CHIS Planning Applications Currently and Recently considered
Gill Blakeman, Planning CoordinatorThis page gives more details of current and recent applications considered.
Applications
Details of the following will be found below- St Mary’s Hospital, Upper Byron Place, Clifton
- 2 - 16 Clifton Down Road Bristol BS8 4AF (WH Smith Block). Updated August 2015
- Hotwells cycling schemes. Updated March 2015
- Land Between Ladies Mile And Clifton Down Bridge Valley Road Bristol
- Richmond Spring Hotel 33-37 Gordon Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1AW
- Somerset House 18 Canynge Road Bristol BS8 3JX
- 3 Princes Buildings Log Cabin
- Former Whiteladies Road Cinema 44 Whiteladies Road Bristol BS8 2NH (discussed again by committee 5 Nov 2014)
- Car Park Area Rear Of Clifton Down Shopping Centre Adjacent To 79 Alma Vale Road Bristol
- Belgrave Hill Quarry (considered by the Development Control Committee B Wednesday 12 November 2014)
- 85 Queens Road Bottelinos
- Beacon House Queens Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1QU (Habitats)
- Flat 6 16 Royal York Crescent Bristol BS8 4JY Tin tabernacle
- 20 Pembroke Road Clifton Bristol BS8 3BB (Channings hotel)garden parking
- 11 - 14 Eaton Crescent Clifton Bristol BS8 2EL garden parking
- 25 Wesley Place Bristol BS8 2YD
- Observatory Playground consultation
- Christchurch School refurbishment
- 14 - 15 Triangle South Bristol BS8 1EY Late hours takeaway
- 18 - 20 Regent Street Large restaurant
- The First House, Kensington Place
- Goldney Hall, Lower Clifton Hill
- Leigh Road, new car parking space in front garden
- Easter Garden, High Street BS8 2YE
- 99 Queens Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1LW
- 114-116 Princess Victoria Street (Bridge Stores)
St Mary’s Hospital, Upper Byron Place, Clifton
AUG 11, 2015 The saga of this site continues. CHIS was pleased when the original plans to build high and densely massed student flats here were rejected by the planning department.Last year architects unveiled to us an interesting scheme for a private residential development of both flats and houses. Nothing more has been heard of that. However, the latest project to emerge is a plan for housing for the elderly, presumably only for those still sufficiently active to negotiate the steep approach!
As yet we have no details of the new plans but we will keep members informed.
Tuesday 12th February 2013: public consultation event
showing emerging ideas for the future of the St Mary’s Hospital site in Clifton, Bristol.
The site on Upper Byron Place is located just off the Clifton Triangle with Brandon Hill
to the South and Berkeley Square to the East.
Student Castle is exploring options for providing student accommodation on the site
which include options for the part retention and/or redevelopment of the existing
buildings.
Avril Baker Consultancy
5 Lilymead Avenue BRISTOL BS4 2BY
email: info@abc-pr.co.uk
tel: 0117 977 2002
2 - 16 Clifton Down Road Bristol BS8 4AF (WH Smith Block)
![]() |
![]() |
![]() Pavement intrusion with little room to queue for a bus and pedestrians passing by |
![]() Clifton rotary seat, litter bin, cycle rack all inaccessible, telecomms cabinet now accessible |
- September 2015: The hoarding licence was not valid, as the developer no longer employs that contractor. Consent for the extended width on Clifton Down Rd was only granted to the company
to provide a safe working zone (a normal safety procedure). Now that works have stopped, there is no reason why the hoarding line cannot be moved back to the site boundary.
However, the situation may need to change in the future if/when any construction works commence on the Clifton Down Rd frontage.
The Council is also receiving serious complaints about the loss of street lighting at the junction of Boyces Ave. The cast iron lighting column was removed in September 2014, and temporary work lights put up. When the hoarding was added in August 2014 the temporary lighting was removed. The Council has told the developer where the lighting units should be placed. Each of the six units should provide illumination L.E.D. equivalent to a 100 watt lamp. They are required to do so by the conditions of the hoarding licence. - July 2015: CHIS’s fears that this site might become an eyesore, after the council gave permission for demolition without development plans being in place, have proved grounded. We have learnt from the owners that, following the rejection of their planning application, they have no plans for the site at present. This is bad news indeed.
The site has now been properly boarded so that the full horror of the half demolished building and accumulated litter is partly hidden. Some of our members are concerned that the boards have narrowed the pavement and taken away the well used public seat. CHIS is trying to get the seat repositioned nearby. It may be that the owners will decide to sell the property. Wouldn’t it be splendid if it could be purchased and turned into an open green amenity space? What a good way for Clifton to celebrate our European Green City status!
- 1 April 2015: Revised plans. Refused by Council Development committee 29 April
- 11 Nov 2014: 14/04500/F:
Proposal Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site comprising retail floor space (A1 and A3), 14 residential apartments (C3) and ancillary uses. (Major application).
CAP commented on these new plans for this site as follows: ”The Panel considered the treatment of the side wings and the hard landscape had not been resolved. The different cladding of the two wings emphasised the disjunction of the façade. The breaks forward in the previously consented scheme were in glass which had less impact on the street scene. The angled cut off to the pent house canopy produced an over assertive silhouette. The ground floor screens, ramps and stairs would create a poor quality public realm because they appear to be disjointed; they would not create a unified design. Active and lively uses in Kings Rd are essential; the Panel regretted the reduction of the retail units to two. The Panel considered that the Clifton Down Rd elevation is the most important public aspect of this development. Neither the ground space nor open space above it enhances the public realm. The proposal represents a lost place making opportunity in a very important public location."
CHIS has commented in a similar vein. - Oct 2014: 14/05253/X | Variation of condition number(s): 1, 8, 10 for planning permission 14/03697/F - the remove reference to demolition, to alter the proposed hours of operation and list of approved plans condition. | 2-16 Clifton Down Road Bristol BS8 4AF
- 24 September 2014: 14/03697/F:
Proposal Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site comprising temporary ice rink and associated uses. Granted.
The proposed hours of operation of the ice rink are Monday to Sunday (including Bank Holidays)
10:00 to 22:00. However, the Pollution Control Team has sought to limit the hours of use to safeguard
residential amenity to 10.00 to 21.00 Monday to Saturday and 10.00 to 18.00 on Sundays.
Redevelopment plans: The applicant wishes to make some changes to the consented scheme and has very recently submitted a planning application for a revised scheme of redevelopment to the Council. This application will shortly be subject to a full public consultation exercise and assessment on its merits as a process separate to the assessment of this current application for the ice rink.
- September 2014: CHIS is keeping a close watch on what is happening at the Clifton Down Road development and were actively involved on site to prevent another lamp post being removed.
Andy Rugman (lighting technician) scratching his head while Brian and Maggie and the Ellises talk to the developer
Maggie and the Ellis sisters looking relieved as the street light is put back
Original Cast Iron Street lamp back and looking lovely. Just need the other one backThe lighting technicians were unhappy that Kings Road and Boyces Avenue would be unlit and that temporary lights should have been requested in their place.
We have subsequently been told by Peter Tisdale from THAT Property Group that the lamp posts were being removed prior to the demolition of the buildings so that they could be safely stored and in due course replaced. This was a somewhat premature act because appropriate planning permission had not been granted and it would be unlawful to demolish without that permission.
- July 2014: 14/03697/F: Proposal Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site comprising temporary ice rink and associated uses.
- July 2014:
The Developers offered a private presentation to interested groups including CHIS for a
detailed discussion of the proposed changes from the previously approved application. CHIS
had given great thought and input over the years concerning this crucially positioned building.
The 1960’s building (which has had no known admirers!) needs, of course, to be replaced.
Therefore, it is with great regret that Clifton is being presented with a bland building such as Bristol is all too familiar for the last 70 years. The new roofline is of the standard glazed type, the much needed clock tower, which would add distinction to the building, has been rejected, the promised number of small units in the road opposite the Hop House has been reduced to two and the Boyce’s Avenue wall would be entirely of glass revealing a Sainsbury’s store ! Another distinctive feature (an arcade walkway from Clifton Down Road to the rear shops) is to be abandoned for security concerns; surely a well designed gate at either end could be closed at the completion of shopping hours so that this imaginative feature could be retained.
We were concerned that there was no drawing of the proposed King’s Road frontage, especially as the previous design complemented the beautiful brickwork of the Victorian buildings opposite. The original planning consent particularly specified only 30% maximum allotment for A3 (food and drink premises). 45% is now being requested, and this in a Cumulative Impact Area! Practical matters such as storage and use of waste bins, the delivery times of goods to yet another supermarket and the changed access to the upper storey flats are among our many additional concerns.
Our discussions at the meeting were detailed and agreeable in tone. We are pleased that Peter Tisdale, THAT Property Man, offered to attend the CHIS planning group meeting to consider our concerns on behalf of the community. On a positive note we are glad of the Group’s confirmation of proper tree replacements and the provision of a CHIS notice board.
This site is both crucial and the last in Clifton to be developed with such a major impact.
- Feb 2013: 13/00780/F | Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site comprising retail floor space (Use Classes A1, A2 and A3), 14 residential
apartments (Use Class C3), open space, car parking, ancillary servicing and new access arrangements, together with alterations to the highway. (Major Application). Granted.
- May 2010: Application No. 10/01775/F,10/01776/LC
Proposal Demolition of existing building and redevelopment of site comprising retail floorspace (Use Classes A1, A2, A3 and A4), office floorspace (Use Class B1), open space, car parking, ancillary servicing and new access arrangements together with alterations to the highway. Granted - Pre-application March 10:
The design is for an increased number of shops, with offices on upper floors of the part along Kings Road. There is no residential accommodation proposed.
The shops would be on two levels, the lower one below that of the present shops, together with a small underground car park for people working in the building. Two lifts would give disabled access to all floors.
There would be a lowered piazza, with trees, accessed by a flight of steps at the north end, open to the road in roughly the same space as the present raised space. The entrances to the shops on Boyce's Avenue and Kings Road would face those roads. Bin spaces would not be on the surrounding roads but within the complex. There would be pedestrian access from Clifton Down Road to Kings Road within the complex.
Proposed pictures
Plans will be submitted later this year.,
Queries to:Woodward AP Ltd, Dyrham Lodge, 16 Clifton Park, Clifton, Bristol BS8 3BY
Hotwells cycling schemes
Both had closing date 19 November 2014.- (14/04812/F, 14/04813/LA: Note Pedestrian and cycling link across the junction lock to include new structures across the southern lock, modifications to the
existing swing bridge,
partial demolition of the Pump House boundary wall and protecting buffer to the north entrance lock.
Granted by committee 17 Dec 2014
- 14/04983/FB | The proposal is to increase the width of the walkway, which runs between the entrance to the former Merchant's Dock and the Rownham Mead development
by 3 metres. | Merchants Dock Rownham Mead Bristol)
Refused by committee 17 Dec 2014 because of affect on Residents amenity, Public Realm, and Pedestrian Safety>
Will be resubmitted late 2015. There was a public consultation meeting in Holy Trinity in June.
June 2015: Drawings shown at consultation in June
Land Between Ladies Mile And Clifton Down Bridge Valley Road Bristol

Application no. 15/01128/F
Proposal: Proposed pedestrian/ cycle bridge over Bridge Valley Road.
Application postponed from being considered by the Development Control Wednesday 24 June 2015.
Richmond Spring Hotel 33-37 Gordon Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1AW
![]() Currently |
![]() Proposed |
Somerset House 18 Canynge Road Bristol BS8 3JX
15 April 2015: 15/01702/F | Demolition of three storey office block. Erection of 8no. residential dwellings in two separate blocks, with proposed hard and soft landscaping and works to London Plane Tree.The applicants have not followed community involvement procedure in that, despite a number of written requests from CHIS, they have refused, through their agents, Pegasus, to meet our representatives to discuss the plans for this sensitive site.
Comments in by 19 May 2015. Withdrawn after many objections
3 Princes Buildings Log Cabin

14 Jan 2015: 14/04860/F Application for retention of i) detached garden cabin with attached deck located to the rear of the property for purposes ancillary to the main residential use of the property and ii) a raised deck towards the end of the garden.
To be discussed by development committee. Grant recommended.
24 June: appeal dismissed.
With due regard to the fall back position established by the Council’s earlier
planning decisions, the use of the cabin and lower deck for purposes which
include holiday letting not ancillary to the host dwelling would cause harm to
the reasonable living conditions of neighbours. This would run contrary to the
objectives of the development plan in this regard, particularly Policies BCS 23
of the Bristol Core Strategy (CS), Policy ME4 of the Bristol Local Plan (LP) and
Policies DM30 and DM35 of the Bristol Site Allocations and Development
Management Policies (DMP) (Publication March 2013).
20 March 2014: gone to appeal. Submit by 22 April 2014
Retention of i) detached garden cabin with attached deck located to the rear of the property for mixed for purposes ancillary to the main residential use and for holiday rental use and ii) a raised deck towards the end of the garden.
Appeal Ref: APP/Z0116/A/14/2215241
http://planningonline.bristol.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=MXAHXJDNK8000
An appeal has been made to the Secretary of State against the city council who have refused to grant planning permission for the above.
The Planning Inspectorate has indicated that this appeal will be determined by an inspector following the submission of written statements by the parties concerned.
The Planning Inspectorate has asked that local residents and others that may be affected by the proposals be informed and given the opportunity to make representations. If you wrote to this department giving your views at application stage, a copy of your letter will be supplied to the inspector. If you would like to write now or modify or elaborate on any earlier views please write to The Planning Inspectorate, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN quoting reference number A/14/2215241.
Alternatively, you can submit your views on-line, check the information and progress using the Planning Casework Service at www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/casesearch.asp. Please use the last seven characters of the Appeal Ref above to search for this case.
Any views must be submitted 22 April 2014, and the Inspectorate must receive three copies of any letter. The Planning Inspectorate will not acknowledge representations but will ensure that letters received by the deadline are passed to the Inspector. Such views will be conveyed to both parties to the appeal.
18 Feb 2014: Application No. 14/00466/VD: Five Day Notice to clear fallen Walnut tree in centre of back garden, which fell over in recent gales and will be cut up on 18th Feb 14. Trunk to remain in situ. Canopy to be cut and stacked in garden for firewood.
Feb 2014: Both applications Refused. The deck to be removed, the chimney and shower to be removed
The formation of a raised deck along the north west elevation and the provision of the deck
and outdoor shower to the rear accessed along the above section of deck introduces
features that detract from the simple regular form of what should be a utilitarian ancillary
structure in a domestic garden. As such the building is judged to be out of context with the
site. This built form attached to the side and rear of the building also provides a raised deck
area for additional activity and movement which harms residential amenity by virtue of noise
and disturbance. For these two reasons this part of the development is contrary to policies
B2 and ME4 of Bristol Local Plan (December 1997), policies BCS21, BCS22 and BCS23 of
the Bristol Core Strategy (June 2011) and policies DM30, DM31 and DM35 of the Bristol
Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (emerging).
Dec 2013: 13/05575/F | Retention of existing oak cabin for mixed for purposes ancillary to the main residential use and for holiday rental.
Dec 2013: 13/05146/F | Retention of i) detached garden cabin with attached deck located to the rear of the property and ii) a raised deck towards the end of the garden.
July 2013: Application 13/03187/F Land To The Rear Of 3 Princes Buildings Bristol BS8 4LB
Change of use of detached cabin located to the rear of the property to allow mixed residential and holiday rental use.
10 Oct 2013:
It is concluded that the introduction of a commercial leisure/recreation use of the building would
harm residential amenity and for this reason the application should be refused.
It is also concluded that as the development has not been built in accordance with the planning permission that no planning permission exists for the building.
This will now need to be pursued under a further planning enforcement investigation which will also need to include the additional deck area.
RECOMMENDED REFUSED
The following reason(s) for refusal are associated with this decision:
1. The proposed use of the cabin for holiday rental use is considered to be harmful to the
amenity of adjoining residents. This is based on the fact that commercial leisure/recreation
uses in this domestic garden setting would give rise to unregulated activity by persons
renting the building and facilities which is above and beyond that which would reasonably be
expected to occur as a result of usage which is for purposes ancillary to the main residential
use. The commercial leisure/recreation uses provides opportunities for users of the building
to undertake activities in the garden area at times when the reasonable expectation of
residential occupiers around the site would be that they should expect not to be disturbed by
noise and disturbance emanating from building. As such the continued use for holiday rental
use would enable activities which would seriously harm residential amenity by virtue of
noise and disturbance to take place which is contrary to policy BCS23 of the Bristol Core
Strategy (June 2011), policy ME4 of the Bristol Local Plan (December 1997) and policy
DM35 of Bristol Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (emerging).
12/02456/F - Proposed detached green oak cabin with decking for purposes ancillary to main
residential use, Approved 6th August 2012.
The planning permission for the detached garden cabin with decking was
specifically for purpose ancillary to main residential use.
Specifically condition 2 reads "The outbuilding hereby approved shall be used only as an ancillary
use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse known as Basement Flat, 3 Princes Buildings."
The reason for the condition was :- Any other use requires further assessment as it has the
potential to cause harm to the character of the surrounding area which would conflict with the
adopted Bristol Development Framework (June 2011) and the Bristol Local Plan (1997)'
Car Park Area Rear Of Clifton Down Shopping Centre Adjacent To 79 Alma Vale Road Bristol
Proposal: Erection of purpose-built student accommodation, including associated landscaping, cycle parking and bin stores.Many members, especially those who live close by, have voiced grave concerns regarding the proposals to build a large block of flats, with accommodation for over 80 students, in this spot behind Clifton Down shopping centre.
CHIS shares these concerns, believing that there are already too many students living in Clifton.
Many would prefer to see a block of residential flats built on this land but the economic reality is that selling flats to individuals does not generate the long term financial benefits to be gained from creating a large number of small units and letting them to wealthy students.
As a result of representations by us and other interested parties, made at a consultation back in March, and a further meeting on Aug 11th between CHIS and JG Communications, Black Rock's agents, some modifications have been made to the original plans. They have reduced the height of the block from 5 storeys to 4 1/2 storeys and there is to be 24 hour on site security.
In response to concerns we raised regarding parking Black Rock have said that they would agree to a planning condition being imposed so that tenants of these flats would not be entitled to residents' parking permits. They have also said that a clause to this effect would be included in the tenancy agreements ensuring that no vehicles are brought on site.
CHIS raised the matter of bins and bin storage as the provision in the original plans seemed inadequate. Black Rock say they have revised the plans and that better facilities would available.
Other than making our views known via the media and making representations to our local councillors there seems to be little residents and residents' associations can do to stem this tide of studentification.
The present position is that, in September 2014, the developers made a pre- application enquiry to Bristol City Council planning department and received, in October, a detailed response from the officer in charge of the case who made, inter alia, the following points:
- The height, bulk and mass are key concerns and the impact of this huge building, which would occupy most of the site, on nearby properties, especially the terrace in Alma Vale Rd.
- The well used public footpath would be dominated and enclosed by this 5 storey building, serving to add to a fear of crime.
- A full arboricultural survey will have to be undertaken as the planners, like CHIS, would wish as few trees as possible to be lost. CHIS members have mentioned that they would be particularly sorry to lose the beautiful cherry trees.
Whilst it is good news that the planners conclude that they are unable to support the proposals in their current form, it is probable that we will soon see an amended application and more public consultation.
CHIS will certainly continue to press for a more appropriate use of this site and one that would enhance the amenity of the conservation area.
Belgrave Hill Quarry

Will be considered by the Development Control Committee B at its meeting on Wednesday 12 November 2014. The meeting will take place in a room in the City Hall, College Green starting at 2pm
3rd June 2014: Application No. 14/02366/F
Proposal: Proposed development of 2 no. Use Class C3 dwellings with associated external works. Site Address: Land On North Side Of Belgrave Hill Bristol If you wish to comment on the application, please reply by 24 June 2014.
Application no. 11/04256/F
Site address: Land On North Side Of Belgrave Hill Bristol
Proposal: Redevelopment of existing vacant site for 3no. two bedroom dwelling houses with associated external
amenity space, refuse and cycle storage.
Refused. This application was considered by the Development Control (Central) Committee at
its meeting on Wednesday 31 October 2012. A unanimous decision.
April 2012: Withdrawn!
Angry Clifton residents campaigned to stop houses being built next door to a disused quarry face.
Featured in the Evening Post.
85 Queens Road Bottelinos
14/02430/F | Proposed alterations to the shopfront, demolition of stone archway and creation of external seating area for customers with associated external alterations. | Bottelino's New Heights Clifton Pavilion 85 Queens Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1QSRefused.
The proposed outside seating area would result in an intensification of use which would result in unacceptable disturbance to surrounding residents by virtue of the noise and activity created by outside eating, drinking and socialising. The proposal is therefore contrary to guidance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012); as well as Policies ME4, S5 and S8 of the adopted Bristol Local Plan (December 1997); Policy BCS23 of the adopted Bristol Core Strategy (June 2011); and emerging Policies DM10 and DM35 within the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (Publication Version, March 2013 incorporating modifications recommended by Inspector in his report of 2nd April 2014).
March 2014: 14/00598/X | Application for variation/deletion of condition number 10 to extend the opening hours to 2am Saturday and 2am Sunday - following a grant of planning permission 13/02228/F - Change of use of basement and ground floor levels from A1 (retail) to A3 (restaurant/cafe).
We are waiting to see if this large new restaurant (granted 19 September 2013) gets its hours extended.
14/00598/X | Application for variation/deletion of condition number 10 to extend the opening hours to 2am Saturday and 2am Sunday - following a grant of planning permission
Refused at Development Committee 9 July 2014
The proposed extension of opening hours including the associated disturbance at sensitive
times of the day would result in unacceptable noise nuisance to the detriment of nearby
residential properties. The proposal is therefore contrary to guidance with the National
Planning Policy Framework (March 2012); as well as Policies ME4, S5 and S8 of the adopted
Bristol Local Plan (December 1997); Policy BCS23 of the adopted Bristol Core Strategy (June
2011); and emerging Policies DM10 and DM35 within the Site Allocations and Development
Management Policies (Publication Version, March 2013 incorporating modifications
recommended by Inspector in his report of 2nd April 2014).
9 Oct 2014: Gone to Appeal Ref: APP/Z0116/ Respond by 11 November 2014.
The appeal documents can be viewed www.bristol.gov.uk/planningonline. Please search for
reference no. 14/00598/X and select the Documents tab.
Feb 2015: Appeal dismissed:
14.I acknowledge that some people visiting the area’s many evening attractions may already park or wait on nearby residential streets. However, in my view, given the proximity of the site to Park Place, the proposal would be likely to result in an increase in such activity late at night. That would generate additional noise from customers talking, shouting, and closing car doors at times when the nearby residential occupiers may reasonably expect to experience greater quiet. Although I appreciate that the activity associated with a restaurant is likely to be different from some other late opening premises where people may queue outside, that impact would be particularly great if many customers were to leave this large premises simultaneously, for instance after a private function. Consequently, although the evidence pulls in different directions, I am not persuaded that the proposal would not harm nearby residential occupiers’ living conditions on Park Place, and in Richmond Heights.
16.For the above reasons, the proposal would conflict with the National Planning Policy Framework (‘Framework’) requirement that development should seek to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of buildings. It would also conflict with policy BCS23 of the Bristol Development Framework Core Strategy 2011 and policies DM10 and DM35 of the adopted Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Local Plan 2014. Amongst other matters, those policies require that proposals demonstrate that there would not be an adverse impact on the surrounding area by reason of noise, general disturbance and late night activity. Furthermore, although the premises is already in use, and there is a proposal to downgrade this part of the Queen’s Road to a Secondary Shopping Frontage, the scheme would also conflict with the general thrust of similar requirements in policy S5 of the LP.
Application 13/02228/F: Change of use of basement and ground floor levels from A1 (retail) to A3 (restaurant/cafe), with no proposed internal or external works. Granted 19 Sept 2013
Beacon House Queens Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1QU (Habitats)
Application No. 14/02090/F, 14/02091/LA: Change of use and subdivision of the ground floor front of Beacon House to provide Use Class A1/A3 (156 sq. m), A1/A2 (60 sq. m) and sui generis (140.8 sq. m). The change of use of the upper ground floor sales rear area to sui generis (792.8 sq. m). Applicant University Of Bristol. Respond by 10 June 2014.Flat 6 16 Royal York Crescent Bristol BS8 4JY
Withdrawn!3 May 2014: Application No. 14/02041/F. Proposal New free-standing summer house erected to rear garden. The design is apparently based on the traditional tin tabernacles which originated in the mid 19th Century. Respond by 11 June 2014.
20 Pembroke Road Clifton Bristol BS8 3BB (Channings hotel)
3 May 2014: Application No. 14/01641/F. Proposal Formation of 10 no car parking spaces, 8 no to southern end of site, 2 no to northern end. Formation of new glazed entrance lobby in space below existing front door canopy. Landscaping to gardens.

June 2014: Refused
- The proposed development would result in the loss of a significant amount of traditional boundary wall and garden space, causing severe harm to the visual amenity of the Clifton and Hotwells Conservation Area. The proposals are, therefore, contrary to policies B2, B15 and B18 of the adopted Bristol Local Plan (1997); policies BCS21 and BCS22 of the Bristol Development Framework Core Strategy (2011); emerging policies DM26, DM28 and DM31 of the Bristol Local Plan Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (Publication version March 2013, incorporating modifications recommended by the Inspector in his report of 2nd April 2014); The Clifton and Hotwells Character Appraisal and Management Proposal (2010); and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012).
- By reason of the lack of available turning space, the formation of a vehicular access for 2no. cars at the north of the site would result in a dangerous manoeuvre in a reverse gear when entering or exiting the site across an existing bus stop. As such, the proposals are contrary to policy M1 of the Bristol Local Plan (1997); policy BCS10 of the Bristol Core Strategy (2011); and policy DM23 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (Publication version March 2013, incorporating modifications recommended by the Inspector in his report of 2nd April 2014).
- The design of the parking area for 8no. cars to the south of the site, by virtue of in sufficient space dedicated to parking bays and turning area and inappropriate materials used, would result in unsafe manoeuvres within the site and surface water flowing onto the carriage way to the detriment of highway safety. This is contrary to policy M1 of the Bristol Local Plan (1997); policy BCS10 of the Bristol Core Strategy (2011); and policy DM23 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (Publication version March 2013, incorporating modifications recommended by the Inspector in his report of 2nd April 2014).
11 - 14 Eaton Crescent Clifton Bristol BS8 2EL
14/00047/F | Provision of an accessible parking space, with access onto Eaton Crescent.3 April 2014: Refused.
25 Wesley Place Bristol BS8 2YD
14/00599/F | Proposed first storey extension to provide additional living space.3 April 2014: Refused. The proposed enlargement to the building at roof level - due to the substantial mass and the resultant loss of a traditional roofscape, would represent an uncharacteristic and unsympathetic alteration to the roof that would appear as an incongruous addition to the host property and visually jarring within the street scene. The proposed windows at first floor level in the Wesley Place elevation - because of their irregular arrangement and conflicting relationship with the existing openings within the elevation, would represent a visually discordant addition to the property. As such, the development would harm the aesthetic value of the host property and the character and appearance of this part of the Whiteladies Road Conservation Area, contrary to guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), policies BCS21 and BCS22 of the Bristol Development Framework Core Strategy (2011) and draft policies DM30 and DM31 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies (Draft proposed modifications - 6 January 2014).
Observatory Playground consultation
Construction images to be found on the nature page 13/03224/FB - The Downs New Play Area, Clifton Down
Proposed play area applied for Aug 2013, granted October 2013
CHIS commented:
We commented in detail on the original proposals for this site, and are delighted that most of our
concerns have been met. The new proposals are much more appropriate, and the numerous benches
will be much appreciated. We would like to make one or two comments, because, as parents and
grandparents, we have all been involved in this site since it was first developed, and we as a society
put in funds originally, and in tend to do so again.
Firstly the natural hedge which is planned to fringe the vertical former quarry wall, replacing the present chain link fence. This must ensure that there is no access to the vertical cliff for small boys- the present chain link fence ends just before an intriguing small natural cave in the quarry face that every five year old has to climb up to. The vertical face is genuinely dangerous, rather than being a health and safety fad, and, because this is also the planned site for the swings, it will attract more children than at present. There needs to be thought to the distance between the hedge and the swing, to enable parents to push, and adventurous children to drop off the swing at the top of the ride, without landing in the hedge. The distance looks too small on present plans. The responsibility for hedge clipping also needs to be very clear.
Secondly the proposal for the woodland trail to clear the understorey. There is a badger sett in this area, and the discovery of it by children is an exciting feature. The present capacity to become lost in this area is also an attractive feature for small children. The existence of numerous interlocking paths through the understorey created by children exploring the area over forty years is a fascinating and unique playground feature that should be retained because it is far far better than anything that could be created artificially. Because the understorey is largely elm scrub, rather than brambles or nettles, and the vegetation is Alexanders, which was formerly used as a vegetable and is not unlike celery, it is an unusually safe. Please maintain this area as it is, only intervening if bramble or nettles appear. A further consideration is that the existing understorey acts as an effective screen from the Suspension Bridge Road and Sion Hill.
Thirdly the equipment looks on the whole appropriately rustic and the use mainly of wood is appropriate. We hope the colours of the equipment can be muted rather than gaudy. However the sketch design does not include an elevation plan, and the climbing apparatus appears to be at a high point on the approach to the site from the North. It is not clear how visible it would be from Clifton Down Road, or the Bridge approach road. The joy of the present site is that it is hidden from almost all directions until the last moment, and this element of concealment and surprise should be retained.
The Officers responded: As a result of negotiations the climbing unit has been relocated in place of the balancing beams within the bowl of the site. The agent has advised that the revised location being within the bowl of the site and at a lower ground level than at previous, with the backdrop of trees, should reduce any visual impact concerns. The Landscape Officer has commented that he feels uncomfortable with the height of the equipment in this location but that moving the tall climbing frame to within the bowl of the play area is an acceptable compromise. It is considered that although the equipment, having a maximum height of 6.15m, would be visible from outside the site; being located at a low level within the bowl of the site and screened by trees, it would not appear overly prominent with the area and would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Also, that this addresses the issues raised by CHIS on this matter. The other equipment is lower in height and being located within the bowl of the site would be acceptable in appearance. The other works are very minor and also acceptable.
March 8th 2013: The Observatory playground Consultation ends.
The consultation proposals can be seen at
https://www.citizenspace.com/bristol/city-design/cliftonplay
Do have a look and comment. It is only a choice between 2 schemes, no apparent chance to suggest anything else
The result of the consultation was that the majority of people responding preferred the option without the bespoke unit.
Christchurch School
April 2014:14/01345/F: Christchurch Church of England Vc Primary School Royal Park Bristol BS8 3AW
Proposal Demolition of 2 no. existing single storey temporary classroom buildings and single storey 'after school club' building, and construction of 3 no. extensions and courtyard infill (totalling 1,112 sq m GEA), together with associated landscape works.
This popular primary school, built in the 1960s, and now an academy, has been asked by Bristol City Council to consider expansion from 45 pupil a year entry to 60. The building is in need of an overhaul and the former caretaker's house is unfit for its present use as an after- school club.
On January 10th 2014 plans were unveiled to develop the site by removing the existing mobile classrooms, demolishing the caretaker's house and extending the main building for use as a junior block, and providing a new infants' block. The school will continue to be a single storey building except for a small two storey section in the very middle of the existing school building.
As an academy, the school is eligible for special government funding but a bid has to be submitted by the end of January. There is no guarantee of funding but if the bid is successful work could start as early as this summer with completion scheduled for September 2015.
The new plans look attractive and the proposed expansion will, no doubt, be welcomed by local parents with young children. CHIS members and local residents present at the open afternoon appeared to approve of the draft plans. If the funding is secured and the project proceeds more open afternoons will be held as the design develops.
14 - 15 Triangle South Bristol BS8 1EY Late hours takeaway (5am)
13/03295/F | Change of use of vacant ground floor unit from Class A2 (Financial and Professional Services) to Class A5 (Hot food takeaway); installation of extraction duct, fresh air vent and a/c compressor; installation of new shopfront, including 1 new fascia sign and 1 new projecting sign.Refused
- The proposed development would result in a harmful concentration of takeaway uses and food and drink uses in this location to the detriment of environmental and residential amenity and public safety and would be contrary to Policy S8 of the Bristol Local Plan and Policies DM8 and DM10 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version (March 2013).
- The proposed shopfront by reason of its detailed design would fail to respect the design of the existing building and the character and appearance of this part of the Park Street and Brandon Hill Conservation Area. The proposal would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies BCS21 and BCS22 of the Bristol Core Strategy, Policies DM26, DM30 and DM31 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version and Policy Advice Note 8: Shopfront Guidelines.
- The proposed development includes home delivery of hot food takeaways by delivery staff, which would require vehicles to park outside or in close proximity to the site to collect orders. This would be concluded to result in unacceptable highways safety issues due to the nature of this part of the highway and lack of parking facilities and would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy M1 of the Bristol Local Plan, Policy BCS10 of the Bristol Core Strategy and DM23 of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Publication Version.
18 - 20 Regent Street Large restaurant
13/03601/F, 13/03602/LA: Change of use from Retail (Use Class A1) to Restaurant (Use Class A3) and associated works including replacement of existing shop front. Expiry 12 Sept 2013Granted at Development Committee January 2014
The First House, Kensington Place
![]() |
![]() Wall removed without permission |
9 May 2014: Appeal withdrawn. Wall to be reinstated by October 2014.
21 March 2014: Appeal against enforcement notice: You can view all the appeal documents on line at http://planningonline.bristol.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=N2F7R1DN0DD00
If you would like to write with your views, please write to the Planning Inspectorate, 3/23 Wing, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol, BS1 6PN quoting reference number APP/Z0116/F/14/2214784
Any views must be submitted by the 23 April 2014 and the Inspectorate must receive three
copies of any letter. If comments are submitted after the deadline the Inspector will not
normally look at them and they may be returned to you. Such views will be conveyed to both
parties to the appeal. Alternatively comments may also be submitted online at the
Government website address:-
www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/casesearch.asp.
Feb 2014: 14/30024/BCN | Breach of condition 2 (restricting further removal of front boundary wall) of conservation area consent 12/01326/LC - demolition of front boundary wall.
Application No. 13/03082/H Proposal Removal of tiled roof and construction of a third floor. Withdrawn
13/02524/CP | Application for a 'Lawful Development Certificate for a Proposed Development or Use' relating to the proposed removal of a section of the front boundary wall, replacement of the wall's concrete coping stones with Bath stone and insertion of new railings and gate to match the original style of railings to the rear of the front patio Withdrawn
12/01326/LC | Remove inappropriate railings and concrete capping, install new bath stone coping. Granted with the condition that permitted development right is removed to demolish the wall of this property (to make a parking space for example).
13/01542/LA – Goldney Hall, Lower Clifton Hill
May 2013: Demolition of partially collapsed roof and adjoining parapet walls for safety reasons and to prevent further damage to the building. GrantedBy undertaking a detailed archaeological recording exercise of the building the applicant has taken all
reasonable actions inorder to ensure that the values of the building to future generations has been
preserved via record.
The requirements of Section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990
are met by this application in that the works are considered on balance to preserve the special interest
of the listed building as the works have stablised condition of the building to prevent further damage
due to structural collapse.
The building will be added to the Councils Heritage at Risk register and its condition monitored
The Stable Block at Goldney Hall is consider to be a Listed Building at Risk and is being monitored by the City Council as part of its duty to safeguard the historic environment. The council will continue to monitor the condition of the structure through its Heritage at Risk Register and if the structure is noted to deteriorate further in condition will consider the need to take formal action to safeguard fabric of building. The City Council encourages the applicant to enter in to a dialogue through the Planning Process to find a long term solution in order safeguard the building for the enjoyment of future generations
![]() 2009 |
![]() 2013 |
This building lies within a very important curtilage containing grade I, II, and II* buildings and I am sure must also be a listed building in its own right. The application was originally submitted with no details with it at all, not even a location map. Being a listed building it should have had a Heritage, Design and Access Statement to justify the reason for wishing to demolish it. This application does not following National Framework Policy paragraph 128 as the level of detail should be proportionate to the assets' importance and sufficient to understand the potential impact of the proposal on their significance. As a minimum the relevant historic environment record should have been consulted and the heritage assets assessed. This would then allow the planning department to follow paragraph 129 to identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by the proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset).
Leigh Road
May 2013: 13/01428/H, 13/01429/LC Partial demolition of front boundary wall to accommodate proposed new car parking space and reconfiguration of front area.
Policy Advice Note 6 (Off-Street Residential Parking in Conservation Areas)
refers specifically to development within conservation areas, providing valuable
guidance which should be applied to all development of this nature, especially within areas
with high visual amenity value such as Clifton. The document emphasises the importance of front
boundary walls, highlighting them as a significant feature that should be retained. As such,
development of this nature should generally be resisted, and when such work is necessary
there is a need to keep the width of any access point to a minimum. It is specified that an
opening of 2-3m should be sufficient, and opening width of no more than a third
of the frontage.
Refused: The proposed demolition of a significant section of the stone front boundary wall of the
property would result in unjustified harm to the significance of a Designated Heritage Asset:
the Whiteladies Road Conservation Area. The proposals are therefore contrary to Section
72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990; and Section 12 of the
National Planning Policy Framework (2012).
Easter Garden, High Street BS8 2YE

- November 2013: At the Public Inquiry related to site allocations the Council stated that "The land is proposed to be designated as Important Open Space (IOS0189). It comprises an
attractive open/community garden, known locally as ‘Easter Garden’ between Wesley Place and
High Street, Clifton.
The representor (Sarjit Singh] objected to the proposed Important Open Space designation in the Publication Version of the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies.
Since this time, Bristol City Council has purchased the land edged in red from Mr Singh. The sale was completed on 2nd October 2013. Records suggest that the remainder proposed for designation as Important Open Space is in unknown ownership. It is the council’s intention as landowner that the site will be maintained by the local residents as a garden. A legal agreement to this effect is to be drafted." - October 2013: Easter Garden – the acquisition of the land had been secured from the developer after protracted negotiation. SJRA held a street party.
- 8 April 2013: Easter Garden meeting. At the meeting of the
council's Public Rights of Way
and Greens Committee 8 April it was decided that the whole site should go to a Public Inquiry, but that
there should also
be a discussion with the owner of the strip in case it could be bought.
The councillors at a development meeting had to decide whether to accept the findings of the independent report. - 7 Feb 2013: Campaign to save Easter Garden, a community garden, Wesley Place, Clifton may have been dealt a fatal blow after a bid to have the space designated as a town green was rejected by an independent inspector.
- REFUSED
26 Jan 2011:
10/05468/F
Proposal Change of use of land for private use, with retained access path across the site. Erection of timber shiplap panel fencing 1950 mm high around the perimeter of the site. - 30 Jun 2010:RESIDENTS leapt to the defence of a community garden in Clifton when a landowner arrived unexpectedly and
tried to fence part of it off.
Up to 40 people warned off three men who had arrived to erect a two-metre high fence around a section of Easter Garden,
which is between Wesley Place and High Street, just off Blackboy Hill.
People living in the area say they have established the right to use the site as a garden over the years and
insist the sloping plot full of plants is protected by planning laws.
The attempt to erect the fence was then abandoned and Mr Singh, who is based in Enfield, London, has now been advised by the city council to outline his plans for the site. Ilse Hambrook, secretary of the Friends of Easter Garden, said she was pleased Mr Singh had been unable to block off part of the land, which has a right of way running through it. She said: "This is not a simple case of 'I own the land so I can put a fence around it'. "This land has a 14-year history of stop orders and secretary of state decisions. The council and police have told Mr Singh to go through the planning process in order to get anywhere. "I doubt he will get planning permission on the land." - 28 Oct 2009: Easter Garden being targeted again! The solicitors are on the case again, and Bristol City Council and CHIS also support
this award winning community garden. Do become a friend and support them.
For Sale By Public Auction Wednesday 28TH October 2009 Price Guide £38, 000+ A freehold site with development potential. The land is situated in a residential area close to the intersection of Whiteladies Road and Upper Belgrave Road. The plot has main road frontage to Wesley Place and the High Street to the rear. In June 1994 planning consent (thus lapsed) was granted for 2 houses (planning ref no. 93/02302/F). We are advised in September of the same year, planning was granted for use as a community wildlife garden.
99 Queens Road Clifton Bristol BS8 1LW
- Granted at the Planning development committee meeting Wed 19 Feb 2014. Planners recommending granting permission
- Dec 2013: 13/05696/F substantial demolition,
13/05499/P Outline planning application for substantial demolition of existing building and the erection of two storey building comprising ground floor cafe (A3) 1no two bed apartment and 1no three bed apartment with retention of shop front and terrazzo forecourt. 'Access', 'appearance', 'layout' and 'scale' to be considered.At the Conservation Advisory Panel in January:
CAP accepted the principle of development on this site. The existing building was an unlisted building of merit. The inlaid pattern in the forecourt, the Art Deco façade and also the virtually intact interior Deco features mean that it was 'handsome and perfect example of its period) (Civic Society 1972). The building had been in continuous retail use from its construction in 1924 for a costumier.
The Panel considered whether the revisions overcame previous concerns:
- Height/scale/bulk -now acceptable.
- Impact on adjacent listed building - the development would not harm it or its setting.
- Impact on merit of Art Deco façade -the development would not harm the façade.
- The Panel considered that the interior detail of the shop is as historically important as the exterior elements of the façade and the forecourt. There are few similar period of such good quality. Restoration would add considerably to the development’s attraction. Because of the loss of the important interior, the Panel considered that the proposed replacement building was not yet of sufficient quality to replace the existing building. The Panel strongly objected.”
- July 2013: 13/02951/P | Outline application - Demolition of existing buildnig and erection of new two storey building comprising of A3 (cafe) use on ground floor, 1 no. two bed apartment and 1no.
three bed apartment with retention of shopfront and terrazzo forecourt. 13/03021/LC Demolition of existing building.
Refused again and again and again - Jan 2013: 12/05174/P, 12/05631/LC Outline application - for the substantial demolition of the existing building
and the erection of a part two and three storey building comprising a coffee shop (Use Class A3) and 4no. residential
apartments (Use Class A3) comprising 3no. 3 bedroom and 1no, 1 bedroom with retention of shop front and terrazzo forecourt.
Withdrawn - Jan 2012: appeal dismissed:
6. The building is identified as a building of merit in the Clifton and Hotwells Character Appraisal and Management Proposals. This guidance was formally adopted by the Council after public consultation, so attracts considerable weight. Para. 7.3.26 describes the importance of shopfronts, using the appeal property as an example. Fig 116 shows a photograph of the appeal property and Map 6 identifies it as an unlisted building of merit.7. The appeal building, in terms of its location, tightly set between the corner block and 20 Richmond Hill is at first sight an oddity in the general street scene. However, it is almost because of its unique relationship with its neighbours and its unusual style that it brings a special and distinctive quality to the area and marks the inter-war epoch in this part of Bristol. These qualities can be compared to that of the large pre-war block of flats opposite, of the similar date and also curiously out of character, yet of its time and also marked as an unlisted building of merit in the conservation area appraisal.
9. I accept that the appeal building does not fit readily into the general criteria for a positive contributor in that it is a one-off building in an odd position in relation to the more traditional buildings in the vicinity. However, individually and together with the flats opposite, it helps illustrate the early 20th century development of the area. The appeal building has a particular architectural style (Art Deco) and examples of this are generally uncommon and are unusual in this area.
10. By contrast the rear of the building has an untidy appearance which detracts from the character and appearance of the street scene in the Richmond Hill area. The decorative terrazzo forecourt is damaged and the building is marred by modern accretions. The interior has split levels and an awkward arrangement and the box dormers are unattractive. However, none of these drawbacks would be insurmountable or would outweigh the building’s very individual and unique architectural character, which adds visual and historic interest to the variety of buildings and activities in this locality.
11. English Heritage has raised no objections to its demolition, but I nevertheless conclude that the proposed demolition of the existing building would fail to preserve the character or appearance of the Clifton and Hotwells Conservation Area.
15. However, the increased bulk would have a significant impact on the setting of adjacent listed building at 20 Richmond Hill. The western apsidal natural stone bay on this building is an important architectural feature of this listed building and was clearly built to be seen. The east elevation of the proposed building would be a full height blank wall, with a recess into a central light well. It would be articulated by the ashlar stone treatment to the ground floor and would be tidier than the existing building, but this high blank wall in close proximity to the attractive east façade of the listed building would have a significantly adverse effect on the setting of this listed building. The additional bulk of the proposed building would also obscure views of the stone bay from Richmond Hill.
18. Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5): Policy HE9.4 requires that where the identified harm is not substantial, that the public benefits of the proposal should be weighed against the harm.
20. There would be some public benefit in the provision of additional housing, but this would not outweigh the harm caused to the character and appearance of the conservation area and to the setting of the adjacent listed building.
21. The proposal would therefore fail to comply with the requirements of saved policy B21 of the Bristol Local Plan and Policy BCS22 of the Bristol City Core Strategy (2011), both of which require that proposals should safeguard or enhance heritage assets. It would also fail to comply with PPS5, policy HE9.1, which gives a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets.
- Aug 2011: gone to appeal
- 1 March 2011: 11/00508/P & 00510/LD Refused
Outline application – for the erection of a 2 storey building with basement accommodation to accommodate six 2 and 3
bedroom flats.
Erection of bin and cycle store. Demolition of existing building. With ‘Access’, ‘Appearance’, ‘Layout’ and ‘Scale’
to be considered.
flier
- Application No 09/02750/LD; Type of Application Listed Building Consent (Demolish)
Proposal Demolition of existing two storey retail outlet and associated car parking for redevelopment to four storey residential.
24 Sep: Refused
Pronto Print to be demolished and replaced with a 4 storey building 8 S/C flats by Andrew Wotton Associates who were appointed after they gained approval on the adjoining property (101) .
Note only 3.8 metre away from grade II listed 20 Richmond Hill
114-116 Princess Victoria Street (Bridge Stores)
Granted- we have lost our corner shop. The only consolation is that the traditional wooden fascia boards were kept comments in by 17 January 2013- 12/05077/LA, 12/05031/F Change of use from Use Class A1 (Retail) to Use Class A2 (Financial & Professional Services) and associated external alterations.
- 12/05034/A Internally illuminated fascia sign and 2 no. internally illuminated projecting signs.
Former Whiteladies Road Cinema 44 Whiteladies Road Bristol BS8 2NH
5 nov 6pm will be considered by the Development Control Committee in the City Hall: Application no. 14/00639/F & 14/00640/LA Proposal: Alterations and extension to allow partial conversion of existing building to form 5 No additional flats and alterations and improvements to existing flat and 3 screen cinema including a new disabled access door and lift for cinema. 7 June 2014: Whiteladies Road Cinema will be considered by the Development Control Committee A at its meeting on Wednesday 18 June 2014. The meeting will take place in a room in the City Hall, College Green starting at 2pm, although it is not possible to say when the case will be considered. The planners report will be available 1 week before.31 March 2014 Many members are wondering what on earth is going on regarding the renovation and reopening of the cinema.
Things seem to have hotted up considerably during the past few months. In December the cinema owners, Medinbrand unveiled some proposals in conjunction with Everyman Media Group who are professional cinema operators. Many of you will have seen their plans at the Whiteladies Shopping Centre.
What they propose is to preserve the 3 screen cinema layout which existed in 1978 and to create six flats above the auditorium in what was the Odeon boardroom, the manager's flat and the roof void. There will be no changes to the cinema's façade and the interior will be extensively restored to retain all the old cinema's distinctive architectural features.
This enormous project will cost several million pounds and the developers say that the inclusion of flats is essential to make it commercially viable.
Medinbrand have now formally contracted to lease the cinema to Everyman and the two companies have made a joint application to Bristol City Council for planning consent. Melanie Chiswell Brooks, who acts as publicity agent for Medinbrand/Everyman, has been canvassing support for this application. CHIS has posted its support for the project on the BCC planning website.
In mid March this year CHIS learned that another group, Whiteladies Picture House Ltd also has proposals for the cinema. This group has been formed locally as a charity, has raised £ 10000, secured the support of some local professionals and says it has pledges for funding. An impressive brochure has been produced showing ambitious plans to restore the building and to create a two screen cinema. No flats are included.
Whilst this scheme has much to commend it, many members doubt that WPH would be able to find the money to buy the cinema from Medinbrand and then to carry out the restoration and renovation. The other huge obstacle seems to be that Medinbrand would not, and could not, sell to WPH since they are under contract to lease to Everyman.
CHIS believes that, above all, its members are keen to see this historic, much loved cinema rescued from its present state of decay and reopen after 13 long years of neglect.
When we gave our support to the Medinbrand/Everyman plan the WPH scheme had not been made public. The present position is that the only planning application which the council actually has before it is the M/E one. That application has the support of the Conservation Advisory Panel, the Civic Society, ORA and other local residents' associations. M/E say that, once planning consent is obtained, the cinema will operational within 15 months. Though commendable, the WPH plans seem unlikely to be capable of being realised without the intervention of a very rich benefactor.
23 March 2014:Whiteladies Picture House Group start a petition to oppose the current plan for the Cinema
http://www.whiteladies-picturehouse.com/2014/03/23/sign-the-petition/
19 March 2014: To be discussed by the Conservation Advisory Panel
11 March 2014: Whiteladies Picture House Group launch their plans for the cinema (viable without the need for flats)
http://www.whiteladies-picturehouse.com/project/future-plans/
16 March 2014: Everyman Group launch their plans for the cinema
3 March 2014: Application No. 14/00640/LA, 14/00639/F Date Registered 21 February 2014 by Medibrand Proposal Alterations and extension to allow partial conversion of existing building to form 5No additional flats and alterations and improvements to existing flat and 3 screen cinema including a new disabled access door and lift for cinema
20 Dec 2013: Medinbrand, the owners of Whiteladies Picture House, will be holding public consultations on the 9th and 11th January at Clifton Down Shopping Centre between 9am and 1pm on both days.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
7 Dec 2013: CHIS has learnt that a professional cinema operator has been found to lease these long- empty and much disputed premises. These are the details:
- 3 screen cinema
- Lounge/bar area
- 6 flats overlooking Whiteladies Rd
- Interior to be restored
- Exterior to remain virtually unchanged
- Small private screening room for hire
- Planning to be sought next March
- Opening (hopefully) summer 2015
24 July 2013 Discussed at Development Control (Central) Committee
24 May 2013: 13/02222/LA
Proposal: Internal works: Formation of three new structural openings at basement level between
The Picture House and The Cowshed. Refurbishment of existing bar: Form new opening to existing
fireplace in The Cowshed through to The Picture House. External works: Reinstate existing
glazing bard over the entrance door with aluminium ventilation louvre.
Replace existing entrance doors with new timber framed glazed doors.
Replace existing side door with new timber framed glazed door and fixed glazed panel.
Please object by 8 July. This could compromise future plans.
24 June 2013: 244 backers, £7,796 raised, 6 days left to raise £10,000. First of all we would like to thank everyone who has already become a backer on Kickstarter - we have had an amazing month so far and, at the time of writing this, we have raised 77% of our total.
We have until 12am on Monday the 1st of July to reach our funding goal of £10,000. This is an all or nothing fund-raising scheme and if we do not reach the target goal all funds pledged so far will be refunded.
The £10,000 will be used to pay for vital building surveys and concept artwork that will become the foundation of our plans for the building
1 June 2013: We are calling upon you, to help us in the next stage of The Whiteladies Picture House campaign. Our mission is to buy and convert the Grade II listed Whiteladies Picture House into a multi-use arts centre.
26 March 2013: The appeal has been turned down as has the application for costa against Bristol City Council.
As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm requires clear and convincing justification. Such justification has not been demonstrated in this instance. Accordingly, taking account of the Practice Guide to Planning Policy Statement 5; Planning for the Historic Environment which remains relevant guidance insofar as it is consistent with the Framework, the proposal would fail to preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building, and would not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. The less than substantial harm to these heritage assets would not be outweighed by any public benefits. As such, the proposal would be contrary to the provisions of paragraphs 131 and 133 of the Framework, policies BCS 21, BCS 22 of the adopted Bristol Development Framework Core Strategy and saved policies B5, B6 and B17 of the adopted Bristol Local Plan.
THE PUBLIC INQUIRY INTO THE WHITELADIES CINEMA’s FUTURE RESUMED FOR ITS FINAL DAY ON MONDAY JANUARY 28th, from 10am AT THE MANSION HOUSE, CANYNGE ROAD, CLIFTON.
H.M. Inspector heard Conditions and Closing Speeches from the three barristers representing the Appellant (the owner), Bristol City Council, and the Keep Cinema Local group.
The Keep Cinema Local group has been represented by a local barrister for free. He’s been a tour de force at the Inquiry, but he thinks it’s absolutely VITAL that as many people turn up to the Mansion House on Monday January 28th as possible, so that the Inspector leaves Bristol having seen, with his own eyes, that locals care about the building. The Inspector has heard evidence from local businesses who believe a cinema would be a far more powerful force for regeneration than a 24-hour gym and flats, evidence from the Appellant’s own witness that the restrictive covenant can be lifted, and evidence that cinema operators are keen to open here.
Many people attended.
![]() |
![]() |
Proposal: Alterations and extension to allow partial conversion of existing building to form 5 no. additional flats and to retain auditorium for use as a gym. Appeal Refs: APP/Z0116/E/12/2180890/NWF & A/12/2180898/NWF An Inspector appointed by the First Secretary of State will attend The Mansion House, Clifton Down, Bristol, BS3 3LJ on 8 January 2013 at 10.00am to hold a Public Inquiry into the above appeal the Inquiry is likely to last 3 days.
You may attend the Inquiry (personally or through a representative) and, at the Inspector’s discretion, may present any evidence or give any views. The appeal documents, including the statement by Bristol City Council can be viewed at Brunel House, St Georges Road, Bristol, BS1 5UY. Please telephone 0117 922 3000 to make an appointment. You will be able to view the decision once it has been published on the planning portal http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/casesearch.asp
- Jan 2012: Planning applications: 12/00068/LA, 12/00067/F. Refused at Development Committee June 2012
- Jan 2011: 11/00126/LA, 11/00125/F Alterations and extension to allow partial conversion of existing building to form 9 no. flats and retain auditorium. Application REFUSED
- July 09: 09/02254/F & 02255/LA –
Internal and external alterations in connection with change of use from cinema to retail
09/02252/LA & 02253/F Internal and external alterations in connection with change of use from cinema to church - Jun 2009: 09/02252/LA, 09/02253/F Change of use from cinema (Use Class D2) to church (Use Class D1) and external alterations. Status: GRANTED
- June 2009: 09/02255/LA, 09/02254/F Change of use from cinema (Use Class D2) to retail (Use Class A1) and external alterations.
- Dec 08: pre-app meetings
You may also want to look at our other planning pages.
- Current Monthly report on applications including those commented on and CAP comments
- Gives all our List of Monthly reports on applications and other planning information.
- official Bristol City Council weekly list for BS8 includes trees applications
- archived considered applications
- Planning Policies
- Useful websites includes how to search for planning applications, decisions, site histories and appeals
- Streetscape- Advertising issues Includes applications for advertising
The reports show which applications we have actually made comments on.