Solihull Planners Reject Revised House Extension Plan in Castle Bromwich
Solihull Council's planning committee has once again rejected a proposal for a house extension in Castle Bromwich, with councillors and neighbours describing the design as "awful" and out of character with the local area. This decision marks the latest chapter in a planning saga that has stretched over a year.
Background of the Application
The applicant, Mr Imran, first submitted plans in February 2025 to extend a property on Hawthorne Road with a single and two-storey side and rear extension, including a single-storey garage. That initial application was refused by Solihull planners in May 2025, who stated it failed to "conserve and enhance the character of the host property" due to issues with scale, design, and massing.
An appeal to the government's inspectorate followed, but inspector Andrew Boughton sided with the council and dismissed the appeal in September 2025. Undeterred, the applicant resubmitted a revised application in November 2025 with several modifications.
Revised Proposal and Committee Debate
At the planning committee meeting held on February 11, 2026, officer Nikki Moore outlined the changes in the new proposal. These included reinstating the hip on both sides of the property, lowering the garage roof, and removing the two-storey extension from the rear. Moore noted that a previous loft conversion had been allowed under permitted development and argued the revised plan now complied with planning policies, recommending approval.
However, the proposal faced strong opposition. During a public consultation, 12 objections were lodged by neighbours, including ward councillor Alan Feeney. In the public speaking section, Councillor Feeney argued that the tweaks did not adequately address the reasons for the previous rejection.
"I believe the adaptations that have been made do not satisfactorily address the reasons it was rejected last time," Feeney stated. "A bit of tweaking with roof heights and putting a gable back in do not suitably address concerns."
He raised concerns about the extension being out of character, risking overdevelopment of the plot, and potentially crowding neighbours.
Officer and Councillor Perspectives
Planning officer Jon Hallam acknowledged the existing property's appearance, remarking, "Lawful can be awful and that relates to what is built on site at the moment. It looks dreadful but it is permitted. I believe this proposal will improve the appearance."
Committee chairman Councillor Bob Grinsell commented, "It certainly is a betterment, whether or not it is appropriate." Meanwhile, Councillor Dave Pinwell drew a literary comparison, saying, "This property as it stands reminds me of one of my favourite books by Tom Sharp, its title is 'Blott on the Landscape'. Yes there are improvements, but I still think there are bits it doesn't satisfy. This is going to be a very wide property indeed."
Committee Decision
When the chairman called for a vote, eight councillors voted against the proposal, with one abstention, resulting in its rejection. The meeting took place at the Civic Suite, underscoring the ongoing local scrutiny of development plans in the area.
This case highlights the tensions between property owners seeking to expand their homes and community members striving to preserve the architectural character of their neighbourhoods. With the application now twice refused, it remains to be seen if further revisions will be submitted or if the matter is concluded.
