Plans for a digital advertising screen, recently blocked by council planning officers, are set to be decided by a Government-appointed planning inspector.

An appeal has been lodged against Sunderland City Council’s recent decision to refuse plans for a digital advertisement in the Easington Lane area.

Applicant Wildstone Estates Limited’s plan was linked to the side of a building at 171 High Street, near the roundabout connecting High Street and Elemore Lane, as part of a nationwide drive to “upgrade traditional advertising hoardings to a modern digital format”.

A digital advertising screen plan was submitted for building near roundabout in Easington Lane | Google/LDRS

placeholder image — A digital advertising screen plan was submitted for building near roundabout in Easington Lane | Google/LDRS

Plans described the digital sign as a “wall-mounted D-Poster display” measuring “6m(w) x 3m(h)” which would be positioned 2.7m above ground “displaying multiple static advertisements on rotation.”

However, Sunderland City Council’s planning department refused the plans on June 20, 2025, after raising concerns about the development’s “visually obtrusive and over dominant” visual impact and highway safety concerns around the plans being “likely to cause a distraction to motorists with increased risk of collision.”

It has been confirmed that the applicant is contesting the council refusal decision and has submitted an appeal to the national Planning Inspectorate.

A planning inspector will now be appointed by the Secretary of State to rule on the matter, which could see the council’s refusal decision being upheld or thrown out.

A number of appeal documents have been published on the council’s public planning portal website, including a “grounds of appeal” document setting out the appellant’s case why the development should be allowed.

The appellant noted the site is in an “established location for advertising” and is in an area which includes a mix of commercial and residential uses.

It was argued that “given the absence of habitable windows fronting the site and the street lighting in the vicinity […] the neighbouring residential units would not be impacted by the illuminance of the signage”.

The appellant also said the council refusing the plans on visual amenity grounds was “not justified” and stressed the digital screen would be controlled by sensors to “adjust the illumination levels” to ensure “no change in impact” compared to a standard “paper and paste display”.

On public safety matters, it was noted that the site is in an “uncomplicated location which drivers should be able to navigate with ease” and data was cited which, appellants said, indicated the site is a “very safe stretch of road”.

It was argued that the “cognitive demand on road users at this point is low as there are no unusual highway complexities which would requireextra care to be taken” and that “given the long-range visibility, drivers will be able to easily assimilate the information on the display”.

It was also noted that the sign would “not display any moving images” and “that the change in [static] images will be almost imperceptible”.

The grounds of appeal statement adds: “The council refused the application on the grounds of public safety and visual amenity.

“However, it is considered that the above demonstrates that the application was not fully considered on its merits and positive aspects of the scheme were not taken into consideration in the determination of the application.

“The proposed digital display will also result in a significant number of social, economic, and environmental benefits through the reduction in CO2 emissions and waste, the use of sustainable energy, the opportunities to advertise charitable campaigns, public art and emergency messages, theincrease in business rates, and reduction in visual clutter on a site specific and strategic level.

“It is considered that the above demonstrates that the proposals would have a positive impact (or at the very least a neutral impact) on the host site and visual amenity and character of the area.

“It is considered that the council’s explanation for the refusal of advertisement consent is not justified based on the site circumstances.

“For the reasons given above, it is strongly considered that this appeal should be allowed.”

An update on the appeal will be published on the Planning Inspectorate’s website once a decision has been made.

For more information on the planning application and appeal, visit Sunderland City Council’s planning portal website and search reference: 25/00763/ADV