DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PANEL 17 AUGUST 2015

Case No: 15/00875/FUL (FULL PLANNING APPLICATION)

Proposal: CHANGE OF LAND USE AND CONSTRUCTION OF A HARD SURFACED TENNIS COURT WITH SURROUND FENCING.

Location: DIDDINGTON MANOR THE STREET DIDDINGTON ST NEOTS

Applicant: MR EDMUND THORNHILL

Grid Ref: 519482 265603

Date of Registration: 30.05.2015

Parish: DIDDINGTON

RECOMMENDATION - REFUSE

This application is referred to Panel as the Parish Council recommendation to approve is contrary to the officer recommendation to refuse.

1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION

1.1 The application site lies in the countryside east of the A1 in Diddington Conservation Area. The site is part of a field which lies north-west of a range of stables and north of a hedge around a large graveled parking area. South-east of the stables lie two substantial old barns, a modern outbuilding and Manor farmhouse. The barn nearer the back of the house is Grade II listed and the other is an old unlisted threshing barn.

1.2 The proposal is to change the use of part of a rural field to create a private hard surfaced tennis court (17m x 35m) and to erect black post and chain link fencing around the court ranging from 0.9m to 2.75m in height. New indigenous hedging would be introduced on three sides of the court. The court would be finished with a grass colour.

1.3 There are views of the site from the road, including from the south west, opposite 21 The Street and through a gap in the hedge from the access south-east of the site.

1.4 A design and access statement and Great Crested Newts survey by Chris Vine of April/May 2015 have been submitted with the application. The applicant has also submitted, during the processing of the application, an Heritage appraisal and an archaeological appraisal statement relating to the earthwork area at Manor Farm, as the Farm is surrounded by Historic Environment Record evidence that attests to the presence of house platforms, enclosures and trackways indicative of shrunken Medieval village remains and which are possible components of Grimbaud’s Manor, the earliest records of which stem from the 11th century AD.

2. NATIONAL GUIDANCE

2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the three dimensions to sustainable development - an economic role, a social role and an environmental role - and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

 Paragraph 7 Achieving sustainable development  Core planning principles, paragraph 17 including bullet point 10 regarding conserving heritage assets.  Section 8 Promoting healthy communities, paragraph 73.  Paragraph 118 regarding protected species.  Section 12 Conserving and enhancing the historic environment including Paragraphs 131 and 134.

2.2 BS42020:2013 Biodiversity-Code of practice for planning and development.

2.3 Natural England’s “Standing Advice” on protected species including great crested newts and bats.

For full details visit the government website: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities- and-local-government

3. PLANNING POLICIES

3.1 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995)

 En2: “Character and setting of Listed Buildings”  En5: “Conservation Area Character”  En6: “Design standards in Conservation Areas”  En9: “Open spaces, trees and street scenes in Conservation Areas”  En12: “Archaeological Implications”  En17: “Development in the Countryside”  En18: “Protection of countryside features”  En22: “Conservation”  En23: “Conservation”  En25: “General Design Criteria”

3.2 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alterations (2002)- none relevant.

3.3 Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009)

 CS1: “Sustainable development in Huntingdonshire”

3.4 Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013)

 Policy LP 1: “Strategy and principles for development”  Policy LP 11: “The Relationship Between the Built-up Area and the Countryside - The countryside includes all land outside built-up areas and those hamlets, groups of buildings and individual buildings that are clearly detached from the continuous built-up area of a defined settlement that are not themselves defined settlements.  Policy LP 13: “Quality of Design”  Policy LP 15: “Ensuring a High Standard of Amenity”  Policy LP 21: “Rural Economy”  Policy LP 28: “Biodiversity and Protected Habitats and Species”  Policy LP 31: “Heritage Assets and their Settings”

3.5 Supplementary Planning Documents:

 Huntingdonshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2007  Huntingdonshire Landscape and Townscape Supplementary Planning Document 2007

Local policies are viewable at https://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk

4. PLANNING HISTORY

Adjoining buildings:

4.1 9001560LBC Demolish front wing and alter part of Barn -consent 1990.

4.2 1000696FUL Change of use from stable block to ancillary residential accommodation (garden room) south of listed barn- approved 2010.

4.3 1200884FUL Change of use from agricultural barn to hospitality suite for farm shoot, demolition of existing 'modern' stables with associated landscaping and parking layout approved 2012.

4.4 1200885LBC Change of use from agricultural barn to hospitality suite for farm shoot, demolition of existing 'modern' stables with associated landscaping and parking layout approved 2012.

4.5 1201246ful convert barn south-west of listed barn to pool and cart shed west of listed and unlisted barns to associated storage- approved.

4.6 1401372FUL and 1401373LBC alterations and change of use of a grade II listed barn to form swimming pool approved 2015.

4.7 1401376FUL Demolition of barn south-west of listed barn- withdrawn.

5. CONSULTATIONS

5.1 DIDDINGTON Parish via BUCKDEN Parish Council- Recommend approve (COPY ATTACHED)

5.2 Cambridgeshire County Council Archaeology – Recommend approve subject to a condition to secure a small works scheme sufficient to allow for the monitoring and recording of this land plot during construction.

6. REPRESENTATIONS

6.1 None received.

7. SUMMARY OF ISSUES

7.1 The main issues for consideration are:

 the principle of the change of use in the countryside,  the impact on the character and appearance of the countryside and conservation area,  setting of the listed building,  archaeology,  protected species.

Principle:

7.2 The site lies in open countryside outside the residential curtilage of the dwelling. Policy En17 of the 1995 Local Plan states that development outside the built-up framework will generally be restricted to that which is essential for the efficient operation of local agriculture, horticulture, forestry, permitted mineral extraction, outdoor recreation or public utility services.

7.3 Policy LP11 states that all land outside the built up area is defined as countryside.

7.4 LP21 states that proposals for outdoor leisure or recreation in the countryside will be supported where a countryside location is justified.

7.5 LP22 states that a proposal for leisure development in the countryside will be supported where it is in a location that is well- related to an existing settlement or where there are demonstrable locational or sustainability reasons why it has to be located elsewhere.

7.6 The applicant advises that the site was selected over 50m from the nearest part of the house and 5m from the stables because the site was relatively level and screened by a hedge to the south and barn to the east. The applicant considers that a site closer to the house would ‘potentially have a more significant impact on the setting of the house and the outbuildings’ and involve the loss of lawn, trees and shrubs.

7.7 The applicant’s points have been taken into account but given limited weight as their assertion is unsupported by evidence. The proposal is considered to be unacceptable in principle as although the NPPF is generally supportive of outdoor recreation), the proposal is not ‘essential development’ in the countryside and the loss of part of the field to the tennis court and fence fails to satisfy policy En17 of HLP 1995 and policy LP21 of The Huntingdonshire Draft Local Plan to 2036.

7.8 The application follows preliminary enquiry reference 1407178PENQ for a similar proposal for a tennis court where the applicant was advised on 9th July 2014: ‘There is no justification for a tennis court in the open countryside and therefore this element of your scheme would not gain officer support’. 7.9 The advantages of securing a private leisure facility are outweighed by the harm caused with the loss of part of the countryside. The proposal is considered to be contrary to policy En17 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) and policy LP21 of The Huntingdonshire Draft Local Plan to 2036.

Character and appearance of the countryside/ conservation area

7.10 The site is currently mown grass in a larger field, part of which was, at the time of the officer site visit, otherwise unmown. The proposal would replace the surface with hard landscaping and introduce a fence and introduce activity into the site. The colour of the court and fence could be controlled by condition.

7.11 The site is part screened by soft landscaping and the stables and the applicant proposes additional soft landscaping which would help to soften the impact when the landscaping matures, although the proposal is to maintain the hedge at approximately 2m in height, which means that the top of the higher part of the fence would be exposed to view from the road. Furthermore, when the existing hedges are not in leaf, the tennis court will be more exposed in this rural setting.

7.12 The main view of the site is from the south west, opposite 21 The Street, due to a gap in the hedges for an access. However, even if a further hedge along part of the roadside was secured, it would not overcome the concern about the harm to the character and appearance of the area caused by the visual intrusion of the court and fence into the field. The proposal would also obscure a view of the pleasingly and traditionally designed stables to the side. It is therefore considered that this proposal fails to conserve or enhance the quality and distinctive characteristics of this rural area.

7.13 The Conservation Area extends over the rest of the field behind the application site, house and barns. Some low timber paddock fences have been introduced into part of the field behind the proposed development but the field has a rural character and appearance. The proposal is considered to fail to satisfy policy LP1 as it fails to preserve local character and distinctiveness. The proposed development would change the character of the site and urbanise it, which would detract from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

7.14 The proposal is considered to result in less than substantial harm to the designated heritage asset. It is necessary to consider this harm against the public benefits of the proposal. As this proposal is for a tennis court for private use there are no public benefits associated with the development. The proposal is considered to be contrary to policies En5 and En9 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995), policy CS1 of the Adopted Core Strategy and draft Policies LP1 LP13 LP21 and LP31 of the Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 and the NPPF. These policies are consistent with the emphasis in the National Planning Policy Framework on the importance of good design, the protection of local distinctiveness and conserving and enhancing the historic environment, particularly paragraphs 17, 58, 60, 131 and 134.

Listed building

7.15 It is considered that the development is far enough from the listed barn, and adequately separated by the stables, to avoid harm to the setting of listed building. Therefore the proposal satisfies policies En2 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and CS1 of the Adopted Huntingdonshire Core Strategy 2009, LP1 LP31 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013) and NPPF in terms of impact on setting of the listed building.

Archaeology

7.16 The area lies within a known Medieval moated manorial complex and the proposal occurs just south of earthworks documented in a Historic Environment Record (HER ref MCB13353).

7.17 The applicant’s appraisal has been assessed by the County Council’s archaeologist and it is agreed that the location of the tennis court is suitable in relation to the earthworks. However, if the application had been approved, a standard archaeological condition to secure the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation could have been imposed in accordance with En12 of Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 and LP31 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3. (2013).

Protected species

7.18 There are great crested newts, smooth newts and common toads and frogs in the vicinity of the site.

7.19 The applicants report advises that mitigation measures would be required to avoid harm to the protected species. If the application had been approved, a condition could have secured the implementation of the recommendation in chapter 8 of the Great Crested Newts survey by Chris Vine of April/May 2015.

7.20 Detailed ecology information submitted with applications for the adjoining land demonstrates that bats and swallows use the listed barn. However, as no external lighting is proposed, there is no reason why foraging bats should be disturbed.

7.21 The proposal need not entail harm to protected species and the new indigenous hedging could be secured by condition and would amount to a biodiversity enhancement. The proposal satisfies En22 En23 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, policy CS1 of the Core Strategy and LP 28 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013) and the NPPF. These policies are consistent with the NPPF paragraph 118 seeks to conserve and enhance biodiversity, policy LP28 is however an emerging policy and can only be afforded limited weight.

Other matters

7.22 The applicant has submitted a list of 10 cases relating to tennis courts approved in the countryside, including courts approved in conservation areas, Green belt, and Areas of Outstanding Natural beauty. However, none of the cases are within Huntingdonshire and as no details of the cases have been provided, and each case has to be considered on its own merits, those cases have not been considered further and do not merit the approval of this application.

Conclusion:

7.23 The proposed development is considered to fail to comply with relevant national and local planning policy as the proposal is unacceptable in principle and will harm the character and appearance of Diddington Conservation Area.

8. RECOMMENDATION – REFUSE

8.1 Having regard to applicable national and local planning policies, and having taken all relevant material considerations into account, it is therefore recommended that planning permission should be refused for the following reasons:

 The proposal is not ‘essential development’ in the countryside and the loss of part of the field to the tennis court and fence is considered to be contrary to policy En17 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) and policy LP21 of The Huntingdonshire Draft Local Plan to 2036.  The proposal fails to conserve or enhance the quality and distinctive characteristics of this rural area and would urbanise it, which would detract from the character and appearance of Diddington Conservation Area. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to policies En5 and En9 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995), policy CS1 of the Adopted Core Strategy and draft Policies LP1 LP13 and LP31 of the Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 and the NPPF. These policies are consistent with the emphasis in the National Planning Policy Framework on the importance of good design, the protection of local distinctiveness and conserving and enhancing the historic environment, particularly paragraphs 17, 58, 60, 131 and 134.

If you would like a translation of this document, a large text version or an audio version, please contact us on 01480 388388 and we will try to accommodate your needs.

CONTACT OFFICER: Enquiries about this report to Sheila Lindsay Development Management Officer 01480 388247 Huntingdonshire DISTRICT COUNCIL Pathfinder House St Mary’s Street Huntingdon PE29 3TN

Head of Planning Services Pathfinder House St. Mary’s Street Huntingdon Cambridgeshire PE 29 3TN

Application Number: 15/00875/FUL Case Officer: Sheila Lindsay

Proposal: Change of land use and construction of a hard surface tennis court with surround fencing.

Location: Diddington Manor The Street Diddington St Neots PE19 5XU

Observations of BUCKDEN Parish Council. þ Recommend approval because the development is in keeping with the adjacent Manor House which itself has been brought up to date. The construction phase should be controlled closely to ensure that requirements of Section 8 of the Great Crested Newt survey are met to minimise disruption to the habitats.

Clerk to BUCKDEN Parish Council. Date : 15 July 2015

Tel 01480 388388 Fax 01480 388099 [email protected] www.huntsdc.gov.uk

PLANNING SERVICES e3c99ed7-dc64-41f0-9bed-89749b321659.doc

Development Management Panel

Scale =1 :2,500 © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Application Ref: 15/00875/FUL Ordnance Survey HDC 100022322 Date Created: 04/08/2015 Location: Diddington

Legend The Site Listed Building Conservation Area Figure 1

Diddington Manor – Tennis Court Site Location

SCALE 1:1250

Figure 3

Fence Elevations – Proposed Tennis Court at Diddington Manor

Fence and Court Detail – Example of court surfacing and fencing to be used at Diddington Manor

1. Court Surfacing

Green coloured porous artificial grass surface.

The court surface blends well with the adjacent paddock land. Similarly, the fencing is very inconspicuous especially when set against a backdrop of soft landscaping (see fencing on far side of photo).

2. Fencing

Black painted galvanised posts and open mesh chain link fencing.

2.75 metre high fencing at both ends but dropping down to the lower height of 0.9 metres along both sides.

Figure 6

Diddington Manor – Tennis Court Soft Landscaping

Proposed new hedgerow along the north west, north east and south west sides of the court area

Notes:

(i) A native mixed species hedgerow is proposed along three sides of the court area using species including holly (10%), hawthorn (50%), hazel (20%), Dog Rose (10%) and Guelder Rose (10%). Robust 0.5 Existing 3m high hedge metre high plants will be used (in accordance with British Standard 3936) at a density of 3 plants per metre in double staggered rows.

(ii) The new hedgerow will be planted in the first planting season following the commencement of the court development.

(iii) The new hedge will be allowed to grow to a height of at least 2 metres. It will be trimmed on an annual basis preferably at the end of the growing season (NB. August). Any dead or dying hedge plants will be replaced before the start of the next growing season.

SCALE 1:500