Agenda item

The SPO introduced the Officers report and recommendation for approval. She informed Members that there was an amendment to the recommendation contained on Page 65 of the Agenda Pack, bullet point 4 which should now read “The use of the site shall be for the purposes of dog walking/exercise only and not by groups, clubs, training classes, dog shows or other similar related activity.”

She advised that Wiveton Parish Council had made four additional points which were not included in the report.

1.     That the proposal is contrary to the North Norfolk Landscape Character Assessment.  The site falls within RHA 1 Rolling Heath and Arable with one of the guidelines being to conserve the high scenic quality and natural beauty of the area and also to conserve and expand …. Including ecological connectivity and the proposal for dog walking is contrary to the spirit and purpose of these guidelines.

2.     The urban nature of the access standards required by Highways brings increasing suburbanisation to a rural landscape.

3.     Damage to the environment, loss of a feeding and breeding habitat for locally scarce/under threat wild birds, mammals, amphibians and insects.

4.     It is contrary to specific policies in the current North Norfolk Local Plan Policy EN 1, EN 2 and EN 9.

As such an additional condition was recommended:

On the cessation of the use of the field for the development, the storage and maintenance building shall be removed from the site and the land restored in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

The SPO stated that the main issues for consideration were the principle of the development, design and impact on the heritage asset (conservation area); landscape impact within the AONB; amenity and highways impact. She advised that In terms of the principle, the site was within the rural area where Policy SS 2 states that development will be limited to that which requires a rural location and is for one of a number of specified types of development which includes recreational use.  The development is acceptable in principle.

She summarised that the landscape impact arises largely from the proposed storage shed, whilst the site lies within the AONB and designated undeveloped coast valued for its wide, open and unsettled areas of land which provide a sense of remoteness, tranquillity and wilderness, in this instance the main physical changes to the site would be two buildings of a relatively modest size and scale which would be subservient to the important views of the landscape beyond and on balance are not considered to significantly detract from the landscape setting or have a significant adverse impact on the special qualities of the AONB.

Public Speakers

John Ramm –  Chairman Wiveton Parish Council

Nichola  Harrison – Objecting

Annette Rigby - Supporting

       i.          The Local Member – Cllr V Holliday – spoke against the Officers Recommendation. She acknowledged that there had been support for the application, but considered that the development for not sustainable or suitable for its location. She stated, based on the representations received, assuming that those individuals were to use the dog walking field, there would be an average round trip of 22 miles. On the assumption that there are 7 dog walking sessions a day, use of the field would generate a daily mileage of 151 miles, and 1057 miles a week. She asserted that if 25% of the dogs were brought via electric car, the mileage in fossil fuel cars equates (according to the Sustainable Travel Calculator) to .22tonnes CO2/week and 11.44 tonnes/CO2/year. The Local Member commented that flying from Norwich to Schipol return only produces .07tonnes CO2/person. Even if all the customers are more local, say with an average round trip of 12 miles, the same calculation is .16 tonnes/CO2/week or 8.32 tonnes/yr. The above also only assumed one vehicle per session, and that the design statement would allow for parking of three vehicles, and two households at any time. Cllr V Holliday relayed NNDC’s net zero strategy and the commitment to reduce carbon emissions across the district, and that she did not consider the application fit with the NNDC local plan policy SS4. The Local Member noted a recent study which showed the impact of dog waste, high in nitrogen and phosphorus and its negative impact on biodiversity and ecosystem function. Within the study Dog nitrogen and phosphorus fertilisation rates per hectare per year averaged out at about 11kg nitrogen, and 5kg phosphorus. Even if the dog waste was removed, the urine would remain an enduring problem. She stated that whilst it could be argued better that the dogs utilise a designated field rather than protected habitats including nearby marshes, the density of dogs would be greater in the field. Cllr V Holliday considered that the application would lead to a disturbance to the tranquillity and sense of remoteness which are essential features of the AONB, and to which the Council had a duty to preserve and enhance. She asserted that the proposed application contradicted NNDC policy SS4, EN2 and EN3.

      ii.          Cllr A Fitch-Tillett expressed her support for the Officers Recommendation for approval, and considered that the inclusion of the site would take pressure off more sensitive public area’s within the AONB as identified within the Officer Report. She acknowledged that the North Norfolk Coast Partnership saw value in the application, which may reduce the numbers of dogs off lead which can cause disturbances to protected species. She commented that during summer months dogs off lead could disturb ground nesting birds, and during winter months the seal pupping season. On balance, Cllr A Fitch-Tillett considered that the proposed application would not result in a significant detriment to the special qualities of the AONB, and so proposed acceptance of the Officers Recommendation.

     iii.          Cllr J Toye stated that it was not uncommon for dog walkers to drive a long way to walk their dogs, therefore comments on users requiring vehicles should be given less credence. He reflected that during the Covid lockdowns there had been a rise in the number of difficult dogs with behavioural difficulties, and that there was value in these animals having a space to exercise without disturbing other walkers and protected species in the AONB including ground nesting birds. Cllr J Toye commented that he would prefer to see amendments to the scheme which would enhance the AONB.

    iv.          The SPO affirmed that tree planting was proposed on the eastern boundary which would also aid to screen the new fencing to the east.

      v.          Cllr A Brown considered that there were many sites of this nature appearing across the district, but that the sites location within the AONB meant the bar was set higher. He asked a series of questions to Officers for clarification, first; how the condition of the operating hours could be enforced. The MPM advised that, as with the enforcement of any condition, it was reliant on individuals reporting breaches to the enforcement Team. Second, How could the amount of users be regulated, the SPO advised that a management plan would be required subject to prior approval. Third, if the site would be spot checked. The SPO relayed the MPM advice that the enforcement team were reliant on the public reporting a breach. The MPM relayed that the enforcement team would take appropriate action if a breach was reported and assured Members that a Management plan for the site would need to be provided and signed off by the Council, after which time it would be placed in the public domain.

    vi.          At the discretion of the Chairman, the Applicant was invited to address Members questions. The Applicant commented that she would be agreeable to restrict the number of dogs on the site at any one time – if this was considered to be a suitable condition by members.

   vii.          Cllr R Kershaw reflected on objections raised, and considered that as the site was only utilising 1 acre for dog walking, this would not have a detrimental effect on the local deer population. He stated that socialisation of dogs was a good thing, and use of the proposed site by difficult dogs may cut back anti-social behaviour. He commented that concerns about traffic generated from the site were misplaced, and affirmed that the site was in close proximity to a builder’s yard which would generate much more traffic. Cllr R Kershaw commented that had the application been for horses and not dogs, there likely would not have been an issue.

  viii.          Cllr N Lloyd noted the issues raised my Members and Members of the Public, and commented that the use of the site from dawn to dusk was too long. Whilst comments of the impact of Carbon were a good argument, they did not have weight under planning law at present.

    ix.          Cllr N Pearce supported the representation of the Local Ward Member. He commented that he was not against dogs, or dog walking site, but that this was not a suitable location due to presence in the AONB. He noted that the proposed application was subject to 7 conditions, with more potentially being added, and considered that the use of so many conditions indicated that the proposal was contentious and should be deferred pending addition information on the applications impact on the village.

      x.          The MPM reflected that, from the representations made, Members were broadly okay with the principle of the application, but that details of the Management Plan.

    xi.          Cllr J Toye seconded the proposal to accept the officer’s recommendation.

RESOVED by 8 votes for, 1 against, and 1 abstention.

That planning application PF/21/2977 be approved subject to conditions relating to the following matters and any others considered necessary by the Assistant Director for Planning.

•        Time limit for implementation

•        Approved plans

•        Prior to first use a management plan shall be submitted and agreed by the Local Planning Authority

•        The use of the site shall be for the purposes of dog walking/exercise only and not by groups, clubs, training classes, dog shows or other similar related activity

•        Prior to first use, full details of the proposed fencing and new native hedgerow/tree planting shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

•        Full details of any external lighting to be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

•        Operating hours

•        On the cessation of the use of the field for the development hereby permitted, the storage and maintenance building shall be removed from the site and the land restored in accordance with a scheme that has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority