Agenda and minutes
PDF 121 KBVenue: Lavery Room (Room G05), City Hall
Contact: Barry Flynn Tel: 028 9027 0610
| No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Apologies Minutes: Apologies for inability to attend were reported from Alderman R. Patterson and Councillors Garrett, McCarthy and A. Newton.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest Minutes: No declarations were reported.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Request for Deputations Minutes: It was noted that no new requests had been received.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Deputation from the Inner North Campus Development Group - University of Ulster Planning Application Minutes: The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 7th February, it had agreed to receive a number of representatives from the Inner North Campus Development Group to provide Members with information on their concerns in connection with the proposals in respect of the University of Ulster’s planning application at York Street. Accordingly, the Committee welcomed to the meeting Mr. P. O’Neill from the Ashton Community Trust, Mr. F. Dempsey from the Carrick Hill Residents’ Association, Mr. S. Baker from the Sailortown Regeneration Group, Mr. D. Hill from the Forum for Alternative Belfast, Mr. C. Bradley and Ms. C. McGrath from Community Places in relation to the application.
Mr. O’Neill outlined to the Committee the purpose, aims and principles of the Campus Development Group which were to create and maximise tangible and measurable benefits for the community and for the University of Ulster by maintaining and developing a permanent, collaborative structure between the Group and the University to ensure effective community participation at all stages, with an emphasis on genuine partnership working with a solution-based focus.
Mr. Hill informed the Committee that the Group had lodged four objections against the University of Ulster’s York Street Development with regard to: overall massing; orientation; the issue of student housing not having been taken into consideration; and car parking. An objection had also been made against the multi-storey car park proposal at Frederick Street, in that it was at the expense of a social housing site which had been zoned in the Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan.
The Group answered a number of questions put by Members in respect of their concerns and then retired from the meeting.
The Committee noted the information which had been provided and noted also that the University of Ulster York Street Development planning application would be submitted to the Committee for consideration in the near future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Streamlined Planning Applications - Decisions Issued Minutes: The Committee noted a list of decisions on streamlined planning applications which had been issued by the Planning Service between 29th January and 13th February.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Appeal Dates Notified Minutes: The Committee noted information which had been received regarding the date for the holding of a future appeal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Deferred items still under consideration Minutes: The Committee noted a list of deferred items which were still under consideration by the Planning Office.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Planning Applications Additional documents:
Minutes: The Committee noted a list of new planning applications which had been received by the Planning Service from 29th January until 11th February.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Planning Management Board Referral Minutes: Prior to the reconsideration of the undernoted application, the Committee was reminded that the former Policy and Resources Committee, at its meeting on 20th October, 2006, had agreed, in respect of planning applications where significant opposition was evident, to delegate full Council powers to the Town Planning Committee to reject the Divisional Planning Manager’s opinion and refer such applications to the Planning Management Board for adjudication. This was on the condition that 75% of the Members in attendance at the Committee meeting voted in favour of such a course of action. Accordingly, the Committee reconsidered the undernoted item.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Z/2011/0037/F Orchard House Nursing Home 2 Cherryvalley Park Minutes: The Committee considered further a planning application in relation to extensions and alterations to the nursing home to increase occupancy from thirty six bedrooms to fifty two bedrooms and ancillary accommodation with external car parking and landscaping with temporary opening of former access onto the road for use during construction in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered an opinion to approve.
A prolonged discussion ensued in respect of the application and the representatives from the Planning Service addressed a range of Members’ questions in respect of the scale and mass of the application and the amendments which had been made thereto which had resulted in a change of opinion from that which had originally been indicated by the Planning Service.
After discussion, it was
Moved by Councillor McNamee Seconded by Councillor Hanna
That the opinion of the Divisional Planning Manager to approve the extensions and alterations to the nursing home to increase occupancy from thirty six bedrooms to fifty two bedrooms and ancillary accommodation with external car parking and landscaping with temporary opening of former access onto the road for use during construction, be rejected on the grounds that a previous planning application which had been granted approval approximately twenty years ago had resulted in the site reaching the limit of acceptable development, that the current proposal would jeopardise the designation of the Cherryvalley Area of Townscape Character and that a number of local objections had been received regarding the scale and mass of the proposal and, accordingly, the Committee agrees that the application be referred to the Planning Management Board for adjudication.
On a vote by show of hands four Members voted for the proposal and twelve against. Since the proposal had not achieved the required support of 75% of the Members present and voting, the motion was declared lost. The Committee agreed, with one Member voting against, to adopt the revised opinion of the Divisional Planning Manager to approve the application.
(As the decision was not unanimous it was subject to ratification by the Council.)
Arising from the discussion, the Committee requested that a letter be issued to the Divisional Planning Manager requesting that a list of criteria for Planning Management Board referrals be provided to enable Members to have a greater awareness of the types of applications which could be referred for adjudication.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Z/2011/0902/F 46 Sicily Park Minutes: The Committee considered further a planning application in relation to the erection of a two storey garage with new access from Priory Gardens in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered an opinion to approve.
After discussion, the Committee agreed, with one Member voting against, to adopt the opinion of the Divisional Planning Manager to approve the application.
(As the decision was not unanimous it was subject to ratification by the Council.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Z/2012/0806/F 114 Springfield Road Minutes: The Committee considered further a planning application in relation to the change of use of the ground floor to an amusement arcade in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered an opinion to approve.
After discussion, the Committee agreed, with one Member voting against, to adopt the opinion of the Divisional Planning Manager to approve the application.
(As the decision was not unanimous it was subject to ratification by the Council.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Z/2012/1108/F 2 Oceanic Avenue Minutes: The Committee considered further a planning application in relation to the change of use and sub division from a vacant office unit to a taxi booking office in respect of which the Divisional Planning Manager had offered an opinion to approve.
After discussion, the Committee agreed, with two Members voting against, to adopt the opinion of the Divisional Planning Manager to approve the application.
(As the decision was not unanimous it was subject to ratification by the Council.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Reconsidered Items Minutes: The Committee considered further the undernoted planning applications and adopted the recommendations of the Divisional Planning Manager thereon:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Schedule of Planning Applications Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee considered the schedule of planning applications which had been submitted by the Divisional Planning Manager in respect of the Council area and agreed to adopt the recommendations contained therein with the exception of those referred to below:
Chairman
|
|||||||||||||||||||||