Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
Search representations
Results for INDIGO PLANNING search
New searchObject
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
RT3 clause 1
Representation ID: 7602
Received: 17/11/2017
Respondent: INDIGO PLANNING
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Policy RT3 requires new shopfronts to relate well in scale, proportion, material and
decorative treatment to the façade of the building. In Conservation Areas changes will only be permitted where they contribute to the conservation and enhancement of the area's character or appearance.
The justification for the policy also notes that normally illuminated signage will not be permitted in Conservation Areas. There is no evidence to support the proposed objection to illuminated signage in conservation areas. Applications should be assessed in terms of their impacts and only where they will cause 'substantial harm' should development be restricted.
There is no evidence to support the proposed objection to illuminated signage in conservation areas. Applications should be assessed in terms of their impacts and only where they will cause 'substantial harm' should development be restricted.
The policy should therefore be re-worded to reflect national planning policy, such that advertisements are only controlled in the interests of public safety and amenity or where they would individually or cumulatively result in 'substantial harm' to a heritage asset.
We trust that you will take these representations into consideration, however please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions in relation to the above comments.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
7.5 RT3 Explanation
Representation ID: 7603
Received: 17/11/2017
Respondent: INDIGO PLANNING
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
There is no evidence to support the proposed objection to illuminated signage in conservation areas. Applications should be assessed in terms of their impacts and only where they will cause 'substantial harm' should development be restricted.
The policy should therefore be re-worded to reflect national planning policy, such that advertisements are only controlled in the interests of public safety and amenity or where they would individually or cumulatively result in 'substantial harm' to a heritage asset.
We trust that you will take these representations into consideration, however please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions in relation to the above comments.
There is no evidence to support the proposed objection to illuminated signage in conservation areas. Applications should be assessed in terms of their impacts and only where they will cause 'substantial harm' should development be restricted.
The policy should therefore be re-worded to reflect national planning policy, such that advertisements are only controlled in the interests of public safety and amenity or where they would individually or cumulatively result in 'substantial harm' to a heritage asset.
We trust that you will take these representations into consideration, however please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions in relation to the above comments.
