A music industry entrepreneur’s ambitious plan to save a fire-damaged heritage property has ignited fierce opposition from local residents who fear environmental destruction in one of England’s most protected landscapes.
Parnham House, a Grade I-listed manor dating to the 16th century, suffered devastating fire damage eight years ago that left much of the historic structure in ruins. The property’s former owner, Austrian financier Michael Treichl, died by suicide in 2017, two months after the blaze, following a period of severe mental health struggles.
Music promoter James Perkins acquired the damaged estate in 2020 for £2.5 million, taking on what he calls the “Buckingham Palace of Dorset.” The property boasts centuries of history, having served various roles from family residence to military headquarters during World War II, when General Patton used it before the D-Day operations.
Financial Pressures Mount
The restoration project has proven financially demanding, with scaffolding costs alone reaching £1.7 million. Structural challenges continue to emerge, including roof collapses in areas like the snooker room, while walls threaten to crumble without immediate intervention.
Current revenue streams from wedding events held in restored sections cannot cover the mounting construction expenses, prompting Perkins to seek alternative funding sources.
The Controversial Development Proposal
Mr Perkins has submitted a planning application to construct 85 residential units across 25 acres of estate farmland. The proposal relies on “enabling development” legislation, which can be granted by councils to permit construction projects when the generated funds justify any environmental impact.
Mr Perkins implies that the development is to provide funds for the restoration of the house. Some would say that you should not take on a project if you cannot afford to do so.
If approved, the restored manor would operate as a luxury venue featuring 60 guest bedrooms for weddings, private parties, and tourism. Perkins previously operated similar high-profile events at Aynhoe Park, his former Jacobean estate, where celebrities including Noel Gallagher, Kate Moss, Madonna, and Bono attended exclusive gatherings that earned him the “rave king” moniker.
Community Opposition Intensifies
Local residents have organised substantial resistance to the development plans, establishing action groups to challenge the application. Critics argue the housing scheme would:
- Devastate local wildlife populations, including kingfishers and otters
- Compromise the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty designation
- Eliminate historic public footpaths used for generations
- Transform peaceful countryside into dense residential development
The opposition has grown particularly vocal since the council previously granted the venue a controversial 24-hour alcohol license despite significant community objections. That approval process required a two-day council session due to the volume of public concerns, with the local Conservative MP publicly opposing the decision.
Escalating Scale of Development
Residents express frustration that the original proposal from four years ago outlined just 20 houses, but current plans have expanded to dozens of dwellings across previously undeveloped green space. The targeted meadowland serves as habitat for protected species and represents centuries of unchanged landscape.
Community members argue that while Perkins stands to gain substantial capital appreciation on his private investment, local residents and the council face permanent environmental losses.
Regulatory Considerations
Historic England initially opposed the application but reportedly may now provide more favourable guidance to the council committee. The planning submission process has cost approximately £1.5 million, demonstrating the project’s scale and complexity.
The enabling development framework requires the demonstration of how restoration benefits outweigh construction harm, a calculation that will ultimately determine the proposal’s fate.
From Raves to Restoration
Perkins began his entertainment career at age 15, organising parties in Cheltenham before founding the rave promotion company Fantazia. His breakthrough came in 1992 when, at just 22, he organized a Castle Donington event attracting 28,000 attendees.
The entrepreneur previously owned Aynhoe Park, where he hosted celebrity gatherings that established his reputation in high-end event management.
Parnham’s Varied Past
The estate has served multiple purposes throughout its history, functioning as a private residence, nursing facility, country club, and woodworking school. The Strode family maintained ownership for over two centuries from the mid-1500s, establishing the property’s historical significance.
During World War II, American forces requisitioned the building as a strategic headquarters, adding to its historical importance.
Project Justification
A estate spokesperson defended the development proposal, emphasising extensive consultation with planning authorities, Historic England, and subsidiary organisations. They argue that enabling development represents the only viable path to preserve this nationally significant heritage asset.
Dorset council faces a planning decision over the potential development. Heritage preservation, and environmental protection are separate concerns.
The case highlights the difficulties that owners of historic properties have with funding issues when heritage conservation is required.
Most people are sympathetic towards traditionally owned and inherited estates, where there is an absence of the necessary cashflow to restore and maintain historic buildings. There are many people who are less sympathetic towards multi-millionaire developers who acquire historic estates requiring major works, who then claim the need to redevelop the grounds of all or part of the estate in order to fund the development.
Councils should avoid connections between heritage conservation and property development.
When these developments adversely affect the community and the environment, they should not be permitted. They should be judged on their own merits and not being directly associated with an owners’/developers’ other schemes, unless they are community owned. Some would say the proposals are profiteering.
There are broader tensions between heritage conservation funding challenges and community rights in designated protected landscapes.
The planning committee’s decision may set important precedents for similar heritage preservation projects across England, where many historic properties struggle with restoration costs.