Plans to modernise an old farm building in Penhow spark controversy with Newport City Council

Plans to modernise an old farm building in Penhow represent an “urban intrusion into open countryside”, according to Newport City Council planning officers.
The application to redevelop the building, off Arcade Road, has proved controversial with planners, who rejected a previous proposal for the site in 2023.
A Welsh Government inspector went on to dismiss the applicant’s appeal against that decision in March this year.
The new application is for the building, which is reportedly more than 100 years old, to be repurposed for residential use, including a small side extension, a separate stable block, garden and landscaping works, and new access and parking provision.
It is currently being used as an agricultural shelter.
The council’s planning department argues the proposal is simply a “resubmission” of the previously rejected plans, however.
At a meeting of the local authority’s planning committee on Wednesday September 4, east area development manager Joanne Davidson said officers “retain many of their previous concerns” about the redevelopment of the site.
These include the impact on the surroundings, which are “very rural” and contain a designated special landscape area, the committee heard.
Ms Davidson said the planning inspector raised concerns about a “significant” effect on “the appearance of the local area” during the previous appeal process.
She also said protected bats had formed a “maternity” habitat in the building, which if redeveloped would require significant structural works.
The applicant had proposed building a “bat house” to the satisfaction of Natural Resources Wales, Ms Davidson acknowledged.
But she told committee members the site was “unsustainable” and her officers had recommended planning permission be refused.
Spence Gadsby, the planning agent for the application, spoke in support of the proposal and rejected some of the council’s claims.
He alleged council planners had made “exaggerated claims” about the development, and defended the plan as being “committed to responsible development”.
Ward councillor Ray Mogford also spoke to the committee, telling members the application was “not simply a resubmission” of the previous plan refused in 2023.
There are “a lot of complexities” in the case, and the committee should “take a closer look” at the arguments, he urged.
Committee member Cllr John Reynolds reminded his colleagues they should only make a decision on planning considerations within the group’s remit.
A majority of committee members ultimately voted in favour of conducting a visit to the site to better understand the competing claims, before deciding the fate of the application. ‌​‌​‌​​​‍‌​‌​​‌‌‌‍‌​‌‌​​‌​‍‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍‌​‌‌‌‌​​

By BBC LDRS ‌​‌​‌​​​‍‌​‌​​‌‌‌‍‌​‌‌​​‌​‍‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‍‌​‌‌‌‌​​