News
Cambridgeshire family banned from using swimming pool for commercial lessons
23 objections were sent to the council from residents
The Planning Inspectorate backed Huntingdonshire District Council by refusing permission to allow a family in Little Paxton to use their swimming pool as a commercial business. The council refused retrospective permission to allow the pool at 12 River Close to be used for a mixed use of residential and children’s swimming classes.
The decision has been supported by the Planning Inspectorate which dismissed an appeal by Graham Jeffery who has been running children’s swimming classes at the pool since 2021.
E Catcheside, the inspector, concluded that the use of the pool for commercial reasons “fails to protect the character and living environment of the local area, which is the prevailing consideration in this appeal.
“Therefore, the need for the facility does not outweigh the harm I have identified”.
There has been widespread support for the pool, but many residents feel issues of parking have seriously affected their living conditions.
One group of residents even brought in a planning consultant to collate evidence that “the unauthorised use of this existing swimming pool for lessons had already demonstrated the effect on the amenities of residents and the quiet enjoyment of their properties”.
Council officials were sent photos evidencing “the disturbance caused from parked and manoeuvring traffic” as people picked up and dropped off their children for lessons.
Huntingdon council officials said they had weighed up all pros and cons of the issue before concluding that “the commercial use and its volume of use in what is a residential area would result in an alteration to and be harmful to its domestic character.
River Close, Little Paxton with one of the photos submitted by residents showing the impact of vehicles using the site.
“As a result of this intensification unacceptable harm would be caused to the residents of neighbouring dwellings and land due to increased activity and disturbance as well as other factors associated with the increased level of vehicle movements”.
Mr Jeffery had sought retrospective permission to continue with the classes and launched an appeal after the council’s refusal.
Little Paxton Parish Council objected on the grounds of parking and traffic problems and in a later consultation argued that they felt the house was not a suitable location for operating a swimming lesson business.
They also expressed fears over parking and traffic problems “which impact residents” and felt commercial use to be “intrusive”.
Cambridgeshire County Council Highways Team were consulted once on the original submission and raised no objection in terms of highway safety.
23 objections were sent to the council from residents in the immediate vicinity of the site (within River Close and Gordon Road) in addition to a collective objection by Hutchinson’s Planning Consultants commissioned by some residents of River Close.
There have also been 37 comments in support of the retention of the pool, but council officials said that “it should be noted that whilst these are labelled as neighbour comments the vast majority are from a wider area, some within Little Paxton and others further afield”.
The planning inspector there was no issue with pool but its use for commercial swimming lessons for children.
“The main issue is the effect of the development on the character of the area and the living environment for residents, with particular regard to disturbance from increased pedestrian and vehicular activity,” he said.
“However, unlike its use for residential purposes, the use of the pool for swimming lessons entails pupils and their parents or carers arriving and departing from the site on a half-hourly basis, over a large part of the afternoon and evening.
“Based on the average of 2 pupils per lesson, this amounts to 16 arrivals and 16 departures over the four-hour operating period, or 32 movements in total.
“It is entirely feasible that a significant proportion of pupils travel to the site by car, particularly during hours of darkness in the winter months, and in inclement weather.”
He felt there was insufficient space for parking.
“The volume of vehicular and pedestrian movement and activity arising from the development is significantly greater than that which would ordinarily be associated with a residential dwelling on this small, lightly trafficked cul-de-sac,” he said.
“Consequently, the increased comings and goings alter the character of River Close during the hours of operation of the development.
“This undoubtedly causes disturbance to local residents, including through the noise and lights of manoeuvring vehicles, the opening and closing of doors, and verbal exchanges between parents, carers and children travelling to and from the site.
“All of these activities take place in the public realm and in close proximity to dwellings on River Close and nearby on Gordon Road.
“The disturbance is unduly harmful and disruptive given that the swimming lessons occur during the early evening hours when residents are likely to be at home and seeking the peaceful enjoyment of their properties.”
