From Daniel Wynn the Tree and Landscape Officer...

"I have reassessed the gap shown between Group 1 and Group 2 of the above Order and to do this I took various measurements from two separate datum points in an attempt to try and locate the groupings of trees more accurately. The result is that whilst I agree that the boundaries of the two groups shown on the TPO documents are not wholly accurate, the Order does, in my view,  adequately encompass the two main groupings of trees (excluding shrubs) along on the northern embankment of the Phoenix Causeway.

Having said that, we may decide in the not-too-distant-future to modify slightly the position of the boundaries of the two group Orders but this would depend heavily of the County Council's road scheme proposals in relation to proposed development nearby. In any event, an Order can be modified at any stage during confirmation, assuming it is confirmed, and at any stage after confirmation. In all probability, however, I will await and see what the proposed road layout scheme looks like before deciding whether to modify the boundaries of the two group Orders. In the meantime, the County Council are aware of the new Tree Preservation Order and the need to consider the issue of trees in the design of the road scheme and as a result I understand that they are currently looking into the situation.

You will of course be able to comment further on the issue of trees when the relevant Planning Application for the Phoenix quarter is submitted in the future.  

I have also reassessed the Elder and the Crataegus at the rear of Penrhos, and the Rowan, Holly, Goat Willow and Viburnum at the rear of Green Wall on the embankment. For the assessment I used the scoring system contained in TEMPO (Tree Evaluation Method for Preservation Orders). The result of the assessment is that the trees fail to qualify for inclusion within the above Order for the following reasons;

The Elder and the Viburnum are classified as shrubs and do not therefore, qualify under the terms and conditions of the Tree Preservation Order legislation. The Rowan, Goat Willow, Holly and the Crataegus scored very low for potential longevity (generously rated at 10 - 20 years) and scored low for relative public visibility and suitability. They also scored low for a section termed 'Other Factors' which lists exceptional visual amenity qualities such as 'Trees with identifiable historic, commemorative importance'. In the final analysis, the trees failed to meet the visual amenity importance criteria required for inclusion with a Tree Preservation Order.

I turn now to another issue that has cropped up since the Order was first served. It has been reported that various wild bird species have been seen in or around the trees in the area. Unfortunately, wildlife habitat is not a determining factor for deciding whether to include trees within a Tree Preservation Order. There is, however, separate legislation for the protection of wildlife (including birds) which is contained within the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1980 (as amended).  This will be a matter for the planning departments of the County Council and the Lewes District Council to consider when they determine any future planning applications for the site.

Lastly, we have received no written objections to the imposition of TPO (No.1) 2006 and as a result it is intended to confirm the Order under the Council's scheme of delegation. We will write to you separately about this in due course. The decision on the outcome of TPO (No.4) 2006, Waitrose Store, Eastgate Wharf will have to be deferred until the statutory consultation period has expired for those who were served the Order at a late stage. Again, I will write to you separately about this in due course."