A BUILDER has lost his appeal to halt the demolition of a four-bedroom family bungalow he built without permission.

Steve Turley constructed the house on rural land opposite Yorkley Court Gatehouse on Lydney Road, but Forest planners said he had tried to hide the unauthorised building behind walls and hedges.

They issued an enforcement notice in December 2017 ordering him to bulldoze the bungalow and remove a static caravan and portable building from the site.

Dismissing Mr Turley’s appeal against the demolition, planning inspector Mr Stephen Hawkins said permission had been given in 1999 for the “renovation of existing sheds”, but only in connection with the “residential enjoyment” of the house at Yorkley Court Gate where he used to live, and not for the development of separate housing.

However, concrete bases and drainage pre-dated the building of the house, he added, and could stay, as the order to remove it was ‘excessive’.

Forest Council Cabinet member for planning policy issues, Cllr Alan Grant (UKIP, Pillowell), said: “I am very pleased that the Inspector has endorsed the key elements in our enforcement notice.

“We have planning controls for a good reason and we will not hesitate to use our powers to address any planning breaches that come to our attention.”

Cllr Philip Burford (Ind, Hartpury), planning committee chairman, added: “Our enforcement officers work hard to ensure compliance with the relevant planning laws for the benefit of the community at large. 

“This decision serves as a warning to anyone who decides to ignore the planning process and the message is clear: don’t spend a considerable amount of money and time on a building project in the knowledge that it does not have planning permission.”

A report by Forest planners last year said: “The owner has constructed a new four-bedroom bungalow attached to the existing outbuildings within the last 18 months. It appears that he has sought to conceal this within the site.”

A static caravan, used by two family members, was also hidden from view, it added.

“The owner has stated that the enlargement of the outbuildings had been undertaken many years previously, but this contradicts the 2014 aerial photograph held by the council sh- owing that these works had yet to be undertaken,” the report continued.

A “significant amount of the site” had been concreted at an earlier stage, also without permission, along with large access gates with stone pillars and high walls, it was claimed.

“It is considered that the nature of the character of the land has changed significantly from a rural character to that of an urban character by constructing the unauthorised bungalow and stationing of the static caravan and portable building,” councillors were told.

“These works are considered totally out of keeping with the existing rural character,” said planners, while being next to a 60mph road in a rural location, it was not “sustainable development.”