| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The application proposes the insertion of two top-hung opening uvpc windows on the northern elevation of 20 King Street. These windows would fail to respect the historic rhythm and proportions of the building through the unsympathetic form, style and use of uvpc windows in their proposed positioning and siting, and are considered inappropriate in materials and form and design. The addition of two further inappropriate windows would be harmful to the appearance of the building and this would subsequently cause further harm to the significance of the Conservation Area exacerbating the harm generated by the presence of unauthorised uvpc windows on the front elevation. As such, the application is contrary to the adopted Great Yarmouth Local Plan Core Strategy (2015) policies CS09 A and CS10, as well as Great Yarmouth Local Plan Part 2 (2021) policy E5, and Paragraph 199 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021). |
| 2. | Paragraph 202 of the NPPF requires that any level of 'less-than-substantial harm' to designated heritage assets should be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. In this case, there would be a fairly high degree of less-than-substantial harm to the Conservation Area designated heritage asset, especially when viewed in conjunction with the appearance of the unauthorised unsympathetic windows already installed on the front elevation. It is not considered that this application presents a level of public benefit which would outweigh the harm caused to the appearance of the building and the wider detrimental impact on the significance and character of the Conservation Area. |
| 3. | The property is located within the King Street Conservation area (No4), a designated heritage asset. Paragraph 200 from the NPPF requires that there should be clear and convincing justification for any harm to the significance of a heritage asset. No such justification has been proposed. It is therefore considered that the development will be detrimental to the appearance of the building and create harm to the significance and character of the Conservation Area, which is not resolved nor outweighed by public benefit. As such the proposal remains contrary to the development plan and there are no material considerations to justify a decision contrary to the plan. Furthermore, the proposal would not address the duty within Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to have regard to the need to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area. |
| 4. | The property is located within the King Street Conservation area (No4) and it is an expectation of Local Plan Part 2 policy E5 that an application which has the potential to impact on Heritage Assets or their settings (such as in a Conservation Area) should be supported by a Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by an individual with relevant expertise. There is no such Heritage Impact Assessment submitted with the application and therefore the application is supported by insufficient information to comply with Local Plan Part 2 policy E5 and with Paragraph 194 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2021). |
| 5. | 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. |
