For:      Miss L.A. Jenkins & Mr W.Pinkney per Mr A Jenkins, 12 Broad Street, Hay-on-Wye, Herefordshire,  HR3 5DB

Ward: Castle

The Senior Planning Officer presented a report about an application for an agricultural storage building and kennels at Brilley Wood.  The application had been referred to the Committee because the Northern Area Planning Sub-Committee was mindful to refuse it, being concerned about noise, odor and the impact on the character of the area.  Consideration of the application was deferred at the last meeting of the Planning Committee for a site inspection at the application site and also to an operational kennels at Tedstone Wafre. 

The Senior Planning Officer presented the following representations which had been received since the report was prepared:-

A further letter has been received from Marc D. Willis from Willis & Co. Chartered Town Planners. The letter states that the officer’s report to the committee still does not address many of the issues referred to in earlier letters. The issues highlighted are as follows;

·   no justification for the agricultural use,

·   no reliance on dried food for the hounds and the potential for the use of fallen stock for feed,

·   the impact on the footpaths

·   the noise report being flawed and unreliable,

·   no protected species assessment,

·   no detailed assessment of the search for an alternative site,

·   no consideration to employment policies,

·   the use of the highway for exercising the hounds is a material consideration

·   conditions do not take into account the agricultural and breeding activity.

The Senior Planning Officer was of the view that the matters raised were covered in the report. She said that a satisfactory wildlife protection and enhancement scheme would need to be submitted for her approval by the applicants prior to permission being granted.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, the following spoke on the application.

Brilley Parish Council – Cllr White

Objector – Mr Watts

Supporters – Mrs Lloyd

Councillor JW Hope, the Local Ward Member, said that he had received some 60 – 70 letters and a petition with 161 signature.  He said that he was not opposed to the site being developed but felt that the application before the Committee was for an inappropriate use.  He proposed refusal of planning permission for the application based on the following reasons:

• the detrimental affect on residential amenity,
• the unacceptable odour from such a development and
• the character of the surrounding area would be detrimentally affected.

Councillor GW Greenow drew attention to the considerable opposition to the application by the Sub-Committee.  He said that he could not support the application as the kennels were not in the interests of the local community and that there would be problems of noise and nuisance arising from hounds. Councillor H Davies was also concerned about the noise issue. Councillors Walling and Cutter also shared these views.  Councillor KG Grumbley said that the roads surrounding the proposed development were narrow and felt that this would create danger for road users, hunt personnel and the hounds. He felt that sometimes the behaviour of hounds could be unpredictable on the roads and lead to further potential hazards.

Councillor Mrs JE Pemberton felt that the recent site inspection had proved to be very informative. She could see no objection to rural activities in a rural area. Councillor TW Hunt said that there had been no complaints about the kennels visited by the Committee in Tedstone Delamere and that the hounds were well disciplined on the road.  He felt that most of the objections were based on supposition and that there were insufficient grounds for the application to be refused.

The Senior Planning Officer said that there were no complaints about other hunt kennels in the County and that the Environmental Health officers had raised no objections to the application.  Notwithstanding the views of the Officers, the Committee felt that problems would arise for local residents and that the recommendation of the Northern Area Planning Sub-committee for refusal should be supported. 

RESOLVED

That the application be refused on the following grounds:

(i)                       the proposed development would be detrimental to the residential amenity of the surrounding area;

(ii)                     the odour from the proposed development would be detrimental to the residents of the surrounding residential area;

(iii)                   the proposed development would be detrimental to the character of the surrounding area; and

(iv)                   a satisfactory wildlife protection and enhancement schemewildlife survey had not been prepared by the applicants.