Officer Report

Application No.: 24/91366/B Applicant: Mr Craig And Mrs Lisa Hodgson Proposal: Replacement of existing UPVC casement windows to UPVC sliding sash windows Site Address: 34 Alexander Drive Douglas Isle Of Man IM2 3QG Principal Planning Officer: Belinda Fettis Site Visit: 17.12.2024 Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 24.02.2025 _________________________________________________________________

Conditions and Notes for Approval

C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions

• C 1. The development hereby approved shall be begun before the expiration of four years from the date of this decision notice.

Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.

• C 2. Notwithstanding the submitted quote by LDGlazing the replacement windows are detailed as per the window numbers;

-- 2 and 3 shall be fitted with uPVC ratio 2/3 1/3 split sliding sash with horns and vertical astragal mid-bar. -- 8, 9 and 10 shall be fitted with uPVC ratio 2/3 1/3 split sliding sash with horns -- 1 shall be fitted with uPVC ratio 50/50 sliding sash with horns

-- 6 shall be fitted with uPVC ratio 50/50 sliding sash All other window numbers shall be fitted as per the LDGlazing schedule submitted on the 4th of December 2024. Reasons: For clarity and to accord with General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.

Having applied the Statutory Test of Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999), due to the scale and design of the proposed replacement windows the Conservation Area shall be preserved. Having regard to Planning Policy Statement 1/01, Planning Circular 1/98, the Design Guide and General Policies 2, 34 and 35 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, the proposal is acceptable.

Plans/Drawings/Information;

This decision relates to the following detail, plans and drawings received on the 4th of December 2024 unless otherwise stated;

• o Location Plan
• o Site Plan
• o Photograph identification of windows numbered to match quote (06.02.2024).
• o Window replacement quote by LDGlazing read in conjunction with Condition 2 _________________________________________________________________

Right to Appeal It is recommended that the following organisations should NOT be given the Right to Appeal: o Douglas Corporation - No Objection

_________________________________________________________________ Officer’s Report

- 1. THE SITE

• 1.1. The application site is a mid-terraced dwelling within the curtilage of no. 6 Woodbourne Villas that is also known as no.34 Alexander Drive, Douglas. The dwelling is separated from the road by a small garden with low walls, as such the dwellings in the terrace are prominent in the street scene. The dwelling overlooks a public garden area opposite.
• 1.2. The terrace is characterised by the dual pitch dormers, shared chimney stacks, pattern of sash windows and tiled roof that stretches across the bay window of two dwellings at a time.
• 1.3. The eaves of dual pitch dormers are decorated with ornate timber boards, some of which have been replaced with simple boards.
• 1.4. Although there are some variations the overarching fenestration pattern is the same and a key feature of the terrace. The character of the fenestration varies according to floor level. The lower windowpane is larger than the top, a 2/3 1/3 or 30/70 split.
• 1.5. At ground floor the bay windows comprise 3 30/70 split windows and this is consistent along the terrace. Some have vertical bars in the smaller upper window.
• 1.6. At first floor level there are two windows, one wider than the other. With a 30/70 split. The narrowest window has one vertical bar, the other two vertical bars, although there are variations of one vertical bar. The application site has no vertical bar in the narrowest window and one in the other.
• 1.7. At second floor level the window is a30/70 split as on the application site. However there are four 50/50 and one with a single pane.

- 2. THE PROPOSAL

• 2.1. Planning approval is sought to replace the existing timber frame windows on the front and rear elevations with uPVC frames. The following information has been submitted in support of the application;

• o Photograph identification of windows numbered to match the quote.
• o Window replacement quote by LDGlazing dated 03/12/2024

• 2.2. The front elevation windows are numbered 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10. These are the prominent windows with a 2/3 1/3 (30/70) ratio split casement windows with top openers. The first floor window above the bay window, no.3, has a vertical bar.
• 2.3. It is proposed to replace window no.2, 3, 8, 9 and 10 with uPVC white 30/70 ratio split sash uPVC windows. Window no.1 is proposed 50/50 uPVC white sash window.
• 2.4. The rear elevation window no.6 is a 50/50 casement top opening window proposed replaced with a 50/50 ratio sliding sash uPVC window.
• 2.5. Also on the rear elevation, windows numbered 4, 6, 7, and 11 are a mix of fenestration detail casement windows. No.12 is the rear door.
• 2.6. It is proposed to replace window no.4, 6, 7 and 11 with 50/50 ratio split uPVC sliding sash. Window no.5 is a small single glass window and is proposed replaced with same in uPVC. The door, no.12, is proposed with a uPVC door full glass.

• 3. PLANNING POLICY Site Specific

3.1. The site is within an area designated by the Isle of Man Strategic Plan in the Area Plan for the East as Predominantly Residential. It is not a registered building but it is within the Selbourne Drive Conservation Area. The site is on the edge of the Selbourne Drive Conservation Area where it meets the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area.

Strategic Policy

• 3.2. Strategic Policy 4 states that development must protect or enhance the fabric and landscape quality of a Conservation Area.
• 3.3. 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.
• 3.4. General Policy 2 states that development which 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 (c) and (g); (c) does not affect adversely the character of the surrounding landscape or townscape; and (g) does not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or the character of the locality.
• 3.5. Environment Policy 34 expresses a preference for the use of traditional materials in the maintenance, extension or alteration of pre-1920 buildings.

4. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

• 4.1. 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.

• 4.2. Planning Circular 1/98 - The Alteration and Replacement of Windows Set states: Category b) Buildings in a Conservation Area "if the original windows are in place they should preferably be repaired. If repair is impracticable, replacement windows which would be readily visible from a public thoroughfare must have the same method of opening as the originals. Whatever the material used in their construction, the windows must have the same pattern and section of glazing bars and the same frame sections as the original windows. Windows not readily visible from a public thoroughfare must have the same or similar pattern of glazing bars

• as the originals, but not necessarily the original method of opening, whatever the material used in the construction."
• 4.3. Residential Design Guide (July 2021), Chapter 5 Architectural Details, 5.2 Windows and Doors.
• 4.4. 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.
• 5. PLANNING HISTORY

• 5.1. There is another planning entry however this is the only one considered to be a material consideration in determining this application.

• 5.2. 24/91148/B Installation of replacement windows. Refused. The reason for refusal is, ' By virtue of the loss of the existing 2/3-1/3 ratio windows the proposal would cause undue harm to the character of the dwelling and the character of the terrace within 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 and the Residential Design Guide (July 2021), Chapter 5.'
• 6. REPRESENTATIONS

• 6.1. Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only. Local authority

• o Douglas Council - No objection (20.12.2024) Statutory Bodies
• o Highway Services - although consulted on the 10.12.2024, has not commented on this application at the time of drafting this report, and so it is assumed that there are no objections to the application.
• o Registered Buildings - although consulted on the 10.12.2024, has not commented on this application at the time of drafting this report, and so it is assumed that there are no
• objections to the application.

- 7. ASSESSMENT

• 7.1. The key considerations in the determination of this application are whether the impact of the proposal would protect or enhance the character of the dwelling and the Conservation Area and, whether the proposal addresses the reasons for refusal under planning application no. 24/91148/B.

• 7.2. The dwellings in the Selbourne Conservation Area are described as being mostly two storey late Victorian/Edwardian properties with some features of repetition such as slate roofs, quoins, carved or moulded detail on facades and eaves, angular bay windows beneath mono pitch roofs, dual pitch gables, angular sash windows and some 3rd floor windows with curved uppers.

• 7.3. The relevant stand out feature of the terraced row in which the application site is located, is the 2/3 - 1/3 or 30/70 ratio window detail with vertical bars and horns.

• 7.4. This application proposes to replace the existing casement windows with uPVC sliding sash windows. The prominent windows on the front elevation are proposed at ground and first floor with a ratio of 30/70. The second floor window is proposed as uPVC 50/50 ratio sliding sash. Rear elevation windows have mixed fenestration but aside from one small window the windows are proposed replaced with uPVC 50/50 ratio sliding sash windows.
• 7.5. The key reason for refusal was that the loss of the existing 2/3-1/3 ratio windows would cause undue harm to the character of the dwelling and the character of the terrace within the Conservation Area. Therefore the proposal failed the test of Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act (1999), and was contrary to Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2(c)(g), Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01, Planning Circular 1/98 and the Residential Design Guide (July 2021), Chapter 5.'
• 7.6. This submission retains the 2/3-1/3 ratio at ground and first floor level but not second floor level, horns are proposed but not vertical bars.
• 7.7. The applicant makes the case that not all first floor windows in the terrace are 2/3 - 1/3 split with vertical bars and not all second floor windows are 2.3-1/3 split.
• 7.8. In respect of the first floor level windows, any windows approved without the vertical bars is regrettable but is not a reason to continue erosion of the Conservation Area. Therefore vertical bars were requested and agreed by the applicant.
• 7.9. Although the harm is reduced by this submission, the proposal would cause harm to the Conservation Area by virtue of the loss of the 30/70 ratio window at second floor level. Therefore the reason for refusal has not been completely addressed. Planning Balance
• 7.10. Woodbourne Villas is within and on the boundary of the Selbourne Road Conservation Area where it abuts the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area. With the exception of Woodbourne Villas the majority of upper floor windows are a ratio of 50/50.
• 7.11. The overriding fenestration of the second floor window in the terrace is a 30/70 ratio. However there are variations in the depth of the upper section of the window, methods of opening and vertical bars. In the last two properties either end of the terrace the second floor window comprises a 50/50 ratio fenestration, and it was at the time of the application.
• 7.12. Applying the Statutory test of Section 18(4) of the Town and Country Planning Act, and having regard to Policy Statement 1/01, Planning Circular 1/98, it is important to establish what the original window would have been.
• 7.13. A great deal of research has taken place to try and establish what the original fenestration looked like; 30/70 or 50/50 ratio split, with or without vertical bar. No evidence has been found beyond doubt that the second floor windows were a 30/70 ratio window. A recent application at no.2 Woodbourne Villas (26 Alexander Drive) replaced timber windows, and this is one of the sites that had a 50/50 ratio second floor window. Opinion is that the windows at this site were the original windows.
• 7.14. The balance of probability is weighted towards the original second floor windows being a 50/50 ratio sliding sash window. It is possible that the continuation of 30/70 ratio windows into the second floor window occurred due to the introduction of casement windows, but no conclusive evidence has been found either way.
• 7.15. There are 50/50 ratio windows in other areas of Alexander Drive and nearby Queens Terrace and Queens Avenue however that is the character of those terraces. There are some

• 50/50 windows on Alexander Drive between Brunswick Road and Woodbourne Road however the style of those dwellings is different to those on Woodbourne Villas.
• 7.16. In weighing up the planning balance the harm caused by the 50/50 ratio second floor window is considered less than significant and insufficient to warrant refusal. Overall the proposal replaces the unsympathetic casement windows with traditionally styled sash windows and reintroduces the vertical bars at second floor level. Together with the lack of clarity as to what the original fenestration was, the balance is weighted in support of approval.

- 8. CONCLUSION

• 8.1. For the reasons given within the report the slight harm is considered outweighed by the planning balance in support of the proposal which is considered an improvement to that which exists. Therefore the proposal would not cause adverse harm to the Conservation Area.
• 8.2. Overall, on balance the proposal is considered to sufficiently address the reasons for refusal and accord with accord with Strategic Policy 4, General Policy 2(c)(g), Environment Policy 35 and Planning Policy Statement 1/01, Planning Circular 1/98 and the Residential Design Guide (July 2021), Chapter 5.

9.0 RIGHT TO APPEAL AND RIGHT TO GIVE EVIDENCE - 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:

• o applicant (in all cases);
• o a Local Authority; Government Department; Manx Utilities; and Manx National Heritage that submit a relevant objection; and
• o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.

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):

• o any appellant or potential appellant (which includes the applicant);
• o the Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture, the Department of Infrastructure and the local authority for the area;
• o any other person who has submitted written representations (this can include other Government Departments and Local Authorities); and
• o in the case of a petition, a single representative.

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 the Head of Development Management 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 : Permitted Date : 25.02.2025

Determining Officer

Signed : S BUTLER Stephen Butler Head of Development Management

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.