A proposal to erect multiple solar panel arrays has been turned down due to excessive protrusion above the roof surface.

Newport City Council has denied a lawful development certificate for a solar photovoltaic installation at the Holiday Inn Express on Lakeside Drive in Coedkernew, after determining the panels would contravene planning policy height restrictions.

The developer had sought confirmation that the project could move forward without full planning consent, utilizing permitted development allowances that typically enable certain building works to proceed without formal authorization.

Such allowances only apply when particular criteria are satisfied, including a cap on how much panels can rise above a sloped roof.

Documentation filed with the council indicated the scheme comprised four solar panel sections across the hotel’s curved roof, each spanning approximately 28 metres by 4.5 metres.

The objection centred not on the panels themselves or their positioning, but rather on their elevation relative to the roof structure.

Planning guidelines specify that for sloped roofs, panels must remain within 20 centimetres of the roof surface to qualify for permitted development.

Here, the panels were engineered to extend up to 37 centimetres at their tallest section.

A council officer’s delegated decision stated that the solar panels were depicted as protruding 37 centimetres beyond the roof surface at their maximum height.

While the proposal failed on procedural grounds, officials identified no concerns regarding its visual impact or effects on surrounding residences.

The assessment observed that the panels were situated more than one metre from the roof perimeter and would not impact neighbouring properties.

It also highlighted that the hotel’s setting within a predominantly commercial zone near Cleppa Park and Celtic Lakes Industrial Park meant the installation would not seem inappropriate or out of keeping.

Despite these observations, the panel dimensions meant the proposal could not proceed under permitted development regulations.

In refusing the application, the council cited non-compliance with Schedule 2, Part 43, Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended.

Full planning permission is therefore necessary for the scheme to advance.

The ruling does not permanently prevent the project; it merely requires submission of a complete planning application for consideration.

Should the scheme gain approval through the standard planning procedure, the installation could potentially be implemented at a later stage.