Two infill dwellings at Between 88 & 90 Haw Road, Bushmills

“Outline planning permission is sought for two infill dwellings and garages in accordance with Policy CTY 8 (Ribbon Development). • The application site is located outside of any settlement development limits as identified in the Northern Area Plan (NAP) 2016. The site is not subject to any specific environmental designations.”

“Outline Planning Permission is sought for two proposed infill dwellings and garages. The application site is located within an agricultural field. An indicative block plan has been submitted which shows proposed siting, however details relating to design and finish are not available at this outline stage.”

“This site is situated beside the Haw Road to the south-east of Bushmills. The site comprises the majority of the roadside portion of a much larger field. The west boundary is defined by the roadside hedge. The northern and eastern boundaries are undefined through the open field. The south boundary is comprised of a post and wire fence, hedge and a timber fence to the adjacent semi-detached property.”

“The application site is located outside of any settlement development limits as identified in the Northern Area Plan (NAP) 2016. The site is not subject to any specific environmental designations.”

“No other relevant planning history on application site.”

“E/2000/0370/O - Lands adjacent to 88 Haw Road, Bushmills - Proposed site for dwelling – Application Withdrawn 07.12.2000”

“External Neighbours: There are no formal objections to the application…”

“Internal NIE: No objection HED: No objections DFI Roads: No objection Environmental Health: No objection NI Water: No objection NIEA Water Management Unit: No objection…”

“Regarding plot size, the aforementioned neighbouring dwellings and the hall have an average plot size of 823 square metres. Each plot within the application site have an average area of 898 square metres which are comparable in size only however, due to the fact that the nature of the proposed plots significantly differ from the adjacent pattern of development. The established pattern of development of the dwellings to the south comprise narrow, linear plots.”

“As outlined above at Paragraphs 8.2 – 8.9 the proposal does not represent the infilling of a small gap site. The application sites are significantly larger in terms of frontage width and with a larger site area than the surrounding properties which define the built-up frontage and therefore fails to respect the traditional pattern of development within the area and consequently the proposal fails criterion (c) of CTY14.”

“Refusal is recommended. In response to questions the Senior Planning Officer advised that if No 223 Garryduff Road was accepted 6 dwellings could fit into the gap site. The Chair read the recommendation.”

“260422 Proposed by Alderman Coyle Seconded by Alderman Boyle - That the Committee has taken into consideration and agrees with the reasons for the recommendation set out in section 9 and the policies and guidance in sections 7 and 8 and resolves to REFUSE outline planning permission subject to the reasons set out in section 10. The Chair put the motion to the Committee to vote. Members voted For; Members voted Against, 3 Members Abstained.”