A developer is making a third bid not to have to demolish the house he built with a huge basement not included in the original plans.
The house in a back garden off Shirley Drive is now being sold for £1.25 million by receivers, with a warning it does not have full planning permission.
Michael Deller bought the plot in June 2021 for £648,000, with planning permission to build a three bedroom house.
He built the house – but also put in an 800 sq ft basement. Because a new levy had been introduced since the original permission was granted, he applied for permission for the basement as an extension to the original plans on the advice he would only be taxed on the additions, not the whole house, saving him £40,000.
But Brighton and Hove City Council rejected his application – and because the development as built was in breach of planning permission, issued an enforcement notice requiring the whole thing be demolished.
Mr Deller appealed the enforcement notice, but that was dismissed. He then submitted a retrospective application for the whole house, which the council refused to consider as it was too similar to the development which the enforcement notice required to be demolished.
He has now submitted another application, which proposes changes to the house to bring it more in line with what was originally approved and to meet minimum building standards, such as light levels in the basement.
In its letter refusing to determine the previous application, planning officer Jack Summers said: “The local planning authority will consider a further revised planning application that overcomes the reasons for which the notice was served, if you wish to pursue this.
“The revised proposal would need to be of high quality and detailing and finished in suitable materials as per the originally approved scheme; the lightwells serving basement-level rooms require significant enlargement; a green living roof should be installed; and high quality landscaping that will deliver biodiversity improvements.
“Furthermore, any such application should be supported by the appropriate reports and statements, including a design and Access statement; an arboricultural report (detailing the impact that has been caused to the elm tree in front of the site, and proposed mitigation); a noise impact assessment (detailing the large air source heat pump on the north side of the dwelling); and a sunlight and daylight assessment regarding the basement rooms – note that this list may not be exhaustive.”
The current application was first submitted in February last year, and several documents and revisions have been added to it since, including daylight and aboricultural reports.
Several comments objecting have been made – although because the identities of those commenting are redacted it’s not clear whether some are from the same person. Most local authorities do not redact the identity of commenters.
One, which says it’s from a neighbour, said: “The property that has been built on this plot is not even remotely like what was approved and the outrageously shoddy and illicit conduct of this specific developer cannot simply go a miss by the council when he is notorious for this type of behaviour.
“The fact the developer has been actively marketing the property for sale, all while an enforcement notice to demolish the property has been issued only cements his character as dishonest and immoral.
“Please do the honourable and right thing here and seek that the house is correctly demolished and the originally approved property is built in its place. Otherwise, we may as well all not give a damn and dig illegal basements under our properties without the slightest concern of planning.”
Another said: “There has been cynical manipulation of the planning process – a large, three-storey dwelling has been built with complete disregard for the original planning conditions.
“Variations are extreme, significant and deliberate and all serve to maximise profitability and get around permissions.
“Are we really expected to believe that oversight includes constructing three bedrooms and a large leisure room in an unplanned basement, replacing a winter garden with a metal balcony, laying astroturf instead of sedum on the roof and in all other ways reducing the quality and consideration for the local area, neighbours and environment?”
Mr Deller declined to comment.
