A bid to convert a derelict tennis pavilion in historic Herefordshire grounds into a home has failed for the second time.

The pavilion lies within the grounds of Adams Hill, Breinton, west of Hereford, a mock-Tudor house and estate built in 1906 for Fred Bulmer, co-founder of the well-known cider making firm still based in Hereford (though now part of the Heineken brewing conglomerate).

The building “has some architectural merit”, but its heritage value “is predominantly in its historic connection with Adams Hill and the social history of the site and former owner”, a report by a council planning officer said.

However, an earlier application for the conversion was already refused in February. And according to Breinton Parish Council, “there is nothing in this rapid re-application that makes it any more acceptable in planning terms”.

“Put simply, it is the wrong development in the wrong place, it goes against a raft of county-wide and local planning policies,” the councillors said.

RELATED NEWS:

The revised application proposed a two-bedroom rather than a slightly larger three-bedroom home, with “an extension is finished in materials to match the existing (ones)”, the planning report said.

Hereford Civic Society said these additions would be easily confused with what was original. And it warned the proposal “could easily become the trojan horse for something much larger and permanent”.

The building is, anyway, not in its original position in the grounds, and black and grey “are not colours one associates with tennis or other sports pavilions”, the society said.

The council’s tree officer also objected due to the proposed loss of a section of native hedgerow, and the lack of a tree report – although no trees would have been removed.

The officer concluded the plan for the pavilion “fails to protect and enhance its character and significance”, while the size of the proposed extension shows it is otherwise unsuitable for conversion into a home.

The bid had also failed to show that waste water from the house would not affect the river Wye special area of conservation, nor that it would not have an impact on protected wildlife, the officer said in their refusal.