Rural dwelling and garage at Adjacent and north of 48 and opposite and west of 47 Springhill Road, Lurgan

What was proposed

Outline permission was sought for a detached rural dwelling, detached double garage, landscaping and related site works.

“Proposal: Proposed site for dwelling and detached double garage (infill site)”

“Site Address: Adjacent and north of 48 and opposite and west of 47 Springhill Road, Lurgan, BT66 7JL”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 0.14-hectare grazing site lies beside No.48 and opposite a farmhouse and farmyard, in a rural area with scattered dwellings and farm buildings.

“The application site is situated adjacent and north of No. 48 and opposite and west of No. Springhill Road, Lurgan. It is located in the rural area approximately 500m east from the settlement of Dollingstown and outside any areas of special protection, as depicted in the Craigavon Area Plan 2010.”

“The site is 0.14 ha in size and is used for agricultural grazing and fronts the main Springhill Road. The topographical levels of the site are generally flat with a fall in levels of approximately one metre moving southeast to northwest. The western boundary of the site is physically undefined in the landscape. The northern boundary of the site is irregularly shaped and is physically undefined in the landscape.”

Officer report

Earlier planning history

An earlier application for a replacement dwelling at No.48 Springhill Road was granted permission in 1987.

“Planning Reference: N/1986/0766 Location: Springhill Road, Magheralin Proposal: Replacement Dwelling Decision: Permission Granted: 03/03/1987 _________________________________________________________________________”

Officer report

Consultees and residents

Statutory consultees raised no objections, while twelve letters included objections about policy, rural character, privacy, access, farming activity and other impacts.

“Statutory Consultees and Non- statutory environmental bodies.”

“The road frontage development will create an urban character and will create a clustering effect in an otherwise rural road. • The proposal relies upon new landscaping for integration. • The proposal will overlook neighbours and impact right to privacy of existing residents. • The proposal is close to a bend in the road and vehicular access has not adequately been addressed in the interests of all road users.”

Officer report

Who spoke

A planning consultant spoke in support, the agent had clarification rights, and a written objection was received from a named objector.

Members’ debate

Members discussed the garage’s contribution to the frontage, access, the nearby farm and possible effects on future agricultural business expansion.

“ADVISED: by the Principal Planning Officer ([name withheld]) that the reason it was on the delegated list with a recommendation to refuse was due to the consideration of the impact of the garage and whether it added to the built up frontage.”

“COMMENTED: by Councillor Wilson that he accepted the application was only for outline permission at this stage and there was issues with access and proximity to a farm. There were concerns raised by objectors and there could be an impact in the future on expanding businesses. He had concerns in relation to agriculture and the family business and if they wanted to expand, people living at this location could put in objections which could hinder the expansion.”

Minutes

The final decision

The application was approved subject to conditions, with no counter-proposals made.

“AGREED: on the proposal of the Vice-Chair, Councillor O’Dowd, seconded by Councillor McGeown, that Application No: LA08/2023/1781/O by Heather Copeland be approved, subject to conditions.”

“NOTED: that there were no counter proposals made.”

Minutes