Highway trees, section 278 works and removal consent

Highway tree removal consent does not come from the local planning authority. A tree standing in the verge or footway is almost always vested in the highway authority as part of the highway, and the decision to fell it, prune it or accept works within its rooting area belongs to that authority under the Highways Act 1980. A planning permission that shows the tree removed does not authorise its removal, and officers will say as much in the report.

For a developer forming a new access, that split is the whole problem. Two authorities, two timetables, and only one of them is bound by an eight or thirteen week determination period.

Who owns a tree in the verge

Ownership follows the highway. Where the highway includes the verge, and it usually does, trees planted in it by the authority are the authority's trees. Where a tree was planted by an adjoining owner under a licence granted for that purpose, the licence governs the position, and those licences do exist on older residential roads.

The boundary is often not where people assume. The highway commonly extends beyond the kerb line to a fence or hedge, so a tree that appears to sit in a front garden can be a highway tree. Check the highway extent plan held by the highway authority before you draw anything, because a survey drawn to the kerb line will misclassify it.

Two further categories cause confusion. A tree on land the council owns as a landowner rather than as highway authority is a council tree but not a highway tree, and the internal route to consent is different. And a tree on private land whose canopy overhangs the footway remains private, though the authority has powers to require work where it obstructs or endangers highway users.

The authority's separate consent

There is no application form with a statutory timetable. Most highway authorities deal with street tree removal requests through their arboricultural team, on a case by case basis, applying a policy that starts from a presumption against removing a healthy tree for private benefit.

Tree preservation orders barely feature here. An order does not prevent work that is dead or dangerous, or work needed to comply with an obligation under an Act of Parliament, and highway authorities exercise their own statutory powers over trees within the highway. So the usual arboricultural consent route, an application to the local planning authority for consent to works to a protected tree, is not the mechanism.

What that means in practice is a negotiation rather than an application. The material that persuades an arboricultural officer is different from the material that persuades a planning officer: condition, expected remaining contribution, species suitability for the location, the alternatives considered, and what is offered in return.

Access works that conflict with a street tree

The conflict is usually visibility, kerb radius or the physical position of the crossing. Before accepting removal as the answer, work through the alternatives, because the authority will ask.

• Move the access along the frontage. A shift of two or three metres often clears the tree entirely.
• Reduce the kerb radius. A tighter radius slows entry speeds, which highway officers generally welcome, and it shrinks the footprint of construction.
• Set the visibility splay at a lower height. A splay measured to a driver's eye height can sometimes be achieved beneath a raised crown rather than through the trunk position.
• Use a no dig construction within the root protection area, with a cellular confinement system above the existing grade instead of excavation.
• Reposition the footway locally around the tree rather than through it.

Where these are set out in a tree survey prepared to BS 5837:2012, with the root protection areas plotted over the highway works drawing, the conversation becomes technical rather than adversarial. An application that simply omits the tree from the survey because it sits outside the red line invites a refusal recommendation.

The construction detail goes into the highway works package, which is normally delivered under a section 278 agreement following the permission.

Valuation, commuted sums and replacement planting

Where removal is accepted, expect to pay for it in more than the felling cost. Many authorities value the tree as an amenity asset using a published capital valuation method and seek a sum reflecting that value, alongside the cost of removal, the cost of supplying and planting replacements, and a commuted sum covering establishment maintenance for a period of years.

Replacement is rarely one for one in size. A mature street tree cannot be replaced like for like, so authorities commonly ask for several replacements, larger nursery stock than a developer would otherwise specify, and a planting pit specification with soil volume, irrigation and root barriers detailed. The note on tree planting conditions covering species, stock size and establishment sets out what those specifications typically require.

Ask early where the replacements will go. On a constrained street there may be nowhere to plant them, and the answer is then a larger commuted sum for planting elsewhere in the ward, which is a different conversation with a different budget holder.

Utility trenching and root protection

Service connections do more damage to street trees than accesses do, and they are usually designed by someone who has never seen the arboricultural report. A new water, gas, electricity or telecoms connection trenched along a verge will cut roots on both sides of every tree in its path.

Industry guidance on working near trees sets out trenchless techniques, offset distances and hand digging within rooting zones, and street works are carried out under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 regime, so the undertaker is working to its own permit rather than to your planning condition. That gap has to be closed by coordination, not by paperwork.

Three habits help. Share the arboricultural drawings with every utility at the connection enquiry stage. Ask for directional drilling under root protection areas rather than open cut, and price it. And get the trench alignment onto the same drawing as the root protection areas before the connection design is fixed.

Sequencing with the planning permission

The order that works:

1. Survey every tree that could be affected, including highway trees outside the site, and plot root protection areas over the proposed access and service routes.
2. Open an informal discussion with the highway authority's arboricultural team before the application is submitted.
3. Submit with the alternatives assessed and, where removal is unavoidable, with a replacement and valuation position already discussed.
4. Agree the highway works and the tree provisions together in the section 278 design approval.
5. Discharge the planning conditions on tree protection and planting in parallel, using the approach in the note on discharging a tree protection condition without delay.

Doing step two late is the single most common cause of a stalled start on site. An arboricultural officer who first hears about a proposal after permission has no reason to move quickly, and there is no appeal against their answer.

Evidence to submit

The application should carry the tree survey and impact assessment covering offsite highway trees, a drawing showing root protection areas against the access geometry and service routes, the visibility splays achieved, a statement of the alternatives tested, and a planting proposal. Where the scheme involves wider landscape works, a Landscape Strategy that shows the replacement planting in context carries more weight than a bare schedule.

Arboricultural reports are documents councils expect from a suitably qualified author, and professional review before submission is strongly advised. Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which tree and landscape reports your scheme is likely to need.

This is general guidance, not legal advice; check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.