17 December 2009 · Senior Planning Officer (delegated under Article 3(13) of the Town and Country (Development Procedure) Order 2005)
Land Adjacent To, Nobles Park Pavilion, Nobles Park, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM2 4bd
The proposal sought permission to retain a tarmac hardstanding area installed in May 2008 adjacent to Nobles Park Pavilion in a public park zoned as Public Open Space under the Douglas Local Plan 1998.
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 officer concluded the tarmac area results in loss of Public Open Space contrary to Recreational Policy 2, as no reasoned justification exists despite applicant claims of need for maintenance acces…
General Policy 2
Requires development in line with Area Plan zoning (Public Open Space here) and respects surroundings including character of locality, visual amenities, and open space provision. Officer found conflict as tarmac introduces urbanised element harming park townscape and amenities without overriding need.
Recreation Policy 2
Prohibits loss of open space/recreational facilities unless alternative equivalent provision made or overall community gain with no significant effect on local provision/character. No alternatives provided; tarmac seen as permanent loss despite claims, failing both exceptions as no community gain demonstrated.
Do not oppose
no objections
The original application (09/01606/R) sought retention of a 270 sqm tarmaced area installed without permission in May 2008, which was refused by the planning authority for loss of open space and unacceptable visual impact. The appellant (Douglas Borough Council) argued it was needed for maintenance access, did not reduce recreational open space, was not for parking, and had no visual impact. The planning authority defended the refusal citing contravention of Recreational Policy 2 and visual incongruity in the park. The inspector found the tarmac's urbanised appearance detracted from the parkland character, rejected the appellant's explanations for its size and shape as unconvincing, and noted risks of precedent for further surfacing. The Minister accepted the inspector's recommendation to dismiss the appeal and directed removal of the tarmac by 31 July 2010.
Precedent Value
This appeal demonstrates that even functional justifications for hard surfacing in parks fail if visual harm to parkland character is evident and precedent for incremental urbanisation is a risk; future applicants must minimise scale, provide robust evidence against unauthorised uses, and consider less invasive repairs.
Inspector: Graham Self MA MSc FRTPI
