This application is simply a resubmission of previous submission 11/04829 with the interior planned as 3 student flats rather than 4 two bedroom flats.

To all intents and purposes the external design and footprint of the building has not changed. The Society objected to the previous application on the following grounds:
•     building too large and high on the site
•    overbearing and overlooking the elderly care home (which sits at a much lower level directly alongside) and other neighbouring properties
•     design is extremely dull and boxy and has little in common with surrounding properties
•     over development of the site
•     no provision for vehicle parking on site which will result in significantly increased pressure on local streets
We would wish to raise the same objections to the current application. In addition to this we would question the floor area of the new student flats and how they relate to the Bristol City Council Core Strategy - Residential Space Standards. This raises a significant anomaly. If the flats are considered to be occupied by one person per bedroom then they comply handsomely with the space standards. However, the bedrooms are planned as doubles at 10.0 – 11.3m2. On the basis of double occupancy the flats are very significantly undersized. We have queried the matter with the planning department and it seems that at present there is no way of enforcing the occupancy of student rooms and that the BCC Space Standards do not relate to student developments. With the increasing overlap of the student and the private rental sectors, this is an anomaly which needs to be resolved without delay.


We would also express our concern that the Living/Dining/Kitchen of Flat 1 is unworkably small and should be re-planned to be suitable. Lastly, the Design and Access Statement bears little relationship to this current application. It still refers to ‘flats for young professionals’ and ‘mews character gables and pitched roofs to match other buildings in the locality’, which refers to the proposals from 2 schemes previous.

We recommend refusal.

NOTE: the articles shown above are merely the most recent 10 in our Planning section. There's lots more as you'll see by clicking through to the sub-sections Commentary, Architecture, Licensing and Policies.