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

Figure 2 - Floor Plans

Existing

Figure 3 - Floor Plans

Proposed

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

Figure 5 - Views travelling north along Cumber Road

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.