Loading document...
Application No.: 25/90585/B Applicant: Mrs Zoe Ellis Proposal: Installation of replacement front door and surround Site Address: 19 Victoria Road Castletown Isle Of Man IM9 1EN Principal Planning Officer: Belinda Fettis Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Refused Date of Recommendation: 04.08.2025 _________________________________________________________________ R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons Reasons for Refusal R 1. By virtue of the loss of the existing detailed timber frame within this property within the terrace of three properties, the proposal would cause undue harm to the character of the dwelling and the character of the terrace and so harm this location of the Conservation Area. The proposal fails the test of Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999), is contrary to Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2(c)(g), Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01, Planning Circular 1/98. _________________________________________________________________ Right to Appeal None
_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report
1.0 THE SITE - 1.1 The site is the residential curtilage of no. 19 Victoria Road. The property is a three storey end terraced in a group of three dwellinghouses. The properties front onto Victoria Road in Castletown and the rear elevations back onto wooded park land. - 1.2 In this location of Victoria Road the terraced row stands out because of its Victorian architectural features compared to the more 'modern' dwellings nearby that are styled between the 1930s to 1980s. The terraced row
2.0 THE PROPOSAL - 2.1 The application seeks approval to replace the existing timber front door and surround with a uPVC composite front door and surround, and replace the failing render with a 'K-rend' render of the same colour as the existing painted render. In support of the proposal the applicant has submitted the following;
2.2 In respect of the door, the existing timber door and frame has deteriorated beyond repair and is proposed replaced with a uPVC composite door and frame with side panels. The side panels are proposed in glass with a mid-bar replicating the existing split where the lower section is solid. However the new side panels will not have solid panels but are proposed glass for two reasons, the applicant has been advised that due to the width of the door the side panels cannot easily be replicated solid, and the glass will improve natural light into the hallway. - 2.3 In respect of the render, the mouldings are retained but render replaced with K-rend in a colour to match the existing.
3.0 PLANNING HISTORY - 3.1 Other planning history exists for the site however the one below is the only one considered materially relevant in the assessment of this application.
08/00961/B - Alterations, erection of extensions, detached garage and creation of an access. Permitted.
4.2 The site is not a Registered Building nor is it within the setting of one. - 4.3 Strategic Policy
4.4 Strategic Policy 3 and Environment Policy 42 focus on the visual design of development and its impact upon the character and identity of its immediate locality. - 4.5 Strategic Policy 4 states that development must protect or enhance the fabric and landscape quality of a Conservation Area. - 4.6 General Policy 2 states that development that is in accordance with the land-use zoning and proposals in the appropriate Area Plan and with other policies of the Strategic Plan will normally be permitted, provided that the development accords with the criteria of the Policy. In this case the following criteria are considered relevant (b) (c) and (g);
4.7 Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01 require development to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area and to take into account in any decision, the special character of the area.
5.1 Planning Policy Statement 1/01 (Conservation of the Historic Environment of the Isle of Man) - Policy CA/2, (Conservation Areas); "When considering proposals for the possible development of any land or buildings which fall within the conservation area, the impact of such proposals upon the special character of the area, will be a material consideration when assessing the application.
5.2 Residential Design Guide (2021) Chapter 5 Architecture details and 5.2 Doors.
5.4 Legislation: Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999) states, "(4) Where any area is for the time being a conservation area, special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing its character or appearance in the exercise, with respect to any buildings or other land in the area, of any powers under this Act". This sets out the approach to be taken in determining planning applications, which includes giving great weight to the asset's conservation when considering the impact of a proposed development on the asset. Given that the site is within a Conservation Area, the above requirements apply and appropriate consideration will be given in section 7. - 6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 Local Authority o Castletown Commissioners were consulted on 11.06.2025 however at the time of drafting this report (23.07.2025) no comments have been received therefore it is assumed that there are no objections.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 Taking account of the above observations the key consideration in deciding if the proposal is acceptable is whether the proposals would preserve or enhance the character of the building and therefore the Conservation Area and so meet the statutory test of Section 18(4) of the TCP Act (1999).
7.3 Planning Balance The applicant was informed that a new door would be acceptable but the loss of the frame would cause harm to the Conservation Area that the application was not acceptable. In response the applicant referred to other such door and frame replacements, including within another larger group of Victorian terraced dwellings; towards the far end of 'The Promenade'. However these dwellings are not in the Conservation Area and so less weight is given to preservation of original features.
The case for removing the frame is that it is in disrepair however no professional opinion has been submitted in support of that statement. Allowing uPVC and or composite doors and frames and windows within a Conservation Area is a compromise that has become more acceptable. However it is made only when it is considered that it does not harm the character of the Conservation Area.
In this instance the standout feature of this area of the Conservation Area is this terraced row with mostly original features, or at least good replicas of original features that include the timber carvings within the door frame and the 50/50 glass and solid timber panels either side of the door. The probability of losing all of these frames increases if one is allowed.
It is acknowledged that in the wider context of the site setting there exists modern fenestration. However this in itself affords greater weight to preserving the main character feature of the Conservation in this location. Therefore it is resolved that the balance is weighted towards retention and there is no evidence to show that retention is not achievable.
9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted). - 9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10. - 9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
9.5 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given the Right to Appeal.
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Refused Date: 04.08.2025 Determining Officer
Signed : C BALMER Chris Balmer Principal Planner
Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/ customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
