Pensioner’s home ‘dwarfed’ by neighbour’s 45ft bungalow extension
A civil engineer has criticised council officials who approved a huge 45ft extension to his neighbour’s bungalow.
Derek Adams, 67, said that his Paisley home was “dwarfed” by the building now looming large over his back garden.
He tried and failed to stop Renfrewshire council from approving the single-storey extension to the side of the home, as well as a dormer to the front and rear, in 2021.
Mr Adams, who lives with his wife and daughter, claims the extension is even bigger than it should have been after a council “oversight”.
He said a second application for changes to “various openings on the extension and rear dormer” did not include some specific measurements, and claims it therefore should not have been approved.
Mr Adams, who has lived in his home for 28 years, said: “As soon as we come out our back door, it’s effectively sitting on top of us.
“The original bungalow was sitting high, but it’s now sitting about four metres higher than it was.
“It’s just ridiculous. If you read the council’s requirements for a dormer, the first point is they must be ‘small, discrete additions which retain the character of the original roof’.
“This dormer in length is 13 to 14 metres. It’s hardly small and discrete.
“Another point is that they shouldn’t ‘dominate’ the roof. They’re effectively creating a new roof. It’s not really a dormer, they’re effectively adding a second storey. It’s over-developed.”
He added: “But I’m not trying to get to my neighbour, I went round and spoke to him about it. I’m trying to get to the council because of the mishandling of it.
“It’s not the neighbour’s fault.”
After the original application was approved, in September 2022 the council approved a second request from the homeowner for a non-material variation (NMV).
NMWs are normally used for minor tweaks which do not significantly alter an original application.
The local authority’s decision notice said the changes were “to various openings on the extension and rear dormer” - but the document did not specify any changes in the size of the dormer.
Mr Adams claimed: “What I realised was, between revision A [the original planning application] and revision B [the NMV] there was actually an increase in the length of the dormer.
“My understanding is that shouldn’t have been approved under an NMV request and we should have been notified specifically, but it was ignored. Nobody picked it up ... The whole thing is a mess.”
A spokesman for Renfrewshire council said: “Our officers have visited the property and consider the development under way to be in accordance with the approved plans for the alterations to the house.
“The final design for the works was subject to a number of negotiated changes, which is often the case with applications for domestic properties.
“While the depth of the dormer has increased slightly under the NMV, it is minor in comparison to the dormer as a whole and does not raise any overshadowing or overlooking issues.
“Any request for an NMV is at the discretion of the planning authority and, in this case, we believe the changes to the original proposed design for the depth of the dormer were sufficiently minor to grant the request.”