Planning discussions continue over proposals to transform historic stables near Tenby harbour to form a ‘drinking quarters’ - with Town Councillor Charles Dale telling his committee colleagues that he remained concerned for neighbours and the fact that they have not been consulted.

Full and listed building planning applications submitted by Mike Evans of the Harbwr Brewery to the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park (PCNPA) are for a retrospective ‘change of use’ of parts of the former Grade II Listed stables building and stable yard on Sergeants Lane, to A3 use for the sale of food or drink for consumption on the premises.

The retrospective plans also include alterations to roofs, and some changes to fenestration, windows and openings, and addition of roof lights.

However, residents living in the vicinity recently met with members of Tenby Town Council to point out and raise concerns that some alterations to the premises had already taken place, before planning consent was approved by the National Park Authority.

They stated that they had been in support, in principle, of the applicant regenerating the area and the endeavours to date, but pointed out that no prior consultation had been undertaken with neighbouring residents on the work recently carried out by the applicant.

Residents also raised concerns that, in the past there had been considerable noise generated by associated developments within the lane, and extending the A3 premises could exacerbate this.

Back in October, members of Tenby Town Council’s planning committee wrote PCNPA to state that they ‘declined to determine’ the application - as they were ‘unhappy with another retrospective application for the town, which has been undertaken without prior consultation with neighbouring residents’.

However, meeting again last month, the application was back on the table, with the clerk informing the committee that he had received further correspondence from the PCNPA conservation officer dealing with the application who pointed out that the Listed Building aspect for the proposals was not retrospective and was classed as a new application.

Cllr Laurence Blackhall felt that in light of guidance from the conservation officer, the committee should give consideration to the application once again.

Cllr Charles Dale who chaired the meeting told his fellow committee members that he felt they should still be making a decision based on the concerns raised by local residents.

“The work carried out by the applicant is never in doubt, it is always top notch,” he said.

“However, we have to consider the effect on local residents, the lack of consultation with them and the complaints received.

“Do we make our decision based on the concerns of those who live in the local area, or if the drawings are nice?!” he asked, stating that he was concerned for the neighbours and the fact that they were not consulted.

He said that the alleged presence of a karaoke machine was also a concern.

Cllr Blackhall asked if the residents were opposed to the application in general or just asking for noise and disturbance to be taken into consideration?

“Clearly they have legitimate concerns, but are they suggesting they could be overcome?” he remarked.

Cllr Trevor Hallett said that the applicant was developing the area and trying to keep its character as best as they can. “It needs development to tidy it up, and I think it is a good idea,” he told his colleagues.

Cllr Dai Morgan believed that building wise, and to preserve and enhance that historic part of the own, there was nothing wrong with the application, but noise and over development were the main concerns for residents in that area.

Having revisited the application, members of the planning committee elected to recommend that while they ‘welcomed plans to enhance and preserve these historic buildings, they were concerned as to the effect of the expansion of the business on the amenity of neighbours’.

The application is due to come before PCNPA’s development management committee in the near future to be determined.