Agenda and minutes

An apology was reported on behalf of Councillor McDonough-Brown.

            The minutes of the meeting of 20th June 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 July, subject to the omission of those matters in respect of which the Council had delegated its powers to the Committee.

            Councillor Armitage declared an interest regarding item 11.c) LA04/2015/1465/F Demolition of rear hall and provision of annexe at Bloomfield Presbyterian Church, in that he had met with residents regarding the application, however, he indicated that, during those discussions he had not committed himself to any particular course of action in relation to the application.

            Regarding item 11.c) LA04/2015/1465/F Demolition of rear hall and provision of annexe at Bloomfield Presbyterian Church, Councillor Dorrian declared an interest, in so far as he had received contact from residents, however, he indicated that he had not committed himself to any particular course of action in relation to the application.

            Regarding item 11.d) LA04/2015/0773/F Demolition of existing building and erection of new building to extend the facilities within the existing orthodontic clinic located at 218 Ormeau Road, Councillor Lyons, declared an interest, in so far as he had discussed the proposal with local residents. He also declared an interest in relation to items 11.i) LA04/2017/0361/F and 11.j) LA04/2016/2360/F - Subdivision of retail unit 1 into 2 retail units at Hillview Retail Park, Crumlin Road, in that he had previously had a working relationship with objectors, however, he indicated that he had not committed himself to any particular course of action in relation to the application.  

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 23rd June, the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee had agreed that the selection panel to recruit the post of Operational Director for Planning and Building Control in the new Place and Economy Department would be constituted by the Planning Committee at its meeting in August 2017.

            It was reported that the Committee should nominate and agree three elected members for this selection panel who, along with the Chief Executive and City Solicitor, would balance the panel in terms of gender and community background.

            The Committee agreed that:

·        the composition of the selection panel to recruit the post of Operational Director for Planning and Building Control would be three elected members, along with the Chief Executive and City Solicitor;

·        the panel would comprise of the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Committee (or their nominees) and a third elected member (either Cllr. Johnston or Cllr. Carson, or their nominees) with the Human Resources Section liaising with the Members to ensure the selection panel was balanced both in terms of gender and community background; and

·        a targeted and timely proactive executive search approach be initiated to ensure a strong and competent applicant field for the job.

            The Committee noted the contents of a report which provided an overview of the financial position of both the Planning and Licensing Committees, as at the end of the first quarter of the financial year. It was noted further that, as at 30th June, there had been a net over-spend of £141k, however, the forecast year-end departmental position was an under-spend of £61k (4.2%). 

Pursuant to its decision of 20th June, it was noted that the Committee had undertaken a site visit on 8th August in respect of planning application LA04/2016/0487/F - Change of use from dwelling to coffee shop, single storey side and rear extension at 1 St. Agnes Drive, Andersonstown Road.

            It was reported that correspondence had been received from the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) notifying the Council of the regional significance of an application which proposed re-development of Casement Park to provide a new Stadium (capacity of 34578) at lands at 88-104 Andersonstown Road and between 36-42 Morreland Park and 202-206 Stockman’s Lane (full description available here). As a result of it being classified as ‘Regionally Significant’ under Section 26 of the Planning Act (NI) 2011, DfI would be responsible for determining the application.

                                                                                                            Noted.

            It was reported that correspondence had been received from the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) notifying the Council of the regional significance of an application which proposed a new integrated public transport interchange at lands to the east of the Westlink (A12) (full description available here). As a result of it being classified as ‘Regionally Significant’ under Section 26 of the Planning Act (NI) 2011, DfI would be responsible for determining the application.

Noted.

The Committee was advised that a consultation request had been received by the Department for Infrastructure for the proposed application for the Re-development of Casement Park to provide a new Stadium (Capacity of 34578). The development included the demolition of the existing facilities; construction of new pitch, boundary wall and stands, incorporating bar/restaurant and ancillary kitchen areas, conference,  training, community and cultural heritage and education facilities, ancillary offices, player accommodation and welfare facilities, press/media and broadcast facilities, replacement floodlighting, stadium/event management suite, ground support facilities including new arrangements for vehicles and pedestrians, electronic display installations, storage, surface and undercroft car parking, hard and soft landscaping, new landscaped pedestrian access from Mooreland Park to Stockman's Lane, together with use of the stadium for up to three outdoor music concerts in any calendar year.

            The Committee agreed that the response, as outlined in the report, be issued to the Department for Infrastructure’s Strategic Planning Division on behalf of the Council, with emphasis of the following points: 

·        Further detailed cross sections through the entire site and surrounding properties as a whole was recommended;

·        In addition, in terms of wider visual effect, it was recommended that further images were required to demonstrate the impact on the skyline and on key views, both near and distant; and

·        Greater certainty around travel, transport and traffic should also be provided at this stage.

            The Committee was advised that a consultation request had been received from the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) for the proposed application for the Erection of 480MW Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Power Station comprised of turbine hall/heat recovery system generator building with 50m exhaust stack, air cooled condenser, 2 storey administration building, 2 storey workshop building, gas insulted substation, gas compressor station, gas pressure reduction station, associated water and fuel tanks and other associated infrastructure and ancillary development including provision of site access and road works to facilitate extension to pedestrian footways and delineation of a right hand turn lane. Construction of new Above Ground Installation (AGI) at Kinnegar Army Barracks and new underground pipeline along Airport Road West, Esplanade Road with option of also following Heron/Moscow Road and which would connect the Power Station Site to the existing gas transmission infrastructure at Kinnegar Barracks.

            The case officer informed the Committee that, after the agenda had been published, additional information had been received from AES UK and Ireland, in response to comments from Belfast Power Limited in the case officer’s report regarding Kilroot Power Station, which suggested that the forecasted reduction in capacity and eventual closure of Kilroot was inaccurate due to recent legislative changes and planned technological upgrades. She advised that these comments would be relayed to DfI.

            After discussion, the Committee agreed that the response, as outlined (copy available on the Council’s website), be issued to the Department for Infrastructure’s (DfI) Strategic Planning Division on behalf of the Council.

            The Committee was advised that a consultation request had been received from the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) for the proposed application for the construction of a new multi-purpose facility at D3 for berthing of cruise ships, and for lay-by and transient storage of project cargo, break bulk and dry bulk during cruise ship off season. The development comprised of the construction of 340m long solid quay with mooring dolphins, dredging of the berthing pocket and infilling behind the new quay wall using imported clean fill materials, construction of a 25m wide piled relieving slab along the quay length, with heavy duty paving surfacing on the quay/slab hinterland, access road, security gates, access barrier and kiosk at Airport Road West, modular terminal building, shore side facilities, lighting, fencing, and landscaping. (Amended Description).

            The Committee was reminded that previous notification had been received from DfI and had been reported at the Planning Committee in June, 2016. This further consultation had now been received following the receipt of further environmental information resulting in updates to the Environmental Statement and an addendum.

            The Committee agreed that the response, as outlined (copy available on the Council’s website), be issued to the Department for Infrastructure’s (DfI) Strategic Planning Division on behalf of the Council.  

            The Committee was reminded that Section 229 of the Planning (Northern Ireland) Act 2011 (Duty to respond to consultation) placed the previous administrative consultation arrangements in the development management process for planning applications on a statutory basis. It was reported that consultee bodies that had been identified in Schedule 3 of the Planning (General Development Procedure) Order (Northern Ireland) 2015 (“the GDPO”) were statutory consultees, and therefore subject to the duty to respond to statutory consultation requests from another district council, or the Department, acting as the relevant planning authority.

            It was reported that the Statutory Consultee Annual Report, as outlined in Appendix A, outlined the Council’s performance for 2016/17 and highlighted that the Department for Infrastructure had acknowledged that there had been shortcomings with the consultation process and would be establishing a task and finish working group to identify and introduce improvements, to which an officer from the Council had been nominated to attend.

            The Committee noted the contents of the report and agreed to the submission of the Statutory Consultee Annual Report to the Department for Infrastructure as outlined in Appendix A of the report. (Copy available here).

            The Committee noted the receipt of correspondence in respect of a number of planning appeals which had been submitted to the Planning Appeals Commission, together with the outcomes of a range of hearings which had been considered by the Commission.

            The Committee noted a list of decisions which had been taken under delegated authority by the Director of Planning and Place, together with all other planning decisions which had been issued by the Planning Department between 12th June and 7th August, 2017.

            The Development Engagement Manager provided the following information on the Department’s performance up to 31st July, 2017:

            Planning Applications

·        191 applications had been validated in July, 2017;

·        277 applications had been validated in June, 2017; and

·        Overall numbers of applications validated this year had increased by 13% on the same period last year.

            Planning Decisions

·        131 decisions had been issued in July, 2017;

·        220 decisions had been issued in June, 2017;

·        96% approval rate;

·        95% decisions had been issued under delegated authority; and

            No. of applications in system by length of time

·        971 live applications were in the system at end of July, 2017;

·        71% of applications were in the system for less than 6 months; and

·        14 legacy applications were outstanding.

Performance against statutory targets (un-validated management information)

·        The statutory target for processing major development planning applications from the date valid to decision issued or withdrawal date was within an average of 30 weeks. Up to the 31st July, 2017, the average processing time to decide major applications was 60. This, however, included legacy applications and those Major applications which had been delayed whilst a Section 76 agreement had been put in place;

·        The statutory target for processing local development planning applications from the date valid to decision issued or withdrawal date was an average of 15 weeks. Up to the 31st July, 2017, the average processing time to decide local applications was 16.7 weeks; and

·        The statutory target was that 70% of all enforcement cases are progressed to target conclusion within 39 weeks of receipt of complaint. Up to the 31st July, 2017, 70% of enforcement cases had been concluded within 39 weeks.

                  The Committee also noted that the amount of legacy applications that had been completed and that remained in the system, would be included in the performance report next month.   

            The Committee noted the receipt of correspondence from the Department for Infrastructure which related to the Extinguishment of Public Rights of Way at:

·        Beechpark Street and Beechnut Place;

·        Jamaica Road;

·        Lawther Court;

·        Slievegallion Drive; and

·        The Village.

            The Committee also noted the receipt of correspondence from the Department for Infrastructure which related to the proposed abandonment of Public Rights of Way at:      

·        Lisburn Road, Turning Circle.

            The Committee was advised that correspondence had been received from the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) seeking the Council’s views in respect of proposals for the listing of a number of buildings in Belfast.

            The Committee was reminded that Article 80 (3) of the Planning Act (NI) 2011 required the Agency to consult with the Council before placing any building on the statutory list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest.

            The Committee noted the contents of the report and supported the proposed listings of the following buildings by the Department for Communities:

·        22A Cadogan Park;

·        22 – 24 Windsor Park;

·        26 Windsor Park;

·        28 Windsor Park;

·        30 Windsor Park;

·        32 Windsor Park;

·        114 Marlborough Park Central; and

·        47 Derryvolgie Avenue.

            The Committee also agreed to defer consideration of the listing of 30 Malone Park so that further clarification could be sought from the Historic Environment Division regarding the process that had been undertaken to list the property.

            The Committee considered the following report:

“1.0     Purpose of Report or Summary of main Issues

            The purpose of this report is to update members on the progress of the new Belfast Local Development Plan (LDP) and outline the next steps in the plan development process.

2.0       Recommendations

            It is recommended that Members note the progress on the LDP.  The main issues to report include:

·        The Preferred Options Paper (POP) Consultation Report and now been completed and has been published on our website.

·        Note progress on a number of commissioned research studies including the Strategic Housing Needs Assessment (SHNA), Urban Capacity Study for residential and employment land, a Retail and Leisure Capacity Study, the Open Spaces Strategy and the Blue and Green Infrastructure masterplan

·        Work is ongoing on the preparation of the draft Plan Strategy and members will be invited to workshops in the Autumn as policy is being composed

3.0       Main report

            Background and Context

3.1       Draft POP Consultation report was presented to Committee in June.  Work on this report has now been completed at was published on our website on Wednesday 26 July.  The feedback from this consultation process will now feed into the development of the draft plan strategy.

3.2       It is necessary to continue to build upon this extensive evidence base as we work towards the preparation of the draft Plan Strategy – the first of the two development plan documents that will form the final LDP.  In accordance with regional policy and best practice in plan preparation, a need has been identified for a further three inter-related pieces of research.  These can be summarised as follows:

?       Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) – Whilst the Housing Growth Options report considered the overall number of housing units required in Belfast to 2035, the Strategic Planning Policy Statement (SPPS) requires the completion of a Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) and Housing Market Analysis (HMA) to consider the right mix and balance of housing required in terms of tenures, types and sizes.  Whilst much of the HMA work was undertaken to inform the Housing Growth Options Study, this will now be built upon to provide a detailed assessment of need.  This will provide robust evidence in relation to the mix of houses of different sizes required and the balance of tenures, such as open market housing, social housing, and other affordable housing types.  It will also consider needs associated specialist housing types, such as homes for older people, private rented accommodation, student housing and needs associated with the Traveller community.

?       Urban Capacity Study (UCS) – The SPPS for Northern Ireland requires that an UCS be completed to “assess the potential for future housing growth within the urban footprint and the capacity for different types and densities of housing.” In addition, the SPPS requires that “LDPs should identify previously developed land within settlements for potential economic development” with the need to “offer a range and choice of sites in terms of size and location.”  An UCS has been commissioned to assess in detail  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

Aditional ItemAdditional       The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 7th June, it had been agreed that the Council would participate in a joint working group linked to the preparation of the Local Development Plans, which would comprise of the planning authorities in the Metropolitan area and that the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the Planning Committee had been nominated to serve on the working group.

            It was reported that the inaugural meeting was scheduled for 4th September, 2017 and a draft agenda had been included in the report which included the following items: Membership and governance for the group; Terms of Reference; Timetables for each Local Development Plan; Information availability and sharing; Individual council priorities and potential synergies, together with key areas of discussion, such as the environment, housing, retail, transport and infrastructure.

                                                                                                                                    Noted.

            With the permission of the Chairperson, the Director of Planning and Place provided the Committee with an update regarding the rotation of staff on the Strategic and Major Planning Application Team, and the Local Planning Application Team, within the Planning and Place Department.

            The Committee noted the update and that contact details for the teams would be sent to the Members in due course.

            The Committee was reminded that the application had been on the agenda and case officer reports had been published in March and April, 2017, however, the application had not been presented at either of the Committee Meetings.

            The Committee was also reminded that, at its meeting on 13th April, before presentation of the application commenced, the Committee, given the issues which had been raised regarding the ratification of the Gasworks Masterplan, the relationship between the proposed tower block and the impact on the surrounding housing, and consistency in the approach to major developments, had agreed to defer consideration of the application to enable a site visit to be undertaken to acquaint itself with the location and the proposal at first hand.

            The case officer informed the Committee that, after the agenda had been published, the following additional information had been received from the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, which raised the following points:

·        high social housing need in the local area (104 applicants on waiting list, 84 in housing stress and 20 allocations over the previous year (September, 2016);

·        the site was located within a larger social housing zoning; and

·        BMAP was the primary consideration in determining planning applications unless material considerations dictated otherwise.

            The case officer outlined the response of the Planning Department to the aforementioned issues raised, as outlined in the Late Items Report Pack. 

            She presented the application and highlighted that further consideration had been given to the application in the second addendum report, in light of additional and changes to the material circumstances.

            She concluded that the public consultation exercise had been conducted in line with legislation and advised that the proposal for an office development at this location was recommended for approval.

            The Chairperson advised that deputations who wished to speak on the application should deal with the technical aspects and planning considerations of the application.

            The Committee received a representation from Councillor Hargey. She outlined a range of objections to the case officer’s recommendation for approval. She suggested that the Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan (BMAP) should be a material consideration as it was the most recent planning document and zoned the entire site for housing, and applications for the site should not be considered until an overall masterplan had been agreed and adopted. She also suggested that there was a high need for social housing in the area and 86 families were in housing stress, mainly needing three bedroom houses. She raised concerns regarding land which had been zoned for housing being changed for business interests, and suggested that there was a lack of respect for inner city communities and their needs.

            During points of clarification, she also suggested that there had been disparity between how the Committee dealt with sites zoned for housing, especially when the sites were located in the City centre.

            The Committee also received representation from Ms. N. McFall, representing the Markets Development Association (MDA), and Ms. C. Bailey, MLA.

            Ms. McFall outlined a range of objections to the proposal. She  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

            The Committee agreed to deal with the applications together, however, noted that separate decisions were required for each of the applications, and that deputations who wished to speak had been allocated double the standard allocated time to make their representations.

            The Chairperson advised the Committee that a late request to speak had been received from Councillor McCusker. Accordingly, the Committee agreed that he could make representation regarding the applications.

            The case officer presented the aforementioned application - LA04/2016/2360/F, followed by the second application relating to the same retail park - LA04/2017/0361/F.

            He informed the Committee that, after the agenda had been published, an additional 5 objections had been received regarding LA04/2016/2360/F and LA04/2017/0361/F, together with a petition, which raised the following points:

·        the site was an opportunity to address housing inequality in North Belfast;

·        Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 required due regard to the promotion of equality of opportunity;

·        the district centre status of the site in BMAP was of declining influence. The site had been vacant for 10 years and the district centre use was not needed;

·        approving the application would use up limited space required for housing and to tackle housing inequality in North Belfast. The Planning Committee had stated there was a need to address housing need through the emerging Local Plan;

·        requested copies of the equality screening template, and any other records kept of compliance with the statutory equality duty, in relation to the work which had been undertaken under the Council’s functions in relation to processing, consideration and recommendations on the two Hillview planning applications;

·        raised concerns regarding the Council’s obligation to fulfil human rights and equality obligations, and not discriminate on grounds of religious belief or political opinion and compliance with the Section 75 Equality Duty;

·        the adverse impact on existing retailing in the locality; and

·        clarification had been sought on question 25 of the planning application form (average no. of vehicles/ persons attending premises daily); and

·        suggested that a transport assessment form should be required.

            The case officer outlined the response of the Planning Department to the aforementioned issues raised, as outlined in the Late Items Report Pack. He highlighted that the proposal for consideration was for a retail development and the site was zoned as a District Centre in BMAP.  

            The Committee received representations from Councillors Collins, Clarke, McCabe, Campbell and McCusker. They outlined a range of objections to the case officer’s recommendation for approval, as follows:

·        zoning of housing in North Belfast;

·        support and need for social housing in North Belfast and cases of homelessness in the area;

·        procedural flaws regarding use of the relevant plan (BUAP and BMAP) and that the BUAP shouldn’t’ be discounted;

·        application and policy flaws;

·        that there was no mention of asbestos in the case officer’s report;

·        the development would prejudice discussions with NIHE;

·        potential of vesting the land for social housing;

·        oppose the development on behalf of local residents;

·        the previous retail outlet had been a failed venture;

·        cross community  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

            (Alderman McGimpsey and Councillors Carson, Dorrian, Lyons and Mullan took no part in the discussion or decision-making of the application since they had not been in attendance at the meeting on 16th May when it had originally been considered).

            The Committee was reminded that the application had been originally presented to the Planning Committee on 16th May and had been deferred so that a site visit could be undertaken and also for information to be submitted from the applicant regarding reflective glazing.

            He highlighted that the case officer’s report of 16th May had included a recommendation to refuse the application, however, subsequently, amended application form and drawings had been submitted which had reduced the number of apartments from 6 to 5, together with details of the proposed reflective glazing. He pointed out that the amended application had been re-advertised and the neighbours re-notified and no further objections had been received.

            He advised that the amended plans fully addressed the Planning Department’s concerns regarding the proposal and it was now recommended for approval.

            The Committee agreed (with one Member opposed) to grant approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.

The Committee considered the aforementioned application.

            The case officer advised that the following condition outlined in 12.0 of the report was no longer required: ‘16. Tree numbers 22 and 24 as shown on approved drawing 15A, date stamped 28 February 2017, shall be retained and protected in accordance with the tree protection measures as set out in “The Tree Survey Report” date stamped 23 December 2016.Reason: To protect bats.’

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

            The case officer outlined the proposal for the redevelopment of Andersonstown Leisure Centre to include demolition of existing leisure centre and Ulster Bank and the erection of a new multi-purpose leisure facility building, including family leisure water provision, 25m swimming pool, learner pool, fitness suite, fitness studios, ancillary rooms and associated works, public and service vehicles access via Andersonstown Road and secondary service vehicle access from Owenvarragh Park. External facilities included 2 five-a-side pitches, cycle and car parking, coach drop off points, landscaping, external water slide flumes and plaza area to the front of the centre and open space at the rear.

            It was noted that the application, in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation, had been presented to the Committee since the Council was the applicant and it was also a major application.

            During discussion, Members were apprised of information regarding the car parking ticketing system, flood lighting and the proposed opening hours of the complex and the case officer highlighted the planning conditions which related to these issues under 12.0 in the case officer’s report.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

The Committee considered the aforementioned application.

            The Case Officer advised that the Council’s Conservation Officer had objected to the proposed extensions as they considered that it would have a negative impact on the interpretation of the Conservation Area as a late Victorian / Edwardian commercial city centre. He advised that these concerns had been carefully considered by Officers, however, taking into account the context of the existing building and the heights and roof forms of adjoining buildings with the main views of 9 Donegall Square West (Grade A listed building) which would remain uninterrupted, along with the upgrade secured to the ground floor shop units, the impact on the conservation area was considered to be acceptable and not considered in this case to result in harm.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

            The Committee considered the application for an apartment development (28 units) with associated car parking, landscaping and amendments to existing access (renewal of approved application Z/2008/2449/F).

During discussion, the Committee raised issues regarding access, car parking and the replacement of trees.

            After discussion, given the issues which had been raised regarding the traffic and impact on the trees, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of the application to enable a site visit to be undertaken to allow the Committee to acquaint itself with the location and the proposal at first hand. The Committee also agreed that the Council’s Tree Officer be invited to attend the site visit and Transport NI be asked for clarification on their position and attend the next Planning Committee, if possible. 

            The case officer advised that the site was located within the curtilage of a Grade B1 Listed Building – Bloomfield Presbyterian Church, and the Cyprus Conservation Area.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.

(Councillor Lyons, who had declared an interest in this application, took no part in the debate or decision-making process, and left the table. Councillor Johnston acted as Chairperson for this application.)

            The Case officer advised that the site was located within the settlement development limits of Belfast as defined in the Belfast Urban Area Plan (BUAP) and Draft Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan, and was within the North Parade/South Parade Area of Townscape Character (Draft BMAP).

            During discussion, the case officer advised that although the existing building contributed strongly to the character of the area and also to the character and setting of Cooke Centenary Presbyterian Church (Grade B1 Listed Building), a structural engineer’s report had been obtained which demonstrated that it was not feasible to retain the existing building, given the level of structural defects identified. He explained that the proposed replacement building and the proposed commercial use were considered to be acceptable given the planning history on the site, the business uses in the surrounding area and the fact that this was an extension of an existing business.

            Proposal

            Moved by Councillor Hussey, and

            Seconded by Councillor Dorrian,

      That the Committee agrees to approve the application, in line with the draft conditions outlined in the addendum report, and delegate authority to the Director of Planning and Place to agree and finalise the planning conditions

            On a vote by show of hands eight Members voted for the proposal and four against and it was declared carried.

(Councillor Lyons returned to the Committee table at this point)

(The meeting was adjourned for 10 minutes.)

            The case officer outlined the proposal for the conversion of a dwelling to a HMO.

            The case officer explained that, after assessment, the application had been recommended for refusal on the grounds that the proposal was contrary to Policy HMO 1 of the Houses in Multiple Occupation Subject Plan for Belfast City Council Area 2015, in that the number of HMO dwelling units in the Donegall Road HMO Policy Area (HMO 2/07) already exceeded the 30% threshold and no further HMO development was permitted.

            The Committee refused the application for the reasons as set out in the case officer’s report.

            The Committee considered the aforementioned application.

            The case officer informed the Committee that, after the agenda had been published, a revised landscape plan had been received which showed additional planting, of which neighbours had been notified. She advised that the neighbour notification period expired on 21st August and that additional planting was unlikely to raise any new issues.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place to deal with any further comments or issues that might be received regarding the application.

            It was noted that the application, in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation, had been presented to the Committee since the Council was the applicant.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.

            The case officer outlined the proposal for 53 dwellings comprising of 34 semi-detached dwellings, 3 detached, and 16 two-bed apartments, in addition to open space, landscaping, and associated access infrastructure. He advised that the proposal had been reduced from 74 dwellings in the original submission.

            He informed the Committee that, after the agenda had been published, an additional 3 objections had been received, which raised the following points:

·        impact on protected wildlife species;

·        contrary to PPS7 and LC1 of a PPS7 – loss of privacy and overshadowing;

·        impact on character – high density;

·        impacts of traffic and potential impact on road safety; and

·        construction and stability issues.

            The case officer outlined the response of the Planning Department to the aforementioned issues raised, as outlined in the Late Items Report Pack. 

            After discussion, the Committee, given the issues which have been raised regarding access and drainage at the site, agreed to defer consideration of the application to enable a site visit to be undertaken to allow the Committee to acquaint itself with the location and the proposal at first hand. 

            The Case officer advised that the application proposed the erection of a warehouse unit and secure yard for use as a depot for mobile collection and shredding vehicles with on-site shredding and baling of waste facilities and its associated head office (sui generis) (part retrospective).

The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

            The Committee considered the aforementioned application for amendments to the previously approved hotel under LA04/2015/0418/F and LA04/2016/1050/NMC to increase the number of bedrooms from 206 to 237, through a reconfiguration of the internal space (31 additional rooms).

            The case officer advised that the proposed changes relate purely to internal reconfiguration works with no external alterations to the previously approved building.

            The Committee approved the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and, in accordance with Section 76 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place, in conjunction with the City Solicitor, to enter into discussions with the applicant to explore the scope of any Planning Agreements which might be realised by way of developer contributions and, if so, to enter into such an Agreement on behalf of the Council. The Committee also delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

            The Case officer advised that, after the agenda had been published, the following additional objection had been received, which raised the following points:

·        the height of the development;

·        impact on neighbouring properties;

·        loss of light; and

·        impact on the setting of listed building and the conservation area.

            The case officer outlined the response of the Planning Department to the aforementioned issues raised, as outlined in the Late Items Report Pack and clarified issues regarding the height, line-up of the cornice line and set-back of the proposal.  

            The Committee approved the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and, in accordance with Section 76 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place, in conjunction with the City Solicitor, to enter into discussions with the applicant to explore the scope of any Planning Agreements which might be realised by way of developer contributions and, if so, to enter into such an Agreement on behalf of the Council, and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

            The case officer outlined the proposal for amendments to a previous planning approval (Z/2012/0645/RM) to include changes to site layout, house types and modifications to plot arrangements including ancillary buildings and landscaping for phase 3 of the development comprising of 37 dwellings in total.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.

            The Case officer advised that the site was located within the development limits for Belfast. The site was zoned for Industry and Commerce within the BUAP 2001. The site was within land zoned for housing (uncommitted); and was also a Site of Local Nature Conservation Importance (SLNCI) in draft BMAP. A Community Greenway also ran along the west and to the rear of the site in draft BMAP.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.

The Committee considered the aforementioned application.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.

            The Committee approved the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out in the case officer’s report and, in accordance with Section 76 of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2015, delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place, in conjunction with the City Solicitor, to enter into discussions with the applicant to explore the scope of any Planning Agreements which might be realised by way of developer contributions and, if so, to enter into such an Agreement on behalf of the Council, and delegated power to the Director of Planning and Place for the final wording of the conditions.

            The Case officer advised that permission was sought to modify conditions 3, 4 and 6 of planning approval under Z/2015/0182/F to facilitate changes to the hard and soft landscaping on the development of an office block.

            The Committee granted approval to the application, subject to the imposing of the conditions set out within the case officer’s report.