Agenda and minutes

            Apologies for inability to attend were reported for Councillors Carson and Hanvey.

            The minutes of the meetings of 27th June and 16th August were taken as read and signed as correct.  It was reported that those minutes had been adopted by the Council at its meeting on 1st September, subject to the omission of those matters in respect of which the Council had delegated its powers to the Committee.

            No declarations of interest were reported.

            The Director of Planning and Building Control provided the Committee with an update in relation to the various notifications which are referred to the Planning Committee, with particular reference to the making of Abandonment Orders and the reasons for abandonment.

            She explained that the Council received various notifications from a range of sources, such as the Department for Infrastructure, the Department for Communities and the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, that included:

·        Abandonment Orders;

·        Vesting Orders;

·        Extinguishments of Public Rights of Way;

·        Waiting Restrictions;

·        Provision of Accessible/Disabled Parking Bays; and

·        Other Traffic Management Schemes.

            She pointed out to the Committee that, while some of the aforementioned items appeared regularly on the agenda for the Planning Committee, others were referred directly to the City Growth and Regeneration Committee.

            She explained the circumstances by which an Abandonment Order would be received and processed and that the Department for Infrastructure had indicated that objections to a proposed Abandonment Order would usually relate to opposition of a proposed development of the area, rather than a loss of a public right of way. 

            She advised the Committee that the range of potential considerations and the different approaches to the matters being brought to the Committees suggested that it would be appropriate to carry out a review of the process and procedures associated with such notifications, that would include consideration of whether it would be more appropriate for the matters to be brought before a single Committee.

            The Committee noted the outline of the consultations and the proposed review of the current process and procedures in respect of the various notifications and their reporting to the Committee.

            The Committee noted the Ross Street Extinguishment Order.

            The Committee noted the Roumania Rise Extinguishment Order.

            The Committee noted the Planning decisions issued between 10th and 7th September, 2022.

The Committee noted that there had been no appeals decisions notified. 

            The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application for Our Lady of Lourdes Primary School at 700 Antrim Road.

            He illustrated the impact of the proposal with site location and layout plans, aerial photographs and proposed elevation imaging and outlined the key issues which had been considered in the assessment of the proposed development, that included:

·        Principle of redevelopment;

·        Visual impacts;

·        Impact on neighbouring amenity;

·        Impact on Built Heritage;

·        Traffic and Parking;

·        Impact on trees and Natural Heritage;

·        Contaminated Land;

·        Drainage and Flooding; and

·        Pre-application Community Consultation.

            He stated that the proposal would not have any adverse impact on trees or natural heritage features, was compliant with relevant policy considerations, that there had been no objections received from any consultees or members of the public, and that the proposal had been considered as acceptable and he recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions.

            The Committee approved the application and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of the conditions.

            The Principal Planning Officer outlined the application for the renewal of temporary planning permission for a further period of five years, for a temporary exhibition centre, access arrangements, service and surface car parking and associated works.

            He explained the following key issues for consideration of the application:

·        The Principle of a Temporary Exhibition Centre at this location

·        Transport including network capacity, parking provision and highway safety;

·        The Impact on Built Heritage and Archaeological interests;

·        The Impact on Amenity;

·        Environmental Protection and Human Health;

·        Ecology and Natural Heritage;

·        Drainage and Flood Risk;

·        Planning Agreement and Developer Contributions; and

·        Pre-Application Community Consultation.

            He referred the Committee to the site location plan, aerial views of the site and environs, floor plans and the proposed elevation images.

            He informed the Committee that no objections had been received from any statutory or non-statutory consultees and that, having regard to the Development Plan, relevant material considerations, and that the principle of the use as an Exhibition Centre had been established, the proposed development had been considered acceptable and it was considered appropriate, as the structure was temporary, to limit the permission to five years.

            The Chairperson welcomed Ms. S. Murphy, Turley and Mr. C. O’Hara, RPS, on behalf of the Applicant to the meeting, and pointed out that they were in attendance to answer any questions from the Committee.

            In response to a question from a Member with regard to the temporary nature of the application, Ms. Murphy informed the Committee that there had been steady growth until the Covid-19 Pandemic had impacted the industry and that there was a need for the exhibition industry to re-establish itself and allow the market to return.

            The Committee approved the application for a period of five years, subject to conditions, and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of the conditions.

            The Senior Planning Officer outlined the main issues to be considered in the determination of the applications, that included:

·         The principle of development at this location;

·         The acceptability of the design;

·         Impact on character of the area and the setting of listed buildings;

·         Access, parking and servicing arrangements; and

·         Environmental Considerations - Drainage, Contamination, Noise.

            She referred the Committee to the proposed floorplans and contextual elevation images and outlined the key design improvements.

            She pointed out that the site benefited from a previous approval of a similar development, of a similar height scape and massing, that had been granted in November 2013 for a 16-storey building, comprised of 60 apartments, which remained live and therefore presented a lawful fallback position for the Applicant.  The Committee was informed that the Council’s Conservation Officer had indicated that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the character of the area and that officers had worked collaboratively with the Historic Environment Division and the Applicant to seek to improve the design quality of the proposed development, given the existing permission which had previously been granted.

            She advised the Committee that no third party objections had been received and referred the Committee to late items which had been received, whereby the Applicant had indicated that a Schedule 6 consent to discharge had been approved and that the Historic Environment Division had provided a further final response, which did not change its overall position but did recommend two conditions - the submission of a method statement to indicate how the McHugh’s Bar, which was a listed building, would be protected, and the submission of external material samples in advance of application.

            She informed the Committee that the application was recommended for approval.

            The Chairperson welcomed Mr. T Stokes, Agent, Mr. A. Maxwell, Project Manager and Mr. J. Humes, Project Architect to the meeting who indicated that they would be available to answer any questions with regard to the application from the Committee.

            In response to a question from a Member in relation to the residential capacity of the apartments, Mr. Stokes indicated that the intention had been to sell the apartments following construction and that the Applicant would have no control over how many individuals would subsequently reside within the apartments.

            In response to a further question from a Member with regard to there not being a daylight assessment on the proposed development, the Senior Planning Officer indicated that there was not a requirement for a daylight assessment, as it was not in an established residential area and could not be considered as part of the planning application. It was clarified that the space standards for residential units do not apply in this location because it is not an established residential area for the purposes of the guidance. The Senior Planning Officer highlighted that the design quality of the application was a significant improvement on the previously approved design.

            The Committee approved the application and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

            The Senior Planning Officer presented an overview of the application to the Committee.  She explained the key issues to be considered, that included:

·        The principle of the proposal at this location;

·        Design, layout and impact on the character and appearance of the area;

·        Impact on Residential Amenity;

·        Impact on Historic Buildings;

·        Access, Movement and Parking;

·        Drainage and Flood Risk;

·        Infrastructure Capacity; and

·        Environmental Health.

            She pointed out that the application site was located within the settlement development limit, had been zoned partially for housing and was located within the Housing Action Area in the adopted BUAP.

            She informed the Committee that two letters of objection to the application had been received which raised concerns with regards to traffic, parking, loss of light and privacy and the impact on residential amenity. 

            She provided the Committee with illustrative representations of the impact of the proposed development on the objectors’ properties and advised the Committee that the proposed development had not been considered to adversely impact the character and appearance of the surrounding area and was considered to be sympathetic in its built form, scale, massing and appearance with the surrounding area and neighbouring properties.  She added that there had been no objections received from consultees.

            She reported that the proposal had been recommended for approval, subject to conditions and a Section 76 agreement to secure green travel measures.

            The Committee approved the application, subject to conditions, a Section 76 Planning Agreement and no new and substantive issues arising during the remainder of the consultation period with neighbours and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of the conditions and Section 76 Planning Agreement.

            The Senior Planning Officer provided the Committee with an overview of the application and outlined the following key issues:

·        The principle of the proposal at this location;

·        Design, layout and impact on the character and appearance of the area;

·        Impact on amenity;

·        Access, Movement and parking;

·        Infrastructure capacity; and

·        Other Environmental Considerations.

            She explained that the proposal was for social housing and that the Northern Ireland Housing Executive had indicated its support for the proposal by stating that the “demand for social housing in the West Belfast area continues to be high and our projection of social housing need indicates a requirement for 2,148 new units of social housing across the Council area over the 5 year period 2021-2026”, and that they would welcome the scheme as a means to address unmet social housing need in the outer west Belfast catchment area.

            She reported that there had been one objection to the application which had raised concern with regard to additional traffic leading to more congestion in the locality, however, DfI Roads had not indicated any concerns and no objections had been received from any statutory consultees.

            She highlighted that a late item had been received from the Agent requesting that the landscaping and boundary conditions in relation to dwellings 10 and 11 would be worded to allow the development to be phased to allow each dwelling to be let upon completion and reported that officers indicated no objection to the request.

            She pointed out that the application was recommended for approval.

            The Committee approved the application, subject to conditions, and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of the conditions.

            The Planning Manager reported that the application sought permission to install an art sculpture and was before the Committee due to the Council being the Applicant.

            He presented the site location, site plans and elevation images to the Committee and pointed out that no objections had been received in relation to the application and that it was recommended that the Committee approve the application on the basis that:

·        The scale, design and materials of the proposal would not detract from the appearance and character of the surrounding area;

·        The sculpture was a well-designed compatible use at its location and would contribute positively to the overall environmental quality of the area; and

·        The proposal would provide public art and an interesting feature for those who may access the Innovation Factory and Forth Meadow Greenway.

            The Committee approved the application and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of conditions.

            The Committee approved the application for a limited period of two years only and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of conditions.

            The Committee approved the application for a limited period of two years only, subject to conditions, and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to grant temporary planning permission and to finalise the wording of conditions.

            The Committee approved the application and granted delegated authority to the Director of Planning and Building Control to finalise the wording of conditions.

            The information contained in the reports associated with the following two items is restricted in accordance with Part 1 of Schedule 6 of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014.

      Resolved – That the Committee agrees to exclude the members of the Press and public from the meeting during discussion of the items as, due to the nature of the item, there would be a disclosure of exempt information as described in Section 42(4) and Section 6 of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014.

            The Director of Planning and Building Control provided the Committee with an update on the Quarter 1 financial position, that included a reporting pack which contained a summary of the financial indicators and an executive summary.

            The Committee noted the content of the report.

            The Planning Manager provided the Committee with an update on the project to replace the Planning Portal.

            The Committee was advised that the timeframe for the project remained under significant and increasing pressure.

            He provided an update on the project plan, change and transition plan and next steps to the Committee.

            The Committee noted the contents of the report