|Address||Former Public Conveniences Lawrence Hill Bristol BS5 0BT
|Proposal||Development of a 4-storey building comprising a ground floor commercial unit and 2no. HMOs on the upper floors with associated refuse and cycle storage.|
|Neighbour Consultation Expiry||05-03-21|
|Standard Consultation Expiry||18-02-21|
|Decision||GRANTED subject to condition(s)|
|BCC Planning Portal||on Planning Portal|
|Public Comments||Supporters: 1 Objectors: 3 Total: 4|
|No. of Page Views||0|
|Comment analysis||Date of Submission|
|Nearby Trees||Within 200m|
We are pleased to see the plans for the protection of this high-quality tree a mature false Acacia (Robinia pseudoacacia) growing to the west of the former public convenience building.
The tree is approximately 12m tall with an average crown spread of 5m, though we have measured the widest spread – to the south-east (and towards the development site) - at over 10 metres. The stem diameter was measured at 560mm creating a Root Protection Area of 6.7m (141m2).
We note that. at the time of the inspection there were no significant defects visible within the tree and that it was categorised A1,2 in accordance with BS5837:2012.
We also note that there are no potential shading issues associated with the proposed development so that future pressure to prune the tree in future should not be an issue.
Despite the plans to protect the tree, we remain concerned that a significant part of the canopy encroaches within the footprint of the development area and is liable to be damaged during both construction and by the fabric of the building once it is constructed.
The planning officer is asked to satisfy themselves that the fabric of the building as currently planned will not come into conflict with the tree's canopy in future. If it does then the design will need to be adjusted to accommodate the tree.
We suggest any permission granted be conditioned on the basis that an arboricultural officer be required to satisfy themselves that proper precautions have been taken to safeguard the tree before development can commence and that they or the developer's arboricultural be required undertake regular inspections during construction to ensure that proper safeguarding of the tree is maintained.
The Arboricultural Method Statement should be amended to reflect this with a condition added that, where any delivery or movement of materials to, from or on the site which risk damaging the tree will be undertaken under arboricultural supervision.
In our view this tree is worthy of a Tree Preservation Order, especially given the risk that it may be damaged by the close proximity of building works. Granting the tree TPO status will bring home to the developer and all those working on the site how important this tree is.