Skip to content
PlanIndex Get alerts
Menu

Planning application

Arundel House 1 Park Valley Nottingham

Decided Nottingham 24/01670/5DAY 5 Day Notice

Works: Trees

Decided. The decision notice on the council portal carries the outcome in full, including any conditions.

Proposal

Remove failed limb from fractured willow tree, pollard or fell remaining stem.

As published by the council, reference 24/01670/5DAY

Application record

Reference
24/01670/5DAY
Type
5 Day Notice
Status
Decided
Decision
5 Day Noticed Accepted
Received
19 Sep 2024
Validated
19 Sep 2024
Decided
23 Sep 2024
Ward
Castle (May 2019)
Decision by
Delegated Decision

Timeline

Dates from the published record

  1. 19 Sep 2024

    Received by Nottingham

  2. 23 Sep 2024

    Decision issued: 5 Day Noticed Accepted

  3. 25 Aug 2026

    Added to PlanIndex

Documents

Plans, drawings, consultee responses and the officer's report

2 documents on file for this application

A planning file usually holds the application form, drawings and site plans, consultee responses, the officer's report and the decision notice.

Trade members open them from here.

Open the documents

After the decision

The process from here

The council has decided this application; the published outcome sits in the record above and the decision notice on the council portal carries the detail, including any conditions.

If permission was granted, work must normally begin within three years of the decision. If it was refused, the applicant can appeal within the statutory time limit or submit a revised scheme.

About this record

Reading the register

This page mirrors an entry on the statutory planning register that Nottingham is required to keep. The published feed for this record does not state which type of application it is, which is common for older entries and for some council systems; the register entry on the council portal will say, alongside the case officer and any consultation dates.

Every planning application follows the same broad path: submission, validation, publicity, then a decision by officers or committee. Our guide to planning application types explains the common types and what each can approve.

Nearby applications

Within 500 metres

  • 3 Lenton Road Nottingham NG7 1DP

    24/01528/5DAY Submitted 2 Sep 2024 42m away

    5 day notice. Removal or monolith of poplar with cracked stem.

    Decided 1 doc
  • 6 Castle Grove Nottingham NG7 1DN

    21/01347/LLIS1 Submitted 2 Jun 2021 45m away

    Conversion of basement into habitable room (retrospective)

    Granted Heritage and listed buildings 4 docs
  • 6 Castle Grove Nottingham Nottingham City NG7 1DN

    24/01505/PFUL3 Submitted 3 Sep 2024 45m away

    Repair/reconstruction of the boundary wall.

    Granted Full applications 4 docs
    Small domestic
  • 4C Park Valley Nottingham Nottingham City NG7 1BQ

    22/02490/PFUL3 Submitted 23 Dec 2022 57m away

    New windows to ground floor and new front door. Reconfiguration of entrance area and infill ground floor extension.

    Granted Full applications Extension Windows or glazing 7 docs
  • Royal Standard House Standard Hill Nottingham Nottingham City NG1 6FX

    25/00302/PTPO Submitted 19 Feb 2025 81m away

    96% historically approved · decision due ~16 Apr

    T1 Acer Pseudoplatanus, insufficient rooting area with a poor quality soil substrate contributing to a reduced overall lifespan coupled with a decreased ability to withstand biotic and abiotic factors. T1 Shows an unfavourable safety of 1.29, accepted calculated safety factor is 1.5. To increase the Safety factor to the 1.5 will require a reduction of a minimum of 2m (8% reduction in height), however with the previously passed cyclical lateral reduction to ensure 1.5m of clearance from the building there is the high likelihood that the combined reduced canopy area will severly compromise the trees health. T2 Acer Pseudoplatanus, insufficient rooting area with a poor quality soil substrate contributing to a reduced overall lifespan coupled with a decreased ability to withstand biotic and abiotic factors. T2 Shows an unfavourable safety of 0.9, accepted calculated safety factor is 1.5. The level of height reduction required to increase the safety factor to 1.5 would require a 4m height reduction, resulting in a significant loss of photosynthetic area and would compromise the tree's health severely. T002 has a non-tolerable risk level when utilising The VALID methodology of Tree risk/benefit and a Tolerable by Agreement risk level if using QTRA. As we cannot impart an "agreement" with passing vehicles or pedestrians this risk level must be downgraded to "risk will not ordinarily be tolerable".

    Awaiting decision Trees 3 docs
  • Royal Standard House Standard Hill Nottingham Nottingham City NG1 6FX

    24/02217/PWC Submitted 17 Dec 2024 81m away

    Removal of 4 Sycamore trees T4-T7 along the southern slope, so far one tree is showing signs of decline caused Cryptostroma corticale and given the proximity to each other and the limited soil volume, infection and death of all the maple species along this line is highly probable. Given the brittle nature of timber in trees that have died from this and the negative effects on the health of workers exposed to the spores of this disease, it is recommended that they be removed during the wetter winter months.

    Granted Trees 3 docs