Skip to main content

This is a new service – your feedback will help us to improve it.

East Hampshire District Council

Tree

There is a problem

  • 1000 entries with tree-preservation-order field must match the reference field in the tree preservation order

1364

reference
174-tree-1
name
1364
tree-preservation-order

undefined

174-tpo-1
uprn
address-text
point
POINT (-0.944755 50.859260)
geometry
MULTIPOLYGON (((-0.944712 50.859255,-0.944714 50.859264,-0.944720 50.859271,-0.944730 50.859277,-0.944741 50.859281,-0.944754 50.859283,-0.944768 50.859282,-0.944780 50.859278,-0.944789 50.859272,-0.944795 50.859264,-0.944798 50.859256,-0.944796 50.859248,-0.944790 50.859240,-0.944781 50.859234,-0.944769 50.859230,-0.944756 50.859229,-0.944742 50.859230,-0.944730 50.859234,-0.944721 50.859240,-0.944715 50.859247,-0.944712 50.859255)))
notes
felled-date
entry-date
2026-08-06
start-date
end-date

How to fix this issue

Your data is missing a tree-preservation-order.

The tree guidance explains how to fix the issue:

tree-preservation-order

The reference for the tree preservation order that affects this tree.

Example: TPO1

This diagram shows the relationship between the tree preservation order dataset and the tree dataset. The reference value from your tree preservation order dataset needs to match the tree-preservation-order value in your tree dataset.

How to improve East Hampshire District Council’s data

  1. Fix the errors indicated
  2. Use the check service to make sure the data meets the standard
  3. Publish the updated data on the endpoint URL