Solihull Council has been forced to spend tens of thousands of pounds of public money defending its planning decisions against appeals from residents, new figures have revealed.
Sharp Rise in Appeal Defence Costs
In the last financial year, 2024/25, the authority spent a total of £35,437 on contesting planning appeals. This sum covers all legal advice, professional representation, and associated costs incurred when applicants challenge the council's refusal of their planning proposals.
This expenditure marks a significant peak in recent years. Data shows that in the 2023/24 financial year, the council spent nothing on such defences, while in 2022/23, the cost was £29,835. The latest figure indicates a notable financial burden arising from what the council describes as applicants who "could not take no for an answer."
A Bumper Year for Planning Battles
According to reports from the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), 2025 proved to be a particularly active year for planning appeals in the borough. When the council's planning officers or the elected planning committee refuse an application, the applicant has the right to escalate the matter to the government's Planning Inspectorate for a final, binding verdict.
Despite the high cost, the council's record in defending its decisions has been largely successful. In the majority of appeals covered by the LDRS last year, the government inspector sided with the council and upheld the original refusal.
Key cases where the council successfully defended its position include:
- A proposed two-storey side and rear extension at a property on Hazelhurst Road in Castle Bromwich.
- Plans for a new four-bedroom detached house on green space at the corner of Whitefields Crescent.
- A first-floor side extension and rear dormer at a semi-detached home on Widney Road in Bentley Heath.
Notable Defeats for the Authority
However, the council did not win every battle. One notable defeat involved an application for a detached single-storey garage at a four-bedroom home on Warwick Road in Knowle.
Council planners had refused the application, arguing the structure would be "overly prominent and visually intrusive." The planning inspector disagreed, allowing the appeal and granting permission. The inspector concluded the garage would be in an "unobtrusive position" and would not form a prominent feature or harm neighbours' amenity.
The outcomes of all planning appeals are publicly available for review on the Planning Inspectorate's official website. The substantial spending highlights the ongoing tension between local planning authority, resident aspirations, and the cost to the public purse when disputes arise.
