The appellant had lost a previous appeal to retain eight 2m-high columns. He contended that the council's preferred solution of low-level lighting bollards would provide insufficient illumination for vulnerable elderly residents, staff and visitors to find their way at night.
The appellant asserted that the requirement for the replacement lights to be fitted with sensors that would switch them on when a vehicle or person passed was impractical. His further claim that the use of sensors would lead to fits in some residents was rejected as without foundation by the inspector.
He agreed that the premises lay in an area of countryside with little street lighting. However, he endorsed the previous inspector's view that the columns harmed the setting of the grade II listed building and the character of the conservation area in which it lay. The appellant had failed to produce evidence that low-level lighting would be insufficient to provide adequate illumination, he concluded.
DCS Number 100-064-121
Inspector John Murray; Hearing