One-bedroom annexe at Hope Chapel Hope Chapel Hill, Bristol
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Bristol Planning Committee A on 5 Nov 2025.
What was proposed
A freestanding, 37-square-metre, one-bedroom annexe was proposed to house a support worker or caretaker for the church.
“This application proposes the construction of a freestanding, 1-bedroom annexe to house a support worker/caretaker for the existing church.”
“The proposed building would be located to the eastern side of Hope Chapel set 60cm away from the designated heritage asset and will be located on elevated ground. The building would be of approximately 37square metres in size with a mono-pitch roof of approximately 3.6 to 3.2 metres in height. The building would be faced in larch cladding with EPDM single ply membrane roof and composite frame casement type windows.”
Officer report
The site
The site contains a Grade II listed chapel in an open burial ground within a conservation area, with two protected trees nearby.
“The application site compromises Grade II Listed Hope Chapel which is a standalone singular chapel structure sat in an open burial ground setting, which is located within the boundaries of the Clifton ward.”
“The application site is located within the boundaries of Clifton and Hotwells Conservation Area and there are 2 trees protected by a Tree Protection Order to the east of site (within the curtilage of Hope Chapel House).”
Officer report
Earlier application
A nearly identical annexe proposal was refused in 2024, and the applicant did not appeal that decision.
“The current applications are for a proposal which is nearly identical to one which was previously refused under delegated powers on 28.10.2024 (ref. no: 23/03216/F and 23/03217/LA). The applicant had the right to appeal the decision against the LPA; however, this right was never exercised.”
Officer report
Why officers recommended refusal
Officers identified harm to heritage, archaeology, neighbouring amenity, protected trees, nature conservation and biodiversity, which public benefits could not outweigh.
“Officers have carefully assessed the impact and merits of the application and recommend they are refused for reasons including impact on designated heritage assets (including archaeology), impact to the amenity of neighbouring occupiers, impact to locally important trees (TPO protected), as well impact to nature conservation and lack of biodiversity net gain. The public benefits associated with the proposals would not outweigh the harm identified.”
Officer report
Objections and support
Four objections were received, including objections from three local amenity groups, while a ward councillor said the accommodation’s benefits outweighed the concerns.
“The applications for planning permission and listed building consent have received 4 representations from separate parties in total following public consultation. Of these 4 representations, all are objections, including 3 objections from local amenity groups. Reasons for objection are summarised in the below sections of this report.”
“The applications have been referred to the committee by local the ward Councillor citing reason for referral: "the benefits of the construction and availability of this accommodation outweigh any heritage or other considerations arguing in favour of the rejection of the application".”
Officer report
The vote
Councillors Rob Bryher and Andrew Varney moved and seconded refusal, which passed by five votes to three.
“Councillor Rob Bryher moved, seconded by Councillor Andrew Varney and, upon being put to the vote, it was…”
“RESOLVED (5 for, 3 against) – that the application is refused on the grounds recommended by officers in their report.”
Minutes
The members' reasons
“In addition, the façade and development were shown • Objections related to the negative impact of the single standalone setting within the Conservation Area • The Committee noted that human skeletons had been found buried beneath the chapel • In addition, tree protection measures would need to be provided since there was a Tree Preservation Order in place.”
Minutes
Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.
Sources
- Bristol Planning Committee A minutes, 5 November 2025
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Bristol's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Bristol Planning Committee A
- Council
- Bristol
- Date
- Wednesday 5 November 2025
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended refusal
- Committee decided
- Refused
- Vote
- 5 for refusal, 3 against
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Bristol committee decisions →
Source: Plota analysis of the minutes.
This committee's year
5 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.