A planning application to change the use of a former pig house to dog kennels at Bystock Court in Exmouth has received more than 40 objections.

The majority of the 44 objections list noise, ecological impact, and increased traffic as their concerns.

The application also seeks to turn an office or store into an associated management office for the kennels and to create a new gravelled area.

Would it be noisy?

Residents think so. 

Anne and David Foster, objecting, said: "Surely such a plan could not be approved with nearby housing estates within such close hearing distance. Dogs cannot be prevented from barking whether in the day or at night which could cause considerable distress to those living nearby."

Paul Scott, objecting, said: "We cannot understand why Bystock Court should have the need for kennels. How many residents have dogs that need to be put in a kennel whilst visiting for the day? Surely any overnight residents could take their pets with them to their own designated accommodation?"

But a supporting statement from the application said there had been a misunderstanding. 

It said the kennels would be small, housing "a maximum of either five dogs or five cats at any one time", and would only operate during the day.

The statement reads: "The purpose for the dog kennel and associated admin office is to allow for residents of Bystock Court many of which have learning disabilities or other specialist needs to have a facility to allow them to own their own pets. 

"[This is] due to restrictions of being able to keep the pets within their own roomed accommodation within the main Bystock Court and Day Care Centre.

"In terms of noise impact it is considered that the proposal's intention… is negligible and comparable to any domestic house's situation."

The application also earlier stated that the "surrounding dense woodland and other vegetation" would act as a "natural screen to prevent the wider transmission of unwanted noise impact."

Environmental concerns

Several objectors said that works have already begun at the site, including the felling of trees.

Mr Steven Noyes, objecting, said: "Significant work has clearly commenced and to some degree been completed in advance of submitting the application. 

"This is contrary to planning regulations and furthermore, the work undertaken appears to have breached a number of environmental protection orders placed on Bystock Court regarding the grounds which are a habitat for rare or protected flora and fauna."

But the supporting statement said that no trees have been felled that were not already dying - and that no tree works to create the hardstanding area had commenced.

It reads: "It has been raised by various neighbours and the EDDC Tree Officer that works have already commenced on site including the clearance of some existing trees to create a hard surface area just west of the proposed kennel and associated office space. 

"We can confirm that no trees have been felled that were not already dying or had been felled in long past previous years to make this hard surface area. We do acknowledge that prior to this application groundworks have been commenced to clear the area of overgrown shrubbery.

"It is acknowledged that this area prior to 2006 had a select number of trees… however since 2006 this has been a cleared area and therefore no tree works have commenced to create the hardstanding area the subject of this application."

The application is currently awaiting a decision from the district council.

Click here to view the application.