Loading document...
The property St Ninians Church, Ballaquayle Road, Douglas, is located adjacent to St. Ninians High School. The property is a Registered Building (RB228).
The application proposes the erection of additional two storey internal space to provide replacement accommodation in place of the redundant St. Ninians Church Hall, Laureston View, Ballaquayle Road.
SAVE Mann’s Heritage write to object to the proposals. SPMCE have no objection The Department of Transport Highways Division do not oppose the proposal subject to the imposition of the following conditions:
The parking facilities for the church approved in planning application (05/00038) must be constructed prior to the commencement of this development and;
The Sunday School will be used by children of parents who will attend services at the church and will not generate traffic. The hall will not be used at the same time as church services are in progress and the parking spaces can be used for both facilities.
Policy RB/5 Alterations and Extensions, is of particular relevance as the building is registered.
The insertion of the two storey structure (essentially a floor, as the ceilings above the first floor remain unaltered) within the space is a major internal alteration to the interior of the church, an alteration that is in my opinion, carried out in a modern, ‘honest’ manner. The architect for this scheme, in consultation with myself, has worked toward a design that has minimal impact on the existing fabric of the church. Indeed, the scheme entails the use of an ‘isolation’ layer designed to
ensure that the existing floor is maintained and a structure and demountable partitioning system designed in such a way as to be readily removable at a later date.
Save Mann’s Heritage have raised strong objections relating to the architectural design of W. D. Caroe and the impact of this scheme on his work. In my opinion, the extensive use of glass seeks to minimise the impact of the new structure in the space, thereby maintaining the expression of Caroe’s original structure and architectural form.
In my opinion, the positioning of the insertion preserves the “wow! factor” alluded to by SAVE. Clearly, there is a loss of the total volume of the space, but a viewer’s immersion from beneath the insertion will still have that effect.
I should emphasise that the intention of the scheme is to have a minimal effect on Caroe’s detailing. Attention is drawn to the Port Hole doors off the Lobby which are retained and not lost within this scheme. I am not sure whether the mention of the Celtic stonework is a suggestion that the detailing should utilise this effect, but it is an approach that I personally disagree with.
In my opinion, this scheme recognises both the registered building status of the church into which it is inserted and the requirement of the Church to change in terms of the way its congregation utilise the space.
I consider that the proposal is well considered and therefore my recommendation is for an approval.
PARTY STATUS:
Isle of Man Victorian Society
Save Mann’s Heritage
SPMCE
The Department of Transport
Recommended Decision:
Date of Recommendation:
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
C 1.
The use must be taken up within four years of the date of this notice in order for this approval to remain valid after that time.
C 2. Prior to the commencement of the works a full photographic survey of the property is to be carried out and provided for approval by the Planning Committee.
C 3. Prior to the commencement of any works, the architects are to provide details of the partitioning system intended for use.
C 4. This approval relates to the submitted documents and drawings 1327/05 Drawing 01; 1327/05 Drawing 02 and 1327/05 Drawing 03 all received on 8th February 2006.
C 5. Prior to the commencement of any works, the architect is to provide large scale details of the full height glazed screen.
NOTE: 1, SW 2 CFD
Decision Made: _________________________ Committee Meeting Date: _________________________
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
