Agenda item

            The Principal Planning officer provided the Members with the details of the application.

            She outlined the key issues which had been considered during the assessment of the proposed development, including:

·        the principle of re-development and use;

·        scale, design, massing and layout;

·        impact on the Surrounding Character, Area of Townscape Character;

·        impact on neighbouring amenity;

·        provision of internal and outdoor amenity;

·        parking and traffic issues; and

·        water and sewage

            The Members were advised that eight letters of objection had been received in response to the initial and amended schemes. Seven were from two individuals and the other was from Councillor T. Kelly, who had supported the comments from one of the objectors.  Councillor McKeown had also made representation and requested that the application was brought before the Committee for the reasons set out in the objection letters. The Principal Planning officer explained that it was considered that some of the initial issues of concern had been resolved following amendments to the scheme.

The objections referenced inadequate parking provision, overlooking/dominance of neighbouring properties, noise/smell from balconies resulting from talking/smoking, food waste, density, need/economic impact of an additional retail unit, and that the design was contrary to Area of Townscape Character.

The Case officer’s response to the points raised were dealt with in report.

The Principal Planning officer explained that the proposal was within the Urban Area and the development limits of Belfast. The proposed uses of retail on the ground floor with residential above was compatible on the site and therefore the principle was acceptable providing the proposal was compliant with all relevant polices and

material considerations.

She advised that the proposed design, scale, height, mass and appearance was, on balance, acceptable within the surrounding context. The proposed residential units were of a size and layout which were acceptable with all having access to amenity provision.  She highlighted that a reduced standard of amenity was considered acceptable as the site sat in a highly accessible location close to local amenities including parks and a contribution would be made towards local park amenities.

The Members were advised that the proposal had been amended during the processing both to ensure that it would not result in an unacceptable impact in terms of dominance and overlooking on neighbouring terraces and to ensure that the design would sit more comfortably both on the Lisburn Road and the residential street.

She reported that DFI Roads, Environmental Health, the Urban Design Officer, NI Water and Rivers Agency had been consulted in respect of the application and had offered no objection to the proposal.

The Members were advised that, as the development proposed fell short in terms of private and shared amenity, the developer had agreed to contribute to local public amenity to offset the reduction.

The Chairperson welcomed Ms. C. Flanagan and Ms. L. Dawson, objectors, to the meeting.  Together they advised the Committee Members that:

·        they were concerned that the recent amendment to the plans included double doors which opened onto the balconies/terraces;

·        there was no precedent for double doors opening onto the street in the area and that they would encourage the use of the balconies for socialising, including anti-social noise and smoking;

·        the amended plans showed that the ground floor terrace would be even closer to the front door of 1 Rathcool Street;

·        the balconies/terraces would result in overlooking of nos. 1 and 2 Rathcool Street from all levels;

·        the bin collection point had been moved and was now outside the front door of 1 Rathcool Street which would be an eyesore;

·        residents of Rathcool Street already had outstanding issues in relation to their own bin collection point, beside No. 2 Rathcool Street, including fly tipping, contamination, graffiti and anti-social behaviour;

·        another collection point opposite the existing one would compound the issue; and

·        there was a severe lack of parking provision in the area already and that a nearby apartment block had underground parking included.

A Member queried why there was no parking included in the development.  The Principal Planning officer advised the Members that the Travel Plan had been accepted by DFI Roads.  DFI Roads was satisfied that sufficient on-street parking was available in the surrounding area and had requested that green travel measures, in the form of travel cards, be supplied to each apartment and funded for 3 years to encourage the uptake in the use of public transport.  The developer had agreed to the measures being implemented.

            A further Member requested information on overlooking and the bin collection issues raised.  The Principal Planning officer outlined that it was acceptable in urban situations where neighbours could see into each other’s front gardens in a high density development.  The balconies would not intrude into the private amenity space to the rear of properties, which was afforded greater protection.

In relation to the bins, she explained that they were originally to be placed in the entry which was unacceptable to officers. She outlined that they had since been moved in curtilage within the building and that a management plan would ensure that the bins were brought out and back into the storage area.

            A number of Members expressed concerns with DFI Roads’ assessment which confirmed that there was adequate on street parking available in the area.

Moved by Councillor Whyte

Seconded by Councillor McCullough and

Resolved – that the Members of the Committee agree to recommend that, in accordance with the Council decision of 4th May 2021, the Chief Executive would exercise her delegated authority to defer the application in order that:

·        the Committee would undertake a site visit to allow the Members to better familiarise themselves with the proposals and the site at first hand; and

·        DFI Roads be requested to attend the next meeting in order to answer Members queries in relation to the parking issues.