Appeal 6005036

The appeal is dismissed.

The main issues are the effects of the proposed advertisements on the visual amenity of the area and on public safety.

The appeal site is a vacant parcel of land positioned on a corner of [address] between houses. The character of the area is divided by the busy [address] and [address] near the appeal site, with the appeal site forming part of a residential area. This contrasts with the commercial activities and the associated signage to the south of [address].

A grassed strip of land planted with maturing trees runs between [address] and [address]. This landscaped area makes an important contribution to the amenity of the area in softening and contrasting with the busy road and commercial development on the other side of [address] providing visual relief.

The introduction of the two [name] would be seen predominantly within this residential and landscaped setting of the housing. In such a location the proposals would be highly visible and striking features, drawing the eye as the images change. The vibrancy and size of the images would appear incongruous in this residential and landscaped setting on the corner of [address].

As the appeal site is located within a residential setting and not a commercial area, the presence of illuminated advertisements within the nearby commercial area does not provide justification for the appeal proposals.

I therefore conclude that the proposed advertisements would have a harmful effect on the visual amenity of the area. The Council has cited Policy 10 and Policy 49 of its Local Plan and paragraph 141 of the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) in its reason for refusal. The Regulations1 require that decisions are made only in the interests of amenity and public safety. Consequently, although I have taken them into account, they have not been a decisive consideration in my determination of this appeal.

The proposed [name] would be orientated to face traffic using the [address] Roundabout. The roads approaching and exiting the roundabout were busy during my site visit and I saw that there is also a signalised pedestrian crossing near the appeal site on the [address]. Moreover, near the roundabout along [address], I also saw several pedestrians cross the road between traffic at an unsignalised crossing point. Given this context, drivers coming to and exiting the roundabout are faced with increased cognitive demands.

Due to their position in a residential setting, the vibrancy of the advertisements and rotation of images in such an incongruous location would draw the eye of passing drivers. Although vehicles may not be travelling at a high speed, the introduction of rotating digital displays in this sensitive location would increase the risk from distraction to an unacceptable level. Here, the rotation, sharpness and the richness of the images would attract attention at a time when the focus should be on reacting to other road users, such as vehicles pulling out of the roundabout or pedestrians crossing [address] between traffic.

Controls have been suggested by the appellant on, amongst other things, hours of operation, the luminance levels, the frequency of change of advertisements and measures to prevent flashing and moving images. However, the matters covered by the suggested conditions would not overcome my fundamental concern over the potential distraction caused by a rotating advert in this particular location.

I therefore conclude that the proposed advertisements would have a harmful effect on public safety. The Council has drawn my attention to Policies 13 and 49 of its Local Plan and paragraph 141 of the Framework in its reason for refusal. For the reasons previously stated, whilst I have taken them into account as material considerations, they have not been decisive in my determination of this appeal.

As the power to control advertisements under the regulations is exercised in the interests of public safety and amenity, any social or economic benefits emanating from the two [name] do not outweigh my conclusions on the main issues.

I note that the appellant has made changes to their scheme, with a view to finding a solution. That said, this is not a matter for my consideration as part of this appeal, and I have assessed the proposal on its own merits.

For the reasons given above, the appeal is dismissed. Mr [planning inspector] INSPECTOR 1 Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 2007