|Address||38 Church Road Sneyd Park Bristol BS9 1QT
|Proposal||Side annexe to be demolished. Double storey side extension. Double storey rear extension with balcony. New Pool area to be built to replace existing one. 2 X Silver Birch to be felled.|
|Type||Full Planning (Householders)|
|Neighbour Consultation Expiry||14-05-21|
|BCC Planning Portal||on Planning Portal|
|Public Comments||Supporters: 0 Objectors: 6 Total: 6|
|No. of Page Views||0|
|Comment analysis||Date of Submission|
|Nearby Trees||Within 200m|
This Application is an example of how things can go very wrong with planning regulation.
The Applicant stated on the Application Form that trees would be affected by this development, but the Applicant submitted no Arboricultural report or arboricultural impact statement, as required. Where is the Arboricultural report required to accompany the Application Form? It is a bit late now because on 8th March 2021 a massive tree clearance of the site took place and was reported to Planning Enforcement.
A complaint to Planning Enforcement was made to the effect that trees to facilitate development were being felled in advance of any planning consent and in the absence of an arboricultural impact statement. The reply from Planning Enforcement was "the tree removal will be properly considered including testing against policy about replacement. It is of course regrettable that the landowner has worked on trees ahead of permission being granted but other than to address the matter through the above planning application we propose no further action".
Others who complained were told, on 9th March, that the case officer would undertake a site visit and robustly challenge the landowner about recent works to trees". I really hope that this happened.
The loss of trees to facilitate development requires mitigation under the Bristol Tree Replacement Standard. I truly hope that there is with the Arboricultural Officers in the Planning Department of BCC a record of the trees that WERE on the site. Images are available on Google Earth etc. All this tree loss is to the detriment of the Conservation Area's character and to the quality of the environment.
It is not just about mitigation for tree loss either. Bristol has a planning policy - BCS9 - that states that green infrastructure will be retained wherever possible - and "planned around" if possible. "Individual green assets should be retained wherever possible and integrated into new development." With tree clearance prior to planning consent there has been no opportunity to consider this.
One might weep at the answers to the two "tree" questions on the Application Form
"Are there trees or hedges on the proposed development site? Yes No"
"and/or: Are there trees or hedges on land adjacent to the proposed development site that could influence the development or might be important as part of the local landscape character? Yes No"
These two answers should now be phrased in the past tense. Even the two remaining Silver Birch trees are apparently doomed. The importance of the local landscape character has been ignored. Planning Consent procedures with reference to existing trees have been ignored.
If consent is granted, please ensure mitigation for the tree loss at the very least. Please could this mitigation not be two tiny shrubs squeezed on to the last remaining square cm. of garden? If possible, please ensure retention of the two remaining trees. Maybe even some kind of enforcement procedure could be considered please?