Enlarged front extension at High Hall, Compton Martin, Bristol

What was proposed

The application sought a larger single-storey front extension replacing the existing one, with new stone retaining walls and steps.

“This application seeks permission to erect a single-storey front extension. The proposed extension would replace an existing addition.”

Officer report

The site

The historic dwelling is a non-designated heritage asset in the conservation area and Mendip Hills National Landscape.

“REPORT This application relates to a historic two-storey residential dwelling, likely dating back to the 18c. The property was originally two cottages, one a 3-bay house with central doorway, and the other a single bay house. Whilst some alterations have occurred over time, the property retains its simple character and form.”

“The property lies within the Compton Martin Conservation Area and Mendip Hills National Landscape.”

Officer report

Earlier application

An earlier application for a replacement front extension and landscape works was withdrawn in March 2024.

“23/04685/FUL - Demolition of front single storey extension and timber landscape retaining walls. Erection of a replacement single storey front extension and landscape alterations including new stone retaining walls and steps, withdrawn 28.03.2024”

Officer report

Officers’ assessment

Officers considered the extension too large and visually discordant, harming the cottage’s character and the conservation area without sufficient public benefit.

“The cottage positively contributes to the Conservation Area. Notwithstanding the visibility of the property from wider viewpoints within the Conservation Area, the proposed development would clearly harm this non-designated heritage asset and detract from its historic significance. It therefore follows that the proposed extension would fail to preserve or enhance the character of the Conservation Area.”

“The main issue with regard to the relationship of the proposed development to the host dwelling is its position and visibility. Large areas of glazing and no read-able entrance fail to address the design shortfalls of the current extension. While the existing extension is an incongruous addition to a traditional dwelling it does have some merits, albeit limited that allow it to assimilate better with the dwelling.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke in support of the application.

Members’ debate

Members supporting the motion considered the extension limited, recognised some heritage harm, and gave weight to the parish council’s support.

“He expressed the view that there would be a public benefit to permit the development as it was a limited extension to a small property and would result in less than substantial harm to a non-designated heritage asset in the conservation area. He moved that officers be delegated to permit the application subject to appropriate conditions. This was seconded by Cllr Warren.”

“Cllrs Halsall, Hounsell and Hughes spoke in support of the motion, noting the officer had given a fair assessment based on policy, but that the location was unique and weight was given to the support from the Parish Council.”

Minutes

The vote

Members unanimously supported the motion to delegate permission, with nine votes in favour and none against.

“On voting for the motion, it was CARRIED (9 in favour and 0 against - unanimous).”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee resolved to grant permission subject to suitable conditions, overturning the officers’ recommendation to refuse.

“RESOLVED that permission be granted subject to suitable conditions.”

Minutes