Controversial landscaping plans to plant just eight trees to shield homes in Featherstone from the village’s new superprison will be drawn up again following complaints from residents.

Contractors building the new jail have been told to go back to the drawing board with its landscaping plans after the original application sparked controversy. After an angry reaction from residents, and following discussions with South Staffordshire Council, construction firm Kier has now agreed to amend its planting plans and provide better screening for houses on Oaks Drive.

Resident Barry Pickering, from Oaks Drove, claimed the original landscaping plans were “an insult”.

“It took them several months to come up with a landscaping proposal and yet they didn’t even specify what species of tree, it could have been eight twigs,” he said.

“Obviously we have accepted that the building is going to happen, but the screening is seen as something to help us out long-term. We have shown that residents do have a voice and that just complaints will be answered properly.

“It has really helped bring the community together.”

South Staffordshire Council spokesman Jamie Angus confirmed that the authority had asked Kier to submit new plans following feedback from residents.

“They will shortly be setting out their plans for more extensive landscaping,” he added.

Controversy over the landscaping comes as prison bosses face having to take down part of the prison development after building it higher than agreed.

South Staffordshire Council’s regulatory committee last week rejected retrospective plans to construct the 1,620-inmate jail at 41ft, despite planning officers recommending they were approved.

Building on the revised plans had already started, despite planning permission only allowing 33ft, and the plans would have also seen the total floor space occupied by a support building at the jail swell by 4,255 sq ft.

Prison Service spokesman Georgina Mear said today that bosses have not yet made a decision about what to do next. They can either appeal the decision or face reducing the steel frames to the approved height.

By Alex Campbell