Skip to content
PlanIndex Get alerts
Menu

Planning application

38 Boyce Gardens Nottingham Nottingham City NG3 3FB

Awaiting decision Nottingham 26/01564/PTPO

Works: Trees

Still open. Anyone can comment while the consultation period runs, and comments go to the council rather than to us.

Proposal

T1 - Lime Re-pollard back to previous points to reduce the risk of secondary thickening related failures. T2 - Lime Remove Tree. T3 - Lime Crown lift to approximately 5m above ground level, this will be achieved by removing epicormic growth and small diameter branches. Reasons: T1: Maintenance of an existing pollard to reduce the risk of failure associated with large secondary regrowth. T2: Removal due to terminal decline, poor vitality and limited prospects for recovery. T3: Crown lifting to improve ground clearance and remove excessive epicormic growth adjacent to neighbouring residential property. Trees protected under TPO189.

As published by the council, reference 26/01564/PTPO

Application record

Reference
26/01564/PTPO
Status
Pending Consideration
Received
3 Sep 2026
Validated
11 Sep 2026
Postcode
NG3 3FB

Timeline

Dates from the published record

  1. 3 Sep 2026

    Received by Nottingham

  2. 11 Sep 2026

    Validated

    Checked as complete and ready for consideration.

  3. 11 Sep 2026

    Added to PlanIndex

  4. Decision

    Awaiting decision

    Decision expected by 6 November 2026, 8 weeks from validation under the statutory target for most applications. Extensions of time are common and are agreed case by case.

    Nottingham took a median of 70 days over the applications it decided in the last year.

What happens while it is decided

This application is with Nottingham for determination, against a statutory target of eight weeks. Over the last year Nottingham's median decision took 70 days. More in our guide to how long planning decisions take.

About this record

The published feed does not state which type of application this is; the register entry on Nottingham's portal will say. Our guide explains the common types.

Nearby applications

Within 500 metres

  • 26 Boyce Gardens Nottingham Nottingham City NG3 3FB

    24/01673/PTPO Submitted 23 Sep 2024 0m away

    TPO189 T43 Lime tree. We have taken advice from Tree Surgeon Sam Wass who has advised a 30% pollard due to dead and dying branches. The sides are growing very unevenly also requiring trimming back. The tree is at 55ft and it has been recommended to bring it down to 35 ft for safety. A few lower branches (skirt?) need trimming also.

    Granted Trees 2 docs

  • 26 Boyce Gardens Nottingham NG3 3FB

    19/02459/PTPO Submitted 4 Nov 2019 0m away

    TPO189 T43 Lime tree - Trim skirt on one side only (growing unevenly). One dead branch on the same side needs removing.

    Granted Trees 2 docs

  • 15 Landmere Gardens Nottingham NG3 3BG

    21/01322/PFUL3 Submitted 17 Jun 2021 79m away

    91% historically approved · decision due ~12 Aug

    New terraced dwelling to side of existing.

    Awaiting decision Full applications 5 docs
    Domestic

  • 348 The Wells Road Nottingham Nottingham City NG3 3AA

    26/00385/PFUL3 Submitted 10 Mar 2026 134m away

    91% historically approved · decision due ~20 May

    Creation of a three-bedroom end of terrace dwelling by subdividing 348 The Wells Road and outbuilding.

    Awaiting decision Full applications 5 docs
    Small domestic

  • 22 Longbeck Avenue Nottingham NG3 6LT

    21/01399/PFUL3 Submitted 8 Jun 2021 146m away

    Proposed single-storey rear and side extension

    Granted Full applications Extension 3 docs
    Small domestic

  • 81 Landmere Gardens Nottingham Nottingham City NG3 3BG

    26/01163/PTPO Submitted 7 Jul 2026 165m away

    TPO79 - Silver Birch - Felling of tree. Reasons: 1. The tree is situated very close to the house and has led to ongoing issues with squirrels and other wildlife accessing the roof and, more recently, entering the property. Its dense canopy also significantly reduces natural daylight to both the house and garden. 2. The tree's roots have displaced the adjacent pathway and paving slabs, creating a trip hazard and making the area more difficult to maintain. Continued root growth is likely to cause further damage over time. 3. TPO79 is located only a few metres from two larger protected trees, TPO78 and TPO80, whose crowns and branches already overlap with it. Removing TPO79 would reduce competition for space, light, water and nutrients, while retaining the overall tree cover and amenity value of the area. See case for more details.

    Refused Trees 5 docs