TRESA objects to the L&G development on Temple Island

News & Events, Planning

TRESA, along with several other organisations, has objected to the proposed L&G development on Temple Island. The objection is reproduced in full below.

25/10013/P | Hybrid planning application for the phased development of Temple Island comprising the following: (i) Detailed approval for the first phase of development comprising a commercial office building (Office 1) (Use Class E(c)(i), E(c)(ii) and E(g)(i)) with flexible commercial space at ground floor level (and associated mezzanines) (Use Class E(a), E(b), E(d), E(g)(ii) and sui generis drinking establishments, drinking establishments with expanded food provision and laundrettes), public realm works, landscaping, access and associated infrastructure; (ii) Outline approval with all matters reserved for a series of development plots to include commercial offices (Office 2) (Use Class E(c)(i), E(c)(ii) and E(g)(i)), dwellings (Residential Blocks 1-4) (Use Class C3), hotel with conference/exhibition space (Use Class C1) and a flexible commercial building (Use Class E(a), E(b), E(c), E(d) and E(g), with flexible commercial space at ground floor level (and associated mezzanines) within buildings (Use Class E(a), E(b), E(c)(iii), E(d) and E(g)(ii) and sui generis uses drinking establishments, drinking establishments with expanded food provision and laundrettes), public realm works, landscaping, access and associated infrastructure. | Land Next To River Cattle Market Road Bristol BS1 6QW

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

TRESA strongly objects to this application.  In doing so, we acknowledge and support the objections of several important organisations including Historic England, Bristol Civic Society, The Conservation Advisory Panel, Windmill Hill & Malago Planning Group, Bristol Walking Alliance, Active Travel England, and NHS Bristol, North Somerset & South Gloucestershire Integrated Care Board.

DESIGN, HEIGHT AND MASSING

  • the design for such an important site needs to be exemplary, but the proposed design is value engineered architecture which is contrary to the requirements of the Urban Living supplementary planning document
  • the elevations appear generic and without character
  • the density and height, along with its monotonous architectural design, undermines the character and integrity of this part of the City
  • the proposed use of dark grey materials will exacerbate the adverse impacts

IMPACT ON HERITAGE ASSETS

  • the setting of Listed Buildings at Temple Meads will be compromised
  • this application will have a substantial harmful impact on the character and appearance of the nearby Silverthorne Lane Conservation Area
  • the proposal does not provide sufficient public benefits to outweigh the permanent harm caused, and does not meet the requirements of paragraphs 210, 212, 213, 214 and 219 of the NPPF and relevant Local Plan heritage policies

IMPACT ON VIEWS

  • the buildings would have a detrimental impact on the approach to the city and on a number of views towards, over and across the site
  • the most prominent view with a significant visual impact is looking north from the Bath/Wells Road junction. This is a primary visual entry point into the city, and the dominance of the tower-blocks would impinge on the city skyline
  • the proposed buildings would interrupt and obstruct views of the Totterdown escarpment, an important feature in the topography of the city

PLACE-MAKING AND THE WIDER COMMUNITY

  • the application appears to rely heavily on infrastructure to be delivered or partially funded by neighbouring projects and planning applications while offering no specific financial or physical contributions of its own, other than within the site itself
  • deficiencies highlighted in the Transport Assessment and the Design and Access Statement do not support assertions made that accessibility of the local area is ‘excellent’, and that the development is likely to be acceptable ‘without any additional physical transport infrastructure’. This is not a credible position and is out of step with the updated National Planning Policy Framework paragraphs 96 and 115 and the policy expectation to deliver safe, inclusive and accessible infrastructure to serve the development
  • Policies BCS11 and DM14 of the adopted Bristol Core Strategy set the expectation that development will make sufficient provision for the infrastructure made necessary by the development. Based on the latest data on primary care infrastructure capacity, there is not sufficient existing capacity locally to accommodate the population growth generated by the proposed development
  • Earlier public engagement referred to a building that would be accessible for community use. This appears to have been replaced with a ‘flexible space’ with no commitment for use by the community.

ACCESS TO AND FROM BATH ROAD

  • the footway along the east side of the A4 Bath Road is currently shared use between pedestrians, cyclists and e-scooters. It is sub-standard and unsafe, and the Temple Island development should be actively contributing to a solution for the section that runs along its site
  • the utility of the proposed access to the site from the Bath Road, using a staircase and a lift, is undermined by the inadequate footway onto which it will open
  • it is not clear how the stairs and lift access will be supervised and kept secure
  • there is insufficient information on the proposed lift and stepped access to Bath Road to be confident that the site will be accessible and inclusive