A pizza chain will have to wait a little longer for a slice of the action in Tenby after members of Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority’s planning committee delivered their objections to the plans.

The application from Domino’s UK for a change of use from Class A1 (retail) to Class A3 (hot food takeaway) use, at the newly-built units along the South Parade, went before the PCNPA development management committee at a meeting in Pembroke Dock on Wednesday.

The plans would see the takeaway and restaurant unit sited adjacent to Tenby’s Grade II listed war memorial and opposite the historic town walls.

Both Tenby Town Council and Tenby Civic Society objected to the applications, feeling that the application would be disrespectful alongside the war memorial.

Tenby Chamber of Trade and Tourism also objected to the plans, expressing concern that an A3 business offering home delivered food with delivery vehicles would affect traffic flow along the South Parade.

Planning case officer for PCNPA Caroline Bowen, recommended in her report that the ‘change of use’ application be delegated to the authority’s team leader to grant permission to the application, subject to a transport management plan; the receipt of details of suitable acoustic details, and a list of further conditions, including waste collections to only be permitted between 7 am and 7 pm, Monday to Friday; and that the store be closed to members of the public at 10 pm, with deliveries up until midnight.

Tenby Town Council clerk Andrew Davies told the meeting that they were not adverse to Domino’s opening a unit in Tenby, but felt that this particular location wasn’t suitable, on the basis that it was along a one-way system, with double yellow lines on both sides of the street, with a bus stop also on the main route, and the fire station entrance nearby.

Mr. Davies stated that there would be potential increase to traffic and congestion with customers and delivery drivers illegally parking to collect food.

He also said that the application would have a detrimental effect to residents in the vicinity.

Thirteen letters objecting to the plans had been received by PCNPA, one of which represented six residents of the flats above the application site.

Cai Parry, of Barton Willmore, an independent planning and design consultancy firm who represent Pembrokeshire Housing, said that the plans would have a concerning impact on the amenity standards of residents living above the units, with the noise and odour from the premises.

He also said that the increase in traffic would be a danger to highway safety and that there was potential for an increase in the levels of littering, which would be highly inappropriate considering it was next to the War Memorial.

Mr. Parry said that Pembrokeshire Housing had not agreed to condition three in the recommendations, where it was proposed that ventilation/extraction equipment would be operated at the premises.

The agent speaking on behalf of the applicants Domino’s, Gareth Hooper told the meeting that the plans would benefit the local economy by bringing back into use the site and creating a number of jobs.

He also pointed out that the highways authority had raised no objections to the scheme and CADW had no concerns about the plans being in close proximity to the war memorial.

Case officer Ms Bowen said that a traffic impact assessment plan from the applicants to give more of a representation on data collated from a seaside resort was imminent.

PCNPA planning committee member Clr. Phillip Kidney told the meeting that he found it hard to think of a ‘worse place’ to put such a premises.

“It will just cause nothing but nuisance, noise and chaos for local residents.

“There is no sensitivity with the closeness to the cenotaph. It’s a recipe for disaster, and I certainly couldn’t support it,” he commented.

His colleague Mrs. Gwyneth Hayward agreed, and said that Tenby’s war memorial gardens deserved to have ‘tranquillity’.

“Imagine the fallout from pizza boxes falling in those gardens? I can’t believe that this is the right location,” she remarked.

Clr. Phil Baker said that he had the greatest of sympathy with the residents living above the site, as this application would be totally different to what they were expecting when they chose to live there.

Ted Sangster said that the planning officers had taken into account all concerns raised and on balance he would support their views to recommend that the application be delegated to the development management team leader to issue permission subject to conditions listed.

When put to the vote, six members rejected recommendations to pass the application with five approving it.

The members objecting pointed to the authority’s planning policies where the application would have an unacceptable impact on amenity, leading to extra noise late at night, and also that extra traffic would cause congestion and impact on road safety.

A further application for signage at the units on the South Parade was also discussed, with the applicants agreeing to proposed amendments beforehand to remove internal illumination from the fascia sign facing the war memorial.

“You couldn’t have a more sensitive area in Tenby than this,” commented committee member Clr. Mike Evans.

Members voted six in favour and five against approving the signage application.