Skip to content
PlanIndex Get alerts
Menu

Planning application

6 Barons Wood Tite Hill Englefield Green TW20 0ND

Refused Runnymede RU.19/1582 Trees

Works: Trees

Refused. Only the applicant can appeal, within the statutory time limit, and a revised scheme can be submitted instead.

Proposal

REAR T1 - OAK - REDUCE BY APPROX 4-5m GENERAL MAINTENANCE PURPOSES, TREE HAS GROWN TOO LARGE FOR LOCATION, TO PREVENT NUISANCE

As published by the council, reference RU.19/1582

Application record

Reference
RU.19/1582
Type
Trees
Status
FINAL DECISION
Decision
Tree - Refuse works to tree covered by TPO
Received
1 Nov 2019
Validated
1 Nov 2019
Decided
16 Dec 2019
Postcode
TW20 0ND

Timeline

Dates from the published record

  1. 1 Nov 2019

    Received by Runnymede

  2. 16 Dec 2019

    Decision issued: Tree - Refuse works to tree covered by TPO

  3. 21 Aug 2026

    Added to PlanIndex

Documents

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

4 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

What this refusal means

Runnymede refused this application for the reasons on the decision notice; only the applicant can appeal, and refused schemes often return in revised form. More in our guide to what happens after a planning decision.

About tree works applications

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.

Nearby applications

Within 500 metres

  • 5 Barons Wood Tite Hill Englefield Green TW20 0ND

    RU.19/1581 Submitted 1 Nov 2019 0m away

    REAR T1 - OAK TREE - REDUCE BY APPROX 4-5m T2 - HORSE CHESTNUT - REDUCE BY APPROX 4-5m & REDUCE BACK BRANCHES GROWING TOWARDS GARDEN OVER FENCE T3 - LONDON PLANE - REDUCE BY APPROX 7-8m WORKS REQUIRED FOR GENERAL MAINTENANCE & TO PREVENT NUISANCE

    Refused Trees 4 docs
    Small domestic
  • 9 Barons Wood Tite Hill Englefield Green Surrey TW20 0ND

    RU.25/1199 Submitted 10 Sep 2025 0m away

    T1 - Horse Chestnut located in woodland strip beyond north boundary of property - reduce height by 5m and spread by 3m to leave a finished height of 16m and finished spread of 10m. Recent branch failure resulted in very large branch falling into garden. Tree also has leave minor moth infestation and bleeding canker which have further weakened the tree over several years. The tree is located very close to the property directly above an outdoor seating area. Reduction will ensure future safety as well as longer term viability of the tree.

    Withdrawn Trees 5 docs
  • 9 Barons Wood Tite Hill Englefield Green Surrey TW20 0ND

    RU.23/0296 Submitted 24 Feb 2023 0m away

    T1 Chestnut tree in rear garden - Remove major dead wood, tip reduce lower crown side limbs up to a maximum height of 9m from ground level by 2m. (to reduce the length of the limbs over the garden.)

    Granted Trees 5 docs
  • 16 Barons Wood Tite Hill Englefield Green Surrey TW20 0ND

    RU.26/0605 Submitted 13 May 2026 0m away

    Oak: Crown Reduction - Reducing the height and spread of the tree by up to 1 metre. All arisings to be removed from site. Customer has requested maintenance work to the Oak tree in her garden to ensure it remains a suitable size for the space.

    Granted Trees 7 docs
  • 1 Barons Wood, Tite Hill, Englefield Green, Egham, TW20 0ND

    RU.25/1396 Submitted 3 Oct 2025 0m away

    5 day notice

    Granted 5 docs
  • Lime Lodge Barons Wood Tite Hill Egham SUrrey TW20 0ND

    RU.26/0572 Submitted 6 May 2026 0m away

    T1 - Oak Thin crown by 15 - 20% and lift canopy to 4 to 5 metres from ground level through the removal of lower secondary branches.

    Granted Other 6 docs

In Runnymede

  • RU.26/0594 Refused

    49 Woodham Park Road Addlestone Surrey KT15 3SP

    T1- English Oak (Quercus robur), located in the rear of the property in a Westerly direction. The client proposes a reduction of 3m as part of the trees ongoing management and ensuring it doesn't outgrow its position. The tree is currently 19m high and 25m wide, and will be approximately 16m high and 22m wide following the proposed works.

    14 May 2026 Trees
  • RU.26/0595 Decided

    53 Woodham Park Road Addlestone Surrey KT15 3TN

    T1- Silver Birch located in the rear of the property in a Southerly direction. The client proposes a reduction of 3m as part of the trees ongoing management to ensure it doesn't outgrow its position. It is currently 14m high and 4m wide and will be approximately 11m high and 2m wide following the proposed works. T2- Sycamore, 3 Birch & 4 Oak are a cluster of trees loaded at the rear boundary again in a southerly direction. They overhang 49 Woodham Park Roads building and the client would like them cut back by 1m to reduce the squirrels entering the roof of the property. They are currently 8.5m high and 4m wide and will remain 8.5m high and become 3m following the proposed works.

    14 May 2026 Trees
  • RU.26/0569 Granted

    4 Simmons Place Staines-upon-thames Surrey TW18 3HW

    T1 Lime - reduce canopy by 1m metres to previous secondary pruning points. Reason - to reduce excessive shading and for the health of the tree.

    14 May 2026 Trees
  • RU.26/0605 Granted

    16 Barons Wood Tite Hill Englefield Green Surrey TW20 0ND

    Oak: Crown Reduction - Reducing the height and spread of the tree by up to 1 metre. All arisings to be removed from site. Customer has requested maintenance work to the Oak tree in her garden to ensure it remains a suitable size for the space.

    13 May 2026 Trees
  • RU.26/0576 Granted

    71 A Harpesford Avenue Virginia Water Surrey GU25 4RG

    T1 - Oak at front - fell - tree has Acute Oak Decline (AOD) The tree is in advanced decline, almost dead, due AOD evidenced by weeping exudates on the main stem and progressive and advanced canopy dieback monitored over 5+ years. Structural integrity and vitality are now significantly compromised. Given its proximity to the dwelling and highway (high target occupancy), retention presents an unacceptable foreseeable risk of failure and liability under duty of care obligations. Felling is therefore justified on arboricultural safety grounds.

    8 May 2026 Trees