Officer Report

Application No.: 17/01116/B Applicant: Rebecca & Steven Ormond-Smith Proposal: Replacement timber front door Site Address: 7 Eastfield Douglas Isle of Man IM1 4AU Case Officer : Mr Edmond Riley Photo Taken: 15.11.2017 Site Visit: 15.11.2017 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 29.11.2017 _________________________________________________________________ Reasons for Refusal R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons R 1. The existing door on the application site is likely to be original to the dwelling, and is a feature that appears prominently on the Eastfield terrace and contributes to the character and appearance of this highly rhythmic terrace that was laid out as a single development and which comprises an early form of Town Planning on the Island, where individual details were protected by legal covenant with the intention of retaining its historic appearance: against this context, the insertion of a door (even one formed of a timber frame) with two glazed panels as proposed would fail to preserve the character or appearance of the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area and is therefore contrary to the associated Character Appraisal thereof and to Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan.

_______________________________________________________________ Interested Person Status – Additional Persons

It is recommended that the following persons should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):

The Isle of Man Victorian Society which is a properly constituted body with a specific area of knowledge in respect of the particulars of this application.

_____________________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

1.0 THE APPLICATION SITE - 1.1 The application site is the residential curtilage of 7 Eastfield, Douglas, which includes a two-and-a-half storey, mid-terraced dwelling located on the northern side of the highway and

• also within the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area. The dwellings combine to provide the streetscene with a very clear rhythm here, with a large number retaining traditional and / or original fenestration styles / opening mechanisms.
• 1.2 The current front door within the dwelling is panelled timber in the traditional Victorian style, although it has a somewhat unusual vertical letterbox, off-centre from the door. The dwelling retains its traditional sidelights and top lights along with moulding details.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION - 2.1 Full planning approval is sought for the installation of a replacement door. This would be formed of timber, and it is the door only to which the application relates (i.e. not the surrounding lights, which are to be retained). The primary difference between the existing and proposed door is that the latter would have two glass panels in place of the more traditional solid finish; there would be two more solid panels below. - 2.2 The applicant states on the application form that the quote from the joiner shows one continuous pane, but that the applicants wish to have two panes as per the door installed "at a house in Hawarden [presumably Avenue]". This is not fully understood since the joiner's quote does, in fact, shown two vertical panes in a manner that matches the Hawarden example.

3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 The site has a recent planning history, which has resulted in approval being issued to applications seeking to replace front elevation (PA 17/01013/B) and rear elevation (PA 16/00906/B) windows.

4.0 THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 4.1 The site lies within an area zoned as Predominantly Residential on the Douglas Local Plan. - 4.2 Accordingly, the application falls to be assessed against the relevant parts of General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 34 and 35 of the Strategic Plan. - 4.3 Eastfield is mentioned in the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area Character Appraisal; it is worth noting the relevant text as follows (paragraph 3.24):

"The terrace known as Eastfield was an early approach to Town Planning in that covenants were incorporated into deeds of sale in an endeavour to control the design of properties and the retention of open space. The evolution of the remaining properties fronting onto the gardens happened predominantly in the 1880s and resulted in an interesting and lively mix of architecture. The retention of private allotment gardens is a survivor of the original plan."

5.0 REPRESENTATIONS - 5.1 Highway Services have no interest in the application (15.11.17). - 5.2 Douglas Borough Council raise no objection (14.11.17). - 5.3 The Isle of Man Victorian Society object to the application, suggesting that whilst other windows have been installed in an other than original fashion, this should not undermine the need to retain original doors and their style. They point out that there are covenants in place to control the replacement of railings and verandahs and the reference to other streets is inappropriate as these properties were developed at a different time. They consider that the existing door should be retained (23.11.17).

6.0 ASSESSMENT - 6.1 The key issues here are the design effect the proposed door will have on the dwelling and the surrounding streetscape, being particularly mindful of the Conservation Area

• designation. EP35 requires that development should either 'preserve' or 'enhance' the character or appearance of the Conservation Area in which it would sit in order for it to be approved.
• 6.2 Eastfield is a terrace of dwellings that has very much its own sense of identity. The terrace benefits from an extremely strong eaves line and string course, along with decorative hood moulds for the first floor windows. At ground floor a number of the dwellings retain front canopies that appear to be original to the terrace. The highly rhythmic nature of the built form, reinforced by the dormer windows above the strong eaves line, reflects that the terrace was built as a piece. Against this context are the doors, which are unusual: the thin, vertical panels set within the majority of the doors on the terrace further mark it out as being distinct from other Victorian terraces in Douglas. These, too, would therefore appear to be original to the terrace.
• 6.3 The proposed replacement door is timber in form and is not wholly traditional owing to the glazing proposed. Strong material weight should be given to the intention to retain the existing lights and detailing around the door, all of which contribute significantly to the traditional and attractive appearance of the dwelling and Eastfield terrace. The insertion of two window panels is not the ideal approach, while the proposed door would replace a door design that is likely original to the terrace and (crucially) is judged to provide a key characteristic to the terrace.
• 6.4 It is acknowledged that the terrace by no means has an 'as-original' appearance, with many dwellings having inappropriate dormer windows, inappropriate window opening styles, inappropriate door styles, along with the occasional removal of the front canopies. These all contribute to a lessening of the character and appearance of the terrace, but nevertheless it is judged to be a character and appearance that should be protected from further diminution. 'Conservation' should not be viewed as synonymous with 'preservation' but, nevertheless, it is further noted that the Character Appraisal states that Eastfield's appearance was strictly controlled by legal covenant, meaning that there is clear historical precedent for offering stringent protection to the detailing of the terrace.

7.0 CONCLUSION - 7.1 It is concluded that the development proposed is not acceptable when assessed against the relevant Development Plan policies and the Conservation Area Character Appraisal. While it is unusual to object to the insertion of a timber door, which is clearly welcome in principle, the fundamental view has to be that the door proposed is less appropriate than the existing and, as such, could not be said to either preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Conservation Area.

8.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS - 8.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) (No 2) Order 2013 Article 6(4), the following persons are automatically interested persons:

• (a) The applicant, or if there is one, the applicant's agent;
• (b) The owner and the occupier of any land that is the subject of the application or any other person in whose interest the land becomes vested;
• (c) Any Government Department that has made written submissions relating to planning considerations with respect to the application that the Department considers material;
• (d) Highway Services Division of Department of Infrastructure, and
• (e) The local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated.

8.2 The decision-maker must determine:

• o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material, and

• o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.

I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Senior Planning Officer in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation.

Decision Made : Refused Date: 29.11.2017 Determining officer

Signed : S CORLETT Sarah Corlett Senior Planning Officer

Customer note

This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.