7 March 2012 · Minister for Infrastructure (on appeal, via Chief Executive I T Thompson)
Red House, Victoria Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 6aq
The proposal involved internal and external alterations to the Arts & Crafts house designed by Baillie Scott in 1893, adding a two-storey extension to the service wing for kitchen/dining/sun lounge/study at ground floor and master bedroom suite above, plus demolition and relocation of the garage to a larger double gara…
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 Planning Committee refused under reg 8(3) of Registered Buildings Regs 2005, finding 'substantial and irreversible impact on the dwelling house, resulting in an unnecessary and detrimental impact …
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/design, not adversely affect character/amenity/highways. Assessed compliant: extension subordinate, no harm to streetscene/amenities/neighbours/Victoria Manor; garage replacement acceptable.
Environment Policy 32
Prohibits extensions/alterations detrimentally affecting Registered Building character. Officers/Inspector found no detriment: sympathetic to service wing, preserves special interest; Committee disagreed but overturned on appeal.
PPS 1/01 - Registration of Buildings
Criteria for registration (architectural/historic interest). Red House qualifies highly (Baillie Scott, Arts & Crafts); proposals tested against but justified as not harming.
RB/3 General Criteria Applied in Considering Registered Building Applications
Assesses importance/physical features/setting. Building's significance acknowledged; service wing alterations acceptable given prior changes/lowered integrity.
RB/5 Alterations and Extensions
Presumption against unless convincing case (desirable/necessary, full impact info). Inspector found convincing: needed for viability as family home, minimal harm via subservient design on compromised wing.
Time limit
The development hereby permitted shall commence before the expiration of four years from the date of this notice.
Approved plans
This consent relates to alterations, the erection of an extension, and the relocation and erection of a replacement double garage and carport as shown on Drawing No's 000, 001, 002, 003, 004, 201B and 202B, all date stamped as having been received on 17th November 2011.
Samples of materials
Prior to the commencement of development, a sample of the roof tiles, tile-hanging tiles and bricks to be used in the construction of the development hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details.
Materials matching
The tiles and bricks of the development hereby permitted and as approved by Condition 3 shall match in material, colour, texture and size those of the existing building.
Brickwork sample panel
Prior to the commencement of development, a sample panel of brickwork shall be constructed and approved by the Planning Authority. Thereafter, all new brickwork in the development hereby permitted shall be laid in accordance with the approved sample panel.
Detailed drawings
Prior to the commencement of development, scale (1:10) drawings detailing - (a) the door and canopy on the west elevation; (b) all new dormers; (c) all new skirtings, architraves and internal doors; (d) all new windows; and (e) all new cills shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved details.
Retention of original features
This approval is limited to the works as shown on the approved drawings. All existing original windows and any other original features unaffected by the proposed development shall be retained.
no objection (standard comments on surface water discharge)
does not oppose
The original applications for alterations to the service wing, erection of an extension, and replacement garage/carport at the historic Red House were refused by the Planning Committee due to substantial and irreversible impact on the character of the unique Registered Building. The appellant argued the proposals were necessary for modern family living, preserved the historic core, and extended the compromised service wing sensitively. Manx National Heritage and the Council objected on grounds of scale (50% increase) harming the building's integrity. The Inspector found a convincing case under policy RB/5, noting the extension's subservient design, matching materials, and necessity to protect fragile features while ensuring viability as a family home. Both appeals were allowed subject to conditions on materials, drawings, and retention of original windows.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates that substantial extensions (50%) to Registered Buildings can be allowed if convincingly justified under RB/5 as necessary for continuing viable use, sensitively located on compromised wings, subservient, and using matching materials. Future applicants should prioritise owner stewardship evidence, internal fabric protection, and site-specific inquiry advantages over written reps.
Inspector: Ruth V MacKenzie BA(Hons) MRTPI
