2021 Submissions

The first submission of the year was a comment on the proposed installation of railings at 34 Clarence Grove Road. The existing fence was refused planning permission and a failed appeal against an Enforcement Order in June 2020. It was suggested that part of any approval should include a requirement that the fence be removed in the shortest possible time avoiding further delay. (20/P/2892/FUH). APPROVED WITH EXISTING FENCE TO BE REMOVED

Also in January an objection was raised against the appearance of the proposed side extension at 25 Elmsleigh Road. It was considered to be overlarge with a bulky appearance. It was suggested that the height should be minimised and the materials considered more carefully, perhaps timber cladding would be more suitable. (21/P/0027/FUH) APPROVED

February started with two objections.

Firstly over the demolition of existing garage and erection of a detached 1 bed dwelling at land adjacent to 2 Sunnyside Road. A previous application was made for the site and the new plans were eliminate the reasons for refusal. Unfortunately the new design was not considered in keeping with the street scene. (21/P/0076/FUL)  REFUSED

Secondly on the retrospective application to replace the existing fence at 37 Brean Down Avenue. The property is immediately adjacent to the Uphill Road North Sub Area of the Whitecross Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. The replacement fence dominates the street scene. (21/P/0180/FUH) APPROVED BUT HAS TO BE PAINTED OR STAINED

The month continued with an objection was raised over the planned erection of a two storey side and single storey rear extension at 183 Locking Road. The buildings either side of the entrance to Rosedale Avenue offer an appropriate sense of urban scale to the cul-de-sac’s access. The proposed side extension sits outside the established building line and would represent an unwelcome and bulky intrusion to the street scene. (21/P/0216/FUH) REFUSED

In April an objection was raised against the application for advertising consent for an illuminated fascia sign and an illuminated projecting sign at 12 Walliscote Road for the TSB. The proposal was contrary to the North Somerset Council Shopfront Design Guide which states such signage in a conservation area is unsympathetic to the special character of the area. (21/P/1175/ADV) APPROVED AFTER DESIGN CHANGED

At the end of the month two objections were made. Firstly to the retrospective application for the erection of a wooden cabin at 24 Clarence Road South. It was recognised that temporary arrangements during the pandemic were understandable if not legal without planning permission. However, approval for a permanent installation would create a precedent and such structures do spoil the street scene. (21/P/1000/FUL) REFUSED

The second to the demolition of single storey detached garage and proposed erection of a two storey side extension and first floor extension to rear at 5 Sandcroft Avenue, Uphill.

On the south side of this delightful there are a series of well-proportioned detached villas. The space between the villas is generous and polite. The development was considered overbearing in nature and had disregard for the street setting in particular the spacing between buildings. (21/P/0788/FUH)  APPROVED

In May a comment on the proposed change of use of the ground floor of the building from a micropub to an aesthetic treatment clinic with alteration to front elevation to provide a separate entrance door to the upstairs apartment at 3 Boulevard. There was no objection to the principle of a change of use and alteration to the front elevation. However, the design did not the Shopfront Design Guide. Concerns were raised over the design of the fascia for which there was little detail. (21/P/1192/FUL) APPROVED AFTER DESIGN CHANGES

Also in May an objection was made to the proposal for the retrospective application for the erection of a garden shed to front garden at 14 Queens Road. The shed was partially visible from a number of directions and was considered to spoil the street scene. (21/P/0959/FUH) APPROVED

May continued with objections to the retrospective applications to demolish the boundary stone walls at 48 and 50 Wallliscote Road.  The properties are in the Great Weston Conservation Area and loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments e.g. front garden walls was rated in the management plan as 4 - Significant - serious and requires action. (21/P/1191/FUH) and (21/P/1045/FUH)  REFUSED

Also in May there was no objection to the change of use of the ground floor retail unit to form a self-contained dwelling including change to windows at frontage at 67 Severn Road. However, there was objection to the occasional shopper parking space in front of the shop being made permanent. (21/P/1288/FUL)  APPROVED

In June An objection was raised over the retrospective erection of fence and gate at front of house at 144 Spring Hill. The installation was out of keeping with the other properties in the road and blocks the view of the building. (21/P/0868/FUH) APPROVED

The month continued with an objection  against the retrospective application for the erection of a 7.5 foot fence around the boundary of 19 Lyndhurst Road. Mature hedging was removed and the high fence was installed due to a large bread dog, weekend visits of young nieces, nuisance from passing drunk pedestrians and security. The installation was totally out of keeping with the street scene. (21/P/1435/FUH) REFUSED

July started with an objection raised against the application for advertising consent for 6 non illuminated hoarding boards at Hornets Rugby Football Club in Hutton Moor Road. It was considered such adverts should be relocated on the fencing surrounding the playing area. They could be a distraction to motorists as well as spoiling the road scene. (21/P/1794/ADV) APPROVED

The month continued with an objection against the partial demolition of front wall to accommodate new parking arrangement at 10A Beaconsfield Road. The Great Weston Conservation Area Management Plan stated the loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments for Beaconsfield Road states was serious and required action. (21/P/1914/FUL)

WITHDRAWN

Also in June there was a comment made on the fifth application for a conversion of the First and Second Floors at Union House, 3 High Street. Concerns were raised over the proposed under stairs space recycling/waste storage was insufficient for a proposed 28 person residence. There will also be the problem of the location of the bins/recycle containers on collection day. Placing in front of the shops would not be ideal. (21/P/1995/COA) APPROVED AFTER MODIFICATIONS

In August an objection was made over the proposed provision of a glass safety glazing barrier to the inside of the balcony enclosure of top floor flat at St. Leonards in Clifton Road. The balcony forms a key feature of the properties architecture. The Society believed it was unreasonable to modify the building by bringing the design up to current safety design specifications. The proposed addition of a glass safety glazing barrier 1100mm high would add a visual element which degrades the ornate view of the building. It would also be out of keeping with the other levels. (21/P/2080/FUH) APPROVED

August was a busy month. A comment was made on the application for a Certificate of Lawful Development about the proposed paintwork to external elevations and vinyl to glazing at the Sovereign Centre. It is known that planning permission is not required for the painting however this may not be true for the vinyls. The NSC Shopfront Design Guide states glossy or reflective materials that have a negative visual impact, for instance in a conservation area may need planning permission. (21/P/2115/LDP)  APPROVED BUT SOCIETY QUESTIONING THE OUTCOME

Support was given to the application for full replacement of existing shopfronts at numbers 8; 8A and 10 South Parade with new shopfronts including tiles stallrisers, new timber framed glazing and shop signage. Repairs to upper levels at first and second floor level of front façade including replacement of uPVC windows with double glazed timber sliding sash windows; new metal railing and low stone base to front properties. (21/P/0552/FUL)   APPROVED

An objection was made on the retrospective planning application for the retention of a conservatory and pergola built over existing front patio area at 15 Cherrywood Road. Although the property is not in a conservation area the installation, including a heating system, is not suitable for a front garden. (21/P/2202/FUH)  APPROVED

An objection was made to the retrospective planning application for the erection of a fence across the top of the front boundary wall and a wooden entrance gate at 15 Trewartha Park. The Society did not agree with claims that it improved the aesthetics of the property, a simple discrete design in keeping with the area and the gate and fence was mostly camouflaged by trees and bushes. (21/P/1917/FUH)  REFUSED

An objection was made to the application for advertising consent for 1 illuminated fascia sign and 1 illuminated projecting sign at 90 - 92 High Street. The NSC Shopfront Design Guide states that internally lit box fascia signs and projecting box signs will not be supported in conservation areas because they are unsympathetic to the special character of the area. (21/P/2201/ADV)  APPROVED AFTER REDESIGN

In September started with an objection to the extension and alteration of existing building to form 5 additional flats (7 existing, 12 flats in total) at 60 Bristol Road Lower. It was believed that the extension should be set back from the existing elevation to be of a lessor height. The proposed extension overwhelms the Victorian architecture.     (21/P/1255/FUL) APPROVED

The last objection of the month was over the proposed new window to the front second floor bay at 22 Clarence Road South. Many of the properties in the road with a window in a similar position have ornate stonework contributing to the stone gables. The proposed new window opening was devoid of any architectural embellishment such as stone quoins, surrounds etc. (21/P/2490/FUH) APPROVED AFTER REDESIGN

In October an objection was raised on the retrospective application for partial demolition of front wall at 40 Severn Avenue. The Appraisal and Management Plan for the Great Weston Conservation Area stated Severn Avenue was reported as having a moderate Loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments and needed monitoring. The Society believes this is a case for action. (21/P/2755/FUH) APPROVED AFTER REDESIGN

In November an objection was raised against the retrospective application for the erection of a wooden fence behind the existing front stone boundary wall at 74 Bristol Road Lower. The property is in the Grove and Montpelier Sub Area of the Hillside Character Area of the Great Weston Conservation Area. The Appraisal and Management Plan highlighted the loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments as an area of concern. (21/P/2762/FUL) REFUSED

December was a busy month. Details were given of the boundary wall design for the former Lynton House Hotel. A comment was made that it was pleasing to see that walls 1.4m above the paving level and piers 1.8m tall had been proposed. However, to be in keeping with the rest of the road, a stone wall should be used rather than white render. This would also lower the chance of defacement with graffiti. (21/P/3285/AOC) APPROVED ALTHOUGH WALL FINISH NOT CHANGED

Support was given for the application by the Odeon to enhance the façade of the cinema including replacement of all the existing black ceramic tiles with like for like and enabling the shop units to be (potentially) re-occupied or at very least to give a presentable frontage and back into good condition. It also improves the street scene for Regent Street and The Centre. (21/P/2926/LBC) WITHDRAWN

An objection was raised on the fascias for the new bowling alley at 1 Central Walk. The “Shopfront Design Guide states: "The deemed consent of illuminated advertisements does not extend to any premises in a conservation area. Internally lit box fascia signs and projecting box signs will not be supported in conservation areas or on listed buildings because they are unsympathetic to the special character of the area.” (21/P/3222/ADV) APPROVED

Probably the most important and significant objection of the year was raised against the redevelopment of the former Royal Pier Hotel site with the erection of 90 residential apartments, retail, cafe, restaurant floor space including basement levels, associated access, car and cycle parking, infrastructure and works. The height and bulk fails to meet the Principles for Managing Change and fails to continue the Positive Features of the Conservation Area. (21/P/2682/FUL) NO DECISION YET

Support was given to two applications for new shop fronts in the High Street at 80 (Gardens Restaurant) and 82 (Rebel)  (21/P/3049/FUL) and 132 (Lamlighters Pub) and 134 High Street (The Stage Door) (21/P/3050/FUL). In each case the new shopfronts met the North Somerset Council SPD Shopfront Design Guide. It was pleasing to see that this work has been produced following discussion with Historic England and North Somerset Council, and is part of the Heritage Action Zone: Partnership in Conservation Areas Programme. APPROVED

The final objection of the year was made to the retrospective request for the erection of a timber fence at 1A Eastfield Park. The fence and wall borders Arundell Road. The adopted Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan, stated for both Eastfield Park and Arundell Road that Loss of/inappropriate boundary treatments e.g. front garden walls was some, issue could be monitored. The installation of the fence spoils the street scene. (21/P/3462/FUH)REFUSED BUT APPEAL UPHELD