An environmental activist has won a potentially landmark legal challenge over building work permitted along the front of countryside roads in Northern Ireland.
The Court of Appeal quashed a decision by Newry, Mourne and Down district council to grant planning permission for dwellings and garages after backing Gordon Duff’s case that it breached planning policy on so-called ribbon development.
Mr Duff claimed the ruling will have wider implications for future attempts to build in rural areas.
“It’s a precedent and will potentially affect thousands of similar planning applications over the next few years,” he predicted.
All other infill planning applications to local authorities will have to take the court’s decision into account.
”The campaigner took legal action after the council gave outline approval for an application to construct two detached dwellings and garages on the Glassdrumman Road, Ballynahinch in April 2021.
Mr Duff, who represented himself, claimed the decision would unlawfully lead to an extension of ribbon development - where lines of houses are built along existing highways.
Amid criticism that it leads to urban sprawl and damages rural character, new buildings in those locations are prohibited under Northern Ireland’s guidelines for countryside development.
The council accepted that the application constituted ribbon development, but argued that Policy CTY8 includes a limited exception allowing a maximum of two houses in small gap sites.
But after his initial judicial review challenge was dismissed, Mr Duff mounted an appeal in a further bid to have the planning decision quashed.
He contended that the council’s decision was unsupported by the facts and wrong in law.
Judges at the Court of Appeal highlighted CTY8’s “strong, unambiguous language” about denying applications which will add to ribbon development.
“This is an inherently restrictive policy such that, unless the exception is made out, planning permission must be refused,” Lord Justice Treacy said.
The judge identified irrationality in treating a substantial visual gap in undeveloped land at the Glassdrumman Road site as part of the front to an existing property.
“Where the infill exception is being relied upon a key question is whether there is a substantial and continuously built up frontage,” he stated.
“That question must be addressed in light of the purpose of the policy and its inherently restrictive nature, and, of course, with proper regard for the physical features of the area in question.”
The judge confirmed: “We hold that the decision-maker has not acted compliantly with its own policies which are designed to protect rural integrity and priority habitats and so the decision cannot stand.
“This appeal is allowed. The decision will be quashed.”