Decision pushed back on service station in Brome, near Diss, due to concerns

A decision on a contentious service station has been pushed back due to local concerns.

Members of Mid Suffolk’s planning committee met yesterday afternoon to discuss plans submitted by R H Developments for a new service station adjacent to the A140 Ipswich Road, in Brome, near Diss.

The plans included a new petrol station and electric charging facility, a roadside restaurant with drive-through, 24 business starter units, and a lorry parking facility and rest area, built on a portion of underdeveloped grassland in the north-west corner of the Eye Airfield site.

The application was first discussed in November 2022 with councillors deciding they were minded to approve it subject to more information being made available about flooding, the environment, noise, and location.

Since then, the developer has decided to move the lorry park further away from the nearest homes to address amenity issues and has submitted the information requested.

Despite this, however, many of the initial issues still came to the surface, first through 20 objection letters submitted by residents throughout the consultation period, and then during the public speaking portion of yesterday’s meeting.

Members heard, for instance, from the county councillor for the area, Jessica Fleming, who said the water management elements of the application were not comprehensive enough.

Thrandeston Parish Council clerk, Philip Freeman, stressed this point further, stating the area had not only seen extensive flooding during last October’s Storm Babet but also during weaker rainfalls since.

He added: “There have been problems with flooding more recently than previously and the landowners say it’s the only time in living memory that there has been regular flooding.

“It is vital that there is a strategic plan for the development of Eye Airfield — currently it is piecemeal, haphazard, and unthought out, with implications for the local area.”

Mr Freeman also went on to express his disappointment after requesting a site visit with the council’s planning department several times, all of which, he said, were rejected or not even answered.

Addressing the concerns raised during the meeting, Jack Wilkinson, the planning consultant speaking on behalf of the applicant, said the company had provided robust evidence that the issues were ‘limited and under control’ and urged for the plans to be ‘endorsed without delay’.

He added: “This application requires a rational and logical decision, based on the fact that the locality is commercially established with established transport links.

“The site is capable of accommodating the proposed end use, the scheme will stimulate employment, supply chain services will be supported, and the units offered will mutually cohesive to the wider airfield.”

A planning statement submitted on behalf of the applicant also stressed the development would have ‘abundant benefits’ for the area, particularly in the face of rural areas often being disadvantaged economically.

Cllr Tim Weller, the ward member, said he had spoken to several residents who stated their support and enthusiasm for the plans.

A letter of support was also received from a resident arguing the development would reduce HGVs in lay-bys overnight, and that the extra food outlets would benefit the local community.

Nevertheless, Cllr Weller still recognised many of the concerns regarding flooding data, noise, and planting, calling for a site visit to be performed.

He added: “In principle, I’m not opposed to this development, it brings with it growth, sustainable infrastructure, and job creation, which is broadly welcomed by many residents.

“It is, in my opinion, perverse that any decision can be reached here when the quality or credibility of factors informing that decision has been reasonably questioned without further enquiry.”

Although there were plenty of questions from committee members during the lengthy discussion, there was little debate in the face of the speeches of local representatives, with all councillors agreeing to defer the decision in order for a site visit to be performed.