PLANS to partially demolish a 19th-century Newport listed building, convert it to flats and build houses in its grounds have been given the go-ahead again.
Planning councillors previously approved plans to partially demolish Grade II-listed Woodlands House, on Woodlands Drive, Malpas, in April, 2012.
But the council held off issuing permission after a threat of judicial review from campaigning group Save Britain’s Heritage.
Planning permission for the project was approved again at Newport council’s planning committee meeting yesterday, following changes made to the scheme.
Save Britain’s Heritage yesterday didn’t rule out the prospect of further action.
Under the plans, Rydale Court Properties wants to knock down extensions on the run-down house, and convert it into six apartments. The company would build seven homes in the grounds of the property.
But Save Britain’s Heritage had threatened a review, saying the house was a rare survivor of its type and period in the city and important as part of the development of Newport.
Welsh heritage organisation Cadw also expressed concerns over how much the retaining of the whole building had been explored.
Since then more survey work and information on the project’s viability has been submitted, while the scheme has been subject to significant alterations. These include the retention of the central hallway and stairwell that were previously earmarked for removal.
Malpas councillor, Jane Mudd, whose ward covers the property, welcomed the application saying: “This particular property has been a blight on the community for many many years.”
Caerleon councillor, Paul Huntley, added: “I don’t think we can jeopardise this scheme. I do think it would be of benefit to the community of Malpas.”
An officers’ proposal for the application for permission to be granted was passed unanimously.
A spokesman for Save Britain’s Heritage said: “We’ll be looking closely at the planning application and any new documentation submitted following the council’s decision to grant planning approval, but at this time we cannot indicate either way whether we will be pursuing a judicial review.”