1 Comment
A decision on the Planning Permission Application for the proposed Newry, Mourne and Down District Council's Civic Hub at Abbey Way in Newry have been deferred so that legal concerns can be addressed.
The meeting today 30 April, discussed procedural issues surrounding the planning application between March and July 2023. Initially classified in March 23 as a local application it was reclassified in July that year as a major application, after legal advice from Belfast with the Pre Application Community Consultation report, required for major applications, submitted retrospectively.
At today's meeting, where the application was finally meant to be determined, Andy Stephens was objecting to the application. Representing Newry Cathedral Parish, Stephens had sent documents to the planners at midnight last night. Speaking to Councillors Stephens said "I indicated last night in my correspondence that there'd been a procedural error in regards to the mandatory requirements of Article 3.3.e of the Planning, General Development Procedure Order Northern Ireland 2015, which requires at the outset when the application is submitted for a Pre Application Community Consultation Report. That wasn't submitted on the 17th of March, 2023, that was submitted on the 3rd of July, 2023 and that is a fundamental and latent error which has tainted this application from the outset."
Mark Keane from the Council's Planning Department had said earlier in the meeting "The validity issue raised just last night is not a new matter and was previously fully considered by the planning department."
Stephens addressed this saying "To try to dismiss it, as Mr. Keane has done, to say that that has been considered is, quite frankly, unacceptable. It's wrong. I'm not going to sit here and listen to that Chair. Because it hasn't been considered and I've raised that point having had to use the Environmental Information Regulations, 2004 to get that information from the Department for Infrastructure. Now that raises even bigger questions in regards to the processing and procedure of this application, that none of that information is online in the public domain, and we are sitting here two years and one month later, and the application was invalid from the outset, and what we now have is trying to sweep over to cover the tracks.
Stephens continued "Unfortunately, the legislation can't be sidetracked. You can't set it to one side. And the question then remains is, has this application been predetermined on the basis this council has chosen and elected to set aside the legislation."
Stephens added "when this application was submitted on 17th of March 2023 the agents, failed to ascertain that it was a major application, so they submitted it as a local application, because when they did their Pre Application Notification in 2019, the building was smaller. It then changed over the intervening period of time, which is why you should do your Pre Application Notification just before you submit."
Sounding confident in the event of a review of the application Stephens concluded "This will be the fastest judicial review ever won. End of discussion"
Deferral
Following this conversation Cllr Glyn Hanna suggested a deferral might be needed "Do we need to defer this so we can get legal advice, senior legal advice here" adding "Should we defer this to protect the planning committee at the very least. So Mark [Keane], I'm asking you, has there been mistakes made."
Keane replied "Has there been mistakes made? I would say, not". He continued "The application did come in, in March 2023, and it was submitted as a local application. However, following it being validated and allocated and reviewed, the planning department then established that it considered it to be falling within the threshold of a major application. At that time, it took advice, and following that advice on an agreed position, it contacted the nominated agency straight away and advised that it's actually a major application, and therefore you need to do your Pre Application Community Consultation Report, which followed from the PAN 2019, which they proceeded to do straight away"
No Grey Area Here
Cllr Jarlath Tinnelly queried "Mr Stephens is suggesting here that information should have been submitted by the 17th of March, 2023 and wasn't submitted until the third of July, 2023 and that information that we're talking about should have been in at the start of the process."
He added "Mr. Stevens says that that information that was submitted in July, by law had to be submitted by the 17th of March. Now what you've just told us is you got advice from Belfast that said that could be submitted retrospectively. Is that what you're telling us, and I want you to address the legislation bit. There's no grey area here - It's black and white. Mr. Stephens is right, or you're right. Mark."
Keane replied "Article 3 says the application must be accompanied when the application relates to development belonging to the category of major application by a Pre Application, Community Consultation Report.
"The application then was accompanied with one and processed with one. The legislation does not say at the outset."
Cllr Tinnelly wasn't happy with the reply and added "What you're saying is that it's quite acceptable to add the information retrospectively that was required between March and July, and Mr. Stevens, therefore is wrong."
Keane said "The application was first submitted as a local, and when it was reclassified as a major, the information was requested, submitted, re-advertised, and based on legal advice that was entirely acceptable and appropriate to do so" to which Cllr Tinnelly suggested "You started to change the rules after the game had started."
Legal Questions
Chairman of the Planning Committee Cllr Declan Murphy then interjected "What I'm conscious of is that we are straying very much into legal questions."
"if all our questions are going to be based around legal issues then we may need a deferral, if that's okay with everybody."
Cllr Murphy's proposal that the decision would be defered and that Nora Largey from legals in Belfast could address concerns was accepted.
Oversight?
Discussion wasn't over though as Cllr Killian Feehan asked the planning representative "if the if the application was for development in excess of 5000 square metres, would that then automatically be considered a major development as opposed to a local development?
"I'm trying to ascertain if there was an oversight in relation to the classification of the application as a local one as opposed to a major one"
Mark Keane from Planning replied "once the full application came in, I think it amounted to to 5,680 square metres, so that would have triggered major."
Cllr Murphy concluded the meeting "the proposal has been accepted, so we will defer this until further notice."
Timeline of Application
Councillors voted to approve the Civic Hub Planning Application at a Planning Committee Meeting, 18 December 2024 though a series of procedural stages were invoked in the months leading up to today's meeting, due to the Department for Infrastructure writing to council 9 October 2024, requesting that council notify them following any decision and that they reserved the right to 'call in' the application.
This meant the application returned to today's Council Planning Committee for approval once again following DfI's decision not to call in the project.
In the interim a special planning predetermination hearing meeting was held on 9 April and the Full Business Case for the Newry City Centre Regeneration project (specifically the Civic Hub) was approved at the 17 April Strategy, Policy and Regeneration meeting although this hasn't been ratified at full council yet.
Today's meeting has certainly delayed the Civic Hub project once again but whether this has a knock on effect for the proposed theatre/ conference centre, also part of the Newry City Centre Regeneration scheme is unknown.
