A CIVIL engineer has hit out at the council after they gave his neighbour the go-ahead to build a “ridiculous” dormer on their bungalow.

Derek Adams, who has lived in his home on Glasgow Road in Paisley for 28 years, says it feels like the building, which is still under construction, is “sitting on top of him” when he’s in his back garden.

The 67-year-old had objected to the plan that was first submitted to Renfrewshire Council in 2021.

But the application for a single-storey extension to the side of his neighbour’s Dalfoul Court home as well as a dormer to the front and rear was approved.

(Image: Gordon Terris) Earlier this year, building work began.

Derek, who lives with his wife and daughter, 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. Well, they're effectively creating a new roof. It's not really a dormer, they're effectively adding a second storey. It’s over-developed.

“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.”

(Image: Gordon Terris) After realising how big the dormer was being constructed, Derek had a closer look at the plans.

In September 2022, a non-material variation (NMV) request submitted by the homeowner was approved by the council.

The local authority’s decision notice states the changes are “to various openings on the extension and rear dormer” – which were detailed as the size and positioning of the doors and windows.

The document does not specify any changes in the size of the dormer.

Derek said: “What I realised was, between revision A (original planning application) and revision B (NMV) there was actually an increase in the length of the dormer.

Revision A vs BRevision A vs B (Image: Supplied) “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.

“It was showing on the architect’s section, but it wasn't covered at all in any of the paperwork or the NMV description or approvals.

“I have an e-mail from the case officer confirming that the extension of that dormer along my face of the building wasn’t included in the NMV, so reading between the lines, it has been missed. The whole thing is a mess.”

Derek has made “umpteen” requests for a council officer to come out to his property to have a look, but these have been refused.

“They’ve certainly not come into my garden, and I offered,” he said. "I told them ‘Come out and I'll point out where the errors are’ and they haven't come out.”

(Image: Gordon Terris) A spokesperson for Renfrewshire Council said: “Our officers have visited the property and consider the development underway 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 a 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.”