Ally McCoist wins planning battle after neighbour row over 90ft trees

A Bridge of Weir resident’s appeal against Renfrewshire Council’s decision to take no action over the height of two trees on Rangers legend Ally McCoist’s property has been dismissed.

The football pundit’s neighbour recently challenged the local authority’s ruling that a ‘high hedge notice’ should not be served by taking the case to Scottish ministers.

Alan Tyers claimed the “fast-growing, very old Sycamores” block light into his house and falling branches have damaged his roof during adverse weather events.

He sought a solution under the High Hedges (Scotland) Act 2013, which allows councils to order for qualifying trees to be cut back, but the application was refused in April.

Mr Tyers turned his attention to the Scottish Government’s planning and environmental appeals division but it has this week been confirmed his appeal was unsuccessful.

Simon Bonsall, the reporter appointed by ministers, wrote: “I have carefully considered this case.

“I acknowledge the concerns of the appellant regarding the barrier to light within his property and safety during storms.

“The council did not turn away the application for the high hedge notice.

“However, as I have found the trees do not constitute a hedge, I am not required to consider the grounds of appeal further.

“I therefore must dismiss the appeal.”

A site visit was held in connection with the dispute on Friday, July 10, to allow the reporter to complete an inspection.

Mr McCoist had made it clear he supported the local authority’s finding in May but the former Scotland international questioned whether the specific trees met the statutory definition of a ‘high hedge’ in the first place.

He added: “These are two mature, deciduous trees standing over six metres apart. They are not managed as a hedge and do not resemble what would ordinarily be understood to be a hedge.

“Their spacing, character and management are inconsistent with hedge planting as described in the guidance.

“It is respectfully submitted that the trees do not fall within the statutory definition of a ‘high hedge’ at all and that the original application should have been refused on that basis alone.”

Council planners previously said it was not considered their height – estimated to be in excess of 27 metres – “adversely affects the enjoyment of the domestic property” which someone “could reasonably expect to have.”

Mr Tyers refused to back down and escalated the matter at the end of April. In his appeal form, he said: “These are fast-growing, very old Sycamores, which combined with increased storm activity and high wind events over recent years in line with climate change, have meant that the problem has increased year on year.

“I am now living with the real fear and risk of tree collapse onto my house. During storms, the upstairs rooms to that side of the house overshadowed by the trees are unusable for fear of tree collapse and by virtue of noise of falling debris.

“The trees overhang my rear door and block out light from the rear windowed door area, causing my rear hallway to be darkened.”

But Mr Bonsall’s decision notice was clear-cut, with the reporter adding: “I have considered all other matters raised but there are none that would lead me to alter my conclusion.”