Erection of advertising signage

Why Was This Refused?

• ✓Four signs proposed in addition to an existing main estate advertising board
• ✓Location directly adjacent to the A1 junction raises driver distraction and road safety concerns
• ✓Visual clutter harmful to the appearance of the highway frontage
• ✓Risk of setting a precedent for further trader signage at the same junction
• ✓Earlier application for three signs at the same entrance refused in May 2006 on identical grounds
• ✓Unauthorised signage already on site referred for separate enforcement action
• ✓highways
• ✓precedent

The application sought permission to erect four advertising signs at the junction of Snugborough Trading Estate with the A1 at Union Mills. The estate already has a main group advertising board at its entrance, which officers accepted provides adequate identification and direction for visitors. This was the second attempt to add further signage at this busy junction; an earlier application for three signs (PA 06/00385) had been refused in May 2006 on identical grounds. Officers concluded that the four additional signs would introduce unwarranted clutter to the detriment of visual amenity and, given their position directly adjacent to the A1, would distract drivers and harm road safety. Braddan Commissioners objected on the basis that adequate signage already exists and that the proposal would harm the appearance of the highway frontage. The Department of Transport opposed the application on highway safety grounds.

The application was refused because the signs, positioned at the estate's junction with the A1, would distract drivers and undermine road safety. The additional signage would also create visual clutter harmful to the appearance of the highway and set a precedent for further trader signs at the same location. These concerns had already led to refusal of a closely related application earlier in 2006.

Policies Assessed (3)

Documents (33)