Loading document...
Application No.: 25/90999/B Applicant: Culture Vannin Proposal: Alterations and erection of replacement rear extension and rear store and garden room, installation of rooflights, solar panels, air source heat pump, replacement of garage door with a window, creation of seating area, access ramp and bin store, and replacement of front windows and door. Site Address: Fairfield House Main Road St Johns Isle Of Man IM4 3NA Senior Planning Officer: Mrs Louise Phillips Expected Decision Level: Officer Delegation Recommended Decision: Permitted Date of Recommendation: 02.03.2026 Conditions and Notes for Approval C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions
Reason: To comply with Article 26 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 and to avoid the accumulation of unimplemented planning approvals.
Reason: To allow for appraisal of the effects of an ASHP upon the living conditions of near neighbours.
Reason: To provide off road parking for future residents in the interest of highway safety and living conditions.
This application has been recommended for approval for the following reason.
The proposed development would cause no harm to the character and appearance of the site or wider area and it would preserve the setting of the nearby Registered Buildings and Ancient Monument. It would cause no significant harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers to the west or south; and the loss of one off-road parking space would have no detrimental effect upon highway safety. The benefits of improving public access to the building would outweigh the loss of the parking space and the conflict with Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan. The proposal would otherwise comply with the Development Plan and with relevant legislation.
Plans/Drawings/Information; This approval relates to the following drawings:
Right to Appeal
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties SHOULD be given the Right to Appeal as they have submitted an objection that meets the specified criteria:
1.1 The application relates to Fairfield House and its curtilage, a detached building on the south side of the A1 Peel Road, St Johns, opposite Tynwald Hill and the associated Registered Buildings listed in Section 3 below. The building was originally a dwelling but is presently in use by Culture Vannin, an organisation founded to support Manx culture and heritage. The ground floor is open to the public on weekdays and comprises teaching and exhibition space. The upper floors are used as offices.
1.2 The main building is of a traditional Manx style, with a symmetrical façade, chimneys and a pitched slate roof. At the rear, there are several single storey projecting elements. There is a two-storey extension to the east side of the building, with a lower ridge height and a catslide roof to the rear. It is set back from the main front elevation allowing off-road parking
1.3 The property is bordered to the west by a residential property, Tynwald View. The buildings are separated by a driveway leading to Tynwald View's detached garage which abuts the rear garden of the application site. To the immediate south of the garden is a dwelling under construction which is almost complete (23/01149/B). It is close to the boundary of the application site, separated by a path around the house, and will be reached via a narrow access lane which runs along the eastern boundary of the application site.
2.1 The proposed development includes an extension to the rear, which would replace the small single storey projections with a single structure which would essentially carry across the catslide roof of the existing two-storey extension. The walls would be finished in painted render and the roof in natural slate to match the existing building. The roof slope would include 14 solar panels and 8 rooflights and there would be two sets of rear-facing patio doors into the garden. There would be no side-facing windows. The additional space on the ground floor would allow for a multi-use classroom and more permanent exhibition space; while the space above would be a void, lighting the ground floor public areas.
2.2 It is also proposed to set out the garden more formally, with paving over the majority interspersed with planting, benches and tables. A timber pergola would run across the back of the building. Two timber-clad buildings are proposed - a garden room for sitting in, and a store. Both would have pitched roofs. The garden room would measure 3.6m wide x 3.0m deep x 3.6m tall to the ridge; and the store would measure 3.3m wide x 2.25m deep x 3.25m tall to the ridge. Both buildings would be positioned close to the southern boundary of the site. An Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP) would be installed on the western boundary of the garden between the application property and the garage belonging to Tynwald View.
2.3 At the front of the building, it is proposed to replace the garage-type door with glazed doors and to use the driveway space in front of them as a public seating area. The seating would be curved in front of the building and a set of display panels, together with some landscaping, would be installed behind it.
3.1 The site is within a predominantly residential area and within the boundary of a proposed Conservation Area (CA). There is no CA Appraisal for the proposed area. The site is not at risk of flooding.
3.2 The following Registered Buildings lie opposite the site:
Tynwald Hill Assembly Site is also an Ancient Monument.
3.3 Registered Tree Area GM23 (Tynwald Hill Fair Field) lies opposite but it would not be affected by the proposal.
3.4 Policy TYNWALD/P/1 states that in light of the national significance of the Tynwald Hill Ancient Monument, no development shall be permitted which would prejudice the setting of this general area or the operations of the annual ceremony. Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016
3.5 Strategic Policy 3 requires development to have regard to local character.
3.6 Strategic Policy 4(a) required development to protect or enhance the fabric and setting of Ancient Monuments, Registered Buildings and Conservation Areas.
3.7 Strategic Policy 5 states that new development should make a positive contribution to the environment.
3.8 General Policy 2 - Provides various criteria for development management purposes, including those below which are relevant to this proposal. The development should: landscaping of buildings and the spaces around them;
convenient access for all highway users, together with adequate parking, servicing and manoeuvring space.
3.9 Transport Policy 7, together with Appendix 7, requires the provision of one parking space per 15sqm of net office floorspace.
4.1 Section 16(3) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1999 requires that special regard shall be had to the desirability of preserving a registered building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses.
4.2 Residential Design Guide to the extent that the development is proposed to a previously residential property in a predominantly residential area.
5.1 15/00694/C: Change of use from residential to office, temporary exhibition space and retail point. Permitted.
5.2 23/01149/B: Demolition of garage and erection of two bedroom dwelling etc. at Land North of Fo Chronk, Station Road, St Johns, to the immediate south of the application site. Permitted.
6.1 Highways Services, DoI (24/11/25): Do not oppose. The proposal would have "…no significant negative impact upon highway safety, network functionality and/or parking as the benefits of improving the frontage of the tourist/visitor building and making it accessible to the mobility impaired outweighs the loss of minimal off-street parking space at the front of the existing garage. Additionally, there is public parking nearby to the site that can cater for demand of public and staff vehicles. The ramp should be removed if the building was converted back to a residential dwelling as this would require private off-street parking again".
6.2 The following organisations were consulted on 21st or 24th November 2025 but, at the time this report was drafted, no comments had been received:
Public Comments
6.3 The owners of the property under construction to the immediate south of the site, "Site adjacent to Fo Cronk", Station Road, St Johns, make the following main points. The full representation is available online. (9/2/26).
height and very close proximity. They appear to be over-imposing and would block natural daylight.
7.1 The main issues are the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the host building and wider area; upon the setting of the nearby Registered Buildings and Ancient Monument; upon the living conditions of neighbouring residential occupiers to the west and south; and upon highway safety in respect of parking provision. Character and Appearance
7.2 The proposed extension to the rear of the building would replace several small extensions of different sizes, heights and styles with a single, comprehensive structure. The continuation of the catslide roof over the two-storey element to the east side would better integrate this existing extension with the main building, using a roof form suitable to its age and style. Together with the proposed use of matching materials, this part of the development would improve the appearance of the rear elevation and the addition of rooflights and solar panels to the roof slope would not diminish this benefit.
7.3 The proposal to formalise the space within the garden reflects the use of the building as a public exhibition and teaching centre. The ASHP would be small and discretely sited; and the pergola, garden room and store would be constructed in wood suitable for the garden setting. The garden buildings would be attractively designed with pitched roofs and, being of relatively small size, they would not make the outside space appear cramped.
7.4 On the front elevation, the replacement of the garage door with glazing sympathetic to the windows at first floor level would improve the appearance of the building. The introduction of the proposed seating and display panels would be in keeping with the public use of the building. These features would be contained well within the existing frontage and they would neither dominate nor detract from the traditional style of the building.
7.5 Overall, the proposed development would cause no harm to the character and appearance of the host building and it would improve the appearance of the rear elevation. It would similarly protect the character and appearance of the wider area. Thus it would comply with Strategic Policies 3 and 5 of the Strategic Plan, and with General Policy 2(b), (c) and (g). Registered Buildings/Ancient Monument
7.6 The application site is opposite the Registered Buildings and Ancient Monument forming part of the Tynwald Assembly site, but it is of a relatively small scale and in a line of several other buildings in a mix of public and private uses. It does not stand out particularly in the street scene and the proposed development would not alter its appearance conspicuously. The addition of seating and notice boards on the frontage might make the intention for the building to be used by the public more obvious, but the Assembly Site is similarly intended for public use. Consequently, this would cause no harm.
7.7 Therefore, in light of my conclusions above in respect of the effect of the proposed development upon the character and appearance of the host building and wider area, it would also preserve the setting of the nearby Registered Buildings and Ancient Monument. It would comply with Section 16(3) of the Town & Country Planning Act 1999; with Strategic Policy 4(a) of the Strategic Plan; and with Policy TYNWALD/P/1 of the St Johns Local Plan 1999. Living Conditions
7.8 The residential property to the west, Tynwald View, has a conservatory to the rear from which it would be possible to see the main extension at the back of the application property. However, because the buildings are separated by a driveway and the new catslide roof would slope steeply downwards, the additional massing of the extension would not be unduly overbearing. There would be no facing windows to give rise to overlooking; and the extension would not be so deep as to cause any significant loss of light in either the house or rear garden.
7.9 The proposed garden room would be sited in a small "nook" between the garage belonging to Tynwald View and the southern boundary of the site, and it would be close to a window on the southern elevation of the garage. However, its effect upon lighting and outlook in the garage would not be so significant as to be detrimental to living conditions.
7.10 The new dwelling to the south of the application site is nearing completion. The plans for which planning permission was granted show that it will be a single storey dwelling with some accommodation in the roof space over the garage at the eastern end of the site. From the garden of the application property, it is mostly the roof of the new house which is visible above the boundary wall at the western edge of the site and the boundary planting further east.
7.11 Given the distance between the main rear extension to the application site and the new dwelling, and the absence of first floor windows in the latter, this element of the proposed
7.12 The garden room would be close to a window serving the kitchen/dining area of the new dwelling, but the view from and light to this window is already restricted by the boundary wall between the two properties. Moreover, the main outlook from this part of the house is from the southern elevation, from glazed doors onto a terrace. In this context, the effect of the proposed garden room upon living conditions in respect of both outlook and light would be limited.
7.13 More generally, while the works proposed in the rear garden might mean that it is better used, but the seating areas would encourage quiet activity which should not be unduly disturbing to the neighbours. Similarly, the information provided about the ASHP confirms that it would not be harmful in respect of noise.
7.14 Overall, therefore, the proposed development would have no significant detrimental effect upon the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers at either Tynwald View or the new dwelling to the south. Thus it would comply with General Policy 2(g) of the Strategic Plan. Highways/Parking
7.15 The proposed development at the front of the property would result in the loss of the single off-street parking space. However, as noted by Highways Services, there is on-street parking close to the site as well as a public car park just to the east to accommodate staff and visitors. No concerns have been raised in respect of highway safety, related to parking or any other issue and, in this context, the benefits of the development to public access to the building outweigh the minimal loss of parking and the conflict with Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan.
7.15 Notwithstanding the above, Highways Services notes that if the application property were ever to revert to a dwelling, off-street parking would be required. A condition should be attached to to any grant of planning permission to secure this. Other Issues
7.16 Concerns have been raised by the owners of the newly constructed dwelling to the south about the lack of direct consultation by the applicant and the nature of the plans produced. However, there is no statutory requirement for an applicant to consult with neighbours on a proposal of this type and they have been formally notified by the Department. Full account has been taken of their representations, and the plans provided by the applicant were sufficient to allow for a proper appraisal of the proposal.
8.1 For the reasons given above, the proposed development would cause no harm to the character and appearance of the site or wider area and it would preserve the setting of the nearby Registered Buildings and Ancient Monument. It would cause no significant harm to the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers to the west or south; and the loss of one off-road parking space would have no detrimental effect upon highway safety. The benefits of improving public access to the building would outweigh the loss of the parking space and the conflict with Transport Policy 7 of the Strategic Plan. The proposal would otherwise comply with the Development Plan and with relevant legislation and it is recommended for approval accordingly.
9.1 The Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019 sets out the process for determining planning applications (including appeals). It sets out a Right to Appeal (i.e. to submit an appeal against a planning decision) and a Right to Give Evidence at Appeals (i.e. to participate in an appeal if one is submitted).
9.2 Article A10 sets out that the right to appeal is available to:
that submit a relevant objection; and o any other person who has made an objection that meets specified criteria.
9.3 Article 8(2)(a) requires that in determining an application, the Department must decide who has a right to appeal, in accordance with the criteria set out in article A10.
9.4 The Order automatically affords the Right to Give Evidence to the following (no determination is required):
I can confirm that this decision has been made by a Principal Planner in accordance with the authority afforded to that Officer by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Officer has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded interested person status and/or rights to appeal.
Decision Made : Permitted Date: 04.03.2026 Determining Officer Signed : J SINGLETON Jason Singleton Principal Planner
Customer note This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the office copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online service/customers and archive record.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
View as Markdown