DOGS can carry on using an exercise field in a Cornish town after pet owners thought Cornwall Council was barking mad to try and stop its use.

Channel View Dog Paddock, which was set up without planning permission, can carry on trading as long as its owners agree to certain conditions.

Dog owners who use the purpose-built paddock, off Sandy Lane in Redruth, to exercise and train their pets were up in arms against moves by Cornwall Council to close the business.

A large number of residents supported the bid to keep the “amazing facility” open. They were backed by Redruth Town Council and Cornwall councillor for the area Connor Donnithorne who called the matter before a planning committee.

A case officer from Cornwall Council’s planning department told a meeting of the west area planning committee on Monday, March 31 that a request for retrospective permission by owner Louise Hanley for the continued use of the land as a dog exercise area should be refused as there’s no sound barrier to stop neighbouring properties being bothered by the noise of barking dogs.

He said the council had received multiple objections from residents along Sandy Lane who had complained about barking which was causing distress not just to residents but pets as well. The officer added that dogs were particularly vocal when they got excited on arrival or on “seeing other animals or birds passing”.

The council was concerned about the location where a noise study was carried out by the applicant – from the access lane rather than the field next to the residential properties, something which Mrs Hanley denied.

She told the committee she set up the community dog space with her husband for people to exercise their dogs in a safe and secure area. The couple are both teachers at Treleigh Primary School, Redruth, so used their holidays, weekends and evenings to create the paddock.

Since opening in November last year they’ve been “blown away” by its popularity, with over 500 Facebook followers and 24 positive comments on their online planning application, “highlighting what a valuable asset the paddock is to the local community”.

Mrs Hanley said: “In a recent article over 100 people commented, stressing what an awesome facility the paddock is for Redruth.

“Our main clientèle are people with accessibility issues, also people who have got young families and struggle to walk their dogs off-lead while also caring for their children, and people with reactive or banned breed dogs.” She read a number of positive comments from customers.

Mrs Hanley said their noise survey showed a negligible difference between when the paddock is open and when it is closed. She said the case officer’s assertion that the recording was done in the lane outside the field was “false” as the acoustic sound engineer placed the recording equipment at the entrance to the paddock, within the field, as this was the place where dogs were reported to most likely bark.

She said a recent Freedom of Information Act (FOI) request showed there have been no recent noise complaints made in the area, which, she added, “is unsurprising as of the four properties that back on to the field, all are in support of the paddock and three of them use it on a regular basis”.

Mrs Hanley added that three out of the four neighbours said they didn’t want a buffer as they liked to see the paddock.

Cllr Mike Thomas said: “There are clearly people who do object and there are examples on the planning portal of concerns.” He asked Mrs Hanley if there was any mitigation she could put in place should concerns arise in the future from any new neighbours. She said they’d be happy to cap visits to just four dogs per session and a sound buffer could be erected.

Following discussion among councillors, they agreed to a new recommendation to give delegated powers to planning officers to approve subject to an agreed boundary between the field and neighbouring houses. Conditions also included opening hours from 8am to 7pm all week during daylight hours only, parking for no more than two vehicles and keeping the number of dogs per session to six.

This was approved by eight votes for, none against and one abstention.