A controversial application to change a vacant spa centre in rural Mullaghbawn into a house of multiple occupancy was withdrawn earlier today (Friday) following a major backlash from residents this week.
An application to transform the property at 6A Lough Road had been lodged by Brian Hollywood.
According to a surveyor’s report, lodged on behalf of the applicant, the existing building was a commercial spa centre for a number of years and the building at the time was designed to look like a dwelling because of the rural location.
The report adds: “We are not proposing to extend the existing building [as] all changes are to be internal [and] the reuse of the building would not unduly affect the amenities of nearby residents or adversely affect the continued agricultural use of adjoining land or buildings.
“The reuse will benefit neighbouring dwellings as the building before was used for commercial purposes so there would have been more traffic etc, on the road. This way the building will be used for domestic purposes, so it will be of similar status as the other dwellings in this rural area.
“This application is unique as this proposal is converting back to a domestic dwelling from a commercial building.
“All necessary services are available without having any significant impact on the environment.”
The applicant also argued that the proposal for an HMO “will benefit the area”.
The report stated: “The building will be in use again and will provide accommodation in the locality which is needed. This type of accommodation will allow the occupants to have an opportunity to reside in this area if needed for work purposes etc. Housing in this area is hard to come by. This will allow for people in need of housing and with a limited budget a chance to reside in this location if they need or want to.”
However, almost 50 objections had been lodged since plans became clear, many of which have come in the last week.
Concerns were initially raised when the applicant stated that the property had previously been used to house asylum seekers; a claim disputed at the time by residents as a “gross misrepresentation of the facts with respect to the current use” and has since been amended on the application.
One objector, earlier this month, wrote: “We welcome the amended description, which now generally refers to the correct change of use.”
The objector says the agent “makes a number of unfounded assertions, including: ‘an HMO will benefit the area’, ‘will provide accommodation in the locality which is needed’ and ‘will allow for people in need of housing and with a limited budget a chance to reside in this location if the[y] need or want to’.
“No evidence has been provided by the agent to support these assertions, therefore no weight can lawfully be attributed to them in the determination of this application.
“Even if a need for such accommodation in the area could be demonstrated, PPS21 CTY1 makes it clear that this should be directed to within designated settlement limits.
“We have stated in our previous objection letter why we consider this location unsuitable for low-income individuals – given the relatively remote location; the lack of nearby shops, services and public transport; and the fact that such individuals are unlikely to own or have access to a private vehicle, they would therefore have difficulty accessing essential goods and services, which would prejudice their welfare.”
Many of the objectors have cited a lack of public services or amenity areas on the narrow road leading to and from the property; no street lighting or public footpaths, which would lead to road safety issues and that the nearest bus stop and shop is in the local village c.1 mile away.”
One residents said: “This [application] would put increased pressure on local public services, such as the local schools and the local GP surgery.”
Another added: “The current doctors’ surgery and pharmacy is already over subscribed and under serious pressure. They will not be able to cope with the added pressure which will then have a knock on effect on the local people in the area.”
The application was due to be considered by Newry, Mourne and Down Council planners, however, that will no longer be the case after it was withdrawn earlier today.
Sinn Féin councillor for the area, Aine Quinn, said: “I’m glad to see that this application is no longer going forward, especially after the uncertainty it caused within the community.
“I hope the owner will now consider a more appropriate use of the building, particularly given its location in an area of outstanding natural beauty.”
