Planning appeal decision
Bridge House Public House, Paley Street, Maidenhead, SL6 3JS
Planning appeal 6003154 at Bridge House Public House, Paley Street, Maidenhead, SL6 3JS (Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead) was dismissed on 16 July 2026 by Inspector V Simpson, by written representations. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: whether the works and development would preserve the Grade II Listed Building, and any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses.
the conversion of former public house to provide a four bedroom dwelling, incorporating upgrading existing single storey extensions to original building, restoration of existing barn, the reduction of hardstanding and new landscaping
- Appeal type
- Planning
- Procedure
- Written
- Development
- residential
- Inspector
- V Simpson
- Postcode
- SL6 3JS
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- whether the works and development would preserve the Grade II Listed Building, and any features of special architectural or historic interest that it possesses
- the effect of the scheme on protected species, with particular regard to bats
- the effect of the development on the provision of community facilities in the area
- whether the development would make appropriate provision for mandatory biodiversity net gain (BNG)
- whether the scheme includes sufficient measures to mitigate climate change
- if conflict with the development plan would arise, whether any such conflict would be outweighed by material considerations
What decided it
The failure to make appropriate provision for mandatory biodiversity net gain as required by Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to which substantial weight was attributed as a matter of overriding importance, meant the adverse impacts significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits when assessed against the Framework.
The benefits of housing delivery (moderate weight), conservation of a designated heritage asset (great weight), economic and social benefits, and reuse of an existing building were substantially outweighed by the substantial weight attributed to the failure to comply with Schedule 7A regarding mandatory biodiversity net gain and the failure to secure sufficient climate change mitigation measures, resulting in conflict with the development plan as a whole.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- Policy HE1Policy NR2Policy IF6Policy EP1Policy SP2Gen 5 of the Neighbourhood Plan
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 11Paragraph 154
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision


More decisions in Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026
- Allowed27 October 20266007126Grove Park Industrial Estate Waltham Road, White Waltham, Maidenhead, SL6 3JF
- Allowed26 October 20266014376Roseland, High Road, Cookham, Maidenhead, SL6 9JS
- Dismissed21 October 20266009694Land Adjacent to Stud Green Farm, Sturt Green, Holyport, SL62JH
- Dismissed9 October 2026600900559 to 61 and Land to the Rear of 59 to 61 St Leonard's Road, Windsor, SL4 3BX
- Notice upheld24 September 20263353235Sunnyside Stanwell Road, Horton, Slough, SL3 9PE
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.
®