- Decision
- allowed, 18 September 2026
- Decided by
- Planning Inspector: A Knight
- Authority
- Canterbury (South East)
- Appeal reference
- 6009081
- Application reference
- CA/26/00307
- Procedure
- householder
- Development
- Retrospective replacement of timber windows and rear door with uPVC in a conservation area
- Site context
- conservation area, inside settlement
- Green Belt
- No
- Framework applied
- August 2026 NPPF
- Determinative policies
- HE5(2)(b)
- Development plan policies
- Canterbury District Local Plan 2017 DBE3, DBE6, HE1, HE6
- Main issues
- conservation area
Summary
Retrospective uPVC windows in a Herne Bay conservation-area terrace were allowed. They kept the terrace's uniform window pattern, and uPVC was already present and Council-approved nearby. The Inspector used the new HE5 categories: "the scheme has had no effect on the significance of the heritage asset" (DL ¶19).
What made the difference
The significance lay in the terrace's uniformity of pattern, not in its material, and the pre-existing photograph showed the replacement was, if anything, slimmer (DL ¶¶10, 15–17). HE5(2)(b) "no effect" meant there was no HE6 balance.
Policy findings
Policy codes are those of the National Planning Policy Framework (August 2026) unless a development plan is named.
| Policy | Finding | Weight | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| HE5(2)(b) | pass | "With reference to Policy HE5 of the Framework, the scheme has had no effect on the significance of the heritage asset" (DL 19) | |
| HE6(1) | neutral | substantial | substantial weight to conservation cited (DL 6) but no harm found |
Key facts
- uPVC front window has slimmer mullions/transoms than the timber original and keeps the terrace's 6-panel ground-floor pattern
- Council previously approved uPVC on four terrace properties
Sources
This note is one of the decisions behind the NPPF 2026 Navigator, which shows how each Framework test has been applied across all the decisions in the database. Also available as Markdown.