Councillors asked if 'public car parks should make up a shortfall for private developers' as committee approves town centre apartments

THE Principal Planning Officer of Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council has asked the Planning Committee if ‘ratepayers should be paying to maintain car parks for private developers’.

Barry Diamond was speaking during a meeting last week where members approved permission for apartments and retail at the old First Trust bank and more flats in a building at Market Square in Antrim town.

No parking has been provided for either scheme and on both occasions, the committee went against planning officers’ recommendation to refuse.

However local reps have welcomed the news, with South Antim MP Robin Swann sending a representative to speak in favour of both applications.

Two Antrim Town reps, Neil Kelly of Alliance and Roisin Lynch of SDLP, spoke in favour of the Market Square application, while after the meeting, Matthew Magill of the DUP said that ‘Living Over The Shops will breathe new life into our towns’.

The applicant for the Market Square scheme is a local businessman and employer, who said that he wanted his staff to be able to live in the town centre.

The first application before the committee was for change of use of the former ground floor bank to two retail units and change of use of the first floor to five residential units, including internal works and external alterations at 50-52 High Street.

The applicant is Brian McKenna.

A planning officer outlined the proposal, saying that demolition plans were not fully detailed, but that a ‘living above the shops’ model could make a positive contribution to Antrim town.

She noted that there was no designated parking, but that less spaces would be required for retail than for the previous use as a bank, with visits being briefer.

However the officer said that the supplied surveys ‘do not sufficiently demonstrate adequate parking for the residential units’ and that the applicant had failed to make a persuasive argument to explain no parking spaces.

She also noted that parts of the design were ‘inappropriate for the conservation area’ and repeated that the application for demolition consent was also unacceptable.

First to speak in support was Stephen Nicholl, on behalf of Robin Swann MP, who has a constituency office opposite the bank building and along the street from the Market Square building.

He said that Mr Swann was ‘very supportive’ of the council initiative to promote ‘Living Over The Shops’.

His statement said that town centres had lost their viability and ability to survive, and that such a scheme would promote increased footfall and sustainability.

He added that the council’s Environmental Development team had played a leading role in bringing similar schemes to Crumlin and Glengormley, which would help reduce vacant and under-utilised properties and reduce the dependency on private transport if people were working and living in town centres.

He said that such projects added to the vibrancy of town centres and their sustainability, with access to employment and public transport, which are all council objectives, adding: “There is no requirement for people living at these properties to have a car, there are very significant parking opportunities in the town centre.”

Mr Nicholl said that such schemes: “Save properties like this from falling into disrepair, encourage investment. A ground floor retail option on its own does not attract the investment that is needed.”

Grainne Rice, Director at GRA Planning + Development, was next to speak.

She said that the building was not listed, but was sited in the conservation area, which presented ‘significant commercial challenges as it does not have access to listed building grants and funds’.

She repeated that the council was a supporter and funder of the ‘Living Over The Shops’ model.

She said that given the location, amenity and location, there was a lower demand for parking and that it was a ‘viable and sustainable proposal’, adding that parking and design matters could be resolved.

Also in support of the applicant, transport planning consultant Richard Agus said that planning policy seeks sufficient parking and that ‘sufficient can be zero’.

“Some development can have zero parking and this is supposed to be taken into consideration.

“The application is reusing the existing area, it can’t be conserved if there is demolition for parking.”

He referenced previous applications and comparison cases where there had been a reduction in parking demand, noting that not all apartment owners had cars and added that in the case of a development for elderly residents, remote parking wasn’t an option and should not have been considered applicable.

Mr Agus` added that ‘parking surveys aren’t necessary when there isn’t a need for parking’.

Ulster Unionist Councillor Robert Foster noted that the applicant had proposed a travel scheme to encourage use of public transport.

Anne Marie Logue, Sinn Fein Airport rep, also asked about the travel plan and asked how the application intended to deal with insufficient parking.

The committee was told that parking is free in High Street, but that there are time restrictions and no return limits during the day, but not overnight.

Mr said that the travel plan follows the line of other schemes, with a travel card from Translink to promote the use of public transport.

Mr said that parking surveys were asked for in December and submitted even though ‘we didn’t need to’.

“We are not able to do surveys in the last two weeks of December, then we had the inclement weather in January, they were carried out last week in accordance with DFI between 7pm and 7am, when there are no parking restriction in the street.” he said.

Councillor Foster said that while there was no guarantee residents would get parking spaces, if they were working, they would be gone in the morning and there between 5pm and 9am.

He said that other car parks could be used and if Farmleigh in Glengormley could be used as a model.

“If we are trying to get people out of cars, do these things not provides the norm and not exceptions.

“We said earlier (considering another application) is this not the case, that they cannot park here or somewhere else?”

Barry Diamond said that ‘there were alternatives, the committee may deem that to be acceptable’.

“There’s no parking, not a reduction,” he said.

“The applicant has proposed a travel plan and travel co-ordinator to get people out of the car and onto buses and trains.

“They could park on the street, during the day there would be displacement of shoppers coming in to spend and there is not much of a night-time economy.

“The committee could take the view that this is an exception, the conversion as opposed to new development, would this set a precedent for similar and have an adverse impact on the town centre or could the town centre cope with Living Over The Shops with mitigation but no parking, the mitigation would be the travel card and coordinator.”

Councillor Foster asked if the ‘no return’ policy stop people living there from parking, noting that he had ‘ run the gauntlet of traffic wardens every half hour’ in Antrim town.

He also asked if each application was not taken on its own merit.

Mr Diamond said that planning officers had to be ‘mindful to what has been already approved’ and consider the cumulative effect of what had not been already built.

He said that in the area, three schemes had never been implemented and that planning was extant, with merits depending on what was happening at the time.

Councillor Logue said that the town was served by several ‘very large car parks’.

Mr Diamond said that the committee could form the view that it was ‘not up to car parks to provide overflow for private developers’ and that ‘ratepayers shouldn't be paying to maintain car parks for private developers’.

While he acknowledged that Bridge Street, Central and Railway Street ‘could take pressure off’: “Equally the committee may consider that for public car parks to make up for shortfalls is not acceptable.”

Committee Chair Rosie Kinnear of Sinn Fein asked if the demolition application issues could be overcome.

Mr Diamons said that some more drawings were needed ‘to see what is being removed’, adding that because officers had issues with the principal of the scheme ‘it is not something we pursued’.

“We are not recommending demolition, if are not recommending the granting of planning permission.” he said.

Design issues he said related to a ‘largely glazed door’ facing onto the Old Courthouse, which he said would ‘contrast badly’ but that if the applicant was amenable to amend, it could be finished in hardwood.

While the recommendation was to refuse, Councillor Foster asked, given that it was not a new build and with mitigation in place, if it was in the committee’s gift to have the apartment advertised as having no parking, as a condition.

Mr Diamond said that the council could add an ‘informative’ but could not control how the vendor could market the property.

He said that as well as conditions, while unlike nearby social housing schemes with an overarching landlord, ‘it might be more beneficial to go for legal agreements’ on any mitigation issues.

Councillor Foster proposed approval for both the change of use and demolition consent, subject to all caveats, seconded by Councillor Logue.

Airport DUP Alderman Matthew Magill said that other conservation area-related issues could be delegated to council officers.

Both proposals passed by eight votes to one, with only Alison Bennington of the DUP voting against.

Market Square

Next on the agenda was the Market Square application.

JMCK Investment Ltd had applied for retention of retail units at basement and ground floors and change of use from offices to nine apartments on upper floors four two-bed apartments five one-bed apartments to include five escape roof windows, one smoke ventilation roof window and soil waste/ ventilation pipes at 12, 12A-12E Market Square.

Councillor Kelly said that approval would be a ‘positive step forward for Antrim town’ and that Antrim was ‘unique in the borough’ in terms of free parking.

“Over the five areas, we have 1193 free car parking spaces, Antrim has over 800 of those.

“Central has 452, Castle Street has 117 if you turn left, over the footbridge at the Six Mile river, there is a car park with 40 spaces, it’s 100 yards max, Bridge Street has 195 free spaces, which is the most underused, it always has spaces, so many, as a resident, there are always spaces available at Dublin Road, a couple minutes walk away.

“There is a huge amount of car parking spaces that are not fully utilised, there is the Market Square bus stop, a taxi rank outside, the station, is less than a ten minute walk and we have 804 free spaces, in particular the Lough Road and Dublin Road spaces.”

Councillor Foster joked that Councillor Kelly was making the case for paid car parks, adding: “There are too many spaces!”

But he said that there were the same issues with on-street timings.

Councillor Kelly said: “I don't see the number of apartments having an impact car parking, if was, I would be objecting to it.”

Councillor Lynch said that representatives had been championing town centre regeneration for many years.

She said that the scheme was utilising a building that had been in Antrim town for many years, providing much-needed homes and contributing to the vitality of the town centre.

She repeated that the Economic Development Committee had been championing the Living Above The Shops Scheme.

“This is not just about one building, the regeneration strategy has already been endorses. Town centres have changed, we need a mixed economy with residential use, retail space is no longer in demand.

“This strengthens existing buildings. Leaving town centre buildings vacant unused is not sustainable, we have real housing need, with 3400 households on the waiting list across the borough.

“This is not social housing, but contributes to a longer-lasting solution, a car free or car-light location close to shopping and river walks, when we have policies to reduce reliance on the car.”

She said that rigid adherence to policy was not a safety or capacity issue, that the way people live has changed and urged the committee to take a ‘balanced and forward looking-view’ and repeated that approval would be a ‘positive step towards town centre living in Antrim.”

Mr Nicholl also spoke out in favour, adding ‘I am not going to repeat what I said before’ but that the argument was the same, that it was a vital part of the regeneration of Antrim.

“Councillors Lynch and Kelly have outlined the position very well. There are extensive car parks in the Antrim, which were designed and placed there to facilitate a thriving retail centre that existed 30 years ago, but doesn't exist now.

“As that changes, then the car parks also have a role to play in supporting the overall direction, not solely to support the retail user, there will be a need for residential support for economic opportunities and sustainability.”

Applicant Jonathan McKinney said that he was resident in the borough and runs the PING Group at Belfast International Airport, employing around 85 people and turning over £300,000.

He said that he had worked with council in a number of schemes, including upskilling projects and that the while the firm had expansion plans across Europe, he wanted to keep the head office in the borough.

“Being a resident and living in the town, I have a genuine interest in the area, the Living Over the Shops scheme will bring people into town and promote cafe culture, it is frustrating when policy blocks investment plans and the Living Over The Shops Scheme.”

He reiterated that the building is also in the conservation area and that ‘we can't make parking’.

In support of the applicant, transport consultant Timothy Cousins said that the a parking survey was based on the previous and current use of offices.

He said that the need for 31 spaces had been reduced to 13, due to a reduction in parking demand within Antrim town centre, as people worked in the offices had to park somewhere.

He agreed that the parking survey before 7am and after 7pm, was the DFI standard.

He said that a travel plan offered a three-year travel card to each apartment, in the hope that potential residents were going to use and continue to use it, adding that would ‘take care’ of the fact that no parking provided.

Councillor Foster asked about a Planning Appeals Commission ruling on another matter cited in the planning officers’ report, and if ‘robust methodology’ had been used.

Councillor Bennington moved the recommendation to refuse, but found no seconder and the motion fell.

Sinn Fein Dunsilly Councillor Henry Cushinan said he was happy to propose approval ‘in line with same recommendations as the previous one’.

Mr Diamond said that legal agreement would be needed for the travel card and co-ordinator.

He said that there had been no application for demolition consent and said that any delegation to officers would have to be ratified.

Alderman Magill seconded.

Voting followed the same lines, with only Councillor Bennington voting against and the other reps voting for.

Speaking after the meeting, Alderman Magill said: “I am very pleased that two residential planning applications for High Street have been given the green light by the Planning Committee.”

“Several years ago, aware of the immense need to encourage greater town centre living, especially in Antrim, I spearheaded efforts within the council to incentivise greater use of first and second floor spaces, by town centre landlords, for the provision of residential accommodation.

“Working alongside other colleagues and council officers, the ‘Living Over The Shops’ Programme was established and is already having a tangible impact on the vitality of our town centres across the Borough. Following planning approval, two strategic buildings in Antrim, including the old First Trust Bank, whose upper floors have been vacant for some time, will now benefit from the scheme which will also incorporate ground floor retail provision. Vibrant town centres with good footfall are lifeblood for our local shops. It is imperative that government acts, where possible, for the benefit of our town centres and I am delighted that the ‘Living Over The Shops’ Programme is a clear commitment to make good on that aim by the council.”