A home to fill in a gap between two houses and a one-bed flat have both been approved, with both to be rented at affordable housing rates.

The Reading Borough Council (RBC) applications, both in west Reading, were unanimously backed by the council’s virtual Planning Applications committee on Wednesday, April 29.

Two other plans were voted on at the meeting, including a controversial extension plan that a councillor said would almost double the size of a house on a quiet cul-de-sac, which was refused.

Councillors also voted on a proposal for a “huge” 5G tower in Southcote, which they choose to defer a decision on.

The first proposal, in Southcote, to fit in a new house in a gap between 76 and 80 Circuit Lane in Southcote, was praised by the council’s lead member for Housing, John Ennis.

READ MORE: Here is how much extra funding your council is getting to tackle coronavirus

Cllr Ennis, who did not vote on the plan due to his role in creating the scheme, said: "I've often thought 'ooh you could get another house in'.

“I think a lot of other residents in the area said that. I think it is a great idea. It’s exactly what we should be doing -utilising as much as space as possible.”

Heritage lead Karen Rowland also backed the brownfield site scheme and said it would be a “welcome home for a small family”.

Council officers said the scheme will help with the borough’s housing needs.

READ MORE: Barn works “not restoration” and "long journey ahead" warn campaigners

The other approved plan, also a council scheme, will see a laundry room, bin store and cycle storage space converted into a one-bed flat at 72 Brunswick Street, west Reading, where there are currently 24 flats.

This is a resubmission of a previous plan which was slammed by neighbours, who said the area is already struggling with anti-social behaviour.

Cllr Ennis said: “I totally support the application and the reasons why it was withdrawn and then brought back.

“When it first came, there were issues about washing and drying facilities. It was a case of the council listening and then acting.”

The previous proposal was withdrawn because it did not include a proposal to replace the lost laundry facility, which has now been rectified.

While the previous plan sought to make the flat available for the homeless on a temporary basis, the updated version does not. No comments have been sent opposing the latest plans.