Newport homeowner's extension angers neighbour

A Newport homeowner has been granted permission to complete his house extension despite objections from his nextdoor neighbour who claims it will compromise his privacy. Newport City Council's planning committee was told the "atypical" extension is currently under construction at the rear of 2 Ridgeway Hill, along a shared boundary. Applicant James George, reading a statement prepared by his architect, maintained that the extension is "shaped specifically to correspond with the existing site boundaries". He further described the project as a "modest, single-storey addition located entirely to the rear of the property". Never miss a Newport story by subscribing to our newsletter here Case officer Adam Foote confirmed the extension exceeded the size permitted under permitted development rights by 50cm. However, Mr George's nextdoor neighbour contended that the extension "falls short of the design standards typically applied in the neighbourhood". He argued that the angle of the properties' gardens would result in "a much greater impact", with the finished extension meaning it "would look directly at me as I stand in my garden". "It directly impacts my privacy", he said, adding he was "looking to enjoy my garden in retirement – but this overlooking will impact me". A number of committee members raised concerns about the extension being constructed in close proximity to a bay window on the neighbouring property. "I'm not happy in regards to the amount of light that is being taken away from that bay window," said Cllr Trevor Watkins. However, Mr Foote explained that if the extension was marginally reduced in size, it could be constructed in the identical location without requiring approval. "What can be done without planning permission is the majority of this proposal," he said. The officer noted that amongst the suggested conditions for planning approval was a restriction preventing any additional doors or windows along the extension's shared boundary. Committee members voted five to one to approve planning permission, subject to conditions.