A family’s dream of a relaxed country lifestyle and the opportunity to fully enjoy their hobby of training a small group of Greyhounds has been shattered, following the failure of their appeal to have a previous decision made against them in December 2016, overturned.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Alita Funnell and Keith Selten purchased a property in Mandurama in 2015, a move that was meant to allow them more freedom to enjoy their hobby.
“We found this property, went and had a look at it, the real estate agent told them that we had Greyhounds and that was what we wanted to use it for and they (the owners) said yep, no worries,” Alita said.
“Even when Keith and Bailey went out there one day to fix up the water they spoke to the neighbours and Keith told them about wanting to race them, train them and again they said okay, no worries.
“We spent months building a shed, putting up fences and the second we were in there, a complaint to council.”
Zoned RU1 Primary Production, Ms Funnell said that they were informed that they didn’t require to lodge a Development Application to build the shed, but did so in May 2016, soon after the first complaint arrived at council.
Ms Funnell acknowledges that the wording of the DA for an animal breeding, keeping and training facility was slightly misleading.
“We are not a boarding facility. We only have our own dogs on the property,” she said.
“We aren’t breeders. We haven't had a litter for 2 years and until we know what is going to happen with the new regulations in our sport and have our numbers low, we have no intention of breeding.”
The family then entered an expensive and long process involving having a noise assessment written and then having that, and subsequent reports, peer-reviewed.
“Those reports are for sound levels when there were 26 dogs and we only exceeded the levels put in place by the EPA by two decibels, and now we’re down to 20 dogs,” she said.
For councillor David Somervaille, the decision was a difficult one to make.
“We have to look at the social impact of the development in this locality and I know it’s zoned rural but it’s mainly a residential area of development and we have to keep that in mind,” he said, “In this case the loss of amenity for residents tips it over to not being acceptable.”