Work has begun to transform an iconic seafront hotel in Tenby, after plans were given the go-ahead by the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority.
Full and listed building applications (Ref: NP/24/0296/LBA & NP/24/0295/FUL) for the Fourcroft Hotel situated along The Croft, for replacement of the dormered mansard roof structure; windows and render to the front elevation of the premises, reinstating historic details have been approved by PCNPA, with conditions set out.
The applicant’s agent states that the proposal largely involves later additions to the historic hotel, seeking their removal and in the case of the roof, a more sympathetic design, whilst the reinstatement of the lost balcony is welcomed.
The proposal preserves the setting of the listed building and there is no impact on the setting of surrounding buildings apart from the enhancement of Croft Terrace through the reinstatement of the balcony.
Tenby Town Council supported the application, however, Tenby Civic Society objected to the proposals, due to the retrospective nature of some of the works and potential need for a ‘change of use’ in light of the future use of the building still being unclear.
The Grade II-listed seafront hotel that overlooks the North Beach has been closed since 2019, after it was one of several properties acquired by ‘entrepreneur’ Gavin Woodhouse that went into administration following a high court hearing.
New owners Mark Chaichian and his wife Jenny whose parents own the Park Hotel nearby, set out a programme of works towards the end of 2022 to renovate the building and garden area but admitted at the time that they were unsure as to whether the premises would return as a hotel.
Adressing concerns of the Civic Society, an officer’s report to PCNPA planners stated: ‘Revised drawings clarify the construction of the front mansard windows, and a suitable condition will be added with regard to those to the rear.
‘Retrospective applications have, to date, always been assessed on the merits of the scheme. In this case, the demolition of the rear extensions does not adversely effect the character or appearance of the building of special architectural or historic interest.
‘The proposal is considered to be separate to the requirement for ‘change of use’ in that the works do not in themselves preclude the ongoing existing use.
‘The proposal is appropriate in terms of size, scale and detail - an as such, can be supported subject to conditions.’
