- Aberdare Office +44 (0)1685 888 730
- Alcester Office +44 (0)1789 765522
- Bedford Office +44 (0)1234 400000
- Birmingham, Newhall St. Office +44 (0)121 703 2606
- Bristol Office +44 (0)1454 275 190
- Cardiff Office +44 (0)29 2240 8700
- Eastbourne Office +44 (0)1323 928 500
- Evesham Office +44 (0)1386 425300
- Harrow Office +44 (0)20 8907 4366
- Leicester Office +44 (0)116 255 9911
- Leigh Office +44 (0)1942 673311
- Lichfield Office +44 (0)1543 414426
- Northampton Office +44 (0)1604 233 200
- Redditch Office +44 (0)1527 406363
- Solihull Office +44 (0)121 705 2255
- Sutton Coldfield Office +44 (0)121 355 6118
- Swansea Office +44 (0)1792 983 755
- Tunbridge Wells Office +44 (0)1892 553090
- Walkden Office +44 (0)161 790 1411
- Walsall Office +44 (0)1922 720000
- Warrington Office +44 (0)1925 632267
- Westhoughton Office +44 (0)1942 816515
- Whitefield Office +44 (0)161 796 7920
- Wigan Office +44 (0)1942 244294
Homeowner ordered to demolish Executive Box on Worcester home
A Worcester homeowner has been ordered to tear down a controversial extension to her 125-year-old terraced house after it both drew fierce criticism from neighbours and was refused planning permission.
Rozia Hussain, who owns a local newsagents, added a large dormer to the front of her mid-terraced property on Wyld’s Lane as part of an extensive renovation project. The property, originally purchased for £100,000 in 2003, has undergone a complete transformation over the past four years and is now estimated to be worth up to £320,000, according to Rightmove.
However, neighbours have condemned the dormer, described by one as resembling “an executive box at a Premier League stadium”, arguing it spoils the character of the street. Others have called the addition a “monstrosity,” claiming it dominates the historic terrace and clashes with the area’s traditional architecture.
A retrospective planning application submitted by Mrs Hussain was rejected by Worcester City Council, which concluded that the dormer causes “significant harm” to both the property and the wider street scene.
In an official statement, the council said:
“By virtue of its size, design and position, the addition of the large box dormer to the front of the property results in detrimental impact and creates significant harm to the character and appearance of the existing property and wider street scene in which it sits.”
As part of the renovation, a wall and intercom system were also installed at the front of the property. Despite the backlash, Mrs Hussain appeared unaware of the planning decision when approached, saying: “I don’t know anything about the planning application being rejected. I don’t think it looks too big.”
The issue has stirred frustration amongst neighbours, one of whom revealed they had previously applied for a similar dormer, only to be denied permission themselves.
“When my friend visited, he asked what the monstrosity was on one of the houses,” the neighbour said. “So it’s clearly noticeable to people.”
Mrs Hussain has now been given three months to remove the unauthorised extension or face potential enforcement action from the council.
This article is for general information and interest purposes only and is not intended to provide legal advice, nor does it necessarily represent the views of HCB
