Replacement composite door at 1 Tanjon Court, Fleetwood

What was proposed

The application sought consent to replace the existing timber front door and surrounding frame with white composite and fibre glass or plastic materials.

“The application proposes listed building consent for the replacement of the existing front door and its surrounding frame, changing from timber to composite materials. The proposed replacement door would be a white, wood-grain effect composite door, with a replacement frame formed of fibre glass/plastic incorporating a white foil wood-grain finish.”

Officer report

The site and building

The door is in a Grade II listed terrace within Fleetwood Conservation Area, on a corner elevation serving three flats.

“The proposal site falls within Fleetwood Conservation Area and forms part of Queen's Terrace, which was built in 1836-41 to Decimus Burton's design. The terrace is a three-storey ashlar building with a strong classical order under a hipped slate roof. Several prominent brick chimney stacks remain.”

“The door, subject to this application, is set within a stone surround on a corner elevation to the north of the building, at Queens Terrace and Pharos Street, Fleetwood and is used as a main access door to three flats within the building. The entrance is raised above pavement level and accessed by a small set of curved, stone steps, with a simple metal handrail to one side.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier listed building applications covered rendering and pebble dashing of a gable and replacement windows, and both were permitted.

“84/01120 - Listed building consent for rendering and pebble dashing of gable - permitted…”

“78/01077 - Replacement of existing windows - permitted…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended refusal because the white composite door would harm the listed building’s significance, character and appearance, with no evidence that timber could not be energy efficient.

“As the existing door is a modern insertion and does not make a positive contribution to the significance of the listed terrace, its removal is not objected to in principle. However, the proposal includes the installation of a white, four- panel composite door. While the design is considered to reflect the established appearance of the building, it does not replicate the traditional timber material historically used.”

“Furthermore, all existing doors along the principal elevation are finished in dark, traditional colours, which are considered to contribute to the coherent appearance of the terrace. The proposed white composite door would appear visually prominent and incongruous within this context, disrupting the established uniformity of the elevation. As such, the colour and material proposed would fail to preserve the character and appearance of the listed building.”

Officer report

Objections received

A neighbour objected that the existing door might need maintenance, the frame need not be removed, and the proposed white finish would be out of character.

“One letter of objection has been received. The primary reasons for concerns are (summarised) below:”

“- The existing door was installed within the past 4-5 years, and its lack of maintenance may be responsible for its poor condition. - The bells etc. can be removed and the frame painted. The removal of the frame is not necessary. - There are no other white or light-coloured doors within the building, and so this door would look out of character.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Councillor Duffy, the ward councillor for Pharos, spoke against the application.

The vote and decision

Councillor Belshaw proposed refusal, Councillor Swatton seconded it, and members refused listed building consent in line with the officer recommendation.

“The Chair ended the public speaking portion of the meeting and opened up the members’ debate.”

“Councillor Belshaw proposed the recommendation to refuse listed building consent. Councillor Swatton seconded the proposal. It was resolved to refuse listed building consent in line with officer recommendation.”

Minutes