I would like to object to this planning application for a number of reasons.1. Current parking in the area is already NOT sufficient. Orchard House doesn't have enoughspaces for the current residents as it is. There is already a significant parking problem in this areaand due to the double yellow lines in Hungerford Road many cars park on the kerb, making itdangerous for pedestrians and other road users.2. Children walking to the local school will face danger and daily hazards walking around theconstruction site and vehicles. The road is already congested most of the day and will restrictaccess to the park & ride.3. The proposed developer (Litt brothers) already have a court order to make Orchard House safeas it has a B2 rating and the cladding is a fire hazard. They have ignored this order, severed allcorrespondence with the Orchard House residents and the Management company. They shouldbe made an example of and be forced to carry out their obligations and make the building safebefore any further planning permission is given.4. The Litts and their associated companies have been applying to Bristol CC for newdevelopments at Orchard House since 2021. If they can afford to build new developments thenthey can afford to carry out the necessary work needed to make Orchard House safe. Avon Fire,Homes England, Sky news, local MP and numerous others have all failed to get a response fromthem. You have a responsibility to ensure safety before agreeing to further developments.5. The trees between the parking lot and Orchard House would definitely be damaged by anyworks carried out.6. The proposed development overlooks some of the windows in Orchard House. Residents wouldhave their privacy invaded and the noise would make it nearly impossible to work from home.Bristol CC is already aware of the developers unscrupulous behavior, they have been involved inmany previous planning controversies.

Please make the right decision. This application should be declined, like the others they havesubmitted. The developer needs to be held to account. Please make an example of them.

I live in Orchard House and strongly object to this application. There can be nojustification for approving an application to build onto a property that has documented claddingissues. This increases the risk to the already high risk building, especially when the peopleapplying for this particular planning are the freeholders of the building at risk (Orchard House).These freeholders refuse to address the problems at Orchard House (ignoring a Remediationorder and legal documentation) and yet want to continue building on this land. I also object due theeffect it will have on the parking situation ie, parking will not be sufficient. This will likely lead tocars being parked on the road, increasing risk to pedestrians. I must also raise that the overallsafety of all occupants (of Orchard House and the proposed building) will be highly at risk. Whilstthe safety of residents of Orchard House are being ignored, the idea of an additional apartmentbuilding being built on the same site by the same freeholders is truly heartbreaking. Residents ofOrchard House are battling with the demons of being held hostage in dwellings that we are unableto sell and in a building that has been deemed unsafe, with no light at the end of the tunnel due tothe Freeholders (the Litt brothers) ignoring us.

Issues with current Orchard house- not enough parking and issues of parking onhungerford road. This will only increase these issues.Anti social behaviour- reported several times of anti social behaviour in and around Orchard housefrom young people. This is ongoing and I believe more closed in areas will give more space forthis. Also ongoing theft of parcels etc in Orchard house and damage to property.Green areas around Orchard house not being maintained particularly tress running property andcars and neighbouring houses.The space is already very limited in the area and more houses squeezed into a tiny space justadds to the overall issues listed above but also gives less privacy to neighbours and doesn't give avery nice look to the overall neighbourhood.This is already a very busy road with lots of traffic issues and this will increase with moreproperties with limited parking. There is already issues when the school and college with a lot ofnear misses with cars and children and general chaos.The work will impose on Orchard house resident which seems unfair given the current conditionsimposed by the same freeholders, the Litt Brothers . It is absolute insanity that they have a courtorder to make Orchard house safe which has been ignored but they carry on trying to build morebuildings that are so close. I would be concerned for the safety of current and new residents as thesafety standard aren't up together. The chances of a fire in Orchard house are already high and itis extremely negligent to allow another build so close by, works in general will increase fire risk onan already unsafe building and it is unfair for someone who does not know the current issues tobuy here.

1. The rear windows of plots 3 & 4 would directly overlook the garden of 511 StockwoodRoad at a distance of as little as two metres depriving it of any privacy2. there appears to be only 6 parking spaces for the proposed 9 residential units and no provisionfor visitor parking which will encourage parking on the grass verges of both sides of StockwoodRoad which are designated visibility splays.3. Architect's drawing number 301 showing "proposed elevations 2 of 2" depicts "gates to 513 sideaccess". Those gates are for the side access to 511 Stockwood Road only and there is not any"side access" to 513 Stockwood Road.4. The proposed roof of Flat 9 is too high as it exceeds a line between the nearest high points ofthe roofs of 511 and 515 Stockwood Road.5. The "Public Comments" published on 19th, 22nd, 23rd and 29th August 2023 in relation toprevious proposals for this site are hereby repeated.

I would like to lodge my strong objection to the application of the demolition andconstruction of 9 dwellings.

There is currently inadequate parking as there is, and an extra 9 dwellings would only contribute tothis. Also, the traffic that builds up along Hungerford road and Bath road will only worsen if extradwellings are built.

We currently have problems with antisocial behaviour and thefts of parcels, which has beenaddressed to the management company many times.

The noise and disruption the demolition would cause night shift workers living in Orchard Houseand surrounding areas is unacceptable.

I am also under the impression that the company wanting to build these dwellings are the currentowners for Orchard House and they were ordered to fix the cladding on Orchard house in June2024. This has still not been done and it seems unreasonable that they are building other buildingswhilst we remain in an unsafe fire risk building, which has had a mental and physical impact onresidents at Orchard House.

I'm objecting to this application on several grounds.

1. Parking in this area is already oversaturated; there are already people parking cars in non-drawn out spaces in the car park e.g next to the end space in a row because the parking is notpoliced by any enforcement company or by the management and spaces while allocated, are notdesignated. There is not enough space to create an equitable resolution in my view.

2. The proposed development is on the side of our building where our windows are and my wifeworks from home and the noise would ruin her ability to conduct professional meetings.

3. The school has hundreds of kids that walk past daily and as there will be nowhere legitimate forbuilders to park I can see this being a hazard as kids may be forced to walk in the road which getsreally busy and often I see cars from my window going well over the limit.

4. This is unlikely to have any bearing on decisions, but I can't see how this developer is evenallowed to place any planning requests while the situation at Orchard House, right next door, isdue to their negligence and abandonment of us as leaseholders; they should be barred from theprofession in my view and planning office should hold them to account by not allowing them to ruinany more people's lives, like they have ours.

5. The lovely old trees between the parking lot at Orchard House have a preservation order inplace i believe and I expect these would be damaged by passing trucks/lorries/diggers etc.

6. If orchard house was to burn down, which given the fire safety rating is legitimate concern, this

would be a hazard for any building works or future neighbours.

7. The road is already incredibly congested in the morning and evenings; this can prevent the parkand ride busses to get out already.

I can think of many other reasons but mostly these align with point 4 above and may be beyondthe scope of consideration. However, I must ask for there to be some common sense andempathy used in decisions because this developer needs to be held to account and I implore youas a council based office to not allow such unscrupulous individuals to have a further footholdacross Bristol.

Thanks for reading.

I would like to object to this planning application for the following reasons:1) The parking spaces provided within the boundaries is not going to be enough for propertiesproposed. There is already a significant parking problem in this area due to stockwood road beingdouble yellows, resulting in the nearby hungerford road becoming dangerous for pedestriansbecause of the many cars parked and up on the kerb.I worry that the cars would then park in nearby orchard house which is a private carpark in whichleaseholders paid for the spaces2) I understand this will not be seen as part of the planning application, but the litt brothersinvolved in the proposed application own Orchard house on stockwood road, under the name'stockwood land 2 Ltd'.Orchard house has the worst possible fire risk rating due to cladding issues and although itstheirresponsibility to fix, the Litt brothers have ignored all communication and pleas from residents, themanagement company and local MP's. This has resulted in leaseholders being stuck in orchardhouse unable to sell their properties and move forward.The council are very aware of the problems with orchard house as well as the previous issuesassociated with the litt brothers and their building and fire safety issues.Until they are able to sort the fire safety issues with orchard house, the litt brothers should not beallowed to build anymore residential properties that potentially put people at risk. It is unfair anddangerous. The council have the chance to ensure the publics safety!

Freeholders are unwilling to address ongoing issues with other buildings they own

Good Morning ,Is this a for real ?

We live in the building adjacent and we are stuck since 2018 with cladding issues scandal with noresult and been ignored by freeholders as you might already know.

All the residents at Orchard House are frustrated enough of this situation,our life has been put onhold , we can't even remortgage or pay off the help to buy and there is plan for building more nextto us?

We already experience crimes ,vandalism , car park occupied by unauthorised cars at all the timeand bikes stolen few times .

Also , people that bought flat on top floor have paid extra money for the top floor benefit , view carpark etc .

This is a very serious situation and the permission of building more should not be considered at all.

Many Thanks

I would like to lodge my strong objection to the above mentioned planning application. Iam a leaseholder and resident at Orchard House.

Stockwood Land Limited, Director - Ranbir Litt has submitted a planning application to build furtherflats on to the existing Orchard House building. The freeholder of Orchard House isSTOCKWOOD LAND 2 Limited, Director - Armajit Litt. Ranbir was a Director at STOCKWOODLAND 2 Limited until July 2023.

In May 2021 leaseholders paid for a preliminary review of all documentation for sign off under theEWS1 form. Signing of the EWS1 in relation to the building could not be carried out under OptionA due to the combustible and unknown materials identified. The report determined that a physicalinspection would be required. In April 2023 leaseholders paid for an intrusive EWS1 Option Bsurvey to take place. The result of the assessment was a B2 rating which means there isn't anadequate standard of fire safety and remedial work/interim measures are required.

Since May 2023 leaseholders have known that the building is unsafe and requires work toremediate the dangerous materials but to date no work has taken place.

In December 2023, myself and another leaseholder, secured one of the first First Tier PropertyTribunal (FTT) Remediation Orders (CH1/00HB/2023/0007). This judgment ordered our freeholderto complete the required works by 12th June 2024. No action has been taken by the freeholder todate. The freeholder did not take part in the FTT remediation hearings.

Since the survey in 2023 our freeholder has cut all communications with leaseholders and our

management company. Ground Rent has been collected and paid to the freeholder during thisperiod.

Our management company have confirmed that they are unable to apply to the Cladding safetyscheme as they are not the responsible entity for the building. They say that they have asked thefreeholder to provide authority and/or apply themselves however they have ignored theserequests. Leaseholders are also unable to apply for the Cladding scheme. Homes England havebeen trying to contact the Litts since August 2024 to arrange for them to complete and applicationbut have also been ignored.

The Litts, and their associated companies, have been applying to Bristol Council for planningpermission for new developments at Orchard House since 2021, when they initially knew of thedefects at Orchard House. The Freeholder and his family have shown a pattern of applying forpermission to build a care home, then switch to residential as a way of avoiding affordable housingtargets, as was the case at Orchard House.

I attended a BCC appeal hearing in person last year. Here I met with Horizon Homes, StokesMorgan and other associates of the Litts including a Barrister. All of which assured me they wouldshare the dire situation my neighbours and I are in with the Litts. We of course did not hearanything and instead have been insulted with yet another planning application by the samepeople.

The Litts have also been fined by Avon Fire for ignoring fire safety legislation at another buildingand they have been involved in a number of planning and development controversies over thepast 10 years. All of these are documented online.

Bristol Council, Avon Fire, Homes England, MP Kerry McCarthy , Sky News and The Bristol Cablehave all failed to get a response from the freeholder, along with the leaseholders and ourmanagement company.

The mental, physical and financial toll this situation has had on me over the years is almostindescribable. I brought the flat in 2018 in good faith and utilised the government help to buy loanto get my first step on the housing ladder. I have since been left in an impossible position where Icannot sell my flat, I cannot remortgage, I cannot pay off my help to buy loan, I cannot moveforward in my life and all whilst going to sleep at night knowing I am in an unsafe building.

Allowing the building of more flats on to a B2 rated building like Orchard House or near to it is ahuge risk to life and cannot be considered. Orchard House is unsafe, there is no argument to behad on this, and exposing the building to further fire risks through machinery and hazardousmaterials is unthinkable. I also wouldn't wish the situation orchard house residents are in onanyone.

I understand that I have shared more information than you require but I feel it is important thatyour department understands the severity of our situation and the impact your decision has on the54 leaseholders at Orchard House.

I object to this development as it states on the newPlan hes leaving the trees up behind the house backing on to mine which he do not maintain at alland is ruining my childrens trampoline and wooden play-set with the stuff coming off the trees andwe have nothing put problems all year round with bees nest etc stopping my children from playingout in my garden which would also cause problems with the new residents who would move in tothat property. There is also a big problem with the parking up on hungerford road which would getworse as one parking space each just on the houses would not be enough.

I object to this planning application due to the current building has cladding issues thathave not been fixed. Also the windows leak water every time we have a storm that have beenfixed.

There will be no privacy , there is no enough spaces and we already experience crimearound the area.

This is not a land that houses can be built.

I bought my first home spending all the money and paid over £20 thousand extra for my flat to beon top floor for the tranquility and the green area view and now there is a plan to built to block this?Please reconsider this.Residents in the building 515/517 are already frustrated and in bad situations caused by claddingand feel stuck in there affecting people life no able to remortgage, sell or move .Don't need more disruptions

The existing conifer tree at the rear of the proposed unit 4 should not be removed as itis well established (over 30 years) and is a nesting site for a variety of birds.Stockwood Road is already a very busy road (not only at opening/closing time of Oasis Academyas suggested) and any increase of traffic entering or exiting the road will exacerbate that.In view of the vicinity of existing residential development working hours on the site should berestricted to 0800 to 1800 weekdays, 0800 to 1300 on Saturdays and none on Sundays.

1. The proposal is for a gross over-development of the site2. There would appear to be provision for only 9 parking spaces for the 9 plots and no provision forvisitor parking which would encourage parking on the grass verges on both sides of the roadwhich are visibility splays3. Plots 3,4&5 should be no more that two storey as they would otherwise be oppressive to 511 &509 Stockwood Road and 261 to 267 Hungerford Road4. It would appear that the NE elevation of plot 4would be only 2 metres from the boundary of 511Stockwood Road and the windows of that elevation would not only overlook the garden but alsooppose a bedroom window of 511 Stockwood Road5. The SE elevation of plot 5would directly overlook the garden of 511 Stockwood Road at littlemore than 2 metres thus depriving it of any privacy

I object to this as the plans are the same as his last ones 22/03642/F

As the building plans have not changed I object this due to the house being right at the bottom ofmy garden giving no privacy into my garden or the back of my house due to the rear will beoverlooking into mine.

The plans are the same as the original one thats he put in last time. The houses wouldbe built to close to houses already built and would cause them to have no privacy in there ownhomes from the plans he submitted you would be able to see straight in to the houses windowsbehind while in the second and third floor. Theres not enough space within that land to build 9houses. My children wouldnt be able to play in the garden without being seen closely. Having awindow at the top of the house would enable them to see clearly through the houses windowsbehind. When we had issues with the owner and stuff on his land hes been very rude andunhelpful. This is not a land that houses can be built on