Pathway resurfacing works at St Marys Church, Bury St Edmunds
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by West Suffolk Development Control Committee on 1 Apr 2026.
What was proposed
Permission was sought to replace the existing gravel and hoggin pathway with a buff or natural-coloured tar-and-chip surface and timber edging.
“Proposal: 1. Planning permission and listed building consent are sought for resurfacing works to a path behind St Marys Chuch. The proposal is part of the Abbey of St Edmund Reborn Project, to replace the existing gravel and hoggin pathway, with a new tar-and-chip surface course.”
“A buff or natural-coloured aggregate will be selected to harmonize with the historic surroundings. Timber edging will be introduced to all adjacent planted verges to provide a defined and sympathetic boundary.”
Officer report
The site
The pathway runs along the northern edge of St Mary’s Church to St Margarets Gate and is used by pedestrians and vehicles.
“Site details: 4. The application site, St Mary’s Church pathway, runs along the church building’s northern edge, spanning east to west on approximately half the length of the church. The pathway extends to St Margarets Gate with its eastern edge abutting to the existing Great Churchyard footpath leading to remains of the Chapel of charnel. It is a joint pedestrian and vehicle pathway.”
Officer report
Earlier site history
Earlier applications concerned tree works around the church and an ecclesiastical notice for alterations to the tower.
“E/95/2238/EB Ecclesiastical Exemption Notice - Alterations and works associated with internal re-ordering of tower Ecclesiatical Notice - Comment 8 September 1995”
Officer report
Consultation and representations
The conservation and heritage consultees raised no objections, archaeology requested a written investigation scheme, and the town council supported the proposal.
“Suffolk County Council – Archaeology: No objection subject to written scheme of investigation condition.”
Officer report
The decision
“Decision Listed Building Consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1 The works to which this consent relates must be begun not later than three years from the date of this notice. DEV.WS.01.04.2026 2 The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and documents, unless otherwise stated. The meeting concluded at 3.14pm Signed by: Chair”
Minutes, 1 Apr 2026
Conditions
Approved subject to 1 condition, set out in the minutes.
Councillors at the meeting
- Andrew SmithChairDeclared an interestConservative
- Jon LondonVice-ChairLib Dem
- Carol BullConservative
- Mike ChesterConservative
- Roger DickerIndependent
- Susan GlossopConservative
- Rachel HoodConservative
- Ian HoulderReform UK
- Sara Mildmay-WhiteConservative
- Lora-Jane Miller-Jones
- Andy NealIndependent
- Marilyn SayerLabour
- David SmithLabour
- David TaylorIndependent
- Jim ThorndykeIndependent
Source: Plota analysis of the council's minutes; parties from the council's list of councillors.
Sources
- West Suffolk Development Control Committee minutes, 1 April 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of West Suffolk's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- West Suffolk
- Date
- Wednesday 1 April 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Vote
- Unanimous
- Councillors
- 15Conservative 6Independent 4Labour 2Lib Dem 1Reform UK 11 otherShow councillors
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- View application →
- All decisions
- West Suffolk committee decisions →
This committee's year
33 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 4 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.