Street Record Perrett Way Pill Data via plota.co.uk

26/P/2059/TPO - Works to TPO Registered
Trees & landscaping

Proposal

T1 - Horse Chestnut - Reduce tree leaving a bare stem (monolith) for habitat retention only. Approx 4m final height. Reason: This tree has been structurally compromised by significant basal and lower stem decay and now poses an unacceptable risk of harm to users of the adjacent footpath. Two very large lateral limbs reach southward over the footpath and failure of the stem will result in this asymmetric tree collapsing across the well used footpath/cyclepath. Decay is most advanced on the northern (tension side) of the stem and no stabilising adaptive growth is possible here due to the widespread dysfunction. This means that the risk will continue to increase and that significant remedial action is required. Owing to the high ecological value of the stem it will be retained as a habitat feature. Data via plota.co.uk

Track application Save this application and get an email when its status or decision changes. Alerts nearby Get email alerts for new planning applications near this address.
View original council record ↗Last checked

Application progress

✓
Received
6 Oct 2026
✓
Validated
21 Oct 2026
Decision
Expected by 16 Dec 2026

Under consideration

No decision has been issued yet. Plota predicts a decision between 5 Dec 2026 and 16 Dec 2026, from North Somerset's recent tree and landscaping works.

Comments are open until 12 Nov 2026

Comment on this application ↗

Documents 1

Application forms 1

PDF APPLICATIONFORMREDACTED Application Form · 6 Oct 2026 View ↗

All documents on the council site ↗

Site constraints 7

Green belt: Bath and Bristol
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 ↗
Tree preservation order: Ham Green Hospital, Easton-In-Gordano.
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.
National infrastructure project 69 m away: Portishead Branch Line - MetroWest Phase 1
The site is 69 m from the project boundary. Railway, decided. The project page says whether consent was granted. Also within 2 km: Hinkley Point C Connection (decided, 1671 m); Hinkley Point C Connection Project Material Change (at pre-application, 1695 m).
Nationally significant infrastructure projects (power stations, electricity lines, pipelines, major roads and railways, harbours, airports and reservoirs) are consented by a Secretary of State under the Planning Act 2008, after an examination by the Planning Inspectorate, rather than by the council. The boundary is the one the Inspectorate consults on and can change as the scheme does. Projects are shown within 2 km of the site.
Planning Inspectorate project page ↗
Habitat network: Network Enhancement Zone 2
Where habitat is joined up enough to work as a network. Context, not a constraint on its own.
Also on the record
Radon affected area, class 4; Inside the Pill and Easton-in-Gordano built-up area; Natural England's Provisional ALC map (1:250,000, 1970s) had this area as grade 2, 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 23 October 2026. Historic England, the Environment Agency, Natural England, the Planning Inspectorate, 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 North Somerset - and every UK council - as a live feed, an API, or a bulk CSV export.

About Plota's data service

Nearby new applications

8 Oct 2026Pending

Eden Lodge Studios Chapel Pill Lane Pill BS20 0BX

T1, Silver Birch, Betula pendula full crown reduction of approx. 3.0m inheight m...

26/P/1891/TPO
21 Sept 2026Pending

Pill Fire Station Westward Drive Pill BS20 0JS

Installation of new stand-alone pre-fabricated ancillary building to house gym f...

26/P/1754/FUL

Important details

Council
North Somerset
Application type
Works to TPO
Received
6 Oct 2026
Validated
21 Oct 2026
Ward
Pill
Parish
Pill And Easton In Gordano
Case officer
Show
Target decision
16 Dec 2026
Applicant
Show

Decision outlook

Day 7 of the 56-day target. North Somerset usually decides tree and landscaping works by day 50.

Day 749 days to the 56-day target
61%decided within 8 weeks
95%approved
343decided in the last year

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

Public comments

No public comments yet.

13 neighbours consulted · Last counted 23 Oct 2026

Read the comments on the council site ↗

Consultation & key dates

Comments by
12 Nov 2026
Statutory expiry
16 Dec 2026
Env. assessment
No
North Somerset
Planning Authority Score
6.4/10
Average
#83 of 296 councils
Relevant to this application:
Householder decisions

North Somerset is faster than most councils at deciding householder applications, ranking #96 out of 296. Householder applications are slightly more likely to be approved here (93%) 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
North Somerset decision statistics
Based on MHCLG data, the year to March 2026
89%
Overall approval rate
Above avg (87%) #137 of 296
93%
Householder approved
Above avg (90%) #134 of 296
73%
Decided in 8 weeks
Above avg (63%) #96 of 296
34%
Extended time limit
Below avg (41%) #88 of 296
74%
Minor dwellings approved
135 decided (1-9 homes)
95%
Major dwellings approved
19 decided (10+ homes)
85%
Change of use approved
52 decided
1,139
Total decisions
128 refused in the year to March 2026
Source: MHCLG planning statistics · See full council rankings