Infill dwelling and garage at Approx 60m South of No. 158 Whitebridge Road

The site and surroundings

The site was a rectangular plot cut from an agricultural field in the countryside, with another infill application to its south.

“Site Details The application site fronts onto the Whitebridge Road, Carrickmore and is located in the countryside. The site is a rectangular shaped plot cut from a large agricultural field.”

“To the south of the application site, there is the remainder of the field which is subject of application reference LA10/2025/0914/O for an infill dwelling.”

Officer report

Consultees and objections

DfI Roads provided advice, NI Water recommended approval subject to conditions, and an objection compared the proposal with an earlier refused infill application.

“NI Water has advised that it recommends approval subject to standard planning conditions. (Published on Portal on 18 September 2025).”

“An objection was received from 121 Whitebridge Road. The letter states that the objector ‘also submitted an application for an infill site further up the Whitebridge Road under HOU13 (reference LA10/2023/1965/O) and were refused on the basis building number 2 was a garage of next door. This is the same scenario’.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke in support, saying the site could not reasonably accommodate three modern dwellings and could accommodate only two.

What members considered

Planning officers said the key issue was whether the site complied with the infill policy, and judged that it could accommodate more than two dwellings.

“In response to the agent’s comments, the Lead Planner and Principal Planning Officer stated that: • The Council’s Plan Strategy included additional policies for new dwellings in the countryside, over and above the provision within regional policy, and these were incorporated given the specific circumstances within the Council area; • While the policies had been subject to detailed scrutiny during the Independent Examination, they were ultimately found to be sound; • Policy…”

“In response to further Member queries, the Principal Planning Officer stated that: • The relevant planning policy permitted infill development only where a gap existed within a substantially and continuously built-up frontage. In assessing the existing buildings and the intervening space, the key test was whether the gap could accommodate only two dwellings of a scale comparable to adjacent plots.”

Minutes

The vote

A proposal to refuse planning permission was seconded and unanimously agreed.

“At this juncture, a Member proposed that the application be refused planning permission. This proposal was duly seconded.”

“RESOLVED: On the proposal of Councillor O’Reilly, seconded by Councillor Robinson, and unanimously agreed, that the above application be refused planning permission, for the four reasons listed within Paragraph 8.0 of Appendix 3. (”

Minutes

The decision

The committee refused planning permission for the four reasons set out in the officer report.

“For the reasons listed within the report and in line with the wording of the transitional arrangements in the 2015 LDP Regulations, when reading both the DDP and Plan Strategy together, the proposal does not accord with the LDP for the following reasons:”

“1) The proposal is contrary to Strategic Policy SP01 - Furthering Sustainable Development and Policy DE03 - Sustaining Rural Communities, Policy DE04 – Integration and Design of Development in the Countryside;”

Officer report