Earley homeowner finds out about their extension plans

The owner of a semi-detached house in Chiltern Crescent, Earley, applied to add side and rear extensions to the property and do a loft conversion.

But their immediate neighbour objected to the plan, arguing it would lead to a loss of privacy and complaining about cooking smells during previous works. 

The extensions create a new kitchen and add two bedrooms, changing it from a three-bed to a five-bed property.

Due to the conflict between the neighbours, a decision on the project was made by Wokingham Borough Council's planning committee.

Councillor Stephen Newton (Liberal Democrats, Maiden Erlegh & Whitegates), who listed the plan for the committee to determine, argued the extensions went against the borough design guide.

Cllr Newtown said: “You are the custodians of this design guide.

“Development should respect and be sympathetic to the character of an area. They should minimise overlooking, loss of privacy or over-dominance.

“And when reviewing applications, full account should be taken of the mass and height in relation to adjacent development and surrounding spaces.”

There was an argument over the change of the roof extension from a hipped roof to a gable end.

Cllr Newtown called the proposed gable end roof 'unacceptable', with
Tim Marsh,  Whitegates Residents Association saying that it would be 'out of character'.

Mr Marsh stated that of the 87 houses in Chiltern Crescent, 40 have two-storey extensions, all of which have hip-end roofs. 

He said: “To add a gable end roof to an extended property would exaggerate an out-of-character and incongruous form of development. Furthermore, it would be the only extended gable end property in Chiltern Crescent.”

The project had been recommended for approval by planning officer Tariq Bailey-Biggs, who stated that cooking odours from the property are not a planning consideration.

He also explained that the extensions would not lead to an unacceptable loss of privacy.

Mr Bailey-Biggs said: “A mutual degree of overlooking between two adjoining properties is a common feature in any suburban environment with houses arranged in a linear format.

“It is not the purpose of planning policy or guidance to completely eliminate any visibility or intervisibility between houses. The purpose is to mitigate and prevent and reduce any unacceptable level of overlooking um towards say a rear patio area.

“The rear dormer windows in this question would largely offer views towards the far rear garden of the adjoining houses.

“Now there would be oblique views to the adjoining houses, but the oblique view is classed as a view where the onlooker or occupier would have to purposely stand in an angled way and purposely look into their neighbouring garden areas.

“It's the equivalent of sticking your head outside of a window and looking into your neighbouring garden area. Effectively, it wouldn't offer a direct constant line of sight into the neighbouring houses.”

Commenting on the design of some of the extensions in the area, cllr Wayne Smith (Conservative, Thames) said: “Don’t shoot me down, but there are some horrific extensions.”

The plan was unanimously approved on November 12.

You can view the application by typing reference 252161 into Wokingham council's planning portal.