PROPOSALS for a new restaurant at a former post office in Swansea have been set back after a planning inspector said it can’t include takeaways or deliveries.
A husband and wife had secured change of use permission from Swansea Council last year to set up a restaurant at the old Caereithin Post Office in Ravenhill but a planning condition was imposed prohibiting takeaways because of its proximity to a busy junction and a lack of parking spaces for people picking up food.
The couple then applied to the council to vary the condition to allow a takeaway service. Their planning agent contended that the presence of double yellow lines, a bus stop and pedestrian guard railing prevented indiscriminate parking and waiting and that there wasn’t evidence of such activity despite nearby businesses attracting short-term visits.
The agent added that the majority of takeaways were delivered to people’s homes these days – often on mopeds and e-bikes – rather than being collected, and that this would give the restaurant business more control over parking.
“Whilst it is recognised that deliveries and collections fall within the category of takeaways they are fundamentally different in character,” said the agent’s report. It claimed a nearby business had introduced takeaways without any apparent issues.
The council took a different view and said the increased to-ing and fro-ing of customers would cause indiscriminate and unacceptable short-term parking nearby. “The close proximity to the signalised crossroads of Pentregethin Road with Ravenhill Road further exacerbates this issue,” said the planning officers’ report.
The report added that a nearby cafe had sought consent for takeaways in 2021 and that this also been refused.
The applicants keen to redevelop the former post office appealed the council’s decision but this has now been dismissed. The inspector from Welsh Government body planning and environment decisions Wales said there was no “cogent evidence” that having more deliveries as opposed to collections would reduce highway safety risks in this case.
“There is also no direct evidence that links delivery services to any less ad hoc or indiscriminate patterns than customer collections,” said the inspector’s report. “Similarly, it is not clear how the appellants would effectively control parking behaviours by delivery drivers.”
