A call for a two-year period of grace to test a previously-refused Pembrokeshire dog exercise area has again been turned down by planners.
In a resubmitted application to Pembrokeshire Coast National Park after a 2025 refusal, Lawson and Penny Owen, through agent Hayston Developments & Planning Ltd, sought retrospective permission for a farm diversification scheme for a dog exercise area with a small hardstanding area for parking on land near Williamston Farm, Long Lane, Broad Haven, near Haverfordwest.
The previously-refused scheme sought a permanent seasonal exercise area, the latest application seeking a temporary two-year year-round option so that the impact of dog exercise on agricultural land could be fully assessed.
That application was refused on the grounds it was not considered to be sited in a sustainable location which will assist in removing the need for private motor vehicle trip generation, and the potential impact on neighbours.
Local community council The Havens again objected to the latest application, objections including it too close to neighbouring residential properties resulting in unacceptable noise impacts, is incompatible with the adjoining agricultural use, and is located adjacent to a cycle route.
A supporting statement said: “It is clear that, whilst the whole of the field has been operating as a dog exercise area for the past two years, staff in Public Protection have not received any complaints in respect of noise or any other form of objection. As a result of additional information gained from [the previous application], this re-submission sets out to explore a suggested temporary two-year option so that the impact of dog exercise on agricultural land can be fully assessed.”
It said the applicants, who have some 400 acres spread across four farms in the Broad Haven/Nolton area, have had a need to diversify, with previous activities including holiday lets, a weddings/summer cinema show venue, and a submitted planning application for nine holiday units.
It said the non-framing activities amounted to under a third of the applicants’ income, the dog exercise operation now foreseen to be some five per cent of income, at up to £20,000 per year.
An officer report recommending refusal said that, as with previous application, objections had been received; concerns including it being in an unsustainable countryside location, noise and disturbance to neighbouring residential properties, disturbance to grazing livestock, and concerns the proposal relies entirely on private motor vehicle journeys and conflicts with sustainable transport objectives.
The report said that while many planning matters could be addressed, they didn’t outweigh the principal policy objections that it had not been demonstrated the particular location was needed or it accords with the sustainable transport objectives [of planning policy], representing “an unsustainable form of development within the open countryside”.
It also said officers were of the view “that the proximity of the commercial dog exercise area to neighbouring residential properties would give rise to an unacceptable impact upon residential amenity through noise and associated activity”.
It concluded: “The proposed temporary two-year permission does not overcome these fundamental planning objections. The use has already operated for a significant period, enabling the Authority to assess the proposal on its planning merits, and a temporary consent would not resolve the inherent conflict with the adopted Development Plan.”
The resubmitted application was refused on the grounds highlighted in the officer report.
| [donate]
| Help keep news FREE for our readersSupporting your local community newspaper/online news outlet is crucial now more than ever. If you believe in independent journalism,then consider making a valuable contribution by making a one-time or monthly donation. We operate in rural areas where providing unbiased news can be challenging. |