Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Site visit made on 12 November 2025 by JP Sargent BA(Hons) MA MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 01 December 2025 Appeal A: APP/Z0116/Y/25/3370963 Flat 2, 9 Richmond Hill, Bristol BS8 1AT • The appeal is made under section 20 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant listed building consent. • The appeal is made by Mr Sam Hopkins against the decision of Bristol City Council. • The application Ref is 25/10837/LA. • The works proposed are the replacement of the 2 front-facing single-glazed timber frame windows with slimline double glazed timber windows. Appeal B: APP/Z0116/W/25/3370965 Flat 2, 9 Richmond Hill, Bristol BS8 1AT • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr Sam Hopkins against the decision of Bristol City Council. • The application Ref is 25/10836/F. • The development proposed is the replacement of the 2 front-facing single-glazed timber frame windows with slimline double glazed timber windows Decisions Appeal A 1.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions The appeal is allowed and listed building consent is granted for the replacement of the 2 front-facing, single-glazed timber frame windows with slimline double glazed timber windows at Flat 2, 9 Richmond Hill, Bristol BS8 1AT in accordance with the terms of the application Ref 25/10837/LA and the plans submitted with it subject to the conditions in Conditions Schedule A below. Appeal B 2. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for the replacement of the 2 front-facing, single-glazed timber frame windows with slimline double glazed timber windows at Flat 2, 9 Richmond Hill, Bristol BS8 1AT in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/10836/F, subject to the conditions in Conditions Schedule B below. Procedural matters 3. Given the differing views between the parties and mindful that the term was not necessary to describe the works or development before me, I have deleted ‘non- original’ from the descriptions above. Main Issues 4. The main issues are the effect of the proposal on the special architectural and historic interest of this Grade II listed building, whether it would preserve the https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/Z0116/W/25/3370965, APP/Z0116/Y/25/3370963 character and appearance of the Clifton & Hotwells Conservation Area, and whether it would harm the significance of either of these designated heritage assets. Reasons 5. 9 and 10 Richmond Hill are a pair of semi-detached former houses (now used as flats) that together are a Grade II listed building. They date from the early 19th Century, and appear to have been constructed as houses of some status that reflect a time of prosperity and growth in the city. They are of a distinctly Late Georgian style due to their proportion and scale, as well as features such as their giant pilasters and the rustication on the ground floor. 6. Making a particular contribution to the significance of the building and its special architectural and historic interest are the windows on the front elevation. These follow a typical arrangement for this era, with both of the properties having 2 tall sash windows with a distinctly vertical emphasis on their ground, first and second floors, each with 6 panes on its upper sash and 6 on its lower. Furthermore, the ground floor windows have incised keys above, while the windows on the upper floors are within arched recesses.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions The basement windows, which are at ground level on this elevation, follow the vertical alignment of the windows above, but have far simpler, less ornate surrounds and an 8 over 8 arrangement. The windows themselves have slender timber glazing bars creating a very open and light impression, both from outside the building and when within. As a result, the windows very much enhance the sense of status that the building now displays and together contribute to a visual uniformity and cohesion in the elevation. Overall, I therefore find that the significance of the building is partly architectural, partly artistic and partly historic. 7. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) says that heritage assets are an irreplaceable resource, and great weight should be given to their conservation. It adds that any harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset requires clear and convincing justification. 8. This scheme proposes to replace the sliding sashes (but not their box frames or their internal shutters) in the 2 bedroom windows on the front-facing north elevation. The replacements would also be sash windows and would have a slender lamb’s tongue moulding of comparable proportions to what is now present.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions However, instead of being single-glazed, 6mm double glazing would be used. The appellant said that the proposal was needed to address issues of rot, heat loss, condensation, and maintenance. 9. I do not have much firm evidence about the history of these windows. The Council said that they currently included ‘substantial’ historic glazing and joinery, although little detail was given as to the extent and age of the parts that were historic. The appellant challenged this view, considering only the lower sash in the larger of the 2 bedrooms was likely to include some older glazing bars and glazing, and he suggested that the windows had been extensively repaired following bomb damage in World War II. Ovolo style glazing bars appeared to be widespread over the 2 windows, and while these may be of some age, in this context they appeared to be more recent than the lamb’s tongue moulding that was also present. When compared to what the appellant indicated, I saw as well a greater presence of what appeared to be older glazing. Therefore, it is difficult to be precise on this matter https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/Z0116/W/25/3370965, APP/Z0116/Y/25/3370963 but I consider that these windows are likely to contain more historic fabric than the appellant assumed, but I would not go as far as to say it was a ‘substantial’ amount. 10. The Council’s concern with these works appeared to be broadly focussed on 3 areas, namely the introduction of visually prominent glazing bars, the resultant mismatch with other windows on the frontage because of the new glazing bars and glass, and the loss of historic fabric. 11. To my mind the appellant’s stated intentions give sufficient confidence to find that glazing bars of a suitable detail and width, no larger than the existing, could be agreed by condition. This would ensure they were of a slender lamb’s tongue design that respected not only the existing windows on the front of No 9 but also the significance of this Late Georgian designated heritage asset. Given the importance of this detailing, it should be agreed before the works commence and the existing windows are removed. 12. Moving on to the glazing, the Council contended that the introduction of modern ‘flatter’ glass displayed less of a character than older glass.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions I am aware though that a significant proportion of the present glazing appears to be relatively modern, while the location of the windows, in effect at first floor level, reduces the appreciation of the older glazing that is there now and any distinction between that older glazing and newer glazing that may be present. While double-glazed units would be installed, these need not create any unacceptable additional depth to the glazing bars or the glazing itself. I am therefore satisfied that, although ‘flatter’ glass would be used, this would not result in harm to the significance of the building. Accordingly, I consider that what is proposed would not appear as a mismatch with the other windows on the elevation. 13. There would be a loss of historic fabric as a result of this proposal through the removal of glazing bars and some glazing that could, quite possibly, be original. However, losing some historic fabric is not uncommon when considering works to listed buildings, and does not necessarily stand in the way of those works being found to be acceptable.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions To my mind lamb’s tongue glazing bars are more befitting of high-status housing of this period than the ovolo style that is found within the windows now, and the works would match the originals in terms of glazing patterns and method of opening. Therefore, in this case I consider any adverse effect on the integrity of the building that would result from the loss of older fabric would be off-set by the benefits to the understanding of the building arising from the re- introduction of the slender lamb’s tongue moulding throughout both of these windows. 14. Maintaining and repairing historic features rather than replacing them is the preferred approach in listed buildings. However, the operation of the shutters, which this household uses on a daily basis instead of curtains, could be impeded or compromised by secondary glazing and, quite possibly, by magnetic fixings. In any event, as I have not identified that the proposal would result in overall harm to the building’s significance then the merits or otherwise of these alternative approaches do not have a bearing on my findings.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Replacing windows over the whole building would allow a systematic approach to be taken to devising and implementing suitable, co-ordinated, balanced and well-integrated solutions. That though is not a proportionate option given the building has been subdivided into https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Replacing windows over the whole building would allow a systematic approach to be taken to devising and implementing suitable, co-ordinated, balanced and well-integrated solutions. That though is not a proportionate option given the building has been subdivided into https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 3

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/Z0116/W/25/3370965, APP/Z0116/Y/25/3370963 numerous flats under differing ownerships, and as I consider that what is before me would respect what is otherwise present. 15. Overall, I recognise that the current design of the windows contributes positively to the significance of this asset, and there would be some loss of historic fabric. I also accept that using glazing bars of a slightly different dimension and style to what is there now would result in a minor visual change. However, other parts of the fabric of these windows seem to be of limited historic or architectural interest and what is proposed would be of an appropriate style that enhances the building and leads to a better understanding of its significance. Moreover, the resultant windows would respect the appearance of the asset and would not be discordant when compared to those elsewhere on the frontage. I consequently consider that the works would not harm the building’s significance. 16. Turning to the justification for what is proposed, although the introduction of double glazing may not have a significant effect on heat in the flat as a whole, it could well keep these 2 relatively small bedrooms warmer.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Indeed, a failure to perform thermally is given by Historic England as one of the possible instances when replacing a historic window may be justified. To my mind introducing a moulding treatment across both windows that echoes what was commonly found in buildings of this era and style is a further justification for this proposal. Given my assessment of the impact of the works, I consider these comprise a proportionate, clear and convincing justification for what is before me. 17. Otherwise, I saw little evidence of rot on the frames, and while there was a need for some maintenance that was nothing beyond the on-going work that can be necessary for timber windows. Furthermore, I saw no sign of condensation or mould, though accept that would not be present throughout the year but rather is dependent on factors such as the weather. Such matters have therefore not had a decisive effect on my reasoning. I was also told that a resident in the flat suffered from a medical condition associated with matters of condensation and damp. I was given little further information about this though and so the relationship of the resident’s condition to the state of the windows, or how it would be addressed by the works, are unclear.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions This therefore has not been determinative. To counter the proposal it was said that these new windows would in fact increase condensation, but little basis to support that was forthcoming. 18. The conservation area covers an extensive area of grand terraces, villas and other buildings from the 18th and 19th centuries, with an array of complementary open spaces, and has a strong presence of Georgian architecture throughout. In this regard, 9 and 10 Richmond Hill makes a positive contribution to the area’s significance. For the reasons that I find that the works would not harm the significance of this listed building, I also find they would not fail to preserve the character or appearance of the conservation area, and so would not result in harm to its significance either. 19. Accordingly, I conclude that the works would not fail to preserve the special architectural or historic interest of this Grade II listed building, and would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area, and so would not cause harm to the significance of either designated heritage asset.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions I therefore conclude they would not be contrary to Policies BCS21 and BCS22 in the Bristol Core Strategy, Policies DM26, DM30 and DM31 in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Local Plan, or the Framework, all of which https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions I therefore conclude they would not be contrary to Policies BCS21 and BCS22 in the Bristol Core Strategy, Policies DM26, DM30 and DM31 in the Site Allocations and Development Management Policies Local Plan, or the Framework, all of which https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 4

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — Appeal Decisions Appeal Decisions APP/Z0116/W/25/3370965, APP/Z0116/Y/25/3370963 seek high quality design that respects the existing buildings and safeguards the significance of heritage assets. Conditions 20. Concerning both appeals, I have discussed above the need to agree the detailing for the windows and for the moulding to be lamb’s tongue in style, while the materials should be as stated in order to safeguard the historic character of the location. However as no works are proposed to the shutters and shutter boxes they need not be included in these conditions. For the avoidance of doubt the works should be commenced in accordance with the relevant time limits. 21. Having regard to the historic integrity of the building, for Appeal A the internal features should be protected and any making good should match the existing. 22. Concerning Appeal B, for the avoidance of doubt the development should be in accordance with the approved plans. Conclusion 23. For the reasons given I conclude that both appeals should be allowed.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — JP Sargent INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — JP Sargent INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 5

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — JP Sargent Appeal Decisions APP/Z0116/W/25/3370965, APP/Z0116/Y/25/3370963 CONDITIONS SCHEDULE A 1) The works authorised by this consent shall commence not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) Notwithstanding any details already submitted, all glazing bars associated with the works hereby consented shall be of a lamb’s tongue moulding 3) Prior to the commencement of the works hereby consented, 1:5 section details of the proposed windows, showing all materials, method of opening, and detailing of the frames, glazing, glazing bars, and fabric connections at head, cill and reveal shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall then be undertaken in accordance with the approved details only. 4) The works hereby consented shall be carried out in accordance with the materials specified on the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 5) All existing internal decoration features, including ironwork, window shutters, and other woodwork, shall remain undisturbed in their existing position, and shall be fully protected during the course of works on site unless expressly specified otherwise in any approved drawings.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — JP Sargent 6) All new external and internal works and finishes, and any works of making good, shall match the existing fabric in respect of using materials of a matching form, composition and consistency, detailed execution and finished appearance, unless expressly specified otherwise in any approved drawings. CONDITIONS SCHEDULE B 1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than 3 years from the date of this decision. 2) Notwithstanding any details already submitted, all glazing bars associated with the development hereby permitted shall be of a lamb’s tongue moulding only. 3) Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, 1:5 section details of the proposed windows, showing all materials, method of opening, and detailing of the frames, glazing, glazing bars, and fabric connections at head, cill and reveal shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall then be undertaken in accordance with the approved details only. 4) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the materials specified on the approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Ground Floor Flat, 9 Richmond Hill, BRISTOL, BS8 1AT — Bristol City Council — JP Sargent 5) Unless otherwise modified under the conditions attached to this permission, the development shall be undertaken in accordance with the following approved drawings, namely ‘2 no. existing sash window details’ (dated 14 February 2025) and ‘2 no. sash windows to be slimline double glazed’ (dated 14 February 2025). https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 6