Progress Pride flag at Wiltshire Council, County Hall, Bythesea Road, Trowbridge

What was proposed

The application sought consent for a non-illuminated Progressive Pride flag on the existing flagpole for up to five days yearly for five years.

“The application seeks advertisement consent to display the Progress Pride Flag for no more than 5 days in a calendar year, for the next 5 years on the existing flagpole.”

“Officers are aware that there may be some confusion regarding the duration for which the flag would be displayed if consent were to be granted. The application as originally submitted sought consent for the display of the Progressive Pride flag between 1 June and 30 June each year for a period of five years.”

Officer report

The site

The site is at the front of County Hall, where an existing flagpole has flown various flags for many years.

“The application site is at the front of Wiltshire Council’s County Hall in Trowbridge. The flagpole is already in place and has been used to fly various flags for many years. The flagpole…”

Officer report

Earlier flag applications

Earlier applications allowed several flags to be flown from the existing flagpole outside County Hall.

“Reference No. Proposal / Summary Decision W/10/03202/ADV Flying of the Wiltshire Compact flag from existing flagpole outside County Hall Approved W/10/01733/ADV Flying of Armed Services Day flag from existing flagpole outside County Hall Approved W/09/02792/ADV Flag on flagpole outside County Hall during Compact Week (from 2nd November 2009) Approved W/08/02488/ADV Temporary consent for display of Olympic flag until 30/09/12 Approved…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal would have no unacceptable effect on visual amenity, heritage assets or public safety.

“It is considered that the proposed flag advertisement would cause no harm to the visual amenity of the area, including the setting of any heritage assets, and would therefore comply with the relevant provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 2007.”

“With regard to public safety, including matters relating to any perceptions of safety or security (which are not determinative under the Regulations), it is acknowledged that concerns have been raised through the consultation process. However, officers have concluded that the proposed flag would not constitute as a material highway hazard, obstruction, or distraction to highway users or the general public.”

Officer report

The planning issue

Advertisement consent was limited to the proposal’s effects on amenity and public safety, rather than the flag’s subject matter or symbolism.

“Unlike planning applications, advertisement consent applications are subject to only two key assessment considerations, namely the impact(s) on amenity and public safety.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Trowbridge Town Council raised no objection, while public representations included concerns about neutrality, cohesion, precedent and safety and support for inclusion and reassurance.

“A number of representations characterise the proposed flag as representing a particular viewpoint or set of beliefs and not being universally representative, with concerns raised that its display may give rise to a perception of institutional support for one side of an ongoing public debate.”

“Concerns are also raised regarding precedent, with representations noting that the granting of consent for this proposal may make it more difficult for the Council to resist similar requests for the display of other flags in future, potentially resulting in council buildings being used for a wider range of campaign or advocacy displays.”

Officer report

Who spoke

Two members of the public spoke against the application, two spoke in support, and the local member spoke in support.

The committee’s debate

Members discussed highway safety, visibility and the flagpole’s distance from the highway, and said symbolic views and council flag policy were not planning considerations.

“Members of the Committee then had the opportunity to ask technical questions of the officer. Details were sought on why officers considered there was no impact on highways safety, the visibility of the proposed new flag and whether it would have any unique impact compared to other flags, the distance from the flagpole to the public highway…”

“In debate it was noted that there was already an existing flagpole at the application location, which was set well back from the public highway and had flown a variety of different flags for many years. It was argued there were therefore no material grounds for objection, and personal views towards the symbolic meaning of a particular flag were not relevant considerations for the committee, which would make any decision purely on planning terms.”

Minutes

The decision

The committee resolved to grant advertisement consent for up to five days each year for five years, subject to conditions.

“That advertisement consent be granted subject to the following conditions:”

“The Progress Pride flag hereby approved shall only be displayed for a cumulative period of no more than five [5] days in any calendar year. This…”

Minutes

The conditions

The conditions controlled the display period, approved plans, site permission, highway safety and maintenance of visual amenity.

“No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.”

“Any advertisement displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a condition that does not impair the visual amenity of the site.”

Minutes