View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Appendix 11
Derry City and Strabane District Council Planning Committee Report
COMMITTEE DATE: 4th December 2019
APPLICATION No: LA11/2019/0363/F
DATE OF RECEIPT: 8th April 2019
APPLICATION TYPE: Full Planning Application
PROPOSAL: Change of use - part of existing vacant dwelling to hairdressing salon (A1 Use
Class)
LOCATION: 56 Cumber Road, Claudy BT47 4JA
APPLICANT: Mr George Wilson
AGENT: Mr Don Forrest
ADVERTISEMENT: 14.05.19
STATUTORY EXPIRY: 13.05.19
STATUTORY EXPIRY: 13.05.19
RECOMMENDATION: Refusal
REASON FOR PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE: The recommendation is to refuse.
All planning application forms, drawings, letters etc. relating to this planning application are available
to view on www.planningni.gov.uk.
1. Description of Proposed Development
This is a full planning application for the retention of a part change of use of a residential dwelling
to a hairdressing salon at 56 Cumber Road, Claudy, Londonderry BT47 4JA. The building is currently
vacant.
The Site Layout Plan - (Figure 1) highlights the building where the proposed hairdressing salon will
be located. Parking is proposed to the front of the building. Figure 3 below annotates the proposed
floor plans of the salon which includes four chairs at a styling area, three chairs at shampoo sinks,
Appendix 11
two chairs at a blow dry bar, one chair at a nail bar and one chair at a make-up counter. The plans
also include a small kitchen, staff area, unisex toilet, small reception and waiting area. The
building’s exterior will remain unaltered. The rear of the building will remain as its former use.
This part of the building is also vacant.
Figure 1 – Site Layout Plan
Appendix 11
2. EIA Determination
This application has been screened by Council and as the development does not meet any
thresholds, as set down in The Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations
(Northern Ireland) 2017, an EIA determination is not required.
3. HRA Determination
There is no watercourse directly abutting this site therefore as there is no hydrological link it is
unlikely that there will be any adverse effects from development works on integrity of any
National or European site.
There are no trees or landscape features on this site which will be impacted by this proposal.
Therefore, it is unlikely that this proposal will adversely affect a priority species or their habitat
which is afforded protection.
4. Site and Surrounding Area
The proposed site is located within an existing group of buildings on Cumber Road. The buildings
comprise of a courtyard of single storey properties which are considered to be of a vernacular
nature. The buildings have hipped roofs and a small archway to the front. The finishes of the
building include pebble dashed render, white PVC windows and grey slate roof tiles. The adjoining
property at the front (no. 56b) remains in residential use, there is a Veterinary premises within
the courtyard (no. 56a) and the remainder of the buildings appear to be vacant or used for
agricultural storage.
The site is located within an area of open countryside as identified in Derry Area Plan 2011. The
site is also within the Sperrin AONB. The surrounding area is rural in character with agricultural
land. It is also in the vicinity of Comber House, which is a Grade B1 Listed Building located North
West of the application site (approx. 110m), however the site lies outside of the Listed Building
curtilage. The site lies approximately 800m south west from the village of Claudy as defined in the
DAP 2011.
Appendix 11
Figure 4 – Photo of the Application Site (highlighted in red is the section in which the part
change of use applies)
Appendix 11
5. Site Constraints
Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) – Sperrin.
Area of Local Nature and Amenity Importance (AoLNCAI) - Map SE1 Derry Area Plan.
Archaeological Site and Monument- POLREF: LDY029:013 approx. 110m North West of Site.
Listed Building Cumber House approx. 110m North West of Site.
6. Neighbour Notification
7. Relevant Site History
A/2014/0117/F- Adjoining 56 Cumber Road, Claudy. Change of use - part of existing disused farm
buildings to veterinary surgery. PERMISSION GRANTED – 30/6/14
8. Policy Framework
Regional Development Strategy for Northern Ireland (RDS) 2025
Derry Area Plan (DAP) 2011
Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS)
Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 2 - Natural Heritage
Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 3 - Access, Movement and Parking
Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 6 - Archaeology and the Built Heritage
Appendix 11
Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 21 - Sustainable Development in the Countryside:
9. Consultee Responses
Environmental Health- no objections.
DFI Roads- no objections subject to standard conditions and informatives.
NI Water- no objections.
HED-Historic Buildings & Historic Monuments- Content with the proposal, with standard
informatives/advice.
10. Representations
There have been no letters of support or objection submitted in relation to this application.
11. Planning Assessment and Other Material Considerations
Section 6 (4) of The Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 requires the Council to make planning
decisions in accordance with the local development plan, unless material considerations indicate
otherwise.
This proposal has therefore been assessed against the policy framework listed in paragraph 8 and all
other material considerations including relevant planning history, consultation responses and
representations.
The SPPS introduces transitional arrangements which will operate until the Council’s Plan Strategy has
been adopted. During this period Planning Authorities will apply the existing policy (contained in the
PPSs, referred to as the retained policy) together with the SPPS. Any conflict between the SPPS and
the retained policy must be resolved in favour of the SPPS.
Principle of Development - SPPS
This proposal is for a hairdressing salon and therefore falls within Class A1 (retail) of The Planning Use
Classes Order 2015.
Appendix 11
Policy CTY 1 of PPS 21 does not provide any policy with respect to Class A1 retail development within
the countryside.
Para 6.279 of the SPPS states that retailing will be directed to town centres, and the development of
inappropriate retail facilities in the countryside must be resisted. However, as a general exception to
the overall policy approach some retail facilities which may be considered appropriate outside of
settlement limits include farm shops, craft shops and shops serving tourist or recreational facilities.
Para 6.281 of the SPPS states that Planning Authorities will require applications for main town centre
uses such as this to be considered in the following order of preference (and consider all of the
proposal’s catchment):
primary retail core;
town centres;
edge of centre; and
out of centre locations, only where sites are accessible by a choice of good public transport
modes.
As detailed above, whilst the SPPS has no specific policy with regards to regards to villages and small
settlements, in terms of retail policy, paragraph 6.278 states that policies and proposals for shops in
villages and small settlements must be consistent with the aim, objectives and policy approach for
town centres and retailing, meet local need (i.e. day-to-day needs), and be of a scale, nature and
design appropriate to the character of the settlement. It further goes on to direct cultural and
community facilities to town centres first, i.e. primary retail core, town centres, edge of centre and
out of centre locations, only where sites are accessible by a choice of good public transport Nodes.
Again, this is not specific to small settlements but given the above, it is assumed that the same
sentiment applies.
Claudy is a village as defined in Map SE1 of the Derry area plan therefore there is no defined primary
retail core or town centre. However, in accordance with the policy provisions of the SPPS retail
development should be located along Claudy Main Street where the majority of shops and services
are currently concentrated. Therefore, as this proposal is located in the countryside and therefore
outside of the centre of Claudy village, it is considered contrary to the SPPS in this respect as it is not
consistent with the town centre first approach.
Appendix 11
Officers are of the opinion that the village centre is a more appropriate location and retaining this A1
use in this location will maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of the area, in line with the
SPPS.
In consideration of this proposal, it is concluded that the proposed A1 Retail facility is an unacceptable
use in the countryside and should be located in Claudy Village in line with the SPPS.
Principle of Development - Policy CTY 1 of PPS 21
As this is an application for development within the countryside, and outside any settlement limits as
designated within the DAP, the DAP advises that the tests of the relevant rural strategy will apply in
consideration of proposals. This is provided by PPS 21 which is identified by the SPPS as a retained
policy document. PPS 21 Sustainable Development in the Countryside aims to manage development
in the countryside in a manner consistent with achieving the strategic objectives of the RDS for
Northern Ireland 2035. Policy CTY 1 of PPS 21 states that there are a range of types of development
which in principle are considered to be acceptable in the countryside and that will contribute to the
aims of sustainable development.
The applicant submitted supporting information with the main points as follows:
Unit is currently vacant.
The applicant is a local hairdresser with the view of converting the building to accommodate
her business.
The hairdresser has claimed that her clientele mainly consist of the local farming community.
The agent believes that the current location of the hairdressers (5 Church Street, Claudy
Village) is unsuitable as the business is located at a very busy junction in the centre of Claudy
village, particularly for Senior Citizens and mothers with prams and young children.
The agent states that the existing accommodation is a small ground floor room with a small
toilet, which is “unsuitable for combined staff and customer use”.
The current premises has a three year lease in which rent is subject to change each year.
The agent feels that the site would be ideal to relocate the hairdressers as “it can be adopted
to suit the tenant’s requirements to meet current health and safety standards especially in
respect of the toilet and access requirements.”
They state that it will integrate successfully into the site and with the existing properties with
little or no impact on the immediate surroundings.
Appendix 11
The agent considers the application to be in compliance with the “relevant policies in referred
to in the Planning Policy Statement 21.
In considering this supporting information it is clear there is no site specific over-riding reason for the
current proposed location. It has not been demonstrated that there are no other suitable alternative
sites located within Claudy to accommodate this proposal.
Therefore Officers are of the opinion there are no site specific over-riding reasons why this proposal
is essential at this location and would be contrary to CTY 1 of PPS 21.
As detailed above, though this proposal is not considered acceptable in principle, the proposed must
be further assessed under Policy CTY4, Policies CTY 13 and CTY 14 of PPS 21, PPS 3, PPS6 and PPS 2.
Policy CTY 4 of PPS 21 is also relevant given that this proposal is for the conversion and reuse of an
existing building. This policy states that planning permission will be granted to proposals for the
sympathetic conversion, with adaptation if necessary, of a suitable building for a variety of
alternative uses, including use as a single dwelling, where this would secure its upkeep and
retention. In considering merits of the building to be converted, Policy CTY4 allows for the conversion
of suitable buildings, whereas the SPPS specifies the conversion of locally important buildings. The
SPPS provides examples of the type of locally important buildings which would merit sympathetic
conversion and includes school houses, churches and older traditional barns and outbuilding.
The existing building is considered to be a vernacular residential dwelling, however it is not considered
as a locally important building as detailed in the SPPS, due to its original residential use.
Policy CTY 4 states that such proposals will be required to be of a high design quality and to meet
all of the criteria (a) to (e).
Part (a) of Policy CTY 4 states in the first instance that the building must be of permanent
construction. The building (whilst vacant) is considered to be of permanent construction and
as such Part (a) is complied with.
As this proposal is to be located within a former dwelling within the rural area, Policy CTY 4,
(parts b and c) permit the reuse of such buildings where it would maintain or enhance the
form, character and agricultural features, design and setting of the existing building and would
not have an adverse effect on the character or appearance of the locality. This is also re-
iterated in Policies CTY 13 and CTY 14 of PPS 21. These policies seek to ensure that new
buildings blend sympathetically with their surroundings and do not appear incongruous in the
rural landscape and does not cause a detrimental change to, or further erode the rural
Appendix 11
character of an area. In accordance with the SPPS a greater level of emphasis is placed on
integration than that set down in CTY 13. This therefore must be considered alongside the
location of this site within the AONB. Policy ENV 4 of the DAP is also applicable. It states that
though new development is not normally permitted, an exception is permitted for a change
of use where the buildings and structures are neither unsightly nor obtrusive in the landscape.
As seen in Figure 6 and 7 below, there will be no exterior changes and therefore the building’s
façade will remain unaltered. There are also no extensions proposed and window and door
openings will remain unaltered.
Elevations
Figure 6:
Building’s façade will remain unchanged
Figure 7: Interior Courtyard with previously approved Veterinary surgery on left
Appendix 11
As detailed previously there are no external changes or extension proposed to any part of the
building. In terms of rural character there is no addition of buildings therefore there is no
adverse impact on the existing character of this area. Therefore it is considered that the
proposal will have no adverse impacts on the AONB or AoLNCAI at this location and as such it
complies with Policy CTY 13 of PPS 21, the SPPS and Policy NH 6 of PPS 2 in terms of
integration, design and rural character.
Part (d) of Policy CTY 4 considers potential impacts on amenity and the SPPS also states that
the planning system operates in the public interest of local communities. The basic question
is whether the proposal would unacceptably affect amenities of owners or occupiers of
neighbouring properties and the existing use of the land and buildings that ought to be
protected in the public interest. At present, Officers consider that the proposal will not result
in unacceptable noise nuisance as all hairdressing activities will take place in doors and there
is no proposal for any external plant or ventilation units, therefore having no detrimental
impacts on amenity of this adjoining neighbour.
It is likely the proposal will create an increase on parking within the curtilage of the site. It is
considered that this will have no significant detrimental impacts on amenity of the adjoining
property. It is considered that the proposal will not result in any detrimental visual amenity
issues as the façade of the building will not change.
Environmental Health have been consulted and have no objections in terms of residential
amenity. It is therefore considered that this development would not unacceptably affect the
amenity of surrounding properties and therefore the proposal complies with Paragraph 2.3 of
the SPPS, the DAP 2011and Policy CTY 4 of PPS 21.
Part (e) deals with the nature and scale of the proposal. This is further clarified under para
5.21 where it states that retailing (unless small scale and ancillary to the main use) will not be
considered acceptable.
This proposal is for a Class A1 (retail) Use within the rural countryside. The adjacent uses
include the veterinary practice/surgery. The veterinary practice use falls within category D1
(Cultural and Community Uses) as per the Planning Use Class Order (NI) 2015. It was
Appendix 11
established under that application that the veterinary practice would be a necessary
community facility for the public at this specific location.
It is considered that the nature of this proposal (Class A1 Retail), is not suitable use in the rural
area and given that it is for a hairdressers, it is not an ancillary use to the veterinary surgery
or any residential property. Furthermore, given the scale of this hairdressing use and its
proposed beauty salon use is considered that this would attract up to ten customers at any
one time. There is no site specific reason for this proposal to be located on this rural site.
Therefore, the proposal is contrary to part (e) of Policy CTY 4.
Site Access, parking and utilities are assessed Under Parts (f) and (g) of Policy CTY 4. PPS 3
also sets out the planning policies for vehicular and pedestrian access, transport
assessment, the protection of transport routes and parking. DFI Roads have requested
visibility splays of 4.5m x 110m, parking allocation for all existing/proposed commercial
units to be shown and additional alterations to the public road.
The agent been advised that DFI Roads have requested the above amendments however
no revised plans have been received to date. Therefore Officers have concluded that there
is insufficient information to determine that the proposal can be provided with sufficient
parking and a safe access and therefore the proposal fails to comply with Policies AMP 1, AMP
2 and AMP 7 of PPS 3 and parts (b) and (g) of Policy CTY 4 of PPS 21.
The agent has indicated on the P1 form that they will connect to the mains water supply and
sewerage infrastructure. Therefore the proposal complies with part (f) of Policy CTY 4 in this
respect.
Archaeology & Built Heritage
In terms of archaeology, policy consideration is provided by Policies BH 2, BH 3 and BH 4 of PPS 6
alongside the SPPS. These policies seek to ensure that archaeological remains are preserved and if
any works are required that they are appropriately mitigated against.
The archaeological monument which has been identified is an ecclesiastical site and is approximately
110m North West of the application site – it is described as an early Christian (eighteenth century)
church and graveyard. Given the separation distance and as this proposal is for a change of use it will
not adversely affect this site. HED HM are also content in this respect.
Appendix 11
Given the proximity of this site to a Listed Building (Cumber Church), Policy BH 11 of PPS 6 is applicable
as is the SPPS. Specifically, Policy BH11 of PPS 6 advises that the Planning Authority will not normally
permit development, which would adversely affect the setting of a Listed Building. This building
(Comber House) is a Grade B1 Listed Building and is located 70m northwest of the application site. As
there are no external changes proposed and given the separation distances, it is considered that the
proposal will have no detrimental impact on the setting of the listed building. HED have been
consulted and have no objections.
Natural Heritage & Flood Risk
In consideration Natural Heritage issues in accordance with PPS 2 a Biodiversity checklist was
submitted. The checklist submitted stated there were no visible roof cracks or bat dropping’s which
would suggest a bat roost and therefore no requirement for a Bat Survey to be undertaken.
As detailed previously, as this proposal involves internal amendments only, there will be no significant
site works. Furthermore, here are no waterways directly abutting this site and there are no trees or
landscape features, which will be impacted by this proposal.
There has been no areas of flood risk identified at this site.
Therefore, it is unlikely that this proposal will have an adverse effect in terms of natural heritage or
biodiversity. Thus, the proposal complies with Policies ENV 7 and 8 DAP and Policies NH2, NH5, NH6
of PP2.
13. Conclusion
Overall, as detailed above having considered the relevant policy as set out in Section 7 and other
material considerations, it can be concluded that whilst this scheme would ensure the reuse and
preservation of the building, it is considered that the use is inappropriate within the rural area, and
therefore the proposal is contrary to Policies CTY 1 and CTY 4 of PPS 21 and the SPPS in that there is
no over-riding reason why the proposal is essential and could not be located in a settlement.
Furthermore, it has not been demonstrated that the proposal can provide a safe access and sufficient
parking and as such the proposal is also contrary to PPS 3. Refusal is therefore recommended for the
reasons set out in Section 14 below.
Appendix 11
14. Proposed Reasons for Refusal
1. The proposal is contrary to the Policies CTY 1 of Planning Policy Statement 21 as there are no
overriding reasons why this development is essential and could not be located in a settlement.
2. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and CTY 4 of PPS 21 in that the proposal does not involve the
conversion of a locally important building and the proposed use would not be appropriate to this
countryside location.
3. The proposal is contrary to Policies AMP 1, AMP 2 and AMP 7 of PPS 3 and Policy CTY 4 of PPS 21
in that it has not been demonstrated that it is possible within the application site to provide adequate
visibility splays of 4.5m x 110m where the proposed access joins the Comber Road and inadequate
information has been submitted to demonstrate there is acceptable parking within the site.
Recommended