A PEMBROKESHIRE town bowls club’s call on planners to let it keep advertising signs for local businesses which help support its operations has been turned down.
In an application to Pembrokeshire County Council, Fishguard & Goodwick Bowls Club, Wern Road, Goodwick sought retrospective permission for up to 36 signs on land close to the town’s Phoenix Centre.
The signs had been in place for some 18 months, being removed ahead of the formal planning application.
A supporting statement accompanying the application says: “This application seeks retrospective consent for the display of up to 36 non-illuminated, single-sided advertisement panels mounted to an existing timber boundary fence.
It said the advertisements are modest in scale, facing an existing large car park rather than nearby residential properties and does not project over any public highway or footpath.
It added: “The advertisement signs have been temporarily removed while planning permission is sought. The advertisements and fence had been in place for approximately 18 months prior to their temporary removal, during which time no complaints were received.
“The total number of advertisements has been consciously limited, and not all fence bays display signage, ensuring that the proposal does not result in harm to visual amenity or public safety.
“The income generated from the advertisements provides an important source of revenue for the Fishguard and Goodwick Bowls Club, supporting the ongoing operation and maintenance of local community sporting facilities.
“The advertising panels also offer local businesses an affordable and accessible means of promotion within the community.”
An officer report recommending refusal said two objections to the scheme were received, raising issues over discrepancies in the application and the scheme having no merit, being “at odds with the established character and appearance of the area”.
The report added: “While it is acknowledged that businesses have a reasonable need to advertise their presence and services, such advertisements must be appropriately sited and designed to ensure they do not detract from the visual amenity of the area.”
It went on to say: “It is considered that the proposed advertisements are inappropriately sited relative to their functional purpose. The cumulative impact arising from the proliferation of signage in close proximity, extending along the entirety of the boundary fencing, results in a visually cluttered and intrusive form of development.
“Furthermore, the scale and number of the proposed 36 advertisement boards is considered excessive and not reasonably necessary, giving rise to a harmful impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area.”
The application was refused by planners on the grounds it was “an excessive concentration of signage within the locality, creating visual clutter that would harm the visual amenity and undermine the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings”.
