Understanding planning · 13 min read
Planning application documents: what to read first
Understand planning application documents, officer reports and decision notices. Use a reading checklist, document table and worked example to inspect a case.
Application overview
Front porch.
Proposal details
- Reference
- PA26/2208
- Alternative references
- PP-15032722
- Ward
- Teddington Ward [TDD]
- Agent
- Docherty
- UPRN
- 100022326633
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 10 of 10
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Application Form - Without Personal DataApplication Form - Redacted | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| EXISTING PLANS & ELEVATIONs ref.: PP-01Submitted Drawing | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| PROPOSED PLANS & ELEVATIONs ref.: PP-02Submitted Drawing | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| EXISTING & PROPOSED SIDE ELEVATIONS ref.: PP-03Submitted Drawing | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| Fire safety statementReport | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| Flood risk assessmentReport | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| CIL FORMApplication Form | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| Location PlanSubmitted Drawing | 23 Jun 2026 | View |
| decisionDecision Notice | 12 Aug 2026 | View |
| Officer ReportReport | 12 Aug 2026 | View |
Documents open on the council website. Browse council documents if a link has changed.
Application timeline
Council milestones and published deadlines. A deadline passing does not confirm a decision.
Consultation expiry date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceStatutory expiry date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceDecision due date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council source
Decision & conditions
decisionPlanning conditions
- The proposed front porch, by reason of its prominent siting, excessive depth, height and massing, would represent an unsympathetic, incongruous and visually obtrusive form of development to the detriment of the visual amenities of the application property, street scene and locality as a whole. The proposal therefore fails to comply with, in particular, Policy 28 of the Local Plan (2025) and the House Extensions and External Alterations SPD (2015).
- For the avoidance of doubt the Drawing(s) No(s) and Document(s) to which this decision refers are as follows:- Fire safety statement Flood risk assessment EXISTING PLANS & ELEVATIONs ref.: PP-01 PROPOSED PLANS & ELEVATIONs ref.: PP-02 EXISTING & PROPOSED SIDE ELEVATIONS ref.: PP-03 Location Plan - all received 23 June 2026.
- In accordance with paragraphs 38-42 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Richmond upon Thames Borough Council takes a positive and proactive approach to the delivery of sustainable development, by: * Providing a formal pre-application service * Providing written policies and guidance, all of which is available to view on the Council's website * Where appropriate, negotiating amendments to secure a positive decision * Determining applications in a timely manner. In this instance: * The applicants did not seek formal pre-application advice, and the scheme was found to be contrary to policy and guidance, and subsequently refused. The Council is ready to enter into discussions, through the Council's formal pre-application service, to advise the applicants of relevant policy and guidance; and where possible assist in the preparation of a new planning permission. More information on the pre-application service and relevant fees can be found online at www.richmond.gov.uk/pre-application_for_developers.
