A HOMEOWNER has just months to demolish his “monstrosity” of an extension after repeated complaints from enraged neighbours.
Mohammed Shorab was granted permission for the two-story side and single storey rear add-on to his property in Burslem, Stoke-on-Trent.
4
4
But instead of following the approved plans, the taxi driver constructed a “complete bloody mess”.
Appalled locals moaned to the council about the “overpowering eyesore” and Mohammed now has just nine months to knock it down.
One outraged resident, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “It would have been fine if they had stuck to the approved plans, but they’ve just put that monstrosity up instead.”
Ignoring the approved proposals, Mohammed added a porch to the front and a canopy across the width of the property.
This is supported by five white fluted Grecian-style columns, which his neighbours have described as “intrusive”.
The floor level has also been raised, a mono-pitch roof installed, and the size and position of the windows differ to those given the green light.
The same angry local said: “It would have been easy to follow the plans, but they didn’t and we are delighted that the enforcement has been approved.
“It’s completely not in keeping with the area.
Most read in The Sun
“We are getting people driving down the road just to look at it, that shouldn’t be happening in a quiet residential street.”
Someone else who lives on the street, who also wished to remain anonymous, said: “It’s disrupted the street because it doesn’t fit in at all.
“Looking out at it all the time, it’s overpowering. I’d say it is intrusive.
“I don’t think anybody would have been bothered if they’d stuck to the plans, but they’ve ignored the plans altogether.”
And a third described it as “an eyesore, a complete bloody mess”.
“The windows don’t even fit properly,” they added.
“The roof is not as high on the extension – they have engaged cowboys.
“It stands out as not in keeping with the area. If they had built to plan it would have received no objections.”
‘MONSTROSITY’
Officers at Stoke-on-Trent City Council recommended enforcement action be taken to demolish the unauthorised development in its entirety, or make all necessary alterations to complete the extension under the granted planning permission.
The report stated: “The overall poor design and appearance of the property, and its detrimental impact on the visual amenity within the locality, justify the taking of appropriate enforcement action.
“The ward councillor has been consulted on the recommendation to take enforcement action and has requested that this matter be heard by the planning committee.
“This is on the basis of the complexity of the issues and the impact that this ongoing situation is having on the mental health of surrounding neighbours.
“The councillor is concerned that, if demolition and rebuild were to be approved, then there will be continued disruption to the residents of this small cul-de-sac.
“They would like other avenues to be explored around a compromise or adaptation to the current property to bring it more in line with the approved scheme and therefore limit the distress to neighbouring residents.”
Have you had a similar experience with one of your neighbours? Email [email protected]
It went on to say that while the consequences of enforcement action would be “severe” for Mohammed, it was his responsibility to ensure the works were undertaken in “strict accordance with the approvals given”.
“Given all of the above, it is recommended that enforcement action be taken to require the demolition of the unauthorised development and the reinstatement of the condition and appearance of the property prior to development taking place or the making of all necessary alterations to implement the extant planning permission,” it concluded.
Committee chairman Councillor Ross Irving added: “The development does not compare in the slightest with the original approval.
“We have a duty – not only to the residents of that particular street, but also generally to residents throughout Stoke-on-Trent – to ensure that if planning consent is granted, then the development that goes ahead complies with that consent.”
Neighbours are now thrilled that the extension will be bulldozed within the next nine months.
“I’d much prefer a couple of years of disruption than to have to look at that for the rest of my time here,” one said.
The Sun attempted to speak to the homeowner, who had a separate application to build a retaining wall refused, but he declined to comment.
4
4
