FIFE Council is being asked to approve the demolition in a conservation area of a Dunfermline house that’s already been knocked down.

Mr and Mrs Blair McGregor did not have permission to raze the two storey property at 2 Tolmount Crescent and replace it with a new build.

After the “mistake” was admitted, they have now said sorry to the council and submitted proposals in retrospect.

While it’s unlikely to happen, the local authority do have the power to order the property to be returned to “its original state” and that “can include re-building a house the same as one that has been demolished”.

A planning statement on behalf of the couple, who currently reside in Glenrothes, said there were three previously approved plans which allowed for extensions and alterations to the original house.

It continued: “At the outset, it is submitted that at all times, the applicant has sought to fully comply with the terms of these various planning permissions.

“During the course of the construction of the overall development covered by these three planning permissions, it became apparent to the applicant that the construction of the approved scheme of works to the original property presented a number of challenging technical difficulties that, having considered the range of options available, could be best overcome by down taking the original property to DPC (damp proof course) level and thereafter to progress to ‘reconstruct’ the dwelling house in accordance with the details approved under the various planning permissions.”

Photos of the house that’s now been demolished show an attractive four-bedroom property with a conservatory and garage. The new plan is to build a five-bedroom home with a sunroom on the site, which is just off St John’s Drive in the Garvock area of town.

The statement added: “The applicant undertook these works on the mistaken belief that if the reconstructed building matched the details of the approved scheme for the extension of the original dwelling house, the terms of the various planning permissions would have been complied with and it is with regret that the applicant did not seek appropriate professional advice to establish/clarify if this was indeed the case.

“Had the applicant sought such advice, he would have been made aware that such works were not covered by the terms of any of the extant planning permissions and that a further planning application would require to be lodged with the council.

“The applicant fully accepts the mistake made by him in relation to the works that have taken place thus far on the site and apologises for any inconvenience this may have caused for the council.”

A spokesperson said Fife Council can’t comment on a live application but added that “in this type of situation” the owner would be encouraged to seek retrospective planning permission.

They added: “The council is unlikely to take formal action over developments which, in planning terms, are deemed acceptable.

“However, if it is considered that an application is unacceptable and that enforcement action would be appropriate, then the landowner can be made to return any property to its original state. That can include re-building a house the same as one that has been demolished.”