We have a number of concerns about the proposed erection of these signs.

1. Are signs of this type appropriate in a rural environment we feel they are not.

2. Possible distraction of drivers on an already fast stretch of road which may cause the junction of Pipehouse and Pipehouse Lane to become dangerous for traffic exiting and entering these rural lanes.

3. What possible use is it to drivers who are still some considerable distance from Bath some of whom may not even be travelling to the city.

4. Is such a sign really necessary in the first place. Who has asked for it and what useful purpose does it serve.

I have not seen the actual detail of what it proposed (but have seen others elsewhere which are presumably similar) so am commenting in principle.

There is an excess of on-street signage generally. Illuminated message signs are non-essential. They should not be placed in rural settings. The existing direction sign to Pipehouse is over-sized for its purpose and to have a variable message sign in addition will create even more avoidable road-side clutter.

 

I am in agreement with all the points raised by the previous commenters.

I think this is a purposeless piece of signage in the wrong place , adding to the general Over signage that BANES seems to go for. No thanks to a variable message sign at Pipehouse or anywhere else around here.

HCPC's response to the consultation has now been submitted to BANES and published in the News section of this website.



Chris

Chairman