1 Stonehills Steventon Hampshire RG25 3BA Data via plota.co.uk

T/00324/26/TCA - Works to Trees - Conservation Areas Approved

Proposal

T1 - Sycamore: Fell to ground level. Reason: Tree causes excessive shading to the property and possesses low amenity value due to poor form T2 - Willow: Fell to ground level. Reason: Tree causes excessive shading to the property and possesses low amenity value due to poor form T3 - Sycamore: Crown lift to 4m from ground level and crown thin by 15% to increase light penetration T4 - Sycamore: Crown lift to 10m from ground level and crown reduction by 2m (all cardinal points) to reduce excessive shading to the property T5 - Horse Chestnut: Fell to ground level. Reason: Tree has previously lost a major structural limb, leaving a significant entry wound for decay, and causes excessive shading T6 - Yew Hedge: Fell/remove hedge. Reason: Causes excessive shading to adjacent garden areas and possesses low amenity value T7 - Sycamore: Crown lift to 4m from ground level and crown thin by 15% to increase clearance to power cable T8 - Cooking Apple: Crown thin by 15% and crown reduction by 1m to increase clearance to telephone cable T9 - Cooking Apple: Crown thin by 15% and crown reduction by 1m to increase clearance to telephone cable T10 - Crab Apple Tree: Crown thin by 15% and crown reduction by 1m to increase clearance to telephone cable… Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

Received
22 Jul 2026
Validated
23 Jul 2026
Approved
18 Aug 2026

Approved on 18 Aug 2026 · Delegated · Last checked 20 Aug 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.
Steventon 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 ↗
Agricultural land, grade 3a
Best and most versatile land (grades 1, 2 and 3a). Predicted from the national soil map. The older provisional map agrees.
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 Expansion Zone
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
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 Basingstoke - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Important details

Application type
Works to Trees - Conservation Areas
Postcode
RG25 3BA
Received
22 Jul 2026
Validated
23 Jul 2026
Ward
Oakley & The Candovers
Parish
STEVENTON CP
Case officer
Show
Target decision
3 Sept 2026
Decision
Raise No Objection
Decision date
18 Aug 2026
Decision level
Delegated
Applicant
Show

How this decision compares

Decided in 26 days from validation, about the council's usual 28 days. Approved, as 94% of tree and landscaping works here are.

98%decided within 8 weeks
94%approved
278decided in the last year

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

Public comments

No public comments yet.

Last counted 20 Aug 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Alt. reference
PP-15083569
Env. assessment
No
Basingstoke
Planning Authority Score
5.1/10
Average
#143 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Other decisions

Basingstoke ranks #189 out of 296 councils for householder decision speed. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (96%) than the national average (90%).

These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Basingstoke decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
92%
Overall approval rate
Above avg (87%) #75 of 296
96%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #49 of 296
59%
Decided in 8 weeks
Below avg (63%) #189 of 296
46%
Extended time limit
Above avg (41%) #198 of 296
75%
Minor dwellings approved
150 decided (1-9 homes)
63%
Major dwellings approved
19 decided (10+ homes)
81%
Change of use approved
32 decided
1,076
Total decisions
90 refused in the year to March 2026