Town Planning Committee 16 June 2005
From Nigov
F39
Thursday, 16th June, 2005
MEETING OF TOWN PLANNING COMMITTEE
Members present: Councillor Patterson (Chairman); and Councillors Campbell, Cobain, Hanna, Hendron, Lavery, Maginness, P. Maskey, McCarthy, McGimpsey, McKenzie, O’Neill, Rodway, Smyth and Wilson.
In attendance: Mr. P. McNaney, Chief Executive; Mr. R. Boyd, Members’ Support Officer; Mr. J. Heaney, Committee Administrator; and Mr. T. Gordon ) Divisional Mr. J. King ) Planning Office.
Apologies
Apologies for inability to attend were reported from Councillors Empey and Long.
Minutes
The minutes of the meeting of 2nd June, which had been printed and circulated, were taken as read and signed as correct.
July Recess
The Committee authorised the Chief Executive (or his nominee), in conjunction with the Chairman or the Deputy Chairman, to approve planning applications for house extensions, shop fronts and other minor developments submitted during July to which there were no objections. This would permit such non-contentious applications to be processed without undue delays. It was noted that a list of those applications approved by the Chief Executive (or his nominee), in consultation with the Chairman or the Deputy Chairman, would be submitted to the Committee for information at its first meeting in August.
Routine Correspondence
It was reported that correspondence had been received from various Statutory Bodies in connection with the undernoted items:
Notification of intention to introduce traffic calming measures at the following areas:
Cranmore Park, Iris Drive/Crocus Street Rosapenna Parade Springfield Park
Notification of ongoing traffic surveys in relation to a request for a disabled parking bay at 13 Reid Street.
Notice of Intention to remove a disabled parking bay at 9 Fane Street
The Annual Report of the Town and Country Planning Association
The Journal of the Town and Country Planning Association - May edition.
Copies of the letters, Orders and maps relating to the above-mentioned matters were displayed at the meeting for the attention of the Members.
The Committee noted the information which had been received.
Planning Issues in the Holylands
The Committee was advised that Mr. A. Adair, Team Leader, the Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan, was in attendance and was admitted to the meeting and welcomed by the Chairman (Councillor Patterson).
The Chief Executive submitted, for the Committee’s attention, a report in respect of Planning issues in the Holylands. A copy of the report, with the exception of the appendix referred to therein, is set out hereunder:
“1.0 Purpose
1.1 To advise the Committee that a response has been received from Lord Rooker, Minister of the Environment, to the Committee’s request for a meeting to discuss the Committee’s concerns in respect of the proliferation of Houses of Multiple Occupation in the Holyland and its concern that the problems in the Holyland area will spread to other areas of the City.
1.2 To inform the Committee of the action being taken by the Council, the Planning Service, the Universities and a number of other statutory agencies, to address the concerns raised by Elected Members in relation to this issue.
2.0 Background
2.1 At its meeting on 5 January 2005 the Council referred to a Notice of Motion proposed by Councillor M McGimpsey and seconded by Councillor McCarthy to the Town Planning Committee for consideration. The Motion stated:
Town Planning Committee, F
Thursday, 16th June, 2005 41
‘This Council recognises the difficulties created in the Holylands area as a result of overdevelopment caused primarily by the changing of residential homes into dwellings of multiple occupancy.
In an effort to ease these difficulties and prevent further deterioration of services and living standards, the Council calls upon the Minister with Responsibility for Planning, Angela Smith MP, to apply an immediate moratorium on development of existing dwellings into houses of multiple occupancy and initiate a review of the planning situation in respect of the Holylands area with a view to applying and enforcing a suitable and robust policy to curtail the adverse impact which is being caused to the provision of services and indeed the entire character of the area.’
2.2 The matter was considered by the Town Planning Committee at its meeting on 6 January at which the Committee decided to write to the Minister to request a moratorium on the future development of existing dwellings into Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs). The Minister replied by letter of 22 February and a copy of the response is attached at Appendix 1. The Committee decided at its meeting on 24 March to request a meeting with the Minister to discuss its growing concern that applications for HMOs were being dealt with on an individual basis and expressed the view that the Planning Service should put in place a broader plan to deal with the overall impact of individual decisions on the whole area.
3.0 Response
3.1 The Minister has now replied by letter dated 19 May stating that the ‘Planning Service is considering how planning policy can be developed and applied to address the issues presented by HMO development and student accommodation. We are currently considering the approaches, experiences and best practice of authorities in Great Britain. This includes limiting HMO and student housing development in certain areas, dispersing development and assessing the impact on adjacent areas’. The Minister further states that ‘The issues surrounding HMOs are multi-faceted and partnership with other agencies including the universities, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, PSNI, the local community and indeed the Council will
F Town Planning Committee, 42 Thursday, 16th June, 2005
be essential if a comprehensive strategy is to be developed.’ The Minister refers to a Strategic Group of all the key agencies convened by the Council’s Chief Executive which is developing a comprehensive approach and states that the Planning Service recognises that the lack of spatial planning control is a key issue which needs to be addressed.
4.0 Progress of Inter Agency Group
4.1 At a meeting of the Health and Environmental Services Committee on 18 April the Committee was advised that an Inter Agency Group had been established by the Council to provide an integrated and co-ordinated response to the significant issues of anti-social behaviour being suffered by residents in the Holyland area. The Group contains representatives from education, namely Queen’s University, University of Ulster, Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education, St Mary’s College and Stranmillis; representatives from statutory agencies, namely the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, Planning Service and Roads Service; and representatives from the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Office Community Safety Unit.
4.2 The Inter Agency Group is developing an integrated project plan assigning clear actions and accountability to each organisation. A proposal to establish a Neighbourhood Warden Scheme has been agreed and financial contributions are being made by all parties, including the Council. The wardens are to be in place by September and all agencies have signed up to an information sharing protocol and memorandum of understanding to develop a shared approach to the resolution of the problems in the area. The work of the Planning Service, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and the Council in relation to planning issues is set out below.
5.0 Development of Non-Statutory Plan by Planning Service
5.1 The Planning Service is working with the other organisations on the Inter Agency Holyland Group to develop a non-statutory plan for the Holyland area. The purpose of this plan is to provide an interim solution until the statutory plan, BMAP, is formally adopted. The Planning Service recognises that the legal framework
Town Planning Committee, F Thursday, 16th June, 2005 43
and planning policy in relation to HMOs and high density areas such as the Holyland provides an incomplete policy sanction. Whilst the introduction of BMAP could provide this, it would take considerable time before BMAP was formally accepted and introduced. To help address this problem, the Service suggested that the best option in the interim would be to develop a non-statutory plan for the area. The aim is to have this plan accepted as a material consideration in the interim period and therefore assist in the planning application and appeals process.
5.2 The non-statutory plan would seek to replicate what would be produced through the longer statutory process of BMAP. To be accepted, the plan would need to be accountable and have as much inter agency endorsement as possible. It would be subject to a consultation process, but unlike BMAP it would not require a public enquiry. It is envisaged that the landlords would be consulted formally at two stages in the process. Whilst no guarantees can be given, the Planning Service is confident that the non-statutory plan will carry sufficient authority with the Planning Appeals Commission.
5.3 The Service has completed a survey of the Holyland and Stranmillis area and is now working with the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to identify the actual number of HMOs and single family homes and to begin drawing zones and proposed planning constraints. A dedicated team has been established within the BMAP Unit to develop the non-statutory plan. It is envisaged that the non-statutory plan would be adopted in January – February 2006. A report on the timescale and work required to complete the review and establish the non statutory plan is due to be brought to the Inter Agency Group on 15 June and will be brought to the Committee as soon as possible thereafter.
6.0 HMO Registration Scheme
6.1 The Housing Executive is responsible for the statutory registration scheme for HMOs which came into operation in May 2004. The Fitzroy Avenue area within the Holyland is one of five designated HMO Action Areas in Northern Ireland. Under this scheme all HMO properties in the Fitzroy HMO Action Area will have to be registered by 2008. To become registered the properties must:
F Town Planning Committee,
44 Thursday, 16th June, 2005
- meet HMO standards in respect of the number of occupants;
- meet the basic Fitness for Human Habitation Standard;
- be managed in compliance with the HMO Management Regulations; and
- have valid certificates for electrical systems and gas installations, where appropriate.
6.2 A dedicated HMO Enforcement Team for South Belfast concentrating initially on the Holyland area is being set up. The Team will use existing legislative powers to address problems of poor standards (including over occupation) and non-compliance with the Management Regulations. Grant assistance will be provided to help bring existing HMOs in the HMO Action Areas up to standard but not to convert single family homes into HMOs. Properties in the Holyland area which fall outside of the Fitzroy HMO Action Area will not qualify for grant aid under the Registration Scheme.
6.3 The Northern Ireland Housing Executive has also begun, in collaboration with the Council and Roads Service, to systematically enforce Articles 11 & 12 of the HMO Management Regulations. The legislation requires landlords to provide receptacles for the disposal of refuse and litter, where it is not already provided by the local authority, and to ensure that they maintain the external areas of their properties in a good and clean condition.
7.0 Development of Integrated Council Response to Planning Applications
7.1 The Council is one a of number of bodies that can be consulted as part of the planning application process. As a statutory consultee the Council’s Health and Environmental Services Department, for example, must have valid legal reasons for objecting to individual applications. This makes it difficult, however, to object on general grounds or cumulative impact.
Town Planning Committee, F
Thursday, 16th June, 2005 45
7.2 Following a recent decision of the Planning Appeals Commission in which it appears that limited weight was attributed to arguments that the work would prejudice the outcome of BMAP and that the intensification of HMOs is detrimental to general amenity, Council officers from Health and Environmental Services and Legal Services are reviewing how the Council might validly object to future planning applications on the grounds of intensification and potential contravention of Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights. Data is being collected to support the intensification argument in relation to anti-social behaviour and demands on statutory services and it is likely that the Council will be in a position to object to future planning applications on this ground.
8.0 Next Steps
8.1 The Inter Agency Group is aware that there are likely to be an increasing number of cases heard by the PAC. Inevitably, a test case will be taken challenging the approach to HMOs and planning policy in the Holyland currently being developed through the Group. The Group is conscious that solid evidence and strong inter agency endorsement will be required to defend such a challenge. The Chief Executive has asked the Planning Service to consider how best it might ensure that public officers at PAC hearings were suitably equipped with the skills to respond to what tends to be a very formal and difficult process. Agreement has been reached in principle with the Planning Service to permit the Council’s Legal Department to provide representation at significant PAC hearings. The Council is also keen to explore with the Planning Service the potential for joint enforcement activity. This issue was raised at the meeting with the Planning Service, but will need discussed further.
8.2 The Inter Agency Group has provided an influential and effective means of discussing the strategic issues affecting the Holyland. The Council, by bringing together the various public agencies into a coherent group, has been able to articulate resident concerns and also encourage a shared resolution to some of the issues. Whilst the Group has made significant progress, it is essential that the Council continues to
F Town Planning Committee, 46 Thursday, 16th June, 2005
advocate on behalf of the residents to ensure the integrated framework produces visible results. The next meeting of the Inter Agency Holyland Group is 15 June and a further report will be brought to Members following that meeting.
9.0 Recommendation
9.1 That Members note the Minister’s response and, following a review of the work of the Inter Agency Group in September, determine an appropriate time to ask the Minister for a meeting.”
Mr. Adair drew the Committee’s attention to Item 5 in the foregoing report, namely, Development of Non-Statutory Plan by Planning Service. He pointed out that concerns had been expressed that a non-statutory plan possessed a high risk that little weight would be given to it, should any application become the subject of an appeal to the Planning Appeals Commission. The Planning Service would, therefore seek to develop a subject plan, with a view to that plan receiving statutory powers. He outlined the procedure which would be involved in the development of such a statutory instrument and suggested that a statutory plan would create conditions of certainty in relation to the determination of applications.
The Principal Planning Officer stated that during the development of the proposed statutory plan, issues addressed within the plan could constitute a material consideration in the determination of planning applications for Houses in Multiple Occupancy. The weight given to the plan would increase during the plan’s development but would only have statutory standing when it was approved and published.
He pointed out that there were a number of applications relating to Houses in Multiple Occupancy currently within the planning system, including several for improvements to dwellings currently designated as Houses in Multiple Occupancy. He suggested the applications in the planning system currently could only be considered under existing policies and guidance.
A Member pointed out that in Glasgow it had been determined that within the University area in that city, Houses in Multiple Occupancy should not exceed 5% of the total housing stock. However, he suggested that in the Holylands area of Belfast 90% of the housing stock was in flats or Houses of Multiple Occupancy and that the Stranmillis area had a figure of 40% in this regard.
In response, Mr. Adair stated that any statutory plan must consider the need for Houses in Multiple Occupancy and he drew the attention of the Members to areas within the City, other than Stranmillis or the Holylands, and he suggested that there was a requirement to control the development of Houses in Multiple Occupancy across the whole of the City. In this regard, the Planning Service would be working closely with the Northern Ireland Housing Executive to ascertain the exact level of need in each area of the City.
Town Planning Committee, F
Thursday, 16th June, 2005 47
A Member, whilst welcoming the development of a statutory instrument, expressed concern about possible delays and suggested that there might be an inappropriate number of new applications submitted prior to the full development of any statutory plan. In this regard, he suggested that the Minister with responsibility for the Department of the Environment be requested to apply a moratorium in relation to the development of Houses in Multiple Occupancy until such times as the plan had obtained full statutory powers. He expressed the view that it might prove beneficial if the Committee were to invite the Minister to meet with it to discuss the matter.
The Chief Executive indicated that, if the Committee was so minded, it would be beneficial that any invitation to the Minister included also a request to discuss other planning related issues and to discuss how the Review of Public Administration, might have an impact upon planning within the City.
After discussion, it was
Moved by Councillor McGimpsey, Seconded by Councillor Smyth and
Resolved – That, the Committee affirming its decision of 6th January, 2005, that this Council recognises the difficulties created in the Holylands area as a result of overdevelopment caused principally by the changing of residential homes into dwellings of multiple occupancy.
In an effort to ease these difficulties and to prevent further deterioration of the services and living standards, the Council calls upon the Minister to apply an immediate moratorium on the development of existing dwelling into Houses in Multiple Occupancy and initiate a review of the planning situation in respect of the Holylands area with a view to applying and enforcing a suitable and robust policy to curtail the adverse impact which is being caused to the provision of services and indeed the entire character of the area.
In addition the Committee agrees that a letter be forwarded to the Minister inviting him to attend a special meeting of the Committee, to which all Members of the Council would be invited, to discuss matters related to the imposition of a moratorium in respect of planning applications for Houses in Multiple Occupancy in the Holylands and Stranmillis areas, to consider planning issues affecting the development of the City and to consider also how the implementation of the Review of Public Administration might impact upon planning within the City.
Conferences
Planning and Public Investment
The Committee was informed that the above-mentioned Conference, organised by the Waterfront Conference Company, would be held in the Cavendish Conference Centre, 22 Duchess Mews, London, on 6th July.
F Town Planning Committee,
48 Thursday, 16th June, 2005
The Members' Support Officer reported that the Conference would examine ways in which the planning system could be used to finance public investment projects across the United Kingdom and, in particular, in growth areas. He stated that the Conference would seek to address also issues relating to Sustainable Community Plans, financing infrastructure, planning gain and land value taxation.
The Conference programme was structured in such a way as to ensure that the points of views of those who were directly involved with or affected by planning process would be fully represented and the key speakers at the Conference would include Mr. S. Burwood, Research and Policy Director of the British Urban Regeneration Association, Mr. M. Burchell, Deputy Chief Executive (Planning and Environment), Essex County Council and Mr. S. Joseph, Deputy Chief Executive, Thames Gateway London Partnership. Cost of attending the Conference would be approximately £600 per delegate, provision for which had been in the Revenue Estimates.
The Members’ Support Officer recommended that the Committee authorise the attendance at the Conference of the Chairman, the Deputy Chairman and the Head of Committee and Members' Services (or their nominees).
After discussion, the Committee adopted recommendation of the Members' Support Officer and agreed to authorise the payment of the Conference fees, together with the appropriate travelling, subsistence and attendance allowances in connection therewith.
Street Design Within Master Plan: Delivering Sustainable Communities
The Committee was informed that the above-named Conference, organised by the Waterfront Conference Company, would be held at the Confederation of British Industry Conference Centre, London on 7th July, 2005.
The Members' Support Officer reported that the Conference would provide training and information for Members on issues relevant to the planning process and would permit Members to examine best practice in street designs within the masterplans for both new communities and those which were being regenerated. He reported that the Conference would be structured around lectures and key note speakers following which the opportunity would be provided for discussion sessions. He suggested that delegates might benefit from the discussion of issues relating to innovative approaches to street design and masterplans, and how better street design could cut crime levels. The cost of attending the conference would be approximately £600, provision for which had been made in the Revenue Estimates.
The Members' Support Officer recommended that the Committee authorise the attendance at the Conference of the Chairman, the Deputy Chairman and the Head of Committee and Members' Services (or their nominees).
After discussion, the Committee adopted to the recommendation of the Members' Support Officer and agreed to authorise the payment of the Conference fees, together with the appropriate travelling, subsistence and attendance allowances in connection therewith.
Re-Introduction of Two-Way Traffic System at Florenceville Place
The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 2nd June, it had deferred consideration of the proposal to introduce a two-way traffic system at Florenceville Place, in order to enable the views of local residents to be obtained in relation to the matter.
After discussion, during which a Member indicated that he had spoken with several residents in the area and they appeared to be in favour of the proposal, the Committee agreed to offer no objection to the proposal to reintroduce a two-way traffic system at Florenceville Place.
Planning Applications
Non-Determination Appeals
Notification of Appeals Lodged
The Committee was informed that correspondence, copies of which had previously been circulated, had been received from the Divisional Planning Manager indicating that the undernoted planning applications had been subject to Non Determination Appeals under Article 33 of the Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991:
Location Proposal
31 Lawrence Street Demolition of property and erection of three flats
7 Lawrence Street Conversion of building to four flats including demolition of two-storey rear return and erection of three storey extension
23 Donegall Park Avenue Erection of seven dwellings and associated car parking (including demolition of a bungalow) (Amended Scheme)
12 Ireton Street Change of use from dwelling to three flats including three-storey extension and alterations
8 Ireton Street Conversion from two flats to three flats including three storey extension and alterations
The Committee was reminded that, in accordance with the usual procedures in respect of the planning consultation process, further details outlining the recommendation of the Divisional Planning Manager in respect of the aforementioned applications would be submitted to a future meeting of the Committee for its consideration.
Noted.
34 Sandhurst Drive
The Committee considered the contents of a letter, copies of which had previously been circulated, which had been received from the Divisional Planning Manager in relation to a planning application for the erection of a House in Multiple Occupancy at the rear of 34 Sandhurst Drive, indicating that it had become the subject of a non-determination appeal under Article 33 of the Planning (Northern Ireland) Order 1991.
The letter indicated also that the Divisional Planning Manager was of the opinion that the application should be refused on the grounds that the proposal was contrary to policy QD1 of the Department’s Planning Policy Statement No. 7: Quality Residential Environment, in that development, if permitted, would cause unacceptable damage to the local character and residential amenity of an established residential area by reason of overdevelopment, layout and form and would result in inadequate amenity space, loss of privacy, noise and general disturbance for existing and perspective residents. The proposal would also set an unacceptable precedent for similar developments within the area. The Council’s views on the application were now being sought.
After discussion, during which several Members suggested that it might prove beneficial if local representatives were to attend hearings of the Planning Appeals Commission, the Committee concurred with the views of the Divisional Planning Manager in respect of the erection of a House on Multiple Occupancy at the rear of 34 Sandhurst Drive and agreed that should any Members of the Committee attend the Planning Appeals Commission in respect of the application, such attendance would be considered as an approved duty.
86 Andersonstown Road
The Committee considered further a planning application relating to the demolition of a house and outbuildings and the redevelopment of the site for six apartments and two semi-detached dwellings, in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered a revised opinion to approve the application. After discussion, it was
Moved by Councillor O’Neill, Seconded by Councillor Maskey,
That the Committee agrees to defer consideration of the planning application in respect of the demolition of a house and outbuildings and redevelopment of the site for six apartments and two semi-detached dwellings at 86 Andersonstown Road, in order that further information be obtained by the Members.
Amendment
Moved by Councillor Wilson, Seconded by Councillor McKenzie,
That the Committee agrees to adopt the revised opinion of the Divisional Planning Manager to approve the planning application in respect of the demolition of existing house and outbuildings and the redevelopment of six apartments and two new semi-detached dwellings at 86 Andersonstown Road.
On a vote by show of hands seven Members voted for the amendment and four against and it was accordingly declared carried.
The amendment was thereupon put to the meeting as the substantive motion when seven Members voted for and three against and it was accordingly declared carried.
(As the proposal was not unanimous it was subject to ratification by the Council.)
45 Knightsbridge Park
The Committee considered further a planning application relating to the proposed demolition of a detached bungalow and the erection of two semi-detached dwellings at the above-mentioned location in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered an opinion to approve.
The Principal Planning Officer advised the Members that the proposed replacement semi-detached dwellings were of an acceptable style, shape and mass. However, he indicated that there had been concern in respect of the excavation and structural work which would be required to be undertaken and, in this regard, he indicated that the advice of the Planning Service engineers had been obtained. The engineers had reported that, whilst excavation and association structural work would be required, the adjacent premises should not be at risk from subsidence.
The Principal Planning Officer stated that, in regard to car parking, no objection had been offered by the Roads Service since two parking spaces for each house, including a garage, would be available.
A Member indicated that the site was restricted and that construction would be extremely difficult and he was of the view that there might be a risk of subsidence to adjacent properties if the development were permitted.
After further discussion, it was
Moved by Councillor Wilson, Seconded by Councillor McGimpsey,
That the planning application relating to the erection of two semi detached dwellings at 45 Knightsbridge Park in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered an opinion to approve, be rejected on the grounds that the proposed development had the potential to create subsidence which would be detrimental to neighbouring properties, the development would be out of character with the existing streetscape and would be detrimental to the residents by way of increased traffic congestion and restricted parking space.
On a vote by show of hands six Members voted for the proposal and four against and it was accordingly declared carried.
(As the proposal was not unanimous it was subject to ratification by the Council.)
Landmark Headquarters Office Complex, Related Car Parking, Together with Associated Hard and Soft Landscaping on Lands at the Junction of Sydenham Road/Queen’s Road, Queen’s Island
The Members' Support Officer reminded the Committee that, at its meeting on 17th April, 2003, it had received from the Planning Service Headquarters correspondence seeking the Committee’s views in respect of the above-mentioned major planning application. The Committee had been advised that the Department of the Environment had applied Article 31 of the Planning (Northern Ireland) Order, 1991 to the application designating it as one of major importance as it considered that, if permitted, the development would involve a substantial departure from the Development Plan for the area to which it related. He informed the Members that, at that meeting, the Committee had agreed that, in view of the fact the proposal was contrary to the Department’s current policy in respect of office development and without sight of a masterplan for the Titanic Quarter development, the Divisional Planning Manager be recommended to refuse the application at the above-mentioned location.
The Members' Support Officer reported that correspondence had been received from the Planning Service Headquarters indicating that following detailed consideration of the proposal, the Department had decided to issue a notice of opinion to approve the development. In arriving at this decision, the Department had taken into account all relevant planning matters including planning policy, development plans, relevant material factors and representations which had been submitted from all interested parties.
A Member expressed the view that, subsequent to the meeting of 17th April, 2003, the Committee had received a presentation from the Titanic Quarter Limited and had been given sight of the masterplan for the area. He pointed out also that Titanic Quarter Limited had given an undertaking that, prior to the submission of any future planning applications, the Council would be consulted.
Several further Members however, expressed the view that they had not been given sight of a masterplan for the area, rather they had been given a series of schematic drawings only, which did not indicate the types of development proposed for the different areas within the Titanic Quarter. The Members referred also to the proposed office development which, they suggested was contrary to the Department’s current policy in respect of office development within the City centre.
In response, the Principal Planning Officer indicated that the Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan and the Harbour Plan did permit some office development at this location and, given that there had been considerable office premises in the former Harland and Wolff Complex, it would be appropriate to permit further office development at this location.
After prolonged discussion, the Committee noted the correspondence which had been received and agreed to affirm its decision of 17th April, 2003, opposing the proposed development at the above-mentioned location.
THE COMMITTEE DEALT WITH THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IN PURSUANCE OF THE POWERS DELEGATED TO IT BY THE COUNCIL AT ITS MEETING ON MONDAY, 1st NOVEMBER, 1973
Planning Applications
Reconsidered Items
The Committee resumed consideration of the undernoted planning applications and, after discussion, agreed with the Divisional Planning Manager’s opinion thereon:
Site and Applicant Proposal Divisional Planning Manager’s Opinion
71 Shandon Park Mr. and Mrs. Smyth Erection of three two-storey detached dwellings Permission 26 Parkmount Road Hawthorn Properties Erection of seven residential units including demolition of existing dwelling (Amended Description and Revised Scheme) Permission Development Site, Airport Road West Belfast Harbour Commissioners New distribution depot with ancillary offices including vehicle parking and service yard (Amended Description) Permission
F Town Planning Committee,
54 Thursday, 16th June, 2005
Site and Applicant Proposal Divisional Planning Manager’s Opinion
105/107 Cliftonville Road Mr. Cavanagh Change of use from dwelling and five apartments to nine two-bedroom apartments and erection of attached townhouse Permission Junction of East Bridge Street and Stewarts Street J.C. Decaux Erection of 2 X 48 sheet advertising hoarding Refusal 1. The proposal is contrary to Development Guidance Note no. 2: Control of Large Scale Advertisements and would, if permitted, be an unduly prominent and intrusive feature in this streetscene and harm the visual character of this predominant residential area
30 Bloomfield Avenue J. Wilson Change of use from dwelling to self-contained offices including a single storey extension and alterations Permission 44-46 Corporation Street J.C. Decaux Erection of individual neon lettering advertisement Refusal 1. The proposed sign would be visually inclusive and distract the attention of road users thereby prejudicing the safety and convenience traffic on this main traffic route. The proposed sign is contrary to Draft Planning Policy Statement 17: Control of Outdoor Advertisements in that the development would, if permitted, be visually intrusive in the streetscene and to road users who use the M3 Motorway. The proposal would also cause detriment to the building to which it was sited
Town Planning Committee, F Thursday, 16th June, 2005 55
Amended Opinion
The Committee resumed consideration of the undernoted applications in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered a revised opinion:
Site and Applicant Proposal Divisional Planning Manager’s Opinion
12a Wyndford Street Kane Developments Erection of three townhouses and twelve apartments with associated car parking and landscaping Permission 134 Somerton Road Mr. and Mrs. R. Varini Erection of single-storey rear extension and single storey side extension including demolition of existing garage (Amended Scheme) Permission 84 Wandsworth Road Mr. N. Kirkpatrick Erection of two-storey side and rear extensions Permission The Committee adopted the recommendation of the Divisional Planning Manager in respect of the above-mentioned applications.
Applications Deferred
The Committee deferred consideration of the undernoted planning applications to enable further information to be obtained.
Schedule of Applications
The Committee considered the undernoted schedule of planning applications, details of which had previously been circulated to the Members.
The Committee agreed to inform the Department of the Environment that it had concurred wit the observations of the Divisional Planning Manager in respect of the foregoing planning applications.
New Applications
The Committee noted the list of planning applications, copies of which had previously been circulated, which had been received from the Divisional Planning Manager for Belfast City Council area in the period from 24th May, till 6th June, 2005.
Chairman
