Mayfield couple lose sunroom appeal

Watch more of our videos on Shots! 
and live on Freeview channel 276
Visit Shots! now
A couple ordered to demolish a garage and sunroom they built four years ago for just £3,000 have lost their appeal against the council enforcement action.

Despite receiving support from neighbours, James Bevis and his partner Louise, were told they needed planning permission for the DIY extension and could face a fine of up to £50,000 if they did not remove it.

Planners objected to the structure saying it was too far forward from the front of their home in Mayfield. And now the Scottish Government Reporter has backed planners after the couple lodged an appeal against the council’s enforcement notice with Scottish Ministers.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

In his ruling the Reporter said that he was not able to grant planning permission for the addition to the house and could not overturn the enforcement notice issued by the council because it had been built without permission, breaching the rules.

Joiner James Bevis in front of the Mayfield extension.Joiner James Bevis in front of the Mayfield extension.
Joiner James Bevis in front of the Mayfield extension.

And he dismissed the couple’s argument that another solution should be sought by the council instead of demanding the demolition of the addition.

He said: “I was able to observe during my site visit that the garage and sunroom would not be classed as permitted development.

Planning permission is therefore required for the building and in itsabsence the garage and sunroom represent a breach of planning control.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“Section 5 of the enforcement notice sets out the steps required to be undertaken to remedy this breach, which is effectively to restore the land to its condition before the breach took place.

“In my view these steps are not excessive and there are no less onerous stepswhich would remedy the breach of control. ”

Joiner James (52) said the sunroom was added to the garage as a space for the couple’s twin teenage girls to spend time with friends.

The couple live on an end terraced house on Laurelbank, which has a large side garden rather than space at the back.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

They built the garage and sunroom in the side garden, with the small sunroom extending slightly forward of the front of the house.

In the enforcement notice issued by the council it argues that allowing the building to remain would undermine public confidence in planning policy.

However a planning officer’s report into the original planning application acknowledged no complaints or objections to the building were lodged by neighbours.

Instead they received two letter of support from people living across the road.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The council notice said: “The council’s planning authority has deferred (sic) taking enforcement action due to the circumstances relating to the Covid 19 pandemic.

“However, that situation has now improved and the unauthorised building that houses both developments now needs to be removed.

“Its continuing presence on the land is in conflict with the democratic, planning, decision making process and would thereby undermine the credibility of the planning system and public trust in its outcomes.”