Dormer extensions - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Open group
|
Started - July 2012
|
Last activity - Yesterday
Dormer extensions
I am currently trying to draft an Enforcement Notice with regard to the dormer extension see photo attached. It was erected this summer without planning permission. The rear part could have been done under pd and the problem is the part on the gable end. One of the requirements of my Notice is to remove the whole thing, I think it is unfair to just ask for this and want to include another requirement requiring lesser steps eg. remove the part of the dormer on the gable end. Is it sufficient to ask for this and include a photo with the part to be removed shaded or do I have to be more precise and include dimensions. Also the owner says they cant get stairs access if they remove the gable part and I dont want to require them to do something they cant practially do. Any advice?
EN sohuld require removal of the Dormer in its totality. Beware the perils of under enforcing. This dormer is absolutely hideous and to require any lesser steps will result in a carbuncle by any other name.
I agree that the Enforcement Notice should specify that the dormer be removed in its entirety. There is no reasonable alternative to this. I would add that the Enforcement Notice does not affect their permitted development rights, which would allow them to build another awful dormer without planning permission. A strong EN may lead to negotiation later on, and allow the Authority to influence the finishing materials of a reduced dormer that could otherwise be erected as PD.
I also agree that the dormer extension should be entirely removed in this instance. It will of course require removal of a part of the structure that may otherwise have been constructed under permitted development. However it is appears highly unlikey, from the photos, that allowing a smaller part of the dormer to remain under PD would comply with Building Regulations requirements. Assuming that the stairway is located above the existing stairs. Whilst this may have no bearing upon the requirements of the enforcement notice it may be useful to consult with Building Control in order to add justification for the removal of the structure in its entirety. Afterall by allowing a small part of the rear that would normally be permitted this would not meet the owners requirements or comply with Building Regulations. The existing hipped roof may then be reinstated and the offender may consider their options under PD which would require internal alterations that are unlikely to meet with their needs.