KCG does not oppose the idea of developing the site, but we still think the current proposal would put too many houses there and we are unhappy about some aspects of the proposed design. We also want a planning condition to ensure that the house at the very top of Marlborough Hill, on the western side, is not destroyed as it is one of the very oldest in the area.

You can read KCG’s full response to the architect here, in Word format: Preapp response.

However, the Council clearly feel that the application is not a simple straightforward one that can be decided by a planning officer, so it will be considered by the Development Control (Central) Committee at its meeting on Wednesday 5 November 2008.

The Council’s notification says: “The meeting will take place in a Committee Room in the Council House, starting at 2pm, although it is not possible to say when the case will be considered. From the Wednesday before the Committee date, a copy of the officer’s report and recommendation can be seen at:

•    Planning Reception, Brunel House, St George’s Road
•    Reception Area, The Council House, College Green
•    The Council’s website www.bristol.gov.uk/planning. Please select PublicAccess for Planning.

Copies can be obtained subject to the usual photocopying charges. From 48 hours before the start of the meeting, you will also be able to view the officer’s report and any appendices, from the Council’s website www.bristol.gov.uk/meetings.

You will also be able to view this committee live via a web cast transmission over the Internet. Please visit www.bristol.gov.uk/webcast

We will not write to you again, however if you wish to find out what happened at the Committee meeting, you could telephone the above named Officer from mid-day on the day following the meeting.”

Anyone who wishes to attend and speak at such meetings is able to do so, but there are rules governing the procedure which can be found on the Council website or by telephoning the Planning Department.

We’re delighted that the Council has agreed with us and refused the application, citing several strong grounds for doing so. You can see the detailed reasons by looking at the Planning Applications section of the Council website and entering the reference 08/02222/F.

No doubt the hospital will be back with more plans, though maybe not until the property market improves. Let’s hope they take more notice next time of local views and Council policies for the conservation area.

(Ref: 08/02222/F)

After two recent unsuitable applications – both withdrawn after widespread criticism – the UBHT hospital authorities have now put in a third one, this time to build four flats in the garden of the listed building at 42 Alfred Hill. (Ref: 08/02222/F)

We say: Bristol Council’s Policy is very clear, so let’s stick to it.

The Council’s recently completed Character Appraisal of the Kingsdown Conservation Area sets out a very clear policy: “The many mature private gardens in Kingsdown are an important complement to the general urban character, they also have biodiversity value….Many original gardens have been lost to development on their southern edges. Where they remain, gardens should be presered in order to protect the special interest of the area.” The accompanying map shows the garden as ‘private space under threat from redevelopment’.

You can find KCG’s full response here on the website. Please help to ensure that these plans are rejected. You can find the application details, and make your comment, at http://tinyurl.com/6s3td5

Or you can email the Planning Officer: north.planning@bristol.gov.uk to say that you object.

The deadline is June 18th – don’t forget!

UBHT may just be biding their time and waiting for the property market to pick up. We can, of course, expect new applications to be made in due course, and we hope that the Trust will then genuinely take note of the very sensible and reasonable views of local residents, instead of just ignoring them. That would save a lot of time and effort for all concerned, and might even lead to a scheme we could simply support.

Thanks again, but stay vigilant.

6KDP

We say
We welcome development of the site, but 4 storeys is too high and the proposals would cram in far too many houses on the site. Describing them as ‘new 3-storey terrace houses’ is extremely misleading. The buildings should respect the domestic scale of their immediate neighbours.

These “family houses” have no gardens. Roof space is a very poor substitute for gardens or other amenity space. Children need somewhere to play safely and make noise. Either replace carparking with gardens or use site for key-worker housing.

UBHT have largely ignored the views of local residents, despite their (false) claim that ‘Members of the local community have been involved from the outset’, so we will have to make a formal objection to the council.

Please help to ensure that these plans are rejected. You can find the application details, and make your comment, here:

Or you can email the Planning Officer: chanelle.brodie@bristol.gov.uk to say that you object.

The deadline is May 28th – don’t forget!

Their Planning Application claims that the building ‘presents a unified facade to the road without being monolithic‘. It talks of ‘a bold, dramatic gesture at roof level‘ and ‘an eye-catching attractive element in the roofscape‘ They say that this new block of flats ‘echoes the wall opposite, creating an area of visual compression – a gateway…‘ and ‘will reinstate the street frontage and residential fabric‘. They also claim that ‘members of the local community have been involved with the design from the outset’ and ‘the site is not within the Conservation Area’. Both claims are wrong.

Kingsdown Conservation Group were emphatically not involved with the design from the outset, but we were shown the plans once they had been prepared. We said:
The building is much too big and its large blank walls right on the pavement would make Horfield Road even more of an unfriendly canyon
This is an important route into town used daily by hundreds in cars and on foot. The design should contribute to the appearance and safety of this route, not turn its back on it.
The building could be set further back on the site (for example, as a courtyard with a garden in front), and should not project so much above the two-storey houses on either side.
We question the provision of off-street parking here, the resultant loss of amenity space and the safety of car access onto this busy road with its fast traffic.

Further points made by local residents included:
ignores context and wrong scale. A 3-storey stepped form might be acceptable. The new pink and blue houses next door provide a good precedent in terms of scale and form. The large blank street elevation is extraordinarily insensitive.
The road facade is totally unacceptable.
Particularly agree with the KCG comments.
This garden is very pleasant. They are taking away a rather restful spot. The thought of 3 cars reversing into the fast-moving traffic is not good.
I welcome development of this ‘garden’
New houses next door have no off-street parking. This sets a good example.

What you can do: email north.planning@bristol.gov.uk before May 28th and tell them what you think of this scheme: ref: 08/01713/F 78-84 Horfield Rd, BS2 8EQ.