Flexible community facility at Fowlmere And Thriplow United Reformed Church, Fowlmere

What was proposed

The application sought flexible F1 and F2 community use of the former place of worship, without internal or external changes.

“25/01387/FUL – Fowlmere and Thriplow United Reformed Church, 2 Chapel Lane, Fowlmere, Cambridgeshire SG8 7SA Application details Report to: Planning Committee Lead Officer: Joint Director of Planning and Economic Development Ward/parish: Foxton / Fowlmere Proposal: Change of use from Class F1 (place of worship) to sui generis use comprising of Classes F1 and F2 to allow the building to be given more flexibility as a community facility.”

“The existing the building has been used as a place of worship, whilst hosting the village playgroup and the occasional community-based activity such as a polling station as part of the existing F1 use.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The listed building stands within a residential part of Fowlmere, on a corner plot with a graveyard, hardstanding and existing access.

“Officers recommend that the Planning Committee approve the application, subject to conditions. Table 2 Consultee summary 2. Site description and context 2.1 The proposal site is located south of the centre of the village of Fowlmere. The proposal site comprises a building within a corner plot, close to the junction between Chapel Lane and London Road.”

Officer report

Earlier use and applications

The building has served worship and the village playgroup, with earlier permission for extensions and listed building works.

“Information to clarify existing uses and the potential proposed uses • Noise management plan 4. Relevant site history Reference Description Outcome 25/02631/LBC Removal of pews and dais in main hall at ground floor level Permitted S/0053/00/F Extensions Permitted 17.05.2000 Table 32 Relevant site history 4.1 The application site has primarily been used to serve the congregation of the United Reform Church, and as the pre-school site to serve the village of Fowlmere.”

“A listed building application has been permitted this year, however Officers are not aware that this work has been carried out at the time of completing this report.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the proposal would expand a protected community asset and provide public benefits without significant heritage, parking, traffic or noise harm.

“The proposal has the potential to create noise pollution due to the uplift and expansion of community based activities, however given that the existing building can operate within F1 use in an unrestricted manner, the proposed mixed use of the building to incorporate F2 uses are not considered to result in significant noise impacts that would result in significant harm to neighbouring occupiers.”

“The application is considered to enhance the community value of the building and provide a unique opportunity to increase the community facilities within a Group Village. The building benefits from a fallback position, as it can already be utilised within F1 use class in an unrestricted manner and therefore the additional F2 uses are not considered to result in adverse impacts above and beyond this use.”

Officer report

Consultation and public views

Consultees raised no objections, while residents’ views were divided over community benefits, parking, highway safety, noise and competition with the village hall.

“Those in objection have raised the following material considerations: • Existing village hall serves community • Undermine village hall • Superfluous community space • Lack of car parking • Highway safety concerns due to lack of parking and location • Parking spill in local area • Noise levels in later hours • Sufficient facilities within the village • Lack of information on design of building • Inadequate community engagement • Residents unlikely to walk to facility…”

“Those in support have given the following reasons: • Chapel already services village residents • Benefits to local residents to provide community facility • Supports sustainable community in the village • Supports services and facilities in village • Continued use of pre-school • Complement rather than compete with Village Hall • Local users can walk or cycle or use Village Hall car parking • No noise concerns • Support retention of space for playgroup • No history of…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from a speaker objecting, the agent and a supporter, and a local district councillor supporting the application.

What members debated

Members discussed noise, shop classification, operating hours, transport, parking, the existing unrestricted use and whether more details were needed.

“In response to issues raised by the local district member: i. The Deliver Manager advised that the Noise Management Plan was published online via the Planning Portal and covered anticipated hours for F1 and F2 use classes which had been applied for, however it was noted that the list of uses was not an exhaustive list. Members were reminded that they could add a condition restricting hours for different parts of the use classes. ii.”

“During debate the Committee considered the following issues: i. Any noise which might arise from the proposed uses would be relatively low noise level. ii. Reassured by the distinction between a shop use under use class F2a and use class E. iii. Some members did not want to restrict operating hours for uses. iv. Transport to the building would be managed. v. Noted the Highways Authority hadn’t raised any concerns. vi.”

Minutes

The vote and decision

The committee approved the application by 10 votes to 1, subject to the officer conditions with minor amendments delegated to officers.

“By 10 votes in favour of the recommendation for approval (Cllrs Anna Bradnam, Ariel Cahn, Martin Cahn, Peter Fane, Corinne Garvie, Tumi Hawkins, Lisa Redrup, James Rixon, Peter Sanders, Richard Williams) and 1 vote against (Cllr Heather Williams), the Committee approved the application subject to: • The planning conditions set out in the officer’s report with minor amendments to the conditions as drafted delegated to officers.”

Minutes