Bleary site approved for outline planning permission despite accessibility issues

ABC Planning officers have received objections from five different postal addresses in relation to the planning application for the site immediately northwest of 94 Plantation Road, Ballydugan.

One such objector wrote: “I will be closing my cement lane to all lorries by a gate to [only] let cars.”

Another letter, sent from the same address, stated: “I will close the gate at the end of my property, and no lorries will be allowed up my cement lane.”

One resident argued that the laneway could not cope with increased traffic, saying: “If two vehicles meet, one has to reverse to let the other through.

“The lane is currently a health and safety hazard, and adding another dwelling to the lane will increase traffic even more.

“Also, due to increased rainfall and recent use of heavy machinery, the lane is not capable of taking any further traffic.”

Another resident wrote: “The lane off which I expect the entrance to this proposal is a private lane.

“It was originally a single-width rough cart track, and over the decades has been maintained solely by the residents living on the lane. It is not a public road and it is not maintained by the local authority.”

Access issues, however, are outside the remit of planning policy, and Senior Planning Officer, Nicola Creaney explained that the outline application was deemed to be compliant with current regulations.

In the course of a presentation to ABC Planning & Regulatory Services committee members on July 1, she commented: “This is an outline application for an infill dwelling on lands immediately northwest of number 94 Plantation Road, Bleary.

“The application site is located in the rural area. It’s approximately 1.4 kilometres south of Bleary. Officers consider that the proposal accords with the Strategic Planning Policy Statement and all the relevant planning policies.

“Officers are satisfied that the application site constitutes a small gap within an otherwise substantial and continuously built-up frontage, which respects the existing development pattern along the frontage in terms of scale, size, siting and plot size.

“Officers have taken into consideration all material matters, including letters of representation, and considered any material harm that the development would otherwise give rise to can be offset by conditions.

“On this basis, and subject to the conditions, it’s recommended that permission be granted.”

Councillor Peter Lavery (Alliance) expressed concerns regarding accessibility issues, saying: “There’s your indication that this is a private laneway - and some objectors may not allow the lane to be used by this new owner if the house is built.

“Can you provide some clarity as to whether that’s legal? We’re looking at a situation here where we could give an approval on the house, but if the other residents of the lane say it can’t be accessed, is that a consideration?

“Because then it wouldn’t be able to be used as a property if you can’t legally get vehicles up that private laneway.

“What rights would this resident have in terms of access to the property up this private laneway, if the other residents are saying that they own it and they’re declining admission?”

The Senior Planning Officer confirmed that her Department did not have enforcement powers regarding accessibility.

“On the private laneway, Planning doesn’t confer title. The issues in regard to access to the site is a legal issue which any occupier of the property would need to consider when they’re purchasing the property,” the officer said.

“We can’t guarantee that there’s an access. That’s something which is a separate legal and private issue amongst the residents and the prospective occupier.

“The laneway, I think, is owned in different parts by different people, and that does complicate it for the potential occupier, but it’s not a planning issue.

“The owner of the lands immediately to the north — if they’re able to close that lane, which they’ve suggested, that’s within their ownership and control.”

There was a short recess as Councillor Lavery wanted clarification on legal matters.

As the public session resumed, Councillor Kevin Savage (SF) recommended approval for the planning application: “Just based on what we’ve heard from Nicola and also what we heard in legal there, I would be minded to propose we accept the officer’s recommendation.

“It has come up before around ownership of land in Planning committee, and as we’ve been told many times before, it’s not a planning consideration. The applicant would have been well aware of that.

“So the issue is not for us. I’d be minded to accept the officer’s recommendation based on what I’ve heard today.”

Cllr Savage’s proposal was seconded by Alderman Gordon Kennedy (UUP).