| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | There are no public benefits to the acceptance of works that would lead to substantial harm to a designated heritage asset and therefore the application is refused in accordance with paragraph 133 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The inappropriate materials and glazing would significantly reduce the importance of the building and therefore should be resisted in line with paragraph 132 of the National Planning Policy Framework as there is no exceptional reason for such reduction in value of a heritage asset to occur. |
| 2. | The details that accompany the application are insufficient to make a determination; there are no details of the proposed windows or elevation drawings showing the alterations proposed. The absence of sufficient details and heritage statement is contrary to paragraph 128 of the National Planning Policy Framework and demonstrates that the significance of the heritage asset has not been considered as part of the application. The lack of information prevents a conclusive assessment to be made, the details that have been provided indicate an inappropriate form of development which would have a significant adverse impact on the distinctiveness of the locality and erode the character contrary to policy CS9 of the adopted Core Strategy. |
| 3. | The insertion of windows of inappropriate materials, design and glazing would not improve the heritage asset and would be detrimental to the appearance and value contrary to policy CS10 of the adopted Core Strategy. The heavy profile of uPVC imparts a bulky, unattractive appearance which is often at odds with the proportions and traditional character of historic properties and would have an adverse effect on the character of the building and the area contrary to policy CS10 and CS9 of the adopted Core Strategy and saved policy BNV18 of the Borough Wide Local Plan. |
| 4. | STATEMENT OF POSITIVE ENGAGEMENT (REFUSALS): In accordance with the NPPF, in determining this application for planning permission, the Borough Council has approached it in a positive and proactive way and where possible has sought solutions to problems to achieve the aim of approving sustainable development. Unfortunately, despite this, in this particular case the development is not considered to represent sustainable or an acceptable form of development and has been refused for the reasons set out above.
|
