appendix 1meetings.derrycityandstrabanedistrict.com/documents...appendix 1 the pre-determination...

Appendix 1

Derry City and Strabane District Council Planning Committee Report

COMMITTEE DATE: 29th July 2020

APPLICATION No: LA11/2019/0329/O

APPLICATION TYPE: Outline Permission

PROPOSAL: Construction of social/affordable residential development and community

centre with works to include new access to Springtown Road, upgrades to

Springtown Road and junction of Hawthorne Drive to include 2 no. right hand

turning lanes, part culverting of existing watercourse, demolition of existing

building, development of associated communal amenity spaces and

landscaping and associated site works, road and car parking.

LOCATION: Lands between No. 44 Derrymore and 42 Springtown Road and to the west of St.

Eithne's Park, Derry BT48 0FN

APPLICANT: Hartlands (NI) Ltd & Apex Housing Ass.

AGENT: c/o applicant

ADVERTISEMENT: 08.05.2019; 09.10.2019; 17.06.2020

STATUTORY EXPIRY: 22.05.2019; 23.10.2019; 01.07.2020

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE

REASON FOR PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE: Major Housing Development - Recommended

Refusal

All planning application forms, drawings, letters etc. relating to this planning application are available

to view on www.planningni.gov.uk

The application was deferred at the Committee meeting on 8th January for a Site Visit. The site visit

was held on 16th January 2020. Members in attendance included: Cllr C Jackson, Cllr P Logue, Cllr D

Kelly, Ald McClintock, Cllr M Durkan, Cllr J Boyle and Cllr P McKinney. Planning Officials in attendance

included A McNee, S Barrett and K Donaghey.

It was requested by the agent to seek a Pre-Determination Hearing which was discussed at the

Planning Committee on 5th February 2020. The application was then deferred at the Planning

Committee meeting on 5th February 2020 for a Pre-Determination Hearing.

http://www.planningni.gov.uk/

Appendix 1

The Pre-Determination Hearing was held on Thursday 12th March 2020. Members in attendance at the

meeting included Cllr Jackson, Cllr Boyle, Ald McClintock, Cllr McGuire, Cllr McKinney, Cllr Kelly, Cllr

Durkan, Cllr Barr, Cllr Logue, Cllr Harkin and Cllr Kerrigan.

Following the Pre-determination hearing the applicant by email on 26th May 2020 submitted a

document link titled “Discussion note addressing issues that arose during the pre-determination

hearing on 12th March and the request for further information” and a Transcript of the pre-

determination hearing and a link to the audio recording. The applicant requested that this could be

forwarded to Members, therefore both documents are appended to this report for Members

information.

1. Description of Proposed Development

This is an outline application for construction of social/affordable residential development and

community centre with works to include new access to Springtown Road, upgrades to Springtown

Road and junction of Hawthorne Drive to include 2 no. right-hand turning lanes, part culverting of

existing watercourse, demolition of existing building, development of associated communal amenity

spaces and landscaping and associated site works, road and car parking.

Proposed site layout plan (26 May 2020)

Appendix 1

Concept Summary

The layout plan and Design and Access Statement indicates the proposal is for a total of 258

residential units.

Access is proposed from Springtown Road and the proposal indicates improvement works to

the public road including right-hand turning pockets to both the proposed site and Hawthorne

Drive/Hawthorne Grove; and potential provision for a bus route within the development.

Mixture of social and affordable homes managed by Apex Housing Association.

Community Infrastructure as part of a Health & Wellbeing Strategy to enhance local amenities

in the area, with: Community hub building to include a multi-use hall and retail unit; outdoor

gym trail; community venue and hard landscaped areas and; landscaped communal garden

areas.

Although not part of the description of the proposal, the proposal also involves encroachment

into adjacent site approved A/2015/0187/F, known as Derrymore which is a social housing

development under construction. It will involve removal of two of the approved units to

provide what is indicated on the site plan as a car park for the community building and

significant encroachment into the area where a substantial landscape buffer was to be

implemented as part of the development approved under A/2015/0187/F.

The application was accompanied by a voluntary Environmental Statement and Non-Technical

Summary; Design and Access Statement; Pre-application Community Consultation Report; Transport

Assessment Form; RPS Scoping Study and Well-being Strategy. During the processing of the

application RPS submitted two further reports, including a response to DFI comments (received July

2019) and a response to comments made by DFI Roads on the agent’s Scoping study. An Outline

Construction Environmental Management Plan was received in September and was considered as

Further Environmental Information. On 6th December 2019 a Transport Assessment and RPS report

and further roads drawings were received. On 26th May 2020 RPS response to DFI Roads consultation

and amended plans were received on the application.

2. EIA Determination

The application was submitted with a Voluntary Environmental Statement under Schedule 2 10(b) of

EIA Regulations 2017. The Environmental Statement has three components:

Volume 1 – Non Technical Summary

Volume 2 – ES Main text which included chapters on; Landscape & Visual Assessment; Ecology;

Drainage and Flood Risk; Noise; Air Quality and Climate Change; Transport; Contamination,

Appendix 1

soils and geology; Cultural Heritage and Cumulative (or combined) impact and interaction of

effects.

Volume 3 – Appendices.

Further Environmental Information in the form of an Outline Construction Environmental

Management Plan was received in September 2019.

3. Habitats Regulation Assessment

The site is hydrologically linked to Skeoge River, a cross border river that flows between Lough Swilly

SAC/SPA and River Foyle. The River Foyle flows to Lough Foyle SPA, Ramsar and ASSI. Shared

Environmental Services required further information to assess the potential impacts on the selection

features, conservation objectives and Status of River Foyle and Tributaries SAC, Lough Foyle

SPA/Ramsar and Lough Swilly SAC/SPA. In order to enable a Habitats Regulation Assessment to be

completed SES required an Outline Construction Environmental Management Plan (OCEMP) to

identify all pollution pathways and mitigation measures to be employed which will negate the risk to

the aquatic environment. They advised this should include details of pollution prevention measures

for any culverting works, and any proposed buffers to watercourses/drains on site, silt management,

emergency spill procedures etc. The OCEMP was submitted by the agent in September 2019 as Further

Environmental Information (FEI). Shared Environmental Services response on 2nd March 2020 stated

a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment was completed; and, provided mitigation is conditioned in any

planning approval, requiring submission of a final CEMP and Drainage Plan to be submitted, the

proposal will not have an adverse effect on site integrity of any European Site.

Appendix 1

4. Site and Surrounding Area

Site location plan

Appendix 1

Aerial Photograph of site – The blue line is the defined limits of development as identified in Derry

Area Plan. The application site comprises of 5 agricultural fields outlined in red all of which are

outside the settlement limit

The site is located outside the development limits of Derry as defined in the Derry Area Plan 2011

(DAP), so it is considered to be in the countryside. It is located on the Springtown Road and comprises

of a total of 5 agricultural fields and small agricultural building, measuring 9.89 hectares in size. A

watercourse traverses the site running west to east. The levels of the site rise from Springtown Road

which are at 102m to 121m towards the south of the site, with the highest part of the site is the south

west corner. The 5 fields which form the application site are separated by post and wire fencing and

some hedgerows. There are a number of trees within the vegetated boundaries.

Hawthorn Grove and Springtown Court are existing developments north east of the site on the

opposite side of the road. Immediately adjacent to the east of the site is the newly constructed

development known as Derrymore which was a major housing development for 53 houses approved

by Planning Committee in 2016. Part of the eastern boundary also adjoins existing development St

Eithne’s Park. The southern boundary is mainly defined by existing vegetation and partially abuts

boundary with Ard Grange and adjoins other agricultural fields in the countryside. The western

boundary is defined by hedgerows with agricultural post and wire fencing. There is an existing

Appendix 1

agricultural access and small building on site and at the time of site visit horses were being kept on

part of the site.

The area is mainly characterised by countryside west, south and north of the site, dominated by

farmland with livestock grazing with some rural farmsteads located within the immediate rural area.

Immediately to the east and north east is existing housing. The nearest bus stop to the site is located

at St Eithne’s Primary School 480m from the site.

Application site outside the development limits - current use is agricultural fields

Appendix 1

Application site outside the limits of development. Derrymore social housing development, St

Eithne’s Park in the distance

Site frontage along Springtown Road

Appendix 1

Application site boundary and No 42 Springtown Road in distance

Appendix 1

5. Site Constraints

The application site is located outside the settlement limits of Derry and is therefore located within

the countryside.

6. Neighbour Notification Report

Neighbours were notified initially on 03.5.2019; notified following receipt of Further Environmental

Information on 24.09.2019; and were notified following submission of amended plans and information

on 8th June 2020.

Neighbour Address Date Neighbour Notified

100 St. Eithne'S Park Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0LE

08/06/2020


08/06/2020

102 St. Eithne'S Park Springtown Road Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0LE

08/06/2020


08/06/2020

10 Derrymore Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0FN

08/06/2020

10 Springtown Court Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0GX

08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

Appendix 1


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

1 Hawthorn Grove Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0GD

08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

Appendix 1


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

Appendix 1

42 Springtown Road Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0JZ

08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

Appendix 1


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

69 Ard Grange Londonderry Londonderry BT48 0SF

08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

Appendix 1


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

Appendix 1


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020


08/06/2020

7. Relevant Site History

There has been no previous history of housing applications on this particular site. However, an

application on Springtown Road located directly opposite the application site was refused outline

planning permission for 83 dwellings for social housing on 14th May 2009, planning application

reference A/2009/0134/O as the site was outside the settlement limits and was contrary to the Derry

Area Plan and it did not promote a drive to provide housing in existing urban areas. The site is similar

to the current application site in that it was also located outside of the development limits and within

the rural area.

A/2015/0187/F – permission was granted by Planning Committee in November 2016 for 53 residential

units outside the development limits on the site adjacent to and east of the current application site.

This development that has been constructed is known as ‘Derrymore’. The application at that time

was recommended for refusal by officers, however, Members voted contrary to the recommendation

as it was considered by the Committee to be ‘rounding off’ and was approved subject to number of

planning conditions including the provision for a substantial landscape buffer being provided at the

newly defined edge of the development. Following officers site visit this landscape buffer to the

countryside has not been put in place or implemented.

Appendix 1

Layout approved under A/2015/0187/F on land adjacent to the application site for 53 units

outside the settlement Limit – considered as ‘rounding off’

Council held a Pre-Application Discussion (PAD) with the agent under reference LA11/2018/0690/PAD

prior to the current application being submitted. The advice provided to the agent was that the

principle of the development is not acceptable as the proposal is for a major housing development

outside the limits of development and would therefore be contrary to the Derry Area Plan 2011 and

contrary to planning policy; and would be a significant Departure from the Derry Area Plan 2011. The

agents were advised during the PAD that the fundamental principle of housing on the site is not

acceptable outside the limits and the proper procedure for this land potentially being considered to

be included within the development limits would be through future representations in the LDP process

which was underway.

LA11/2018/1000/PAN - Development of major social / affordable residential development together

with community facilities and associated access to Springtown Road, site works, landscaping and

internal road.

Appendix 1

8. Policy Framework

RDS 2035:

Policy SFG7 Strengthen the role of Londonderry as the Principal city of the North West; Meeting the

Housing needs of the area.

Policy RG8: Manage housing growth to achieve sustainable patterns of residential development.

Derry Area Plan 2011 - The site is located on the Springtown Road outside the defined settlement

limit of Derry.

Strategic Planning Policy Statement for NI – The SPPS is a statement of the Department’s policy on

important planning matters that should be addressed. The provisions of the SPPS apply to the whole

of NI and are material to all decisions on applications. Sustainable development is at the heart of the

SPPS, which includes key principles for development and also strategic policies on housing, natural

heritage, flooding etc.

PPS 2 Natural Heritage – sets out the policies for the conservation, protection, and enhancement of

our natural heritage.

PPS 3 Access Movement and Parking – sets out the planning policies for vehicular and pedestrian

access, transport assessment, and the protection of transport routes and parking.

PPS 6 Planning, Archaeology and the Built Heritage – sets out the policies for the protection and

conservation of archaeological remains and features of the built heritage.

PPS 7 Quality Residential Environments - Planning seeks to achieve residential developments that

promote quality and sustainability in their design and layout, are in harmony with their townscape or

landscape setting and which will ultimately make a positive contribution to the character and

appearance of the country’s settlements. Policy QD 1 of this PPS lists the criteria to be met by housing

schemes and Policy QD2 requires the submission of a Concept Master Plan which is expected to

demonstrate how the comprehensive planning of the entire zoned area is to be undertaken.

Planning Policy Statement 8: Open Space, Sport and Outdoor Recreation - Sets out the policies for

the protection of open space, the provision of new areas of open space in association with residential

development.

PPS 15 Planning and Flood Risk - sets out the Planning policies to minimise and manage flood risk.

Appendix 1

PPS 12 Housing in Settlements. - The policy guidance in this statement applies to all residential

development proposals within cities, towns, villages and small settlements in Northern Ireland,

including the push for ‘sustainable development’ in the choice of housing land.

PPS 13 Transportation and Land use – Guides the integration of transportation and land use,

particularly through the preparation of development plans. It can also be a material consideration in

individual planning applications.

Planning Policy Statement 21 – This policy statement sets out the main planning considerations in

assessing proposals for development in the countryside.

Creating Places: Achieving Quality in Residential Developments – This sets out the guidance for

creating quality and sustainability through design of all new residential developments.

9. Consultee Responses

NIHE – have stated that the site is located in an area of acute housing need within the Westbank

Housing Area. The housing need projection for the Westbank is 2,009 units over the period of 2018-

23. NIHE advise the site is not registered by a Housing Association however subject to planning

permission being obtained they would be supportive of the mix of housing as proposed by the

application i.e. 10% 2-person 1-bedroom apartments; 60% 3-person 2-bedroom houses and 30% 5-

person 3-bedroom houses. Within the mix allowance also needs to be made for wheelchair users and

there is a statutory requirement for up to 10% of units in all social housing schemes to be wheelchair

friendly unless there are overriding factors prohibiting it.

HED Historic Monuments – has considered the impacts of the proposal and is content that the

proposal satisfies PPS 6 Policy requirements, subject to conditions for the agreement and

implementation of a developer funded programme of archaeological works.

Environmental Health – A Noise impact assessment was submitted and contained with the

Environmental Statement. Based on the information submitted EHS has no objections subject to a

condition relating to window glazing. Conditions have also been provided relating to construction site

noise and dust to be addressed in a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP); a wheel

wash at the entrance; construction activities and mechanical plant. Additionally, as part of the ES

submission a Preliminary Contamination Risk Assessment (PRA) was undertaken. EHS accept the

findings and concluded the proposed development does not pose any contaminated land risks and

that no third party land uses are likely to pose a risk to the site. A condition is provided in the event of

unexpected contamination.

Appendix 1

DFI Roads;

Transport Assessment

The Transport Assessment Scoping Study was assessed by DFI Roads Data Section and this identified

a number of issues that needed to be addressed within the Transport Assessment. A Transport

Assessment, RPS Consultants Report and roads drawings were received on 6th December 2019. DFI

Roads advised they required two issues to be addressed and further assessment with regards to

impacts on off-site junctions which includes all junctions on Buncrana Road and Strand Road, and;

assessment of impacts on Northland Road/Duncreggan Road/Eden Terrace junction. Further

assessment was also required on committed developments which have to be taken into account by

the developer. The Roads Consultant submitted further information in correspondence dated 15th

May and DFI Roads confirmed they have enough information now to conclude their assessment of the

Transport Assessment. No further information is therefore required on this matter.

External Road Works

DFI Roads advised during the processing of the application that amendments would be required to

include the setting back of boundary treatments along the site frontage of 3 metres from the proposed

edge of Springtown Road to allow for future development of a cycle network which is required to

promote sustainable travel; visibility splays and retaining walls details; creation of a ghost island which

will require relocation of the road edge 3 metres south which will have a detrimental impact on the

existing sightlines from Derrymore; provision of a ghost island junction may impact on existing

dwellings already constructed as part of the Derrymore housing development; Springtown Road will

require alterations to the traffic calming features. With regards to the ghost island junctions and

stagger distance if the designer is not able to provide the required standards an application (Scheme

Design Overview) for a Relaxation/Departure from standards will be required.

Amended plans were received on 6th December 2019 and further amendments received on 26th May

2020. DFI Roads in their latest consultation response dated 24th June 2020 have advised the following;

1. The layout of the ghost island is now generally acceptable.

2. The boundary treatment along the frontage of the existing dwellings at 44-50 Derrymore will

require setting back. This will have a significant impact on these dwellings. There may not be

sufficient space between the rear of the visibility splay from the proposed development and the

fronts of no’s 44 and 45 to provide a boundary wall and railings whilst still retaining access.

Appendix 1

3. The proposal necessitates amendments to the existing traffic calming on Springtown Road for the

works required to Springtown Road to accommodate this major proposal. The applicant team will

need to liaise with Traffic Section and these amendments need to be demonstrated on a plan.

4. The crossing island on Springtown Road should be widened to 2.0 metres for safety and

convenience of non-motorised users. However, there appears to be sufficient space to

accommodate this requirement within the current design.

Bus Provision

The proposed bus route for this major development as shown is not acceptable both in terms of the

use of a speed control bend and the location of the lay-by in close proximity to a junction. This will

have significant impact on the internal road layout and will need agreement between DFI Roads and

Translink.

Additionally, Officers would advise Members that with regards to public transport provision required

by this major development that agreement will be required with Translink and a Public Transport

Contribution to Translink would need to be secured and this may require a S76 Planning Agreement.

Internal Layout

The internal layout is required to be designed to Creating Places standards and DFI Roads have advised

this will have a severe impact on the internal layout of the development for example the sightlines

from driveways are currently shown through dwellings; will impact the internal road and the bus route

requires amendment.

Loughs Agency - advise that storm water should not be discharged into nearby watercourses unless

passed through pollution interception and flow attenuation measures.

DFI Rivers – the ES contained a Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment. The Strategic Flood Map indicates

the development does not lie within the 1 in 100-year fluvial floodplain the proposal therefore is

acceptable under FLD 1. In considering FLD 2 the site is traversed by an undesignated watercourse.

DFI Rivers required a maintenance strip to be marked up on a site layout drawing and an amended

layout plan was received on 17th September 2019 showing the maintenance strip. DFI Rivers advise

this will have to be protected from impediments including tree planting, hedges, permanent fencing

and sheds, land raising or future unapproved development by way of a planning condition. The

Drainage Assessment submitted was considered and evidence of consent to discharge provided. DFI

Rivers advise the internal storm drainage system is to be adopted by Northern Ireland Water according

to the FRA/DA. Therefore, DFI Rivers while not responsible for the preparation of the report accepts

Appendix 1

its logic and has no reason to disagree with its conclusions. In consider the culverting of the existing

watercourse on site, part of the watercourse is proposed to be culverted in two locations to provide

access roads within the development which is acceptable under FLD 2. DFI Rivers advise that any

culverting proposed will be subject to Schedule 6 approval from DFI Rivers. FLD 5 is not applicable to

this site.

Water Management Unit – is content with the proposal subject to condition requiring a detailed

Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP).

Regulation Unit – considered the Preliminary Risk Assessment submitted and have no objections

subject to conditions in the event of unexpected contamination.

Natural Environment Division;

Designated Sites

The application site is hydrologically connected to Skeoge River, a cross border river that flows

between Lough Swilly SAC/SPA and River Foyle. The River Foyle flows into Lough Foyle SPA, Ramsar

and ASSI. These are of national and international importance and are protected by Habitats

Regulations and The Environment Order 2002. NED has considered the impacts of the proposal on

designated sites and other natural heritage interests and on the basis of the information provided has

no concerns subject to conditions. NED recommends that SES liaise with the National Parks and

Wildlife Service to consider possible transboundary designated sites issues. NED also notes that full

details on the proposed culverts have not been provided within the OCEMP.

Habitats

The hedgerows and stream on site have been identified as NI Priority habitat. NED welcomes the

removal of the culvert from public open space area 2 on the revised drawings. The proposal involves

culverting of part of the stream that is necessary for access within the development. Whilst it is

indicated that a minimum buffer of 10m from all construction works will be maintained from the

stream on site, NED have advised that this buffer appears to fall short in places.

It is not clear from the amended plans submitted what hedgerows are to be retained and lost and

details on proposed compensatory planting for any loss are not provided. Drawing 03 Revision 1 and

08 Revision 1 show retained and enhanced hedgerow on the key but how it is represented in drawing

03 rev 1 appears white and not clearly distinguished on drawing 08 rev 1. Existing hedgerows should

be retained where possible and enhanced. Planting should be of native species particularly along the

stream corridor.

Appendix 1

Bats

Trees and buildings on site have been assessed as negligible for Bat Roosting potential. The Activity

surveys however confirm that bats use the site for foraging and commuting. It is unclear if the stream

corridor is to be vegetated and hedgerow/tree planting would be preferable to enhance

foraging/commuting opportunities for bats. The hedgerows and stream appear to be the most

important features for bats therefore the lighting on the boundary vegetation and stream corridor

should be bat friendly and less than 1 lux. Provided the hedgerows can be retained and enhanced as

much as possible and lighting is bat friendly the development should not significantly impact bats.

Badger

Clarification was provided from the ecologist who carried out the PEA whether field boundaries and a

buffer to development were surveyed thoroughly for badgers. A letter received from the ecologist in

July 2019 confirmed a thorough search including a 25m buffer was carried out with regards to badgers.

NED is content that the ecologist has confirmed a thorough search including a 25m buffer was carried

out however advise that pending on the time elapsed between this and any future reserved matters

application updated surveys may be required. Any necessary vegetation removal must be undertaken

outside of the bird breeding season or pre-checks carried out by a suitably qualified ecologist.

NED has provided conditions requiring that plans at reserved matters be submitted showing a

minimum buffer from all works at the watercourse; plans at reserved matters showing which hedges

are to be retained and removed, enhancement of retained hedgerows and compensatory native

planting for any hedgerows lost; a lighting plan for the site to minimise impacts on bats; and protective

fencing for retained trees and hedgerows.

Shared Environmental Services – Further information was required to enable Habitats Regulation

Assessment (HRA) to be completed in the form of an Outline Construction Environmental

Management Plan to identify all pollution pathways and mitigation measures to be employed which

will negate the risk to the aquatic environment. SES advised this should include details of pollution

prevention measures for any culverting works, and any proposed buffers to watercourses/drains on

site, silt management, emergency spill procedures etc. An OCEMP was submitted as Further

Environmental Information by the agent in September 2019. SES responded on 2nd March 2020

advising a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment was completed for the proposal and provided mitigation

is provided in any planning approval the proposal will not have an adverse effect on site integrity of

any European Site. It should be noted that NED advised that the OCEMP has not provided full details

on the proposed culverts. SES has however provided conditions requiring submission of a

Appendix 1

Construction Environmental Management Plan and Drainage Plan; and, advise the conditions

provided from Regulation Unit must be added to any approval.

NI Water – responded to a Pre Development Enquiry in February 2019. In summary NI Water advise:

a network capacity check of the watermain is required; there is a 150mm public foul sewer located

within Springtown Road however there is significant incapacity in the network; there is no public

storm sewer available to serve the proposal; the receiving WwTW at Culmore has sufficient capacity

to serve this proposal.

Local Development Plan Team – The current DAP 2011 sets out that ‘a city limit development limit

has been established around all future development areas beyond which there will be a presumption

against further urban development’ (para 2.6). The DAP 2011 makes no policy provision for

development, such as that proposed, beyond the development limits of settlements. The LDP team

has the responsibility for the monitoring of housing land and this includes monitoring progress of the

committed housing developments and also outlining the remaining potential in terms of units and

area. The LDP team advises that the last available figures for Derry are up to 1st April 2017. The figure

for remaining potential of units within the current development limits was approx. 10,000 units, with

an approximate of remaining potential of over 429ha. This figure excludes potential urban capacity

land and windfall potential. If these factors are taken into account the figure is estimated to approx.

16,500 units. Therefore, there is more than adequate land available within the current development

limits to meet demand/housing need for the city.

10. Representations Consideration

5 representations have been received on the application.

Three representations were initially received on the application, two of which were objections and

one comment was non-committal. The representations were received from No 97 St Eithne’s Park, 48

Springtown Road and 30 Groarty Road. Following re-neighbour notification of amended plans in June

2020 two additional objections were received from properties at 42 and 44 Springtown Road.

The issues raised are summarised below:

- The proposal invades privacy of No 97 St Eithne’s Park from houses in block 5.

- The layout plan does not provide the same information as the landscape plan – it is unclear what

landscaping features will be implemented.

- Impacts on rural setting.

- Clarification required on empty space behind block 5 (on maps) and between St Eithne’s Park will

be filled in with or will it be a laneway which would encourage anti-social behaviour.

Appendix 1

- Semi-mature trees provide habitat for bats current flight path.

- Inaccurate description as the area outline on maps also includes lands to rear of No 44, 46 and 48

Springtown Road.

- Site is not zoned for housing in Derry Area Plan 2011 - this is development in the countryside PPS

21 applies and is on lands outside housing zones H3 Groarty Road / Creggan Road or H17

Springtown Road.

- CTY 5 only allows for a group of no more than 14 dwellings adjacent to or near a small settlement

or within a designated dispersed rural community to provide social and affordable housing to

meet needs of rural community – objector quotes policy CTY5 criteria.

- Objectives of PPS21 are to conserve the landscape and natural resources and protect them from

excessive, inappropriate or obtrusive development and from the actual and potential effects of

pollution. It is therefore appropriate to develop first all zoned lands or brownfield lands before

considering development of this scale in the countryside.

- There is inadequate land drainage in Springtown Road area and limited sewer capacity.

Development of these lands will put additional loads on the inadequate utilities in the area and

flooding has been experienced annually in this area.

- Springtown Road is inadequate for the additional traffic and will increase danger.

- Proposals upgrade the road towards the town with no concern for the countryside direction of

Springtown Road which is heavily used for school traffic as Old Creggan Road is queued in the

mornings and afternoons and traffic is using the Springtown Road as an alternative.

- Dangerous blind bend at property 48 Springtown Road and this increased traffic is not subject to

speed restrictions at this part of the road – danger with 60mph, increased traffic and dangerous

road bends.

- Insensitive development.

- Query over neighbour notification procedures from a person owning land adjacent to the site.

Consideration of objections

- NED were consulted on the objection letter relating to impacts on bats and NED has no objection

subjection to lighting details, and plans at reserved matters showing trees/hedgerows to be

retained.

- DFI Roads, NI Water and DFI Rivers were consulted on the objection relating to traffic and road

safety concerns, flooding and the issues raised regarding sewerage capacity. DFI Roads are

currently assessing the transport assessment but advise no further amendments are required for

them to conclude their assessment. Further amendments and plans are required demonstrate

Appendix 1

works required to Springtown Road to accommodate this major proposal including amendments

to the existing traffic calming measures. DFI Rivers advise the site is not in a floodplain and the

Drainage Assessment submit demonstrated consent to discharge. Re sewage capacity issues NI

Water advised there is capacity in the receiving Waste Water Treatment works however identified

that the public foul sewer located within Springtown Road has significant incapacity in the

network. The agent would therefore need to demonstrate how foul sewage would be disposed

of for this development. This information was not requested from the agent as the principle of

the development is not acceptable.

- Re the neighbour notification query officers wrote to the person advising of Council’s procedures

regarding neighbour notification to occupiers of buildings on neighbouring land and not

neighbouring land owners.

- Re the site address, officers are content that the application site address has been provided

accurately with no prejudice to neighbouring properties.

- The objections raised regarding policy and the site not being acceptable outside the settlement

limit, officers agree with points raised. The principle of the development is unacceptable and

contrary to policy and this is assessed in detail in officer’s assessment in section 12 later in this

report.

- With regards to the discrepancy between the landscape plan and the agent site concept plan, and

the impacts on residential amenity at St Eithne’s Park, whilst officers appreciate this is outline

planning permission it is noted there is a discrepancy between the landscape plan and agent’s

layout/concept plan, however it is shown as a landscape buffer.

11. Summary of Agents Supporting information

The agent advises alternative sites have been considered as part of devising the current

proposals, and states an assessment of the area indicates there are limited development

opportunities available to deliver social housing for the Springtown Road community, and

considers that a lack of alternative sites should be a material consideration in determining the

application and that the community benefits of the proposal outweigh the loss of agricultural

land.

The agent acknowledges the proposed development conflicts with the Derry Area Plan, SPPS

and PPS 21 and consider that it is an exceptional case that will deliver community benefits and

social/affordable housing in an area of NIHE need.

Appendix 1

The supporting information states the proposal will provide interlinked open space and

community facilities which are central to the proposal and are underpinned by a Health and

Wellbeing Strategy which has been developed in collaboration with Apex. The information

submitted states this is central to the applicant’s vision for the development and it will

enhance local amenities in the area by providing;

- A community hub building

- Outdoor gym/trim trail

- Community outdoor theatre/venue

- Landscaped communal garden areas.

Summary of Well-being Strategy as submitted by the agent in support of the application

- Apex Housing Association in its Community Investment Strategy (2017-2020) and Action Plan

(2018-2019) states it is ‘committed to investing in people, property and the environment and to

make a real difference to the way people live their lives’.

- Improved health and wellbeing is a national policy priority committed in the NI Programme for

Government (PFG) and translated into the SPPS.

- The SPPs establishes core principles that include Improving Health and Wellbeing; and notes well

designed buildings and successful places can have a positive impact on how people feel.

- To understand how this proposal could respond to Health and Wellbeing agenda, the following

was undertaken, site visits to exemplar Health and Wellbeing Initiatives; reviewed literature to

appreciate theory and local context for delivering improved health and wellbeing; promote

concept of Health and Wellbeing at design development stage and engage with community to

develop understanding of how successful suggested measures might be to deliver a residential

development that promotes Health and Wellbeing.

- Within The Apex Plan (Corporate Strategy & Business Plan) are strategies for Community

Investment and to promote tenant participation.

- Apex challenged the design team to embed the ethos of the Community Investment Strategy in

the development proposal to demonstrate how this investment will assist in improved health and

wellbeing for residents.

- As an opportunity to adopt best practice and encourage improved Health and Wellbeing of

residents and tenants, the following components are proposed as part of the development;

Appendix 1

Community venue (public realm)

Community hub building (with a local shop)

Formal and informal play parks

Outdoor trim/fitness trail (including exercise equipment) and;

Enhanced connectivity (with a new bus service and pedestrian connection to Derrymore)

- The agent states that future programmes and indicators for measuring success are not agreed

and recommend the community is re-engaged to agree the scope and detail of how health and

wellbeing will be promoted in the development, outside of the physical

environment/infrastructure proposed in this application. And within the life cycle of the

development monitoring of Health and Wellbeing.

Officers consideration of the agents supporting information relating to Health and Well Being is set

out in the SPPS assessment later in this report.

12. Planning Assessment, including Other Material Considerations

Section 6(4) of The Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 requires the Council to make planning

decisions in accordance with the local development plan, unless material considerations indicate

otherwise.

Accordingly, this proposal is assessed against the provisions of the Derry Area Plan 2011, as well as

the other material considerations including the Regional Development Strategy; Strategic Planning

Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS) , PPS 12 Housing in Settlements; PPS 15 Planning and

Flood Risk; PPS 21 Sustainable Development in the Countryside; PPS 7 Quality Residential

Environments; and PPS8 Open Space, Sport and Outdoor Recreation, PPS 6 Planning and Archaeology;

PPS 3 Access, Parking and Movement; PPS 2 Natural Heritage and supplementary guidance ‘Creating

Places’ and relevant planning history.

Derry Area Plan 2011

The site lies outside the development limit of the city and is therefore located within the countryside.

Paragraph 2.6 of the DAP states that beyond the city limits there is a presumption against further urban

development. The function of the development plan is to provide sufficient land to facilitate growth

whilst protecting the open countryside from urban sprawl and ribbon development (paragraph 3.1).

The Area Plan further states in paragraph 3.3 that within the countryside there will be a clear

presumption against any new building and new use of land which might create a demand for more

Appendix 1

buildings and no other development will normally be allowed unless there are over-riding reasons why

that development is essential and could not be located in a town.

Application A/2015/0187/F adjacent to Sherriff’s Glen which was a major housing development for 53

units outside the development limits; now known as ‘Derrymore’ housing development. At that time

it was stated by the agent to be a rounding off and would set ‘a new defendable edge to the city, a

new defensible limit’ and would not set a precedent. Whilst against officers’ recommendation, the

permission was approved on this basis by Councils Planning Committee in November 2016 as it was

considered to be ‘rounding-off’. This current application is for a further 258 residential dwelling units

submitted by the same applicant on land adjacent to Derrymore Housing development. This proposal

would again extend the edge/limit for a second time in this locality from that as the defined limits of

development in the Derry Area Plan and would create unacceptable urban development into the

countryside and again setting an undesirable precedent for development outside the defined

development limits, and into the protected countryside.

In the context of Derry, there is a surplus amount of available zoned housing land which has not yet

been developed within the limits, much of which has planning permission or current planning

applications. This includes a considerable amount located within the west bank of the city. The latest

Housing Monitor Report (2017) shows that there remains land for approx. 10,000 houses within the

city for this plan period until the new LDP is adopted, so there is clearly not a justification for

permitting this housing outside the development limits in terms of lack of provision of land within the

development limits.

Chapter 5 in the Environmental Statement states alternative sites were considered as part of devising

the proposals, which was carried out between November 2018 and March 2019. The sites identified

include;

H2 Housing zoning – outline permission was granted for approximately 3,500 houses on lands at

Buncrana Road in December 2017. The agent considers this is not a reasonable alternative to the

application site as it is not available on the “open market”. Officers would advise Members that this is

not a planning material consideration. In planning policy there remains more than an adequate

amount of available land within the settlement limits of the city to accommodate this major proposal

for 258 units. H2 is located within an area of Housing Need in an accessible location in the Westbank

which would adequately accommodate this proposal. Additionally, as part of the Section 76 Legal

Agreement for the H2 zoned housing lands an obligation was provided to allow for up to 30% of the

site for social housing. The Housing Association could therefore liaise with the developers of H2 as

Appendix 1

provision has been made for social housing within this zoning. H2 is zoned housing land within the

development limits and has outline approval on a significant portion of the zoned land to provide

residential and community development.

H3 Housing Zoning (Lands at Creggan) – Part of this zoning remains undeveloped. This site is also

accessible and located within the area of housing need. The agents advise the site is not available to

purchase due to the reluctance of the land owner to release the lands for development. Planning

officers would advise that no evidence has been provided to ascertain if this is the case; however this

is not a material planning consideration. Adequate land is located within the city’s development limits

and within the Westbank which could accommodate the proposal and address the housing need.

Zoned Housing land H1A – There is no planning application or approval on these zoned housing lands.

The agents advise the site is not available to purchase. No evidence has been provided of this however

Officers would advise Members this is not a material planning consideration. In terms of location this

site is easily accessible from Buncrana Road and is also located within the Westbank and in an area of

housing need.

Zoned Housing Land H15 (Lands at Creggan) – The agents advise that due to the size of the site being

4.5 hectares it would not accommodate 250+ social/affordable units.

43-45 Limavady Road – The site is 2.06 hectares and therefore is not of adequate size to deliver 250+

social housing units.

4 Foyle Road – The site is 0.43 hectares with planning approval for 53 apartments. This does not satisfy

the proposed housing mix applied for to the NIHE.

Officers would re-iterate that there is available land within the settlement limits and also within the

Westbank to accommodate this proposal, with Council’s Local Development Plan Team advising there

is available land to accommodate up to 10,000 houses within the limits. There are other sites which

may be available which has not been considered as part of the agents supporting information i.e. H1B

and other potential sites in the Westbank. The current application for a major housing development

in the countryside is therefore contrary to the Derry Area Plan 2011 (DAP). This fundamental

departure from the Plan would create an undesirable precedent for similar housing developments on

other lands outside the development limit – with many such potential sites all around the

development limit of Derry, or indeed, around any of the other settlements in the District. There are

no over-riding reasons why the development is essential and could not be located within the defined

Appendix 1

limits of the city. This is further supported by policy CTY 1 of Planning Policy Statement 21 Sustainable

Development in the countryside as set out later in this report.

Therefore, to allow this housing development outside of the Area Plan’s development limit, would

also be contrary to Section 6(4) of the Planning Act.

Other Area Plan Policies

The principle of this development is not acceptable as the proposal is contrary to the Derry Area Plan

2011, however it is still necessary to assess the other policies within the Area Plan. See below:

ENV 7 Retention of Trees and Hedges and Landscape Requirements – The landscaping plan submitted

does not identify if any of the trees within the application site can be retained as part of the

development proposal. From the site visit it was noted that there are some trees within the existing

agricultural field boundaries. The landscaping plan does not identify retained trees and if it is possible

to retain any of the existing vegetation, the plan only identifies proposed planting. There is also

discrepancies between the landscape plan and the concept plan in terms of the boundary adjacent to

St Eithne’s Park.

ENV 8 The water Environment – An existing stream is located within the site which is proposed to be

partially culverted to accommodate internal development access within the development. An Outline

Construction Environmental Management Plan was submitted as further environmental information

(FEI). The OCEMP was required to identify all pollution pathways and mitigation measures to be

employed which will negate the risk to the aquatic environment. This also should have included details

of pollution prevention measures for any culverting works, and any proposed buffers to

watercourses/drains on site, silt management, emergency spill procedures etc. Natural Environment

Division has advised that the OCEMP does not include the full details on the proposed culverts. As the

principle of the development is not acceptable officers have not requested an updated OCEMP to

include the information on the culverts. Shared Environmental Services however considered the

OCEMP submitted as FEI and completed a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment which concluded that

provided mitigation is conditioned in any planning approval the proposal will not have an adverse

effect on any European Site. SES have stated that in the event of an approval on the site they would

require a final CEMP and drainage Plan to be conditioned and have also stated that conditions as

provided by Regulation Unit must be added to any approval.

BE1 Urban Design – These policies require development proposals to make a positive contribution to

townscape and be sensitive to the character of the area in terms of design, scale, and use of materials.

Appendix 1

As this major housing development is located within the countryside officers consider the proposal is

not sensitive to the rural character of the area.

Policy H1 Housing Design and Layout - policy requires scale and density to respect the locations

characteristics of the site, landscape features including retention of trees, provision of planting and

appropriate house design. This element is considered in more detail under PPS 7 assessment, see later

section in this report. It is also important to note that DFI Roads have advised that the layout will

require significant amendments to accommodate the internal bus route and to design the site to

Creating Places Standards which will impact the internal layout, the road layout and could reduce the

number of dwellings as well as impacting open space provision. Additionally, the existing boundary

along the sites frontage at existing dwellings no 44 to 50 Derrymore has to be removed to

accommodate the required visibility splays. No detail has been shown on the Architects drawing to

indicate if this is practicable or deliverable and does not adversely impact on the existing dwellings.

Officers consider that to provide for the required visibility splays the removal of front gardens and

walls of existing properties and their then proximity to the Springtown Road would be detrimental to

the residents and could pose a health and safety risk.

The concept layout therefore is not acceptable however no further amendments have been requested

to be submitted as the principle of the development is unacceptable in the countryside.

Policy H2 Open Space Provision in new Housing Areas – the policy requires provision of open space

within new housing developments. This is assessed in more detail under PPS 8 assessment later in this

report.

Policy TR1 Public Transport - the developer has suggested the proposal will involve extending the

main bus route services. The proposal does provide for a bus stop and bus lay over within the site,

however the bus route proposed as shown on the roads consultants drawings is not acceptable in

terms of the use of the bend and the location of the layby in close proximity to a junction within the

internal layout. Addressing this issue will have a significant impact on the internal road layout.

Members should also note agreement with Translink would need to be secured for a public transport

contribution and this may require a S76 Planning Agreement. The Department, Council and Translink

would need to liaise further on this matter should Members be minded to approve the application.

Regional Development Strategy 2035 (RDS)

The RDS enshrines the commitment to the concept of sustainability with particular emphasis on having

more compact urban settlements. Policy RG8: Manage Housing growth to achieve sustainable

patterns of residential development; advocates the encouragement of compact urban forms, and

Appendix 1

promoting housing within existing urban areas with more urban housing by recycling land and

buildings and making use of other suitable sites thereby reducing the use of greenfield land. Policy

SFG7: Strengthen the role of Londonderry as the principal city for the North West: Meeting the housing

needs of the area; states that the expected need for housing in the city will continue to increase and

the additional dwellings will be provided on land already zoned for housing and on windfall sites which

becomes available for development.

Given that this proposed housing development is located within the countryside, it will not promote

a drive to provide more housing in existing urban areas on land already zoned for housing and is

therefore contrary to the Regional Guidance and the Spatial Framework Guidance set out in the

Regional Development Strategy.

Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS)

The principle of ‘Sustainable Development’ is supported through the SPPS; in particular, paragraph 3.5

‘Further Sustainable Development’ is specific to housing, and states ‘In furthering Sustainable

Development it is important to manage housing growth in a sustainable way, placing particular

emphasis on the importance of the inter-relationship between the location of local housing jobs,

facilities and services and infrastructure….’. It further states in paragraph 3.8 that ‘the guiding principle

for planning authorities in determining applications is that sustainable development should be

permitted, having regard to the development plan and all other material considerations’. The SPPS

advises that a proposed development that conflicts with the development plan should be refused.

Paragraph 5.72 of the SPPS further emphasises this.

This proposal is for a major housing development of approximately 258 residential units outside of

the defined settlement limits, on a greenfield site, which is not considered a sustainable form of

development when there is a more than adequate resource of existing undeveloped zoned and

brownfield land within the development limits, as set out in the development plan. The proposal is

therefore contrary to the SPPS.

Additionally, officers have considered the agents supporting information including the submitted

Health & Wellbeing Strategy’. One of the core principles within the SPPS includes Improving Health

and Well-being through well designed buildings and successful places; the way in which places and

buildings are configured, patterns of movement and access to quality open space. Para 4.5 of the SPPS

lists 9 specific considerations for decision taking, i.e. safeguarding and facilitating open space; better

connected communities; better integration between planning and transport; supporting the provision

Appendix 1

of jobs etc. and the further recommendations from para 4.6-1.10 to improve Health and Wellbeing

such as the need for adequate private, semi-private and public amenity space. The agents have quoted

the material from the SPPS and also The Strategic Growth Plan 2017-2032, which also recognises the

importance of improving the social, economic and environmental wellbeing of the city and district in

a sustainable way. The agents supporting information also includes details on Apex’s Corporate

Strategy and Business Plan which is summarised earlier in this report. Whilst these are all material

planning considerations and have been considered in the application; the information provided does

not evidence or justify why this development in considering Health and well-being alone would

outweigh the fundamental fact that this housing development is located in the countryside outside

the limits of development. The proposal is contrary to the Derry Area Plan, RDS and the SPPS, and as

aforementioned in the paragraph above is not a sustainable form of development. Sustainable

development and managing housing growth in having more compact urban form within the limits of

development is at the heart of the SPPS, and whilst housing layouts can be designed to achieve

improved health and well-being in any development proposal, this is not a site specific argument to

bear determining weight to allow a major housing development outside the limits of development or

to overcome Regional and Strategic material planning policy.

Local Retail

Although local retail does not form part of the application description the Design and Access

Statement and the Environmental Statement submitted makes reference to a new Community Hub

and retail unit measuring 90m2. It also states that this will include a 60-person multi-purpose hall,

however as this is an outline application no detailed floor pans of this building showing the hall and/or

retail have been provided, although a community building is indicated on the site plan. In assessing

any retail element the SPPS states that a sequential test should be applied to planning applications for

main town centre uses that are not in an existing centre and are not in accordance with an up to date

LDP. Applications for retail are to be considered in the following order;

Primary retail core

Town centres

Edge of Centre

Out of centre locations, only where sites are accessible by a choice of good public

transport modes.

Paragraph 6.279 of the SPPs states ‘Retailing will be directed to town centres, and the development

of inappropriate retail facilities in the countryside must be resisted’. The retail element proposal is

Appendix 1

therefore contrary to SPPS. Members should note that the need for local retail or neighbourhood

facilities are generally identified through the Local Development Plan process, as per QD2 of PPS 7.

There is no identified need in the existing Area Plan on this site which is outside the limits of

development in the countryside for any neighbourhood facilities, this includes a local shop and the

community uses being proposed. And as stated above proposed retailing is not included in the

proposed description of development.

PPS 12 Housing in Settlements Planning Control Principle 3: Sustainable Forms of Development

Planning Control Principle 3 advocates more sustainable forms of development where use of

greenfield land for housing should be reduced and more urban housing accommodated through the

recycling of land and buildings. Major housing development should be concentrated in sustainable

locations facilitating a high degree of integration with centres of employment, community services,

public transport and taking advantage of existing infrastructure.

This proposal is for housing outside of a settlement on a greenfield site, which is not considered a

sustainable form of development when there is a more than adequate resource of existing

undeveloped zoned and brownfield land within the existing development limit.

PPS 13 Land Use and Transportation

The site’s location in the countryside does not take full advantage of locational accessibility as the site

is located beyond the edge of the settlement limit. It does not encourage the wider view of transport

in terms of walking, cycling and public transport. Whilst there are linkages in the vicinity nearby and

the developer has suggested the proposal will involve extending the main bus route services, this

peripheral site does not integrate land uses with the existing transportation services. The proposal

does provide for a bus stop and bus lay over within the site, however Members should note agreement

with Translink would need to be secured to extend the existing bus service and this may require a S76

Planning Agreement. DFI Roads have also advised that the bus provisions are under consideration in

conjunction with Translink.

Planning Policy Statement 21 Sustainable Development in the Countryside

Policy CTY 1 Development in the Countryside

As this site is beyond the development limits of a settlement, Policy CTY 1 ‘Development in the

Countryside’ applies. The proposal does not meet any of the exceptions to policy that could be

considered acceptable in the countryside. There are no overriding reasons why this housing

Appendix 1

development is essential in this rural location and could not be located within a settlement. The

housing need in the Westbank has been considered however as advised earlier in this report there is

sufficient land and sites within the Westbank including H2, H1B and H1C that could accommodate this

proposal and which would meet the housing need identified by the NIHE. The application is therefore

contrary to CTY 1.

Policy CTY 5 Social and Affordable Housing

This exception to PPS 21 is not relevant to this application proposal for the following reasons:

Policy CTY5 states that Planning permission may be granted for a group of no more than 14 dwellings

adjacent to or near a small settlement or within a designated Dispersed Rural Community to provide

social and affordable housing to meet the needs of the rural community. Planning permission will only

be granted where the application is made by a registered Housing Association and where a

demonstrable need has been identified by the Northern Ireland Housing Executive which cannot

readily be met within an existing settlement in the locality. The proposal is indicated for a total of 258

dwellings, on a site outside the City limits. Policy CTY 5 is therefore not relevant to this application

proposal.

Policy CTY 15 The Setting of Settlements

Policy CTY15 states that Planning permission will be refused for development that mars the distinction

between a settlement and the surrounding countryside or that otherwise results in urban sprawl. The

principle of drawing a settlement limit is to partly promote and partly contain new development within

that limit and so maintain a clear distinction between the built up area and the surrounding

countryside. It also provides confidence and certainty to developers and the public regarding the

planned development of settlements. This development proposal would result in the creation of urban

sprawl outside the limits into the countryside, further extending it for a second time in this area, which

is unacceptable and is contrary to the Area Plan and planning policy.

Planning Policy Statement 7 Quality Residential Environments

Policy QD 1 Quality in New Residential Development

The site layout/concept plan indicates the proposal is for a total of 258 dwelling units comprising of

34 apartments, 6 complex needs units and 218 two storey dwellings. The scheme also includes 2 public

open space areas, a community building and tiered outdoor venue space as indicated on the layout

plan. The Environmental Statement also states there will be outdoor gym equipment and a pedestrian

connection to equipped children’s play area which was approved as part of the Derrymore housing

Appendix 1

development. All of the QD1 criteria (a-i) are expected to be met; however as advised earlier the

principle of this major housing development outside the limits is contrary to the Derry Area Plan and

is not acceptable.

DFI Roads have advised the internal layout will require significant amendments to be designed to

Creating Places Standards to accommodate the internal road, the internal bus route and location of

the bus lay-by and proximity to a junction and, to provide visibility for all proposed units, and therefore

the layout could be significantly changed and open space areas could also be impacted. Officers are

therefore unable to fully assess the housing layout as submitted as significant changes are required

which will impact the overall concept layout. Furthermore, other layout and design elements also need

considered and incorporated into the layout such as retention of existing trees and vegetation, and

watercourse buffer as advised by Natural Environment Division and these should be incorporated into

the overall concept. This application is for outline to assess the principle of housing outside the

development limits. The submitted site plan is a concept only and therefore the detailed design and

layout would be conditioned to be included in any reserved matters application. However, at this stage

and in the absence of information and discrepancies on plans the proposed layout is unacceptable. As

the application is for outline planning to agree the principle of the development, officers are not

offering a reason for refusal on the internal layout.

Site Layout/Concept plan will require significant amendments internally to address DFI Roads

Appendix 1

PPS 8 Public Open Space in New Residential Development

Policy OS 2 requires new development proposals to provide public open space as an integral part of

the development. A normal expectation for a development of this size will be at least 10% of the total

site area. The Design and Access Statement describes the proposal as including an outdoor gym/trim

trail, community outdoor theatre/venue and landscaped communal garden areas. Two areas of open

space are indicated on the plan, within the site. As advised earlier in the report the application site

encroaches into the approved existing development Derrymore, which, it should be noted was to have

a significant landscape buffer provided at that development’s edge with the countryside. Following a

recent site visit this has not been implemented. The open space area 1, community building and car

park encroach into where the landscape buffer should be provided as part of the previous approval.

Planning Policy Statement 6 Planning and Archaeology

The application site is located close to the site of a Scheduled anti-aircraft battery. HED Historic

Monuments has reviewed the Cultural Heritage section within the Environmental Statement and

agree with the Assessment of Effect set out within this document. While the proposed development

will not provide any adverse impact on the recorded monuments, given the extent of the development

area there remains potential for previously unknown archaeological sites to be uncovered during site

works. As such, archaeological mitigation is required. On this basis HED HM advise the proposal

satisfies PPS 6 Policy requirements, subject to conditions for the agreement and implementation of a

developer funded programme of archaeological works.

Planning Policy Statement 3 Access, Movement and Parking

DFI Roads do not at this time require any further information to conclude the Transport Assessment.

However, in order to provide an adequate and safe access into the development the following works

are required;

External Works

The proposal requires demolition of two residential buildings (4 apartments) to be demolished (no 40-

43 Derrymore). The agent has now provided fully dimensioned plans for the access arrangements with

the access located at a 15m stagger from the junction at Hawthorn Grove and splays of 4.5 x 90m

being provided. The design and layout of the Ghost Islands has been submitted and are generally

acceptable to DFI Roads. The boundary along Springtown Road has to be set back 3 metres to allow a

future cycle network along the site frontage.

Appendix 1

For these external road works and a safe access to the site to be provided this requires the existing

walls along the frontage of the Derrymore development along Springtown Road to be set back to

accommodate the visibility splays. The existing boundary walls therefore of properties no 44-50

Derrymore will have to be set back. DFI Roads has advised that there may not be sufficient space

between the rear of the visibility splay from the proposed development and the fronts of properties

44 and 45 to provide a boundary wall and railing whist still retaining access to these properties. It has

not been shown on the plans if it is practicable or deliverable and does not adversely impact on the

existing dwellings e.g. with regards to the ability to carry out routine maintenance operations. This is

also unacceptable to planning officers and at the time of assessment of that application (Derrymore)

the walls including the front amenity space was required to provide a quality development, adequate

amenity and an acceptable frontage along Springtown Road.

With regards to traffic calming alterations on Springtown Road, the proposal necessitates

amendments to the existing traffic calming which must be agreed with DFI Roads Traffic Section. This

has not been agreed.

The crossing island on Springtown Road has to be widened to 2.0 metres for the safety and

convenience of non-motorised users. Whilst there appears to be sufficient space to accommodate this

requirement, this needs to be demonstrated on a plan.

External roads works required

Internal Layout and Bus Provision

With regards to the internal layout this will need to be designed to Creating Places standards. This will

have a significant impact on the internal layout of the proposed development, for example the

Appendix 1

sightlines from driveways pass through dwellings; the internal road layout and the bus route will

impact the layout. The bus route as indicated on the plan below is not acceptable both in terms of the

use of a speed control bend and the location of the lay-by in close proximity to a junction. This will

have a significant impact on the internal layout. Officers would advise members that with regards to

public transport provision required by this major development, agreement will be required with

Translink and a Public Transport Contribution to Translink would need to be secured and this may

require a S76 Planning Agreement.

For the reasons as outlined above the proposal is contrary to PPS13 and PPS3. Council Planning

officers have not requested any further information or amendments from the agent to address the

above matters as the principle of the development is not acceptable in the countryside, for the reasons

stated earlier in this report.

Appendix 1

Planning Policy Statement 2 Natural Heritage

Policy NH 1 – European and Ramsar Sites – international

Planning permission will only be granted for a development proposal that is not likely to have a

significant effect on a European Site (SPA, proposed Special Protection Area, Special Areas of

Conservation etc.) The application site is hydrologically connected to Skeoge River, a cross border river

that flows between Lough Swilly SAC/SPA and River Foyle. The River Foyle flows into Lough Foyle SPA,

Ramsar and ASSI. These are of national and international importance and are protected by Habitats

Regulations and The Environment Order 2002. NED has advised they have considered the impacts of

the proposal on designated sites and other natural heritage interests and have no concerns subject to

conditions. In relation to designated sites in the Republic of Ireland, NED advises that Shared

Environmental Services liaise with the National Parks and Wildlife Service to consider possible

transboundary designated site issues. Shared Environmental Services, our environmental advisors,

have undertaken a Habitats Regulation Assessment following submission of an Outline Construction

Environmental Management Plan submitted as Further Environmental Information in September

2019. NED has advised however advised that the OCEMP does not include full details of the proposed

culverting however SES in response received 02 March 2020 have advised they have undertaken a

Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment and provided mitigation is conditioned in any planning approval the

proposal would not have an adverse effect on the site integrity of any European Site. SES require that

in the event of a planning approval a final Construction Environmental Management Plan and Drainage

Plan be submitted at Reserved Matters/Full application stage for agreement and also state the

conditions of Regulation Unit must be added to any approval.

Policy NH 2 – Species Protected by Law and Policy NH5 – Habitats, Species or Features of Natural

Heritage

The hedgerows and streams on site have been identified as NI Priority habitat. The proposal involves

culverting of part of the stream that is necessary for access within the development. A 5m buffer from

all construction works is required to be maintained from the stream on site. This has been shown on

the site plans.

However, it is not clear from plans submitted what hedgerows are to be retained and lost and details

on proposed compensatory planting for any loss are not provided. Existing hedgerows should be

retained where possible and enhanced. The drawings submitted indicate retained and enhanced

hedgerow in the key but this is not accurately represented on the concept layout.

Appendix 1

With regards to impacts on Bats the trees and buildings on site have been assessed as negligible for

Bat Roosting potential. The Activity surveys however confirm bats use the site for foraging and

commuting. It is unclear if the stream corridor is to be vegetated and hedgerow/tree planting would

be preferable to enhance foraging/commuting opportunities for bats. The hedgerows and stream

appear to be the most important features for bats therefore the lighting on the boundary vegetation

and stream corridor should be bat friendly and less than 1 lux. Provided hedgerows can be retained

and enhanced as much as possible and lighting is bat friendly the development should not significantly

impact bats.

With regards to badgers, the ecologist confirmed that a thorough search including a 25m buffer was

carried out. NED advise that pending on the time lapsed between this and any future reserved matters

application updated surveys may be required.

Therefore, in consideration of all of the above; and, in the absence of detailed information on the

layout with regards to existing and retained vegetation so as to have minimal impact on bats, officers

consider the proposal contrary to policies NH2 and NH5 of PPS 2. Officers have not requested

additional amendments from the agent as the principle of the development is not acceptable, as

stated earlier in this report.

Planning Policy Statement 15

The ES contained a Flood Risk and Drainage Assessment.

FLD 1 - The Strategic Flood Map indicates the development does not lie within the 1 in 100 Year fluvial

floodplain the proposal therefore is acceptable under FLD 1.

FLD 2 - In considering FLD 2 the site is traversed by an undesignated watercourse. A 5m maintenance

strip has been indicated on the revised site layout drawing and cross-section drawings of the

maintenance strip to show level access can be provided. DFI Rivers advise the maintenance strip

should be protected from impediments including tree planting, hedges, permanent fencing and sheds,

land raising or future unapproved development by way of a planning condition. The proposal complies

with FLD 2.

FLD 3 – A Drainage Assessment was submitted and evidence provided from the agent regarding

Consent to Discharge. DFI Rivers advise the internal storm drainage system is to be adopted by

Northern Ireland Water according to the FRA/Drainage Assessment. On this basis DFI Rivers has no

reason to object to the development from a drainage or flood risk perspective.

Appendix 1

FLD 4 - In considering the culverting of the existing watercourse on site, part of this is proposed to be

culverted to provide access roads within the development which is acceptable under policy. DFI Rivers

advise that any culverting proposed will be subject to Schedule 6 approval.

FLD 5 is not applicable to this site.

Social Housing Need

The letter from the NIHE has been considered and whilst Planning officials acknowledge that the

Housing Executive supported the general need for social housing in the Westbank, it is considered that

this does not outweigh the policy constraints for this proposed housing development of 258 units

within the countryside, as set out and detailed above in this report. Whilst it is acknowledged that

there is a need for social housing for the city and in particular the Westbank, there is no need to build

it in the countryside as there is an ample supply of zoned housing land existing within the limits of the

development which can accommodate any housing in a more sustainable manner. The supporting

information and assessment of sites has also been considered and as advised earlier in the report and

officers consider that the supporting information including health and well-being strategy as

submitted, do not outweigh this significant and fundamental departure from the Area Plan and

planning policy including the RDS and SPPS. Planning has approved several hundred houses in the last

few years, specifically for social housing. Major construction is ongoing on H1C with approx. 1200+

social houses built on this site; a major housing approval on H1B with an approved concept for approx.

1400 for which Members recently approved the first reserved matters for almost 300 social houses;

major outline approval granted by Members on the H2 zoned housing land which is located in the

Westbank for approx. 3500 houses in which the S76 made allowance for up to 30% of these units for

social housing. Members will also be aware that significant numbers of dwellings including those for

social housing have been granted full permission in recent years. Officers are therefore satisfied there

is adequate supply for private and social housing within the city limits. This application will set an

undesirable precedent for other housing or development proposals outside any settlement limits and

not complying with the Area Plan and Regional and Strategic Planning Policy.

13. Conclusion and Recommendation

In summary, the proposed development of 258 dwellings within the countryside is contrary to the

Derry Area Plan 2011, as well as being contrary to the Regional Development Strategy, Strategic

Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS), PPS 12 (Housing in Settlements), PPS 21

(Sustainable Development in the Countryside), PPS 7 (Quality Residential Environments) and PPS 3

Access Movement and Parking.

Appendix 1

The supporting documents have been taken into account, including the need for social housing, the

well-being strategy and the representations received, but none are such to justify this major

development proposal of multiple housing outside the development limit which is contrary to the

current Area Plan and Strategic Policies.

It is therefore recommended that the Council’s Planning Committee Refuse planning permission for

the proposed development for the following reasons:

1. The proposal is contrary to 'The Derry Area Plan 2011' as the proposed site lies outside the

limit of development and is located on a Greenfield site in the rural countryside.

2. The proposal is contrary to 'The Regional Development Strategy 2035' - Policy RG8: Manage

Housing growth to achieve sustainable patterns of residential development and Policy SFG 7

- Meeting the housing needs of the area in that the proposal would not promote a drive to

provide more housing in existing urban areas and is not a sustainable form of development.

3. The proposal is contrary to Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland (SPPS), in

that the proposed development does not manage housing growth in a sustainable way, as the

site lies outside the development plan's limit of development.

4. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and PPS 12 - Housing in Settlements in that it undermines

sustainable forms of development by proposing residential development to out of town

Greenfield sites when there is an adequate resource of existing undeveloped land and zoned

land within the existing development limit.

5. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and PPS 13 – Land use and Transportation as the sites

location in the countryside does not take full advantage of locational accessibility, nor does

the proposal as submitted sufficiently promote walking, cycling, and public transport. This

peripheral site does not sufficiently integrate land uses with existing transportation services.

6. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and Policy CTY1 of Planning Policy Statement 21,

Sustainable Development in the Countryside in that there are no overriding reasons why this

development is essential in this rural location and could not be located within a settlement.

Appendix 1

7. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and Policy CTY15 of Planning Policy Statement 21,

Sustainable Development in the Countryside in that the development would if permitted mar

the distinction between the defined settlement limit of Derry and the surrounding countryside

thereby resulting in urban sprawl.

8. The proposal is contrary to Planning Policy Statement 3 Access, Movement and Parking in that

a satisfactory access from Springtown Road to the site has not been demonstrated.

9. The proposal is contrary to the SPPS and Planning Policy Statement 7 Policy QD 1 in that the

works required to provide the visibility splays and access to the site will have a detrimental

impact on existing residential amenity and safety and design quality of 44-50 Derrymore in

terms of loss of front amenity space and boundary walls.

appendix 1meetings.derrycityandstrabanedistrict.com/documents...appendix 1 the pre-determination...

Documents