Accurate
Country-specific legal content
Drafted with legal expertise for each jurisdiction, far more thorough than AI-generated drafts that copy generic clauses across borders.
Planning ApplicationsUnited Kingdom
Free Tree Preservation Order (TPO) Consent Application Template
A Tree Preservation Order consent application is the formal request to an English Local Planning Authority (LPA) Tree Officer for consent to carry out works to a tree protected by a TPO under section 198 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Use our free UK template to apply under SI 2012/605 (the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012) — engaging the amenity test, the reg 13 exceptions for dead / dying / dangerous trees, the BS 5837 arboricultural survey methodology and the section 206 replacement-planting condition across the English planning jurisdiction. Where the protection arises because the tree is within a conservation area (rather than under a specific TPO), the section 211 six-week notice procedure applies instead.
Free to useInstant PDFNo account required
PDF (free) + editable Word (.docx) with Expert
Tree Preservation Order Consent Application — TCPA 1990 ss.198-202
TPO Ref: WH/TPO/2018/047 · SI 2012/605 · The Old Rectory, Church Lane, Welwyn AL6 9LZ · 15 June 2026
TO: Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council — Tree Officer (Sarah Chalmers, Tree Officer)
RE: Application for consent under TPO WH/TPO/2018/047 to carry out works at The Old Rectory, Church Lane, Welwyn AL6 9LZ
Application is made under sections 198-202 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/605) Part 2 for consent to carry out the works particularised below to the tree(s) protected by the above Tree Preservation Order. Unauthorised works to a protected tree are a criminal offence under section 210 of the Act with the maximum penalty on summary conviction of GBP 20,000 (or twice the value of the timber, whichever is greater) for destroying a tree; on indictment, unlimited fine.
RE: Application for consent under TPO WH/TPO/2018/047 to carry out works at The Old Rectory, Church Lane, Welwyn AL6 9LZ
Application is made under sections 198-202 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/605) Part 2 for consent to carry out the works particularised below to the tree(s) protected by the above Tree Preservation Order. Unauthorised works to a protected tree are a criminal offence under section 210 of the Act with the maximum penalty on summary conviction of GBP 20,000 (or twice the value of the timber, whichever is greater) for destroying a tree; on indictment, unlimited fine.
1. APPLICANT PARTICULARS
| APPLICANT NAME | James Henderson Trust |
| APPLICANT ADDRESS | The Old Rectory, Church Lane, Welwyn AL6 9LZ |
| TELEPHONE | 01438 822719 |
| trustees@hendersontrust.org.uk | |
| CAPACITY | Owner of the site (registered proprietor) |
| ARBORICULTURAL AGENT | Arboriquest Tree Consultants Ltd of 3 The Maltings, Hertford SG14 1PE |
2. SITE AND TPO PARTICULARS
| SITE ADDRESS | The Old Rectory, Church Lane, Welwyn AL6 9LZ |
| TPO REFERENCE | WH/TPO/2018/047 |
| LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY | Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council |
| TREE OFFICER | Sarah Chalmers, Tree Officer |
3. TREE PARTICULARS.
(a) Species (common): English oak
(b) Species (Latin): Quercus robur
(c) Location on site: Mature specimen tree located in the south-east corner of the rear garden, approximately 12 m from the rear elevation of the main dwelling and 3.5 m from the eastern boundary fence.
(d) Height: 22.5 metres
(e) Crown spread: 14.0 metres
(f) Diameter at breast height (1.5 m): 95 cm
(g) Status: Individual tree
(h) TPO schedule tag: T1 (per TPO schedule)
(a) Species (common): English oak
(b) Species (Latin): Quercus robur
(c) Location on site: Mature specimen tree located in the south-east corner of the rear garden, approximately 12 m from the rear elevation of the main dwelling and 3.5 m from the eastern boundary fence.
(d) Height: 22.5 metres
(e) Crown spread: 14.0 metres
(f) Diameter at breast height (1.5 m): 95 cm
(g) Status: Individual tree
(h) TPO schedule tag: T1 (per TPO schedule)
4. WORK PROPOSED.
(a) Type of work: Crown reduction — reduction of overall crown volume
(b) Detailed description: Crown reduction of approximately 2.5 metres from the southern lateral branches, with reshaping cuts back to suitable secondary growth points to maintain the natural form. Removal of three deadwood limbs (each less than 60 mm diameter) on the western side. Crown lifting to 5 m above ground over the rear garden path to provide pedestrian clearance.
(c) Proposed start date: 15 September 2026
(d) Contractor: Hadley Wood Tree Surgeons Ltd (AA Approved Contractor; NPTC Lev 3 ABC; Public Liability £5m; £5m Employer Liability)
(a) Type of work: Crown reduction — reduction of overall crown volume
(b) Detailed description: Crown reduction of approximately 2.5 metres from the southern lateral branches, with reshaping cuts back to suitable secondary growth points to maintain the natural form. Removal of three deadwood limbs (each less than 60 mm diameter) on the western side. Crown lifting to 5 m above ground over the rear garden path to provide pedestrian clearance.
(c) Proposed start date: 15 September 2026
(d) Contractor: Hadley Wood Tree Surgeons Ltd (AA Approved Contractor; NPTC Lev 3 ABC; Public Liability £5m; £5m Employer Liability)
5. REASON FOR WORK.
(a) Primary reason: Safety — risk to persons or property
(b) Narrative justification:
The southern lateral branches have extended over a children's play area used by the trust's nursery school. The arboricultural inspection by Arboriquest (report ref: AQ-2026-0312 dated 18 March 2026) identifies elevated wind-throw risk for these limbs following the storm season of January 2026. The proposed reduction is a conservative crown management measure rather than wholesale removal — the tree is structurally sound and retains good form, but targeted reduction is appropriate to manage the public safety risk. The three deadwood limbs on the western side are above the courtyard parking area used by trust staff and visitors.
(a) Primary reason: Safety — risk to persons or property
(b) Narrative justification:
The southern lateral branches have extended over a children's play area used by the trust's nursery school. The arboricultural inspection by Arboriquest (report ref: AQ-2026-0312 dated 18 March 2026) identifies elevated wind-throw risk for these limbs following the storm season of January 2026. The proposed reduction is a conservative crown management measure rather than wholesale removal — the tree is structurally sound and retains good form, but targeted reduction is appropriate to manage the public safety risk. The three deadwood limbs on the western side are above the courtyard parking area used by trust staff and visitors.
7. REGULATION 13 EXCEPTION ANALYSIS — SI 2012/605.
Regulation 13 of SI 2012/605 sets out the exceptions to the consent regime — works that may be carried out without TPO consent. The exceptions are narrowly drawn and the burden of proof is on the applicant to establish that the exception applies on the facts. The leading authority is Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v Secretary of State [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 — the Inspector must engage with the BS 5837 assessment when considering the exception. The "tree" definition for woodland exceptions follows Bullock v Secretary of State for the Environment [1980] 1 EGLR 165.
(a) Exception ground relied on: No regulation 13 exception applies — formal consent required
(b) Evidence summary:
The arboricultural report assesses the tree as Category A (high quality, retention highly desirable) with a life expectancy of 80+ years. The tree is structurally sound and not in terminal decline. No part of the tree is dead. There is no immediate danger requiring exception-route works. The applicant has therefore proceeded by way of formal consent application rather than relying on the reg 13(1)(a) "dead, dying or dangerous" exception. This is the safer course where any doubt exists about the strict construction of the exception.
(c) Five working days notice (reg 14): Not applicable on the facts
Caution: the exception under reg 13(1)(a) for "dead, dying or dangerous" is strictly construed. "Dead" means complete absence of living tissue. "Dying" means terminal decline (not merely poor health). "Dangerous" requires IMMEDIATE risk of SERIOUS HARM (the Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 amenity test does not relax this). Where the exception is wrongly relied on, the works are a criminal offence under s.210 even where the tree was in fact in poor condition.
Exception narrative:
The applicant considered whether the deadwood removal alone could proceed under reg 13(1)(a) — three deadwood limbs above the courtyard parking — but elected to include the deadwood removal in the consent application for completeness and certainty. Per Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v SS [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 the LPA must engage with the BS 5837 assessment, and the applicant prefers the certainty of consent over the risk of a contested s.210 prosecution if the exception is later disputed. The leading authority on amenity test scope (Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1) supports a robust amenity finding for this particular tree.
Regulation 13 of SI 2012/605 sets out the exceptions to the consent regime — works that may be carried out without TPO consent. The exceptions are narrowly drawn and the burden of proof is on the applicant to establish that the exception applies on the facts. The leading authority is Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v Secretary of State [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 — the Inspector must engage with the BS 5837 assessment when considering the exception. The "tree" definition for woodland exceptions follows Bullock v Secretary of State for the Environment [1980] 1 EGLR 165.
(a) Exception ground relied on: No regulation 13 exception applies — formal consent required
(b) Evidence summary:
The arboricultural report assesses the tree as Category A (high quality, retention highly desirable) with a life expectancy of 80+ years. The tree is structurally sound and not in terminal decline. No part of the tree is dead. There is no immediate danger requiring exception-route works. The applicant has therefore proceeded by way of formal consent application rather than relying on the reg 13(1)(a) "dead, dying or dangerous" exception. This is the safer course where any doubt exists about the strict construction of the exception.
(c) Five working days notice (reg 14): Not applicable on the facts
Caution: the exception under reg 13(1)(a) for "dead, dying or dangerous" is strictly construed. "Dead" means complete absence of living tissue. "Dying" means terminal decline (not merely poor health). "Dangerous" requires IMMEDIATE risk of SERIOUS HARM (the Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 amenity test does not relax this). Where the exception is wrongly relied on, the works are a criminal offence under s.210 even where the tree was in fact in poor condition.
Exception narrative:
The applicant considered whether the deadwood removal alone could proceed under reg 13(1)(a) — three deadwood limbs above the courtyard parking — but elected to include the deadwood removal in the consent application for completeness and certainty. Per Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v SS [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 the LPA must engage with the BS 5837 assessment, and the applicant prefers the certainty of consent over the risk of a contested s.210 prosecution if the exception is later disputed. The leading authority on amenity test scope (Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1) supports a robust amenity finding for this particular tree.
8. BS 5837:2012 ARBORICULTURAL SURVEY.
The British Standard for Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction (BS 5837:2012) sets the professional standard for tree surveys accompanying TPO consent applications. The survey classifies trees in four categories (A high quality / B moderate / C low / U unsuitable for retention), records life expectancy, and identifies the Root Protection Area for construction-context applications. Distinctive Properties (Ascot) [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 confirms that the Inspector must engage with the BS 5837 assessment on appeal.
(a) BS 5837 surveyor: Dr Helen Murray BSc MArborA — Arboriquest Tree Consultants Ltd
(b) Category classification: Category A — high quality, retention highly desirable (life expectancy 40+ years)
(c) Life expectancy estimate: 80+ years
(d) Root Protection Area (RPA) radius: 11.4 metres
The RPA is calculated as 12 times the stem diameter at 1.5 m above ground (DBH) and represents the minimum area in which the rooting environment should remain undisturbed. Construction-context applications must demonstrate either retention of the RPA or use of approved no-dig methods (cellular confinement, suspended slab).
BS 5837 narrative:
BS 5837:2012 survey by Dr Helen Murray dated 18 March 2026. Category A classification on the basis of: (i) excellent structural condition with no significant defects; (ii) form typical of a free-grown mature English oak; (iii) wide amenity value as a focal point of the south-east garden corner visible from Church Lane; (iv) biological value as a mature native species supporting saproxylic invertebrates and lichens. Life expectancy estimated at 80+ years given current condition and absence of decay. RPA radius calculated as 12 × 95 cm DBH = 11.4 m. The proposed works (crown reduction + deadwood + crown lifting) are within accepted BS 3998:2010 tolerance for a mature oak and do not affect the RPA or root environment.
The British Standard for Trees in Relation to Design, Demolition and Construction (BS 5837:2012) sets the professional standard for tree surveys accompanying TPO consent applications. The survey classifies trees in four categories (A high quality / B moderate / C low / U unsuitable for retention), records life expectancy, and identifies the Root Protection Area for construction-context applications. Distinctive Properties (Ascot) [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 confirms that the Inspector must engage with the BS 5837 assessment on appeal.
(a) BS 5837 surveyor: Dr Helen Murray BSc MArborA — Arboriquest Tree Consultants Ltd
(b) Category classification: Category A — high quality, retention highly desirable (life expectancy 40+ years)
(c) Life expectancy estimate: 80+ years
(d) Root Protection Area (RPA) radius: 11.4 metres
The RPA is calculated as 12 times the stem diameter at 1.5 m above ground (DBH) and represents the minimum area in which the rooting environment should remain undisturbed. Construction-context applications must demonstrate either retention of the RPA or use of approved no-dig methods (cellular confinement, suspended slab).
BS 5837 narrative:
BS 5837:2012 survey by Dr Helen Murray dated 18 March 2026. Category A classification on the basis of: (i) excellent structural condition with no significant defects; (ii) form typical of a free-grown mature English oak; (iii) wide amenity value as a focal point of the south-east garden corner visible from Church Lane; (iv) biological value as a mature native species supporting saproxylic invertebrates and lichens. Life expectancy estimated at 80+ years given current condition and absence of decay. RPA radius calculated as 12 × 95 cm DBH = 11.4 m. The proposed works (crown reduction + deadwood + crown lifting) are within accepted BS 3998:2010 tolerance for a mature oak and do not affect the RPA or root environment.
10. COMPENSATION CLAIM RESERVED — TCPA 1990 s.203.
Section 203 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 confers a right to compensation for loss or damage caused or incurred in consequence of refusal of TPO consent (or restrictive grant). The claim must be made within TWELVE MONTHS of the relevant decision. Claims under GBP 500 are excluded by statute. The applicant reserves the right to claim compensation if the application is refused or granted subject to onerous conditions.
(a) Loss or damage anticipated if consent refused:
If consent is refused, the applicant will need to maintain enhanced inspection regime (twice yearly arboricultural inspection at GBP 850 per inspection) and may need to install protective decking under the children's play area at estimated cost GBP 12,500. The applicant reserves the right to seek compensation under TCPA 1990 s.203 for these incremental costs.
(b) Estimated claim amount: GBP 18,500 (12-month inspection + protective decking)
(c) 12-month limit acknowledged: YES — the applicant acknowledges that any claim must be made within 12 months of the LPA decision under s.203(3) TCPA 1990
Note: the section 203 right is to compensation for actual loss, not for the diminution in value of the tree itself. The Lands Chamber of the Upper Tribunal determines disputed claims. Reference: Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v SS [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 for the reasonableness of LPA refusals.
Compensation narrative:
The reservation is made formally pursuant to s.203(3) TCPA 1990 — any claim will be lodged within 12 months of the LPA decision if refusal materialises. The s.203 right is to compensation for ACTUAL loss not the diminution in tree value. The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) determines disputed claims. Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v SS [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 confirms the standard of reasonableness applicable to LPA refusals. The applicant invites the LPA to consider the BS 5837 Category A finding and the targeted nature of the proposed works in determining the application.
Section 203 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 confers a right to compensation for loss or damage caused or incurred in consequence of refusal of TPO consent (or restrictive grant). The claim must be made within TWELVE MONTHS of the relevant decision. Claims under GBP 500 are excluded by statute. The applicant reserves the right to claim compensation if the application is refused or granted subject to onerous conditions.
(a) Loss or damage anticipated if consent refused:
If consent is refused, the applicant will need to maintain enhanced inspection regime (twice yearly arboricultural inspection at GBP 850 per inspection) and may need to install protective decking under the children's play area at estimated cost GBP 12,500. The applicant reserves the right to seek compensation under TCPA 1990 s.203 for these incremental costs.
(b) Estimated claim amount: GBP 18,500 (12-month inspection + protective decking)
(c) 12-month limit acknowledged: YES — the applicant acknowledges that any claim must be made within 12 months of the LPA decision under s.203(3) TCPA 1990
Note: the section 203 right is to compensation for actual loss, not for the diminution in value of the tree itself. The Lands Chamber of the Upper Tribunal determines disputed claims. Reference: Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v SS [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 for the reasonableness of LPA refusals.
Compensation narrative:
The reservation is made formally pursuant to s.203(3) TCPA 1990 — any claim will be lodged within 12 months of the LPA decision if refusal materialises. The s.203 right is to compensation for ACTUAL loss not the diminution in tree value. The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) determines disputed claims. Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v SS [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 confirms the standard of reasonableness applicable to LPA refusals. The applicant invites the LPA to consider the BS 5837 Category A finding and the targeted nature of the proposed works in determining the application.
11. DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED. The applicant encloses:
(a) Site plan to scale (1:500 or 1:1250) showing the location of the protected tree(s);
(b) Photographs of the tree showing form, condition, surrounding context;
(c) Arboricultural report (BS 5837:2012 standard) by qualified arboriculturist;
(d) Where the works are to facilitate development: copy of the planning permission + arboricultural method statement (AMS) + tree protection plan;
(e) Where exception relied on (reg 13): supporting condition report quantifying dead / dying / dangerous state.
(a) Site plan to scale (1:500 or 1:1250) showing the location of the protected tree(s);
(b) Photographs of the tree showing form, condition, surrounding context;
(c) Arboricultural report (BS 5837:2012 standard) by qualified arboriculturist;
(d) Where the works are to facilitate development: copy of the planning permission + arboricultural method statement (AMS) + tree protection plan;
(e) Where exception relied on (reg 13): supporting condition report quantifying dead / dying / dangerous state.
12. DECLARATION. The applicant confirms that the particulars set out in this application are true and correct to the best of the applicant's knowledge and belief, and that the applicant has the authority of the owner of the site to apply for consent in respect of the protected tree(s). The applicant acknowledges that carrying out works to a protected tree without consent (or in excess of any consent granted) is a criminal offence under section 210 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 with the maximum penalty on summary conviction of GBP 20,000 (or twice the value of the timber, whichever is greater) for destroying a tree, and unlimited fine on indictment.
APPLICANT
James Henderson Trust
Through arboricultural agent: Arboriquest Tree Consultants Ltd
Date: ____________________
Available as a print-ready PDF or an editable Microsoft Word (.docx) file.
What Is a TPO Consent Application?
A Tree Preservation Order consent application is a written request to an English Local Planning Authority Tree Officer for consent to carry out works (felling, lopping, topping, uprooting or other operations) to a tree protected by a Tree Preservation Order under section 198 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The TPO is a planning instrument made by the LPA where it is "expedient in the interests of amenity" — a relatively low test of visibility from a public space, contribution to landscape or townscape character, or biological / cultural significance. Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 is the leading United Kingdom authority on the amenity test scope.
The operational regime is the Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/605). Reg 13 lists the exceptions where TPO consent is not required — works to a dead or dying tree; works to a tree that has become dangerous (immediate risk of serious harm); works by a statutory undertaker on its undertaking land; works required for compliance with an Act of Parliament; works required to prevent or abate a nuisance; works required by the TPO itself (replanting). Five working days' written notice to the LPA is required under reg 14 before works are carried out in reliance on the dead / dying / dangerous exception.
Where the protection arises by virtue of the tree being within a conservation area, section 211 of the TCPA 1990 applies. Any tree of a diameter exceeding 75mm at 1.5m above ground level within a conservation area is automatically protected — a person proposing to carry out works must give SIX WEEKS' written notice to the LPA before commencing. The six-week procedure is NOT a consent application: the LPA may do nothing (the works may proceed after six weeks) or may make a TPO to extend protection. Contravention of a TPO is a criminal offence under section 210 — summary conviction can attract a fine up to £20,000 (or twice the timber value, whichever is greater) for destroying a tree; conviction on indictment carries an unlimited fine. Bullock v Secretary of State for the Environment [1980] 1 EGLR 165 is the leading United Kingdom authority on woodland TPO interpretation; Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v Secretary of State [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 addresses TPO consent reasonableness on appeal.
What's Covered in This Template
Our United Kingdom TPO consent application template builds a structured form an English LPA Tree Officer can validate quickly — applicant identity, site and TPO reference, tree species and dimensions, proposed works, the s.198(1) amenity-test framing, the BS 5837 arboricultural survey methodology, the reg 13 exceptions analysis and the section 206 replacement-planting + section 203 compensation positions.
Applicant Identity + Capacity
Records the applicant — owner, occupier, neighbour or agent — and the capacity in which the application is made. The signature block adjusts to match for the British or English applicant.
Site + TPO Reference + LPA Tree Officer
Site address, TPO reference (where known), Local Planning Authority, Tree Officer contact details, conservation area engagement (where applicable triggering the s.211 procedure instead).
Tree Identification + Species + Dimensions
Tree species, diameter at 1.5m above ground, height, crown spread, location on site, condition and (where applicable) BS 5837:2012 category (A — high quality; B — moderate; C — low; U — dead / dying / dangerous).
Proposed Works Description
Type of works — felling, crown reduction, crown lifting, crown thinning, deadwooding, pruning, removal of branches. Reasons for the works. Timing. Method of working.
Expert: Section 198(1) Amenity-Test Framing
Engages the section 198(1) amenity test as developed by Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 — visibility from a public space, contribution to landscape or townscape character, biological / cultural significance. The framing supports a consent decision.
Expert: BS 5837:2012 Arboricultural Survey Methodology
Engages the British Standard BS 5837:2012 arboricultural survey methodology — Category A/B/C/U classification, Root Protection Area calculation, ground-protection methodology and tree-loss recommendations.
Expert: Reg 13 Exceptions Analysis
Where the works fall within a reg 13 exception (dead / dying / dangerous; statutory undertaker; Act of Parliament; nuisance abatement; replanting under TPO), TPO consent is not required. The expert section addresses the reg 14 five-working-days notice requirement.
Expert: Section 206 Replacement Planting + Section 203 Compensation
Where consent is granted on condition of replacement planting under section 206 TCPA 1990, the planting obligation is recorded. Where consent is refused or granted subject to onerous conditions, section 203 compensation is signposted with the 12-month limit.
Distinctive Properties + Bullock + Smith v Oliver Caselaw
Engages Distinctive Properties (Ascot) Ltd v Secretary of State [2015] EWCA Civ 1250 (TPO consent reasonableness on appeal); Bullock v SS for the Environment [1980] 1 EGLR 165 (woodland TPO interpretation); Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 (amenity test scope).
England-Only Scope + s.210 Offence Warning
SI 2012/605 applies to England only. The application warns of the s.210 offence — summary conviction up to £20,000 fine for destroying a protected tree; conviction on indictment carries an unlimited fine. The warning protects the applicant from inadvertent breach.
Single Signer — Applicant or Agent
Application signed by the British applicant or by an authorised agent (typically an arboricultural consultant or planning consultant). No witness or notarisation is required for TPO consent.
How to Apply for TPO Consent
Follow these steps to produce a well-structured TPO consent application an English LPA Tree Officer can validate and determine quickly.
- 1
Check the Tree Is Subject to a TPO
Search the LPA's TPO register or contact the Tree Officer. Where the tree is in a conservation area but not under a specific TPO, use the section 211 six-week notice procedure instead (different procedural route). Where the tree is in an ancient woodland, additional protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 may apply.
- 2
Screen Against the Reg 13 Exceptions
Where the works fall within a reg 13 exception — dead / dying / dangerous; statutory undertaker on undertaking land; required for compliance with an Act of Parliament; nuisance abatement; replanting required by TPO itself — TPO consent is not required. Reg 14 requires five working days' notice to the LPA in the dead / dying / dangerous case.
- 3
Identify the Tree(s) and Condition
Species, diameter at 1.5m above ground, height, crown spread, location, condition. Where a BS 5837:2012 arboricultural survey has been obtained, the Category A/B/C/U classification supports the application. Photographs are normally required.
- 4
Describe the Proposed Works
Felling, crown reduction (percentage), crown lifting (to specified height), crown thinning (percentage), deadwooding, pruning of specified branches. The description should match arboricultural practice and BS 3998:2010 (Tree Work).
- 5
Set Out the Reasons for the Works
Subsidence damage; building damage; light loss; structural defect in the tree; pest or disease; nuisance; access; safety. Reasons must engage the amenity-test framing under s.198(1) — and must be supported by evidence (engineer's report for subsidence; arboricultural report for tree condition).
- 6
Apply the Section 198(1) Amenity-Test Framing (Expert)
Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 establishes the amenity test as a relatively low threshold — visibility from a public space, contribution to landscape or townscape character, biological or cultural significance. Address how the proposed works affect the amenity value.
- 7
Address the Section 206 Replacement Planting (Expert)
Where consent is granted on condition of replacement planting under section 206 TCPA 1990 — a like-for-like or compensatory planting condition — the applicant should propose the species, size and location of replacement planting. Section 206 conditions are routinely imposed.
- 8
Submit to the LPA + Wait for Determination
Submit the application to the LPA Tree Officer (often via the Planning Portal). The LPA aim to determine within eight weeks. Where consent is refused or granted subject to restrictive conditions, the applicant has the right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS) under SI 2012/605 Part 4 within eight weeks.
Why Doxuno documents are different
Four things that make our templates more thorough than AI-generated drafts and more current than static template libraries.
Always current
Always current with the law
Templates carrying statute references are continuously updated as the law changes. Your document always reflects the current legal framework.
Free PDF
Print-ready PDF
Free to download. Vector text, embedded fonts, statute citations baked in. Print, sign, file. Ready for any signing flow including electronic signature.
Word · .docx
Editable Word (.docx)
Continue editing in Word after download. Add custom clauses, reuse the template for similar agreements, or share with a colleague for collaborative review.
Requires Expert one-time unlock or any paid Doxuno subscription.
Legal Considerations — TPO Consent
TPO consent is governed by United Kingdom planning legislation as devolved to England. SI 2012/605 is the operational regime. Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland operate under separate devolved British planning legislation.
This template is for general information and does not constitute legal advice. The Arboricultural Association, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and planning solicitors regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority advise on complex TPO and conservation-area tree cases. The Planning Inspectorate has the final word on appeal. Section 210 criminal offences are matters for the Magistrates' Court (summary) or Crown Court (indictment).
Reviewed for England (United Kingdom)
Statutory Framework — TCPA 1990 ss.198-202 + SI 2012/605
The TPO regime sits in sections 198 to 202 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Section 198 confers on the LPA the power to make a TPO in the interests of amenity. Section 199 sets out the form of an Order; section 200 deals with Forestry Commission interests; section 201 provides for provisional Orders pending confirmation. Sections 203 to 205 cover compensation. The operational regulations sit in SI 2012/605 — Town and Country Planning (Tree Preservation) (England) Regulations 2012.
Section 198(1) Amenity Test + Smith v Oliver
Section 198(1) of the TCPA 1990 allows a TPO to be made where it is "expedient in the interests of amenity". Smith v Oliver [1989] 2 PLR 1 establishes that the amenity test is a relatively low threshold — visibility from a public space, contribution to landscape or townscape character, biological or cultural significance suffice. The test does not require the tree to be exceptional or rare. The amenity assessment underlies both the original TPO and any consent decision.
Conservation Area Trees — Section 211 Six-Week Notice
TCPA 1990 section 211 protects any tree of a diameter exceeding 75mm at 1.5m above ground level within a conservation area automatically — without the need for a specific TPO. A person proposing to carry out works must give SIX WEEKS' written notice to the LPA. The procedure is NOT a consent application: the LPA may do nothing (works may proceed after six weeks) or may make a TPO (works become subject to TPO consent). The six-week period gives the LPA time to consider a TPO.
Reg 13 Exceptions + Reg 14 Notice
SI 2012/605 reg 13 sets out exceptions to the consent regime: works to a tree that is dying or dead (but "dead wood only" must be carefully distinguished from removal of the whole tree); works to a tree that has become dangerous (immediate risk of serious harm); works by a statutory undertaker on undertaking land; works required for compliance with an Act of Parliament; works required to prevent or abate a nuisance; works required by the TPO itself. Reg 14 requires five working days' written notice to the LPA before works in reliance on the dead / dying / dangerous exception.
Section 210 Offences + Penalties
TCPA 1990 section 210 makes contravention of a TPO a criminal offence. Summary conviction in the Magistrates' Court attracts a fine up to £20,000 (or twice the value of the timber, whichever is greater) for destroying a protected tree; lesser fine for other works. Conviction on indictment in the Crown Court carries an unlimited fine. Bullock v Secretary of State for the Environment [1980] 1 EGLR 165 is the leading authority on the scope of TPO offences, particularly woodland TPO interpretation and the definition of "tree".
Section 203 Compensation + Section 206 Replanting
Section 203 TCPA 1990 provides for compensation where TPO consent is refused or granted subject to onerous conditions — the applicant may claim compensation from the LPA within 12 months. Section 206 allows the LPA to impose a replacement-planting condition on the consent — typically a like-for-like or compensatory planting requirement. Replacement planting is routinely imposed on consent for major tree removal.
Frequently Asked Questions
Build Your TPO Consent Application
Produce a clear, statute-cited application an English Local Planning Authority Tree Officer can validate and determine within the eight-week window. Whether the works are felling, crown reduction, crown lifting, deadwooding or pruning, the template structures the s.198(1) amenity-test framing, the BS 5837:2012 arboricultural survey methodology, the reg 13 exceptions analysis, the s.206 replacement-planting condition and the s.203 compensation route under TCPA 1990 ss.198-202.
Free PDF · Editable Word with Expert · No account required