Mead Cottage Cockington Lane Torquay TQ2 6QS Data via plota.co.uk

AT/2026/0179 - Works To Tree Within TPO Refused

Proposal

Monterey cypress T1 and Lawson cypress T2 - crown reduction by a maximum of 2 metres. Both are in very limited space and are already damaging garden furniture. T1 was heavily reduced on one side by the utility company, as BT cables pass through the crown. Reasons: The tree?s root system has displaced and damaged the adjacent stone and brick walling, creating structural issues and minor trip hazards. The crown currently encroaches over the patio and wall, increasing debris fall and obstruction. The proposed works are intended to manage foreseeable conflict with built structures and reduce nuisance while retaining the tree?s overall form and contribution to the setting. The intervention is proportionate and consistent with BS3998 and NTSG principles, addressing specific areas of conflict without imposing excessive reduction. Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

Received
22 Jul 2026
Refused
3 Sept 2026
Appeal
Not lodged

Refused on 3 Sept 2026 · Delegated · Last checked 4 Sept 2026

Site constraints 6

Tree preservation order: Cockington Lane, Torquay
Consent is needed before work on protected trees.
Not every council has published its orders as open data, so no order shown is not proof there is none.
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 2
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Special area of conservation 292 m away: Lyme Bay and Torbay
Work nearby can need a habitats assessment.
Harm to a protected site is only accepted where there is no alternative and an overriding public interest.
Also on the record
Conservation area 37 m away: Cockington; Inside the Paignton built-up area; Priority habitat 36 m away: Lowland meadows.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt · No listed building at the site

Checked on 11 September 2026. 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 Torbay - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Council
Torbay
Application type
Works To Tree Within TPO
Postcode
TQ2 6QS
Received
22 Jul 2026
Validated
22 Jul 2026
Ward
Cockington With Chelston
Case officer
Show
Decision
Part allowed/part refused
Decision date
3 Sept 2026
Decision level
Delegated
Applicant
Show

How this decision compares

Decided in 43 days from validation, 7 days faster than Torbay's median of 50 for tree and landscaping works. Refused, as 22% of tree and landscaping works here are.

98%decided within 8 weeks
78%approved
160decided in the last year

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

Public comments

No public comments yet.

Last counted 4 Sept 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Alt. reference
PP-15087598
Env. assessment
No
Torbay
Planning Authority Score
1.9/10
Poor
#276 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

Torbay is one of the slowest councils in England for householder decisions, ranking #276 out of 296. 54% of applications have the time limit extended, above the 41% national average. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (90%) 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
Torbay decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
87%
Overall approval rate
Above avg (87%) #183 of 296
90%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #197 of 296
37%
Decided in 8 weeks
Below avg (63%) #276 of 296
54%
Extended time limit
Above avg (41%) #247 of 296
81%
Minor dwellings approved
53 decided (1-9 homes)
100%
Major dwellings approved
9 decided (10+ homes)
91%
Change of use approved
44 decided
529
Total decisions
68 refused in the year to March 2026