As part of PG Group’s efforts to get the Carriageworks development started they have submitted a new planning application.
Last year PG were focused on a S.73 minor alterations application to add seven additional units to the fourth and fifth floors of Block A and make other changes to the facade, stair wells etc. However, a recent case in the Court of Appeal (Finney v. Welsh Ministers, 2019) effectively closed the S.73 route for the additional units. Consequently PG will remove the extra flats from the S.73 application so that the rest of it can go through. And they have now put in a full planning application for the flats.
The application can be seen on the Council’s planning website. Neighbours will have received written notification and the public consultation period officially ends on 6 April.
The application seeks permission for 3 x 1 bed flats and 4 x 2 bed flats for market sale or rent. The design, footprint and floor area are the same as previously proposed in the S.73 application except that one two bed unit has been split into two one bed units. The fourth floor is set back 2.2m from the Ashley Rd frontage and the fifth floor is set back by 7.75m and clad in grey metal in order, say PG, to reduce their visibility and prominence from street level when compared to the lower floors which will be clad in brick.
Floors plans and elevations of the additional seven flats proposed for the fourth and fifth floors of Block A.
Top drawings show the elevations as proposed by S.73 application excluding additional flats (not yet granted planning permission). The lower drawings show the proposed additions to the fourth and fifth floors.
Update: Planning permission was granted on 20 April 2020
This latest planning application includes drawings from an application that is yet to be determined.
Drawings posing as ‘as existing’ drawings are from the recent section 73 application not from the planning application that actually has permission.
The section 73 application, which was not passed, introduced revised internal layout and introduced new external balconies both of which resulted in unacceptable loss of privacy to the neighbouring property 108 stokes croft. Loss of privacy that does not conform to current Bristol City Council planning guidelines.
To include these elevation drawings in this application is misleading and inaccurate and as such these drawings should be redrawn and replaced with elevations from the current approved scheme. The true nature of the changes proposed would then be clear.
NB. The additional flats as shown in this application are dependant on a revised layout of the existing block which is yet to be approved.
I have sent congratulating letter to Mr Peter Westbury for achieving additional 7 appartments through widening of Block A as we talked about in the meeting. I hope I have understood that it is possible and achievable if not please correct me. Mrs Danuta Kellett