Piccards Cottage, Sandy Lane, Compton, Guildford, GU3 1HF Data via plota.co.uk

26/T/00209 - Trees in Conservation Area Approved

Proposal

1. Scots Pine. Crown thin and reduce lower canopy. Falling branches are a hazard. 2. Arbutus unedo. Reduce height. Prevent damage to retaining wall. Let light into dark house entrance. 3. Acacia/Robinia. Reduce height. Bring back into proportion for its close proximity to the house and boundary wall. Prevent further shedding of high branches onto paving for the house entrance below. 4. Tall Cypress trees. Thinned out with dying specimens removed. Infected with honey fungus, either already dead, or falling over. A hazard within the property, or to Sandy Lane. 5. Rhododendron. Cut dead sections back to ground level. Failing to thrive they appear to have honey fungus. 6. Two or three small Cyprus trees. Closely adjacent poorly established group, dying and/or fallen. Removal will allow an adjacent Oak to thrive. 7. Bay tree. Reduce height of tree-like extensions and re-establish as a large bush. Impinging on the driveway and preventing balanced growth of an adjacent Sweet Chestnut tree. 8. Three or Four Holly trees. One dead and others no longer healthy due to shade. Removal allows established nearby large Beech, Pine, Hornbeam and Oak trees to thrive. 9. Corsican Pine. Section fell to ground level. Dead tree with large falling branches that are a hazard to anyone on the former tennis court below. 10. Ash tree. Felled to ground level. Single tree, or closely adjacent group have die-back disease. 11. Holly seedlings. Cut stems to ground level. Open up the woodland for light and visual impact. 12. Twin-stemmed Corsican Pine. Raise the lower canopy and remove limbs that interfere with each stem's movement. Possible fitting of a Cobra bracing system between the two stems. Reduce weight and danger from limbs falling onto the former tennis court below. Provide support to the leaning stem if a bracing system is applied. 13. Sycamore seedlings. Cut stems to ground level. Prevent further undermining of the terrace wall. Open up the woodland for light and visual impact. 14. Leylandii. Remove poor, dead/windblown specimens. As approved in previous application. Prevent their roots periodically damaging the cesspit drainage. Reveal and enable the adjacent established Oak to thrive. Bring late afternoon sunlight into the property. 15. Liquid Amber. Remove leaning stem, retain main upright trunk. Prevent falling stem further damaging the nearby terrace wall. 16. Acacia/Robinia. Reduce height. Encourage new growth and establish a height balanced with the similar tree (T3) flanking the other end of the house. 17. Conifer. Section fell to ground level. Prevent damage to the high terrace wall on which it sits and against which its roots press. Removal will let the adjacent Acacia/Robinia to thrive ? possibly through reduction of its height. 18. Leyland Cyprus. Cut to ground level. Dying or thinning leaning stems. Replace with large variegated shrubs suitable for shaded area (St Catherines Conservation Area). Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

✓
Received
10 Aug 2026
✓
Consultation
21 Aug 2026
✓
Approved
28 Sept 2026

Approved on 28 Sept 2026 · Delegated · Last checked 29 Sept 2026

Site constraints 10

Green belt: London
Inappropriate development needs very special circumstances.
Green belt policy allows a short list of exceptions, such as limited extensions and replacement buildings. Anything else needs very special circumstances that clearly outweigh the harm. Some green belt land can count as grey belt, where it does not strongly serve the green belt's purposes. The council decides this in its green belt assessment or on each application, so we do not mark it here.
Read the government guidance ↗
Surrey Hills National Landscape
Great weight to conserving the landscape; major development restricted.
Previously an area of outstanding natural beauty, which is still the designation in law. Since 2023 authorities must seek to further its purpose, not merely have regard to it.
St Catherines Guildford Town Centre conservation area
Demolition needs planning permission and permitted development is restricted.
The council must give weight to preserving or enhancing the area's character and appearance. Not every council has published its boundaries as open data.
Council document ↗
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 2
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Public footpath 27 m away
Matters where it crosses or adjoins the site: obstructing a path without a diversion order is an offence, and work cannot start until the order is confirmed.
Compiled from highway authority data, not the legal definitive map. A few authorities have not published, so no path shown is not proof there is none.
Also on the record
Nature recovery project: Heathland Connections; Radon affected area, class 2; Inside the Artington built-up area; Priority habitat 23 m away: Deciduous woodland; Natural England's Provisional ALC map (1:250,000, 1970s) had this area as grade 3, but it predates the buildings here and the current map does not class it as farmland.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · No listed building at the site · No scheduled monument at the site

Checked on 6 October 2026. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England, the British Geological Survey and UK Health Security Agency (radon, contains BGS materials © UKRI) 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 Guildford - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Council
Guildford
Application type
Trees in Conservation Area
Postcode
GU3 1HF
Received
10 Aug 2026
Validated
10 Aug 2026
Ward
Shalford
Parish
Artington
Case officer
Show
Target decision
21 Sept 2026
Decision
Tree Application Approved
Decision date
28 Sept 2026
Decision level
Delegated
Applicant
Show

How this decision compares

Decided in 49 days from validation, 8 days slower than Guildford's median of 41 for tree and landscaping works. Approved, as 98% of tree and landscaping works here are.

90%decided within 8 weeks
98%approved
214decided in the last year

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

Public comments

No public comments yet.

Last counted 29 Sept 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Alt. reference
PP-15141393
Planning Portal ref
PP-15141393
Consultation
21 Aug 2026
Comments by
12 Sept 2026
Env. assessment
No
Guildford
Planning Authority Score
1/10
Poor
#292 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Other decisions

Guildford is one of the slowest councils in England for householder decisions, ranking #282 out of 296. The council extends the time limit on 64% of applications - one of the highest rates in England. Expect your application to take longer than the standard deadline. Householder applications are slightly less likely to be approved here (86%) than the national average (90%).

Among the slowest councils in England
for householder decisions
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Guildford decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
84%
Overall approval rate
Below avg (87%) #221 of 296
86%
Householder approved
Below avg (90%) #243 of 296
31%
Decided in 8 weeks
Below avg (63%) #282 of 296
64%
Extended time limit
Above avg (41%) #276 of 296
79%
Minor dwellings approved
156 decided (1-9 homes)
67%
Major dwellings approved
6 decided (10+ homes)
66%
Change of use approved
47 decided
1,348
Total decisions
219 refused in the year to March 2026