Application Details
| Council | BCC |
|---|---|
| Reference | 21/00380/CP |
| Address | 129 Northover Road Bristol BS9 3LG
Street View |
| Ward |
|
| Proposal | Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for a Proposed use or development - A hip-to-gable roof extension/loft conversion to include rear dormer - 3x roof lights, Juliet Balcony & window. The erection of a double garage/outbuilding to include - garage door, single door & window. |
| Validated | 26-01-21 |
| Type | Certificate of Lawfulness - proposed |
| Status | Decided |
| Determination Deadline | 23-03-21 |
| Decision | Certificate of Lawfulness BE ISSUED |
| Decision Issued | 24-03-21 |
| BCC Planning Portal | on Planning Portal |
| Public Comments | Supporters: 0 Objectors: 1 Unstated: 2 Total: 3 |
| No. of Page Views | 0 |
| Comment analysis | Date of Submission |
| Nearby Trees | Within 200m |
BTF response:
NEUTRAL
Application forms for permitted development do not include questions about trees.
But looking at aerial images, the place where the outbuilding/garage would be built at the foot of the garden is just full of trees.
I ask that if the development goes ahead the Bristol Tree Replacement Standard is applied to mitigate for the loss of the trees, as there is no doubt that the removal of the trees would be to facilitate development.
Public Comments
on 2021-02-11
Application forms for permitted development do not include questions about trees.But looking at aerial images, the place where the outbuilding/garage would be built at the foot ofthe garden is just full of trees.I ask that if the development goes ahead the Bristol Tree Replacement Standard is applied tomitigate for the loss of the trees, as there is no doubt that the removal of the trees would be tofacilitate development.
on 2021-02-04 OBJECT
I cannot reconcile the merits of this Application whilst the concurrent Application 21/00205/HX forthe same property has yet to be decided.
The significant difference is that, whilst the earlier Application (21/00205/HX) includes no loftconversion and the 6m ground floor rear extension is twice as deep as proposed in thisApplication, the proposed works also include the demolition of the existing garage, in order toaccommodate the 6m extension.
However, this latest Application (21/00380/CP) now proposes to add a loft conversion and reducethe depth of the ground floor extension to 3m, thereby allowing retention of the existing garage.
Most loft conversions carried out under Permitted Development suffer from being uglycompromises and this application is no exception. Unfortunately, this represents yet anotherfailure by the planning authorities to put the Permitted Development genie back in the bottle and,therefore, near-neighbours will have to live with the consequences of such ugly "gob-ons" inperpetuity.
This latest Application also proposes the provision of a double garage at the bottom of the garden.Can this really be classified as "Permitted Development"? Be that as it may, there appears to beno provision for vehicular access to the garage, so can it be technically classified as a garage?Could it possibly be converted into habitable accommodation, such as a "granny flat" at a later
date?
The location of the proposed garage outbuilding currently enjoys the presence of several trees.The application makes no mention of any tree removals to accommodate this outbuilding, neitherare there any proposals for root protection zones during the construction phase. In the event thatpermission should be granted for this outbuilding, I would request that the Bristol TreeReplacement Standard (BTRS) is applied to any trees that are removed.
Retention of existing trees is currently supported in NPPF proposals for existing trees to beretained wherever possible.
on 2021-02-02
Going out 6 meters is too big .would be better on the eye if it would mirror effect the extension size of ours.