Agenda item

Report No: DEV/WS/24/005

Planning application - change of use of agricultural land to enclosed field for dog training and exercising and associated access and parking

Planning application - change of use of agricultural land to enclosed field for dog training and exercising and associated access and parking

The application was considered at the last meeting of the Committee meeting held on 3 January 2024 following a site visit which had been undertaken the day before.

Officers were recommending that the planning application be refused for the reason outlined in Paragraph 30 of the report. This recommendation was in conflict with the view of Freckenham Parish Council and Councillor David Taylor (Manor Ward Member) who supported the proposal.

Members at the meeting resolved that they were ‘minded to’ approve the planning application, subject to conditions, contrary to the officer recommendation of refusal. At this point, the decision making protocol was invoked, requiring a Risk Assessment report to be prepared for this matter before any decision was made.

Members had resolved that they were ‘minded to approve’ the application as a result of taking into account the biodiversity benefits the native hedging and trees would bring about and they considered that the landscape impact of the proposals would not be adverse.

A risk assessment had been undertaken by officers in accordance with the Committee’s Decision-Making Protocol which set out the potential risks that might arise should planning permission be approved, as well as providing clarity on queries raised during the meeting and to also allow appropriate conditions to be drafted.

The report that had previously been presented to the Committee was attached as Working Paper 1, which contained details of the site and development, summaries of consultation responses and neighbour representations, and the officer assessment of the proposal.

A supplementary ‘late paper’ was issued following publication of the agenda, which gave details regarding the removal of two proposed conditions should permission be granted. For clarity, the revised list of proposed conditions was provided.

Speakers:    Councillor David Taylor (Ward Member: Manor) spoke in support of the application

Tracy Cannam (applicant) spoke in support of the application

Having considered the risk assessment undertaken by officers and having inspected the site, members remained in support of the proposal. It was acknowledged that the landscape would change as a result of the fencing; however, members considered the ecological benefits of the mitigation hedging and tree planting that were proposed to the perimeter and site frontage far outweighed any potential harm to the character of the landscape. To support the rationale for potentially approving the application, recognition was given to the openness of the area, that the fencing was a temporary structure, and that prior to modern farming methods, the countryside would have looked very different with numerous hedgerows providing natural divisions to the landscape into smaller parcels of land.

Recognition was also given to the economic, social and health benefits of the proposal. Members felt this was an innovative new business that would be a welcomed facility by users, which in turn would provide social, physical and well-being health benefits to those accessing the service.

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the officer recommendation and following a risk assessment report where the Committee had been ‘minded to approve’. This was duly seconded by Councillor David Smith.

The following reason was given for proposing approval of the application. This was duly accepted by Councillors Mildmay-White and David Smith as proposer and seconder of the motion:

That recognising the biodiversity merits of the proposals including the mitigating hedge and tree planting, the economic and ecological benefits of this proposal outweighed the harm to the landscape perceived by the Committee.

The motion for approval was put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be APPROVED, CONTRARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION

Subject to the following conditions:

1.       The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.       The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the following approved plans and documents, unless otherwise stated below:

Reason: To define the scope and extent of this permission.

3.       All planting comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting season following the commencement of the development (or within such extended period as may first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority). Any planting removed, dying or becoming seriously damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced within the first available planting season thereafter with planting of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent for any variation.

Reason: To enhance the appearance of the development and ensure a satisfactory environment, in accordance with policies DM2, DM12 and DM13 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, Chapters 12 and 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

4.       The use of the development hereby approved shall only permit a maximum of 6 (six) dogs for exercising on the land at any one time and up to two owners at any one time. There shall not at any time be any professional training, obedience, agility classes or similar taking place on the site.

Use of the site shall be restricted to only between the hours of 8am to 8pm hours on any day.

Reason: To protect the amenity of occupiers of adjacent properties from noise and disturbance, in accordance with policies DM2 and DM14 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, Chapter 15 of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

5.       No external lighting shall be installed on the application site without prior written consent from the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To safeguard the residential amenity of neighbouring properties and to minimise light pollution, in accordance with policy DM2 and DM14 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

6.       Before the access is first used visibility splays shall be provided as shown on Drawing No. 22:123-2 Rev C with an X dimension of 2.4 metres and a Y dimension of 45 metres [tangential to the nearside edge of the carriageway] and thereafter retained in the specified form. Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2 Class A of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no obstruction to visibility shall be erected, constructed, planted or permitted to grow over 0.6 metres high within the areas of the C.

Reason: To ensure drivers of vehicles entering the highway have sufficient visibility to manoeuvre safely including giving way to approaching users of the highway without them having to take avoiding action and to ensure drivers of vehicles on the public highway have sufficient warning of a vehicle emerging in order to take avoiding action, if necessary,  in accordance with policy DM2 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

7.       No other part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the new access has been laid out and completed in all respects in accordance with drawing no. 22:123-2 Rev C with an entrance width of 6 metres.

Reason: To ensure the access is laid out and completed to an acceptable design in the interests of the safety of persons using the access and users of the highway, in accordance with policy DM2 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

8.       Prior to the development hereby permitted being first occupied, the new access onto the highway shall be properly surfaced with a bound material for a minimum distance of 5 metres measured from the nearside edge of the metalled carriageway, in accordance with details that shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure construction of a satisfactory access and to avoid unacceptable safety risks arising from materials deposited on the highway from the development, in accordance with policy DM2 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

9.       The use shall not commence until the area(s) within the site shown on drawing no's. 22:123-2 Rev C, 304/2023/02, and 304/2023/02 for the purposes of manoeuvring, and parking of vehicles has / have been provided and thereafter the area(s) shall be retained, maintained, and used for no other purposes.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient areas for vehicles to be parked are provided in accordance with Suffolk Guidance for Parking 2019 where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to the safe use of the highway, in accordance with policy DM2 and DM46 of the West Suffolk Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, Chapter 9 of the National Planning Policy Framework and all relevant Core Strategy Policies.

(Councillor Jim Thorndyke left the meeting at the conclusion of this item and did not return.)