Illuminated fascia sign at 18 Broad Street, March

“Display of 1 x internally illuminated fascia sign (retrospective)”

“This application seeks advertisement consent (retrospectively) for the display of 1 x internally illuminated fascia sign. The fascia sign measures approximately 10.275 x 1.1 metres. The sign includes internally illuminated lettering and blue chevron on a high gloss black background. This is made from an aluminium panel fascia painted with high gloss blue.”

“The application site is situated on the western side of Broad Street, within the market town of March. The site is situated within the March Conservation Area. There are also a number of Grade II Listed Buildings surrounding the application site.”

“The building is currently occupied by F & S Majestic Turkish Restaurant and was previously occupied by NatWest. The advert is already in situ.”

“The fascia sign appears dominant upon the principal elevation of the host building, concealing important architectural features such as the ionic columns that form the termination of the pilasters and keystones to the centre of the window arches.”

“The signage is considered to detract from the character and appearance of the building and therefore is considered to adversely impact on the streetscene and character of the area and fails to protect and enhance heritage assets with a consequent adverse impact upon the visual amenity of the area. The proposed advertisement is therefore considered contrary to Paragraph 141 of the NPPF and Policies LP16 and LP18 of the Fenland Local Plan 2014.”

“Consideration is given to the impact of this proposal on the character and appearance of March Conservation Area with special attention paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area according to the duty in law under S72 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.”

“The Environmental Health Team note and accept the submitted information and have 'No Objections' to the proposals, as they are unlikely to have a detrimental effect on the local amenity as a result of artificial light overspill and/or glare.”

“Objecting Comments Officer Response Queries over repeat application being accepted Addressed in ‘Background’ section Applicant has not followed Conservation advice The FDC Conservation Office has provided comment on this application which has been considered within the recommendation on the application. Queries over other unauthorised works on site and lack of enforcement action The enforcement team are aware of unauthorised works on site.”

“Supporting Comments Officer Response Other illuminated signs in the high street Addressed in ‘Amenity’ assessment section Does not impact on view Addressed in ‘Amenity’ assessment section Design Addressed in ‘Amenity’ assessment section Important to support businesses This application is for advertisement consent only. The change of use of the building itself was approved as per application reference F/YR24/0858/F.”

“Members made comments, asked questions and received responses as follows: • Councillor Marks referred to the reasons for refusal, in particular the impact on the street scene and character of the area and fails to protect and enhance heritage assets, and queried if this is the building front which this sign has covered over and he feels it is protecting heritage assets.”

“He feels that if the restaurant was half the size, the sign would be half the length and they are making, in his view, good use of the space available. • Councillor Connor referred to driving through the middle of Dunstable in the dark and there were so many signs, with most businesses having signs equal to this and lit up, probably having a more pro-policy approach to signs. He expressed the view that this application cries out to be approved.”

“Proposed by Councillor Purser that the application be refused as per officer’s recommendation, but no seconder was forthcoming.”

“Proposed by Councillor Benney, seconded by Councillor Marks and agreed that the application be GRANTED against officer’s recommendation, with conditions to be applied by officers in consultation with Councillors Connor, Benney and Marks.”

“Members do not support officer’s recommendation of refusal of planning permission as they feel that the Conservation Area has changed and the heritage is not lost but just covered by the sign.”