This article is from page 14 of the 2009-01-20 edition of The Clare People. OCR mistakes are to be expected so download the original SWF or the rendered page 14 JPG
TWO Miltown Malbay couples have called for a doctor’s surgery to be closed down as soon as possible.
James and Pauline McMahon and Brendan and Doreen Hughes of Ballard Road made the call as part of their appeal against a decision to grant a two-year planning permis- sion to Dr Maura O’Meara.
Dr O’Meara secured planning re- tention for the surgery from Clare County Council in the face of local Opposition.
In their appeal, the objectors state that the decision to grant a permis- sion “seems to have been made, not on good planning practice but on the grounds that a medical centre was in Operation and was necessary.
“We are of the opinion that if this medical centre is allowed to operate for a further two years, then it will be almost impossible to close down. A commercial enterprise of this nature is not suitable for a wholly residen- tial area. We strongly object to this development even on a temporary basis.”
They also claim that the develop- ment has already interfered with
their quality of life and ask that it be closed as soon as possible.
“This objection is not of a personal nature. We have no desire to harm the practice of either doctor nor to interfere with the medical care of the patients. We feel that the medi- cal centre is located in the wrong place and will devalue properties to the point where they will become un- saleable. The estate is not designed nor laid out to cater for the volume of traffic that would be generated by such an operation.”
The planner’s report noted a sub- mission from Maura O’Meara stat- ing “that this was the only building suitable to her needs as a doctor’s surgery, which was bought after much searching in the area”.
The planner stated, “While I do have some concerns in relation to the location of the surgery this far from the village, I note that such facilities are needed to serve both the village and the rural hinterland.”
The council granted planning per- mission on the basis that the proposed development would not seriously in- jure the amenities of the area.
A decision is due on the appeal later this year.