Illuminated shopfront signs at Basement and Ground Floor, 10 Pembridge Road, Kensington
Summary of planning committee decision
Decided by Kensington And Chelsea Planning Applications Committee on 11 Aug 2026.
What was proposed
The application sought consent for illuminated fascia, door and projecting signs, together with two television display screens with colour-changing LED tiles.
“THE ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA PLANNING APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE 11/08/2026 REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR, PLANNING AND PLACE Application: CA/26/02226 Agenda Item: N041 Address:Basement and Ground Floor, 10 Pembridge Road, LONDON, W11 3HL Proposal: Installation and display of 1 x internally illuminated fascia logo sign, 1x internally illuminated door sign, 2x TV display screens with intermittent colour changing LED tiles and 1x internally illuminated halo projecting sign…”
“The proposal site consists of the west elevation of 10 Pembridge Road. The site comprises of a ground floor and basement commercial ‘adult gaming’ centre 3.2 The site is located within a row of ground-floor shopfronts, with various retail and commercial activities dominating the area. The site is located facing Ladbroke and Pembridge Conservation Areas respectively; however, is not within any Conservation Area. 4.”
Officer report
Earlier permissions and enforcement
Earlier permissions covered a shopfront, an amusement-centre use and façade alterations, while an illuminated-signage enforcement investigation was pending the application’s outcome.
“APPEAL ALLOWED – 30/01/1989 TP/89/1755 Erection of a new front dormer window, the installation of a new shopfront and alterations to the front facade. APPROVED – 27/12/1989 ENF/26/-1131 Installation of illuminated signage Pending outcome following submission of CA/26/02226 5.”
Officer report
What officers recommended
Officers recommended granting advertisement consent because the proposal was acceptable, would not harm the street scene or highway safety, and could be controlled by conditions.
“It is recommended the Committee grants advertisement consent with the conditions listed in Section 8 of this report. 2. Reason for committee consideration · Three or more objections were received during the consultation period and the recommendation is to grant. 3. The site and its surroundings…”
Officer report
Main effects considered
Officers considered visual amenity and highway safety, finding that existing signage, limited changes, restricted brightness and the mid-terrace position reduced impacts.
“In this regard, no objections have been raised by the Council's Highways Officer on highway safety or operational grounds. The proposed fascia, projecting and other illuminated signs would not impede pedestrian or vehicular movement, obstruct visibility, or otherwise adversely affect the safe functioning of the highway network.”
“Accordingly, the proposals are considered to satisfy the public safety objectives of Policy TR4 of the RBKC Local Plan 2024 and are therefore considered acceptable in transport and highway safety terms. Balancing 6.18 Overall, having regard to the limited matters for consideration under the Advertisement Regulations, it is concluded that the proposed advertisements would not result in unacceptable harm to visual amenity and would not prejudice highway or public safety.”
Officer report
What consultees said
The Director of Transportation and Highways raised no objection, while conditions would limit brightness to 170 candelas per square metre and require static projecting-sign illumination.
“Other consultees and organisations ConsulteeComment Where in the report this is considered Director of Transportation and Highways No objection to the works, in accordance with Policy TR4. 6.14-6.16 8. Recommended conditions if the application is granted. 1.Any advertisements displayed, and any site used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the local planning authority.”
“5.No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to obscure, or hinder the ready interpretation of, any road traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air, or so as otherwise to render hazardous the use of any highway, railway, waterway or aerodrome (civil or military). Reason - As required by the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007.”
Officer report
What objectors said
Eight objections concerned illumination, the garish shopfront, highway safety, the street scene, nearby Conservation Areas and the Shopfront SPD.
“Comments from interested parties 7.1 The application was advertised in the Gazette on 08/05/2026 7.2 8 letters were received objecting to the application, summarised as: CommentResponse 1 Objection to illumination, causing light illumination and harm to highway safety. The illumination has been considered against the existing longstanding shopfront, which is a material consideration. Given the existing shopfront design, the proposals are acceptable on balance.”
“Reference to the impact on the Conservation Areas is noted, however, the site is located outside of these areas and is considered unlikely to harm their setting or character. 3 Harmful to character of area and in close proximity to Conservation Areas. Cumulative impact of the illumination is excessive. Noted, however, the site falls outside the Conservation Areas and is considered to have minimal impact on their wider setting.”
Officer report
The committee’s decision
The committee granted consent in accordance with the recommendation and added an informative requesting continued enforcement monitoring of compliance and illumination.
“Details GRANTED in accordance with the recommendation subject to an additional informative:”
“The applicant is advised that the Planning Applications Committee has requested that the Council’s Planning Enforcement Team keep the associated enforcement investigation open following the grant of consent. This is to enable continued monitoring of compliance with the consent and all relevant conditions, with particular regard to the approved illumination and its operation.”
Minutes
Councillors at the meeting
- Sam MackoverVice-ChairConservative
- Billy BeckettLab Co-op
- Marc GoldfingerConservative
- Georgia HardistyConservative
- Walaa IdrisConservative
Source: Plota analysis of the council's record of attendance; parties from the council's list of councillors.
Sources
- Kensington And Chelsea Planning Applications Committee minutes, 11 August 2026
- Agenda and papers (council website)
Source: Plota analysis of Kensington And Chelsea's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.
Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API
The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.
See the API →At the meeting
- Council
- Kensington And Chelsea
- Date
- Tuesday 11 August 2026
- Recommendation
- Officers recommended approval
- Committee decided
- Approved
- Councillors
- 5Conservative 4Lab Co-op 1Show councillors
- Minutes
- The council's minutes
- Meeting
- Agenda and papers (council website)
- Application
- View application →
- All decisions
- Kensington And Chelsea committee decisions →
This committee's year
190 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting, 11 against officer advice.
Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.