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
Construction of a single storey front extension to form porch, single storey side and rear extension following demolition of existing garage to the rear, part first floor rear extension including hip to gable loft conversion to create habitable accommodation with rear dormer extension and 2no. rooflights to front elevation.
Proposal details
- Reference
- P/20868/002
- Alternative references
- PP-14657570
- Ward
- Cippenham Green
- Agent
- Mr Abdul Wajid
- UPRN
- 100080335729
Sign in to view all collected council fields and recorded changes.
Sign in to view collected detailsDocuments 8 of 8
| Document | Published | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Proposed Floor PlansSubmitted Plans and Details | 28 Jan 2026 | View |
| Location planSubmitted Plans and Details | 28 Jan 2026 | View |
| Existing elevationsSubmitted Plans and Details | 28 Jan 2026 | View |
| Existing Block plan and ground floor planSubmitted Plans and Details | 28 Jan 2026 | View |
| Application Form - Without Personal DataApplication Form | 28 Jan 2026 | View |
| Proposed ElevationsAmended Plans | 18 Feb 2026 | View |
| P-20868-002_-_59_St_Georges_Cres_REFUSAL.pdfDecisions | 10 Apr 2026 | View |
| Signed_Decision_Notice.pdfDecisions | 10 Apr 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.
Decision due date
Past published deadlineA published target or deadline. It does not confirm an outcome.
Council sourceConsultation 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 source
Decision & conditions
P-20868-002_-_59_St_Georges_Cres_REFUSAL.pdf Signed_Decision_Notice.pdfPlanning conditions
- The proposed extensions cumulatively, by virtue of their excessive scale, massing, design and siting, represent a discordant, jarring and incongruous addition to the host property. They are overly bulky and unduly detract from the architectural composition and proportions of the original dwelling house. The proposal is not representative of good design and would significantly unbalance the pair of semi-detached properties and cause visual harm by standing at-odds in the streetscene, particularly this stretch of the St Georges Crescent. The proposal represents poor design contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework, Core Policy 8 of the Slough Core Strategy 2006 - 2026 (adopted 2008), Policies H15, EN1 and EN2 of the Slough Local Plan (adopted 2004) and the Slough Residential Extension Guidelines (adopted 2010).
- The proposed single storey rear extension, by reason of its size, siting, height and proximity to both neighbouring boundaries, would have an overbearing and overly dominant appearance when viewed from the gardens of both immediately neighbouring properties, and a significant overshadowing impact in the garden of No.57 St Georges Crescent, detrimental to the residential amenities of the neighbouring occupiers contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework, Core Policy 8 of the Slough Core Strategy 2006 - 2026 (adopted 2008), Policies H15, EN1 and EN2 of the Slough Local Plan (adopted 2004) and the Slough Residential Extension Guidelines (adopted 2010).
- The proposal would provide an unacceptable shortfall in amenity space on site and thus would lead to an inadequate and a poor standard of living conditions for the current and future residents. As such, the proposal would be contrary to the provisions of Core Policy 8 of Slough Core Strategy 2006-2026, policies H13 and H14 of the Adopted Local Plan for Slough 2004, the Residential Extensions Guidelines, Supplementary Planning Document, Adopted January 2010 and The National Planning Policy Framework.
- The development hereby refused was submitted with the following plans and drawings: - Location Plan - Existing Ground Floor/Block Plan, Drg No. PL/01 - Existing Floor Plans and Elevations, Drg No. PL/02 - Proposed Floor Plans and Block Plan, Drg No. PL/03 - Proposed Elevations, Drg No. PL/04
- In dealing with this application, the Local Planning Authority has decided that there are no amendments that would make the proposed development acceptable within the scope of the proposal description, and therefore none were requested. It is the view of the Local Planning Authority that the proposed development does not improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area for the reasons given in this notice and it is not in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.
