Councillors raise ‘demonstrable harm’ concern while turning down latest Portadown HMO application
Growing concern over the number of planning applications for houses in multiple occupancy (HMOs) in the ABC Borough, and particularly in Portadown, has led ABC Planning committee members to go against a recommendation to approve another one, citing “demonstrable harm” as grounds for refusal.
This will no doubt come as a setback to the developer who had started extending the property at 6 Goban Street, Portadown, at their own risk.
The fact there are already 38 HMOs in Portadown – the highest concentration in the ABC Borough – including one just across the street from the proposed new one, in a street that has only nine properties, did nothing to encourage Planning committee members to approve this latest application.
This latest HMO application was for change of use from a dwelling to a five-person, five-bedroom HMO.
Outlining the Planning Department’s grounds for recommending approval, Principal Planning Officer, Roisin Hamill said the application also includes the construction of a single-storey rear extension.
The site is currently occupied by a three-bedroom end-of-terrace, two-storey dwelling within the development limit of Portadown.
“The relevant policy consideration is provided by the Strategic Planning Statement (SPPS), which states the planning authority should be guided by the principle that sustainable development should be permitted, unless the proposed development would cause demonstrable harm.
“The proposed development will retain the building in residential use. There are no physical alterations proposed along the front elevation, and officers are satisfied there will be no adverse impact on the design of the host property, the character of the area, or neighbouring properties.
“Officers, in consultation with DfI Roads, are satisfied the proposed development will not prejudice road safety or significantly inconvenience the flow of traffic.
“Officers are of the opinion that the proposed development complies with the Area Plan, the SPPS, and all other relevant planning policies.
“On this basis, and subject to conditions, it is recommended that planning permission be granted.”
Nearby resident, Alison Curran, voiced her objection to the planning application, specifically in relation to the change of use to an HMO.
“The proposal includes the construction of a single-storey rear extension, which has already been built despite the proposal only being presented to committee today.
“Decisions in relation to HMOs in Portadown are being taken in isolation, case by case, with no strategic plan, policy, or thresholds in place across the council area.
“HMOs are not factored into the Craigavon Area Plan, and council policy has not been developed in light of the HMO Act.
“At a council meeting in Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon in April 2026, Councillor [Kyle] Moutray brought forward a notice of motion regarding the volume of HMOs in ABC, particularly in Portadown, where there is a disproportionately high number.
“At the same meeting, Councillor [Peter] Lavery [said] his understanding was that a policy was being developed in relation to HMOs; there was a proposed threshold of around 10 per cent per street.
“There are nine houses on Goban Street, [and] already one HMO. Two HMOs would represent overprovision, equating to 22 per cent of the street.
“Councillor [Kevin] Savage highlighted that there are 54 HMOs across ABC, with 38 in Portadown.
“What is the threshold for HMOs in Portadown? It has surely been reached. This proposal should be considered alongside all other HMOs in Portadown.
“The parking survey was carried out when three properties were vacant and during a holiday period. I would query what arrangements are in place in relation to the proposed management of the HMO, to ensure there are only five tenants living [at the address].
“I respectfully request that the committee decline the proposal.”
The objector also cited the Houses in Multiple Occupation Act (Northern Ireland) 2016, which she said gives local authorities the power to look at the issue of overprovision.
Agent Jason Martin, from JWM Planning Ltd, Ballymena, speaking on behalf of client, Gosford Rentals Ltd, Markethill, said they agreed with the recommendation for approval.
“I know that HMOs are a very contentious thing in NI at the moment, and ABC Council have been very stringent in terms of looking at this application to ensure that it does meet thresholds of not changing the character of an area too much.”
When asked to confirm the number of properties in Goban Street, the Principal Planning Officer replied: “I think there are nine [properties] altogether, one of which has an approval as an HMO. It is literally just across the road, on the opposite side of the street.”
When asked by Councillor Scott Armstrong (DUP) if this constituted clustering, the council officer replied: “There is no threshold at this moment in time in terms of planning policy.
“The planning we’re working to is the SPPS which talks about demonstrable harm. The things we look at are the character of the area, impact on amenity, impact on parking.
“Yes, [the existing HMO] is in close proximity, but there is no policy that says that’s unacceptable.”
---
Read more:
---
Councillor Peter Lavery (Alliance) pointed out a draft planning policy is currently being devised in relation to HMOs. It was confirmed that it can’t be given weight at this stage, as it hasn’t been adopted as formal policy.
Councillor Fergal Donnelly (SF), referred to a photo showing the applicant has already started extending the property.
The Planning Officer remarked: “Yes, they are building on site, but obviously they are building without prejudice.
“Just because they’re building doesn’t automatically mean that they will get planning permission. Any work they carry out without planning permission is entirely at their own risk.”
Later in the debate, Cllr Moutray said his concern would be regarding the overconcentration of HMOs in this area.
“Ultimately, my concern is that it will alter the character of the area and cause demonstrable harm. So, I would propose that we refuse the officers’ recommendation.”
The proposal was seconded by Cllr Scott Armstrong.
Planning permission was consequently refused.