Millionaire businessman could be forced to dig up his tennis court

A wealthy businessman could be forced to dig up his tennis court and tear down a home gym after building them in his field without permission. Mark Hepburn - who until recently owned a multi million pound business - had received complaints over the development of agricultural land behind his £800,000 six bedroom country house. Locals raised concerns about 'increased urbanisation' after the successful Starbucks coffee entrepreneur had built a bright blue tennis court, home gym, bar, TV room and children's play area on the three acre rural site. Mr Hepburn claimed the plot had been used as a garden by its previous owners and that he and his family were just doing the same. But the council refused the 52-year-old's application to formally convert the land to residential use and served him with an enforcement notice. Details of Mr Hepburn's case have emerged at a planning inquiry in Winchester, Hampshire, where he is appealing against the city council's decision. Until October last year, the father of three owned the successful Starbucks franchise 23.5 Degrees which operates 110 locations of the popular coffee chain across the UK. He bought the house in the quiet village of Durley - near Southampton - for £740,000 in December 2017 and planned additional work to the house and garden. In evidence submitted to the inquiry, Mr Hepburn said it was the 'extensive garden' that appealed to him the most when the previous owners had shown him around the property. He said they told him how they had used it to walk their dogs and installed rope swings on the tree for their children. At the inquiry, Mr Hepburn said: 'It is semi-rural, the house wasn't the nicest house but it had an extensive garden and with a young family that is important, we spent more time viewing the garden than the house. '[They were] using the land how we would use it.' After the family moved in, Mr Hepburn said they fulfilled a dream of his wife's by buying a flock of alpacas, which lived on the land at the back of the home. However, because they were pets rather than for commercial use, in 2021 he was asked by the council to apply for a lawful development certificate, stating that the land was in residential use not agricultural. 'I got an email from the council, they had a problem with the alpacas because they were pets,' he said. 'They said I had to make an application to change the use. [My wife] always wanted them as a child, she loves them. 'Our dream was to own alpacas, they eat the grass and they are inquisitive, they come up and approach you.' He made the application in May 2023 and in July it was refused by Winchester City Council. The planning inquiry heard that the lawful development certificate was denied because the council did not believe the field had been used as a garden continuously for ten or more years, the threshold for certification. To support the application Mr Hepburn had submitted statutory declarations from him and Mrs Spencer stating that the field had been used as a garden, stretching back as far as 1988. After the certificate was refused Mr Hepburn built the bar and gym in late 2023 and the tennis/netball courts in 2024. The bar and gym, comprising a weight machine, boxing and two elliptical machines, are housed in two timber huts with a TV room also part of the complex. He told the inquiry he did not seek planning permission for these developments as he thought they were allowed under permitted development rights. David Bushby and Dawn Castell, who spoke at the inquiry, explained that they fear 'increased urbanisation' if the change of use was allowed. In a statement on the planning portal they said: 'Furthermore [Mr Hepburn] has continued with the land mainly to pasture having only recently fenced off a large area of the land to keep alpacas and up until recently pigs and installed a large animal shelter. 'We had not queried the installation of the children's play area on the agricultural land. 'In conclusion we consider that this request for a lawful development certificate to amend this land from agricultural use to residential at this time does not appear warranted given the fact that it has recently been redeveloped into formal pasture land. 'Furthermore we consider there maybe a risk of increased development or urbanisation of this countryside area which is not included within local authority plans if this were to be agreed.' Neighbour Mark Day has lived in the village for 40 years and remembers the 'market garden' that used to be on the land. In the planning portal he said: 'I clearly remember as I had many visits to my Grand parents and remember the large market garden at the rear of the property and the large industrial green houses. 'It has always been used for horticultural use, grazing use and for a short time fallow and I strongly believe it should remain so for the foreseeable future.'