A government planning inspector has overruled Solihull Council and allowed an extension to a Shirley property to be increased in height. The applicant's costs will now fall on the taxpayer after the inspector's damning verdict that the authority engaged in 'unreasonable behaviour'.
Background of the Saga
The inspector's intervention brings to an end a long-running saga that began in 2021 when applicant Mariam Kiani applied for a two-storey front, side, and rear extension to her property in Solihull Road, Shirley. The council's planning committee granted planning permission for that in 2023.
Last August, the applicant resubmitted the plans with an increase to the height of the extension from 8m to 8.2m and a front central gable feature proposed to be extended to project forward by an extra 0.7m. Neighbours and council leader Karen Grinsell flooded planners with objections over the impact on neighbours and the potential for the property to become a house of multiple occupancy (HMO), leading it to go to the planning committee.
Committee Decision
Last October, the application went before the committee with an objector describing the proposed home as a 'mini mansion'. Councillors argued there were two different perspectives on how high the building was going to be between objectors and the applicant. Councillor Dave Pinwell on the committee said: 'I think we have been presented with conflicting information.' Despite planning officers' advice to approve, a majority on the committee voted against granting planning permission.
Appeal and Inspector's Verdict
The applicant then took the matter to the government's planning inspectorate, with inspector Ben Plenty visiting the site in March. On April 15, he issued an appeal decision allowing the appeal and granting permission. In the appeal decision, he wrote: 'Whilst the relationship to off-site features is questioned by the council there appears to be no question as to the accuracy of the proposed plans themselves. The proposed alterations would have a minimal further effect on the living conditions of the occupiers of (a neighbour) with respect to sunlight, daylight and outlook. The variance in height would be minor and only be increased by a small extent in comparison to the approved scheme.'
Costs Awarded
In a separate verdict, the inspector ruled the applicant should be awarded costs, making a scathing assessment of the council's conduct. He wrote: 'Members appeared to give minimal weight to the previously approved plans or acknowledge the proposal was for very minor alterations. This point also appears to have been largely unappreciated by the objections raised by most interested parties. In failing to properly wrestle with the nature of the proposal the committee misdirected itself in attributing significant weight to the concerns of objectors. As such, the council failed to exercise its duty to determine an application in a reasonable manner and this was also evidence of unreasonable behaviour. For these reasons, the council's unreasonable behaviour has led to the unnecessary delay and costs to the applicant, and thus costs are awarded.'
The full judgement has been posted to the council's planning portal, which can be viewed by searching for application PL/2025/01579/VAR at https://publicaccess.solihull.gov.uk/online-applications.
