Agenda item

19/05300/F - 51 to 53 Westbury Hill


Officers made the following points in presenting this application:


·         Details of the site location and of the proposed application were provided

·         Materials had been chosen to match the existing site

·         There were separate bin and bike stores with no parking provision on site

·         Twelve objections had been received, including from the Westbury-on-Trym Society relating to the lack of amenity for the proposed development and the loss of employment use and the shortage of flat provision in the area

·         The application is the commercial core of the conservation area

·         The City Design Group didn’t raise any concerns at the pre-application stage

·         The nearest property was at 49 Westbury Hill and was approximately 15 metres away from the application site. The proposed development was approximately 20 metres from other residential dwellings

·         Two to three storey buildings were predominant within this commercial core

·         The required space standards would be exceeded for both flats and it was considered acceptable

·         Transport Development Management indicated they would not recommend refusal on the grounds of lack of car parking. Following objections, the applicant had agreed to re-locate the bin and bike storage at the ground floor level

·         Sustainability – the development would have a 22.3% carbon saving


In response to members’ questions, officers made the following points:


·         The new development rights would not allow the ability to negotiate space standards, affordable housing or sustainability criteria. There were likely to be very limited circumstances in which these would apply and would require examination in more detail in future

·         The site in question was not in a residents’ parking zone

·         Prior approval had been granted for a three bedroom flat. With the proposed increase in the application to 6 flats, it was noted that this was likely to generate an extra two to three cars

·         Waste bins would be installed using a ramp system and could be conditioned

·         Councillors’ concerns were noted as to how recycling would operate. However, they were reminded that there were only three steps leading up to the recycling area. There was a ramp internally within the ground floor and facilities within the building in the corridor


Councillors made the following comments:


·         There was unlikely to be a significant impact on street parking in this area. The arrangements with the car park ramp and bin seemed acceptable. The scheme should be supported

·         The attempts to make the development blend in were impressive and the scheme should be supported

·         This development is in accordance with the council’s urban living policy. It addressed the issue of the shortage of flats. There were lots of parks nearby so the lack of amenities on the site should not be a difficulty. There was a need for a residents parking zone in this area. Any concerns over the situation with the bins was not enough to refuse it and therefore the application should be supported

·         The frustration from residents about parking was understood. A Residents Parking Zone was the solution to this problem.

·         Waste Management on the site was a cause for concern. A Waste Management Plan was required to show evidence of a workable solution

·         The rooms and flats were suitable. However, there were difficulties with parking and a lack of outside space. In addition, the situation with waste bins could cause problems for an elderly or disabled resident

·         Whilst the situation with the bins was not ideal, the scheme should be supported


Councillor Tom brook moved, seconded by Councillor Sultan Khan and upon being put to the vote it was


RESOLVED (7 for, 1 against) – that the application be approved.



Supporting documents: