The current plan hasn't addressed existing problems within our neighbourhood (parkingspaces, high levels of contamination, lack of services for the community and heavy traffic).

The proposed main access is not wide enough for a two way system.

There is the potential of creating a safe cycling route and main access to the site by Petherbridgeway that hasn't been thoroughly explored.

I strongly believe that the quality of life for both, the current residents and potential new ones,should be considered before going ahead with the plans.

I wish to object to the granting of Outline Planning Permission for up to 140 residentialdwellings for the following reasons:

The access to the backland site containing up to 140 houses via a single road (between twoexisting houses) should be considered unsatisfactory given the number of house related, anddelivery, vehicles such a large site is likely to attract every day.

There is no consideration of the houses either side of the proposed access in terms of soundnessof their construction (foundations, etc.) to take the vibration and 'weight' of the likely traffic to andfrom the proposed site.

With the current proposal of 140 houses, whilst the site appears to be quite large, the layout of thehousing can only be described as 'congestion housing' with all the associated damaging aspectsof overlooking, overshadowing, loss of direct daylight, noise, and lack of amenity space built intothe overall design.

The use of three and four storey buildings in the plan exacerbate the damaging aspects as listedabove.

The site is very close to the main rail link (4 tracks) between Bristol Temple Meads andParkway/South Wales, a known pollution hotspot through Bristol with associated ill health(respiratory, etc.) to near residents. There does not appear to be any recognition of this issueanywhere in the application documentation and as such no remediation proposed.

The site with only one access point is not 'joined up' to the larger community and does suggest anisolated development with the potential for economic and social difficulties. A second access toMuller Road for example, allowing greater use of public transport, better availability of localschools, and more choice of local shops, would help reduce these difficulties.

Thank you

I would like to consider development in terms of the Weca Placemaking Charterhttps://www.westofengland-ca.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/West-of-England-Placemaking-Charter.pdf, which was recently launched and endorsed by Cabinet Member for Housing.

It has 5 factors that can be used to define developments.

1. Future Ready1. According to the sustainability statement, final construction has not been decided. Energygeneration, i.e. solar panels, only needs to provide enougth energy to offset the use of Heat PumpTechnology. Every building that the council builds needs to have solar panels if we are to meet ourclimate change targets.2. I'm not convinced that a development that has 170 parking spaces for 140 homes is enabling alow-carbon lifestyle. Designs for community space and the sustainable urban drainage plan doseem adequate for a development of this size.2. Connected1. Public Transport is accessible from Muller Road, and Digital Inclusivity is well catered for.2. I am very concerned that the sole entrance/exit road is not fit for purpose with the possible 360vehicle movements from dwelling-based vehicles alone and being able to deliver safe pedestrianand cycle movements during peak times.3. No consideration is being given to pedestrian movements south out of the site to Muller Roadand to the supermarkets. Constructing a fence to block this desire line is also incompatible withdelivering a low-carbon lifestyle.4. There is a huge opportunity to re-assess the route of the Concorde Way cycling and walkingroute. This doesn't seem to be in scope for this development which is disappointing.

5. There is no mention of connecting to the Strategic Heat Main - part of the City Leap Project -building this functionality in now will save a lot of disruption in later years.3. Biodiverse1. The proposals for community space and the retention of trees are actually quite good - now thatthe proposals for the Emergency Access Route have been removed as a result of communityengagement.4. Characterful1. It is noted that both Goram Homes and Keepmoat have committed to building this site; anyconsideration for the look and feel of the homes will have to come at the reserved matters stage ofplanning. The illustrative designs suggest that they will have a different character to both existinghouse stock and other recent developments in the ward. I would hope that the shade of brownbrick that has been used in the Bonnington and Shackelton Heights developments is not used inthis development.5. Healthy and Inclusive1. The site plans include a commitment to provide a number of wheelchair-accessible homes,which is good.2. I do have reservations about the lack of multi-modal transport features. Providing cycle parking,wide pavements and lots of street trees is expected, but having access through one exit/entranceroute choke point does promote car or vehicular use.

I do see the need for affordable housing in both Lockleaze and across the City, and thisdevelopment might deliver at least 42 out of 140 homes in a mixture of houses and apartments.The other issue for Lockleaze is that because of the nature of all of the recent developments in theward, they have attracted the absolute minimum of CIL and S106 payments because of theaffordable housing component. Subsequently, Lockleaze has not had its fair share of infrastructureinvestment in things like Bus Services, Active Travel and even spaces in Health centres. The areacommittee system does not have the budget to match this shortfall.

However, I cannot support a development that is not fit for purpose by it having a single accessroute onto Dovercourt Road - this application is, after all, titled - Application for Outline PlanningPermission for up to 140 residential dwellings. All matters except means of access to the sitereserved. The access issues outweigh the other considerations. It is too narrow and will lead tocollisions on Dovercourt Road or the access road itself.

Bristol needs affordable housing and we need more housing quickly. Lockleaze wardhas felt this pressure and has been expected to provide the space and infrastructure for many ofthese new houses. When we are considering these new developments we really need to considerthe road, public transport, school and GP surgery capacity for all these new residents. I have notseen enough evidence of this happening. So I have concerns.

I support this development being 30% affordable, and I hope it will be 50% as many of the otherprojects in the area are. I also hope that these houses can be built to the highest environmentalstandards, including solar panels and low/zero carbon heating.I congratulate the local residents for protecting the important green space next to thedevelopment, and I was glad to support them on this, and glad that the developers listened to localconcerns on this and emergency access. I would love to see access via Petherbridge way, but notat the cost of having any affordable housing on site.

The main concerns and issues for local residents are around cars, parking and the local roadsafety and capacity. There's a commitment in this proposal to necessary traffic calming and roadadaptions around the development. In my view many changes would need to be made so thatthese extra vehicle movements do not make the surrounding roads unsafe.I can support this outline planning with a lot of hesitation. I would like the developers to know that Iexpect a real commitment to spending on the local roads if they would like my support when thefull proposal comes to planning. How about a low or no car development so it has less impact onthe surrounding area?

I support this planning application. I am a local resident (a private renter) currently living0.2 miles (6 mins walk) from the proposed development and believe that this type of new housingis badly needed in the area for people like me to have the opportunity to get on the housing ladder.I am pleased to see the developer proposing to turn a disused brownfield site into a mix of market-rate and affordable housing.

I have reviewed the planning documents submitted and think that the design and proposalsregarding transport and accessibility are well-considered. It is clear that extensive environmentalassessments were undertaken which provides good assurance that high standards will bemaintained in this area.

There are a few areas I think could be improved. I am not sure that the current proposed layout issufficiently dense; I think that the location of the site means more storeys on the planned buildingswould be achievable with limited external impact. I also think that too much space is given over tocar parking, but acknowledge that the area is not currently well-served by buses (re-reroutingConcorde Way through the development is obviously good news for cycling amenities).

Bristol Civic Society

Dovercourt Road development - March 2022 - VERSION 2

authors: Kerry Chester and Peter Weeks

Summary

Bristol Civic Society welcomes the proposal to develop the derelict brownfield site at DovercourtDepot site in Lockleaze. We have submitted written comments to both of the earlier publicconsultations in April and Sept 2021.

Having considered the current plans (Jan 2022), the Society considers that the proposeddevelopment makes effective use of the site for much needed housing. In particular the Societysupports:

- The density and mix of housing as being appropriate for the location: 140 new homes, made upof 45% apartments (1 and 2 bedroom) and 55% family houses (2, 3 and 4 bedroom) on 2.7 hawithin the 4.7 ha site.- The maximum building height of 4 storeys which should ensure that neighbouring properties arenot overlooked.- The goal of providing 30% affordable housing via 78% social & 22% shared ownership.- The aspiration to design "characterful architecture providing a sense of identity" and "efficient,sustainable, low energy housing".

- Connecting the network of streets and paths to encourage walking and cycling.- The plan to enhance existing plant and wildlife habitats and create new ones to increasebiodiversity.- Creating well-maintained shared public open spaces which can be used by new and existinglocal residents and thoughtful landscaping of the site.

The Society believes that the development of this site provides a real opportunity to create anattractive place where people want to live and that will become known nationally as a showcase ofoutstanding urban design.

Possible concerns:

Access:Vehicular access is from Dovercourt Road, using the existing depot access route, with emergencyaccess provided via a rear access lane further along Dovercourt Road. Local residents wouldprefer the main access to the site to be from Petherbridge Way, as they are concerned about theincrease in traffic. We accept the Council's arguments that the alternative is unfeasible.

ParkingDue to concerns about the impact of overspill parking on the residents of Dovercourt Road,parking on the site has been reconfigured and increased to 170 (1.2 per dwelling) from 140spaces before.

Walking and cyclingWhilst a link has been incorporated into the development to connect the pedestrian bridge whichcrosses the railway to pedestrian routes within the development, there does not seem to be anyreference to making the pedestrian bridge accessible for bicycles and wheelchairs. The bridge canonly be accessed from the site by flights of steps.

Future matters:We reserve our position to comment further in future on matters such as landscaping, detailedbuilding design, streetscapes and other matters not specified at this stage.

. There is heavy traffic in the area and dovercourt is used by emergency services to getaccess to southmead hospital during rush hour when muller road is backed up. Theses houses willcause traffic to back up along dowvercourt/ Downend road aswell.. School and GP services are at capacity in the area, who are the new residence going to sign upwith.. There are a lot of houses in the area that down have driveways, where are the residence going topark. They are going to have to park on the surrounding streets putting pressure on neighbouringstreets. When the football is on you already can't park anywhere.. Goes again it bristol council plans net neutral by 2030. How green are the houses and increasedcars in the area will increase air pollution.. River and Rhine's are protected areas under the biodiversity action plan,and one's of theobjectives is to maintain and enhance biological diversity. This development will further fragmentthe landscape for wildlife and goes against the BAP.A waterway runs directly next to thisdevelopment..

The development will make living on Dovercourt Road and connecting Downend Road anightmare! Parking for residents is already somewhat limited and not everyone can park on theirown street, if you think 170 parking spaces for 140 dwellings is enough you are sadly deluded,vehicles belonging to the 140 new dwellings WILL spill over onto Dovercourt Road and DownendRoad.Traffic along Dovercourt Road and especially the connecting end of Downend Road is already badat peak times and backs up all the way along Downend Road and onto Muller Road, add on to thatthe traffic can't flow through Downend Road in both directions at the same time due to how narrowDownend Road is, this causes horrendous jams for hours each day quite literally blockingresidents in!The one small access road planned to be used for the development is simply not good enough.

This development is going to massively add crowding and traffic to a well used andimportant cycle way. It is taking away green space and important habitats. The traffic access isnarrow and unsafe for both residents and emergency vehicles. There are many young families inthe vicinity who can currently play out and they will be vulnerable to traffic accidents. In a time ofclimate emergency should you really be taking away nature and adding emissions? Plus the airquality in Bristol is horrific and this will make it worse - causing deaths.

I think it's absolutely disgusting that you are trying to take a nice, family area and forcein more blocks of people piled on top of each other. We live in an amazing and peaceful street andyou are going to make it apaulingly busy where you can't even park. Truly atrocious that you areforcing us to live in the shadow of housing blocks, oppressive isn't even close to describing it!

Re: Objection in Full to Planning Application 22/00632/PB Dovercourt Depot, Dovercourt Road,Bristol, BS7 9SH. Outline Planning Application for up to 140 residential dwellings. All mattersexcept means of access to the site reserved.

I object in full to the applications based on the following points.

1. Single point of access is to narrow.2. No dedicated cycle access.3. No consideration to existing residence access and egress via the lane.4. Emergency Access lane is not lawful.5. Emergency Access Lane does not meet building control regulations.6. Inadequate traffic assessment

1. Access Lane

In the Aecom document titled "Technical Note" in response to a Petherbridge Way access for thisdevelopment, point 2.8 it outlines the access widths required for this development should be12.5m and new access will cost £4-7m. I'm not going to go into those costs which are extremelyexaggerated as it would not be a bridge but build up land across unmaintained scrub. Its also thereason the stream is culverted and the reason why planning application 88/02416/S by Bristol citycouncil was made explicitly to access this depot site at this location to "safeguard the amenitiesand access for existing residents" some years ago.

As stated in the objection letter from Rackham Planning, I believe the current access does notconfirm to either local or national planning rules or quality design requirements and moreimportantly will create a very unsafe environment for all that use it effecting existing residencegreatly in stark contrast to previous council statement in bold above.

The current access consists of 2 x 1.5m paved pedestrian walkways and 6.0m carriageway for 2way traffic. This will be narrowed to 5.5m and an increase to one pavement to 2m. the carriagewaywithin the depot site will be 6m.

Planning hierarchy states pedestrian, cycle, emergency and municipal vehicles then privatevehicles.

At peak times queuing will form trying to leave the depot joining Dovercourt road. The visibility isnot as clear as indicated in the traffic assessment and edging out is frequent and risky currently. Ihave had an a accident when waiting to turn into the lane when a car overtook me as I was waitingfor an oncoming cyclist to pass. It is even riskier turning out.

2. No Dedicated Cycle provision.

As stated in point 2.8 in the technical note indicated above the cycling access provision requireseither a 2 way segregated cycle way 3m wide or separate 2m cycle way in parallel with traffic flow.Neither of which can be achieved with the current access and does not currently meet the "futurethinking" element for all new developments. In the Transport Assessment 3.4.2 makes note of theCycle Infrastructure design (LTN1/20) and mentions Concord Way's current road position but itdoes not take into account that the cycles would be joining or leaving concord way via a T junction.This is the point of most risk for all parties at this Junction especially with no traffic calmingmeasures in place along Dovercourt Road and cars regularly seen travelling in excess of 30mphand upto 60mph.

In the Aecom Transport assessment point 1.4.2 It clearly states that all pedestrian and cycleaccess will be via the existing depot entrance and any rerouting of concord way does not form partof this OPA so cannot be included despite it being mentioned frequently in multiple sections in theassessment.

In the Aecom Transport Assesment Apendix A page 2 the full development site is shown includingthe green area to the south of the site. On page 8 the drawing depicts the cycle access shown tothe south of the site along with a section on Concord Way in contradiction to the assessment point1.4.2.

I would also like to point out the pleasure Tom Renhard had on Friday 25/03/22 while in a meetingwith local residents stating he was personally responsible for ensuring that the green space wassaved from any road or pathway but it is clear that the plan is in fact the complete opposite by re-

routeing concord way directly across it.

3. No consideration to existing Access and Egress for dwellings via the lane.

There are other issues concerning this lane which have not been considered in anyway despiteconcerns raised at the initial consultation and numerous times since as the teams at BCC andGoram/consultants change.

There are 2 existing access points next to the depot gateway both used continually throughout theday. One gated access to garages at the north west to the rear of 148 - 194 Dovercourt Road theother to the south east is access to 9 dwellings and associated vehicle directly onto the lane at theentrance to the depot forming access for 142, 146 Dovercourt Road, Flats 1,2, 3 144 DovercourtRoad and 3,4 Downend House Farm.

In the transport assessment it takes 3 lines to mentions these entrances in 2.2.4 but makes nomention as to how the vehicles access and exit.

These entrances are in constant use. Many of the vehicles reverse out of both entrances.Sometimes 7m long vehicles. The access is blind for the people coming out of them due to theexisting walls/boundaries. The already limited access in place means manoeuvres are requiredblocking both directions of the lane. For the gated access to 148-194 this is a lengthier process asthe gate needs to be unlocked prior to entry and after exit meaning stopping on the lane hinderingaccess. In either reversing in or reversing out cause's disruption to the traffic flow aswell asincreasing the difficulty of these manoeuvres due to the narrowing of the lane.

Statement 3.3.10 states there will be no change to existing access but that isn't true due to theincreased volume of movement on the lane and narrowing of it.

The vehicle movement assessment's are low and based on inaccurate outdated figures.

During Network rails 2 year occupancy of the depot (with only 80 parking spaces in place on thesite) numerous unsafe situations occurred. 10 dangerous near misses reported by myself to theproject management team on site. Dovercourt Road and this lane were frequently blockedbecause of large vehicles or multiple vehicles accessing at the same time as well as blocked atDownend Rd when Articulated lorries accessed from Muller Road. This would clearly be the caseduring the construction phase but the long term unsafe situation of this site having 170 (actuallyover 200) vehicles located within the depot boundaries with this single inadequate access cannotbe stressed enough.

That's just vehicle issues. Add cycles and pedestrians via this sole inadequate access will createaccidents and potential for serious harm. What about the traffic calming measures alongDovercourt Road? What is the real cost of this development if its unsafe and dangerous?

Existing residents worries and concerns have not been listened to or addressed. Any newdevelopment plans should always put existing residents as top priority. The proposed plan doesnothing to enhance the street or environment for new and existing residents, nor does it safeguardexisting or give safety to new residents.

4. Emergency Access lane is not lawful.

it is not lawful as it is a private lane for existing residence use as stated in the property deeds.Using the 2004 fire rescue and services act which grants access for the fire service across anyland regardless of ownership to enable access to a fire in the case of danger to life does notconstitute a new development emergency access plan as an emergency access needs to be inplace for all services not just fire and meet an adopted highway at the boundary which this doesnot. The email correspondence in Apendix H confirms this as Fire servie state in correspondencethat ambulance access is required.

5. Access lane does not meet building regulations.

Point 3.5.2 references Apendix H

- Emergency vehicle access should accommodate emergency vehicles (not just fire), requiring ahard surface (i.e. no grass or soft ground) and widths / height clearance as per BuildingRegulations Approved Document B

- Gate access also needs to meet Building Regulations Approved Document B with a lock that isnot tamper proof and can be cut easily in an emergency;- Confirmation that on-street parking in the vicinity of the emergency access do not precludeaccess for emergency vehicles (for example do the current double-yellows on Dovercourt Roadprovide sufficient space for a fire tender access into lanes without being blocked by parkedvehicles);- Southern access between No. 98 and No. 100 Dovercourt Road appears preferable to AFR(compared to consulted on alternatives) due to it being a shorter / more direct route to thedevelopment, and benefits from existing hard standing surfacing.In Building regulations Approved Document B Vol 2 2019 table 15.2 Typical fire and rescueservices vehicle access route specifications state a minimum carrying capacity of 12.5 or 17tonnes. This lane has not been weight tested and it is not level so cannot benefit from existinghard standing nor is it within the site boundary.

Any gate put at the boundary creates a potential for new residents to use as an access point (asthis was originally proposed as the pedestrian and cycle access for the site) and existingDovercourt road residence are not happy with this. They propose to block this access by means ofa wall at the boundary/development gate or gate at the entrance to the lane rendering this route

inaccessible.

The turning circle indicated could not be achieved when there was a fire at no 100 DovercourtRoad.

As this lane is not part of the development there is no onus on the developer/land owner ormanaging agents to maintain it. It will be very difficult to agree this with all residents as they arestrongly against it and as stated is already not in a fit state to accommodate fire engines.

7. Inadequate traffic/ parking assessment.

There has been no actual physical traffic assessment's only modelling. I believe there is a 2 yearwindow of which modelling is valid.

The use of Covid 19 pandemic as a reason to not carryout needed physical assessment ofDovercourt and Downend Road to gain real figures cannot be oversold. There are daily problemswith the bottleneck junctions either end of Downend Road. Add to that constant speeding alongDovercourt Road, the number of new developments and proposed removal of parking from MullerRoad residents will only exacerbate the issues on Dovercourt road currently.

Car use has increased, as has the ownership of vans and second vehicles for recreational andwork use. Road traffic has increased over 10% since lockdown and this needs to be reflected andadjusted in the figures for planned cars on the site aswell as the spill over into Dovercourt rd fromthe Muller Road development and bus lane works as well as additional parking from second carsfrom this development.

I hope the planning committee take into consideration the points I have made but also that as acommunity we have tried to engage positively at all times regarding this development. We are notagainst the houses, just the amount of them and the access proposed which does not create agood community or safe environment for all in its current design.

Yours Faithfuly

Michael Sheldon

As someone who uses the vehicle access to to my house off the lane 5 times a dayminimum as do another 4 people/vehicles how are you going to manage the safe reversing out ofthis blind exit onto the depot lane?

I had a few very near misses with vehicles exiting the depot and with the proposed layout believethe cars exiting the new development will be traveling faster creating greater risk.

Added to that are the cycles in the road as no cycle provision in this application as well aspedestrians (as this s the only access) creates even further risk that has not been properly riskassessed only traffic volume assessed and that is incorrect as there will be many more cars thanstated which is proven on other new developments around Bristol.

How are the new residents going to fell having only this old lane between 2 houses as their soleaccess? Doesn't seem like good design is being followed as its creating a giant cul de sac withbuildings twice the height of my house.

I do believe there is a genuine risk that the depot entrance could be blocked and there would be aneed to use the emergency access. Whether that be blocked by an accident or badly parkedvehicles in inappropriate places in the lane or development. In either situation the emergencyaccess would need to be used to access this giant cul de sac and the proposed secondary accessis not viable. I drive a big van, I wouldn't take it down that lane between 98-100 because its notlevel or solid ground and im not as wide as a fire truck!

We as residents have tried to convey our issues many times and are exhausted with the lack of

response to our questions and concerns especially to access and safety.

What about traffic calming measures on Dovercourt road? What about all the other developmentsthat have not been finished adding to the traffic aswell as all the parked cars from Muller Road busroute and development aswell as this developments second cars/work vehicles that will be parkingon Dovercourt Rd if they cant find half a space to block your entrance?

I am sure there will be an accident within weeks if the access is designed the way it is suggestedcurrently.

Access directly onto Petherbridge way is the most viable solution offering multiple vehicle accessoptions. It also takes away all the pollution from cars sat at the end of Downend road/muller roadtraffic lights easing pollution levels there as well as Dovercourt Road. They will mostly be turningdown muller road anyway so make the depot lane the emergency access or one way traffic andPetherbridge the main entrance or one way similar to Bonnington walk. They have slightly morehouse and 2 access points both wider than this one aswell as dedicated cycle route.Concord Way reroute cannot be included in this application.

It just doesn't seem right that this access is considered acceptable and acceptable to who?

Its certainly not to me and I already live here.

1. The access roads are inadequate and dangerous to walkers and cyclists.2. Downroad is already an unsafe bottleneck.3. Access to the development would be safer from Petheridge Way4. Height of the proposed development will overshadow houses in Dovercourt Road and istherefore out of keeping with the locality.5. There must be an environmental assessment since access is a key factor in how to go ahead. Itis disingenuous to pretend that at 140 houses projected there is no need fo the assessment.

Hello.

The reason for objection against these plans are the following;

1. Main Access - Have you had a look at the main access to the site on Dovercourt road? Haveyou visited and seen the access and seen the amount the vehicles / commercial vehicles passingetc? I cannot see any mentions of this on the plans.2. Junction - Appalling visibility of the road for vehicles pulling in and out of these access points forthe main access? This is extremely dangerous for pedestrians/children and cyclists and nowscooters!3. I also object to the emergency access which has been proposed between 98- 100 DovercourtRoad. Please confirm and advise when you have you driven a commercial vehicle down this lane?Let alone an emergency vehicle.4. Permission - Not a single letter of permission has been sent to the residents of 82-130Dovercourt Road. This is a Private Lane written on the deeds of the properties which belongs tothe owners(us)5. Gate - You propose to have a gate in place, Who do you have in mind to man this gate inregards to keeping this a secured and maintained?6. You are proposing 170 parking spaces for 140 dwellings. Lets say the average house hold has2-3 cars (which is a realistic fact) I would calculate that you will require around 280-320 spaces doyou realistically feel that these vehicle can all park on the new site? If they cannot where do youthink they will flow onto? Dovercourt Road and Downend Road. This would make near impossiblefor residents to park right? This would also make it an actual disaster for any emergency vehiclesto go down Downend road (which is already tight as it is) / Dovercourt road. Please do send

council representative over and observe the sheer bedlam this would cause and then lets addMatch day Football/Cricket Weekdays/Weekends.7. Privacy - 16 meters high overlooking into our gardens and houses? This is just wrong anddisrepectfull. So there is no getting away from The busy roads with aggressive fast drivers aspeople will be slowing down to find parking and then.... In the garden people looking over ontoyou. This sounds like a well thought plan and idea.

Main Access - Have you had a look at the main access to the site on Dovercourt road? Have youvisited and seen the access and seen the amount the vehicles / commercial vehicles passing etc?I cannot see any mentions of this on the plans.Junction - Appalling visibility of the road for vehicles pulling in and out of these access points forthe main access? This is extremely dangerous for pedestrians/children and cyclists and nowscooters!I also object to the emergency access which has been proposed between 98- 100 DovercourtRoad. Please confirm and advise when you have you driven a commercial vehicle down this lane?Let alone an emergency vehicle.Permission - Not a single letter of permission has been sent to the residents of 82-130 DovercourtRoad. This is a Private Lane written on the deeds of the properties which belongs to theowners(us)Gate - You propose to have a gate in place, Who do you have in mind to man this gate in regardsto keeping this a secured and maintained?You are proposing 170 parking spaces for 140 dwellings. Lets say the average house hold has 2-3cars (which is a realistic fact) I would calculate that you will require around 280-320 spaces do yourealistically feel that these vehicle can all park on the new site? If they cannot where do you thinkthey will flow onto? Dovercourt Road and Downend Road. This would make near impossible forresidents to park right? This would also make it an actual disaster for any emergency vehicles togo down Downend road (which is already tight as it is) / Dovercourt road. Please do send councilrepresentative over and observe the sheer bedlam this would cause and then lets add Match dayFootball/Cricket Weekdays/Weekends.

Privacy - 16 meters high overlooking into our gardens and houses? This is just wrong anddisrespectful. So there is no getting away from The busy roads with aggressive fast drivers aspeople will be slowing down to find parking and then.... In the garden people looking over ontoyou. This sounds like a well thought plan and idea.

I do not support this planning application. This is not resident led: we are not beinglistened to. Furthermore the whole process seems designed to prevent us commenting easily andfully on this consultation.

I am not against building homes on this site, in fact initially I felt pleased that this land was going tobe put to use again and that our area might be improved - how naïve. The effect on the currentresidents is going to be severely detrimental and the proportion of affordable and social housing toaddress the housing issues is laughable.

I oppose the Access Road because:Residents are very unhappy about the proposed main access road. ONE TINY one-way accesspoint (a small lane) has been planned for ALL the hundreds of new pedestrians, scooters, cyclistsand a minimum 170 cars with no designated cycle access point at all which presumably makes itunlawful to pass the planning regulations? This is simply not wide or safe enough for all this traffic.There has been no consideration for the properties whose garages and driveways back onto thattiny access point and are in frequent use throughout the day. There is a locked gate here fornumerous garages, which, in order to access, these drivers need to stop in the lane, exit theircars, unlock the gate, get back into their cars and drive through. Some of these users may beelderly and it may take them some time to run through the process, all the time blocking the SOLE,narrow access road to all cars, bikes and pedestrians. This access point comes out onto what is abusy road in rush hour (especially with cyclists) with limited visibility for both vehicles exiting theaccess road and for vehicles already on Dovercourt Road. This road has enough traffic on italready and now with Muller Road being developed further with the traffic flow changing there, thetraffic here is going to be utterly impossible. At best, this will cause immense bottlenecks,

gridlocks, angry drivers, frightened children, delays and increased pollution and at worst hugeaccidents and even death. I do not think it is acceptable that this traffic modelling is using historicaldata that does not take into account the high number of new developments in the area and theassociated cars that will come with these multiple developments in Lockleaze.

I oppose the Parking considerations because:No reasonable parking consideration has been given for a) the number of cars that will be in thenew development - it is completely insufficient b) the fact there is NO spare parking on DovercourtRoad and Downend Road as it is. Where are current residents supposed to park?

I oppose the proposed Emergency Access because:The emergency access point isn't lawful and I can't imagine building control are going to allow it.The council does not have legal rights to use it and all the residents who own that lane areopposed to it. If this development is resident-led, this alone should be reason enough not to pass itthrough planning, but it is also not fit for purpose: it is not suitable for emergency vehicles, it hasno public right of way, the local authority doesn't maintain it and does not reach an adoptedhighway. Apparently the only emergency service which could viably use it is the fire serviceanyway, so I don't think this can be lawfully designated as an emergency access lane.

Environmental ImpactApparently, an assessment has been made by the council that the pollution levels for the airquality are too high to reroute this development in and out through Petherbridge Way onto MullerRoad as we requested, but it is perfectly ok to put it smack bang through a residential area, rightby our homes and gardens - poor air quality is fine for that apparently. Ours and our children'shealth is clearly a lower priority that money. Curiously coincidental that at 140 dwellings, noenvironmental survey is required, isn't it? I hope the corners being cut won't put lives at riskbecause contamination levels haven't been checked. The wildlife in this area is impressive:woodpeckers, owls, badgers, deer and foxes are all being seen in gardens and in the woodsbehind Dovercourt Road. Are we still considered a green city or is that only when it looks good tobe so?

Height of housesSome of these properties will be towering over existing properties on Dovercourt Road blockingout their natural light and privacy, something many of us chose this street for, devaluing ourproperties and way of life. We are not being considered.

InfrastructureThis new development brings nothing to the current community - we already lack playgrounds forour children, places in schools and space at GP surgeries amongst many other things. How willthis help without any new amenities being considered? Why is there no bus route or communityresource being considered which current residents might also benefit from?

This whole development shows a total disregard for our community to merely add chaos, pollution,danger, traffic and inconvenience and provide no benefit whatsoever. It shows no understandingof our needs. This is in no way community-led and you have lost our trust. This is about whatmakes the most money and is the easiest and cheapest to provide, cutting as many corners as itcan both unlawfully and immorally. Please do not allow this to be rushed through without morescrutiny and consideration and ultimately please do not approve this development if the accesspoint cannot be changed.

As a resident of Dovercourt road I find the proposed development deeply concerning,mainly for the health and safety of there being no proper reliable entrance for emergency vehicles.Dovercourt road is a wonderful place to live however there's already problems with congestion andparking, adding a significant amount of dwellings into the mix with no separate access would bedeeply irresponsible and dangerous, not just to residents in the development but to residents inDovercourt road and in the care home.

furthermore the possible loss of a green space by Aldi is deeply concerning for me - as a woman Ifind that it is extremely threatening walking by yourself at night. I find this well lit green space areliable and safe shortcut to get myself home and to take my dog on a walk and I know manyothers feel the same. the possible loss of the use of the space would be such a disappointment.

it is also of deep concern the height of the development - so many houses would completely looseall of their light and sun, something particularly important with the rising prices of gas andelectricity bills, not to mention mental wellbeing.

Another important point is that the entrance would severely intervene with the Concorde way cyclepath. cycling is a deeply important mode of transport for people and its already dangerous enoughas it is. to have such a large amount of congestion added to a blind spot on a bottleneck road isdeeply dangerous.

I think its desperately important that the health and safety of the residents (both future and current)is considered with this development as it really does feel like a disaster waiting to happen.

Hello, i support the idea of making use of that space, however i would like to express 2concerns.

As far as i understand the emergency access road is claimed on what's supposed to offer soleaccess right to the residents of the adjacent houses. This is a dangerous precedent and it requiresclarification.

I also understand there's no environmental impact assessmet available as it is not required for adevelopmemt up to 140 dwellings. The application is for the exactly that number and the developershould show good will by providing it if the concerns in the community arise on this ground. Ofcourse the limit has to be set up at a fixed number, but coonsidering this is on the limit thedeveloper has an opportunity to gain support for their application by providing an enviromentalimpact assessment.

As a resident very near to Dovercourt road I am concerned that the access to theconstruction will not be sufficient which will result in traffic filtering down already crowded roads inthe area.

The proposal suggests that the main access road is going to be where the current depot lane is.This is an extremely narrow road which is far too small for the size of development that is beingproposed. Furthermore, this main access road will be the sole pedestrian and cyclist access whichwill be UNSAFE due to how narrow it is. This will result in ALOT of traffic going through a bottleneck from dovercourt road,through downend road to Muller road as this will now become the mainaccess.

Due to poor parking in the area, Traffic already has to be single file down that section of road andIt can already be challenging to get out of our road during heavy traffic times of day.

There is also the issue of emergency access. The proposed emergency access between 98-100Dovercourt road is very narrow and emergency vehicles in the past have declined to use it, Soagain, Extremely UNSAFE.

It is also very disappointing that despite the clear implications to access in/out of our roadbecoming extremely difficult secondary to volume of traffic, that we were not even informed of thedevelopment consultation process.

I object to the development as it is currently proposed.

It was my understanding that this outline planning application is to decide access only, howeverfollowing a meeting with Jill Baker from BCC and Stephen Baker from Goram Homes on Friday25th March, I understand that this outline planning application will also decide the number ofhomes to be built on the site.

The number of homes proposed in the development is 140. Whilst I support the use of brownfieldsites to build housing, and recognise the need for more affordable housing in Bristol, the proposalfor 140 homes at Dovercourt Depot as outlined in the current plans are unsuitable. The proposedsingle access road is not suitable for the amount of vehicular traffic that will result (more objectionsto access below). Furthermore, the current proposal is to build 4 storey high buildings, which willbe double the height of the existing houses on Dovercourt Road, and completely not in keepingwith the area. If the number of homes is to be decided in this round of planning, these pointsshould be considered.

Access:I strongly object to both the proposed access road, and to the proposed emergency access road.

Access road:The proposed access road is completely unsuitable for the number of vehicles that would beaccessing the site on a daily basis. The width of the road will be reduced to 5.5m, which althoughtechnically may not be too narrow under planning rules, in practical terms it will likely cause issueswith congestion - especially with delivery trucks/bin lorries etc. Furthermore, there are two access

points, one at either side of the road, for driveways and access to garages for current residences,which result in vehicles reversing out blind into the access road, across both pavements and intooncoming traffic and pedestrians. This has the potential to cause collisions on the single accesspoint to the development on a daily basis. Yet in the transport assessment is deemed 'immaterial'.Vehicles entering and exiting this narrowed access road onto and off Dovercourt Road will causedangerous conditions for cyclists using Concorde Way along Dovercourt Road, and for the cyclistson the access road itself.

According to the hierarchy of access under planning rules, pedestrians should be considered first,then cycles. There is no dedicated cycle access to this development. They have to access thedevelopment on the same narrow road as all the vehicles. This is dangerous. The transportassessment outlines that there could be future cycle/pedestrian access under BCC's aspirations tore route Concorde Way (2.5.8, 2.5.9, 2.5.10, Figure 2-8, 2.10.5, 3.4.3, 3.10.5). The repeatedmention of this aspiration is disingenuous, as this has not yet even been approved to go toconsultation. I understand there are considerable engineering issues with the proposal to moveConcorde Way, and that there is no guarantee this will go ahead. To attempt to use that thisCOULD provide pedestrian and cycle access in the future is misleading. This planning applicationMUST be decided on the basis that Concorde Way does run, and may well continue in perpetuity,along Dovercourt Road. This development does not satisfy the requirement to provide cycleaccess to a new development, and should therefore be refused planning permission.

Which brings me to my next point regarding the proposed access road: traffic. Dovercourt Roadand surrounding roads are not equipped to cope with the additional traffic that this developmentwould bring. We already experience speeding, rat running and dangerous driving alongDovercourt Road, which although residents have repeatedly mentioned at consultations and inconversations/emails to BCC/AECOM/Goram Homes representatives, has not been highlighted inthe transport assessment. Downend Road is essentially a one way carriageway due to parkedcars on either side of the road, and this causes road rage and dangerous driving already, with thecurrent number of cars using the roads. This would only be exacerbated and worsened with theincrease in traffic this access road would bring the road. The lights at the junction of DownendRoad and Muller Road will also become even more of a pinch point than they already can be.

The proposed number of parking spaces in the development is currently set at 170. This will beinsufficient as most homes in the area have 2 or sometimes more vehicles, and will cause overspillto park along Dovercourt Road and surrounding roads, which are already full, with no additionalcapacity for more parking. At the same time, the improvements to Muller Road will take awayresident parking spaces on Muller Road to create bus lanes in their place. This will lead to thesecars looking for new places to park, will spill into surrounding roads and consequently very likelyadd pressure to parking on Dovercourt Road/Downend Road. The Ford Site on Muller Road isalso being developed, and due to the footpath from Dovercourt Road that comes out right by theFord Garage development, it is likely that we will experience overspill parking from thisdevelopment on our road as well. I am extremely concerned that this will all combine to create a

nightmare parking scenario along Dovercourt Road and Downend Road, with illegal/poor parking,and crawling cars looking for parking spaces and having to drive repeatedly around the streets tofind spaces. This will make our road more dangerous for pedestrians, cyclists using ConcordeWay, and other road users.

I would also like to highlight that we were informed that the planners had listened to residents, andincreased the number of parking spaces to 170. However, in the Transport Assessment (3.7.8) itstates that 'the outline parking strategy will be reviewed during the Reserved Matters stage' andthat they will 'investigate....the potential to reduce the level of on-site parking to promotesustainable travel.' This is unacceptable. If BCC/ Goram Homes/AECOM are truly listening toresidents, they will provide the maximum number of parking spaces on site as possible underplanning rules. If they are reduced at the next stage of planning, it would be further proof to localresidents that only lip service is paid to our concerns (more on this later).

Emergency Access:I strongly object to the private lane between 98 & 100 Dovercourt Road being used as emergencyaccess to the development. First of all, residents - who have the sole right to use the lane in theirhouse deeds - were asked if they would grant permission for the lane to be used. Theyunanimously refused consent. Representatives from the council then told them at a new meetingthat their legal team was looking into a way to use it as they believed it to the be the bestoption.The next thing they heard from the council was when the next round of plans came out andtheir lane was indicated as the emergency access, with no prior warning of this fact, and noexplanation as to why they believed they had the right to do it. This disdain for local residents isbreathtaking!

It seems that the use of this lane relies on the Fire Service Act 2004, that gives the fire servicesthe right to gain access where ever they need in order to protect lives. As I understand it thislegislation relates to Fire Services, in which case Police and Ambulance Services would not havethe same rights, and the proposed emergency access is not a full emergency access, but rather aFire Service access. It is worth pointing out at this stage that the fire service declined to send a fireengine down that same lane when 100 Dovercourt Road (the house adjacent to the lane) wasactually on fire 2 years ago, as they said it was not suitable.

Furthermore, this lane is not suitable under Building Control guidelines. As I understand it theystate that an emergency access should exit onto an adopted highway. Once past the boundary ofthe development, the emergency access is on a private lane, so it cannot be used for this purpose.The Emergency Access would also have to be maintained to a certain standard to be acceptableunder Building Control guidelines. As BCC do not have the right to access the lane to maintain it,how will this be accomplished?

Environmental assessment:Although I understand that the development as proposed is (just) under the 150 homes limit

required to undertake an environmental assessment, it seems very backward of a council ownedcompany to not undertake one. Surely at this time of climate crisis when we are all being urged todo our bit to protect the environment, leaders in green cities should be leading the way in settingout best practice? I urge the council and the developers to reconsider, and to undertake to carryout an environmental assessment should this development progress to any future stages.

I would like to finish my objection by highlighting the disappointing way residents have beentreated throughout this process over the last year. From the initial consultation in March 2021 tothe present day, communication with and respect for local residents has been underwhelming. Inthe initial consultation in March 2021, the meeting was opened with the with the phrase 'residentled development'. During that meeting, and since, almost every concern and request fromresidents has been dismissed as irrelevant, or outside the scope of the development. The onlycircumstance where we have felt heard was in the abandoning of the planned emergency accessthrough the green space, which was proposed in the first consultation. However, as this wassuperseded by a much cheaper and easier option for the council (putting that emergency accessthrough a private lane), which has been highly contentious and disagreed with by all the residentswho it affects, this can hardly be seen as a win-win situation from our perspective as residents!

As a community, we fundraised in order to pay for our own transport assessment, and for a townplanner to look at the proposals. This letter of representation was forwarded to the council and wewere promised a detailed response. As has been typical of the attitude towards us by the council,we only received a response when we expressed our disappointment at having not yet receivedone, in an article about our concerns on Bristol Live.

From the beginning of this process, we have spoken about the desire for this development to be apart of our community, and asked if there could be a community building included, and somecommunity outside space, for example a play park (with structures). We were told that acommunity building was outside the scope of the development, and in the plans there is spaceallowed for 'public outdoor space with natural play for children'. We have an abundance of naturalplay area locally for children with Muller Road Rec and the Dovercourt Road Green Space. As itstands, there is no reason for current residents to go into the new development, and plenty ofreasons why it negatively affects them.

Many residents have spoken about concerns regarding the proposed height of the new buildings(the 4 storey buildings will be twice the height of the current houses on Dovercourt Road!). Oneresponse to this from the planners was that it would make the area more 'vibrant' (!) Rather thanengaging with the concerns, it has consistently felt as though we are being told to put up and shutup!

We have repeatedly spoken about speeding traffic, and asked about the possibility of trafficcalming measures, but have been told that it is outside the scope of the development.

There has been very little attempt to meet residents part way; no attempt to liaise with othercouncil departments to help address residents concerns via other means. As with other recentdevelopments in Lockleaze, it feels that there has been very little consideration as to the impact onthe area as a whole - the sole focus is on building houses at any cost. Where is the overview ofLockleaze as a whole? The infrastructure? Ways for the new developments to really add to thecommunity?

For a 'resident led' project, it has felt to me to be very one sided, and that residents are beinginvited to give their opinions as a tick box exercise. As Goram Homes is owned by Bristol CityCouncil, I would expect that they would be leading the way in engaging with residents, not puttingprofits before safety. Trust in Bristol City Council and the whole planning process thus far hasbeen severely damaged in our neighbourhood. I sincerely hope that the planning officer anddevelopment team will take this opportunity to listen to local residents concerns. We are a reallyfriendly and welcoming community, and would love to welcome new neighbours to our area, butNOT at the expense of our safety as residents, and all those who use Concorde Way. I urge theplanning committee to refuse this outline planning application on the basis of insufficient andunlawful access, and ask the developers to go back to the drawing board, engage respectfully withlocal residents, and come up with better solutions to access this site.

I fully support the use of Dovercourt Depot to provide much needed housing on what islargely a brownfield site. I would really love to see an ambitious, well thought out and sustainablescheme with an opportunity to provide much needed local facilities for local residents.Unfortunately, the proposals are none of this being essentially a large cul-de-sac of housing and Ibelieve are against the principles of sustainable development. I object to the scheme for thefollowing reasons.

Although there is the prospect of the re-routed Concorde Way providing better sustainabletransport links it cannot be considered in this application as it is some way from becoming areality.In its current form there are no adequate cycle links with the only site access too narrow toprovide space, car use will essentially take priority due to distance from bus stops and amenities.Bristol has pledged it will double tree canopy cover by 2046 under it's one city plan and yet theproposals would see the majority of the trees on site removed with and I suspect many morebeyond what the plans show as has been seen in the Bonnington Walk development. A recentstudy by the University of the West of England found that BCC are well behind in their hopes toachieve this target. It has not been shown that the proposals have attempted to follow theapproach from Bristol Core Strategy BCS9 that states individual green assets should be retainedwhere possible and integrated into the new development. Removing these trees to plant new onesthat may not even become carbon positive for a decade is counterintuitive.The Open Space Assessment submitted as part of the application says that the nearest play areato the site is 1.1km away. That is way over the Bristol Core Strategy Target of 450m. It states thatpriority should be time to travel and distance to these play areas but then goes on to say that onedoesn't need to be provided for the proposed site as the play areas that are too far away are quitelarge. This is another chance missed for the development to provide something of value to the

local community.Much like many other residents I am disappointed that BCC have chosen to not carry out a fullEnvironmental Impact Assessment. As a resident I have been witness to Owls, Woodpeckers andDeer in on the development site. Neighbours have seen Badgers and Water Voles which are apriority species in the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. Water Voles are fully protected under section 9of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 which makes it an offence to intentionally damage orobstruct access to water vole burrows. I would like to see a full EIA carried out to investigate to thefullest and mitigate any biodiversity loss.There has been inadequate traffic assessment and modelling with none being physical modelleddue to covid 19 restrictions, instead the assessment relies on old data from other previousdevelopments. In consultation the traffic consultant was dismissive of concerns saying thateveryone would be working from home now and not using their cars. It is dangerous to make suchassumptions and a new traffic survey should now be undertaken to ascertain current levels.Downed Road is a bottle neck, it is a narrow road with cars parked on both sides of the road, overthe pavements and even then there is only a single width carriageway. Lorries get stuck here dailyas the road bends causing traffic chaos. Bus routes have been diverted away from this route dueto getting stuck. Failure of the proposals to provide sufficient access to sustainable modes of travelwill promote further traffic and pollution in what is already one of the most congested cities in thewhole country.Dovercourt Road is a long straight road encouraging vehicles to speed which they do regularly.Coming down the hill cyclists can get above 20mph and as much as 30mph as they pass theproposed site entrance. This is a dangerous due to limited visibility due to the narrow access laneto the site and parked cars. There is potential for serious accidents to occur with the possibility of170 cars leaving the site every day. The proposals need to consider the need to slow traffic andimprove visibility along Dovercourt Road which they don't at present.

I'm disappointed in what a "resident led scheme" has been so far with local residents feelingunheard and ignored. I would like to see BCC and Goram Homes fully engage with the communityin a meaningful way rather to design and build a sustainable and vibrant community in line withsustainable development goals.

I would like to object against the planning application for 140 dwellings on DovercourtRd Depo.

First and most important issue for me is the proposed access to the development, as I feel it isinadequate to be the sole access in and out of the site. In your employment and marketing reportyou state;

A1 .We do think the site would not be suitable for such uses given the significant constraints onaccess and the neighbouring uses. A development of residential uses with ancillary employmentuses is equally challenging given the practicalities of delivery, the demand or uses and how thiswould be achieved given the access.

I am aware that you are saying that the site would not be a good site for employment and ormarketing. However, I feel this also highlights the issues with access in general as it states thereare "significant constraints on access and the neighbouring uses". I feel the proposed plans do notreflect the impact this will have on the area and not to mention the around 20 residence thatreverse their cars out on to this proposed entrance/exit.

Dovercourt Rd is a very busy road and is known by the police to be a "rat run" cars come roundfrom Downend rd and then can go up to 50mph up DR . I worry about my children crossing theroad already and we are not only going to have at least 250 extra cars from this development, butwe are a main road for Lockleaze who have 1000 homes under 30 developments coming to thearea which will have a massive impact on our rd.

Another failing in this proposal is that all new development is there is no other form of transport i.ebus route or a bicycle lane. Re-routing concord way has not gone through the planning process sothis can not be used in this proposal as this may not happen. Therefore, I feel this development isnot within guidance for meeting target to make Bristol a green city and encouraging less carusage, as they have no facilities in, out or around the of the development.

Aecom Transport assessment point 1.4.2 It clearly states that all pedestrian and cycle access willbe via the existing depot, this is not good enough and does not put cyclist at the top priority whenusing the public highway.

This develop has nothing to offer existing residence there is no community space, no park and notenough green space inside that we would use this area. All planning regulations must stipulatewhat you are doing to enhance the area and I don't think this is good enough for local residenceas the only thing this development is brining is more housing and unfortunately housing alonedoes not build communities which is what we need especially after covid 19.

My last point is that the emergency access route has not been agreed by the residence and this isa private lane, therefore is this even legal? I feel it is not good enough to use the 2004 fire andrescue service act to gain access to the site from the emergency access as the development doesnot link with the lock highway.

This development has been sold to us residents as a "resident lead project" as quoted by Kiran onthe first consultation and I do not feel like we are having our voices heard so I hope that you willtake all comments into consideration.

On a side not can the council's planning and housing departments look at the infrastructure for allthe new development as a whole for Lockleaze. This is going to have a big impact on ourcommunity when we have 1000 + new home coming to Lockleaze.

I have family living on Dovercourt Rd and am very concerned about the proposed newdevelopment and the access to it. The access has not been thought through properly and is notwide enough for emergency vehicles. The increase in traffic will greatly affect the safety of thelocal people. The road is a very well used cycle route and the increase in the number of cars willmake it more dangerous. The visibility for the access is not good enough either, which isdangerous.

We strongly object to the proposed development in its current form. We are extremelyconcerned about the currently proposed site access arrangements which seem to be completelyinadequate to accommodate the level of traffic that is likely to be generated by the large number ofhouses that are proposed to be crammed onto the site.

The existing entrance to the site is wholly unsuitable as the main access due to the narrowness ofthe access road, the dangerous junction onto Dovercourt Road and the unsuitability of DovercourtRoad to accommodate the resulting additional traffic, especially if Dovercourt is expected tocontinue to accommodate significant cycle traffic as is the case today. A new road fromPetherbridge Way would be a far better access route.We do not believe the claims made that the existing highway network can safely accommodateadditional vehicle movements associated with this proposed development or that there will be noimpact on parking. Surrounding roads will not be able to cope with the additional traffic andparking demand that would result from this development in combination with all the other housingdevelopments already in progress or currently planned in the local area.

Where we live (Muller Road) the existing volume of traffic is already at saturation point and we aresubject to tremendous congestion verging on gridlock at peak times. This has already becomenoticeably worse recently since the opening of the Lidl store. We are threatened with theimposition of a bus lane which will make the situation even worse by further impeding traffic flow,remove existing parking provision on Muller Road and block off access to side roads on the AshleyDown side which will drive more parking demand onto the Downend Road/Dovercourt Road area.There are multiple housing developments already under way in Lockleaze and also imminentdevelopment of the Brunel Ford site all of which will generate even more traffic onto Muller Road.

There seems to be a complete lack of joined up planning by the council in considering thecumulative impact of all these new developments on the local road network. It should be afundamental requirement to show that adequate and properly thought out solutions (not just auseless white elephant bus lane) are put in place BEFORE planning for any such newdevelopment is allowed to proceed.

We are not wholly averse to the development of the Dovercourt Depot however we would like tosee the number of houses reduced to a more sensible level and we believe that in addition toimproving the site access a prerequisite for this development going ahead should be for theConcorde Way cycle path between Constable Road and Muller Road to be rerouted through thesite, instead of the current dangerous situation where cyclists are forced to negotiate DovercourtRoad in close proximity to vehicle traffic. We also would like to see better access for pedestriansand cyclists from the southern end Dovercourt Road through to the railway footbridge, via a safeand well lit path. This would be highly beneficial for instance for children from this area needing towalk or cycle to the new Trinity school.

The proposed access road will cause a heavy increase of traffic to Dovercourt rd.Dovercourt Rd is used as part of a cycle route and has 2 nearby primary schools and a busyplaying field. I feel this increase in traffic will have a negative impact on the safety of cyclists, andthe local children. The proposed access road is too narrow for emergency vehicles to travelthrough, and it also cuts through land who's deeds are owned by current residents.

I know council will do what it wants anyway. Dovercourt Road and Downend road isnotorious for parking. Most of the time muller road traffic is at a standstill. You want to buildhouses which will be taller than our homes. How many cars will be at these properties?Also what about the wildlife which have made that area home. Council will be happy to destroytheir habitats.

WhilstI do not object to the redevelopment of the Dovercourt Road site I am veryconcerned with the access to the site. the portal is to not put in any additional access to the site. if140 plus houses are built this will bring in at least 140 vehicles. The current access is alongDownend Park which is very narrow and operates on a mutual give way basis. Dovercourt Road ispart of a cycle path to and from UWE and the centre of Bristol. Lockleaze Road is a busy busroute and has a school on it. I cannot see any good reason why an additional road could not beconstructed as in the original plan through Lidl car park to the back of the site or upgrade the roadfrom Aldi. This would be expensive but it would be a long term solution and help with the additionhouses currently being built. in Lockleaze.If there is no changes to the access it will make emergency access very difficult.

I would like to object on the proposed access to the proposed Dovercourt Road DepotDevelopment.The current depot lane is not wide enough for traffic in and out of the development and foremergency vehicle access and is clearly unsuitable as the sole access to the proposeddevelopment.Dovercourt road is already busy with traffic and cyclists and using the lane as sole access to thedevelopment will be dangerous.Why not use an alternative from Muller Road via Petherbridge Way? or as an addition to take thepressure off Dovercourt Road?It could be one way to stop it being used as a rat run to Filton avenue. Surely from an emergencypoint of view there would be the need for more than one access road.

I would like to disagree that the increase in vehicles from the development will not negatively affectresidents. If there is not sufficient parking for residents of the development then they will park onDovercourt Road where parking is already limited.UWE students are not permitted parking on campus as Dovercourt Road lies within a 3 mile radiusso if properties are let to students there are bound to be several cars per property with not enoughparking spaces so they will spill out on to Dovercourt.

I hope my comments and those of my neighbours will be taken into consideration when thisplanning application is looked at.

I have no issue with development of the land for housing and hope that the amount ofsocial housing is included in the final development. My over-riding concern is that access to thesite is completely inadequate and need to be changed. There are other possible routes into thesite, notably via Petherbridge way, which allows traffic to flow onto a major road, rather than onto asmall and already congested residential street, which is already a busy and established cycleway.Doverecourt road has a very good safety record in regard to traffic accidents and funnelling a largeamount of traffic onto the road is going to have a serious impact on road safety.

I feel this planning application is not taking into consideration the local residence andcyclist the use concord way. As a keen cyclist i use concord way and have had a few near misseson DR, as it's already a busy road at rush hour time especially. I know the measurements arewithin guidelines of building a new road but i don't think you have factored in how many carsaccess that space on the right and left before you hit the depo yard and how many cyclist use thatspace. Can this be factored into your planning?

I feel it would be dangerous to make the space between DR and the depo an entrance todevelopment with 140 dwellings. DR is currently a cycle route and may i say a very busy one, soto have 200 plus cars coming out of this small space is going to cause many incidents.

From and ecology point of view i feel this will have a big impact in the area as their is a lot ofwildlife that also use this space and will be effected by the development. Why is there no in-depthecology survey?

My last point to make would be that there seems to be no other way out in case of an emergency.I can see from the plan that you have put and emergency access route but is this not private land?

I am aware of the housing crisis in Bristol and would be in full support if the access to thisdevelopment could have to an other area. Maybe petherbridge way?

We have two young children, Dovercourt road is becoming busier and busier, thehousing will only add to an already busy road, creating an unsafe environment.1)under planning hierarchy, it goes (in order of precedence)Pedestrians, cyclists, municipal vehicles, then all other traffic.There is no dedicated cycles access. We feel this is contrary to planning rules.

2)they are using the private lane between 98 & 100 dovercourt road as emergency access as theyare relying on 2004 legislation that allows the fire service to access anywhere they choose in orderto protect lives. This doesn't apply to other emergency services. So the emergency access is onlyfor fire service therefore not a true emergency access point. Furthermore building controlstipulates that an emergency access needs to come out onto an adopted highway. This onedoesn't. It comes out of their boundary onto a private lane.

I am a local resident and i am very happy that there is more social housing coming toLockleaze but i am really unhappy a the way all the developments in a individual way as all thedevelopment will impact on us local residence.

1. Point one is that there is not enough parking for the amount of housing which will impact onstreets around this development. To add to this there is no cycle route into the development, nolocal bus from Dovercourt rd. Where is the infrastructure to support less cars on the road!

2. The access to this site is not adequate for the size of the site and the face that this is the onlypoint of access. The traffic on Dovercourt Rd is already bad and i often get stuck on Downend rdso this will be come worse with more cars not just for this development but the 30 otherdevelopments in the area. Why is there no mention of the back gate and private parking spacesthat access the lane that will be the main road onto the site as this will cause traffic on dovercourtrd.

3. Please can you tell me what us local residence will be gaining from this development? As therewill be no reason for me to enter this development. Where is the community space.

4. This is not an emergency access space, the lane between house number 100 and 98 as it is aprivate rd and not suitable for any emergency vehicle to gain access.

Whilst I do not object to the building of new homes on the depot site I do feel that thecouncil/Goram homes are not listening to the concerns of local residents on certain issues.

It's clear that the proposed main entrance on the small road off Dovercourt Rd has been chosensolely for its money-saving properties. Making a main access point off Petherbridge way wouldobviously be more costly but would provide much less of an impact to the residents around thedepot site. I understand this is a profit-making venture (as well as providing new homes) but giventhe ever-rising prices of Bristol's houses we're talking a very small percentage difference, whichsurely can be sacrificed for the good of local residents?

Dovercourt Rd is already a dangerous route for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists due to theinability of the majority of Britain's motorists to abide by speed limits, adding more vehicles to thisroute is just going to make it worse. Bringing the depot out onto a main road (Muller Rd) wouldmake much more sense in protecting the aforementioned groups.

I also think it's a really poor show to set the housing limit just under the threshold that requires aenvironmental impact assessment. There is an abundance of wildlife around the depot that couldbe affected by this build and that should be given more thought.

With regards to the emergency access point being on our lane I fully object to this. Not only is itour private lane but it is also very small, on a cul-de-sac itself (and so not suitable as anemergency access point as it could be easily blocked) and would require (for a turning circle intoit) a large area of double yellow lines along Dovercourt Rd, further affecting local residents' abilityto park outside their own houses.

I have noticed that the conifers backing onto houses 118-130 (approx) have been noted to be keptand trimmed in size, I'd like to say I'm really happy that we have been heard on this issue andwould implore a level of care with regards to this planning not seen in the Bonnington Walkdevelopment (where trees marked to be kept were "accidentally" chopped down).

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

In relation to sustainable transport, the NPPF states that development should:

a) give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements, both within the scheme and with

neighbouring areas; and second - so far as possible - to facilitating access to high quality public

transport, with layouts that maximise the catchment area for bus or other public transport

services, and appropriate facilities that encourage public transport use;

b) address the needs of people with disabilities and reduced mobility in relation to all modes

of transport;

c) create places that are safe, secure and attractive - which minimise the scope for conflicts

between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, avoid unnecessary street clutter, and respond to

local character and design standards;

d) allow for the efficient delivery of goods, and access by service and emergency vehicles; and

e) be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe,

accessible and convenient locations.

The developer is proposing to use the access that currently serves the Dovercourt Depot off

Dovercourt Road, as the main vehicular and pedestrian access into the site. Transport planning

consultancy Ardent have reviewed the information provided by the developer so far.

The proposed access is narrow and not considered suitable to serve the level of development

proposed, with the proposals resulting in low quality pedestrian footways and no ability to provide

dedicated cycle infrastructure into the site, which is contrary to the objectives of both the NPPF as

well as Local Plan policies BCS10 and DM23. In addition, there are two vehicle accesses and one

pedestrian access onto the current access route which would provide conflict with proposed vehicular

movements. The location of these is shown below on an aerial photograph in image 1.

Image 1 – Aerial photograph of existing access (source: Google Maps)

Pedestrian Access

Existing Vehicular

Accesses

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

The two vehicular access are lawful and in frequent use. The rear access lane to the north of the

current access is shown below in image 2. As can be seen the access provides unfettered access onto

the current access with poor visibility, particularly when turning right which would be the most

frequent turn used when exiting this junction. Due to the close proximity of the garages, there is no

opportunity to improve the visibility splay in this direction.

Image 2 – Rear access lane to north of current access

The access to the south of the current access is shown below in image 3. It provides access to a total

of 8 properties as follows: 3 and 4 Downend House Farm, 142 Dovercourt Road, flats 1, 2 and 3 144

Dovercourt Road, and flats A and B 146 Dovercourt Road. Again, the access provides unfettered access

onto the current access with poor visibility, particularly when turning left which would be the most

frequent turn used when exiting this junction. Due to the close proximity of the garage and block wall,

there is no opportunity to improve the visibility splay in this direction. Vehicles frequently reverse out

of the access due to the tight parking area, further increasing the likelihood of collision.

Image 3 – Access to properties south of current access

In addition, there is a front door to no. 146b Dovercourt Road which abuts the current access. This is

shown below in image 4. The doorway is the main entrance into the property and is less than 1m from

the highway. Visibility is poor when exiting the doorway, particularly when turning right due to the

rear lean-to extension.

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

Image 4 – Doorway of 146b Dovercourt Road adjacent to the current access

It is considered surprising that a vehicular access off Petherbridge Way, similar to the previously

consented access (App ref: 88/02416/S), hasn’t been proposed. The Decision Notice and approved

plans are attached at Appendix 1. The new access was proposed by the Council at the time and given

a planning history search must have been carried out by the developer prior to proposing the current

plans for a residential scheme, it is unclear why this historic consent for an access at Petherbridge Way

was not disclosed to local residents. Extracts of the approved plans (ref: 38241/16b) are shown below

in images 5 and 6. This alternative access would have the benefit of removing vehicular traffic from a

residential area as well as having the capability of providing a higher quality pedestrian and cycle

experience. It would also provide a more suitable route to the strategic highway network.

As part of the approval the current Dovercourt Road access was proposed to be stopped up for general

use, and instead proposed as an emergency access, as the local residents are now proposing.

Image 5 – Extract of Site Location Plan (App ref: 88/02416/S)

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

Image 6 – Extract of Proposed Site Plan (App ref: 88/02416/S)

In addition, it is our understanding that the Concord Way cycle path has had funding approved which

means it will likely go-ahead and be constructed. This path would likely take a lot of cycle movements

in a north and south direction past the site to the east, away from Petherbridge Way, meaning there

would be less chance of cycle/vehicle conflict if a new access off Petherbridge Way was proposed.

The current arrangement as proposed by Goram Homes would require vehicular traffic to ‘rat run’

through Downend Road or utilise Dovercourt Road and Lockleaze Road, both roads less suited to

vehicular traffic than Muller Road, increasing opportunity for conflict and the likelihood of accidents.

This could lead to highway improvements being required under a S106 Agreement to make the

scheme acceptable. Such works could, for example, include a restriction on on-street parking near the

bottleneck of Dovercourt Road and Downend Road. This could in-turn lead to an unacceptable loss of

on-street parking for local residents. This would be contrary to Local Plan policies BCS10 and DM23.

2. Unacceptability of proposed emergency access

Dovercourt Road Residents Group have a number of concerns regarding the proposed emergency

access, which is proposed to be the narrow lane between no’s 86-130 Dovercourt Road. A photograph

of the entrance to the lane is shown below in image 7.

As can be seen in the image, the lane is very narrow and previously fire engines have declined using

it. It is also a weak tarmac surface currently paid for by local residents over a mud path and there will

be damage if large vehicles use it which currently fall on local residents to pay to fix, as it they have

the exclusive rights to access but also have to maintain the lane.

The lane is also gated. There is no way to guarantee or enforce that in the future that the gate will

continue to be locked. This could lead to a situation where if the gate is used during an emergency it

will then be left open which will allow depot residents to cut through what is essentially a private lane.

There is no guarantee that the gate will be locked within a timely manner, which is of concern to

residents.

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

Image 7 – Photograph of the proposed emergency access

3. Increase in trip generation as a result of the development

The proposed residential development is predicted to generate 60 two-way vehicular movements in

both the AM and PM peak hours. Based on 141 dwellings this equates to a two-way vehicular trip rate

of 0.425 which, whilst not implausible, is considered on the low side. A more realistic level of trip

generation is considered to be closer to a trip rate of 0.55 which would result in a total of 78 vehicular

trips in both peak hours. Notwithstanding the above, the proposed development is likely to result in

a significant increase in vehicular trips over the existing use as a storage depot, and it is not clear if the

safety implications of this increase in trips has been fully considered. This is contrary to the objectives

of both the NPPF as well as Local Plan policies BCS10 and DM23.

4. Poor options for sustainable modes of transport for new residents of the development and

lack of permeability of site

Policy BCS10 (Transport & Access Improvements) of the Core Strategy states that development

proposals should be located where sustainable travel patterns can be achieved, with more intensive,

higher density mixed use development at accessible centres and along or close to main public

transport routes. Proposals should minimise the need to travel, especially by private car, and maximise

opportunities for the use of walking, cycling and public transport.

The following hierarchy for transport user priorities is set out:

a) The pedestrian;

b) The cyclist;

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

c) Public transport;

d) Access for commercial vehicles;

e) Short stay visitors by car;

f) The private car.

The nearest bus stops are located approximately 550 metres walking distance from the site, which is

outside the traditional recommended walking distance of 400 metres (DoE, 1973). It is also outside

the recommended maximum walking distance of 500 metres to ‘core bus corridors with two or more

high-frequency services’ identified in ‘Buses in Urban Developments’ (CIHT, 2018). As such, the lack of

suitable access to sustainable transport options creates a significant reliance on the private car and

reiterates the concerns that the vehicular trip assessment significantly underestimates the impact of

the site.

It is appreciated that the nearest stops are served by high frequency services, providing good

connections to a variety of destinations. However, the walking distances involved are likely to impact

on the effectiveness of encouraging future residents to travel by public transport rather than the

private car.

A solution to this would be to provide a bus service through the proposed development via

Petherbridge Way. This could go some way to proposing a replacement service that used to run along

Dovercourt Road but ceased due to the bottleneck at the Downend Road/Dovercourt Road junction.

Given the isolated nature of the site, the lack of permeability will also impact on the ability to

encourage future residents to travel by sustainable modes of transport. This is against the principles

of design set out in Manual for Streets, which encourages the creation of permeable development,

rather than the effectively gated development proposed. It is also contrary to the hierarchy for

transport user priorities as set out in policy BCS10.

The site’s overall permeability is considered to be poor, particularly in respect of a lack of pedestrian

access points from the south, which would be a preferable direction of travel for many residents that

need walking access to shops, bus and train travel, as well as onwards to the city centre.

5. Unsatisfactory level of off-street car parking provision

Policy DM23 (Transport Development Management) of the SADMP outlines that new development

should not give rise to unacceptable traffic conditions and will be expected to provide safe access to

the highway network. The policy also outlines that new development should be accessible by

sustainable transport methods such as walking, cycling and public transport.

Furthermore, the policy sets standards for parking provision. Policy DM23 requires a maximum

provision of car parking spaces and minimum provisions for cycle parking. Based upon the limits

outlined within DM23 and Appendix 2 of the SADMP, a maximum of 1.5 car parking spaces can be

accommodated per 3 bedroom or greater house and a minimum of 3 cycle parking spaces are required

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

per house. This would generate a maximum acceptable car parking provision of 6 car parking spaces

and minimum acceptable requirement for 12 cycle parking spaces within the development. It is noted

that in relation to individual or small-scale developments car parking standards will be applied flexibly

to allow for the best layout of the site. On occasion this may result in the provision of driveway space

which exceeds that specified in the guidelines.

It has not been demonstrated that a suitable level of car parking has been provided, and again, the

low level trip generation assumed will significantly underestimate the level of parking likely to occur.

On-street parking in the vicinity of the site is limited, and unless a significant proportion of parking can

be provided on-site it is likely there would be a significant level of overspill parking onto residential

streets in the vicinity. This in turn could create highway safety issues and contribute further to the

pinch point between Dovercourt Road and Downend Road, contrary to the Local Plan policies BCS10

and DM23.

6. Adverse impact on residential amenity of nearby residents including noise and air pollution

Policy BCS10 states that developments should be designed and located to ensure the provision of safe

streets and reduce as far as possible the negative impacts of vehicles such as excessive volumes, fumes

and noise. Proposals should create places and streets where traffic and other activities are integrated

and where buildings, spaces and the needs of people shape the area.

The significant increase in vehicular trips on the current access road would lead to an increase in noise

associated with both vehicular and person movements, likely to result in a significant impact on the

amenity of existing local residents. The increase in vehicular movements will also result in a

detrimental impact to air quality in the vicinity of the site, and the associated health impacts that

would accompany this. The site is located within the Bristol Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)

and so an increase in traffic will further contribute to fumes and emissions in the local area, which

isn’t compatible with the aims and objectives of the AQMA to manage and improve air quality.

Paragraph 130(f) of the NPPF states that:

“Planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments create places that are safe,

inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity

for existing and future users”.

Due to the increase in traffic that would be generated as a result of the proposals, as highlighted in

the trip generation section of this letter, there would be an adverse impact upon the amenity of local

residents living opposite the current access. Image 8 below shows an estimate of the properties

opposite the access road that would be adversely impacted upon by a significant increase in light spill

into habitable front rooms of these properties caused by car headlights.

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

Image 8 – Aerial photograph of existing access showing properties effected by light spill (source: Google Maps)

Clearly, this issue and noise and air pollution impacts, would be solved by proposing the main access

via Petherbridge Way and using the Dovercourt Road access as an emergency access, as suggested by

the Dovercourt Road Residents Group. This proposal does of course have historic permission by virtue

of application 88/02416/S with one of the reasons for consent being granted that the stopping up of

the Dovercourt Road access for general use would “safeguard the amenities of nearby and adjoining

residential occupiers” (see Appendix 1).

7. Loss of Dovercourt Road Principle Industrial and Warehousing Area (PIWA)

Planning applications are assessed against the planning policy framework to consider whether it

complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and local Development Plan. The

relevant Development Plan for this site is formed by the Bristol Core Strategy (June 2011) and Site

Allocations and Development Management Policies (SADMP) (July 2014). Section 38(6) of the Planning

and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that applications must be made in accordance with the

Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Chapter 6 of the NPPF refers to “Building a Strong, Competitive Economy” and paragraph 80 states

“Planning policies and decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest,

expand and adapt. Significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and

productivity, taking into account both local business needs and wider opportunities for development”.

Policy BCS8 of the Core Strategy states, “The economic performance of the city will be strengthened

by providing a sufficient and flexible supply of employment land, addressing barriers to employment

and promoting the city as a place to invest”. The policy goes onto confirm that “Principal Industrial

and Warehousing Areas will be identified and retained for industrial and warehousing uses”.

The proposed development would result in the loss of the Dovercourt Depot PIWA.

Rackham Planning Ltd, 2A High Street, Thornbury, BS35 2AQ Dovercourt Depot Consultation Response

BCC have stated that the Depot is no longer required for use by the Council, however it has yet to

provide evidence of any viability studies which have been carried out to prove whether the site is or

is not in fact viable as employment land. We would therefore question whether this information is

available and whether any marketing of the site has been carried out in order to demonstrate whether

there is any external interest in the land for its designated use.

Summary

On this basis, and for all the reasons given above, we are of the opinion that the current development

proposals are unacceptable and that the opinions and knowledge of local residents have not been

fully taken into consideration. This is an isolated site, from a public transport connection perspective,

which currently has poor connections and permeability with the surrounding neighbourhood. It does

not propose amenities, including play space, that would enhance the Dovercourt Road community.

The Dovercourt Road Residents Group’s primary concerns centre on the use of the current Dovercourt

Road access as the main access point for the new development. This letter has outlined why this access

is unsuitable in terms of impact upon residential amenity, and how it could cause highway safety

concerns. The residents have proactively suggested the use of Petherbridge Way as the main access,

and this letter highlights why this access point, which benefits from a previous planning permission,

would be considerably more preferential.

We would be grateful for acknowledgement of receipt of this submission and also notification of the

next steps of the consultation process. In all respects, if you wish to discuss anything raised herein

further, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Yours faithfully

Rackham Planning Limited

Enc.

Cc:

Avril Baker PR info@abc-pr.co.uk

Cllr Heather Mack

Cllr David Wilcox

Mayor Marvin Rees

Darren Jones MP

Martin Booth (Bristol 24/7)

Whilst i do not object to more houses being built i do object to the amount of extra trafficit will bring.The main access will bring many more cars on to an already busy commute road usedas a short cut from Lockleaze to Muller road causing safety problems for cyclist andpedestrians.The sensible solutions would be to make Petherbridge way the main access to thedevelopment.The proposed emergency access is a private lane and would create safety issues forresidents.

This proposal is not acceptable.The access road to Dovercourt Road is too narrow for traffic.There is a danger to pedestrians of which I am one, as vehicles turning into or out of the accessroad onto Dovercourt road have limited vision of Pedestrians.Dovercourt Road is a popular cycle route (Concord Way) and the safety of commuter & leisurecyclists including children will be reduced to the point that people may get killed. Their are youngchildren, elderly people and others who will be adversely affected by:Dangerous cars travelling at speed, Commercial vehicles and emergency vehicles will increasenoise & pollution levels. The safety of people in this area will be put at risk and this proposal mustbe stopped.

I am very worried about the main access being via Dovercourt Road, it would be muchsafer if it was via Petheridge Road.Dovercourt Road is already very busy and is a main route for cyclist. The extra traffic will make itextremely dangerous. The Downend Road end is already a terrible hazard due to numberofparked cars and this will only get worse

I writing in regard to my objection to this proposed application.This is mainly due to themain access route from the development on to a land that joins the main Dovercourt Road. I liveon the boundary line adjacent to Dovercourt depot.I bought my garden flat in 2008.Moved in nearly14 years ago in June.I called Bristol City Council regarding refuse collection? Told there is no waythe rubbish collection of recycling would be collected from property too narrow!! So have wheeledeverything up to the corner of 142 Dovercourt.So the Council and Developer now thinks thisnarrow route is a suitable access route for 140 homes being considered.I object to both routesproposed Main/ emergency access route both ridiculous.Why not Petherbridge way by the mainstores definitely side enough.Just to mention shown the build design by the devopers.InSeptember last year no the flats will be built by the railway track and no higher than two levels.I t afour storey back of flats built by entrance not only block light to my property but totally invasive.Isuffer from severe mental health issues this will affect my wellbeing as well as reduce myproperty's value.Very disillusioned with Bristol City and Devopers.Total disregard for health andsafety.A chaotic mess.Reconsider this before homes built.

Access to this site via the lane which joins Dovercourt Road is not acceptable.

My house is opposite the private lane that is being suggested as an access to the proposeddevelopment.

This is a private lane, and as the council has already informed us this cannot be used as a right ofway.For permission to use the land. The land owners unanimously refused permission for it to be usedas an access of any sort.

Previous vehicular access to the site in question for the railway works to the line behind the siteresulted in many workers' vehicles blocking the road and damage to private cars parked legally onDovercourt Road. Large vehicles entering and exiting the site created a lot of noise. There wereproblems for all local residents with young children, Dogs and elderly residents parking oraccessing their own houses safely.

Dovercourt road is a residential area, and during peak times - especially around school hours isbusy already. Downend Road Junction with Dovercourt Road is narrow and on a blind turningwhich often becomes blocked with excessive traffic including commercial vehicles.

This is a dangerous junction used by pedestrians, children and the elderly. It is a popular cycleroute for commuters and families with children. There are residents walking their dogs.

There are alternative access routes available notably via Petherbridge way which provides direct

access to Muller Road.

The submitted Traffic Analysis states that "It has not been possible to undertake newtraffic surveys for this TA owing to COVID-19 and as such the Lockleaze Road / Constable Road /Dovercourt Road / Wordsworth Road crossroad junction to the north of the development site andthe Dovercourt Road / Downend Road junction to the south have been omitted from the analysis."

Given the relaxation of Covid-19 rules I do not believe it is reasonable to continue to dismiss theassessment of these critical local junctions from the TA.

The TA should be extended to include these junctions and the TA report revised and resubmitted.Covid-19 cannot continue to be used for planning applications submitted/determined after covid-19restrictions have been lifted.

Access to this site via the lane which joins Dovercourt Road is a bad idea.

I live opposite the private lane that is being suggested as an access to the proposed developmentof 140 dwellings.

I am a pedestrian and a regular cyclist and Dovercourt road is already too dangerous for a quietresidential road.

I walk my dog twice a day and cars drive very fast and scare him sometimes.

In the winter when we have short daylight hours, children walking to school or anyone walking is indanger of being hit when crossing the road. This is really bad in the winter with icy roads / rain /wind.

It will increase the level of danger to everyone around - the whole community will be adverselyaffected. House prices will fall due to the increase in traffic and noise.

The local schools are already full, the medical & NHS services are not able to cope now. How canthey cope with another 200 or so people. The infrastructure here is not strong enough to cope.

The roads are currently in a bad state of repair - pot-holes, drain covers, cars parked onpavements. More building = more traffic = more pollution = more illness = and more risk.

Downend Road Junction with Dovercourt Road is narrow and on a blind turning which often

becomes blocked with excessive traffic and is dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists.

Bristol City Council please think carefully before you destroy our lives.

Traffic flow issues already traffic pressure om Dovercourt and Muller Road.

Entry not big enough for number of houses and cars.

Local amenities not enough to cope with increased housing.

Height of proposed development higher than originally proposed so will be viewed and have moreimpact on more houses.

Impact on wildlife corridor. Loss of mature trees and natural habitats for animals and birds.

Literally not taken any of the neighbourhoods opinions into account in this process and have notbeen truthful about the development throughout the process. A Bristol city council attempt atsolving the housing issue, admirable and needed but not in conjunction with the current residentswhich is a real shame. All about the profit for the council!

I am really concerned that there is no need for an environmental impact assessment.even though there will be 140 dwellings, which is at the limit for a need for one, there will mostdefinitely be an impact as a result of extra traffic, dwelling, building works, etc. In a time where weare looking to conservate and protect, surely an assessment is wise.

I am gravely concerned about the additional traffic from the proposed additional 170 vehicles,which are being planned for and expected. Dovercourt road is used by many students, elderlypeople and people with disabilities, all vulnerable groups. The added traffic will no doubt provide avery definite hazard. What precautions will be taken to ensure traffic speeds will be kept low whileexerting and exiting the development? Or even within the development.

Access is also an issue as the road which will access the proposed site is too narrow to service140 dwellings with 170 proposed cars /parking spaces. The emergency access is an issue too.Just to save money, our private access lane is going to be used without our permission, whenthere are alternatives. cheaper isn't always better or morally right.

209 Dovercourt rd

- Traffic calming measures were declined by the council in previous years due to Dovercourt rdbeing an emergency services route, therefore increased traffic volume would be surely be anissue!- Parking and traffic volume already a concern on Dovercourt road and it hasn't been taken intoconsideration.- There are no amenities for existing and future residents- green space creation is lacking

After reviewing the available documents I am concerned about the project to modify themain and emergency access points. I believe that the longer-term plan is building new houses inthe area and this will have a negative impact in increasing number of cars circulating on our roadand less parking space, both of which are already a concern.

I live immediately adjacent to the proposed site where my sole vehicle, cycle andpedestrian access is via the access lane. Being a regular user of this lane I do not see how it willbe possible for this route to be the sole entry for 140 dwellings. It will create a dangerous situationwhere the planners will be breaching their duty of care and may end up with blood on their hands.Especially with rat running and poor visibility on the junction with Dovercourt Road. The bottleneckand extra congestion in conjunction with all the as additional traffic from other developments willcreate a perfect storm. We already have accidents on the street and this does not take in toaccount the near misses. This feels very irresponsible and will certainly impact negatively on thelives of all residents. Has anything been considered regarding the fact that Dovercourt Road is amain cycle route?

Under planning hierarchy, it goes (in order of precedence)Pedestrians, cyclists, municipal vehicles, then all other traffic. There is no dedicated cyclesaccess. This is contrary to planning rules.

Also, the private lane between 98 & 100 dovercourt road for emergency access is relying on 2004legislation that allows the fire service to access anywhere they choose in order to protect lives.This doesn't apply to other emergency services. So the emergency access is only for fire servicetherefore not a true emergency access point! Furthermore building control stipulates that anemergency access needs to come out onto an adopted highway. This one doesn't. It comes out oftheir boundary onto a private lane.

From my own point of view, the sole access to my home is via the lane. It has not been addressedhow I will access my property when work commences on the lane itself. If there is a period when I

cannot access my property, how will you address this?

I am not against the building of houses on the site and encourage the development, howeverwithout a better and well thought access plan possibly via petherbridge, then I have no choice butto object to the development. Why can't the proposed current main entry be the emergencyaccess rather than the private lane or part of a one way system like the bonnington walkdevelopment?

Whilst I appreciate the need for housing stock in Bristol, I do not approve of ill-thoughtout plans that show no regard for the huge environmental impact and the huge impact on existingresidents and existing infrastructure.

I have many objections/concerns regarding this development proposal but as this stage is focusedon Access I wish to object on the following grounds:

Main access: The proposed access road is simply too narrow and wholly unsuitable for the size ofthe proposed development. Existing properties have vehicular access that are in frequent use butthese have not yet been mentioned in any of the plans. Dovercourt Road is already an incrediblybusy road (this will be further exacerbated if the Muller Road bus lane goes ahead) and theproposed access road and it's visibility/limitation issues will result in danger for motorists, cyclistand pedestrians alike.

Emergency access: The proposed emergency access is very narrow and the fire service haspreviously declined to use it. The deeds for that land belong to the residents which is a causingjustified concern about tactics being used here. I would urge you to consider an alternative accessroute from Petherbridge Way.

Disappointed with the height of these new builds!! Especially as they will be overlookingthe current residents on Dovercourt road. There has been little or no consideration for our privacy.I would like to see the fern trees kept where they are to firstly help block the unsightly plantmachinery PLUS keep the noise a tiny bit less that we will endure once the build process starts.But later on they would also help with privacy of being overlooked by the higher developmentsgoing ahead. This MUST be a serious consideration !!!

I am writing in regards to the proposed development plans. I agree there is a need fornew homes, however the plans proposed to build such a high volume with sole access is worryingwhat it will do to the community. I live just by the depot and the lane is our sole access to myhome. Many times when driving I have found it hard in current road layout to turn into DovercourtRoad from the lane due to very limited visibility and it is worrying that this is now going to be thesole access to hundreds of vehicles. To add to the issue as a cyclist I have been many timesdangerously overtaken by speeding cars near this junction as it's often used as a rat run. The onlyanswer given to these concerns previously was that people will not drive or that the traffic concernis outside of the scope. I can not see cars disappearing from people's lives anytime soon andusing transport links that are still a fair distance away and not very liable is not the solution thatshould be proposed either.This is very disheartening to be hearing from a development company that is owned by city counciland the lack of care that went into the planning.What I have heard from you is is that you only care about the money it will bring to your pop anddo not care about the relationship you are breaking with this community or any people thatcurrently live here.

Almost all of the children who attend Ashley Down and Brunel Fields primary schoolswalk to school- our roads getting busier would put our children in danger and potentiallyencourage people to use their cars to make this journey instead (in order to keep children saferthan walking). Our wonderfully close community would change immeasurably and we would allbecome detached, we currently live in a very community centred road and would hate for this tochange because of the amount of traffic that will inevitably cause our wonderful road to become athoroughfare! Please don't let this happen! It's not safe and it would kill our fantastic communityspirit. We all chose to live away from a main road but this would simply create one, quite literally,on our doorstep!

It would be a real shame to see so much of the green infrastructure go from this area.Although individually many of the trees have a low category in the BS5837 categorisation I feelthey add a much needed green corridor in this build up area. With such little tree cover inneighbouring areas it would be a massive loss which will affect people and wildlife alike. It wouldbe a much better alternative to retain as much tree cover, big or small as possible. replanting oftenfails and its much better to keep vegetation that is already established as it is locally adapted andin wooded areas will be able to regenerate itself with seed. A whole lot better than replanting withtiny sorbus trees that wont get watered and die which seems to be the norm....Also the current access is pretty ridiculous and can surely not be adequate for the constructionphase or when people move in.

There needs to be access to the site other than just Downend or Dovercourt Road

It is outrageous that the council has proposed that the lane is to be used for emergencyaccess, it is private land. The council has no right and no permission to use it for their own benefit.It is also not wide enough for any large vehicles so we don't know why this has even beenconsidered as an option in the first place.

It has also come to our attention that although the houses being built directly behind our house areonly 2 storey, they are 25% taller than our home. We are worried that this is going to be; intrusive,ruining our view and devaluing our property by having a house looming over our back garden.

It's concerning that no environmental impact assessment will be carried out. Since we have beenhere we have seen an incredible array of birds, it would be such a shame to disrupt their homes, itis part of what makes living here so special. We urge that you reconsider!

Dovercourt road already has cars parked along every pavement. The spot where this becomesmost evident is the bend that joins Dovercourt road to Downend road. It's particularly difficult to getthrough and is dangerous for pedestrians crossing, this will be exacerbated by an inadequateamount of parking spaces provided for the number of properties being built. The currentinfrastructure is not fit for the number of cars, especially with other developments also taking placein Lockleaze.

Dear Planning,

I'd like to object to this planning. Being a resident of Downend Road I acknowledge that thedevelopment will not impact me from a visual perspective. However, I do live on the slight bendthat is in Downend Road outside number 94.

Cars are often parked on both side of the road on Downend Road, as you come round the bendthere is a very dangerous blind spot - where we have witnessed a number of physical accidentsand many verbal abuses. Increased traffic will only make this worse on top of the planned works toclose Springfield Avenue. Please also note this pavement is used by children going to the schooland back - therefore I'd propose the local parking restrictions are reviewed to make the road saferwithout restricting residents parking.

Please ignore my previous support request - this was a mistake due to fat fingers.

ear Planning,

I'd like to object to this planning. Being a resident of Downend Road I acknowledge that thedevelopment will not impact me from a visual perspective. However, I do live on the slight bendthat is in Downend Road outside number 94.

Cars are often parked on both side of the road on Downend Road, as you come round the bendthere is a very dangerous blind spot - where we have witnessed a number of physical accidentsand many verbal abuses. Increased traffic will only make this worse on top of the planned works toclose Springfield Avenue. Please also note this pavement is used by children going to the schooland back - therefore I'd propose the local parking restrictions are reviewed to make the road saferwithout restricting residents parking.

I am in support of the council building new housing in the city and using innovative waysof doing this. My main concern is the access to the site. The current road is very narrow with poorvisibility. Living on Downend Road the road is also narrow and a "rat run" for traffic - there arefrequent altercations and difficulties with vehicles larger than cars trying to access DovercourtCourt Road. Parking is an issue and vehicles have been damaged on a regular basis already. I amconcerned about emergency vehicle access to the site. Dovercourt is a main cycle route andadding a large number of vehicles accessing the site could put cyclists at risk. The site does nothave adequate parking which could impact on parking in Dovercourt and Downend. Has anenvironmental impact assessment been completed? Finally the height of the buildings seemslarge. will this have an impact on light for local residents?

First of all, this development will severely impact traffic all through this area of the city.Along with the constant traffic and no parking spaces because of football this will really impactCO2 levels as many more cars will be brought into the lockleaze area. Another example of thisdevelopments severity is within the plans for it itself countless environmental habitats and treeswill be replaced by a concrete jungle. These many factors will portray a very bad reputation for thearea of Lockleaze

As a resident of Horfield for some time I have seen a significant increase in the volumeof traffic using Dovercourt and Downend Road. As a cyclist observing the current disregard for the20mph limit both roads are already heavily congested and dangerous. The Main and onlyproposed access road for such a huge development is clearly below acceptable standard for theexpected/anticipated volume of traffic. From a simple point I cannot see how this could be rectifiedconsidering sight lines and general safety of a plethora of users on varying modes of transport.The same can be said of the proposed emergency access and concerns regardingdeeds/ownership care and consideration of the impact on residents and even potential concernsfrom emergency services?( reference to work carried out by Ardent)The councils assumption that 'some increase in traffic will not affect local residents must clearly bedeemed simplistic, vague and inaccurate.Significant increases in parking and no environmental impact assessment due to the absurdity that140 dwellings does not constitute one is clearly indicative of the need for a substantial review ofthe entire application.

Main Access - This is far too narrow for the extra traffic, blind spots when joiningDovercourt rd.

Emergency access - Not suitable for fire engines and has been proved in the past.

Traffic safety - This is a extremely busy road more traffic is not needed, there is a 20mph speedlimit but i am yet to see anyone to keep to this. My privacy would be invaded, at the moment withlocked gates i feel reasonably safe in my home.

I do not support this planning application. As a local resident I feel cheated. Thisdevelopment was pitched as a 'resident led project' instead we feel belittled and unheard.

I was upset to read in the planning documents that after 150 comments during the first round ofconsultation, and a further 57 comments at the second round, that the council is using this todemonstrate a "greater acceptance/and or less resistance to the overall proposals by the majorityof residents". This simply demonstrates that local residents are tired and fed up with the process.We have engaged in numerous meetings and filled in detailed multi-answer questionnaires for theconsultation process, we have emailed the development team and chased answers. We don't feellistened to and have found the whole process of a 'resident led' development demoralizing.

Local residents are not against building homes on a local brownfield site, we fully support it. Weare concerned primarily with the proposed access points and the effects they will have on thecurrent residents on an already busy street. I would like to see a far larger proportion of affordableand social housing to address the issues we have in our area of local families not being able toafford to buy a home. However, it is clear as this process progresses, that this development issimply earmarked for bringing maximum profit to Bristol City Council, which comes at a cost tocurrent residents, and future residents of the development. Goram Homes are not undergoing thesame scrutiny a private developer would have in the same situation and it is sole destroying. Thecouncil cannot act independently when it has such a vested interest in this project going ahead.We understand that Goram Homes are relying on this site to gain planning and move quickly, asrecent problems on some of their other Bristol developments are seriously affecting their bottomline.

This new development brings nothing to the current community other than a huge increase intraffic, parking issues, pollution and safety concerns. With a single road in and out of the site thereis no reason for anyone who does not live in the new development to visit. If it offered somecommunity resources, or had a bus route travelling through, there may be reason for the currentresidents to visit the site. The current plans show a disregard for involving local residents, or anyunderstanding of the local community. A simple example is the reference to providing 'wild play' aspart of the new development instead of a structured playground. It is well known that there is nolocal accessible playground for young children in this part of Lockleaze, however what we reallydon't lack is wild play. The green space at the end of Dovercourt Road and the Muller Roadrecreation ground opposite the site, both offer an abundance of wonderful 'wild play' areas and areused regularly by the local community. Yet again, Goram Homes and BCC are going for thecheapest possible option to maximise their profit.

We asked the development team what weight all these residents objections will carry when it goesto the Planning Committee. From what I understand, it was suggested that unless residents couldfind legalities or flaws in any of the proposed application, then simply stating that residents object(and giving reasons why) did not hold any weight. This is incredibly disheartening and upsetting tohear. As local residents we are not planning experts, but we are experts in our localarea/community. It should not be our job to try and unearth any deceptive parts of the planningdocument that may or may not legally be allowed.

At the first meeting with the Development Team a year ago, when the preliminary plans werebeing shown prior to consultation, it was local residents who had to point out that the pedestrianwalkway from the development site was in fact a private lane and would be unable to be used assuch. Since then this private lane has now become the proposed 'Emergency Access' to the newdevelopment. It definitely provides the developers with the cheapest, easiest, level entry option.During the 'you said, we listened' phase of consultation, BCC proudly stated that they had listenedto residents' concerns about putting a road through the much loved green space at the end ofDovercourt Road used by the local community, and instead had found another solution. It wasclear during one of the early walk around sessions with the Development Team that they wereseeing things for the first time. The emergency road is not being built through the green space soas to preserve the natural environment, it is obvious to anyone that knows the area that thetopography would create massive challenges and an emergency road built on that incline, with thestructure to withstand a fire engine would be a feat of engineering and an incredibly costly piece ofinfrastructure. Bristol City Council have instead found a much easier, cheaper option in the form ofa private lane and do not care that residents who believe this is their private lane do not want itused.

I oppose the new proposed Emergency Access because:

- Residents that back on to this lane have it in their deeds that it is there responsibility to maintainit. They regularly have to clear fly tipped waste, the council have always refused to assist stating

it's a private lane- There is absolutely zero trust from local residents that this 'Emergency access' point won't laterbecome a regular pedestrian access point. Once a gate is installed, in the future there will besome kind of loop hole which will allow the new residents on the development to request safe,pedestrian access. At this stage this development team or the councils interest in supportingcurrent residents will be long gone.- The residents that 'own' this private land plan to build their own wall along the boundary of theirlane and that of the council land. Presumably a fire engine is unable to get through a brick wall?- The emergency access would only be suitable for a fire engine; I understand that otheremergency vehicles would not be able to use it due to regulations about it accessing directly on toa private lane and not an adopted highway. Therefore I don't understand how it is a properemergency access point?- The private lane does not have adequate hardstanding to fulfil building regulations to make itsuitable for a fire engine.

Residents are very unhappy about the proposed main access road. My concerns regarding theDovercourt Depot Lane as the main and sole access road:

- There is no separate pedestrian or cycle access - this single access point will provide for all roadusers - this is not safe.- On one side of the Dovercourt Depot Lane there is access to current homes, these users backvehicles out of their driveway in to the Depot Lane. Visibility is poor. It will be incredibly dangerousfor pedestrians and cyclists.- On the other side of the Depot Lane, there is a locked gate to numerous garages. In order toaccess garages these drivers need to stop in the lane, exit their cars, unlock the gate, get back into their cars and drive through the open gate. The same in reverse when leaving their garages.Some of these users may be elderly and it may take them some time to run through the process,all the time blocking the sole access road to all cars, bikes and pedestrians.- Children using this sole access point walking to and from school will be at huge risk from thepoor visibility of vehicles exiting both the driveways and the garages.- Due to the narrow lane, visibility is restricted when exiting from the Depot Lane. 'near miss'accidents are not recorded and there have been many 'near misses' between cars and the largenumber of cyclists that use Dovercourt Road as part of Concorde Way.

Local residents have strongly urged BCC to consider a through road to Petherbridge Way,allowing a better flow of traffic. This is being dismissed as being too expensive and we urge theDevelopment Team to reconsider this option. Having a through road would enable the re-introduction of a bus route to serve our community. The bus route we previously had was stoppedten or so years ago due to the bottle neck on Downend Road. I understand that a newdevelopment is recommended in the 1999 published 'Providing for Public Transport inDevelopments' published by the Institution of Highways and Transportation that the maximumrecommended distance to walking to a bus stop is 400m. From the Depot Lane entrance point to

the bus stop on Lockleaze road it is approximately 480m, from the Depot Lane to the bus stop onMuller Road is approximately 640m. Neither of these calculations takes into account the distancewithin the development that the new residents will need to walk to get to the singlecar/cycle/pedestrian access point. Someone living in one of the new homes at the south of the sitethat will need to walk up to the Depot Lane to exit the site will have to walk closer to 800m toaccess the closest bus stop - almost double the recommendation by the Institution of Highwaysand Transportation.

One of the other reasons given during consultation to why access via Petherbridge Way was notan option was that queuing cars accessing Muller Road would increase pollution levels above anacceptable point. This is insulting to families on Dovercourt and Downend Road where theirchildren play in gardens, as queuing traffic on our road creating additional pollution appears lessimportant than on a commercial site opposite allotments with no close houses.

Downed Road is a bottle neck, regularly being blocked in both directions, there is not enoughspace to pass oncoming vehicles and so it is at all times a single lane road. Lorries regularly gotstuck whilst Network Rail was using the Dovercourt Road Depot site. Dovercourt/Downend Roadsare used as a cut through by Lockleaze residents as it is the most direct route to Muller Road (dueto the train line only allowing a couple of access points on to Muller Road). Current residents aregoing to be adversely affected with additional traffic due to the other new developments in thearea. Bonnington Walk, the Brunel Ford site on Muller Road (as the cul-de-sac end of Dovercourtroad linked by public footpath will become the unofficial overflow car park) and Constable Roadhousing developments have all been granted planning permission, but are not yet built andoccupied therefore the true knock on effect of the additional traffic from all these developments isnot known. Changes to traffic flow on Muller Road, including the closing of Springfield Avenue isgoing to dramatically change traffic flow at the Downend Road/Muller Road traffic lights. Currentlyat rush hour, from stationary only 3 or 4 cars can get through on the green light from DownendRoad as priority is given to cars travelling up/down Muller Road.Aecoms commissioned Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) surveys were done in 2019 to informassessments for other BCC developments. These were not conducted on Dovercourt Road,neither were Junction Turning Count (JTC) surveys conducted on any of the junctions leadingto/from Dovercourt Road. I do not think this acceptable that this traffic modelling is using historicaldata that does not take into account the high number of new developments and the associatedcars that will come with these developments. If there was only one or two new developments inLockleaze then it might be possible for accurate modelling on old data, but I cannot believe thatwith multiple new developments and literally thousands of extra cars in Lockleaze that these'predicted' figures can be accurate.

As with many other comments from local residents, I am disappointed that there is not a fullEnvironmental Impact Assessment being carried out on the site as we regularly watch deer andhear owls and woodpeckers in the trees behind our house on the proposed development site.Other neighbours have seen badgers in their garden. I fully appreciate that with 140 proposed

dwellings it is not a legal requirement to complete an EIA however the cynic in me wonders if thenumber of proposed dwellings (just under the 150 limit) is a compromise that BCC are prepared tomake to offset the risk (and cost of any mitigation) of an EIA.

Local residents urge the Planning Committee not to allow this application to be rushed throughwith no thought or consideration to current residents.

I understand the need to build new homes and that reuse of brown field sites makes alot of sense.However the current proposal seems ill conceived on a number of issues.Access: The proposed main access via the depot entrance is too narrow for the proposed numberof vehicles and will have a detrimental effect on neighbours. Plus the access lane to garages atthe rear of these homes will open on to the new sites main access road which is dangerous asvehicles join the new access road just behind the existing homes. The increase in traffic on bothDownend Road and Dovercourt Road will create congestion and increased air pollution on what isalready a pinch point where residence vehicles have to be parked on the pavement anywaybecause it is too narrow. Cars have to take turns to pass.The emergence vehicle access via a new road across the park at the bottom of Dovercourt roadalso seems ill thought out. Spoiling a well loved local green space. A main access to the newdevelopment via Petheridge Way would make much more sense, routing the extra traffic awayfrom existing residential streets.

Also diversion of the cycleway through the new development does not make any sense. It makesthe cycle route less direct and I believe this will create a lot of confusion and many cyclist willcontinue on existing route.

The size of proposed buildings: The scale of the new buildings is out of keeping with existinghouses and will detrimentally affect existing home owners who will be overlooked by the newdevelopment.

I strongly object to this proposal.

Having had the main access deemed unsuitable for the size of the proposeddevelopment by Ardent, it is impossible to see how the consideration of existing residents, theirday to day lives and their safety has been put first.Our views and suggestions have been quickly dismissed and it would be disgusting for you to putthe priority of cheap and easy access for the property developers over the safety of our communityand new residents.How on earth you can say that adding 200 extra vehicles to this road will not have a negativeaffect on residents is beyond me. This is also without considering the impact all the extra trafficfrom other local new developments that haven't been built yet will have.It will significantly change the already chaotic peak times to mayhem not to mention the increasein pollution it will bring to us and our families. The rush of cars, bikes and scooters is already asafety hazard for residents, especially for the young and elderly. Please, please can yourealistically look at this data again and put human safety over financial profit?

The private lane which is being proposed as emergency access belongs to us and there has beenlittle to no information about proof that fire rescue could access new development withoutdamaging our properties and who would be responsible for maintaining it once it was used by thecouncil. I am unaware of how opening the lane up in this way and exposing the backs of ourproperties would have the same amount of security that my home has now?Where does it state that you have the right to our land?

I'm concerned about several things:

The amount of traffic on Muller Rd is too much currently, adding so many extra houses is going tocause even greater hold ups. Downend Rd is already a rat run with many drivers managing toblock the road (through impatience/selfishness) then speeding because they're frustrated at beingheld up. I expect this development will only make this worse.

The emergency services access proposed does not seem adequate given the Fire service havepreviously declined to use it. I understand the access road is private anyway -?

I don't believe 170 car parking spaces is sufficient, many households still have 2 cars, this willoverspill onto Dovercourt and nearby roads.

The proposed development includes buildings twice the height of current properties...this doesn'tseem fair on current residents who may lose their privacy.

1. MAIN ACCESSOur Planning Consultant ARDENT carried out research on this proposed main access road. Theyconsidered it to be too narrow and unsuitable for the development size. It also has two entrancepoints/driveways onto it. The entrance onto Dovercourt is near to the exsiting 90 degree bend andmeans poor visibility for traffic pulling in or out. A main entrance from Petherbridge Way would bea big improvement.

2. EMERGENCY ACCESSThe proposed route between 98-100is a private lane for the use of residents only. As stated ontheir deeds.

3. PARKINGThere are 170 parking spaces for 140 houses, which is totally inadequate. Dovercourt Road isalready over full for parking.

4. HEIGHT OF NEW HOUSESTHE HEIGHT OF CURRENT HOUSES IN DOVERCOURT ROAD IS TWO STOREY I.E. 8METRES TALL. THE PROPOSED HOUSES ARE ALL TALLER THAN THIS!/THE NEW 4STOREY PROPOSED HOUSES ARE TWICE THIS HEIGHT.

5. Environmental impact assessment.An Environmental Assessment would be very informative for local residents.

6. TRAFFIC AND SAFETY.

Downend Road and Dovercourt Road are already heavily used by traffic. Our local bus servicewas removed because of traffic difficulties. The impact of another c 200 cars/vans would imposean impossible burden on the existing community. Many households own two cars. Surely thesafest way would be to extend the road along Petherbridge Way. This would be safer forvehicurlar traffic and cyclist.

This should simply not happen! There have been two meetings which I attended amongmany other local residents where we all strongly opposed the emergency access road proposedon Dovercourt road but we also expressed how we strongly opposed the entire building plans forthe dwellings. I cannot understand how any of this is going further. In no way can these dwellingsor any of the planning associated with it be 'resident led' when no current local residents are beingpaid attention to or even thought of in regard to any of this. Just in regard to the proposedemergency access lane, it is not a requirement that this lane be used for emergency access andso it doesn't make sense why it is being pushed forward, especially when other suitablealternatives have even been suggested, ie Petherbridge Way. There are many reasons as to whythis lane should not be used as was covered in the meetings and by many of my neighbours intheir comments.

Largely, it is not necessary. It is also a suggestion which would put more people in danger due tocurrent residents, my property included, using the lane daily for rear garage access. The visibilityis terrible and dangerous for current drivers, let alone large emergency vehicles. This is withoutthe increase in pedestrians, cyclists and cars which would be using the road and surroundingroads due to the increase in properties. Dovercourt Road is already a bottleneck and this is due tobecome much worse. Large and emergency vehicles, lorries and even standard cars and cyclistsstruggle with negotiating the roads around here with the traffic and parked cars as it is, let alonebefore adding in so many more properties, residents and vehicles. Even the traffic onto MullerRoad, which is already horrendous - particularly at busy hours - will become inevitably so muchworse. I would also like to note that such an increase in traffic in this area is such a negativeimpact on the environment which the general public around the city, country and world are fightingstrongly about in these challenging times for the climate and so should be given much more

thought than you obviously have. The safety of the public should be at the centre of yourjudgement but it feels it is nowhere in your sight.

Furthermore, and most importantly to me as it is a matter very close to my heart; I am so upset bythe fact that no environmental impact assessment has been done. I am aware that they havetactically decided to build only just enough houses that this is not 'necessary' but I really do urgeyou to reconsider this. Anyone who lives or is familiar with the area are more than aware just howabundant of wildlife this area is. Particularly in and around the lane where the access road isproposed. It disturbs me and makes me unbelievably upset, especially in this day and age, with allthe current threats to wildlife, that this is even being considered in the first place, let alone noteven looking into assessing the environmental impact. The amount of birds we see and hearsinging every day, morning and night; the number of squirrels we see hopping and darting around;the foxes and badgers which are often around at night; and even the sightings of beautiful deer; allof these beautiful animals make this environment their home and live off of it. Any work whichdisturbs so much life, especially for selfish monetary gain, is absolutely horrifying. This shoulddefinitely be considered in all aspects of the proposed buildings as well as the proposedunnecessary access road which runs behind my home.

Please take some time to consider the feelings, thoughts and lives of all of the current localresidents whom you have thus far been ignoring. And please take the time to think of the impactsthese plannings have on us, the environment and the precious wildlife around us.

The lane is not suitable for the scale of the proposed development. I can't image why itwould be seen to be.

Affordable housing is of course needed in the city but this project is supposed to be in consultantwith the community. The community feel and have been unconsidered. The approach todevelopment doesn't make senseS the lane simply isn't safe enough or big enough. Thecommunity deserve to be considered and the local community improved and protected by suchprojects. That's all that's being asked for

I do not support this planning application. I agree with everything that people are writingin their objection comments. I am worried about there being one road for all the cars and bikes andpeople. I don't understand why Petherbridge Way cannot have a road to the new houses.

We live on Dovercourt Road and I am building a driveway because parking has got worse andworse since we moved here 7 years ago. I am a tradesman and we need two vehicles in ourhouse. I like to cycle but not everyone can cycle to work. I can't take my tools on the bus! Whathappens when there are more cars than parking spaces on the new development where will theypark? Everyone is having to turn their gardens in to car parks, this is not environmentally friendly.

There are often near accidents on our streets, from all the bikes and scooters using ConcordeWay. Many more cars will turn these in to real accidents, esspecially on the tight bend to DownendRoad.

Traffic on Dovercourt rd is already busy especially during peak times and there is quiteoften lengthy traffic jams on Downend Rd as this is a bottle neck. Even know the Speed limit is 20mph I often see cars vans and lorries going twice this speed and with this junction which will bethe entrance to this new housing estate, which is situated at the brow of a hill I feel there will beaccident waiting to happen also there are lots of children walking and cycling to school and manycyclist in general and this option of having this as main and only entrance is a total disgrace and Ifeel that none is listening to the the residents of the local area

I have lived on Dovercourt Road for 35 years, a quiet cul de sac 1930-40s houses manyfamily's being here before myself and now which is being overgrown with HMOs Flats andBackgarden businesses, which I have fought against with no avail to try and save the last parts ofdignity and character of my home. I had finally lost all faith in Bristol planning to now be told ahuge development is to shadow what I have left.. multi story homes, flats and apartments to bebuilt. Not only that but they want to utilise the private home owned access to the rear of myproperty also, an access which is resident funded for repairs and maintenance, council havewanted nothing to do with flooding and drainage to this previously and now want to take this awayfrom us?Adding access and security issues for the future.Previous meetings discussing this could not the guarantee that this wouldn't become a full timeaccess to the site, or be able to uphold the maintenance/security of said gate..Badly parked cars and a 24/7 rat run all of this is before the purposed 140 homes to be built, whichwould completely gridlock this area while works were completed and forever onwards. A fire onthe intended site on the 26/3/22 saw multiple fire engines struggling to navigate round these roadsand access the site.And I'm still trying to find a environmental impact statement.. What happens the the deers thatroam free.. bats they swoop down flying through my garden at night.. the owls that I can see thebig eyes and hooting in the night.. foxes and badgers the birds and the bees.. do they have a sayin this?This site could be utilised in multiple ways and I'm not saying it shouldn't be used for homes.. but aproject of this size is a greedy investment for someone's pocket without taking the impact it has oncurrent residents or looking at the pros and cons, and disregarding the purpose built access roadlike Petherbridge Way.

Please take this back to the drawing board.. this is a large wasted unused concrete jungle whichdeserves to be developed.. but developed in away which can save the natural habitat everyonecan be happy..

I am concerned about the access route and the intersection with Dovercourt rd. I cansee from the Transport Assessment that the results state that at worst there will be 60 cars perhour. However this is a lot of extra cars for an area that already has difficult passing - the doubleparking on downend road and Dovercourt intersection already relies on people to adult and politeand when the bin lorries or delivery trucks are involved can become quite fraught.Dovercourt rd already has issues with speeding and I am worried that increased traffic willincrease the danger for my kids crossing the road to School and the ref ground.During the build phase there will be massively increased congestion issues with lorries etc arrivingon site.I am also concerned about the number of cars that are not accounted for in the calculations for thenew build. The data you have used is ten years out of date and car ownership has massivelyincreased in the last ten years and is likely to increase further.It is already incredibly difficult for us to park our car on Dovercourt rd due to the number of housesthat have become multi occupancy so where will the extra cars from the new development park?This will add to congestion, dangerous parking and again make crossing the road more dangerousfor our kids.

Concerns:The increased traffic on Dovercourt road , when this is used by cyclists and there has been noenvironmental impact assessment (I believe) on this build which is a concern. I do support thebuilding of affordable housing but it would be good to ensure increased traffic does not impactsustainable ways of travelling around Bristol. I also have concerns about the amount of availableparking spaces on Dovercourt road.

I have many objections to the proposed Dovercourt Depot Development.The main concern is the access. The proposed main access road to the new development is toonarrow and unsuitable for the size of the proposed development. There are access points on theroad which are not even mentioned in the current plans and there is already poor visibility forvehicles pulling in and out. This is dangerous, particularly as the main access road will also be thesole pedestrian and cyclist access.very narrow and previously fire engines have declined using it (during an emergency). Theresidents of some of the houses along Dovercourt road have sole access rights to the lane andare not happy with a private lane being taken from them. The council have not explained why theybelieve they have a right to do this.Another concern, linked to the access is the traffic and safety of the road. The increase in traffic islikely to negatively impact the street. Dovercourt road is already busy with cars, bikes andpedestrians, is part of the national cycle network with many cyclists using the route everyday. Theimpact of traffic, and the visibility of the access onto Dovercourt road will undoubtedly lead tosafety issues, and an increase in accidents on the road. In addition, there are many other newlocal developments which will further impact the traffic that have not been factored into theassessment of transport.I am also concerned at the proposed height of the development. Current house height onDovercourt road is 8 metres and the proposed buildings are 16 metres. The drawings aremisleading on this as the height is obviously a big disadvantage to current residents. Not only willit impact the current street scene, but it will also impact many of the current residents ofDovercourt Road and their right to light.Furthermore, the impact on the environment will be significant. There will be many mature treesneeding to be cut down and removed, directly impacting the local air quality. This in addition to the

increased traffic will likely have a negative impact on current residents' health. The council haveapplied to be exempt from the environmental impact assessment which is unacceptable given theyare one dwelling short of it being a legal requirement.Overall, I fail to see where the current residents are really being considered given this has beentouted as a 'resident led' project. While I understand there is a need for housing, there are manyhousing developments in progress in a very small radius of this site, and surely the impact of theseneed to be considered in unison.

I support the development of new housing on brownfield sites in the local area but Ihave many objections to the proposed Dovercourt Depot Development and am extremelydisappointed about the way the views of local residents have been disregarded during theplanning process to date.My primary concern is the access as the proposed main access road to the new development istoo narrow and unsuitable for the size of the proposed development. There are access points onthe road which are not even mentioned in the current plans and there is already poor visibility forvehicles pulling in and out. This is dangerous, particularly as the main access road will also be thesole pedestrian and cyclist access.The proposed emergency access route is through an unsuitably narrow lane which has previouslybeen deemed unusable by the fire service during an emergency. The access rights to the lane aresolely owned by of some of the Dovercourt Road residents and it is not clear that the council haveany rights to use the access lane as part of this development.Increased traffic and road safety on the section of road between the proposed site entrance andmuller road is also a significant concern. Traffic surveys completed as part of the planning processdo not take into account the volume of additional traffic that will arise from other newdevelopments in Lockleaze which will also use this as the main route to Muller Road. This sectioniof road is narrow and only allows one directional traffic flow at a time. It is also heavily used bycyclist from surrounding areas joining up with the concord way. Increased traffic flow associatedwith this and other developments will make this section very congested and dangerous. There areno viable solutions to free up traffic flow which retain essential parking for existing residents in thissection. Routing the main site entrance via Petherbridge way instead would resolve all of theseissues.I am also concerned at the proposed height of the development. Current house height on

Dovercourt road is 8 metres and the proposed buildings are 16 metres. The drawings aremisleading on this as the height is obviously a big concern for existing residents affecting their lightand aspect.The avoidance of completing an environmental impact assessment due to being exactly at thedwelling limit of this requirement is a clear example of the disrespectful way in which thisdevelopment is being completed with little regard for the views of local residents. This assessmentshould be completed so that existing resident have a clear understanding of the impact to local airquality etc.

I think this is a very badly thought out plan with so many houses being planned to buildthe infrastructure for the increase in traffic is very badly planned.It's just going to be very dangerous and just accidents waiting to happen.The access to the site must be planned from the muller road side by the petherthon way next Aldiand homebargian this is a much bigger access to the site. And would be much safer .I I'm very much against this whole badly planned out project to put so many houses with noadditional roads and other amenities for the extra increase in traffic and people.

Context:Your planning office role involves making decisions about the future of ourcities, towns and countryside. This is vital to balance the desire to develop the areas where we liveand work with ensuring the surrounding environment ISN'T NEGATIVELY AFFECTED FOREVERYONE. It includes considering the sustainable needs of future communities. (including bothenvironmental, social and safety standards)

It is with this in mind that I write my comments for this planning application. I have no objection tothe need to build affordable homes to address the housing crisis, but this should not be at thedetriment to existing residents, their safety and quality of life, and also must think beyondhousebuilding and profit, and to how communities will live, work, move and play in the future.

I urge the planning team to consider this development in combination with all the otherdevelopments running/planned in the Lockleaze area and the added overall traffic problemsrouting through Dovercourt Road with tight corners and accident hot spots near and at the MullerRoad/Downend Road traffic lights.

I also urge the planning office to fully consider the most up to date BREEAM communitiesguidance for master planning all proposed/planned/in progress sites in the Lockleaze area andstop individual projects going through on their individual sites as this is breaking down theopportunity for community development and growth for the future. Residents are fed up of beingtreated unfairly in this regard with the need to volunteer significant time and resources to readwhat are effectively bamboozling and legal speak documents that you need to be an expert to fullyunderstand and comment on successfully.

Specific comments to this proposal access: An application can only be supported by me as a localresident of 14 years if one of the following two options are progressed;

1) through this planning process reject the current proposed access point and recommend havingthe main access linking to Petherbridge Way which then links simply to main arteries of traffic, (asoriginally proposed and consented when the Depot was built) rather than the current proposalwhich will only create a rat run scenario and then joining in the same position. The proposedaccess road has a number of failings as it is not appropriately specified and does not includededicated cycling access, plus it creates a significant safety risk with connecting to a highly usedsection of Concorde Way that is on an incline and entertains many cyclists and scooter riders.With the proposed number of dwellings being highly dense, parking will spill over into DovercourtRoad and the surrounding area which will only increase visibility issues and decrease quality of lifeand safety for existing residents, commuters and many young families currently using ConcordeWay.

2) through this planning progress an alternative scenario put forward as a condition - Reducing thehousing density by 50% and maximising the social/affordable housing percentage. This wouldresult in many of the above problems to be reduced, actually contributing to the housing problemputting people before profit, and then perhaps I could accept the main access route as currentlyproposed. The rest of the depot can then be developed as a mixed use area with e.g. cafes, bikerepair shop, light industrial units, and community service buildings, while utilising existing trees,biodiversity and water courses to create a Bristol gem of an eco forest park in an urbanenvironment.

To achieve Net Zero by 2050 we need to think AND ACT differently now, build developments forfuture communities and a local ambition to achieve these goals building on the Bristol GreenCapital status, as well as climate emergency declarations.

Traffic calming measures must also be considered as a condition of whatever development routeis taken forward. It is simply not good enough to use the excuse that a traffic survey was taken in"Covid times" as this does not reflect the actual and future traffic scenario skewing modelling dataand we are in a very different environment now.

They haven't considered parking of these extra cars. It will disrupt the cycle path.Destroy the local green space and nature habitats. Our flat front door and garden gate is on theproposed access route for the site - how do they propose moving all these new vehicles down aone way street - it will be dangerous. It threatens our local community's health and well being.

This would negatively impact our life greatly. Our front door and garden gate opens ontothe pavement of the access road to the depot. The development would mean traffic and pollutionwould increase greatly and we wouldn't feel safe having children here as it would be a healthhazard. This means we would feel pushed out of the community and home that we have lived infor almost 5 years. The plans for the site have NOT been thought through and would becatastrophic for this community.

The proposed access would cause chaos and congestion. There is a lot of traffic usingDownend Road and Dovercourt as a short cut from Muller road to Lockleaze and Filton Aveschool. With the double bend and amount of traffic there is often congestion making it difficult toget through.Petheridge road by Aldi would be a far better and safer access road.

We have been blessed in living in an area where we have enough parking, enoughsunlight and not a lot of car flow/ traffic.

This development is going to ruin an environment on so many basis.Realistically in a household there will be a car per adult and with these new apartments there maybe 2 adults per household, to see that there will only allocate 1 car per household is ridiculous andwill over crowd our streets. Not only this, the added pollution from incoming and outgoing driving inthe area.

The height of the houses are so high that it will block the sunshine into our gardens and create adark environment.

As both a resident of Dovercourt Road for over 15 years and as a member of theDovercourt Road residents group, I strongly object to these ill conceived proposed plans. No carehas been taken at all to consider the impact on current residents, wildlife habitats, or the significantand problematic traffic management issues that will inevitably arise from such a thoughtlessdevelopment proposal. In no way is this a "resident led" project as Bristol City Council areclaiming, as they have chosen to ignore most suggestions and ideas for reasonable compromise.

For example, residents suggested using the access point via Petherbridge Way to link onto MullerRoad, thus significantly reducing inevitable traffic management problems along Dovercourt Road.Instead, the proposed plan to use a far too narrow and inappropriately sized lane for the mainaccess point to such a huge development has been proposed. This has also been deemed entirelyunsuitable by an independent transport planning consultant Ardent.

This lane is still currently being used frequently as a vehicular access point for existing properties,yet the council have failed to even consider this and have made no reference to this in theproposed plans, thus further illustrating their lack of thoughtful engagement with current residents.Pulling in and out of these access points is very dangerous as there is limited visibility, so havingto pull in/out onto the proposed main access road will become even more dangerous, especiallywhen more pedestrians and cyclists will also be using this road.

Dovercourt Road is already very busy and it is becoming more and more difficult to access onstreet parking for residents. Having an access road here as well will make traffic issues evenworse, and will become unmanageable. The council transport assessment seems to think therewill not be a negative impact but I strongly disagree. Dovercourt Road is a bottleneck and given all

future developments not yet built, plus traffic flow differences on Muller road, this proposal willhave a significant and severe impact on traffic.

The proposed emergency access between 98-100 Dovercourt Road is also very narrow, and thehouses between 82-130 have deeds that signify this is their sole access and these houses areresponsible for maintenance. It does NOT belong to the council, and they are yet to explain whythey feel they have a right to use it. The proposed locked gate suggested will also cause problemsas it is highly unlikely this will remain intact, and will be vulnerable to vandalism, thus leaving theseproperties more vulnerable in turn. This has been mentioned many times by residents to councilrepresentatives, yet hasn't been reflected in these plans.

Please reconsider the access point on Petherbrige Way- this is a far more reasonable and rationalsolution to the access road issue.

As both a resident of Dovercourt Road for over 15 years and as a member of theDovercourt Road residents group, I strongly object to these ill conceived proposed plans. No carehas been taken at all to consider the impact on current residents, wildlife habitats, or the significantand problematic traffic management issues that will inevitably arise from such a thoughtlessdevelopment proposal. In no way is this a "resident led" project as Bristol City Council areclaiming, as they have chosen to ignore most suggestions and ideas for reasonable compromise.

For example, residents suggested using the access point via Petherbridge Way to link onto MullerRoad, thus significantly reducing inevitable traffic management problems along Dovercourt Road.Instead, the proposed plan to use a far too narrow and inappropriately sized lane for the mainaccess point to such a huge development has been proposed. This has also been deemed entirelyunsuitable by an independent transport planning consultant Ardent.

This lane is still currently being used frequently as a vehicular access point for existing properties,yet the council have failed to even consider this and have made no reference to this in theproposed plans, thus further illustrating their lack of thoughtful engagement with current residents.Pulling in and out of these access points is very dangerous as there is limited visibility, so havingto pull in/out onto the proposed main access road will become even more dangerous, especiallywhen more pedestrians and cyclists will also be using this road.

Dovercourt Road is already very busy and it is becoming more and more difficult to access onstreet parking for residents. Having an access road here as well will make traffic issues evenworse, and will become unmanageable. The council transport assessment seems to think therewill not be a negative impact but I strongly disagree. Dovercourt Road is a bottleneck and given all

future developments not yet built, plus traffic flow differences on Muller road, this proposal willhave a significant and severe impact on traffic.

The proposed emergency access between 98-100 Dovercourt Road is also very narrow, and thehouses between 82-130 have deeds that signify this is their sole access and these houses areresponsible for maintenance. It does NOT belong to the council, and they are yet to explain whythey feel they have a right to use it. The proposed locked gate suggested will also cause problemsas it is highly unlikely this will remain intact, and will be vulnerable to vandalism, thus leaving theseproperties more vulnerable in turn. This has been mentioned many times by residents to councilrepresentatives, yet hasn't been reflected in these plans.

Please reconsider the access point on Petherbrige Way- this is a far more reasonable and rationalsolution to the access road issue.

I write with strong opposition to both access points proposed for this development.Please note that I have no opposition to houses being built but I do vehemently oppose the lack ofsuitable access, the lack of improvement in local amenities that is needed if thousands of newhomes are going to be built in Lockleaze (some of which are already underway) and the lack ofthought given to current residents' safety whether, that is from increased traffic or pollution.

The developer is proposing to use the access that currently serves the Dovercourt Depot offDovercourt Road, as the main vehicular and pedestrian access into the site. Transport planningconsultancy Ardent have reviewed the information provided by the developer so far. The proposedaccess is narrow and not considered suitable to serve the level of developmentproposed, with the proposals resulting in low quality pedestrian footways and no ability to providededicated cycle infrastructure into the site, which is contrary to the objectives of both the NPPF aswell as Local Plan policies BCS10 and DM23. In addition, there are two vehicle accesses and onepedestrian access onto the current access route which would provide conflict with proposedvehicular movements. The access points are not mentioned in any of the outline drawings and arementioned in just one sentence in the whole plan. They seem to have been completelydisregarded as an issue, which does seem disingenuous as it is clearly a safety issue.

The two vehicular access points are lawful and in frequent use. The access provides unfetteredaccess onto the current access with poor visibility, particularly when turning right which would bethe most frequent turn used when exiting this junction. Due to the close proximity of the garages,there is no opportunity to improve the visibility splay in this direction. Again, the access providesunfettered access onto the current access with poor visibility, particularly when turning left whichwould be the most frequent turn used when exiting this junction. Due to the close proximity of the

garage and block wall, there is no opportunity to improve the visibility splay in this direction.Vehicles frequently reverse out of the access due to the tight parking area, further increasing thelikelihood of collision.

The current arrangement as proposed by Goram Homes would require vehicular traffic to 'rat run'through Downend Road or utilise Dovercourt Road and Lockleaze Road, both roads less suited tovehicular traffic than Muller Road, increasing opportunity for conflict and the likelihood ofaccidents. This could lead to highway improvements being required under a S106 Agreement tomake the scheme acceptable. Such works could, for example, include a restriction on on-streetparking near the bottleneck of Dovercourt Road and Downend Road. This could in-turn lead to anunacceptable loss of on-street parking for local residents. This would be contrary to Local Planpolicies BCS10 and DM23.

The proposed residential development is predicted to generate 60 two-way vehicular movementsin both the AM and PM peak hours. Based on 141 dwellings this equates to a two-way vehiculartrip rate of 0.425 which, whilst not implausible, is considered on the low side. A more realistic levelof trip generation is considered to be closer to a trip rate of 0.55 which would result in a total of 78vehicular trips in both peak hours. Notwithstanding the above, the proposed development is likelyto result in a significant increase in vehicular trips over the existing use as a storage depot, and itis not clear if thesafety implications of this increase in trips has been fully considered. This is contrary to theobjectives of both the NPPF as well as Local Plan policies BCS10 and DM23.

Policy BCS10 states that developments should be designed and located to ensure the provision ofsafe streets and reduce as far as possible the negative impacts of vehicles such as excessivevolumes, fumes and noise. Proposals should create places and streets where traffic and otheractivities are integrated and where buildings, spaces and the needs of people shape the area. Thesignificant increase in vehicular trips on the current access road would lead to an increase in noiseassociated with both vehicular and person movements, likely to result in a significant impact on theamenity of existing local residents. The increase in vehicular movements will also result in adetrimental impact to air quality in the vicinity of the site, and the associated health impacts thatwould accompany this. The site is located within the Bristol Air Quality Management Area (AQMA)and so an increase in traffic will further contribute to fumes and emissions in the local area, whichisn't compatible with the aims and objectives of the AQMA to manage and improve air quality.Paragraph 130(f) of the NPPF states that:"Planning policies and decisions should ensure that developments create places that are safe,inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenityfor existing and future users". Due to the increase in traffic that would be generated as a result ofthe proposals there would be an adverse impact upon the amenity of local residents livingopposite the current access. Image 8 below shows an estimate of the properties opposite theaccess road that would be adversely impacted upon by a significant increase in light spill intohabitable front rooms of these properties caused by car headlights. Clearly, this issue and noise

and air pollution impacts, would be solved by proposing the main access via Petherbridge Wayand using the Dovercourt Road access as an emergency access, as suggested by the DovercourtRoad Residents Group. This proposal does of course have historic permission by virtue ofapplication 88/02416/S with one of the reasons for consent being granted that the stopping up ofthe Dovercourt Road access for general use would safeguard the amenities of nearby andadjoiningresidential occupiers

If access was via Petherbridge Way then all of my concerns would be eradicated. Access viaPetherbridge Way has previously been granted (App ref: 88/02416/S). This new access wasproposed by the Council at the time and given a planning history search must have been carriedout by the developer prior to proposing the current plans for a residential scheme. This alternativeaccess would have the benefit of removing vehicular traffic from a residential area as well ashaving the capability of providing a higher quality pedestrian and cycle experience. It would alsoprovide a more suitable route to the strategic highway network. As part of the approval the currentDovercourt Road access was proposed to be stopped up for general use, and instead proposedas an emergency access, as the local residents are now proposing.

For Petherbridge Way to be deemed suitable then but not now leads me to believe that the onlymotivation to disregard it now is for financial reasons. Therefore, a reasonable conclusion to cometo is that profit is more important than safety for Goram Homes. On those grounds, I urge thecouncil to reject this application to secure access rights from Dovercourt Road and insist that mainaccess has to come via Petherbridge Way. If the cost of access via Petherbridge Way makes thewhole project unsustainable, then this must be simply deemed as unfortunate and the project mustcease to exist. The Council surely cannot grant a dangerous and unsafe access point simplybecause a company's profits would otherwise be hit. The planning department has the opportunityhere to put residents safety ahead of profit and I urge it to do the right thing.

First of all i would like to know how on Gods earth that this is a community lead projectwhen most of the community object to this ghastly, imposing, dangerous estate that you proposeto build. Its not just the ugly 4 story flats but the one way in and one way out road that we greatlyobject to.My house and driveway backs onto the SINGLE lane which you propose to use as the only accessand exit point for an absolute minimum of 140 vehicles, pedestrians and cycles. from my row ofhouses we have at least 9 vehicles that require access to reverse out immediately onto this road.The road is utterly inadequate! This is an accident waiting to happen! Not to mention the row ofgarages opposite who have a gate that they use off this road. They have to stop on the road, exittheir car to open the gate before entering thus temporarily blocking this road. This small road willnot only be an accident waiting to happen but it will also increase vehicle pollution, compromiseroad safety for our neighbourhood and increase road noise from an unwanted flow of traffic.Not only that but the noise, the lorries, that we residents will have to contend with during your,quite frankly, NOT VERY GREEN, NOT resident friendly development.You could have used Concord Way as the main entrance to this site and didn't! Profit marginsseem to be more of a priority for you than they are for us!

As a cyclist, in particular one who cycles along this route taking my young children tonursery, I am extremely concerned about the implications of the development on road safety. Themain access road appears far too narrow for the expected volume of traffic, and does not havegood visibility onto Dovercourt Road & Concorde way, the cycle path. The problem is exacerbatedby the fact that no additional calming measures appear to have been considered for Dovercourtroad, where there are already issues with speeding.

The section of Downend road between Dovercourt & muller Road is a bottleneck. It is hard to seehow the road could cope with the additional traffic without causing huge congestion issues at peaktimes. To compound the issue, the traffic lights on the Muller road/Downend road crossroads don'tcurrently have a separate green arrow to the full green phase. With no right-turn filter lane, aconsiderable amount of traffic will therefore end up queuing on both muller Road & DownendRoad, causing further congestion.

Finally, the emergency access lane is a private lane & so access can presumably not beguaranteed, posing a safety risk for residents.

The development will inject significant, additional traffic into the Concorde way cyclepath, where there is no segregated section for cyclists. It is already dangerous in the section alongDovercourt Road, with cars frequently overtaking cyclists into oncoming traffic. The limited visibilityat the entrance to the site will result in cars pulling out into the path of cyclists travelling at speeddown the hill, in the direction towards the city centre.

The Concorde way cycle path is a significant amenity, and is used by many cyclists includingmyself on a daily basis. The risk from the additional traffic should at least be mitigated, by reducingthe density of the development, using Petherbridge way as the primary access point, andsegregating the cycle path from motorists as it is in many other places.

Additional segregation of the cycle path was initially considered as part of this development, buthas now been removed. I understand that some space has been reserved, but it isn't clear to meexactly how it will be used. Since the development will affect any potential rerouting of the cyclelane into this space, it should be considered and made clear as part of this application.

I am also concerned about the increase in traffic in general, particularly with other large numbersof houses being constructed nearby, such as at Bonnington Walk. Pavement parking alreadycauses access issues for pedestrians, particularly those with prams or wheelchairs.

Parking is inadequate and will exacerbate problems of congestion on Dovercourt andDownend Road.

Main access road is unsafe - apparently no consideration of existing access points on this roadwhich have low visibility to carriageway on egress.

Main access road will place an intolerable burden of extra traffic on Dovercourt and DownendRoad which are already dangerously congested at peak hours.

Unacceptable to have no dedicated cycle and pedestrian access.

Secondary (?) emergency access road is not an adopted highway (lane between 98 and 100Dovercourt Road) and is in fact privately owned, collectively, by several local households. Thereare concerns that the lane is not suitable for fire engines, and also that sooner or later the lane willbecome an unofficial pedestrian access route by virtue of the fence having the necessary gateinstalled.

I am as yet unconvinced that the Petherbridge Way has been exhaustively ruled out as a viableoption - the proposed access road of Dovercourt Road will certainly be problematic for thecommunity and road safety.

I welcome affordable housing in our community but object to this development asproposed on the following grounds:

The proposed main access route is inadequate and dangerous with low visibility when turning ontoDovercourt Road. The existing gates and vehicular access points on the proposed main accessroad do not seem to have been considered in the planning and will create a hazard, particularly topedestrians and cyclists, but also generally by blocking the road during maneuvers in order toenter gates.

Dovercourt and Downend Road will suffer an extra burden of traffic when they are alreadydangerously congested at times. This congestion will be exacerbated by the proposed parkingprovision which is also inadequate and is already a problem for local residents. The developmentalso needs a dedicated cycle and pedestrian access point.

For all these reasons I believe Petherbridge Way would make a much better main access roadwithout creating so many problems and hazards for the local community.

Finally, I am concerned about local amenities being already overstretched and inadequate, e.g.oversubscribed GP practice. This development should taken as an opportunity to enhance anddevelop existing social infrastructure but I see little of that in the proposals.

I object to this development as I feel it is unsafe as the one way access route in and outis not adequate for the size of development and the amount of vehicles, pedestrians and cyclistusing that small space is an accident waiting to happen. My children walk to school this way and Iam scared every day as its such a busy road already. I can not see how this development can beallowed to happen as its not safe. . There are no cycle path on the plans? Is this not a legalrequirement for new developments to have safe cycle access?Another point is that at least 20 houses back into this road from their back lane and driveways isthis safe or legal to make this a main Rd? as it does not feel as though it should be.My final point is that the emergency access is not legal and it is not enough to use private lanes toaccess the development in an emergency. How is this allowed when all the recidence who backonto the lane said no to this happening. This is not a recident lead project and I am unable to seehow this would enhance the area for current recidence. I walk in the area every day and I yet tofind one person who agree with the development with the current access plan.

This plan has not been well thought out and the whole process has ignored the localcommunities concerns.Access to the proposed estate is not good enough, not wide enough and with not enoughprovision given to pedestrians, cyclists and to the increased volume of traffic that will happen.The height of the houses will overlook houses on dovercourt Road despite initial promises thatthey would not.There should be more consideration to the impact on local amenities e.g. Horfield health centre isalready the busiest gp in bristol, introducing even more patients will overwhelm an already stainedservice. The new estate should supply a new gp surgery, schooling and shops. Otherwise there isno benefit to the existing community.A big opportunity has been missed to improve the cycling route known as concorde way, which isperfect to have a dedicated cycle route through the site.Why has no consideration been given to adding a rail station at the site, this would be perfect forthe community.This is building houses for the sake of it, you need to consider building communities by alsosupplying everything a community needs at the same time.

The main access road (only 1) will create more traffic and danger for the road.

Dovercourt road is already very busy and I am concerned with the impact of traffic from thedevelopment and changes to traffic flow will increase traffic to our road which will affect safety.

There will not be enough parking on the bee development so Parking on dovercourt road willbecome worse. Downend road is already a bottleneck.

The proposed emergency access route is through a very narrow private lane.

I have concerns about this development. My main objection is the access. The lane istoo small to support the amount of traffic that will use it. Visibility is poor exiting into DovercourtRoad and the increase in traffic will create further dangers for people using the road. It is regularlyused by cyclists and school children and will be an accident waiting to happen. The increase intraffic will also have an environmental impact on existing and new residents.

I also object to the height of some of the buildings. It is not appropriate to build blocks of flats thishigh in this area. It will block the sunlight for existing houses and I fear the new buildings will betypically tiny with little outside space. Much better to build affordable homes which are of a decentsize and suitable for a family to live comfortably.

As a resident of Dovercourt Road, I have concerns regarding the development of thedepot yard.

An environment impact assessment needs to be carried out due to the number of different speciesof wildlife:

We have seen evidence of Bats, Foxes, Badgers, Owls, Water Bikes, Squirrels, Deer.

Whilst I understand that many people regard Foxes as a nuisance and squirrels as vermin, theyhave made their homes in the area.

Dovercourt Road has become a rat-run for cyclists and e-scooters, many using the pavementinstead of the road. We are just waiting for any accidents to happen.

The access road will only increase traffic, and thereby increase the risk of accidents.

Having insufficient access to so many new houses will cause severe congestion anddelays on an already busy road. The traffic that it will bring to the area will make things muchworse for us. Road rage and bottlenecks are already a fixture on Downend Road where cars haveto wait for one another to pass. We're already going to see a great deal more traffic from thedevelopment on Bonnington Walk and the housing being built on Constable Road. Has that trafficbeen taken into account in the assessment for this development?Poor visibility for vehicles pulling in and out of the proposed access road will make conditionsmore treacherous for pedestrians (including children on their way to school) and cyclists onDovercourt Road (part of the busy Concorde Way route).The access in question is private, as per the home owners deeds. No proof of rights to use thelane has been provided.The only solution is to provide primary access to the site from Petherbridge way, and while it isargued that this would be expensive and complicated I see nothing other that this is a matter ofmaximising profit from the development at the expense of the current residents, few of whichobject to the housing itself, just to the impact it will have on traffic, pollution and safety in the area.170 parking spaces for 140 dwellings is unrealistic and is going put severe pressure on parkingprovision for existing residents. Parking restrictions would not be the answer as it is likely to leadto front gardens being converted into parking spaces which obviously is not ideal for theenvironment or community. No wander developers are not willing to undertake an environmentalimpact assessment.Despite claiming to be a community led project, the local residence have felt consistentlyoverlooked. It is only reasonable to expect new developments to be collaborative when they standto impact so heavily on a group of residents. There should be more consideration to the impact onlocal amenities e.g. Horfield health centre is already the busiest gp in bristol, introducing even

more patients will overwhelm an already stained service. The new estate should supply a new gpsurgery, schooling and shops. Otherwise there is no benefit to the existing community.A big opportunity has been missed to improve the cycling route known as concorde way, which isperfect to have a dedicated cycle route through the site. Why has no consideration been given toadding a rail station at the site, this would be perfect for the community.

I have major concerns regarding the increased traffic flow through Lockleaze,particularly in view of a number of other new housing developments in the area. Safety concernswhen exiting Dovercourt Road onto Lockleaze Road as a junction and impact upon air quality frompollution.

The site is also prone to flooding as often able to see when overlooking from the railway bridge onLockleaze Road, vast areas of accumulated water on this site.

There is a lack of local amenities, Horfield Health centre is already struggling with the number ofnew residents moving into the area.

Serious concerns about access to the site for emergency vehicles.

A lost opportunity to re-open a train station by the bridge on Lockleaze Road, there used to be astation there a number of years ago.

Number of dwellings excessive and the height of buildings not in keeping with the local area.

I too have been a member of the local residents planning committee in the past. However, afteryears of being ignored by Bristol City Council I no longer attend as never listened too, hopefullythis time it may be different.

Thank you.

too much traffic accident waiting to happen plus the houses are too high we were nottold about this when they sent us the paperwork .we are on the end or the plan and they will belooking right into our back room and bedroom not happy

The access to this site is simply not acceptable. My house is next to the private lanethat is being suggested as an emergency access. Being a private lane as the council itself hasadmitted in the paperwork you do not have the full legal right to use it. We land owners wereasked to come to two meetings with the people working on this development where they asked ourpermission to use the land. We unanimously declined for it to be used as an emergency access. Itwas done anyway behind our back. Resident led is a joke. We are under no requirement to giveyou access and are in fact currently all in unanimous agreement that we want to block access. Weare getting quotes to build a wall at the back of the lane which will block all access to the site. Irepeat we are in the process of permanently blocking our lane with a wall (or locked gate - weshall see what the quotes come back as and what all of the people who own the lane want to do).Even if you could access the site through our lane to suggest this is an appropriate emergencyaccess is totally incorrect. A legal loop hole of the Fire Services Act 2004 means they will use thelane if they can but that does not allow any other emergency services to have an emergencyaccess. Building control requires the land to be maintained to a certain standard and as they donot lawfully own the land they are unable to do this. Also building control requires an emergencyaccess to access an adopted highway and not a small quiet cul de sac. It's absolute madness thatyou would even consider a private lane as the emergency access for an entire site of 140 houses.Not that you can even consider it seeing as a wall will be blocking any access as soon as we havecrowdfunded for one.

The main entrance way is simply not wide enough for this amount of extra traffic. Under planninghierarchy you know that pedestrians and cyclists have priority over cars and so this access cannotbe approved due to a complete and total lack of cycle provision. We are also aware that somechanges to the concorde way are coming but planning permission stipulates future works cannot

be considered as they are not confirmed. There is no cycle access therefore making this mainaccess road inappropriate. Not to mention the many houses whose drive backs out onto this lane.You surely can't put existing residents lives on the line but not creating a safe entrance for the sitefor these people who's drives are literally coming onto this small lane you have chosen as a road.

Talking about putting lives at risk the pure amount of additional traffic along a road that is a maincycle route is going to cause issues and no additional traffic calming measures have beenconsidered. Downend Road junction into Dovercourt Road is a horrible bottleneck and we alreadyhave huge traffic issues without any additional cars. Not to mention all the extra traffic from theother houses being built in Lockleaze. Over 1000 houses! There used to be a bus route onDovercourt Road that was closed due to the traffic congestion.

We are all well aware that the Goram Homes is short of funds and is pushing this through ascheaply as possible but too many corners are being cut. I am mostly ashamed that knowing thesite an environmental impact assessment has been declined. Yes I know they have builtEXACTLY the right amount of houses to avoid one and I imagine this is because they know fullwell that a large wooded area near a brook and a wildlife corridor is teeming with wildlife. We haveseen them. We have seen deer and badgers and all sorts. So many birds. Please for the love ofgod stop them from pushing profit and check on the animals. Bristol is supposed to be a green cityyet you will refuse to just check. What have you got to lose? If they are right then yes build away.But if they are wrong you have just destroyed the homes of animals that Bristol City claims to be ahabitat for.

Goram homes should hang their heads in shame that you chose profit over wildlife and localresidents. Local resident who are actually fully supportive of you building homes on this site. Wejust ask that you stop using Goram Homes as a way to cut corners and build this developmentproperly like you would ask a non council developer to.

I'm very concerned about the point of access being the narrow lane on DovercourtRoad. It would increase the traffic around the street hugely; why aren't there plans to create aproper access point on Petherbridge Way that links to Muller Road? I'm very worried about theincrease in traffic during the building process with lorries etc coming in and out but also after thebuild with 170+ cars regularly using that narrow lane. Dovercourt Road and Downend Roadresidents already struggle with parking; this will only exacerbate the situation and make the roadseven more dangerous for pedestrians/children and cyclists.

I have safety concerns over the increased traffic using just one small lane onDovercourt Road - for 150 new houses! Double access with both this lane and Petherbridge Wayat the rear would reduce this issue drastically. A much wider road which is only used currently toaccess department stores. Parking (which is also an issue) will become more so causing biggerbottle necks and dangerous corners for pedestrians, motorists and cyclists too. The lack of entrypoints for cars needs a big rethink of the current design. Dovercourt Road and Down End Roadare already busy with traffic and parked cars and this will only increase the volume. PethebridgeWay access combined with dovercourt road access must be considered as a much better optionfor current and future residents of the area.

I am commenting as I am seriously concerned about the strain that 150 new houses willput on the local facilities. The Downend and Dovercourt roads are already seriously congested atpeak times of the day, and then around those hours parking is constantly an issue. It is such abottle neck which is already tricky to navigate without all the vehicles which will be needed in theconstruction and then afterwards the residents own vehicles. There is a lack of bus routes herealso. I am concerned about if there was an emergency on the development and having only oneentrance coming from an already congested road, this seems incredibly short sighted and quitedangerously not considered. It would ease the strain if an extra access route was created atPethebridge Way and make a much safe neighbourhood for the current and future residents.

There are a number of reasons why the proposal is not acceptable:> The access road via Dovercourt road is not fit for purpose, it's too narrow, creating a bottleneck.It needs to be a separate access onto Petherbridge Way.> Access onto Dovercourt road right next to Downend road will cause a further bottleneck,increasing the issues that already occur there, and specifically a hazard for the larger number ofcyclists that use the road to access the cycle path on to Concorde Way.> There are not enough car parking spaces increasing the burden on Dovercourt & Downend roadwhere there is already a shortage.> The proposed access is via a private lane which the council do not own.> I don't think it is appropriate to have a four storey block of flats overlooking resident gardens.

I strongly object to this planning application. The housing is too dense, and will ruin theresidential amenity of those living in Dovercourt Road because of increased traffic, noise from overdensity . Dovercourt Road is a quiet cul de sac with a care home at the far end and a substantialarea of green space. To build on this green space will not only fly in the face of the city's allegedcommitment to green issues but cause devastation to the wildlife, which is quite numerous and biodiverse.The proposed access , between two existing houses is nothing less than ludicrous . I urge thecouncil to turn down this application

I object to this proposal on the following grounds1)The proposed access is too narrow,there is poor visibility entering the main road causing ahazard to pedestrians,cyclists and traffic. Further there would be an increase in noise andpollution.2) The 'emergency vehicle ' access is currently a gated private lane,I believe this proposal hasalready been turned down by the services.I believe this is impractical on several grounds .3)There does not seem to be a detailed environmental assessment of the impact of thedevelopment.4) Given the number of dwellings there needs to be detailed consideration of the development oflocal infrastructure to support existing and new residents.5) There may be parking issues if the 170 car spaces arent enough

I have considerable concerns and objections to the proposed development of theDovercourt depot site.

Whilst I do not object to new homes in particular for social, low cost housing on brown fill sites ingeneral, I believe this is a special case for these reasons:

1) No reasonable road parking consideration. The allocated parking is wholly insufficient for thehousing, more housing and cars would be exacerbating the current parking issues - we had tobuild a drive to ensure we had a parking space at a reasonable distance to our house. I do notbelieve all the proposed families with guest/family would fit, if they did there would be a huge bottleneck getting in and out.

2) Roads in and out of the site have been poorly planned. there could have been an easy solutionform Petherbridge way leading to the houses. A representative of the council has previously statedthat an assessment has been madeindicating that an access from Petherbridge Way would result in poorer air quality. This isnonsense as the traffic would still be the same, just next to my home and garden.One tiny access road is planned, This would grind traffic to a halt and log jam traffic on DownendRoad and would be a safety hazard for pedestrians and cyclists. When refuse/ recycling or largevehicles are present it already causes gridlock, imagine that with another feed of potentially 50-100 cars. My property rear access would also slow or block traffic in and out whilst I accessed it. Ineed to do this regularly, but would cause significant issues to cyclist and vehicular traffic, andwould be a safety concern.

3) The emergency access is neither suitable for an emergency vehicle nor does the public havethe right of way to use the private lane.

4) The lack of decent infrastructure or amenities for new residents. Schools, GPs, play parks. Wealready have a lack of facilities before the new homes

5) Consideration for the environment. It doesn't seem an accident that the 140 houses fall justunder the environmental survey required for 141 houses? This will have a major impact on habitatwildlife and fauna along the banks of Horfield brook and the Dovercourt Road Green space. Thereneeds to be an assessment of this likely damage.

6) I am also concerned in the privacy, security and environmental impact of losing the tree linebehind my house. My garden and rooms would also be seriously overlooked if a 3 story buildinglet alone 4 was to be built. Previous planning permission has been denied for a 5m garage, so Ihope the same terms/precedent apply.

This application will severely affect the residents of Dovercourt Road. Parking is alreadya nightmare, and this application will mean a significant increase in the volume of traffic. Also, onlyone access road is dangerous with so many additional vehicles, and there does not seem to beany additional pedestrian access

It feels like the residents of Dovercourt Road are going to be sandwiched in by largehousing developments.

This is already an overly populated area and this size of project will be detrimental to the existingresidents and it's limited amenities.

Parking and access is a big concern as the bend at Downend Road/Dovercourt is alreadydangerous due to congestion and over parking.

I agree that a plan for a smaller development would be a better idea to limit traffic pollution and notcause such a weight on the surrounding community.

Whilst I understand the need of extra housing in the local area, the current proposalhasn't taking into consideration the existing challenges that we're currently facing in ourneighbourhood.One of my main concerns is the proposed access to the site, as it will increase the pollution, trafficand parking problems on our road.The proposed access is not wide enough and therefore, not safe for pedestrians. If this was tobecome the main access, the driveway could be badly affected with cards driving on thepavement, as previously observed.I would like to see the main access to be through Petherbridge Way and the road leading toDovercourt Rd, becoming the emergency access.The main access could come across the end of the road owned by the council (before the U drive)and through all the unused wasteland at the bottom of this area. This way the natural corridorcould be preserved and the new Concorde cycling route.

This could then mean that the proposed emergency access (currently on a private lane) could thenbe moved to a more suitable access.

I would also like to take this opportunity to suggest that you consider bringing some facilities to ourneighbourhood. There's a lack of parks, play areas and community rooms/halls for our localresidents to use/hire.With the increase of housing in our local area, the council should consider ways of enhancing thewellbeing and quality of life of all the residents.

I really hope that you take our comments into account and find the right balance between just

building houses or homes for our community.

Kind regards

Strongly object the single access proposed for the development. The road is too narrowto allow traffic, cyclists and pedestrians to all pass safely. It will create additional pressure ondownend road which is already a bottleneck, causing a severe impact on traffic and safety.

I believe the road/ traffic plan for this development is ill thought out and poses a risk toboth residents and local commuters. To send so much traffic down Downend road is dangerous, Ican't believe that a route cannot be created over to petherbridge way, which a) keeps the trafficaway from a residential rat run and cycle route b) means that busses will again be able to runthrough this area, importantly connecting aldi / Lidl with lockleaze residents.

I also object to it not having an environmental assessment.

The access road is unsuitable for the amount of traffic. The turning from and into theaccess road has already caused severe damage to cars parked on Dovercourt Road. It will bedangerous for the cyclists who use Dovercourt road .Downend road is congested already withoutincreased traffic flow.

Car parking around Dovercourt Road and Downend Road is extremely busy presentlywith limited access.The intended access Road into the new housing development will not be substantial for the extratraffic, its original use was an access Road for a council yard NOT for a housing development.

Yet another huge housing development in this area. 140 houses with no thought foraccess in and out of the development. Not enough parking spaces, no environmental impactassessment, and yet more traffic in an already over congested area. Dovercourt Road itself verybusy, and it leads to...Muller Road - major arterial Road and source of great pollution andcongestion.

The lack of thinking around the access will put people in danger - cyclists, pedestrians, residentsof the houses already there. Emergency services will have difficulty getting in and out, putting livesat risk.

Please ensure that the "Planning Committee" actually read all the documents and visit the site tosee for themselves what the residents are telling them. "Bristolneedshouses,bristolneedshouses"is NOT a good excuse to put people's lives at risk.

I completely and strongly object to the current plans to make the depot laneway off DovercourtRoad into the main road and access point to the new so called Dovercourt Development!

There is no way it would be safe to put two lanes of traffic, a bicycle path and a pedestrian path inthe laneway, it is too small and would be very dangerous. The reason is the pathway would be tooclose to the cars meaning children/ families would be at risk and have nowhere to escape ifsomebody was driving unsafely, both sides are walled off. Cyclists will also be at risk for the samereason.

The next problem is how are the current residents of Dovercourt Road (including myself)supposed to open the gates to our private garage laneways to bring out our cars? Does the traffichave to stop every time we open the gate, park up (on the proposed new road) and stop traffic,cyclists and pedestrians whilst we lock up/ wait for our gates to open?

Why on earth do you not build a new access point, alongside the new proposed cycle path fromPetheridge Way? Seems like the job will be half done for you, instead of cutting costs by using atiny lane way adding a mass of congestion, traffic pollution and danger to all residents onto analready very busy Dovercourt Road.

The proposed access already has its problems with large lorries and vehicles bashing up thepavement as they try to pull out of the laneway onto Dovercourt road. What will happen on refusecollections days on the school run/ work commute?? This is already a big congestion problem onDovercourt Road (which is a fairly wide road) Add this congestion onto your new, very small

access road.

The visibility is already poor for vehicles pulling into/ out of the proposed access road. It will be adisaster and really dangerous.

There is already a serious parking problem on Dovercourt and Downend Roads, adding more carsto this area will create an even bigger problem. A few years back (just before lockdowns) manyresidents on Dovercourt had yellow lines put in front of our houses (to make access easier for theDovercourt Depot laneway) making it impossible to park near your home. Home owners likemyself had to have driveways put in to help with the parking issues and spending money that wedidn't have to do it. We were not consulted. If you didn't own your home or you live on Downend(where most front gardens are too small to fit a driveway) you will currently have daily problemswith parking. This is before you move more people in and add to the traffic congestion and parkingissues.

I have trouble getting on and off my driveway due to traffic/cars and bikes (from the Concorde waycycle path) and now scooters! (I live on the same side three houses down from the proposed newroad) this is what cars/ traffic, pedestrians coming to and from the new Dovercourt proposal willdeal with every day continuously. Everyone is at risk of either being hurt or sitting in needlesscongested traffic. This is not what Dovercourt & Downend Road need at all!

I would also like to see an environmental Impact Assessment taken out on the project, the trafficalone will be disastrous to our area.

Next up is why are you proposing to use private land (between 98-100 Dovercourt road) to createan emergency access point? Are you aware Fire engines have previously refused to drive downthis lane way as its too narrow??? There is no way that you would maintain and keep the land andgateways safe and usable for its residents. This road is not yours to take; it is on the deeds of thehouses 82 to 130 to take care of as it belongs to them! This is ridiculous bullying and stealing fromour residents. Why on earth are you calling this a resident led project, we are not being included atall.

Although this particular proposal is about access. i am also totally against the plans for the 3 and 4storey apartments! This is an outrageous invasion of our privacy. As a resident who has currentlybeen denied planning permission on our 5 metre high garage/ office conversion, this is an outragethat the rules appear to be very different for this project with buildings being proposed three timesthe height of this, which will overlook our gardens and block many of our views of Purdown.

I have serious concerns regarding access and traffic in relation to this applicationproposal. The main access road to the development, leading off Dovercourt Road is narrow, andinappropriate as a main road to a development of 140 homes. Dovercourt Road itself is used bycyclists and children throughout the day, and the visibility and safety of these groups in particularare in danger by having so many vehicles use this narrow road, by what is proposed a being 170vehicles (based on the proposed number of parking spaces on the new site). Increased trafficalong Dovercourt Road, which is used throughout the day by elderly people, young people andpeople with disabilities, poses a very serious threat to the residents, especially these vulnerablegroups of people.

As well as this, the emergency access proposed is via a lane which does actually belongs toresidents, including myself. We have NOT given permission for the use of the lane and haveserious doubts as to the maintenance of the proposed gate, one of the reasons being why wehave not given permission for the use of our lane.

I am very concerned that an environmental impact assessment has been deemed unnecessary.Having lived her for almost twenty years, I can say without a doubt that there is an abundance ofwildlife in the area, which will be impacted. In times where human impact is known to have majorconsequences on the environment we live in, surely this seems remiss. The impact of building andadditional 140 households on this area, MUST be assessed, despite the number of homes being'at the limit' of being unnecessary.

In my opinion, there has not been enough consideration or investigation into the impact that thisproposal will have.

I think the parking will be terrible and even more cars on Downend and DovercourtRoad. Don't want to lose the beautiful green area at the cul-de-sac end of Dovercourt. Beautifulspace for wildlife and children to play.

I object to this development for a number of reasons. This area is already overloadedwith cars and parking in my own street is often not possible- this problem will only be exacerbatedby more cars- particularly as they're aren't enough dedicated spaces for the new housesproposed. Also the traffic increase in the area and lack of facilities for to serve an increase inpopulation.

I regularly cycle between a relatives house and Central Bristol, riding past the entranceto the proposed development. I am concerned that the current plan concentrates too manymovements in to a very restricted area, those movements being motorised traffic, cyclists andpedestrians.The Council should consider alternatives that reduce the concentration.

As a resident who lives on Dovercourt Road and already struggles to safely cross theroad between at the Downend/ Dovercourt junction with my child and a pram I have seriousconcerns regarding access and traffic in relation to this application proposal. The main accessroad to the development, leading off Dovercourt Road is narrow, and inappropriate as a main roadto a development of 140 homes. Dovercourt Road itself is used by cyclists and children throughoutthe day, and the visibility and safety of these groups in particular are in danger by having so manyextra vehicles use this narrow road. Increased traffic along Dovercourt Road, which is usedthroughout the day by elderly people, young people and people with disabilities, poses a veryserious threat to the residents.I do not think it's appropriate to use a very narrow private Lane as emergency access and I worryabout the safety implications for the potential new residents as well as the current residents in thesurrounding area.Downend road has stand still traffic on a regular basis- especially on waste removal day and thiswill only become a more regular event with potentially over 200 extra cars using this route throughto muller road.Bristol already has a big parking problem and I would have thought it very unlikely that there wouldonly by the need for 170 parking spaces when there are 140 new homes- especially as there areno longer any regular bus routes near by.For a 'green council' it is unacceptable to not assess the environmental impact caused. Surely withthe current environmental crisis this should be assessed with any development.The height of the tallest houses are unacceptably high and will impact the view for the wholestreet.Overall I feel this development has been poorly thought out with no thought to the impact of thecurrent residents.

The access is a concern, the proposed main access appears too narrow and potentiallydangerous in terms of visibility. Emerging vehicles a real danger for cyclists.The assumptions on parking requirements seem too convenient, I don't think they're realistic and Ifeel there will be much more demand all along Dovercourt Road.

I have considerable concerns and objections to the proposed development of theDovercourt depot site.

Firstly, the plan is for too many dwellings with insufficient available parking. This will inevitablyresult on an increased number of cars parking on the road, which is already congested. This willpotentially lead to unsafe conditions on our roads.Access to the site is inadequate. The proposed main entrance is narrow and unsuitable for thenumber of proposed dwellings on the site.

A representative of the council has previously stated that an assessment has been madeindicating that an access from Petherbridge Way would result in poorer air quality. This, from anysensible perspective is nonsense and clearly focused on cost rather than quality. The currentproposal for a single entrance will put greater pressure on the single trunk road of Muller Way, withmore traffic will come more congestion and more pollution. An access from Petherbridge way willgive an additional route through to the site which will clearly ease traffic and improve air quality.

The emergency access is neither suitable for an emergency vehicle nor does the public have theright of way to use the private lane. Furthermore, on several occasions over the past months thelane is blocked by cars already parking in front of the lane entrance, which would block anemergency vehicle. The lane itself is private for the use of residents of Dovercourt road, and thecouncil have not provided any sufficient evidence to allay concerns that the lane would not end upbeing used as a cut through. If this were to happen, there would be considerable security andsafety concerns for the Dovercourt road residents whose properties back on to their private lane.

The main access to the site should be via Petherbridge Way, with the emergency access beingthe current access to the site from Dovercourt road.

You cannot be seriously thinking of building yet more homes in lockleaze!!!??? We havelocal shops which are struggling we have no local cafe or pub!!! No real funding for projects !!! Thepolice can hardly look after the area or make people feel safe and you are planning to build yetmore houses in an old estate that was not built to handle so much traffic!!! Question 1 - once youhave the houses are you going to make the area better to live in?? No point spending money onhouses if people don't want to live in a run down area! 2 - why can bcc not invest more in localbusinesses !? Make a way to get a cafe set up in lockleaze (NOT THE OUTSKIRTS OFLOCKLEAZE!!) PEOPLE IN LOCKLEAZE DO NOT WANT AMENITIES TO BE OUT ON THEBOUNDARY LINE TO LOCKLEAZE!!! Please just stop stop for a minute and think of what u aredoing to our town to our homes the places we have called home for years !!! You do not listen tous at these meetings !! By the time we have been to 2/3 of them we feel so ground down becauseyou won't listen! So we give up and don't come back!!! 80/90% of us at that meeting didn't comeback because of this issue!!!! Now fact..... bristol city council have council houses (obviously) inlockleaze so could you please explain. Why in your right minds you will spend so much on newhousing but ignore and do NOTHING!! About those homes in disrepair that's been reported toyou!! Sort your stuff out fix up re think your idea because pissing of your local neighbourhood andexpecting no backlash from anyone is a silly thing to think my friends -.- now goodnight.

It seems the Lockleaze area is yet again being used to cram in as many houses aspossible without enough thought to the impact on current and future residents, safety, environmentand wellbeing.

I oppose the development on the following grounds:

1. Access to this land is not suitable for the number of houses that are being proposed. It isnarrow, visibility is difficult and the emergency access route has been declined as suitable byemergency services in the past.

2. Traffic and parking - this will have a huge impact on the road system around Muller Road,Horfield and Lockleaze. Current poor local cycle, pedestrian and public transport routes are inneed of improvement to adjust to the massive increase in housing across the area.

3. Environmental impact - this forms part of a vital wildlife corridor flanking the railway in NorthBristol, however no environmental assessment has yet been carried out. In our current ecologicalemergency, it is vital our environment is taken into consideration above and beyond the basicbuilding site requirements. At minimum, an independent impact assessment should be carried out.

4. There is a huge lack of facilities within the Lockleaze ward, including schools, playgrounds andhealth facilities alongside wellbeing and amenities. The health centre is over subscribed, as arethe schools, there are no play facilities within walking distance of this proposed housing estate andis over double the distance standard (over 1km instead of 450m) set out by Bristol City Council in

their greenspaces plan.

To address this, housing developments across the area should be required to include provisionsfor these to help address the massive gap. It is vital we start addressing this, an issue which hasbeen raised time and time again by reisdents here, LNT, Lockleaze councillors, in news articlesand even by Marvin Rees. would like to see this housing development include one communityspace and a playground to start to help address these issues in line with Bristol City Council's OneCity plan.

A lot of development is happening in Lockleaze currently but there is no new newinfrastructure or amenities.This is another big build to add to what is already a problem.The access road to this development is on a road that I use all the time and it gets bottle neckedwithout the extra cars from from this development.Having only one access point for so many cars is never easy but for it to be near a sharp bend canonly exacerbate the usual problems.Lockleaze is slowly losing it's wildlife corridor which is sad for the annals losing their habitat andfor us who use the space for our mental health.

I do not object to new homes in particular for social, low cost housing on brown fill sitesWhat I object to isa) no decent road consideration: the allocated parking is wholly insufficientb) roads in and out of the site have been poorly planned: there could have been an easy solutionform Petherbridge way leading to the houses. There is planned one tiny access road with resultantlog jam traffic on Downend Road and a safety hazard for pedestrians and cyclistsc)the lack of decent infrastructure: where are the new residents going to access GPs, dentists, andsupport services?d) consideration tfor the environment: is it accident or design that the 140 houses fall just underthe environmental survey required for 141 houses? This will have a major impact on habitatwildlife and fauna along the banks of Horfield brook and the Dovercourt Road Green space thereshould be at the very least an assessment of this likely damage.The residents of Dovercourt Road have lived here for many years and have a good workingknowledge of the needs of residents, traffic flow and solutions to problems. this could have beenwell planned, consultative and partnership engaged throughout and it has been none of these

The development seems to provide lack of due care and safety with the single goalbeing more affordable housing.

Emergency services have declined access as suitable in the past and no logical solution has beenprovisioned. There is already a significant challenge on parking and traffic in the area. This is ahigh accident zone. The plans to adapt Muller Road over the coming year will only put more strainon parking and dangerous shortcuts between Elmcroft Crescent and Shaldon Road. Thedevelopment will then push this over the edge, leading to more far more danger considering theproximity to Fairfield school this is putting young lives at risk. Again no solution provisioned.

No environmental assessment has been carried out and with a city that is trying to push forwardand lead from the front that is also introducing a clean air zone in the coming year, this isembarrassing to see. An independent impact assessment should be had considering the proximityto Purdown. This area is a wildlife corridor.

This housing development provides absolutely nothing to the local community. Lockleaze alreadyhas a huge lack of amenities, with the current such as schools and shops not meeting highstandards. This will further increase traffic because those in affordable housing will need to travelfurther to get to amenities. It would be useful to see some local benefit being added in to reducethis.

The negative impact on the local area has clearly not been considered with thisplanning project.An environmental survey has not been properly completed- Bristol likes to champion itself as agreen city but this hasn't been thought about at all.There will be a huge number of additional cars coming onto Dovercourt Road and using a smallaccess road, and with not enough parking spaces in the development there will be chaos with carslooking to park everywhere. The size of the buildings will be a big eyesore in the area and meanmany gardens are looked down on, impacting people's privacy.The road is used by many cyclists and this will also increase the danger to them.Really disappointing that the local area has been ignored in favour of profits.

I am not in agreement with the planned use of the lane 98-100 and the use of theentrance to the site being used as the only entrance

Main access off Dovercourt road too narrow and unsuitable as per independantplanning consultant Ardent. Poor visability to vehicles pulling in and out of these access points,risk to cyclists and pedestrians where sole use planned.

Emergency access - proposed via private residents lanes, they have makred on deeds and areresponsible for maintenance

Additional 200 vehicles travelling down Dovercourt road which is already used as a 'rat run' withspeeding vehicles common place, safety issues and noise pollution to existing residents

Lack of sufficient proposed parking to the new development means parking spilling out ontoDovercourt road which is already at a premium

To build another 140 houses in this area is insane. Our schools, doctors and dentiststruggle with the residence already on their list. I live on the lane in Dovercourt Road , which is in astate of disrepair and is a public walk way. Piles of rubbish left there daily. Don't you think youshould be cleaning and repairing this broken down area instead of causing more chaos which willdefinitely occur from building more houses. It's about time the people were heard and respected,we don't want more housing in an already full community. Respect our choices for a change.Something you rarely do.

I am very disappointed that an Environmental Impact Assessment has not beencompleted for the area. This area has had to endure much environmental damage recently in thepursuit of endless homes for Bristol Council; I would like to see a full Environment ImpactAssessment undertaken to give residents peace of mind that the council actually cares aboutthese things and is not ignoring this aspect of the development.

I believe that access to the site from the main access point is wholly unsuitable and presents aclear danger to existing cyclists and motorists. With regards to the emergency access, the councilhas not given enough guarantees that the proposed gate will be maintained and locked well intothe future, especially should the site be sold or the existing owners be dissolved etc.

No thought has been given to the increase in traffic and pollution that this site will cause. This isalready a hugely busy road, and this development in conjunction with others will exacerbate this.Nor has nearly enough consideration been given to parking - again this road is already extremelyhard to park on, and the woefully low amount of parking spaces proposed for the development willforce people to park on Dovercourt Road and the surrounding streets.

Furthermore, the height of the new homes is far far to high, and not in keeping with the currentarea at all. I will lose a great deal of visibility, privacy and sunlight because of the excessive heightof these buildings.

Although I Live in gloucester my 10 yr old son shares custody with my exwife who livesat Dovercourt Farm House and we are there several times a week often overnight. I strugglealready to park om Dovercourt road which is a very busy road at peak times like school drop offand pick up. I have myself opened my car door whilst parking and it's been ridden into by a cyclistwho are very heavy users at commuting times. I am very concerned that one of the proposals willbe access to Dovercourt road as the Main road for the development. This just won't work butcreate a dangerous choke point for the 200 plus vehicles from the new development. I can foreseeaccidents and deaths of cyclists as people jump this poor visibility junction at peak times as trafficbuilds up. Also households with shared occupancy adults or adult children rarely have just onevehicle be it car,van or motor bike so 140 vehilcles is a conservative estimate. 170 parking spacesjust won't do it and more people will park in surrounding areas which are already saturated. I oftenhave to park my car overnight when I stay on yellow lines as there are no spaces in theDovercourt or Downend roads. I know I'm not a resident but the proposed 140 new houses alsowill have visitors and family with vehicles because that's normal life. I urge the council to considerseriously the main access road location and the increased vehicle numbers in the area in theinterest of road safety and already saturated on road parking in the neighbourhood.

I don't really see that the area proposed can support 140 houses on all levels,enviromental, transport, social disturbances etc etc. I think a smaller number is more realistic. asfor supporting not only the addition of numerous homeowners vechicles that will come with it. Isuspect also the addition of numerous delivery vans as well will mean the inadequate road layoutetc will be a very tedious situation for all. God help us if they stick some roadworks in as well andparking ?

In its current form I object this application.

*My main concern is with the traffic.

-The current new developments in Lockleaze haven't yet been completed and our road is alreadyfar too busy and used as a rat run from Lockleaze through to Muller road.-People drive far too fast and there is already regular conflict between drivers along the smallDownend Road stretch. Often this conflict turns in to quite heated arguments. I fear that thecouncil's way of resolving this issue will be to place double yellow lines down the Downend Roadstretch. This will have negative impacts on the residents living there. Lack of Parking in the front oftheir houses (means more driveways, in turn having a negative impact wildlife). Faster flow oftraffic. More traffic as currently the lack of flow creates a small deterrent to using the road as a ratrun.

-Traffic backs ups from Muller road waiting at the traffic lights and I don't want cars sitting outsidemy house on Downend Road pumping out fumes in to our front gardens (this WILL happen withmore traffic on the road). If anything the junction of Downend Road / Muller road needs cutting offto through traffic.-As a cyclist and a father of small children who cycle, more traffic coming down the road means usnot feeling safe to cycle on our road. There are already so many near misses and driversprioritising their need to get somewhere quickly over the safety of cyclists.-Parking already at capacity. The application does not have enough parking to accommodate thenumber of residents currently.

*Access

-The current Access road is far too small for the size of the development. It will be dangerous tohave that amount of traffic coming out on to a national cycle network. It's only a matter of timebefore an accident happens.

-The emergency access road does not have permission for the development to use.

-Pertherbridge way is the only suitable alternative to many of my objections. It may be expensivebut it already has planning permission and the developer will be gaining considerable profit fromthe site. The least they can do is to spend some of that on making the site access work for themajority.

*Building works

-I'm concerned that access to the site will be through Downend Road. Way too small forconstruction traffic. When the railway had works down a few years ago. We regularly had workstraffic getting stuck on Downend Road. Sometimes for hours with no access through. I'm alsoconcerned this will lead to damage to vehicles and property.

*Sevicies

-Our doctors surgery is so busy that I can barley get an appointment as it is. Sometimes takingweeks before I can arrange an appointment. Sometimes having to spend an hour or so on hold toget through to arrange an appointment. I don't feel like we have space for any more residents inthe area until the local doctors surgeries have their capacity increased.

I use this route when heading out of and back into the city on bike rides and it is alreadya dangerous enough route, if more vehicles are forced to park on the street it will only exasperatethe issue further, I don't believe that there is enough parking being proposed for the amount ofhouseholds proposed in the plan.

t:Main Access point is too narrow for the size of the new development and will be adanger to vehicles and speeding cyclists.Emergency access is very narrow and recently fire engines have been unable to use it.Adding over 200 vehicles will cause more traffic problems on both Dovercourt and DownendRoads.Insufficient parking spaces will add to the current ongoing parking problems.The 16m height of new buildings will tower over the existing 8m houses (which isn't shown on themisleading drawings shown on the BCC plans).An Environmental Impact Assessment has been deviously been avoided by the unscrupulousdevelopers.

With a large number of properties on Dovercourt and downed without parking, this buildwill have a huge impact on the parking situation on the street + traffic flow will become hectic likeall other streets in Bristol.

There is already too much traffic along Dovercourt Road and there simply isn't enoughspace for additional cars (to park or to use the road as a thoroughfare).

At double the height of existing houses on Dovercourt Road, the proposed height of houses in thenew development is much too high.

The council doesn't appear to have the legal right to access the lane behind 82-130 DovercourtRoad.

As a member of the Lockleaze Resident's Planning group I have followed thisdevelopment since initial consultations with residents and I am appalled at how residents viewsand voices have come to be sidelined. Despite being told at the beginning that this would be a"resident-led" process, this has clearly not been the case and residents' very real concerns oversafety, access and traffic have been brushed aside. This is creating huge mistrust of the Counciland cynicism about the planning process in general. Lockleaze residents in general are notagainst the building of new homes. Many of us understand the pressing need for them. But housesalone don't make a thriving community and it is vitally important that housing is supported by theappropriate infrastructure, community facilities and resident engagement.As for this specific planning application, in my view the proposed main access road (the currentdepot lane) is too narrow and unsuitable for the size of the proposed development. It is already anarea of bottlenecks at peak times and this will only get considerably worse with an additional 170-odd vehicles using it.There is already poor visibility for vehicles pulling in andout of current access points onto the proposed main accessroad. This is dangerous as this main access road will also be thesole pedestrian and cyclist access.There will also be a negative impact on overall traffic flows. Dovercourt Road is already busy withhundreds of cars and bikes (due to being part of Concorde Way) going up and down it every day.Other new local developments have been given planning permission but are not yet built, whichwill also increase traffic issues as will changes to traffic flow being made on Muller Road.Lockleaze is known to have a speeding and traffic problem, as highlighted by the ongoing ACORNLockleaze campaign for a #SpeedFreeLockleaze, and I am concerned that there is no one in theCouncil with an overall big picture view and plan for managing traffic flows across the ward.

Downend Road is a bottleneck. Adding over 200 vehicles to this will have a severe impact ontraffic and safety.I am also horrified that the Council has declined to do an Environmental Impact Assessment onthis development. We are in an age of rampant climate change and BCC has declared a climateemergency. It is thus unacceptable to give environmental concerns so little consideration.

I object to the current plans regarding access to the site - the main access point inparticular is problematic. There is already a lot of traffic on Downend Rd, and in particular the bendwhere Dovercourt becomes Downend Rd is problematic - visibility for turning vehicles is poor, andthere are often traffic bottlenecks at this point. The main access to the site is located very near tothis bend and will further impact on already heavy traffic here. Visibility is of particular concern asthis area is a well-used thoroughfare for cyclists using Concorde Way to commute. Additionally,visibility coming out of the depot site is not great due to parked traffic and will be of concern tocyclists and other road users. This is not in keeping with Bristol's sustainable city strategy.

I note also that the parking allocation for the site is not enough - this will lead to additional parkingrequirements for Dovercourt Rd, which is already heavily used. We are concerned that parking willbecome increasingly problematic due to the proposed development as it currently stands.

I also believe that the buildings should be in keeping with the local area - the proposed 4-storeyapartments, at 16m high, are double the existing house sizes and will have a negative visualimpact on the area.

Please note that I do not object to the development of the site for housing - however, I do believethat the main site access must be reconsidered and an alternative option (such as the use ofPetherbridge Way) that ensures the development is safer for, and more considerate of, existingresidents and road users (particularly cyclists) should be adopted.

I would also be interested in a development plan that aligns more with the city's local plan (CoreStrategy adopted June 2011). This sets out the provision of more houses, but also emphasises:

"Mixed, balanced and sustainable communities - throughout the city, where places are shared andcommunities mixed, that are good places for communities to live in and are socially cohesive, andwhere there is easy access including by walking and cycling to local community..." [The accessissues will reduce the safety for cyclists and pedestrians due to increased traffic and reduced airquality.]

"High quality built environment - highly attractive and safe places, with a high quality well designedbuilt environment." [The current apartment heights will negatively impact on the "attractiveness" ofthe area.]

"Better health and wellbeing - a pattern of development and urban design that ... provides goodplaces and communities to live in. Bristol will have open space and green infrastructure, highquality healthcare, leisure, sport, culture and tourism facilities which are accessible by walking,cycling and public transport." [As above with respect to cycling safety / increased congestion.]

This project is a housing estate within a housing estate, seems this application hasbeen drawn up with no thought of the people who live in the area, parking is already congested &Dovercourt rd is a rat run between muller rd & Lockleaze rd.Regarding the main entrance, this is really too small to use for this poor object, there is a betteralternative but the council won't consider due to costs & this project seems to be based on keepcosts down to maximise profits!Regarding the proposed emergency access, this lane backs onto my property, I object to this100%, why does the council think they can access this lane into the site, there is no gate in thefence now & It should remain that way. I've lived on Dovercourt rd rd for over 20 years & thecouncil has never accessed or maintained this lane, only the residents of this lane have access &nobody else. At the moment this lane is secured by a boundary fence, stoping access into theproposed site & should remain a boundary fence with no gates put in.Any more information required please contact me.Lee

I object to this development for several reasons.1. The traffic along dovercourt road is terrible at the best of times. I live in the s bend that joinsdovercourt and Downend Road and there are always accidents with bikes and traffic gettingbacked up as it is only wide enough for one car as cars are parked both sides. Even the busroutes no longer run a longer here due to this end of the road.Access via Petherbridge way is a much more sensible option, and planning/investigative work fora road was put in a decade ago, but you refuse to go that way because it might cost more money.This doesn't have the safety of the public, residents, traffic and pedestrians in mind, just thepockets of the council2.access to the site. The road is not wide enough to accommodate two way traffic to get into thedevelopment via the depot access road. This will therefore back traffic up along dovercourt road.You say that you can get around this by reducing the size of the pavements. Can you even dothis?3. The emergency access - you plan toPut this off a private lane that runs between houses. The gates will find a way to be opened andresidents will use it as an actual access point. This is not acceptable. You are forcing this throughand this is one of the main concerns listed by the residents. I use that access road four times aday as park in the garage at the back of my property. I bought this house because of the privateaccess and now it is going to be used. The council won't tarmac it because it is considered aprivate lane (this has just been done on the pavements in the area) but you are willing to use it atyour own free will.4. House height and pitch. The houses planned along the boundary of the development, andtherefore the ones that will back the private lane and my property, are taller than the houses in thearea by 2m, this will impact light in the area. Why do they need to be 2m higher? The pitches are

so steep, why? Also, the pitches are individual, why can they also not be terraced and follow theline of the houses on Dovercourt Road and will be more in keeping with the area.5.lack of environmental study. The development is being built to the absolute capacity (140homes) and anything beyond this will require a full environmental study. Another cost cuttingexercise and allowing you to push through the agenda of the estate.6. Parking - parking is already at capacity along Dovercourt Road from houses that do not haveaccess to off street parking. This gets worse when there are football or cricket matches. Thedevelopment will offer the very minimum parking that it has to. However a three/four bed house ishighly likely to need more than one parking space and therefore will push parking back out ontoDovercourt Road.7. There is a lot of building going on in the Lockleaze ward and the traffic issue will not be limitedto just the dovercourt depot site. Traffic will be increased due to the development on bonningtonwalk and off Lockleaze road. All resulting in additional traffic.8. Being overlooked and the removal of trees.I currently have a house where no one overlooks my garden. The privacy was the reason Ipurchased it, now I'm going to have a row of houses looking directly into my bathroom andbedroom windows.

The proposed development will increase traffic along Dovercourt Road, which has analready hazardous bottle neck as it approaches Muller Road where traffic can only flow onedirection at a time. Dovercourt Road is also a significant busy cycle route.

With many households having more than one vehicle the development will increase demand for onstreet parking on Dovercourt Road. This will impact local residents who do not have access to offstreet parking.

I object wholeheartedly to this proposal

The environmental impact has not been adequately consideredThe height of the proposed homes will be an eyesore and has enough not been run past theresidentsThere will be far too many cars in a congested area. This seems to be ironic since Bristol is aimingto be green. It seems indicative of profits over peopleIssues of traffic and safety for there are many young families and vulnerable people in the areaThere will be increased danger to cyclists and continued

All in all resident are being ignored. We don't want this. Shameful.

I have concerns with the proposed access to the site which is far too narrow for thismany new properties and residents to use safely. The turing is far too close to the bend at the endof the road and will not be safe either for people pulling out of and for road users coming aroundthe blind bend.

I also have a concern over the number of parking spaces added to the site. Many houses havetwo cars and you have only proposed a small number of parking spaces over one car perhousehold. This won't take into account visitors, nor multi car households which In turn with willadd a greater demand on the few parking spaces available on the surrounding streets. It is alreadydifficult to park near our home (especially on match day with Rovers Stadium right around thecorner). The added parking, coupled with the parking which is being lost through other schemes,like the new bus lane on muller road, will leave current residents without parking.

I'm also aware there are plans to build flats twice the height of the current houses on Dovercourtroad. We enjoy our neighbourhood and feel this will be an eyesore. If the site proposed lesshousing built, less strain on our already busy roads then this would be a welcomed addition to thecommunity. As it is now, it seems crowbarring in as many houses that will fit and leaving residentsto suffer is the chief goal and this isn't acceptable.

My concerns with this development proposal:1. Limited access to the proposed site resulting in significant increase in traffic along DownendRoad and congestion at the crossroad with Muller road which is already overly congested.2. Inadequate emergency access provision via private road without permission from relevantresidents- previously fire engines have declined to use Dovercourt road which is already toonarrow

3. No survey to assess environmental impact locally.4. Insufficient provision for parking- this will spillover to surrounding streets that are already difficultto find adequate parking on.5. No clear plan for supporting local infrastructure - eg. schools, health services with increasedpopulation.

My concerns with this development proposal:1. Limited access to the proposed site resulting in significant increase in traffic along DownendRoad and congestion at the crossroad with Muller road which is already overly congested.2. Inadequate emergency access provision via private road without permission from relevantresidents- previously fire engines have declined to use Dovercourt road which is already toonarrow

3. No survey to assess environmental impact locally.4. Insufficient provision for parking- this will spillover to surrounding streets that are already difficultto find adequate parking on.5. No clear plan for supporting local infrastructure - eg. schools, health services with increasedpopulation.6. Tall buildings overlooking and disrupting natural light and the privacy of nearby properties.Downend Park has been missed off the initial neighbour notification list despite the fact we will stillbe directly impacted by this.

Against the amount of housing being built and more cars on dovercourt road and thebottleneck of downend road. Also increase in cars and the low amount of parking spaces willmean more cars parking on dovercourt road which we have an issue with.If the depot entrance was only used for cycle and emergency access and vehicle access was builtfrom petherbridge with bus stops outside home bargains that would be preferable to support thenew build and the existing residents.

1. Main Site Access: As I am sure many others have stated I have significant concernsrelating to the suitability of the single access point to the proposed site. Put quite simply it is notbig enough. I can see form the Transport Assessment that the results state that at worst there willbe 60 cars per hour. However, looking through Appendix K and the background to the calculationthere is a clear warning that "For two-way major roads, please interpret results with caution if thetotal major carriageway width is less than 6m" As this applies to Dovercourt Road South (width4.38m) please could it be clarified what caution has been taken in interpretation of these results?As an engineer myself, such a warning I would interpret as "the software can't estimate this socongestion levels may be significantly higher than those predicted." I would be interested to hearyour operates interpretation.In truth the access to the site is of secondary concern for me the real issue I think will be theincreased traffic Dovercourt Rd south up Downend road. This is currently (due to cars parkedeither side) single width. This works (just) because the volume of traffic is such that people aremature enough to give way and let each other through. It would not take very much more traffic forthis road to become unmanageable at peak times. I appreciate that junctions have been looked atbut please could evidence that this has been considered be provided?

2. Emergency Access. I have read your correspondence (Annex H of the transport Assessment)and numerous times it is mentioned by Ms Highman (email 14th July 21 @1029) that both thenorthern and southern lanes are private. If they are private, I don't see how the council candesignate them as emergency access - as I presume that the owners are under no obligation toensure the lane is clear for emergency vehicles. Such an arrangement (despite the admittedlyinfrequent need for access) should, I presume, mean that it is unsuitable for use as emergencyaccess.

3. Parking: I suggest that the 170 spaces proposed is inadequate based on the following:Your very own transport assessment Dovercourt Depot Transport Assessment (bristol.gov.uk)derives the 1.2 cars per dwelling figure and then states "It is acknowledged that this is based onlocal data collected over 10 years ago, and it is likely that car ownership per household may haveincreased over the intervening years. However, this is unlikely to have grown significantly, and theoutline parking strategy remains within BCC maximum standards."I would suggest that it is at best naive and at worst dishonest to state that car ownership is "likely"to have increased, it is a FACT that car ownership has increased. One only has to spend 2minutes on Google (Number of Cars in the UK 2022 | NimbleFins) to see that the number of carson the road has increased in GB from 28.2M in 2009 to 31.8M in 2019 this represents a 13%increase from the data you are using. This would correspond to a requirement of circa 1.4 carparking spaces per dwelling or 196 spaces for the proposed 140 dwellings. This may seem likeonly an additional 26 spaces however;A) These are the numbers required now, excluding the temporary effects of the pandemic, carownership numbers have only been on the increase, and I would be interested to see anyevidence that this trend is likely to abate.B) If I am correct and you do underprovide the number of spaces in the order of 26 cars (at 3.5mper car plus 2m to allow parallel parking this is easily 100m required to accommodate them. Thiswould have severe consequences for the current occupants of Dovercourt Road a road thatalready has parking down both sides.C) The ratio of 1.2 may comply with BCC maximum standards, but wouldn't it be better to do theright thing rather than the minimum stipulated by legislation?

4. Regarding the Environmental Impact Assessment. I have read several times through yourdocumentation that we are currently in the grips of a "climate emergency" in that context I find itextraordinary that such a development would not be subject to an Environmental ImpactAssessment. I am not cynical by nature, but the number of dwellings being at the very limit ofwhere one would be required does seem coincidental.To whoever is reading this and making a judgment, I would ask you to consider:In context of the costs relating to this development an EIA is incidental (it won't even be a fractionof a % compared to building 140 homes). Best case, nothing is found, and all can continue asplanned. Worst Case, some elements are identified and these need to be addressed, in whichcase the EIA has done its job, you have done your job, but most importantly the environment forthose currently living here (and those who will live in the new houses) will have been improved.Don't bow a knee to the planners and builders, do the right thing and stipulate an EIA.

Many Thanks Phil Henderson CEng

I am a resident of Downend Park and frequently cycle along Dovercourt road with myyoung children. There are some instances of speeding and impatient drivers but the majority arecourteous. I am concerned at the increase in traffic along this road and the danger this will bring tocyclists and pedestrians.In addition to increased traffic I am also concerned about the access to the new development andthe restricted views to the main road. Again I feel this will endanger other road users.It would be good to see a proper cycle lane installed along Dovercourt Road linking up toConcorde Way. The pavements are wide and could be split to give cyclists greater safety. Or theroad could be made a cycle priority road.I am also concerned about the environmental impact of the development. Losing any green spaceat all needs to be looked into and ways to make it as sustainable as possible. The fact that housesare going to be 4 stories high is terrifying and these will dwarf the current houses will not fit into thecurrent community at all.

I do not oppose the building of much needed housing in the city.

I do oppose the way this development is being managed; the lack of planning in respect of theimpact on the community and road safety as well as the very poor access to the development, lackof parking and lack of consideration to the associated need for wider infrastructure development.

Access- the main access is to not fit to serve this development. The road is too small and hashomes where owners need to reverse cars onto the road to leave their properties. The road haspoor visibility. The risks are increased by the high number of cyclists on Dovercourt Rd, as well aschildren walking to the local primary school and adults with disabilities who are daily pedestrians,based at Silva care which is opposite the development.

The emergency access is on a private lane. Last year when a caravan on the Dovercourt roaddepot caught on fire I called the fire brigade who could not initially gain entry through the mainentrance. They would not consider going down the private lane. There was considerable delaygetting onto the site. There is no trust between the developers and those who hold the deeds tothis private lane and no agreed plan with those who own the lane for how the emergency accesswill work.

There are 170 parking spaces planned for 140 homes, which is insufficient especially given thelack of a bus route on the road.

No environmental impact assessment has been completed.

The Main Access to the proposed Dovercourt development is poor. It is too narrow andvisibility too poor for the volumes of cars/cyclists and pedestrians joining Dovercourt Rd.

The Emergency Access option is also very narrow. Neighbours have commented that it is also aprivate lane. Why should the council have access to this without compensating the neighbourswho are allowed to use and required to maintain it, according to the deed of their properties?

It is concerning to think of the extra cars using Dovercourt Rd and then Downend Rd in order toaccess Muller Rd. The bend in Downend Rd is already a challenge for many vehicles. There arealready safety issues and further cars, bikes, pedestrians from poorly thought through housingdevelopments will only serve to increase difficulties for all users.

It is very convenient that the council has carefully planned the number of houses to avoid anEnvironmental Impact Assessment. This seems very sneaky and not in the spirit of addressingconcerns of existing local residents.

The height of some of the houses proposed also seems out of character with the area and it ishard to see how they can be integrated in a way that will enhance the local area.

More housing is needed but it has to be delivered in a sustainable way. The access currentlyavailable to the site proposed is not adequate for the number of houses and volumes of additionalcars/bikes/people. Please think again about access

I am disgusted by the lack of planning and forward thknking in our area. There are 30developments happening and not one of them are working together for the greater good of thecommunity. Where is the infustructure around this development? The access road in and out ofthe preposed development is a lane not a road!!! This is an accident waiting to happen with carsalready accessing lane for driveways and their back lanes on each side of the road.Also the emergency access route has been denied by the recidence so who gives goram homepermission to over ride this? This is not good enough.I am aware that the housing crisis is of grand scale in bristol with people /families not being offeredadiquate housing, but these new developments should not be at the cost of former recidence.We gain nothing as exsisting recidence no park, no community space, nothing at all but morepeople and no infustructure around this to make it work. It should not be all about numbercrunching and making housing targets so Marvin Reece can finish what he set out to do. Are yougoing to pay us if this development devalues our homes?

I strongly oppose this application.1) air quality in this area is extremely poor already without extra housing and transport added2) living on Downend road for the last 5 years the road traffic has become unmanageable at rushhours. There have been plenty of verbal road rage incidents with only one way access. Morehousing will only make this situation worse3) lack of amenities and schools4) this area is already overpopulated, why cram so many more homes into this area instead ofproviding a better quality of life for people living in greener areas on the outskirts of bristol?5) parking is a nightmare, when I drive home late from the hospital when OnCall (I cannot walk toan emergency I have to drive), I have to park a very long distance from my home meaning extratime to get back to the hospital when called back in. Further housing and their cars will make thiseven worse.

Main Access point is too narrow for the size of the new development and will be adanger to vehicles and speeding cyclists.Emergency access is very narrow and recently fire engines have been unable to use it.Adding over 200 vehicles will cause more traffic problems on both Dovercourt and DownendRoads.Insufficient parking spaces will add to the current ongoing parking problems.The 16m height of new buildings will tower over the existing 8m houses (which isn't shown on themisleading drawings shown on the BCC plans).An Environmental Impact Assessment has been deviously been avoided by the unscrupulousdevelopers.

Concerned about the viability of the access road for emergency vehicles, concernedabout the number of houses put forward for development, concerned about the height ofdevelopment overlooking existing homes, concerned about the additional traffic, with reducedsightlines, exiting onto Dovercourt Road which is a main designated and well used cycle route.Concerned that the green space at the end of Dover court road by Aldi will be compromised or lostto buildings.

Concerned that though we need homes in the city there needs to be a balance between buildingand our city plans for maintaining greenspaces (climate strategy), cycle routes (connectivity) is thisdevelopment in its current plan going to build resilience into the area or overwhelm existingresilience factors.

Whilst I accept that more housing is needed, due to the proposed amount of dwellings,the extra traffic this will amount to and the lack of appropriate access, I do not believe this is theright area.The main access point is too narrow for the size of the new development and will be a danger tovehicles and speeding cyclists.Emergency access is very narrow and recently fire engines have been unable to use it.Adding over 200 vehicles (with only plans for 170 parking spaces) will cause more traffic problemson both Dovercourt and Downend Roads . The pollution levels in this area is already very high, asa parent if young children who walk to school I am very concerned about how this impacts theirhealth and saftely.Insufficient parking spaces will add to the current ongoing parking problems.The 16m height of new buildings will tower over the existing 8m houses (which isn't shown on themisleading drawings shown on the BCC plans).An Environmental Impact Assessment has been deviously been avoided by the developers.For such a large development to not include a play area is not acceptable and shows a lack ofconsideration for the needs of the community.

I am not objecting to the development of new homes, but I have concerns to the amountof homes being offered. I would be in support for lesser better quality homes.I have huge concerns for the effects of the current plans of the development.1. The traffic that will be added to an existing problem in the area mainly the Dovercourt /Downend Road turn. The traffic leading to and from Muller Road with Downend Road. I am insupport with the idea of another access point to reduce added traffic via Petherbridge Road.Having more vehicles to the local area will increase more risk to motorists, pedestrians and cyclist.Especially with in mind there are a lot of young people who live in the area, walking to school andcollege. The cycle path route cuts along Dovercourt Road so you can imagine the number ofcyclists who will be at risk. Mainly from vehicles using access road from Dovercourt Road to theproposed development.2. Will the local authorities be able to accommodate an increased number to the local schools andhealthcare which is already at capacity. Many people are worried that the standards will drop withthe added pressure to schooling and health care.3. Many residents have parking issues on normal days and near impossible on events like footballmatch days. Added parking from the new development might cause problems with illegal parking.Again reduction of proposed homes will reduce parking issues.4. Currently there is a variety of wildlife living in the proposed development. There are a number ofbirds nesting in the trees in the depot site. This will be a huge loss to the area. These various birdsbring character and beauty to the area. The impact of 140 homes will no doubt effect theenvironment. The noise and pollution will increase to an existing concern.5. I fully object to the idea of the new development homes are higher than existing homes onDovercourt. This is very disrespectful to homeowners Who will lose their privacy in their gardensmainly families with young children and also have clear sights to their garages.

6. The proposal to use access for emergency services via Dovercourt Lane is not suitable firstlybecause it is not carrying out the service it needs to in the shortest time possible. The lane is notsuitable for large fire engines to get down. A better solution might be Petherbridge Road.Everybody who lives on Dovercourt Road with access to their properties using the lane are allagainst the idea of allowing access. This is a private lane and the developers should not makeexisting residential home owners uncomfortable or force something that better suits them. All thehomeowners have a voice and right that cannot be taken away.If the developers can make tweaks to the plans, they might get more support from local residents.

The access road into the development is not good enough. We get our car out of theback lane and this would block the lane and slow down traffic.I don't mind all the houses but that road is not wide enough for all the traffic and people. Also youcan not get a fire engine down the emergency access lane as it too small.

This lane is not big enough for all the traffic. You should build it the other end fromMuller Rd.This road is already busy and dangerous which is why they had to stop the bus route so why areyou putting more cars onto it.I will not be able to use my back lane with out stopping the traffic if this is the main enterencewhich will be dangerous.

I do not oppose the building of more houses as there is a clear need although I amconcerned about the number of empty office blocks particularly in the city centre where morepeople now work from home. I would like to see some consideration give to re-purposing thesebuildings before more houses are built in already crowded residential areas of Bristol.

The main issues or concerns that I have in respect of this proposal are:

Main AccessThe proposed main access road to the new development has been deemed too narrow andunsuitable for the size of the proposed development. I live next to this access road and havewitnessed many vehicles turning out of this road with very limited visibility. There are a largenumber of cyclists (due to Concorde Way) that use this road along with the school children whowalk to the Filton Avenue Primary school and the increased traffic turning into an already busyroad will result in a hazard to all that use these roads or pavements.

Emergency AccessThe proposed emergency access road is very narrow and previously fire engines have declined touse it. The deeds belong to the residents stating they have sole access rights. This begs thequestion of how the private lane is being used for another purpose and there is not trust that thegate will remain locked nor how quickly this will be able to be unlocked in the case of anemergency.

Traffic SafetyThe Council's transport assessment says that there is likely to be some increase in traffic but will

have no negative impact. Having lived and witnessed the traffic issues on this road I stronglydisagree. There are already issues where there are a series of bends as the road approachesDownend Road and Muller Road. Parked cars mean this can only accommodate one way flow oftraffic at a time and increasing the number of vehicles to over 200 can only increase the risk to thissection of the road. The road is busy with a large number of users and the road is not suitable tobe the only access route for all the additional road users to Muller Road.

ParkingThere will be 170 parking spaces for 140 dwellings. This is not adequate especially given thatDovercourt road is not part of a bus route due to the unsuitability of the road for buses (series ofbends).

No Environmental Impact AssessmentThis is required if the number of new dwellings exceeds 140, as the intention is to build 140 itwould seem reasonable that there may be a significant impact on the environment and as it is onthe threshold this should be carried out.

Height of new housesThe height of nearly all current houses on the road is 8 metres. The new development intendsbuilding as high as 16 metres. The councils planning application states the height of the proposedbuildings but the drawings are misleading. 16 metres would be overly intrusive on neighbouringhouses and their privacy.

Parking is a concern that there will be no residents sceme to ensure that dovercourtroad will not get flooded with extra parking.

First of all I support the use of brownfield site to create much needed new housing in thearea. However it needs to be planned properly with adequate infrastructure and genuine impactassessments. The existing residents should be considered and the aim should be to improve thearea not damage it. So far it seems that any concerns raised by residents have been ignored.

My main concerns are:

The proposed entry/exit route is wholly insufficient for a development of this size. It is essentially awide lane suitable for accessing garages not a main route in and out of a busy housingdevelopment. It leads straight out on to a busy road/cycle path with a sharp bend where visibility ispoor at the best of times. Accidents occur even before the introduction of 140 new dwelling andpotentially 150+ vehicles. Safety of residents/road users should be paramount and as it stands theproposed layout will create a very dangerous traffic situation where more accidents will occur.

The number of dwellings is too many for the area, we do not have the infrastructure in place tocope with so many in one small area (and this is before we even consider the many otherdevelopments underway in the area). It will lead to traffic/parking problems, more stress on localamenities, not to mention the negative impact on the environment. A smaller more considereddevelopment could focus on providing genuine quality of life for both new and existing residentswhile considering our natural environment.Why is no environmental impact assessment taking place? This is shocking in the current climate.

The proposed height of the buildings is far too tall. They will tower over the existing houses withsome of the proposed dwellings twice the height. How can that be fair on the near neighbours who

will be so overlooked? Surely the design/size of the houses should compliment an area?

The proposed emergency access is a private lane. Do the council even have permission to use it?The surrounding neighbours do not want it to be an access point so surely this has to be taken intoaccount. Aside from that it is not fit for purpose as it's too narrow for an emergency vehicle.

Traffic speed and bottle necks on Downend Road already an issue.The proposed access is unsuitable and unsafe and will be a danger to local children, cyclists andpedestrians.Emergency access unsuitable as a private lane.Petherbridge Road should be used for access. With bus stops added outside Aldi andHomebargains.There should only be cycle access from Dovercourt Road to the new development as was done inLockleaze between Romney Avenue and Danny Street.

The traffic speed on Dovercourt Road and bottle necks on Downend Road are alreadyan issue.The proposed access is unsuitable and unsafe and will be a danger to local children, cyclists andpedestrians.Proposed emergency access is unsuitable as it is a private lane.Petherbridge Road should be used for access. Bus stops should be added outside Aldi andHomebargains.There should only be pedestrian and cycle access from Dovercourt Road to the new developmentas was done in Lockleaze between Romney Avenue and Danby Street.

Main Access point is too narrow for the size of the new development and will be adanger to vehicles and speeding cyclists.Emergency access is very narrow and recently fire engines have been unable to use it.Adding over 200 vehicles will cause more traffic problems on both Dovercourt and DownendRoads.Insufficient parking spaces will add to the current ongoing parking problems.The 16m height of new buildings will tower over the existing 8m houses (which isn't shown on themisleading drawings shown on the BCC plans).An Environmental Impact Assessment has been deviously been avoided by the unscrupulousdevelopers.

I am extremely concerned that no environmental impact assessment has been carriedout - this seems like a complete (and convenient) oversight on behalf of the developers. Surely inthe age of the climate crisis, an environmental impact assessment should be mandatory? And itwould be a way of working with the local residents who have real concerns about theenvironmental impacts that this development will have on their daily lives.

I live on Downend Road and regularly witness bottle necks, speeding, unsafe driving, cyclists onpavements in order to avoid traffic jams and road rage - and this is all with the volume of trafficthat we currently have. The location of the proposed entrance to this new development will makethis much worse and more dangerous. The increased amount of of traffic - up to 200 extra cars! -is a real safety concern as is the increased air and noise pollution.

The tight bends on Downend Road make it unsuitable as a main artery and needs traffic calmingmeasures now - to increase traffic here will be terrible for residents on this stretch of road, not tomention those who use it as a through road.

The changes to Muller Road parking will put a strain on these small roads in terms of parkingspaces - it is already hard to find space a lot of the time. With this in mind, these much neededtraffic calming measures would be very difficult to implement.

I appreciate the need for more new housing in brownfield sites such as the depot, but it seems somuch more logical and sensible to have the main access point to the new development throughPetherbridge Way which is already a busy straight lined thoroughfare from Muller Road, and nextto existing infrastructure. Surely this should be considered as a serious option?

The proposed entrance - the depot lane - is too narrow for the proposed size of the developmentanyway. And I worry that the visibility at this junction is poor and dangerous, particularly topedestrians and cyclists.

In terms of the emergency access, I believe it is also too narrow not to mention the fact that it is aprivate lane to the residents whose houses back on to it.

The number of homes proposed is disproportionate to the space available as well as thesurrounding area and infrastructure. Downend Road & Dovercourt road are already rat-runs whichcan't cope with current traffic levels. Cars cannot fit down downend road due to only one vehiclebeing able to pass at a time. Arguments between drivers is a weekly occurrence. The roadscannot cope with the increased traffic these homes will bring. The access to the new homes is notadequate. Loss of the green space is appalling.There will not be enough parking for the cars that the residents will have.The area is already over populated with schools & Dr surgery's massively over subscribed. Nothought has gone into the planning of these homes as we were told in the consultation that no newschools/doctors/amenities are going to be provided. The area cannot cope as it is.No thought has gone into these plans and residents have been ignored at every step of theprocess.

Concerned regarding increase in traffic on Dovercourt Road, surrounding air quality andresultant health implications. More consideration should be given regarding access to thedevelopment and alternatives to access via Dovercourt rd should be considered. Also Concernedregarding destruction of wildlife habitat.

The reason why object against these plans, is for the following reason:

Main Access, have you had a look at the main access to the site on Dovercourt road, have youvisited the access, and seen the amount the vehicles, commercial vehicles passing etc?I can not see signal mention of this on the plans?Also, have you seen the poor Visibility for vehicles pulling in and out of these access points for themain access? This is so dangerous, for pedestrians and cyclists.I own 128 Dovercourt Road

I also object to the emergency access which has been proposed between 98- 100 Dovercourt rd.Have you driven a commercial vehicle down this lane? Let alone an emergency vehicle.I have not seen permission being asked, As I have not seen a single letter that has been to theresidents of 82 - 130 Dovercourt Road. This is a private Lane and on the deeds, it belongs to us..Also, You proposed a plan to have a gate, who is going to manage this and lock it?

Also, Parking, you are proposing 170 parking spaces, for 140 dwellings, average household. let'ssay will have 2-3 cars per household, that is a fact.So I calculate that you will require around 280-320 spaces. So if there is no space, I will guessthey will be parking on Dovercourt road or Downend road. Making it impossible for us, as residentsto park. Can you explain this?On match day ( Bristol Rover playing Home) There is no parking space for anyone ( Residence),how does this work. Have you sent anyone from the council to see this on Matchday on aSaturday?And the height of the build for these blocks 16m high, so now these properties will be overlooking

our space and invading privacy. 16 meters, high,..

Let alone the noise, this will make, busy roads, cut through, speeding etc.

My main objection to this development is to do with the traffic that it will bring to thearea. Whatever the encouragement of rail use and cycling that is made for the new occupants ofthe area there will undoubtedly be a significant increase of traffic in both directions alongDovercourt Road; towards Lockleaze Road and Downend Road. Dovercourt Road is a busy roadfor cyclists and the additional load around the access to this site will raise the risks for this set ofvulnerable road users, among them children cycling to and from school. The increase in cars,particularly down the narrow and snaking stretch towards Muller Road has been experiencedbefore during a diversion of traffic from Shaldon Road when the street on which I live became a ratrun and from our windows we witnessed daily stand offs between drivers desiring to travel inconflicting directions down a street only capable of allowing travel in one direction at a time. Thiswill become our daily reality if this plan goes ahead. I fear that the resolving measure will be topaint double yellow lines, prevent residents parking outside their houses, further increase thenumber of front gardens turned into driveway parking (has that been considered in anenvironmental report? No, because there is not one done) and make our currently tolerably busystreet a race track. Alternatively, something may be done to close off Downend Road to throughtraffic, or entirely which would further increase the traffic up Lockleaze Road, Elmore Road/BerryLane etc. The real solution is to provide primary access to the site from Petherbridge way, andwhile it is argued that this would be expensive and complicated I see nothing to convince me thatthis is not a matter of maximising profit from the development at the expense of the currentresidents, few of which object to the housing itself, just to the impact it will have on traffic, pollutionand safety in the area. My understanding of the secondary emergency access is that it isessentially a paper exercise to fulfil an obligation rather than a truly serviceable access. The twoproposed accesses are also within a hundred yards of one another and from the same street. Itseems to me that most of the objections to this development could be addressed by proving

primary access via Petherbridge Way and secondary emergency access via the currentlyproposed primary access.

I don't necessarily object to the building of the houses but my main concern is theaccess. My house is directly opposite the existing access road and the access road is nowherenear wide enough to be the main access point for 140 homes. Dovercourt Road is already a busyroad and is used by several bikes due to the links with the cycle route. I think it is really dangerousto ha e so many cars using the access road whilst there are so many cars and particularly bikesalready using the road.

The traffic that it will bring to the area will make things much worse for us. Road rageand bottlenecks are already a fixture on Downend Road where cars have to wait for one anotherto pass.

Poor visibility for vehicles pulling in and out of the proposed access road will make conditionsmore treacherous for pedestrians (including children on their way to school) and cyclists onDovercourt Road (part of the busy Concorde Way route). They will not get the consideration theydeserve at the access to the site, narrow and restricted as it is.

170 parking spaces for 140 dwellings is unrealistic and is going put severe pressure on parkingprovision for existing residents. Parking restrictions would not be the answer as it is likely to leadto front gardens being converted into parking spaces which obviously is not ideal for theenvironment or community.

Petherbridge way is where the access should be. It is inexplicable (except for putting profit beforepeople) that the aim is to put two accesses from the same street, both of which are too narrow fortheir intended traffic load. The reps at the last consultation meeting mentioned that there is aproblem with pollution on Muller Road but the solution isn't to pollute Dovercourt Road andDownend Road instead.

We're already going to see a great deal more traffic from the development on Bonnington Walkand the housing being built on Constable Road. Has that traffic been taken into account in theassessment for this development?

Dear decision maker, I am the owner and occupier of Downend Park Farm, the closestListed property to the proposed new development. Whilst I have my own concerns regarding thedirect visual impact to my property, the biggest and by far the important objection to make relatesto the proposed size of the site and the proposed access and the safety concerns this raisessurrounding increased number of vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists.

Parking and moving vehicles passing through:Residents of both Downend Road and Dovercourt Road rely on the current road parking available,there are many trades vehicles parked along these streets, parking that is vital to the localresidence's livelihoods. It perhaps could be anticipated that there be a very similar scenario withinthe new planned development, in which case the proposed parking spaces could be argued asinadequate. Albeit essential, the parking on Downend Road means it is essentially narrowed to asingle lane and should be considered as such, and with the high volumes of traffic coming throughfrom Muller Road this leads to a continuous backlog with vehicles having to give way. It isinevitable that both the number of parked vehicles and vehicles using Downend Road andDovercourt Road as through-roads will only increase as a result of the proposed development;predicting further backlogs. Most concerning is that bigger backlogs will cause traffic to back upcloser towards the blind corner of Downend Road, (the first corner after turning off Muller Road),and beyond this, backing up at the traffic-light controlled crossroad. It seems that this crossroadisn't wide enough to have a designated Right-Turn filter lane to turn from Muller Road ontoDownend Road, meaning cars filter the best they can, getting dangerously close to on-comingtraffic in order to allow on-going traffic on Muller Road to continue pass. This is often incrediblytight and dangerous, and if traffic turning right here from Muller Road is to increase as a result of140 new homes a stones throw away, then the already frequent jams and chaos seen on Muller

Road with vehicles using single lanes as double lanes will only worsen and the risk of roadaccidents increased.

Pulling out from proposed access road:The proposed access directly off Dovercourt Road to the new development is a well-known blindspot with drivers having visibility issues when pulling out, worsened by the road parking. Thestretch of Dovercourt Road where proposed access will be is a long straight road without otherside roads. Vehicles are often speeding down here and may not anticipate vehicles turning on tothe road. If amendments aren't made to find a more appropriate access route, please considermitigating the dangers from the poor visibility of this junction.

Pedestrians safety:Should any of the above concerns escalate as anticipated, the biggest and most important threatis to the safety of pedestrians, particularly the vast number of children in the area due to thesurrounding schools. Should the proposed plans go ahead without amendments to reduce theproblems already being faced by local residence or anticipated escalation of these problems, atthe very least, please can we ask that further measures be taken to minimise the danger topedestrians. A zebra crossing on Dovercourt Road could go some way to slowing the speed ofpassing traffic and allowing pedestrians to cross visibly and safely during busy times rather thanhaving to weave through gridlocked traffic on the road.

As local residences we are the most familiar with the current road situation around our area andmust stress (as I have no doubts my neighbours are doing to), that these are genuine issues thatare already causing dangerous situations daily that we ask to be heard. And whilst there are lawsof the road in place, we must be realistic that neither the council nor those responsible for thedevelopment are able to rely on everyone passing through our neighbourhood to abide by these.As developers responsible for actioning further change to our area, we rely on them as much aswe rely on our council, and your duty of care on behalf of our community, to have the safety ofexisting and newly welcomed residence at the forefront of your decision making. I therefore haveto object as, without change, the current proposal falls short of this. Thank you for your time, Emily

We have reviewed the plans for this development. The development itself looks ok,however the issue of access and traffic has not been very well addressed.The proposed access route is dangerous and will create a lot of traffic on a road network thatcannot support it. The traffic will increase on the Downend Park and Muller Road junction, alreadydue to be impacted by the introduction of a bus lane.The new development will be dangerous for Concorde way as the access does not have goodvisibility and I have witnessed incidents with cyclists being hit on this stretch of Dovercourt Roadbefore.We are already expecting additional cars to try and park on Downend Road once the bus lane isintroduced and feel that this new development will also increase the strain on residents parking asnot enough spaces have been allocated on the development.Access to this development would be better linked to Petherbridge Way.

This development is being effectively shoehorned down a lane designed for access to garages.150+ cars potentially using this access at peak times, where previously it was a handful ofvehicles is dangerous.

I would like to see a proper traffic and impact study carried out.

I am supportive in general of developing/improving the area and the need to provideextra housing.

I am worried about the safety aspect of the plans - both for vulnerable road users on Dovercourtroad meeting a large number of vehicles at the access point, and the ability of emergency vehiclesto access the site.

I also feel the tallest buildings proposed are too large for the area.

I feel the council should carry out the Environment Impact Assessment for this project.

I hope the project will include plenty of thought to reduce car usage - e.g. bike storage, electricbike charging etc.

Hello,I'm commenting to list my objections to this proposal. I'm concerned that the access to thisproposed development does not take into account the fact that 2 properties already use the lane.I'm concerned that the space is too narrow to be a safe route for emergency vehicles and I'mreally windows about the increase in traffic and parking implications for the neighbourhood as awhole. Downend Road is already a bottleneck and adding a significant number of additionalvehicles will seriously impact on traffic, the climate abs safety. I'm concerned that there appears tohave been no environmental impact assessment and I'm really saddened that this developmenthas been planned in away which has been disrespectful to currently residents, many of whomhave lived in this area for years and contribute greatly to our community.

I wish to register an objection to this development. My primary objection is due to thedrastic increase to traffic in the area (one which already cannot deal with the current residentsparked cars and use as a rat-run).

As much as Bristol is moving to a cycle city - it is one where most households own two cars -andlive in street networks designed without motor vehicles in mind.

I would like to see proper development planned for the surrounding streets for this new housingdevelopment.

This proposal does not seem like a great idea given that the access to the site will all bevia a lane with poor visibility of Concorde Way, a busy cycling route. The pre-existing number ofcars and angles of the road layout mean that as potential residents would be pulling out ontoDovercourt Road they will struggle to see approaching cyclists on a fast and busy part of the route.

I recognise more housing is required but this is not a smart area to build it given the plannedaccess route for 170 cars. With the planned bus lane on Muller Road, parking in this area is goingto become even more congested leading to poorer visibility of cyclists and all other road users.Cars are already starting to be left at the very end of t-junctions in this area due to limited parking,this obviously limits the visibility of drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. Pushing ahead with this planwill only worsen the situation.

I would like to echo my neighbours objections to the proposal on the grounds that thiswould be yet more dangerous for cyclists around Concorde Way especially when combined withthe increased traffic brought about by the planned bus lane on Muller Road whereby parking willbecome yet more congested - we are already seeing dangerous parking at the end of t junctions.

I too am concerned that there has been no environmental assessment on this proposedbottleneck.

Further, there appears to be no consideration as to the impact this will have on local schools,healthcare facilities etc which are already stretched to capacity.

OBJECTIONS

Hello,I live at 135 Downend Road, BS7 9PYI have objections to the proposed development of Dovercourt Road Depot Development.

The height of new house.I object to the propose development that the height is higher than 8 metres.For any buildings higher than 8 metres, it will not fit in with the style of houses next to DovercourtRoad. It will likely obstruct the morning sun light onto the properties.

I do not support large building designed for several individual tenancies. I do not support them asflats. Houses are far better equipped to support couples and families in terms of space and theimpact on their emotional and mental health. You need to make these houses affordable forfamilies rather than making them flats at high cost for low spaces.

2) You have not done an environment impact assessment. Therefore you cannot make aninformed decision whether the proposal have an impact on the environment.

3) I object to the proposed access to the housing site. The original entry has poor light of sightonto Dovercourt Road. The cars are not able to turn without some difficulties into the road due thewidth of this road. Cars will park near the houses and thus reducing the line of sight. Noisepollution will worsen for those living next to the access road. The entry road is a bottle neck. Theroad is dangerous as this is the main access road will also be sole pedestrian and cycles access

too.

Increasing the number of residents there will worsen the queues at the Downend/Muller roadcrossroads. The road is already very narrow on Downend Road, allowing one car to pass. This willincrease driver's frustrations and risk to residents.It is far better and safer, to use the Petherbridge Way where the road is much wider, with widerline of sight, and the road system on Muller Road is already equipped to manage busy flows oftraffic.

I do not agree that the proposed fire access for emergency is suffice for size for fire engines. I amdubious who will lock the gates when it is not in used. It is my understanding that you want to usethe private lane behind the houses. Are you sure this belongs to the council? If not, then you willneed consent for all of the owners who have access rights to the private lane before you can doanything.

Not only are you disturbing wildlife and cutting down trees. It's probably going to look aneyesore. Going by all new buildings going and gone up. Petherbridge way, Dovercourt Road andDownend Road are awful for parking. Constant giving way on downend road as only suitable forone way driving. But as we all know the council will do what it wants. I have lived here for 45 yearsand traffic has got worse. Building all these new homes will make it hell.

1 Has any body carried out checks on the speed of traffic on Dovercourt Road2 We have lived here for 50 years, it's obvious to us that the site access road is not fit for the job3 Downend Road has always been a bottle neck4 The proposal for the emergency vehicle access is inadequate5 The site should be accessed from Petherbridge Road

Thank youSteve & Bridget Pascoe

While new housing is of course important, so is undertaking development that considerthe local area and its residents.

-The access in question is private, as per the home owners deeds. No proof of rights to use thelane has been provided.

- Having insufficient access to so many new houses will cause severe congestion and delays onan already busy road.

-170 parking spaces is not enough to avoid worsening parking issues in the area.

-Developers are not willing to undertake an environmental impact assessment. In the currentclimate, literally! How can developers be allowed to avoid measures put in place to protect thearea and its community.

-The access lane proposed, as well as being private, is far too narrow to represent a suitableemergence access option.

Despite claiming to be a community led project, the local residence have felt consistentlyoverlooked. It is only reasonable to expect new developments to be collaborative when they standto impact so heavily on a group of residents.

There are far too many properties popping up in horfield/lockleaze. Our doctors dentistetc are over whelmed and struggling with residents now. Our roads are busy without further trafficover loading our roadsThere are houses being built , lockleaze Road, Crome Road . Cycle track on lockleaze Road, havehouses in the process of being built now. How about tiding the place up before building more andmore houses. It's getting ridiculous.

For me there are 4 issues for the number of properties being built.

The access to the site is not a road, more of the width of a wide lane. There are also existingresidents who also have vehicular access and egress to their driveways off this entrance to thenew site.

The height of some of the properties planned will be double the height of the average houses ofthe existing residents - would anyone want that - I don't think they would. We do not to stop thedevelopment but 140 properties is far too many for the access in to a residential area alreadybusy.

The emergency access is using land that is owned by the existing residence. How can the councilthink this will work.

Downed Road can already be a of a bottle neck, especially if cars don't park properly and manylarge vehicles use it, although the road isn't suitable for them. As residents of Dovercourt Road wehave to be so careful as this is a busy cycle path. Lots of people use Dovercourt Road andDownend Road as a rat run to avoid Filton Avenue and Muller Road. Part of Muller Road is beingmade a bus lane heading towards the M32 and houses are being built in that location exiting on toMuller Road close to Lidle. It's all madness. The area is busy enough as it is and we have noticedthat people are parking in Dovercourt Road (which is a dead end) and walk to shop in Lidle, Aldietc., to avoid using Muller Road.

For all these reasons I think the number of properties being built should be reconsidered for all the

above.