Mother's £170k 'two-floor mini-house' built for disabled daughter sparks 'barmy' neighbour row

The structure was meant to provide accommodation for her disabled daughter, but it is now at the centre of a bitter neighbour dispute.

Worcester City Council turned down her application on November 5, ruling that the building was "overbearing" and had an unacceptable impact on nearby residents.

The council found that the annexe's height, scale and proximity to boundaries created "an increased sense of enclosure and loss of outlook from neighbouring gardens."

Ms Birch insists she built the annexe in good faith for her disabled daughter, who has a "phobia of being on the ground floor at night."

She originally sought approval for a one-bedroom annexe to replace an existing garage at her semi-detached property.

The 58-year-old claims she believed she had the necessary permissions since June, and blames the property firm she hired for the planning fiasco.

"My planner royally messed up," she said. "On one application, he put it as an Airbnb, then he has done this."

She maintains that the two-storey building was specifically designed to meet her daughter's needs and give her independence. Neighbours, though, have branded the structure an "eyesore" that doesn't fit with the character of the street.

"I'm not sure how on earth they thought they could get away with throwing up that eyesore," one resident said. "Who builds a detached house in their back garden without getting permission first? It's barmy."

Several residents also claim the building encroaches onto their properties and has caused damage. One neighbour had a boundary surveyor confirm the annexe extends onto their land, with toilet piping and drain pipes installed on their property.

"There's no drain for the rain gutters, so it's dropping all on my side," they said.

Another resident complained that the structure overshadows their property and causes flooding issues, while complaints were made over privacy concerns, saying windows overlook gardens on both sides.

The council's planning decision highlighted several key issues with the development. Officials stated the build "fails to demonstrate a clear functional or physical dependency on the main dwelling."

They also found the size and scale of the works lacked "visual cohesion" with the surrounding area.

The planning application refusal noted: "The overall height, scale, and proximity of the annexe to adjoining boundaries result in a visually dominant and overbearing structure."

Council officials added: "The development leads to an increased sense of enclosure and loss of outlook from neighbouring gardens and results in an unacceptable impact on the amenity of nearby residents."

The Local Planning Authority said they had identified matters of concern with the proposal and set out the reasons for refusal clearly, giving Ms Birch the opportunity to consider whether revisions could remedy the harm caused.

Ms Birch has hit back at what she calls her "snotty neighbours" for "making life hell" over the development. She insists the annexe replaced a "massive" garage, wood shed and toilet, denying the new structure is oversized.

"I was born in this house, do you really think I'd want to ruin this?" she questioned.

The homeowner disputes claims that the building is a separate dwelling, stating it "hasn't got its own utilities" and is "linked to the house." She also revealed she's already lost £70,000 to a dodgy builder who left the property unstable.

Despite spending £170,000 in total, Ms Birch says she's still in the dark about what planning documents have been submitted.