“I no longer feel safe walking in the street”
A Telford resident has told planners how unsafe they feel with the way the area around their home has changed over the last 12 years.
The woman from Dudmaston in Hollinswood was responding to a council consultation over a care company’s plan to change a seven-bedroom house in Telford into a children’s home.
“This will probably make me look for a home elsewhere, which I shouldn’t have to do as I love my home here; but if it continues like this here then I will have no option. I strongly object to this home in the street,” she told Telford & Wrekin Council’s planning department.
“There are already multiple HMOs [houses in multiple occupation] in this street which have had a negative impact on residents. This will only add more, issues such as parking, potential of blocking off the street – which some already do.
“People park on your drive, block you in. There have been incidents of verbal abuse, threatening and intimidating behaviour from some of the residents who have moved into HMOs and houses in the street; and now you want to add a house full of children into the mix.
“In the 12 years I have lived on this street, it has declined to a horrible/unsafe area to live due to all the HMOs and the issues they bring such as fly-tipping, anti-social behaviour.
“Because of all of this, I no longer feel safe walking in the street and estate and have had to buy multiple cameras.
“You don’t think about the wellbeing of the residents when you make all these decisions, it just seems to be all about money and how many people can be crammed in.
“It is so depressing, with a feeling of being unsafe, living here now and this will not help matters.”
The woman had been responding to an application by Reward Chitura, of Cynosure HCS, for a certificate of lawfulness for the proposed change of use of the property in Dudmaston, Hollinswood.
Following a consultation period Telford & Wrekin Council has now refused to certify that the change of use would classify as a lawful development with officials saying that they need to assess more detailed information.
Such certificates can mean that proposals are granted without going through the fuller planning process.
Agent Neil Boughey, of Kent-based Planning Geek Limited, had told planners that using the property as a children’s residential home for up to six children aged under 16 is not a ‘material’ change in its use as a residential dwelling.
But planners wrote that they consider it would be in a different class of use.
They added that factors they have to consider include car usage and movements around staff shift patterns, and change-over periods and visitors to the site.
Planners were also concerned that more than two staff members would be needed to care for six children.
The applicant has been told that they can appeal to the Planning Inspectorate to challenge the council’s decision to refuse the certificate or they can submit a planning application with all the details.
