A full BS5837 process produces five distinct deliverables — the Tree Survey, the Tree Constraints Plan, the Arboricultural Impact Assessment, the Tree Protection Plan and the Arboricultural Method Statement — each doing a different job at a different stage of the planning journey.
People often talk about "a BS5837 survey" as if it were a single document. It isn't. It's a family of outputs that appear in sequence, some before you apply for permission and some only after it's granted. Understanding which is which — and when each is needed — is the difference between a smooth application and one that's invalidated at the door or held up for weeks at the discharge stage. This is the master decoder.
The five outputs at a glance
| # | Output | The question it answers | Stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Tree Survey (+ schedule) | What trees are here and what are they worth? | Pre-design |
| 2 | Tree Constraints Plan (TCP) | Where can we actually build? | Pre-design |
| 3 | Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) | Can we build this specific layout? | Submitted with application |
| 4 | Tree Protection Plan (TPP) | Where does the protection go? | With application and/or at discharge |
| 5 | Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS) | How exactly will we protect them? | Usually a pre-commencement condition |
The load-bearing distinction: outputs 1–3 are the pre-permission "can we build this?" documents. Outputs 4 and 5 (in their detailed form) are the post-permission "prove you'll protect them" documents, discharged as conditions before works start.
1. The Tree Survey
The foundation. A systematic record of every relevant tree — species, height, stem diameter (at 1.5m), crown spread in four directions, age class, condition, life expectancy, its BS5837 category (U, A, B or C) and its calculated Root Protection Area. It's presented as a schedule (a table), with each tree given a unique reference so it can be tracked through every later document. Everything else builds on this. For what the survey must contain clause by clause, see our BS5837:2012 standard requirements guide, and for how the categories work, our tree categories explained breakdown.
Done: before the design, ideally.
2. The Tree Constraints Plan (TCP)
A scaled drawing that takes the survey data and puts it on the site plan: each tree's position, its crown spread, and its RPA drawn as a circle or polygon, sometimes with shading arcs where trees could overshadow future windows or gardens. The point is to show a designer the "no-go" zones before a layout exists — so roads, footings and drainage can be arranged around the trees rather than through them. Skipping this step is why so many schemes hit trouble later: the constraint is discovered at AIA stage, when the layout is already drawn and every change is expensive.
Done: before the design, alongside the survey.
3. The Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA)
Once a layout is drawn, the Arboricultural Impact Assessment tests it against the trees. Which trees have to go? Which are retained? What conflicts arise — excavations, changes in ground level, incursions into RPAs, future shading pressure that could push new occupiers to lop retained trees? This is the document that persuades (or fails to persuade) the tree officer that your scheme is compatible with the trees worth keeping. A strong AIA doesn't just list problems; it proposes the engineered solutions — no-dig surfacing over an RPA, hand-dug or pile-and-beam foundations — that make retention credible.
Done: with the layout, and submitted as part of the planning application.
4. The Tree Protection Plan (TPP)
A scaled drawing showing the physical protection during construction: where the protective barrier fencing goes to form Construction Exclusion Zones, where ground protection is laid, and how service routes avoid rooting areas. A Tree Protection Plan can be submitted in outline with the application and then finalised at the discharge stage, once the detailed build sequence is known.
Done: with the application (outline) and/or finalised at discharge.
5. The Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS)
The "how". The Arboricultural Method Statement is the detailed methodology for any works within or near RPAs — no-dig construction, hand-digging, special foundation design, fencing specification and installation timing, the supervision regime, and phasing. It's the most technical of the five, and the one most likely to be a condition rather than a submission document.
Crucially, a detailed AMS is very often a pre-commencement condition: permission is granted "subject to no works taking place until a detailed AMS has been approved in writing by the LPA." You can hold full planning permission and still be legally barred from starting until this condition is discharged. Starting early — even bringing machinery on site or clearing scrub — is a breach of condition that can make the whole development unlawful.
Done: typically after permission, discharged as a condition before works begin. Arboricultural site supervision during construction often follows as a further condition.
How they sequence
- Survey + TCP — first, to shape the design.
- AIA (+ draft TPP/AMS) — once a layout exists, submitted with the application.
- Permission granted with conditions — usually including a pre-commencement AMS/TPP condition.
- Discharge — the detailed AMS and TPP are submitted and approved in writing before any works begin. The developer applies to discharge the condition (a fee is payable) and the LPA typically has around eight weeks to respond.
- Construction — protection installed per the TPP, with supervision as conditioned.
A worked example: a rear extension near a neighbour's oak
Say you want a single-storey rear extension, and a mature oak stands just over the fence in your neighbour's garden. Its RPA — 12 times its stem diameter — projects several metres into your plot, right where the footings would go. Here's how the five outputs play out: the survey records the oak (an off-site tree, but it still counts) and calculates its RPA; the TCP draws that RPA on your plot so you can see the extension can't use standard trench footings there; the AIA confirms the conflict and recommends a cantilevered or pile-and-beam foundation that avoids excavation in the rooting zone; the TPP shows fencing on your side of the RPA; and the AMS, discharged before you break ground, sets out exactly how the foundation is dug by hand under arboricultural supervision. Skip the early documents and you find all this out only when the tree officer objects — after you've paid for the wrong drawings.
What "goes wrong" most often
- Nothing submitted at validation — the single most common cause of a tree-related rejection. If trees are affected and the survey or AIA is missing, many LPAs won't even register the application.
- Survey done after the design is fixed — the whole sequence is designed to prevent this, yet it's routine.
- Off-site and neighbouring trees ignored — the oak over the fence is exactly the tree people forget, and exactly the one whose RPA scuppers a layout.
- Starting works before the AMS condition is discharged — a breach that can unwind an otherwise lawful development.
What you need depends on your council
Not every project needs all five upfront. A small domestic scheme might start with a survey, TCP and AIA; a larger development will run the full sequence. What your Local Planning Authority demands at validation is set by its local validation list, and that genuinely varies council to council — some want the full AIA, TPP and preliminary AMS in the application, others accept a survey and AIA at validation and condition the rest. Local TPO density and conservation-area coverage change what the tree officer scrutinises, too.
Because the bar is set locally, it pays to check your own authority before you scope the work. PlanWatch tracks live tree-related planning activity per council, so you can see how applications near trees are handled where you are — compare, for instance, Bristol, Nottingham and Manchester, then find your own area from the tree surveys hub.
Our main BS5837 tree survey guide explains how to scope the right package, the tree survey cost page sets out what each stage typically costs, and to see what the finished paperwork looks like, read our annotated arboricultural report example.
This sequence reflects the England planning regime (Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the 2012 Regulations). BS5837:2012 applies UK-wide, but validation and condition mechanics differ in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland — check your national regime if you're outside England.