The Solihull Council Planning Committee meeting on 12 June 2024 focused on several key planning applications, with decisions made on various development proposals.

121 Victor Road

The committee discussed a proposal for a two-storey side and part two-storey, part single-storey rear extension at 121 Victor Road, along with the change of use of the dwelling to four self-contained flats for people with learning disabilities. The application faced significant opposition from local residents and Councillor Laura McCarthy, who raised concerns about parking, the size of the units, and the potential impact on vulnerable neighbours. The committee decided to defer the application to gather more detailed information on parking, bin storage, and unit sizes. The full details can be found in the Plans Victor Road document.

22 White House Way

A retrospective application for the realignment of a boundary fence at 22 White House Way was considered. The committee approved the revised plan, which included moving the fence behind a significant maple tree covered by a tree preservation order. This decision was made to maintain the openness and character of the area, particularly given its proximity to the White House Way Conservation Area. The updated plans are available in the Plans White House Way document.

10 Spring Lane

The committee reviewed an application for extensions to the property at 10 Spring Lane, including a single-storey rear extension, a loft conversion, and a single-storey front extension. Despite objections from a neighbour regarding the size and impact of the extension, the committee approved the application, noting that the height of the bungalow would remain unchanged and that similar extensions had been approved in the area. More details can be found in the Plans Spring Lane document.

Kenilworth Road Telecommunications Mast

A proposal for a 25-metre lattice telecommunications mast on Kenilworth Road in Balsall Common was discussed. The committee refused the application due to the lack of evidence of need and the speculative nature of the proposal. The mast was deemed to have a significant visual impact on the Green Belt area, and no end-user had been identified. The refusal was supported by the council's landscape team. The full report is available in the Report by Head of Development Management - PL202400678PN document.

Appeals and Delegated Decisions

The committee noted the appeals report and the list of delegated decisions. The appeals report can be accessed in the June24Appeals document, and the delegated decisions are listed in the June24Delelist document.