24 November 2011 · Council of Ministers
31, Castle Street, Douglas, Isle Of Man, IM1 2ex
The proposal sought express consent for two wooden 'A' boards (1m high, 0.6m wide) on the public highway outside The Book Company shop at 27-31 Castle Street, part of a row of shops on the northern pedestrianised section. The boards were already displayed without consent.
Click a button above to find applications similar to this one.
See how this application compares to similar ones — policies, conditions, and outcomes side by side.
The independent inspector identified main issues as impact on character/appearance of Castle Street and pedestrian safety.
General Policy 6
Requires external advertisements in towns/villages to be high standard design/material relating well to building/site; in keeping/not detracting from surrounding area; located not to cause highway safety hazard. Inspector found design high standard (criteria a satisfied) but boards detract by adding clutter (b failed) and create pedestrian hazard esp visually impaired (c failed). Planning Division also cited vinyl not high quality.
General Policy 2
Cited by Planning Division alongside GP6 as relevant; proposal contrary due to visual clutter detrimental to amenities and safety obstruction. Assessed as failed due to siting/design impacts.
no objection to the application
does not oppose the application because, in its view, it has no adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications
Douglas Corporation and Highways Division both have no objection to the placement of two advertising boards outside The Book Company at 27-31 Castle Street.
Douglas Corporation
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals listed below.; It should be noted that the above comments are made in relation to the Town and Country Planning Acts and does not imply approval or consent under any other relevant enactment, byelaw, order or regulation.
Douglas Corporation
No ObjectionDouglas Corporation have no objection to the proposals listed below.; It should be noted that the above comments are made in relation to the Town and Country Planning Acts and does not imply approval or consent under any other relevant enactment, byelaw, order or regulation.
Highways Division
No ObjectionDo not oppose has no adverse traffic management, parking or road safety implications
The original application 10/01812/D for two advertising 'A' boards was refused by the Department of Infrastructure due to visual clutter, low design quality, and pedestrian safety concerns under General Policy 6. Appellant Spencer Benham argued the boards were essential for business viability, prevented vehicle accidents near the shop door due to a projecting adjacent building, matched the Victorian shop front, and were needed to attract tourists and locals. The inspector conducted a site visit, assessed impacts on street character and pedestrian safety, found the boards contributed to clutter and hazard despite acceptable design, and rejected the safety argument as not uniquely solved by boards. The inspector recommended refusal of express consent for two boards.
Precedent Value
Reinforces strict application of GP6 against 'A' boards in pedestrian streets due to clutter and safety, even with no highway objections and business need; applicants must show exceptional circumstances beyond design quality, as site-specific safety arguments failed.
Inspector: Ruth MacKenzie
