Dog walking field at Land Adjoining, Heath End Road, Belbroughton

Earlier application

An earlier, larger dog recreation proposal was refused for Green Belt, residential amenity, ecology, highway and sustainability concerns.

“The proposal would represent inappropriate development in the Green Belt by virtue of the introduction of additional surfacing, car parking, and trackway though the site together with agility equipment associated with the proposed agility course area. The inappropriate development would be harmful to the openness of the Green Belt. No very special circumstances exist to outweigh the harm.”

“Furthermore, the proposal fails to contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment contrary to Policy BDP21 of Bromsgrove District Plan and Chapter 15 of the NPPF. The Highway Authority has identified concerns with the visibility at the site entrances and the speed of the road. No speed survey has been submitted or any other information to overcome the concerns.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways, noise, water management and ecology consultees raised no objection, subject to conditions; an objection from the parish council was reported at committee.

“Worcestershire Highways - Bromsgrove • No objection. • Based on the analysis of the information submitted the Highway Authority concludes that there would not be an unacceptable impact and therefore there are no justifiable grounds on which an objection could be maintained. Conditions recommended: Pedestrian visibility splays, gates to be set back, access layout and visibility splays…”

“Ecology • No objection • Conditions recommended with regard to ecology: • CEMP • Badger Method statement • Bat/bird boxes…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant’s agent spoke in support, while the parish council representative and a ward member spoke against the application.

Committee debate

Members discussed dog numbers, booking and parking, accident evidence, highway consultation, earlier refusal reasons and the evidence now submitted.

“That the maximum number of dogs on site would be 3 and that this would be managed via an online booking system. • 4 parking spaces were deemed appropriate as the site was bookable for 50-minute time periods with a 10-minute turnaround time which should prevent overlap time with arrivals.”

“Members asked for some clarity regarding the application before them and the application 22/01129/FUL which was previously refused. Officers drew Members’ attention to page 9 of the main agenda pack outlining the reasons for refusal, noting that the refused application did not supply enough evidence to prove that there was not a serious impact in regard to ecology and noise concerns.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee approved the application subject to the listed conditions and two additional conditions in the committee update.

“RESOLVED that having had regard to the development plan and to all other material considerations, the application be approved subject to the Conditions as detailed on pages 14 to 16 of the main agenda pack with…”

Minutes