7 March 2012 · Minister for Infrastructure (on appeal)
Red House, Victoria Road, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 6aq
The proposal involved internal and external alterations to Red House (Registered Building No. 160, designed by Baillie Scott in 1893), erection of a two-storey extension to the western service wing providing dining area, sun lounge, utility, study, master bedroom suite, and associated spaces, plus demolition of the exi…
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 documents primarily contain the Planning Committee refusal decision dated 7 March 2012, which overruled the officer's recommendation to permit.
General Policy 2
Requires development to respect site/surroundings in siting/layout/scale/form/design, not adversely affect townscape character or local amenities, and provide satisfactory standards. Officers found proposal compliant as extension subordinate scale, echoing existing features, no harm to streetscene or neighbours.
Environment Policy 32
Prohibits extensions/alterations detrimentally affecting character of registered building. Officers argued building could accommodate sensitive change to service wing without loss of special interest; MNH/Committee disagreed re scale/irreversibility; appeal approval found no unacceptable detriment.
RB/5 Alterations and Extensions
General presumption against alterations unless convincing justification shown desirable/necessary; full impact assessment required. Officers found justification in modern needs, prior modifications to wing, sympathetic design; MNH found insufficient case against importance/physical features/setting criteria.
RB/3 General Criteria Applied in Considering Registered Building Applications
Assesses building importance, physical features, setting. Officers/Conservation Officer affirmed Red House's high significance (Baillie Scott's finest) but changes confined to compromised service wing acceptable; main core unaffected.
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.
Materials samples - roof/bricks
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 but standard comments on surface water discharge
does not oppose, no adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications
recommended permit
proposals respect character of registered building and are acceptable
Manx National Heritage strongly objects to the proposals due to detrimental impact on the character and protected status of the registered Baillie Scott-designed Red House; other consultees including Douglas Corporation, Douglas Borough Drainage, and Highways Division raise no objections subject to standard drainage conditions.
Key concern: proposals would fundamentally change the character of the protected Baillie Scott-designed Red House
Manx National Heritage
Objectionwe cannot support this scheme and would respectfully recommend refusal; There will be a general presumption against alteration or extension of registered buildings, except where a convincing case can be made; Applicants...must be able to justify their proposals. They will be required to show why the works...are desirable or necessary; Extensions or alterations to a Registered Building which would affect detrimentally its character...will not be permitted
Manx National Heritage
Objectionour position...is to protect the building as it stands against inappropriate extension and development
Manx National Heritage
ObjectionMNH remains opposed to the proposed development and supports the decision of the Planning Committee to refuse these applications
Douglas Corporation
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals
Douglas Corporation
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals
Douglas Borough Drainage
Conditional No ObjectionNo Objection in Principle subject to:-
Conditions requested: NO discharge of surface water (directly or indirectly) from this proposed development to any foul drainage system(s); The proposed extensions must be connected to the public sewer(s); Exact details of the drainage layout must be provided to the Douglas Borough Council’s Drainage Section, for approval, prior to any work commencing on site
Highways Division
No ObjectionDo not oppose has no adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications
The original applications for alterations, extension to the service wing, and replacement garage/carport at The 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 extension was necessary for modern family living, located in the compromised service wing to preserve the historic core, and designed subserviently. Manx National Heritage and the Council opposed due to the 50% floorspace increase harming the building's integrity. The inspector found a convincing case under policy RB/5, noting the appellant's maintenance efforts, the need for viability as a family home, and minimal visual impact, thus no detriment to character. Both appeals were allowed subject to conditions on materials, drawings, and preservation.
Precedent Value
Demonstrates that significant extensions (50%) to Registered Buildings can be allowed if convincingly justified by functional necessity, located subserviently in non-original areas, and preserving fragile historic fabric. Future applicants should emphasise owner stewardship, site-specific viability needs, and policy-compliant design over blanket preservation.
Inspector: Ruth V MacKenzie BA(Hons) MRTPI
