Proposed erection of a first floor side extension and installation of 1no. rooflight without complying with a condition attached to planning permission Ref 24/P/1636/FUH, dated 22 November 2024

Appeal Decision Site visit made on 03 March 2026 by N Robinson BA (Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 9th March 2026 Appeal Ref: 6004155 11 Brendon Avenue, Weston-super-Mare, North Somerset BS23 2TE • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) for the development of land without complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted. • The appeal is made by Mr Jonathon Webber against the decision of North Somerset Council. • The application Ref is 25/P/2231/S73. • The application sought planning permission for proposed erection of a first floor side extension and installation of 1no. rooflight without complying with a condition attached to planning permission Ref 24/P/1636/FUH, dated 22 November 2024. • The condition in dispute is No 2 which states that: The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Drawing Number: Bren 3a (Proposed Improvements - Floorplans and Elevations), Drawing Number: Bren 4 (Proposed & Existing Block Plans), Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment Report (Revision 1 - Dated November 2024), Produced by Avondale Ecology, Site Location Plan (08 August 2024), Application Form: Dated 08 August 2024. • The reason given for the condition is: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. Decision 1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of a first floor side extension and installation of 1no. rooflight at 11 Brendon Avenue, Weston-super-Mare, North Somerset BS23 2TE in accordance with application Ref 25/P/2231/S73 made on 24 October 2025 without complying with condition 2 set out in planning permission Ref 24/P/1636/FUH granted on 22 November 2024 by North Somerset Council otherwise subject to the following conditions: 1.) The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiry of three years from the date of the planning permission reference 24/P/1636/FUH, approved on 22 November 2024. 2.) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: BREN 1, BREN 4, BREN 6A, Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment (Avondale Ecology, November 2024), Site Location Plan. 3.) The external walling and roofing materials to be used in the building works hereby permitted shall match those of the existing building. If any other material is proposed no development shall take place until such has been approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. 4.) The development shall not take place except in strict accordance with the measures outlined in Section 5 of the Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment Appeal Decision 6004155 2 (Avondale Ecology, November 2024). If amendments to the methodology are required, details of the changes must be submitted in writing and agreed by the Local Planning Authority before relevant works proceed. The development shall then be implemented in accordance with the agreed changes. 5.) No external lighting shall be installed on site until details, including: i. details of the type and location of the proposed lighting; ii. existing lux levels affecting the site; iii. the proposed lux levels; and iv. lighting contour plans have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Any external lighting shall be installed and operated in accordance with the approved details. Background and Main Issue 2. Planning application 24/P/1636/FUH granted permission for a first floor side extension and installation of 1no. rooflight. That permission included a number of conditions, one of which (condition 2) specifies the approved plans and documents. The appellant wishes to vary this condition and replace it with a condition specifying plans that reflect an amended design. 3. The Council refused this application due to its effects on the character and appearance of the appeal property and the surrounding area. Taking this into account the main issue is the effect of the proposed variation of the condition on the character and appearance of the appeal property and the surrounding area. Reasons 4. 22 Brendon Avenue is a hipped roof semi-detached dwelling with a recessed 2- storey pitched roof extension and a flat roof garage to the side. The surrounding area comprises a mixture of 2-storey semi-detached and detached dwellings and bungalows with varying roof forms, some of which have undergone extensions and alterations. This results in a pleasant, varied character and appearance to the area. 5. The extension approved under application 24/P/1636/FUH has a hipped roof, which the appellant seeks to replace with a flat roof. The North Somerset Residential Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document (2014) (SPD) advises that extensions should have a roof that reflects the style of the existing building. The flat roof form would differ from that of the host dwelling and thus conflict arises with the guidance in the SPD. Nonetheless, the existing 2-storey pitched roof extension would be clearly visible behind the flat roof extension in street scene views, softening the impact of the proposed extension. In view of this the extension would not be comparable to the bulky, box-like flat roof extensions depicted in the SPD. 6. In light of the above, whilst the proposed roof form would not match that of the host dwelling, contrary to the guidance in the SPD, in these circumstances no harm would arise to the character and appearance of the host dwelling or the established character and appearance of the surrounding area as a result. Appeal Decision 6004155 3 Therefore, I find no conflict with policy DM38 of the North Somerset Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 (Development Management Policies) (2016) which seeks to ensure that extensions respect the overall design and character of the existing property and do not harm the street scene or local area. Conclusion 7. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed and grant a new planning permission replacing the disputed condition with an amended condition which reflects the amended design but retaining the non-disputed conditions from the previous permission that appear still to be relevant. N Robinson INSPECTOR