It was perhaps inevitable that a further appeal decision (APP/X0360/W/25/3371069) relating to veteran trees would follow so quickly. This case considers the potential impacts of development within the buffer zones of veteran trees, both within the site and in the immediate surrounding context.
As with previous decisions, there was a degree of disagreement between the Council and the appellant, both in respect of the categorisation of certain trees and the application of appropriate buffer zones. In particular, the Council sought to apply buffer distances in excess of those set out within Natural England’s Standing Advice.
Of particular interest is the Inspector’s consideration of proposed footpaths within the buffer zones of veteran trees. In relation to a partially failed tree exhibiting regenerative ‘phoenix’ growth, the Inspector noted:
“Access within the buffer zones is permissible under the Standing Advice, provided the habitat is not harmed by trampling. In this instance, the re-growth is not within the area where the footpath is proposed. I therefore conclude that the proposed development would not harm T39.”
A similar position was adopted in respect of a second tree (T72), where paths were proposed within the buffer:
“It is proposed that they would be delivered using a permeable and porous no-dig installation method. As with T39, the NE Standing Advice does not preclude such access and the routes and methodology would be determined as part of the reserved matters.”
On this basis, the Inspector concluded that the development would not result in harm to veteran trees or the loss of irreplaceable habitats.
While the decision reflects a pragmatic application of Natural England’s Standing Advice, it sits in contrast to the more precautionary approach often taken by local planning authorities, where buffer zones are typically expected to remain free from any form of development. As with previous decisions, this reinforces our approach of a proportionate, evidence-led slant to the protection of veteran trees, whilst recognising that the interpretation of guidance in practice continues to vary.
