|Address||Garage 10 Lying To The South West Of Cossins Road Bristol BS6 7LY
|Proposal||Redevelopment of existing garages to provide 6 dwellings with associated parking and landscaping.|
|Neighbour Consultation Expiry||03-11-23|
|Standard Consultation Expiry||24-07-23|
|BCC Planning Portal||on Planning Portal|
|Public Comments||Supporters: 4 Objectors: 38 Unstated: 9 Total: 51|
|No. of Page Views||0|
|Comment analysis||Date of Submission|
|Nearby Trees||Within 200m|
Recommendation submitted 20-11-23
Bristol Tree Forum Objection to Housing Development 23/00665/F
Our main concern with the design of this development is the future potential for conflict
between the new houses and existing trees on Redland Green.
The development as currently designed has the southern perimeter of the buildings directly
bordering onto the park in a way that would not be permitted were this adjoining private
property. We feel that a similar principle of design should apply to this development.
The developers recognize these issues, describing this as post-development pressure:
“Large tree canopies close to buildings can also cause ‘post-development pressure’ by
way of requests for tree removal or pruning as a result of resident anxiety.”
And describe future constraints:
“constraints may be where low branches conflict with new elevations either at the time
of building or in the future. Future growth of young trees should be accommodated in
building design. Other constraints include shade, leaf litter and damage from falling
Such future constraints must be managed by the developers and should not be enforced now
or in the future on the wildlife and ecological priorities of Redland Green, a recognised and
protected Valuable Urban Landscape in the Local Plan Site Allocations.
We would suggest a range of measures to ensure that Redland Green can continue to provide
the amenity and ecoservices so vital for local residents and the wider city.
1. The ground floor of the building should be stepped back such that it does not abut
directly onto the park. This would also improve the privacy of the residents as
currently the bedroom windows border directly onto the margin of the park.
2. A group tree preservation order is placed on all trees to the southeast of the
development to ensure that the recognized threat to these trees does not result in any
removals or pruning without the explicit permission of the council in consultation with
the local Parks Group.
3. A “covenant” should be undertaken by owners of the properties that they will not
request removal or pruning of any trees in the park other than what is essential for
safety and prevention of damage to the property.
4. That the requirements of DM17 for tree replacement for trees lost on site should be
made available to extend the wooded area a few metres southeastward (as far as the
line of newly planted trees) to compensate for any unavoidable constraints on trees
directly adjoining the development.
There is some confusion in the arboricultural report as to whether it is T2 or T3 that is to be
removed; the narrative says T3 but the diagram shows T2. On the assumption that T2 is to be
removed, we request that T3 is covered by a tree preservation order to protect from
subsequent removal post-development.
We would also recommend that the Norway maple (T5) only has a crown reduction of the
branch facing north west, with crown balancing as required, as other branches pose no danger
to the properties.