Agenda item

Report No: DEV/WS/23/036

Application for advertisement consent - a. one internally illuminated fascia sign b. two non-illuminated window graphics 3. one non-illuminated customer board d. one internally illuminated totem

Application for advertisement consent - a. one internally illuminated fascia sign b. two non-illuminated window graphics 3. one non-illuminated customer board d. one internally illuminated totem

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration at the Delegation Panel on 10 October 2023. It was presented to the Delegation Panel at the request of the Ward Member.

Attention was drawn to the supplementary ‘late papers’ which had been issued following publication of the agenda and which set out a further neighbour objection to the proposal together with an expanded reason for the refusal part of the recommendation.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting. Officers were recommending a split decision; with advertisement consent only granted for the two non-illuminated window graphics and one non-illuminated customer board, subject to the condition set out in Paragraph 51 of Report No DEV/WS/23/036. And with refusal recommended in respect of the internally illuminated fascia sign and the internally illuminated totem sign, for the reason set out in the supplementary late papers.

Speakers:    Councillor Jim Thorndyke (Ward Member: Stanton) spoke on the application

                   Joel Mattless (applicant – The Cooperative) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Andy Drummond proposed the split decision as per the Officer recommendation and this was duly seconded by Councillor Marilyn Sayer.

During further debate a number of the Committee referenced the detrimental impact the totem sign could have on residential amenity but voiced support for the illuminated fascia sign.

Accordingly, as the Committee largely seemed to accord in respect of the fascia sign, the Chair sought the approval of the proposer and seconder of the motion to amend their proposal to grant advertisement consent for the internally illuminated fascia sign (and only to refuse the totem sign).

Upon being put to the vote and with 14 voting for the motion and with 2 abstentions, it was resolved that

Decision

Advertisement Consent be GRANTED for the two non-illuminated window graphics, one non-illuminated customer board and one internally illuminated fascia sign, subject to the following conditions:

1.   The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and documents, unless otherwise stated.

2.   The maximum luminance from the internally illuminated signs shall not exceed 600 candela/m2.

3.   The illuminated advertisement hereby approved by this consent shall only be illuminated between 7am and 10pm. Outside of these hours, the advertisements shall not be illuminated in any way.

And, Advertisement Consent be REFUSED for the one internally illuminated totem sign for the following reason:

1.   Policy DM17 applies in relation to all proposals within, adjacent to or visible from a Conservation Area, and states that new shop fronts, fascias, awnings, canopies, advertisements and other alterations to commercial premises must be of a high standard of design which respects the character of the Conservation Area and the building to which they relate. Standardised shop fronts, unsympathetic ‘house’ signs, projecting box signs, internally illuminated signs and externally lit signs will not normally be granted consent. Where it can be demonstrated that premises rely principally on trading after dark externally illuminated signs sympathetic to the character of the building and the surrounding area may be permissible.

The totem sign is internally illuminated. The internal illumination is considered to neither preserve nor enhance the character of the adjacent Conservation Area, from which the store and its signage is readily visible from. Furthermore, with the site being well lit by other forms of illumination which already exist there is no justification provided as to why the internal illumination of the signage is required to support the trading of the business, resulting in a clear conflict with policy DM17.

Furthermore, policies DM2 and DM38 seeks to ensure that development, including advertisements, does not have a detrimental impact on residential amenity, nor the amenities of the wider area. The totem sign is prominently sited relative to nearby residential dwellings and will be visible in outlook from nearby homes and gardens, with its illuminated nature materially and adversely affecting amenity, contrary to these policies.

The totem sign is therefore deemed to conflict with policies DM2, DM17 and DM38 of the Joint Development Management Policies Document 2015, as well as to paragraph 136 of the NPPF, to a level which warrants the refusal of the advertisement consent for this sign.