists of pole stage goat willow, common alder, silver birch, ash, rowan and a few Noray spruce. 4.40 The independent arboriculturist commented as follows in respect of the woodland: Many of the trees have been roughly reduced in height by 'topping' or pollarding, presumably to contain their size due to light blockage and/or a perception that they were getting too large for their location close to residential properties and gardens. Unfortunately the reduction work has not been carried out in a sympathetic or professional manner, and most of the trees which have been treated in this way are of species unsuited to the practice. As a result, their amenity value and future life expectancies have been severely diminished. In addition, many trees have suffered breakage or failure in storms, and most of the ash are infected by the fungus Hymenoscyphus fraxineus which causes Chalara Ash Dieback. As a result, there are very few individual trees present which have good future life expectancies. 4.41 The woodland achieved a TEMPO score of 5 indicating that a Tree Preservation Order would be indefensible.
Page 7
PUBLIC 4.42 In light of the above it is recommended that a TPO designation is not progressed in relation to the woodland in question. ___________________________________________________________________ 5. Next Steps 5.1 Separate TPO’s are prepared in respect of the woodland at Hollybush and the tree at Paisley Grammar. Thereafter the orders will be served on the respective landowners and made available to the public for comment. 5.2 Following a period of public consultation, the TPO’s will be returned to Board to take account of any comments received and to confirm, or otherwise the orders. ___________________________________________________________________ Implications of the Report 1. Financial – None. 2. HR & Organisational Development – None. 3. Community/Council Planning – • Reshaping our place, our economy and our future – the TPO designation will offer protection to a tree and protect it in the long term for the benefit of the local area. • Creating a sustainable Renfrewshire for all to enjoy – the TPO designation will offer protection to a tree which contributes to the amenity of the local area. 4. Legal - The recommendations in the report would require tree preservation order to made in relation to the woodland in question. Should the order be confirmed it would require to be lodged with the Land Register of Scotland. 5. Property/Assets – In the event that maintenance work is required to be undertaken in respect of the tree/woodland within the ownership of the Council, permission to undertake the works would be required via the submission of a treeworks application. 6. Information Technology – None. 7. Equality & Human Rights - The Recommendations contained within this report have been assessed in relation to their impact on equalities and human rights. No negative impacts on equality groups or potential for infringement of individuals’ human rights have been identified arising from the recommendations contained in the report. If required following implementation, the actual impact of the recommendations and the mitigating actions will be reviewed and monitored, and the results of the assessment will be published on the Council’s website. 8. Health & Safety – None.
Page 8
PUBLIC 9. Procurement – None. 10. Risk – None. 11. Privacy Impact – None. 12. Climate Risk – None. 13. Children’s Rights – None. 14. Cosla Policy Position – None. _______________________________________________________ List of Background Papers (a) Background Paper 1 – TEMPO Assessment trees at Hollybush (b) Background Paper 2 – TEMPO Assessment of tree at 35 Haining Road, Renfrew (c) Background Paper 3 - TEMPO Assessment of woodland at site at Inchinnan Industrial Estate, Inchinnan (d) Background Paper 4 – TEMPO Assessment of Turkey Oak at Paisley Grammar School (e) Background Paper 5 - TEMPO Assessment of woodland at Ladyacres Way, Inchinnan ___________________________________________________________________ Author: David Love, Chief Planning Officer Tel: 07483410182; Email: david.love@renfrewshire.gov.uk
Page 9
Crownhead, Stobo, Scottish Borders, EH45 8NX t: 01721 760268 e: mail@treeconsultancygroup.com www.treeconsultancygroup.com Principal Consultant: Kenneth Harvey MICFor. M.Arbor.A. Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist Tree Consultancy Group Arboriculture - Urban Forestry - Planning 'TEMPO' ASSESSMENT OF WOODLAND AT 'HOLLYBUSH' DYKEBAR RENFREWSHIRE Client: Renfrewshire Council Date: 15th December 2025 Background Paper 1
Page 10
1 INSTRUCTIONS 1.1 We have been instructed by Mr David Love, Head of Planning at Renfrewshire Council, to assess the suitability of a site known as Hollybush, to the south-west of Dykebar Hospital, for inclusion within a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The assessment to be carried out using the TEMPO evaluation method developed by Julian Forbes-Laird MICFor. The information is required to assist with long-term planning for the area. 1.2 To assist in our appraisal, we have been supplied with a very helpful and informative report on the site prepared by Kirsty Menzies, titled "Hollybush - Ancient Woodland in need of protection" dated 21st November 2024. This thoroughly researched and well-presented work gives the historical background to the woodland, identifies the majority of the most significant trees present and extensively details the very wide range of plant, animal and bird species found. We have relied heavily on its contents and conclusions in making our assessment of the woodland and in the preparation of this report. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 A TPO suitability assessment starts with an appraisal carried out from places to which the public have access, as the purpose of protecting trees by a TPO is primarily to preserve their visual amenity in the landscape. This process involves identifying the most significant trees, groups or woodlands and then considering the expediency of making them the subjects of a TPO. 2.2 In order to be able to decide which trees are suitable for inclusion in a TPO and which aren't, the use of some kind of system is recommended to ensure, as far as possible, that selection is carried out in a fair, consistent, objective, and repeatable manner. It helps the Council explain to landowners why their trees have been included in a TPO, and also helps to avoid including large numbers of low value trees within the TPO system which the Council then has to manage. 2.3 The most widely used appraisal system developed for this purpose is the Tree Evaluation Method for Tree Preservation Orders - TEMPO. It is an easy to use field guide to decision-making which also provides a written record of the process. It is presented as a single-page pro forma, and allocates scores to various relevant criteria. When these scores are added together, it gives a total figure which informs whether the tree merits protection by a TPO and, if so, whether the making of a TPO is justifiable (i.e. defensible). As with any such system, its efficacious use is predicated on the assessor having a thorough understanding and knowledge of the subject matter. 2.4 As Woodland TPOs are essentially different in nature and intent to 'normal' TPOs, TEMPO has been produced in two forms - one for individual trees and groups of trees, and one for woodlands. In the assessment of the trees at Hollybush, we have used the woodland version. 3 SITE VISIT AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 We visited the site to carry out an assessment on 12th November 2025. The trees were assessed to establish their general condition, character, longevity and visibility in the wider area. 3.2 The tree cover was initially considered in the terms of individual trees, groups of trees and woodland as might be deemed appropriate. However, while many trees present are fully worthy of protection as individuals in their own right or as part of identifiable groups, their value was considered to be primarily as part of a collective whole along with the many younger trees of lesser Hollybush TEMPO 1125 1
Page 11
apparent value which would not be included in such designations but which will, in time, succeed the older trees. As woodlands are more than just a collection of trees and also include their associated flora and fauna, we discounted the use of individual and group designations and considered the site solely as a woodland. 4 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS 4.1 The principal tree species noted include Pedunculate oak Quercus robur, beech Fagus sylvatica, ash Fraxinus excelsior and sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus. The dominant tree species is easily Pedunculate oak, which reproduces freely at the site. All age ranges are present, ensuring a good supply of successor trees. The majority of the sycamores and beeches present are veteran trees which appear to be of planted origin and are not freely reproducing, although some young, self-sown sycamores were noted. 4.2 Most of the ash are suffering to a greater or lesser extent from the fungal infection known as Ash Dieback Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, (commonly called Chalara) which is likely to result in the loss of most of them over the next few years. Young regeneration of ash is particularly susceptible to the fungus and most of those found were already infected or dead. 4.3 Of the three mature beech recorded by Ms Menzies, one was found to be extensively decayed and another has advanced infection by the decay fungus Meripilus giganteus. Both of these are likely to be only short-term components as failure in storms becomes increasingly likely. Otherwise the overall quality of the tree cover is fair to good, with abundant new growth arising where conditions allow. 5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 The TEMPO evaluation for the site produced a total score of 33 points, indicating that it definitely merits the making a Woodland Tree Preservation Order if there is any risk of loss or fragmentation. Any future Order should be made to include "Mixed hardwoods consisting mainly of Pedunculate oak" in Schedule 1. 5.2 An aerial plan of the site marked with the recommended boundaries for a Tree Preservation Order is attached along with the relevant TEMPO score sheet. Kenneth Harvey MICFor. Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist 15th December 2025 Hollybush TEMPO 1125 2
Page 12
Figure 1 - Recommended extent of Woodland Tree Preservation Order (W1). Hollybush TEMPO 1125 3
Page 13
WOODLAND EVALUATION METHOD FOR PRESERVATION ORDERS (WOODLAND TEMPO) SURVEY DATA SHEET & DECISION GUIDE Date: Surveyor: Woodland details TPO Ref (if applicable): Location:/OSGR: Owner (if known): Composition: REFER TO GUIDANCE NOTE FOR ALL DEFINITIONS Part 1: Amenity assessment a) Condition & suitability for TPO 10) Unmanaged – good/fair condition Highly suitable 8) Unmanaged – poor condition Very suitable 5) Excessively managed Suitable 2) Under good management Barely suitable 1) Derelict Unlikely to be suitable 0) Dead/dying/dangerous* Unsuitable Score & Notes * Relates to existing context and is intended to apply to majority of main stand trees having severe irremediable defects b) Naturalness & suitability for TPO Score & Notes 10) Ancient / ASN Highly suitable 8) Recent semi-natural Very suitable 5) Replanted ancient Suitable* 2) Recent native plantation Barely suitable 1) Pioneer dominant Unlikely to be suitable 0) Recent exotic plantation Unsuitable * If few old growth trees present & little or no regen consider TEMPO tree/group assessment c) Size (ha) & suitability for TPO Score & Notes 10) 100 + Extremely suitable 8) 10 - <100 Highly suitable 5) 5 - <10 Very Suitable 2) 0.25 to <5 Suitable 1) 0.1 – <0.25 Barely suitable 0) < 0.1 Unsuitable (consider TEMPO tree/group assessment) d) Cultural factors Woodland must have accrued 13 or more points (with no zero score) to qualify Score & Notes 10) Historical record / vital landscape feature / ≥10% veteran tree population present 8) SSSI or other national designation; significant landscape / habitat importance 5) Woodland with local designation / high public use / identifiable habitat value 2) Woodland with internal public access (use light or unknown) / some habitat value 1) Woodland adjacent to highway or with external public access / low habitat value 0) Woodland with none of the above additional features inc. minimal habitat value Part 2: Expediency assessment Woodland must have accrued 15 or more points to qualify 5) Immediate threat to overall woodland 4) Immediate risk of significant loss / severe fragmentation 3) Foreseeable risk of significant loss / severe fragmentation 2) Foreseeable risk of partial loss / fragmentation 1) Precautionary only Score & Notes Part 3: Decision guide Add Scores for Total: Decision: Any 0 Do not apply TPO 1-12 TPO indefensible 13-15 Does not merit TPO 16-20 TPO defensible 21 + Definitely merits TPO November 2025 K Harvey MICFor. Dip.For. N/a NS492611 Unknown Mixed woodland of Pedunculate oak, beech, sycamore, ash & hawthorn Unmanaged in fair condition Highly suitable 10 points Ancient semi-natural (woodland existed prior to 1750) Highly suitable 10 points Approximately 3.0ha Suitable 2 points Historic woodland containing <10% veteran trees but with significant landscape and habitat importance 8 points Woodland with foreseeable risk of significant loss or severe fragmentation 3 points 33 points Definitely merits a TPO
Page 14
Crownhead, Stobo, Scottish Borders, EH45 8NX t: 01721 760268 e: mail@treeconsultancygroup.com www.treeconsultancygroup.com Principal Consultant: Kenneth Harvey Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist Tree Consultancy Group Arboriculture - Urban Forestry - Planning 'TEMPO' ASSESSMENT OF COPPER BEECH AT 35 HAINING ROAD RENFREW PA4 0AH Client: Renfrewshire Council Date: 17 December 2025 Background Paper 2
Page 15
1 INSTRUCTIONS 1.1 We have been instructed by Mr David Love, Head of Planning at Renfrewshire Council, to assess the suitability of a tree growing in the rear garden of 35 Haining Road, Renfrew for inclusion within a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The assessment was to be carried out using the TEMPO evaluation method developed by Julian Forbes-Laird MICFor. A request to consider giving the tree statutory protection has been received from the owners, following unauthorised pruning carried out by a third party. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 A TPO suitability assessment starts with an assessment carried out from places to which the public have access, as the purpose of protecting trees by a TPO is primarily to preserve their visual amenity in the landscape. This process involves identifying the most significant trees, groups or woodlands and then considering the expediency of making them the subjects of a TPO. 2.2 In order to be able to decide which trees are suitable for inclusion in a TPO and which aren't, the use of some kind of system is recommended to ensure, as far as possible, that selection is carried out in a fair, consistent, objective, and repeatable manner. It helps the Council explain to landowners why their trees have been included in a TPO, and also helps to avoid including large numbers of low value trees within the TPO system which the Council then has to manage. 2.3 The most widely used appraisal system developed for this purpose is the Tree Evaluation Method for Tree Preservation Orders - TEMPO. It is an easy to use field guide to decision-making which also provides a written record of the process. It is presented as a single-page pro forma, and allocates scores to various relevant criteria. When these scores are added together, it gives a total figure which informs whether the tree merits protection by a TPO and, if so, whether the making of a TPO is justifiable (i.e. defensible). As with any such system, its efficacious use is predicated on the assessor having a thorough understanding and knowledge of the subject matter. 2.4 As Woodland TPOs are essentially different in nature and intent to 'normal' TPOs, TEMPO has been produced in two forms - one for individual trees and groups of trees, and one for woodlands. In the assessment of the tree at 35 Haining Road we have used the individual version. 3 SITE VISIT AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 We visited the site to carry out an assessment on 12th November 2025. The tree was assessed from the pavement on Haining Road and from Rosshall Place to establish its general condition, character, and visibility in the wider area. We did not enter the property to carry out a detailed inspection as it was not considered to be necessary and no appointment had been made with the owners. 4 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS 4.1 The tree is a semi-mature Copper beech Fagus sylvatica Purpurea, growing within the rear garden of Number 35 towards the rear boundary. It is of spreading form with a multi-stemmed crown developing above a single stem. Crown vigour appears to be normal and overall it seems to be in satisfactory health and good structural condition with no obvious significant defects. 4.2 The tree has significant visual amenity, being clearly visible from many viewpoints in the surrounding locality. The TEMPO assessment (copy attached) gave the tree a total score of 13 points, which suggests that should there be any threat to the tree, a Tree Preservation Order would be defensible. 1
Page 16
4.3 While the TEMPO assessment score indicates that the tree is worthy of protection if it was under threat, that is only the first part of the process of considering the suitability of a tree for statutory protection by a TPO. The second part of the process has to consider the necessity and expediency of making it the subject of an Order. From the information made available (from the tree's owners), we understand that the perceived threat to the tree is not from felling but from actions taken by third parties to cut back branches (presumably those overhanging the boundary) and entering the property to carry out such work without the owners' permission. 4.4 Under Common Law (i.e. without a TPO in place), neighbours have a right to prune back any tree branches or roots crossing the boundary line (although they may not enter the property to do so). This right does not apply where a tree is subject to a TPO or in a Conservation Area, where such works normally require the formal consent of the Local Planning Authority. However under Section 160(6) (b) of The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997 as amended by the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006, felling or lopping of trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order is exempt from the need for formal consent if the work is necessary for the prevention or abatement of a nuisance. Whether or not the encroachment of branches constitutes nuisance in the legal sense is a matter for a solicitor, not an arboriculturist. Mere encroachment is not, in itself, considered to be an actionable nuisance in the legal sense. However if a tree is having an unreasonably detrimental effect on the living conditions of neighbours and restricts their full use and enjoyment of their properties, that could be regarded as being a nuisance and the neighbours could proceed without the need for formal consent. That would make a TPO pointless if it's purpose was solely to prevent such action. It would also be inappropriate use of the legislation and be bad practice on the part of the Council. Even if the neighbours were to make a formal application to the Council and have the consent refused, they would almost certainly win on appeal to the Scottish Ministers. 4.5 Unauthorised entry into the property to carry out pruning without the owners permission would be a criminal act, regardless of whether or not a TPO is in force. The correct course of action in such a case would be to call the police, not the Council. 5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 The TEMPO evaluation for the tree shows that it would be appropriate to make it the subject of a Tree Preservation Order is it was under threat of being felled. As there is currently no such threat, it would not be expedient for the Council to make an Order. Kenneth Harvey Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist 17th December 2025 2
Page 17
Figure 1 - The tree as seen from Haining Road Figure 2 - Aerial view of the tree in leaf 3
Page 18
TREE EVALUATION METHOD FOR PRESERVATION ORDERS ‐ TEMPO SURVEY DATA SHEET & DECISION GUIDE REFER TO GUIDANCE NOTE FOR ALL DEFINITIONS Part 1: Amenity assessment a) Condition & suitability for TPO 5) Good Highly suitable 3) Fair/satisfactory Suitable 1) Poor Unlikely to be suitable 0) Dead/dying/dangerous* Unsuitable * Relates to existing context and is intended to apply to severe irremediable defects only b) Retention span (in years) & suitability for TPO 5) 100+ Highly suitable 4) 40‐100 Very suitable 2) 20‐40 Suitable 1) 10‐20 Just suitable 0) <10* Unsuitable *Includes trees which are an existing or near future nuisance, including those clearly outgrowing their context, or which are significantly negating the potential of other trees of better quality c) Relative public visibility & suitability for TPO Consider realistic potential for future visibility with changed land use 5) Very large trees with some visibility, or prominent large trees Highly suitable 4) Large trees, or medium trees clearly visible to the public Suitable 3) Medium trees, or large trees with limited view only Suitable 2) Young, small, or medium/large trees visible only with difficulty Barely suitable 1) Trees not visible to the public, regardless of size Probably unsuitable d) Other factors Trees must have accrued 7 or more points (with no zero score) to qualify 5) Principal components of formal arboricultural features, or veteran trees 4) Tree groups, or principal members of groups important for their cohesion 3) Trees with identifiable historic, commemorative or habitat importance 2) Trees of particularly good form, especially if rare or unusual 1) Trees with none of the above additional redeeming features (inc. those of indifferent form) ‐1) Trees with poor form or which are generally unsuitable for their location Part 2: Expediency assessment Trees must have accrued 10 or more points to qualify 5) Immediate threat to tree inc. s.211 Notice 3) Foreseeable threat to tree 2) Perceived threat to tree 1) Precautionary only Part 3: Decision guide Any 0 Do not apply TPO 1‐6 TPO indefensible 7‐11 Does not merit TPO 12‐15 TPO defensible 16+ Definitely merits TPO Tree details TPO Ref (if applicable): Tree/Group No: Species: Owner (if known): Location: Score & Notes Score & Notes Score & Notes Score & Notes Add Scores for Total: Date: Surveyor: Score & Notes Decision: 15/12/2025 K Harvey Dip.For. n/a Mr&Mrs Hamilton n/a Text Copper beech 35 Haining Rd., Renfrew PA4 0AH Satisfactory 3 points 40 - 100 4 points Medium - clearly visible 4 points No additional redeeming features 1 point No direct threat - precautionary only 1 point 13 points TPO defensible
Page 19
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 1 Tree Evaluation Report Prepared for: Renfrewshire Council On the instruction of: Amy Brady Completed by: Stuart Glen BSc (Hons) MSc Ph.D. Date: 30 December 2025 Project Reference: CTC/2025/023 Background Paper 3
Page 20
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 2 Contents Evaluation of Trees at Inchinnan Drive 3 1. Instructions 3 1.1. Received from 3 1.2. Terms of reference 3 2. Introduction 4 3. Methodology 6 4. My Findings 8 5. Conclusions 9 6. Recommendations 10 Appendix 1 11 References 11 Appendix 2 12 Tree Survey Plan 12 Appendix 3 13 TEMPO assessment 13 Appendix 4 14 Photographic record 14
Page 21
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 3 Evaluation of Trees at Inchinnan Drive 1. Instructions 1.1. Received from Amy Brady, Planner (Development Management) with Renfrewshire Council, Renfrewshire House, Cotton Street, Paisley PA1 1JD. 1.2. Terms of reference To assess the suitability of an area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park, Inchinnan Drive for inclusion within a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The assessment was to be carried out using the TEMPO evaluation method developed by Julian Forbes-Laird, Principal Consultant with the Forbes-Laird Arboricultural Consultancy, for CBA Trees Ltd.
Page 22
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 4 2. Introduction 2.1. A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) suitability assessment starts with a walkover appraisal carried out from places to which the public have access, as the purpose of protecting trees by a TPO is primarily to preserve their visual amenity in the landscape. This process involves identifying the most significant trees, groups or woodlands and then considering the expediency of making them the subjects of a TPO. 2.2. In order to be able to decide which trees are suitable for inclusion in a TPO and which aren't, the use of some kind of system is recommended to ensure, as far as possible, that selection is carried out in a fair, consistent, objective, and repeatable manner. This should assist Council representatives, • In explaining to landowners why their trees have been included in a TPO, and • Helps to avoid including large numbers of low value trees within the TPO system, which the Council then has to manage. 2.3. A widely used appraisal system developed for this purpose is the Tree Evaluation Method for Preservation Orders (TEMPO). It is an easy to use field guide to decision-making which also provides a written record of the process. It is presented as a single-page pro forma, and allocates scores to various relevant criteria. When these scores are added together, it gives a total value which informs whether the tree merits protection by a TPO and, if so, whether the making of a TPO is justifiable (or defensible). As with any such system, its efficacious use is predicated on the assessor having a thorough understanding and knowledge of the subject matter. 2.4. As woodland TPOs are essentially different in nature and intent to peri- urban TPOs, TEMPO has been produced in two forms – one for individual trees and groups of trees, and one for woodlands. 2.5. This report is based upon data collected on a visit to the site in question on Sunday, 7 December 2025 and Sunday, 4 January 2026. Weather conditions were overcast on 7 December 2025 and cold and bright with clear skies on 4
Page 23
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 5 January 2026. The weather conditions did not hinder my ability to inspect the trees. 2.6. A TEMPO assessment had been carried out previously on the trees of Inchinnan Business Park by Keneth Harvey of Tree Consultancy Group in June 2025.
Page 24
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 6 3. Methodology 3.1. The tree assessment comprised of a visual inspection carried out from ground level, using only hand tools where appropriate. No below ground, invasive or destructive tests where undertaken. No soil or root samples were taken for analysis. 3.2. The assessment was carried out in accordance with arboricultural best practice, namely the guidance contained in the Forbes-Laird Arboricultural Consultancy publication TEMPO: Tree evaluation method for preservation orders. 3.3. TEMPO is designed as a field guide to decision-making, and is presented on a single side of A4 as an easily completed pro forma. As such, it stands as a record that a systematic assessment has been undertaken. 3.4. TEMPO is a three-part assessment system, • Part 1. The Amenity assessment • Part 2. The Expediency assessment • Part 3. The Decision Guide 3.5. The trees were assessed to establish their general condition, character, longevity and visibility in the wider area. 3.6. The tree cover was considered in the terms of, (a) individual trees (b) groups of trees (c) woodlands as deemed appropriate 3.7. Given the uniform age, recent history and general character of the site, it was considered appropriate that a Woodland TEMPO assessment was carried out.
Page 25
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 7 3.8. It is important to stress that the TEMPO evaluation method is not prescriptive, except in relation to 0 scores. TEMPO merely recommends a course of action. 3.9. The recommendations in this report relate to the site as it exists at present, and to the current level and pattern of usage.
Page 26
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 8 4. My Findings 4.1. My brief was to inspect all the trees on site for health and vitality, and to assess the suitability of an area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park for inclusion within a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). 4.2. The area of woodland is located to the south of the village of Inchinnan, and to the southwest of a roundabout intersection with Greenock Road (A8) and Inchinnan Drive. 4.3. The site is a scrubby area of woodland of approximately 3.3 ha in size. The land is, by and large, flat, but heavily waterlogged in places. Originally planted as a shelterbelt, the site would appear to have had minimum intervention in recent years and as such there is substantial natural regeneration throughout the woodland. The species mix is predominantly broadleaf - including alder, ash, birch, hazel, oak, poplar, sycamore and willow - with a handful of conifers present. 4.4. More mature trees are found in the northern half of the site; the site is largely devoid of trees in the southern half. Even in the north, a large number of trees have stem diameters less than 150 mm, meaning that these individuals are unsuitable for TEMPO assessment. There are some windblown specimens in the northern half of the site also. 4.5. The site is clearly visible to the public from the roadside and will be of increasing significance in the wider landscape as the trees mature. The site has some degree of landscape, amenity and ecological value at present.
Page 27
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 9 5. Conclusions 5.1. In this instance, the woodland version of the TEMPO assessment was used to assess the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park. 5.2. The TEMPO evaluation for the site produced a total score of 6 points, indicating that imposing a Tree Preservation Order on the area of woodland would be indefensible on this occasion (Appendix 3). 5.3. Whilst no individual trees or groups of trees have been detailed of particular merit, the site contains a group of 30-35 early mature alder (Alnus glutinosa) within the woodland. This group of trees is impressive and could be grouped together to allow the Council the widest range of options for negotiated tree retention. However, I do not believe that this group would amass enough points to strongly merit a Tree Preservation Order.
Page 28
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 10 6. Recommendations 6.1. I recommend that a Tree Preservation Order is not afforded to this area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park. Stuart Glen BSc (Hons) MSc Ph.D. Principal Consultant, Callophrys Tree Consultancy
Page 29
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 11 Appendix 1 References British Standards Institution (2010). BS 3998:2010. Tree work – Recommendations. British Standards Institution. ISBN 978 0 5805377 76. British Standards Institution (2012). BS 5837:2012. Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction – Recommendations. British Standards Institution. ISBN 978 0 5806991 77. Department for Communities and Local Government (2006). Tree Preservation Orders: A guide to the law and good practice. Helliwell, D. R. (2008). Visual amenity valuation of trees and woodlands. Guidance Note 4. The Arboricultural Association, United Kingdom. ISBN. 978 0 9009784 32 Fay, N., Dowson, D. and Helliwell, D. R. (2016). Tree Surveys: A guide to good practice. Guidance Note 7. The Arboricultural Association, United Kingdom. ISBN. 978 0 9009783 88 Forbes-Laird, J. (2009). TEMPO: Tree evaluation method for preservation orders. Guidance Note for users. Hirons, A. D. and Thomas, P. A. (2018). Applied tree biology. Wiley Blackwell. ISBN 978 1 1182964 00. Lonsdale, D. (1999). Research for Amenity Trees No. 7. Principles of Tree Hazard Assessment and Management. The Arboricultural Association, United Kingdom. ISBN 978 0 9009785 79. The National Tree Safety Group (2024). Common sense risk management of trees. Forestry Commission, United Kingdom. ISBN 978 0 9009787 77.
Page 30
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 12 Appendix 2 Tree Survey Plan Figure 1. The illustrative position of the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park under tree evaluation assessment.
Page 31
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 13 Appendix 3 TEMPO assessment Figure 2. The TEMPO assessment form of the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park.
Page 32
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 14 Appendix 4 Photographic record Figure 3. The southern boundary of the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park.
Page 33
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 15 Figure 4. The northern boundary of the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park.
Page 34
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 16 Figure 5. Pockets of alder (Alnus glutinosa) present in the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park.
Page 35
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 17 Figure 6. Windblown larch (Larix decidua), indicative of several windblown trees found in the area of woodland at Inchinnan Business Park.
Page 36
Tree Evaluation Report. Inchinnan Drive Callophrys Tree Consultancy | 18
Page 37
Crownhead, Stobo, Scottish Borders, EH45 8NX t: 01721 760268 e: mail@treeconsultancygroup.com www.treeconsultancygroup.com Principal Consultant: Kenneth Harvey. Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist Tree Consultancy Group Arboriculture - Urban Forestry - Planning 'TEMPO' ASSESSMENT OF TURKEY OAK AT PAISLEY GRAMMAR SCHOOL PAISLEY PA13RP Client: Renfrewshire Council Date: January 2026 Background Paper 4
Page 38
1 INSTRUCTIONS 1.1 We have been instructed by Mr David Love, Head of Planning at Renfrewshire Council, to assess the suitability of a mature Turkey oak growing within the curtilage of Paisley Grammar School for inclusion within a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The assessment was to be carried out using the TEMPO evaluation method. The school is scheduled for redevelopment and the information is required to assist with long-term planning for the site. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 A TPO suitability assessment starts with an assessment carried out from places to which the public have access, as the purpose of protecting trees by a TPO is primarily to preserve their visual amenity in the landscape. This process involves identifying the most significant trees, groups of trees or woodlands and then considering the expediency of making them the subjects of a TPO. 2.2 In order to be able to decide which trees are suitable for inclusion in a TPO and which aren't, the use of some kind of system is recommended to ensure, as far as possible, that selection is carried out in a fair, consistent, objective, and repeatable manner. It helps the Council explain to landowners why their trees have been included in a TPO, and also helps to avoid including large numbers of low value trees within the TPO system which the Council then has to manage. 2.3 The most widely used appraisal system developed for this purpose is the Tree Evaluation Method for Tree Preservation Orders - (known by the acronym TEMPO) developed by Julian Forbes-Laird MICFor. It is an easy to use field guide to decision-making which also provides a written record of the process. It is presented as a single-page pro forma, and allocates scores to various relevant criteria. When these scores are added together, it gives a total figure which informs whether the tree merits protection by a TPO and, if so, whether the making of a TPO is justifiable (i.e. defensible). As with any such system, its efficacious use is predicated on the assessor having a thorough understanding and knowledge of the subject matter. 2.4 As Woodland TPOs are essentially different in nature and intent to 'normal' TPOs, TEMPO has been produced in two forms - one for individual trees and groups of trees, and one for woodlands. In the assessment of the tree at Paisley Grammar School, we have used the individual and group version. 3 SITE VISIT AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 We visited the site to carry out an assessment on 18th December 2025. The tree was assessed to establish its general condition, character, longevity and visibility in the wider area. 4 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS 4.1 The tree is a fully mature Turkey oak Quercus cerris growing within the playground of Paisley Grammar school close to the eastern boundary and overhanging Crossflat Terrace. It is one of two trees in this part of the site, the other tree being a slightly smaller early-mature Common lime. 4.2 The oak has an estimated height of around 23 metres with an average crown radius of 12 metres and a trunk diameter of around 1.0 metre. The wide, spreading crown develops above a fork structure at 3.5 metres. Some light branch removal appears to have been carried many years ago to thin the crown and reduce obstruction of overhanging branches over the road, but otherwise it has not been subjected to any major pruning or reduction work. 1
Page 39
4.3 Overall health and vitality seem to be good for its age and maturity. There are no obvious defects, storm damage, significant decay cavities or signs of fungal infection. Most of the root system is under tarmac, but it does not seem to be suffering unduly from drought conditions which so often affect trees growing in similar conditions where surface water drainage is too efficient. 4.4 The tree has a predicted safe future life expectancy of over 40 years. Other than maintaining statutory clearance of 5.2 metres over the highway and 2.4 metres over the pavement, no pruning works are likely to be required in the foreseeable future. 4.5 A plan of the site along with the relevant TEMPO score sheet is attached. 5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 The TEMPO evaluation for the tree produced a total score of 22 points, indicating that it definitely merits a Tree Preservation Order. Kenneth Harvey Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist 7th January 2026 2
Page 40
Fig. 1 - The tree as seen from Crossflat Crescent 3
Page 41
Fig. 2 - Lime on left and Turkey oak on right as seen from south. Fig.3 - Base of tree. 4
Page 42
Fig.4 - Google Streetview from June 2024 5
Page 43
TREE EVALUATION METHOD FOR PRESERVATION ORDERS ‐ TEMPO SURVEY DATA SHEET & DECISION GUIDE REFER TO GUIDANCE NOTE FOR ALL DEFINITIONS Part 1: Amenity assessment a) Condition & suitability for TPO 5) Good Highly suitable 3) Fair/satisfactory Suitable 1) Poor Unlikely to be suitable 0) Dead/dying/dangerous* Unsuitable * Relates to existing context and is intended to apply to severe irremediable defects only b) Retention span (in years) & suitability for TPO 5) 100+ Highly suitable 4) 40‐100 Very suitable 2) 20‐40 Suitable 1) 10‐20 Just suitable 0) <10* Unsuitable *Includes trees which are an existing or near future nuisance, including those clearly outgrowing their context, or which are significantly negating the potential of other trees of better quality c) Relative public visibility & suitability for TPO Consider realistic potential for future visibility with changed land use 5) Very large trees with some visibility, or prominent large trees Highly suitable 4) Large trees, or medium trees clearly visible to the public Suitable 3) Medium trees, or large trees with limited view only Suitable 2) Young, small, or medium/large trees visible only with difficulty Barely suitable 1) Trees not visible to the public, regardless of size Probably unsuitable d) Other factors Trees must have accrued 7 or more points (with no zero score) to qualify 5) Principal components of formal arboricultural features, or veteran trees 4) Tree groups, or principal members of groups important for their cohesion 3) Trees with identifiable historic, commemorative or habitat importance 2) Trees of particularly good form, especially if rare or unusual 1) Trees with none of the above additional redeeming features (inc. those of indifferent form) ‐1) Trees with poor form or which are generally unsuitable for their location Part 2: Expediency assessment Trees must have accrued 10 or more points to qualify 5) Immediate threat to tree inc. s.211 Notice 3) Foreseeable threat to tree 2) Perceived threat to tree 1) Precautionary only Part 3: Decision guide Any 0 Do not apply TPO 1‐6 TPO indefensible 7‐11 Does not merit TPO 12‐15 TPO defensible 16+ Definitely merits TPO Tree details TPO Ref (if applicable): Tree/Group No: Species: Owner (if known): Location: Score & Notes Score & Notes Score & Notes Score & Notes Add Scores for Total: Date: Surveyor: Score & Notes Decision: 18/12/2025 K Harvey Dip.For. n/a Renfrewshire Council T1 Turkey oak Paisley Grammar School (NS 49198 64094) Good condition - Highly suitable 5 points 40 - 100 - Very suitable 4 points Prominent large tree - Highly suitable 5 points Principal component and possible veteran tree - 5 points Foreseeable threat to tree - 3 points 22 points Definitely merits TPO Quercus cerris
Page 44
Crownhead, Stobo, Scottish Borders, EH45 8NX t: 01721 760268 e: mail@treeconsultancygroup.com www.treeconsultancygroup.com Principal Consultant: Kenneth Harvey. Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist Tree Consultancy Group Arboriculture - Urban Forestry - Planning 'TEMPO' ASSESSMENT OF WOODLAND AT LADYACRES WAY INCHINNAN PA4 9NQ Client: Renfrewshire Council Date: January 2026 Background Paper 5
Page 45
1 INSTRUCTIONS 1.1 We have been instructed by Mr David Love, Head of Planning at Renfrewshire Council, to assess the suitability of a small area of woodland adjacent to Ladyacres Way, Inchinnan for inclusion within a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The assessment was to be carried out using the TEMPO evaluation method developed by Julian Forbes-Laird MICFor. The Council has received a request from a local resident that an Order be made. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 A TPO suitability assessment starts with a walkover assessment carried out from places to which the public have access, as the purpose of protecting trees by a TPO is primarily to preserve their visual amenity in the landscape. This process involves identifying the most significant trees, groups or woodlands and then considering the expediency of making them the subjects of a TPO. 2.2 In order to be able to decide which trees are suitable for inclusion in a TPO and which aren't, the use of some kind of system is recommended to ensure, as far as possible, that selection is carried out in a fair, consistent, objective, and repeatable manner. It helps the Council explain to landowners why their trees have been included in a TPO, and also helps to avoid including large numbers of low value trees within the TPO system which the Council then has to manage. 2.3 The most widely used appraisal system developed for this purpose is the Tree Evaluation Method for Tree Preservation Orders - TEMPO. It is an easy to use field guide to decision-making which also provides a written record of the process. It is presented as a single-page pro forma, and allocates scores to various relevant criteria. When these scores are added together, it gives a total figure which informs whether the tree merits protection by a TPO and, if so, whether the making of a TPO is justifiable (i.e. defensible). As with any such system, its efficacious use is predicated on the assessor having a thorough understanding and knowledge of the subject matter. 2.4 As Woodland TPOs are essentially different in nature and intent to 'normal' TPOs, TEMPO has been produced in two forms - one for individual trees and groups of trees, and one for woodlands. In the assessment of the trees at Ladyacres Way, we have used the woodland version. 3 SITE VISIT AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 We visited the site to carry out an assessment of the site on 18th December 2025. The trees were assessed to establish their general condition, character, longevity and visibility in the wider area. 4 ASSESSMENT FINDINGS 4.1 Tree cover at the site consists of a relatively young shelterbelt of mostly native broadleaved species planted to screen the residential development of Ladyacres Way. Mostly it consists of pole-stage Goat willow, Common alder, Silver birch, ash, rowan and a few Norway spruce. 4.2 Many of the trees have been roughly reduced in height by 'topping' or pollarding, presumably to contain their size due to light blockage and/or a perception that they were getting too large for their location close to residential properties and gardens. Unfortunately the reduction work has not been carried out in a sympathetic or professional manner, and most of the trees which have been treated in this way are of species unsuited to the practice. As a result, their amenity value and future life expectancies have been severely diminished. In addition, many trees have suffered breakage or failure in storms, and most of the ash are infected by the fungus Hymenoscyphus fraxineus which 1
Page 46
causes Chalara Ash Dieback. As a result, there are very few individual trees present which have good future life expectancies. 4.3 Generally the component trees are in poor overall condition with little long-term amenity value. As such, they are not worth protecting by a Tree Preservation Order. 4.4 The relevant TEMPO score sheet is attached. 5 CONCLUSIONS 5.1 The TEMPO evaluation for the site produced a total score of 5 points, indicating that a Tree Preservation Order would be indefensible. Kenneth Harvey Dip.For. Chartered Arboriculturist 8th January 2026 2
Page 47
Fig. 1 - Google streetview dated April 2024 3
Page 48
WOODLAND EVALUATION METHOD FOR PRESERVATION ORDERS (WOODLAND TEMPO) SURVEY DATA SHEET & DECISION GUIDE Date: Surveyor: Woodland details TPO Ref (if applicable): Location:/OSGR: Owner (if known): Composition: REFER TO GUIDANCE NOTE FOR ALL DEFINITIONS Part 1: Amenity assessment a) Condition & suitability for TPO 10) Unmanaged – good/fair condition Highly suitable 8) Unmanaged – poor condition Very suitable 5) Excessively managed Suitable 2) Under good management Barely suitable 1) Derelict Unlikely to be suitable 0) Dead/dying/dangerous* Unsuitable Score & Notes * Relates to existing context and is intended to apply to majority of main stand trees having severe irremediable defects b) Naturalness & suitability for TPO Score & Notes 10) Ancient / ASN Highly suitable 8) Recent semi-natural Very suitable 5) Replanted ancient Suitable* 2) Recent native plantation Barely suitable 1) Pioneer dominant Unlikely to be suitable 0) Recent exotic plantation Unsuitable * If few old growth trees present & little or no regen consider TEMPO tree/group assessment c) Size (ha) & suitability for TPO Score & Notes 10) 100 + Extremely suitable 8) 10 - <100 Highly suitable 5) 5 - <10 Very Suitable 2) 0.25 to <5 Suitable 1) 0.1 – <0.25 Barely suitable 0) < 0.1 Unsuitable (consider TEMPO tree/group assessment) d) Cultural factors Woodland must have accrued 13 or more points (with no zero score) to qualify Score & Notes 10) Historical record / vital landscape feature / • 10% veteran tree population present 8) SSSI or other national designation; significant landscape / habitat importance 5) Woodland with local designation / high public use / identifiable habitat value 2) Woodland with internal public access (use light or unknown) / some habitat value 1) Woodland adjacent to highway or with external public access / low habitat value 0) Woodland with none of the above additional features inc. minimal habitat value Part 2: Expediency assessment Woodland must have accrued 15 or more points to qualify 5) Immediate threat to overall woodland 4) Immediate risk of significant loss / severe fragmentation 3) Foreseeable risk of significant loss / severe fragmentation 2) Foreseeable risk of partial loss / fragmentation 1) Precautionary only Score & Notes Part 3: Decision guide Add Scores for Total: Decision: Any 0 Do not apply TPO 1-12 TPO indefensible 13-15 Does not merit TPO 16-20 TPO defensible 21 + Definitely merits TPO