NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

This site has had 4 applications since 2009: 4 approved, 0 refused.

• DC/10/73425 Granted

  NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  Crown thin a Horse Chestnut tree at North Several, SE3.

  Decided 24 Feb 2010 Trees
• DC/10/073425 Granted

  NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  Crown thin a Horse Chestnut tree at North Several, SE3.

  Decided 24 Feb 2010 Trees
• DC/09/72310/FT Granted

  NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  Crown thin an Oak tree at the rear of North Several, Orchard Drive, SE3.

  Decided 8 Oct 2009 Trees

1. 17 Aug 2009

   Received by Lewisham

2. 8 Oct 2009

   Decision issued: Granted

3. 20 Aug 2026

   Added to PlanIndex

Lewisham granted permission on 8 October 2009, subject to any conditions on the decision notice. Work must normally begin within three years or the permission lapses. More in our guide to what happens after a planning decision.

Applications for works to trees cover protected trees: consent under a tree preservation order, or six weeks notice for trees in a conservation area. More in our guide to planning application types.

• NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  DC/09/72310/FT Submitted 17 Aug 2009 50 yards away

  Crown thin an Oak tree at the rear of North Several, Orchard Drive, SE3.

  Granted Trees

• 4 NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  DC/23/129938 Submitted 16 Jan 2023 50 yards away

  ONE Acer Negundo (T1) (ht: 11m, width: 6m) HEIGHT REDUCTION by 1.5m from 11m to 9.5m, LATERAL REDUCTION by 1m from 6m to 5m; Reason: A lot of dieback in the crown, indicating a root disease, the owners would like to reduce the tree to prolong its health.

  Granted Trees 6 docs

• 6 NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  DC/17/100166 Submitted 13 Feb 2017 50 yards away

  Rear Garden (See Accompanying Plan):ONE Sycamore (T1) FELL, TWO Chestnut (T2 & T3) Crown Thin by up to 15%, ONE Box Elder (T4) Crown Reduce by up to 15% and ONE Oak Crown Reduce by up to 15% and Reduce the Length and Height of the Lower Main Scaffold Branch that Over Hangs Neighbouring Property by up to 25%Amended the notice with the applicant on site on 24/02/2017.

  Granted Trees 1 doc

• NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  DC/10/73425 Submitted 28 Jan 2010 50 yards away

  Crown thin a Horse Chestnut tree at North Several, SE3.

  Granted Trees

• NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  DC/10/073425 Submitted 28 Jan 2010 50 yards away

  Crown thin a Horse Chestnut tree at North Several, SE3.

  Granted Trees

• 1 NORTH SEVERAL, ORCHARD DRIVE, LONDON, SE3 0QR

  DC/14/87516 Submitted 12 May 2014 50 yards away

  Amended Notification: Sweet Chestnut (T1) 30% reduction due to excessive shading Sycamore (T2) fell due to overcrowding Sea Buckthorn (T3) fell due to roots raising paving slabs, causing trip hazard Holm Oak (T4) 30% reduction, including root reduction, due to damage to retaining wall Horse Chestnut (T5) 20% reduction due to proximity to house,(T6)-Sweet Chestnut-crown thin by 30% removing crossing and rubbing branches

  Granted Trees

• DC/26/145119 Awaiting decision

  43 DEVONSHIRE ROAD, LONDON, SE23 3EN

  FRONT: ONE Lime tree (T1) Ht 15m FELL to ground level & treat stump REASON: A remedy to the differential foundation movement at the insured property and to ensure the long-term stability of the building. To limit the extent and need for expensive and disruptive engineering repair works at the insured property. To limit the extent and need for costly CO2e emissions relating to alternative engineering repair works at the insured property. It is the case that an alternative to felling such as pruning or significant 'pollarding' of the tree would not provide a reliable or sustainable remedy to the subsidence in this case. We do not consider that any other potential means of mitigation, including root barriers, would be effective or appropriate in the circumstances. We are satisfied that the evidence obtained following completion of our Arboricultural Implication Assessment report completed 31/01/2024 clearly links the Lime T1 and False Acacia T2 as the cause of damage to the risk address. REPLANTING: Insurers understanding the requirement to offer replacement planting in the event consent to fell is granted. 43 DEVONSHIRE ROAD TREE PRESERVATION ORDER 2024 DC/24/135159

  Received 20 Aug, published by the council 26 Aug 2026 Trees
• DC/26/145120 Awaiting decision

  45A DEVONSHIRE ROAD, LONDON, SE23 3EN

  FRONT: ONE False Acacia tree (T2) Ht 10m FELL to ground level and treat stump with eco plugs (broadleaved). REASON: Proposed as a remedy to the differential foundation movement at the insured property and to ensure the long-term stability of the building. The above tree works are proposed to limit the extent and need for expensive and disruptive engineering repair works at the insured property It is the case that an alternative to felling such as pruning or significant 'pollarding' of the tree would not provide a reliable or sustainable remedy to the subsidence in this case. We do not consider that any other potential means of mitigation, including root barriers, would be effective or appropriate in the circumstances. We are satisfied that the evidence obtained following completion of our Arboricultural Implication Assessment report completed 31/01/2024 clearly links the Lime T1 and False Acacia T2 as the cause of damage to the risk address. REPLANTING: Insurers understanding the requirement to offer replacement planting in the event consent to fell is granted. 45 DEVONSHIRE ROAD TREE PRESERVATION ORDER DC/24/136999

  Received 20 Aug, published by the council 26 Aug 2026 Trees
• DC/26/144620 Granted

  249A KIRKDALE, LONDON, SE26 4QD

  FRONT: THREE Lime (T1,T2,T3)(ht.7-8m) carefully re pollard the crown back to old points aproximately 3 metres of regrowth FRONT: ONE hornbeam (T4)(ht.8m) reduce the overall size of crown by 3 metres. These trees are causing excessive shading

  Received 7 Jul, published by the council 20 Aug 2026 Trees
• DC/26/144984 Granted

  9 EXETER PLACE, LONDON, SE26 6AB

  REAR (fronting Wells Park Rd) ONE Sycamore (T2, in TPO A1)(ht.12-14m) FELL by dismantling to safe standing stem or high stump. Reason: health & safety, the tree is in severe physiological and structural decline, leaning towards the road, several branches have already failed, and although a small amount of live growth remains, the tree has no meaningful long-term viability, the significantly compromised structure presents an unacceptable risk of further branch or whole-tree failure onto highway. The proposed removal is necessary to eliminate the risk. The replacement tree is to be a large canopy species planted as near as practicable to the original location. The County of London (Lewisham No.2) Tree Preservation Order, 1957. Informative A: thank you for proposing 4x replacement trees, 1x is required to be a large canopy tree to replace the TPO tree and to maintain the treed boundary character to Wells Park Road for public streetscape amenity, wildlife and shade to reduce increasingly high summer temperatures due to climate change ? Hornbeam, Hop hornbeam, sessile oak, Japanese Pagoda Tree, walnut (Juglans regia), Italian alder or grey alder, Caucasian Elm (Zelkova carpinifolia), small leaved lime, Hackberry (Celtis australis), Turkish hazel (Corylus colurna), Kentucky Coffee Tree (Gymnocladus dioica) - see further planting details below. Informative B: thank you for planting additional voluntary trees for screening, to improve species diversity, and the setting of the property. Informative C: thank you also for looking to retain a safe standing stem/high stump and creating habitat log piles with some dead wood arisings for wildlife and biodiversity.

  Received 5 Aug, published by the council 10 Aug 2026 Trees
• DC/26/144936 Granted

  12 PRINCETHORPE ROAD, LONDON, SE26 4PF

  REAR: ONE Lombardy Poplar (T1)(ht.16m) CROWN REDUCE by 10-11m to ht.5-6m, REDUCE SPREAD from 10m to 5m to create new pollard. Reason: multi-stemmed tree has had a major stem failure exposing large cavity approx.2m above gd level. Remaining stem above cavity is weighted towards neighbouring properties and a crown reduction to reduce weight and sail above cavity is urgently needed to minimise risk of future failures. Merely reducing the one stem would drastically change the balance of the overall canopy and exposure to wind would be likely to cause more failures on the remaining stems. Crown reduction is required for safety to reduce overall canopy to approximately 5-6m from ground level (please see annotated photo) to create a new pollard. Informative A: thank you for managing the tree by safe reduction to retain as a low pollard for rear amenity, wildlife and canopy shade to reduce heatwave temperatures due to climate change. Informative B: please create habitat log piles with arisings for wildlife and biodiversity.

  Received 3 Aug, published by the council 10 Aug 2026 Trees