Holiday lodges plan approved for historic park despite objections

Land around Patshull Hall was transformed into gardens and pleasure grounds in the late 17th century – and renowned Georgian landscape gardener Capability Brown was involved in later alterations.

The 183 hectare (452 acre) site is now a Grade II designated Historic Landscape Area, and Patshull Hall’s Great Pool area features a Grade II* Listed Doric temple, built in the mid-18th century. In the following century brick wings were added and in 1980 it became part of the 1.8 hectare Patshull Park Hotel site.

A golf course was also created in part of the historic parkland. But this is “now redundant”, a report to South Staffordshire Council’s planning committee said, and the site closed “some time ago”.

Harlaston (Packington) Ltd has put forward plans to demolish the modern hotel extensions and remove hard standing car parking. The listed temple structure will be retained and 62 holiday lodges are earmarked for the northern half of the existing golf course, terminating at the southerly side of the Great Pool.

The report added: “A modest amenity building would be erected not far from the site entrance. The design of this building is modern with contrasting roof pitches and timber cladding (and) it would house the reception, a small café, staff facilities and a meeting room.

“An existing machinery store used in association with the golf course would be converted and used for housekeeping and general maintenance. The application proposes an ongoing maintenance scheme for the grounds and a footpath linking the far northern site to the village of Pattingham that the users of the site can use, as well as members of the public.”

Planning officers recommended the application be refused permission as it was considered inappropriate development in the Green Belt. There were also concerns “the proposal would cause harm to a number of designated Heritage Assets including the character of the Grade II listed Park and Garden as well as the setting of the Grade I listed Hall, Grade II* listed Temple and Grade II boathouse.”

Objections were raised by Historic England, Garden History Society, The Gardens Trust, Staffordshire Gardens and Parks Trust, Capability Brown Society and Georgian Group. A further 12 letters of objection were received by the district council.

But the plans were backed by Enjoy Staffordshire, which works to support the county’s visitor economy. And there were a further 28 letters of support.

Applicant Robert Mercer, who spoke in support of the application at a planning committee meeting on Tuesday, said: “I am new to this as a farmer and not a holiday operator, however I would like to reassure you, as a farmer, I have the best intentions for all the land I am fortunate to manage. For me looking after the land in a sustainable way is of paramount importance, as is working with the communities which I am lucky enough to operate within.

“The golf course and hotel at Patshull have been closed since Covid. Currently the site employs a fishing manager and some fishermen get to enjoy the fishing in the lake; apart from that no-one gets to enjoy the parkland and it generates no income for the area.

“The hotel is in disrepair and this ruins the setting of the historic temple which it has been built around. There is also no formal access to St Mary’s Church, a matter we understand has been of concern to the local parish church council for some years.

“The plan is for timber cabins, not park homes as originally planned, which will be built and operated by Forest Holidays who are a respected and quality national operator. All the lodges will provide short stay self-catering breaks.

“It represents less development than the current square footage of the hotel, which will be knocked down, and the temple will be fully reinstated as a standalone feature. The parkland has already been developed and a large red brick hotel is visible from the road, along with an extensive Tarmac car park – our proposal will have less impact on the setting.”

But a statement read out at the meeting on behalf of two nearby residents said: “While we support the overall intention in the application to find a long-term sustainable use for the site, we object to the erection of the proposed 62 lodges which we consider to be overly intensive. The proposed lodges and amenities will have a seriously harmful impact on the appearance and significance of the historic designated landscape.”

Another statement from a resident, also read out at the meeting, said: “The Patshull estate comprises land designed by Capability Brown and numerous listed properties which have been identified as being of historic importance. Our concerns can be consolidated into two key issues: the ecological and environmental impact and the impact on our privacy.

“If users of the development are granted access to the private walkway which runs adjacent to St Mary’s Church towards Patshull Hall, this will result in significant increase in footfall along the boundary of a number of private properties. If the development were amended so the access was restricted to the church, but no further, that would mitigate our concerns.”

Ward councillor Terry Mason, who called in the application for consideration by the planning committee, said: “As part of my cabinet portfolio I sit on the Enjoy Staffordshire destination management board, and following four successive meetings where the lack of high quality accommodation for tourism was raised, I drew their attention to this application. They express their strong approval for the development proposal – it’s something we need in Staffordshire in general and certainly in this part of South Staffordshire.

“This is an opportunity to revitalise this site, restore the temple to its proper status without those massive red brick monstrosities impacting on the landscape and replace the John Jacobs golf course – not the Capability Brown golf course – with a rewilded environment better reflecting Capability Brown himself. Are we going to allow South Staffordshire to remain ignored for serious tourism investment, for the economic employment, health and wellbeing benefits this application will bring?”

Committee member Penny Allen proposed that the application should be approved. Seven members voted to pass the plans – going against the officers’ recommendation – while three voted against approval.