Guernsey Press

Mill Court request for traffic mirror refused

Planners and traffic officials have refused to allow a traffic mirror outside an office block over concerns it would create an unreasonable dependence on the mirror for vehicles exiting the car park.

Published
Last updated
Mill Court has applied to put a traffic mirror on the wall opposite to make it easier for drivers to exit. It has been rejected over concerns it would create an unreasonable dependence on the mirror for vehicles exiting the car park. (Picture by Sophie Rabey, 33911602)

It had been proposed the mirror be installed on a wall on the south side of the road to help vehicles accessing Mill Court, an office development next to Frossard House.

But Traffic & Highway Services raised concerns about the proposal. It noted that investigations six years ago had found the car park access had been reversed to allow drivers to use a tag system when entering the car park.

This meant vehicles leaving the car park left on the right-hand side of the access, the opposite of what had been approved in the original planning application, and leaving sight lines ‘substantially below’ the recommended standards.

Traffic & Highway Services said it had never been told about the switch and had it known of the move during the planning process, it would have objected on road safety grounds.

In 2018 it proposed that the site find an alternative tag system. The following year the property managers said a change would be made, but it never was.

THS said that the application for a mirror appeared to be the approach to mitigate an issue ‘of their own making’.

‘THS would have strong concerns to the suitability of the proposed mirror and is not a satisfactory solution in our view.

‘This proposal would tend to create an unreasonable dependence on the mirror by traffic exiting the car park as well as reduction in the ability to judge an oncoming vehicle’s speed and distance.

‘Additionally, issues around the distortion or restriction of the view in adverse weather or when the mirror is dirty would only create a greater road safety risk, as would any occasion when reflected light should interfere with driver’s vision.’

Planning accepted that the mirror was unlikely to have an adverse effect on the character and appearance of what is a conservation area, but noted traffic’s strong concerns, which led to the overall rejection.

A site visit also revealed an existing traffic mirror to the east of the access, which appeared to have been installed without planning permission. This has now been referred to Planning’s enforcement section for further investigation.

There is an exemption from planning permission for small traffic mirrors on domestic properties, as long as they comply with certain restrictions.