Walsall Council's planning committee has unanimously rejected a proposal to significantly enlarge a property in Streetly, following a dramatic last-minute change of heart by planning officers.
Last-Minute U-Turn Leads to Refusal
The application sought to increase the size of the house at 1 Inglewood Grove by 42 per cent. It was presented to the committee on Thursday, January 15. Initially, council planning officers believed issues from a previous, refused application had been resolved and recommended approval.
However, upon final publication of the committee documents just days before the meeting, officers discovered clear discrepancies in the plans. This prompted an '11th hour' reversal, with the official recommendation switched from approval to refusal mere hours before councillors convened.
Strong Local Opposition and Committee Scrutiny
The plans faced substantial local resistance. Objections were received from 131 residents of Inglewood Grove and Wood Lane. The local MP, Wendy Morton, also formally objected. Streetly ward councillor, Keir Pedley, called the application in for committee determination, citing concerns over design, layout, inaccuracies, and harm to neighbours' amenities.
The agent for the application, Hanif Ghumra, requested a deferral of the decision, arguing the late change left no time to address the newly cited issues. This request was denied by the committee.
Unanimous Decision Against 'Incongruous' Development
Councillors voted unanimously to refuse permission. The refusal was formally moved by committee chair, Councillor Mike Bird, on grounds of inaccuracies, the design being 'out of character' and 'incongruous', and the development being detrimental to the amenities of adjoining neighbours.
Deputy chair, Councillor John Murray, expressed his support for the officers' revised stance: "I'm glad that the officers have changed the decision on this. I can now support the officers' decision whereas previously I would have gone against it." He highlighted the scale of the proposed increase, stating, "When you read it's a 42 per cent increase in the footprint, it's incongruous."
This marks the second refusal for conversion plans at this address. The first application was rejected due to design flaws and discrepancies that prevented an accurate assessment.
