Permission given for six homes to replace bungalow

Bru’s Retraite is at the southern end of the road, close to the traffic light, and was sold for £1.4m. in September 2023.

A previous application for seven houses on the site was withdrawn after the planners raised concerns about the scale of the homes and how much they would overlook nearby properties.

The latest scheme would create six semi-detached homes, with a mix of two- and three-bed homes.

The existing access onto Rue du Friquet would be widened and four protected trees on the boundary would be removed.

The latest scheme had two letters of objection. These raised concerns about the new proposal still having a significant mass and claimed it would cause over-development of the area.

There were also worries that increased traffic could lead to more accidents and that the removal of the four trees would alter the street scene.

Traffic & Highway Services raised concerns about the new access being so close to the garden centre exit, which could cause access and road safety concerns.

Guernsey Water also still has concerns about the shallowness of the foul sewer in the area, which already overflows during heavy rainfalls.

The utility said that meant that all surface water from the new development must be dealt with on the site.

The bungalow backs on to The Orchard – a new housing development for seven houses and four flats behind L’Aumone House – which is being built by developers Infinity.

The application for this site came from Swallow Services Ltd, an unrelated developer. For the planners’ considerations, the land lies within the L’Aumone local centre, which is one of the areas where new housing can be developed.

They expressed disappointment that the site could not be developed in conjunction with the neighbouring Infinity scheme, but said it was not reasonable to delay the scheme to ensure there could be a connection between the two sites.

Planners said that roadside trees made an important contribution to the character of Rue du Friquet. The trees – turkey oaks – were protected only earlier this year, as there were concerns they could be under threat from the proposed development.

In their report, the planners accepted that the trees were not unique or valuable species and that planting replacements would be acceptable.

‘In terms of visual amenity, the impact of the loss of the trees would be significant, but limited, restricted to a short section of the adjacent road and negated to an extent by the presence of other mature trees along both sides of the road.

‘On balance, therefore, it is considered that the removal of the protected trees would facilitate development... and any impacts would not be of such scale that would warrant refusal of the application, subject to provision of appropriate replacement planting,' the planners said in their report.

The planners accepted objectors' concerns that the density and scale of the proposed development were greater than might be expected in more rural locations.

But they believed the scheme struck a balance between the transitional location of the site on the edge of a local centre and providing an efficient and effective use of land.