Ards and North Down Borough Council a G E N
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ARDS AND NORTH DOWN BOROUGH COUNCIL 26 April 2021 Dear Sir/Madam You are hereby invited to attend a virtual meeting of the Planning Committee of the Ards and North Down Borough Council which will be held on Tuesday, 4 May 2021 commencing at 7.00pm. Yours faithfully Stephen Reid Chief Executive Ards and North Down Borough Council A G E N D A 1. Apologies 2. Declarations of Interest 3. Matters arising from minutes of Planning Committee Meeting of 13 April 2021 (Copy attached) 4. Planning Applications (Reports attached) Development of 24 No. extra-care living units and shared communal facilities 4.1 LA06/2018/0324/O Lands at 95 and 97 Donaghadee Road, Millisle Demolition of existing retail premises and adjacent dwelling and replacement with new shop and café, additional retail unit, hot food unit, petrol filling station, 4.2 LA06/2016/0853/F parking. access, landscaping and associated operational development McCann’s Killinchy, 3, 5 & 7 Comber Road, Balloo New school building and sports hall, with associated 4.3 LA06/2019/1207/F infrastructure, culverting of watercourse, electricity/waste/service infrastructure, hard and soft landscaping works, boundary treatments, drainage works and other associated site works Strangford Integrated College, Abbey Road, Carrowdore Static village entrance signage 4.4 LA06/2020/0992/A 80m North East of 26 Comber Road, Balloo 5. DFI Planning Engagement Partnership (Report attached) ***IN CONFIDENCE*** 6. Quarterly Enforcement Update (Report attached) MEMBERSHIP OF PLANNING COMMITTEE (16 MEMBERS) Alderman Gibson Councillor Cooper (Vice Chair) Alderman Keery Councillor McAlpine Alderman McDowell Councillor McClean (Chair) Alderman McIlveen Councillor McKee Councillor Adair Councillor McRandal Councillor Brooks Councillor P Smith Councillor Cathcart Councillor Thompson Councillor Kennedy Councillor Walker ARDS AND NORTH DOWN BOROUGH COUNCIL A virtual meeting of the Planning Committee was held on Tuesday, 13 April 2021 at 7.00 pm via Zoom. PRESENT: In the Chair: Councillor McClean Aldermen: Gibson Keery McDowell McIlveen (7.05pm) Councillors: Adair McAlpine Brooks McKee Cathcart McRandal Cooper Smith, P Kennedy Thompson Officers: Director of Regeneration, Development and Planning (S McCullough), Head of Planning (A McCullough), Principal Professional and Technical Officers (G Kerr and L Maginn), Senior Professional and Technical Officer (P Kerr) and Democratic Services Officer (M McElveen) Also in Sid Stevenson (DfI Roads) Attendance: David Donaldson Karen McShane Michael Graham Stephen Wood Tony Rafferty 1. APOLOGIES An apology for inability to attend was received from Councillor Walker. NOTED. 2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Adair and Councillor McAlpine declared an interest in Item 4.4. NOTED. PC.13.04.21 3. MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING OF 2 MARCH 2021 PREVIOUSLY CIRCULATED:- Copy of the above. RESOLVED, on the proposal of Councillor Cathcart, seconded by Councillor Cooper, that the minutes be noted. 4. PLANNING APPLICATIONS 4.1 LA06/2016/0105/F – Quintin Castle, 3 Kearney Road, Portaferry – Change of use from external courtyard to function room to include new roof, external doors, ancillary mobile toilet facilities, associated site works and parking (Appendix I) PREVIOUSLY CIRCULATED:- Case Officer’s Report and Addendum. DEA: Ards Peninsula Committee Interest: Call in by Councillor Adair Proposal: Change of use from external courtyard to function room to include new roof, external doors, ancillary mobile toilet facilities, associated site work and parking. Site Location: Quintin Castle, 3 Kearney Road, Portaferry Recommendation: Refusal of Planning Permission The Planning Officer (Paula Kerr) outlined that the application related to change of use from external courtyard to function room to include new roof, external doors, ancillary mobile toilet facilities, associated siteworks and parking. The site was located at Quintin Castle which was on the Kearney Road, approximately two miles east of Portaferry. It was set back from the road and was sited along the eastern coast directly facing towards the Irish sea. This application was being presented at Planning Committee as it had been called in by Councillor Adair. Three letters of objection were received from members of the public with traffic generation and noise being the main issues raised. A noise impact assessment was submitted, and Environmental Health Department was satisfied that there would be no adverse impacts on nearby residents. Impact on herons was also raised but Natural Environment Division was content with the proposal. The officer advised that there was relevant planning history at this site. LA06/2016/0602/F for alterations and change of use from dwelling house to guest house and function room, including new garden ancillary building for storage and LA06/2018/1367/F for car parking, low level bollard lighting, associated ancillary works and landscaping to serve this application. There were associated Listed Building Consents for both. Those applications went to Committee in June 2019 recommended for refusal on the basis of roads related reasons. As DFI Roads was unable to attend in June the applications were then heard in September 2019 with input from DFI Roads and the recommendation was subsequently overturned and approvals were issued in October 2019. 2 PC.13.04.21 The officer explained that Quintin Castle was a listed building and was in an area designated as a historic park, garden and demesne. It was located within the Strangford and Lecale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. In the late 1970’s the castle was used as a 25 bed private nursing home. All consultees were content with the proposal subject to conditions apart from DFI Roads. All refusal reasons for this application related to road safety and convenience concerns and parking. The proposal was in conformity with the Ards and Down Area Plan 2015 and the site was located outside the settlement limit. In terms of the principle of development with regard to the SPPS and the conversion and re-use of existing buildings for non-residential use: provision should be made for the sympathetic conversion and re-use of a suitable locally important building of special character or interest for a variety of alternative uses where that would secure its upkeep and retention, and where the nature and scale of the proposed non- residential use would be appropriate to its countryside location. Quintin Castle was an acknowledged locally important building. The proposal essentially involved putting a standing seam zinc clad roof and timber roof lantern on existing listed courtyard walls. The proposal would have a maximum capacity of 144 people and would be approximately 2800 sq ft. This proposal met the requirements of the SPPS. With regard to PPS2, the proposal would have no impact on any aspects of the Natural Heritage. Both Natural Environment Division and the Shared Environmental Service were content with the proposal. Turning to PPS 6 Archaeology and the Built Heritage, Policy BH7 change of use of a listed building applied and was satisfied. Policy BH11 in relation to development affecting the setting of a listed building was relevant and was also satisfied. Historic Environment Division was content with the proposal. The officer referred to PPS21 Policy CTY4 for the conversion and reuse of an existing building suitable for a variety of uses; that was relevant and, in this case, it was for a function room in the countryside. In this policy, weight was attached to the building being locally important. For this proposal it was considered Quintin Castle to be locally important as previously addressed under the SPPS. The proposal met all of the criteria in Policy CTY4 apart from criteria (g) which related to access to the public road not prejudicing road safety or significantly inconveniencing the flow of traffic. PPS21 Policies CTY13, CTY14 and CTY16 had all been satisfied. On the subject of Policy TSM 7 of PPS16 which was the tourism policy (as the building had often been associated with a tourism use); she indicated that that Policy set out the criteria for tourism development, all of which this proposal met apart from criteria (L) and (M) which related to access arrangements and road safety and inconvenience to the flow of traffic. The main issue for this proposal was PPS3 Access, Movement and Parking. The main access road was extremely narrow and the previous approvals for this site would already result on pressure on the road network. If this proposal were to be approved, considering the potential capacity of the function space and cumulative impact of previous approvals, there would be considerable impact to the convenience and safety of road users. DFI Roads was consulted and recommended refusal based on an unacceptable level of conflict by reason of increased number of vehicles attracted to the site, including large delivery 3 PC.13.04.21 vehicles, together with the impact it would have on the local road network. All six refusal reasons were on that basis. The first four refusal reasons were under Policies AMP 2 and AMP 7 of PPS 3. Policy AMP2 dealt with access to public roads and Policy AMP7 related to car parking and there was a significant shortfall. Refusal reasons 5 and 6 related to the traffic, road and access aspects of PPS 21 - Policy CTY 4 and PPS 16 – Policy TSM7. In conclusion, the Planning Officer confirmed that this proposal met all the required planning policy criteria apart from that which related to access, movement and parking. The Planning Department therefore itself in the position where it must recommend refusal on that basis. She noted that Sid Stevenson from DfI Roads was in attendance and would be able to answer any queries relating to the roads issues at the site. The Chairman thanked the Planning Officer for her report and sought questions from Members. Councillor Cathcart asked if there was a speaker present for this application and the Chairman confirmed that to be the case.