Appeal 6002991

The appeal is allowed and express consent is granted for the display of two externally illuminated inset advertisement boards, each measuring 5.5m x 9.3m, to be integrated within the scaffold building wrap approved under application ref. 25/06861/ADV, at [site address] , in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 25/06862/ADV. The consent is for eighteen months from the date of this decision and is subject to the five standard conditions set out in Schedule 2 of the 2007 Regulations and the following additional conditions:

The advertisements permitted by this consent shall be displayed for no more than eighteen months from the date of this decision, or until completion of the external refurbishment works and removal of the scaffold and building wrap, whichever is sooner. All associated advertisement material shall be removed immediately thereafter.

When either of the advertisements permitted by this consent is not in active use, the corresponding inset area shall be covered with the approved Trompe-l’Oeil depiction of the building façade forming part of the building wrap.

The advertisements permitted by this consent shall not be illuminated between 23:00 and 07:00 on any day.

The intensity of the illumination of the advertisements permitted by this consent shall be no greater than 300 cd/m2.

The illumination of the advertisements permitted by this consent shall be static only, with no flashing, scrolling, intermittent lighting or moving images. The glare-control measures specified in the submitted lighting details shall be installed and retained for the duration of the display.

The Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 (as amended) (the Regulations), the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) and the Planning Practice Guidance (the PPG) all confirm that control over the display of advertisements should only be in the interests of amenity and public safety, taking into account the provisions of the development plan in so far as they are material, and any other relevant factors.

The Council has raised no concerns regarding public safety. I have no reason to take a different view. I have therefore focused my considerations of the appeal on the effects of the proposed advertisements on amenity. ‘Amenity’ is not defined exhaustively in the Regulations. It includes aural and visual amenity1, and factors relevant to amenity cover the general characteristics of the locality, including the presence of any feature of historic, architectural, cultural or similar interest2. Additionally, the PPG advises that, in practice, ‘amenity’ is usually understood to mean the effect on visual and aural amenity in the immediate neighbourhood of an advertisement or site for the display of advertisements, where residents or passers-by will be aware of the advertisement3.

During the determination of the appeal, the City of Westminster Council adopted the City Plan Partial Review / City Plan 2019-2040 on 21 January 2026 (the City Plan 2026). This supersedes the City Plan 2021. From the information provided, only the numbers of the policies cited by the Council in its Decision Notice have changed4, not their wording, nor the wording to their supporting text. I am satisfied that no prejudice would arise from me taking the relevant policies of the City Plan 2026, in so far as they are material, into account in my determination of the appeal, and have proceeded on this basis.

The appeal property forms part of a [name] listed building which is located within the settings of nearby [name]* and [name] listed buildings. As the appeal does not concern whether to grant planning permission, the statutory duty under section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended) (the Act) does not apply. Nevertheless, the above are relevant factors in the context of considering the effect of the proposal on amenity. The appeal site is also located within a conservation area. As the appeal concerns the exercise of planning functions within a conservation area, the duty under section 72(1) of the Act does apply, and I have paid special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area, in the context of considering the effect of the proposal on amenity.

The site address in the heading above is taken from the application form as stated in the ‘description of the site location’. This differs to that in the Council’s Decision Notice5. I am satisfied they refer to the same building. 1 Regulation 2(1). 2 Regulation 3(2)(a). 3 Planning Practice Guidance, Paragraph: 079 [name]: 18b-079-20140306. 4 Policy 38 is now Policy 42 Design principles; Policy 39 is now Policy 44 Westminster’s heritage; Policy 40 is now Policy 45 Townscape and architecture; and Policy 43(G) is now Policy 48(G) Public realm. 5 [address], [address], London [postcode] .

The description of the proposed advertisements is taken from the Council’s Decision Notice and the appellant’s appeal form6.

In the context of the above, the main issue is the effect of the proposed advertisements on the amenity of the area, having regard to the host listed building, the settings of nearby listed buildings and the character and appearance of the [address] Conservation Area.

The appeal site comprises two properties which span between, and possess frontages onto, [address] and [address]. They form part of a [name] listed building known as The Quadrant7. It is part of [name] grandiose rebuilding of [name], stated to have been designed from circa 1911 and completed 1920-23.

Several listed buildings dating from the early 20th century lie proximate to the site. Those referenced in the Council’s reason for refusal include the [name]* listed Piccadilly Hotel8; the [name] listed The Quadrant9; and the [name] listed [address], [address], [address] and New Gallery10. Also cited in the Council’s delegated officer report are the [name] listed [name] (Main Building and Bridge)11, and the [name] listed [address] W1,[address] W112.

The special interest and significance of these designated heritage assets are primarily derived from their historic and architectural interests in being fine examples of early 20th century grand architecture, and their value as part of a group. Together, their imposing scale, consciously designed set-piece composition, and fine detailing, using a common palette of materials of Portland stone and slate, present an impressive townscape.

Pertinent to the appeal, their special interest and significance also stem, in part, from their settings. The assets are primarily experienced from the immediately adjacent vehicular roads, pedestrian footpaths and historic built backdrop which form this busy city centre environment. These planned routes, spaces and heritage context positively contribute to both their significance as designated heritage assets, as well as the ability to appreciate their significance.

The site is located within the [address] Conservation Area (the RSCA). In respect of the appeal, the main characteristics of the RSCA which positively support its special interest and significance, are its historic street pattern, and the richness, quality and formal composition of its historic buildings in predominantly retail and commercial uses. This context, whilst being sensitive to change in 6 The description in the application form is ‘Please refer to supporting documents enclosed’. 7 National Heritage List for England. [name]: 1227631, comprising 14-18 [name] W1; [address] W1; 5-17 [name] W1; [address] W1; 9,19, 27 and [address] W1; and The Quadrant [address] W1. 8 National Heritage List for England. [name]: 1265754, comprising [address]; [name], 21-31 and 31A Piccadilly; and [name] [address]. 9 National Heritage List for England. [name]: 1265195, comprising The Quadrant [address] W1; The Quadrant [address] W1; and The Quadrant [address] W1. 10 National Heritage List for England. [name]: 1235118 comprising [address] [address] W1; and [address], [address], [address] and [name] [address] W1. 11 National Heritage List for England. [name]: 1391115. 12 National Heritage List for England. [name]: 1227632. heritage terms, provides for a vibrant and bustling atmosphere, as well as an abundance and diversity of associated signage, particularly around the nearby [name].

The historic integrity, architectural quality and formal settings of the aforementioned listed buildings, contribute positively to the character and appearance of the RSCA as a whole, and thereby to its significance as a designated heritage asset.

This is recognised in the Council’s Metropolitan Views Draft Supplementary Planning Document, 2007 ([name]). [address] 27 takes in the vista from [address] to Piccadilly, and highlights the importance of controlling signage in this area to enhance the architectural unity of the buildings and avoid disrupting the view.

The Council’s Westminster’s Streets and Spaces, Public Realm Guidance Supplementary Planning Document, 2025 (Streets and [name]) provides broad guidance on ‘signs and adverts’ as well as detailed guidance on ‘shrouds’13. Whilst being generally restrictive in the control of advertisements above ground floor on shrouds, some flexibility and judgement in relation to the merits and circumstances of each case are incorporated into the ‘principles’.

I am also aware of guidance on advertisements, including those on shrouds, within the Framework14 and the PPG15.

The appeal properties are currently undergoing comprehensive refurbishment which benefits from planning permission and listed building consent. Advertisement consent has also been granted for a Trompe l’Oeil ‘printed scaffold building wrap’ which provides a full scale representation of the property’s [address] façade16. This was in place at the time of my site visit.

The proposal seeks advertisement consent for a period of eighteen months for the display of two externally illuminated inset advertisement boards. Each would measure 5.5m (height) by 9.3m (width) and would sit within the consented printed scaffold building wrap facing [address] for the duration of the construction period17. They would consist of flexible Biotex (100% recycled yarn) with non-petrochemical PVC coating substrate. Each of the advertisements would be illuminated by four LED units.

The advertisements shown on the submitted drawings are indicative only and, if the appeal were allowed, the displays would likely change regularly. However, the appellant has confirmed that if / when the inset areas are not in use, they would be replaced with the consented Trompe l’Oeil representation of the building.

I concur with the parties that the Trompe l’Oeil printed scaffold building wrap is of a high quality, and maintains the character and appearance of the area’s distinctive townscape during the approved refurbishment of the properties, making a positive contribution to the amenity of the locale. 13 8.3 Signs and Adverts. 14 National Planning Policy Framework Paragraph 141. 15 Planning Practice Guidance, Paragraph: 005 [name]: 18b-005-20140306. 16 Application Ref: 25/06861/ADV. Display of printed scaffold building wrap along [address] façade, measuring 41m (width) x 11.04m (height), for a temporary period of eighteen months. Application Permitted 30 October 2025. 17 Estimated to be completed in February 2027.

The proposed inset advertisements would be fairly large and combined with their elevated position would cause them to be prominent features. However, they would cover only about 23% of the building wrap, and occupy balanced positions within it. Considering the elevation as a whole, they would not be ‘large-scale’, but rather, proportionate additions; and whilst they would partly conceal the host building’s façade without replicating it, this would not unduly impair the appreciation of the existing building wrap’s high quality representation.

The proposed external illumination would give additional prominence to the advertisements during early morning and night-time, particularly in the Autumn and Winter months. Even so, the units would be limited in number, and being fixed to the existing gantry, would not be visible within the street scene. Additionally, the imposition of appropriately worded conditions relating to the timing, intensity and nature of the illumination would adequately mitigate any potential adverse effects.

The proposed advertisements would undoubtedly be conspicuous within the townscape and readily apparent when viewed from adjacent public routes and buildings, particularly the south side of [address]. However, given the specific detail of the proposal, in conjunction with the area’s intrinsic commercial character and vibrant appearance and atmosphere, they would not appear as wholly incongruous nor unduly assertive, but instead designed with regard to its context. The architectural unity of the buildings within the townscape, for the most part, would be maintained, and [address] 27 would not be disrupted. On this basis, the character and appearance of the RSCA as a whole would be preserved.

Relevantly, the proposed inserts would be temporary, only for the duration of the approved refurbishment of the properties. I also note in the appellant’s evidence what appear to be comparable externally illuminated shroud advertisements in the area which have been allowed on appeal, some within the last year.

I acknowledge the heritage sensitivity of the host building and the surrounding townscape. However, bearing in mind the specifics of the site and proposal, in this particular instance, I find that the proposed advertisements would not harm the amenity of the area, having regard to the host listed building, the settings of nearby listed buildings and the character and appearance of the RSCA.

There would be no conflict with Policies 42, 44, 45 and 48G of the City Plan 2026 in so far as they are material considerations relevant to the appeal. Amongst other things, these policies seek to ensure proposals respond to their context; conserve and enhance heritage assets and their settings in a manner appropriate to their significance; and that advertisements are sensitively designed in terms of their size, location and their impact on the building on which they are displayed, local context, street scene and wider townscape. It would also be in line with the guidance contained in the Council’s Views Draft SPD and Streets and [name]; and Paragraph 141 of the Framework.

The Soho Society submitted an objection to the proposal. However, it refers to ‘illuminated digital adverts’, which are not proposed as part of this scheme. Moreover, for the reasons set out above, I have found no harm as a result of the proposal in respect of the amenity of the area, having regard to the relevant designated heritage assets.

The five standard conditions set out in the Regulations are imposed. The Council has submitted suggested additional conditions were the appeal to be allowed. I have considered these having regard to the advice set out in both the Framework and the PPG. It is necessary to define the period of consent to provide clarity. A period of eighteen months was applied for and specifying from the date of this decision, as opposed to from the date of installation, would cover the period to the anticipated completion date of February 2027. Additionally, it is necessary to require the removal of the advertisements at the end of the temporary period of consent or until completion of the external refurbishment works and removal of the scaffold and building wrap, whichever is sooner. In the interests of visual amenity, a condition requiring the inset areas to be covered with the approved depiction of the building façade when not active is necessary. In the interests of visual amenity and / or public safety, it is necessary to include conditions to control the proposed illumination’s timing and intensity, and to ensure it is static.

Express consent relates to the means of displaying advertisements. Therefore, although the parties agree that the detail of the advertisements could be submitted for approval, I have not included the suggested additional condition requiring this as it would not meet the tests of necessity or reasonableness.

For the reasons given above the appeal should be allowed.