Tighter controls on changes to homes within a historic Solihull suburb look set to be imposed by the council.
A decision is due next week on whether to remove permitted development rights from properties in part of the Olton conservation area.
If approved, those affected will have to get planning permission for a whole host of small-scale changes which, at present, do not need an application.
Changes to roofs, chimneys, windows and paintwork could be included depending on their visibility.
Officers argue that alterations currently being made mean the loss of original features and, over time, the character of the conservation area will be eroded.
Next Thursday, Cllr Andy Mackiewicz, cabinet member for climate change, planning and housing, will decide whether to move forward with introducing the stricter requirements, in order to preserve the area's appearance.
Cllr Katy Blunt (Con, Olton) said she supported efforts to protect the "distinctive" nature of one of the borough's oldest suburbs.
"In Olton a lot of these beautiful properties are on main roads so everybody sees them," she told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS).
"History is my passion and I really want to see it conserved so [in 100 years' time] people will still have the same view of Olton we have today.
"I would welcome feedback from local residents for and against."
Olton conservation area, which contains a range of Victorian and early 20th century buildings, was created in 1980.
One of 20 such zones in Solihull, its boundaries were extended in 1996 and again in 1999.
But the recent removal of the original windows from a locally-listed property in St Bernards Road is said to have worried some of those living nearby.
While the work was lawful, and classed as permitted development under the current arrangements, there were concerns that the new double-glazing detracted from the look of the area.
Jon Beesley, a council conservation officer, said: "The local residents have expressed concern that other properties within St Bernards Road may be under threat from similar proposals.
"The cumulative effect of inappropriate minor changes over time will gradually erode the character and appearance of the conservation area."
While any change in policy is set to take immediate effect once a relevant direction has been made, Mr Beesley's report said the rights set to be removed were "the minimum necessary" to protect the area.
