Support quality, independent, local journalism…that matters

From just £1 a month you can help fund our work – and use our website without adverts. Become a member today

A family’s proposal to extend their home has won planning permission despite neighbour concerns.

The Habib family applied for a ground-floor extension and a smaller upstairs extension at their Western Avenue home.

Speaking at a Newport City Council planning committee meeting, on Wednesday August 6, one family member urged the local authority to show “compassion” in granting the scheme, which she said would provide an “appropriately designed space” for a relative with additional needs.

The family’s original proposals for a larger extension had been scaled back in response to the council’s initial concerns, she added.

A neighbour, Jeff Connolly, told the committee the proposed extension would leave his property “overshadowed and boxed in”.

He said the property had already been extended under a previous application for a conservatory, and he feared approving the new project would “set a precedent for future development” in the neighbourhood.

Two of the Allt-yr-yn ward’s three councillors had “expressed concerns about overdevelopment”, he added.

One of them, Cllr Matthew Evans, told the committee he had “empathy” for the applicants’ case but in planning terms “there is a principle of what is acceptable”.

Planners’ conclusions that the development wouldn’t result in significant harm were “hardly a ringing endorsement”, he added.

Case officer Adam Foote said the council was “satisfied this application is acceptable… regardless of the personal circumstances that have been discussed”.

“We consider the planning merits of this scheme to be acceptable,” he added.

The committee also heard that ward councillor Pat Drewett had submitted written comments in support of the application.

However, Mr Connolly noted Cllr Drewett had previously opposed a single-storey extension proposal elsewhere in Western Avenue, which the councillor said at the time “risks setting a precedent for overdevelopment in the area, leading to a loss of the neighbourhood’s character”.

Commenting on the current proposal before the committee, Cllr Trevor Watkins questioned the overall increase in the property’s footprint, given the second proposal for its extension.

“It concerns me that could be an overdevelopment,” he said.

Mr Foote said planners were “satisfied” the property would have “ample space left for amenity”.

Members of the planning committee granted permission for the extension, subject to several conditions including that the proposed flat roof must not be used “in any form as a balcony, roof terrace, storage area, sitting out area or similar amenity area”.