Agenda item

Recommendation: Conditional approval

Items 16 and 17 were debated together due to their associated nature, with sperate votes having taken place. The substantive combined minutes are contained within minute item 16.

Rachelle Shepherd-DuBey declared an interest in this application and left the room for its duration. Andrew Mickleburgh became the Vice-Chair in the chair.

Proposal: Householder application for proposed single storey rear extension, installation of glazed turret spiral staircase, extension of existing first floor roof terrace with 2No. rooflights, new terracing, lawns and stone pathing to the rear, and associated fenestration, following removal of integral spiral staircase.

Applicant: Mr and Miss Paul and Sarah Warn and Perkins

The Committee considered a report about this application, set out in agenda pages 345 to 382.

The Committee were advised that there were no updates contained within the Supplementary Planning Agenda.

Imogen Shepherd-DuBey, Wokingham Town Council, spoke in objection to the application. Imogen stated that this application involved a listed building within the conservation area of Wokingham and was the former home of William Martin who was the mayor of Wokingham Town Council. Martin’s pool was an outdoor pool area which was built by Martin using his own money, and it included bridges, fountains, rockeries and caves within a grotto. Imogen recalled the outrage when the pool was sold and demolished by Wokingham District Council. Imogen raised concerns in relation to the rockery, which was constructed in the 1920’s in the same style as Martin’s pool whilst originally being open to the public. Imogen felt that the information contained within the third party heritage report did not fully acknowledge the full heritage of the site. Imogen understood that the current family wished to modernise their space, however felt that Wokingham would lose some of its heritage should the rockery be removed completely, which the Wokingham Society concurred with.

Paul Warn, applicant, spoke in support of the application. Paul stated they had purchased the property as they loved its history and they had previously owned a listed building in Barkham. On purchase, they had accepted that the property did require significant investment to move it towards its next stage and to futureproof it for future owners. The design brief was to preserve and blend with significant historical features whilst improving upon some of the functional aspects to be more in keeping with modern living. A lot of work and efforts had gone in to ensuring that guidelines and policies were followed, including working closely with architects, undertaking historical research, and commissioning a detailed heritage assessment. There was a desire to restore the prominent historical Italianate aspect of the garden, the cross pond and associated brick works and to bring this design into a new terrace to replace the current rockery transition from the back of the house and the existing Italianate aspect. Paul stated that it was a key to the redevelopment was to use reclaimed bricks and replicating wall and pillar design seen in the existing Italianate garden and within the former Martin’s pool. The current circular design feature seen in the pond would also be replicated within the lawn terrace design. Paul added that it was neither the expectation or the intention for the new terrace design to be of lower maintenance than the rockery, however the garden as a whole did require a lot of maintenance without direct access from the rear as previously existed when the meadow and pool were present, nor from the side. A such, a functional aspect of the design was to create more direct access through the garage and house but not via the utility space. Paul stated that other functional aspects to the scheme included the repair of the porous roof and back wall to the utility room, increased kitchen size, and to create an occasional bedroom and study. The house designs were of modest scale and follow on from work carried out in the 1980 and 2000. Paul added that the design drew on original characteristics including landscaped steps in a contemporary manner whilst maintaining the narrative of the building. It was difficult to determine how much of the rockery was original, and the rockery did not feature within the historic plans. The paths had been augmented and materially redesigned in the 1980’s, whilst the water features within the rockery contained plastic piping within concrete and modern electrics. Paul noted that the bridge structure constituted of reinforced concrete and was in disrepair, which would require material amendment and repair in any case to improve its safety to a modern standard. Mature TPOd trees at the rear of the garden were to be retained, whilst some younger and poorer quality trees were due to be removed and replaced with a greater number of trees and a number of oak species. The staircase within the Victorian part of the house was not being removed, whilst the steel staircase installed in the 2000’s was proposed for removal.

Kate Cooper, architect, spoke in support of the application. Kate stated that this had been a thorough and lengthy process which had taken into account a wide range of considerations. Kate felt that the application needed to be viewed in its current context and condition with no public access, whilst officers had not called for it to be retained. Kate asked that the Committee approve the application.

Rachel Bishop-Firth, ward member, spoke in objection to the application. Rachel stated that she was not opposed to the development overall, and understood the wishes of the family to extend and modernise their house and garden so that it was easier to maintain. Rachel hoped that in the process a piece of Wokingham’s history was not lost. Rachel stated that properties on The Terrace were some of the most beautiful and distinct within Wokingham, whilst the Wokingham Society felt that the removal of the staircase would affect the layout of the listed building. The bridges, sunken pathways and rockery area were uniquely designed and are the last remnants of the unusual design found at Martin’s pool before it was demolished. Rachel asked that trees were retained wherever possible. Should the application be approved, Rachel asked that as much of this unique garden as possible was retained.

Stephen Conway commented that there was no longer any public access to the garden, and noted that should the rockery be retained it would still not be publicly seen.

John Kaiser queried whether the garden area counted as part of the built heritage. Tariq Bailey-Biggs, case officer, confirmed that the gardens were listed.

Gary Cowan commented that he had lived in a Grade 2 listed building, and he had found in general that occupiers of these properties were people who go on with the very best of intentions, and he believed that this was the case for this application.

Stephen Conway was of the opinion that certain historical features, for example the Italianate style, were being retained which was central to the design.

Andrew Mickleburgh noted that the heritage statement included comment that the existing structure in that part of the garden were totally unsuited to domestic gardens.

RESOLVED That application number 220825 be approved, subject to conditions and informatives as set out in agenda pages 346 to 348.