Home owners must demolish extension following failed appeal

A battle over extensions made to a house in Telford has ended with a planning inspector decisively siding with council planners.

The applicants at a house in Little Dawley had built a two-storey front and side extension and a first-floor extension above a garage despite a restriction put in place when the property was built 20 years ago.

Yula Morrison and Paul Crittenden told planning inspector Felicity Thompson that they had received advice from Telford & Wrekin Council. But the inspector ruled that complaints about the council were not relevant to the final decision.

“I have had regard to the appellant’s family circumstances regarding the need for the extension,” wrote the inspector in a recent decision.

“Notwithstanding these important considerations, and whilst dismissing the appeal would mean that the appellant may have to consider other options for meeting her accommodation/living needs, there is no evidence before me to demonstrate the appeal development is the only means by which such needs may be met.

“Accordingly, dismissing the appeal would be a proportionate response necessary in the wider public interest, given the identified harm and as such, would be a justified interference with the appellant’s human rights.”

The inspector added: “I acknowledge that the appellant sought pre-application advice, and the development was self-funded with no grants from the council.

“However, these matters and the appellant’s general misgivings about the council are separate from the planning merits of the proposed development and have no bearing on the outcome of this appeal.”

The property in Holly Road had been approved by the council in 2005 but with a condition banning permitted development rights from being used, the inspector heard.

But the inspector added that the extensions went above and beyond permitted development rights.

The council slapped an enforcement notice on the property, ordering it to be returned to its previous built condition.

A planning application made in an attempt to address the issues was refused by the council last year.

Three appeals were made to the planning inspectorate: two against the enforcement notice and one against the refusal of planning permission.

The appellants had argued that the “extension is not disproportionate in size”.

“It provides an extra 36 metres square of living space to the upward extension of the garage, being the minimum required for a double bedroom with en-suite bathroom.”

The planning inspector dismissed the appeals and re-enforced the enforcement notice.

It orders the appellants within six months to demolish the two-storey front and side extension including the first-floor extension above the existing garage, and to re-instate the original look of the property.