17 July 2014 · Senior Planning Officer (decision notice); appeal dismissed by Minister for Infrastructure, Hon P A Gawne MHK
Flat 1, 18, Kensington Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM1 3ep
The proposal involved removing a substantial chimney stack from No. 18 Kensington Road, one of a row of identical traditional two-and-a-half storey terraced dwellings in the Woodbourne Road Conservation Area, Douglas. The applicant cited unsuccessful attempts to fix shared water damage with the neighbour.
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 determined that the chimney stack is a substantial and characteristic design feature shared by all properties in the terrace, except one end property with a concrete replacement.
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect the site and surroundings in terms of siting, layout, scale, form, design; not adversely affect the character of the surrounding townscape; and not affect adversely the amenity of local residents or character of the locality. The officer found the chimney removal failed these tests by harming the terrace's design and conservation area character.
Environment Policy 35
Within Conservation Areas, permits only development that preserves or enhances the character or appearance of the Area and protects special features from inappropriate development. The proposal was assessed as harmful to the conservation area's character due to loss of the chimney feature.
Planning Policy Statement 1/01 - Policy CA/2 (Conservation Areas)
Emphasises considering the impact of proposals on the special character of the Conservation Area. The officer concluded the removal would detrimentally affect this character, as chimneys are an important element of the terrace.
no objection
The original application (14/00683/B) to remove a chimney stack from 18 Kensington Road, Douglas, was refused by the planning authority. The appellant argued that the stack caused persistent dampness affecting the property and adjoining buildings, that removal was the most cost-effective solution, and that the terrace already lacked uniformity. The council defended the refusal citing harm to the conservation area's character from loss of a characteristic chimney stack feature and precedent concerns, contrary to policies GP2, EP35, and CA/2. The inspector found that chimney stacks provide an essential visual rhythm to the terrace, replicated even in recent developments, and their removal would cause substantial harm outweighing dampness issues. Precedent risks added further weight against approval. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the refusal.
Precedent Value
This appeal demonstrates that conservation authorities can successfully defend chimney retention even for disused, problematic stacks if they contribute to terrace rhythm; applicants must show harm is outweighed by benefits, not just existence of issues, and precedent risks strengthen refusal cases.
Inspector: Stephen Amos MA(Cantab) MCD MRTPI
