Man who replaced 'rotting' windows with new double-glazed windows refused retrospective listed building consent

A council has rejected consent for new windows that were installed on a historic house as the "joinery details" didn't match.

Alastair Gourlay, who replaced the windows at the B listed Duchlage Farmhouse due to rot, claims he was unaware that planning permission or listed building consent was required. As a result, he had to submit a retrospective application.

However, the application was rejected by the council, despite Mr Gourlay claiming the "difference is negligible" between the old and new windows. He has now decided to appeal the decision to the Scottish Government.

Historic windows replaced with 'like for like for replacements'

Mr Gourlay replaced the old timber-framed, single-glazed sash windows, which were "rotting and draughty", with new windows that he claims "match the style, material and colour of the previous windows".

He said in his listed building application that he aimed to preserve the character of the home "by installing new windows which are up to current standards and as close to as possible like for like for replacements".

The only change made was the addition of plant on astragals, the decorative white strips applied to the surface of the window panes to give the appearance of multi-pane windows, whereas previously the panes used structural astragals, which physically separated the panes.

Mr Gourlay said this was done to make the windows "as thermally efficient as possible" by reducing the number of cold bridges, which are formed by a structural astragal, whilst also mimicking the look of older, traditional sash windows.

Why was consent required to replace the windows?

Although replacing windows is not normally required as the house was a B listed home (equivalent to a Grade II listed home in England and Wales) and as the house is in a conservation area listed building consent was required.

Mr Gourlay was not aware consent was required to carry out the work when he replaced the windows in March last year.

However, he became aware after a complaint was made by a local resident and subsequent enforcement action was taken against him, forcing him to submit a retrospective application.

'Loss of structural astragals' blamed for rejected application

This application was rejected by Perth & Kinross Council after they ruled the new windows failed to "replace the historic windows with matching joinery details".

The council said the work was contrary to Sections 14 and 59 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1997 as the work failed to "preserve the subject listed building's character".

The council specifically mentioned the "loss of structural astragals" and that the "non-structural astragal detailing is inappropriate to the listed building's window character".

It was also said that "proposed repair works" were "not fully investigated where a repair 'potential' had been identified".

Appeal submitted to the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division

An appeal has now been submitted to the Scottish Government against the council's decision to reject the application.

In the appeal it said Mr Gourlay and his wife have “received nothing but compliments on the windows from people who have commented to them personally" and it is "only the planning authority who have taken exception to the replacement windows”.

He again argues that "the difference is negligible visually when the windows are inspected on site" and the new windows "do not alter the appearance of the house to a lay person from the restricted views of the house".

The appeal will be dealt with by the Planning and Environmental Appeals Division (DPEA) where a planning reporter will decide the outcome.