King Edward VI Preparatory School Highwood House Highwood Lane Romsey Hampshire SO51 9ZH Data via plota.co.uk

26/01846/DDTPO - DEAD AND DANGEROUS TREE PRESERVATION ORD Approved

Proposal

Removal of two large Sycamore trees and a group of smaller Syamore trees - TPO.TVBC.180 Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

✓
Received
24 Aug 2026
✓
Consultation
24 Aug 2026
✓
Approved
28 Aug 2026

Approved on 28 Aug 2026 · Last checked 30 Sept 2026

Site constraints 4

Nutrient neutrality catchment: Solent: Includes Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA/Ramsar, Solent and Southampton Water SPA/Ramsar, Solent Maritime SAC, Portsmouth Harbour SPA/Ramsar
New homes and overnight accommodation must show nutrient neutrality before approval.
Natural England advice: extra wastewater in these catchments harms protected habitats, so schemes must offset their nutrient load, usually through credits.
Agricultural land, grade 3a
Best and most versatile land (grades 1, 2 and 3a). Source: the Predictive Agricultural Land Classification Map (Defra and Natural England, 2025; the Welsh Government's Predictive ALC Map 2 in Wales), a model rather than a site survey. Natural England's Provisional ALC map (1:250,000, 1970s), which most planning maps still show, had this area as grade 4. The predicted grade is Defra's current estimate; only a site survey settles it.
Where development of farmland is needed, policy prefers poorer land over the best and most versatile (grades 1, 2 and 3a). Three sources: Natural England's post-1988 field surveys, which are definitive where they exist; the Defra predictive map for England (2025) and the Welsh Government predictive map, modelled from the soil map with 3a and 3b split; and the 1970s provisional map, which planners and other services still show, coarser and with grade 3 undivided. Where the provisional and predicted grades disagree, treat the predicted grade as the current estimate and expect an application to carry its own survey.
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 1
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Also on the record
Priority habitat about 38 m away: Deciduous woodland.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt · No scheduled monument at the site

Checked on 11 September 2026. The pin for this application is the centre of its postcode rather than the building, so distances to nearby designations are measured from the postcode and can be out by the width of the postcode area. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England and council datasets, Open Government Licence. A boundary can run through a site and the council holds the definitive record: confirm with the council before relying on this.

Work with planning data?

Every application in Test Valley - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Application type
DEAD AND DANGEROUS TREE PRESERVATION ORD
Postcode
SO51 9ZH
Received
24 Aug 2026
Validated
24 Aug 2026
Ward
ROMSEY TADBURN
Parish
ROMSEY TOWN
Case officer
Show
Target decision
29 Aug 2026
Decision
Fell Dead TPO Tree DD
Decision date
28 Aug 2026
Applicant
Show
Agent
Bourne VP Ltd

How this decision compares

Decided in 4 days from validation, 27 days faster than Test Valley's median of 31 for tree and landscaping works. Approved, as 95% of tree and landscaping works here are.

97%decided within 8 weeks
95%approved
481decided in the last year

Plota live figures for tree and landscaping works decided by Test Valley in the last twelve months, from validation. Test Valley decision record →

Public comments

No public comments yet.

Last counted 30 Sept 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Consultation
24 Aug 2026
Comments by
28 Aug 2026
Statutory expiry
29 Aug 2026
Env. assessment
No
Test Valley
Planning Authority Score
7.8/10
Good
#32 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

Test Valley is faster than most councils at deciding householder applications, ranking #71 out of 296. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (96%) than the national average (90%).

Faster than most councils
for householder decisions
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Test Valley decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
93%
Overall approval rate
Above avg (87%) #68 of 296
96%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #62 of 296
76%
Decided in 8 weeks
Above avg (63%) #71 of 296
31%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #61 of 296
70%
Minor dwellings approved
96 decided (1-9 homes)
80%
Major dwellings approved
5 decided (10+ homes)
88%
Change of use approved
50 decided
996
Total decisions
72 refused in the year to March 2026