Valuation of Amenity Trees

[Andy Clark]

Its the only standard reason that I've received in thirty odd years, and I'm yet to understand the criteria on which it is based. So a pretty tree seems, to me, as good as reason as any

 

 

Well of course it would be the only reason, purely because. the sole purpose of a TPO is to preserve a tree based on its amenity value

 

 

So exactly how is the rationale decided to classify the amenity value? Surely there is a policy document that everyone refers to, for the sake of classification. Otherwise one authority tree officers idea of amenity value can be different to another's. That is, it becomes a subjective classification!

 

Via guidance notes, such as the "blue book" that was, plus subsequent revisions, (which I believe is currently being re-written to coincide with the 2012 Regs); via CPD events, run by the respective TO associations and independent arb consultancies; in Peter Annett's day at the ODPM/DCLG, I'm also pretty sure he used to publish bulletins and updates also; advice notes from the AAIS......

 

As for one Authorities idea vs another, again, of course it would be different - in exactly the same way as one tree in one location is extremely different to another. A mature oak in the heart of a major conurbation is not the same as a mature oak in the heart of the Cotswolds. Granted, both are mature oaks, but both have a very different relationship in respect of their surroundings. Both TO's would therefore appraise each tree differently - as they should do.

 

So again, it's simply that missing magic word again. "Context". Which can mostly be found when reading Chapter 3 of the blue book (as revised) .

 

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[daltontrees]

THe relevant Guidelines are not too long to reporoduce here in their entirety.

 

3.2 The Act does not define 'amenity', nor does it prescribe the circumstances in which it is in the interests of amenity to make a TPO. In the Secretary of State's view, TPOs should be used to protect selected trees and woodlands if their removal would have a significant impact on the local environment and its enjoyment by the public. LPAs should be able to show that a reasonable degree of public benefit would accrue before TPOs are made or confirmed. The trees, or at least part of them, should therefore normally be visible from a public place, such as a road or footpath, although, exceptionally, the inclusion of other trees may be justified. The benefit may be present or future; trees may be worthy of preservation for their intrinsic beauty or for their contribution to the landscape or because they serve to screen an eyesore or future development; the value of trees may be enhanced by their scarcity; and the value of a group of trees or woodland may be collective only. Other factors, such as importance as a wildlife habitat, may be taken into account which alone would not be sufficient to warrant a TPO. In the Secretary of State's view, it would be inappropriate to make a TPO in respect of a tree which is dead, dying or dangerous.

 

3.3 LPAs should be able to explain to landowners why their trees or woodlands have been protected by a TPO. They are advised to develop ways of assessing the 'amenity value' of trees in a structured and consistent way, taking into account the following key criteria:

 

(1) visibility: the extent to which the trees or woodlands can be seen by the general public will inform the LPA's assessment of whether its impact on the local environment is significant. If they cannot be seen or are just barely visible from a public place, a TPO might only be justified in exceptional circumstances;

 

(2) individual impact: the mere fact that a tree is publicly visible will not itself be sufficient to warrant a TPO. The LPA should also assess the tree's particular importance by reference to its size and form, its future potential as an amenity, taking into account any special factors such as its rarity, value as a screen or contribution to the character or appearance of a conservation area. As noted in paragraph 3.2 above, in relation to a group of trees or woodland, an assessment should be made of its collective impact;

 

(3) wider impact: the significance of the trees in their local surroundings should also be assessed, taking into account how suitable they are to their particular setting, as well as the presence of other trees in the vicinity.

 

The word amenity is in the Act, the purpose is very simply stated. " If it appears to a local planning authority that it is expedient in the interests of amenity to make provision for the preservation of trees or woodlands in their area, they may for that purpose make an order with respect to such trees, groups of trees or woodlands as may be specified in the order."

 

There is no latitude in the Act for different LPAs to use TPOs for different purposes. But it is up tot the LPA to decide on expediency and amenity. The lack of case law as to what amenity means might be partly a result of there being no right of appeal to a TPO being made. I agree, context is everything. Even so, you may have noted that the Guidance says that LPAs "are advised to develop ways of assessing the 'amenity value' of trees in a structured and consistent way". Maybe we should all ask our local Council if it has done so.

Edited November 11, 2013 by daltontrees

[daltontrees]

Well of course it would be the only reason, purely because. the sole purpose of a TPO is to preserve a tree based on its amenity value

 

I would contend that the sole purpose of a TPO is to preserve the amenity provided by a tree. Its amenity 'value' has presumably already been considered and has formed the rationale for the TPO.

[Andy Clark]

THe relevant Guidelines are not too long to reporoduce here in their entirety.

 

 

 

3.2 The Act does not define 'amenity', nor does it prescribe the circumstances in which it is in the interests of amenity to make a TPO. In the Secretary of State's view, TPOs should be used to protect selected trees and woodlands if their removal would have a significant impact on the local environment and its enjoyment by the public. LPAs should be able to show that a reasonable degree of public benefit would accrue before TPOs are made or confirmed. The trees, or at least part of them, should therefore normally be visible from a public place, such as a road or footpath, although, exceptionally, the inclusion of other trees may be justified. The benefit may be present or future; trees may be worthy of preservation for their intrinsic beauty or for their contribution to the landscape or because they serve to screen an eyesore or future development; the value of trees may be enhanced by their scarcity; and the value of a group of trees or woodland may be collective only. Other factors, such as importance as a wildlife habitat, may be taken into account which alone would not be sufficient to warrant a TPO. In the Secretary of State's view, it would be inappropriate to make a TPO in respect of a tree which is dead, dying or dangerous.

 

 

 

3.3 LPAs should be able to explain to landowners why their trees or woodlands have been protected by a TPO. They are advised to develop ways of assessing the 'amenity value' of trees in a structured and consistent way, taking into account the following key criteria:

 

 

 

(1) visibility: the extent to which the trees or woodlands can be seen by the general public will inform the LPA's assessment of whether its impact on the local environment is significant. If they cannot be seen or are just barely visible from a public place, a TPO might only be justified in exceptional circumstances;

 

 

 

(2) individual impact: the mere fact that a tree is publicly visible will not itself be sufficient to warrant a TPO. The LPA should also assess the tree's particular importance by reference to its size and form, its future potential as an amenity, taking into account any special factors such as its rarity, value as a screen or contribution to the character or appearance of a conservation area. As noted in paragraph 3.2 above, in relation to a group of trees or woodland, an assessment should be made of its collective impact;

 

 

 

(3) wider impact: the significance of the trees in their local surroundings should also be assessed, taking into account how suitable they are to their particular setting, as well as the presence of other trees in the vicinity.

 

 

 

 

The word amenity is in the Act, the purpose is very simply stated. " If it appears to a local planning authority that it is expedient in the interests of amenity to make provision for the preservation of trees or woodlands in their area, they may for that purpose make an order with respect to such trees, groups of trees or woodlands as may be specified in the order."

 

 

 

There is no latitude in the Act for different LPAs to use TPOs for different purposes. But it is up tot the LPA to decide on expediency and amenity. The lack of case law as to what amenity means might be partly a result of there being no right of appeal to a TPO being made. I agree, context is everything. Even so, you may have noted that the Guidance says that LPAs "are advised to develop ways of assessing the 'amenity value' of trees in a structured and consistent way". Maybe we should all ask our local Council if it has done so.

 

 

Glad you agree that context is everything.

 

So now let's put trees and amenity and the LA TO into context of the much wider remit of both an LA Planning dept as a whole, and the TCPA as a whole, and remember that trees and tree preservation only in fact play a very small part in that wider aspect of the "amenity" criteria........

 

- The LA's powers to serve Section 215 improvement notices for example, in respect of land and/or buildings adversely affecting the amenity of an area.

 

- All of the other factors in relation to Conservation Areas (ie, not just trees) and the Conservation Area principle being brought to life by the Civic Amenities Act.

 

- Similarly with Listed Buildings.

 

So I think that, yes, you've quoted the section from the "blue book" with regards to amenity in respect of trees, but I think it's key to remember that the principles of "Amenity" doesn't just start/stop with trees and TPO's. The principles of "Amenity" are well enshrined throughout the whole raft of the many aspects of planning legislation - and have been since the inception of the overall Act back in the 40's and the rebuilding of the country after the war.

 

 

.

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[daltontrees]

Glad you agree that context is everything.

 

So now let's put trees and amenity and the LA TO into context of the much wider remit of both an LA Planning dept as a whole, and the TCPA as a whole, and remember that trees and tree preservation only in fact play a very small part in that wider aspect of the "amenity" criteria........

 

- The LA's powers to serve Section 215 improvement notices for example, in respect of land and/or buildings adversely affecting the amenity of an area.

 

- All of the other factors in relation to Conservation Areas (ie, not just trees) and the Conservation Area principle being brought to life by the Civic Amenities Act.

 

- Similarly with Listed Buildings.

 

So I think that, yes, you've quoted the section from the "blue book" with regards to amenity in respect of trees, but I think it's key to remember that the principles of "Amenity" doesn't just start/stop with trees and TPO's. The principles of "Amenity" are well enshrined throughout the whole raft of the many aspects of planning legislation - and have been since the inception of the overall Act back in the 40's and the rebuilding of the country after the war. .

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

As the saying goes, there are only three things that affect the value of property - location, location and location. Context is everything because context means location.

 

Your reference to improvement notices is a useful one, I will look into it (scottish legislation always seems to differ slightly), I was involved in the would-be compulsory purchase of a derelict site a few years ago on the basis of its detriment to the amenity of the area. Something that I suspect would be easy to pull off after the war on bombsites than these days when the owner was just sitting back waiting for development offers and using the state of the site to create local political desparation for any sort of development consent that would make the problem go away.

 

I don't agree entirely about listed buildings, the statutory purpose of listing is to preserve buildings that are of special architectural or historical significance. They may have local context but otehrwise are not location-sensitive. A stately home would be just as worthy of listing if it was at the end of a long driveway as at the end of a short one. One couldn't say the same about the public amenity value of a tree.

[Andy Clark]

 

 

 

I don't agree entirely about listed buildings, the statutory purpose of listing is to preserve buildings that are of special architectural or historical significance. They may have local context but otehrwise are not location-sensitive. A stately home would be just as worthy of listing if it was at the end of a long driveway as at the end of a short one. One couldn't say the same about the public amenity value of a tree.

 

 

Fair comment.

 

But aesthetic appearance is also one of the statutory criteria for listed designation.

 

Pretty building, pretty tree - hence why I used the word "similarly".

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[daltontrees]

Fair comment.

 

But aesthetic appearance is also one of the statutory criteria for listed designation.

 

Pretty building, pretty tree - hence why I used the word "similarly".

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

 

Aesthetic appearance is one of the criteria for special architectural interest, quite rightly so, it's the quintessence of good architecture. The word 'pretty' is much too subjective and soft for my liking, the term 'intrinsic beauty' in teh Guidelines seems an improvement on 'prettiness'. Trees can be gaunt and tortured-looking, far from pretty but wuite beautiful at the same time because we can marvel at their tenacity, history, context even if they are not pretty lollipops.

[Andy Clark]

Anyhoo, the salient point is that "Amenity" and the concept and principles thereof, are enshrined throughout much much more than just trees and tree preservation.

 

 

 

Sent from my BlackBerry 9700 using Tapatalk

[Gary Prentice]

http://www.asca-consultants.org/membersSection/archive/appraisal/pdfokWz8eJI1K.pdf this is a sort of interesting read

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

http://www.asca-consultants.org/membersSection/archive/appraisal/pdfokWz8eJI1K.pdf this is a sort of interesting read

 

Nice one, will save that read for later in the week.