Plans for a HMO in the Maindee area of Newport have been turned down for a second time.

City council planning officers judged the proposals to convert and extend the property at 22 Crown Street would have had a “significant adverse effect” on future occupiers and neighbours.

The applicant, a Mr Wheatle, had a previous bid for planning permission rejected earlier this year, and scaled back the size of the HMO from seven to six bedrooms in the amended proposals.

HMOs (houses in multiple occupation) are typically properties for between three and six single, unrelated adults who have their own private bedrooms but share other communal areas.

In a supporting statement, the applicant’s planning agents at KW Dorrington Architectural Associates argued the property was “quite large” and in an “extremely sustainable” location near Maindee Shops and public transport.

The initial application was rejected because of “inadequate” communal space, potential noise and overlooking from an outdoor area on the first floor, and increased parking demand.

The agents said the amended plans had cut the number of bedrooms to create additional communal space and reduce the property’s parking demand.

They also argued the new proposals would ensure better privacy for neighbours.

Council planners disagreed, however, finding the outdoor space on the first floor would have an “adverse” impact on neighbours because of potential noise and disturbance.

They also rejected the new plans because of “a lack of acceptable window openings serving the kitchen”, as well as that room’s proximity to one of the proposed bedrooms – which they said would “result in an unacceptable loss of privacy, and increased noise and disturbance”.

A planning report also shows the application drew 22 objections from neighbours during a recent consultation period, with concerns including parking pressures and fears of increased noise and waste if the property was converted to a HMO.

Cllr Farzina Hussain, who represents the Victoria ward, also objected to the application for the HMO, which she alleged would “result in poor detrimental impact on neighbouring residential amenity and the wider character of the area”.