Industrial unit with parking at Opposite116 (Sdc Trailers) Deerpark Road, Bellaghy
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Mid Ulster Planning on 1 Sept 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed phase one of an industrial unit with car parking and associated landscaping.
“DC09011MW The proposal is described as ‘Phase 1 – Industrial unit with car parking & associated landscaping’. Although this is an outline application and is for a site for an industrial unit, the location map shows the site containing a large rectangular building. An additional location map indicating how the site would be extended to include phase 2 of the proposed development has also been provided.”
Officer report
The site and surroundings
The site was in a rural field opposite an existing industrial site, with hedges, open boundaries and an overhead electricity line.
“DC09011MW No representations have been received in relation to this application. Characteristics of the Site and Area The site which is set within a larger field extending to around 3.1 hectares and which has a road frontage extending to approximately 220 metres. The site is located in the south- western half of the overall field and has a road frontage of approximately 110 metres.”
“The site is traversed by an overhead electricity line extending east to west through the southern end of the site. The site is set within a rural area with a mixture of uses, including the extensive South Derry Coachworks (SDC) industrial site located both directly opposite the site as well as beyond the adjoining field to the south, Annahorish Primary School which borders the southern boundary of the main SDC site, a storage yard, a number of residential dwellings and farm…”
Officer report
Why refusal was advised
Officers considered the site isolated, insufficiently integrated and contrary to policies covering rural location, landscape, rural character and economic development.
“At present, the LDP has not been adopted therefore transitional arrangements require the council to take account of the SPPS and existing planning policy documents, with the exception of PPS 1, 5 and 9 as these policies are cancelled by the introduction of the SPPS.”
“Major Industrial Development – Policy PED 5 The proposed development is not considered to be a major industrial development. • Small Rural Projects – Policy PED 6 This is the only one of the above policies which the proposal could be considered under and is discussed further below. However, it is noted that the supporting statement accompanying the planning application has not considered or suggested that the proposal be considered under this planning policy.”
Officer report
Who spoke
The applicant’s representative spoke in favour, followed by planning officers and councillors during the committee’s consideration.
What members debated
Members debated the lack of suitable alternative sites, the area’s industrial character, economic benefits, policy exceptions and site-specific circumstances.
“Councillor S McPeake said that Council had advised Invest NI of their growing concern that manufacturing and the wider business growth is being constrained and endangered by the lack of infrastructural capacity of development lands. The Councillor said that he believed that the site itself on the Deerpark Road, is a suitable site for industrial development as it’s adjacent to and opposite the regional trailer manufacturer SDC trailers.”
Minutes
Wastewater needed resolving
The application form proposed mains sewerage, while the applicant later proposed a treatment tank, so officers sought further wastewater information.
“[name withheld] (PPO) advised that NI Water had come back to advise that there was no foul capacity available, and they recommend the wastewater impact assessment gone through to bottom that out. It’s going through that which sometimes would negatively condition that but felt in this case we're going to get them to do it first. In summary it’s about going through the wastewater impact assessment procedure with any water that's in their consultation response.”
“[name withheld] (PPO) referred to [name withheld] earlier point and said that whilst looking at the P1 form, the sewage is to be disposed of through the mains according to the application form submitted so that’s why NI Water have come back with their comments. [name withheld] has indicated that disposal of sewage would be through a treatment tank but on submitted P1 form it states that it would be disposed of through the mains.”
Minutes
The committee’s decision
The committee approved the application provided the wastewater element could be dealt with, with officers authorised to finalise the necessary conditions.
“Resolved That planning application LA09/2025/0220/O be approved provided wastewater element can be dealt with.”
Minutes
The members' reasons
“Members agreed that they were content with the analysis provided by the HLP.”
Minutes
Source: the council's minutes, quoted word for word.
Sources
- Mid Ulster Planning minutes, 1 September 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Mid Ulster's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Committee
- Mid Ulster Planning
- Council
- Mid Ulster
- Date
- Tuesday 1 September 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended refusal
- Committee decided
- Approved, against officer advice
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- The application (council website)
- All decisions
- Mid Ulster committee decisions →
This committee's year
284 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 36 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.