Replacement windows and doors at 5 Golgotha Village, Lancaster
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Lancaster Planning Regulatory Committee on 22 Jun 2026.
What was proposed
The application proposed replacement windows and doors together with a new mechanical extract fan at the rear.
“26/00067/FUL Installation of replacement window and doors and new mechanical extract fan to rear. Bowerham Ward A”
Minutes
Main planning issue
Officers identified heritage and design as the key planning consideration.
“The key planning considerations in the assessment of this application are: - Heritage and Design…”
Officer report
What officers advised
Officers considered the replacement windows, doors and extract grille acceptable, with limited harm outweighed by improved thermal efficiency and heritage benefits.
“The existing casement windows are not original to the property and do not contribute positively to the significance of the building. As such, the replacement of these with slimline double-glazed units in a suitably designed timber frame is acceptable. Originally, the proposal sought to mimic the appearance of the existing top-hung windows, which would not provide any enhancement.”
“Any harm is less than substantial and is considered to be outweighed by the benefits of improving the thermal efficiency of the Listed Building, contributing to its conservation and its sustainable long- term use as a dwellinghouse. The replacement windows to the front are also considered to conserve and enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and setting of nearby Listed Buildings.”
Officer report
Representations received
No neighbour representations had been received when the officer report was compiled.
“At the time of compiling this report, no neighbour representations have been received.”
Officer report
Recommended conditions
The recommendation included conditions covering the time limit, amended plans, and further details of the windows and vent.
“That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:”
“Condition number Description Type (indicative) 1 Time limit Standard 2 Development in accordance with Amended Plans Standard 3 Details of Windows and Vent Prior to installation…”
Officer report
The committee vote
Councillors proposed and seconded approval, and 15 voted in favour with none against and no abstentions.
“It was proposed by Councillor Keith Budden and seconded by Councillor Robert Redfern:”
“Upon being put to the vote, 15 Councillors voted in favour of the proposal with none against and no abstentions, whereupon the Chair declared the proposal to have been carried.”
Minutes
The final decision
The committee approved the application subject to the time limit, amended plans, and windows and vent detail conditions.
“That the application be approved subject to the following conditions:”
“Time limit. 2. Development in accordance with Amended Plans. 3. Details of Windows and Vent.”
Minutes
Sources
- Lancaster Planning Regulatory Committee minutes, 22 June 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Lancaster's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- Lancaster
- Date
- Monday 22 June 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- 15 for, 0 against
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- View application →
- All decisions
- Lancaster committee decisions →
Source: Plota analysis of the minutes.
This committee's year
59 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 3 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.