The rear garden of the semi-detached house contained a dog compound 11m long comprising two kennels with walk-in wire enclosures. The appellant maintained that the dogs were well trained and caused no significant noise or disturbance. But the inspector decided that the compound and kennels had materially altered the site's character and appearance.
In his view, keeping eight energetic dogs at the premises had a significant impact on the character of the appeal site and the surrounding area. His view that the number of dogs was incompatible with lawful residential use was reinforced by the considerable number of occasions that they were taken from the site for training and shoots.
The inspector noted that local residents had lodged a significant number of complaints over barking and unpleasant smells. He held that the dogs adversely affected other residents' amenity, particularly when using their gardens. Conditions limiting the number of dogs kept and requiring a noise mitigation scheme would not reduce the impact to acceptable levels, he ruled.
DCS Number 100-050-487
Inspector Joe Street; Inquiry.