Top Boy star Ashley Walters launches new bid to extend his £1million family home after two previous plans were rejected for the designs being 'overpowering'

Top Boy star Ashley Walters has launched a third bid to extend his family home - after his two previous proposals were rejected.

The Netflix actor has been battling to get his vision for his bungalow near Herne Bay in Kent approved.

The father-of-eight wants to extend the height of the ceilings amid fears his kids will be 'banging their heads' as they continue to grow, but Canterbury City Council (CCC) have already turned two applications down.

Mr Walters, who plays drug kingpin Dushane in the hit crime drama, previously revealed that he would consider moving home if the decisions went against him again.

However, it appears he has no intention of throwing in the towel just yet - as a new application to extend the property has been submitted to CCC.

Papers show that the 41-year-old still intends to expand the front and rear of the bungalow - but the scale of the development appears to have been significantly reduced.

Speaking at his home in December, Mr Walters, who first rose to fame as a member of UK hip hop group So Solid Crew, said: '[The extension] is about making it slightly bigger in height because it's a bungalow conversion.

'The top floor is essentially in the roof, which means you are kind of ducking.

'As the kids grow they will be banging heads on the ceiling so we are just trying to make that a bit higher.'

Mr Walters added that he was 'a big fan' of the area and his children were settled in school, so he did not want to move his family back to London.

But he admitted: 'It is highly likely if we cannot get it the way we want to, we will have to move out of this part of Kent.

'We would just have to find somewhere else locally that suits our needs.'

Mr Walters submitted an appeal earlier this year after his second application was rejected by CCC.

However, the council's decision was upheld by Stewart Glassar, who described the designs as 'strident, discordant, and overpowering'.

Despite noting some of the proposed features were 'no doubt designed to minimise the size and scale of the works, and thus their visual effect', he claimed 'the result would nevertheless be a significantly larger building'.

He wrote: 'The principal and side elevations would have a much greater overall massing, that would noticeably contrast with the immediately neighbouring bungalows.

'Once extended, the building would have a strident, discordant, and overpowering appearance.

'As a result, it would dominate and significantly harm this part of the street scene.'

Concluding, he added: 'The proposed development would have an unacceptable effect on the character and appearance of the area.

'The proposal would also be contrary to provisions within the National Planning Policy Framework which include requirements that development should add to the overall quality of an area and be sympathetic to local character.'