Loading document...
The site represents the curtilage of 6 Sherwood Terrace Douglas. The building is currently used as apartments and is one of 8 similar buildings forming the terrace located on the north-west side of Broadway.
The site is located within an area identified as being Residential Use by the Douglas Local Plan. the site is also located within the Douglas (Promenades) Conservation Area.
Planning Circular 1/98 'The Alteration of and Replacement of Windows' Policy 6 states:
'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 bars and the same frame sections as the original windows.'
Douglas Corporation indicates no objection to this proposal. The Department of Transport Highways Division does not oppose this application.
We have received no privately written representations in relation to this planning application.
Proposed here is the replacement of the existing, original timber-framed sliding-sash windows on the front elevation with white uPVC casement windows.
I have considered the nature of this application in context with Planning Circular 1/98, in conjunction with the property's location in a Conservation Area. Overall, the preference would be to retain the original timber sliding sash windows where possible on the principal elevation which is visible from the public domain. Were this is not possible due to extensive decay, any replacements should have matched those they replaced in terms of their design, materials and opening method.
Given the reasons outlined above, the proposal to fit uPVC windows to the front elevation is not acceptable due to the historic nature of these properties and the surrounding area. It is acknowledged that properties within the vicinity of 6 Sherwood Terrace have uPVC windows fitted. However, neighbouring properties have retained their original timber sliding sashes and the proposal to fit uPVC windows to 6 Sherwood Terrace would only serve to further dilute a historically, and architecturally sensitive location.
It is my recommendation therefore to retain/reinstate timber sliding sashes to the principal elevation, as viewed from the road, and oppose the fitting of uPVC units.
The applicant has supplied photographs indicating that the terrace displays a range of window types with both timber and plastic windows evident along with casement and sliding-sash methods of opening.
A check of previously submitted planning application records revealed that most of the properties displaying uPVC casement windows have not benefited from planning permission. These may have been carried out prior to the area being designated as a conservation area or indeed no planning application may have been submitted. The only relevant planning application available is PA98/00281 which sought permission to replace the windows of the ground floor bay window of 4 Sherwood Terrace with uPVC windows. This was permitted however the existing windows in this case were louver windows which were not the original windows.
Irrespective of this, the existence of inappropriate window replacements does not serve to justify the further degradation in character of an area identified as being worthy of conservation and enhancement. It is considered that the reverse is true in that it is even more important to resist such applications that would result in further detrimental impacts upon the conservation area.
This proposal for replacement windows would contravene the established policy set out by Planning Circular 1/98 in that the proposed replacement windows would fail to replicate the method of opening or delicacy of the glazing bars displayed by the existing original windows. I am minded to concur with the assessment made by the Assistant Conservation Officer and therefore recommend that this application is refused.
It is considered that the following parties, who submitted comments, accord with the requirements of Planning Circular 1/06 and are therefore, afforded interested party status:
C: Conditions for approval N: Notes attached to conditions R: Reasons for refusal O: Notes attached to refusals
R 1. The replacement windows would fail to replicate the method of opening or delicate glazing bar pattern of the original existing windows and as such would fail to preserve or enhance the conservation area to the visual detriment of the street scene.
I confirm that this decision accords with Government Circular Nos 44/05 (Delegation of Functions to Director of Planning and Building Control) and 47/05 (Delegation of Functions to Senior Planning Officer)
Decision Made: Refused Date: 01/11/07
Signed: [Handwritten signature]
M. I. McCauley Director of Planning and Building Control
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
