A hotel group has been ordered to remove double glazed windows from one of its Lake District venues.
The Inn Collection Group replaced timber window frames with uPVC ones at Oakbank House on Helm Road in Bowness.
The Lake District National Park Authority served an enforcement notice in September last year because it said the work had been carried out without planning permission and told the firm to remove the frames.
The North East-headquartered group appealed the notice and the Planning Inspectorate has now issued its ruling.
A planning inspector has ordered the firm to removed the plastic frames and replace them with timber frames that restore the building to its previous condition.
The inspector said the main issue was the effect of the new windows on the building and if they preserved or enhanced the early-Victorian property, which is in the Bowness Conservation Area.
The building is not listed but is identified as of being of special character.
The inspector, who visited in June, said: “Despite some modern interventions and refurbishment works, I agree that it is a good example of a relatively unaltered historic building where its architectural style, form, detailing and building materials provide the streetscape with interest and variety.
“Furthermore, the appeal property provides a focal point in the descent from the Grade II-listed Hydro Hotel. Thereby forming part of a significant view
within the conservation area, allowing an appreciation of the historic and architectural character of the area at a point where the streetscape meanders down to the town centre and lakeside below.”
The Inn Collection Group said there were a number of different window types in the area so no prevailing style could be identified, but the inspector said: “The building’s fenestration is a key element of its architectural style and appearance.
“The windows that have been removed were classic single-glazed, multi-pane, vertical sliding sash units, some flanked and headed with a decorative slim-paned border, and constructed with traditional timber frames, all of which were compatible with the age and style of the building.
“In these respects, they were important architectural components of the property which, although may not have been original, made an important contribution to the architectural merit of the building, and, in doing so, made a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the conservation area.
“The examples of uPVC framed windows in the surrounding locality serve only to highlight the unsympathetic style and design of these modern features and the resultant harm to the character and appearance of the conservation area.”
The inspector added that the loss of the windows and their replacements had had a profound effect on the building.
Her report added: “Whilst they offer a more consistent appearance, the windows, as installed, make no attempt to replicate the multi-pane arrangement of the previous historic windows.
“Instead, they are of a bland utilitarian appearance with bulky frames, a modern opening mechanism, and fail to respect the historic character.
“Overall, they lack the architectural finesse, historic character, and high-quality craftsmanship that was evident in the previous windows.”
The report added that prior to the breach, the building had lost a number of timber framed windows, but that did not justify further loss.
The Inn Collection Group said the new windows have resulted in significant improvements to the thermo-efficiency and helped to stop the decline of the building due to damp.
However, the inspector said: “To support that assertion, the appellant states that a survey of the building by chartered building surveyors informed the decision to remove the windows. I have not been presented with a copy of any survey to confirm the condition of the windows prior to their removal, or that they were the cause of any damp ingress.
“Even if I were to accept that the windows were beyond economic repair, the fact remains that the replacement windows are of an unsuitable design.”
Claims that the windows were part of a redevelopment programme, which represented a major investment in the local economy, were dismissed by the inspector, who said: “It has not been demonstrated that the replacement windows were essential to ensure the viability of the property, or that in their absence economic activity or employment opportunities would be have been curtailed.”
