Shropshire Star

Councillors approve controversial Wellington pub conversion plans

Controversial plans to convert a derelict Shropshire pub into supported living accommodation have been approved, despite claims that there is an empty alternative.

Published
Last updated
The Lion in Wellington. Picture: Google Maps

The Red Lion in Wellington will be converted into 10 assisted/transitional living units, including wheelchair-accessible accommodation.

The facility will be managed by Telford & Wrekin Council who will contract a registered provider to manage the individual properties.

The ‘intention’ is that the facility will be used to provide supported accommodation for young people aged over 16.

“Such groups can include care leavers, who require a level of support to gain life skills in moving to independent living,” said a council planning officer when introducing the application.

The facility will be managed 24 hours a day with staff present at all times.

Wellington town councillor Lisa Jinks addressed Telford & Wrekin Council’s planning committee on Wednesday night objecting to the scheme ‘on behalf of the Dothill residents’.

She said that there had been over 30 objections made against the planning application on the borough council’s website.

Councillor Jinks claimed that some of the supporting documents with the application were ‘inaccurate and misleading’.

“There is no mention of the Honeybuns Nursery 100 metres away or the local primary schools whatsoever,” said Councillor Jinks.

She argued that allowing the building to be converted into C2 accommodation means that it could be used as residential housing for anybody in need. The councillor fears that in future the property could be used to house ex-offenders, the homeless or immigrants.

“We accept these people require housing,” said Councillor Jinks. “Already in Wellington there is residential accommodation with disability rooms, it’s empty and owned by Telford & Wrekin, that is the Farcroft.

“Listen to the residents of Wellington, act and reject this application.”

Another resident spoke about his fears that the development provided inadequate parking and said that a lack of turning space could force cars to reverse onto Whitchurch Road.

The council’s planning officer added that there had been no objections from the council’s highways team who had scrutinised the plans and were ‘content’ that 10 parking spaces were sufficient.

The meeting heard that the council’s built heritage specialist objected to ‘a number’ of specific elements of the plans.

The applicant said the recommended amendments would ‘prohibit the successful conversion’ of the building – which has been derelict for over four years.

“Planning officers have determined that in the planning balance that the benefit of bringing this vacant building back into beneficial use outweighs the harm to the heritage asset,” concluded the planning officer.

Councillor Gemma Offland backed the plans and said that there was currently a ‘massive housing crisis’ and that certain groups of people should not be stereotyped.

Councillor Janice Jones queried how many people would be living in the 10 apartments over fears that each property could have two occupants. She also asked if they could place controls on the number of people staying there.

“The proposal is for nine one-bedroom and one two-bedroom apartments, I can’t say how many people will occupy it,” replied the council’s planning officer.

“The benefit of this application is that Telford & Wrekin Council’s housing specialist will own and manage this facility. The council will make an assessment of the level of care for the accommodation and tailor that to the staffing accommodation.

“The council won’t be placing members of the community with high dependency in that facility if they can’t provide an equivalent level of staffing.”

Councillor Nigel Dugmore was the only member of the planning committee to vote against the application.

“There is no indication as to how many staff will be onsite,” argued Councillor Dugmore. “Whether or not that’s one or half-a-dozen, it’s unclear and makes the parking provision fairly meaningless.

“I’m a bit concerned that if it’s accepted that there’s doing to be harm to the building with it being at least a couple of hundred of years old. I’m not sure this is the best way to utilise the building.”