008An on-going issue since the aircraft hanger sized buildings have been developed. Readers can read more of previous posts via this link: (4 June 2014) and (11 August 2014). These posts show the background to the development.

I have left following things up for two reasons; one was because I wanted to see what planting takes place to screen the premises. I also knew Solihull MBC was to appoint a new Head of Development Control; James Carpenter has recently been appointed to that position.

I have written to James carpenter (copy of letter is posted here: James Carpenter IMG_20150317_0001_NEW ). I have pointed out the problems and the pitiful amount of planting to screen the view and any noise, attaching photographs to help explain (same photographs as shown in this post).

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

As Cllr Jim Ryan (Planning Committee member) stated at a committee hearing, when referring to the size and nature of the proposed buildings ‘We must mitigate, mitigate, mitigate’. I will update the website as soon as I hear more. I am driven to ensure substantial and effective planting/screening will take place.


  1. Hello Ken, isn’t this typical, we fight to prevent the size and use of this development only to find the council officers we employ, who deem to know best, give permission and then walk away. For the company concerned ‘Job done’! Yet again we have been let down by the Council big time and there is no excuse, the council employs more than one officer to oversee these things; now there is no going back, what has been done with the development cannot be undone. Why is it up to you to monitor these things when it is totally the Councils responsibility. I’m disgusted…bunch of wasters! Suppose they will blame the cutbacks as usual.

  2. It’s a bit late complaining about the appearance of a new development after the work has been completed and the builders have left the site. Although the thing I find strange about this site is they built the units with grey external walls to presumably blend in with the local environment but then covered the roofline in brilliant white cladding that can be seen from hundreds of yards away in any direction. I would have expected the planning officials to have spotted this in the planning application details. I’m afraid It’s a bit late in the day to ask them to change this cladding colour now so we residents are stuck with another eyesore!

  3. Unfortunately, I never was convinced by the assurances given regarding this development. It really is an eyesore and the only screening that is likely to be effective would be to plant evergreens, which I did suggest, but was told that it was felt deciduous trees would fit better with the existing hedgerow. In other words, it may be screened during the summer, but not the winter, when it is more obvious anyway, with all the leaves off the existing trees. The issue of lighting is an important one and I took this up with the Council’s ecologist, on the grounds that it was disturbing for wildlife in what is supposed to be a nature reserve. I should think as well that it must be awful for the residents whose houses in Lakeside Drive back on to this mess. I did achieve a partial success when the ecologist managed to get the lights on the walls of the unit adjusted downwards so that the light didn’t spread out into the park, but in my view the whole site is still far more brightly lit than is necessary and should be reduced. Anything left should be properly screened by evergreens (preferably fast growing ones!).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s