Appeal 6007098

The appeal is dismissed.

The description of development above differs from that used by the Council but reflects the description used by the Appellant on the original application form. I consider that the description accurately describes the scheme proposed.

The main issues are the effect of the proposal upon the visual amenities of the area and upon highway and pedestrian safety.

The appeal site is an area of grassed land adjacent to the main road, [address], as it runs north south through this area of [site address] . To the rear of the site is a fairly blank brick elevation of a modern block of flats and opposite there is a residential street, [address]. Presently there are two 48 sheet paper and paste advertising panels that are of a similar size to those as proposed. The main differences are concerned with the proposed advertisements being of a digital LED format and their relocation towards a different orientation. The new panels would measure around 6m in width, 3m in height with a depth of around 0.15m. The panels would be set upon a plinth and the advertisement screen would be around 1.5m from ground level as a result.

The orientation would alter the alignment of the existing panels, which is currently along the existing building line of the surrounding development, to one where the panels would be placed at oblique angles to the building line and this would see them placed closer towards the pavement as a result. Appeal Decision Appeal Ref: 6007098

Opposite the site towards the south, diagonally over the junction with [address], is the Grade II Listed United Reformed Church of [name] at Bowes. When seen from the north this church presents a strong gable elevation towards [address] and it is seen within the immediate context of the appeal site.

Despite the lack of contention between the parties with regards any effect upon this Listed Building I am nevertheless required by Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to give ‘Special Regard’ to the desirability of preserving a Listed Building or its setting. As such I am required to assess the effect of the proposal upon the significance of the Listed Building as part of my assessment upon the amenities of the area.

As mentioned above, the two existing advertisement panels are currently aligned along the approximate building line that I consider defines much of this part of [address]. Despite building design being varied, the building line to which most structures abide appears to be regular and I consider that this is a characteristic of the area as a whole.

Through moving the footprint of these large hoardings outward there would be a much greater visual disturbance of the street and a harmful encroachment upon the streetscene. This would occur due to both the irregular departure from the building line, but also due to the greater potential to view the backs of these hoardings aswell as to notice their inevitable protrusion into the streetscene here.

When assessed as part of what is quite a regular street with buildings abiding by relatively equal separation distances between plots and the highway, the proposal before me would create an incongruous addition to the streetscene here that would appear both alien and harmful.

When viewed along [address] looking south the hoardings would protrude to a much greater degree into views of the Listed Building of [name] and I cannot see how such an encroachment of this type into this view could be anything but harmful to what is an important view of the Listed Building. As such I consider there would be harm to immediate setting of the Listed Building as a result.

Coming to the effects upon highway safety, I saw on my site visit that [address] is a one way street and that traffic is unable to enter [address] from this direction. As such any distraction to drivers would likely occur through the prominence of the hoardings on approach along what is a relatively straight road aswell as the entrances into private premises either side of the site.

In assessing this effect, although I recognise that the vibrancy and busyness of the street here would cause a certain amount of added cognitive demand, and although I note the evidence of accidents in this area in the past, I am unable to see that such distraction would occur to the road user abiding by the speed limit and rules of the road so as to place others at notable extra risk.

Although there would always be a risk associated with movement in such places as can be demonstrated by past events, I am unable to find evidence that the proposed relocated hoardings would add to this to any significant degree.

In conclusion therefore I have found significant harm to the visual amenities of the area and also harm to the setting of the Grade II Listed United Reformed Church of Appeal Decision Appeal Ref: 6007098 [name] at Bowes that are not outweighed by the economic benefits of the hoardings themselves. However, I am unable to find such harms to highway safety as alleged by the Council that would convince me that the addition of new hoardings here would increase the risk of accidents.

Nevertheless, this scheme is poorly designed and, due to the serious harms upon the visual amenities of the area, I consider it contrary to policies DM3 and DM8 of The Development Management DPD 2017 and Policies D8 and HC1 of The London Plan.

For the reasons given above, whilst taking into account all other matters raised, I dismiss this appeal.