Great Yarmouth Borough Council

No.	Condition Text
1.	It is considered that where agricultural buildings are converted, they should not be extended, as this leads to wider impact on the form and character of the building in the landscape and reflects that rural conversion of buildings with intrinsic character that is worth preserving is justified, allowing residential development therefore in less sustainable locations but this without the need for extension of the built form. The proposal is contrary therefore to saved policy HOU11(C) where the building should be suitable for conversion without extensive alteration or extension and Emergent policy H7 where conditions are stated as being required to avoid future extensions, curtilage buildings or other domestic paraphernalia undermining heritage or landscape justification for conversion.
2.	The proposal creates harm to the setting of the designated grade 1 listed barn heritage asset where the changes proposed alter the historic meaning of the agricultural group and the barns themselves as un-designated heritage assets are affected by the extension and its impact on the wider landscape and understanding of the asset. This is considered contrary to paragraph 193 of the National Planning Policy Framework where the significance of a Grade 1 asset carries great weight and paragraph 194, where any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification, and Core Strategy Policy CS10 where proposals should preserve or enhance assets, and where these extensions are considered to do neither.

No.

Condition Text

It is considered that where agricultural buildings are converted, they should not be extended, as this leads to wider impact on the form and character of the building in the landscape and reflects that rural conversion of buildings with intrinsic character that is worth preserving is justified, allowing residential development therefore in less sustainable locations but this without the need for extension of the built form. The proposal is contrary therefore to saved policy HOU11(C) where the building should be suitable for conversion without extensive alteration or extension and Emergent policy H7 where conditions are stated as being required to avoid future extensions, curtilage buildings or other domestic paraphernalia undermining heritage or landscape justification for conversion.

The proposal creates harm to the setting of the designated grade 1 listed barn heritage asset where the changes proposed alter the historic meaning of the agricultural group and the barns themselves as un-designated heritage assets are affected by the extension and its impact on the wider landscape and understanding of the asset. This is considered contrary to paragraph 193 of the National Planning Policy Framework where the significance of a Grade 1 asset carries great weight and paragraph 194, where any harm to, or loss of, the significance of a designated heritage asset (from its alteration or from development within its setting), should require clear and convincing justification, and Core Strategy Policy CS10 where proposals should preserve or enhance assets, and where these extensions are considered to do neither.