15 February 2019 · Delegated - Principal Planner Sarah Corlett
Isle Of Man Breweries, George Hotel, The Parade, Castletown, Isle Of Man, IM9 1lg
The proposal sought retrospective permission to retain timber fencing (1.85m high along Georges Lane dropping to 0.9m internally) installed after removing artificial hedging and an oil tank at the rear of the George Hotel, a Registered Building (RB38) in Castletown Conservation Area.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The officer assessed whether the retrospective 1.85m high vertical panel timber fencing protected or enhanced the fabric and setting of the Registered Building (RB38) and preserved or enhanced the Cas…
Strategic Policy 4
Requires proposals to protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Registered Buildings and Conservation Areas. Officer found timber fencing failed this test due to its siting, size, design, and material detrimentally impacting the Registered Building's setting and Conservation Area views along prominent pedestrian route.
Environment Policy 32
Prohibits extensions or alterations to Registered Buildings that detrimentally affect their special architectural or historic character. Assessed as failed because timber fencing neglected historic stone features.
Environment Policy 34
Prefers traditional materials in maintenance/alteration/extension of pre-1920 buildings. Timber not traditional or sympathetic to stone-dominated Conservation Area and Registered Building.
Environment Policy 35
Permits only development preserving or enhancing Conservation Area character. Fence's visual impact neither preserved nor enhanced, conflicting with stone boundary character.
Environment Policy 42
Requires new development to respect particular character/identity of locality, prohibiting inappropriate features. Timber fencing neglected Castletown's stone materials and historic context.
RB/5 Alterations and Extensions
Presumption against alterations affecting Registered Building's special interest unless justified; special regard to preserving setting/features. No convincing justification provided; cumulative changes assessed but fencing tipped to unacceptable impact.
Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Policy CA/2 (Conservation Areas)
Requires consideration of impact on Conservation Area character, setting, and views. Prominent fencing adversely affected views into/out of area.
Requested deferral due to inconsistencies in drawings between beer garden seating lengths; issues addressed by amended plans
Registered Buildings Officer objects to the timber fencing due to its harmful impact on the setting of the registered building and conservation area character, recommending refusal. Highways Division defers comment pending consistent revised plans clarifying car park and beer garden dimensions.
Key concern: impact of the proposals upon the setting of the registered building and character and appearance of the conservation area
Registered Buildings Officer
ObjectionI object to the application due to impact of the proposals upon the setting of the registered building and character and appearance of the conservation area.; I consider the unauthorised timber fencing to be out of character with the surrounding stone walling, the registered building and conservation area.; I have no objection to the principle of walling in this area but this should be solid either stone or stone faced.
Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division
No CommentHighway Services request that the application is deferred to allow the applicant to consider the above.
Conditions requested: revised plans are submitted that are consistent and in accordance with the previous 17/01332/GB planning approval
The original applications (PA 18/00983/GB and RBC 18/00984/CON) for removal of faux hedging/oil tank and installation of timber fencing were refused due to failure to protect/enhance the Registered Building (RB38) setting and Conservation Area character, citing non-traditional materials and visual impact. The appellant argued the fencing was like-for-like replacement, used traditional timber prevalent in the area, improved privacy, and caused no greater harm than before. The inspector agreed, finding no harmful impact on the RB or CA when weathered, compatible with local materials variety, and in line with policy after site visit. The Minister accepted the recommendation to allow both appeals unconditionally on 2 September 2019.
Precedent Value
This appeal shows that in CAs with material variety, non-stone elements like weathered timber can be acceptable if not harmful on individual merits and compatible with approved features. Future applicants should provide clear before/after visuals and local context examples.
Inspector: Brian J Sims
