Agenda item

To consider an application for change of use of stable to Dog Day Care Facility and continuation of use of manege as mixed use of equestrian and dog exercise area and continuation of use of land as agricultural, equestrian and dog exercise area (retrospective) at Wern, Llandyrnog, Denbigh (copy attached).

A retrospective application was submitted for a change of use of stables to a Dog Day Care Facility, continuation of use of menage as a mixed-use equestrian and dog exercise area and continuation of use of land as agricultural, equestrian and dog exercise area at Wern, Llandyrnog, Denbigh.

 

Public Speakers –

 

Miss Catrin Davies (For) – thanked the committee for being allowed to speak; she was the owner of the kennels; the business began three and a half years ago, and it has grown with multiple members of staff, who were all local. There were also volunteers for mental health facilities nearby to assist with dog walking to help with wellbeing and increase their independence. There were visits to care homes with smaller dogs, and there was free daycare for service dogs at the site.

 

With the growth of the business, the demand had also increased; the service provided allowed people to go to work whilst knowing their dogs were cared for. The applicant was aware of noise complaints and, whilst working with the Council, was looking at methods of mitigating the noise pollution; one of these methods was to allow dogs to have testing periods to see if they were suitable for the kennels, there was also soundproofing being placed at the barn, which the Council also advised at significant cost to the business. These would hopefully highlight how the business aimed to reduce noise levels; there was always a member of staff present at the kennels to monitor the noise levels. Miss Davies also highlighted that a noise level assessment had been carried out in line with the planning process.

 

Mr Thomas Brock (Against) – indicated he spoke on behalf of a group of residents who opposed the application on two grounds—the unsuitability of the site and the noise issues over fifteen months. There was a lack of an objection on the planning portal from a specialist with knowledge of the site, which did not meet national standards, regarding fencing concerns and the public footpaths on the site. Nothing was within the application regarding contractual indemnities and statutory public liability; these were highly sensitive issues. Holiday lets surrounded the site and was near the Offa’s dyke path, whilst also the area was being looked at with the possibility of a national park; Mr Brock highlighted that there could be more lost than gained by the local community.

 

Planning policy in Wales indicated that there needed to be the protection of local amenities; however, residents had to deal with noise issues for fifteen months, which had been vindicated by public protection. There were noise mitigation conditions placed on the site; there needed to be evidence of these being carried out before any increase of dogs allowed at the site. The conditions were well thought out, the noise mitigation would need to be of British standard, and the work entailed with the matter should be included in the conditions as a legal requirement. There have also been many incidents of number violations at the site; business trading was carried out before a license was issued on 31/12/22. On these two technical issues alone, the standard precedent would be to dismiss the application and refer the matter to the regulatory bodies. Mr Brock outlined that if these issues continued, the group would exercise their right to proceed with the relevant authorities.

 

General Debate –

 

The chair invited those who attended the site visit to have their say on the application following the visit.

 

Councillor Chris Evans indicated that he believed the site was a good one; the centre cared for the dogs at the site, and the owner was passionate about the care provided. He understood the concerns that the residents had raised; however, he felt these were alleviated through conditions which were set out.

 

Councillor Peter Scott felt that the noise issues seemed fine for the visit. The site was adequate distance from any residential areas, the site was well maintained and looked after.

 

Councillor Alan James echoed what Councillor Scott had stated and felt content with the officer's recommendations and the conditions.

 

Councillor Peter Scott, on behalf of Councillor Merfyn Parry (local member), read a statement in his absence – he apologised for not being present. He had worked with both the applicant and the objectors at the site; he understood the concerns which had been raised; however, he felt the conditions which were proposed would alleviate these concerns; in closing, he stated if he were in attendance, he would have fully supported the application.

 

Councillor Delyth Jones supported the application, and the steps implemented to address concerns have been positive; she stated that including a condition of signage for the nearby public footpaths would be good as they would raise awareness of the dog care facility. The officer responded that including the condition was a viable option if the committee would want to include it with any proposals.

 

Committee members queried with officers how the soundproofing could be checked; officers clarified there was a condition of a noise management plan: the applicant would have two months to install the noise insulation fully.

 

Councillor Huw Hilditch-Roberts thanked the chair for the opportunity to speak; he highlighted the comments which were raised earlier at the meeting and how they could be deemed as offensive to the committee; he raised from personal experience with dog kennels near his residency that noise pollution was a rare issue, he closed by stating that the concerns with the site and any noise pollution would be dealt with through the proposed conditions.

 

Proposal – Councillor Huw Hilditch-Roberts proposed the application be granted with the additional condition that signage was placed around the site’s public footpaths, seconded by Councillor Gareth Sandilands.

 

Vote –

For – 19

Against – 0

Abstain – 0

 

RESOLVED that the planning application be GRANTED in accordance with officer recommendation.