“Big ice cream sign” “does not” detract from Thornbridge Hall, inquiry hears

The comments emerged as heritage expert Kathryn Sather gave evidence at an appeal by Derbyshire business tycoon Emma Harrison and husband Jim against an enforcement notice to remove a driveway, car park and cafe built without planning permission.

The conservation expert said Peak District National Park had “overstated” the harm to heritage structures at Thornbridge Hall’s park and gardens and described the Grade II listed estate as “not Capability Brown or anything.”

Kate Olley, a barrister representing PDNP, told Ms Sather – a professor at Birmingham City University – she had “downgraded” the significance of Thornbridge’s registered park and garden.

She asked whether she would agree that the cafe’s “big ice cream sign” and the car park detracted from the cultural significance of heritage structures within Thornbridge’s park and gardens – in particular four Greek statues or “herms”.

Ms Sather replied she did not agree - that the development “does not harm the cultural significance” of the herms.

Part of PDNP’s justification for the enforcement notice against the cafe, driveway and other works was that they posed “substantial harm” to surrounding heritage assets at the “highest end.”

However Ms Sather said the “highest end” classification of harm would mean that relics such as the four herms would be “very nearly completely lost”.

She said: “It’s very clear that these assets are not harmed by the development. The local planning authority are trying to overvalue the significance of these heritage assets.

“The park and garden is Grade II listed - it’s not Capability Brown or anything - this leads to a fundamentally flawed assessment of harm. There’s an overstatement of harm.”

Speaking about the new driveway (drive A), which she described as “undulating”, barrister Ms Olley said: “Drive A runs through the parkland - you can see it from the east terrace and it contrasts with the historic drive doesn’t it.

“Do you disagree that the differences between the design and construction of the new driveway and the historic driveway are pretty stark?”

Ms Sather said: “Having a driveway that follows the undulation of the landscape is more fitting.

“Otherwise you would have to raise up the ground, which would mean more groundworks.”

The inquiry has heard the Harrisons had put forward a retrospective conservation management plan to support the cafe, driveway and car park.

However, today (Tuesday) at the inquiry barrister Ms Olley said the retrospective plan meant PDNP had “lost” the opportunity to plan for changes brought about by development at the park.

She told Ms Sather: “I think we all agree that should have been done before works were done, don’t we? It’s not professional practice to do this backwards, is it?”

Emma Harrison claims the unauthorised works went ahead without permission because the Peak District National Park Authority (PDNP) “barricaded” its offices during the pandemic.

A decision over hers and husband Jim’s appeal against PDNP’s enforcement notice to return Thornbridge Hall’s gardens and park to their former state is expected in November.