Appeal 6003377

The appeal is allowed and express consent is granted for the display of the wooden non-illuminated traditional billboard at [site address] , Hounslow, [postcode] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2025/2958. The consent is for five years from the date of this decision and is subject to the five standard conditions set out in Schedule 2 of the 2007 Regulations.

The site visit was undertaken by a representative of the Inspector whose recommendation is set out below and to which the Inspector has had regard before deciding the appeal.

The initial application was made retrospectively. The advertisement was in situ at the time of the site visit and accords with the plans submitted. I have therefore considered the appeal on that basis.

Advertisements are controlled with reference to their effect on amenity and public safety only. Regulation 3 requires that powers in this regard shall be exercised taking into account the provisions of the development plan, in so far as they are material, and any other relevant factors.

The main issue is the effect of the advertisement on amenity.

The appeal site is a two-storey corner plot building at the end of a small terrace on [address]. Multiple terraces consisting of mixed-use development are found on this busy thoroughfare, with retail units on the ground floor level and residential dwellings atop. Fascias and other signage installed across these terraces create retail frontages along the street and in turn, a strong commercial feel. This character spills over to the beginning of side streets adjoining [address], where further retail development and wraparound corner fascias can be seen.

The 48-sheet advertisement, affixed to the side elevation of the appeal site and facing [address], is prominent but not out of character with its surroundings. Its size and scale are proportionate to the surface it is located on and contribute to the commercial aesthetic which dominates this section of the street. While it obscures part of the brickwork on the building, it does not affect any architectural feature or decoration. The positioning of the advertisement follows the urban grain of the surrounding area, where the corner and top of side roads appear commercial before becoming residential, most notably evidenced on [address].

Despite proximity to designated areas of special character and conservation, I also observed a freestanding 48-sheet advertisement in the area which although not situated on a building, contributes to the overwhelmingly commercial feel of the appeal site and its surroundings. As such, the appeal advertisement is in keeping with the character and context of the wider area and does not appear visually intrusive.

The rear of the appeal site and a small accessway create some distance between the appeal site and the residential dwellings on [address]. This provides adequate delineation between the commercial feel of [address], the slight area of overlap where the appeal site is situated and the residential character evident further along side roads. This means that even with the advertisement installed, the contrasting characters remain distinct and separate with neither infringing on the other. Consequently, the advertisement does not detract from local character and there is no harm to amenity.

I have taken into account Policies CC1, CC2 and CC5 of the London Borough of Hounslow Local Plan (2015-2030) which promote appropriate design and regard for local character, and so are material in this case. Given that the advertisement does not harm amenity, it does not conflict with these local policies.

[name] has raised concerns regarding oversailing, required licenses and birds nesting. During my visit to the site, I noted that the advertisement is installed at sufficient height so as to not obstruct pedestrian use of the pavement. I observed very little space between the advertisement and the wall it is attached to meaning inadequate room for birds to nest and subsequently cause issues with droppings. Furthermore, this consent is separate from an oversailing license and it is for the appellant to obtain any other additional consents they may require. Overall, I find the design and position of the proposal would not harm public safety.

For the reasons given above and having had regard to all other matters raised, I recommend that the appeal should be allowed. No additional conditions are necessary beyond those in the Regulations.

I have considered all the submitted evidence and my representative’s report and on that basis the appeal is allowed subject to the standard conditions set out in the Regulations.