Two dwellings at Immediately north of 46 Forkhill Road, Cloghoge, Newry

The officers’ view

Officers recommended refusal because the proposal was not genuine infill and failed to comply with three rural planning policies.

“[name withheld] advised that, while Policy CTY 8 of PPS 21 permitted infill development within a small gap in an otherwise substantial and continuously built-up frontage, officers did not consider the proposal to represent a genuine infill opportunity when assessed against the established rural development pattern.”

“[name withheld] confirmed that the proposal failed to comply with Policies CTY 1, CTY 8 and CTY 15 of PPS 21 with officers recommending refusal of the application.”

Minutes

Consultation responses

No representation letters were received, and consultees raised no objections subject to standard advice.

“[name withheld] outlined the application, confirming that no letters of representation had been received and that consultees, including DfI Roads, Environmental Health and NI Water, had raised no objections subject to standard advice.”

Minutes

What the agent said

The agent argued that the proposal was genuine infill within an established frontage and would respect the area’s character.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed the settlement limit, relevant policies, previous decisions, the surrounding development and whether the site needed closer assessment.

“[name withheld] acknowledged the Planning Department's reliance on the preamble to PPS 21 and the distinction between the settlement limit and the countryside. However, he advised that Members were entitled to consider the existing built form and appearance of the area when assessing the proposal and noted that, although the site was accepted as being within the countryside, Members could take account of the surrounding development and the overall character of the locality in…”

“Councillor McAteer noted that the images utilised gave a limited view of the site and its surrounding area, a discussion ensued regarding the surrounding area and the number of dwellings, the outcome of which was it was noted that the site bordered the settlement limit and there were commercial units within the surrounding area.”

Minutes

The vote

Members voted unanimously in favour of a site visit proposal, with no votes against and no abstentions.

“Following the discussion, Councillor McAteer proposed a site visit to better see the site and its surrounding area, which was seconded by Councillor Devlin.”

“The proposal was put to a vote by way of a show of hands and voting was as follows:”

Minutes

The decision

The application was deferred to allow the committee to visit the site.

“AGREED: On the proposal of Councillor McAteer, seconded by Councillor Devlin, it was agreed to defer planning application LA07/2025/0897/O to allow for a site visit.”

Minutes