2018 Submissions
2018 Submissions
The first objection of 2018 by Civic Society was to the demolition of the front boundary wall at 47 Beach Road. This was based on the principle that original boundary walls should be retained and that parking within the original front garden should not be permitted particularly in Conservation Areas. Such actions seriously undermine the urban fabric and erode the sense of public/private space. (18/P/2374/FUL) REFUSED

Also in March an objection was made over some of the detail of the change of use of first and second floors from offices to residential and the construction of third floor at roof level to create a total of 12 two bedroom flats at Union House in the High Street. The submitted floor plans did not include any form of refuse/recycling facilities the provision of which is a mandatory requirement. The bike storage positioned at a half landing level made its usage doubtful. A major concern was the inappropriate architectural styling of the proposed additional storey to that type of building. The blank brick wall, punctuated by small window openings did not acknowledge the building’s original design intent.  (17/P/5524/FUL) WITHDRAWN

March continued with an objection to the proposal to the dormer extension of the loft conversion at 196 Milton Road. It was considered the box like structure would do much harm to the appearance of the road and will be very visible due to the open space between no 196 and the neighbouring property. (18/P/2220/FUH)  REFUSED

In May a revised application was submitted for the extension to the Royal Hotel and changes to the level of the raised lawn over the proposed car park thus retaining the listed Royal Hotel with a plinth was welcomed. The modification of the window design on the north elevation was also welcomed so that the extension no longer appears as an extension to the recently constructed Law College building. In addition improvements had also been made on the south elevation with patio doors on the ground floor, a combination of stone pier and plinths, hedging and metal fencing providing segregation from Spider Lane. Another positive was the reduction in the number of materials on the East elevation and a better vertically ordered ratio of solid to void on the existing building. Unfortunately the society’s previous comments relating to the proposed heavy grey finish and yet another protruding glazed café/restaurant, although not so protruding, were not taken into account. However, in summary the CS accepted that improvements had been made to this modern/contemporary approach to the design of an extension to a listed building and it considered it did harmonise better than the original design with the architectural qualities of the listed building. (17/P/1721/F Update)  APPROVED

Also in May the Civic Society objected to the proposal for a two storey side extension at 5 Ellesmere Road, Uphill. The proposed two storey side extension was very overbearing virtually eliminating the spaces between the buildings. In addition it was planned to demolish the boundary wall to the property a remove a section of the grass verge to provide three car parking spaces.  The CS considers the granting of the request would increase the likelihood of further applications to replace front gardens and remove verges thus destroying the structured appearance of this pleasant road. (18/P/2896/FUH). A revised proposal was submitted which reduced the parking from three to two cars but the fundamental objection still stood.(18/P/2896/FUH- Updated)  APPROVED

Another objection in May was to the application for a two storey side extension at 37 Mayfield Avenue. Mayfield Avenue is a coherent piece of post war planning and retains the original design intentions and the layout remains intact.  The proposed extension was overlarge, overbearing and strives to ignore its impact on the neighbouring properties and the general ordered ambience of the Avenue. (18/P/3019/FUH)  REFUSED

Finally in May a strong objection was made against the conversion and extension of disused office building to create four two-bedroom flats at 3 Walliscote Road. There was a paucity of detail within the application drawings for this fine example of a detached Victorian Villa which retained all its original detail and was significant in the streetscape.The Society had major concerns over the proposed additions. These included the inappropriateness of the staircases on either side of the street elevation, the lack of any detail such as string courses and quoins and the bland areas of masonry where original and intricate Victorian detailing currently existed.(18/2428/FUL)  APPROVED

In June the  Society disagreed with the suggestion in the application that Waterloo Hall in Waterloo Street, “is of no particular merit”. It also had concerns over the choice of materials for the repairs and the detail of the proposed work. (18/P/3208/FUH)  WITHDRAWN

June concluded with a comment on the application for listed building consent for works to roof in order to stop leaks to flat below at 6 Royal Crescent. There were concerns over the detail of the repairs and that the original parapet coping stones should be retained and not covered in lead sheet. (18/3001/LBC)  APPROVED WITH REQUIRMENT TO MEET CIVIC SOCIETY COMMENT

July started with an objection effecting another of Weston’s finest buildings. There was a retrospective application for changes made in the front garden at the 3 Ellenborough Crescent .A fence was erected alongside the party wall between No.3 and No. 4, erection of a waste bin area, a gate at the front of the property and the erection of a shed. North Somerset Council have instructed that these be removed and the Civic Society supported this request. (18/P/2048/FUL)  REFUSED

Note:in August the application was resubmitted as 18/P/3823/LBC and this was alsoREFUSED. In December 2019 a slightly modified application was made and an objection raised. (18/P/5031/FUL) (18/P/5032/LBC) The application was subsequently WITHDRAWN

Also in July an objection was raised for the retrospective application by Weston Town Council to include a large illuminated advertisement on the Blakehay Thatre in Wadham Street. The Civic Society has a history with this building having, with the Weston Trust, saved this building from demolition.The society however felt that the illuminated signage was truly awful and too large.  It dominated the architectural qualities of what must be one of the town’s finest buildings and is already festooned (three hanging and two in window spaces) with signage.  (18/P/3423/ADV)  APPROVED.

The first objection in August was to aspects of the application to convert the retail unit to two residential dwellings at 2 Burlington Street. The loss of the stone built garage, which contributes to the street’s character, was regretted and a suggestion was made that it be included within the redevelopment of the site. The two very ordinary windows were proposed for the elevation to Alfred Street and it was recommended that either there should be an inclusion of a bay window or a single window of appropriate scale and detail, stone facing and quoins. A request was also made for a stone low wall to continue the street elevation and provide a sense of visual order. (18/P/3702/FUL)  APPROVED WITH SOME OF THE CIVIC SOCIETY REQUESTS MET

August also included a very strongly opposed the demolition of the Madeira Cove Hotel at 32-34 Birnbeck Road and erection of a new four-storey building comprising ten new self-contained flats. The application was virtually a repeat of the previous planning application 08/P/2028/F which was refused after appeal. The only change was the proposed elevations represented a backward step when compared to the earlier application. (18/P/3335/FUL) REFUSED BUT APPEAL APPROVED

 At the end of August there was a second application for the change of use of the first and second offices to two bedroom flats at Union House in the High Street. It was welcomed that the addition of an unsuitable extra floor has been dropped. Although the application was for prior approval and not a detailed full application there were floor plans submitted. It was considered the environmental conditions were not acceptable. (18/P/3756/COA)  REFUSED

In September there was a strong objection to what was believed to be an ill-considered and badly presented proposal to extend an existing loft space with the addition of one dormer window and the conversion of a window into a dormer window, with provision of additional one bathroom and access stairs at Flat 5, Rockleaze Mansions, 6 Paragon Road. (18/P/3871/FUL). In November, just prior to the approval decision day, a revised plan for the dormer window was submitted. A further objection letter was sent. (18/P/3871/FUL Update) APPROVED

In October an objection was made with regard to 4 Beaconsfield Road. A previous application 17/P/1980/F for an infill development at this address was refused. It was considered that the revised proposal would still be cramped and out of keeping with the surroundings. The proposed render finish would also not have been an appropriate finish in the area where natural stone predominated. (18/P/4064/FUL) REFUSED

Also in October an objection was raised against the detail of the proposal to convert the former dance studio at 1-3 Baker Street Buildings, Baker Street, to two new dwellings. Natural stone should be used on the ground floor and a new boundary wall built to the back edge of the pavement. The proposed on-site car parking should be eliminated. (18/P/4353/FUL)  REFUSED

October continued with an objection  against a proposal to change a window to a doorway at Ashcombe Court, on the corner of Elmhyrst Road and Milton Road. The proposed change was totally out of character with this fine Victorian building in the Boulevard/Montpelier Conservation Area. (18/P/4451/FUL)  REFUSED

It was announced that b&m were taking over the majority of the former BHS store in the High Street. In September an objection was raised over the planned signage that was proposed. This applied to both the facia board and vinyls which were to cover the windows facing the street. (18/P/4110/ADV).  In November a revised drawing was submitted which was an improvement on the original but the Society still considered that this was unacceptable for the location. (18/P/4110/ADV Update). Immediately afterwards a further modification was proposed which again was considered not to be suitable. (18/P/4110/ADV Second Update). However this third option was unfortunately APPROVED.

November started with an objection to the application from 13 Woodland Road to partially remove a section of a stone garden wall to create a second vehicle access. The proposal was to raise the remaining wall. The widening was accepted but not the heightening and a gate post should be modified. (18/P/4571/FUH) REFUSED

The month continued  with an objection to the proposal for 35A Osborne Road for a loft conversion including a side pitched roof dormer with roof lights. Such a modification to 35A would have ruined the aspect of this well presented road of semi-detached Victorian Houses with narrow separation between the adjoining properties. (18/P/4598/FUH)APPROVED

Also in November there was a proposal to widen the existing access to the roof terrace and the installation of a glass balustrade at Flat 3, Trinity Mansions, 14 Atlantic Road. This had been previously been refused. This was a new application using evidence of other buildings in the area with various balustrades. However the fundamental reason for the original refusal had not changed. (18/P/4686/FUH) APPROVED

In the same month the application to convert 26 Bristol Road Lower from a care home to 9 flats was welcomed. However there were objections relating to the car parking and the proposal to replace the timber balustrading to the balconies at the rear of the property by plate glass. (18/P/4732/FUL)APPROVED WITH SOME SOCIETY COMMENTS ACCEPTED.

In December concerns were raised over the conversion of part of the ground floor to residential at 20 Alexandra Parade & 2 Orchard Street. The proposal to set back a new second floor was questioned and the use of timber cladding was considered an inappropriate material. (18/P/4512/FUL) WITHDRAWN

The month continued with an objection was raised against the application to remove the front wall and use the existing hard standing for car parking at 68A Birnbeck Road. Stone walls are important features. In addition the location was on a very narrow section of Birnbeck Road and near a bend. Reversing in or out of the parking space was likely to cause an accident. (18/P/5045/LDP) WITHDRAWN

The final objection of the year was raised against the revised proposal to fit a new front door in a window opening at Ashcombe Court on the corner of Elmhyrst Road and Milton Road. The previous application had been refused and the Society believed that the new application was only a very minor change compared to that refused previously. (18/P/5071/FUL)APPROVED AFTER FURTHER DESIGN CHANGE WHICH WAS A BIG IMPROVEMENT



















 












Share by: