Agenda item

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer (CPO) in respect of the display of adverts at 117-121 Bishopsgate in relation to the use of the premises as a Bank.

The CPO introduced the application and explained that some additional information including revised drawings had been received. She referred to the Addendum Report tabled before the previous Agenda Item which set out details of the revised drawings and concerns about their accuracy.

The CPO advised that the proposed commercial advertising was considered to be unacceptable owing to its detrimental impact on the integrity of the building and character of the street through the incorporation of such insensitive advertisement proposals to the ground floor frontage. By virtue of the size, design, illumination, quantum and positioning on the building they would be visually dominant and highly conspicuous, particularly when viewed at night.

Several members spoke in support of refusal of the application which they considered would be detrimental to amenity, particularly the illumination of the advertising signage, and not in keeping with the historic nature of the area. Others considered that the opening of any new bank should be welcomed, together with its corporate branding, and the City should combine old and new.

Arising from the discussion, the application was put to the vote, the result of which was as follows:-

·         15 votes in favour of the CPO recommendation.

·         5 votes against

RESOLVED – That the express consent for adverts be refused on the grounds as set out in the Addendum Report.

Reason for refusal

The proposed five fascia signs with internally illuminated lettering, four non-illuminated fascia signs, two internally illuminated projecting signs and four  illuminated ATM sign, by reason of their bulk, size, location obscuring architectural details, design, illumination, proliferation and their visually obtrusive, incongruous and discordant appearance would cause significant harm to the visual amenity of the buildings and the area, including harm to the character and appearance of the Bishopsgate Conservation Area and detrimental to the settings of the listed Church of St Botolph' s Without Bishopsgate (grade II*) and the listed former Great Eastern Hotel (grade II), contrary to London Plan Policies 7.6 and 7.8 and Local Plan Policies CS 10, CS 12, DM 10.5, DM 10.6, DM 12.1 and DM 12.2 and paragraphs 67 and 132-134 of the NPPF. The application cannot be approved on the basis of the submitted drawings as they contain inaccuracies and do not clearly show the proposals or their relationship to retained features