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
Formation of new garden outbuilding.
Proposal details
- Reference
- PA26/2350
- Alternative references
- PP-14990271
- Ward
- South Richmond Ward [STR]
- Agent
- McDonnell
- UPRN
- 10002263167
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 11 of 11
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Application Form - Without Personal DataApplication Form - Redacted | 3 Jul 2026 | View |
| Existing & Proposed Plans, Elevations, and Section 101 BSubmitted Drawing | 3 Jul 2026 | View |
| Location Plan 102Submitted Drawing | 3 Jul 2026 | View |
| Community Infrastructure Levy - Completed formCommunity Infrastructure Levy Form | 3 Jul 2026 | View |
| Fire Safety ReportReport | 3 Jul 2026 | View |
| Statement of use (Redacted)Report | 23 Jul 2026 | View |
| Biodiversity Net Gain StatementReport | 23 Jul 2026 | View |
| Heritage StatementReport | 23 Jul 2026 | View |
| Cert b (Redacted)Report | 23 Jul 2026 | View |
| Officer ReportReport | 2 Sept 2026 | View |
| DecisionDecision Notice | 2 Sept 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
- For the avoidance of doubt the Drawing(s) No(s) and Document(s) to which this decision refers are as follows: Location Plan 102 Existing & Proposed Plans, Elevations, and Section, Proposed formation of new 'garden room' Outbuilding, 101 Rev B Received 03 July 2026
- In accordance with DM3 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.
- The proposed garden building, by reason of its siting, height, scale, and bulk would fail to appear subordinate to the host dwelling and would represent an overly dominant and incongruous form of development that which will negatively impact the character and appearance of the host property and appearance of the rear garden environment. The proposal is therefore contrary to Local Plan Policies 15 and 28, 29 and 30, and the guidance contained within the House Extensions and External Alterations SPD, HE5-HE7 of the NPPF (2026), as supported by the St Matthias Richmond Conservation Area Statement and Appraisal.
- The development, by reason of the absence of adequate arboricultural information, such as an Arbouricultural Impact Assessment, Tree Protection Plan, and Arbouricultural Method Statement, has failed to demonstrate that the proposal would not detrimentally impact on the health and longevity of nearby trees. The proposal is contrary to the NPPF and Policy 42 of the Local Plan.
- The development, by reason of its siting within an area at risk of surface water flooding, and absence of a site-specific flood risk assessment, the application has failed to demonstrate that the development will be safe for its lifetime taking account of the vulnerability of its users, without increasing flood risk elsewhere. Overall, the development proposal has failed to demonstrate compliance with Local Plan policy 8 and London Plan policy SI3, the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, and F4 (2) of the NPPF 2026.
