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
Prior approval application for the conversion of existing first floor office (Class E) to 1no. self-contained dweling (Use Class C3).
Proposal details
- Reference
- F/00870/011
- Ward
- Haymill
- Agent
- Mr Matt Phillips
- UPRN
- 100081264576
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 2 of 2
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Signed_Decision_Notice.pdf | 24 Dec 2025 | View |
| Signed_Officers_Report.pdf | 24 Dec 2025 | 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
Signed_Decision_Notice.pdfPlanning conditions
- The application fails to demonstrate that the first floor of the building has been used for a use falling within Class E of the Use Classes Order. Instead, it appears that the first floor has been used ancillary to the use of the wider site as a builder’s merchants and insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the primary use of the site falls within Class E. As such, the proposals do not benefit from the permitted development rights set out in Class MA of Part 3, of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended). The proposals are contrary to Class MA.1 (1)(b).
- The application fails to demonstrate that sufficient parking would be provided for the occupants of the development. This absence of parking in an area that is already subject to high levels of parking stress would likely lead to increased risk and danger to pedestrians and other highway users. The application is therefore contrary to Saved Policy T2 of the Slough Local Plan (2004), Core Policy 7 of the Core Strategy (2008) and contrary to Paragraphs 115-117 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).
- The application fails to demonstrate that the future occupants of the development would not be subject to unacceptable levels of noise, nusiance and disturbance as a result of external noise sources associated with the adjacent commercial uses. The site is located within an established existing business area and in the absence of a Noise Impact Assessment, the LPA cannot be satisfied that the living conditions of the future occupants of the development would be acceptable. The proposals are therefore contrary to Paragraphs 135 f) and 187 e) of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).
- In the absence of elevation drawings to show the position and dimensions of windows, doors and walls, the application is contrary to Paragraph W (2)(bc) of Part 3 of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended).
- Drawings considered: - 022.04/00.1, dated 06/11/2025, received on 06/11/2025 - 022.04/A.04, dated 06/11/2025, received on 06/11/2025 - 022.04/A.05, dated 06/11/2025, received on 06/11/2025
