Homeowner to tear down extension after council use Google Earth to spot mistake

559     0
The home in 2011 on Google Maps street view (Image: BNPS)
The home in 2011 on Google Maps street view (Image: BNPS)

A council planning department has used satellite imagery in a bizarre planning row to rule a homeowner’s decking extension illegal. Colin Thomas now faces having to demolish his extension and decking after canny planners caught him trying to pull a fast one on them.

In a signed declaration to the council Mr Thomas, 65, "solemnly and sincerely declared" the decking at the front of his house and the single storey extension at the rear had been there for longer than four years, meaning they were exempt from council planners attempts to take them down. But the eagle-eyed planning department at Dorset Council used an innovative way to prove that the additions, for which he did not have permission, had not been there as long as Mr Thomas claimed.

He stated the 20ft by 16ft raised decking at the front of his house and the single storey rear extension were built soon after he bought the property in 2012. His builder and friends who have visited the terraced house on Portland, Dorset, over the past 10 years told Dorset Council the same. But he didn't reckon on meticulous planning officer Thomas Wild who looked up the property on Google Earth and Google Street View.

Homeowner to tear down extension after council use Google Earth to spot mistake qhidquihqiqduinvAn aerial shot showing the front decking with fake grass and rear extension (BNPS)

Mr Wild was able to use the software to look back at old satellite photos of the property and found that the rear extension and the current decking were not present in the satellite photos of the terraced house taken in September 2020. “Therefore...it does allow for a conclusion that the rear extension was constructed between September 2020 and June 2022,” he wrote. “Therefore it has been present for less than four years and has not achieved immunity from enforcement action on that basis."

As for the deck at the front of Mr Thomas’ house, Google pictures shows the structure was there in 2016 but it was not the same one. Mr Wild found different decking in the 2016 picture to one from 2021. "Although it is accepted that by around 2016 the original timber decking had become immune from enforcement action, that immunity was lost when the decking was removed. The construction of the decking are fresh breaches of planning control which do not benefit from previously accrued immunity.,” he said.

Homeowner who built house on driveway forced to tear it down in planning rowHomeowner who built house on driveway forced to tear it down in planning row

Mr Thomas now faces having to demolish both the rear extension and the raised decking although he is entitled to an appeal. A spokesperson for Dorset Council said: "The evidence available from Google Street View images indicates that the decking currently on the site is different from the decking constructed in 2012, which the council accepts did achieve immunity from enforcement, but which was subsequently removed.

Homeowner to tear down extension after council use Google Earth to spot mistakePicture showing the rear extension (BNPS)

"The new decking is larger, with a different design, incorporating a garage underneath it and is therefore considered to be a new breach of planning control. Street View photographs indicate that it was constructed after 2021 and a retrospective application to regularise the changes, which was refused, confirmed that the works were carried out between April and August 2022.

"The rear extension is referred to in statutory declarations but aerial photography indicates that it was constructed sometime between September 2020 and June 2022.There is an ongoing enforcement investigation for the site and the next step will be to consider the expediency of taking enforcement action against the works. The applicant will have a right of appeal against the decision and any enforcement notice."

Joe Smith

Print page

Comments:

comments powered by Disqus