Agenda item

Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) pursuant to planning permission 20/0138/FUL for minor change to design of windows of new build hotel and updating of information to reflect the proposed treatment of windows on existing building.
Duchess High School Annexe, 2 Bailiffgate, Alnwick, Northumberland, NE66 1LZ

Councillor Patterson arrived after D. Love had began the presentation, the presentation was restarted to allow Councillor Hunter to take part in the debate and subsequent vote

D. Love – Senior Planning Officer, addressed the committee and gave the following updates:

·       The Independent examination of the Northumberland Local Plan (NLP) had concluded, and the inspector considered that subject to a number of recommended Main Modifications, the NLP was “sound” and provided an appropriate basis for the planning of the County. The plan was on the final stage of preparation, with no unresolved objections. The plan was consistent with the national policy, therefore significant weight could be given to the policies in the NLP.

·       Paragraph 7.5 on both reports read “The principle of replacing historic windows is accepted where it can be demonstrated that there is some benefit to the building for doing so”. Although the act provided generalised support in principle for sustainable development, the loss of historic windows in a listed building and replaced with modern replicas would be assessed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate whether removing the windows would be harmful to the building’s significance.

Following the PowerPoint presentation, it was explained that applications 21/03038/VARYCO and 21/03039/VARYCO were both recommended for refusal with R. Kain – Built Heritage and Design Officer, explaining that the building was 225 years old, with Georgian windows which should be retained and repaired.

It was noted the Councillor Swinburn arrived during the presentation and would not be able to take part in any debate or vote for applications 21/03038/VARYCO and 21/03039/VARYCO

Guy Munden, spoke in support of the application and gave the following information to the committee:

·       The original planning application for the development was submitted in April 2020 and approved in April 2021.

·       The original scheme was intended to repair the existing windows where possible.

·       When the building was a school, it had lacked proper maintenance and the building was in urgent need of repair, as windows had been vandalised and dry rot had spread significantly.

·       The windows were beyond repair as dry rot had spread to the original window frames.

·       The replacement window frames were proposed to be a like-for-like hand-made timber frame, replicating the exact form of the historic windows.

·       The replacement glass would be cylinder glass, replicating the reflective quality of the historic glass.

·       Secondary glazing was deemed inappropriate as would cause greater harm to the internal appreciation of the building.

·       Double glazing would improve the thermal efficiency of the building.

·       The benefits of the site included: bringing back into use a vacant Listed Building, tourism, investment into the local economy and numerous job opportunities.

Following members questions to the Planning Officers and the Built Heritage Officer, the following information was provided:

·       The building had many of its original shutters, but officers were unable to confirm if they were in working condition.

·       Some of the windows on the rear of the building were showing signs of dry rot however the Built and Heritage Officer did not agree that all the windows were beyond repair.

·       Historic England guidance stated that thermal upgrading should be approached as a whole building, not only windows, this included: loft insulation, draught proofing and efficiency of heating systems.

Councillor Hill proposed to accept the officers recommendation to refuse the application, and this was seconded by Councillor Seymour.

Councillor Thorne explained that he would be voting against the motion as he believed that fit for purpose double glazed windows would benefit the development, this was agreed by Councillor Watson and Councillor Renner-Thompson.

A vote was taken as follows: FOR 4; AGAINST 3, ABSTAIN 1.

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED as the proposal would lead to “less than significant harm” to a Grade II listed heritage asset and it had not been demonstrated as necessary or justified. The proposal would not therefore accord with the Core Strategy Policy S15, advice from Historic England or the paragraph 202 of the NPPF and plan or paragraph 196 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The proposes would also be contrary to sections 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.