| No. | Condition Text |
|---|
| 1. | The structure constitutes an alien and incongruous feature at odds to the articulated and well proportioned building facade, not least through its discordant materials and dominating scale and form within the courtyard. This has the affect of obscuring architecturally interesting features on the facade and poorly responding to the surrounding built characteristics of the area. The marquee structure is therefore considered to be of poor design and inappropriate to its setting, contrary to the requirements of adopted Core Strategy (2015) Policy CS9(a) and Paragraphs 130 of the NPPF (2021), and refusal of the application is consistent with the expectations of Paragraph 134 of the NPPF (2021). |
| 2. | The application site complex includes buildings of historic original and likely heritage vale and significance to both the immediate locality and the remainder of the village. The proposal will mask the entire ground floor of the original building's entrance and principal elevation, and represents an intrusive and incongruous addition which has no regard to the proportions and symmetry of the building, and results in an uncomplimentary, unsympathetic and obtrusive addition to the complex which detracts from the heritage interest of the site. In the absence of any supporting information to the contrary, it is considered likely that the building represents a non-designated heritage asset and the development will cause a level of harm to the heritage asset. Notwithstanding the seasonal nature of the proposal, the development is considered to create a significant level of 'less than substantial' harm to the asset's setting, character and appearance, being contrary to Core Strategy Policy CS10, and Local Plan Part 2 policy E5 because it does not conserve and enhance the significance of the heritage asset. |
| 3. | The proximity of the development to nearby and adjoining residential dwellings, the uncertain ability to enforce restrictive conditions concerning the nature of the use of the development, the increased intensity of the use, and the absence of any mitigation proposals within the application, provides sufficient doubt that the development will avoid creating unacceptable detrimental impacts on the amenity of residential neighbours, contrary to Core Strategy Policy CS9(f), Local Plan Part 2 (2021) Policy A1 and NPPF Paragraph 130(f). |
| 4. | The marquee is considered to bring only a small increase in likely extended use of the external area for seated meals at the restaurant and use of the bar and therefore only very small wider public benefit, which is not considered able to outweigh the harms caused to the heritage setting and interest of the site, nor outweigh the conflict with the development plan caused by the detrimental effects caused to the appearance of the building and the potential harm caused by detrimental impacts on residential amenity. |
