29-05-2025
Plans for two Newport homes with garages are rejected
The plans, by applicant D Gibby, were for the rear garden of a property on Ridgeway, Newport, but were turned down due to several issues.
The site, which includes a single-storey garage, is next to ancient woodland, known as Coed y Glasllwch Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC).
A report noted the "significant alteration" of the site's ecological value due to the recent felling of mature trees.
The proposed homes, both two storeys with four bedrooms each, raised several concerns.
Highways officers objected repeatedly, citing safety concerns over the driveway width and lack of pedestrian visibility.
The proposed waste collection arrangements were also deemed unsuitable due to the distance from the highway and the site's sloping terrain.
Ecological and tree officers voiced major concerns over the absence of a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) and the unassessed felling of mature trees.
The report said: "The removal of the trees has destroyed the habitats of several species, including bats, badgers, foxes, and hedgehogs."
The ancient woodland, protected under a Tree Preservation Order from 2013, was another significant point of contention.
The council's landscape officer noted the lack of any visual impact or green infrastructure assessment, stating the development did not align with the existing landscape or ecological context.
The planning application also faced opposition from the public, with six letters of objection.
Residents raised concerns about environmental degradation, overdevelopment, access and amenity impacts, and overlooking.
One letter stated: "The proposal would result in noise disturbance, light pollution and compromise security of neighbouring properties."
Councillors Drewett, Fouweather, and Evans also strongly objected, citing privacy loss, environmental damage, tree removal, traffic, and light/noise pollution.
Cllr Drewett particularly emphasised the impact on ancient woodland and the character of the area, stating: "Development threatens local wildlife, trees, and natural habitats."
The refusal of the application, listed under number 24/1034, was based on seven detailed reasons, summarised as overdevelopment and visual harm from the backland design, inadequate pedestrian safety and waste management access, detrimental impacts on residential amenity and biodiversity, inappropriate access design, and a lack of affordable housing contribution.
The statutory expiry date was May 9, 2025, but the decision was marked as refused before this date.
