Appeal 6005808

The appeal is allowed and express consent is granted for installation of 1 no. non-illuminated, static advertising sign measuring 8ft x 4ft at [site address] Easting (x) 376377 Northing (y) 396300, in accordance with the terms of the application ref 117563/ADV/25. The consent is for a period of 5 years from the date of this decision. The consent is subject to the five standard conditions set out in the Regulations.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The control of advertisements is exercisable only with respect to public safety and amenity. Regulation 3 states that powers in this regard shall be exercised taking into account the provisions of the development plan, so far as they are material, and any other relevant factors. Therefore, whilst the policy of the development plan referred to by the Council in its decision is not on its own determinative, I have taken it into account as a material consideration.

The Council does not object to the siting of the advertisement on public safety grounds. From the evidence before me and my observations on site, I see no reason to disagree.

Therefore, the main issue is the effect of the proposal on the amenity of the area.

The appeal site sits within a grassed verge on [address] which currently features a gas substation and trees. Whilst the council referred to an existing sign on this area, this had been removed by the time of my site visit. This grass verge is separated from the boundaries of residential properties on [address] by a public footpath. There are also lamp posts as well as occasional non illuminated road signage within the wider verge. [address] is highly trafficked and directly opposite the appeal site, there is a retail park, featuring extensive commercial signage.

Although the site lies to the side of [address] closest to the nearest residential area, the advertisement would not appear incongruous in the context of the existing commercial signage in the vicinity of the road. More particularly, given its modest scale, non-illuminated, static composition, and its siting close to and of a comparable height to a substation, the advertisement would not be an overly prominent feature. Consequently, in this particular instance, the proposal would not detract from the overriding verdant and uncluttered character of the verge to this side of [address].

I have had regard to the Trafford Metropolitan Borough Planning Guidelines - Advertisements (1995) (the Guidelines), which advises, amongst other things, that hoardings in residential areas will not normally be acceptable. However, given the degree of separation from the nearest residential properties, together with the design, layout and site-specific context described, I am satisfied that the proposed advertisement would have a scale of impact appropriate to the character of the area it is in, in line with the Guidelines.

The proposed advertisement would have an acceptable effect on amenity. Insofar as it is material, the advertisement would respect and acknowledge the character and identity of the locality in terms of design, siting, size, scale and materials used, in line with Policy JP-P1 of the Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan (2024). For the same reasons it would also not conflict with Paragraph 141 of the National Planning Policy Framework which seeks to avoid poorly designed and sited advertisements and to protect amenity, taking account of cumulative impacts.

The Council has not suggested the imposition of any additional conditions over and above the five standard conditions and I see no reason to reach a different opinion.

For the reasons given above, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed. Ellie Nutman APPEAL PLANNING OFFICER

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed. [planning inspector] INSPECTOR