Appeal 6002424

Appeal A is allowed and planning permission is granted for a new communications kiosk with integrated advertising display and defibrillator at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application ref 25/01495/PFUL3 (PP-14213799), subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

Appeal B is allowed and express consent is granted for a new communications kiosk with integrated advertising display and defibrillator at [site address] as applied for. The consent is for five years from the date of this decision and is subject to the five standard conditions set out in the Regulations and the additional conditions set out in the attached schedule.

The two appeals are made in relation to the same appeal site and to each other. Appeal A relates to the refusal of planning permission for a freestanding communications kiosk (the development). Appeal B relates to the refusal of advertisement consent for an advertising display (the advertisement) which would be integral to the development. I have determined both appeals on their merits but, to avoid duplication, dealt with the two together below. Appeal Decisions 6002424, APP/Q3060/Z/25/3376395

The appeal site is within the Station Conservation Area (SCA). In respect of both appeals, I have therefore had special regard to Section 72 (1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, which requires special attention to be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area.

In respect of Appeal B, the Council has drawn my attention to Policy DE5 of the Nottingham City Land and Planning Policies Development Plan Document Local Plan Part 2 2020 (LAPP), and I have taken it into account as a material consideration where relevant. However, powers under the Regulations1 to control advertisements may be exercised only in the interest of amenity and public safety, taking account of any material factors. The National Planning Policy Framework reiterates this approach. Therefore, in my consideration of Appeal B, the Council’s policy has not, by itself, been decisive. The Council has not raised any issues of public safety. Based on the evidence before me, I see no reason to disagree.

For Appeal A, the main issue is the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the street scene.

For Appeal B, the main issue is the effect of the advertisement on amenity.

The appeal site is positioned on the pavement, in front of Nottingham Station Car Park, and lies within the SCA, a designated area whose special interest derives from its historic development as a 19th-century industrial suburb. [address], a grade II listed building, is directly opposite the appeal site. Insofar as it is relevant to these cases, the significance of this substantial industrial building lies in its architectural interest as a Victorian lace factory, its scale and massing, and its contribution to the industrial character of [site address] . The building’s setting is experienced primarily through its long, continuous frontage along [site address] and its relationship with nearby historic industrial buildings.

The proposal comprises a freestanding kiosk measuring approximately 2.4 metres in height, 1.1 metres in width, and 0.8 metres in depth, incorporating an advertising display with static advertisements changing every 10 seconds. The section of the road to which the development and advertising display relate, particularly the northern side of [site address] , differs in appearance from the more industrial side where the [address] building lies, as it is defined by the tall, modern multi-storey car park.

Against the backdrop provided by the car park, the proposed kiosk, given its height and compact footprint, would be seen as a small component of the wider street scene. Given the already substantial visual presence and contemporary architectural character of the car park, the kiosk would assimilate comfortably without drawing disproportionate attention. Street trees, lighting columns, and station-related signage are present within the street scene, creating a layered streetscape with multiple vertical elements. Introducing the kiosk would not create excessive clutter, as the pavement depth is sufficient to maintain a visually ordered 1 The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 (as amended) Appeal Decisions 6002424, APP/Q3060/Z/25/3376395 environment. Accordingly, the kiosk would not affect the character and appearance of the street scene.

Advertisements are not uncommon within the immediate area. They vary in terms of format, size, and illumination, including those on the opposite side of the appeal site, which serve commercial premises. The advertising display, which is an integral part of the kiosk, would appear proportionate within this urban corridor. Within such a commercial and transport-focused context, the proposed advertising display, subject to conditions to control the images displayed and illumination levels, would integrate well within its surroundings without resulting in excessive clutter, and thus would not harm the amenity of the area.

I note that the Council found no harm in relation to the character and appearance of the SCA or the setting of nearby listed buildings. Given my findings above, I agree that the development would have a neutral effect on the designated heritage assets.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the development and the advertising display would not harm the character and appearance of the street scene or the amenity of the area. I therefore find no conflict with Policy 10 of the Greater Nottingham Broxtowe Borough Gedling Borough Nottingham City Aligned Core [name] 1 Local Plan 2014 and Policies DE1 and DE5 of the LAPP, which collectively aim to secure well-designed, context-responsive developments.

The Council has suggested a time limit condition for Appeal A and the standard conditions set out in the Regulations for Appeal B. In addition to the time limit condition, I consider that a plans condition is also necessary for Appeal A, in the interests of precision. For Appeal B, I have asked the views of the appellant and the Council in relation to conditions regarding illumination and display. I have not received any objections to the suggested conditions for illumination and display. I consider that such conditions are necessary in the interest of amenity and public safety, therefore I have imposed them for Appeal B.

In addition to the five standard conditions set out in the Regulations, the Council has suggested a condition to ensure that the advertisement consent expires five years from the date of the notice. However, a condition requiring the advertisement consent to expire after five years is not necessary because Regulation 14(7) already imposes this requirement.

For the reasons set out above, the appeals A and B should be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings: elevations NWP-KIOSK/001, location plan ( [site address] Easting, Northing 457576m, 339129m), proposed site plan (dated 15/072025). ** Appeal A - end of schedule ** Appeal B Ref: APP/Q3060/Z/25/3376395

The minimum display time for each advertisement shall be 10 seconds. The digital advertisement screen shall display only static images and shall not exhibit any moving, flashing, scrolling, fading, swiping, blending, audible, three dimensional, or video type elements. All changes between static images shall be instantaneous with no animated transitions. The installation shall include a mechanism that freezes the display or shuts the screen down in the event of a malfunction.

In the hours of darkness, the advertisement display luminance shall be no greater than 300cd/m2 in accordance with the recommended maximum night time luminance value set out in Table 10.4 within the [name] (PLG 05/23) ‘The brightness of illuminated advertisements including digital displays’ (or its equivalent in a replacement guide) in cd/m2.

In daylight hours, the advertisement display luminance shall be controlled in order to reflect ambient light conditions (to ensure it is neither too bright or too dull), and shall at all times be no greater than the recommended maximum daytime luminance values set out in Table 10.5 within the [name] (PLG 05/23) ‘The brightness of illuminated advertisements including digital displays’ (or its equivalent in a replacement guide) in cd/m2. ** Appeal B – end of schedule **