Appeal 6003778

Appeal A: Allowed and planning permission is granted for the installation of 1no. [address] Hub and removal of associated BT payphone at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/25/3977/FUL and subject to the conditions in the attached schedule.

Appeal B: Allowed and express consent is granted for the installation of 2no. digital 75" LCD display screens, one on each side of the [name] unit at [site address] . The consent is for five years from the date of this decision and is subject to the five standard conditions set out in the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007 (as amended) (the Regulations) and the conditions in the attached schedule.

There are two appeals on this site. They differ only in that appeal A relates to planning permission and appeal B to express advertisement consent. Both appeals have been considered on their individual merits. However, as they raise Appeal Decision 6003777 and 6003778 similar issues, and to avoid duplication, they are addressed in a single decision, except where otherwise indicated.

In respect of Appeal B, the Regulations and the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) both make it clear that advertisements should be subject to control only in the interests of amenity and public safety, taking into account cumulative impacts. Regard does not need to be had to the development plan. Therefore, while I have taken relevant policies of the Waveney Local Plan (LP) and the Lowestoft Neighbourhood Plan (NP) into account as a material consideration, they have not been determinative.

The appeal site is located within the South Lowestoft Conservation Area (CA). Accordingly, in my consideration of these appeals I have been mindful of my statutory duties set out in Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This requires, when determining proposals in conservation areas, that special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.

For appeal [name] have amended the description to match the description used by the Council on the decision notice, as this more accurately describes the proposed advertisements.

For Appeal A, the main issue is whether the proposal would conserve or enhance the character or appearance of the [name].

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

The appeal site relates to a section of [site address] which forms part of a busy pedestrianised route. The appeal site is situated within the CA, which encompasses much of the town centre comprising a range of retail and leisure uses.

The significance of the CA is derived in part from its notable association with [name] which influenced its development as a seaside pleasure resort. Much of the townscape dates from the mid-nineteenth century, with many buildings reflecting the architectural character of the Victorian period. The South Lowestoft Kirkley Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (CAAMP) identifies [address] South as deriving its special interest from its commercial character and historic building stock, which reflects its development during the later nineteenth century. The street pattern is characterised predominantly by long. straight roads laid parallel to the seashore.

Commercial buildings line the main street, displaying a range of height, materials, detailing, and uses. Shopfronts throughout the area are of variable quality and design, nevertheless, they collectively form an important feature of the streetscape and make a positive contribution to its established commercial character.

The street in the immediate vicinity of the appeal site contains a range of street furniture including trees, lighting columns, seating, waste bins, telephone kiosk, cycle racks and a tall contemporary art installation. Collectively these elements, Appeal Decision 6003777 and 6003778 together with a mix of illuminated and non-illuminated signage create a modern, commercial context that defines the character and appearance of the area. Whilst the CAAMP notes the square in which the appeal site is located as having a strong sense of place, reinforced by public art at its centre, the existing makes a neutral contribution to the significance of the CA.

The appeal scheme proposes the installation of a [address] Hub incorporating internally illuminated digital advertisement screens on either side. The existing kiosk is of functional appearance and is viewed within a wider cluster of street furniture items. Its removal would not harm the character or appearance of the street scene and would provide a modest enhancement to the CA.

The proposed hub, together with its integrated signage, would introduce a modern element into this prominent location. However, it would be positioned amongst existing street furniture and set against a backdrop of commercial units. While the hub would differ in scale, form and function from nearby street furniture, it would not appear dominant within the streetscape. As a replacement for the existing kiosk, it would not give rise to excessive visual clutter.

Similarly, the advertisement displays within the hub would not appear incongruous in this commercial context. Given their size, they would not be unduly prominent or out of keeping when viewed against the surrounding built form. Furthermore, the presence of other illuminated signage, together with street lighting and traffic signals, means the level of illumination would not appear out of character with the area.

My attention has been drawn to the Lowestoft Town Centre Masterplan, which sets out a strategic vision for the town’s future, including enhancements to the public realm to create a more attractive centre. The site lies opposite [address], identified as a key arrival space, particularly by rail, with aspirations to create a welcoming gateway to the town. The proposal would facilitate way-finding information and, in doing so, would contribute positively to the enhancement of the public realm in this location. I therefore do not consider it would conflict with the aims of the CAAMP.

While a number of recent appeal decisions have been brought to my attention, I have not bene provided with full details of those cases a cannot therefore be satisfied as to the extent of their comparability with the proposal before me. In any event, I have determined the appeal on its own merits.

For the reasons set out above, I conclude in respect of Appeal A that the proposed development would preserve the character and appearance of the CA. It therefore accords with Policies WLP8.29, WLP8.39 of the LP, Policy LOW14 of the NP insofar as they seek to secure high-quality design that reflects local distinctiveness, is informed by the relevant Conservation Area Appraisals and [name], and achieves a particularly high standard of design and materials in order to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area. It would also be consistent with paragraph 135 of the Framework, which requires developments to be sympathetic to local character.

In addition, for Appeal B, I conclude for the reasons set out above that the proposed advertisement would not have a harmful effect on the visual amenity of the area. In reaching this view, I have had regard to Policies WLP8.29, WLP8.39 of the LP, Policy LOW14 of the NP and paragraph 135 of the Framework which, Appeal Decision 6003777 and 6003778 amongst other things, support creative and innovative design solutions where they preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area and contributes positively to its architectural quality and diversity. [name] have found that the proposal would not harm visual amenity, it would not conflict with these local and national policies.

Concerns have been raised that the hub is not needed and lacks public benefit. However, under paragraph 123 of the Framework, the need for an electronic communications system should not be questioned, and the Advert Regulations do not require this need to be demonstrated or public benefits to be shown. Nevertheless, the development would provide public benefits including free ultrafast Wi-Fi, phone calls, wayfinding, device charging, an emergency 999 call button, public messaging capabilities, and a platform for interactive technologies such as air quality monitoring.

The Council has suggested several conditions which I have considered against the Framework tests and Planning Practice Guidance. Where necessary, I have adjusted the wording in the interests of clarity and precision.

For Appeal A, in addition to the standard time-limit implementation condition, it is necessary to specify the approved plans and documents in the interests of certainty.

For Appeal B, the standard conditions apply as per Schedule 2 of the 2007 Regulations, which are not repeated in the attached schedule. I have imposed conditions restricting the luminance of the advertisements in the interests of amenity and public safety. I have also imposed a condition as suggested by the appellant to default to a black or blank screen in the event the advertisement display itself malfunctions.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that Appeal A and Appeal B should be allowed.

The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following drawing nos: 001 rev A Site Location Plan, 002 rev A Proposed Block Plan, 003 rev A Existing and [name].

The maximum daytime luminance value of the display screens shall not exceed 5000 cd/m2 between the hours of 07.00-23.00 hours in accordance with the recommendations of the Institution of [name] – Professional Lighting Guidance (PLG 05). All wall mounted lights are to be set at zero degrees to reduce upward light spill and glare into the night sky and surrounding properties.

The maximum night-time luminance value of the display screens shall not exceed 600 cd/m2 between the hours of 23.00-0.700 hours in accordance with the recommendations of the Institution of [name] – Professional Lighting Guidance (PLG 05). All wall mounted lights are to be set at zero degrees to reduce upward light spill and glare into the night sky and surrounding properties.

The advertisement digital display screens shall include a mechanism to default to a frozen advertisement or a blank or black screen in the event of any malfunction. *** End of Schedule***