a former tanning shop with cars parked outside it
The former beauty salon on Commercial Street, Pontnewydd, Cwmbran which planners have said cannot be converted to a cafe and takeaway. Credit: Google Street View

A DECISION to refuse permission to open a cafe in a former beauty salon has been upheld on appeal. 

However the independent planning inspector who considered the appeal disagreed with council planners who rejected the application as they ruled a proposed “large” extraction flue “would have a detrimental visual impact on the character and appearance of the property and wider area.”

Christopher Sweet upheld the refusal as he said the development would have a detrimental impact on the upper floor of the building at 7-9 Commercial Street in the centre of Pontnewydd, Cwmbran and the neighbouring building that are all used as flats. 

Applicant Gavin Cole, who hoped to create three jobs by opening the cafe, had appealed Torfaen Borough Council’s planning department’s decision to Planning and Environment Decisions Wales

Mr Sweet’s report stated: “The proposed flue would be positioned externally, close to that flat’s rear window openings and a number of those serving the upper floor flat next door.” 

He said little detail had been provided about the potential impact on the flats and as a result neither could he be satisfied a condition could allow permission to granted and stated: “I am unable to conclude that the proposed ventilation system would not significantly harm the living conditions of occupiers of the upper floor flats at the appeal building and its attached neighbour.” 

In its original decision, made in April 2025, Torfaen council said as it had rejected the application as visually unacceptable it hadn’t considered further information about the flue’s impact on neighbouring properties. 

Mr Sweet, who visited Commercial Street in January this year, said the flue “would not appear out of place or unduly dominant within the street scene” and dismissed the argument it would cause harm to the character and appearance of the area. 

The refusal was confirmed “due to the harm to the living conditions of nearby occupiers, which is an overriding consideration.”