The Civic Trust objects to this application for the following reasons:

The proposed ‘A ‘ board would cause an obstruction on the pavement for pedestrians in this location and in particular could be a hazard for people with disabilities.

The board would also be an unattractive distraction from the historic and architectural character of the street scene and the conservation area as a whole.

The Civic Trust objects to this application due to the lack of justification for the felling of these trees which should be provided in an arboriculture report.

TPO (Tree Preservation Order)

The Civic Trust objects to this application because an HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) in this location and in this type of house would seem to be out of keeping with the character of the area. The proposed accommodation is cramped and there is insufficient communal living space for the occupants. A more acceptable proposal would be for the property to be refurbished it as an attractive town house and this would be more in keeping with the character of the area.

The Civic Trust consider that the proposed conversion  be quite acceptable as single 2 bed apartment, but conversion to  as 2 x 1 bed apartments would result in poor space standards and living conditions for the occupants.

The Civic Trust has the following comments on this application:

The plans are incomplete and do not appear to cover the full specification of signs set out on pp 4-5 of the application form. Six signs are described in the application form but there are plans and drawings for only two.Aspects of the application are therefore unclear. The sign in front of the Consistory Court is badly positioned and ugly. It may be that some visitors are confused by the Cathedral’s closed-off entrances but they can easily find the main entrance so the signage seems unnecessary.

The Civic Trust objects to this application for the following reasons:

There is no other detached property along Upton Lane in the vicinity of the proposed plot that is so narrow. It is out of keeping. The proposed garage is well in front of the general building line and even of the garages in the rear of the adjacent property on Liverpool Road. The garage dominates and is an ugly feature on the front elevation of the proposed house and again out of keeping with the area.

The Chester Civic Trust objects to this application to remove this oak tree as there is insufficient supporting information provided by the applicant to justify the felling of a tree protected by a TPO (Tree Preservation Order). No decision should be made until there is a full account of the condition of the tree and whether it could be saved.

20/00602/FUL
HMO Bouverie Street

The Civic trust objects to this application for the following reasons:
The communal facilities and space could be insufficient for 8 people and their
probable visitors.
The outdoor space is insufficient for good quality living conditions.
Bedrooms 2 and 3 are too small as living space.
The rear dormer will overlook the neighbouring property resulting in loss of privacy.

HMO (House in multiple occupation)

Planning application 20/00771/FUL
Erection of one detached dwelling | Redcliffe 9 Lower Park Road Chester
Cheshire CH4 7BB
Civic Trust Comments:
The Chester Civic Trust objects to this application on the following grounds:
1. The proposed dwelling will be harmful to the historic and architectural
character of the adjoining listed buildings and gardens.
2. The proposed dwelling will also be detrimental to the character of the
conservation area.
3. The design of the proposed dwelling pays no respect to or consideration for
the heritage of the listed buildings and conservation area.
The reasons for this are as follows:
Numbers 7and 9 Lower Park Road are both grade 2 listed buildings and were
originally constructed as a single development with a garden designed as a whole by
Edward Kemp well known for his 19 th century landscape design. The listing notes for
9 Lower Park Road state ‘The quality of exterior and interior and their relation to the
contemporary garden make this item probably the most complete example of a 19th
century suburban house in Chester’.
The proposed development would severely disrupt the coherent design of this pair of
listed dwellings and the valuable heritage of the unifying historic garden design
between and surrounding the dwellings, as shown on the heritage statement in
paragraph 4.13.
The Civic Trust does not agree with the claim by the applicants that modern
interventions on the original garden design compromise its overall function as part of
the character of the listed buildings. The garden space could easily be restored to its
historic character by a sympathetic owner. The current ‘neglected’ space cannot be
used as a justification for the proposed development of an infill dwelling that would
cause severe disruption of the garden space which is an important part of the
heritage of the area.
The proposed development would have a major impact on the setting of the Chester
City Conservation Area particularly as observed from the opposite side of the River
Dee. This riverside view is an important part of the overall attractiveness and historic
character of Chester that is so attractive to residents and visitors.

In particular the prevailing character of the high quality 19 th century suburban
development, with large houses set in grand gardens would be severely disrupted by
this unsympathetic intrusion. The limited visibility of the proposed development
claimed by the applicant does not dilute the importance of the design of the garden
between numbers 7 and 9 as part of the listed heritage of the buildings and character
of the conservation area.
The Civic Trust is also concerned with the amount of detail provided in the plans
about the design and materials of the proposed dwelling. This uncompromising
design pays no regard to the architectural heritage of the surrounding buildings and
no detail is given about the materials to be used in construction. In the important
setting of a listed building within the conservation area it is not sufficient to leave the
choice of materials to be left to a planning condition. These important matters must
be agreed in advance particularly as this is a ‘self build development’ which may be
more vulnerable to cost considerations.