Agenda item

Item deferred from 31^st March 2022 Committee Meeting.

The PO re-introduced the Officers report and recommendation for approval, and noted that this item had been deferred from the Committee Meeting held 31^st March. He advised that a submission had been received from the Highways Authority who noted that the sign was set back from the highway and would allow for visibility beneath, as such they would find it difficult to substantiate a reason to object to the proposal. The Highways Authority wrote that that the proposal would not affect current traffic patterns or the free flow of traffic.

1. Local Member- Cllr S Bütikofer – spoke against the Officers recommendation and stated that despite the reassurances provided since the item had last been brought to Committee, her concerns remained. She stated that it was concerning that the Highways Authority in their submission considered that that the view through the posts would reasonable, and affirmed that access to the property was regularly obscured by parked cars, and that the road was unsafe. The Local Member commented that she had lobbied for a reduction of the speed limit, but that this had been unsuccessful. Cllr S Bütikofer considered that both the size and scale of the proposed sign to be out of place for the local context and that it would negatively impact the open space and the undeveloped coast and would serve as a distraction for motorists. She noted that if applied, policy EN3 and EN4 would be contravened by the proposal.

2. Cllr N Pearce noted the history of the site and the various iterations of the sign which had been refused, he considered the proposal to unacceptable due to its position in relation to the underdeveloped coast and to the AONB.

3. Cllr R Kershaw proposed acceptance of the Officers recommendation. He acknowledged the Highway Officers submission, which he considered to satisfy his concerns, and stated that issues relating to individuals speeding on the adjacent road was not the fault of the hotel. He commented that Highways Authority should be written to separately, and not as part of the application, to review and reduce the speed limit of the road.

4. Cllr J Rest sought confirmation and clarity on the removal of wording to advertise parking to the rear of the property. The PO confirmed this had been removed to assist in the overall reduction of wording on the sign. The ADP advised that both Officers and the Highways Authority were satisfied with the proposed visual appearance of the sign, its location and its contents.

5. Cllr N Lloyd seconded the proposal and considered that there was little reason on planning grounds to refuse. He stated that the proposed sign would be less intrusive that prior proposals and commented that the behaviour of drivers to drive in excess of the speed limit could not be controlled by the planning process.

6. Cllr V Holliday enquired if the original sign had been granted planning permission. The PO advised that it had, and that if a sign were in situ for four or more years it would have automatically been in receipt of planning permission.

7. Cllr A Brown supported the Officers recommendation and acknowledged that this was a replacement sign. He stated that the application of policies raised by the Local Member would have had more credence with a new, rather than replacement sign. He reflected on the comments made by the Highways Authority, and considered there to be a minor accident record for the associated road with a minimal fatality record.

8. Cllr P Fisher commented that he since this item had been deferred that he had driven past the site and considered that it was in fact the nearby housing and not the sign which obstructs the view of the road. He noted that the proposal would be located within a 30mph speed limit zone.

RESOLVED by 10 votes for, and 3 against.

That application ADV/21/1260 be APPROVED in accordance with the Officers report with final wording of conditions and any others considered necessary to be delegated to the Assistant Director – Planning.

At the discretion of the Chairman a 15 minute break was taken at 10.55am, the meeting resumed at 11.05am