NI council delegates medical cannabis farm decision to planning department

The application for change of use of an industrial unit at Rickamore Road Upper for the production, cultivation and processing of medicinal cannabis plants was deferred to Monday’s meeting by the planning committee in November.

The decision to do so was to obtain further information with the applicant, Rickamore Ltd, being told there would be no further extensions.

The recommendation had been to refuse the proposal with the council’s environmental health section requesting the submission of an odour impact assessment and a noise impact assessment, and to allow time for environmental health officers to carry out visits to other facilities for further consideration.

A report to a meeting of the planning committee on Monday evening said: “Officers worked with the applicant and reached out to local authorities and facilities in England in an attempt to arrange a site visit.

“However, it has not been possible to gain access to another like-for-like facility.”

No letters of objection have been received in respect of the proposal.

The report says the reason for refusal is because it has “not been demonstrated that the development, if permitted, would not have a detrimental impact on neighbour amenity by way of noise”.

However, it states: “The proposal will not harm the character and appearance of the rural area as there are minimal external changes to the existing building and in addition, the proposal is considered to result in environmental benefit in that it will bring back into use a vacant and disused industrial building within the countryside.”

DUP councillor Alison Bennington asked about the process to deal with waste from the plant.

She was told there is “minimal waste” as products can be recycled and reused although any plant material that can’t be recycled is chemically treated to remove certain compounds and then incinerated.

UUP councillor Robert Foster queried why the company had suggested visiting similar premises.

He noted officers had experienced difficulty in finding another operation to allow them to gain admission.

A company representative told the committee these facilities are private enterprises. He said it may have been viewed as “someone who may have been a competitor”.

Barry Diamond, the council’s principal planning officer, stated: “This has been a long process. The application was submitted 20 months ago. We brought it in front of the planning committee in November.”

He indicated that despite a deadline in December, a noise impact assessment had been received on Friday.

“We have the information from the applicant,” he said. “It is a matter of processing it.”

Alliance councillor Billy Webb said he had expected to see the planning application recommended for approval and asked if it was possible for the committee to give approval subject to the documentation being satisfactory.

He added: “We are now down to the noise issue. I propose it be delegated to the planning section to consider the documentation. If it comes back negative, we can issue a refusal.”

Mr Webb’s proposal was seconded by DUP councillor Sam Flanagan, while Ms Bennington asked for a condition about waste disposal to be added.

“There needs to be something in there about waste and how it is disposed of,” she stated.

Mr Diamond said he would ask the applicant to provide a waste management plan.

Eight councillors voted in favour of the proposal with Mr Foster and DUP councillors Jeannie Archibald-Brown and John Smyth against.