Report of an Inquiry, held on the 25^{\text {th }} May 2011, into an appeal by The Empress Hotel Limited against the decision of the Planning Authority to refuse express consent for the erection of an advertising banner (Retrospective) on the Empress Hotel, Central Promenade, Douglas, Isle of Man, IM2 4RA.

Present: For the Planning Authority: Miss Laura Davy, Assistant Planning Officer, accompanied by Mr Ian Brooks, Planning Officer.

For the Appellant: Mr B Keenan, General Manager, The Empress Hotel Limited; and Mr Christopher Barr, Company Secretary, The Empress Hotel Limited.

The relevant facts and material considerations are summarised as follows:

The Appeal Site

1. The Empress Hotel is situated on Central Promenade and adjoins Derby Terrace and Spectrum Apartments. The displayed banner is on the face of the Hotel above the entrance to the Aroma Restaurant, to which it refers. The banner is above the basement level windows and below the main Hotel entrance level.

The Proposed Development

2. The displayed advertisement is a plastic sheet containing black script some 3.9 m long by 0.8 m tall.

Planning History, Consultations and Planning Policy

3. PA 90 / 04233 / D was approved for the installation of 2 advertising signs.
4. Douglas Corporation has not objected. Highways Division did not comment.
5. In the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2007 the relevant policies are: General Policy 6 and Environment Policies 35 & 37.
6. The site is within an area zoned as "Tourism/Residential" on the Douglas Local Plan 1998. The Hotel is situated within a Conservation Area.

The Case for the Planning Authority

7. The proposed signage is not considered to be of a high standard of design and materials and does not relate well to the building on which it is displayed. It does not preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the property; rather it has a harmful impact which is detrimental to the Conservation Area.
8. The banner has an unacceptable impact on the appearance and character of the property and its appearance within the street scene.
9. Enforcement action as been commenced in relation to this sign. It was thought the sign had been erected in the last year, although the Hotel management thought it had been erected for about 4 years.

The Case for the Appellant

10. Over at least 20 years it has been the custom of the Hotel to erect, in addition to its permanent signage, advertising and display banners on a temporary/semi-permanent basis

to advertise aspects of the business of the Hotel, special events etc. These are often displayed for a few days or weeks and no express consent has been sought. 11. All such banners and advertisement displays have been of high quality, in keeping with the ambiance of both the Hotel and environs on Central Promenade. 12. No complaint has ever been raised by any individual or body to such advertisements. 13. It would be the intention of the Hotel to maintain the quality and character of the banners as erected in the future. It was requested that the appeal be allowed. 14. There are other banners on Central Promenade, some with permanent fixture, e.g. The Beach.

INSPECTOR'S ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION

15. I inspected the site and its surroundings on the 23^{\text {rd }} May 2011. In my consideration of all the submissions and representations made, it seems to me that the main issue is the effect of the banner on the appearance and character of the building and the area.
16. The banner is a white plastic sheet containing black lettering. In my opinion, the banner and its means of fixing has the appearance of a temporary advertisement rather than a permanent advertisement. The displayed material on the banner is likewise seemingly of short term duration as it refers to "Now Open" and advertises a price for a meal and hours of opening. I note that this banner is across the location of the modest previously approved "La Brasserie" sign.
17. From my site visit I consider that the banner, although at basement level, is unduly prominent on the façade of The Empress Hotel and not of the quality which I would expect on this building in the Conservation Area. Therefore, I conclude that express consent should not be granted for this banner.
18. If the Minister is minded to allow the appeal, then the standard conditions relating to the consent for advertisements should be imposed
19. I have considered all the other matters raised at the Inquiry and in the submissions but they are not such as to affect my recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION

20. I recommend that the appeal should be dismissed. If accepted, this recommendation would have the effect of upholding the decision of the Planning Authority to refuse express consent for the display of this advertisement.

John S Turner 30th May 2011 Independent Inspector