Appeal 6009355

The appeal is allowed and express consent is granted for the display of a D6 small format advertisement display at [site address] in accordance with the terms of the application, [name]/2026/00422/ADV, dated 20 February 2026. 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 and the following additional conditions:

There shall be no moving images, animation, video or full motion images displayed unless otherwise permitted by this consent.

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 Classification L2 - Business Data set out for Environmental Zone 3 in Table 10.4 within the Institution of [name] - [name] (PLG 05) 'Brightness of [name] including [name] (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 Institution of [name] – [name] (PLG 05) 'Brightness of [name] including [name] (or its equivalent in a replacement guide) in cd/m2.

Unless otherwise permitted, the minimum display time for each advertisement shall be 10 seconds and the advertisement shall not include any features which would result in interactive messages / advertisements being displayed.

No images displayed shall resemble official road traffic signs, traffic lights or traffic matrix signs.

I have taken the description of the development in the banner heading above from the planning application form but removed superfluous wording to give a more concise description of the development proposed.

The main issue is whether the advertisement would preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the Knowle Conservation Area.

The appeal relates to a petrol filling station on [address] which branches off the [address] marking the transition from the commercial centre of Knowle to residential development. The filling station comprises a canopy covered forecourt with a shop and attached covered carwash to the rear. The access continues to the side and rear of the shop and carwash where EV charging facilities are located. Vehicles enter and exit from [address]. The proposed advertisement would be placed next to an existing totem sign adjacent to the access next to [address], a residential cul-de-sac off [address]. There were 3 free standing adverts, 2 along the site frontage and one next to the petrol pumps at the time of my visit. There were also adverts attached to the shop wall and signage, directing vehicles to the EV charging points and car wash, on the boundary wall to the side of the forecourt.

The site is within the Knowle Conservation Area (CA). The Council has not provided a character assessment of the CA but, in my view, the key characteristic that contributes to the significance of the CA is the rich diversity of buildings which exhibit different styles of architecture reflecting the development of the town since at least the early 15th Century. These range from the stone-built 15th Century Knowle Parish Church and adjacent timber framed and plaster filled [address] to large Georgian properties and Victorian terraced housing.

The greatest concentration and mix of buildings that appear to be of historic interest are on the [address]. Nonetheless. [address] includes attractive terraces of houses of different ages in addition to large, detached, houses. The Council also identified locally listed buildings at No [address], next to the appeal site, and Nos 29-35 opposite the appeal site, the settings for which it submits would be harmed by the proposed advert.

The proposal is for an internally illuminated LED screen advertisement board measuring 2.4m high by 1.23m wide. Advertisements would be static and displayed on one side of the board facing towards the forecourt, but visible to traffic approaching from the west. The images would mimic that of traditional paper adverts with up to six different advertisement campaigns at a time with posters on rotation every 10 seconds. According to the appellant it would enable the garage to rationalise the existing advertisements reducing the number of freestanding adverts as indicated on the plans.

The proposed sign would be located next to a much larger totem sign set in front of the hedge and fence boundary with [address]. Against this backdrop it would not appear out of place or overly large or draw attention from the wider street scene. It would be located at the access furthest from locally listed No 30 with the filling station forecourt intervening between them such that it would not appear as part of the setting of the building. Whilst it would be positioned opposite Nos 29-35, they are setback from the road behind large gardens with substantial mature hedges along their front boundary such that they are not visible from the road and there would therefore be no intervisibility between them and the proposed sign.

Overall, given the modest size of the proposed sign, the commercial nature of the site, and the level of activity associated with it, I consider the proposed sign would have no impact on amenity or the setting of non-designated heritage assets or the wider area. It would thus preserve the character and appearance of the Knowle Conservation Area in accordance with policies P15 and P16 of the Solihull Local Plan 2013 which seek to conserve local character and preserve heritage assets.

Although the Council has not recommended any conditions in the event of the appeal succeeding, I have imposed the model conditions set out by the Institute of [name] as suggested by the appellant. These control daylight and nighttime illumination, ensure the images are static, set the minimum duration between image changes and prevent the use of images that could mirror those of road traffic signs. These are necessary in the interests of protecting public safety and visual amenity.

For the reasons given above, I conclude that the appeal should succeed.