Plans to build a mixed housing and retail development at Tenby’s former Royal Mail sorting office have been deferred until a possible condition stopping their use as holiday homes can be discussed.

Members of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority’s development management committee who met on Wednesday, March 8, were recommended to back an application for the demolition of the sorting office in the conservation area, replacing it with a 19th century-style four-storey mixed development of 34 residential units and ground-level commercial properties.

The application, made by Trillium (RMF) Ltd, includes five affordable housing units, four of which would be socially rented.

Tenby Town Council had recommended the main scheme be refused due to what it sees as a lack of affordable housing and – along with similar concerns from Tenby Civic Society – impact on the surrounding area.

Six letters of objection have been received, raising concerns including over-development, a lack of affordable housing, and a lack of parking.

Concerns had been raised at the March 8 meeting about the low level of affordable housing in the application, with Tenby county councillor for the seaside town’s South ward Cllr Sam Skyrme-Blackhall saying she would not back the application because of a lack of social housing.

“The affordable element is something that is really bothering me, I know as a town there isn’t enough,” she said.

Concerns were also raised at the meeting about a roof terrace included in the application, with fears it may potentially cause interruption to nearby church and chapel-goers if residents were ‘partying’.

Councillor Mike James asked if there could be a local connection criteria could be attached to the affordable housing, later proposing the application be deferred for clarification on whether a ‘dwellinghouses, used as sole or main residences,’ commonly referred to as a C3, condition could be applied to the housing.

His deferment call also included an opportunity to look at a roof terrace concerns.

Councillor Simon Hancock, who had previously moved the recommendation for approval delegated to officers be adopted, withdrew his motion in favour of the amendment.

Members agreed, by eight votes to six, with two abstentions, to defer the application to the April meeting of the development management committee to receive more details.