Two free standing signs (pole sign illuminated) and a fascia sign to building.

Two free standing signs (pole sign illuminated) and a fascia sign to building.

The Senior Planning Officer reported the following updates:

An alteration to the objection listed in paragraph 5.3.  The fourth reason for objection should read:

It would be obtrusive to the views from all rooms, which currently have an uninterrupted view of the riverside.

In accordance with the criteria for public speaking, Mrs Baugh, a neighbouring resident, spoke in objection to the application.

Councillor CM Bartrum, one of the Local Ward Members, noted that the neither the Traffic Manager nor the Town Council had not objected to the application and therefore moved the recommendation.

Councillor G Lucas, the other Local Ward Member, concurred with Councillor Bartrum and seconded the motion.

Councillor H Bramer felt that the door sign and the ground sign were perfectly acceptable although he had reservations in respect of the sign which was due to be relocated. He felt that there was no need to move the sign and felt that it’s current position was acceptable.

The Southern Team leader drew Members’ attention to section 6.1 of the Officer’s report and confirmed that commercial need was not a factor when determining advertisement applications. He added that public safety and amenity were the only issues that could be used as reasons for refusal.

Councillor JA Hyde concurred with Councillor H Bramer, she felt that moving the sign would have a detrimental effect on the amenity of the residents of the White House. She noted that the proposed sign was illuminated and was advised that the existing sign was also illuminated.

In response to a question, the Senior Planning Officer confirmed that conditions allowed the sign to be illuminated during the public house’s hours of business. He advised Members that as the application was for advertisement consent they could choose to approve the application in part.

Members discussed the application and felt that their concerns related solely to the relocation of the pole sign. The original motion to approve the application was withdrawn and the resolution below was agreed.

RESOLVED

That advertisement consent be refused in respect of the pole sign (Item B) due to the impact on the amenity of local residents.

That advertisement consent be granted in respect of the double sided directional sign and the wall sign (Items A and C) subject to standard conditions and the following further conditions:

1.         A01 (Time limit for commencement (full permission))

Reason: Required to be imposed by Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2.         B03 (Amended plans)

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the amended plans and to comply with the requirements of Policy DR1 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan

3.         I35 (Time limit on floodlighting/external lighting ) (amended)

Reason: To minimise the impact of the floodlights and to protect the residential amenity of nearby dwellings so as to comply with Policy DR14 of Herefordshire Unitary Development Plan.

Informatives:

1.         N19 - Avoidance of doubt - Approved Plans

2.         N15 - Reason(s) for the Grant of Advertisement Consent