Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the Plan Strategy by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council

Local Development Plan 2030

Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the Plan Strategy October 2023

www.midandeastantrim.gov.uk/planning

Contents Introduc�on Part A: Dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report of the Dra� Plan Strategy (September 2019) Part B: Addendum to dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report (January 2021) Part C: Second Addendum to the dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report (August 2023) Approval and authorisa�on

Introduc�on 1.1

This document has been prepared by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council (MEA) to collate the published reports that contributed to the Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report of the Mid and East Antrim Local Development Plan 2030 (LDP) Plan Strategy and comprises the following, which are to be read collec�vely as the ﬁnal screening: • Dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report of the Dra� Plan Strategy (September 2019); • Addendum to dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report (January 2021); and • Second Addendum to the dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report (August 2023).

1.2

Under Sec�on 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, Council, as a public authority, has a statutory duty to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity, promote good rela�ons and under the Disability Discrimina�on (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 a duty to have due regard of the need to promote posi�ve a�tudes towards disabled people and encourage par�cipa�on of disabled people in public life.

1.3

In bringing forward the LDP, the Council is commited to ensuring that the needs of Sec�on 75 groups are considered. The likely impacts on equality related issues have been assessed and consulted on at each stage of the prepara�on of the Plan Strategy and details of this work and its outcomes are included within each of the screening reports listed above. There were no comments to the ﬁnal consulta�on on the Second Addendum which took place in August 2023.

1.4

The conclusion of the original Screening Report of the dra� Plan Strategy in September 2019 remains that an Equality Impact Assessment was not required as no significant impacts in equality of opportunity were iden�fied on Sec�on 75 groups. The Council proposed a number of modifica�ons to the dra� Plan Strategy in January 2021 and published an Addendum to the Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report which concluded that these modifica�ons did not alter the overall outcomes of the original report. The dra� Plan Strategy was then subject to a number of further modifica�ons directed by the Department for Infrastructure (June 2023). The associated Second Addendum (August 2023) also concluded that the directed modifica�ons did not alter the overall outcomes of the original report or the first addendum to it.

1.5

As set out in the original report, it was recognised that the LDP Spa�al Growth Strategy has spa�al implica�ons that may have some poten�al for differen�al impacts on the grounds of Religious Belief/Poli�cal Opinion. However, as the Spa�al Growth Strategy is aligned with regional direc�on, overall, it will be of benefit to everyone. A�er detailed assessment it has been iden�fied that many of the Plan’s strategies and policies will likely have posi�ve impacts for a number of Sec�on 75 groups, including those with mul�ple iden��es. Policies rela�ng to housing, economic development, retail development and open space along with the General Policy for all Development, in par�cular, offer posi�ve impacts for those within the racial, group, age, marital status, sexual orienta�on, disability and dependants categories.

1.6

It is also an�cipated that the Plan Strategy is likely to have a posi�ve impact on good rela�ons between people of diﬀerent religious belief, poli�cal opinion and racial group. It recognises the importance of providing quality shared spaces that are accessible and valued by everyone and safeguards against the loss of spaces which play an important role in social interac�on and community cohesion.

1.7

A number of policies within the Plan Strategy are expected to have posi�ve impacts for people living with disabili�es. The focus of housing and economic growth to areas where there is the greatest access to services aim to encourage and help facilitate the par�cipa�on of disabled people in public life. Improving connec�vity and accessibility with par�cular considera�on for people with disabili�es are also key delivery mechanisms in the Plan Strategy. It is an�cipated that the Plan Strategy will promote posi�ve a�tudes towards people with disabili�es as it seeks to ensure that proposals take into account

the needs of people with disabili�es in the design of development. It is also an�cipated the Plan Strategy will be of beneﬁt to our ci�zens, including Sec�on 75 groups, as it seeks to improve the quality of life for all as set out in the Plan Strategy Vision. 1.8

As stated above, the Council in bringing forward the LDP, is commited to ensuring that the needs of Sec�on 75 groups are considered. Therefore, we will carry out an equality screening assessment at each stage of the process. The LDP will be subject to further equality screening at the Local Policies Plan stage.

1.9

Monitoring and review of the LDP is an integral part of the plan making process. The Plan Strategy is accompanied by an annual Monitoring and Review Framework (October 2023) which guides the assessment of the implementa�on of the Plan Strategy policies. This annual monitoring will be used to indicate whether LDP policies and proposals are achieving their objec�ves. If no review is triggered as a result of the annual monitoring a ﬁve-year review of the LDP will be carried out subsequent to adop�on to ensure the policies and proposals are achieving their objec�ves. There will be further scope for any poten�al impacts on Sec�on 75 groups to be considered through this monitoring and review process.

Part A Dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report of the Dra� Plan Strategy (September 2019)

Local Development Plan 2030

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the Draft Plan Strategy September 2019

www.midandeastantrim.gov.uk/planning

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

Contents 1.0 Introduction Background

5 5

2.0 Equality Screening Equality Screening of the Preferred Options Paper Equality Screening of draft Plan Strategy

6 6 6

3.0 Section 75 Policy Screening Form

Appendices APPENDIX A Assessment of Impact on Equality of Opportunity of Section 75 Groups

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

Have your say This Equality Impact Screening Report is issued for consultation purposes alongside the Mid and East Antrim Draft Plan Strategy 2030 for an eight week period commencing 16 October 2019 and closing at 5pm on 11 December 2019.

Pre-Consultation To allow everyone time to read and digest the draft Plan Strategy and all its supporting documents, Council is publishing all documentation in advance of the formal eight week period of public consultation. This period of preconsultation will run from 17 September 2019 to 15 October 2019. Please note that no representations should be made during this period, as they will not be considered outside of the formal consultation period. During this pre-consultation period, Council’s Local Development Plan team will facilitate a series of public engagement events. Arrangements for these events will be published on Council’s website and in local newspapers in the week commencing 16 September 2019. The aims of these events are to:  Promote understanding of the draft Plan Strategy;  Explain how it will be tested at Independent Examination; and  Provide guidance on the submission of representations to the public consultation.

Formal Consultation We welcome comments on the content of this Equality Screening Report from everyone with an interest in Mid and East Antrim and its continuing development over the plan period to 2030. All formal representations received will be given due consideration and may assist further drafting or amendment of policies prior to an Independent Examination. The document will be open for formal public consultation for a period of eight weeks, commencing on 16 October 2019 and closing at 5pm on 11 December 2019. Please note that representations received after the closing date on 11 December 2019 will not be considered.

Availability of the Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report A copy of this document and the draft Plan Strategy, are available on the Mid and East Antrim Borough Council website: www.midandeastantrim.gov.uk/LDP Or it can be made available for viewing in the Council Planning Office, at the address below, for those who do not have online access. Should you require a copy of this document in an alternative format it can be made available, on request in large print, audio format or Braille. It may also be made available in other languages to meet the needs of those for who English is not their first language.

How to Respond Representations should be submitted to the Local Development Plan Team via the following options: Online Consultation Portal: By email: By post:

consult.midandeastantrim.gov.uk planning@midandeastantrim.gov.uk Local Development Plan Team Planning Office County Hall 182 Galgorm Road BT42 1QF 3

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

How will the Council deal with your comments? Mid and East Antrim Borough Council will use this information to fulfil our policy development and statutory obligations. We will keep your information secure, accurate, and for no longer than is necessary in accordance with data protection laws. If you wish to find out more about how we control and process your personal data please see the Local Development Plan Privacy Notice.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

1.0

Introduction

1.1

This draft Equality Screening Impact Report has been prepared alongside Mid and East Antrim Borough’s draft Plan Strategy, published on 17 September 2019. The draft Plan Strategy is the first of two development plan documents, which together will comprise the Local Development Plan (LDP). This report should be read in conjunction with the draft Plan Strategy document along with all other accompanying reports and with our evidence base which is set out in a suite of Technical Supplements. Both the draft Equality Screening Impact Report and the draft Plan Strategy will be subject to an eight week period of formal public consultation, although both documents will be publicly available for four weeks in advance.

1.2

The Council has a statutory duty under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 as a public authority, in carrying out its functions, relating to Northern Ireland, to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity:  Between persons of different religious belief, political opinion, racial group, age, marital status or sexual orientation;  Between men and women generally;  Between persons with a disability and persons without; and  Between persons with dependants and persons without. Functions include the “powers and duties” of a public authority.

1.3

Without prejudice to the above obligations, public authorities are also required to have regard to the desirability of promoting good relations between persons of different religious belief, political opinion or race.

1.4

In addition, the Disability Discrimination (NI) Order 2006 introduced new duties requiring all public authorities in carrying out their function relating to Northern Ireland to have due regard to the need to:  

Promote positive attitudes towards disabled people; and Encourage participation of disabled people in public life.

Background 1.5

The Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 (the 2011 Act) transferred the responsibility for the preparation of Local Development Plans from the Department of the Environment (DOE) (now the Department for Infrastructure (DfI)) to Councils and established a plan-led system which gives primacy to the LDP in the determination of planning applications.

1.6

The main purpose of the LDP is to inform the general public, statutory authorities, service providers, developers and other interested parties of the policy framework and land use proposals that will implement the strategic objectives of the RDS and the LDP objectives and guide decisions on planning applications for development in Mid and East Antrim until 2030.

1.7

The LDP will aim to provide sufficient land to meet anticipated needs for housing, employment, and services; all supported by adequate infrastructure, over the plan period to 2030. It will also seek to ensure that all new development is of high quality and located in suitable places - which themselves should be enhanced by the development. A ‘suitable place’ will generally be a location where the development proposal can help meet economic and social needs without compromising the quality of the environment. This is often referred to as ‘sustainable development’ which has been defined as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.

1.8

In seeking to deliver sustainable development, the LDP will serve to implement the regional direction set out in the Regional Development Strategy (RDS) 2025 and other central government policies. It will also take account of Council’s Community Plan by helping to deliver on these strategies priorities and actions that can be influenced through the planning system. 5

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

2.0

Equality Screening Equality Screening of Preferred Options Paper

2.1

In bringing forward the LDP, the Council is committed to ensuring that the needs of Section 75 groups are considered. Therefore, we will carry out an Equality Screening Assessment at each of the three main stages in the process to establish if an Equality Impact Assessment is required.

2.2

The publication of our Preferred Options Paper (POP) was the first stage in this process and that document was accompanied by an Equality Impact Interim Screening Progress Report. Prior to the publication of the Preferred Options Paper (POP) the Council sought early engagement with Section 75 groups in order to allow for the timely identification of any specific needs. Targeted letters were sent to over 100 organisations who represent the interests of Section 75 groups asking them to identify any particular issues or needs which they consider the LDP should address.

2.3

The POP as a preliminary consultation document did not set out defined policies but rather suggested policy approaches to take forward in the Plan Strategy. A second round of targeted written consultation with Section 75 groups was also undertaken in order to gauge their views on the impact of the proposed approaches on Section 75 interests. The purpose of the Screening Report at POP stage was to consider the potential equality and good relations impact of alternative options associated with 36 Key Issues. The screening did not identify any adverse impacts on the equality of opportunity for any of the Section 75 groups neither did it identify any adverse impact on the on the promotion of good relations. In fact, this early assessment did identify that there was the potential for some policies to have positive impacts in relation to both interests. However, the screening report also recognised that due to the nature of the POP as a strategic and consultative document, the assessment of impacts was difficult or could not be clearly ascertained at that stage and that further assessment would be required at draft Plan Strategy stage.

Equality Screening of draft Plan Strategy 2.4

The LDP is currently at draft Plan Strategy stage. In line with our statutory obligations in relation to Section 75 groups and disabled people this document presents the Equality Screening for the draft Plan Strategy and its associated strategic policies and proposals. The screening has been carried out using the Section 75 screening template and has taken account of the guidance published by the Equality Commission Northern Ireland. The purpose of the screening is to identify if any of the policies are likely to have an impact on equality of opportunity and to ensure that this is taken into account in the policy making process.

2.5

In this report an assessment has been made of the likely impact of the proposed strategic policies and proposals on the equality of opportunity of each of the Section 75 groups. Given the quantum of strategies and proposals included within the draft Plan Strategy, a summary of these likely impacts has been included in the Section 75 Policy Screening Form (pg. 7). Appendix A provides a more detailed assessment of the screening assessment of the policies and proposals within the draft Plan Strategy. Whilst all policies have been considered in the screening, for ease of reference and presentation purposes, the policies have been grouped based on their overall aims and purpose.

2.6

We will continue to screen our policies and proposals and carry out a full Equality Impact Assessment, if required, at Local Policies Plan Stage in order to ensure the impact on Section 75 groups is continually assessed.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

3.0

Section 75 Policy Screening Form

Part 1. Policy scoping – asks public authorities to provide details about the policy, procedure, practice and/or decision being screened and what available evidence you have gathered to help make an assessment of the likely impact on equality of opportunity and good relations. Part 2. Screening questions – asks about the extent of the likely impact of the policy on groups of people within each of the Section 75 categories. Details of the groups consulted and the level of assessment of the likely impact. This includes consideration of multiple identity and good relations issues. Part 3. Screening decision – guides the public authority to reach a screening decision as to whether or not there is a need to carry out an equality impact assessment (EQIA), or to introduce measures to mitigate the likely impact, or the introduction of an alternative policy to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations. Part 4. Monitoring – provides guidance to public authorities on monitoring for adverse impact and broader monitoring. Part 5. Approval and authorisation – verifies the public authority’s approval of a screening decision by a senior manager responsible for the policy.

Part 1: Policy Scoping- Information about the policy

Name of policy

Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Local Development Plan (LDP) 2030 draft Plan Strategy

Is this an existing, revised or new policy?

New Policy The Plan Strategy (PS) is the first of two development plan documents, which together will comprise the LDP. At present the planning policy context is mainly provided by an existing suite of Planning Policy Statements (PPSs) that apply across NI and some residual provisions within ‘A Planning Strategy for Rural Northern Ireland’ (PSRNI). These will be superseded upon adoption of the Plan Strategy. Whilst the new LDP policies will carry forward the thrust of the PPSs, some of the policies have been adjusted to take account of local circumstances in Mid and East Antrim. The strategic policies of the LDP will also take precedence over the strategic policies in the 3 extant Area Plans covering the legacy council areas in Mid and East Antrim. Local spatial designations and associated local policies and key site requirements in these Area Plans will remain in place until superseded by the adopted Local Policies Plan (the second stage of the LDP).

What is it trying to achieve? (intended aims/outcomes)

The main aim of the draft Plan Strategy is to meet the development needs of Mid and East Antrim over the plan period (2015-2030) in a sustainable manner. Accordingly, the LDP seeks to deliver ‘sustainable development’ which has been defined as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. In seeking to deliver sustainable development, the LDP will serve to implement the regional 7

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report direction set out in the Regional Development Strategy (RDS) 2035, the Strategic Planning Policy Statement (SPPS) and other central government initiatives. In line with the vision of the LDP it will also help to improve the quality of life for citizens and those who visit the Borough for employment or leisure purposes. A further outcome will be to provide certainty by informing the general public, statutory authorities, service providers, developers and other interested parties of the planning policy framework and the land use proposals that will guide decisions for development in Mid and East Antrim until 2030.

Are there any Section 75 categories which might be expected to benefit for the intended policy? How?

The vision of the LDP is a spatial reflection of the Community Plan vision to improve the quality of life for everyone therefore it is expected that all Section 75 groups have the potential to benefit as result of the plan. It is anticipated that a number of the policies and proposals will be of benefit to particular Section 75 groups (mainly housing policies e.g. policies in relation to housing design, affordable housing, and also some open space policies).

Who initiated or wrote the policy?

The Local Development Plan (LDP) is being prepared by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council under the provisions of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 and the Planning (Local Development Plan) Regulations (NI) 2015. The Planning Act requires the LDP to be produced in two stages – the first being the Plan Strategy, followed upon adoption, by the Local Policies Plan. This report relates to the draft Plan Strategy and to the strategic proposals and policies contained therein.

Policy Lead Officer

Michael Francey acting on behalf of Mid and East Antrim Borough Council.

Who owns/implements the policy?

The policy is owned and implemented by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council and will largely be implemented by Council through the determination of planning applications that will be assessed against the policies and proposals in the LDP.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Implementation factors Are there any factors which could contribute to/detract from the intended aim/outcome of the policy/decision? If yes, are they X X

Financial –There is potential that any future budgetary constraints could influence the intended aim/outcome of the various policies. This is unknown at this stage. Legislative – As noted above the Draft Plan Strategy has been prepared under the provisions of the Planning Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 the Planning (Local Development Plan) Regulations (NI) 2015 (thereafter referred to as the LDP Regulations). Any future changes to planning legislation or the legislation controlling the activities of service providers may have a bearing on the LDP and the intended aim/outcome of the various policies. Other, please specify            

Planning Appeals Commission decisions Departmental Planning Decisions Judicial Reviews Review of the Strategic Planning Policy Statement for Northern Ireland Statutory Consultees Developers Objectors Planning Committee Government Departments Government Finance Unauthorised development Political Instability

Main stakeholders affected Who are the internal and external stakeholders (actual or potential) that the policy will impact upon?  All members of the public living, working in or visiting Mid and East Antrim.  Developers  Service Providers  Business and Economic Development Enterprises/Sectors  Voluntary/Community Groups  Environmental Groups  NI Government Departments and Agencies  Adjoining Councils  Power Suppliers  NI Water  Registered Housing Associations  Northern Ireland Housing Executive  Translink  Staff This list should not be considered to be exhaustive.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Other policies with a bearing on this policy • what are they? • who owns them?

As specifically required by the Planning (Northern Ireland) Act 2011 in preparing the draft Plan Strategy the Council has taken account of the Regional Development Strategy (RDS) 2035 which sets out the government’s overarching spatial strategy for Northern Ireland up to 2035, as well as the Strategic Planning Policy Statement 2015 (DfI) which provides the regional planning policy framework. In addition, The Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 2014 sets out a statutory link between the Community Plan and the LDP. The strategic priorities of our Community Plan ‘Putting People First’ 2017-2030 have therefore been taken into consideration in the preparation of the draft Plan Strategy. The draft Plan Strategy has also taken account of a wide ranging list of other policies and guidance issued by DfI and other government departments. Regard has also been had to various Council plans and strategies operating at the local level. A list of these documents is provided below, however, it should be noted that this list is not exhaustive. Where relevant, additional regional or local policies and/or guidance, are referred to within the draft Plan Strategy and its associated Technical Supplements.                           

Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Corporate Plan - 2019-2023 Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Integrated Economic Development Strategy - Amplify - 2018-2030 Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Tourism Strategy (Pending) Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Play Strategy (Pending) Mid and East Antrim Pitches Strategy (Pending) Draft Programme for Government 2016-2021 (NI Executive) The Sustainable Development Strategy - Everyone’s Involved - 2010 (NI Executive) Suite of existing Planning Policy Statements, Supplementary Planning Guidance, Design Guides and Development Control Advice Notes (DfI) A Planning Strategy for Rural Northern Ireland - 1993 (DfI) Sustainable Water - A Long Term Water Strategy for Northern Ireland - 2015-2040 (DfI) Ensuring a Sustainable Transport Future - A New Approach to Regional Transportation - 2011 (DfI) Delivering Resource Efficiency - Northern Ireland Waste Management Strategy - 2015 (DAERA) Draft Marine Plan for Northern Ireland - 2018 (DAERA) The EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 (May 2011) The Biodiversity Strategy for Northern Ireland to 2020 (DAERA) Lifetime Opportunities - Government’s Anti-Poverty and Social Inclusion Strategy for Northern Ireland 2006 (DfC) Thinking Rural - The Essential Guide to Rural Proofing - 2015 (DAERA) Northern Ireland Landscape Character Assessment 2000 (DAERA) Northern Ireland Regional Landscape Character Assessment - 2015 (DAERA) Northern Ireland Regional Seascape Character Assessment - 2014 (DAERA) Exercise - Explore - Enjoy: A Strategic Plan for Greenways - 2016 (DfI) Northern Ireland Changing Gear: A Bicycle Strategy for Northern Ireland - 2015 (DfI) Ballymena Area Plan 1986-2001 (DfI) Larne Area Plan - 2010 (DfI) Carrickfergus Area Plan - 2001 (DfI) Draft BMAP 2015 in combination with the Planning Appeals Commission Inquiry report. Neighbouring Council Context – Plans and Strategies from Antrim and Newtownabbey Borough Council, Mid Ulster District Council and Causeway Coast and Glen Borough Council.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Available evidence Evidence to help inform the screening process may take many forms. Public authorities should ensure that their screening decision is informed by relevant data. What evidence/information (both qualitative and quantitative) have you gathered to inform this policy? Specify details for each of the Section 75 categories. As noted above the draft Plan Strategy has been prepared with regard to the Regional Development Strategy (RDS) 2035 and the Strategic Planning Policy Statement (SPPS) 2015. The strategic priorities of our Community Plan have also been taken into consideration in the preparation of the draft Plan Strategy. As work on the LDP progresses, we will seek to deliver on any community planning outcomes where there is an identified spatial land use or local planning policy solution. Please see above list of other policies that have informed the preparation and content of the draft Plan Strategy. The preparation of the draft Plan Strategy has been informed by a robust evidence base which has involved detailed engagement with statutory consultees and including neighbouring Councils. This evidence base is set out in the accompanying suite of Position Papers and Technical Supplements which can be accessed on the Council’s website. Paper 1: Population and Growth, in particular, sets out specific evidence in relation to each of the Section 75 groups. This information has been summarised in the table below and updated where relevant. The information provided is predominately derived from the 2011 Census, however other sources have been used including the results of a resident survey of a sample of 775 residents undertaken in Autumn 2018. Where relevant the individual topic and technical papers set out any particular issues that may be relevant to Section 75 groups. In addition, the draft Plan Strategy has been informed by representations received in response to the consultation on our Preferred Options Paper (POP). In relation to Section 75 groups specifically, engagement took place prior to the publication of the POP with key identified overarching bodies who represent the nine identified Section 75 groups. Over 100 groups were contacted, in writing, offering them the opportunity to identify any particular issues or needs which they consider the LDP should address. These groups were consulted again on the publication of the POP.

General Profile of the Borough   

Mid and East Antrim Borough extends to 104,570 hectares (1,046km2). It is bounded by the Irish Sea to the east and the Lower River Bann to the west. The Antrim Coast and Glens AONB covers some 370sq km in the eastern part of the Borough and extends beyond the Council boundary to the north.

Population 

  

At the time of the 2011 Census the population of Mid and East Antrim Borough was 135,338, this was a 6.5% increase from 2001 total of 127,101. The rate of growth in the former Ballymena Borough was highest (9.3%) which was above the NI average of 7.5%. In both the former Carrickfergus and Larne Boroughs it was below the NI average at 3.9% and 4.4% respectively. In 2011 almost half of Mid and East Antrim’s population was located within the former Ballymena Borough - 64,044 (47.3%), followed by 39,144 within the former Carrickfergus Borough (28.9%) and 32,180 within the former Larne Borough (23.8%). The 2016 based population projections estimate the 2019 population of the Borough to be 139,070 and this is projected to increase by 2.2% by 2030 to 142,114. Overall these figures indicate a slowing down of population growth from previous rates and is lower than the overall growth rate for NI.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report   

Mid and East Antrim Borough accounted for 7.5% of the total NI population in 2011. Based on 2016 estimates this has now reduced to 7.4% of the total NI population. Within the Borough, the birth rate is lower than NI figure and death rate is higher. The population density of Mid and East Antrim at the time of the 2011 Census was 1.29 usual residents per hectare, just below the NI average of 1.34.

Population Distribution  

In Mid and East Antrim just over half of our population (56.2% as shown in the table below) is located within the three main towns of Ballymena, Carrickfergus and Larne, with the remainder spilt between the lower tier settlements and the open countryside. Table below indicates the population spilt at the time of the 2001 and 2011 Census. It illustrates a slight decrease in the percentage of population in the main towns between 2001 and 2011. Conversely villages, small settlements and the open countryside experienced a slight increase in the proportion of the Borough’s population living within them.

Population Split by Settlement Type in Mid and East Antrim 2001 & 2011 % Population 2001 2011 Main towns 57.7 56.2 Small towns 6.8 6.8 Villages 12.8 13.9 Small settlements 1.35 1.5 Open Countryside 21.4 21.6 Source: NISRA Census 2001 and 2011, Key Statistics for Settlements Tables: KS01, STU500 & KS21

The distribution of population is further reflected in the household distribution figures shown in the table below. Population and Household Distribution in Mid and East Antrim - 2011 Former Ballymena Borough (%) Population Households

Former Larne Borough (%) Population Households

Former Carrickfergus Borough (%) Population Households

Mid and East Antrim (%) Population Households

Main towns 46.0% 48.8% 58.1% 61.3% 71.3% 71.2% 56.2% 58.5% Small towns n/a n/a n/a n/a 23.7% 24.4% 6.8% 7.3% Villages 20.1% 21.2% 18.3% 17.5% n/a n/a 13.9% 14.0% Small settlements 1.3% 1.2% 3.4%* 3.2%* 0.3% 0.4% 1.5% 1.4% Total settlements 67.4% 71.2% 79.8%* 82.0%* 95.4% 96.0% 78.4% 81.2% Open Countryside 32.6% 28.8% 20.2% 18.0% 4.6% 4.0% 21.6% 18.8% District Total 64,044 24,817 32,180 13,297 39,114 16,200 135,338 54,314 Source: NISRA 2011 Census Headcount and Household Estimates for Settlements Published 26/03/2015. Based on Settlement hierarchy in existing Area Plans. *Excludes 11 small settlements in Larne where the population and household totals were below the following thresholds: 20 or more households and 50 or more usual residents. The figures for these 11 have been included in Open Countryside totals.



Between 2001 and 2011 the number of households increased by 10.6% due to a trend towards smaller household sizes with the average household size decreasing between 2001 to 2011 from 2.56 to 2.47, this is expected to fall further still in 2030 to 2.37 (as per 2016 projections).

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Section 75 category

Details of evidence/information

Religious belief

In 2011, the population within Mid and East Antrim consisted predominately, of a Protestant and other Christian background at 72.88% (above NI average) with 19.34% from a Catholic background (below NI average). The proportion of people who were brought up in a different religion or with no religion was 7.77% (above NI average) (Source: NISRA, 2011 Census, Religion or Religion Brought Up In: KS212NI, statistical and admin geographies). The table below shows the religious breakdown across the main towns, small towns and villages. Religion or Religion Brought Up In Mid and East Antrim Settlements - 2011 Religion or religion brought up in: Catholic (%)

Religion or religion brought up in: Protestant and Other Christian (including Christian related) (%)

Religion or religion brought up in: Other religions (%)

Religion or religion brought up in: None (%)

Northern Ireland

45.14

48.36

0.92

5.59

Mid and East Antrim Main Towns

19.34

72.88

0.8

6.97

Ballymena

26.71

65.76

1.03

6.5

Carrickfergus

8.35

80.7

0.86

10.09

Larne Small Towns

25.97

67.03

0.57

6.44

Ahoghill

3.78

90.81

0.73

4.68

Broughshane

4.52

89.65

0.42

5.42

Cullybackey

4.01

88.43

1.23

6.32

Greenisland

11.12

77.58

1.04

10.26

Whitehead Villages

17.46

69.17

1.21

12.15

Ballycarry

4.73

86.47

1.02

7.78

Ballygalley

26.31

69.18

0.24

4.26

Ballystrudder

5.25

81.92

1.31

11.52

Cargan

91.16

6.46

0.85

1.53

Carnlough

83.86

14.22

0.07

1.85

Clough*

9.07

87.55

0.42

2.95

Glenarm

43.13

53.35

0.53

2.99

Glynn

4.94

88.06

0.64

6.37

Kells/Connor

4.39

89.29

0.53

5.79

Martinstown*

87.5

8.13

0.42

3.96

46.81 50.64 0.34 Portglenone *Information not available at settlement level only at small area level. Source: NISRA 2011 Census, Religion or Religion Brought Up In: KS212NI (Settlement 2015)

2.21

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report The table below identifies the approximate religious breakdown of small settlements which have been de-designated in the draft Plan Strategy (does not include Trooperslane which will be subsumed into Carrickfergus). Information is not available for small settlements therefore the information provided is for the Small Area within which the small settlement is predominately located as this is the most detailed information available. Religious Breakdown of Small Areas within which De-Designated Settlements are predominately located. Settlements Predominately Within Small Area

Religion or Religion brought up in Catholic (%)

Religion or Religion brought up in Protestant/Other Christian (%) 81.29

Religion or Religion brought up in Other (%)

No Religion (%)

Browns Bay 4.68 1.08 Ferris Bay Mill Bay 6.28 84.06 0.97 Drumcrow 24.38 72.04 0.67 Deerpark Carnageer 56.04 39.84 0.27 Garron Point 59.94 37.58 0 Straidkilly 65 34.12 0.29 Feystown 56.04 39.84 0.27 Kilwaughter 12.03 84.21 0.5 Knocknagulliagh 15.34 72.16 1.7 Source: NISRA 2011 Census, Religion or Religion Brought Up In: KS212NI (statistical geographies)

12.95 8.7 2.91 3.85 2.48 0.59 3.85 3.26 10.8

The table below shows the religious profile of the newly designated settlements. Religious Breakdown of Small Areas within which Newly Designated Settlements are predominately located. Religion or Religion Religion or Religion brought up in brought up in No Religion % Protestant/Other Other % Christian % Buckna 13.71 78.06 0.84 7.38 Craigywarren 9.95 83.67 1.53 4.85 Glarryford 31.24 67.55 0.2 1.01 Milltown 78.72 19.09 0 2.19 Moorfields 5.33 92.39 0.76 1.52 Newtowncrommelin 78.57 20.97 0.23 0.23 Slaght 1.33 92.03 0.33 6.31 Woodgreen 7.47 88 1.07 3.47 Source: NISRA 2011 Census, Religion or Religion Brought Up In: KS212NI (statistical geographies) Settlements Predominately Within Small Area

Religion or Religion brought up in Catholic %

Community Background and Religious Denomination of Mid and East Antrim Residents Protestant

Community Background Catholic

% of 775 Residents 77.9% 8.6% surveyed Source: Mid and East Antrim Resident Survey, 2018

Political opinion

Neither

Religious Denomination Christian No Religion

13.6%

75.8%

24.2%

Mid and East Antrim Local Government Election Results 2014 vote share was as follows: DUP: 33.01% UUP: 18.7% TUV: 15.01% Alliance: 9.35% Sinn Féin: 6.82% Independent: 6.03% SDLP: 4.07% PUP: 2.95% Other: 3.96% (Source: The Electoral Office for NI).

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Mid and East Antrim Local Government Election Results (1st Preference Votes) - May 2019 District Electoral Ward Unionist Ballymena 3,577 51.6% Braid 6,989 79.1% Bannside 6,352 78.7% Larne Lough 3,954 66.1% Coast Road 3,066 54.5% Carrick Castle 3,503 62% Knockagh 3,732 65.4% Source: Mid and East Antrim Borough Council, 2019

Nationalist 1,369 19.7% 631 7.1% 971 12% 0 0 873 15.5% 0 0 0 0

Other 1,990 1,220 750 2,032 1,677 2,150 1,971

28.7% 13.8% 9.3% 33.9% 30% 38% 34.6%

Number of seats per Political Party - May 2019 No. of Seats Alliance 7 DUP 15 Independent 3 SDLP 1 Sinn Féin 2 TUV 5 UUP 7 Total 40 Source: Mid and East Antrim Borough Council, 2019

At the time of the 2011 Census, 71.36% of the usual resident population indicated that they had a British national identity, 9.19% indicated an Irish national identity and 29.43% indicated a Northern Irish national identity. Political Affiliation of Mid and East Antrim Residents - 2018 % of 775 residents surveyed British Irish Northern Irish English Scottish Other Source: Mid and East Antrim Resident Survey, 2018

Racial group

79% 4.5% 14.8% 0.1% 0.1% 1.4%

The 2011 Census figures indicate that 98.97% of the population in Mid and East Antrim are White, 0.35% Asian, 0.33% mixed/other, 0.2% Chinese, 0.08% Black and 0.07% Irish Traveller. Mid and East Antrim has one of lowest proportion of residents from an ethnic background in NI (ranking eight of the 11 local authorities). The table below indicates that the number of people within the Borough who were born in other countries is below the NI average (with the exception of Scotland).

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Country of Birth Mid and East Antrim - 2011 Country of birth: Northern Ireland (%)

Country of birth: England (%)

Country of birth: Scotland (%)

Country of birth: Wales (%)

Country of birth: Republic of Ireland (%)

Country of birth: Other EU: Member countries prior to 2004 expansion (%)

N. Ireland 88.84 3.57 0.85 0.14 2.09 0.54 Mid and East 90.88 3.45 1.16 0.14 0.81 0.45 Antrim Source: NISRA 2011 Census, Country of Birth: KS204NI (administrative geographies)

Age

Country of birth: Other EU: Accession countries 2004 onwards (%) 1.97

Country of birth: Other (%)

1.74

1.99 1.37

Age Breakdown of Residents in Mid and East Antrim Borough - 2018 Age % of Population 0-15 years 19.3% 16-64 years 61.9% 65+ 18.8% Source: NISRA Population & Migration, Mid-Year Population estimates 2018 (LGD)

Since 2001, the proportion of pensioners has been above the NI average and population projections to 2030 indicate that this trend will continue to be the case. By the end of the plan period in 2030, it is forecast that 24% of the population of Mid and East Antrim will be aged 65 years and over (Source: NISRA 2016 based population projections for areas within NI LGDs). At the time of the 2011 Census the Median Age of the Borough was 40, this is the second oldest out of all 11 local authorities. 21.9% of respondents to the Mid and East Antrim Council Resident Survey Oct 2018 (775 Residents) were aged 65+.

Marital status

Since 2001, there has been an increase in the number of single people and as well as an increase in those that have divorced. There has also been a decrease in the number of married people in the Borough. The proportion of those that are married remains above the NI average and the proportion of those that are single remains below the NI average. Marital status in Mid and East and NI - 2001 and 2011 2001 2011 Single 28.57% 31.4% Married 55.13% 51.56% Divorced 4.65% 5.92% Widowed 7.97% 7.16% Separated 3.67% 3.88% Civil Partnership N/A 0.08% Source: NISRA 2001 and 2011 Census, Marital and Civil Partnership Status, KS103NI (admin geographies)

In 2011, single people were more likely to be male (34.53%) than female (28.48%). By contrast women are considerably more likely to be widowed (10.68%) than men (3.37%). The relatively higher life expectancy for women accounts for this finding.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Marital and Civil Partnership Status by Sex - 2011 Single

Men 34.53%

Women 28.48%

Married Divorced

53.42% 5.18%

49.82%

Widowed Separated

3.37% 3.40%

10.68% 4.33%

6.62%

Civil Partnership 0.10% 0.07% Source: NISRA 2011 Census, Marital and Civil Partnership Status by Sex: DC1103NI (admin geographies)

Sexual orientation

There is limited information available for this category. The Continuous Household Survey 2017/2018 (NISRA) found that 97.8% of all NI adult respondents identified themselves as heterosexual/straight with the remaining adults identifying as either gay/lesbian, bisexual, don’t know or not providing an answer. Local government statistics indicated that 65 civil partnerships took place in Mid and East Antrim between 2008-2017 out of an NI total of 963 (ranking 4th in NI). At the time of the 2011 Census 0.08% of the population were in a civil partnership. Sexual Orientation of Mid and East Antrim Residents - 2018 % out of 775 residents Same Sex 0.6% Different 98.8% Both 0.1% Prefer not to say 0.4% Source: Mid and East Antrim Resident Survey, 2018

Men and women generally

At the time of the 2011 Census the gender balance was broadly a 50/50 spilt with slightly more females, this is reflective of NI as a whole. Recent population estimates indicate this trend is set to continue. Gender Balance of Mid and East Antrim Population - 2011 Males % Females % Northern Ireland 49 51 Mid and East Antrim 48.7 51.30 Source: NISRA Census 2011, Sex: QS105NI (admin geographies)

This balance was supported in the results of the Mid and East Antrim Council Resident Survey 2018 where out of 775 residents surveyed 50.5% were female and 49.5% were male. Life Expectancy The life expectancy of females is greater than that of males which is consistent with NI as a whole. Over the decade 2001-2003 to 2011-2013 the increase in life expectancy at birth among females was greater than that of males. Change in life expectancy at birth for Mid and East Antrim in 2001-2003 and 2011-2013 2001-2003 2011-2013 Males 76.3 78.4 Females 80.4 82.9 Source: NISRA Life Expectancy for areas within Northern Ireland 2011-2013, Oct 2015.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Disability

The 2011 Census indicates that 20.01% of Mid and East Antrim residents have a long term health problem or disability that limited their day to day activities. 11% of people suffered a mobility or dexterity difficulty. 8% of the population received Disability Living Allowance which is 2.5% below the NI average and 13% received Multiple Disability Benefit. The 2011 Census indicated that just over 10% of homes in the Borough have been adapted to suit the needs of someone with a disability, the majority of which are for wheelchair usage (5.46%). % of Households within Mid and East Antrim with Adaptations Adapted Accommodation Type

% of households

Wheelchair Usage Other physical or mobility issues

5.46 6.01

Visual Difficulties Hearing Difficulties

0.26 0.5

Adapted for other No adaptation

0.24 89.26

All Households 54,314 Source: NISRA Census 2011, Adaptation of Accommodation: KS406NI (admin geographies)

Residents within Mid and East Antrim with disability - 2018 % of 775 residents surveyed 6.6% 12.9%

Disability yes, limited a lot Disability yes, limited a little Disability, No 80.5% Source: Mid and East Antrim Resident Survey, 2018

Dependants

Households with dependent children The proportion of households with dependent children in Mid and East Antrim has decreased since 1981 falling from 46.86% to 32.14% in 2011. This decline is reflected in the decline of the average household size with one or two person households accounting for 59.9% of all households in 2011 compared to 43.06% in 1981. The 2011 Census indicated that 8.26% of households were lone parent with dependent children. Mid and East Antrim is in the top quartile in NI in relation to dependent children in household between the ages of 0-4 years. Carers The 2011 Census found that 11.91% of all usual residents are providing unpaid care. This figure has increased from 10.58% in 2001.There were 4,510 Carers Allowance Claims made in 2018, a 2.7% increase on 2017. Mid and East Antrim Council Resident Survey Oct 2018 (775 Residents) Caring Responsibilities Yes - 44% No - 56%

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Needs, experiences and priorities Taking into account the information referred to above, what are the different needs, experiences and priorities of each of the following categories, in relation to the particular policy/decision? Specify details for each of the Section 75 categories. It is likely that the LDP will accommodate the specific needs of a wide range of identities linked to the various Section 75 groups, either singly or in combination. Generally, the needs, experiences and priorities listed below are considered to be of importance to all Section 75 groupings. The table further draws out those which are of particular importance to the various Section 75 groupings. All the identified needs, experiences and priorities will be afforded due consideration, as far as practical, in implementing the LDP. 1. Good quality safe places to live 2. Access to healthcare 3. Improved health and wellbeing 4. Access to community facilities 5. Access to sport recreation and play facilities 6. Shared and safe environments 7. Access to employment 8. Access to education and training facilities 9. Access to business and retail 10. Access to public transport and an active travel network (Note that access as detailed above refers to physical access and not to meeting any access requirements on the part of the service provider to access the service). Section 75 category

Religious belief

Political opinion

Racial group

Age

Details of needs/experiences/priorities

The Borough has a predominately Protestant/other Christian population, with those of Catholic belief, other belief or no religion in a minority. It is recognised that the needs and priorities indicated above are relevant irrespective of religious belief. Good quality safe places to live along with access to shared and safe environments including community facilities are identified as key priorities for those of different religious belief. The Borough has a predominately Unionist population. It is recognised that the needs and priorities indicated above are relevant irrespective of political opinion. Good quality safe places to live along with access to shared and safe environments including community facilities are identified as key priorities for those of different political opinion. 2011 Census data indicates that the Borough has a low representation from people of different ethnic backgrounds. However, it is recognised that this figure has likely increased since 2011. Ethnic minorities within the Borough are predominately located within and/or around the three main towns. It is recognised that that the priorities of such groups centre around good quality safe places to live, access to shared and safe environments as well as access to employment, services and facilities. Access to community facilities may also be important for ethnic minorities in order to ward against marginalisation and to aid community integration. The population of the Borough is ageing which raises particular priorities in relation to appropriate and safe housing provision. Other identified priorities for older people include access to healthcare, opportunities for improving health and wellbeing which may also include access to recreation and community facilities. The provision of shared and safe 19

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report environments, access to public transport and an active travel network as well as access to retail are also identified as important to those older people who may be marginalised or for those who have mobility issues. At present the majority of our population are of working age, the main priorities for this group are identified as access to good quality and safe places to live, access to employment, education and training facilities and access to business and retail. Just under a fifth of our population are below the age of 16. The main priorities for this group are identified as access to sport recreation and play facilities, as well as access to education and training facilities or indeed employment. Marital status

Just over half of the Borough’s residents are married or in a civil partnership with remainder either single, divorced or widowed. No specific priorities of one group over another is identified, however it is recognised that those of different marital status have different needs in terms of housing.

Sexual orientation

There is limited information available with regards the sexual orientation of residents within our Borough, figures indicate that the majority of the population are straight/heterosexual. It is recognised that this data is limited and that there is likely a greater diversity within the Borough. It is recognised that members of the LGBT can often be marginalised or have concerns regarding safety therefore good quality safe places to live, access to shared and safe environments which may include access to community facilities are identified as key priorities.

Men and women generally

The Borough has an almost 50/50 spilt in terms of gender. Access to employment, education and training facilities are identified as key priorities for men and women generally, but perhaps more so women who are under-represented in the labour market or for those returning to work.

Disability

The 2011 Census indicates that 20.01% of Mid and East Antrim residents have a long term health problem or disability. Key priorities for those living with disabilities therefore are identified as good quality safe places to live, appropriate housing, access to healthcare, improved health and wellbeing, shared and safe environments and access to community facilities. For those with mobility issues, in particular, access to public transport and an active travel network are identified as key needs. Those living with disabilities tend to be underrepresented in the labour market therefore access to education, training and employment is also important.

Dependants

There is a decreasing number of households within the Borough with dependant children, however they still account for a third of the Borough’s households. This decline in household size raises particular priorities in terms of appropriate (type and size) housing provision. It is also recognised within our Borough that a significant proportion of the population provide care. Particular priorities for both these groups are identified as the need for good quality safe places to live, access to community facilities, access to health facilities, improved health and wellbeing, access to sport recreation and play facilities, access to public transport and an active travel network, as well as access to retail. For those with dependants, often underrepresented in the labour market or seeking to return to work access to education, training and employment is a key priority.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Part 2: Screening Questions Introduction The information provided in Part 1 of the Screening is used to inform the likely impact of the draft Plan Strategy on equality of opportunity and good relations for each of the Section 75 groups. In making a decision as to whether or not there is a need to carry out an equality impact statement, the Council should consider the answers to the 4 questions below and indicate the level of impact on each category i.e. major, minor or none. Consideration of Level of Impact In favour of a ‘major’ impact a) The policy is significant in terms of its strategic importance; b) Potential equality impacts are unknown, because, for example, there is insufficient data upon which to make an assessment or because they are complex, and it would be appropriate to conduct an equality impact assessment in order to better assess them; c) Potential equality and/or good relations impacts are likely to be adverse or are likely to be experienced disproportionately by groups of people including those who are marginalised or disadvantaged; d) Further assessment offers a valuable way to examine the evidence and develop recommendations in respect of a policy about which there are concerns amongst affected individuals and representative groups, for example in respect of multiple identities; e) The policy is likely to be challenged by way of judicial review; f)

The policy is significant in terms of expenditure.

In favour of ‘minor’ impact a) The policy is not unlawfully discriminatory and any residual potential impacts on people are judged to be negligible; b) The policy, or certain proposals within it, are potentially unlawfully discriminatory, but this possibility can readily and easily be eliminated by making appropriate changes to the policy or by adopting appropriate mitigating measures; c) Any asymmetrical equality impacts caused by the policy are intentional because they are specifically designed to promote equality of opportunity for particular groups of disadvantaged people; d) By amending the policy there are better opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations. In favour of none a) The policy has no relevance to equality of opportunity or good relations. b) The policy is purely technical in nature and will have no bearing in terms of its likely impact on equality of opportunity or good relations for people within the equality and good relations categories. If the conclusion is major in respect of one or more of the Section 75 equality of opportunity and/or good relations categories, then consideration should be given to subjecting the policy to the equality impact assessment procedure. If the conclusion is minor in respect of one or more of the Section 75 equality categories and/or good relations categories, then consideration should still be given to proceeding with an equality impact assessment, or to:



measures to mitigate the adverse impact; or



the introduction of an alternative policy to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Screening Questions The detailed assessment of the likely impact on equality of opportunity for the Section 75 categories is included in Appendix A. A summary of the likely impact in relation to each of the categories is provided below. 1

What is the likely impact on equality of opportunity for those affected by this policy, for each of the Section 75 equality categories? minor/major/none

Section 75 category

Details of policy impact

Level of impact? minor/major/none

Religious Belief

It is considered that the main potential for differential impact on equality of opportunity for this group is most likely to arise from:

Minor negative

(a) The spatial implications of the LDP Spatial Growth Strategy (SGS) and associated sectorial strategies of a spatial nature (such as Strategic Housing Allocation) which seeks to direct growth between settlements and also between settlements and the countryside, in accordance with regional guidelines set out in the RDS, and taking account of our evidence base as it relates to varying capacity of settlements to support further growth. The Spatial Growth Strategy directs most growth (housing, economic development land, retail etc.) to the larger tier settlements, i.e. the three main towns and to a lesser extent the five small towns. All of these towns have majority Protestant populations (varying between 67% for the main town of Larne and 90.8% for the small town of Ahoghill). The impact here is deemed to be ‘minor’ because the proposal is not unlawfully discriminating and to a large extent the religious split within these settlements reflects that for the Borough as a whole (which is 72.9% Protestant). Further, the SGS whilst not seeking to direct growth to the smaller tier settlements, does not actually preclude development that is appropriate to the scale and character of the individual settlement. The focus of major population and economic growth in the three main towns aligns with the regional direction of the RDS and will maximise benefits for all citizens because of the ready availability of a wide range of services and employment. This is considered to outweigh any differential impacts for smaller tier settlements irrespective of their religious composition. (b) The spatial implications of the LDP Countryside Strategy (CS) and associated strategic designations which seek to restrict development (or certain types of development) in areas of high landscape/environmental quality and sensitivity. The Countryside Strategy in protecting certain areas of the countryside from development (or certain types of development) raises potential for differential impact within the Section 75 groups. However, the most spatially extensive of these designations restrict specific types of development, mainly mineral development and high structures such as wind turbines, electricity pylons and telecommunications masts. Such restrictions will have little bearing in 22

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report terms of likely impact on equality of opportunity within section 75 groupings. The CS also identifies four Special Countryside Areas (SCAs) where most forms of development will be prevented or restricted. These designations are relatively small and tightly defined and coincide with areas of sparse population. Any marginal differential impacts on the grounds of religious belief are outweighed by the positive net benefits that will be realised by protecting the exceptional landscape character and unique amenity value of these areas, particularly in consideration of the overarching aim of achieving sustainable development. Overall, the CS is deemed to have no adverse impact on equality of opportunity within the section 75 groups. Political opinion

As above

Minor negative

Racial group

Minor positive

Appendix A indicates that a number of policies and approaches included within the draft Plan Strategy have the potential to have positive impacts for those within this group. Ethnic minorities within our Borough are predominately located within or near to our main town centres. Policies in relation to Retail and Economic Development, for example, are likely to be of benefit as they direct the provision of services and employment largely to these locations. Policies for Housing in Settlements are also anticipated to be of benefit as they seek to provide safe residential environments. The policies in relation to Retail and Open Space also have potential to provide positive impacts through facilitating the creation of shared spaces, thereby assisting integration with the wider community. NIHE have not identified any need in relation to Traveller Accommodation in the Borough at this time, however should the need arise over the plan period Policy HOU8 will support and facilitate the provision of a suitable accommodation. Age

No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity have been identified at this stage. It is anticipated that the overall aim and strategic approach of the draft Plan Strategy will be of benefit to all age groups. Appendix A, indicates that a number of policies and approaches included within the draft Plan Strategy have the potential to have positive impacts for older people. Retail policies, for example, seek to focus such development in the most accessible locations. Open Space policies seek to deliver accessible opportunities for active lifestyles. In addition, the General Policy for all Development will be of benefit as it seeks to enhance accessibility. The draft Plan Strategy approach to both Housing in Settlements, Policy HOU 7 in particular, and Housing in the Countryside aim to allow opportunities for older people to stay 23

Minor positive

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report in their homes for longer. Supporting the provision of Health, Education, Community and Cultural Facilities where there is a need and in accessible locations also has the potential to have positive impacts for this group. This is also the case for infrastructure policies in relation to Transportation and Telecommunications and Overhead Lines by supporting improvements in accessibility and connectivity. As indicated in Appendix A, it is anticipated that those of working age will benefit from the approaches to Retail and the Economic Development Strategy and the Strategic Allocation of Land for Economic Development Land as they encourage a range of employment opportunities in the most sustainable and accessible locations. Positive impacts for younger people are also anticipated through the Open Space policies such as Policy OSL 4: New Open Space in Residential Developments which seeks to provide safe and accessible places to play. Supporting the provision of Health, Education, Community and Cultural Facilities in accessible locations and where there is a need also has the potential to have positive impacts for this group. Marital status

No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity have been identified at this stage. It is anticipated that the overall aim of the draft Plan Strategy and strategic approach will be of benefit to people of different marital status.

Minor positive

Appendix A indicates that a number of policies and approaches included within the draft Plan Strategy have the potential to have positive impacts for this group. The policies in relation to Housing in Settlements seek to provide a range of tenures, house types and sizes, therefore which will help to address the housing needs of those of different marital status. Sexual orientation

Minor positive

Appendix A indicates that a number of policies and approaches included within the draft Plan Strategy have the potential to have positive impacts for the LGBT community. The General Policy for all Development and policies in relation to Housing in Settlements, for example, strive to create safer public spaces and residential environments that have been designed to deter crime. Men and women It is the aim of the plan to benefit both men and women generally. The screening assessment has not identified anything inherent in the generally draft Plan Strategy that will benefit one gender over another. However, it is acknowledged that there are indirect gender impacts in relation to issues such as housing, employment, access to services and leisure. 24

None

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

Disability

No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity have been identified at this stage. It is anticipated that the overall aim and strategic approach of the draft Plan Strategy will generally benefit those living with and without disability.

Minor positive

Appendix A indicates that a number of policies and approaches included within the draft Plan Strategy, have the potential to have positive impacts for those living with disability. Retail and Economic Development policies, for example, could benefit those with disabilities by directing such development to the most accessible locations. The Open Space policies which protect and provide for accessible open space will bring both physical and mental health benefits. In addition, the General Policy for all Development will be of benefit as it seeks to enhance accessibility and takes account of the particular needs of people with mobility difficulties. The draft Plan Strategy approach to both Housing in Settlements, policy HOU 7 in particular, and Housing in the Countryside aims to allow opportunities for housing that will support people living with disability to stay in their homes for longer. Supporting the provision of Health, Education, Community and Cultural Facilities where there is a need and in accessible locations also has the potential to have positive impacts. Infrastructure related policies such as Transportation are also anticipated to be of benefit in seeking to ensure development takes account of the mobility needs of all. Dependants

No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity have been identified at this stage. It is anticipated that the overall aim and strategic approach of the plan will be of benefit generally to both those with and without dependants. Appendix 1 indicates that a number of policies and approaches included within the draft Plan Strategy have the potential to have positive impacts for those with dependants. Retail policies, for example, could benefit those with dependants by focusing such development in the most accessible locations. Policies in relation to Economic Development are also anticipated to benefit by providing a generous supply of economic land to meet employment needs in the most accessible locations, where the majority of our population are located. The Open Space policies seek to provide safe and accessible open space and play parks thereby benefitting families with dependant children. Policies in relation to Housing in Settlements and Housing in the Countryside aim to provide for a range of house types, sizes and tenures to meet all housing needs. Supporting the provision of Health, Education, Community and Cultural Facilities where there is a need and in accessible locations also has the potential to have positive impacts for those with dependants. This is also the case for infrastructure policies in relation to Transportation and Telecommunications and Overhead Lines by supporting improvements in accessibility and connectivity.

Minor positive

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report 2

Are there opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity for people within the Section 75 equalities categories?

Section 75 category

If Yes, provide details

If No, provide reasons

Religious belief Political opinion Racial group Age It is the aspiration of the draft Plan Strategy to improve the quality of life for all, no opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity are apparent at this stage.

Marital status Sexual orientation

However, any Section 75 issues raised during consultation or further down the line will be considered in a proportionate way.

Men and women generally Disability Dependants

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report 3

To what extent is the policy likely to impact on good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group? minor/major/none

Good relations category

Details of policy impact

Level of impact minor/major/none

Religious belief

The draft Plan Strategy is likely to have a positive impact on good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion and racial group. The strategic objectives of the draft Plan Strategy, particularly our social objectives, should assist in the creation and enhancement of shared spaces. The draft Plan recognises the importance of providing quality shared spaces that are accessible and valued by everyone. This is reflected in our General Policy for all Development and throughout many other policies within the draft Plan Strategy. The draft Plan Strategy specifically safeguards against the loss of valued neighbourhood services and supports infrastructure such as public open space and greenways, which play an important role in social interaction and community cohesion. It is anticipated that the proposals and policies in relation to design and place making, retailing and economic development, open space, housing and tourism will impact positively upon good relations between people of different religious belief.

Minor Positive at this stage. Further assessment at LPP stage.

Further assessment of the likely impact on good relations will be undertaken at Local Policies Plan stage when land for purposes such as housing, economic use and opportunity sites in town centres and various forms of open space will be zoned or otherwise identified and protected. In addition, the draft Plan Strategy will be subject to a statutory consultation process and any further issues raised in relation to Section 75 groups during the process will be taken into account. Political opinion

As above

Racial group

As above

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report 4

Are there opportunities to better promote good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group?

Good relations category

If Yes, provide details

If No, provide reasons

Religious belief

It is the aspiration of the draft Plan Strategy to improve the quality of life for all and therefore offer potential to promote good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion and racial group.

Political opinion Racial group

It is anticipated that the proposals and policies in relation to design and place making, retailing and economic development, open space, housing and tourism will all assist in the delivery of opportunities for social and cross community interaction, thereby enhancing prospects for promoting good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion and racial group. Any Section 75 issues raised during consultation or further down the line will be considered in a proportionate way.

Additional considerations Multiple identity Generally speaking, people can fall into more than one Section 75 category. Taking this into consideration, are there any potential impacts of the policy/decision on people with multiple identities? (For example; disabled minority ethnic people; disabled women; young Protestant men; and young lesbians, gay and bisexual people).

The draft Plan Strategy recognises that people may fall in to more than one Section 75 category. The vision of the LDP is to improve the quality of life for everyone, and the overall outworking of the strategic policies and proposals is likely to promote equality of opportunity for people with multiple identities. No negative differential impacts have been identified at this stage. However, as the draft Plan Strategy will be subject to consultation process any further issues raised in relation to Section 75 groups during the consultation process will be taken into account.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Provide details of data on the impact of the policy on people with multiple identities. Specify relevant Section 75 categories concerned. None identified. However, as the draft Plan Strategy will be subject to a public consultation process any further issues raised in relation to Section 75 groups during the consultation process will be taken into account. Disability The Disability Discrimination (NI) Order 2006 introduced new duties requiring all public authorities in carrying out their function relating to Northern Ireland to have due regard to the need to:  

Promote positive attitudes towards disabled people; and Encourage participation of disabled people in public life.

Does the policy promote positive attitudes towards disabled people and encourage participation of disabled people in public life? The draft Plan Strategy aims to focus major growth and opportunities for development within our three main towns, whilst providing for sustainable growth in smaller settlements and in the countryside. By focusing housing and economic growth in areas where there is the greatest access to services and facilities as well as better public transport links it is considered that this will encourage and help facilitate participation of disabled people in public life. Several of the LDP Strategic Objectives seek to improve connectivity and accessibility as well as improving the health and wellbeing of our citizens. One of the key delivery mechanisms is our General Policy, that will apply to all development and which seeks to ensure that accessibility and ease of access for people with disabilities is taken into consideration in the design of development and in the consideration of movement patterns, with particular regard for the pedestrian environment. Appendix A identified a number of policies within the draft Plan Strategy that are expected to have positive impacts for people living with disabilities. This includes policies that seek to protect and facilitate quality and accessible public open space due to the physical and mental health benefits that all forms of open space can provide. It is the intention that a number of our housing policies such as Policy HOU7: Adaptable and Accessible Accommodation, Policy HOU6: Housing Mix (Unit Types and Sizes), will allow people with disabilities to stay in their own homes and communities for longer. The draft Plan Strategy specifically safeguards against the loss of valued neighbourhood services and facilitates additional provision where necessary, thereby allowing people with disabilities to participate as fully as possible in public life. It is anticipated that the draft Plan Strategy will promote positive attitudes towards disabled people as it seeks to ensure that proposals take into account the needs of people with disabilities in the design of development proposals.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Part 3. Screening decision If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment, please provide details of the reasons. At this stage no significant adverse impacts on equality of opportunity have been identified on Section 75 groups. It is anticipated the Draft Plan Strategy will be of benefit to our citizens including Section 75 groups as it seeks to improve the quality of life for all as set out in our vision. At this stage it has been identified that many of the policies within the draft Plan Strategy will, in fact, be of particular benefit to a number of the Section 75 groups. It is recognised that the LDP Spatial Growth Strategy has spatial implications that may have some potential for differential impacts on the grounds of Religious Belief/Political Opinion. However, the Spatial Growth Strategy is aligned with the regional direction and to significantly depart from this would likely render the LDP unsound. Overall, the Spatial Growth Strategy will be of benefit to everyone. This is a draft Screening Report and the draft Plan Strategy will be subject to public consultation. Any issues raised through this process will be considered prior to the publication of the final Plan Strategy.

If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment the public authority should consider if the policy should be mitigated or an alternative policy be introduced. No mitigation is considered necessary at this stage. Any issues raised during the consultation process will be considered prior to the publication of the final Plan Strategy.

If the decision is to subject the policy to an equality impact assessment, please provide details of the reasons.

Mitigation When the public authority concludes that the likely impact is ‘minor’ and an equality impact assessment is not to be conducted, the public authority may consider mitigation to lessen the severity of any equality impact, or the introduction of an alternative policy to better promote equality of opportunity or good relations. Can the policy/decision be amended or changed or an alternative policy introduced to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations? No If so, give the reasons to support your decision, together with the proposed changes/amendments or alternative policy.

At this stage the LDP Plan Strategy presents overall positive impacts for equality of opportunity and good relations. It is acknowledged that there may be potential for ‘minor’ impacts arising within the religious belief and political opinion groupings as a result of the Spatial Growth Strategy/Settlement Hierarchy. However, taking account of all the evidence, the Council does not consider mitigation to be appropriate at this stage.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Timetabling and prioritising Factors to be considered in timetabling and prioritising policies for equality impact assessment. If the policy has been ‘screened in’ for equality impact assessment, then please answer the following questions to determine its priority for timetabling the equality impact assessment. On a scale of 1-3, with 1 being the lowest priority and 3 being the highest, assess the policy in terms of its priority for equality impact assessment.

Priority criterion

Rating (1-3)

Effect on equality of opportunity and good relations

N/A N/A

Social need

N/A

Effect on people’s daily lives

N/A

Relevance to a public authority’s functions

Note: The Total Rating Score should be used to prioritise the policy in rank order with other policies screened in for equality impact assessment. This list of priorities will assist the public authority in timetabling. Details of the Public Authority’s Equality Impact Assessment Timetable should be included in the quarterly Screening Report.

Is the policy affected by timetables established by other relevant public authorities?

If yes, please provide details

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Part 4. Monitoring Public authorities should consider the guidance contained in the Commission’s Monitoring Guidance for Use by Public Authorities (July 2007). The Commission recommends that where the policy has been amended or an alternative policy introduced, the public authority should monitor more broadly than for adverse impact (See Benefits, P.9-10, paras 2.13 – 2.20 of the Monitoring Guidance). Effective monitoring will help the public authority identify any future adverse impact arising from the policy which may lead the public authority to conduct an equality impact assessment, as well as help with future planning and policy development.

The draft Plan Strategy will be subject to consultation with the public and will include specific consultation with a variety of Section 75 groups. Any Section 75 issues raised during consultation will be considered prior to finalising the Plan Strategy. The LDP will also be subject to further equality screening at Local Policies Plan stage. Monitoring and review of the LDP is an integral part of the plan making process. The draft Plan Strategy includes a Monitoring and Review Framework (see Technical Supplement 1) which highlights that a five year review of the LDP will be carried out subsequent to adoption to ensure the policies and proposals are achieving their objectives. There will be further scope for any impacts on Section 75 groups to be considered through this review.

Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report Part 5 - Approval and authorisation Screened by:

Position/Job Title

Date

Michael Francey

Principal Planning Officer

16/09/2019

Planning Manager

16/09/2019

Approved by: Paul Duffy

Note: A copy of the Screening Template, for each policy screened should be ‘signed off’ and approved by a senior manager responsible for the policy, made easily accessible on the public authority’s website as soon as possible following completion and made available on request.

Appendix A Assessment of Impact on Equality of Opportunity of Section 75 Groups Topic

Detailed Policies

Purpose of Policy

Comments on likely impact on equality of opportunity

The purpose of the strategy is to set out the broad locations in the Borough where growth should be directed in terms of housing, employment and commercial development over the plan period. The Spatial Growth Strategy provides the framework for the range of strategic policies which together will work towards realising the vision and objectives of the LDP.

The Spatial Growth Strategy (SGS) has been prepared in accordance with the RDS Spatial Framework Guidance. A hierarchy has been established which aims to focus major population growth and economic development in the three main towns whilst facilitating appropriate growth in small towns and sustaining villages and small settlements. In the open countryside, the emphasis is on facilitating sustainable development opportunities taking into account the need to protect rural character and the environment, while sustaining a strong and vibrant rural community. The overarching aim of the Spatial Growth Strategy is to manage growth to secure sustainable patterns of development across Mid and East Antrim.

Please note policies will be applied uniformly across all S75 categories.

Spatial Growth Strategy

SGS1 Spatial Growth Strategy

It is anticipated that the proposed strategy will have a minor impact on people of different religious Belief and political opinions as the proposed Strategy directs most growth (housing, economic development land, retail etc) to the larger tier settlements, i.e. the three main towns and to a lesser extent the five small towns. All of these towns have majority Protestant populations (varying between 67% for the main town of Larne and 90.8% for the small town of Ahoghill). The impact here is deemed to be ‘minor’ because the proposal is not unlawfully discriminating and to a large extent the religious split within these settlements reflects that for the Borough as a whole (which is 72.9% Protestant). Further, the SGS whilst not seeking to direct growth to the smaller tier settlements, does not actually preclude development that is appropriate to the scale and character of the individual settlement. The focus of major population and economic growth in the three main towns aligns with the regional direction of the RDS and will maximise benefits for all citizens because of the ready availability of a wide range of services and employment. This is considered to outweigh any differential impacts for smaller tier settlements irrespective of their religious composition The strategy is likely to benefit the community as a whole as it provides sustainable growth opportunities across the Borough by meeting current and future needs of residents through the provision of new jobs and homes. The strategy encourages more sustainable transport modes and greater access to health, education, employment, housing and other

services and facilities. This will be of particular benefit to people living with disabilities, racial groups, those with dependants and both younger and older age groups. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity of any Section 75 group are identified at this stage.

Settlement Hierarchy

SGS2 Settlement Hierarchy

The purpose of this strategic policy is to designate the settlements within the plan area. This strategic policy sets out the new settlement hierarchy for the Borough which provides the spatial framework for the delivery of the Spatial Growth Strategy.

Settlements have been designated and classified as the result of a detailed settlement evaluation process based on their population, role, facilities and services along with their potential to accommodate further development. Our three main towns have been retained, based on their regional status set out in the RDS, five new small towns have been designated retaining Greenisland and Whitehead plus the former villages of Ahoghill, Broughshane and Cullybackey. 11 villages have been designated including the former small settlement of Martinstown, 12 existing small settlements have been de-designated and eight new small settlements have been designated. The proposed re-classification, designation and de-designation of certain settlements may impact on religious belief and political opinion categories due to their spatial distribution. However analysis of wider geographical areas indicates that the spread of religious belief across the relevant settlements is largely reflective of the Borough as a whole. The Settlement Hierarchy has been defined by taking account of the regional direction, population distribution and the capacity of individual settlements to support further growth. To depart from this rational could undermine the ‘soundness’ of the LDP. The Settlement Hierarchy is likely to provide general benefit as it provides sustainable growth opportunities across the Borough in line with the existing population distribution, infrastructure and service provision. The Settlement Hierarchy will facilitate development in appropriate and sustainable locations to ensure improved access to services, employment and community facilities for everyone. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity of any Section 75 group are identified at this stage.

Housing Allocation Strategy

SGS3 Strategic Allocation of Housing to Settlements

The purpose of the strategy is to achieve sustainable patterns of residential development and to ensure an appropriate supply of land is available to

The Housing Allocation Strategy is based on a detailed Housing Evaluation Framework and aligns with our Spatial Growth Strategy and our Settlement Hierarchy. The strategy indicates the amount of housing to be allocated to each of our settlements and the open countryside during the

SGS4 Protection of Zoned Housing Land

accommodate the new homes required to meet the full range of housing needs.

SGS5 Management of Housing Supply

plan period. The quantum of housing allocated is proportionate to a settlement’s role and position within the hierarchy and to its existing level of services and facilities. The Housing Allocation Strategy ensures that the majority of housing is located within the most sustainable and accessible locations. It is anticipated that the broad location of housing land and the identified quantum will cater for all Section 75 groups. Housing will be allocated across the settlement tiers and countryside in broad alignment with the Spatial Growth Strategy, similar Section 75 implications may apply. However, it is important to note previous comments in regard to the regional direction and the regional split for the Borough as a whole. Further assessment will be undertaken at LPP stage to ensure the Housing Allocation Strategy has no differential impact on these groups. It is considered that the Housing Allocation Strategy is likely to have a positive effect generally as it seeks to provide housing to meet the needs of all in the most accessible locations and where the majority of our population are located. This will be of particular benefit to different age and racial groups and those living with disabilities and dependants.

No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity of any Section 75 group are identified at this stage.

Economic Development Strategy

SGS6 Strategic Allocation of Land for Economic Development

The purpose of the strategy is to allocate an appropriate amount of economic development land to meet economic development needs within the Borough, offering a range and choice in terms of quality.

The Strategy allocates a quantum of economic land within the three main towns in accordance with the Spatial Growth Strategy which seeks to focus employment in these locations. Whilst land will not be zoned in small towns, villages and small settlements appropriate opportunities for business growth will still be facilitated within these areas and within the countryside. In terms of religious belief and political opinion the composition of the three main towns are reflective of the Borough. It is also where the majority of our racial groups are located. As a whole therefore no impact on equality of opportunity is predicted at this stage on these groups by allocating economic zonings in these areas. Further assessment will be undertaken at LPP stage to ensure the location of economic zonings has no differential impact on these groups. It is considered that the Economic Development Strategy is likely to have a positive effect generally as it seeks to provide a range of economic land to meet varying needs in the most accessible locations and where the majority of our population are located. This will be of particular benefit to

those of working age, different racial groups, and those living with disability and those with dependants. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity of any Section 75 group are identified at this stage.

Retail Strategy

SGS7 Retail Hierarchy RET1 Retail in Town Centres RET2 Retail Impact Assessment RET3 Retail in Villages, Small Settlements and Local Centres RET4 Rural Shops and Roadside Service Facilities

The purpose of this strategy and associated operational subject policies is to define the network and hierarchy of centres (a retail hierarchy) appropriate for Mid and East Antrim and to identify the broad type and scale of retail development considered appropriate for each tier of the retail hierarchy. They seek to promote our town centres as the first choice location for future retailing and other main town centre uses. In addition, it aims to meet local day-to-day needs in villages and small settlements appropriate to their role and function and to prevent inappropriate retail development in the countryside.

The Retail Hierarchy seeks to ensure that the nature and scale of new retail development is appropriate to the role and character of the settlement. It is anticipated that by protecting and sustaining the vitality and viability of our town centres there will be benefits for the community as a whole. The approach will help these areas to perform at their maximum potential in meeting the needs of citizens and visitors and contributing to the economy of Mid and East Antrim. In addition town centres are important safe and shared spaces within our settlements and by protecting and enhancing them the retail hierarchy has a potential positive impact for and between those of different religious belief, political opinion and racial group. The Retail Hierarchy can promote good relations by providing opportunities for social interaction in general. By focusing retail and complementary uses within the larger centres of population travel demand is reduced as these functions are in the most accessible locations with a greater potential for the use of public transport. The approach ensures that retail and other town centre uses will be more accessible for everyone particularly the elderly, people living with a disability and those with dependants. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity of any Section 75 group are identified at this stage.

Tourism

SGS8 Tourism Strategy TOU1 Safeguarding of Tourism Assets TOU2 Tourism Development in Settlements and Tourism Opportunity Zones TOU3 All Tourism Development in the Countryside

The purpose of the Tourism Strategy is to ensure that planning can contribute to the economy of Mid and East Antrim by facilitating sustainable tourism growth. The strategy and associated operational subject policies seek to safeguard our tourism assets and to accommodate future tourism demand in appropriate locations. It provides for sustainable tourism opportunities across the Borough including in the countryside and within identified tourism opportunity zones.

The strategy in conjunction with the operational subject policies set out the circumstances in which different types of future tourism demand will be considered appropriate subject to high quality design and environmental considerations. The strategy sets out that tourism development will be restricted within a number of vulnerable areas in the countryside (for example sites of nature conservation importance). This may have the potential to have an impact in terms of religious belief and political opinion (see Countryside Strategy below). In the context of the Borough however these areas are limited and are often not highly populated. No adverse impact is anticipated as

TOU4 Tourist Amenities in the Countryside

the Tourism Strategy provides opportunities for development in nearby settlements as well as in the wider countryside.

TOU5 Hotels, Guest Houses and Tourist Hostels in the Countryside

It is considered that the approach to tourism development will have positive impacts generally. The policies protect our quality landscapes and our tourism assets which will provide environmental, economic and physical and mental health benefits. Tourism assets and facilities are often safe and shared social meeting spaces therefore supporting their provision, protection and enhancement will be of benefit to all Section 75 groups.

TOU6 Self Catering Accommodation in the Countryside TOU7 New and Extended Holiday Parks in the Countryside

No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

TOU8 Major Tourism Development in the Countryside – Exceptional Circumstances

Transport Strategy

DfI Transport Study to support LDP and associated operational policies.

The purpose of the Transport Strategy is to provide clarity on the transport measures that DfI expect to deliver during the Plan period in MEA and to ensure that the transport network and transport needs of the Borough are taken into account in planning for its future development.

The Transport Strategy is represented by the draft Local Transport Study for Mid and East Antrim (LTS), prepared by DfI. The strategy in conjunction with the operational subject policies will benefit all sections of the community through improved accessibility, connectivity and road safety. The emphasis on more sustainable active travel will have positive impacts for the health and wellbeing of all. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Open Space

SGS9 Open Space Strategy OSL1 Protection of Open Space OSL2 Greenways

The purpose of the Open Space Strategy and the associated operational subject policies is to protect existing open space and to provide for appropriate new and accessible open space and recreation facilities to meet a range of community needs.

OSL3 New Open Space Provision

The proposed strategy and associated policies provide for and support increased opportunities for leisure and recreation in our Borough and therefore have the potential to benefit the community as a whole, both urban and rural, by reason of their multiple benefits for amenity, recreation, health and wellbeing and the environment. In particular the policies have the potential to positively impact on religious belief, political opinion and racial groups as open space provides opportunities for social and cross community interaction which will help aid good relations and community cohesion.

OSL4 Public Open Space in New Residential Development OSL5 Sport and Outdoor Recreation Facilities

The policies also have the potential to bring physical and mental health benefits to young people and dependants through the provision of safe and accessible open space and play parks in residential areas especially, as well as generally through the provision of indoor and outdoor facilities in the most accessible locations.

OSL6 Community Growing Spaces and Allotments OSL7 Cemeteries and Burial Space

It is also anticipated that safe and accessible open spaces such as allotments and open space within residential developments in particular, will provide enhanced opportunities for our elderly population to pursue active lifestyles. In addition, well located and designed open spaces and facilities including greenways will provide benefits to people living with disabilities by ensuring enhanced ease of access for those with mobility issues. In general all types of open space are considered to offer substantial mental health benefits. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Countryside Strategy

CS1 Sustainable Development in the Countryside CS2 Special Countryside Areas CS3 Areas of Constraint on High Structures

The purpose of the Countryside Strategy and associated strategic proposals and policies is to facilitate development which support and sustain rural communities in Mid and East Antrim, whilst protecting, conserving and where possible enhancing the rural landscape, seascape, natural environment, and historical and cultural heritage assets associated with the countryside.

CS4 Rural Landscape Wedges CS5 Antrim Coast and Glens Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty CS6 Developed Coast (Belfast Lough Shore) CS7 Local Landscape Policy Areas CS8 Protection of Main River Corridors

The Countryside Strategy includes a number of spatial designations and associated policies which seek to protect sensitive landscapes from inappropriate development. The proposed Countryside Strategy has the potential to have a differential impact on religious belief and political opinion due to the spatial distribution of these areas. The Countryside Strategy identifies four Special Countryside Areas (SCAs), where most forms of development will be prevented or restricted. The designation of these areas has been informed by a comprehensive Landscape Character Assessment and determined on the basis of their exceptional landscape quality and unique amenity value. As these are relatively small and tightly defined entities in areas of sparse population there are likely to be few implications for equality of opportunity. Any differential impacts on the grounds of religious belief/political opinion is balanced against the positive net benefits that will be realised by protecting such areas particularly in consideration of the overarching aim of achieving sustainable development. The Countryside Strategy also restricts specific types of development in more extensive designations in the rural area. However, this applies mainly to mineral development and high structures such as wind turbines, electricity pylons and telecommunications masts. These structures will have little bearing in terms of likely impact on equality of opportunity within section 75 groupings. Considering this in conjunction with the benefits of protecting the landscape of these areas, no adverse differential impacts are anticipated at this stage.

CS9 Development at Risk from Land Instability or Coastal Erosion

Within the other countryside designations development is permitted within their extent subject to meeting criteria that will ensure landscape

quality is protected. No adverse impact on the basis of religious belief or political opinion is anticipated. It is anticipated that the Countryside Strategy overall will benefit the community as a whole as it seeks to protect our exceptional landscapes and environmental assets. This in turn will deliver numerous environmental, social and economic benefits. Where development is permitted the strategy will enhance access to these areas for the enjoyment of all, therefore bringing health and wellbeing benefits. In addition the strategy seeks to ensure development is prevented in areas where there are known risks to safety. No adverse impact on equality of opportunity are anticipated at this stage.

General Policy for all Development

GP1 General Policy for all Development

The purpose of the policy is to ensure that key planning principles embodied in overarching government strategies such as the RDS, SPPS and SDS, filter through to development on the ground via the operation of the development management process in the context of the new Plan-led system.

The General Policy for all Development sets out the main considerations that the Council will take into account when assessing all development proposals with the exception of minor proposals. The policy seeks to ensure that all development has regard to design, integration and character, safeguarding of amenity, access/movement and car parking and safety and safeguarding of human health and wellbeing. As an overarching policy that will be applicable to the majority of developments it is anticipated that it will benefit the community as a whole as it seeks to contribute to the creation of a quality environment and the provision of shared spaces through the promotion of good design and place making. This in combination with criteria that encourage active travel have positive implications for health and wellbeing and good relations. The policy will have positive benefits in particular for those living with disabilities, younger and older residents as well as those with dependants by reason of the criteria set out in relation to Access, Movement and Carparking. The policy requires that the design of new development must take account of the specific needs of people with disabilities and others whose mobility is impaired including incorporating facilities to aid accessibility. The policy also requires development to be designed to deter crime and promote personal safety which has positive benefits all Section 75 groups and in particular for those within the racial group and sexual orientation categories No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Economic Development

ECD1 Economic Development in Settlements ECD2 Retention of Economic Development Land ECD3 Development incompatible with Economic Development Uses ECD4 Economic Development in the Countryside

The purpose of these operational subject policies are to facilitate the economic development needs of the Borough in ways consistent with protection of the environment and the principles of sustainable development. The policies safeguard land required for economic development use and support the reuse of previously developed economic development sites and buildings for economic development use. The policies seek to protect economic development uses from incompatible development.

The proposed polices set out the main considerations the Planning Authority will take into account when assessing applications for economic development. As it is the intention of the LDP to focus economic development on the three main towns where the religious and political makeup is generally reflective of the Borough as a whole, no adverse impacts on these groups are anticipated. As specific sites have not been designated at this stage, this will be reassessed at Local Policies Plan stage to ensure no adverse impact and to ensure opportunities for all are maximised. It is anticipated that these policies will be of benefit to the community as a whole. Policy ECD4 may also offer particular positive benefits for those with dependants as it offers opportunities for employment in the countryside at existing farms and businesses etc. and closer to where people may live. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Minerals Development

MIN1 Mineral Development – Extraction and Processing of Hard Rock and Aggregates MIN2 Valuable Minerals MIN3 Hydrocarbons MIN4 Areas of Constraint on Mineral Development MIN5 Area of Salt Reserve, Carrickfergus MIN6 Development at Risk of Subsidence due to past or present underground mineral extraction MIN7 Peat Extraction

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to secure a balanced and sustainable approach to minerals development that takes account of the need for minerals to support development and provide employment, and the need to protect landscape quality and other environmental assets. They seek to minimise the impacts of minerals development on landscape quality and the natural environment, water environment and historic environment – particularly in areas designated for their importance in regard to one or more of these qualities as well as the impact on local communities. They seek to prevent development that could prejudice the exploitation of important mineral reserves, particularly those which are scarce or of particular value to the Northern Ireland economy. Lastly the policies will secure the appropriate restoration, re-use and management of redundant minerals sites.

MIN8 Restoration and Management of Mineral Sites

The proposed operational subject policies set out the main considerations the Council will take in account when assessing applications for mineral development. Minerals can only be exploited where they occur and whilst this may have a differential impact on Religious and Political belief, the location of these resources cannot be influenced by the policies. The intention of the policies however is to ensure that the approach to mineral development is sustainable with minimum impact on the environment and communities. The plan identifies a number of areas where there is a presumption against mineral development due to the sensitive nature of the landscape. There is the potential for this to have a differential impact on the grounds of religious belief/political opinion due to the location of these designations in primarily Catholic areas. However, it is considered that on balance taking into account the environmental benefits the impact is not adverse. In addition, the proposed restrictions in these areas could provide benefits to those living there in relation to protecting and minimising impact on their amenity and the quality of their local environment. Limited restriction on development within the Area of Salt Reserve and Areas at risk of Subsidence also have the potential to have differential

impact on Section 75 groups. However, it is considered that this is outweighed by the overriding responsibility to protect and safeguard public safety. Overall the sustainable exploitation of minerals resources has the potential to benefit all sections of the community due to the important role it plays in our economy, through maintaining a diverse range of jobs, supply of construction materials and meeting a resource need. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Housing in Settlements

HOU1 Quality in New Residential Development in Settlements HOU2 The Conversion or Change of Use of Existing Buildings to Flats or Apartments

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to promote sustainable residential development in our settlements that meets a range of needs. They seek to secure good design and increased housing density without town cramming as well as nurturing the development of balanced communities.

HOU3 Residential Extensions and Alterations HOU4 Protected Town Centre Housing Areas

The proposed operational subject policies set out the main considerations that the Council will take into account when assessing proposals for residential development in settlements. As it is the intention of the LDP to direct the majority of housing to the three main towns where the religious and political makeup is generally reflective of the Borough as a whole, no adverse impacts on these groups are anticipated. As specific sites have not been designated at this stage this will be reassessed at Local Policies Plan stage to ensure no adverse impact and to ensure opportunities to promote good relations are maximised. It is anticipated that the policies will be of benefit to all sections of the community as they seek to deliver good quality housing with a range and mix of house types and tenures in our settlements to meet the specific needs of our residents. This includes taking account of our ageing population, the reduction in household size as well as affordable housing need. The proposed policies will contribute to enhancing good relations by building sustainable communities.

HOU5 Affordable Housing in Settlements HOU6 Housing Mix (Unit Types and Sizes) HOU7 Adaptable and Accessible Homes

It is considered that the proposed policies will bring positive benefits for a number of groups in particular including those with multiple identities eg single parents. Policies which encourage a mix of house types and tenures will help build mixed communities and aid good relations between those of differing religious belief, political opinion and racial group. The provision of mixed house types and tenures along with the introduction of Adaptable and Accessible homes will also have positive benefits for the elderly, those of different marital status, and those living with disabilities and dependants. By seeking to ensure all housing environments are designed to be safe and deter crime the policies are also particularly beneficial to certain groups such as Sexual Orientation, the Elderly and those of different Racial Groups.

HOU8 Travellers Accommodation

Policy HOU8 will have positive impacts for racial group and in particular Travellers. Travellers have specific needs which are assessed as part of the Housing Needs Assessment undertaken by the NIHE. At present there is no identified need for Traveller accommodation. However, should a need arise over the plan period this policy will support and facilitate the provision of a suitable facility. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Housing in the Countryside

HOU9 Replacement Dwelling HOU10 Dwelling on a Farm Business HOU11 Dwelling for Non-Agricultural Business Enterprise

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to manage residential development in the countryside in order to secure a sustainable balance between protecting the environment from inappropriate development while supporting and sustaining rural communities.

HOU12 New Dwelling in Existing Clusters

The proposed operational subject policies set out the circumstances in which residential development in the countryside will be considered appropriate subject to meeting the General Policy in regard to development in the countryside. The proposed policies are necessary to ensure that housing growth in the countryside is commensurate with our spatial growth strategy and to ensure the necessary housing needs of our rural communities are met. The religious and political makeup of the countryside reflects that of the Borough as a whole therefore no adverse differential impact is anticipated on either of these two groups. It is not anticipated that there will be any adverse impact on those within the racial group as in our Borough they are concentrated primarily within or adjacent to our main settlements where the majority of opportunities for housing are afforded.

HOU13 Ribbon/Infill Development HOU14 Personal and Domestic Circumstances HOU15 Residential Caravans and Mobile Homes

The proposed policies respond positively to a range of different needs, issues and priorities experienced by people within certain Section 75 groups. All the opportunities for housing will benefit both young and old, as they aim to help people to stay connected with their communities for longer, therefore aiding social cohesion.

HOU16 Affordable Housing in the Countryside

Policy HOU 4 specifically provides for a new dwelling where there are compelling personal and domestic circumstances and this is likely to positively impact on those of different age groups, those living with disabilities and with dependants. Provision for affordable housing in the countryside also has the potential to impact positively on these categories. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Health, Education, Community and Cultural Facilities

COM1 Education, Health, Community and Cultural Facilities

The purpose of this operational subject policy is to meet the anticipated needs of the community, in terms of health, education and other public services.

This operational subject policy allows sites to be reserved for such facilities where a need is identified by the relevant agencies or service providers. It also protects these facilities from redevelopment for alternative uses and supports the provision of new facilities in appropriate locations within settlements. The draft Plan Strategy has not designated land at this stage and any future development will be based on need, as dictated largely by the relevant government departments. No adverse impacts on religious belief/political opinion are anticipated at this stage. Further assessment will be carried out at Local Policies Plan to ensure impacts are minimised and opportunities for good relations are enhanced. It is anticipated that the policy will benefit the community as a whole as it makes provision for Education, Health Community and Cultural Facilities where a need is identified particularly in settlements where the majority of our population are located. This has positive impacts for health and wellbeing. Enabling the provision of community and cultural facilities supports inclusive shared spaces which contribute to establishing good relations. The policy seeks to ensure they are located in appropriate and accessible locations within settlements which will be of particular benefit to ethnic minorities, those living with a disability, young and old and those within dependants. As the majority of the population is located within our settlements supporting the provisions of such facilities in these locations will be beneficial to all. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Transportation

TR1 Access to Public Roads TR2 Access to Protected Routes TR3 New Transport Schemes TR4 Disused Transport Routes

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to deliver sustainable patterns of development which reduce the need for the private car and promote the use of public transport and active travel modes. In addition they facilitate safe and efficient access, movement and parking. They also protect land required for new transport schemes and the reuse of disused transport routes.

TR5 Active Travel TR6 Parking and Servicing TR7 Provision of Car Parks

It is anticipated that these operational subject policies will benefit all sections of the community through improved accessibility, connectivity and road safety. The focus on more sustainable active travel will have positive impacts for the health and wellbeing of all. The policies will be of particular benefit to the elderly, those living with disabilities and those with dependants. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Flood Risk and Drainage

FRD1 Development within Floodplains FRD2 Protection of Flood Defence and Drainage Infrastructure FRD3 Management of Development in regard to Surface Water Flood Risk

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to manage development that may be at risk from flooding or that may increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. In addition they seek to protect flood defence and drainage infrastructure as well as promoting sustainable drainage solutions to improve water quality.

The proposed operational subject policies set out the main considerations that the Council will consider to ensure that development proposals take full account of flood risk. The proposed policies are largely technical in nature and are not anticipated to impact on equality of opportunity. Some elements of these policies relate to restricting development in areas of flood risk for bespoke accommodation for vulnerable groups, such as schools, residential/nursing homes, sheltered housing, and children’s playgrounds. Therefore there is potential impact on those within the age, disability and dependents categories. However, as this policy is intended to safeguard such groups from flooding, any minor differential impact is not considered to be adverse or to require mitigation.

FRD4 Sustainable Drainage (SuDS) FRD5 Artificial Modification of Watercourses FRD6 Development in Proximity to Controlled Reservoirs

Ultimately these policies seek to benefit all sections of society by safeguarding people and buildings from the impacts of flooding. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Renewable Energy

RE1 Renewable Energy Development

The purpose of this operational subject policy is to facilitate renewable energy development in appropriate locations within our Borough, whilst balancing the recognised benefits against any potential environmental or social impacts.

The proposed operational subject policies set out the main considerations that the Council will consider in the assessment of applications for renewable energy development. Outside of the designated Areas of Constraint on High Structures, the policy aims to support renewable energy development due to the economic and environmental benefits in mitigating against climate change and improving air quality. The approach to balancing these benefits against any potential social or environmental impacts will contribute to improving the health and wellbeing of society as a whole. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Telecommunications and Overhead Cables

TOC1 Telecommunications and Overhead Cables

The purpose of this operational subject policy is to facilitate the development of telecommunications and utilities infrastructure in appropriate locations to support sustainable economic growth; and to minimise the environmental impact of telecommunications and utilities infrastructure.

This operational subject policy sets out the main considerations that the Council will consider in the assessment of applications for overhead Lines or Telecommunications Development. It is anticipated that the proposed policy will benefit the community as a whole as it will facilitate the expansion of telecommunications to improve digital connectivity and facilitate investing in our electricity infrastructure which has social and economic benefits for all. Facilitating increased connectivity may have particular benefits in terms of reducing isolation for perhaps the elderly, people living with disabilities or racial groups. The

policy aims to minimise the environmental impact of such developments which will have health and wellbeing benefits for all. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Water and Sewerage Infrastructure

WWI1 Development Relying on NonMains Wastewater Infrastructure

The purpose of this operational subject policy is to ensure new development is adequately served by water and wastewater infrastructure, so as to avoid creating or adding to a pollution problem or to threaten environmental quality.

This operational subject policy is largely technical in nature and therefore is not expected to impact on equality of opportunity. The policy will however be subject to public consultation and any Section 75 issues raised will be considered. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Waste Management

WMT1 Environmental Impact of a Waste Management Facility WMT2 Waste Collection and Treatment Facilities WMT3 Waste Disposal Sites WMT4 Development in the vicinity of a Waste Management Facility

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to facilitate the development of new waste management facilities in appropriate locations and to minimise the environmental impact of waste management facilities. In addition, they control development in proximity to existing waste management or WwTW facilities and make provision for waste proposals intended to improve land quality.

WMT5 Land Improvement

These operational subject policies set out the main considerations that the Council will take into account in the assessment of proposals for waste management facilities. It is the intention of the policies that facilities which are for shared public use should be situated in appropriate locations and therefore accessible for all members of our community irrespective of religious belief or political opinion. At this stage there are no anticipated adverse impacts on these groups. The policies seek to ensure that facilities such as civic amenity sites are conveniently located in terms of access to a neighbourhood or settlement. This should have positive benefits for those who may have limited access such as the elderly or those with mobility issues. The main thrust of the policies is to ensure the sustainable management of waste in order to reduce the adverse impact on our environment which is essential for the health and wellbeing of all in our society. No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

Historic Environment

HE1 Archaeological Remains and their Settings HE2 Historic Parks, Gardens and Demesnes HE3 Listed Buildings - Change of Use or Extension/Alteration or Conversion of a Listed Building

The purpose of these operational subject policies is to protect, conserve, and where possible enhance the historic character and assets of the Borough. They promote new high quality and innovative architecture and built forms which are sympathetic to the historic character and which respond to locally distinctive patterns of development, townscape and landscape. They seek to safeguard and protect archaeological sites, monuments, objects and their settings and any additional newly discovered

These operational subject policies sets out the main considerations that the Council will take into account when assessing applications that have the potential to impact on our historic environment. This can include archaeological remains, listed and vernacular buildings and other areas such as Conservation Areas and Historic Parks and Gardens. In terms of religious belief/political opinion it is not anticipated that the approach to conserving, protecting and or enhancing our built and archaeological assets and Conservation Areas will result in any significant

HE4 Listed Buildings - Demolition of a Listed Building

archaeological remains. They aim to exploit the tourism and educational value of Mid and East Antrim’s unique heritage and historic environment, in a sensitive and sustainable manner.

HE5 Development affecting the Setting of a Listed Building HE6 Conservation Areas

differential impact on these groups given the wide geographical spread of these features across the Borough. Any designation or policy that seeks to protect built heritage and archaeological heritage assets, including Conservation Areas, are intended to provide benefits for all sections of society, irrespective of section 75 group identity. In addition, the policies promote good design and positive place making and as such are expected to yield positive benefits in regard to the creation and enhancement of shared spaces.

HE7 Areas of Townscape Character No adverse impacts on equality of opportunity are identified at this stage.

HE8 Non-listed Locally Important Building or Vernacular Building HE9 Enabling Development for the Conservation of Heritage Assets

Advertisements

PM-146 PM-147

HE8 Non-listed Locally Important Building or Vernacular Building and justification and amplification paragraph 10.1.57, paragraph 10.1.59, paragraph 10.1.60 and paragraph 10.1.63

Amend policy title and policy to replace term ‘Non-Listed’ with ‘Unlisted’.

PM-148 PM-149

HE9 Enabling Development for the Conservation of Heritage Assets – justification and amplification paragraph 10.1.64 and paragraph 10.1.66

Amend justification and amplification text to replace ‘significant place’ with ‘heritage asset’ and to provide clarity to applicants of what information is required as part of any submission.

PM-150 PM-151

AD1 The Control of Advertisements and Appendix K

Amend policy to ensure that the assessment criteria listed as a) to f) also apply to the two policy subheadings; Advertisements and Heritage Assets and Digital Advertising Screens.

No Modifications to the policy and the justification and amplification for factual corrections that does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. No Modifications to the justification and amplification for clarification purposes and to ensure consistency of terminology that do not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. No Modification for the clarification purposes that does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

No Modification to the introductory text to ensure consistency of approach in referencing natural heritage designations that does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. No Modification to the justification and amplification for purposes of factual correction and to ensure consistency of approach in referencing

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

Amend Appendix K to remove ambiguity between guidance and policy. Natural Heritage

PM-152

NAT Intro paragraph 11.1.7

Amend to replace the term ‘Internationally’ to reference International and European.

PM-153

NAT1 European and Ramsar Sites – International justification and amplification paragraph 11.1.8

Amend justification and amplification to ensure correct reference to natural heritage designations, remove inference that Ramsar sites are designated under European law clarify how Ramsar sites are designated.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

PM-154

NAT2 Species Protected by Law – justification and amplification paragraph 11.1.11

Amend justification and amplification to include a link to the Priority Species list.

PM-155

NAT4 Sites of Nature Conservation Importance – Local – justification and amplification paragraph 11.1.13

Amend to remove reference to the fact that Ulster Wildlife Trust can establish a Local Nature Reserve and add an additional sentence to provide clarity on who has responsibility for their designation.

natural heritage designations that do not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. No Minor modification to ensure consistency of approach in referencing relevant external sources of information that does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. No Minor modifications to the text for purposes of factual correction that do not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Planning Office Silverwood Business Park 190 Raceview Road Ballymena BT42 4HZ

Part C Second Addendum to the dra� Equality (Sec�on 75) Screening Report (August 2023)

Local Development Plan 2030

Draft Plan Strategy Second Addendum to the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report

August 2023

Executive Summary A draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report was prepared by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council and published along with the Council’s draft Plan Strategy (dPS) and other associated assessment documents on 17 September 2019. A first Addendum to the Equality Screening of the dPS was published alongside a Schedule of Proposed Modifications to the dPS January 2021. These previously published screening documents were subject to formal consultation alongside other published Mid and East Antrim Local Development Plan (LDP) 2030 documents as part of the plan process and none of the representation received raised any issues in regard to the Equality Screening of the draft Plan Strategy or its first Addendum. In June 2021 the Council also published a Schedule of Proposed Corrections to the dPS. The corrections within that document addressed a factual mapping error related to the extant Area of Constraint on Mineral Development designated within the Larne Area Plan 2010. Following submission of the dPS and associated documents to the Department for Infrastructure (DfI) for Independent Examination (IE) on 29 March 2021, DfI appointed the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) in June 2021 to conduct an IE. The hearing took place from June 2022 until August 2022 and during the hearing sessions, the Council brought forward additional proposed changes for consideration. Subsequently, the PAC produced a report on the dPS and the Council’s proposed changes to it and concluded that the dPS met the tests of soundness as required, subject to recommended amendments. DfI accepted the concluding findings of the PAC and considered the recommended amendments within the Report. In June 2023, DfI issued a Direction to the Council to adopt the draft Plan Strategy with modifications. These modifications were presented in Schedules 1A, 1B and 2 of DfI’s Direction. This Second Addendum to the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the draft Plan Strategy has been prepared to consider the modifications to the dPS that DfI have specified in the context of the statutory requirement to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity, promote good relations and to promote positive attitudes towards disabled people as well as encouraging their participation in public life. This second addendum comprises the following stages: • •

Screening the modifications to the dPS that are within DfI’s Direction and which have not been previously assessed to determine whether further assessment is required; and If necessary, to undertake an assessment of the proposed modifications that have not been screened out.

The findings of this screening exercise are contained within the Section 75 Policy Screening Form and Appendix A. Following consideration of the proposed modifications to the dPS in the context of the statutory requirements, it has been concluded that the proposed modifications do not alter the outcomes of the original draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the dPS (September 2019).

1.0 Introduction 1.1. This document has been prepared by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council (MEABC) and is a second addendum to the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the draft Plan Strategy (DPS-112). 1.2. Mid and East Antrim Borough Council’s draft Plan Strategy (DPS-101) was developed through extensive involvement by elected members and other stakeholders who worked closely with planning officers to agree the policy direction and wording. A draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the draft Plan Strategy was prepared by Mid and East Antrim Borough Council and published for public consultation along with the Council’s dPS and other associated assessment documents on 17 September 2019. 1.3. A formal public consultation period on the dPS ran from 16 October 2019 to 11 December 2019. Having considered the responses received, Council suggested a number of 'proposed modifications' to the dPS. A Proposed Schedule of Modifications (DPS-143) was subsequently published in January 2021 along with an addendum to the original Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the draft Plan Strategy (DPS113). A formal public consultation period on these documents ran from 8 January 2021 to 5 March 2021. 1.4. In June 2021, the Council published a Schedule of Proposed Corrections to the draft Plan Strategy (DPS144). The corrections within that document exclusively addressed a factual mapping error related to the extant Area of Constraint on Mineral Development designated within the Larne Area Plan 2010. Independent Examination and Department for Infrastructure Direction 1.5. In accordance with Regulation 20 of the Planning (Local Development Plan) Regulations (NI) 2015 the Council submitted the dPS and supporting documents, including the proposed modifications and corrections to DfI on 29 March 2021. DfI carried out initial checks on the submission to ensure it met the basic legislative requirements prior to appointing the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) to conduct an Independent Examination (IE) of the dPS. The IE was carried out by the PAC via a number of hearing sessions that took place between 6 June and 11 August 2022. During the IE hearing sessions, the Council brought forward additional proposed changes for consideration. Subsequently, the PAC produced a report on the dPS and the Council’s proposed changes to it and concluded that the dPS met the tests of soundness as required, subject to recommended amendments. These PAC recommended amendments were made in accordance with Section 10 (8) of Part 2 of the Planning Act (NI) 2011. 1.6. In accordance with Section 12(1) of Part 2 of the Planning Act (NI) 2011, DfI considered the recommended amendments by the PAC and in June 2023 DfI issued a Direction to the Council to adopt the draft Plan Strategy with modifications. These modifications were presented in Schedules 1A, 1B and 2 of DfI’s Direction. Categories of Modifications 1.7. DfI’s Direction included two schedules containing the modifications to be carried out. The first schedule consists of two parts. Schedule 1A consists of the modifications from the Council’s Schedule of Proposed Modifications (January 2021) and Schedule of Proposed Corrections (June 2021) that the PAC consider necessary to make the dPS sound and which DfI have subsequently directed must be carried out. These have not been subject to any further amendments throughout the IE process, apart from some minor editing changes. 1.8. Schedule 1B consists of the modifications from the Council’s Schedule of Proposed Modifications (January 2021) that whilst the PAC do not consider them necessary to make the dPS sound, DfI has commended them to be taken forward. These have not been subject to any further amendments throughout the IE process. 1.9. The modifications within Schedules 1A and 1B, with the exception of those included in the Schedule of Proposed Corrections to the draft Plan Strategy (DPS-144), have already been subject to equality screening for potential impacts within the Addendum to the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report and as noted above were consulted upon between January and March 2021.

1.10. Schedule 2 lists 55 modifications that are required to make the dPS sound. These modifications are a combination of Council proposed changes that have been amended and new changes recommended by the PAC following the conclusion of the IE process. DfI has updated some of these changes for clarity and consistency. This Second Addendum to the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the draft Plan Strategy assesses these modifications for any potential impact on issues of equality.

Between persons of different religious belief, political opinion, racial group, age, marital status or sexual orientation. Between men and women generally; Between persons with a disability and persons without; and Between persons with dependants and persons without.

Promote positive attitudes towards disabled people; and Encourage participation of disabled people in public life.

3.0 Consideration of Representations Received 3.1. The dPS and its associated assessment documents were published on the 17 September 2019, with the formal consultation period running from 16 October 2019 to 11 December 2019. During the consultation period the plan team held a series of events to promote consultation and encourage engagement with the dPS. Eighty representations were received, and these were available for inspection from the 31 January to 27 March 2020. A further ten counter representations were submitted. All representations received remain available to view on the Council website. No respondents commented directly on the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report. 3.2. Following detailed consideration of the representations received and the issues raised, the Council proposed a number of changes to the dPS. All the proposed changes were set out in the Schedule of Proposed Modifications to the draft Plan Strategy (January 2021). The proposed changes varied in nature and included minor editing corrections to address typographical errors along with corrections to ensure factual accuracy. Other amendments were included as logical changes to a strategy or policy and/or associated text in order to provide or increase clarification and transparency. A formal public consultation period on these documents ran from 8 January 2021 to 5 March 2021. No respondents commented directly on the addendum to the Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report.

4.0 Screening of Modifications 4.1. In bringing forward the LDP, the Council is committed to ensuring that the needs of Section 75 groups are considered. Therefore, Equality Screening is being carried out at each of the three main stages in the process to establish if an Equality Impact Assessment is required. A Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report was published alongside the dPS and further screening was carried out alongside the Schedule of Proposed Modifications, both of which concluded that an Equality Impact Assessment was not required. 4.2.

As noted above the modifications within Schedule 1A and 1B of DfI’s Direction have already been subject to equality screening, with the exception of the corrections included within the Schedule of Proposed Corrections to the draft Plan Strategy (DPS-144) (see RA054 & RA064 of Schedule 1A) and any minor editing changes made by DfI, both of which fall under MOD55 of Schedule 2.

4.3. The modifications listed in Schedule 2 include changes that have not previously been assessed. In line with our statutory obligations to have due regard to the need to promote equality of opportunity, promote good relations and to promote positive attitudes towards disabled people as well as encouraging their participation in public life, it is imperative for the Council to screen the modifications, as put forward in Schedule 2 of the direction from DfI, in order to identify if they will alter the impact that the dPS was predicted to have on these matters. 4.4. This document assesses the modifications as presented in Schedule 2 of the Direction from DfI. For screening purposes Schedule 2 of DfI’s Direction, containing the 55 modifications directed as being necessary for the adoption of the dPS, has been included in Appendix A of this document. As well as detailing the modifications it also sets out the following: • •

An assessment of whether Schedule 2 modification(s) impact on the overall aim/purpose of the policy as originally assessed; and An assessment of the likely impact on equality of opportunity for Section 75 groups as a result of the Schedule 2 modification(s).

4.5. It is noted that within Schedule 2, MOD55 included provision for the correction of presentational or factual amendments, typographical errors and grammatical errors. Generally, such changes are so minor that they have no bearing on the nature or intent of a strategy or policy, as such it has not been considered proportionate to list them individually. 4.6. Council has reassessed the relevant strategies and policies in light of the modifications in Schedule 2 as well as taking account of any modifications previously considered (i.e., those included in Schedule 1A and 1B) for any differential impact that it may have when compared to the original, as well as the impact of cumulative changes to that strategy or policy. Appendix A has been used as the basis for the completion of the Section 75 Policy Screening Form below. 4.7. This document, which is a second addendum to the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report (September 2019), identifies whether the outcomes of the original screening should be amended as a result of the modifications to the dPS. Therefore, this addendum should be read in conjunction with the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report of the Draft Plan Strategy (September 2019) and its addendum published in January 2021. The reader should also refer, where necessary, to Schedules 1A, 1B and 2 of DfI’s Direction to Council and the PAC’s Independent Examination Report of Mid and East Antrim Borough Council’s Local Development Plan 2030: Draft Plan Strategy.

Section 75 Policy Screening Form Part 1: Policy Scoping - Information about the policy All information provided on pages 7-20 of the Draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report remains relevant. Part 2: Screening Questions A detailed assessment of the likely impact on equality of opportunity is included in Appendix A: Table 1 of this document. What is the likely impact on equality of opportunity for those affected by this policy, for each of the Section 75 equality categories? Appendix A: Table 1 demonstrates that the modifications do not change the aim/purpose of any of the proposed strategies or policies from that previously assessed. As such, the Council’s original assessment of the proposed impact of policies on equality of opportunity for each of the Section 75 equality categories remains unchanged from that stated on pages 22-25 of the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report. This is with the exception of the additional very minor positive impact for all groups as result of modifications to SGS9 and HOU16 identified in the first addendum, and a minor positive impact, identified in this report, for people whose mobility is impaired through modification of OSL4. Are there opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity for people within the Section 75 equalities categories? As a result of the proposed modifications, no opportunities to better promote equality of opportunity are apparent at this stage. Any Section 75 issues which are raised during this consultation process will be considered before any decision is made in respect of the adoption of the plan strategy. To what extent is the policy likely to impact on good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group? Appendix A: Table 1 demonstrates that the modifications do not change the aim/purpose of any of the proposed strategies or policies from that previously assessed. As such, the Council’s original assessment of the proposed impact of policies on good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group remains unchanged from that stated on page 27 of the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report. Are there opportunities to better promote good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group? As a result of the proposed modifications, no further opportunities to better promote good relations between people of different religious belief, political opinion or racial group have been identified over and above those originally stated on page 28 of the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report. Additional Considerations Multiple Identity Further to the proposed modifications and as previously assessed no negative differential impacts have been identified. The overall outworking of the strategic policies and proposals is likely to promote equality of opportunity for people with multiple identities.

Disability Does the policy promote positive attitudes towards disabled people and encourage participation of disabled people in public life? The Council’s original assessment of the ability of the proposed dPS to promote positive attitudes towards disabled people and encourage participation of disabled people in public life remains unchanged from that stated on page 29 of the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report. The modification of OSL4 is positive, as the policy will further provide for people whose mobility is impaired. Part 3: Screening Decision If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment, please provide details of the reasons. Further to the proposed modifications to a number of the individual dPS strategies and policies no impacts on equality of opportunity have been identified on Section 75 groups either individually or cumulatively, therefore the decision has been taken not to conduct an Equality Impact Assessment. It is anticipated the dPS will be of benefit to our citizens including Section 75 groups as it seeks to improve the quality of life for all as set out in our vision. At this stage it has been identified that many of the policies within the dPS will, in fact, be of particular benefit to a number of the Section 75 groups. It is recognised that the LDP Spatial Growth Strategy has spatial implications that may have some potential for differential impacts on the grounds of Religious Belief/Political Opinion. However, the Spatial Growth Strategy is aligned with the regional direction, overall, the Spatial Growth Strategy will be of benefit to everyone. If the decision is not to conduct an equality impact assessment the public authority should consider if the policy should be mitigated, or an alternative policy be introduced. No mitigation is considered necessary at this stage. Mitigation When the public authority concludes that the likely impact is ‘minor’ and an equality impact assessment is not to be conducted, the public authority may consider mitigation to lessen the severity of any equality impact, or the introduction of an alternative policy to better promote equality of opportunity or good relations. Can the policy/decision be amended or changed, or an alternative policy introduced to better promote equality of opportunity and/or good relations? No. If so, give the reasons to support your decision, together with the proposed changes/amendments or alternative policy. Further to the proposed modifications, the Councils previous reasoning provided on page 30 of the draft Equality (Section 75) Screening Report remains relevant.

Part 4: Monitoring Public authorities should consider the guidance contained in the Commission’s Monitoring Guidance for Use by Public Authorities (July 2007). The Commission recommends that where the policy has been amended or an alternative policy introduced, the public authority should monitor more broadly than for adverse impact (See Benefits, P.9-10, paras 2.13 – 2.20 of the Monitoring Guidance). Effective monitoring will help the public authority identify any future adverse impact arising from the policy which may lead the public authority to conduct an equality impact assessment, as well as help with future planning and policy development. Any issues raised during this consultation process will be considered before any decision is made in respect of the adoption of the plan strategy. The LDP will be subject to further equality screening at Local Policies Plan stage. Monitoring and review of the LDP is an integral part of the plan making process. The dPS includes an annual Monitoring and Review Framework which highlights that a five-year review of the LDP will be carried out subsequent to adoption to ensure the policies and proposals are achieving their objectives. There will be further scope for any impacts on Section 75 groups to be considered through this review.

Appendix A

MOD02

MOD03

MOD04

RA003

RA010

RA016

Page/ para number in Draft Plan Strategy

RA002

Policy section within the Draft Plan Strategy

Recommended Amendment number

MOD01

Linked to Council’ s amendment number (if applicable1)

DfI Modification No.

Table 1: Assessment of Impact of Schedule 2 Modifications* on Equality of Opportunity of Section 75 Groups *Schedule 2 – Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Direction – Recommended Amendments table with DfI modifications showing amended Council proposed modifications and new Commissioners changes.

In part PM-003 & also derived from Council evidence

Setting the Context. Section 2.1 Other Strategies and Plans

Page 29, Paragraph 2.1.18

Derived from note District Profile 9 in MEAM005 Section

PM-018 in part with change to reflect headnote wording

Page 38, Paragraph 3.6.6

3.6 Infrastructure Economic Page 72, Development Strategy Introduction Paragraph 5.4.11

CS2 Special Countryside Areas

Page 94 paragraph 5.9.12

PAC Recommended Amendment

Add bullet points to list stating:

•

Northern Ireland Regional Landscape Character Assessment (NIRLCA) 2016

•

The second Northern Ireland Climate Change Adaption Programme 2019-2024

Amended final sentence to read: The March 2022 update of the NI Water Capital Works Programme identifies four WWTWs for upgrade. Add additional text to the end of paragraph to read: The Council will not only be relying on previously zoned economic development land in their consideration of SGS6: Strategic Allocation of land for economic development. New sites for economic development may be identified at the local policies plan stage of the process to fulfil the required allocations within the main towns. The identification of a range and choice of sites will be required as part of the LPP. The evidence base indicates that further land is likely to be required to fulfil that aim in Ballymena over the plan period. Amend third sentence of paragraph 5.9.12 to read: To this end, Council may require the submission of additional assessments which fully demonstrate that the landscape value and character and unique amenity value of the area has been fully considered and that any adverse impacts can be effectively mitigated.

DfI Modification following the Department’s consideration of the Will the proposed change recommended amendments under Section 12 of the 2011 impact on the aim of the Planning Act policy?

Likely impacts of the proposed changes

DfI directs the Council to modify paragraph 2.1.18, page 29 of the No N/A This is not a policy change. dPS, by adding two additional bullet points to the list in Modification is for purpose accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. of a factual update.

DfI directs the Council to modify the final sentence of paragraph 3.6.6, page 38 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No N/A This is not a policy change. Modification is for purpose of a factual update.

DfI directs the Council to modify by adding text to the end of No paragraph 5.4.11, page 72 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Modification to Introductory Further to modification, there will be no differential text for purposes of Recommended Amendment. coherence and clarification. impact than the original Additional text included to text in terms of its impact on S75 groups. reflect the evidence base more clearly.

DfI directs the Council to modify third sentence of J&A to CS2, paragraph 5.9.12, page 94 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to J&A for Further to modification, coherence with the policy the policy will have no differential impact than wording and in relation additional assessments that the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups. may be required. The modification does not change the aim/ purpose of the strategy from that originally assessed.

Proposed Modifications (PMs) as contained within DPS-143 Schedule of Proposed Modifications or Corrections within DPS-144 Schedule of Proposed Corrections submitted to DFI on 25th June 2021 or submitted as a Matter Arising during the public examination hearing sessions. The recommended amendment may reflect a revised wording to that originally suggested by MEABC following consideration of representations, response to questions and discussions under the various topic areas at the IE hearing sessions. In these circumstances the original Council reference is generally referred to in column 2 of this table as linked ‘in part’ to the recommended amendment or the column contains a specific explanation.

MOD05

RA017

In part CS3 Areas of encompasses the Constraint on following PMs, PM- high Structures 019, PM-020, PM022, PM- 024, PM- 025, PM-027, PM028 and PM030.

CS3 Title And Page 96 Headnote

Amend the headnote of CS3 Areas of Constraint on High Structures to read:

DFI direct the council not to carry out PM-019 change to CS3 heading. The Heading should remain as is written in the draft Plan Strategy, page 96 of the dPS, for clarity the title should say:

Areas of Constraint on High Structures (ACHS) are designated CS3 Areas of Constraint on High Structures. at the following locations (refer to District Proposals Map) in order to protect the distinctive and vulnerable landscapes and the environmental assets associated with the natural and DfI also directs council to modify the headnote of CS3 Areas historic environment of the following areas: of Constraint on High Structures, page 96 of the DPS, in • Islandmagee East and Whitehead accordance with the PAC Recommended Amendment. •

Slemish Mountain

•

Eastern Garron Plateau and Scarp Slopes

•

Knockdhu, Sallagh Braes, Scawt Hill to Glenarm Headland

•

Carrickfergus Escarpment

•

Lough Beg and the Lower Bann Rover Corridor

Note: Typographical error in bullet points. This should say ‘River’ rather than ‘Rover’. DFI direct Council to modify this under MOD55.

No Modification to policy Further to modification, wording for coherence, and the policy will have no consistency with other differential impact than polices in the dPS and to the original in terms of its assist the implementation of impact on S75 groups. the policy. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Structures above 15m to up to 25m in Height Within all of these areas, in exceptional circumstances structures above 15 metres in height above original ground level and up to 25 metres in height above original ground level will be permitted where it can be demonstrated that: a)

The structure does not interrupt key views from public vantage points;

There is a need for a structure of this height;

There are no suitable alternative sites located outside of the designated area; and

Appropriate mitigation measures are in place to minimise the impact of the proposed structure on the designated area.

Structures above 25m in Height Structures that exceed 25 metres in height above original ground level, will only be permitted if it can be clearly demonstrated that criteria a) – d) are met and the proposal is of such regional importance, as to outweigh any detrimental impact on landscape character, any distinctive landscape feature and/or heritage interest in the designated area. All development proposals for new structures within these areas will be required to accord with other provisions of the LDP and meet the General Policy GP1. Within Policy GP1 criterion f) any provisions which refer to buildings will also apply to structures in the context of this policy. MOD06

RA018

In part incorporates PM-021

CS3 Areas of Constraint on high Structures

Page 97, Paragraph 5.9.20

Amend Paragraph 5.9.20 to read: The aim of this policy is to ensure that those unique or distinctive features of the landscape, including key views that contribute to its character, value, distinctiveness, sense of place, and quality are protected from adverse impacts related to the introduction or proliferation of high structures. Distinctive landscape features can include landforms, natural heritage assets and historic environment assets. Safeguarding the distinctive character of these areas is

Refer to final row under MOD06 for Direction

No Modification to J&A for Further to modification, coherence or to assist in the the policy will have no implementation of the differential impact than policy. the original in terms of its The modification does not impact on S75 groups. change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

important to maintain the identity of the Borough and in providing opportunities for sustainable tourism growth in line with Council’s strategic priorities. MOD06

RA019

In part incorporates PM-023

CS3 Areas of Constraint on high Structures

Page 97, Paragraph 5.9.22

Amend paragraph 5.9.22 to read: Wind turbines and other structures up to 15m in height may be accommodated on suitable sites within these designated areas and such turbines could serve local farms and remote rural communities. Development within these parameters may be considered acceptable provided all other relevant policy tests within the LDP are met. The protection of key views of landscape or heritage assets within ACHS and their settings is particularly important. Any development proposals which individually or cumulatively prejudice the overall integrity of an ACHS will be refused.

MOD06

RA020

RA022

In part Incorporates PM-026

CS3 Areas of Constraint on high Structures

Page 97 paragraph 5.9.21

Amend wording of paragraph 5.9.21 to read:

In part Incorporates PM-031

CS3 Areas of Constraint on high Structures

Page 97 After paragraph 5.9.20

After paragraph 5.9.20 insert:

Within designated ACHS there will be a presumption against development that exceeds 15m in height, for example, wind turbines, electricity pylons or telecommunication masts/equipment. There will also a presumption against other types of development that will adversely impact on landscape character, key views by virtue of their visual prominence or any distinctive landscape feature or heritage asset in the designated area. Such development could potentially include overhead electricity cables or other types of energy infrastructure.

High structures can be difficult to integrate into the landscape, particularly in landscapes that are visually highly sensitive. ACHS are, visually, some of the most sensitive areas within the Borough. Therefore, it is likely that most proposals within an ACHS will be required to be accompanied by an objective assessment that will aid Council’s analysis of any potential visual impact, with the level of detail being commensurate with the nature and scale of the proposal. Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIA) are one example of such an assessment.

MOD06

RA023

In part incorporates CS3 Areas of PM-032 Constraint on high Structures

Page 98 Paragraph 5.9.25

Remove the word ‘also’ from the first line in paragraph 5.9.25 and insert additional text to end of first sentence of paragraph 5.9.25 to read: For example, where the proposal is to serve a recognised telecommunications ‘not spot’ or is for essential electricity transmission or supply.

PM-034

Page 98 Paragraph 5.9.26

5.9.26. Structures that exceed 25 metres in height will only be granted planning permission in exceptional circumstances where it can be demonstrated that they are of such regional (significance) importance as to outweigh any adverse impact within the designated area and if the policy tests of criteria d-f are met. All proposals for

structures exceeding 15 metres in height must demonstrate that appropriate mitigation measures can be put in place to mitigate the impact of the development in the designated area. This policy should be read in conjunction with other relevant policies in the LDP, in particular Policy RE1 Renewable Energy Development and Policy (TOC1) TEI1 Telecommunications (Development and Overhead Cables) Electricity Infrastructure.” DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A of Policy CS3 Areas of Constraint on High Structures (pages 97 and 98 of the draft Plan Strategy) in accordance with the PACs updated IE Recommended Amendment, Appendix 6 Revision A, Annex 1 dated, 12/5/2023, which are inclusive of the PACs Recommended Amendments. For Clarity the whole J&A section of policy CS3 (pages 97 and 98 of the DPS) should read: Justification and Amplification

5.9.17. Within the rural area of Mid and East Antrim some areas can adequately accommodate the development of public utilities and high structures without unduly compromising visual amenity and local character. However, in line with the SPPS it is important to identify those landscapes which are distinctive and vulnerable to this particular form of development, and to apply a cautionary approach in the determination of such proposals.

5.9.18. The areas designated under this policy are supported by the evidence contained in the Landscape Character Assessment within Technical Supplement 10 Countryside Assessment. 5.9.19. Landscape impacts are defined as changes in the fabric, character and quality of the landscape as a result of the development. Visual impacts relate solely to changes in available views of the landscape, and the effects of those changes on people. This includes the impact on visual amenity as enjoyed or experienced by receptors – for example from a main transport route, a settlement or a tourist attraction. The definition of all these designated areas is therefore informed not only by inherent landscape quality and character, but also by the views available from the main receptor vantage points. 5.9.20 The aim of this policy is to ensure that those unique or distinctive features of the landscape, including key views which contribute to its character, value, distinctiveness, sense of place, and quality are protected from adverse impacts related to the introduction or proliferation of high structures. Distinctive landscape features can include landforms, natural heritage assets and historic environment assets. Safeguarding the distinctive character of these areas is important to maintain the identity of the Borough and in providing opportunities for sustainable tourism growth in line with Council’s strategic priorities. 5.9.21 High structures can be difficult to integrate into the landscape, particularly in landscapes that are visually highly sensitive. ACHS are, visually, some of the most sensitive areas within the Borough. Therefore, it is likely that most proposals within an ACHS will be required to be accompanied by an objective assessment that will aid Council’s analysis of any potential visual impact, with the level of detail being commensurate with the nature and scale of the proposal. Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIA) are one example of such an assessment. 5.9.22. Within designated ACHS there will be a presumption against development that exceeds 15m in height, for example, wind turbines, electricity pylons or telecommunication masts/equipment. There will also be a presumption against other types of development that will adversely impact on landscape character, key views by or any distinctive landscape feature or heritage asset in the designated area. Such development could potentially include overhead electricity cables or other types of energy infrastructure. 5.9.23. Wind turbines and other structures up to 15m in height may be accommodated on suitable sites within these designated areas and such turbines could serve local farms and remote rural communities. Development within these parameters may be considered acceptable provided all other relevant policy tests within the LDP are met. Within ACHS, the protection of landscape or heritage assets and their settings and key views of these assets is particularly important. Any development proposals which individually or cumulatively prejudice the overall integrity of an ACHS will be refused. 5.9.24. The height of turbines or other such infrastructure relative to other structures in the landscape is a key consideration in terms of landscape ‘fit’. The 15m threshold is considered appropriate because this relates well to the size of the existing buildings in the landscape, including typical farm buildings. A single turbine of this height is most likely to be used to contribute to the energy needs of a residential house, farm or other rural based small business. It is relatively easy to accommodate in the landscape, if sited to cluster with existing buildings. Such turbines are also more easily screened or concealed by low ridges and undulating landform and tree cover. 5.9.25. Minimising the sustained visibility of micro-turbines helps limit detrimental cumulative visual impacts. Therefore, it is preferable to site on the leeward sides of ridges and prominent hill slopes, rather than on summits and high points. In circumstances where the scope for concealing and screening turbines is limited, providing broad consistency of turbine design, height and location can help mitigate against potential visual impacts. 5.9.26. The policy allows for structures above 15 metres but less than 25 metres in height in circumstances where there is a need for height and where it is demonstrated that there are no suitable alternative sites outside of any designated area. For example, where the proposal is to serve a recognised telecommunications ‘not spot’ or is for essential electricity transmission or supply. Such cases will be assessed on their merits. While due account will be taken of technical reasons for exceeding the 15 metre threshold, the infrastructure provider will also need to justify why an alternative site outside of the designated area is not feasible. The lack of land ownership outside of the designated area will not of itself be regarded as sufficient justification in this context. 5.9.27. Structures that exceed 25 metres in height will only be granted permission in exceptional circumstances where it can be demonstrated that they are of such regional importance as to outweigh any adverse impact within the designated area and if policy tests a-d are met. All proposals for structures exceeding 15 metres in height must demonstrate that appropriate mitigation measures can be put in place to mitigate the impact of the development in the designated area. This policy should be read in conjunction with other relevant policies in the LDP, in particular Policy RE1 Renewable Energy Development and Policy TEI1 Telecommunications and Electricity Infrastructure. Note: Paragraph numbers differ from those in DPS from paragraph 5.9.21 on to reflect PM-031 which inserts a new paragraph. Also, small grammatical changes as underlined above have been made, for clarity.

MOD07

RA025

MEAM 18

CS5 Antrim Coast and Page 100 Glens AONB Headnote

Remove the reference to ‘its setting’ from paragraphs one and DfI directs the Council to modify reference to ‘its setting’ within No paragraph one and two of CS5, page 100 of the dPS, in accordance Modification to policy and two of CS5. with this PAC Recommended Amendment. J&A for purposes of consistency. For clarity paragraph one of CS5 on page 100 of dPS, should The modification does not read: change the aim/purpose of Development proposals within the Antrim Coast and Glens Area of the policy from that Outstanding Natural beauty (AONB), will only be permitted …… originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

And paragraph two of CS5 page 100 of dPS, should read: All new development proposals within the AONB must meet the general Policy……. DFI also direct council to modify paragraph 5.9.36 on page 101 of the dPS, to delete reference to CS1 replace with CS2 as set out in MEAM18. MOD08

RA031

PM-042 in part

ECD1 Economic Development in Settlements

Page 124 Headnote

No Modification to policy, Large and Small Towns further text included in policy box for clarification Amend the Industrial Uses Section to read: DfI also directs the Council to amend the Industrial uses Section and coherence to reflect Industrial Uses and Storage and Distribution Uses of ECD1, page 124 of the dPS in accordance with the PAC what was always intended Recommended Amendment with a further amendment to reflect and already defined in A development proposal for a class B2 or B3 Industrial Use or B4 the correct title of Class B4 ‘Storage or distribution’ uses. The title footnote. Storage or Distribution Use will be permitted on land zoned for of this section shall therefore read “Industrial Uses and Storage or The modification does not such purposes in the LDP, or in an existing industrial area, Distribution Uses.” change the aim/ purpose of provided it is of a scale, nature and from appropriate to the the policy from that DfI also directs the Councils to amend the ‘Villages and Small location. Elsewhere within large and small towns, such originally assessed. Settlements’ section of ECD1, page 124 of the dPS in accordance proposals will be determined on their individual merits. with this PAC recommended amendment. Add to the Heading Towns to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify the Heading ‘Towns’ within Policy ECD1, page 124 of the dPS, to say ‘Towns and Small Towns’ to reflect the terminology used throughout the dPS.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

For clarity this section should read as follows: Villages and Small Settlements A development proposal for Class B1 business use, B2 or B3 industrial use or B4 storage or distribution use located in lower tier settlements in the settlement hierarchy will be permitted where all the following criteria are met. a) the proposal is commensurate with the LDP Spatial Growth Strategy; b) the nature, scale and form/design of the proposal is appropriate to the character of the settlement; and c) the proposal is compatible with adjacent and nearby land uses. All new proposals and those seeking to extend an existing Class B1, B2, B3 or B4 use or premises within settlements will also be required to meet the General Policy and accord with other provisions of the LDP. MOD09

RA032

MEAM008 in part

ECD1 Economic Development in Settlements

Page 125,

Amend third sentence to read:

Paragraph 7.1.10

Where there is no town centre boundary defined within a large or small town, new business will be directed to within the urban footprint’.

DfI directs the Council to modify third sentence of paragraph 7.1.10, J&A on page 125 of the dPS, as follows:

No Modification to J&A for purposes of coherence to Where there is no town centre boundary defined within a town or refer to the term ‘urban small town, new business will be directed to within the urban footprint’ which is already footprint’. defined within the dPS. The modification does not change the aim/ purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

MOD10

MOD11

RA033

RA036

PM-044 & in part PM-049 & MEAM009

ECD1 Economic Development in Settlements

Page 124, Paragraph 7.1.13

ECD4 Page 128 Economic, Agricultural Headnote and Forestry (d) & (i) & Development in the Paragraph Countryside 7.1.25

DfI directs the Council to modify paragraph 7.1.13, J&A page 124 of the DPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Land will not be zoned for economic development purposes in Amendment. our small towns both in the interests of flexibility and due to Note: Page number in 5th column should say page 125. small towns being located in close proximity to main towns where we aim to focus economic development growth. In the lower tier settlements, comprising of villages and small settlements favourable consideration will be given to small scale proposals that will not compromise the LDP Spatial Growth Strategy and provided the proposal is of a scale, nature and design appropriate to the character of the settlement. Adjust paragraph 7.1.13 to read:

Amend criterion i) under (d) small start-up projects to read: There is a locational need. Amend third paragraph of 7.1.25 to read: The applicant will be required to demonstrate the locational need for, and the economic or community regeneration benefits, of the proposal.

No Modification to J&A for purposes of coherence and to remove ambiguity. The modification does not change the aim/ purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy ECD4, subheading No d) Small Rural Start-up Projects, criteria i), page 128 of the dPS, in Modification to policy and Further to modification, J&A for purposes of the policy will have no accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. clarification and consistency. differential impact than For clarity this should read: The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim/ purpose of impact on S75 groups. d) Small Rural Start-up projects the policy from that A firm proposal to develop a small community enterprise centre or originally assessed. a small rural start-up industrial enterprise on land outside a village or small settlement will be permitted where the applicant has demonstrated that all of the following criteria are met:

i) There is a locational need; DfI also directs the Council to modify the second last sentence of paragraph 7.1.25 of the J&A to Policy ECD4, page 130 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. MOD12

RA038

PM-046 & amend title ref

Page 129, ECD4 Economic, Agricultural Headnote Paragraph and Forestry 7.1.29 Development in the Countryside

Amend ECD4 Criterion g) The Conversion and Re-Use of an Existing Building to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy ECD4, subheading g) The Conversion and Re-Use of an Existing Building, page A proposal for the conversion and re-use of an existing building 129 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. for economic development use will be assessed under Policy HE8 Unlisted Locally Important Building or Vernacular Building. The policy title should also be amended within the second sentence of paragraph 7.1.29

MOD13

MOD14

RA040

RA041

PM-048

ECD4 Page 130, Economic, Agricultural Paragraph and Forestry 7.1.24 Development in the Countryside

MEAM10 in Policy RET1 Retail in part Town Centres (encompassing PM-50 & PM- 051)

Page 134, Policy Headnote

Amend penultimate (4th) sentence in paragraph of 7.1.24 to read:

DfI also directs the Council to modify the policy title within the second sentence of paragraph 7.1.29 of the J&A to Policy ECD4, page 131 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. DfI directs the Council to modify paragraph 7.1.24 of Policy ECD4, page 130 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

The latter test will require evidence of the exploration of alternative sites in urban areas, and full consideration of all environmental and transport impacts. Amend Policy RET1 Retail in Town Centres to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy RET1 Retail in Town Centres, page 134 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Proposals for retail development will be permitted within town Recommended Amendment. centre (footnote 26) and small town centre boundaries where defined. For other locations, a sequential approach to site DfI also directs the Council to modify the J&A of RET1, selection will be applied in the following order of preference: paragraph 7.2.14, page 134 of the dPS, in accordance with this a) Edge of Town Centre boundary (i.e. adjoining it or PAC Recommended Amendment. normally within 300m); and

b) Out of Centre locations (i.e. outside the town centre

No Modification to policy and J&A for purposes of consistency. The modification does not change the aim/ purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

No As assessed in previous addendum.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

No Modifications to policy and Further to modification, J&A for purposes of the policy will have no consistency and to improve differential impact than coherence and effectiveness. the original in terms of its The modification does not impact on S75 groups. change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

boundary but within settlement limits) where sites are

accessible by walking, cycling and public transport. Proposals for other town centre uses (cultural and community facilities, leisure, entertainment and businesses) shall also follow the same sequential approach. There will be a presumption to refuse a retail application outside town centre and small town centre boundaries unless the applicant can demonstrate that:

a) Alternative sites within these locations are either not suitable, not viable or not available (or any combination thereof), and

b) There is a qualitative and/or quantitative need for the proposal, and

c) There will be no significant adverse impact on any centre within the whole catchment. All proposals must meet the General Policy and accord with other provisions of the LDP. Amend Paragraph 7.2.14 to read: Proposals for retail and other town centre uses (footnote 27) will therefore only be considered outside the town centre or small town centre boundaries when the sequential test has been undertaken. Preference will be given to edge of centre land before considering an out of centre site provided it has been demonstrated that there is a need for retail provision and that there will be no significant adverse impact on the existing centre. Footnote 26: Until such times as the town centre boundaries may be amended through the adopted Local Policies Plan, the town centre boundaries and the commercial core designations as defined in the existing plans will be the town centre boundaries. MOD15

RA043

PM-056 in part

Policy RET2 Retail Impact Assessment

Page 136 Paragraph 7.2.21

Paragraph 7.2.21 to be replaced and to read: Factors to be addressed in a retail impact and assessment of need include:

a) The impact of the proposal on trade and turnover for both convenience and comparison goods traders, and the impact on town centre turnover overall for all centres within the catchment of the proposal;

DfI directs the Council to modify paragraph 7.2.21, J&A of Policy RET2, page 136 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to the J&A for Further to modification, purposes of clarification and the policy will have no consistency. differential impact than The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim/purpose of impact on S75 groups. the policy from that originally assessed.

b) The impact of the proposal on the existing committed and planned public and private sector investment and investor confidence in the town centre(s);

c) The impact of the proposals on the delivery of the planned/allocated sites and the LDP strategy;

d) The impact on the vitality and viability of existing centres including consideration of the local context. This should take into account existing retail mix and the diversity of other facilities and activities;

e) Cumulative impact taking account of committed and planned development, including plan commitments within the town centre and wider area; and

f) A review of local economic impacts. Where town centre is referred to this means town centres, small town centres or any centre defined at footnote 26. MOD16

RA044

MEAM11 (Incorporating the omission of PM053, and including PM- 054, PM-055 and PM-057)

Policy RET2 Retail Impact Assessment

Page 136, Policy Headnote & Paragraph 7.2.19

Amend Policy RET 2 to read: All applications, including extensions for retail development and town centre uses, above the thresholds identified below, must be accompanied by a Retail Impact Assessment (RIA) where the proposal is located outside town centre or small town centre boundaries.

• Above 750sq.m gross external area outside Ballymena and Larne town centre boundaries.

• Above 500sq.m gross external area outside Carrickfergus town centre and small town centre boundaries.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy RET2, Page 136 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to policy for the Further to modification, purpose of coherence and the policy will have no implementation of the differential impact than policy. the original in terms of its The modification does not impact on S75 groups. change the aim/ purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. .

Outside town centre, and small town centre boundaries, but within the towns settlement limit, permission may be granted for a small scale convenience shop which does not exceed 100sq.m gross external area, where it can be demonstrated that: a) it meets a defined local need which cannot be met within an existing centre; and b) it will not adversely affect the vitality and viability of existing centres within its catchment. The Retail Impact Assessment should provide a proportionate response to the proposal being sought and should incorporate an assessment of need, impact and the sequential approach. Where proposals are considered to cause significant adverse impacts on any of the relevant criteria, or where in balancing overall impacts on each of the relevant criteria, the proposal is judged to be harmful, then it should be refused. Add the following two sentences to the end of Paragraph 7.2.19: A Retail Impact Assessment is required where a proposed extension would result in the overall development exceeding the relevant thresholds above. Where an applicant is required to undertake a Retail Impact Assessment for a proposal which is outside a small town centre boundary, then the assessment must consider the retail impact on any centre within its catchment.

MOD17

RA045

MEAM12 in part (ref PM-058)

Policy RET3 Retail in Villages, Small centres and Local Centres

Page 137, Policy headnote

Amend Policy RET3 to read: A proposal for retail development within a village, small settlement or local centre will be permitted provided:

It is to meet a local need and which helps to sustain local communities; and

It is in keeping with the scale, nature and design appropriate to the character of the settlement or centre.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy RET 3, page 137 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to policy for the Further to modification, purposes of consistency and the policy will have no Note: In accurate reference to the title in the 4th Column, it should to assist with differential impact than say: Policy RET3 Retail in Villages, Small Settlements and Local the original in terms of its implementation of the Centres. impact on S75 groups. policy. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy form that originally assessed.

Proposals for retail extensions to a local centre will have to meet a) and b) above and will only be permitted where the applicant has demonstrated the proposal is consistent with the local centres complimentary role and function to the town centres (or small town centres) in the catchment and that no adverse impact will result on those centres. All proposals must meet the general policy and accord with other provisions of the LDP. MOD18

RA046

RET4 Rural Shops and Roadside Service Facilities

Page 138 Policy headnote

DfI directs the Council to modify criterion a) under the Roadside No Service Facilities section within Policy RET4, page 138 of the dPS, Modification to policy for All proposals must demonstrate there is no unacceptable in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. purposes of coherence and adverse impact upon the vitality and viability of an existing consistency. For clarity this should read: centre within the retail catchment. The modification does not Remove this reference from criterion a) in the roadside service Roadside Service facilities change the aim/purpose of facilities section to read as follows: Development of roadside service facilities in the open countryside the policy from that originally assessed. will only be accepted if: a) There is a clear indication of need. Above the last sentence within the headnote insert:

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

a) There is a clear indication of need; and DfI also directs the Council to modify Policy RET4, above the last sentence within the headnote, page 138 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. For clarity this last paragraph of the policy headnote should read: All proposals must demonstrate there is no unacceptable adverse impact upon the vitality and viability of an existing centre within the retail catchment. All proposals must meet the General Policy and accord with other provisions of the LDP. MOD19

RA049

MEAM13

Policy TOU5 Hotels, Guest Houses and Tourist Hostels in the Countryside

Page 146 Policy headnote

Within section c) New Build Hotel, Guest House or Tourist Hostel on the periphery of a Settlement amend to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify section c) iv) New Build Hotel, No Further to modification, Guest House or Tourist Hostel on the periphery of a Settlement of Modification to policy ensures a coherent approach the policy will have no Policy TOU5, page 146 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC the development is on the periphery of the settlement, but will in implementation and differential impact than Recommended Amendment. not dominate it, adversely affect landscape setting, or otherwise consistency of terminology the original in terms of its contribute to urban sprawl. throughout the policy. impact on S75 groups. The modification does not Also amend the third bullet point in this section to read: change the aim/purpose of the policy from that • an undeveloped site on the periphery of the originally assessed. settlement where the development could be visually integrated into the landscape.

MOD20

RA058

MEAM14

PM-074

MOD21

PM-075

Policy MIN1 Mineral Development Extraction and Processing of Hard Rock and Aggregates

Page 157,

Amend first sentence to read:

Paragraph 7.4.16

Whilst there is not a general presumption against mineral development in the AONB, Council will exercise a cautious approach within this area.

Policy MIN1

Page 156157

There is no PAC recommended amendment.

Mineral Development Extraction and Policy headnote Processing of Hard and Rock and Aggregates Paragraph 7.4.15

DfI directs the Council to modify first sentence of paragraph 7.4.16 of J&A to Policy MIN1, page 157 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to J&A for Further to modification, purposes of consistency and the policy will have no coherence. differential impact than The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim/purpose of impact on S75 groups. the policy from that originally assessed.

DFI directs Council to withdraw PM-074 and PM-075 in accordance with paragraph 11.57 of the PAC IE consideration report and retain references to ‘quality’, page 156-157, as written within the dPS.

No The direction withdraws Further to modification, modifications put forward by the policy will have no the Council therefore these differential impact than elements of policy and J&A the original in terms of its remain as originally impact on S75 groups. assessed.

For clarity, these are: Policy MIN1 headnote: “c) Landscape quality and visual amenity. Paragraph 7.4.15, first sentence: “Whilst potentially difficult to reconcile with this form of development, the protection of landscape quality and visual amenity will be afforded due weight in decision-making.”

MOD22

MOD23

RA059

RA061

PM-080

MEAM15

Policy MIN1 Mineral Development Extraction and Processing of Hard Rock and Aggregates

Page 157,

Policy MIN2 Valuable Minerals

Page 158,

Paragraph 7.4.14

Paragraph 7.4.18 & Glossary

Reword first sentence to read: Any mineral development that could impact on a European Designated Site must demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Regulation 43(1) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1995 (as amended), commonly referred to as HRA. Remove first sentence of 7.4.18 and amend second sentence to read: Where metalliferous or non-metalliferous minerals licenced by DfE or Crown Estates are found and considered economically viable to extract, there will not be a presumption against their exploitation in any area of the Borough, except for Special Countryside Areas.

Amend definition of Valuable Minerals in Glossary at page 132 to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify first sentence of paragraph 7.4.14 of J&A to Policy MIN1, page 157 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to J&A for purposes of clarification. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI directs the Council to modify by removing the first sentence and amending the second sentence of paragraph 7.4.18 J&A to Policy MIN2, page 158 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to the J&A and Further to modification, glossary for the purposes of the policy will have no clarification and coherence. differential impact than The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim/purpose of impact on S75 groups. the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI also directs the Council to modify the definition of Valuable Minerals in the Glossary at Page 312 of the dPS and the spelling error underlined (licensed rather than licenced), in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. Note: the PAC typo regarding page number of the Glossary and spelling of ‘licenced’ to ‘licensed’, within the RAs. This has been amended above.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

Valuable Minerals: Metalliferous or non- metalliferous minerals licensed by DfE or Crown Estates which are particularly valuable to the economy.

MOD24

RA065

PM-090 superseded by MEAM 15

Policy MIN5 Area of Salt Reserve, Carrickfergus

Page 161, Paragraph 7.4.29 &

7.4.30

PM-091 in part

MOD25

MOD26

RA066

RA067

MEAM16

PM-093

Policy MIN6 Page 162 Development at Risk of Paragraph Subsidence due to past 7.4.31 or present underground mineral extraction

Amend second sentence of 7.4.31 to read: These areas should not be developed in the interests of public safety.

Policy MIN7 Peat Extraction

Amend first and second sentence to read:

Page 165, Paragraph 7.4.36

MOD27

RA070

MEAM23

DfI directs the Council to modify the first sentence of paragraph No 7.4.30 of J&A to Policy MIN5, page 161 of the dPS, in Modification to J&A for Further to modification, Where planning permission is granted for surface development purposes of clarification and accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. the policy will have no in this area, and where Council perceives a risk of subsidence coherence. differential impact than from either shafts or mining, an informative will be attached to DFI also directs Council to withdraw PM-090 in accordance with The modification does not the original in terms of its the PAC IE consideration report paragraph 11.64 and the updated change the aim/purpose of the consent indicating the potential risk of subsidence. impact on S75 groups. MEAM 15 (see above MOD23) and retain the paragraph as written the policy from that within the dPS. originally assessed. Amend first sentence of paragraph 7.4.30 to read:

Policy HOU1 Quality in New Residential Development in Settlements

Page 174 Paragraph 8.1.14

DfI directs the Council to modify the second sentence of paragraph 7.4.31 of J&A to Policy MIN6, page 162 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to J&A for purposes of coherence. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

DfI directs the Council to modify the first and second sentence of No paragraph 7.4.36 of J&A to Policy MIN7, page 165 of the dPS, as Modification to J&A for Further to modification, Accordingly, there will be a presumption against commercial follows: purposes of coherence. The the policy will have no peat extraction for new sites, extensions to existing sites and modification does not differential impact than renewal of extant permissions will not be permitted. Exceptions Accordingly, there will be a presumption against commercial peat change the aim/purpose of the original in terms of its are limited to sites where the peatland is already degraded and extraction for new sites, extensions to existing sites and renewal of the policy from that impact on S75 groups. not reasonably capable of restoration and where there is little extant permissions. Exceptions are limited to sites where the originally assessed. conservation value. peatland is already degraded and not reasonably capable of restoration and where there is little conservation value. Insert italic text into paragraph 8.1.14 to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify paragraph 8.1.14 of J&A to Policy No HOU1, page 174 of the dPS, by inserting italic text just before the Modification to J&A for ……houses are located within a designated area. Where an third last sentence of this paragraph, in accordance with this PAC purposes of coherence. applicant is required to submit a design and access statement The modification does not Recommended Amendment. and a design concept statement, it will be acceptable for all the change the aim/purpose of For clarity it should be inserted as follows: relevant information to be contained in one document. the policy from that originally assessed. 8.1.14 ….houses are located within a designated area. Where an

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

applicant is required to submit a design and access statement and a design concept statement, it will be acceptable for all the relevant information to be contained in one document. Where council grants outline planning permission for residential development based on indicative plans, a condition will be imposed requiring that any reserved matters………

MOD28

RA074

MEAM26

Policy HOU5 Page 178 Affordable Housing in Policy HOU5 Settlements Policy Headnote

Insert additional text after the second bullet point to read: Where it is demonstrated that a development is not viable a reduced or alternative provision of affordable housing may be acceptable.

DfI directs the Council to modify the second bullet point of Policy No Modification to policy for HOU5, page 178 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC purposes of coherence and Recommended Amendment. effectiveness. Viability is a normal planning material consideration at planning application stage. The modification to the policy expressly sets this out. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that previously assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups

MOD29

MOD30

RA078

RA079

MEAM30

PM-105 in part

Policy HOU8 Travellers Accommodation

Page 182 Policy HOU8 headnote

Policy HOU9 Page 184 Replacement Dwelling Policy HOU9 headnote

Insert Italic text into Policy HOU8 to read: Where a need is identified for a transit site or a serviced site, which cannot readily be met within an existing settlement in the locality, a proposal will be required to meet the requirements of criteria a to c of Policy HOU16 Affordable Housing in the Countryside.

Remove policy section on listed dwelling from headnote.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy HOU8, page 182 of the dPS, by inserting italic text just after criterion b), in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to Policy Further to modification, provides clarification that it the policy will have no is the sequential location differential impact than test of Policy HOU16 that is the original in terms of its being referred to and to impact on S75 groups. assist in the implementation of the policy. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy HOU9, page 184 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to policy and Further to modification, J&A for purposes of the policy will have no Amend headnote text related to Non listed vernacular dwelling DFI also directs the Council to modify Policy HOU9, page 184 of consistency and coherence differential impact than to read: the dPS, to remove the paragraph, sub-titled Listed Dwelling from as the text to be removed the original in terms of its the Policy headnote, in accordance with paragraph 12.40 of the was directional in nature. UnListed Vernacular Dwelling impact on S75 groups. PAC IE Report. Replacement of listed All proposals for the replacement of an unlisted vernacular buildings will still be For Clarity this paragraph is: dwelling will be assessed against this policy and the policy considered under Policy HE4. The modification does not provisions of Policy HE8 Unlisted Locally Important Building or Listed Dwelling change the aim/purpose of Vernacular Building Planning permission will not be granted for the replacement of a the policy from that listed dwelling unless there are exceptional reasons, see Policy HE4 originally assessed. Listed Buildings - Demolition of a Listed building. Furthermore, DFI also direct the deletion of paragraph 8.1.55 of the J&A of Policy HOU 9, page 185, of the dPS, for consistency.

MOD31

RA081

Policy OSL4 Open Space in New Residential Developments

MOD32

RA085

Policy TR3 New Transport Schemes

Page 198 Headnote

Page 218, Paragraph 9.1.26

Amend criteria iii) to read: iii) it is designed, wherever possible, to be multi-functional and take account of the needs of people with disabilities or whose mobility is impaired

Amend paragraph 9.1.26 to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify criteria iii) of Policy OSL4, page 198 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. Note Omission of word in the Policy title in 4th column, it should say: Policy OSL 4 Public Open space in New Residential Developments.

DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.1.26 of Policy TR3, page 218 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC A guidance framework on planning agreements and developer Recommended Amendment. contributions will be developed by the Council in the future. Until that time the matter of what will be required to be delivered in each instance will be agreed between the Council and the applicant on a case by case basis.

No Modification to Policy Impact of the modification providing clarification that is positive, as the policy equality of access for the will further provide for mobility impaired should be people whose mobility is considered in the provision impaired. of public open space in new residential environments. The modification does not change the aim/purpose from that originally assessed. No Modification to J&A to provide coherence to ensure delivery of a Developer Contributions Framework. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

MOD33

RA086

PM-114 extended for

Footnote 38 re parking Page 221 standards

consistency

Reword Foot note 23, 36 and 38 to read: Currently ‘Parking standards’ (DOE 2005) or as updated. The reference to DCAN 15 ‘or as updated’ should also be added in a consistent manner throughout the document including paragraph 9.1.15.

MOD34

MOD35

RA087

RA089

PM-115

MEAM32 in part

Policy TR6 Parking and Page 222, Servicing Paragraph 9.1.40

Remove from the last 6 lines of paragraph 9.1.40:

Policy TR7 Provision of Page 222, Car Parks TR7 Headnote Criterion a) Paragraph 9.1.41

Add text to the end of criterion a) to read:

Development Control Advice Note (DCAN) 11 ‘Access for People with Disabilities’ (DOE, 1991) and draft Revised Development Control Advice Note (DCAN) 11 ‘Access for All – Designing for an Accessible Environment (DOE, 2003).

DfI directs the Council to modify footnotes 23 (Page 115), 36 (page 220), 38 (page 221) in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. DFI also directs council to modify reference to DCAN 15 ‘or as updated’ within J&A paragraph 9.1.15 of Policy TR1, page 215. This reference should also be amended in a consistent manner throughout the Plan Strategy. DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.1.40 of Policy TR6, page 222 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No This is not a policy change. Modification to footnotes and dPS text for consistency for purposes of future proofing.

No As assessed in previous addendum.

Further to modification, there will be no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

DfI directs the Council to modify criterion a) of Policy TR7, to add No Modification to policy and Further to modification, text to the end of the criterion, on page 222 of the dPS, in or accepted by the Council, in consultation with DfI following J&A for purposes of accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. the policy will have no a robust analysis provided by the applicant. consistency. This is a policy differential impact than For clarity this should read: change in order to be the original in terms of its Add text to the end of paragraph 9.1.41 for consistent with DfI guidance a) the proposal meets a need identified by DFI in the local impact on s75 groups. consistency. Final sentence to read: and provide for greater Transport Plan or accepted by Council, in consultation with DFI flexibility. Proposals will therefore be required to meet a need identified following a robust analysis provided by the applicant. The modification does not in the Local Transport Plan (which will incorporate a Car Parking change the aim/purpose of Strategy), or accepted by the Council, in consultation with DfI, DfI also directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.1.41 of the policy from that following a robust analysis provided by the applicant. originally assessed. Policy TR7, page 223 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

MOD36

RA090

MEAM33

Flood Risk and Drainage Introduction

Amend first sentence of 9.2.3 to read:

Paragraph 9.2.3 and

Within the Mid and East Antrim Council area, Ballymena, Carrickfergus, Larne and Greenisland are all considered to be at DFI also directs council to modify J&A paragraph 9.2.10 of Policy significant risk of flooding. FRD1, page 228, to refer to DFI Flood Maps NI, instead of Amend paragraph 9.2.10 to refer to DfI Flood Maps NI. Strategic Flood Maps NI.

9.2.10

MOD37

RA092

MEAM34 (updates PM118) MEAM35

DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.2.3 of the Introduction to Flood Risk and Drainage, page 224 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

Page 224,

Policy FRD6 Page 235, Development in Paragraph 9.2.49 Proximity to Controlled Page 347 Reservoirs Appendix I Part C

DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.2.49 of Policy FRD6, page 235 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Details of controlled reservoirs in the Borough are available on Recommended Amendment. the Reservoir flood maps produced by DfI Rivers and are DFI also directs council to remove Appendix 1 (Part C – available to view on the DFI website. Controlled Reservoirs within MEABC (as of June 2019), page 347 Omit list of controlled reservoirs from Appendix I (Part of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended C) of dPS. Amendment. Amend paragraph 9.2.49 to read:

Furthermore, DFI direct Council to modify Policy FRD 6 in accordance with MEAM35.

No Factual update to introductory text only.

Further to modification, there will be no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on s75 groups.

No Modification to policy, J&A Further to modification, and Appendix for purposes the policy will have no of consistency. differential impact than These are policy changes in the original in terms of its order to be consistent with impact on s75 groups. existing central government policy. This will widen the scope of the policy as it now extends to include minor development. However, the modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

MOD38

RA093

MEAM36 (supersedes PM120 & PM121)

MOD39

RA099

MEAM38 in part PM-126 in part

Renewable Energy DevelopmentIntroduction

Page 236, Paragraph 9.3.1 Footnote 42

Policy RE1 Renewable Energy Development criterion l)

Page 239 Policy Headnote

Replace last sentence of 9.3.1 to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.3.1 of Introduction to Renewable Energy, page 236 of the dPS, in The Climate Change Act (Northern Ireland) 2022 states that the accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. Department for the Economy (DFE) must ensure that at least DFI also directs council to remove footnote 42, page 236, of the 80% of electricity consumption is from renewable sources by dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. 2030. The latest figures for electricity consumption and renewable energy generation are available on the energy Note: This will affect further footnote numbering within the Plan section of the DFE website. Strategy, which should be modified as directed under MOD55 Remove footnote 42. Note: MOD44 (RA108) will also update paragraph 9.3.2 – Introduction to Renewable Energy.

No Factual update to introductory text only.

Further to modification, no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on s75 groups.

No Modification to policy for the Further to modification, For wind farm development (footnote 44), a separation purposes of consistency with the policy will have no l) For wind farm development (footnote 44), a separation distance existing central government distance of 10 times rotor diameter to occupied properties differential impact than of 10 times rotor diameter to residential properties (including (including temporarily unoccupied), with a minimum policy, however it does not the original in terms of its separation distance of not less than 500m, will generally apply. extant permissions), with a minimum separation distance of not change the aim or purpose impact on s75 groups. less than 500m, will generally apply. The separation distance The separation distance required for single turbines will be of the policy from that required for single turbines will be assessed on a case-by-case originally assessed. assessed on a case-by-case basis. basis. Criterion l) is replaced to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify the last criterion l) of Policy RE1, page 239 of the dPS, as follows:

Note: the footnote reference within this MOD will change, due to changes made under MOD38. This will affect further footnote numbering within the Plan Strategy, which should be modified as directed under MOD55. MOD40

MOD41

RA100

RA103

MEAM39

Policy RE1 Renewable Energy Development

Page 238

Policy RE1 Renewable Energy Development

Page 238

Amend RE1 criteria a) to read:

Policy Headnote

It will not have an unacceptable adverse impact on visual amenity, or landscape character including the cumulative effect of development on the landscape;

Policy Headnote

Amend the fifth paragraph of RE1 headnote to read: A proposal for the re-use, refurbishment or repowering of an existing renewable energy development, including in order to extend its lifespan, will be considered favourably subject to meeting the criteria within this policy.

Amend criteria e) to read: It will not have an unacceptable adverse impact on built heritage or on biodiversity or nature conservation (including cumulative effects).

DfI directs the Council to modify the fifth paragraph of Policy RE1, page 238 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to policy Further to modification, introducing reasonable the policy will have no flexibility to ensure such differential impact than proposals will be considered the original in terms of its favourably whether the impact on S75 groups. lifespan of the development was extended or not. The modification does not change the aim or purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI directs the Council to modify the criteria a) of Policy RE1, page 238 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to Policy for Further to modification, purposes of consistency to the policy will have no ensure proposals fully take differential impact than account of cumulative the original in terms of its effects and the built heritage impact on s75 groups. and for coherence with J&A text. The modification does not change the aim or purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI directs the Council to modify the criteria e) of Policy RE1, page 238 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

MOD42

RA106

PM-133 and PM135 plus additional text insertion

Policy TEI1 Telecommunications and Electricity Infrastructure

Page 244 Headnote

Remove ‘Outside of Special Countryside Areas’ from first sentence of policy headnote.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy TEI1, page 244 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

Remove Fourth, Fifth & Sixth Paragraphs that refer to Areas of Note: MOD05 (RA017), removes PM0-19 which keeps CS3 Constraint on High Structures. heading as ‘Areas of constraint on High Structures’ Add additional sentence at end of first sentence to read: Given the height of some telecommunications and electricity infrastructure CS3 Areas of Constraint on High Structures may also be applicable.

MOD43

MOD44

RA107

RA108

Policy TEI1 Telecommunications and Electricity Infrastructure

Page 244 Headnote

Add a new penultimate sentence to headnote to read:

Introduction to Renewable Energy (9.3)

Page 236 and page 245

Additional text should be added to the justification and DfI directs the Council to modify the J&A paragraph 9.3.2 amplification paragraph 9.3.2 to direct the reader to the policy Introduction to Renewable Energy, page 236 of the dPS, in context for strategic energy delivery at Kilroot and Ballylumford accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. power stations. This should refer to policies RE1, TEI1 and GP1 and the importance of promotion of a more diverse energy mix For clarity paragraph 9.3.2 should read: (See form of words inserted into existing paragraph at 9.3.2) in the drive to provide adequate security of supply.

And Policy TEI1 Telecommunications and Electricity Infrastructure

A proposal by a statutory undertaker for the upgrading or refurbishment of existing energy infrastructure in order to maintain energy security will be considered favourably subject to meeting the criteria within this policy.

The policy context for natural gas infrastructure should be explicitly set out.

DfI directs the Council to modify Policy TEI1, page 244 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

Mid and East Antrim is a key strategic location in relation to Northern Ireland’s energy network given the location of Kilroot and Ballylumford power stations in the Borough. The policy context for strategic energy delivery at Kilroot and Ballylumford power stations are set out in policies RE1, TEI1 and GP1. The importance of promotion of a more diverse energy mix in the drive to provide adequate security of supply should be noted. In addition, Mid and East Antrim’s wind resource and topography has attracted numerous renewable energy projects, including wind farms and large- scale solar farms across the Borough.

No Modification to Policy for Further to modification, purposes of coherence. the policy will have no Cross referencing CS3 differential impact than reflects what was already the original in terms of its intended within the policy impact on S75 groups. requirement to accord with other provisions of the LDP. The modification does not change the aim or purpose of the policy from that originally assessed. No Modification to Policy for the Further to modification, purposes of coherence and the policy will have no consistency. differential impact than The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim or purpose impact on S75 groups. of the policy from that originally assessed. No Modification to Introductory Further to modification, text and J&A for purposes of there will be no differential coherence and clarification. impact than the original in The modification does not terms of its impact on S75 change the aim or purpose groups. of the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI also directs the Council to modify J&A paragraph 9.4.14 of Policy TEI1, page 245 of the dPS, by firstly modifying the paragraph to include amendments under RA105 (Schedule 1A) which includes the new sub-heading ‘Electricity Infrastructure’ and the first sentence of 9.4.14 to be moved to form the start of a new second paragraph under this heading, with additional wording to be inserted in accordance with the PAC recommendation. The subheading ‘Overhead lines’ should now sit above the existing paragraph 9.4.15. For clarity this should read as: Electricity Infrastructure Paragraph 9.4.14 New and upgraded electricity infrastructure including poles, pylons, transformers sub stations and cables are vital in contributing towards these objectives but need to be carefully balanced against the potential impacts on the environment and amenity. Investing in our electricity infrastructure is critical for maintaining

energy security and ensuring we can meet our wider sustainable energy objectives and contribute towards a diverse energy mix. These need to be balanced carefully against the potential impacts on the environment and amenity. Proposals for strategic energy infrastructure and development will be assessed against Policy TEI1, Policy GP1 and other relevant operational policies of this plan as appropriate. Overhead Lines Paragraph 9.4.15 Overhead line, especially those mounted on pylons …… MOD45

RA111

Policy HE1 Archaeological Remains and their settings

Page 267 Paragraph 10.1.15

Add additional text after second sentence of paragraph 10.1.15 to state, where the information can be found on the ‘wide array of prehistoric and historic archaeological sites and monuments’ (referred to in second sentence) to assist in understanding of the baseline position. The HED publication guidance on setting and the historic environment should also be referred to. Cross reference the landscape assessment for the ASAI within other LDP documents.

DfI directs the Council to modify text after the second sentence of No Modification to J&A for J&A paragraph 10.1.15 of Policy HE1, page 267 of the dPS, in purposes of clarification on accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. the implementation of the For Clarity this should read: policy. The modification does not The only ASAI in Mid and East Antrim is designated at Knockdhu, an change the aim/purpose of upland area within the Antrim Coast and Glens AONB (refer to the policy from that District proposals Maps). This unique historic upland landscape originally assessed. contains a wide array of prehistoric and historic archaeological sites and monuments (refer to Sites and Monuments Record | Department for Communities (communities-ni.gov.uk).

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

The landscape of the ASAI is highly vulnerable to insensitive change (see Technical Supplement 10, Appendix A- Landscape Character assessment, Appendix E – Candidate sensitive Landscape Report and Technical Supplement 13, Appendix C- Knockdhu Area of Significant Archaeological Interest (ASAI). Published guidance on setting can also be found in DfC HED Guidance on the setting and the Historic Environment at the following website guidance-onsettingand-the-historic-environment.pdf (communities-ni.gov.uk).

MOD46

RA112

Policy HE1 Archaeological Remains and their settings

Page 267 Paragraph 10.1.15

Reword 4th paragraph of 10.1.15 to read: In particular, the erection of masts, pylons, wind turbines and associated infrastructure, or other large- scale development including large agricultural buildings may adversely impact on the distinctive landscape character and historic landscape assets, including the archaeological sites and monuments.

DfI directs the Council to modify the fourth paragraph of J&A paragraph 10.1.15 of Policy HE1, page 267 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. For Clarity, to include the changes above at MOD45, the whole Paragraph 10.1.15 should now read as follows: The only ASAI in Mid and East Antrim is designated at Knockdhu, an upland area within the Antrim Coast and Glens AONB (refer to District proposals Maps). This unique historic upland landscape contains a wide array of prehistoric and historic archaeological sites and monuments (refer to Sites and Monuments Record | Department for Communities (communities-ni.gov.uk).

No Modification to J&A for purposes of coherence and effectiveness to ensure consistency with the ASAI Statement of Significance. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

The landscape of the ASAI is highly vulnerable to insensitive change (see Landscape assessment for the ASAI). Published guidance on setting can also be found in DfC HED Guidance on the setting and the Historic Environment at the following website guidance-onsetting-and-the-historicenvironment.pdf (communities-ni.gov.uk). In particular, the erection of masts, pylons, wind turbines and associated infrastructure, or other large-scale development including large agricultural buildings may adversely impact on the distinctive landscape character and historic landscape assets, including the archaeological sites and monuments. Accordingly, this regionally significant archaeological site is protected under this policy and through other LDP strategic designations and associated policies (footnote 55). MOD47

RA114

Policy HE3 Listed Page 270 Buildings – Change of Use or Paragraph Extension/Alteration 10.1.28 or Conversion of a Listed Building

Replace ‘historic asset’ with ‘heritage asset’ throughout paragraph

DfI directs the Council to modify paragraph 10.1.28 of Policy HE3, page 270 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to J&A for the Further to modification, purposes of clarification and the policy will have no consistency in wording. differential impact than The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim/purpose of impact on S75 groups. the policy from that originally assessed.

MOD48

RA120

MEAM40 in part

Policy HE8 UnListed Locally Important Buildings or Vernacular Building

Amend first sentence of headnote to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify the first sentence of Policy HE8, page 280 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to Policy for purposes of coherence and effectiveness. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

Page 280 Policy Headnote Paragraph 10.1.57

All development proposals impacting on unlisted locally important buildings and/or vernacular buildings should involve the minimum intervention and should maintain or enhance the existing character of the building and its setting. Amend first sentence 10.1.57 to read: Unlisted locally important buildings, structures or features which have a degree of architectural or historical significance but are not formally designated and can include buildings such as former schoolhouses, churches, mills or former banks.

DfI directs the Council to modify the first sentence of paragraph 10.1.57 of Policy HE8, page 280 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

Further to modification, the policy will have no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

MOD49

MOD50

RA121

RA124

PM-150 & word ‘normally’ incorporated as per MEAM43

Policy HE8 Non Listed Page 280 Locally Important Buildings or Policy Headnote Vernacular Building

Add the following text at the end of the policy:

Policy AD1 The Control Page 286 of Advertisements Third and Fourth Paragraph

Amend the first sentence of AD1 section of Advertisements and Heritage Assets to read:

‘In addition, proposals must meet the General Policy and accord with other provisions of the LDP.’

When assessing applications for consent for the display of an advertisement which affects a heritage asset or its setting, Council will have regard to criteria a to f above and the following considerations: Amend the first sentence of the section on Digital Advertising Screens to read:

DfI directs the Council to modify the end of the of policy HE8, page 280 of the dPS, by adding in text in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to Policy for the Further to modification, purposes of clarification and the policy will have no consistency. differential impact than The modification does not the original in terms of its change the aim/purpose of impact on S75 groups. the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI directs the Council to modify the first sentence of Policy AD1, page 286 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment.

No Modification to Policy for the Further to modification, purposes of coherence and the policy will have no implementation. differential impact than DfI directs the Council to modify the first sentence of the section The modification does not the original in terms of its on Digital Advertising Screens within Policy AD1, page 287 of the change the aim/purpose of impact on S75 groups. the policy from that dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. originally assessed.

NOTE: the PAC have used the word “advertisement” screen in the first sentence of the section on “Digital Advertising Screens”, this When assessing applications for consent for the display of a digital advertisement screen criteria a to f above shall apply and should be “advertising” in line with PM 150 consent for the display of a digital advertising screen will not normally be granted in any of the following circumstances: MOD51

RA125

PM-152

Natural Heritage Implementation

Page 297 Paragraph 11.1.7

MOD52

MOD53

RA127

Revise wording of third sentence of 11.1.7 to read: International, European and Nationally important nature conservation sites and the Antrim Coast and Glens AONB are identified in the draft Plan Strategy (see District Proposals Maps).

DfI directs the Council to modify the third sentence of paragraph 11.1.7 of the Natural heritage Introduction, page 297 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. Note: Reference to ‘draft’ Plan strategy. The word ‘draft’ should be removed, council should modify this changes as directed under MOD55. DFI directs Council to withdraw PM-154 as updated by MEAM 41 in accordance with paragraph 15.4 of the PAC IE consideration report and retain paragraph 11.1.11, page 299, as written within the dPS.

MEAM41 updating PM154

Nat 2 J&A para 11.1.11

Page 299

There is no PAC recommended amendment.

PM-155 updated by MEAM42

Policy NAT4 Sites of Nature Conservation Importance

Page 301 Paragraph 11.1.13

Remove the reference to the Ulster Wildlife Trust from first DfI directs the Council to modify the first sentence and add sentence and add (as amended) to end of sentence as per PM- text to the end of the same sentence of paragraph 155. 11.1.13 of Policy Nat4, page 301 of the dPS, in accordance with this PAC Recommended Amendment. Insert additional sentence after the first sentence of 11.1.13 to read: For clarity this should read same as PM-155. The Northern Ireland Environment Agency has key DfI directs the Council to modify by adding a further sentence responsibility for the designation and hierarchy of sites that are after the first sentence of paragraph 11.1.13 of Policy Nat4 and removing the word ‘the’ (underlined) page 301 of the dPS, in of nature conservation importance and it is sites through the accordance with this PAC Recommended application of policy. Additionally, Council has the power to identify and designate Local Nature Reserves (LNR). The Amendment. designation of Wildlife Refuges is a matter for DAERA. Note: Omission of word in the Policy title in 4th column, it should say: Policy NAT4 Sites of Nature Conservation Importance-Local

MOD54

RA129

PM-160 plus Monitoring & Review ‘across the plan area’ incorporated – Technical

Environmental Objective a)

Insert indicator under Restriction of development on open space:

Monitoring

Target: No more than 1 application permitted per year within

No As assessed in previous addendum.

Further to modification, there will be no differential impact than the original in terms of its impact on S75 groups.

No The direction withdraws a The policy has not been modification put forward by modified from that the Council, there is no need originally assessed, no for further assessment as the differential impact on S75 policy will remain as groups. originally assessed. No Modification to J&A text for Further to modification, the purposes of factual the policy will have no correction to assist in differential impact than implementation of the the original in terms of policy. impact on S75 groups. The modification does not change the aim/purpose of the policy from that originally assessed.

DfI directs the Council to modify Technical Supplement 1 – No Monitoring and Review, Environmental Objective a), by inserting This is not a policy change N/A but does allow for improved a new indicator following Indicator 22 and re- number the

following hearing

MOD55

Supplement 1

Indicator 22

zoned open space areas across the plan area. Review trigger: More than 1 application permitted in any one year on zoned open space across the plan area.

remaining Indicators, in accordance with this PAC Recommended monitoring. Amendment. Note: PAC referred to Monitoring Indicator 22 in the 4th column, however DFI acknowledge this MOD is in relation to a new indicator following Indicator 22. As a result of the modifications contained within this direction, DfI No directs the Council to ensure that any other presentational or This modification covers These modifications will factual amendments, typographical errors and grammatical errors Schedule 1A, Schedule 1B not result in any are updated as necessary to the overall Plan Strategy upon and Schedule 2, including differential impact than adoption. These updates should not amend the nature and intent mapping corrections. the original in terms of of the modifications. The modification does not impact on S75 groups. change the aim/purpose or the nature and intent of the plan strategies or policies.

Mid and East Antrim Borough Council Planning Office Silverwood Business Park 190 Raceview Road 28 Ballymena BT42 4HZ

Approval and authorisa�on Screened by:

Posi�on/Job Title:

Date:

Sandra Adams

Principal Planning Oﬃcer

3/10/2023

Planning Manager

3/10/2023

Approved by: Paul Duﬀy

Local Development Plan Team Silverwood Business Park 190 Raceview Road Ballymena BT42 4HZ Tel: 0300 124 5000 planning@midandeastantrim.gov.uk www.midandeastantrim.gov.uk/planning