2019 Submissions
The first submission of 2019 was an objection raised against the proposed alterations and extensions to the existing building together with erection of a new build block to create 16 flats at 60 Bristol Road Lower. It was considered that the proposed remodelling, which included full height extensions to either side and a raising of the roof profile, should not be permitted as it would severely detract from its strong contribution to the Victorian street scene. (
18/P/4874/FUL)
WITHDRAWN
January continued with comments on the sub-division of the existing property to form 3 flats at 10 Clifton Road. The principal was accepted. However, comments were made as no details were provided for the new windows and do
ors, external refuse a nd cycle storage. It was unacceptable that the case officer was expected to provide such information as part of the planning conditions. (
18/P/5078/FUL)
CIVIC SOCIETY COMMENTS ACCEPTED AND LAYOUT CHANGED
Also an objection was raised over the poor quality of the submitted application data for the first floor side extension at 35 Mayfield Avenue. False information was included on the Application Form as well as lack layout information showing the proposed changes. It was considered that the proposed extension would ruin the overall street scape of semi-detached houses. (
18/P/5245/FUH)
APPROVED
The month continued with an objection against the demolition of 16 Beach Road, including 2 and 2a, Oxford Street to leave a level site. This was because there was no knowledge in the public domain of a replacement scheme for the remainder of Dolphin Square. Demolition at this early stage would have been premature and there would be yet another vacant site within the central area. (
18/P/5095/DEC)
APPROVED
February started with an objection against the retrospective application for a fence which was installed above the stone wall at Slimeridge Farm in Links Road Uphill. The fencing by virtue of its location, height, design and materials represented visually intrusive and incongruous feature within the street scene which was detrimental to the character and appearance of the area. (
19/P/0205/FUH)
REFUSED
This was followed by a strong objection to the application for a double storey side extension at 9 Berkeley Crescent, Uphill. Concern was raised over the change in parking arrangements which were not included in the application. The pillar and boundary wall had been removed to allow car parking in front of the house. The proposed front elevation was considered to be out of context with the rest of the road with its unique splayed corner entrances and pleasant front gardens contained behind brick piers and boundary walls to the pavement.(
19/P/0050/FUH)
APPROVED
February continued with an objection being lodged against the demolition of the existing ‘delicate’ single garage to be replaced with a large double garage at 8 Cecil Road. There was no detail of the impact on the current boundary wall. The addition of the proposed garage and its large expanse of painted metal or UPVC would cause harm to the street scene within the Conservation Area. (
19/P/0209/FUH)
REFUSED
Also in February there were two objections to proposals to add dormer windows to 1930s type houses. The first was at 36 Charlton Road. This was a re-application following a refusal of planning permission with a very small change in design. The Society considered the reasons for refusal were still valid as the side dormer would have appeared incongruous in the streetscene. (
19/P/0221/FUH)
APPROVED
The second was at 41 Lewisham Grove. The property was at the end of a cul-de-sac with the front elevation having high visibility from the road. The side dormer would have appeared incongruous in the streetscene. (
19/P/0280/FUH)
WITHDRAWN
The month continued with an objection to the retrospective application for a ground floor rear elevation extension re-build and enlargement at 60 Jubilee Road. This was due to incorrect information on the application form. The demolition of the front stone wall and pillar to provide parking space took place subsequent to the property being sold for development. (
19/P/0199/FUH)
APPROVED BUT NSC REGISTERED WALL DEMOLITION AS A BREACH OF PLANNING FOR ENFORCEMENT TO HANDLE
February ended with an objection on part of the application to take down and rebuild part of front retaining wall at Rotary Court, 37 South Road. The repair of the stone wall was welcomed. However the proposal also included to install a wooden fence behind the wall for edge protection and safety of building users. The Society considered the fence would be detrimental to the street scene and the safety argument was spurious. (
19/P/0252/FUL)
APPROVED BUT FENCE REMOVED
The month continued with a comment on the proposal for a single storey rear extension, pitched roof over existing garage, a loft extension to include dormer windows, gable end window and new detached garage at 52 Uphill Road South, Uphill. A strong comment was made that the applicant submit a detailed site plan showing the stone boundary wall to the pavement edge. (
18/P/5243/FUH)
APPROVED AFTER ADDITONAL DRAWINGS ADDED
March started with the Society welcoming the proposal to upgrade the Grade 2 listed former Dauncey's Hotel to 9 flats with external and internal alterations. The restoration of the stone arched dormer windows to the North and South elevations of numbers 13 and 14 was appreciated. A request was made that the retention of the existing floor space behind the new dormer be changed to the original roofscape behind the stone dormers as between numbers 9 to 12. (
18/P/4936/FUL)
APPROVED
Also in Mach the upgrading and refurbishment and redevelopment of 38-40 Birnbeck Road was welcomed. The proposal was for demolition, with part retention of facades, to create 36 apartments with associated parking, bin and cycle storage was welcomed. However, comments were made with regards to parking, the glazed balconies and the design of some of the accommodation. (
19/P/3151/FUL)
APPROVED AFTER REDESIGN WHICH INCLUDED MEETING CONCERNS
March concluded with an objection against the proposal for first floor extension to existing triple garage and works to create three dwellings behind 69 Beach Road. It was considered there would be a negative effect on the setting and environment of the adjacent Clarence Park. There would be a loss of a pleasurable view to be replaced (disfigured) by an inappropriate coloured obstruction. (
19/P/0382/FUL)
WITHDRAWN
In April an objection was raised against an additional gable on the west elevation to include windows at 6A Clevedon Road. The modification was contrary to the management plan for a property in the Walliscote Sub Area of the Winterstoke Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. It would reduce the architectural integrity of the building. A note was also made of missing documentation with the application. (
19/P/0705/FUH)
APPROVED
At the end of the month an objection was raised against the application to include two illuminated fascia signs and one illuminated projecting sign at the refurbished W H Smith at 42-44 High Street. The properties are now in the Town Centre Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 Schedule 3 forbids such illuminated adverts in Conservation Areas. (19/P/0777/ADV)APPROVED AFTER NEW DESIGN OF FASCIA
In May an objection was raised against the revised plans for the change of use of existing dance studio to two three bedroom dwellings at 1-3 Baker Street Buildings, Baker Street. It was acknowledged that improvements had been made compared to those on 18/P/3702/FUL. However, it was considered that a fully rendered elevation to Baker Street was not appropriate. Also a stone boundary wall should be included.
(19/P/0921/FUL) APPROVED
At the end of May comments were made on the revised plans for conversion of 20 Alexandra Parade and 2 Orchard Street to residential. The major concern was over the provision of bedrooms at the ground floor level which sit adjacent to a narrow and well used pavement. Location of bedrooms at ground level will cause problems associated with security, privacy and natural ventilation. (19/P/1005/FUL)
APPROVED
The final objection in May was raised against the application to prune a yew tree located at 53 Boulevard. The primary low lateral branches which overhang the drive way were already 3-4 m above the drive and parking area of 51 Boulevard. There seemed no reason why further branches should be removed. This tree provided noise insulation from traffic for properties behind it. (
19/P/1162/TRCA)
APPROVED AFTER YEW TREE REMOVED FROM APPLICATION AND GIVEN A TPO
At the begging of June an objection was made to the architectural detail of the plan of change of use of from office to student accommodation at Parkside, Grove Road. The Society welcomed the re-use of the building but consider that insufficient attention has been paid to the qualities of the existing building’s intent and interest and that the proposed new materials are not of a sufficient quality for this historic part of town adjacent to Grove Park. (19/P/1246/FUL) APPROVED AFTER REVISED DESIGN FOLLOWING MEETING INCLUDING CIVIC SOCIETY.
The month continued with an objection to the proposal to display three banners on the balustrades of 3-5 Regent Street overlooking Princess Royal Square. Within the Conservation Area the advertisements would not preserve or enhancing the character of appearance of the area. (19/P/1277/ADV)
REFUSED
Also an objection was raised on an aspect of the application for a single storey side and rear extension at 113 Totterdown Road. The extension was accepted but the application drawings showed two existing car parking spaces at the front of the house. The Society does not believe this is the case. In order to carry out the works as proposed it would be necessary to remove the stone pier and a section of walling which would be detrimental to the street scene. (19/P/1266/FUH)
APPROVED AND CONFIRMATION NO CHANGE TO THE WALL
July started with the change of use of offices at first & second floor level to four one bedroom flats at 28 Waterloo Street being welcomed. However, a comment was made that the supplied drawings showed different windows to those in place despite the statement that there would be no changes to the elevation. (19/P/1301/FUL)
APPROVED AFTER DRAWINGS AMENDED
The month continued with an objection to the erection of 1.8 metre high boundary fence to replace an unstable brick wall, adjacent to the highway at 1 Landseer Close. The Society considered that the brick walls were an integral part of the general layout of this estate and the surrounding area. The work had already started with a change from brick to composite timber effect panels which were considered to be too dominating and inappropriate for the setting. (19/P/1626/FUH)
REFUSED
In July an objection was raised over the plan to the change of use of shop with manager’s accommodation to a four bed dwelling at 18 Baker Street. The shop is an integral part of a row of active frontages. It appeared no effort had been made to let the shop rather than sell the property. Also if it were to be converted the design was considered to be poor. (19/P/1590/FUL)APPROVED
In the same month a strong objection was raised over the delayed application to display of non illuminated objects trailer advertisement just off Marchfields Way. The advert portrays the wrong image of the town to those visiting and residents alike. It did not have the permission of the land owner and therefore was displayed illegally. (19/P/1303/ADV) REFUSED
A busy July continued with an objection to the second application for the first-floor extension to an existing triple garage and change of use to three dwellings at 69 Beach Road. No change had been made to the plans since 19/P/0382/FUL
in order to improve the view from Clarence Park. The Society still believed the visual intrusion was unacceptable. (19/P/1672/FUL)APPROVED
Finally in July an objection was raised over the change of use from a commercial café unit into a one bedroom for one person residential dwelling at 26 Meadow Street. The property is the second building at the entrance of the Orchard Meadows and is in a very prominent important position of this important retail area for small shops. (19/P/1717/FUL) REFUSED
August started with an object to the second retrospective application from Slimeridge Farm to retain a timber fence erected at various points along its boundary with Links Road in Uphill. Although there had been minor changes i.e. small reduction in height and change of colour the fundamentals were still the same and the reasons for refusal of the original application (19/P/0205/FUH) still applied. (19/P/1727/FUH) APPROVED
August continued with three objections regarding retrospective applications for large wooden fences. These were for 63 Milton Road (19/P/1929/FUH) REFUSED, 34 Clarence Grove Road (19/P/1983/FUH) REFUSED
and 1 Milton Road (19/P/1999/FUH) REFUSED. Fences adjacent to a public highway used by vehicular traffic should not exceed 1 metre from natural ground level. Fencing destroys the beauty of the wall as it swamps the wall, and, it typically changes the street view from a road of character to a road that puts a barrier between architecture of the buildings and public realm.
A comment was made on the trimming of a bay hedge at 41 Bristol Road Lower. (19/P/2008/TRCA)
APPROVED
The month continued with an objection to the creation of access to the rear garden from Wooler Road with dropped kerb and gate at 20 Wooler Road. The character of the area relies clearly on the existence of boundary walls to the back edge of the pavement.The proposed vehicular access requires the removal of a long stretch of stone boundary wall which will be detrimental to the character of the area. (19/P/1910/FUH)
REFUSED
The month ended with an objection to the retrospective application for the removal of a stone wall and a stone pillar to front of the property at 16A St Pauls Road. The property is now in the Whitecross Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. (19/P/1683/DEC)
REFUSED
September started with a comment regarding a replacement tree at 32 St Nicholas Road in
Uphill.
Also early in the month there was an objection to a wooden fence at 2 Manor Road. (19/P/2048/FUH)
REFUSED
The month continued with an objection over the removal of gate and pillars at ground floor and construction of fire escape stair to the eastern side at Albany Lodge Guest House, 9 Clevedon Road. The proposed removal of the gate and pillars would be a further detrimental impact to the street scene. Claims that the changes would not have a negative impact on the Conservation Area were refuted. (19/P/1988/FUL) APPROVED BUT GATE AND PILLARS NOT TO BE REMOVED An objection was raised over the detail of the plan to demolish
a single storey rear extension and change of use of ground floor to form three
dwellings at 50A Clifton Road. Due to the location of an electrical substation it
was considered advisable that the proposal should be for two units and a stone boundary
wall added. (19/P/2017/FUL)
WITHDRAWN
September concluded with another retrospective application for the erection of front boundary fence over a stone wall at 21 Stafford Road. The fencing which was greater than 1 metre in height destroys the beauty of the wall as it swamps the wall, and it changes the street view from a road of character to a road that puts a barrier between architecture of the buildings and public realm. The architecture of the building is cut off from its setting. (19/P/2022/FUL)REFUSED
October started with an objection against the request for the removal of front boundary wall to create parking on hardstanding at 68A Birnbeck Road. As well as objecting to the demolition of a stone wall in the conservation area it was considered that reversing in or out of the parking space was likely to cause an accident. The location was on a narrow section of Birnbeck Road and near a bend. (19/P/1671/FUH)REFUSED
It continued with an objection over the retrospective application for the erection of a fence at the front of the property at 55 Old Church Road, Uphill. Although the property is not in the Great Weston Conservation Area, in its development it became clear of a much greater awareness of the Loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments. he fencing changes the street view and the surrounding area with its bushes and low walls. It puts up barriers to the public realm. (19/P/2186/FUH) REFUSED
and
APPEAL DISMISSED
October included three further objections to retrospective application for wooden fences at 1 Rennison Court, Whitting Road (19/P/2143/FUH) APPROVED, 22 Upper Bristol Road (19/P/2206/FUH) REFUSED.
8 The Scaurs (19/P/2292/FUH) REFUSED
The plan for demolition of existing buildings and erection of new buildings to create 40 self contained flats at 6-10 Madeira Road, (Former Lynton Hotel). The reconstruction of the elevations to Madeira Road in the original Victorian style was welcomed. A request was made for appropriate boundary treatment. The lack of lifts was a surprise. (19/P/2018/FUL) APPROVED
The month continued with an objection raised to the part (70%) demolition of the front stone boundary wall to allow for widening of the existing driveway access and erection of detached single garage to front of property at 26 Montpelier. The property, in the Hillside Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. (19/P/2526/FUH)
REFUSED
but applicant has appealed APPEAL DISMISSED
The month ended with an objection raised against the proposed side extension at 13 Bournville Road. The property’s Kensington Road elevation defines the corner with an attractive double height bay window, natural stone walling, window surrounds, quoins and string courses. The extension does not preserve the existing building line and not finished in a suitable material. (19/P/2386/FUH) APPROVED
November started with an objection against the demolition of existing single-storey rear extension and construction of two-storey rear extension with hipped pitched roof. Part-demolition of north-side stone boundary wall to create vehicle access to parking in rear garden at 20 Wooler Road. The reasons for the refusal of the original proposal (19/P/1910/FUH) still remained. In addition the proposed extension gave an over bearing nature that on the uniformity of the remainder of the Victorian terrace. (19/P/2700/FUH) APPROVED
The month continued with an objection for the retention of a wooden boundary fence to front of the property at 1 Lisle Road. The property is on an open plan development of over 60 houses. If approved it could lead to a proliferation of fences and the open plan layout would be lost.
(19/P/2657/FUH) REFUSED
The final objection in the month was raised against the retrospective application for the erection of pergola at 13 Montpelier. The Society believed any such installation should be in a back garden and not in a prominent position in the front garden, interfering with the view of this fine Victorian House. The construction of the wooden pergola and associated fencing in the front garden of the property severely impacts on the street scene. (19/P/2343/FUH) REFUSED
December started with an objection against the application to increase the front drive access at 28 Montpelier. There was no justification given why there was a needs to widen the access and therefore remove a section of the boundary wall. The change was contrary to the Appraisal and Management Plan for the Hillside Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. (19/P/2840/FUH) APPROVED
The month continued with an objection was raised against the retrospective change to boundary fencing at 29A Clevedon Road. The property is now in the Whitecross Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. The adopted Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan, highlighted that for Clevedon Road the inappropriate boundary treatments is significant and the issue is serious and requires action. (19/P/2049/FUH) REFUSED
An objection was raised against the demolition of stone boundary wall in the proposal for a single-storey side extension to west of dwelling. Relocation of garage, and creation of new driveway to accommodate off-road parking to front at * Cecil Road. (19/P/2882/FUH)
APPROVED AFTER CHANGE TO EXCLUDE DEMOLITION OF STONE WALL.
The year ended with an objection against the retrospective application for the erection of a boundary fence behind the existing stone wall fronting 47 Bristol Road Lower. The Society believes that the approval of this application will lead to a worsening of the situation relating to loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments e.g. front garden walls and could lead to a proliferation in the area. (19/P/3072/FUH) REFUSED
