STREET RECORD, Langdon Park, Teddington Data via plota.co.uk

PA26/3054 - Works to Tree/s in Conservation Area Approved

Proposal

5 DAY DANGEROUS TREE NOTICE T5 - Larch - Fell T6 - Sycamore - Fell Data via plota.co.uk

View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

✓
Received
2 Sept 2026
✓
Validated
7 Sept 2026
✓
Approved
7 Sept 2026

Approved on 7 Sept 2026 · Delegated Decision · Last checked 23 Sept 2026

Site constraints 9

Wick Road 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 ↗
In flood zones plus climate change
Inside the extent flood zones 2 and 3 could reach with climate change: the Central allowance for the 2080s on rivers, the Upper End allowance for sea level rise to 2125. From rivers. Defences are not counted.
The Environment Agency flood map for planning. Councils use it to decide when a flood risk assessment and the sequential test are needed. It is indicative and does not show whether a particular property will flood.
Flood map ↗
Air quality management area: Richmond AQMA
The council has declared the area as failing an air quality objective.
Schemes that add traffic, parking or combustion plant are assessed against the area's action plan and may need an air quality assessment.
Council record ↗
Also on the record
SSSI 306 m away: Bushy Park and Home Park SSSI; 1 listed building within 150 m; Inside the Richmond upon Thames built-up area; Public transport access: PTAL 2 (poor), TfL 2023, for the 100 m square; National infrastructure project 986 m away: Teddington Direct River Abstraction (TDRA), at pre-application; Metropolitan Open Land 75 m away.
Not affected
Outside flood zones 2 and 3 · Not green belt · No scheduled monument at the site

Checked on 6 October 2026. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England, the Planning Inspectorate, Transport for London (public transport access levels, Powered by TfL Open Data, OGL v3.0, contains OS data © Crown copyright and database right 2025) 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 Richmond upon Thames - 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 Tree/s in Conservation Area
Received
2 Sept 2026
Validated
7 Sept 2026
Ward
Hampton Wick & South Teddington Ward [HPK]
Case officer
Show
Target decision
14 Oct 2026
Decision
Raise No objection
Decision date
7 Sept 2026
Decision level
Delegated Decision
Agent
The Tree Associates (Surrey) Ltd

How this decision compares

Decided in 0 days from validation, 31 days faster than Richmond upon Thames's median of 31 for tree and landscaping works. Approved, as 96% of tree and landscaping works here are.

97%decided within 8 weeks
96%approved
1,050decided in the last year

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

Richmond upon Thames
Planning Authority Score
4.4/10
Below average
#182 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Other decisions

Richmond upon Thames ranks #130 out of 296 councils for householder decision speed. Richmond upon Thames is also one of the strictest councils - it refuses more householder applications than almost any other, with only 82% approved vs 90% nationally.

One of the strictest councils
only 82% approved vs 90% nationally
These figures are council-wide context, not a prediction for this application. View full council performance
Richmond upon Thames decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
81%
Overall approval rate
Below avg (87%) #257 of 296
82%
Householder approved
Below avg (90%) #268 of 296
69%
Decided in 8 weeks
Above avg (63%) #130 of 296
35%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #104 of 296
68%
Minor dwellings approved
181 decided (1-9 homes)
100%
Major dwellings approved
3 decided (10+ homes)
47%
Change of use approved
17 decided
1,888
Total decisions
358 refused in the year to March 2026