®Planning appeal decision
Land to the Nw of Harlocks Farm, Stuntney, CB7 5TR
Planning appeal 3372470 at Land to the Nw of Harlocks Farm, Stuntney, CB7 5TR (East Cambridgeshire District Council) was dismissed on 5 January 2026 by Inspector Major R, following a hearing. The main issue, as the Inspector framed it: the effect of the proposal on protected species, with particular regard to bats.
proposed development of four tennis courts (with external lighting), fencing, clubhouse, and associated parking, drainage, utilities and landscaping
- Authority
- East Cambridgeshire District Council
- Appeal type
- minor · Planning Appeal
- Procedure
- Hearing
- Development
- leisure-sport · Other minor developments
- Inspector
- Major R
- Postcode
- CB7 5TR
Main issues, as the Inspector framed them
- the effect of the proposal on protected species, with particular regard to bats
- the effect of the proposal on the character and appearance of the surrounding area
- whether the proposed development provides adequate parking provision
- whether the appeal site is a suitable location for the proposed development, including its accessibility by sustainable modes of transport
- whether the proposed development meets biodiversity net gain objectives
What decided it
Insufficient information (absence of a bat survey) to demonstrate the proposal would not cause significant harm to a European Protected Species (bats).
The significant social benefits, together with limited economic and environmental (BNG) benefits, outweighed the moderate harm to character and appearance and the limited harm from parking under-provision, but did not outweigh the significant harm arising from insufficient information on the impact on protected bats, which was decisive in tipping the balance against the proposal.
What the Inspector cited
- Development plan policies
- ENV 7ENV 1ENV 2ENV 9COM 4COM 7COM 8Growth 2EN 7NE.6
- National Planning Policy Framework
- Paragraph 193Paragraph 187Paragraph 110
- Judgments
- Bernard Wheatcroft Ltd v SSE [JPL 1982 P37]; Holborn Studios Ltd v The Council of the London Borough of Hackney [2017] EWHC 2823 (Admin)
How the Inspector dealt with each one is set out in the app, in order: the development plan, national policy, housing land supply, other considerations and the planning balance, beside the letter.
See how each was appliedThe decision letter
Town Planner Pro holds this letter. The Appeals plan opens it and every other letter we hold, all of them searchable, with the main issues and what decided each case picked out. We do not show letters on the free site because they carry people’s names and addresses.
With an account
What an account adds to this decision
More decisions in East Cambridgeshire
The authority’s record since 2016 · every decision in 2026
- Allowed14 October 20266012656Land North East Of 70 St Johns Avenue, Newmarket, CB8 8DE
- Allowed3 August 2026600923915 Newnham Street, Ely, CB7 4PG
- Dismissed18 May 20266005887Land Adj To 1 Victoria Place, Sutton, Cambridgeshire, CB6 2NP
- Dismissed15 August 20253363755East of 38A Chapel Lane, Wicken, CB7 5XZ
- Allowed15 August 20253357194Site to the East of 38A Chapel Lane, Wicken, Cambridgeshire, CB7 5XZ
The main issues, what decided it, the planning balance and the policies and judgments listed as cited are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro and are our summary, not the Inspector’s words; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.