Wildlife hospital given time to revise site plans

Sue Stubley fears her wildlife centre will be forced to close if it does not expand into a new building

An animal rescuer who wants to build a new wildlife hospital has been given time to address concerns after her plans were initially set to be refused by a council.

Sue Stubley, founder of Suffolk Hedgehog Hospital based in Newmarket, had applied to build the hospital on land off Water Lane near Kirtling, Cambridgeshire, to serve Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, Norfolk and Essex.

Planners at East Cambridgeshire District Council had recommended the application be refused based on concerns about traffic caused by rural development.

However, after Ms Stubley said given more time she could address those concerns, a committee agreed to defer the application.

The hospital specialises in the rescue and rehoming of hedgehogs, but has already expanded its brief and has recently treated a baby hare, a badger cub, a fox cub, ducks and ducklings, baby birds, baby rabbits, a stoat, an owl and a buzzard.

When the application for the new hospital was submitted, more than 100 comments of support for the plans were shared with the district council, the Local Democracy Reporting Service said.

However, objections included "serious concerns" about the noise and visual harm of the development in the countryside, and the traffic impact of people travelling to and from the site.

Some claimed that allowing the development to go ahead "threatens to set a dangerous precedent for rural expansion".

The centre takes in all kinds of animals in need

Angie Curtis, speaking on behalf of Ms Stubley, told a planning committee meeting on Wednesday that there was an "undeniable risk" Ms Stubley might be "forced to close her doors and move away" if the new hospital did not go ahead.

She said Ms Stubley had spent years searching for a site to build the hospital and had found nowhere else in the area that was suitable.

While she recognised there were outstanding questions and concerns about the plans, she said they "would be more than happy to go away and address all the questions", but claimed they had not been given this option.

Although some councillors thought delaying the decision could be "setting false expectations", when a decision was put to a vote the majority of the committee agreed to defer the application to give Ms Stubley more time.