The Cosy Nook Cafe Port Erin

[Max Power]

3 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Actually listed April 2018, so if they're only complaining now they're not exactly speedy.

I have to say I'm glad it has been listed because if you look at old photos and paintings of the Quay, it's the only building that seems unaltered since. 

Yes, listed after the purchase!

Whilst it's nice to think that all of the building's structure is original, the practicalities are otherwise, hence the problem with preservation orders. I believe the plans were sympathetic to the area.

[John Wright]

11 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Yes, listed after the purchase!

Whilst it's nice to think that all of the building's structure is original, the practicalities are otherwise, hence the problem with preservation orders. I believe the plans were sympathetic to the area.

Yes. But they’d have been given notice, in writing, of intention to register  and a copy stuck on the building. They get the chance to object. They either did, and lost, or they didn’t and have only themselves to blame.

if no notice was given then the registration can be challenged.

[Roger Mexico]

14 minutes ago, Max Power said:

Yes, listed after the purchase!

Whilst it's nice to think that all of the building's structure is original, the practicalities are otherwise, hence the problem with preservation orders. I believe the plans were sympathetic to the area.

Obviously the planning office thought the plans were sympathetic as well, because they were permitted.  So I can't see what they are complaining about.

Edited to add: If you look on the link in my previous post you can see that if they object to the listing they can also appeal against it.

Edited April 14, 2021 by Roger Mexico

[Max Power]

31 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Yes. But they’d have been given notice, in writing, of intention to register  and a copy stuck on the building. They get the chance to object. They either did, and lost, or they didn’t and have only themselves to blame.

if no notice was given then the registration can be challenged.

 

31 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Obviously the planning office thought the plans were sympathetic as well, because they were permitted.  So I can't see what they are complaining about.

Edited to add: If you look on the link in my previous post you can see that if they object to the listing they can also appeal against it.

I'm sure they would have objected as there was a lot of expenditure on plans etc. There  must be another reason not to have gone ahead with the revised plans I guess?

[Roger Mexico]

10 minutes ago, Max Power said:

I'm sure they would have objected as there was a lot of expenditure on plans etc. There  must be another reason not to have gone ahead with the revised plans I guess?

The only plans associated with the site were submitted in December 2018 and approved the following March.  So it was well after the listing.  There weren't any earlier ones that were turned down.

[TerryFuchwit]

1 hour ago, John Wright said:

Mmm? Written notices are sent to the address and stuck to doors. Purchasers advocate should have searched the register and also asked the vendor about any notices received. All standard stuff.

Sounds like it came about AFTER the purchase.

[Boris Johnson]

The whole listed building thing on the island is a bit of a joke, the island does not have any old properties of any real significance, there was no money here in the past to build good architecture and the islands main building stone, slate is crap as a building material when built with rubble pieces and stuck together with mud.

I can only think of the sea terminal as a building worth listing for architectural significance apart from that not a lot really, maybe the Bailey Scott designed lot?

I think the planners or whoever lists these buildings need to remember that just because its old does not make it worth saving.

This love of Manx stone cottages has in conjunction with our crap planning system rules means we are stuck with a lot of estates built in the recent past with the planners preferred "modern Manx cottage" design which is about as cheap a house as you can build, a rectangular 2 storey cement rendered  box with fake chimneys on each gable.

No wonder the developers lash them up, you don't get a more profitable build than that. Not only pig ugly to look at they are costly for the owners to paint every few years in our climate.

[Max Power]

45 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

The only plans associated with the site were submitted in December 2018 and approved the following March.  So it was well after the listing.  There weren't any earlier ones that were turned down.

If I'm reading it right, they were advised that whatever they had planned for the building was not going to happen due to the preservation order, after having expensive plans drawn up? Hence the new plans which were submitted to planning. I'm only assuming that the original plans were to demolish the building, the new plans, retaining the structure, were not financially viable or maybe restrict the development too much?  

[Max Power]

33 minutes ago, TerryFuchwit said:

Sounds like it came about AFTER the purchase.

Correct!

ETA: It seems that being upfront and checking with planning that there was no preservation order on the building provoked the planners to slap one on it?

Edited April 14, 2021 by Max Power

[Roger Mexico]

1 minute ago, Max Power said:

If I'm reading it right, they were advised that whatever they had planned for the building was not going to happen due to the preservation order, after having expensive plans drawn up? Hence the new plans which were submitted to planning. I'm only assuming that the original plans were to demolish the building, the new plans, retaining the structure, were not financially viable or maybe restrict the development too much?  

Well you've not linked to your original information, but they clearly never submitted anything else and seemed happy enough to submit plans that did get approved, if they are only complaining now.  And imagining knocking down and replacing an old building on a street that was clearly historic and has several other listed buildings would be a simple matter that you would assume would happen would be naive at best.

[Max Power]

18 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well you've not linked to your original information, but they clearly never submitted anything else and seemed happy enough to submit plans that did get approved, if they are only complaining now.  And imagining knocking down and replacing an old building on a street that was clearly historic and has several other listed buildings would be a simple matter that you would assume would happen would be naive at best.

I don't have any information to link to, it's all based on a conversation I had which may be open to translation. 

I don't particularly agree that the building is historic, it's an old warehouse in a state of disrepair but I accept that it is a familiar old place. We have been knocking down much more worthy buildings around Douglas than this, now here we are, left with another derelict building to enhance the town. 

The only people who are going to develop Douglas are people and companies who have money, want to make money and have the resources to do so. The town is a disgrace and sinking into a pit. The lack of vibrancy is mainly down to poor legislation which creates a downward spiral over time. We need to be open to development, within certain constraints, particularly around the towns of the island, before it's too late.  

ETA: The planning permission may have been obtained to improve the chances of selling the premises. Easier to show that something can be done and it's possibly viable or negotiable? 

Edited April 14, 2021 by Max Power

[Happier diner]

12 hours ago, Boris Johnson said:

The whole listed building thing on the island is a bit of a joke, the island does not have any old properties of any real significance, there was no money here in the past to build good architecture and the islands main building stone, slate is crap as a building material when built with rubble pieces and stuck together with mud.

I can only think of the sea terminal as a building worth listing for architectural significance apart from that not a lot really, maybe the Bailey Scott designed lot?

I think the planners or whoever lists these buildings need to remember that just because its old does not make it worth saving.

This love of Manx stone cottages has in conjunction with our crap planning system rules means we are stuck with a lot of estates built in the recent past with the planners preferred "modern Manx cottage" design which is about as cheap a house as you can build, a rectangular 2 storey cement rendered  box with fake chimneys on each gable.

No wonder the developers lash them up, you don't get a more profitable build than that. Not only pig ugly to look at they are costly for the owners to paint every few years in our climate.

That's a great post and yes it reinforces my view on fake look Manx. Look at the Ballerkameen horror show too.

[Happier diner]

21 hours ago, Apple said:

The monstrosity, in my view, that was envisaged to take its place was never a runner, and I think they knew that. 

There is too little space for parking down there and the neighbours would probably not appreciate any constant traffic going back and forth looking for somewhere to park.

The only option is in time to sell to HNWI for a new house. Lovely view.

I think people miss the point of the design of the new building. It wasn't particularly meant to look nice from the outside. Its beauty is what you are intended to see when you are in it. Unlike the old building. The new one was to give users a feel of being outside but actually inside nice and warm. 

Anyways it's done now. The mob have got their way. Let's watch it rot for 20 years now and slap each other on the back as to how small minded we are.

[John Wright]

10 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

12 hours ago, Boris Johnson said:

The whole listed building thing on the island is a bit of a joke, the island does not have any old properties of any real significance, there was no money here in the past to build good architecture and the islands main building stone, slate is crap as a building material when built with rubble pieces and stuck together with mud.

I can only think of the sea terminal as a building worth listing for architectural significance apart from that not a lot really, maybe the Bailey Scott designed lot?

I think the planners or whoever lists these buildings need to remember that just because its old does not make it worth saving.

This love of Manx stone cottages has in conjunction with our crap planning system rules means we are stuck with a lot of estates built in the recent past with the planners preferred "modern Manx cottage" design which is about as cheap a house as you can build, a rectangular 2 storey cement rendered  box with fake chimneys on each gable.

No wonder the developers lash them up, you don't get a more profitable build than that. Not only pig ugly to look at they are costly for the owners to paint every few years in our climate.

 

11 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

That's a great post and yes it reinforces my view on fake look Manx. Look at the Ballerkameen horror show too.

It’s not really true that there are no buildings worthy of registration. There are some stunning 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th century buildings, well worthy of registration. And we’ve got some good modern ones as well as the older ones. In fact, for such a small place and population we’ve got more than our fair share. OK, not much of it is grand, although some is, lots is artisan and domestic. We just don’t recognise it.

[Happier diner]

47 minutes ago, John Wright said:

 

It’s not really true that there are no buildings worthy of registration. There are some stunning 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th century buildings, well worthy of registration. And we’ve got some good modern ones as well as the older ones. In fact, for such a small place and population we’ve got more than our fair share. OK, not much of it is grand, although some is, lots is artisan and domestic. We just don’t recognise it.

I should have clarified that my quote that BJs was a great post was in relation to his comments about trying to recreate manxness in modern buildings.