Agenda item

The Principal Planning officer presented the main details of the application to the Committee, for the subdivision of an existing dwelling into two apartments with a two-storey rear extension.

She explained that the surrounding area was residential and that the site was located within the Lisburn Road draft Area of Townscape Character in dBMAP (2014).

The Committee was advised that the application had been submitted before the Committee as NI Water objected to the proposal.

The key issues which had been considered during the assessment included:

·        the principle of dwelling at that location;

·        character/layout/design;

·        private amenity/landscaping;

·        access/parking;

·        impact on neighbouring amenity;

·        impact on an established residential area; and

·        the NI Water consultation response.

The Principal Planning officer explained that the area displayed both dwelling houses and apartments as well as conversion to apartments and therefore, in principle, the conversion was acceptable. She described how the scale and massing of the extension was considered sympathetic with the existing dwelling and the surrounding area. The Members were advised that the internal space standards were exceeded, and that the private amenity space provided was also well in excess of that recommended.

She outlined that NI Water had not recommended refusal but that it had stated that public foul and public storm capacity was not available at present to service the proposed development.

The Principal Planning officer explained that no supporting data or information had been provided by NI Water in respect of the application. She outlined that, while the objection was a material consideration, it was a matter for the Committee to determine the weight to be attached to it.

The applicant had been advised to liaise with NI Water and NI Water had advised that it intended to upgrade the Waste Water Treatment Works. The Principal Planning officer explained that the proposed apartments would contained 3 bedrooms, which was the same as the existing dwelling and that the maximum number of occupants was not therefore being increased. She outlined that whilst it was acknowledged that each apartment would have its own kitchen and toilet which might generate more waste water, it was considered that the modest scale of the scheme presented a significantly like for like proposal which would not exacerbate the impact on the waste water system to such a level that would warrant a refusal. She advised the Committee that the applicant was currently in discussions with NI Water regarding a potential solution and that it was considered that the issue could be resolved by means of a pre occupation condition.

The Committee was advised that NI Water had a duty to connect significant committed development across the city to its waste water infrastructure. Such development, which included unimplemented permissions for over 20,000 houses and significant levels of commercial space across the city, would not all come forward at once and some might not come forward at all.  It was therefore considered unlikely that the proposal would result in a significant impact on waste water infrastructure over and above the existing use of the site.

            It was reported that one objection had been received, citing issues with on-street parking in the area.  The Principal Planning officer explained that DFI Roads had been consulted and had no objections.

            A Member queried whether the officers had the figures in relation to the existing number of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) and flats on that street.  She also queried whether, given the Local Development Plan (LDP) was at a more advanced stage, prematurity would be a factor in respect of the Committee taking a decision on the application without those figures.

            In response, the Principal Planning officer advised that unfortunately officers did not have those figures to hand but that the LDP had not yet been adopted and that officers were content that the application could be approved.  The Divisional Solicitor advised the Committee

that the SPPS required that the Committee considered existing policies until such times as the draft plan Strategy had been adopted and therefore limited weight should be given to the draft plan.  She added that officers did not feel that the application would engage the issue of prematurity and that prematurity applied in cases where the type and scale of development would prejudice the delivery of the aspirations within the LDP.  However, it was up to the Committee to consider if it wished to defer the application in order to receive the figures which had been requested.

            Moved by Councillor Groogan,

            Seconded by Councillor O’Hara and

            Resolved – that the Committee agrees to defer consideration of the application in order that it would be provided with the figures of existing HMOs and flats within the area, in light of concerns about potential prematurity in relation to the draft LDP Plan Strategy.