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
Proposed two-storey side and rear extensions
Proposal details
- Reference
- 26/002155/HHFUL
- Alternative references
- PP-14813639
- Development type
- Householder Works / Extension
- Ward
- Park
- Agent
- Roffey
- UPRN
- 100090190966
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 6 of 6
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Application Form - RedactedDCAPFORM | 30 Mar 2026 | View |
| Biodiversity ChecklistDCSUPDOC | 30 Mar 2026 | View |
| Proposed Block Floor Elevation and Roof Plan 79525151 02DCPLANS | 30 Mar 2026 | View |
| Location Existing Block Floor Elevation and Roof Plan 79525100 02DCPLANS | 30 Mar 2026 | View |
| 66183_Decision_Notice_-_REFUSE.pdfDCDEC | 22 May 2026 | View |
| Case Officers ReportDCCORPTP | 22 May 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
66183_Decision_Notice_-_REFUSE.pdfPlanning conditions
- By virtue of its scale, massing and siting, the proposed two storey side and rear extension would represent a dominant and incongruous addition to the host dwelling. The wraparound form, increased width to the rear and overall depth would result in a bulky appearance, whilst the provision of a largely blank elevation facing the street would appear visually intrusive within the public realm. Therefore, the proposal is considered to result in harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling and surrounding area. Therefore, the proposal is considered to be contrary to Policy LP16 in particular part (a) as well as paragraph 135 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).
Related records
No related records were published in this section.
