Agenda item

Non illuminated pole mounted sales sign (retrospective).

The Committee considered a report of the Senior Planning Officer with regards to an application for Non illuminated pole mounted sales sign (retrospective) on Land North East Of Stockton Road, Sedgefield (for copy see file of minutes).

The Planning Officer gave a detailed presentation of the application which included a site location plan, aerial photograph, elevations, site layout and photographs of the site.

Councillor Carr, representing Sedgefield Town Council objected to the erection of signage and cited a previous application on the site for housing which had been refused and appealed.  He referred to the reasons for refusal which had been cited by the Planning Inspector and considered the sign to be inappropriate for the same reasons.  There were already signs erected upon entrance to the site and some signs attached to lampposts to advertise.  This application was for a sign near a junction where there had been road fatalities in the past and he was surprised that there had been no objection from Highways.  He considered that should the application be approved there could be other signs erected for other development currently going on in the area and confirmed that Sedgefield Town Council objected to the proposal.  Councillor Carr indicated that he wished to refer to photographs which were not included in the Officer’s presentation.  Initially he was advised that it was not possible to produce new material during the meeting, however the Planning Officer confirmed that the photographs had already been submitted by the applicant as part of the application and was therefore given the opportunity to circulate the photographs to Members.

The Principal DN Engineer confirmed that these type of signs were commonly erected adjacent to the Highway Network and their existence was to attract attention to new developments.  However, he was of the view that there was no basis for saying that this sign would be detrimental to highway safety just because of its prominence and that a highways objection would not be sustainable.

Councillor Brown referred to the length of time advertisement consent is granted for and the request from the Town Council to issue a reduced period of 3 years and enquired how long the sign had been up for. The Planning Officer confirmed that the standard issue was 5 years however the Applicant had indicated a period of 6 years be issued and confirmed that the sign had been in place since April 2018.

Councillor Tinsley suggested that it was usual for a developer to seek to advertise their development and it was not unreasonable to expect that, there was no Highways objection, the sign was on private land, set back from the road, and there was no impact on amenity as there were no residential properties nearby.  He referred to the Town Councils reference to the Planning Inspectors comments and clarified that this was with regards to a housing development and not the erection of signage.  He did note the date from which the sign had been erected without consent and suggested the amendment of the timescale condition to ensure the developer did not gain one additional day over 5 years from when the sign was erected.  He therefore moved that the recommendation was approved subject to a condition which granted a period of consent for 4 years and 9 months only.

The recommendation was seconded by Councillor Brown who commented that the developer would have knowledge of the regulations for planning consent with regards to signage.

Resolved:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions outlined in the report and to condition no. 7 being amended as follows;

This consent shall be valid only for a period of four years nine months from the date hereof. At the expiration of that period the advertisements referred to in Part 1 shall be removed within 14 days and the site shall be reinstated to the satisfaction of the local planning authority.