Angry Shifnal residents say they weren't consulted about plans for children's home in their street

People living in a Shropshire town say they have never been consulted about plans to turn a nearby house into a children’s home.

Walsall-based Saje Care Group has been granted a certificate of lawfulness for the change of use in Admirals Way, Shifnal.

However, people who live in Admirals Way say the company has not engaged with them, with their questions going unanswered. Saje Care Group has not responded for a request to comment.

A planning application was initially validated on February 5 for a change of use from a private dwelling house to a residential care home.

In a planning statement, Ben Embrey, of Base Architecture and Design, said the firm’s goal “is to provide safe and tailored care to a better standard for children, mainly suffering from traumatic backgrounds".

“Due to the fact that the property's primary aim is to provide an enhanced level of care and accommodation, the home will be operated in a very similar manner to that of an ordinary family home," said Mr Embrey, adding that the property would be occupied by a maximum of three children on a long-term basis, with a minimum of two qualified care staff.

Out of 39 comments submitted via Shopshire Council's planning portal, 37 were in objection. The initial proposal was withdrawn on April 8, the day after a lawful development certificate was approved.

"It is important to note that applications for certificates of lawful development are determined solely on legal grounds," said Councillor David Walker, portfolio holder for planning.

"They are not subject to the same public consultation process as planning applications, and public comments are not taken into account in reaching the decision."

In assessing the application for a certificate for the home in Admirals Way, Councillor Walker said that officers concluded that the use would not be materially different from that of a typical dwelling house in terms of its day-to-day impacts, such as traffic, noise, and general activity.

However, people who live in the street believe that the process was moved swiftly due to the objections raised when the initial application was lodged.

Talking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, Bill Southan said he was told by a woman viewing the property that it would be rented out, before another man said "they were having children here”.

"I had no idea what he was on about," said Mr Southan.

Fellow resident Jo Wootton added: "We realised there was only a week or so left of the consultation, so I asked the council how it works.

"[A council worker] said the notice had been displayed next to the letterbox, which is down by [the property’s] front door. [The applicant] put it on a wall, took a photo of it, then took it down.

"The council then made him re-do the whole three-week consultation period."

Mrs Wootton said legal advice was obtained and solicitors told them it is "unheard of" for a certificate to be issued that quickly.

"So we never got a chance to comment," said Mrs Wootton.

"I have helped re-home children, and been a safeguarding lead for seven years. It's about not being listened to and not having a fair process.

"Not one objection said 'we do not want these children on our street'.

"We asked questions about waste, parking and rotas because we've got no information to base it off. We've never had any answers to any of those questions. I've worked in education my whole career until recently, and have people who are carers.

"We are not NIMBYs - we just want information and get a chance to ask our questions to put our minds at rest.

"It might be the best thing that's ever happened to this street - we don't know.

"If it's going to happen, at least we were able to have our say."

Tim Grove, a resident for 13 years, said that companies inform people if roadworks will be taking place in their street.

"But this is more significant than digging a hole for a week," he said.

"Trust has been broken before they've even started."