Rear extension and pergola at Manorbier House, Manorbier, Tenby

What was proposed

The application proposed rebuilding the rear extension, adding a pergola and front railings, and replacing single-glazed sash windows.

“Ref No: NP/25/0515/FUL Proposal: Rebuilding of ground floor rear extension, construction of pergola, alterations to roof. Replacement of all single glazed windows with double-glazed sash windows. Addition of railings to yard at front Site Location: Manorbier House, Manorbier, Tenby, Pembrokeshire, SA70 7TD”

“Manorbier House is a traditional, unlisted building in the centre of Manorbier Conservation Area, prominently located within the village’s historic core. The application seeks permission for a rebuilt rear extension with patio doors, a rear garden pergola, front boundary railings, and replacement of single-glazed sash windows.”

Officer report

The site

Manorbier House is an unlisted traditional building in the village’s historic core and Manorbier Conservation Area.

“Manorbier House occupies a village centre location within Manorbier Conservation area and within the centre boundary of the ‘rural centre’ of Manorbier (as defined by PCNP Local Development Plan 2). The building is not listed but is one of the mainly 19th-century stone- built houses and other buildings that form the small, historic village core. The property is traditionally built with slated roof and chimney stacks.”

“The property is set back slightly from the road and has a small front yard in the right angle formed by an extension to the front of the building, which this application seeks to enclose with a low dwarf wall and railings. It sits within a row of traditionally built houses which are highly visible from the public domain, both from the south (village centre) and from the B road which runs round and along the rear of the properties on the row.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the amended scheme was acceptable in scale, design, amenity, historic, ecological and landscape terms, subject to conditions.

“The proposed scheme is considered to be acceptable in terms of scale, form, use and design. The development will not cause an unacceptably detrimental impact to the special qualities of the National Park. It is not considered that subject to the conditions listed in Section 5 of this report, the development will cause an unacceptable impact upon privacy or amenity of neighbouring properties.”

“The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: • Drawing 104 - Rev F Proposed Ground Floor Plan • Drawing 105 Rev F Proposed First Floor Plan • Drawing 106 - Rev G Proposed Attic Floor Plan • Drawing 202 - Rev G Proposed Elevations • Ecological Survey rec’d 20/10/2025 • Design & Access Statement • Heritage Impact Statement • Lighting Statement Reason: In order to be clear on the approved scheme of development in the…”

Officer report

Consultation responses

The Community Council opposed the application, while conservation, ecology, highways and rights-of-way consultees supported it or raised no adverse comments.

“The plans have been amended in line with advice from PCNPA’s Conservation Officer, with the previously proposed rear dormers and external fire escape now removed from the scheme. Consultee Response • Building Conservation Officer- recommending approval following submission of revised plans (initially recommend refusal) • Planning Ecologist – Conditional Consent • PCNPA Access & Rights of Way Officer - No Adverse Comments • Community Council – Refusal (not supporting) • Heneb…”

“Concerns have been raised by residents and nearby business owners regarding: • The proposal could facilitate or intensify existing usage for evening and late events at Manorbier House Café, which have been associated with noise and disturbance, particularly following late finishes to music events.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The agent spoke for the applicant, who was also present, describing modest improvements and confirming that the application did not seek changed use or extended hours.

Members’ debate

Members remained concerned about amenity issues but noted enforcement action and supported improvements intended to restore the building’s character.

“Members were concerned about the amenity issues raised by objectors, but officers re-iterated that these were being dealt with as an enforcement matter. It was noted that the application largely concerned internal alterations to the house and conditions were proposed to ensure that development did not cause disturbance to neighbours.”

“Members supported the improvements which would restore and retain the character of the building while improving facilities for its owners, but hoped that they would consider additional biodiversity gain measures beyond those required by condition 3. The recommendation of approval was proposed by Councillor George, seconded by Councillor James and carried.”

Minutes